I he big picture that Mike Bara and I have tried to paint in the
preceding pages is imperfect, at best. We know that.
It is, however, an honest effort - based on official NASA data - but
data which has been (as you have repeatedly seen throughout this
book) both deliberately hidden ... and deliberately corrupted.
It is a picture also based, in part, on correlating what objective
evidence we've been able to gather (primarily, the astonishing
official NASA photographs ...), combined with the first-person
testimonies of a small handful of human beings who have personally
witnessed this remarkable deception (a few ex-NASA employees and the
As noted earlier, the latter have been demonstrably compromised -
either by having their own memories deliberately altered after
seeing first-hand the wonders we have laid out here - or, from their
own continuing, misguided "allegiance" to the security oaths they
signed when they joined NASA. Remember, according to the official
Charter NASA is not a civilian research institution, but "a defense
agency of the United States [emphasis added]...").
It is an extraordinary picture based, at best, on an investigation
also severely hampered because it lacks the force of law to compel
the truth. As authors and investigators, we do not have the power of
the subpoena, the legal process of "discovery" or the simple ability
to have witnesses testify under oath - all crucial tools in
confronting a government-wide cover-up of such a sweeping,
overwhelming magnitude and implication.
But, we do have evidence - extraordinary scientific evidence - which
has been leaked to us quietly out of NASA by a few of its truly
patriotic former employees over the years. And now suddenly -
literally as we go to press - a brand new flood of even more amazing
imagery is being posted directly, on official NASA websites
available around the world.
A Few "Loose Ends"
As Mike and I were coming to the end of the four years it took to
put this book together, our own original focus began to seriously
shift - from our decades-long Enterprise investigation of the
Martian anomalies, and calls for new and better NASA data on the
artifacts on Mars - to several major "creeping breakthroughs" in our
quiet, ten-year investigation of the Moon:
The first of these breakthroughs came literally from within NASA
itself, or at least from several former associates or employees of
the Agency. In mid 2006, a story broke in the national media
concerning the existence of high-quality TV recordings of the Apollo
11 mission having "gone missing."169 As it turned out, the original
TV broadcasts of the historic first lunar landing were far below the
quality of what was originally transmitted from the Moon.
The Apollo 11 TV images were sent from an antenna mounted on top of
the Lunar Module to three tracking stations on Earth: Goldstone in
California and the Honeysuckle Creek and Parkes facilities in
Australia. These original signals were in a format called Slow Scan
Television, or SSTV.
The camera carried to the lunar surface
provided a progressive 320 scan lines at 10 frames per second (hence
the Slow Scan TV moniker) in black and white. Although still far
below the resolution of the standard broadcast quality of the day
(525 lines [interlaced] 30 frames per second), the original SSTV
signals were orders of magnitude better than what was finally
broadcast to the American public on July 20th, 1969.
Because the SSTV signal could not be directly translated to
broadcast TV, RCA had to develop a Slow Scan Converter to provide a
TV signal to the viewers in "real time." This converter had serious
limitations however, and they led to a broadcast signal that was
only 262.5 vertical lines of resolution, about half as sharp as a
then standard TV signal and on a par with the old "kinescope"
recorders of the 1950's.
The result was the dark, ghostly images we all saw on July 20th,
1969 when Neil Armstrong finally set foot upon the lunar surface.
Polaroid pictures taken of the SSTV monitors in Australia (the
signal from Honeysuckle Creek was the one that was eventually used
by NASA to broadcast the historic "one small step to American
audiences) show just how dramatically better the SSTV signals were
compared to the scan-converted images the public received [Fig.
Fortunately, the original SSTV signals were recorded, using a video
technology that would eventually find its way into the Betamax and
VHS recorders of the 1980's. Unfortunately, when a group of
enthusiasts, including some of the original site engineers from
Goldstone and the Australian tracking stations tried to find the
original SSTV tapes, they found that they were missing. For several
years, they have been searching for them, only to discover a very
Following the Apollo 11 mission, procedures required that the tapes
be shipped to the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) in Greenbelt,
Maryland. In 1970, the tapes were moved to the U.S. National
Archives in Accession #69A4099. By 1984, all but two of the over 700
boxes of Apollo era magnetic tapes placed in the Accession had been
removed and returned to Goddard at their request for "permanent
There are no records at Goddard showing receipt of the
boxes of tapes. In fact, all of the SSTV tapes sent to Goddard are
now missing, and to this date not one of the original Apollo 11 SSTV
tapes has been found.
All of this might just be a sad story of incompetence and
misfortune, as long as you don't consider the context in which all
of these events took place.
Remember, if our thesis is correct, NASA was sending its astronauts
to the Moon on an archeological reconnaissance mission, looking to
find the lost power of the gods that may have been left lying around
the lunar surface in the form of instrumentalities from eons past.
As we have also seen from the many images presented in this volume,
there were awesome glass structures all around the landing sites on
most of the missions. If NASA actually suspected this - that
Armstrong and Aldrin may have been descending into a vast,
mysterious wasteland of enormous ruins - then a whole lot of things
about this "missing tapes" affair begin to make sense.
First, given that color TV was commonplace by the late 1960's, why
did NASA send a crappy, low resolution black and white camera to
record the most momentous journey man had ever undertaken?
Westinghouse had begun development of a color TV camera called "The
Westinghouse Field Sequential Color Camera" for use in space (and on
Moonwalks) in 1968 and had perfected it by 1969. The color camera
had none of the "down.converting" problems of the primitive SSTV
cameras and could produce a sharp, clear, color picture that was
comparable to broadcast quality.
It was tested on Apollo 10 in 1969
and worked flawlessly, transmitting over three hours of clear, color
pictures back to Earth from the Moon.170 Following this test, you
would have thought that NASA would
enthusiastically pursue the use of color broadcasts from the lunar
surface. Not so.
According to a NASA paper by Bill Wood, former Apollo MFSN station
engineer from Goldstone, there were a great many at NASA who were
utterly stunned when it was decided to use the black and white SSTV
camera instead of the Sequential Color Camera to cover the first
Moonwalk. Max Faget, the designer of the Mercury capsule and
considered an "icon" of the glory days of NASA, was beside himself
that so many of the pictures (and all of the TV) from the lunar
surface would be in black and white.
According to "Chariots for
Apollo" the official NASA history of the Apollo missions:
"Faget was more than mildly upset when he learned that so much of
the television, motion, and still photography planned for Apollo 11
would be in black and white. To him, it was 'almost unbelievable'
that the culmination of a $20-billion program 'is to be recorded in
such a stingy manner.'"
His objections were based on the fact that the color camera had been
so successful on Apollo 10.
Now, it might be argued that with only
one mission under its belt, the color camera was too risky to take
to the lunar surface. However, consider this other point; neither
had the SSTV black and white camera. Both systems were equally
"untried" in the exposed lunar environment.
Unbelievably, the Sequential Color Camera was eventually approved
for use aboard Apollo 11, but only inside the Command Module. It
never was allowed inside the LEM. NASA didn't want that high
resolution Color camera anywhere near the lunar surface.
You would think, just based on the high political cost of a TV
camera failure (assuming the real objective the Apollo program was
to simply "beat the Russians to the Moon"), that they would have at
least taken the color camera on board the lander as a backup, in
case the SSTV camera failed.
In fact, this is exactly what was done
on later missions, with the exception that the Sequential Color
Camera was the primary TV camera and SSTV camera the back-up.
Instead, we had only one chance to record the historic events of
that day, and it would all be recorded by a black and white camera
that used about as much power as single Christmas light bulb.
Imagine the political embarrassment had the SSTV camera failed to
All of this really only makes sense in the context of our arguments.
If NASA had nothing to hide, if the high level puppet masters that
ran the program under the auspices of the various secret societies
had nothing to hide, then why not send the best possible TV camera
to record our historic victory over the Soviets and communism
Unless, of course, they could not be sure just what the audience at
home (or the honest engineers at the monitors) might actually see if
they were allowed to. So they sent the worst TV system they had,
which was then downgraded even more by the scan conversion process.
Fahrouk El Baz, Ken Kleinknecht and Wernher Von Braun must have
breathed a huge sigh of relief when the images of Armstrong came
back ghostly, dark, and full of contrast.
Interestingly, the color camera was carried on Apollo 12 as the
primary camera, without the SSTV as a back-up. A few minutes after
deployment of the camera, Alan Bean managed to violate his training
and point it directly into the sun, which badly damaged the
receiver. This rendered the camera useless.
On subsequent missions, the TV transmissions got better and better.
However, the Sequential Color Camera only received a gamma
correction capability on the last three missions (Apollo 15, 16, and
17) and all of the transmissions were run through a bandwidth
limiting "low-pass" filter which dramatically reduced the image
When you put all this together, we feel it strengthens our arguments
considerably. Despite the existence of a vastly superior color
technology, NASA chose to send an unproven and very poor quality
black and white camera to the Moon on Apollo 11.
This is exactly the
behavior you would expect if the powerful cabal inside the agency
was concerned about how much viewers would be able to see.
when they did finally send a color camera, they ran the signal
through a "brute force" filter to effectively limit the bandwidth of
the color image, and then managed to "stage" an accident once they
had enough test footage. On subsequent missions, the cameras got
better, but were always limited in both contrast and detail by the
gamma correction and low pass filter problems.
So the only existing unfiltered TV images of the lunar landings are
the original SSTV images. With today's digital processing
capabilities, how much we might glean from those nearly 40 year old
tapes? Instead, all we know for certain is that the same agency that
ordered Ken Johnston to destroy the only remaining four sets of
early generation negatives and prints of the hand held Apollo
photography also removed these tapes from the National Archives for
"permanent retention" in their own facility.
And then promptly "lost" them.
We doubt, quite honestly, that they will ever be found.
The second breakthrough of which we spoke was the sudden, public
availability of a veritable flood of new Apollo lunar images (which
would ultimately turn out to be literally thousands...), placed
without fanfare on the web.
These high quality "close-to-original" Apollo films - scanned at
very high resolution (averaging around 16 MB) by NASA's
Houston-based Johnson Space Center (JSC) - had begun to quietly be
"leaked" to the general public beginning in 2006, through multiple,
official NASA websites. This immense amount of data, suddenly
"dumped" on the web [on such sites as the Apollo Lunar Surface
Journal (ALSJ)], abruptly made possible Enterprise analyses never
before practical - starting with a one-to-one "calibration" of the
validity of the entire database.
By comparing the new NASA "JSC" scans to Ken Johnston's original,
30-year-old Houston data, stored safely away in his private archive
for all those years, I realized we could quantitatively test the
information contained in the newly-released images, by directly
comparing them to the pristine details present on Ken's
originally-preserved images ....
The immediate results were outstanding [Fig. E-2]
When the two versions of AS14-66-9301 ("Mitchell Under Glass" ...)
were compared side-by-side, it was obvious that much of the amazing
"geometric sky detail" seen on Johnston's original 1971-era Apollo
14 "C-print" (above-left), was still visible on the 2006 ALSJ scan
(above-right). However, differences were also very obvious ... with
Ken's 30-year-old print showing, by far, that it was MUCH closer (as
it should have been) to the original NASA data acquired on the Moon
than the new Apollo Lunar Surface Journal "web scans."
Since this first experiment had proven that a significant percentage
of the original geometric information on Ken's print had been
successfully passed on - even across the countless generations of
analog copies made over those 30+ years between its original
Hasselblad source negative and the much later ALSJ scans - I decided
to press on with a search for a second Apollo 14 ALSJ Archive image,
one that might have independently captured the same crucial
"shattered dome geometry" at the Apollo 14 landing site. I quickly
ALSJ Archive frame AS 14-66-9279 [Fig. E-3])-a photograph Alan
Shepard took while standing on the east side of the LM - contains
major elements of the same scattered light geometry as seen on Ken's
version of "9301" (where Shepard was standing to the west when he
took that amazing photograph)..
Though, again, nowhere near as detailed as Ken's pristine
30-year-old version, the correspondence of the major sky features in
the two separate Apollo 14 images definitively, scientifically
proves that the deep blue, ancient lunar glass dome - seen arching
over the Edgar Mitchell on frame 9301 - is not a photographic
In fact, after going through the entire newly-released ALSJ Archive
for Apollo 14,1 ultimately found four independent Hasselblad scans -
all showing the same general "towering glass geometry" visible on
Ken Johnston's original print. You can't get much better scientific
validation for a controversial optical phenomenon than four
independent photographic confirmations!
Having these immediate positive results, I was encouraged to begin
downloading as many of the newly added, high-resolution frames -
from all the Apollo Lunar Missions - as I could over the next
My objective: find independent, multi-mission
confirmations of anomalous phenomena indicative of lunar glass-like
ruins - such as the tell-tale brightening on images above sunlit
lunar features. Since natural rocks and craters have sharp, solid
edges, "fuzziness" of lighting along the lunar limb, for example,
would be significant evidence of light-diffusion and scattering by
If I could identify a handful of such criteria, and then find
corroboration for each of these on a succession of separate NASA
photographs taken during a particular Apollo mission - such as the
preceding confirmation of the diffuse "sky geometry" first seen on
Ken Johnston's original Apollo 14 print - and, in addition, find
similar confirmations on multiple Apollo missions... then I could
consider those collective anomalous phenomena as "proven."
One striking Archive image was an Apollo 15 frame (AS15-88-12013
[Fig. E4]), taken "post-Trans Earth Injection" (TEI) - after the
Service Module engine had placed the combined Command/ Service
Module on a lunar escape trajectory, homeward-bound toward Earth
after the successful three-day Mission to Hadley Rille.
Taken "looking back" as Apollo 15 was rapidly climbing away from the
Moon, this image provides startling evidence that much of the Moon's
Earth-facing hemisphere was/is "domed over"... as determined by the
scattering of diffuse sunlight being reflected off remnants of the
surviving "glass-like domes."
These domes are visible in this
amazing image as a ghostly, bluish, cloud-like semi-circle
faithfully following the curving lunar limb (see also Color Fig.
16). This intense backscattering quickly fades with altitude - like
a "meteor-bombarded 'prairie fire'" - eventually blending into the
expected black background of space tens of miles above the lunar
surface. It looks, for all the world, exactly like the Earth's
bluish "airglow limb." Except the Moon, as we all know, has no
So it has to be something else.
Combining this key Apollo 15 observation of the whole Moon with
close-ups of this same phenomenon photographed from close-in lunar
orbit (the stunning geometric glass "rebar" photographed over Sinus
Medii by the crew of Apollo 10 - see Color Figs. 2 and 3) provides
two, completely independent confirmations of this same anomalous
light scattering phenomenon.
The only reasonable interpretation of these independent Apollo
observations is that both missions were, in fact, photographing the
diffuse light-scattering created by trillions of surviving fragments
from miles-high, glass-like lunar domes.
But the next late developments win - hands down - the Disclosure
Prize ... for revealing just how much NASA has lied to us, all these
years, about what's really on the Moon.
The story begins with our long-time friend and colleague in this
Enterprise investigation, Steve Troy.
As noted earlier, Steve is our
"analog" photographic expert; he has spent a small private fortune
over the last ten years ordering the lowest generation (best
quality) hard-copy NASA lunar negatives from various NASA
photographic archives including the National Space Science Data
Service (NSSDC), the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory (LPL), and NASA
Headquarters itself. With a NASA negative in hand, Steve then
commissions a commercial photo lab to make enlarged, sectional
prints - which he then both goes over almost "grain by grain"
(literally, with a hand magnifying glass) as well as scans with a
The result is a careful tabulation of increasing numbers
of "lunar anomalies" - for future close-up imaging when new NASA (or
other lunar missions) someday return to photograph the Moon again.
Some of these planned new spacecraft will contain amazing optical
instruments - such as NASA's new "Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter,"
scheduled to begin a "meter-scale" photographic survey of the entire
Moon, beginning in late 2008.
Just a few weeks before this book finally went to press, Steve
forwarded an e-mail from a correspondent in Italy; the individual in
question had his own NASA anomaly website and wanted Steve's opinion
on some recent lunar images he'd found and posted.
After looking at the site, I was curious about the source for the
high-quality NASA lunar images Steve's friend had somehow located.
A quick search revealed another Italian site - www.spacearchive.net/
-where Steve's correspondent procured the images he'd originally
asked about. The "SpaceArchive" site was not only professional and
well-organized (with downloadable pages of "contact sheets,"
arranged by specific NASA missions) it seemed to contain some truly
remarkable low-generation NASA lunar images.
In fact - the best I'd ever seen, outside of Ken Johnston's
30-year-old private NASA stash.
One such image, after downloading [Fig. E-5], revealed a stunning
portrait of the REAL "glass landscape" arching over Taurus-Littrow,
the Apollo 17 landing site.
Blatantly visible is not only an almost blinding lunar sky - FILLED
with obviously battered glass constructions - but one also riddled
with "huge gaping holes" and quasi-vertical, mysterious "dark linear
And, on one of the major background mountains to the SE is a huge,
long, brilliant "spar"... casually leaning on the massive "massif!"
The view fully corroborates Gene Cernan's own emotional reaction to
actually seeing all this, first-hand so many years ago:
"Man, you talk about a mysterious looking place!"
Here [Fig. E-6] is an annotated version of this astonishing new
This astonishing close-up [Fig. E-7], from frame AS 17-136-20767,
confirms several extraordinary additional details of "lunar dome
construction" that we've been proposing over the years - starting
with the "prairie fire effect" seen along the left-hand crest (and
on the far right.,.) of the massive "mountain" that dominates the
view (the "mountain" is "Mons Vitruvius" - according to NASA - just
another ancient, eroded lunar massif... over a mile high).
totally anomalous "scattering phenomenon" is revealing confirmation
of a key prediction of our overall "dome model" - obviously
representing the surviving, battered shards of meteor-smashed glass,
whose remaining density is directly proportional to their ability to
scatter sun light.
The "lunar mountain" beneath this shattered glass is obviously being
systematically eroded from the top down (which is why the optical
density is highest just above the "mountain's" surface); this
incessant micro-meteorite "rain" is thus relentlessly whittling away
- over millions of years - at the vast mass of what is, in fact, the
ruins of another former three-dimensional, honeycombed, mile-sized
lunar structure ... an ancient lunar "arcology!"
Extending far above this ancient eroding arcology
- in this brightness-enhanced version of the original NASA image -
is not the pure black of space expected on any official photograph
taken from the surface of the Moon, but an obviously
three-dimensional matrix, of more porous, semi-transparent, similar
light-scattering material, effectively turning the lunar blackness
overhead into a glittering, shiny "curtain"...
Photographic confirmation of Alan Bean's own haunting lunar memories
"up there, space has a real shiny look. It reminded me a little
bit of (black] patent-leather shoes..."
In our continuing analysis of "the real Moon," this one image is now
total confirmation of the cumulative "optical depth effect" of
literally tens of miles of an extremely sparse, now almost totally
obliterated (otherwise, the Lunar Module Challenger couldn't have
gotten down through it safely to the surface... and returned to
orbit!), former full-blown lunar glass dome... arching far above
the surface of the Taurus-Littrow Valley.
And, if you look closely at this image, you will also see -
apparently imprisoned within this all-encompassing light-colored
"matrix" - a few surviving, larger fragments... more-resistant
objects "still hanging" above Mons Vitruvius... embedded in the
glass! (These cannot be, by the way, stars or other distant
background reflections - the photographic exposure times on the
lunar surface were far too short).
But the most amazing thing, by far, is the gigantic, unquestionably
artificial-looking "linear spar," leaning up against the side of
Mons Vitruvius ... gently sagging - like a "Titan's straw" - under
the obvious effects of lunar gravity!
At the upper end, where this amazing artifact is visibly extending
out of the shadow of the supporting "mountain," there is some kind
of obvious "mechanical linkage." There is also a hint of a
corresponding mechanical "fitting" is attached to the lower end, a
thin filament partially hidden beyond and below the relatively
near-by lunar horizon. This then raises the obvious amazing
Did Gene Cernan and Harrison Schmidt, during their first EVA, drive
the lunar rover the few miles to the lower end of this amazing
artifact... and retrieve an obvious sample of "lunar dome
construction" for return to Earth! And, would they 'remember" ... if
Stunned by discovering such an obviously pristine NASA frame - and
on a public, international website - I immediately downloaded three,
sequentially numbered similar images of Taurus-Littrow, also listed
at the site... and promptly confirmed even more extraordinary
aspects of this amazing scene.
On a wide-angle panorama [Fig. E-8] - assembled by taking four of
these Hasselblad frames and fitting them together - the pervasive
light-colored "matrix" in the sky is revealed to extend across the
entire Valley; the "holes" and "dark, vertical formations" are
clearly the result of "something" smashing through the glass, and
removing a significant fraction of the "light-scattering material"
in those locations.
Exactly what you would expect of an
extraordinarily ancient, physically real "lunar dome" ....
The "prairie fire effect" of the densest, surviving glass still
covering individual features underneath this former dome, can be
seen in this panorama to extend all along the optical "ridgeline,"
formed by the silhouettes of the other "massifs" that create the
southern boundary of the Taurus-Littrow Valley - from "Mons
Vitruvius" (on the far left) ... to "South Massif (on the right).
The glass is apparently densest just over the summit of South
Massif, indicating that (maybe), as Keith Laney has proposed, this
is the "youngest arcology" built within the Valley ... of course, at
[Fig. E-9] is a close-up of the center-section of mysterious "dark
streaks" - and the stark "missing slices" in the glass-like material
still hanging in the sky.
The ultimate political explanation for the sudden appearance of this
astonishing set of original NASA images - and on an international
website! - would be extremely revealing.
But even without knowing
the details (like how a webmaster of an obscure Italian NASA archive
site suddenly came by untouched, original NASA images - and of the
real Taurus-Littrow - photographed over 30 years ago by Schmidt and
Cernan), we can certainly speculate.
In the same timeframe that official NASA websites in this Country
are abruptly posting thousands of never-before-seen "best" scanned
NASA images of the Apollo Program, I find it hard to believe the
appearance of a set of really best lunar images (apart from Ken
Johnston's, of course) - and on a foreign website - "just happened"
to occur simultaneously; this really looks like a deliberate leak
from "someone" inside NASA, with access to some of the astonishing
originally suppressed Apollo imaging.
And, the "coincidental" email to
Steve Troy, which prompted me to do a bit of searching - just as
Mike and I were wrapping up this book - is also just a bit too cute
in terms of timing...
Bottom line: the stunning "Italian images" are profoundly revealing
- not just for what they show... but for what they politically
That the other recently scanned and released Apollo images, on the
Apollo Lunar Surface Journal website (and others) - stated as
"coming directly from original JSC film" did not. That, like
everything else with NASA - going back to its very creation just
under half a century ago - they are merely another carefully
controlled version of the Truth...
Which "someone" inside NASA apparently decided to expose - by
"leaking" (with exquisite timing and "plausible deniability") a
smidgeon of stunning real Apollo data to this Italian website.
Or, to paraphrase John Erlichmann (of Watergate notoriety):
The ALSI images represent, at best, "just another limited 'NASA
Speaking of revolutionary NASA space photography ....
Another major, late development was the sudden acquisition of the
first, long-awaited MRO image of the Face on Mars.
For literally a year, we (and a lot of other folks...) had been
impatiently and intensely looking forward to the first Cydonia image
that would be taken (due to overwhelming "popular demand" -
according to NASA spokespersons) by MRO's "HiRISE" - the High
Resolution Imaging Science Experiment telescope/ camera. HiRISE -
with a 19.5-inch-wide telescope mirror (I kid you not!), and CCD
camera capable of acquiring images over 20,000 pixels wide -
represents by far the largest and most powerful imaging system ever
sent to Mars."
As we were closing out the book, NASA finally, quietly, acquired and
released from HiRISE the first truly spy-camera quality,
ultra-high-resolution image of the Face [Fig. E-10]. At slightly
less than "11 inches per pixel" (compared to previous
"high-resolution" images of some ~4 feet per pixel) the MRO Face
image represents, by far, the best ever taken of this still
intensely controversial Martian surface feature.
As usual, all the critics immediately proclaimed that the new Face
image "finally, overwhelmingly, proves that the 'face' is just a
pile of rocks!" Not quite....
As with any work of art, there is the persistent problem that I have
dubbed in previous years "the Gigi Factor" (from the classic 1950's
film by the same name, in which Maurice Chevalier plaintively asks
in song "have I been standing up too close... or back too far?"); if
you're too far way, you won't be able to recognize the art; if
you're too close, all you will see are brush strokes ....
In all the typical presentations of the Face on Mars, the image
above is how it is inevitably published: a small-scale reproduction,
where various folks then throw around totally subjective opinions on
"what it looks like."
After over 30 years, and probably a hundred (yes, a hundred ...)
repeated imagine of "The Face" since 1998 - curiously acquired by
an Agency which repeatedly, simultaneously, professes with each new
image "this is an object of NO scientific interest..." - you'd think
people would pretty much be past repeating the same tired "instant
reactions" to each retaking of "new" images.
Of course, after the original first "new" imaging of the Face, by
NASA's Mars Surveyor spacecraft in 1998, we at Enterprise
immediately realized that trying to evaluate the potential
artificial possibilities for this object (and its surrounding
structures) - based on "what does it look like?" - were not only
unscientific ... they were pointless. There is no possibility of
determining the objective reality of a subjective "work of art" -
and on another planet! - via such unscientific, "opinion-based"
criteria, let alone "proving" it... to anyone.
Thus, we have waited patiently (for more than 25 years ...) for
NASA's space technology to evolve (or, be "allowed" to evolve ... a
la "Brookings") to the point where an unmanned robotic mission could
be sent to Mars with a powerful enough telescope/camera to actually
see the structural elements that, if the Face is artificial, have to
Things like "rooms," and "walls" with exposed "beams," "girders,"
etc. etc. With the new MRO Face image-that has now occurred.
So, what do we finally see close-up in the new Face image? With a
resolution per pixel of about a foot (!), and a file size of over
300 megabytes, the resolution is finally good enough to detect these
critical, small-scale architectural elements from orbit!
In this case, to prove the Face is artificial, we have to see the
"brush strokes" - if this is, in fact, an intelligent mile-sized
work of art.
And, we do!
Proof of the scientific validity (and practicality) of this approach
came in the months leading up to this unannounced April, 2007
acquisition of MRO's first image of the Face.
Soon after the
spacecraft began routine science operations (in September, 2006) MRO
was commanded to take an image of one of NASA's unmanned "stars"
still operating on the Martian surface, the Opportunity Mars Rover -
perched on the edge of a half-mile-wide Martian impact crater in the
"Meridianii" region of the planet. From its circular orbit of about
180 statute miles straight overhead, the MRO ~ 19.5-inch HiRISE
telescope/camera combination looked down ... and snapped an
astonishingly detailed picture of a known "man-made artifact" on the
surface of Mars.
As can be seen in this comparative enlargement, not only were the ~
5-inch Rover wheel tracks in the sand easily visible from orbit (!),
the shadow of the 3-inch-wide, 3-foot-high camera mast [Fig. E-ll] -
stretching out across the Martian Meridianni desert in the late
afternoon sun - was also clearly visible... from 180 miles!
If there were "eroded walls and girders" on the Face (and on the
other artificial structures all over Mars that we've identified),
this stunning demonstration of the visual acuity of the MRO "HiRISE
camera" proved that we would be able to detect them!
The MRO images (unlike other NASA photographs discussed earlier...)
are NOT "tampered with."
Given the demonstrable hold
"Brookings" has had on the "honest side" of NASA for so long, the
relentless way the dishonest side has used this aging 1950's
sociological Study to repeatedly justify its continuing censorship
of "what is really out there" - to instill an almost palpable fear
in those scientists and engineers who might be moved to openly
discuss what NASA's really found in the way of "ET artifacts" on
other planets in the solar system - the fate of such a powerful new
tool orbiting Mars, and the stunning images it can obviously now
acquire, was (and is ..) still quite uncertain, even at this
So, when the first NASA MRO "Face image" was suddenly released, just
before we closed out the final sections of this book, we (along with
everyone else) truly did not know what to expect. However, after
spending many days enlarging and analyzing different sections of
this enormous object (the Face possesses almost two square miles of
exposed surface area for such analyses...), we have came to three
A) This NASA image is NOT up to the technical standards of previous
MRO images of Mars - such as the Odyssey Rover photo just discussed;
for some inexplicable reason, the MRO "Face" image possesses a
significant amount of what imaging scientists call "noise" - both as
"random noise" across the entire image, and in the form of rhythmic,
handed patterns. The latter appear as equally-spaced bars, both
vertical and on a diagonal. This peculiar and intrusive "banding"
tends to obscure the real, geometrically designed surface patterns
we are searching for underneath (which may explain their presence
...) that represent the signature of actual artificial Martian
B) There are portions of this image, on the Face itself and on
nearby formations, which show the tell-tale signs of image tampering
with a "blur-tool," a device used to obscure detail in a digital CCD
image such as this one.
But 2) despite this handicap, there are now clearly-defined remnants
of artificial constructions - ruins! - easily visible all across
this extraordinary object... as you can see [Fig. E-12].
In this composite MRO Face image, the small area to the right of the
"nose area" (outlined) is the "footprint" of the enlarged section
(inset). In this enlargement one can easily discern row upon row of
obviously collapsed geometric ruins.
The striking, orderly
arrangement includes a blatant, stair-stepped "wall" descending
through the center of the image, as well as a host of other, equally
rectilinear ruins below this blatantly geometric configuration.
The key to proper interpretation of aerial or satellite imagery of
man-made ruins on Earth lies in noting the multiple examples of
"parallel walls" and redundant rectilinear geometry; natural
geologic features cannot present - except in very restricted
contexts (where other geologic clues must also be present) - these
repeating demonstrations of redundant geometric regularities and
90-degree relationships: right angle, enclosed rooms; repeating
linear wall alignments; and redundant examples of geometrically
organized "uniform-width" features.
Intelligently-designed ruins always do.
So, in comparing this same MRO sectional enlargement [Fig. E-13]
with an aerial photograph of a 5 century terrestrial middle eastern
ruin, note the number of strikingly parallel, regular geometric
features that both images present, including those which even look
strikingly like "avenues" and "roads" in the MRO Face image! And ...
all those parallel-width walls.
Further, in spite of obvious evidence of substantial erosion and
decay, redundant examples are present in this MRO enlargement of
entire "enclosed courtyards," "deliberately aligned constructions,"
and evidence of a "large-scale, organizational plan."
It is the presence of these multiple examples of "recognizable,
architectural geometries" - in even this small region of the Face -
that now confirms that this extraordinary object is, indeed, host to
multiple artificial structures.
But, there is more.
Examining another region of the Face - this one approximately a mile
from the first location, further down on the flat "platform section"
at the base of the "chin area" - reveals another type of equally
obvious constructions [Fig. E-14].
Sand and debris-filled, geometric "cavities" - strikingly similar to
ancient Anasazi ruins in the American Southwest [Fig. E-15].
The fact that these ruined structures look somewhat different from
the previous examples high above, near the Face's "nose," is due to
two critical conditions:
1) The original architectural geometry was truly different -
composed of larger (and deeper) individual "cells," consistent with
a structural foundation for the vast mass of the entire "Face"
2), the ruins' current physical location - on the flat "platform
area," at the base of the "chin" slope - allows all the eroded
debris from higher on that slope to cascade down ... into these deep
geometric cavities of former "rooms."
A third striking example of "artificiality" is on the forehead of
the Face [Fig. E-16].
Captured in this region of the MRO Face image (outline-above), this
geometric structure is a ~ 800-foot-long, multi-storied ruin - now
almost totally obliterated by time and erosion. It is located just
below the boundary between the heavily-eroded "cubicle transition
zone" of a former surface coating above the "forehead," and an even
more eroded, flat, "depression area," located above the Face's
The western end of this multi-leveled structure is the most
recognizable as artificial - revealing complex, 3-D rectilinear
geometry and parallel aligned shadows. There are additional ruins to
the east, casting additional tell-tale geometric shadows on the
patterned "ground." A similar-scaled set of "Iranian hilltop forts"
[Fig. E-17] reveal comparable manmade ruined structures here on
Our next example is even more extraordinary - once you get past the
fact that the sheer existence of ANY "ruins" on the Face is totally
"extraordinary" - because NONE of these obviously artificial
structures should even be there ....
Here [Fig. E-18] is where this striking example lurks - at the base
of the Face's eastern "platform."
As can be seen from the detailed image comparison (below - top and
bottom), what we are seeing is a "small," strikingly rectangular
collapsed section of the Martian surface at the base of the much
larger "Face platform" - an in-fallen section, measuring
approximately 1000 feet long by several hundred feet wide ... and
several hundred feet deep.
Fascinating, vertical striations can be
seen all along the right hand (eastern) edge of this deep "chasm,"
indicative of surviving structural columns - still holding up a
multi-layered section of exposed, three-dimensional, distinctly
honey-combed artificial surface structure [Fig. E-19].
three-dimensional geometric patterns, carefully aligned with the
major rectangular axis of this "collapse feature," can be seen
further to the east (above - top right) - presenting an overall
pattern of "a massive, three-dimensional, inexorably deteriorating
The impression of "looking down through multiple levels ... of a
vast, three-dimensional, highly-battered architectural framework..."
is now inescapable [Fig. E-20].
Our last example is obviously (since, I've saved the best for
last...) the most amazing of these enlarged "snapshots" I've been
able to capture from the full resolution MRO image: a series of
obviously high-tech, obviously collapsed entire 3-D structures ...
located on the "chin" of the Face - specifically, on the now highly
eroded "bottom lip" [Fig. E-21].
An enlarged comparison - between this magnified section of the MRO
image, and an entire, tilted (from a recent local earthquake) modern
apartment house in South America [Fig. E-22] - illustrates the
crucial point; if you look carefully at the top image, you will
notice a bewildering number of straight lines, sharp edges,
90-degree angles, flat sides and more of those "parallel-width
walls." These are all unnatural features, never seen on any ordinary
"geological" formation, and certainly not in such extraordinary
numbers and close, repetitive association.
These are the inevitable hallmark of closely-associated, shattered
and eroding hightech structures, whose sheer presence is an
overwhelming confirmation of the completely artificial nature of the
As can be seen in the lower image [Fig. E-22], these same striking
geometric relationships are found in any modern city - the
inevitable consequence of the construction of repetitive,
multi-storied structures formed from basic geometric units.
So, what happens if you partially destroy (tilt, or even knock down)
one or more of these constructed, closely adjacent units?
The result is vividly illustrated in [Fig. E-22]: you then see
multiple sets of mutually conflicting rectilinear geometry ...
exactly like what we see, over and over again, in this astonishing
small section of the Face!
And, if you look carefully at an annotated enlargement [Fig. E-23],
you can even see the infamous "beams and girders" we've been
predicting for over a decade now, that had to be confirmed in any
sufficiently high-resolution image of this ancient "high-tech
Because..., nothing in this image is natural. Let me repeat that: nothing that
you see in this MRO enlargement [Fig. E-23]is natural.
Natural geology doesn't come with "parallel walls," "multiple, 3-D
planes," "twisted beams" - or repetitive examples of obvious "thin
High-tech structures always do ... regardless of their specific
We have been proposing for over 15 years that the Face is, in fact,
just such a massive assemblage of ancient, high-tech buildings - a
literal "headquarters." MRO's stunning first image of The Face on
Mars - and the multiple examples we've presented and discussed in
this brief analysis of that first image - now totally support that
We see the ubiquitous, redundant presence - across all sections of
this mile-wide, upturned "statute" - of striking "geometric
patterns," "parallel walls," "rectilinear collapsed, sand-filled
rooms" and even the elevated remains of a few, still
clearly-recognizable, entire, tilted building fragments!
After more than 20 years of investigating Cydonia, after proposing
test after scientific test for "archaeology," to essentially "deaf
ears" in the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and even
(at times) not just apathy but against heavy official opposition
from this same Agency ... it's finally: Game... set... match!
The "Face on Mars" - after over a generation of ambiguous evidence,
rancorous debate and even outright NASA-manipulated data (certainly,
the first MGS Face image in 1998) - turns out to be exactly what we
said it was at the United Nations in 1992.
The most unique example of an extraordinary honeycombed arcology in
the solar system - because it looks like us, or, something we once
Still standing on the planet Mors.
Testimony to an extraordinary solar-system full of ancient,
ineffable ruins ... left by an incredible civilization that (for
reasons we must now figure out, and soon), completely,
Leaving only us.
The most serendipitous Enterprise discovery in all our years, of
course, is "C3-PO," lying at the bottom of "Shorty Crater" on the
Moon. His discovery, more than any other aspect of this long
investigation, changes everything.
If he is a genuine thinking robot, endowed with bona fide
"artificial intelligence" (AI), he represents an entirely new way of
looking at this unknown, now-vanished brilliant civilization ...
which left countless wonders abandoned, not only across the Moon,
but all across the solar system.
The implications of that one fact - if it is a "fact" - and if the
astronauts found and brought "him" home (or another robot like him -
from any of the other Apollo landing sites) - obviously would have
sent Shockwaves throughout Washington ... if not (certainly among
the "in crowd") all around the world. This discovery, not
"economics," or "lack of interest in the Moon" by the American
people during the end of the Apollo Program, in our opinion was
quite likely the real reason why the entire Program was so suddenly
and so unceremoniously terminated.
And, why no one has gone near the Moon ... for almost forty years.
Because, his stunning presence on the Moon compellingly indicates that "Man"
may have been preceded in this solar system, in addition to his own
ancestors, by a vast integrated population of "other intelligences."
The overriding question then becomes, in light of "Brookings," what
if there are others like him "out there" - but - still functioning?!
What if this was NASA's real "Dark Mission" all along ... to find
and bring to Earth a functioning member of this projected AI
population - a robot that the in-crowd could ultimately interrogate
about the literal "secrets of the Universe"... firsthand?
As we go to press, there is much that could not be covered in this
volume, simply because of space and time considerations.
demonstrated the "what" behind NASA's peculiar behavior vis-a-vis
the "artifacts question" over the years. We have shown that their
original assertions about the Face and Cydonia - that it was just a
trick of light and shadow - are fallacious. We have demonstrated
their duplicitous behavior with the Catbox image and the THEMIS
We have shown that NASA and its appendant bodies,
like JPL, are willing to go to extreme lengths to disabuse the
public from the notion that Mars once harbored life. They've even
gone as far as grinding a possible fossil to dust rather than study
it openly. Can one seriously doubt at this point that NASA has been
manipulative - at the least - around the question of past or present
life on Mars?
We have further shown that there is an undeniable "Orion-Osiris"
Egyptian connection to both the Apollo program and our new space
We have shown that all of the major power brokers inside
NASA at the time of the Apollo program had connections to one of
three secretive societies. And each of these societies has as its
core faith a reverence for the same three ancient Egyptian gods;
Isis Osiris and Horus. We have shown, over and over again, that key
moments in NASA's exploration of the solar system have been planned
around "stellar rituals" that pay homage to these long forgotten
"gods" of ancient Egypt.
What we recognize we have yet to prove is the "why" of this strange
behavior. The Brookings report alone seems insufficient to explain
the artifacts cover-up and even less adequate to explain the occult
naming rituals and curious affinity for stellar alignments. After
forty years of Star Trek and
Star Wars, we would seem to have a populace that is not simply
conditioned, but eager to find extraterrestrial life, or its
Yet still, NASA hesitates, ignoring the obvious evidence
and cloaking their true objectives in posters and paintings,
spacecraft names and odd rituals. To find this truth, we will have
to look back in time once again, not only to the occult history of
NASA itself, but to our nation's founding and our own esoteric
history as a people.
Finally, we must ask the question that NASA fears the most; that it
must never allow to be asked:
"If there are ruins on Mars, and ruins
on the Moon, what happened to the builders of them?"
If this was Apollo's ultimate "deep black mission" - a Mission that
John F. Kennedy was somehow convinced to undertake at the beginnings
of his Administration - is this also, as we've asked earlier, the
real reason for his murder?
Was his discovery of NASA's potential secret motivation for Apollo
the hidden reason he quietly decided to turn around and share our
lunar program with our "arch enemies" only a few months after its
announcement? Did those protracted, behind-the-scenes negotiations
with Nikita Khrushchev in the end, get him killed?
Based on the disturbing, compelling mosaic this combined scientific
and documentary evidence now paints of NASA - and its unquestionably
treasonous actions over these last ~40 years - we believe we have
finally grasped the outlines - and have attempted to accurately
reflect them hereof the staggering truth that has silently,
simultaneously, both impelled and cowed the Space Agency for all
That, the Human Race lives in a solar system surrounded by a vast
array of "silent, ancient ghosts"... countless extinct
"extraterrestrial humans," just like ourselves - in fact, our own
"great, great, great, great, great, great... ancestors" - who once
lived ... and built... and walked amid what are still the almost
incomprehensible remains of an awesome extraterrestrial
civilization, spread across more than one adjoining world.
That, this is the ultimate meaning
of "the Face on Mars"...
That, this is the real, hidden meaning of Neil Armstrong's infamous
(and still deliberately "spun") "misstatement" - as he stepped for
the first time onto the surface of the Moon that unforgettable July
20 night in 1969.
With almost a billion people watching live,
Armstrong uttered those still endlessly debated words:
"That's one small step for Man... one giant leap for Mankind..."
What Armstrong was actually acknowledging - to a "hidden audience"
in code that night - as he, representing "Man," stepped onto the
lunar surface for perhaps the first time in tens of thousands of
years... was that the human race ("Man") is only a subset of a
vastly larger, vastly more ancient, vastly more knowledgeable, but
genetically related "Mankind."
And that we had somehow crawled up
from the ashes of that once grand civilization, to do the same as
they had done, to travel to another world, and touch the face of the
That - this is the True History of the Human Race, the clandestine
reason for the creation and naming of "Apollo"... if not the
ultimate "Dark Mission" for the existence of NASA itself? Was this
the "protective layer of truth" that Armstrong implored the young
people of America to remove at the 25 anniversary celebration of
We may never know. After all, as one of our intelligence sources
admitted about NASA some years ago:
"The lie is different at every level."
of scan-converted TV broadcast from Apollo 11
(left) vs. Polaroid photos
of SSTV monitors at Parkes tracking
station in Australia (right).
Another example from the current NASA archive showing
of the amazing structures found on Ken Johnston's original
Astonishing "airglow limb" from Apollo 15 "lookback"
image of the Moon. See also color figure 16.
Enhancement of Apollo 17 photograph from Taurus Littrow
landing site showing towering glass structures
complete with meteor
damage and a collapsed "spar" resting on Mons Vitruvius.
Close up of the Spar from AS17-136-20767.
Annotated version of AS 17-136-20767 obtained from
Italian website http://www. spacearchive.net/
Artists rendition of mast on Opportunity rover and
visible shadow recorded by MRO.
Rover tracks visible in orbital
image are less than 3 inches across.
1 http://www.enterprisemission.com/images/act-l .gif
Chapter One-The Monuments of Mars
12 Hoagland, Richard C. The Monuments of Mars-A City on the Edge of
Forever. Fourth edition, p. 5.
13 Sagan. Carl. Cosmos, p. 140.
14 The Face on Mars. p. 68.
17 "The McDaniel Report: On the Failure of Executive. Congressional
and Scientific Responsibility in Investigating Possible Evidence of
Artificial Structures on the Surface of Mars and in Setting Mission
Priorities for NASA's Mars Exploration Program." p. 148-156.
18 The Monuments of Mars. p. 185.
19 The McDaniel Report: On the Failure of Executive. Congressional
and Scientific Responsibility in Investigating Possible Evidence of
Artificial Structures on the Surface of Mars and in Setting Mission
Priorities for NASA's Mars Exploration Program."
22 The Monuments of Mars. p. 325.
23 "The McDaniel Report." p. 98-101
24 http: //www.mcdanielreport.com/tvalues.htm,
26 "The McDaniel Report." p. 126.
27 Posting from Ralph Creenberg to the Art Bell BBS. 12:40 p.m..
28 The Nephilim and the pyramid of the Apocalypse. Patrick Heron p.
29 The Nephilim and the pyramid of the Apocalypse, Patrick Heron p.
Chapter Two-Hyperdimensional Physics
30 Hubbard, W. B. Geophys. Space Phys. 18 (1980) 1.
31 Icarus, vol. 112. no. 2. p. 337-353.
32 "An experimental test of non-local realism" by S. Groblacher et.
al. Nature 446, 871, April 2007 | "To be or not to be local" by
Alain Aspect. Nature 446. 866. April 2007
33 "My soul is an entangled knot. Upon a liquid vortex wrought. By
Intellect in the Unseen residing. And thine doth like a convict sit.
With marlinspike untwisting it, Only to find its knottiness abiding:
Since all the tool for its untying." -James Clerk Maxwell. "A
34 Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society. (4 (1887), 54-7)
35 Bulletin of the Calcutta Mathematical Society. Vol. 20,1928-29.
p.202. "Oliver Heaviside: Sage in Solitude" (IEEE Press.
New York. 1988. p.9, note 3.
36 "On the Partial Differential Equations of Mathematical Physics."
(Mathematische Annalen, vol. 57. 1903. p. 333-335|: "On
an Expression of the Electromagnetic Field Due to Electrons by Means
of Two Scalar Potential Functions." (Proceedings of
the London Mathematical Society, vol. 1. 1904. p. 367-372.): Nikola
Tesla. Colorado Springs Notes 1899-1900. Nolit,
Beograd. Yugoslavia. 1978. p. 61-62.
39 Scientific American, September 1975. p. 29.
42 Cook. Alan H. Interiors of the Planets. Cambridge University
Press, p. 261.
43 "High-Resolution Maps of Jupiter at Five Microns." Astrophysics
Journal, vol. 183. p. 1063-1073:
44 "Summary of Historical Data: Interpretation of the Pioneer and
Voyager Cloud Configurations in a Time Dependent Framework."
Science, vol. 204. p. 948-951.; "Infrared Images of Jupiter at
5-Micrometer Wavelength During the Voyager 1 Encounter." Science,
vol. 204. p. 1007-8. Flaser. et. al. "Prospecting Jupiter in the
Thermal Infrared with Cassini CIRS: Atmospheric Temperatures and
Dynamics." American Astronomical Society. DPS meeting #33. #03.01
45 Nelson. J. H. "Planetary Position Effect on Short-Wave Signal
Quality." Electrical Engineering, May 1952.
Chapter Three-Political Developments
50 Light Years - By Gary Kinder - Viking Press ISBN-10: 0670818860
52 The Monuments of Mars. p. 405.
54 The Monuments of Mars. p. 423.
55 Alter its launch in 1991. NASA engineers discovered that a basic
error had been made in the grinding of the Hubble's key reflective
mirror. It was only years later that the optics were repaired on a
shuttle mission, at the cost of hundreds of millions of dollars.
58 SP-4209 The Partnership: A History of the Apollo-Soyuz Test
61 Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States. Lyndon
BJohnson. 1963-19641 (Washington. 1964). pp. 72-73
62 SP-4209 The Partnership: A History of the Apollo-Soyuz Test
63 http://ww.jfMibrary.org/Asset+Tree/Asse^ 946104F2B845%7D&type=lg
67 http://mcadams.posc.rnu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/jfk8/soundl .htm
68 Houston Chronicle coverage, Nov. 22,1963 Edition: Blue Streak, By
STAN REDDING and WALTER MANSELL, Chronicle Reporters
69 Public Law 88215, An act making appropriations... for the fiscal
year ending June 30,1964 88th Cong.. 1st sess.. 1963. p. 16
Chapter Four-The Crystal Towers of the Moon
71 E-mail communication from Ken Johnston Jr. to the authors. July
79 Mechanical Properties of Lunar Materials Under Anhydrous, Hard
Vacuum Conditions: Applications of Lunar Class Structural
Components. Blacic. J. D. In: Lunar Bases and Space Activities of
the 21st Century. Houston. TX, Lunar and Planetary Institute, edited
by W. W Mendell. 1985.p.487 19851bsa.conf.487B
80 The Gold Bulletin
81 http://www.salon.eom/news/feature/l 999/07/20/aldrin/
Chapter Five-A Conspiracy Unfolds
83 All We Did Was Fly Co the Moon. p. 41.
84 Wallis Budge, E. A. Osiris and the Egyptian Resurrection. 1911.
85 Bauval and Gilbert. The Orion Mystery. 1994.
86 Temple. Robert K. G. The Sirius Mystery, 1976.
87 Bauval and Hancock. The Keeper of Genesis. 1996.
88 All We Did Was Fly to the Moon. p. 77.
89 Men From Earth, p. 248.
91 Czarnik, Marvin. "The 'Where' and 'When' of Each Apollo Landing
was Carefully Planned."
93 Knight, Christopher and Robert Lomas. The Hiram Key.
94 "The New Age," Scottish Rite Journal, Volume LXXVII. Number 12.
96 Hunt. Linda. Secret Agenda.
lOrCNN Breaking News." live broadcast. July 4.1997.
102http://www.enterprisemission.com/planet.htm 103Bauval and
Gilbert. The Orion Mystery, 1994. 104Graham Hancock, The Mars
Mystery, p. 50.
Chapter Six-New Mars Global Surveyor Images of Cydonia
Chapter Seven-An Eye for an Eye
I lOE-mail to Mike Bara.
Chapter Eight-FACETS and the Face
Chapter Nine-2001: A Mars Odyssey
124http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/odyssey update 020121 .html
Chapter Ten-Mars Heats Up
133Algorithm Theoretical Basis Document for Decorrelation Stretch,
version 2.2. August 15.1996. Ronald E.
Alley. Jet Propulsion Laboratory.
135Phone conversation between Noel Gorelick and Michael Bara,
September 6th. 2002. 136http://www
137http://www.enterprisemission.com/IRLiesfrornASU.htm 13 8htlp
Chapter Eleven - The True Colors of NASA
143DiGregorio. B., G. Levin and P. Straat. Mars: The Living Planet.
Frog Ltd.. 1997.
Chapter Twelve-Where the Titans Slept...
160Mark Dwane Audio recording.
162http ://www.keithlaney.net/Ahiddenmission/A 17HMp 1 .html
164http ://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/al7/a 17j .html
165http ://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/al7/a 17.html
166Apollo Lunar Surface Journal
Epilogue - Richard C. Hoagland
170http ://www.hq .nasa.gov/alsj/ApolloTV-Acrobat5 .pdf
Richard C. Hoagland, first and foremost, would like to acknowledge
all the folks he has met on this incomparable journey, who have
contributed to where we are today. There are far too many of you,
across far too many years, to thank individually. You know who you
However, I must recognize some of the more outstanding contributions
personally, starting with the talents of my friend and co-author in
this daunting project, Mike Bara; put simply, without Mike this
volume would have never reached your hands. Adam Parfrey, our
esteemed publisher, also deserves considerable credit in that vein -
not only for his unshakable faith in the merits of this work, but
for inordinate patience in the face of almost interminable delays in
seeing its completion.
I also want to send a special "thanks" to Nick and Dana, and Kynthia
- as well as Ken J., Steve T, Keith L.... the "other" Keith
("Scotty" R.)... Stan T, Jay W., David I., David W., Tom VE, Rick
S., Paola H., Paul D., Hollace D., Tim V., Bill A., Robin W., George
G., Ted St. R., Arthur A., Alan C, Michael M., Doris L-M., Boris F.,
Patty M., David K, Charlie B., Bobby T, and Ron G.
Each of you know "why."
A special remembrance also to those colleagues whose contributions
were invaluable, but who are no longer able to contribute - at
least, not from this dimension: David L., Bruce D., Gene M and Gene
To three special furry friends: Luvcky, Shadow and Sasha - whose
boundless loyalty and simple love are unmistakable examples of why
family has never been a species definition; and, further in that
regard, to the entire "Coast to Coast AM family," whose unwavering
support has been a crucial reminder all these years of why we're
doing this - together.
And to Art and George - for keeping us a "family."
Finally, to Robin - without whom, literally, I would not be here...
I love you.
Michael Bara would like to acknowledge the following persons,
without which this project would never have been completed: as
always, my friend, mentor and co-author Mr. Hoagland, the smartest
man I have ever known, Leslie, who changed my life twice, Michael,
of whom I am very proud, my brother Dave, Alyssa and Sherri, whose
friendship has meant more to me than I can articulate, Zaphod, Geo
and Indy, who were constant companions as I worked on this, my mom
and dad, and my sister Kelli.
Steve Troy and Keith Laney, whose
indefatigable work has led to many new discoveries.
About the Authors
Richard C. Hoagland was science advisor to Walter Cronkite and CBS
News during the Apollo program, former curator at the Hayden
Planetarium and consultant to NASA.
He is the co-originator, along
with Eric Burgess, of the British Interplanetary Society, of the
"Pioneer Plaque" currently carrying a message from mankind on the
Pioneer 10 spacecraft. He is the author of The Europa Enigma, the
first extensive scientific article proposing the mechanism by which
life might exist in the oceans of Jupiter's moon Europa.
article became the basis for Arthur C. Clarke's novel 2010. He is
the principal investigator of the Enterprise Mission, an independent
scientific research organization dedicated to the examination of
more than 40 years of NASA data pointing to the possibility of
archaeological ruins on Mars and the Moon.
In 1993, the Angstrom
Foundation, in Stockholm, Sweden, awarded the International Angstrom
Medal of Excellence in Science to Hoagland for that continuing
research. He is the author of the best selling The Monuments of Mars
- A City on the Edge of Forever, now in its fifth edition.
Michael Bara is an aerospace structural engineer with more than
twenty-five years' experience in the field. He is currently a
CAD/CAM consultant for one of the largest engineering software
solution providers in North America. He is the author of numerous
articles on the Enterprise Mission website, as well as on Art Bell's
He is curator of the lunar Anomalies Homepage, a website
dedicated to the investigation of potentially artificial structures
on the Moon.
Back to Contents