The Spaceman Hypothesis

What Does the Evidence Show?

There is a steadily growing mass of evidence that we human beings here on planet Earth share our Solar System with someone else. The evidence that, many thousands of years ago, there was someone on Mars and on our Moon and perhaps elsewhere is very strong, and there is also reason to believe that they are still here and that they are a space faring civilization. They may have originated in some distant star system, but, as we shall see, there is reason to believe that they originated here, close to home. Bear in mind that the Solar System we see today is not the same one that existed millions of years ago; worlds that seem inhospitable now may have harbored life then.

The UFOs reported by ordinary citizens, military, police personnel, and even astronauts indicate that we may have company. Many UFOs may be paranormal manifestations or bizarre life forms, but others appear to be flying craft, apparently using advanced propulsion technologies. While these craft (or some of them) may originate with governments or secret organizations here on Earth, the interplanetary hypothesis is alive and well. Entire books have been written detailing the evidence for UFOs, so a brief summary will suffice here; readers who want to pursue the subject further can buy or borrow the books or consult the many websites dealing with UFOs. Regarding the famous Roswell/Corona incident, I will point out that something clearly crashed there, and there is no way even a ranch hand, let alone military officers, could possibly fail to recognize a balloon, either a weather balloon or a Project Mogul balloon. Neoprene is rubber; foil is foil; balsa wood is balsa wood—and a balloon is a balloon is a balloon. Whatever came down at Roswell, whether an interplanetary craft or a secret government device, was no balloon. The Rendlesham Forest case, where USAF personnel reported a UFO landing and saw it from mere feet away (one even said that he touched it!) is another virtually airtight case, and there are many, many more.

Of special interest are astronaut sightings. From the very beginning of Project Mercury, through Gemini and the Apollo Moon landings, from the Shuttle, and from the International Space Station, sightings have been nearly continuous—and these are just the ones made public. Astronauts Gordon Cooper, “Buzz” Aldrin, James Lovell, Frank Bormann, Scott Carpenter, Donald “Deke” Slayton, and many others have reported unusual objects seen in space. Shuttle pilot Story Musgrave and others saw and filmed a “space eel” that resembles some strange life form. Now, most of us understand that distances (and, hence, the size of objects reported) in space are nearly impossible to estimate; and a presumably large, distant, and fast-moving object may be dust or paint or ice particles floating near the spacecraft. And we know about camera defects and interior reflections on windows. But astronauts are highly intelligent people with superb eyesight, well aware of all this. And what are we to make of objects that stop and start or suddenly change direction? The usual skeptics (really professional debunkers) claim that these are dust or ice flecks struck by blasts from the astronauts’ spacecraft’s attitude control jets. The problem is that they are called “attitude control jets” for a reason; they are fired to make the craft yaw, pitch, or roll. But in film after film the mysterious objects change direction and speed, but the spaceship (as evidenced by the unmoving Earth and stars in the background) does not change its attitude—proof that the jets were not fired and the strange objects have their own propulsion.

I have written elsewhere (AR #118) about the evidence that someone else has been on Mars (and they may still be there), so I will just very briefly summarize it here. There is evidence of life on Mars, including what looks like entire forests of huge “trees.” There are structures that appear artificial, like immense, translucent tubes and rectilinear patterns that look like ancient ruins. There is a large body of circumstantial evidence indicating that the Martian atmosphere is much denser than we have been told. And even NASA/JPL scientists believe, that hundreds of millions of years ago, Mars was warmer and wetter than now, and even had an ocean; so life could very well have existed then, in abundance.

Then there is our own Moon. A photograph of the Lobachevsky Crater on the Lunar far side shows a depression with straight, parallel sides and a tower inside. An enhanced image shows, next to the depression, what looks like a row of huge, parallel pipes with open ends. The Clementine Crater contains what look like buildings and a half-pyramid with dark openings. Stranger still, Apollo 10 (NASA’s label for the picture is AS10-32-4822) photographed a 14-kilometer-high “castle” and its shadow; the same picture also shows “Los Angeles,” a huge, rectilinear pattern. Most of these pictures can easily be found on NASA and other official websites, although there are persistent rumors of vanishing photographs and pictures that have been airbrushed to hide certain things—and some pictures do, indeed, look as if they have been tampered with. There are many other rectilinear structures, and such structures, on such a large scale, are very rare in nature. There are parallel straight lines and artificial-looking structures near Kepler Crater. The “Shard,” photographed by the Lunar Orbiter (LO84M-111) is a one-and-a-half-mile-tall tower that appears damaged. Near it is another tower, an incredible seven miles tall, enlarged at the top. Conceivably, many of the rectilinear structures could have somehow been formed naturally (but no one knows how, and their scale, complexity, and number are very hard to explain), but there is no known natural process that could create structures like these two towers and the “Castle.” The picture of the Shard, by the way, has a cross above it, but this is a marker pre-printed on the film. There are many, many other odd structures on the Moon, including a “ziggurat” in the Daedalus Crater; this does not appear in the current official version of AS-11-38-5564, only on an allegedly original version still on many alternative websites. Either someone has hoaxed the picture (researchers Richard Hoagland and Mike Bara believe it is real) or the current NASA version has been airbrushed.

This is as good a time as any to discuss the oddities of the photographs taken by the Apollo astronauts on the Moon’s surface. Researchers claim that these show that either the Moon landings were a complete hoax or that some pictures were made in studios here on Earth because the real pictures show “alien” craft or artificial structures. I would point out another, relatively innocent possible explanation: many of the real photos may have been of such poor quality that NASA re-created them here on Earth for PR purposes. Whatever the case, some of the most glaring examples include pictures where some shadows go in one direction, and others in another direction, as if made in a studio with at least two lights. Initially, NASA “explained” that these angles were an illusion caused by varying slopes on the lunar surface. Then they changed their story and claimed that they were purely due to the perspective effects of wide-angle lenses. But some of the pictures show shadows diverging at nearly right angles on an obviously near-level surface, with angles utterly unlike those produced by a wide-angle lens. Then there is the Apollo 11 picture of Buzz Aldrin standing on the lunar surface; and he and the ground near him are brightly lit, and the image of the ground gets darker and darker further away from him. On the airless, cloudless Moon, with the Sun fairly high in the sky, this is impossible—the picture, I suggest, was either completely faked or extensively altered.

On the virtually airless Moon, with little internal heat left to drive volcanism, a whole variety of Transient Lunar Phenomena (TLPs) have long been reported. Most of these can perhaps be explained as natural phenomena, including lunar dust, charged by the solar wind, levitating due to static electric repulsion. Earth-based astronomers have reported flashes of light, glows, patches of what looks like fog (perhaps the charged dust mentioned above), and color changes. Astronomers and Apollo astronauts both have seen a strange glow in Aristarchus Crater.

And astronauts have reported UFOs near the Moon. Long after leaving Earth orbit, Apollo 11 astronauts asked Houston about the location of the SIVB, the Saturn rocket third stage (it was 6,000 miles behind them, which they knew perfectly well). Years later NASA admitted that, as many UFOlogists had suspected, this was a way to tell Houston that they had seen a UFO; videos of it have been televised—and the videos were actually from a later mission, for the object, or one like it, shadowed several Apollo craft. NASA “explained” it as “space junk,” but there was no man-made “space junk” near the Moon in 1969, and practically none today. A meteor would had to have magically been on almost exactly the same orbit as Apollo; for this to happen once is almost impossible, and these were seen repeatedly. So NASA changed their “explanation” and claimed that the UFO was one of the panels ejected when the Command Module and LEM separated from the SIVB. If so, why didn’t they say that to begin with? Why wouldn’t the astronauts have recognized such a panel? How could it be on their orbit when the SIVB trailed them by thousands of miles? And, flying just above the Moon, astronauts have reported (and filmed) so many UFOs that they have even coined a name for them: “Moon pigeons.” These, too, are explained as expendable Apollo components jettisoned from the craft and floating nearby, but, if so, why call them “Moon pigeons”? Why would the astronauts not have recognized the components? And the videos have been televised—they look like objects at a distance moving rapidly, roughly parallel to the lunar surface. Jettisoned components, if visible, would be slowly drifting away from the spacecraft.

It appears that if someone is living on (and in) the Moon, they probably came from elsewhere, for it is almost certain that the Moon never had enough air and water to support life on the surface. They clearly have some impressive surface structures, but I suspect that their primary habitats are underground. Richard Hoagland and Mike Bara point to pictures taken by our astronauts that seem to show the hazy remnants of vast structures and suggest that these are the remains of immense glass domes, many miles across, that once enclosed livable habitats with full, balanced ecosystems. The problem with this is that every point on our Moon, save the poles, endures two weeks of daylight alternating with two weeks of night. During the day, temperatures in the domes would rise to well above the boiling point of water, and at night drop to levels far, far colder than Antarctica. Add to this the deadly solar and cosmic radiation and the meteor hazard, and the dome idea is untenable. But what were the artifacts in the pictures? They may be, not domes, but evidence for more fakery, specifically a somewhat sloppy (deliberate?) use of front screen projection—a technique employed in motion picture production, especially by Stanley Kubrick.

So the main habitats would likely be under at least several feet of lunar soil, providing protection from radiation and meteors. Natural lava tube caves might be used, or lunar rills, with a sealed habitat constructed within and then covered over with soil. Some energy source would be required, to provide artificial sunlight, and plants could be grown for food and oxygen. The structures, in the low lunar gravity, could be immense, with ceilings up to a thousand feet high. For all we know, our Moon could well be honeycombed with such habitats to a depth of many miles, supporting a population in the millions.

As to the possible origin of these lunar colonists, in addition to Mars, there are at least two other possibilities. Today, the planet Venus resembles a living Hell, with a barren surface of volcanic rock; and, due to the heat trap effect of its 96% carbon dioxide atmosphere, 92 times as dense as our own (as well as the planet’s proximity to the Sun) a surface temperature hot enough at 462 degrees Celsius to melt lead. The paucity of asteroid craters on its surface shows that its entire crust has been melted and reformed within the last billion years, perhaps even in the last few million years. Incredibly, it rotates backward on its axis compared to the other planets, with a day equal to 243 Earth days. There is one simple explanation for all these anomalies: a massive asteroid struck Venus, which reversed its axial spin, melted its crust, and released vast amounts of CO2. So, prior to this impact, Venus would have been very different. Scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies estimate that, if Venus’ axial spin was similar to Earth’s, then as recently as 715 million years ago, it might have had an average surface temperature about 60 degrees Celsius hotter than Earth’s, or about 74 degrees—very hot but below the boiling point of water. So its polar regions might have had liquid water and life, and a slight chance that an intelligent species developed there and escaped the catastrophe by colonizing our Moon (and perhaps Mars). But I stress that a Martian origin is more likely.

That leaves one other planet where the lunar colonists might have originated: Earth. There is considerable evidence that there was at least one, and probably several cycles of advanced civilizations here, and it is possible that our ancestors colonized this solar system. In fact, for all we know, they may have made it to the stars. So it is possible that our own distant relatives live on the Moon and elsewhere, or Martians live there, or both. And there is one more thing to consider. Given the evidence that our familiar type of DNA may have been spread throughout space, and that even living bacteria may have spread from planet to planet, and the possibility that morphic resonance may drive a kind of parallel “evolution” even on distant planets, there is a good chance that the Martians, if they do exist, may, indeed, be humanoid. On the other hand, human colonists from Earth, after many generations on Mars or our Moon, may have changed their own physical form and might appear “alien.” We may have a very exciting past—and, perhaps, an even more exciting future.

By William B. Stoecker