Writing to Atlantis Rising, via snail mail or e-mail is the best, but not the only way to make your views known to our readers. There are also “forums” on the Atlantis Rising web site (go to www.AtlantisRising.com and select “Discussions”).
Defending Against the Impossible
I’ve just read your editorial in the #68 issue. Your perception that it might indeed be impossible for certain phenomena to appear in any given person’s world is, I think, right on target. I came to the same conclusion several months ago, but from a slightly different point of view, one day while browsing through Skeptic magazineand drinking my hot chocolate at my local Barnes & Noble Cafe. Perhaps what occurred to me then will add another facet to your argument.
As it happens, I am a total believer in the existence of UFOs, am personally friendly with several of the better-known alien abductees, and so on. And yet here was this serious, well-stated and sensibly-argued article that set forth everything I knew to be “white” as “black,” and vice-versa, andwhich authoritatively quoted certain people as making statements about the non-existence of UFOs which statements I know they never made—at least not in my experience. I have been studying the “life” of the soul a lot lately, and believe that each individual soul does enter each new incarnation in a situation specifically set up for that soul’s learning. It has occurred to me that, with physicists telling us that there are an infinite number of universes, perhaps each individual soul in each individual incarnation in fact enters its very own universe (in the same way, perhaps as the crew of the Enterprise, for their entertainment, enter the Holodeck). These universes may well overlap substantially, creating the sense of interaction that we know as “life,” but perhaps in this case the only difference is that my universe has UFOs and the guy who wrote the Skeptic article’s universe does not.
Indeed, if we are each simply an “individuation” of the creative force, we are, whether we know it or not, unlimited in our potential powers and abilities, just as so many philosophical and spiritual traditions suggest.
Your magazine helps greatly to pull together the myriad reminders of all the knowledge our civilization has “forgotten.” Keep up the good work.
Bob Freedman New York, NY
I found the article (“Hidden Agenda?” A.R. #68) to be interesting, as it gave the general drift of Hoagland’s claims while also allowing for the position of those not exactly on Hoagland’s wavelength. Hoagland has been on the religious NASA track for quite some time and that is his approach to the material he studies. It has caused a separation from him by many other researchers.
I don’t know if his stand is correct or not but I do know that he can be a sloppy researcher. One prime example, in his book on page 299 at the bottom the paragraph that begins with “On April 10, 1998….” it continues at the end with: “…it would be good to get images of some of the other pyramidal structures and the odd Giza sized mounds scattered around the Cydonia Plain (fig 6-6).”
On page 307 the title of the page is “Chapter Six, New Mars Global Surveyor Images of Cydonia.” Caption for fig 66, “Giza scale tetrahedral pyramids from original viking data (L) and MGS (R).”
I noted that there was no image number for the offered Viking image and the Viking image very closely resembles the MGS image next to it, but he leads us to think they are two different pyramids and that they are also near Cydonia. So I ask the questions.
First, what is the image number for the Viking image on the left in figure 6-6?
Second, what is the estimated size of that pyramid? It is known that Viking images are maxed out at 40 meters per pixel, so this pyramid would have to be enormous just to be seen.
Third, what is the image number for the MGS image on the right?
The MGS image was taken from an email sent to Hoagland by George Haas author of the Cydonia Codex with the label “confidential,” it was processed by Wil Faust and kept in the Anomalyhunters.com archives. The tetrahedron is located on the floor of candor chasma and is seen in MOC image #E0600269. How is an image (the right one which is the disputed tetrahedron image from Wil Faust) of an object that is found in Candor Chasma attributed to Cydonia?
I have a great deal of difficulty with this overt error and I would like to know how he can reconcile the research and science of the book with this overt error? I wonder what else there is that needs to be vetted? He simply used material to back up his conclusion when it didn’t even relate in any way.
I have asked this of Hoagland by direct emails and on many venues, but it was on Graham Hancock’s December “author of the month forum” that Hoagland finally responded. He, in sum, claimed that while the tetrahedron (spoken of in your AR article) had been first found by Wil Faust that he didn’t recall where he got the image from and that regardless he could use it as it was in the public domain and his not crediting Faust was the result of a late edit to the book. Such outright usurping of intellectual property is just unacceptable. He also told me to get off of it and go concentrate on Wil Faust’s other discovery Parrotopia which had great merit. (Parrotopia can be found on the AH.com web site). By the way, if you want one of Hoagland’s processed images for your use be prepared to cough up hundreds of dollars, he doesn’t give it free but he will take it free.
I have had an online research group called anomalyhunters.com for over eight years now and we have looked at the same data as Hoagland. There are also archives of the original photos of the Apollo missions available from Keith Laney on his web site and there are astounding things to see in them. Hoagland has a theory but in following his release of the material on a gradual basis over the past eight years on his web site and seeing this book, I have to say his theory remains in my opinion unsubstantiated; and because of his malicious attitude in the way he has used someone else’s material I think he has as much to hide as NASA!
Jim Miller aka Starjim Anomalyhunters.com
In Hoagland’s otherwise excellent book, he failed to mention that there is a pattern of evidence indicatingthat NASA has lied to us about the Martian atmosphere, which, while thin and oxygen poor, is almost certainly denser than NASA and Jack Parsons Laboratory claim. You will recall that the first landers showed an unexpected pink sky, due, NASA claimed, to dust suspended in an atmosphere only one percent of the density of earth’s. Yet air this thin, even in the lower Martian gravity, could not possibly hold in permanent suspension enough dust to make it pink. Pictures of American flags on the landers, plus a few true color (light blue sky) images leaked out show that NASA lied even about the color, probably to hide the true density, since light blue indicates a relatively dense atmosphere. Also, air one percent of earth’s atmospheric density could not possibly support the immense, planet-wide dust storms that obscure even high mountains on Mars. Other orbiter pictures, never denied by NASA, clearly show temporary melt water lakes, with icebergs and a water color gradation from shallow to deeper water. Yet liquid water, even near freezing, cannot exist at one percent of earth sea level pressure; the water would boil as fast as it melted. Mars may not be as dead as everyone has been led to imagine, and may well be the origin of our UFOs.
Regarding your article on the DVD about the strange properties of water, I recall that one inventor claimed to be able to use relatively low energy microwaves to liberate hydrogen from water; the hydrogen could then be used as a fuel, with a net energy gain. At first glance this appears to violate the first law of thermodynamics. But, if there is a universal energy (chi, ki, kundalini) throughout all space, and it has a frequency, perhaps the microwaves could cause the water molecule to vibrate until it resonates with this frequency, and the low energy of the microwaves thereby allows the water to absorb the vastly greater universal energy.
William B. Stoecker Author of “The Atlantis Conspiracy” Sacramento, CA
Mr. (Hugh Auchincloss) Brown’s theory (“Mystery Under the Ice,” A.R. #68) about the earth tilting due to accumulations of ice at the poles has several problems.
First, a simple experiment. Take a gyroscope that is spinning at a high speed and try to turn it over. The force required is considerable. Now imagine that gyroscope is 8,000 miles in diameter and made of rock and iron. Tilting it would require colossal amounts of energy.
Second, consider the amount of ice compared to the earth as a whole. Ice is low density, it floats in water, for pity sake. Consider the volume of ice compared to the earth, somewhat similar to a wad of bubble gum stuck on a basketball. Remember, the “basketball” in this case is a planet. According to Wikipedia, the amount of ice on the southern continent is roughly 144,000,000 cubic kilometers. Wikipedia also says the volume of the Earth is 1.0832073?1012km?, that’s 1,083,207,300,000, or over one TRILLION cubic kilometers. The earth has over a million times greater volume than the ice at the South Pole, and the average density is many times that of water ice. So, to be conservative, think of ice as “1” on the density scale, and rock as “8”. That means the earth as a whole outweighs the ice by 8,000,000 times. I leave it to the reader to decide if an ant can move a locomotive by hanging off the side of the cab.
Archimedes is claimed to have said, “Give me a lever long enough, and a place to stand, and I will move the earth.” He never found either, and the earth stays in its appointed path.
This is not debunking, this is simply checking the math. Brown’s theory is woefully short of simple sound math. But that never stopped a good conspiracy, has it?
Larry Jewell ibiblio.org/pha
Hugh Brown states that polar shifts occur every 6,000 years due to excessive ice accumulation at the Antarctic pole. Which sounds suspiciously familiar to what may occur in 2012. He believed we needed to melt itwith a Nuke in order to prevent a disaster. Had Mr. Brown foreseen global warming as portrayed in Mr. Al Gores’ An Inconvenient
Truth, I wonder if he would still think the same?
We believe that we are causing global warming which is causing damage by melting the ice caps, but maybe we are inadvertently saving ourselves; therein liesirony.
Timothy Nicholas Sarno Sandwhich, Illinios
Write to us at Letters to the Editor, Atlantis Rising, P.O. Box 441, Livingston, MT 59047 or email@example.com