-1

PLANETARY EXPLORATION: A FALSEHOOD?

By
David Calvert

It is estimated that within our galaxy alone there are approximately four hundred
thousand million stars, and where there are stars there may be planets similar to that of
our home world. It is in these vast reaches of space that the Search for Extraterrestrial
Intelligence is being conducted. It is generally accepted within the scientific mainstream
that intelligent life does not exist within the confines of our Solar System because of the
data received from probes sent out to our neighbouring worlds. But what if that data was
flawed or, worse still, falsified in order to maintain that belief? Could intelligent life be
much closer to home than we think, or are led to believe?
Thanks to Joseph P. Skipper, et al, truths are emerging into the public domain that
there may well indeed be intelligent life in our Solar System, and that they occupy our
distant planetary neighbour Mars.
Skipper was an insurance investigator with an interest in space exploration and
decades of investigative experience behind him. It was after viewing an official science
data strip that his ‘suspicion meter’ started rising. He knew that what he was looking at
was not any kind of natural geology, but evidence of life on the supposedly dead and
inhospitable planet. ‘If no natural geological explanation fits’, he contends, ‘then one
logically has to consider seriously that these anomalies are forms created by life of some
kind.’
If this is true then why has NASA failed to report such a startling discovery to the
media? The answer to that question may lie in a report prepared for NASA by the
Brookings Institution, Washington DC, on November 30, 1960 and titled, Proposed
Studies On The Peaceful Space Activities For Human Affairs.

The Brooking Report

On page 215 of the document it names the Moon, Mars or Venus as possible
candidates where artefacts left by life forms may be discovered. It goes on to say,
‘Anthropological files contain many examples of societies sure in their place in the
universe, which had disintegrated when they had to associate with previously unfamiliar
societies espousing different ideas and different life ways: others that survived such an
experience usually did so by paying the price of changes in values and attitudes and
behaviour.’ It then suggests two areas of study, the first dealing with the emotional and
intellectual consequences of discovering intelligent extraterrestrial life, the second
dealing with the behaviour of peoples and their leaders when confronted with such a
discovery. Questions arising from these studies, it suggests, would include: ‘how might
such information, under what circumstances, be presented to or withheld from the public
for what ends?’
Tellingly, on page 225 this sentence appears: ‘It has been speculated that of all
groups, scientists and engineers might be the most devastated by the discovery of
relatively superior creatures’.

The McDaniel Report

Sixteen years later the McDaniel report was published. It is a scathing indictment
of NASA’s handling of the scientific Mars data.
In his Executive Summary, McDaniel writes of the extensive analysis of the 1976
Viking Mars mission photographs of the Cydonia region, carried out by independent
investigators who concluded that the photographs appeared to be evidence that some
landforms could be artificial. To date, NASA still insists that there is no credible evidence
of artificiality.
‘NASA has regularly sent false and misleading statements regarding the
landforms to members of Congress and their constituents.’ writes McDaniel.
‘Furthermore, they have condoned efforts to unfairly ridicule and discredit independent
researchers, and have insisted that there is a “scientific consensus” that the landforms are
natural - despite the fact that the only real scientific study of the landforms indicates a
clear possibility that they are artificial.’
Clearly, the Brooking Report was instrumental in NASA’s decision making in
order to avoid political change and the devastating effect it would have upon the
scientists themselves. Such a discovery, after all, would put at risk their own cherished
theories and funding. What is more, NASA’s behaviour regarding the Martian objects is
in direct conflict of their policy that a ‘verified discovery of extraterrestrial intelligence
should be shared promptly with all humanity.’
What may come as a real eye opener to many is that the real control of the Mars
exploration does not rest with NASA but with the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and its
partners. It was discovered that a Navy Admiral, a famous and skilled ‘super spook’, was
chairing the JPL oversight committee in secret. When this was discovered a high-ranking
NASA official ousted him. Under the ‘super spooks’ control however the Mars
exploration programme had been effectively hijacked and had become subservient to a
possible military agenda for, perhaps, the acquirement of extraterrestrial technology. Let
us not forget Operation Paperclip, at the closing of WWII, when the Soviets and Western
allied forces became involved in a race to seize top ranking German scientists and their
rocket technology documents.

The Red Planet?

Mars appears red to us because its surface is largely composed of red iron oxide
dust, commonly referred to as rust. Its atmospheric composition - so we have been led to
believe - is 95% carbon dioxide, 2.7% nitrogen, 1.6% argon, and 0.7% oxygen, carbon
monoxide, and water vapour. Its atmosphere is therefore poisonous to human life.
Prior to January 10, 2004, NASA had released images showing an orange or red
sky. The images had been doctored to give the appearance of a lifeless and dead planet. In
reality the first colour image from Mars, taken by Viking Lander I in 1976, showed a
beautiful blue sky. The landscape of brown and reddish soil was littered with rocks with
patches of green on them. The world never got to see these images because according to
the men who worked at the Viking Image Formatting and Processing section of JPL they
were ordered to destroy the Mars blue sky negative and to falsely redden the images to
make it look like there was no life, no green algae or lichen. The book, Mars The Living
Planet, by Barry Digregorio, Dr. Gilbert Levin, and Dr. Pat Straat, tells of how the tests
carried out by Viking Lander were rigged to deny life.

A Prerequisite For Life

Over twenty years ago Viking principal investigator, Norman Horowitz, stated
that ‘liquid water does not exist on the surface of Mars … Without liquid water life as we
know it cannot exist.’ Thus he established the paradigm of a barren Mars today.
Mars’ atmospheric pressure on average is about six millibars. Its average
temperature is about -60° C. Because of the low atmospheric pressure and low surface
temperature water can only exist as ice or vapour. However, at certain times and locations
on the planet, when the air pressure and temperature are high enough, it is theoretically
possible for liquid water to exist, but its evaporation rate would be so great that it would
quickly vaporise
From the above and other scientific data we are indoctrinated into believing Mars
is a hard frozen wilderness. Its temperature is not only cold enough to freeze water. 3-5
times over but also cold enough to freeze CO2 as snow right out of the atmosphere. And
yet there are images that refute these scientific tenets and suggest that the Martian
atmospheric temperature conditions are not nearly as bad and hostile to life as officially
promoted by NASA, JPL, et al.
Water is a prerequisite for life and it is perhaps telling that in images of standing
liquid water on Mars there is also prima-facie evidence of civilisation around these
bodies of water, despite attempts to hide it beneath layers of image tampering techniques,
as shown in Skipper’s second report image at www.marsanomalyresearch.com. The
reflections in the water and the surrounding rectangular structures surrounding the
‘reservoir’ become more distinct when one inverts the colours. To counter the argument
that Skipper is himself responsible for the image tampering, he has provided
documentation at the end of each report so one can check behind him to confirm and
validate that the official NASA science data is as he received it. You will require a
graphics software programme such as PhotoShop, however, to analyze the images.

The Question of Vegetation

As one might imagine, where there is water there should be biological life too.
There are many images showing what appears to be showing vegetation, only on a vast
scale in comparison to what we see on Earth. NASA dismisses these as ‘geological
structures’ or ‘rock formations’. When shown similar images the late Arthur C. Clarke,
science fiction writer and father of global communications, likened them to Earth’s
Banyan trees and repeatedly supported the idea that some of the images can only be
reasonably interpreted in terms of vegetation

The Moon
Our only natural satellite, the Moon, has come under similar suspicion of
photographic tampering as the images on Skipper’s site show quite clearly. Vast towers
and rectangular forms have been subjected to smudge tampering techniques. However,
early imaging techniques were not as sophisticated as today’s and some of these forms
can clearly be seen poking through and, in some instances, left out completely. If they are
merely geological forms then why have the powers that be gone to such lengths to hide
them?

Imaging Technology
In the 1970s satellite imaging resolution limits available to the military were equal
to, if not better than, those being released today. Are we to believe that up-to-date and
state-of-the-art Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) and Mars Orbital Camera (MOC) satellite
imaging systems are inferior to those of some forty years ago and that there have been no
significant technological advancements in this area over that period of time? It is
unreasonable to assume that JPL, with its heavy military connections and funding and at
a cost of billions of dollars, would do such a thing. Certainly, much of the image
tampering has been done at closer resolutions than is being admitted to. The question still
remains; why would they go to such great expense and trouble to hide the evidence? And
what do the images contain that they are so afraid to show us?

The Military Industrial Complex

Truth, as defined in the Reader’s Digest Universal Dictionary is defined as ‘That
which is considered to be the supreme reality and to have the ultimate meaning and value
of existence.’ and scientific method as ‘The totality of principles and processes regarded
as characteristic of or necessary for scientific investigation …’
But where is the truth in planetary exploration? Has it become subservient to the
military industrial complex with its own secret agendas, of which President Eisenhower
warned in his farewell address in 1961? And what regard is there for scientific principle
as elitist scientists embroil themselves in this web of intrigue? Truth, it would seem, has
become the first casualty in this war of fact and falsehood.

But the truth, whatever it may ultimately prove to be, is out there for those who
wish to seek it: a grass roots movement that is gathering momentum and members thanks
to the likes of Joseph P. Skipper and others.