Here’s a great quote from the paper itself regarding the 1998 image above:
Multiple studies and scientists have argued, through scientific rigor, that the 'Face on Mars' was actually built by a very intelligent civilization from Mars' past. Close analyzing shows a mouth full of 'teeth.'
Why do we ignore, not report and fail to emphasize such important discoveries simply because they go against the accepted framework of knowledge?
Dr. Horace Crater was the Professor of Physics at the University of Tennessee Space Institute, who recently retired after 40 years and, unfortunately, also recently passed away due to natural causes. He was an assistant professor of physics at Vanderbilt before joining the Space Institute in September 1975. He was promoted to professor of physics in September 1987 and has been making breakthroughs in theoretical participle physics ever since.
According to the University of Tennessee Space Institute, “He has a deep commitment to the study of very fundamental problems in relativistic quantum mechanics and quantum field theory, including the relativistic two and three body problem as it applies in atomic, nuclear, and particle physics. Over the years he has taught a wide variety of advanced courses including quantum mechanics, quantum field theory, solid state physics, and general relativity. He has published numerous refereed papers in the most prestigious physics journals. He enjoys teaching new things as he learns new branches of physics.”
Why am I writing about him? Perhaps because he’s one of the most recent examples (out of many throughout the years) who has been pushing the boundaries of false information published in science, something we see too much of today. For a reputable academician to even take on the ‘face on Mars’ subject is quite brave, but far from foolish. Dr. Crater, along with his research colleagues professor Stanley McDaniel and Ananda Sirisena, published a paper not long ago in the Journal of Space Exploration titled “The Mounds of Cydonia: Elegant Geology, or Tetrahedral Geometry and Reactions of Pythagoras and Dirac.”
A study that’s added to the already robust evidence pointing to “artificial surface interventions” on Mars as the study states. The main premise of the article is that these structures, if indeed artificial, “provide an elegant and concise way for an intelligent species to transmit to another intelligence evidence that it understands the basics of tetrahedral geometry, prime numbers, and the quantum mechanics of the electron’s spin, thereby giving additional evidence for the possibility of intelligent intervention.”
They found that the odds against change that these mounds were simply natural formations were hundreds of millions to one…in some cases, billions to one. What really stands out is the fact that they also point out to the existing information which is already available suggesting artificial surface interventions on Mars.”
We (Joe Martino, Founder of CE & Arjun Walia, Senior Writer) recently sat down and did a podcast (access our podcasts here and our Explorers Lounge here) with Ananda Sirisena, who is one of the others of this study, as well as the new one shown below. You can listen to and access that podcast in its entirety, here.
The study above primarily dealt with the mounds in the Cydonia region on Mars, and it was published. The one below was sent to me by one of the researchers, and unfortunately, Dr. Crater passed away before they could attempt to have this one published as well, as a follow-up to their first one. Anytime something like this is published in a mainstream scientific journal, by such credible and scholarly minds, it’s going to raise a few eyebrows. No matter how true something is, or how much evidence exists to at least entertain the hypothesis, if something goes against the grain or defies the current accepted framework of knowledge, it may not be published.
This is why I think it’s important to present to you what Dr. Crater was working on after he published the paper above because it no doubt captured his heightened interest. The new paper was called The “Face on Mars” – Four Decades Later.
“The anomalous characteristics of the so-called “Face on Mars” feature, as seen in the 1976 Viking image, was debunked 20 years ago by reference to a 1998 image taken by the Mars Global Surveyor. However ten years later, in 2008, a far superior image was obtained that shows details consistent with the original of 1976. By means of side-by-side comparisons, we show how this 2008 image gives an improvement in identification of the allegedly anomalous details.”
The picture below was taken in 1976, by NASA
This one below was taken by Mark Carlotto, an image scientist with 30 years of experience in satellite remote sensing and digital image processing, who studied optics, signal, and image processing at Carnegie-Mellon University from 1972-1981, where he received his Ph.D. in electrical engineering. He’s had several positions in academia and industry. Here are some of the peer-reviewed papers he’s authored and c0-authored prior to this one.
It was published in Applied Options, reference: Digital Imagery Analysis Of Unusual Martian Surface Features – Applied Optics, Volume 27, No. 10
Members of the Society For Planetary SETI Research (SPSR) have, Mark, being one of them, also recently published a paper in the Journal of Space Exploration about certain features on the far side of the moon that appear in the crater Paracelsus C. Titled “Image Analysis of Unusual Structures on the Far Side of the Moon in the Crater Paracelsus C,” it argues that these features might be artificial in origin, meaning someone other than a human being built them and put them there.
What’s so special about the image below is that, upon enhancement, it should teeth like structures within the mouth. Keep in mind that we’re looking at a structure that’s approximately 2 miles thick.
Below is a screenshot of a section of the study sent to me, describing what took place with the image that was released in 1998…
Here’s a great quote from the paper itself regarding the 1998 image above:
The effect of the 1998 image of the facial feature, released by MSSS, has been to draw mainstream attention away from a feature on Mars that could be of great cultural value to humanity and to our future search for extraterrestrial intelligence. SETI will have to expand away from only a radio signal search to searching for planetary artefacts as a standard procedure. Perhaps our discovery of ETI may be closer to home than we ever thought possible.
The study then goes on to compare a picture from a decade later, which seems very strange because they look so different. What’s really going on here? Is NASA changing/airbrushing their pictures?
Shown below is the MRO CTX image: B01_010143_2216, acquired on 24th September 2008, from a
distance of just over 311 km. This image has not been processed and is presented here as obtained from
the MRO HiRise website. (The incidence and emission angles are shown in Table 1.)
According to the authors, the image below “shows clearly an ‘eyeball’ in the eye cavity and ‘teeth’ in the mouth area.”
As you can see, they, among many others, are quite convinced…
The study makes a good point with its conclusion, outlining how the focus of the search for extraterrestrial intelligence has primarily been in terms of radio SETI. On a side note, that thought reminded me of this document, showing possible interception of communications from extraterrestrial intelligence by the National Security Agency (NSA). SETI should be considering a lot more than simple radio signals.
Despite not getting any mainstream attention, the idea that this debate was put to rest, as told by the mainstream decades ago, is simply not true at all.
The Journal of Scientific Exploration, in 1991, published a paper by Vincent DiPietro, Greg Molenaar and John Brandenburg espousing The Cydonia Hypothesis. The abstract read, “Evidence suggesting a past humanoid civilization has been found at several sites on Mars. In particular, what appear to be large carved faces, with similar details, have been found at two separate sites. Together with geochemical and geological evidence that suggests Mars was once more Earth-like in climate, the images of the objects support the Cydonia Hypothesis: that Mars once lived as the Earth now lives, and that it was once the home of an indigenous humanoid intelligence.”
That’s just one example, there are also those who have been quite outspoken, and you can see more examples with regards to this in the articles linked below, written earlier, but also go into great detail on the subject. So, if interested be sure to check them out and give them a read.
When contemplating topics as such, we always have to keep in mind that, as NASA astronaut and Princeton physics professor Brian O’Leary once told the world, “there is abundant evidence that we are being contacted, that civilizations have been visiting us, for a very long time.” He is one of the hundreds of people considered “credible” who have testified to the idea that intelligent beings have been visiting us. On top of that, we also have verified footage recently released from the Pentagon, and millions of pages of UFO released by dozens of governments worldwide.
We may not know what’s going on, but it’s quite clear that what we are told is happening, is not. There is a lot of information to consider here beyond the study, and when contemplating extraterrestrial life in general. It seems that there are a lot of people out there who believe without a doubt that we are being visited, have been visited and that this is being covered up. Human beings aren’t stupid, and all of these people aren’t simply believing this for no reason.
The truth is out there, and it has huge perceptual, consciousness, spiritual, historical, and scientific consequences. This type of thing really does leave no aspect of humanity untouched.
Last week Prince Harry and Meaghan Markle announced that they would be stepping down from their royal duties, and ultimately their life as royals.
Why do so many view powerful figures like the Royal's as gods? Is it time to end this type of perception?
Last week Prince Harry and Meaghan Markle announced that they would be stepping down from their royal duties, and ultimately their life as royals. This is pretty huge news. In regards to what prompted this decision there is certainly a lot we could speculate over, perhaps they want to distance themselves from the royal family because of the recent scandal involving Uncle Prince Andrew and the allegations against him being involved in child sex trafficking, maybe they simply want to get out of the public eye, or perhaps they see how the monarchy has already started to crumble and want to get out while they can.
Whatever the reason may be, it certainly seems to validate the massive shift in consciousness that is currently taking place on our planet and perhaps throughout the entire Universe. Some people have already been calling for the abolishment of the British monarchy after the Queen passes away, as many feel this system is very archaic in this day and age.
It was reported that the Queen had no idea of Harry and Meaghan’s decision before it was announced, and inside sources have told reporters that the “monarchy has never been seen in such a bad state.” (source)
Longtime friend of Prince Harry, JJ Chalmers, made an insightful comment during an interview on BBC’s The One on January 10th, stating that he feels Harry likely made this decision in order to “protect his family” and was simply attempting to put his family first and do what was right for them. The details regarding what Harry might be wanting to “protect his family” from weren’t disclosed.
A video that has gained a lot of popularity on social media over the past week or so, being retweeted over 70,000 times since being posted on January 8th, is an interview of Harry himself discussing the need to protect his family.
Prince Harry said what he said and I’m here to remind you. Period. pic.twitter.com/t1dyZ8Tt3A
— . (@meghanysl) January 9, 2020
In another clip from that same interview we can clearly hear Harry saying that, “I will not be bullied into playing the same game that killed my mom.”
“I will not be bullied into playing a game that killed my mom” OOF pic.twitter.com/DBK1sNXDZn
— Nardos (@lvnlavidanardos) January 10, 2020
This past Monday, January 13th a meeting took place to address Harry’s decision. According to CNN.com,
The highly unusual meeting was called after the couple’s bombshell announcement last week that they wished to step back from their roles as senior members of the royal family. The Queen was joined at the summit by Prince Charles, Prince William and Prince Harry, while Meghan was due to have dialed in from Canada.
After a crisis meeting of senior royals at the Queen’s Sandringham estate north of London, the Queen said she had agreed that Prince Harry and Meghan could split their time between the UK and Canada but that “complex matters” would have to be resolved. The monarch said she had ordered final plans to be drawn up in the next few days.
In a statement after the meeting, the Queen said the family would have preferred the couple to “remain full-time working members of the royal family,” but that they “respect and understand” Prince Harry and Meghan’s “wish to live a more independent life.”
The Queen said the family had “very constructive discussions on the future of my grandson and his family” during the meeting, adding that they are “entirely supportive of Harry and Meghan’s desire to create a new life as a young family.”
There were “complex matters for my family to resolve,” and no final agreement had been reached, particularly over Harry and Meghan’s desire to become “financially independent.”
“There is some more work to be done, but I have asked for final decisions to be reached in the coming days,” the Queen said in the statement.
When we look at what happened to “the game that killed William and Harry’s mum,” she was harassed relentlessly by the media, and ultimately ended in a fatal car crash. However, there is a lot of controversy behind this official story. Many believe that Princess Diana was against the monarchy in some ways and was attempting to break free from it’s clutches and even potentially expose some of their secrets, and thus believe that her death was no accident, but rather that she was silenced by being taken out by the Royal family.
Are Harry and Meaghan stepping away because they refuse to continue to be harassed by paparazzi, or are they making a bold statement and declaring their values by taking a stance that shows that they no longer wish to be affiliated with or support the Royal family? Could this signify the beginning of the end for the British monarchy? Only time will tell.
The US Navy recently released a statement claiming that more disclosure regarding a 2004 UFO incident in the form of video footage and documentation would be a big threat to national security.
The mainstream media has long used false information, or real information, and shaped the narrative to suit a particular agenda that serves the interests of their funders. Are we seeing the same thing here?
There is perhaps no other topic that used to be considered a ‘conspiracy theory’ that’s now taken extremely seriously within the mainstream, like the topic of Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs), also sometimes referred to Unidentified Ariel Phenomenon (UAP’s). This is in large part due to the fact that official, declassified documents and footage have been released from a number of intelligence agencies and military organizations, on a global scale. Furthermore, all of it’s complimented by statements from high ranking military personnel, ex-astronauts, and many more.
An incident that really blew this subject open in the United States occurred in 2004, where several Navy pilots that were stationed aboard the USS Nimitz encountered a “Tic-Tac-Shaped” UFO. To the Stars Academy of Arts and Science (TTSA) headed by Tom Delonge alongside several ex-high ranking intelligence personnell, like Christopher Mellon who served 30 years in the federal government and was Deputy Assistant Defense Secretary for Intelligence from 1997 to 2002, obtained the video from the United States Navy, which the Navy later verified was real. He has published detailed articles for outlets like The Hill as well as The Washington Post emphasizing the reality and seriousness of this subject. He is one of several to do so
The 2004 incident was beamed by the New York times, and high ranking people, like Louis Elizondo who headed a an “Ariel Threat Identification Program” at the Pentagon (he’s also part of the TTSA) stated that he believed these objects are extraterrestrial. He also made the point to emphasize that we should not get caught up in this particular 2004 incident, as there are many. He told VICE that “people should not be surprised by the revelation that other videos exist and at greater length.”
More news has come out regarding the 2004 incident, at it’s in response to a recent Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that was filed for more video footage and documents regarding the incident. The footage and documents that were released of the incident don’t show the entire video, and don’t make up all of the documents. A spokesperson from the Navy’s Office of Intelligence (ONI) confirmed that the agency posses at least one classified video pertaining to this incident.
According to an ONI spokesperson, sharing the information with the public “would cause exceptionally grave damage to the National Security of the United States.”
The ONI also admitted to possessing at least one video of unknown length, classified as “secret” by the Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR). ONI didn’t reveal whether this footage is the same 1-minute video that was leaked online in 2007 and widely released by The New York Times in 2017. However, in November 2019, several naval officers who witnessed the incident aboard the Nimitz told Popular Mechanics that they had seen a much longer video of the encounter that was between 8 and 10 minutes long. These original recordings were promptly collected and erased by “unknown individuals” who arrived on the ship by helicopter shortly after the incident, one officer said. (source)
In the 2004 incident, the object in question was performing maneuvers and flying at speeds that no known air craft on Earth can perform.
One thing that seems to rub me the wrong way about mainstream UFO disclosure is what seems to be a constant ‘threat narrative.’ This is a phenomenon that dates back hundreds, if not thousands of years. Cases have ben documented for a very, very long time. If there was some sort of ‘extraterrestrial threat’ or a threat to national security by these objects, wouldn’t some type of ‘event’ have already taken place by now?
Based on my research, and the research of many other UFO researchers around the world, the majority of documented UFO incidents around the world have shown no sign of a threat. Sure, they may be intrusive, but there these objects have not behaved in any way that has been indicative of threat. That being said, this does not mean that footage of these objets performing in a way that represents a threat doesn’t exist, but based on what we have now, 99.99 percent of these cases, in my opinion, do not display behaviour that is at all indicative of a threat.
In fact, not only do these objects not display characteristics of hostility, they are documented performing predominantly evasive manures, making multiple efforts to avoid our air-craft. For example, Canadian defense minister Paul Hellyer said that these objects commonly take “corrective measures to avoid our aircraft,” and that our military tends to “shoot first and ask questions after.” (source) Don’t forget four star General Nathan Twinning, who stated in a declassified intelligence document decades ago that,
“The phenomenon is something real and not visionary or fictitious. The reported operating characteristics such as extreme rates of climb, maneuverability (particularly in roll), and motion which must be considered evasive when sighted or contacted by friendly air-craft and radar, lend belief to the possibility that some of the objects are controlled either manually, automatically, or remotely.” (source)
With all of this being said, it’s understandable how, from our current level of consciousness that these objects would be seen as a threat, especially from a military and intelligence perspective. For example, when a UFO is tracked on radar, military air-craft are usually sent out to take a closer look. There are many documented cases that show electronic systems within the military jet go down, they don’t work. For example, here’s an interesting case from Iran via a declassified NSA document:
As the F-4 approached a range of 25 nautical miles it lost all instrumentation and communications. When the F-4 turned away from the object and apparently was no longer a threat to it, the aircraft regained all instrumentation and communications. Another brightly lighted object came out of the original object. The second object headed straight toward the F4.
UFOs in close proximity to nuclear missile facilities have also been associated with the complete shut-down and deactivation of nuclear missiles. So that’s interesting.
The issue is, is the threat narrative being pushed by the mainstream for some sort of ulterior motive, the same way we’ve seen the mainstream push the war on terror ? Are we being lied to again? To be honest, it’s hard to believe anything that comes from mainstream media these days, and many people have lost their trust in these networks. Truth is not synonymous with mainstream media, so what makes the UFO topic any different? Are they trying to control the narrative?
What’s curious to me is why all of a sudden do a select group of people get to publish serious pieces on the subject in mainstream media outlets while a number of ‘credible’ people as well as UFO researchers have been doing this for years, yet continue to go largely ignored by the mainstream media? These are all important questions to ask?
I go deeper in an article I recently published, which you can read below if you’re interested:
This is a subject that’s full of truth, but also full of disinformation. At the end of the day, it’s curious as to why mainstream media has control over the narrative and never addresses incidents and facts that’ve been uncovered by academics and researchers for decades. And why now? This is a topic that truly leaves no aspect of humanity untouched, it has large implications, especially for human consciousness. That being said, we have a lot of work to do down here on planet Earth to get our ‘stuff’ together, but this topic is no doubt always interesting to explore, and can assist one in expanding their consciousness.
Many scientists presented facts about vaccines and vaccine safety at the recent Global Health Vaccine Safety summit hosted by the World Health Organization in Geneva, Switzerland.
Why are so many people fighting against each other? Why are there "pro-vax" and "anti-vax" groups? Are these terms not useless? Do they prevent us from having discussions that need to be had and moving forward appropriately?
According to organizations like the American Medical Association as well as the World Health Organization, vaccine hesitancy among people, parents, and, as mentioned by scientists at the World Health Organization’s recent Global Vaccine Safety Summit, health professionals and scientists continues to increase. This is no secret, as vaccines have become a very popular topic over the past few years alone. In fact, the World Health Organization has listed vaccine hesitancy as one of the biggest threats to global health security.
The issue of vaccine hesitancy is no secret, for example, one study (of many) published in the journal EbioMedicine outlines this point, stating in the introduction:
Over the past two decades several vaccine controversies have emerged in various countries, including France, inducing worries about severe adverse effects and eroding confidence in health authorities, experts, and science (Larson et al., 2011). These two dimensions are at the core of the vaccine hesitancy (VH) observed in the general population. VH is defined as delay in acceptance of vaccination, or refusal, or even acceptance with doubts about its safety and benefits, with all these behaviors and attitudes varying according to context, vaccine, and personal profile, despite the availability of vaccine services (Group, 2014,Larson et al., 2014, Dubé et al., 2013). VH presents a challenge to physicians who must address their patients’ concerns about vaccines and ensure satisfactory vaccination coverage.
At the conference, this fact was emphasized by Professor Heidi Larson, a Professor of Anthropology and the Risk and Decision Scientist Director at the Vaccine Confidence Project. She is referenced, as you can see, by the authors in the study above. At the conference, she emphasized that safety concerns among people and health professionals seem to be the biggest issue regarding vaccine hesitancy.
She also stated,
The other thing that’s a trend, and an issue, is not just confidence in providers but confidence of health care providers, we have a very wobbly health professional frontline that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. That’s a huge problem, because to this day any study I’ve seen… still, the most trusted person on any study I’ve seen globally is the health care provider, and if we lose that, we’re in trouble.
She also brought up her belief that safety studies are incomplete, and that to continue to refer people to the same old science on safety is not adequately addressing their new concerns because better studies need to be done. Furthermore, she recommended that doctors and professionals forego name-calling with ‘hostile language’ such as “anti-vax”. She recommended encouraging people to ask questions about vaccine safety. After all, it makes sense–in order to make our vaccines safer and more effective, you would think everybody would be on board with constant questioning and examination. After all, that’s just good science, and it’s in everyone’s best interest.
Another interesting point that caught my attention was brought up by Dr. Martin Howell Friede, Coordinator of Initiative For Vaccine Research at the World Health Organization. He brought up the topic of vaccine adjuvants like thimerosal or aluminum, for example. In certain vaccines, without these adjuvants the vaccine simply doesn’t work. Dr. Friede mentioned that there are clinical studies that blame adjuvants for adverse events seen as a result of administering vaccines, and how people in general often blame adverse reactions to vaccines being the result of the vaccine adjuvant. He mentioned aluminum specifically.
He showed concern given the fact that “without adjuvants, we are not going to have the next generation of vaccines.”
He also stated that,
When we add an adjuvant, it’s because it is essential. We do not add adjuvants to vaccines because we want to do so, but when we add them it adds to the complexity. And I give courses every year on ‘how do you develop vaccines’ and ‘how do you make vaccines’ and the first lesson is, while you are making your vaccine, if you can avoid using an adjuvant, please do so. Lesson two is, if you’re going to use an adjuvant, use one that has a history of safety, and lesson three is, if you’re not going to do that, think very carefully.
Furthermore, he criticized the assumption that if an adjuvant like aluminum appears to be safe for one vaccine, that it should be not be presumed to be safe for other vaccines. Dr. Friede said that current safety surveillance is quite effective at determining immediate effects (such as immediate injury to the arm at the injection site), but not as effective in identifying “systemic” long term adverse events.
When I heard him mention lesson two, that “if you’re going to use an adjuvant, use one that has a history of safety,” it instantly reminded me of aluminum because it’s an adjuvant used in multiple vaccines like the HPV vaccine, for example, but has no history of safety.
A study published as far back as 2011 in Current Medical Chemistry makes this quite clear, emphasizing that,
Aluminum is an experimentally demonstrated neurotoxin and the most commonly used vaccine adjuvant. Despite almost 90 years of widespread use of aluminum adjuvants, medical science’s understanding about their mechanisms of action is still remarkably poor. There is also a concerning scarcity of data on toxicology and pharmacokinetics of these compounds. In spite of this, the notion that aluminum in vaccines is safe appears to be widely accepted. Experimental research, however, clearly shows that aluminum adjuvants have a potential to induce serious immunological disorders in humans. (source)
The key sentence here is that “their mechanisms of action is still remarkably poor.” Based on what Dr. Friede said at the conference, it really makes you think.
A study published in BMC Med in 2015 found that “Evidence that aluminum-coated particles phagocytozed in the injected muscle and its draining lymph nodes can disseminate within phagocytes throughout the body and slowly accumulate in the brain further suggests that alum safety should be evaluated in the long term.”
This brings me to another point made at the conference by many scientists in attendance, which was that according to some of them, vaccines seem to lack the appropriate safety testing. This is another big reason why people are so confused and have voiced their concerns about safety, as mentioned above by Professor Larson.
Marion Gruber, PhD and Director of the FDA Office of Vaccines Research and Review, questioned the scope of vaccine safety surveillance and monitoring during pre-licensing vaccine trials as well during the conference.
One source of confusion might be that ‘high-ranking’ health authorities sometimes making conflicting statements. For example, Soumya Swaminathan, MD and Chief Scientist at the World Health Organization, stated at the conference,
I don’t think we can overemphasize the fact that we really don’t have very good safety monitoring systems in many countries and this adds to the miscommunication and the misapprehensions because we’re not able to give clear cut answers when people ask questions about deaths that have occurred due to particular vaccines… One should be able to give a very factual account of what exactly is happening, what the cause of deaths are, but in most cases there’s some obfuscation at that level and therefore there’s less and less trust then in the system.
Prior to this statement, in a promotional video released just days before the conference began, she stated that “we have vaccine safety systems, robust vaccine safety systems.”
She completely contradicted herself.
If you’d like access to the entire conference, you can do so at the World Health Organization’s website.
The scientific community should never stop questioning, especially when it comes to medication. Based on the information that’s come out at this conference, it’s quite clear that there is a lot of room for improvement when it comes to the development of vaccines and vaccine safety overall. Discussion is always encouraging, as long as it’s peaceful and facts are presented like they were at this conference. It’s better to understand the reasons why a lot of people are hesitant about vaccination and appropriately respond, instead of simply using ridicule and hatred because that’s never effective and both parties cannot move forward that way. At the end of the day, scientists should never cease to question.
Last week Prince Harry and Meaghan Markle announced that they would be stepping down from their royal duties, and ultimately...
A double standard is the application of different sets of principles for similar situations. They may take the form of...