MORE MARTIAN STRANGENESS FROM NASA
This is a story I'm finally getting around to, though it's been in my finals' box since K.M. first shared it at the beginning of this month (and our gratitude for doing so!) I kept postponing blogging about it because I think the story is significant enough not to be "crowded out" or "overshadowed" by the usual hubbub in the news). As you can probably tell from the title of the headline, there is more strangeness on Mars, specifically, an unusual "something" on its surface in a photograph snapped by NASA, a "something" which looks all-too-uncomfortably like a gun:
Strange formation in NASA's Mars photo fuels claims of extraterrestrial life on the Red Planet
As the article makes clear, however, this object was first photographed in 2014, and caused a minor stir of controversy back then, because its shape and other features clearly made it look like some sort of gun, and to be more specific, an automatic pistol at that:
A strangely shaped object photographed on the Martian surface has reignited bizarre theories about extraterrestrial life on the Red Planet.
The picture, captured by NASA's Opportunity rover in 2014, recently resurfaced online after social media users claimed the object resembles an 'alien gun.'
Scott C Waring, a Martian researcher from 'UFO Sighting Daily,' suggested the 'gun' is evidence of why the space agency sent a rover to Mars to retrieve alien technology.
This is followed by the usual "explanations" that the object is simply a case of pareidolia, and that it couldn't possibly be a gun or a weapon because it could hardly be expected to fit an alien's hands (assuming, of course, that aliens look nothing like humans, a conclusion that is contradicted by some statements in the Majestic-12 documents, but that's a whole other story for a whole other day):
However, it seems the UFO researchers' claims are nothing more than a case of pareidolia, a psychological response to seeing faces and other significant and everyday items.
NASA has also maintained that it has no evidence of extraterrestrial life and has yet to find any signs of current or past life on Mars.While Waring is sure Opportunity spotted a gun on the Martian landscape, others believe otherwise.
One X user commented: 'I'm not an expert, but I believe this is a rock.'
While another joked: 'Why would aliens have guns designed for human hands and fingers? lol.'
There you have it: another typical Daily Mail tabloid piece, "click-bait" to use the contemporary expression: a tantalizing headline, and then a soft-pedaled article leading to a completely mundane conclusion: "No, that was not a two-headed Elvis Presley that was given birth by a Siamese-twinned mountain goat on the bitter side of a cold crag; it was only a piece of broccoli that looked like a two-headed Elvis given birth by a Siamese-twinned mountain goat on the bitter side of a cold crag."
So, when I look at the accompanying pictures to the article...
....I know what I see, and it definitely looks more like a gun to me, than a rock. I'm willing to leave open the possibility that it might indeed be a rock, but there's only so much "pareidolia" that one planet can seem to support.
In Mars' case, we've been told (repeatedly) that no, those are not pyramids, yes that looks like the outline of a Sphinx but it clearly can't be a Sphinx because it's on Mars, yes the dimensions of the 'Tholus' at Cydonia look like those of Silbury Hill in Great Britain, but that's just another coincidence, yes, that does look like the engine block of an internal combustion engine, but it clearly can't be because it's on Mars, where we know there are no remains of oil wells or gas stations, and no, that is not a Face, it's just a trick of light and shadow because we went back and snapped higher resolution pictures of that and it's not a face nor a degraded Face like some tried to argue (take that Richard C. Hoagland), and ... what's that?.... could you repeat your question please? I didn't hear you... how do we explain the presence of xenon 129 isotope in Mars' atmosphere which can only be produced by a fission reaction and those have to be deliberately engineered? (nervous laughter)... Now that's one I've not heard before... you should quit reading tabloids like the Daily Mail and leave the hard science to us folks at NASA.... what's that? How do we explain that the xenon-129 fact was published by a Los Alamos plasma physicist by the name of Dr. John Brandenburg? How do we react to some people saying NASA stands for Never A Straight Answer? (more nervous laughter).... Oh well lookee here... we're out of time. We'll have to postpone your questions until our next press conference... when will that be?....uhm... as of this moment, we don't really know..."
We now return to our scheduled program:
Speaking of tabloids, it strikes me as extremely odd, and hardly coincidental, that this British tabloid would be running this story amid many other stories it has recently run about the missing scientists, and the story it recently ran about missing US Air Force general, and one-time black projects manager and coordinator, General William McCasland. So the re-appearance of this story after so many years strikes me not only as odd, but as an attempt to shape the narrative, and to do so in a very clever way, by confirming one narrative in the broader context of the contradictory narrative, thereby fostering maximum epistemological confusion and "plasticity". What do I mean by this? I mean simply that the text of the article is the broad context of one narrative, and it is clear that that narrative is of the "pareidolia-trick-of-light-and-shadow" variety, while the pictures themselves stand in stark visual contrast and contradiction of that narrative. The object may or may not be a gun. But whatever it is, it certainly looks more artificial than not. If it's a rock, I'm a mongoose.
So we arrive at my run to the end of the high octane speculation twig-of-the-tree and my Wile E. Coyote leap into Speculation Canyon: That 'epistemological plasticity" in the article may itself be an indicator of an ongoing fight within those agencies having anything to do with UFOs, exotic technologies, and "extra-terrestrial archaeology". It may be an indicator that "they" do not know what narrative to support and promote, and are accordingly trying to hedge all their bets. It's all a part of the recent government marketing operation about disclosure of UFOs, and trying to control the interpretive narrative about them. It's all part of another pattern first recognized by Mars anomaly researcher Richard C. Hoagland long ago, not only in his book The Monuments of Mars: A City on the Edge of Forever, but in his subsequent book with Mike Bara, Dark Mission. In the latter book Mr. Hoagland and Mr. Bara suggested that we were watching the intricate dance of three factions within the section of the deep state that controls America's public and covert space projects. These factions were (1) the Roosters, (2) the Masons/Magicians, and (3) the Nazis. The latter two groups wanted to continue the policy of secrecy and secret exploitation of space and whatever technologies their "extra-terrestrial archaeology" might discover. The first faction, The Roosters, wanted to open it all up and disclose everything. The "To the Stars" academy "disclosure" effort involving Tom DeLonge, Hal Puthoff and others is the most recent iteration of this pattern.
Thus, whatever else the Daily Mail might be up to, it would seem apparent from the epistemological confusion and "plasticity" that the pattern of internal philosophical struggle is continuing. And for that reason, one must be very skeptical of all the figures that have recently emerged claiming to be whistleblowers trying to disclose things, particularly when they appear before committees of Congress... accompanied by several military officers in the background, minding and tending their charges...
See you on the flip side...
(If you enjoyed today's blog, please share it with your friends.)
4 Comments
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Help the Community Grow
Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.
Well, that rock sure looks like a gun, either a Browning 45 or a Glock. NASA has shied away from admitting there is life on Mars since the Viking landers in the 70s.
Dear Joseph, This is not on point, but I felt that you and the Gang would enjoy the fascinating Substack of Gerry Gomez: https://substack.com/@naradigmshift?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=qjdl8
“How wonderful, that we have met with a paradox. Now, we have some hope of making progress.”
– Niels Bohr, 1966
1. Originally, the word ‘religion’ is derived, from the Latin verb ‘religare’, meaning to reconnect – which refers, to moving, from linear time, to cyclical time – which induces a superposition, in the centre.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/religo#Latin
2. The story of quantum mechanics begins, as the Chalcolithic Cucuteni-Trypillian Yin-Yang, and ventures through the proto-Scythian narrative, as the Yahweh-Elohim – which reaches Asia, as Taoism.
3. Paradoxical thinking produces, automatically, the ‘scales of law’, as quantum mechanical jurisprudence – which, in Scandinavia, is known, as Odin’s two brothers, Woe and Will – which induces Odin, as the superposition.
4. In the Gulliver parable, by Jonathan Swift, then the ‘linear time’ is Lilliputian, whereas the ‘cyclical time’ is that of Gulliver, who is the man mountain, the Tao superposition, the Odin-Buddha, who buries the monkey king.
5. Technology, from high antiquity, that is capable of interstellar travel, and terraforming, is not Lilliputian, because zero-point energy is derived, from Black Elk’s Six Grandfathers powwow – which is Gulliver’s overflow.
6. It is an empty mind, that induces the zero-point energy – which is the overflow, that, in Asia, is called Tao – which is the third way, that balances the basic quantum pair, the diametrical opposites, the Yin-Yang [Yahweh-Elohim].
“No paradox, no progress.”
https://www.nielsbohr.net/p/quotes.html
GULLIVER’S TRAVELS
When Gulliver marooned into deep,
the giant rose out of sleep,
and found utopian
was Lilliputian,
in web of melancholic weep.
When Gulliver rose above cloud,
heaven’s field he ploughed,
by round table jig
of whirligig,
sweeping earthly crowd.
When Gulliver transcended vivid,
into vibrant planetary grid,
he became electric
and galactic,
as man-mountain Pyramid.
A Buddha-superposition machine, in sci-fi:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/wisd2mbola2r7m1/wave-synch-device.jpg
“How wonderful, that we have met with a paradox. Now, we have some hope of making progress.”
– Niels Bohr, 1966
1. Originally, the word ‘religion’ is derived, from the Latin verb ‘religare’, meaning to reconnect – which refers, to moving, from linear time, to cyclical time – which induces a superposition, in the centre.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/religo#Latin
2. The story of quantum mechanics begins, as the Chalcolithic Cucuteni-Trypillian Yin-Yang, and ventures through the proto-Scythian narrative, as the Yahweh-Elohim – which reaches Asia, as Taoism.
3. Paradoxical thinking produces, automatically, the ‘scales of law’, as quantum mechanical jurisprudence – which, in Scandinavia, is known, as Odin’s two brothers, Woe and Will – which induces Odin, as the superposition.
4. In the Gulliver parable, by Jonathan Swift, then the ‘linear time’ is Lilliputian, whereas the ‘cyclical time’ is that of Gulliver, who is the man mountain, the Tao superposition, the Odin-Buddha, who buries the monkey king.
5. Technology, from high antiquity, that is capable of interstellar travel, and terraforming, is not Lilliputian, because zero-point energy is derived, from Black Elk’s Six Grandfathers powwow – which is Gulliver’s overflow.
6. It is an empty mind, that induces the zero-point energy – which is the overflow, that, in Asia, is called Tao – which is the third way, that balances the basic quantum pair, the diametrical opposites, the Yin-Yang [Yahweh-Elohim].
“No paradox, no progress.”
https://www.nielsbohr.net/p/quotes.html
GULLIVER’S TRAVELS
When Gulliver marooned into deep,
the giant rose out of sleep,
and found utopian
was Lilliputian,
in web of melancholic weep.
When Gulliver rose above cloud,
heaven’s field he ploughed,
by round table jig
of whirligig,
sweeping earthly crowd.
When Gulliver transcended vivid,
into vibrant planetary grid,
he became electric
and galactic,
as man-mountain Pyramid.
A Buddha-superposition machine, in sci-fi:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/wisd2mbola2r7m1/wave-synch-device.jpg
I can’t understand why the scientists, NASA and ESA won’t entertain the possibility that the Face on Mars was originally carved by an intelligence. What would the faces on Mount Rushmore look like after one hundred thousand years or more of weathering and erosion?
It reminds me of the audience at a pantomime calling out “it’s behind you!” and the actor on the stage insisting they can see nothing at all!
If the scientists would atleast consider the weathering and erosion of anthropomorphic landforms in Marcahuasi in Peru, then they could consider the hypothesis that some landforms on the Earth and Mars have been carved by an intelligence, not merely the result of natural erosion.
https://www.marcahuasi-ruzo.com/daniel-ruzo-discovers-marcahuasi/
Michael, when the so-called Cat Box image of the Face was taken in the 1990s, and so nicknamed by Art Bell on his then nation-wide Coast to Coast AM radio show, he had Richard Hoagland on the show, and if you can find it, it is well worth listening to, because Hoagland argued exactly your point: that the increased resolution only demonstrated a deteriorated and weathered structure. But more iimportantly, FROM that he argued yet another VERY persuasive case that it was in fact the low resolution of the Viking pictures of the Face that allowed one to see the Face… the low resolution, he argued, was rather like reversing the process of deterioration by revealing the larger structure beneath the deterioration. His example: take a sugar cube and expose it to slow moisture: it will degrade, but before a certain threshold, a discernible underlying pattern or shape (the cube itself) is still discernible.