Art Bell

All Episodes

Previous Next

Oct. 25, 1996 - Art Bell

01:55:32

Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell - Richard C Hoagland - Apollo and the Egypt Connection

Participants

Main voices

21:02

richard c hoagland

01:31:54

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
art bell ▲ ● ▼		From the high desert in the great American Southwest, I bid you all good evening, good morning, as the case may be across all these many time zones from the Hawaiian Cohesion Island chain, east all the way across this great land to the Caribbean and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and south into South America, north to the Pole, worldwide on the internet.
		This is coast to coast, A.M. I'm Martell, and tonight, the Mystery Man.
		Richard C. Oakland, Instrument Science Award winner, advisor to NASA, advisor to Walter Cronkite during the good years when we were sending men into space and to the moon and thinking about Mars.
		And I don't know what he's going to talk about tonight.
		He sort of wouldn't tell me what he's going to talk about tonight.
		I said, well, then how can we approach this?
		He said, well, then you'll ask good questions.
unidentified		So we'll try to do that here in a minute.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Ask good questions.
		So we'll get to all that coming right up.
		The Sanjean Ape, here he comes from Manhattan, where it's a little after two in the morning, but he tells me he's had a nap.
		Richard C. Hoagland.
		Hi, Richard.
		Well, a difficult beginning, to say the least.
		Poor Richard.
		So what we're going to do is leap ahead and let me take care of a little extra business that won't hurt anyway.
		And, well, anyway, here he is from Manhattan.
		Hi, Richard.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Hi, there.
unidentified		Well, yeah, you were kind of putting me on hold there.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		I was waiting for the music and the news and all that, and then you went away.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Whoosh, huh?
		All right.
		Well, here we are, anyway.
		We're on the air.
		And, you know, you've been torturing me with this for the last few days.
		When you originally called and said, yes, I'll be ready to do a show Friday.
		But you wouldn't tell me all about it.
		And as I told the audience, your response to me was, well, Daniel, ask good questions.
		And I don't know if there'll be good questions or not.
		I have a feeling, I want to guess, I think it has something to do with Egypt.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		It has to do with Egypt, Mars, the moon, NASA, an extraordinary connection between NASA and all of the above, and something that we haven't discussed on this show for quite a while, i.e., Atlantis.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Atlantis?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Atlantis.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Have you ever wondered, Art, why we have a space shuttle named Atlantis?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You know what?
		I have.
		Atlantis is a mythical, supposedly, land that once was a boy.
		Well, there are arguments about where it was, actually, but it sank into the ocean and disappeared.
		That was Atlantis.
		More, I always thought, a myth than a reality.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, you know, you don't start thinking of these things until you get into the thickets, into the woods, and start lifting up the branches and the rocks, and things start crawling out from under.
		And then things that you completely ignored or took for granted or assumed on the basis of various authorities suddenly take on a totally different meaning.
		And the reason I'm starting with that rather tiny datum is because it's real.
		No one can contest tonight that NASA, you know, the uptight engineering enclave of modern late 20th century America, the personification of the right stuff, of go-get them engineering, of if we can go to the moon, why can't we, dot, dot, dot, fill in the blanks?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Sure.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Which has named a variety of ships and spacecraft and missions after all kinds of historical and documentable sources.
		You know, Clipper ships named Intrepid, famous exploration ships named Challenger, famous other ships named Enterprise, although the lineage of that one is kind of interesting.
		but there is an enterprise on station tonight in the gulf the persian gulf keeping watch over the mideast though it's every part of nassau's lineage traces back to a very specific verifiable eminently historical association except
		Now, what in the world in that company do we have a myth that uniformly, if you wake up any historian or Egyptologist tonight, which you probably should anyway because they should be listening to your show, they will tell you that it's all a myth.
		It's all Plato made it up.
		The Egyptian priest had a food and fed him a bunch of, you know, caca long before the new age.
		It ain't real.
		It doesn't exist.
		That's what I always like.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's what I was like.
		Richard, who in NASA, or what group in NASA, comes up with these names?
		That's probably something we ought to know.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, offhand, I specifically don't know.
		I mean, obviously, it's one of those questions you want to find out.
		But it's like who named Apollo?
		Who named Mercury?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Who named the Gemini program?
		There, we actually do have a name.
		His name was Dr. Abe Silverstein.
		He was a very respected, brilliant engineer and official at the Lewis Research Center in Ohio, where, coincidentally, I've been invited years later to speak three times on our investigation.
		It always amused me that while they were taking pop shots at us at other sides of NASA, that other NASA centers were inviting us in the front door over and over and over again to lay out what we and our teams have been finding over the years.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That is a mystery.
		NASA has invited you in, and I always thought that strange because I rather always thought they'd send a hit team out for you.
		And so then what are they doing inviting you to speak?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, you know, one or two times you can say that, you know, the kind of guys invited the party to jump out of the cake.
		But after the fourth or fifth or sixth invitation, you begin to get the pattern that maybe some folks on the inside want to know what the folks on the outside know.
		And the best way to find out what they know is to invite them into the inside to lay out what they know.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Maybe they think there's a reverse conspiracy theory, Richard, and that they know nothing on the inside, and we know it all out here.
		And we're keeping it from them.
		Sorry, go ahead.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		That's all right.
		So, what I want to do this morning, and it's going to take us some time to do this because we do not have images.
		The one bane of radio is that we don't have images to work with.
		This is not like television or even now like the internet.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Wait a minute.
		You don't have pictures of Atlantis, and you're going to try and convince us that it's real, right?
		Okay.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		What we do have in radio, which is why it is my favorite medium, is we have a little cherished quality of the human system, of the human imagination, called imagination.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Theater of the mind.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Exactly.
		And with all the data that we have presented over the years, we're going to draw upon all of that this evening, in the wee hours of this morning as the Terminator sweeps westward.
		And we are going to limb out the most extraordinary puzzle, connecting the dots, as my friend Zoe Haronima said in Washington this morning.
		And by the end of this program, I hope that people will be intrigued.
		They will want to pursue the evidence we're going to lay out on the World Wide Web at Enterprise on our website.
		They are going to want to join us at Cape Canaveral on the 3rd of November when Dr. Dr. Yes, yes, Ken, I have just promoted you.
		When Engineer Ken Johnston Jr., formerly at NASA, currently at Boeing, is going to join me for a three-hour briefing of the public and press at Brevard County Community College on the evening of Sunday night, November 3rd, three days before NASA launches the next unmanned mission back to Mars.
		And we are going to lay out many, many pieces of this puzzle with illustrations, graphs, documents, and all the things that you can't see on radio.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, we are launching again to Mars.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What are we launching?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		We are launching on the, actually at 12.09, which is just after noon, on November the 6th, one day after the election, an unmanned spacecraft called Mars Global Surveyor, which is kind of like a half makeup for the missing Mars Observer.
		This is a two-spacecraft launch.
		This first one is going to carry about half of the instruments Mars Observer was going to put into orbit two years ago around Mars, and didn't because it disappeared a couple of days before it was supposed to get there.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		In two years from now, in 1998, the second half of this dual mission will be launched, Mars Surveyor 2, and it will carry the other half of the instrument component into Mars orbit.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		In fact, I think it's going to land a rover, a mini-rover on Mars, if I'm not mistaken.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So these are both rovers?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		No, no, this mission will be orbiter only.
		Orbiter.
		Spacecraft.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Imaging.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Imaging, global climatology, weather, environment sensing, I think magnetic fields, I think the laser altimeter is flying.
		You know, it's kind of hard to keep track of what instruments are on or off.
		But in the coming weeks, I mean, we have a year before things get really interesting because it's only leaving Wednesday the 6th.
		It doesn't arrive at Mars for 10 months.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Long way.
		Well, it's not like I don't know anything.
		I know that it is part of the mission to go back and image Sidonia.
		I've got that in front of me.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Uh-huh.
		Yes and no.
		It depends on who you talk to.
		It also depends on what time of day you talk to them, whether there's an eclipse when you talk to them, whether they've gotten out of the left side of the bed or the right side of the bed.
		There are very confusing, contradictory signals coming from NASA regarding the reimaging of Sidonia.
		And they began with the question asked at the Mars Rock press conference on August 7th.
		Remember the major press conference on the microfossil?
		Of course.
		People jumping up and down over something tiny and invisible that had been dead 3.5 billion years?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, one of our associates actually was able to ask the question, Elaine Douglas in the audience there at NASA headquarters, asked the question of Dr. Golden, Dan Golden, who is the administrator of NASA, and Dr. Wes Huntress, who is the deputy administrator or associate administrator for space science, where are they going to take new pictures of Sidonia?
		And on our web, you will see the verbatim transcript of their respective replies, which is the most artful example, you know, Bill Clinton notwithstanding, of saying two simultaneous things to two simultaneous audiences, neither of which they think, I guess, will ever talk to each other.
		Because according to Dr. Golden, this is not a high priority.
		In fact, it's not a priority at all.
		And then he demurred to Dr. Huntress for the details.
		Dr. Huntress picked up the theme and said, well, it's not a priority.
		It's not a priority at all, I'm paraphrasing.
		And it's unlikely that we're going to get a picture, but we certainly are going to get better pictures than we got last time.
		Huh?
		Come again, Wes?
		In other words, it began in a paradox and a puzzle because it's not in the database.
		It's not being prioritized, but they say they're going to get much better pictures than they got last time.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Can I read you what I've got?
		Sure.
		And maybe it's wrong.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, this is new data.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		There was a press conference NASA held on the 16th of October.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And after that, Paul Hoverston, who is the science editor for USA Today, apparently cornered Dr. Golden between a couple of cups of coffee and got him on record.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And I think that's what you have in front of you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, not necessarily.
		Mine says, let's see, Cydonia face-to-face image, FaceTime, while Sojourner is set to crawl around the floor of an ancient channel that scientists believe once carried liquid water, the Mars Global Surveyor is going to map the planet from a polar orbit that will take it over most points on the surface 26 times during a 687-day Martian year.
		That is going to include the so-called Face on Mars, counted in the tabloids as evidence of a past Martian civilization that NASA is trying to cover up.
		Arden Alby, global surveyor project scientist, says the project plans to alert the local Face on Mars lobby, read Richard Hoagland and Company, whenever imagery from the region where the face was spotted is coming up and post that imagery on the internet as soon as it is collected.
		Quote, we think we have done all the things that we can possibly do in the framework of this mission to try to address this question of the face on Mars, End quote.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Okay, this is the statement by Golden and the spokesperson there is Arden Alby, who is the project scientist for the mission.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		This was the Article 102196.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Yep.
		Okay, so we are talking the same thing.
		Now, according to sources I have, Golden a couple days ago retreated from that position and claimed that they were not going to provide what they call near-virtual real-time imagery.
		That means that as soon as it gets back from the spacecraft at the speed of light, they'll put it up on the net and put it up on TV.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, what pretty hell are they going to do with it?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, we have reporters now asking them what it means that they are not quite going to do that.
		And we're going to find out, obviously, we have a year or more to find out what exactly they are going to do.
		But this is one of the reasons why I'm going to Cape Kennedy.
		Actually, Cape Canaveral is the Kennedy Space Center on Cape Canaveral with Ken Johnston on the third.
		Because the way this came about, before the press conference and before the statement you just read, NASA's position was, as it had been over the last several years, that there would be no live television, no prioritization of Sidonia, et cetera.
		Incidentally.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, listen, Richard, this is going to take a moment to develop, so stay right there.
		And we'll come back to you.
		By the way, it launches November 6th, isn't that what you said?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		That's correct, Wednesday.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do you think it has a better chance or a lesser chance than Bob Bill of being elected on November 5th?
		That is, of getting to Mars?
		We'll let that one hang in the air and come back in just a moment.
		Richard C. Hoagland is my guest.
		You're listening to the American CBC Radio Network.
		Hi.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		So we've got this machine to launch back to Mars.
		And really, I was joking, but I wasn't joking.
		Do you think it will make it?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Yes, yes, I think it's going to make it.
		I think that Alby's comments and Golan's comments, and most important, Sagan's comments last year, gave us a heads up that up to the point where we get pictures of Sidonia, this mission is going to work.
		The key question, and this I want everyone listening tonight to take very seriously, the key question is, are those pictures going to be real?
		Because if this is all a shaggy dog story, if we are being set up for the biggest con in history, then it doesn't matter if they're live or not.
		The fix is already in.
		Now, the reason I say this is because what we're going to present, what Ken and I are going to present at Prevard Community College on the night of the 3rd, is absolute, overwhelming, conclusive proof that NASA or some in NASA in key positions,
		I want to be very clear to separate the rank and file, most of the 400,000 people who worked on Apollo and the 20-some thousand people who currently work for NASA from those who are determining policy, which is a tiny handful of people.
		Those people have been lying to us for over 30 years.
		Let me repeat that.
		These people who are in charge of NASA policy, not the rank and file, have been lying not only to us, but to the rest of NASA for over 30 years.
		And Ken and I are going to lay out with highly specific examples, documented, specific examples over and over again, exactly how this was accomplished, how broad it is, how deep it is, how wide it is, and how it goes back apparently to the beginning of the space program itself.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Really?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Now, having said that, and I'm going to present, hopefully, some of that evidence in a form that radio can accommodate, but you really need to see this in terms of the visuals and the documentation.
		So we're going to put it all up on the web in the next several days.
		Actually, it's probably going to take us a couple of weeks to put it all up there because there is so much.
		And our schedule is so hectic.
		And there are meetings on both coasts that I have to be in attendance for.
		Other things are being pursued in parallel with this particular part of the campaign.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, well, I've got to stop you here, Richard.
		And I try to listen very carefully to what you say.
		And in a previous program, you said that NASA was shooting straight, was really a good agency, told the truth up until a certain point.
		And now you've said you think they've lied since the beginning.
		You've changed your mind.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		No, the data has moved on.
		See, everyone in this game, and by game I mean the whole UFO ET anomalous phenomenology community, most of the people out there are basically voicing opinions.
		The problem with opinion is you can change it any day of the week and it doesn't matter.
		What this investigation from the beginning art has tried to do is to follow the data, where the data leads.
		As new information comes to light, as new documents are given to us, as new people come on board, and there have been several key step functions when people within the system have come over to our side and start providing us with evidence and documentation.
		And, you know, Ken Johnson is a critical example.
		If we had not had his untouched database of thousands of photographs going back 30 years, carefully socked away in the Oklahoma City University Archive and in his own private collection, we would not have the mechanism to compare and to converge data sets and analyses against what we've been getting out of NASA's own file.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, I can go along with that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, then what data has changed?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Ah, that's what we're going to take the morning to go through step by step.
		I want to do this in a very orderly way because it's going to be hard to follow without the images.
		And since most people in America are not going to be able to get to the Cape and to show up for these demonstrations on both coasts, and I'll get to what I mean by that in a minute.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Got a lot of listeners in Florida, so.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And a lot will not be able to get to the web because they don't have computers not on the web.
		So that's changing every day.
		But when we did a survey in Seattle, as you know, I just came back from there, the MC actually asked for a show of hands as to how many people have been aware of what we're doing through advertisements, through newspapers, through television, through radio, through the web, and overwhelmingly art.
		Most of the people who came to our seminars listened to the show.
		That's why I want to do this show.
		This show, we know, has impact, and when people are properly motivated, they can make their presence and their voices heard.
		And I'm going to ask the audience later this morning to do a couple of specific things to help as part of this revelatory process.
		Let me go back to the beginning.
		This all starts with the absolute essential cornerstone of any science, which is honest verification.
		If you don't have honest verification, if you don't have an honest attempt to acquire new data to test a model, no matter how controversial the model, then you're up a creek.
		If you can prove that the agency in charge of getting that data on Mars has not been honest, then in analogy to the OJ trial, you know, the first one or this one or whatever one, the judge or in this case, the jury, the American people, have a right to basically look at the witness, i.e.
		NASA, and say, well, look, if you've lied to us on this and this and this, how can we possibly believe you on that?
		And that's really what this is all about.
		What we're trying to do is to basically alert the American people, the taxpayers who are sending this mission back to Mars, to the fact that after this enormous effort to get new data on Sidonia, in fact, we may not be able to trust the data itself because the process is flawed.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, prove they lied.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, let me see how we start, all right?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		You and I have shared this interest in Egypt by way of Hancock and Baval in the last several months.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		I shared it long before because as we looked at the Mars data from Sidonia, the most obvious comparison one can make with the face on Mars is the Sphinx in Egypt.
		Most of the people who write to me or facts to me or are in correspondence note at some point or other this incredible similarity.
		It just looks in those images from NASA like the face of the Sphinx.
		Now it doesn't look like it in specific detail, but there's this overwhelming impression that is left in people's minds that there's some connection, some relatedness.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I agree.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		As we went through our analyses beginning in 1983 and brought experts on board at SRI and the University of California and people like Mark Carlado and Errol Torrin and people like Horace Crater became involved and many, many, many others that I'm obviously not going to be able to mention all of them tonight.
		This perception, this intuitive kind of qualitative, it feels like Egypt.
		It looks like Egypt.
		Face, pyramids, sphinx, pyramids became much more quantitative.
		I was able to stand at the UN in February of 1992, and this of course is part of the UN tape that we have available, and lay out for the audience in the Doghamer Show Auditorium and for all those who have purchased the video subsequently, a most astonishing point-by-point connection between the ruins of Sidonia, the monuments of Mars, and this remarkable place on the Giza Plateau southwest of the city of Cairo here on Earth.
		Starting with the fact that in Arabic, El-Kahira, the root word for Cairo, means Mars.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Does it?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And then going on to the fact that the location of these two sites on their respective planets, the Giza Plateau, the site of the pyramids and sphinx on Earth, and the Sidonia Plain, you know, with the with the pyramid city and the space on Mars on Mars, are linked by a remarkable and extraordinarily provocative geodetic connection.
		Geodetic meaning maps.
		If you look at a planet and you put a grid around it, latitude, longitude, like we have on Earth, you can measure the latitude of the Sphinx and the pyramids in Egypt at roughly 30 degrees north latitude.
		Actually, there are about 29 degrees and several, you know, 50-some arc minutes, but it's close enough to say 30 degrees as a round number.
		That latitude in degrees has, if you remember your high school trigonometry, various trigonometric functions attached to it.
		Ratios, decimals, sines, cosines, tangents.
		And the cosine of 30 degrees is 0.865.
		Again, round numbers, folks, for those out there whipping out their calculators to check me.
		Okay?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		That cosine latitude equivalent of the Giza pyramids and sphinx on Earth is precisely the same, again, round numbers, to the tangent of the latitude of the Martian face and the city on Mars at Sidonia.
		The tangent of 41 degrees north latitude is the cosine of 30 degrees north latitude.
		And 41 degrees north latitude is the latitude of the collection of objects on Mars.
		30 degrees north latitude is the collection of objects on Earth that look eerily similar.
		Now, it was the Russian Vladimir Avinsky, the geologist back in the early 1980s, who wrote a provocative piece in the Moscow news that I spent a lot of time chasing down through the Soviet consulate in San Francisco because it was so eerily similar to our own investigation, which was in process at that time.
		And I discovered to my satisfaction, and I acknowledged him in monuments, that in fact this wasn't an example of Chekhov.
		Remember Chekhov on Star Trek, of course, where he claimed everything was invented by Russians?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, this, it turned out, was correct.
		Vinsky had independently, from us and from the Petro Molinar and others, had been looking at this provocative set of imagery from the Viking missions.
		In fact, it looks like he actually got copies of the Viking data itself somehow into Moscow.
		And he published, in the same time frame, an independent assessment, which was provocative to me for a couple of reasons.
		Not only because it was independent, but because his conclusions were eerily similar to what ours would eventually Be.
		And that was that A, he called the face for the first time on record the Martian Sphinx.
		How eerily prescient Vladimir turned out to be.
		And I want to acknowledge him over and over again because that's what science is supposed to be: acknowledging good seminal work.
		Number two, in this same study, which eventually was reprinted by the KGB in that high-quality, glossy, four-color magazine that was kind of like Life magazine.
		It was called Soviet Life and published out of the Embassy of Washington, D.C. Yes.
		In the summer of 1984, within days of our presenting this paper that Rautenberg and I and Brandenburg and Deputy Gramolinar and others all participating in our first SRI study had collaborated on and had given to John to present at the Case for Mars Conference in Boulder, Colorado in that summer of 84.
		Within days of that paper, Soviet Life carried this story by Ivinsky called Pyramids on Mars, which was shocking and incredibly prescient because the Soviets, through that, claimed they had discovered Sidonia and they were the ones proposing it was artificial and that it was connected to Egypt.
		And Ivinsky specifically in that story, simultaneous with our own work, claimed that the key to resolving the whole problem was the geometry of the city and the pyramids connected to the face at Sidonia.
		In other words, my own geometric relationship model, which in turn was borrowed liberally from our friend Carl Sagan.
		It was Carl in Cosmos back in the 60s who said, if I'm not mistaken, actually it was the 70s.
		I'm making him a little bit older than he is, that terrestrial intelligent life, intelligent life on Earth, first manifests itself through the geometric regularity of its constructions, i.e., if you want to look down on another planet and see if there's anybody at home, look for the geometry.
		It's that simple.
		And that's the rule of thumb we've been using.
		Now, Carl kind of forgot what he wrote, and for 14 years, 15 years, has been telling everybody that we're crazy, that we don't know what we're talking about, that there's nothing there, but it's tricks of light and shadow, etc., etc., etc., up until December of last year, when in his latest book called The Demon-Haunted World, Science as a Candle in the Dark, what a title, he says in chapter 3, but I might be wrong.
		And then he proceeds to lay out specifically why the Sidonia problem, the face on Mars problem, the pyramid problem at Sidonia is different from UFOs, is in fact science, is in fact testable.
		And then he demands, implores that the next missions going back, i.e.
		surveyor, pathfinder, the Russia 96 missions, they take the photographs to once and for all resolve this issue, which would be fine if we could trust the agency taking the pictures.
		But we cannot because it turns out that our interest in Egypt and our linkage at the UN between the Sidonia site and the Giza site is not the first that someone has been interested in Mars and in Earth and in possible connections.
		And we have now found in NASA's own data set evidence, compelling evidence to indicate that NASA knew before the Viking missions ever went to Mars that Sidonia was there and they timed the taking of their first picture from that Viking orbiter on the afternoon of July 25th,
		1976, precisely at the optimum time to record its presence in a context that is meaningful in connection with a lot of other data we've now uncovered, and that's the data that needs the photographs and the imagery to lay out.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, how did they know it regarded?
		All right, how did they know it was there?
		Before.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, remember, Viking was not the first.
		Viking followed the famous and brilliantly successful Mariner 9 mission in 1971.
		And I was present when Mariner 9 became the first spacecraft successfully placed in Mars orbit in November of 1971.
		I was there with Von Braun and Arthur Clark and Phil Chapman and a whole bunch of other space groupies.
		We used to gather at JPL for these periodic planetary parties as part of my CBS activities.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		This was back in the days when you thought NASA was honest.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Exactly.
		We all thought NASA was honest.
		We all thought that NASA was giving us the solar system when they found it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, so how did what?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		So one possibility, now, again, we're going to mix tonight hard fact and informed speculation, and I'm going to try to alert people to which is which.
		The facts are that we've got data unequivocally demonstrating that NASA knew that Sidonia was there before Viking got there and took the pictures that we've all come to know.
		The speculation is, and keep me honest on this, Art, the speculation is, how do they know?
		The one possible answer is that Mariner 9 was there before Viking.
		And it spent several years in orbit and took over 100,000 pictures.
		And it is quite likely that among those pictures, most of which nobody has had time to look at or has seen, because the files on Mariner 9 are so chaotic and so disorganized.
		And I know this because during our first years in the independent Mars Investigation at SRI, we had dedicated people like John Brandenburg and Vince DiPietro go to Goddard and try to get photographs from the Mariner 9 sequences to kind of corroborate some of the things we were looking at in the Viking data.
		And we found at that point that at the NSSDC, they were hopelessly misfiled and not organized at all the way you would want them to.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you're not claiming to have found Mariner 9 data.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		No, no, we have not found Mariner 9 Sidonia frame.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		We have not.
		But it is logical to presume that as part of that very exhaustive and comprehensive mission, with somewhat Primitive television systems, but they were comparable to what was on Viking because the technology really hadn't changed between the two space missions.
		Even though Mariner 9 was in 71 and Viking was in 76, the technology was basically the same.
		It is reasonable to presume that they had a heads up because of the Mariner 9 data.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Do we know that Mariner 9 overflew the area?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Yes, we do.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We do.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Mariner 9 overflew everything and photographed all of Mars down to a resolution of, you know, several hundred meters.
		And when they lowered the orbit, they actually got selected regions at higher resolution.
		And I don't remember enough of the mission without referring to the documents and the ephemerides and all that to know what areas they looked at in close-up.
		But it is a reasonable presumption that if they had a heads up, it came from Mariner 9.
		The more extraordinary possibility, and I'm going to get into some very extraordinary possibilities to give people a feeling for how wide we have to cast our net based on the remarkable data we now have confirmed.
		The most remarkable possibility of all, I'm going to come back to this again and again and again through the morning, is that what's going on in Egypt is not the first effort to find secret rooms and archives under the Giza Plateau.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		They've already been there, done that.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Maybe 100 years ago.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		100 years ago?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Sure.
		The Mideast opened up about 100 years ago.
		We discovered in the 1700s, you know, Napoleon was interested in Egypt.
		And when was it that Champagne, you know, broke the code of hieroglyphics?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		But archaeology, British archaeologists, French archaeologists, German archaeologists have been crawling over, under, and around and through Egypt for at least 200 years.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Secret knowledge.
		All right, Richard, you've got to hold it right there.
		We'll be back to you, and we'll try and wring the rest from him.
		I've got a little fact here.
		It says, Miss Bell, strangle him now.
		You have him in your grasp.
		What about all that stuff about the moon?
		Hoagland must die.
		Hoagland must die.
		Sphinx or no Sphinx?
		Hoagland must be put to sleep.
		Mr. Kvorkian, we need you now.
		Richard Hoagland, back in a moment.
unidentified		You realize just how I have found.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		NASA cannot possibly send a hitman after Richard Hoagland.
		It's not in their budget.
		All right, Richard.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Oh, he seemed to be evoking interesting feelings this morning.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, there's more substantial faxes, but I can't resist the fun.
		We'll get to those.
		Richard, somebody may have been in the Sphinx Chambers 100 years ago.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, even earlier, I have a couple of faxes here from some of our own sources, and they point out that the Mideast has been combed over and crawled over by people ever since the Crusades who were fanatically and frantically looking for the Holy Grail.
		And when you're really on a mission and you're financed by various kings and princes and under the banners of religion and taking back the Holy Land and all that, who knows what could have been found and squirreled away and saved.
		I mean, we all know those rumors of all the things in the catacombs under the Vatican, the so-called libraries.
		There is a lot of data that we know from standard mainstream sources is not generally available to the public.
		There are, you know, the modern era of national security and black budgets is not the first time that human beings have really cornered knowledge and information and kept it away from other people because knowledge is power.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Look, Richard, there's been a lot of water under the Sphinx Paw since we last spoke.
		And what my audience will remember from the last time you were on the air was Baval and Hancock and yourself locked in seemingly mortal combat for a lot of the night about what was about to maybe happen at Giza.
		Now, I don't know how much we can tell and how much we can't tell about what we think we might know and what might or might not be happening at Giza, but we ought to try and go as far with this as we can to update from the last show.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, well, we intend to.
		Okay.
		And all I'll say is that truth is a moving target, Art.
		You know, who was it that said that consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds?
		And it's not that, you know, we're politicians and we're changing our position, which is what I love about, you know, campaigns.
		Science is constantly reinventing itself because it is a successive approximation of truth.
		Our data tonight is different and better than it was when you and I did the show with Graham and Baval some weeks ago.
		We know more.
		In fact, I know enough tonight that I am going to make a prediction specifically on your show for the first time ever as to when this darn secret chamber is going to be opened on Giza.
		Irrespective of all the machinations, all the politics, all the committees, all the strange Byzantine Mideast stuff we've been talking about, I'm going to give you a flat prediction of when it's going to happen tonight on your show.
		Based on what we have figured out that is not out of Egypt.
		It's out of NASA.
		It's out of data that is in public domain.
		All you got to do is know how to put it together.
		And that's the neat part about science.
		This is democratic.
		Anybody can do this, folks.
		All you got to do is really want to do it and be as determined to get to the bottom of this as I and my colleagues.
		And you too can have the same kind of fun we're having.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Hawas, Zahiwas.
		He is the antiquities curator.
		He's the guy who's in charge at Giza, is that?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Agiza Plateau.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Linda Moulton Howe did an interview following our last show.
		In it, she interviewed Mr. Was, who said about the following, Richard, I'm paraphrasing, but he said, accused people of doing bad science, talked about Baval and Hancock and included them in the group Bad Science, and there were some threats made and so forth and so on.
		Then he said, look, there is nothing in those chambers.
		Those chambers, he said, were opened, I forget, back in the 1920s or something, and they're going to open them, and there's going to be nothing in those chambers.
		That's what he said with Linda Bolton Howe.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		So that's one man's opinion.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		One man's opinion.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Are we all talking about the same chambers?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, probably not.
		I mean, if you look at the steli, which is basically a flat, carved, engraved stone, flat slab, tablet, that's erected between the paws of the Sphinx, right in front of its breast, which is very old, thousands of years old.
		It shows on this flaking steli, which is the technical term for it, carved thousands of years before the present, a Sphinx crouching on the top of a chamber which has multiple cavities and rooms and caverns and tunnels.
		Yes.
		There is a literally schematic depiction of the Sphinx on a plateau honeycombed with cavities.
		And I imagine, you know, given some of the hints we've had from the recent investigations, ground-penetrating radar and seismographs and the like, that there are a lot of potential cavities that either could or could not contain interesting or uninteresting artifacts and or records and or stuff.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How much do we know about that, Richard?
		The X-ray work that has been done, I think it's the University of Florida has been doing and others have done.
		What do we know?
		How many chambers or what have we seen?
		Can you tell us that?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, we know there was a rumor some months ago that there were nine chambers discovered.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Nine.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Nine of them.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		With metallic artifacts.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Metal that would show up on an X-ray.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		No, it's not X-ray.
		This is ground-penetrating radar.
		This is microwave wavelength radar.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Radar.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And the way that the instrument measures cavities versus objects in them is by means of reflectivity.
		You know, the wavelengths, the radio waves, go through the ground, through the sand.
		Sure.
		And they are absorbed to varying degrees by moisture.
		As you know, the water table under the plateau is rising.
		That's been part of the explanation for the erosion of the Sphinx, which is not correct.
		The Nile water table is not responsible for the massive water weathering of the Sphinx.
		Bob Schop put an end to that discussion years ago.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What is it, pollution?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		It's just the general water table of the Nile is rising.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, no, no.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Responsible for the weathering.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Oh, just the solubility of water.
		I mean, just water itself dissolves stuff.
		You know, drop sugar in a coffee cup and see what happens.
		So limestone is eroded by water.
		It's dissolved.
		It is water soluble, which is the term.
		So if the water table is rising, and I do believe that's in part because of the industrialization and megalopolis that Cairo has become, and probably the dams and the bridges built over the Nile are in part responsible for this.
		And as well, drilling for water.
		When you're in a country in a desert, they've been drilling a lot of wells to try to find more water.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Because they are dependent, critically dependent, on water.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And the Nile is not adequate now for the increasing populations.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You would think that would drop the level, not raise it.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, it has to do with water pressure and aquifers.
		And the fact is that it is common knowledge among geologists that the water table has been rising over the last 50 to 100 years under the Giza Plateau.
		And in fact, there are tunnels and chambers that friends of mine have actually explored that they now have to use scuba gear under the plateau because they have been flooded by water from the Nile rising.
		General water table elevation.
		This is not, however, what is responsible for the erosion of the Sphinx.
		So we know that there's a lot of stuff under there, you know, to get back to our central theme.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		That has not been properly catalogued and listed in the mainstream Egyptological journals because the Egyptians have been, since they threw everybody out, very secretive about their monuments, their plateau, their pyramids,
		their sinks, their country, as they probably have a perfect right to be because as new colonies throwing off the colonialist powers, they have been asserting from Nasser on an understandable nationalism,
		which means it's very difficult to get good knowledge as to what is still down there, and it's even more difficult to get good knowledge as to what was snuck out by the French or the Germans or the British and is wound up in Berlin or in Paris or in the Louvre or in London in the British Museum.
unidentified		We know a lot of stuff left Egypt.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And tracking back who got what when and what it said and what it decoded to is impossible.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		All you have to do in this game, and we're going to play this kind of intellectual game tonight, is lay out a possible trail, a logical trail for how people could know things that the general population does not know, particularly if they're in the business of wanting to know stuff.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, if there are, I just, I want to ask this, if there are nine chambers, let us, as a working assumption, nine chambers, how many do we know for certain that we have been in?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How many of that nine?
unidentified		We don't.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		We don't know anything for certain.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How many things are in?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, how many of that nine do we know we have been in?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		We don't know.
		It's all rumor.
		We're going to find out in the next couple of months, and I will give you a date when we're going to find out, from our own data, a prediction of when this will be revealed.
		And remember, I've been invited by one of the key players, participants, to be part of that unveiling.
		So we're going to see whether my invitation after tonight still holds good.
		I am running some risk of being forever barred from Egypt by doing this show the way we're going to do it tonight, all right?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You could be thrown in a pit and...
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		But in this case, since we already now know what's going to happen, that's what science can do.
		It can predict what's going to happen without you ever being there.
		We have other people who are, frankly, much better at being there than I am, i.e.
		Egyptians who we're talking to.
		And they're going to report to us and perhaps even get it on film, on tape, what actually happened.
		So whether we're there or not is somewhat irrelevant.
		We will have a presence there when these events go down, even if politically suddenly we're persona non grata.
		So it's more important, I think, to tell your audience and you tonight what it is we think we've got and the connection with NASA.
		This is a critical thing.
		The exquisite connection with NASA that should not exist if this was all it's been cracked up to be.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you're going to blow our invitation, huh?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, maybe mine.
		I don't know whether it's yours.
		Anyway.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, anyway.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		The fact that I have not received the call I was expecting midweek already very, very let's tell them what's going on, all right?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		There's a rumor floating around on the internet.
		I can certainly do it this way, which says that Zahi Oas has been removed from Giza, that, in fact, Zahioas is now in a different part of Egypt.
		And this rumor goes on, I've received it from at least 10 different people trying to confirm it, that the Fox News Group, camera crew, along with, what's his name, Richard?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Boris Sahib.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Boris Said, who I spoke to, is now in Egypt.
		That with Zahi Hawasa out of the way, says this information, the University of Florida project is going to proceed.
		The opening as scheduled will proceed.
		Now, that may be only a rumor.
		And I've had, I don't know how many people all week long working on trying to confirm this, and they've been unable to.
		And that goes for you two, correct?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Yep.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You cannot confirm it.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Nope.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So we don't know what the hell is going on over there.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Nope.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		I do know that I was supposed to get a phone call Wednesday, and I did not get a phone call.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And I've been here, and the machines are on.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yep.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Something's going on over there.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And in fact, since we now know from our own research and investigation that tracks back to Mars and the connection between Sidonia and Giza, that this piece of real estate is overwhelmingly important, and NASA has known this for 30 years.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		I am not surprised we didn't get a phone call because I believe that the players who are there are unwitting parts of a much larger situation, a much larger game of which they are not aware themselves.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You are, in effect, tonight, it seems to me, beginning to agree with Graham Hancock.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, I didn't say I didn't agree with Graham.
		No, I have disagreed not with his conclusion, but with what he was doing prior to reaching that conclusion.
		And our main disagreement was, you know, until we had this new set of data, this new evidence, I would have desired to have been there, you know, to be able to do it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Under any circumstances.
		In other words, even if it was going to be some great take, you wanted to be there to be able to reveal that, or at least judge it for yourself.
		Graham wanted to call the whole damn thing off.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		I still do because I now know exactly what they're going to do, and I'm going to lay it out on your show tonight.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And you do think it's going to be a setup, don't you?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Yes, I do.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And I think we can prove it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And, you know, if we don't get on with it, we're not going to get into it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, all right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, I mean, the audience are going to be very mad at you.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, no, not me.
		It's you they want to choke.
		I've got the facts right here.
		All right, so go ahead, lay it out.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Okay, so where did we last leave it?
		We've been looking at this connection in this investigation, in our enterprise investigation, between Sidonia, the monuments of Mars, and Giza for many, many years, since back in 1983 when I started to take this all seriously.
		And at the UN in 92, I was able to stand up and lay out the specific connection, geodetic.
		I then went into the mathematics of the respective sites.
		You know, we got geometry on Mars.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, we've done that sort of already.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		You know, we got geometry at Giza.
		Yes.
		Well, it's the same geometry.
		The same tetrahedral hyperdimensional geometry I talk about and talk about and talk about at Sidonia is also found at Giza.
		Now stop there for a minute.
		Think about this.
		Giza is supposed to be this primitive bunch of stuff, six and a half million tons of pyramid in the Great Pyramid alone, thrown up by a bunch of savages who didn't know about the wheel and only had copper tools.
		And guess what?
		They've incorporated in the measurements and the architectural layout of these pyramids and this plateau the most sophisticated hyperdimensional mathematics and geometry that we have uncovered.
		Now that's a neat trick.
		And it begins to give credence to the idea that Graham and Robert have been so eloquent at putting forth anew, although they are the first to admit that they have not originated this idea.
		There's a lot of very important researchers who have gone before us who've all been looking at this plateau and saying it's not, you know, an origination.
		It is a legacy.
		It is a descendant.
		It is something that was passed down from a time before.
		The Egyptians themselves did not do what's on that plateau.
		It was there from people who came before.
		And this may violate some of the nationalistic tendencies of Egyptians now, but in fact, the early investigators of Egypt, the French and the Germans and the British, all felt from their own scholarship that there was something special and unique about the plateau as apart from the rest of Egypt.
		There's no doubt that in the rest of Egypt, the Egyptians did amazing, stunning, wondrous things.
		But those pyramids and that sphinx on that plateau seem to be unique, seemed to be different, seemed to be a time capsule from an era before.
		And that era we generally call under the rubric Atlantis, which is a kind of a general term for the high civilization that existed on this planet thousands of years before any known civilization that comes down to us by way of Plato's tale from Solon, from the Greeks, from the Egyptians themselves.
		And it's only in a couple of places that we have fragments relating to this mythical high civilization.
		What is stunning is that NASA tonight has a shuttle named Atlantis.
		And that absolutely has to be answered.
		We've got to find out why our space agency, out of all the possible names, of all the gin joints in all the world, you know, why do they call a shuttle name Atlantis?
		The answer is that we now have found an extraordinary and stunning connection, a provable, on-the-record, documentable connection between NASA and ancient Egypt itself.
		And we have put it up on the web tonight.
		it is on our website.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Richard, hold on.
		You can get to Richard's website, of course, through mine, and I'll let him give his address.
		Or even, if you're used to going to mine, you can go up to mine and get to it from there.
		You can get there from here.
		It's www.artbell.com.
		So, Richard's got new stuff, does he?
		He didn't tell me that.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Brevard.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		On November 3rd.
		Okay, good.
		The first installment has to do with what I'm going to talk about next.
		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		We need to give one brief refresher, which is the work of Robert Bavall.
		Vavall's claim to fame in the last couple of years has been as a civil engineer working in Cairo, working in Egypt, wondering about the pyramids, wondering how a modern technology engineering that we now have in the latter part of the 20th century could possibly lift six and a half million tons of stone, of limestone, and assemble it with such precision.
		He came to the conclusion that we could not.
		As a civil engineer, that we literally did not have the skills or the money to build what's sitting on the plateau at Giza tonight.
		So if we didn't, then how could you possibly expect Neolithic Egyptians without the wheel and only copper tools?
		That's where Egyptologists differ from engineers because Egyptologists can create any theory in the mind and they don't have to make it actually work in practice, whereas engineers have the disconcerting problem of actually having to make the things that they think of.
		So Baval's engineering approach really strikes a chord with me because he's done it.
		He's been there.
		He knows the problems of lifting mass against gravity and assembling it with precision.
		So it was that history that led him step by step, and in his book, The Orion Mystery, he really lays out a wonderful detective story where he came to this flash of insight one night that the pyramids not only were left by a predecessor civilization before our own,
		but that they are laid out on the plateau in a striking geometry that mimics, that mirrors the geometry of a stunningly brilliant constellation seen overhead in the desert skies over Egypt in the winter, i.e.
		the Orion constellation.
		The most brilliant and visible of all the constellations in the sky.
		It's brilliantly visible here now, and out there on the west coast, it's probably slightly further south and southeast or south, yeah, southeast in the sky.
		But it is the most outstanding figure of the celestial parade of the winter skies.
		It looks like a huge rectangle with four bright stars at each of the corners, and in the middle, going diagonal, there are three bright stars called the belt of Orion that are slightly offset.
		They're not exactly in the line, they're offset.
		The last one is kind of up and to the left from where the other two are aligned.
		And when he was shown Orion in the desert skies one night by a friend, and he tells a story in his book, the pattern that he had seen in the architectural plans of the Giza Plateau suddenly fitted over it, and he realized that what the Egyptians or whoever built them before the Egyptians had been doing was basically mimicking the belt stars of Orion thousands of years before the Egyptians themselves could possibly have built the pyramids to conform to that constellation.
		And through all kinds of subsequent work published in his sequel with Graham Hancock, Message of the Sphinx, he pins down the date in his calculations of the stellar alignments to that wonderfully interesting date of 10,500 BC, when the precession of the Earth and the alignment of the stars and the juxtaposition on the ground.
		And he and I have some specific differences.
		For instance, I, in fact, tend to think that this plan is much older than Robert believes.
		Robert thinks it only goes back to 10.5.
		There is another rogue Egyptologist out in Los Angeles named Larry Hunter who has provided me with evidence that indicates very strongly that in fact this ground plan may be hundreds of thousands of years old.
		And this has to do with the placement of some very eroded pyramids that Baval, I believe, and Hunter believes, has misidentified with key outlying stars in the constellation of Orion, which if those are not the stars that Robert thinks they are, but the stars that Larry thinks they are,
		it means that the proper motions, the actual drift of stars through space and time over an immense period of time as we look at them from the Earth, would have moved them to their current positions from where they used to be, and so the configuration that the, quote, pre-Egyptians were trying to memorialize could in fact be hundreds of thousands of years old, not just down to 10,500 BC.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Richard, see if this strikes home for you.
		Let me stop you and read you something.
		Sean from Yucca Valley says, Art.
		Please ask Richard at some point about the mind-blowing NASA Apollo logo on his website.
		The logo, the Apollo logo Richard Hoagland has unearthed is a blockbuster.
		It has precisely the same look, feel, simple elegance, and straightforward symbolism of other NASA logos of that era.
		It is either authentic or a brilliant, masterful fake.
		NASA logo designs are anything but cryptic or intended to be easily decoded and appreciated even by the dullest member of the taxpaying public.
		Art.
		Having followed the issues and enigmas concerning Sidonia, Giza, and the moon on your show, viewing this logo on the web blew my socks off.
		Its simple message of the fundamental connectivity between Earth, the moon, and Orion is undeniable, as is the implication very clear on the Apollo logo that traveling to the moon is somehow profoundly relevant to our understanding of Orion.
		To find such symbolism on a NASA logo is about as expected as finding a pentagram prominently displayed in a Catholic church.
		At last, a smoking gun.
		How will NASA possibly explain away this one?
		That's it.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		I guess I can go home.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Sean gets it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Sean gets the prize, huh?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		yeah, the rewarding prize tonight.
		Sean goes to the head of the class.
		It is thunderstriking.
		It is dumbfounding.
		And that's where my next sentence was going to lead.
		Because what we discovered, and I'm going to describe how we discovered it, and no, Sean, it is not a hoax.
		It is absolutely for real.
		And I will lay out in exquisite detail how I know.
		The official insignia of the NASA Apollo program, John Kennedy's program to land men on the moon before this decade is out in that ringing declaration, is none other than the central constellation epitome of Osiris, i.e.
		the constellation of Orion, which is the constellation to which the Giza Plateau is laid out.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		God, Richard, I'm looking at, I'm on your webpage right now.
		I'm looking at the logo.
		It is astounding.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Now, what everyone needs to know is that Apollo is Osiris, is Orion.
		They are one and the same.
		Now, there is what we call Greek chauvinism in academia.
		You know, everything started with the Greeks.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Civilization, democracy, Plato, the great books, you know, the thinkers, Spinoza, it all started with the Greeks.
		There has been this incredible Western chauvinism against anything pre-Grecian, i.e.
		Egypt, Sumer, Mesopotamia, India, etc., etc.
		So we go to the moon, and Abe Silverstein comes up with the idea that we're going to call the moon missions Apollo, which itself should have raised a red flag.
		Because why would you go to the moon under the aegis of the god of the sun?
		All right?
		Nobody asked.
		You know, it was kind of a chauvinist era, so nobody said, why don't we go there under the banner of Diana, which would make much more sense.
		All right?
		What no one knows is why, if you're going with Greek chauvinism, why do you use an Egyptian symbology?
		Why is that logo, the official Apollo logo of the Apollo program, and yes, it is for real, and I'll explain how we know in a minute.
		Why is it Orion?
		Why is it Osiris?
		Why does the real origin and root derivation of the symbology convey itself in the patch symbology per se and not in the name of the missions?
		That's the first level of chicanery here.
		It's like, why aren't they telling us the whole truth?
		Why are they hiding the real genesis of this symbol?
		Answer, they dared not tell us.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And they've known all along.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And they've known all along.
		Now, let me tell you how we know it's for real.
		Back when I was a not dry behind the ears curator in the Museum of Science in Springfield, I kind of moonlighted.
		And that's a deliberate putt.
		I had a day job at the museum, you know, curator of astronomy, giving classes, teaching kids how to make telescopes, you know, going around to schools, you know, consulting with the mayor and how to get tourists to come to see our science museums.
		And in the morning and the evening, I had a radio show, even before you.
		In Westfield, Massachusetts.
		And I would commute back and forth.
		And at one point, I had three shows, and I literally killed myself, you know, with fatigue and all that.
		And I said, I'm going to get out of this race.
		But as part of the shows, I had a rather sterling cast of interesting people come through town.
		And some of those people included the Star Trek cast, people like Leonard Namoy and Bill Shatner and Gene Roddenberry and others, and science fiction greats like Fred Pohl and Isaac Asimov and people like that.
		And one day, Homer Newell came to town.
		Now, nobody in your audience, well, maybe not nobody, but not many, will remember the name of Homer Newell.
		Homer Newell, after NASA was created in 1958, became the first associate administrator for space science and applications under James Webb, who was appointed by Kennedy to be head of NASA in 1960 when Kennedy became president.
		Homer Newell, for reasons that now escape me, I guess he was lecturing at the Amherst or someplace, came to Springfield.
		And through interesting machinations in January of 1967, just before the tragic Apollo fire that claimed the three astronauts' lives, Grissom, Chafee, and White, Homer Newell was pushing my 1957 Chevy out of a snowbank in Springfield, Massachusetts, on the way to the radio station to do an interview on my show in the morning.
		When we got to the museum, he opened his briefcase and he showed me a whole bunch of stuff, and I still am thinking back, why in the world was he taking all this time with someone who was obviously not on the landscape at that point.
		And among the things he showed me was that patch you see on the website.
		I had it from the horse's mouth in 1967.
		That patch is and was the official Apollo patch of the Apollo program, the symbol of Orion.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So it's real?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		It is real.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Now, let me decode the patch for a second, then I'll get to where I saw it again and how we happen to have it now.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Sure, by now there's a lot of people looking right at it, so go ahead.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		The patch depicts on the left in yellow the moon with a face, which we all thought is Apollo.
		It's not.
		It's Osiris.
		It's Orion.
		On the right, you have the Earth, you know, familiar Cape Canaveral with a looping figure eight, the trajectory of the Apollo missions, linking Earth and moon, going from right to left in a curving, lazy S connecting the two planets.
		Going through the belt stars of Orion with the Betelgees and Rigel and Bellatrix and the other one that I can never remember at the four corners of the constellation.
		And there's a huge A in the middle of the symbol with the three belt stars connecting across the A like the crossbar on a real A. Right.
		Except, it's not.
		The A does not stand for Apollo.
		The A stands in Egyptian for Asar, which is the Egyptian name for Osiris, Orion.
		The multi-level symbology of this patch is Egyptian through and through.
		It is not Greek.
		It is not Apollo.
		It is pyramidal.
		It is ancient Egyptian.
		It is the Giza Plateau.
		It is a stunning connection between NASA and a place NASA has no business being interested in.
		And why do we have a shuttle named Atlantis?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, why do we?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We don't know, do we?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Nope, not yet, but we will.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		I clearly see where you're going.
		Richard, I want to read you something.
		You believe that we're not going to get the real thing when this launch culminates in imagery.
		This launch on the 6th of November culminates in imagery.
		You don't think we're going to get the real thing, do you?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		No, that's not quite true.
		I am basically taking out insurance against all possibilities.
		That's what good science has to do.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, I've got more insurance for you, and I want to see if you think this is reasonable, Richard.
		This is from Michael in Indiana.
		If the pictures coming from JPL from Mars in 10 months will be doctored or might be doctored, the technology exists today in the hands of radio amateurs and others, satellite Earth station owners, to aim their dishes at Mars and track its procession and record the signals on audio tape or hi-fi VCRs to feed into their computers for processing.
		All that's required is inside information on the frequencies used and the modulation schemes and people with satellite dishes 12-foot or better, and I've got one of those, 12 and a half footer, could take them out of their polar look and point them at Mars, lock on Mars and the signal, and do the recordings.
		What do you think?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, I mean, he's actually right up to the point that I'm going to mention next.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Because, you see, we have no guarantee that the signals coming from that spacecraft have not already been doctored.
		Meaning the photographs have been loaded onto the tape recorder to be beamed back to Connas all along.
		Now, the new edition of my book, The Monuments of Mars, has just been released.
		It should be reaching bookstores, you know, sometime this week.
		There is a set of very specific, documented reports of exactly this series of events occurring with Mars Observer in the timeframe just after it was launched in 1992.
		Mars Observer disappeared for 85 minutes after launch in a kind of an eerie foreshadowing about what happened a year later when it got to Mars.
		What I have done from NASA memos and from press reports and sources is to lay out in monuments, in the new chapters, in the new edition, the fourth edition, which has a whole new cover and a whole new look and everything, the rather remarkable story of the missing data on the Mars Observer tape recorder that two weeks after it was launched suddenly was not missing any longer.
		It strongly appears as if someone uplinked data to that tape recorder so people wouldn't ask questions about why it had disappeared for 85 minutes.
		And NASA attempted to blame the incompetence of the DSN managers and the engineers.
		The DSN is NASA's deep space network.
		They're the people that run under JPL this vast network around the world of these huge several hundred-foot dishes with the microwave maser amplifiers that pick up these incredibly faint signals and amplify them up to where they're usable so we can get digital data in pictures.
		The manager of the DSN was so incensed that the people in Washington attempted to blame his team for incompetence that it kind of devolved into a he said, she said.
		And unfortunately, we don't know the end of the story because by the time I got any reporters to get seriously interested in following the trail, the trail was cold and no one was talking.
		It was a bygone incident.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you think it's already been done?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		We have an example of how it was done.
		And I lay out the specifics in the last chapter of my book to how it was done before.
		And this, of course, is a red flag and a warning.
		Again, if the witness can be proven to have lied about one element in a case that is material, then the judge can instruct the jury, and we're the jury, we the American people, to disregard that witness in all subsequent testimony on that same subject.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I heard that in the Simpson trial.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		We're all much smarter, aren't we?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		So what I'm trying to do tonight, and I will be doing it for the next year with my colleagues and other people that are joining us, is simply plugging all the holes in this dam.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, you know what I want to know next?
		We're at the top of the hour, Richard.
		When we come back, I want to know why.
		Why they would go to all this trouble to deceive us in this way because of what information?
		I'm sure you must have some thoughts on that.
		We'll be right back.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		That night, the idea of how the solar system was open to us.
		In fact, Bob Heinlein was saying, and we have this on our website, that from this moment henceforth, Dick, all of human history will be known, you know, as before and after Neil Armstrong's lunar landing.
		Well, it turned out to be very prescient words because, in fact, that's exactly what's going to happen.
		It is now something like 9,650-some odd days since the lunar landing in July 20th of 1969.
		How do we know that?
		Because at the top of the Enterprise website, in kind of metaphor to star dates, we have a lunar landing date computer calendar that Keith Rowland, our dear Scotty Rowland, has come up with.
		And so every time you log on to Enterprise, you will see that date change in terms of the decimals.
		It's 9657.397564, which counts down literally to the second in terms of the fractional times that's elapsed since that night at 8.17 p.m.
		Greenwich Mean Time when Neil Armstrong landed the Lunar Module Eagle at the Sea of Tranquility on the Moon.
		Okay?
		That number is going to become important in a few minutes in our story.
		Incredibly important.
		And it was Keith who helped me figure this part out.
		And I want to give him proper credit because everybody's joining in this.
		This is democracy.
		This is what it's all about.
		This is how you really do science.
		You put bright minds together and amazing convergences come out.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		That landing date, July 20th, 69, has bothered me for a long time.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why?
unidentified		Well, because it was kind of arbitrary.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Let me tell you how arbitrary it was.
		I was, remember, first person, first witness at the right hand of God, I mean, you know, Walter, during the time that we did this.
		Remember?
		I thought, you know, we were omnipotent.
		I thought sitting there next to Walter we knew everything.
		Nothing escaped, that NASA couldn't hide anything from us, that everything we thought they told us was the truth.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, of course, we're now older and sadder and somewhat wiser.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		One of the things that bothered me even then, in 1969, occurred a couple of months before the Apollo 11 mission, in May, during the Apollo 10 mission.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What was that?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, remember back in the 60s, we were in this all-out race with the Russians.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		We were supposed to be racing for the prize of putting men first on the moon and seizing the high ground of philosophical and geopolitical thought, the hearts and minds of the uncommitted third world, etc., etc., fulfilling John Kennedy's vision, all of that, right?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Do you think you'd want to get there first, right?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		So we sent three astronauts, John Young, Tom Stafford, and Gene Cernan, in their Intrepid Apollo 10 mission, which was a duplicate down to the lunar module, to basically go around the moon and rehearse the landing.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And we didn't give Tom Stafford, who then became General Stafford later on, the fuel to land Apollo 10 on the moon.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Now think about that.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		You're in an all-out race with the Russians.
		You had a brilliantly successful Apollo 8 in December of 68.
		It's now May of 69.
		The end of the year is approaching at Warp 9.
		I mean, the end of the decade.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you're saying, why do a recon?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why not give them the fuel and do it on that mission?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Exactly.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And if they don't, if they can't make it, if they get down to what was called Highgate, where they pitched over and saw the landing site, if something happens, they fire the ascent stage, they come on back, they rendezvous, they come home, and you try again with 11.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So what's the answer?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Why not do it then?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Because it wasn't time.
		It was not time.
		There was and is, and it's provable, and we'll lay it out at the Cape, a grand plan.
		Tom Stafford and Gene Cernan could no more land on the moon than you and I could tonight.
		It was not to be permitted.
		That honor, that extraordinary moment was to be reserved and was planned a decade before.
		And we can prove it.
		In Kennedy's own speech that night in 1961, when before a joint session of the House and Senate, he laid out the vision of Apollo.
		Kennedy knew then, and we can prove it, that the site for the Apollo landing was going to be a tranquility on the eastern edge of tranquility, the sea of tranquility on the moon, at 23 degrees west and 0 degrees latitude.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How could he have known then?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Ah, isn't this interesting?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		He was just setting a goal, a political goal.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Precisely.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		How could he have known, and we can prove, and we will prove he did know.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Prove it.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Not tonight.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		We'll do that in a week.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But, Richard.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		But I will lay this out, all right?
		That July 20th date turns out to be important, critically important, because you see, that date is connected to Osiris and Orion.
		The central Egyptian religious cosmology centers on this figure of Osiris.
		Osiris is the, he's the big guy, all right?
		He is the god of reincarnation, of resurrection, of coming back, again and again and again, of return, all right?
		He is the central figure around which the entire Egyptian pantheon of gods and goddesses, everything from Isis to Bastet to Set to Nephthys to Nut to Geb, all these other personages orbit around Osiris.
		July 20th, he and his twin sister Isis, which is Sirius, the brightest star in the sky, the most important star in the Egyptian calendar because it marked when it returned after 70 days behind the sun.
		It marked the flood of the Nile, roughly 3,200 BC.
		That moment of rising in the dawn, the helical rising of the duality of Osiris and Isis, was called the helical return.
		That flash of brilliant starlight before the sun overwhelmed it in the dawn skies over ancient Egypt.
		That date, July 20th, Art, was the date of Isis' helical return.
		They landed on the moon, on the one date on the moon that commemorated Osiris over the pyramids at Giza.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Good Lord.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		It gets better.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It does, huh?
		that's pretty good, all right.
		The documents, what do you imagine the documents to be that they found that laid all this out for them, that caused Kennedy to set that date and that time, that only the landing only could have been done at that very moment in time?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, keep in mind that we have been looking at NASA data now, photographs, pictures, seismic evidence, the lunar science conferences, a vast compendium of orbiter, unmanned missions before Apollo, Apollo missions, The Clementine missions, and it is our central thesis that the moon was formerly occupied.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		There was stuff built there by visitors.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I understand.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		It is now becoming clear that some of that stuff is probably our stuff, meaning the human race.
		For that to be a logical, consistent, scientifically supportable statement, it means we cannot be the first, Art.
		You and I tonight, sitting talking on this technology called radio, are not the first people who have ever used radio on this planet.
		That in that before time, what the Egyptians call in the pyramid text, on page after page after page after page, and pyramid after pyramid after pyramid, you know, miles, square miles of hieroglyphics denoting this time called Zep Tepi,
		the first time, was that they were instructed to reconstruct, to rebuild, to reestablish a fabled civilization that came before, before Egypt, before the pyramids, before the ancient kingdoms.
		All right, i.e.
		Atlantis.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Hold it right there, and we'll be right back with more.
		Absolutely fascinating.
		And the knots are connecting.
		Welcome back and connect some more in a moment.
		Richard C. Hoagland is my guest.
		This is CBC.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		This is about taking back a process.
		And I can't very well ask people to put themselves in the line if I'm not willing to.
		So if I never get on CNN again, I'm going to be there at the South Gate.
		Now, three days before, Ken Johnson and I are going to do a very serious laying out of extraordinary evidence with graphs, with charts, with pictures, with memos, with documents, with NASA data, with some of the extraordinary material that Ken Johnson has preserved as kind of one of the few people of integrity that NASA seemed to have that when he was told to destroy data, he said, wait a minute, why?
		And then did the appropriate thing.
		If we did not have people like Ken Johnson, and there are other Ken Johnstons in NASA and formerly with NASA out there tonight, and I am begging you, I'm imploring you, please come forward and provide us with corroborative data.
		We know that most of NASA was doing the right thing.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Can I ask you a question, Richard?
		Even if you don't get somebody at the top, the committee of how many who really know the real story, and even though most of the little people at NASA, I use that advisedly, would not have the whole picture, indeed, many of them might have a part or a little piece of the picture.
		Wouldn't that be true?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Absolutely.
		And this is, I mean, Ken is a living example.
		When we got into this process, remember, we only met a year ago, and he stood up for us at the National Press Club at the press conference in March of this year.
		That's how rapidly things are moving.
		He has begun remembering things, and he and his brother and his cousin, who's also been involved in Apollo, have been putting their heads together and comparing notes, and they've come up with a lot of other anomalies and things that at the time they just kind of passed over because it was the, you know, it was the Chinese fire drill.
		There was mission after mission after mission after mission with no time to pause and think and reflect or do science.
		Now, with the hindsight of 30 years and knowing what is there and seeing this incredible, extraordinary pattern, they're looking back on their experiences and they're comparing notes and they're looking at their preserved artifacts and the things they've kept in files and in drawers and in boxes in the basement.
		And the most extraordinary things are emerging.
		For instance, we now know from Ken's archive with absolute certainty that this plan, this vision, this secret agenda, if I can use that term, began not with Apollo but with Mercury.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Richard, again, if you concluded that the time for the Brookings cautions had passed and that it was time to unwind this, perhaps slowly, then would it not make sense that the religious leaders,
		like the Pope, would begin to say things that would slowly lead the religious community into a more comfortable belief that, for example, evolution or something other than creation, as the Bible states it, might be possible and might be consistent with Christianity.
		That would be the religious sector.
		That our scientific sector would begin to date things and say, look, it's much older.
		Mankind is much older than we imagined.
		The artifacts much older than we imagined.
		And they would begin to come up with evidence like the rock from Mars and life from elsewhere.
		And it all begins to unfold.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Time release aspirant.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Time release.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I mean, it is a consistent picture.
		And remember, the church as an institution has done this before.
		The church ultimately accommodated to Galileo, not the other way around.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		This was a remarkable statement by the Pope, though.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, it is.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And there are ripples coming all over the place from it.
		I've been hearing them the last couple days, Richard.
		Believe me, a lot of Christians are very upset.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, you know, having been a Roman Catholic and having reconciled, you know, the apparently irreconcilable a long time ago, you can't have truth arguing with truth.
		You know, the God that I imagine is a God that, you know, basically didn't create paradox and contradiction.
		The paradox and contradiction come from the fallibility of human beings in attempting to impose their interpretations on the reality of the universe itself.
		And since science is a process of figuring it out, of admitting and understanding human fallibility, that's why when you keep comparing my positions on your show now to what I said four or five weeks ago, and I gently remind you that this is a moving target, this is a scientific process, and what I always say is an approximation because we're not infallible.
		This is a human activity of uncovering the truth, and it's a never-ending process.
		You never get to the end of the journey.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I know, I know, and I'm doing it for a reason, Richard.
		I'm doing it because if I don't, the audience will sit out there and shred your credibility based on the fact that you have changed, seemingly, your Position, and they don't like that.
		They're not comfortable with that.
		And so, I need for you to explain to them why that's occurring.
		That the truth, as it's uncovered, is in fact a moving target, as you explained.
		Learned new stuff.
		There you go.
		And so, they really do need to understand that, or they will, without cause, shred your credibility.
		You know, and they'll just say, well, if what he said then is not what he says now, then why should we believe anything he says?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's because we're not a politician.
		We're trying to find out the truth.
		Now, let's get back to data.
		Street name.
		Sure.
		This connection with Egypt is so incredibly fascinating and should not exist.
		The real piece de resistance here is when I got to the point where I said, okay, so we're flying to the moon under the banner of Osiris, not Apollo, which is connected to Egypt.
		We land on the moon at tranquility on the date which is constrained by that helical rising of Isis and Osiris, not Apollo.
		What else is there to be mined in this fertile field?
		So we have some computer programs now, which are extremely good and extremely democratizable.
		They are astronomy software programs.
		Redshift is one commercial name that we're using, which was given to me, by the way, by Omni Magazine, and I'm very grateful to them because without them, I probably wouldn't have tripped over this for quite a while.
		And you're able to, in the computer, either at a PC or with a laptop or whatever, in a Mac, to literally put yourself on the surface of any other planet in the solar system.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And with the ephemerids, recreate the sky at any time, plus or minus thousands of years, with proper motions and precessions and all the geometric factors calculated automatically.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Exactly how it would have looked.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Exactly.
		So what did we do?
		I set us up for the landing of Apollo 11 on the moon.
		Now we were told, as part of our briefings with Cronkite, that the astronauts had to land with the sun at about a 10-degree elevation behind them so that as they came down from the east moving west in orbit on their descent trajectory, the shadows of the craters and rocks and whatever would stand out in sharp relief and they would be able to make a safe landing, avoiding obstructions.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Makes sense.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		So I factored in all the known data and I picked as my source an impeccable authority.
		There is a geologist named Donald Wilhelms, who was one of the high-level geologists at the U.S. Geological Survey, who's written a brilliant tour de force of the scientific aspect of the Apollo missions to the moon.
		It's called To a Rocky Moon, published by the University of Arizona Press.
		Pub date is 94, I think.
		It's available now in trade paperback.
		It's got a beautiful silver cover with an Apollo 17 image of the Taurus Littro region on the cover.
		I recommend strongly, anybody interested in this, go out and get this book.
		Find this book.
		Because in this book is a very careful and detailed chronology of the involvement of science and geology with the lunar process, moving through the unmanned missions, the rangers, the surveyors, the lunar orbiters, and then through Apollo, and then into the post-Apollo phase.
		It's a meticulous step-by-step with copious footnotes and a highly documented chronology of how we did it.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Less than a minute.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Will Helms, in that book, documents the times and locations to the best that we now know of every Apollo landing on the moon.
		So I put in the coordinates for Apollo 11.
		I turn on the computer and let it run, and on the screen pops out, looking east toward the rising sun, the most astonishing geometric pattern.
		Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldren landed on the moon when Isis, Sirius, sister and consort to Osiris, whose patch they flew under, remember, was precisely at 19.5 degrees above the eastern horizon.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Wow.
		Richard, hold on.
		We'll be right back to you.
		Wow.
		That is something, isn't it?
		You're beginning to put it together.
		Another dot.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		Landing sites on the moon.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		So we have an Egyptian, an Egyptologist, from Egypt by way of Germany.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Picking.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Comes to NASA.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Gotcha.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Comes to Belcom, winds up picking through the most interesting and intricate mechanisms, which Don Wilhelms lays out in his book, by the way, the Apollo landing sites, which now correspond, and we're going to lay this all out at Brevard Community College over and over again and on the web and in other venues,
		landing sites that correspond to an intricate pattern of the risings, meridian transits, and settings of ISIS and Orion on the moon.
		It's the most astonishing pattern you've ever seen.
		And when I've shown this to these engineers who figured out the celestial mechanics, well, I can't say what some of them said to me because this is family radio.
		But their expletives deleted tell it all because they realize in their gut that for this pattern to be real, and the computer and the data says it is real.
		There's no doubt that it's real.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, I see the aha here.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		It had to be the overriding objective of the entire Apollo program.
		Not science, not rocks, not landing sites, not crew safety, not communications, not the lighting.
		Nothing else could matter, Art.
		Landing according to this configuration with limited rockets and propulsion and even the Saturn V's capabilities had to be the objective.
		And they've never told us for over 30 years.
		They never thought we'd figure it out.
		So we'd have the computers to figure it out.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The knowledge that he used, if, you know, following this training.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, let's assume that Dr. Elbaz knows more than he's been talking about.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Let us assume.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It came from his own knowledge or his father's knowledge of the materials.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		It gets better.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It came from the chamber.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		It gets better.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		The space.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		It gets better.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Am I right?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		He leaves NASA.
unidentified		All right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		The Apollo program ends, and Dr. Elbaz leaves NASA and goes to Boston, to Boston University.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, sir.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Where he sets up a department called the Remote Sensing Group.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		All right?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Really?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Remote sensing.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		As in remote viewing?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, related to that.
		There are, let me just say this, there are rumors.
		That's all they are.
		Unconfirmed rumors.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		About that.
		But remote sensing, in the mainstream colloquial use of the term, is basically using radar or sound waves or seismic, you know, to find things you can't get to physically.
		But there are rumors.
		I will say there are rumors.
		We next see Dr. Elbaz in 1987, which is a good, what, 20 years after Apollo?
		It ends in 72.
		How many years is that?
		All right?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		He's no longer with NASA formally officially.
		He's at Boston University.
		He shows up on the Giza Plateau.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		This is 18 years later.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Yep, 1987.
		He's there as part of a joint NASA engineer National Geographic Expedition to open the second solar boat pit alongside the Great Pyramid using Apollo-NASA drilling technology, which was first taken to the moon on Apollo 15 by David Scott and used to drill the thermal drill cores.
		Wow.
		And, you know, his interest in the Giza Plateau is demonstrable.
		He's also written extensively about the Sphinx.
		He claims it's a wind-eroded yardang.
		He is diametrically and categorically opposed to John West and Bob Schock's contention that it, in fact, is much older and was sculpted thousands of years before the contemporary Egyptologists would have us believe Egyptian civilization began.
		Well, now we have to flash forward the film.
		Because as you know, in 1991, a German named Rudolf Gentenbrink, you know this because Robert Mulal has told you, or I'm sure Graham has, and built this little robot called Uppawatt, which found its way up the ascending passage,
		this eight-inch wide tunnel shaft from the Queen's Chamber, one of the two chambers in the Great Pyramid, up this shaft 66 meters over 180 feet to where in 1991 it found a door.
		A door with two little handles, one of which had corroded off.
		Obviously extraordinarily ancient.
		At which point, Gantenbrink and his robot are summarily ejected from the plateau by Dr. Zahi Hawas.
		None other.
		Okay?
		That shaft, according to Baval, in concert with Gentenbrink's measurements, is oriented, is aimed directly toward the transit point of the star Sirius.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, I thought it was Orion.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I'm sorry.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		No, it's Siri.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		It's the ascending passage in the king's chamber, which is aimed toward Orion.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Thank you.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		The one out of the queen's chamber is aimed toward Sirius, his consort, his twin, his double in the metaphorical, mythological metaphor.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And at the end of that little eight-inch wide shaft, there is a door, and presumably there is something behind the door.
		Where is Monty Hall when you meet him?
		And nobody has been in there for four years.
		Because the Egyptian authorities, as soon as the door was found, thought it was every excuse and kicked everybody off, and nobody has been allowed near that door.
		All right?
		Now remember, this is a door at the end of a passage that no one has been able to get to until the 20th century.
		Why?
		Because no robber, however artful or devious or well-informed, could have gotten through the masonry, the 180 feet of solid masonry, through an eight-inch wide shaft.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Only that robot.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		The robot.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		You needed a technological age to create the technology to build a robot to go up that shaft.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Sure.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Now, in the model that the pyramid complex and the great pyramid itself is a time capsule, what better place to put something of inestimable value, proving once and for all that the pyramids are not ancient tombs, but are in fact preserves of ancient knowledge from before the catastrophe that wiped out the previous high-tech civilization, i.e.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Atlantis, then at the end of that 180-foot-long shaft leading toward the star Sirius.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Let me be sure.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		They have never opened that, that we know of, right?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		As far as we know.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		There would be no way, short of a robot that could do the opening and examination.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Exactly.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It has never been opened.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Nope.
		As far as we know.
		And in fact, I can sit here tonight and I am almost certain that, in fact, they haven't been in there.
		And I'll get to why I'm pretty sure that when they go in, it'll be the first time.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Do you have a commercial you can go to?
		Because I need to go and get a document.
		I want to read you something verbatim, and it's at the other end of the complex here.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Richard, I always have a commercial I can go to.
		Oh, good.
		Sure.
		Stay right there.
unidentified		We'll be right back.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		That Elbaz be hired.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Ed Nixon was Richard Milhouse Nixon's brother.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No kidding.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		The man who ended Apollo abruptly after six missions.
		And Farouk Albaz's brother is currently on the senior staff of Hosni Mubarak, the current president of Egypt.
		To begin to get the picture.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I do.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		So when I told Boris, my dear friend Boris Saeed, and John Nadan, Joe Shore, that the fix was in, because I showed them this data.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		You know, they're on their own tonight, and they have not called me from Egypt, and it's because they are involved in something so much bigger than they ever imagined they'd be involved in.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Is it true that Boris Said, can you confirm that he is in Egypt now with a Fox TV camera?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		He called me from the airport en route.
		That's how I told you I was going to get a call from him.
		I know he's there tonight.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So he's there.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And the fact that he has not responded as he said he would means, as George used to say, that he may be in deeper doo-doo than he thought.
		And I warned him.
		And you see, the problem of being a prophet is that people don't listen to you.
		It's very difficult sometimes to know what's going to happen because, you know, you keep being told, oh, come on, it can't be that way.
		You're seeing things.
		You're one of those conspiracy theorists.
		Well, the history of the human race is the history of conspiracy.
		That's what's so disingenuous about all the discussion of conspiracy these days by the mainstream is because we wouldn't be here without conspiracy.
		There are positive and negative conspiracies.
		Conspiracy simply means to breathe together, conspiritutuo.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Richard, what about Shore?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		He should be available to you.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think he was going.
		I think he's also in Cairo.
		I have not called him because I just haven't called him because I expected to get the call from Saeed.
		But tomorrow in my copious spare time, I am actually going to let Sleeping Dogs, serious pun intended, lie here because I'm going to lay out what's going to happen and we'll just see whether it takes place according to what we figured out.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		And what exactly do you think will attempt?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Oh, this gets better and better.
		Let's go back to 69.
		Neil and Buzz land on the moon.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Now remember, they landed long.
		Did you ever wonder why they landed long?
		You know what the story is?
		That when the LEM pitched over, the lunar module pitched over from the high gate position, the automatic radar control landing?
unidentified		Yes.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		That when he took control of the spacecraft and the RCS, the reaction control thrusters that would kind of move it around as it was coming down on the descent engine.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		He saw there were rocks where the targeting was aiming them.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And, you know, in that great American tradition, man over machine, he took control and moved out of the way and got it around the rocks and landed five miles long.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Baloney.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Baloney?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Baloney.
		What I think happened, and I've now checked with some of the engineers who were part of the actual team in mission control that afternoon.
		And I've checked this with them and they say, holy cow, you're right.
		It could have happened that way.
		I think that they got updates from the computers and the tracking stations on Earth to guide them to the exact coordinates where the ISIS 19.5 degrees alignment would occur.
		And that meant they had to land about five miles long.
		That meant information had to be radioed from Earth up to the spacecraft, but most of NASA was not supposed to know, all right?
		Because they're not in on it.
unidentified		This is a secret thing.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		So how do you get information to the spacecraft when they're not supposed to be getting it?
		You hide it under a program alarm.
		Remember Stephen Bales and the 1201 program alarm?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, I don't.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, there was a computer glitch during the landing, and they were apparently very worried that their computer kept ringing its alarm bell.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Okay, yes, I'm not.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		In fact, if the glitch was to cover the receipt of data by the computer from Earth, the folks in mission control would never have known that a secret set of information had passed up to the spacecraft, telling Neil to land long and telling him where he had to land.
		So the celestial configuration would be confirmed.
		Now, what did they do after they landed?
		33 minutes, and that time, 33 minutes is very important, as you'll see later on, after landing, according to two books that Buzz Aldrin has authored, as well as the actual mission logs and the air-to-ground conversations with mission control,
		Neil and Buzz celebrated with a chalice and wine, a very special ceremony in the lunar module at this temple site to Isis they had consecrated on the moon.
		While Isis is at the tetrahedral 19.5 degrees above the eastern horizon.
		Now, do you know what the hieroglyph for Isis or Sirius is in the Egyptian iconography?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		It is an equilateral triangle.
		It is the two-dimensional form of the 3D tetrahedron circumscribed within the sphere.
		And it means, in the Egyptian translation, a doorway.
		And as I said at the UN, how do the Egyptians know?
		Because the doorway, metaphorically, is the gate, the doorway between hyperdimensional dimensions.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You think they were engaging in an ancient ceremonial something, toast moments, achievements?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, I know they were engaged in the ceremony because they admit that.
		It's speculation as to which ceremony to whom, but if you know anything of your Roman Catholicism, it traces back to Isis, it traces back to Egypt.
		It's all one.
unidentified		It's all one, Art.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		We've got them.
		Well, but what have we got?
		I mean, I clearly see where you've taken me to this point, Richard.
		What have we got?
		What is the next step?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		The next step is Apollo 12.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		When Apollo 12 landed on November 19th with Alan Bean and Pete Conrad at the controls, Orion, not Sirius, but the belt stars of Orion were located at 19.5 degrees above the Western horizon.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh my God.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Now that landing site was and this is where things were going to get really weird So I caution you guys tighten your seatbelts here Remember the Apollo 12 landing site.
		These are all integrated together.
unidentified		It's like Have you ever played pickup sticks?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yep.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Where you have a network of sticks on the ground and you're supposed to pick them up one at a time without moving any others?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Sure.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And they're all so meshed together that if you move one the whole pattern shifts.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		All of the landing sites now on the moon, it turns out, are part of this Orion pattern.
		They're all part of a matrix.
		They're part of an algorithm.
		They're part of a fundamental code.
		If you moved one, you'd have to move all of them.
		So one is the anchor, and all the rest work off that one.
		So 12 and 11 are connected.
		It turns out that if you were standing at the 12 site at the moment, 11 lands, remember, 12 is several hundred miles to the west in darkness.
		The only thing that's at the 12 site is little Surveyor 3.
		Remember Surveyor 3?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I do.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		The unmanned spacecraft we landed in 1967, right after Farouk Al-Baz comes on board NASA?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, yes.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		The spacecraft that was landed on Hitler's birthday?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, this has echoes of an old show.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		It does.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		At that site, if you had been standing there in your spacesuit, in the frigid pre-dawn darkness, at 2.50 below on the moon, with a beautiful full Earth overhead, looking toward the east.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		There would have been Orion at 19.5.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		No, Orion...
		The tangent is at the dawn and setting horizon.
		And the midheaven is 90 degrees, which is a key part of the physics.
		Ancient Egyptian cosmology is a code for the physics itself.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		To what end, Richard?
		I know this is a level two question at least, but to what end are we following this little intricate, complicated, ancient dance?
		To what end?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, the key question is, why do they do it?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And we don't yet know.
		I mean, I'm very honest.
		I don't yet know.
		I have suspicions, but I don't know.
		And part of what we're trying to do is be responsible.
		So I'm not going to say what we don't know.
		I'm going to admit what we don't know.
		That's why we need more help.
		There are people in NASA listening to me tonight at the Manned Spacecraft Center, at Goddard, at headquarters, all over, because we know.
		We know they listen.
		It's time to get to the truth here.
		It's time to fess up.
		It's time that we moved on, that we grew up.
		The founding fathers did not imagine a society where you had a small priesthood that used public money to carry out secret ceremonies, billions and billions of dollars, without some connect between the leaders and the population whose pockets they picked to do it.
		And that's nothing more, nothing less than what's been going on here.
		Now, I do not believe that that's what originally was intended.
		I think that Kennedy's idea, in consonance with the Founding Fathers, was to go and find this stuff and bring it home and then let everybody know after an appropriate decent interval, after they knew what they had.
		But something happened.
		He died.
		And then, as with all power, he seems to have been corrupted.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Richard, he was killed.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, he was killed.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, he was killed.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I don't know if that's all right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Well, if you really want to be Machiavellian, you might begin asking questions in some direction.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		I might.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Not tonight.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		But not tonight.
		Hold on.
		We'll be right back to you.
		Richard C. Hoagland is my guest.
unidentified		This is CBZ.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		In fact, he worked for the president.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And we have proven, and we're going to lay out the proof at Brevard, three U.S. presidents are intimately involved in this pattern.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Why not a fourth or a fifth?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, that's the only leap I'm unable to make so far because I don't know.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		I don't make any leaps.
		I'm just saying there's a pattern.
		Don't ignore.
		See, where most people go wrong in trying to do this is they come up against the brick roads and say, oh, no, I can buy this and this and this, but I can't buy that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's what I just did.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		You can't do that.
		You must simply look at the pattern and then ask second-level questions.
		But if you stop in the middle of the road and say, oh, I'm not going to buy that's part of the pattern, all right.
		Anyway, I don't know whether it means anything.
		I'm just hoping that somebody out there knows something that we don't know and they'll be able to fill in more of the dots.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		My second level question is, and I really would like conjecture since you don't have an answer and I respect that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		What can you imagine, I'll be careful how I ask you, what can you imagine that this entire dance that we're doing to this ancient tune is leading toward?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		all right before it's that let me let me let me give you the peter is a stock We've obviously now calculated this same geometry in this incredible celestial alignment of precision for Giza.
		For the Sirius doorway.
		The Sirius shaft.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes, sir.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Parenthetically, when Voyager...
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Where?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Sirius.
		Now that means, of course, the entire Voyager encounter of Neptune had to be pre-designed to head the damn thing towards Sirius.
		Science, be damned.
		I mean, this eventually begins to touch the average American's pocketbook or scientists or priorities.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, it's been touching our pocketbook right along.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Exactly.
		In other words, if they're not doing what they claim they're doing with our money, what the hell are they doing, and why don't we know about it, and who's in charge, and who's in control, and who's setting this up, and for what reason?
		Those are all questions to which I don't have answers yet.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, try my second-level conjecture question.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		All right, let me get back to Giza and then we'll answer that.
		We'll try to.
		So we've set up the computer to run the opening of the doorway in the pyramid.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Guess when they're going to open it?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Probably July 20th.
unidentified		No.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Remember, things are processing and orbiting.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		It doesn't repeat like that.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		You had me stuck on July 20th.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		That's the anchor date, but it's for the geometry, not for the date.
		The date is important, but only to establish the pattern.
		No, it turns out that the exact time to open this secret serious chamber is December 5th of 1996.
		At which point, the geometry over tranquility repeats precisely what it did that afternoon on July 20th.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		So you're going to predict that they're going to open this December 5th, 1996.
		Public opening?
		Huh?
		Public opening?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Oh, no, no, no, no, no, no.
		The public opening is going to be all this nonsense around the Sphinx and the chambers under the Sphinx.
		It's the bait and switch routine.
		All the lights, all the cameras, Boris, Fox, me, maybe, although I doubt it by now.
		They're on the Giza Plateau with lights, camera, action.
		I mean, have you ever been to a movie shoot?
		Ever been walking down Fifth Avenue or somewhere in New York?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Sure.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And there's vans and there's lights?
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Everybody's watching.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		While we're all outside, gathered around this incredible opening of the Sphinx Live on television.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Inside, secretly, up in that room, standing around looking at the monitors and the robots, will be Dr. Elbaz and company opening the secret doorway at the end of the Sphinx, at the end of the Sirius shaft.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Hey, Richard.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		It has to happen.
		Now, let me finish my punchline.
		You know, I've got to get my punchline.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		All right, punch.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Guess how many days precisely?
		And Keith Rowland helped me figure this out because it's on our website.
		And when I told him, he could not believe I was, because I predicted this before he knew why it was significant the other night, two nights ago.
		We have a calendar on our website.
		Number of days since the lunar landing.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		He said to me, you know, it's going to turn over at 10,000 soon.
		And I said, holy cow, I'll bet it's December 5th.
		He did a quick calculation.
		December 5th, it will be precisely 10,000 days since we landed at Tranquility on July 20th on the moon with ISIS at 19.5 degrees.
unidentified		Until it recapitulates precisely again.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		That's when they're going to open it.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And now you know, as Paul Harvey said, the rest of the story.
unidentified		Well, you know what I have here in my hand?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Your invitation to the opening.
		Richard?
		These flourishing paper folks.
		I don't think you're going.
		I don't think I'm going.
		They'll never let you anywhere near it now, Richard.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		But you see, we have our sources.
		It doesn't matter.
		If this comes off the way, I think it has to.
		You see, it has to.
		All kidding aside, this is mandated by such a high level of seriousness that they can put this off.
		This has to happen this year before the end of 96, because this geometry will not repeat.
		This is almost at the level of, can I even use the word prophecy?
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, you can.
unidentified		So in other words, it can't wait to come off.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		It has to come off exactly.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Which means we'll catch them.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Now, of course, I really piss somebody off.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Maybe you'll catch them.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		No, we'll catch them.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		And your audience.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		How is anybody going to be caught unless there's a presence there?
		There will be.
		Well, maybe there will be.
		Look at your invitation.
		None of it matters.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		It's not my invitation.
		I don't have to be there, remember?
		We have sources everywhere.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, Egypt.
		Well, I'll tell you, and the audience at the same time, that the information out of Giza, and I have more than just you, is shut down.
		There's no talking coming out of Giza right now.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Anyway.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Well, not anyway.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		No, that's important, Richard.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		Oh, no, no, I totally understand.
		I totally understand.
		It's because this is preparation time.
		Now, there will be a fake not a fake.
		It'll be a kind of a false alarm the first week of November regarding all this.
		And then it will go away and the real date is December 5th.
		Mark it on your calendars, folks.
art bell ▲ ● ▼		Oh, I'd mark it.
richard c hoagland ▲ ● ▼		It's exactly 10,000 nights.

▲