Art Bell welcomes callers to Coast to Coast AM, a live overnight show with 500 affiliates, as NASA releases a high-res "Face on Mars" photo—contradicting its own claims of natural erosion. Richard C. Hoagland, backed by multimedia artist Kynthia’s 20-year forensic research, argues the feature is a dual-species fusion (human and lion-like) with mathematical precision, not random rock. NASA’s rushed debunking, including split 1998 imagery and low-resolution MOLA data, suggests political suppression of evidence pointing to artificiality, like tunnel structures. Hoagland predicts 2005’s one-foot-per-pixel mission will expose construction details, while Bell urges skepticism, leaving the debate unresolved but the image available for scrutiny. [Automatically generated summary]
From the high desert in the great American Southwest went to all, good evening, good morning, good afternoon, wherever you may be across all the time zones across the world, commercially from the island of Guam eastward to the Caribbean and the U.S. Virgin Islands, south into South America, north, all the way to the Pole and worldwide on the internet, of course.
unidentified
This is Coast to Coast to Coast to Coast A.M., and I'm Mark Bell.
And I'd like to welcome this Friday night, Saturday morning, KBTM in Jonesboro, Arkansas.
Welcome to the largest live overnight talk show in the world.
Glad to have you reminding everybody that we have three hours of pre-feed every night before the program.
In other words, three hours of the previous night's program is sent to stations that would like to receive it and listeners that would like to hear it.
And that, of course, feeds in a very linear fashion into the current live program and allows you to have Coast on a little bit earlier and do your listeners a great service because a lot of them, of course, begin to nod off as the night goes on.
Anyway, listen, as you all are well aware, the newest face on Mars photograph, done roughly from the same perspective with the same rough lighting, has been taken.
Only a very high resolution version of the face on Mars.
Very high resolution indeed.
And for that, I think NASA deserves a big thank you.
Thank you, NASA, Mr. Malin, everybody concerned, for getting us finally a straight-on photograph of this incredible controversy.
So what tonight we are going to examine just about every aspect of it you can imagine.
I'm going to give you my own personal opinion, and that may change during the show, but right now, when I saw the high-resolution photograph from NASA, I said, that's it.
I talked to Professor Van Flandren, who said that there is plenty there to disappoint both sides.
For the professor, of course, he had looked for the symmetrical aspect of it, and it's not symmetrical.
In other words, it is not a face of a given creature, any single given creature.
Now, that might do some harm to Professor Van Flanderen's model of what it was.
Richard C. Hoagland, on the other hand, years and years ago at the UN, said that the face would be not that of a hominoid fully, but rather of a hominoid slash feline combination.
And I think the one thing you can say about the present face is that clearly it could be seen as that.
As a matter of fact, one of Richard's harshest critics, as well as mine and many others in this kind of business, would be my good friends at The Skeptical Inquirer.
Well, Gary Posner of The Skeptical Inquirer, incredibly, in his May-June 2001 article, said, quote, some have remarked that this version, a light reverse face on Mars photo, does indeed look a bit more like a head, though that of a lion rather than a humanoid.
The idea, therefore, that Richard C. Hoagland should be ridiculed for stating that the new face on Mars photo shows an eastern side lion head is ridiculous.
And you don't frequently ever hear that from the skeptical inquirer.
The concept that Richards should be ridiculed for what he said, according to the skeptical inquirer, is ridiculous.
So, in a moment, with Richard C. Hoagland, a one-time advisor to NASA, Richard C. Hoagland, a one-time science advisor to Walter C. Cronkite, the Angstrom Science Award winner, and Kynthia, we're going to have a talk about the new Face on Mars photograph.
My mind is open, it always is, but after looking at the photograph, like most of the mainstream media, I've said, you've got to be kidding.
We'll see.
Now, we've got a couple of things that we've got to get done right away.
Richard was scrambling and lost his phone line or his connection with us, so the very first thing I have to do is to get Richard back on the line.
And sorry about that, everybody.
It occurs every now and then with live talk radio.
Richard is scrambling to get an image working on the web, and so I suspect in the process he disconnected himself.
So the first thing we're going to do is get Richard back on the telephone.
Kynthia is a well-known multimedia artist living in the San Francisco Bay Area.
We'll join Richard tonight.
For about the last two decades, she's also served as the Art and Simulations Director of the Enterprise Mission.
Her own work first drew international attention in 1986 when she designed the first logo for the White House Young Astronaut slash Young Cosmonaut Exchange Program, displayed right on the front page of the Washington Post with President Reagan and acclaimed as far away as Russia.
Kinthia's 3D sculptures of the Face on Mars span now nearly 20 years of independent and analytical research, the very first sculpture on this planet of a potential extraterrestrial work of art.
Kinthia's initial Face on Mars depictions grace the cover of Richard C. Hogwan's first edition of the Monuments of Mars.
Since pioneering efforts in 1983, she spent literally thousands of hours studying and sculpting and re-sculpting the smallest details of the face from official NASA data.
Now we have more of that.
Within the independent Mars community, it is widely acknowledged that after almost 20 years, no one knows its every feature as intimately as does she.
Her ongoing analysis via the new media of analog 3D sculptures blended with state-of-the-art computer simulations has risen to the challenge of incorporating new data points into these continuing simulations with each new release of NASA data on the face.
Well, first of all, in homage to my political friend who has been giving me insights as to how the Bush White House is proceeding on this new course, I taught I told a putty cat.
On the right-hand side, in front of about 200 people in two-packed auditoriums during a grueling multi-afternoon session, I laid out, you know, it's available on the UN video that we offer at the Enterprise Mission, I laid out the model that unlike everybody else who had been looking at this since the Pietro Laudar started looking back in the late 70s, where everyone assumed that this would be a symmetrical statue.
If we only got good pictures of the other side, it would look like Paul Newman or Marilyn Monroe or, you know, at least be symmetrical.
And I further said, and I backed it up with some extraordinary numbers there at the UN, that there was another example in the solar system of this identical imagery, which is tonight just a few thousand miles away from us in a place called Cairo, Egypt.
The Skeptical Inquirer never, almost never retracts anything it ever says, and they noted in their May-June edition that indeed you should not be ridiculed for stating the new face on Mars photo shows an eastern side lion head.
They actually went out of their way to say in essence that they would agree, they might agree.
unidentified
Well, they didn't say that, but they said you shouldn't be ridiculed.
And the reason for the dinner was he was interested in investing in Sidonia research to basically create something that he could sell on the open market.
And he wanted to pick my brains for what he might do to make him the money.
And this individual, who will remain nameless, because I have to keep it that way, regaled me the entire evening with the strength and the depth of his contacts at JPL, which is literally just up the street from his mansion.
And we're sitting there having dinner in this dining room where, you know, you have to have a megaphone to reach the other end of the intercom to tell people to pass the salt.
And he suddenly said, you know, he says very, very sagaciously, he says, one of my deep contacts at the lab has informed me that the reason NASA has not released new data, this is a year ago now, is because the right-hand side of this creature is definitely a lion, and they don't know what the public reaction will be.
And I looked at him and I said, sir, are you familiar with what I did at the UN about eight years ago?
No, no, he said, I have no idea.
What did you do at the UN?
So after dinner, I took him into the drawing room, and we're sitting there with brandy sniffers, and I opened my laptop and I showed him some of the graphics from the UN presentation.
Well, you never saw art.
A guy's jaw drop to the floor faster because he thought he had a juicy tidbit of inside info to impress me with how he was connected.
And eight years before, I'd laid out this model and I had the glyphs, the graphics to prove what we were contending.
So from that day forward, this is a year ago, I realized that if we ever got a full image, it would be incredibly contentious that since most people live up to their expectations and everybody was expecting except us that it was going to be symmetrical, when we got it, there would be a food fight.
There would be the free-for-all.
And that's why I wanted to do this show tonight with Kinfia, because as you said in your opening, of all the people on this planet, out of six million people, the lady we're going to talk to tonight has lived with this object, this enigma, this extraordinary sculpture for more thousands of hours than anybody else I can think of, and knows it better maybe than the face of her own grandmother or her sons or her father or whatever.
And it's her reaction and the reactions of artists that I believe we need to be paying very careful attention to.
Well, picture yourself on a beach art and you see someone that's been buried in the sand by a child.
Now you notice that the form, the body is not going to show clearly.
And what we have on Mars when we look at the site, at the plateau there, we've got winds that are coming from the city and they're moving across towards the cliff.
That is, they're coming across the plain, they're sweeping up the city side of the face, carving away the sand, sculpting it away, carrying it over the ridge of the nose and depositing sand on the cliff side of the face.
Okay, now when you look closely, since this is a high-resolution photo, so take a close look and you'll notice that the texture on the right side of the face, that is the cliff side of the face, is definitely different than the texture on the city side of the face.
Well, it's pretty hard, Kynthia, because the right side of the face, certainly you're right, the texture is absolutely different.
However, so is the geography.
unidentified
Well, now take a, and I don't know if you can blow it up there, but when you blow it up, what you will see is on the left side, on the city side, you will see it's granular, like carved and sculpted away.
Once again, Richard C. Hoagland and Kynthia and the face on Mars.
Richard, very quickly, reiterating a private call you and I had the other day when this happened, I called you and I said, oh my God, release the face.
And you said, right, you already knew, obviously.
unidentified
And I looked at it and we had a real serious conversation.
Well, I think it's important that we put the conversation in context because about 20 years ago when I got into this, when I first saw DuPietro Molinar's work, the face by itself did not impress me.
Unlike Tom Van Flantern, who has rested his entire case on the face, I have always felt that it was one structure, part of a larger complex.
And I felt that because when I got into this in 1983 and I looked at the images and I began to make measurements and look at alignments and look at the, you know, ask the anthropological question, which was if this was a sculpture, you know, where do the guys who did it live?
Where do they hang out?
And, you know, I've described all this in exquisite detail in the Monuments of Mars, so I'm not going to reiterate it tonight.
But the bottom line is that after 20 years, we have found there is a complex of structures around this Sidonia region of Mars, which is about the size of the Bay Area in San Francisco, where Cintia is tonight.
And there is an exquisite interlocking geometry, alignment, mathematics, redundant mathematics, redundant angles, things that come up again and again.
So if they had taken this picture of this Mesa yesterday or the day before, and it had shown nothing, it was just a hole, I would not have been phased in the slightest because you can't undo the mathematical matrix in which this thing is embedded.
It was Sir Arthur Eddington who in the early part of this century said to his fellow British astronomers, he said, gentlemen, you do not have a science unless you can express it in mathematics.
And what we now have over the last 20 years is a succeeding cascade of rigorous mathematics that demonstrate that whoever did this there on Mars knew an extraordinary amount of geometry, math, and science that we are only beginning to rediscover.
And we have extrapolated those numbers, that math model, to the whole solar system.
That's the basis of my hyperdimensional physics conversations.
We found planets and the sun doing things according to the mathematics we've uncovered at Sidonia.
So to me, at one level, the faith is irrelevant to the discussion and has been for probably the last eight or nine years since I did my thing at the UN.
Notwithstanding that it's not irrelevant, what I was expecting when we got this new image was not that we would, quote, confirm there's life on Mars, because we already know there was life, okay?
I was looking for what does it mean?
What do the guys who did this, if we can peer back through the eons of erosion that have attacked this thing to where I'm astonished that there's as much of it left as there is, what were they trying to say?
What was this monumental work of art on the scale of a mile and a half tall and a mile wide and almost a thousand feet high?
What was so important that they had to do this?
And we have had intimations over the last several years, over the last nine years, and as Cynthia worked with her models over and over again, I mean, she was a skeptic artist.
Canthia, tell them how hard I had to work to get you to finally realize from your own efforts what you were dealing with.
unidentified
Cynthia?
Oh, you know, what convinced me was sculpting this over and over again, Art.
First of all, you know how a forensic artist works where they reconstruct something?
Well, as I sculpted this over and over again, it was very clear to me that there is a basic structure.
First of all, the plateau that the face sits on is symmetrical.
However, when you look at the structure of the two sides and you look at the, like if you were, let's say, the skeleton, the skeleton, or the skull shape, you begin to notice certain things.
And I want to back up here for a moment because Richard was talking about that the face is one unit in a complex, in a larger complex.
Now, when you look at any complete work, each unit reflects the whole.
And when you look at Sidonia, the city, overall, it's not a symmetrical city.
None of the structures are symmetrical.
We are looking at a culture that is highly sophisticated, and the geometry that's inherent in it is not just put out there in a very simplistic, symmetrical way.
There is nothing in Sidonia that's symmetrical.
Why would we imagine that the face itself would be symmetrical?
That is where everybody is tripping up.
They're going and they're looking at this new image and they're saying, oh, it's not symmetrical.
Oh, it's not a face.
However, if you look at each half, then you see a different story.
The other piece of data is to look at the complexity of the whole Sidonia Plateau.
If you look at our modern architecture, and this is something Robert Firtek, an architect, so beautifully elaborates, if you go to Planetary Mysteries and hit Mars and then hit Feartek, you'll see his article on the Sidonia Plateau, where he talks about the difference between modern architecture, like for instance, you would see nowadays, you'd see very simplistic dark buildings.
And then if you were to go back and look at the Gothic buildings with these high cathedrals, each society creates their art and their architecture to reflect their inner spirit.
And it is natural to assume that the face is going to be an element of the entire plateau.
It's not going to be separate from the plateau.
It's not going to have a different intrinsic artistic value than the rest of the plateau.
It's going to be consistent.
And when you look at the city itself, you don't see symmetrical.
What Pierkek found through his architectural analysis is redundant geometry that although it looks asymmetrical, it has an underlying elegant, redundant mathematical pattern.
Which is how you know its architecture as opposed to just pile of rocks.
He extended that to include the base, and Conthillia, of course, approaching it from the artistic perspective, finally saw what I was trying to say at the UN, that if this thing was real and made by somebody, it would be consistent with the whole of Sidonia,
which had this elegant underlying asymmetry, but there was a mathematical pattern to it, and we should expect that they were trying to say something profound with this mile-long, you know, thousand-foot-high thing.
And it may, in fact, harken back to the most ancient terrestrial examples.
I've got to tell a story here because there's somebody that I need to really credit for confirming this model.
Well, I did this at the UN.
You know, there's just so many things you can do, even if you're a multidisciplinarian, like I pride myself on being.
You can't know everything.
So what we have done over the years, Art, is we have opened the door to allow other folks out there, particularly now with the web, to input to us their research, their culling of the archives, their insights, their perspectives.
And we've turned up extraordinary connecting tissue, you know, more data points to fill out the model that we're in fact dealing with something which has touched two worlds.
Well, a gentleman several years ago after I did the UN thing called me one day.
His name is George Haas.
And he has a partner, a geologist.
George is an artist.
He's an anthropologist, turned artist.
Works in the New York City area.
His partner is a geologist named William Saunders.
And they had been working on a separate insight, which was to look, after they saw my UN thing, at ancient cultures all around the world.
And they found, starting with the Central American cultures, the Olmec and the Mayans, this extraordinary reservoir of imagery, glyphs and statuary and icons and hieroglyphs that all are two-faced, that have double meanings.
And we have some examples on our website tonight.
If you go to Enterprise, all right, you go to the main page, and you go one link down, all right?
At the top, you will see on the left-hand side a double face image.
And the two halves are totally asymmetrical.
And what the Maya intended us to do is to slice them down the middle and fold them over like mirror images like we've done with the face on Mars.
And lo and behold, you get two separate and exquisitely meaningful representations in the Mayan cultural idiom.
You can do it with their statuary.
You can do it with the glyphs.
In the center of the page, we have one of the glyphs.
And George has separated it below into two halves.
And you can see the interpretation.
These are all Mayan interpretations.
These are important symbolic interpretations.
In other words, if you could read Mayan, you'd be able to understand what this glyph is telling you.
But what the Mayans did is they coded their meaning in these double images.
We found that it goes all the way back to the Omeg.
He said to me tonight when I was talking to him just before the show that he's got examples from the American Northwest, from California Native Americans who did this.
And we'll have more examples up in the next few days.
What's important then is to establish that even in our own terrestrial cultures, this is an established artistic technique to communicate something.
And from the beginning, I have said if the face on Mars was real, if the Sidonia complex was real, if an ancient civilization there was real, you had to get inside the mind of the builders to figure out what they intended to do.
And obviously, they intended to communicate something.
In this case, they intended to communicate it to the sky, because that's how you photograph this thing from orbit, looking down.
Out of curiosity, Richard, with the first images that did seem clearly to show a face, how did you come to the conclusion for that speech at the UN and for everybody else, that one side eventually would be seen as hominoid, the other feline?
It was literally spending about, at that point, what, 10 years working on this, working with better enhancements from Mark Carlado on 7813, which is the high sun angle.
And it just leaped out at me as I was preparing for the UN thing.
I began doing left-right halves because a friend of mine in Virginia was deeply into one of the Sufi mystics.
And there had been some stuff in the Tibetans about duality.
And I started looking at this one day, and I said, damn, if that right-hand side doesn't look like it's feline.
And the more I looked at it, and the more I, you know, in those days we didn't have computers.
Remember, this is back in the Dark Ages.
And I remember literally sitting in a driveway in Washington, D.C. in Mark's car when he prepared some very high-resolution 8x14 or 11 by 14 glossies for me.
And I said, you know, Mark, this is the best we've Ever seen this, but I had to physically cut them apart and paste them together.
And when I did that, it just leaped out at me.
And of course, everybody said I was crazy.
They all said, oh, come on, there's not enough data.
Well, tonight we got enough data.
And when you see the emails that have come into Enterprise, it's about nine to one of the people who see it.
And the most amazing thing is Gary Poger's reaction.
I mean, the skeptical inquirer can never be considered a prejudiced source in favor of our model, right?
For him to say that I shouldn't be ridiculed for proposing this, I believe, and the reason they did the retraction is they had an inside track from the political side, not the NASA side, but the political side, that there is a face on Mars, it does have dual imagery, and we're going to go there physically and find out what it means with a manned mission.
I think this release and the huge firestorm of NASA counter-attacking, you know, is because there are resistances along there and finding out what's there.
Fortunately, there are a lot of people who do see it.
And as we're going through this process, it's going to get a lot more interesting in terms of those who do see it, in terms of their political commitment to finally go there and find out what it means.
But Richard C. Hoagland does, and so does Kynthia.
Kynthia, actually, is the way it should be pronounced.
And sorry about that, Kynthea.
Anyway, we're discussing the face on Mars.
Latest photo that NASA has righteously given us in the old Viking photos, there was no question in my mind, hey, that might be a face.
I could look at that and say to myself, hey, that might be a face.
In the newest ones, I guess if I imagine one sort of face on one side and another sort of face on another side, then I might reach out and imagine a face.
But at that point, I'm having to do too much imagining for my taste.
Let me put it that way.
I'm having to extend leap over a bridge that is too far for my mind.
But that's just me.
And I understand that people have artistic minds, and they would see things in a way that obviously I don't.
Yet I did in the original Viking photos.
I thought, well, there's a chance.
Scientists most frequently look for a symmetry in something that would be proffered to be a face.
And so if that's what they're looking for, they're obviously going to say, uh-uh, not there.
So to imagine now what I think is being described to us as still being a face really is not one, but two faces, or at least I believe that to be the argument.
Whether I buy into it or not is another question I don't at the moment.
Once again, from the mountains of New Mexico, Richard C. Hoagland and Cinthea.
Cynthia being in the Bay Area, you two, welcome back.
Well, Richard, you must admit, and Kynthia, you must admit, the original image left no doubt, hey, that might be a face.
Wait, to the average person, you looked at the original one, and anybody could say, yeah, gosh, that might be a face, or it might be a bunch of rocks displayed in a way that looks like a face.
We were very fortunate in the original Viking data that the spacecraft, which was Viking 1, orbited above Mars about 1,000 miles at the low point, and it swept over the Sidonia plane at the local time down there at Sidonia, 1,000 miles below it.
Yes.
Absolute in the evening in Martian summer at Sidonia.
Then, 35 days later, NASA, for some reason, still not properly explained, because they deny they did this, they took another picture of this object, and it was one of the only other pictures ever taken of the same object in the entire Viking mission, which got me suspicious when I got into this.
And that picture was taken at about, let's see, 4 o'clock in the afternoon, a couple hours earlier local time, with the sun about 30 degrees above the horizon, still above the northwest horizon, but high enough so we could peek over the nose ridge and see lit by both low-angled sun and scattered skylight what was on the right-hand side.
Now, when you look at those two images side by side, it's very easy to see that the basic structure is the same.
And this is what a forensic artist would do.
A forensic artist would look at the structure, at the skeletal frame, at the skull shape, and would then build on the muscle, build on the tissue to reconstruct what it might have been.
Now, in this case, what we're looking at is on one side, it's been carved away.
And on the other side, it is overflowing with sand.
Now, you can't see detail through sand.
It would be, you know, we shouldn't even be expecting it, but you can see the structure.
And that is very obvious.
For example, let's take details here.
When you zoom in close on this high resolution, which by the way, is very similar to the high Viking.
It is not far from the high Viking.
It's very, very similar.
The details line up almost to the key.
I mean, the camera angle is a little bit to the side, so you have to rectify it to get it to be exactly like the high Viking.
But the basic features that are in the high Viking are still here.
Now, let's zoom in and look at the nose area.
On the humanoid side, you can see that the nostril area is a little higher, and the side bridge of the nose is sharper, just like you would see on a human.
On the feline side, when you look at that bridge of the nose, it's rounder, broader, and in fact, the nostril pattern is lower.
This is like a skull of a feline, where the nose would be very broad.
The nostril would drop down.
And if you look very closely at the nose area there, you'll see that as the ridge is turning, you can see all the detail of the terrain.
And then, as it drops to the side, all of a sudden there's that soft texture.
That soft texture is the sand.
That's why you can't see detail.
When you look at that, you can see there is a definite difference in texture between the bridge of the nose where you can see this crevices and it's eaten away and the soft sand that's known as peak areas.
Conceia, under that image, for the folks in the country who don't know this yet, we have been grappling most of the evening, you know, with getting a movie to work, which you created from Insight Media.
And what I'd like people to do is to click on that link and send R to Fast Blast and see if you can get the movie to work.
If you click on that and look at it, you will see a series of dissolves where Concia and Fred have registered the face, the lion, the Pharaoh image, and made them all superimposed so you go from one to the other to the other,
and you can look at features that are very, very intrinsically similar in the same positions where they would be if this is the work of art that we are contending it is, that has a duality, which is identical to the Mayan and Olmec and other indigenous culture imagery that George Haas brought to my attention five years ago.
You know, you talk about science.
The science of anthropology is to put the data points together.
What we're finding is that these ancient Central American cultures, for some reason, chose to exhibit their art, their symbology, in a way that I am saying is identical to what we see on Mars.
And I want to take it one step further, because this gets into another investigation that we're all quietly working on, which is the Paulina Zelifsky Atlantis thing, you know, half a mile down somewhere off Cuba.
They came from the direction of Cuba, from that city which is sitting on the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, half a mile down.
If that is really an ancient civilization that sank because of a cataclysm and the refugees fled to Central America and created the Mayan and the Toltec and the Aztec and the Olmec cultures that we see, you then have to ask the question, what kind of culture did those predecessors have?
In our model, which will be fully fleshed out in the sequel to Monuments, you know, my book, The Heritage of Mars, I will make the case that what we call Atlantis was not just one area on Earth, but it was a global civilization that succumbed to an incredible catastrophe roughly 13,000 years ago.
And that catastrophe wiped out a high-tech culture, not a primitive Neolithic culture, Stone Age, whatever, but somewhat like us.
We've done this before.
We've climbed the ladder and been slapped down.
And we've come back.
And this previous epic, of which there could be a pristine city sitting under the sands half a mile under the Gulf of Mexico, as soon as we get our ducks in line to find out what they're all going to do about it, that would have been perhaps the last time that human beings knew about what's sitting on Mars at Sidonia and elsewhere.
And not just knew about it, but actually, you know, traveled to and from Mars, walked in the libraries, decoded the disks, whatever kind of storage there is in this high-tech culture on Mars, so they knew what the art was that the, quote, Martians, the Sidonians, were trying to communicate.
And it was embedded in this ancient culture circa 13,000 years ago.
Well, when they were destroyed, when this cataclysm overtook the earth and a few refugees fled to the Yucatan to rebuild a civilization, they brought with them those cultural markers, those cultural ways of thinking.
And we are seeing in the Olmec and the Mayan and the other this duality of sculpture, which is an echo from an ancient source lying on a plane called Sidonia tonight on Mars.
Well, what we need to do, and remember, there are lots of things that we don't do.
I do not do nuclear physics well.
I would probably not be very good in the cockpit of a 747.
I'm really not very good at plumbing.
No.
But we have specialties.
We have divided our society into people who love to do this, they love to do that.
They're very good at this.
They're very good at that.
So what we do is we look at their expertise and we say, almost on faith, if you've done your homework, if I believe you've done your homework, I will go along with you pending further data.
What I would implore you to do, my friend, is to suspend judgment and to go along with us pending further data.
And the data will be coming forth.
For instance, Fredand and Canthia try to have ready for tonight a very important three-dimensional animation, which is the dawn-to-sunset view of this space on Mars with the high resolution we now have.
In Monuments many years ago, I predicted, another prediction, which is what science is based on, that this thing, if it was a work of art, was intended to communicate an evolution.
I really felt, and I still feel now stronger today than then, that this thing is designed to tell us about who they were because it's really about who we are.
And I go back to what I said about an hour ago, which is the matrix, the mathematical model in which this space sits, the Sidonia, this exquisite interlocking matrix, which, by the way, will be published shortly in the last edition of the Monuments of Mars, the 2001 edition.
Well, we knew the photos had been taken because Ed Weiler told us in response to the FAFSA initiative that they had taken this data on April 8th, that it was posted on April 19th.
And I again come back, I'm one of the only people in this whole independent Mars business who have thought from the beginning that the politics were as important as the science or the art.
And I've made a lot of enemies along the way because there are a lot of people who would prefer it to be very clean and honest and above board and not grungy with the politics of what people do when they're hiding something important, which is what's been going on for the last 20, 30 years on this issue.
So we had a heads up from Wyler early in the week with the letter to Peter, Peter Gerston, that they'd done this.
Finally, Wednesday, Wyler got back and was in meetings all day.
My political sources, the people who are close to the Bush administration, told me the night I was on the air that, yes, something big was going to come down.
And they didn't know, and I sat on the air whether it was going to be the actual image finally forced free or an announcement of a press conference in the next few days.
It turned out to be the image.
Now, what's remarkable is that simultaneous with the posting of the image, I mean, literally within microseconds, all the NASA websites suddenly put up hit pieces, basically debunking this as a face.
In fact, one of them, the lead one on the NASA headquarters website, is called Unmasking the Face on Mars.
It's just a MESA.
And those things were not done in 30 seconds.
They were done over a period of several days or less.
So they prepared for it knowing the photo had been taken.
And the posting of the photo was delayed by the enemies of This Is Real until those counterinsurgency arguments could be prepared and sent to the BBC later times all over the world.
unidentified
And I'd like to add here that the spin that they put on it is that they added, and the experts have concluded it is just a Mesa.
Well, that would be Arpell and Richard C. Hoagland and Kinthea, all of us talking about the new image that NASA has provided, and a very good image it is, of the Mesa slash face on Mars, however you need to think about it.
We'll do one more segment, then we'll head toward Open Lines on a Friday night, Saturday morning.
unidentified
This is the end of side one.
please leave the cassette exactly where it is flip it over and begin again All right.
I would suggest that there's a button there that you can hit where you can go frame by frame.
And if you get it to hold on the frame where it's like transitioning from the terrain to the lion, where you can see both of them still clearly, you will have that aha moment because then the structure will become so apparent.
If you look at this again and again and you do what Conthia says, you single frame it at the transitions so you can see both images together, you'll see the correspondences.
And you'll see how this thing actually has exquisite detail on the right and the left, but they're not the same.
And see, everyone expected, and I know you expected, if we got a good view of the other side, it would be symmetrical.
The cosine of the Sphinx latitude on Earth in Egypt, you know, the Sphinx latitude is about 30 degrees, right, within, you know, a few minutes of art.
The cosine of that latitude is exactly the same as the tangent of the face on Mars latitude.
So the tangent of one is the cosine of the other on two separate worlds, and they both represent the same man-lion fusion, hominid feline symbology, linked by a mathematical matrix which has one chance in 7,000 of being an accident.
You just do that by dividing the precision of the numbers of degrees and minutes that you have, you know, measure the latitude of each object.
So that was what drove me to really explore.
When that number fell out, that the tangent of Sidonia is equal to the cosine of Giza.
I said, wait a minute.
If this thing is a left-right hominid lion, then it means on two separate worlds where you had a Sphinx-like image, remember the Russians called the face on Mars the Martian Sphinx, Lavinsky called it back in 84 in Soviet life, the Martian Sphinx.
unidentified
You've got pyramids and the Sphinx on Mars, pyramids and the Sphinx on Earth.
That was where I began looking at what I called the terrestrial connection.
And as I get deeper and deeper into decoding, peeling away the layers of the potential linkages, it was fairly obvious that something about Sidonia resonated with Egypt overwhelmingly, right down to the math.
Then when George Haas called me and laid this Olmec, Mayan, Central American layering of culture on me and showed that they actually do multiple have statues, it's just a lot.
unidentified
The only reason you can't see it, Art, is because you can't see it.
It's that if the face on Mars is not going to sell the people on Earth with regard to artificiality, if looking at that face is not going to do it, the math is going to be a much harder sell to the masses.
We had to threaten them with a damn lawsuit for 20 years.
The only reason they keel over is because the political forces above and beyond the NASA headquarters at the White House level, I'm telling you tonight, demanded that this picture be taken and put out there.
So when you say they're such wonderful people, no, Malin had to be dragged kicking and screaming, and it took him two damn months to put the damn thing up after he'd been ordered to.
The credit lies with the American people who demanded through their political constitutional process that government be accountable finally and give us what we can do.
There is a mainstream website tonight that has put up the identical data claiming there are rumors rife in Washington of this, and they are coming, I now identify they're coming from sources other than our own.
So there is separate confirmation.
It's called MarsNews.com, I believe.
And it's not enterprise-friendly.
In fact, at the bottom of their page, they basically cite that enterprise, you have to watch out because there's fringe science involved.
Sidonia stands apart as its own complex with its own math, its own integrity, its own consistency, its own art.
And it's separate from the other structures.
I mean, on these 70,000 pictures, which again, NASA didn't give us, we had to force them, with the help of John McCain, out of this system at the point of a gun, practically, to get what the American people paid for on the table.
So the political process is functioning if we get involved and stay involved.
Okay, well, let me throw this out, Richard, and maybe you want to tangle with this a little bit.
One case that has been made, if not by you, then certainly by many, is that there was no reimaging of the same angle, roughly, time of day photograph, that they haven't gone back and done it because they had something to hide.
Land Fleming, when the June image, which was released, you know, last April, this past April, a month ago, was put out, Land Fleming, who's at the Johnson Space Center, one of the members of this umbrella organization called Facets Now, he did a calculation based on the pixel width and the length of the image.
And he calculated that what Malin had done is to take the whole thing, slice it in half, and give us only the left half, the western half.
Now, that wasn't me saying that, that was Land Fleming.
If that was done a year ago, that, by the way, roughly when I had my dinner in Pasadena, it would have given them a heads-up of a year.
Look, all I'm saying is that if NASA had been so convinced from the get-go that this thing was just a MESA, as they've gone over backwards to tell everybody now, why didn't they take an honest picture in 98?
Why did they sit on this picture for three months, or I'm sorry, two months?
Why did they put in that hit piece that they wrote on the Marshall Spaceflight website a MOLA piece of data?
And basically, it looks down with a little telescope and it pings a laser off the surface under this spacecraft that is flying around Mars, and you get an altitude height.
They have got on their website a claim that the MOLA data doesn't even show mouth and teeth and any features on this Mesa, this tableland.
But what they neglect to mention, which is dishonest in the extreme, is that the MOLA footprint, the pixel size of that MOLA instrument is 1,000 feet.
It's six times lousier, worse than the Viking data.
You can't make the conclusion they make from the MOLA data, which tells us it's a political argument.
It's a spun argument.
Why would they be spinning like crazy and not just putting it out there when they took it, like a day or two later or even the same day, unless somebody had something to hide and they're trying to steer public opinion in another direction?
In other words, if there wasn't this internal seething war between those that know what's there tonight and those that don't want us to know what's there tonight.
There's no point at which too much resolution doesn't buy you anything unless you get down to the level of the structure.
And remember one of my other predictions, which will not be confirmed now until we get the next spacecraft in 2005 that carries a camera, which is going to give us a few inch resolution.
Kinthea, do you have something else you would like to say?
unidentified
No, I would just add that everybody's saying, oh, it isn't a face because it isn't symmetrical.
But I was approached by two different parties, requested to sculpt the face as being symmetrical, and I had to tell them, I can't do it.
It's not symmetrical.
And this was long before this photo.
Because in the last two MGS photos that we had gotten, it was clear to me that it wasn't symmetrical, and it confirmed all along what the high Viking was showing.
This one is not anything new.
It's really reiterating what we could see in the high Viking.