Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Oct. 5, 2003 - Art Bell

02:51:22

Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell - Alien Implants & Extraterrestrials - Dr. Roger Leir, Mike Heiser, Rich C HOAG

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	♪♪♪ ♪♪♪
	♪♪♪ From the high desert in the great American Southwest, I bid
	you all good evening, good morning, good afternoon, wherever you may be in all the world's time zones.
	And both of them are pretty dark that we talk to at this time of night.
	How you doing?
	I'm Art Bell, and this is the weekend version of Coast to Coast AM.
	As a little follow-up to last night's program, we're going to be very busy tonight, but Trenton, New Jersey Associated Press Alina Slo documented as the world's oldest woman died today at the nursing home where her daughter died three days earlier.
	She was 114 or 15 depending on which source you believe.
	Her daughter had died at the same nursing home a few days earlier.
	Her daughter was 90 years old.
	believe uh... her daughter had died at the same nursing home a few days earlier
	daughter was ninety years old now from can imagine
	being old enough to watch your ninety-year-old daughter Die.
	Being old enough to watch your 90-year-old daughter die.
	Holy mackerel.
	Anyway, so much for longevity.
	Tonight, we will examine the story of The Claw.
	Actually, we're going to do many things, but The Claw is going to be first.
	Dr. Roger Lear is here.
	Dr. Roger Lear, author of his book is Aliens and the Scalpel.
	It's an intriguing title, isn't it?
	And it's said to be one of the world's most important leaders that we're about to interview in physical evidence research involving the field of ufology.
	He and his surgical team have performed nine surgeries on alleged alien abductees.
	This has resulted in the removal of ten separate and distinct objects suspected of being alien implants.
	These objects have been scientifically investigated by some of the most prestigious laboratories in the world.
	Their findings have been baffling.
	Some comparisons have been made to meteorite samples.
	Dr. Learamp states, performing yet more surgeries in the future and will investigate the physiological and biological aspects of the abduction phenomenon.
	He has also formed a nonprofit organization for this specific purpose called A&S Research, Inc.
	In a moment, Dr. Lear will relate for you the story of the claw.
	By the way, in the next hour, Richard C. Hoagland is here with some shocking information.
	Then we're going to have a discussion with Mike Heiser in the hour following that about ETs and religion.
	That's going to be very interesting.
	I plan to play the part of a right-wing religious fundamentalist fanatic, and we'll see how they do with me.
	In the meantime, we're about to hear the story of Klaue, delivered serendipitously one day to Dr. Lear's front porch.
	In a large box, he opened it, and it came directly at him.
	He just barely got it off.
	No, that's not the story of the claw, but here comes the real story of the claw.
	Dr. Lear, welcome to the program.
	Nice to be with you again, Art.
	Great to have you.
	We're going to have to treat this, though I know the claw has been under investigation for a long time.
	Really, this is going to be more the story of how things are car are investigated the real way when when something anomalous
	shows up it doesn't happen frequently enough you know they go in
	drawers and closets and they're forgotten and they're never investigated properly
	so let's tell the story of the claw
	well i uh... this is a unknown uh... implant uh... case that uh... we've been
	investigating for some years now and as far as abduction cases go it probably has uh... more
	physical evidence than any case in the books that are on record.
	And that's why I got interested in it, and I don't mind to say the name because people will recognize it if they've been following it so long.
	So this, we're talking about the Gary Lowery case.
	Gary, well, okay, give us a brief overview of that case.
	What happened?
	He's a gentleman with a family who was a fireman and his job in the fire department was that of an arson investigator.
	So he was sort of a professional at collecting physical evidence in the first place.
	He and his family have been involved with the alien abduction phenomena for some years now and during the course of this There's been a lot of physical evidence of things that go on around the house, which there's magnetic anomalies.
	So, in other words, they're victims of abduction themselves?
	Correct.
	That's correct.
	It involved him and the whole family.
	Now, to shorten the story so we can get basically to the point, one of the things that Gary was doing was trying to collect footprints And he did this in a very simple manner.
	He took a towel, which was the same color as the rug on the floor, and he laminated a piece of heavy tinfoil on the back side of the towel and then placed that down on the floor in front of the wall area where he saw these whatever come through.
	And he successfully got some footprints, which he casted.
	So he got one set of prints.
	Why not get more?
	That's right.
	So he tried doing this for several times and was relatively unsuccessful.
	So whoever or whatever was stepping on the towel decided maybe they would step over it or something.
	And he got a few scratches and things but no more prints.
	But one morning he woke up and looked at the towel and he could see a dark object that was kind of hooked.
	In the loops of the towel.
	Right.
	He called his wife in, who had seen him place the towel on the floor the night before, and was aware of the fact that it was clean, there was nothing on it.
	In fact, she was the one that laundered the towel.
	So here we have two eyewitnesses to this thing that's caught up in the fibers of this towel.
	So we took a look at it, and it's an object that's Maybe about three quarters of an inch long.
	And it's dark in color and sort of has a point that goes down at the end.
	So he looked at it and he said, hmm, this looks like a claw.
	And got a hold of me.
	I said, you know, I'd be very much interested in seeing this.
	So I made a trip up to Bakersfield.
	Looked at the towel and looked at this thing and, by golly, it looked like a claw and it felt like a claw.
	So, here's where it all began.
	We've got to find out, you know, what this thing is because we may really have something here of scientific importance.
	So, we sent it off, first of all, to the University of California in Berkeley, to the Department of Zoology, and a professor there, who was head of the department, looked at it, and he couldn't identify it.
	He didn't know what kind of clone it was?
	He didn't know what it was.
	So, we went back with a letter written and signed by him.
	Couldn't find out what this is.
	What about the basic, is it animal vegetable mineral?
	I mean, did they do any initial tests to try and find out whether it was biological at all?
	Oh, yes.
	Because the next thing we did was we sent it to my very good friend and friend, the Whitley streamer, Bill Mallow, who passed away last year.
	At Southwest Laboratories, and again, I don't mind saying the name of the laboratory because Bill's gone and we'll never get in there again.
	So, no sense hiding the laboratory anymore.
	It was Southwest Labs in San Antonio, Texas.
	He looked at it, and he looked at it microscopically, and he had a couple of people look at it at the University of Texas.
	You ran some tests on it, and in the first place, under the microscope, he found a vegetable layer on the outside of this thing.
	A vegetable layer?
	A vegetable layer.
	So he called me on the phone and told me what he found, and I said, well, you know, Bill, that may not be too unusual, because if it is a claw or a nail, one of the most common things is they become infected with fungus.
	So he would find a vegetable layer.
	Yes.
	So, he thought that sounded okay, and he went ahead and proceeded to do some more tests on the inner layers, and he found that they contained a proteinaceous substance which was very close to keratin.
	Keratin is what makes up our fingernails.
	So, with that ammunition, we were pretty well convinced that it was a claw.
	Now, it went from there To a primate zoologist, P.A.C., at the San Diego Zoo.
	We took it down there personally, and this kind lady looked at it, and pondered over the books, and got on the internet, and looked at it under their microscope, and probed it with a probe, and couldn't identify it as any primate claw that she ever saw.
	Okay, so now, by now, you're really starting to think you've got something on your hands.
	Now, we could have started tooting horns at any time, including right at that.
	Hey guys, I think we got a call from an extraterrestrial.
	But we didn't do that because that's not the way I work.
	I try to get some scientific basis.
	So we knew what we had to do at that point was obviously to look at the DNA.
	Right, of course.
	So, specimens were very carefully taken in the manner in which they should be taken, which wasn't done in the O.J.
	case.
	And we sent these sterile specimens to a very world-famous genetic researcher, who I can't mention his name.
	That's alright.
	Yeah, that's fine.
	And he started doing the DNA studies, and he was funding it himself at the beginning.
	As we got onto it, the reports that we started getting back were absolutely earth-shocking.
	In what sense?
	They came back as non-terrestrial DNA.
	Non-terrestrial.
	So we said, oh boy, we got a tiger by the tail.
	But nevertheless, DNA, huh?
	In other words, recognizable.
	Recognizable DNA chains, but these chains didn't match anything in the database.
	Not human, not primate, nothing.
	So we went on, and as we went on, we had to raise some more money, and if you don't mind me mentioning their names, Bob and Joe Hieronymus, We're very, very responsible for getting us some further funding.
	I don't mind at all.
	Nice people.
	So, you raised more money.
	So, we raised more money and continued the research, which virtually went on for about two years, still getting reports of stuff that we couldn't match for any terrestrial animal.
	So, we had to go Yeah, I think by now anybody would have declared, hey, we've got something biological not from this earth.
	I mean, once you had... DNA would seem to be, would seem to be, and stand by folks, because there's more to this, a pretty conclusive hunk of evidence.
	If you get DNA but it's not human or not known DNA, you've got it, I would think, but maybe not.
	Well, as I said, the temptation was there to really toot the horn about this.
	That's probably one I would have tooted.
	It was a great temptation, believe me.
	I mean, I certainly believe in the scientific method and scientific approach, but when we get reams of paperwork and DNA analysis that comes back that tells you you've got something that's not from here, boy, You know, and to keep your mouth shut, of course, the people that were involved kept saying, I think we should keep our mouths shut, because the eventuality here was to get an article written in a scientific peer-reviewed journal.
	Sure.
	And by doing so, this would have been a first for not only phenomenology, but certainly for the field of UFOs and particularly that of abduction.
	Okay, so you lip-sealed.
	The lips sealed, and I stopped talking about this case on television, on radio, and traveling about the world.
	Yeah, I remember when you began to shut up about it.
	Yeah, and of course, you know, you get all the character assassination stuff, that he's hiding something, he's burying something, he's not going to tell you.
	Well, you actually were.
	Yeah, for the moment.
	But certainly not forever.
	Right.
	So anyway, we had to do something to really push this through organized science.
	And so I got my good friends at the National Institute for Discovery Science involved again.
	And as we know, they've produced some scientific investigation of this portion of phenomenology Bob Bigelow has become quite famous in the field for certainly putting up funds for these investigations.
	Of course, now he's branched out in other things with Bigelow Aerospace and so on.
	Nevertheless, over the years, Bob Bigelow gets a lot of credit for being there with the money for the real serious research when people needed it over the years.
	He's done a hell of a lot of that.
	You bet, and for those out there that aren't familiar with the whole story, the stuff and the rumors and everything they've heard, I'm sure you'll agree, Art, that Bob has not only put up money for this stuff, but in many cases he's put up money and never taken credit for what he's done.
	I'm very well aware of that, yes.
	So, as far as I'm concerned, you know, they've been very good, good friends to me, and they've pioneered some, you know, fantastic research.
	Their Roper polls, of course, everybody knows, but there's a lot of investigation they don't know about.
	And, of course, there's a lot of rumors that things go into a pit and it never comes out and so on, so that's far from the truth.
	As a matter of fact, if folks want to go up on your website or my website or the NIDS website, they'll see not only photos of this object we're talking about, but there's a complete giant DNA report of every facet that we went to.
	So, again, on with the story.
	They've got the claw now, the specimens, the DNA, all the data.
	We have meetings, a plan of attack is formulated, and we start getting some first confirmatory results.
	If you got something and you got something that's this unusual, and believe me, it was unusual, what you want to do is to get somebody else to confirm it.
	That's right.
	So, that's the way science works, and if it would stick with the science, I think we'd all be better off.
	And so, what happened?
	So, we got some confirmatory data.
	And then, as this was going on, the original genetic researcher kept working on the object along with these outside sources, and developing new techniques, and looking at this, and looking at this piece of DNA, and on and on and on.
	Then we sent it out to a third laboratory, which was doing some more work on a different aspect of the DNA, and we were looking at more primate things, you know, what could this be closest to, and so on and so on.
	So, as this is going on, I mean, we are getting real close now to getting this first article in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.
	As a matter of fact, we had a big meeting in Las Vegas.
	It was an all-day meeting, and believe me, I'm not ashamed to say that three-quarters of the material presented at this meeting was way over my head.
	I'm not a geneticist, and I don't have the background and expertise in this field.
	Well, even when they go into courtrooms with genetic material, you mentioned the OJ trial, they have to talk in numbers, and they have to make very simple charts for people to try and understand, and even then it goes right over the heads of a lot of the jurors, so it's tough.
	Oh, yeah.
	Well, I'll tell you, at one point, I felt privileged.
	To be there and just sit there and listen to this stuff.
	Shaking your head every now and then, like, oh, yeah, I got it.
	Yeah, man.
	That's it.
	They're talking about multitask tests and this test and that test.
	Well, all right, let's get to the bottom line, because I do have a lot of other stuff I want to ask you about.
	I mean, the bottom line here is...
	So we got a plan formulated.
	What we were going to do is to get the results published in a small scientific journal that was peer-reviewed, and then we talked about the criticism that we were going to get.
	We tried to obviate that and so on, one jump ahead.
	And so things were going in that direction.
	We left the meeting, and everybody was jazzed, and we thought we had the tiger by the tail on some, you know, very strange DNA.
	So, Researcher No.
	1, we'll call him, goes back to the lab, and while NIS is in the process of writing the article for the journal, My original friend decides to look at the RNA.
	Hold it right there, Doc.
	That's a good hook.
	Bottom of the hour.
	I'm Art Bell.
	We'll be right back.
	Subscribe to After Dark.
	Call toll free 1-888-727-5505.
	And watching you burn.
	Now it begins.
	Day after day.
	I need a smile to tell the shadows.
	There's no way you wouldn't come to me.
	Baby, you'll see.
	You've come to me, baby, you'll see But I'm still hurting, baby
	But I'm gonna hold you through the night But I'm still hurting, my wife
	But it's always up to me But I do
	Who's gonna love you, love you?
	Who's gonna love you?
	But I do Who's gonna love you, love you?
	Who's gonna love you?
	Call Art Bell in the Kingdom of Nigh from west of the Rockies at 1-800-777-8395.
	East of the Rockies, 1-800-825-5033.
	First time callers may reach Art at 1-775-727-1222.
	East of the Rockies, 1-800-825-5033.
	First time callers may reach out at 1-775-727-1222.
	And the wildcard line is open at 1-775-727-1295.
	To reach out on the toll free international line, call your AT&T operator and have them
	dial 800-893-0903.
	This is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell from the Kingdom of Nine.
	It certainly is in a moment the claw makes its final scratch.
	Dr. Roger Lear is my guest and we'll wind this up and move on to other aspects of abductions
	and things, little things left behind if you'll just stay right there.
	Once again, Into the Night with Dr. Roger Lear.
	Doctor, welcome back.
	Alright, the final scratch of the claw.
	Yes, we can't leave everybody hanging like a chad.
	So, yes, we started looking at the RNA, and of course that's ribonucleic acid, which is there before the DNA.
	Right.
	Doctor, do me a favor and back away from the phone just a little bit.
	Your phone has a sort of a Sound to it.
	Okay.
	Oh, that's much better.
	Okay, so you looked at the RNA.
	We're looking at the RNA and suddenly we get a match in the GenBank, a database match.
	And?
	And it turns out to be in the family of molluscum, a mollusc, a snail, a slug.
	It was a slug!
	It was a slug.
	A terrestrial slug.
	Oh boy, and so I'm sure you felt like you just got slugged.
	Yeah, I sure did.
	But boy, at that time, I was just so tickled to death that I didn't flap my lips in the wind.
	Oh, yes, indeed.
	How would all involved look if we had published this article and someone would have come along with this?
	You'd look like slugs.
	You'd look like slugs.
	So there you have it, ladies and gentlemen.
	There's the story of what somebody has to go through to investigate something of this Possible magnitude not a story of one that came out to be extraterrestrial, but nevertheless That's the kind of thing you've got to go through so if you've got a sort of a little anomalous something Don't be afraid to get hold of somebody like dr. Lear Or the Bigelow Foundation or somebody who can do the right kind of research because baby, that's what it takes Dr. Lear you have removed
	Implants from people who have been abducted and had things put in them.
	Are you convinced, doctor?
	After all, who better to ask than someone who's taken them out?
	Are you convinced that there really are abductions and that things really are being implanted in people?
	That's a straight out question.
	Well, let's take part one.
	Am I convinced, personally, that there is such a thing as an abduction?
	Yes, I am.
	I've been all over the world, and I've talked to people in many, many countries, and the things that they talk about here in the U.S.
	are the same as what they talk about in South America, or in Israel, or Czechoslovakia.
	And, by the way, you know, China, too.
	That's not too well known, but the fact of the matter is, while China ...will not allow a lot of things to be investigated.
	For some reason, the Communist Chinese are actively even encouraging and backing UFO investigation.
	It's kind of strange.
	Yes, they've got the largest organization for the investigation of UFOs in the world.
	Now why would you think that would be, Doctor?
	I don't know.
	It's strange.
	I mean, given their governmental system and so on.
	Yes.
	That I have, along with many other things, have no answer for.
	And that's what I was going to say.
	If people come along, so-called experts in this field, and they claim to know the answers, put your fingers in your ears, flap your arms and run just as fast as you can, because it's nonsense.
	No one has the answer.
	All you wind up with, Art, if you follow the science, just follow the science, you wind up with more questions.
	And back to the claw, if you don't mind me just a sec.
	Here's some of the questions.
	How did the slug get in the towel in Gary's closet?
	And lose a claw?
	Yeah.
	How did the slug get mummified to the state in which it was found?
	Now, we just found out recently, and I haven't even published this yet, that slugs in the Bakersfield area are no longer than a half an inch.
	This slug was almost three quarters of an inch and it's mummified state.
	And when we look at the DNA and follow the science, we got a 97% match to a slug from New Zealand and a 94% match to a sea slug.
	from New Zealand, and a 94% match to a sea slug. How did either one of those get into Gary?
	Well, maybe whoever it was who had been conducting the abductions had a sense of humor.
	And you mentioned that it had recognized apparently the towel with the aluminum foil for the footprint, so maybe it just said to its little alien self, hey, let's have some fun.
	Let's drop one of these New Zealand slug claws.
	Or was it something that was on somebody's foot and fell off?
	I know I discussed this with Whitley and he verified the fact that a number of different
	physical evidence cases showed things that were mysteriously there from the sea.
	Well you've had probably more experience with physical evidence than almost any other investigator
	save perhaps crop circle investigators.
	So, of those items that you have removed from people, how many, what percentage of those, only ten, but what percentage are anomalous today?
	Well, the total number of surgeries was 10 to date, and the number of objects was 11.
	One of these objects turned out to be a very expensive piece of glass.
	Not expensive from the manufacturing standpoint, from the standpoint of the research to find out exactly what it was.
	But the other 10 have all had anomalous things, both metallurgically and biologically.
	The two most outstanding things, or three, One is when you examine the individual prior to the time that they're removed, you found that these objects are emitting electromagnetic field of about six milligauss.
	Now that, as you know, Art, that's a pretty strong field.
	Yes, it is.
	It certainly is.
	And once they're out, they emit nothing, so they're obviously unplugged.
	Then you go look at the biological anomalies.
	We find that there's no inflammatory response by the body.
	Can I just stop you for one second?
	The fact that the radiation ceases when it's removed from the body, would that indicate to you that it's drawing its power from the biological entities to which it's attached or that it's just remotely, you know, shut off?
	I would say that the power source has been disconnected.
	It's been unplugged because one of the biological findings we find is that there's not only a lack of inflammatory response, but there's a large number of nerve cells which are not politically correct for the anatomical area that they're in.
	So it's modified the nerve structure near it?
	That's what it seems to be.
	And of course the other startling things, you know, here's somebody that comes in the alleged alien abduction scenario, and the stories are all great.
	They're extremely interesting.
	I love them, love to hear them, catalog them, write them, and so on.
	But to me, you know, the thing is the physical evidence.
	Sure, of course, yes.
	So you look at the metallurgy, and I mean, that information comes back to me from laboratories like New Mexico Tech, Los Alamos National Labs, and on and on and on.
	Tell me, for example, they find iron and the iron turns out to be amorphous iron, but yet the object is so magnetic they can't understand how it could possibly be magnetic at all when the iron in the object has no molecular structure.
	Doctor, is there anything in any and or all of the cases that would lead you toward a clue about function?
	Function is entirely theoretical as far as I'm concerned.
	I mean, there's a number of popular theories.
	One that could be transponders for location or modifiers of behavior, or they could be detection devices such as we use with astronauts.
	But I have another theory, and I think that they are perhaps, at least some group of them, are genetically, genetic detection devices to detect modifications in our genetics.
	I believe, again, that going around the world, I think that the kids that have been born in the last 40-50 years are not the same human beings.
	Boy, you know you're not the first person to say that.
	Can you back that up with any science at all?
	I know that it's possible.
	I was talking to Colin Kelleher at NIDS.
	He thinks that we could do a study to look at old DNA versus new DNA, possibly pinpoint All we need is the funds to do it.
	But, you know, there's a large amount of books that are coming out now, the Millennium Children.
	I know!
	Oh, and the Star Children.
	Indigo Children.
	Right.
	Okay, then let's try this angle.
	What do you think is the difference between these children and my generation?
	What's the difference?
	Well, I can tell you exactly.
	Ask me if there's scientific proof.
	There's statistical scientific proof, because I've done a study on 17 functional growth characteristics.
	This has nothing to do with the child's mood, or their IQ, or anything else, or what they're wearing, or what they ate.
	It's just, you know, what age did they stand, what age did they raise their head, which age did they talk, and so on.
	Yes.
	And we find, looking at 17 functional growth characteristics in a 40-year period, 1947 to 1987, they've been accelerated from 16, that's one-sixth, to 80 percent.
	1987, they've been accelerated from 16, that's one-sixth, to 80 percent.
	Wow.
	You can't argue with that.
	That is a big difference.
	Wow.
	And how many mothers do you talk to that tell you their child has done this or said this and they don't know where to look at them?
	So then doctor, maybe all of these alien abductions and this interaction between aliens and humans, I mean so many researchers think it's for genetic purposes, favoring them or favoring us, but genetic because of the examination of reproduction, reproductive organs, that kind of thing.
	The cows, all of that, the genetics there, all of this perhaps could be to our benefit in the sense that right before our very eyes they're changing us.
	Well, I'll tell you, I tend to lean in that direction, but I hate to use the word all, because as you know, folks like David Jacobs, a famous, well-respected researcher... Oh, I have a lot of respect for Dr. Jacobs.
	...think that there's some hybrid program going on, and I tend to agree that maybe just not the word all shouldn't be used, because maybe a different stroke for different folks.
	Well, what I respect about Dr. Jacobs is he's one of the very few people who has said with regard to aliens, hey, wait a minute now.
	All this warm, fuzzy stuff.
	You know, they may not be our friends.
	And we don't really know.
	And you've got to admit, we don't really know what they're doing.
	And so I'd say it's even money on whether it's good for us or perhaps not so good for us.
	Yeah, I think you hit the nail on the head, and it just goes back to what I said before.
	If any one of us claims to have the answers, you better put your fingers in your ears and run, because we don't!
	This is just asking for a guess here, but how many people do you suppose are running around who are implanted Who, A, may not have the faintest idea of themselves they've been implanted, and B, nobody else knows as well.
	In other words, how many are out there that we don't know about versus the ones that have come and complained?
	Well, let's look at the few figures that we have from the Roper poll, for example, in relation to the amount of abductees, over 2%, and we're talking about quite a few million people if we multiply this on a worldwide basis.
	And it would seem to me that in my experience, which is small and brief, that there's about 15% that might have objects in them for some reason.
	And this kind of goes along... What do we do with our implanting lesser life forms?
	About 15%!
	You're suggesting you do believe that 15% of the totality of the population is implanted?
	To the totalitary of the abductee.
	Of those who have claimed abduction?
	Right.
	Now, also, another thing you just hit on a minute ago, if things go the way they're supposed to go, I don't think you're supposed to know you've been abducted.
	I rather suspect not, except in perhaps rare Rare cases, I don't think you're supposed to know you are either.
	And if they're really talented at creating a situation where you don't remember and you don't know, then most of them probably haven't been reported.
	I think one of the things that's going on is, as we discussed with the kids, is an expansion of consciousness.
	And this can become a problem because it can become a problem for the abductor.
	If one's consciousness is being expanded, then all of a sudden you're going to have a few leaked through memories of things that you may have not been aware of before.
	If you were aware, Doctor, that you had an implant yourself, would you remove it or would you leave it and see what happens?
	Oh, I would have to give you a very biased answer on that, because if someone asked me if a craft landed and I was waved aboard, would I go?
	Of course I'd go.
	All fear would be outweighed by the scientific curiosity.
	Someone asked me, probably... Yes, I know, but your scientific curiosity in the case of an implant you knew you had in yourself could be I guess there's two directions for that.
	On the one hand, you could take it out and try and examine it.
	On the other hand, you could leave it in and try and figure out what it was doing to you.
	Oh, that's good.
	That's a good question because, boy, that sticks it right home.
	Again, scientific curiosity can go two ways.
	But I think I would weave it in, and if I could get the test done that I thought should be run on it, I would leave it in there for as long as I possibly could to get the most amount of knowledge out of it before it was ever removed.
	Yes.
	Well, you know, the one that stood the hair on the back of my neck straight up was when Whitley and the surgeon who did the work on Whitley were on the program, and the surgeon said straight to me, Art, I got in there, I got near it with a scalpel, and I watched it move within his ear.
	The implant moved by itself to a place where I couldn't get it without doing damage.
	Well, Art, the last case I did was a case of a lady who had an object in the arm that when you touched it, it moved out of the way.
	And when we went to remove it, the surgeon that did it had to put a finger on either side To keep it in the surgical wound area.
	Oh my.
	Really?
	And we got it.
	And you got it?
	And we got it.
	And was it moving after you got it?
	No.
	No.
	So, I guess all of this is going to remain very mysterious and unsettling.
	I don't know how we move forward in this area, how we learn anything, but we've got to.
	It's too interesting.
	Where do you go?
	That's, I guess, a good question.
	Where does your research go now?
	Well, we've got to raise the necessary funds so that we can keep the fires of scientific research going in the manner that we did with the claw.
	The claw should be a really good example of How academic science can be applied to phenomenology, ufology, or any other field that you want to investigate.
	Well, as you know, I was given a piece of material said to be from the Roswell crash, which we had investigated by Carnegie and others, and is indeed anomalous, not from this world, and I still have it.
	And it's kind of an odd thing, because when I got it, I really thought very hard about what to do about it.
	And I can tell you that most people, most people, doctor, are going to just put it away as an oddity, and they're never going to turn it over to anybody.
	If somebody's got something out there, and you can bet your bottom dollar they do, and they want to get hold of you to have you take a look-see at something or test something, how do they do that?
	How do they get hold of you?
	Well, the easiest way is to go through my website, which is alienscalpel.com, with one S. Right, and by the way, your book, they might want to read, The Alien and the Scalpel, still out there, still, I take it, available on eBay or whatever.
	Yeah, they should be able to get it, and if they can't, again, go through the website, and we'd be happy to get them a copy.
	So one way or the other, they can get it.
	Sure, and my new one out that has one great story in it, the anthology that we wrote called Chopped Liver.
	Chopped Liver?
	Now there's a title for a book, Chopped Liver, huh?
	Chopped Liver.
	Alright, well as always, Dr. Lear, it's a pleasure having you here and I want to thank you for all the work you do on behalf of those who want to know what the hell's going on out there.
	Thank you.
	You're welcome, Mark.
	Good night, Dr. Lear.
	It is a very odd world we live in, isn't it?
	All right, coming up, this is going to be really fun, I think.
	Richard C. Hoagland is coming on next.
	He's got some kind of breaking news for you on the face on Mars.
	And then we're going to move into another area, which will be the subject of one of Richard's conferences coming up shortly.
	And I think it's been needed for a very, very long time, and that is What the world is going to do from the point of view of religion and all of that if they become obvious.
	How will we all handle it?
	That's what we're going to be talking about.
	I'm Art Bell and this is Coast to Coast AF.
	I'm Art Bell and this is Coast to Coast AF.
	Don't you love her as she's walking out the door?
	Like she did one thousand times before?
	Don't you love her ways?
	Now tell me what you say?
	Don't you love her as she's walking out the door?
	Are you loving her?
	Are you loving her strong?
	To sing a lonely song Of a deep blue dream
	Seven horses singing To be on the moon
	Wanna take a ride?
	arrived.
	Call Art Bell from west of the Rockies at 1-800-618-8255.
	East of the Rockies at 1-800-825-5033.
	800-618-8255. East of the Rockies at 1-800-825-5033. First time callers may reach out at area code
	775-727-1222 or call the wildcard line at 775-727-1295.
	7 12 95.
	To talk with Art on the toll-free international line, call your AT&T operator and have them dial 800-893-0903.
	This is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell.
	It is indeed.
	A brand new weekend version.
	How y'all doing?
	And by the way, we're here all of Saturday and all of Sunday night.
	And so if your radio station doesn't carry all of Saturday and all of Sunday night, call them up and say, hey, what's up?
	What are you doing in the middle of the night when you could be doing something much better?
	Right on the mark is Richard C. Hoagland, a former space science museum curator.
	It's hard to picture him in that role.
	A former NASA consultant and during the historic Apollo missions to the moon was science advisor to Walter C. Cronkite, CBS News.
	The past 19 years, Hoagland has been leading an outside scientific team in a critically acclaimed infinite analysis of possible intelligently designed artifacts on Mars and annoying legions of people.
	In the past four years, He and his team's investigators have been quietly extended to include over 30 years of previously hidden data from NASA.
	That's part of why he's annoyed people.
	NASA, the Soviet, and Pentagon missions to the moon.
	Now, he's a remarkable man, and what I would suggest as a beginning point for all of us that are computer capable is that you immediately go to your computer for the conversation that's about to ensue and go to EnterpriseMission.com.
	There will be a link certainly on the Coast to Coast AM website.
	Get to EnterpriseMission.com and you're going to want to, and I know that everything's going to go berserk here, you're going to want to go to uh... the page that shows uh... there's a link there that
	says the light finally dawns at side only a and you're gonna want to get that
	picture on your computer screen
	for what's coming and it's coming next and here is richard c learned
	Yay, Richard!
	You know, we've got to stop meeting like this.
	People are beginning to talk.
	It's been years and years.
	How are you doing, buddy?
	I'm doing great.
	And you?
	I'm just fine.
	There's a little in your voice that I have not heard in quite a while.
	You're like the old Dalmatian in the damn fire engine.
	I wonder if my cheeks have a little rosy tint to them.
	Anyway, look, you've got something pretty big, in my opinion.
	So you went and looked.
	Oh, hell yeah.
	OK.
	And you know what?
	I had Ramona in here just before showtime and, you know, she's seen the face many times.
	Excellent.
	And she just took a real quick glance at it and she said, what's that reflecting?
	You know, and that's total layman.
	Ramona, you know, and she just, boom, hit it right on the head and I said, yep, that's what it's going to be about.
	What the hell is reflecting?
	It's a new... It's like the Robin test.
	Yes, it's in a way the Robin test.
	Yes, it's a new picture of Cydonia.
	Now, I'm sure Richard will tell us how they got it and what they used and all the rest of it, but a new picture of Cydonia.
	It's at EnterpriseMission.com.
	You ought to be on the way there already.
	And you should be going to the area I said.
	There's a link down there.
	It says, the light finally dawns.
	You like the title?
	Well, oddly enough, this was released.
	Yep, yep, yep, yep, yep.
	So when, what took it, what mode was the satellite in, from what distance, and blah, blah.
	Well oddly enough, this was released.
	I mean it was taken over a year ago.
	And it takes them that long to kind of release these things.
	They probably feel like they have to have it in their desk drawer for a period of time to age it properly.
	Yeah, it was taken on the one-year anniversary, exactly on the one-year anniversary of the arrival of the Mars Odyssey spacecraft at Mars.
	And these guys, remember, they're into dates and anniversaries.
	So you say.
	Well, in their own published data, they took this on October 24, 2002, which was one year after they arrived.
	Exactly one year.
	They'd probably take it at 19.5 minutes after the hour and you're on or something, right?
	So anyway, one year after the satellite went up, they'd take the photo.
	Well, the thing that struck me was I was in Roswell the weekend that they actually released this image.
	They released it around July 4th.
	Right.
	And I had never gone to Roswell.
	I wanted to take Robin down there and see a few friends, you know, like Paul Davis was going to be there, and Larry Lansman from SyFy, and I'd never been part of the Roswell Circus.
	So while I'm there kind of taking a vacation, they released this picture.
	So I get back and I get caught up on email and someone sent me, you know, some links and said, take a look at this.
	And what was unusual, first of all, is that it was the first morning shot of Cydonia we've ever had.
	Showing with light on the eastern side of the face and other structures.
	So you might explain to the audience, the sun actually on Mars at the moment this is taken, really is not over the horizon.
	That's right.
	If you go and look at the logs that they're required by law to post, if you go to the ASU website, Arizona State University website, which is the University team actually running the camera on the Mars Odyssey spacecraft.
	They have a website, which is linked through Enterprise, and you can go to the actual page.
	In the article that you have cited, we have extensive links to all the official information so that everybody can follow the bouncing ball.
	There's nothing here, no sleight of hand, no magic, no, you know, hidden stuff.
	We're blaying out what they have given the American people and the world.
	So I went to their official website, and I'm looking at this picture, first dawn image of Cydonia, and the first thing that rings a bell is when I look at the very bottom of the data block, it says, Cydonia face at night.
	At night?
	What?
	Huh?
	Uh, right.
	How the heck can you take a picture with this camera at night?
	They have trouble taking pictures when the sun is fairly low above the horizon.
	How am I going to take it at night?
	So I would look a little closer, and in the data block, there's a whole bunch of angles listed.
	You know, the subspacecraft point, where the sun is, you know, the angle that the spacecraft has rolled to the ground, all that stuff.
	And there's one little line that says, phase angle, which is the angle between the sun, the surface, and the camera, which read 90.304 degrees.
	So the sun then, that would put sun then just below the horizon.
	Below the horizon.
	Three-tenths of a degree below the horizon.
	Alright, so then what in the hell is the story with this picture?
	I mean, obviously the entire...
	Eastern side of the face is lit up like it's made out of damned aluminum foil.
	I mean, it's impossible.
	Or not, I guess.
	Has anybody toyed with this photograph in any way, or if so, in what way?
	This is from what's called the official archive.
	You know, there's a whole procedure of putting things into the planetary data system, and When things pop up on these websites, we're not supposed to believe the PR versions.
	You're telling me this hasn't been toyed with?
	No, no, no.
	This is exactly as they have given it to us.
	You've got to be kidding.
	And there are five bands represented from the near-infrared through the violet.
	You pick three of them, you put red, green, and blue filters on them, in essence, and you make yourself a pretty picture.
	And unlike the broadband filters in the CCD television cameras or, you know, film, these are very narrow band filters.
	They're one micron wide, more or less.
	So they're basically scientifically isolating The way the light is interacting with the ground, much more precisely than a normal color picture.
	Here's what's hitting me, and I could be wrong about this, but I think what we're seeing is the areas that we previously regarded as those that were damaged.
	Damaged, right?
	In other words, that was the general consensus, remember?
	Well, I mean, just kind of a general consensus.
	If you imagine the face to be whole and complete, Then you would look at the areas that we're now looking at as kind of damaged areas, who knows, meteorites, whatever it is that did damage to the face originally, if you buy the fact that it was a full face at one time.
	These were then the damaged areas.
	Well, alright.
	When the 2001 image came out a couple years ago, the famous full face image, you and I had such... By the way, Art, you know, I've been listening to you for years.
	I have known you for even more years.
	I'm not the only guy that you really argue with.
	That's not true.
	That's not true.
	Oh, come on.
	You give a lot of your guests a chance to just lay out their story.
	But you and I, either consciously or unconsciously, have decided that it's much more interesting if we really confront those things we don't agree with.
	Maybe it's just that you're fun to argue with.
	Maybe that's true too, and likewise.
	Back when that first full-face image was released in 2001, You took one look at it and told me to go into storm windows.
	Yeah, basically I said it's a cat box.
	It's got about as much interest as my cat box on a full day.
	And that was exactly correct.
	And you did not see what we saw and a lot of other people saw.
	Yeah, I know.
	Which is that, no, it's not symmetrical.
	But remember back at the UN 11, 12 years ago now, I said it was not symmetrical.
	I said there were two different species represented From the western to the eastern half.
	And 99.9% of the other people looking at Cydonia seriously, people like Ben Flandern and a whole bunch of others, Carlotto comes to mind, they had been expecting a symmetrical or close to symmetrical representation, and I think that's what you expected too.
	When it did not look symmetrical or anything close to it, you guys threw your hands up and said, oh my god.
	Threw it up in one way, they threw it up in another way.
	They had the damaged side, preserved side hypothesis.
	And everybody thought that the eastern side, the side on the right, was the damaged side.
	We said in papers we published on Enterprise then, that no guys, you got it exactly backward.
	It's the western side, the hominid side, the side toward the city, toward the pyramids, which is the damaged side.
	And it's the eastern side which has been protected and has preserved the original casing, whatever that was.
	Now we fast forward the film to July of this year.
	Odyssey takes a picture precisely at the one moment of day art where you can decide the issue.
	And they take it not just in one color, they give it to us in five colors.
	And if you look at that ASU diagram there, you'll see if you click on it, at the top, you've got a link which actually gives you band 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or the false color.
	I see it.
	You've got a lot of data you can work with.
	What you see is that in any band, The right hand side is so incredibly reflective, the eastern side.
	The side in our model that was more protected.
	So what is it that we're looking at?
	To me, it might as well be aluminum foil, Richard, or metal.
	Well, I think that at the end of the show, I can go home.
	You can do something else for the rest of the night, because that's the bottom line.
	You think we're looking at something that is 99 plus reflectivity.
	I've actually got a numerical quantitative measurement further down in the paper.
	What we've done is we have taken... Give me the reflectivity figures for some other, I don't know, for wood or for iron.
	Well, let's do Mars.
	The average reflectivity of Martian stuff, mazes, ground, canyons, is 7 to 15 percent.
	good yes is seven to fifteen percent seven to fifteen a really bright area is
	7 to 15?
	twenty percent twenty percent and then And yet, what we have on the eastern face here of the face is ninety-what?
	Over ninety-nine percent.
	Over ninety-nine percent?
	That's close to a damn mirror!
	That's right!
	Precisely!
	It's behaving like what we call a specular mirror.
	And if you look at the various versions, and just scan down the paper and look at the various images, you don't even have to read the text, just look at the images, You'll see that when you turn the brightness down of the official version, all we've done here is to turn the brightness down.
	Like having a picture on your TV screen, and you turn the brightness down.
	Back in the days when you had knobs on TVs.
	Yeah, I understand.
	You could do that.
	What you then see on the right, under that overwhelming glare, remember, in a pre-dawn picture.
	Do you know how dark it is on Mars in a pre-dawn image?
	Imagine you're standing at Cydonia.
	Well, we have a lot of atmosphere, and so pre-dawn on Earth is not like pre-dawn on Mars.
	It would be far darker until the sun actually... It would be much darker and roughly a hundred times darker.
	Why?
	A hundred times, okay.
	Well, because the atmosphere is a hundred times less dense.
	Right.
	Now, you add some dust, so maybe it's only 50 times, alright?
	But it's damn dark down there.
	Right.
	Now, if you take a picture You know, a time exposure.
	You can obviously make anything look brighter or dim depending on how long you expose it.
	Can I ask a question?
	That's what you sit there for.
	Other than the possibility that we're looking at some sort of incredibly reflective material, is there any possibility, Richard, that we're observing either a heat anomaly or a radiation anomaly?
	No, and the reason is simple.
	Yes.
	The camera we're looking through, the images we're getting, are visible light or near-infrared.
	The problem has been on the web, if you go on and look at any of the conversations on some of the boards that are devoted to Cydonia, there is a big confusion about the term infrared.
	Huge confusion.
	The Odyssey spacecraft carries two separate cameras.
	One is essentially a visible light camera.
	Even though there's one infrared band, it's so close to the visible in the near-infrared, it's at 8,000 angstroms, or something like that, that it doesn't qualify as heat at all.
	The thermal infrared is much farther out in the spectrum, and there are 15 bands of imagery that are devoted to that in a separate camera.
	And radiation would not?
	Radiation would not, because it would be diffused, it wouldn't be directed.
	It wouldn't be mirrored.
	It certainly wouldn't be.
	No, I mean, this camera is not sensitive to radiation.
	In fact, if there was radiation coming from the surface of Mars, what you'd see is a noisy speckled picture, because how would the radiation be focused?
	By the optics of the camera lenses of the telescope.
	Well, this alone... It has to be visible light.
	Richard, this alone should cause them to want to go back and take many, many more photographs.
	Not just pass it over and keep mapping Mars, but... I mean, what do they say about this at NASA?
	They don't say a word.
	Why not?
	What they do is they do clever little things, like this summer, JPL threw a party.
	It was the 6th International Mars Conference.
	Yes.
	And they have papers invited from all over the world.
	Right.
	And they had a open public presentation at Caltech, which some of our guys went to.
	And Phil Christensen, who is the principal investigator for this camera, the Odyssey camera, and Mike Malin, who is the PI for the Mars Global Surveyor camera, did a kind of a dog and pony show on stage.
	And I was not there, but I have excellent reportage from people like Mike Berra, who was there.
	You know who Mike is, of course.
	Yes, of course.
	See, I'm thinking that a lot of our audience may not have been following this tale as long as you and I have.
	So I may say things that sound dumb and stupid, but it's because we're talking to people that may not be following all the bouncing balls.
	Well, you know, I think a lot of people are up on the Mars face, and I think this is a pretty shocking episode in the whole Mars face saga.
	Pretty shocking, I'd say.
	In a sequence of shock, how many times can you be shocked, Art?
	In other words, how many times do you have to have Observations of this object on the northern Martian desert.
	I'll be honest with you, Richard.
	I was done with the face, as you know.
	I had been pretty much done.
	I was concentrating on the underground cities, which totally blew my toast away.
	Yes.
	But now I can see reason to come back to the face big time.
	Seriously speaking here, what we need to decide this question is ground truth.
	We need to land here, guys.
	You know, we need to put men and women on the ground with shovels to dig in the dirt and take hammers and cut samples and analyze them.
	We're not going to get that, of a miracle notwithstanding, unless there is a rising political ferment from the body politic, meaning you folks out there who give a damn about this, who want to demand the answers.
	I recall you saying to me a few years ago that, uh, oh, you strongly believe the Bush administration was just about to announce this giant initiative to go to Mars.
	What the hell happened?
	Well, just is a political term, isn't it?
	Well... His term's not over, is it?
	He's still got a year and a half.
	Yeah... There are rumors... Still?
	Not just among our sources, but among the mainstream pundits.
	But instead we went to Iraq.
	Listen, hold on, we're at the bottom of the hour and we'll be right back.
	I do want to go to Mars, don't you?
	Wouldn't that be something to observe in our lifetime?
	Drifting on a sea of heartbreak, trying to get myself ashore
	for so long, for so long.
	Missed part of the show?
	Listen online with Streamlink.
	Log on to coasttocoastam.com I wonder what it would be like for man to blast off in a
	rocket and actually head there.
	We'll be right back.
	Hold on, hold on, hold on to what you've got.
	Hold on, hold on to what you got Ain't got no trouble in my life
	No foolish dream to make me cry I'm never frightened or worried
	I know I always get by I hit up, hit up, cool down
	When something gets in my way I go round it Don't let life get me down
	Gonna take it the way that I found it I got music in me
	I got music in me.
	I got music in me.
	Yeah.
	I got music in me.
	They say that life is a circle.
	A man in the wind, but I found it.
	I'm gonna move in a straight line, Ooh,
	Keepin' my feet firmly on the ground.
	I'm gonna move in a straight line, Ooh,
	Keepin' my feet firmly on the ground.
	I'm gonna move in a straight line, East of the Rockies, 1-800-825-5033.
	First time callers may recharge at 1-775-727-1222.
	East of the Rockies, 1-800-825-5033.
	First time callers may reach out at 1-775-727-1222.
	Or use the wildcard line at 1-775-727-1295.
	To reach out on the toll free international line, call your AT&T operator.
	And have them dial 800-893-0903.
	This is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell on the Premier Radio Network.
	Well, Art, I see that we've totally toasted Richard's side.
	A lot of people are complaining they can't get in.
	Sorry about that, Richard.
	I don't know if I can get through myself, which I can't.
	I would have taken and slammed it up on my webcam so you all could get to it.
	So what we're going to have to do when we get back, for the benefit of the audience who can't get there, is to tell them once again in good detail, sort of with a story until they can get there, exactly what that face looks like.
	coming right up richard the enterprise website so belly up for
	for pausing the air Well, not quite.
	I can get in.
	I want to dial up over here.
	Well, trust me when I tell you, many cannot.
	They just have to be persistent.
	OK, so those who haven't made it, describe in words simply what's there.
	Radio before the internet.
	What a concept.
	OK, what this little spacecraft did is look down at Cydonia.
	Home of the face, and the DNM Pyramid, and the City of Pyramids to the West.
	And before the sun had even come up, when the sky was dark, with a glimmer of light in the East, above where it would come up, it took a picture.
	Actually, it took five pictures simultaneously.
	But I'm saying, describe this photograph visually.
	Tell them exactly how dramatic it is.
	What you are seeing on this image is the face, the famous face on Mars.
	Looking on the eastern side, as if it's lit up like a Christmas tree, in comparison to other nearby objects.
	In fact, it's so bright, the entire, what I would call the damaged side, is so bright, it looks like they ripped away what rock was there, and what we've got left is aluminum foil.
	I mean, it is that reflective.
	But why do we keep persisting on thinking that it's rock?
	I have been saying since 1992, in fact in this paper you will see the quotes, From my book, The Monuments of Mars, from 1992, the second edition, where I said the face was made of something different.
	I know.
	If you've been anything, you've been persistent over the years on this.
	Well, science is prediction!
	Yeah, I guess.
	You know, the way you figure this puzzle out, whether it's natural down there or was built, is by getting enough different images, at enough different lighting angles, in enough different wavelengths, to put together a coherent story.
	Now, we've had to wait patiently, decade upon decade, for NASA to send missions, lose missions, you know, ignore missions, ignore Cydonia, claim they couldn't take... Remember when Malin was claiming he could never take a new picture?
	Because he couldn't find it?
	Yes.
	A mile-wide object and he couldn't find the sucker?
	I remember.
	And he claimed he was going to take pictures of the Viking landers?
	Yeah, I remember a lot of strange things surrounding the release of pictures and all... And then the cat box image.
	Where he took it at the worst possible angle, over his shoulder at a 45 degree angle, with the light coming up from beneath, like you were holding a flasher under your Halloween mask at Halloween, in a dark closet.
	And everybody, Dan Rather included, said, oh, it doesn't look like the one in 76.
	End of story.
	Well, the nice part about you is when you are confronted with new information, new evidence, you change your mind.
	Well, sure.
	You said a moment ago that, for you, it was dead.
	Dead, Jim.
	And suddenly, you see this picture.
	And you gotta hear, folks, when I talked to Art this afternoon, he had not seen this picture.
	That's right.
	And it was like, yawn, yawn, oh, you don't wanna talk about the face again.
	Well, yeah.
	And then, obviously, you're, what, am I right?
	Yes.
	Then your curiosity got the better of you.
	You went to the web.
	Yes, and I did the expected, holy crap.
	The scientific thing.
	Yeah.
	Which, of course, is all we're asking anybody to do.
	Just look when you can get to the website.
	Now, did you notice, by the way, do you have it up on your screen?
	Well, in two seconds I can.
	Before the show, as you pointed out, I'm sure I did.
	I was between rooms and I didn't do that, so I've had to wait like everybody else.
	But I have these images stored in memory, so I know exactly where we're looking and I can see it.
	In addition, go back to the first image.
	Alright, if you've got the page, just scroll from the first picture down a couple of pictures.
	The ASU picture, the overview picture, and then there's a close-up inset where I've got the three objects labeled, and then I've got an inset in the bottom left.
	Notice the geometry of these reflections.
	I know.
	This is such a stopper.
	It looks like panels.
	It looks like aluminum siding.
	It really does.
	Remember that great movie with Dreyfus called Tin Men?
	Yes.
	It looks like they were up there hammering shingles on this thing.
	That's why I say, Art, it's not rock.
	I never said it was rock.
	Everybody else has assumed it's Mount Rushmore.
	We never did.
	We said if this thing is manufactured, given the prevailing winds, which are going to blow dust storms From the west.
	The western side has been moth-eaten and bitten to hell by sandstorms.
	The eastern side has been more or less protected.
	No, I mean clearly as you look at, for example, I'm looking at the photograph, I can't tell you which one it is, it doesn't matter, but it shows the face and then it shows other large protruding objects on the surface of Mars in the same area and they have not even Close to the same kind of reflectivity.
	I mean, it's like day and night.
	That's right now.
	Good comparison.
	That's the long skinny one, right?
	Yeah.
	All right, now the face is at the top of that one.
	That's correct, yes.
	At the bottom left.
	You know what that object there is?
	The only other object from the whole surface comparable in brightness in this region?
	What is it?
	That's the DNM.
	The DNM, oh my god.
	That's the DNM pyramid!
	Okay.
	Now, the way you ascertain whether something is artificial from orbit is you look at the way it interacts with light.
	Again, keep in mind, this is a pre-dawn shot.
	I cannot overemphasize this.
	Yes.
	This is on a planet where the sky is a hundred times dimmer at any given moment than it is on Earth, because the air is a hundred times thinner.
	Put a little dust in it, but it's still nowhere near like the Earth.
	Well, Richard, there's got to be some way that you can fire off an email to somebody at NASA Imaging somewhere and say, all right, so what does this mean?
	But they're not going to tell us the truth.
	Well, obviously.
	They're not going to tell us the truth about the Columbia disaster.
	Why would they tell us the truth about this where no lives are at stake?
	But you've talked to your colleagues.
	You've talked to some people we both know about this.
	What do they say?
	Well, privately, among the Cydonia community, which is the folks outside of NASA, they're pretty jazzed.
	And a lot of people are resisting.
	You know what I found out over the years?
	Most people, regardless of their stripe, apart from you and me and Lee, don't seem to really want to know.
	They really don't.
	Well, that'll be the subject for next hour.
	I've got a lot to say about that.
	I did think, for example, when you showed me the cities buried just beneath the surface of Mars, that blew my mind, Richard.
	Oh, the howls of people claiming we made it up in Photoshop, and I brought in people from Hollywood and all kinds of other nonsense.
	I have found there is a broad contingent of even the anomaly people, the people who now have websites all over the internet claiming they want to know the truth.
	They don't want to know the truth!
	They can't stand the truth, as Jack Nicholson said in that famous film.
	You know, they can't handle the truth.
	What this one photograph... Remember, we keep looking for the smoking gun.
	People love life to be simple.
	They want one picture that will blow them away.
	You and me, my friend, look at this, and we're blown away because we know what we're looking at.
	Yes.
	Ramona, God bless her, comes in, obviously not been a fan of this, you know.
	That's right.
	It's okay, Ramona, I love you still.
	She looks at it, and she knows what she's seeing.
	Instantly.
	Yeah, it's like an, oh, my God!
	Yeah, it really is, and so then you've really got something.
	With the cities, in my opinion, you really have something.
	You take these two and you put them together, And you begin to make a pretty darn good case for a civilization having been on Mars.
	With a stupendous technology.
	Remember Art, I've been saying from the get-go, this is not Egypt.
	You know, this isn't a bunch of primitive bronze age stone cutters who one day had nothing better to do and because they were Martians decided to build a human face on Mars.
	Could we do a mission to Mars?
	Could we?
	We?
	You mean you and me?
	Well, no.
	No, Richard.
	No, I don't mean that.
	I mean we, collectively, the world.
	Yes, of course.
	Right now we can.
	The technology is in hand.
	We're what?
	Well, what you would do is to redo the shuttle into a heavy lift vehicle.
	You would automate it.
	I mean, the whole thing could be flown automatically.
	You would assemble the material for the mission in Earth orbit.
	You then send your crew up on the new space plane that they're designing, like the old Apollo capsules.
	Yes.
	And you go to Mars!
	And if you want to do it really, really quick, in the next 10 years, you use Bob Zubrin's Mars Direct idea.
	But there are some of these little problems involved.
	It's what, an 18-month trip?
	No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
	No, a Type 1 trajectory would get there in six to seven months.
	Six to seven?
	No.
	That's pretty good.
	And you wouldn't leave until you had your basing already there.
	The beauty Of Zubrin's idea, which is a refinement of Von Braun's idea and a bunch of other ideas, is that you send your supplies and your habitats and your fuel mechanism to come home ahead of you.
	How many billions of dollars to do it, realistically?
	Well, the problem is the government exists to take taxpayer money and spend a lot of money on its friends.
	So, this is why we haven't had a real space station for the last 30 years.
	How many billions of dollars, Richard?
	If you had someone with cost-cutting ideas that wanted to do it and not make a lot of money on it, it could be done for probably Apollo.
	In terms of cost of dollars, the same percentage of the GNP as Apollo, which was $20 billion back in 1969.
	And in today's dollars?
	It'd be around $40-50 billion.
	Yeah, we're going to spend $87 billion.
	There you go, my friend.
	Well, see, that's what I said.
	I said, well, we went to Iraq, and maybe we did.
	I mean, maybe it was one or the other, and I don't know that we've got another $50 billion to spare at the moment.
	So, I don't know, Richard.
	I don't know that we're... But you don't spend it all in one year, and you don't send it someplace.
	See, this is the misimpression about spending money in space.
	Money spent in space is not sent into space, it's spent on the ground.
	It's spent employing all kinds of technicians, from sea to shining sea, making things.
	And that money stays here.
	It then has what's called a multiplier effect.
	And I've seen some models, some econometric models, out of Princeton and other places, that said that in the heyday of Apollo, back when we were spending money on the race to beat the Russians to the moon, The economic multiplier of Apollo was something like $23 to 1.
	For every billion dollars that was spent on NASA in those years, the country got $23 billion richer.
	Now, you don't have to be an economist to know how this works.
	You basically employ people to make things.
	Those people need to employ people to make the things, to make the things, to make the things.
	And particularly if you're making things no one's ever made before, You have to do a whole crash course in science and engineering, which means research and development, to conquer a whole new set of environmental problems you never had to face before, all of which is investment as opposed to ordinary government spending.
	Somebody named Hanson, fast blast following Richard, have you ever wondered if perhaps maybe we've already had a manned mission to Mars?
	Ask Richard what his thoughts are on that question.
	If you had asked me this, Even a couple years ago, I would have said, uh-uh.
	But given what I know of the black ops people, and given what I know of some other things that we've bumped into, I would bet probably even money that someone with some very advanced technology has already been where we're looking.
	Let me give you one clue, one public clue, That we're possibly not on the wrong path on this?
	Yes.
	Did you read General Wesley Clark's statement the other day in New Hampshire about NASA?
	What did he say?
	He said that he wouldn't want to bet money against the idea that someday we could exceed the speed of light.
	Now, General, and the New York Times took out an op-ed piece by an old friend of mine, Dennis Overby, who used to write for some of the science magazines, like I did, basically cautiously supporting the good general, who has jumped into the presidential race, as everybody knows.
	Now, why is this interesting, and why is this relevant?
	Because General Wesley Clark, as a four-star general, as the former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO... Well, you know a lot.
	He knows a lot about Black Ops R&D, would you not think?
	Possibly this is a hint to his campaign people, to the rest of the candidates, to this administration, that he could drop a few bombshells, if he were to so choose.
	Maybe it is.
	Yes, obviously, he might well have knowledge of The edge, at least, of that kind of a black op.
	He might.
	And might he use it in campaign-type rhetoric?
	Well, yeah, he might.
	Well, look at California.
	Anything is fair in campaigns now, right?
	Obviously.
	And this is a much more subtle... In other words, just watch Wesley Clark.
	Of all the candidates on that side, to me, he's the most intriguing.
	Well, if we've been to Mars, or someone has been to Mars, and I would think it would be us, Then we would, presumably, based on what I've seen tonight, seen in the past, we would have evidence that Mars was, at one time, inhabited.
	We would have evidence... Would it be in NASA's hands, Art?
	We would have evidence of aliens.
	Well, I don't know, Richard, is the answer to that question.
	It could be in some very locked up, compartmentalized... Super secret program.
	Sure.
	Remember, what's his name?
	Steve... Come on, help me.
	Oh, your friend from West Carolina, the doctor.
	Oh, Dr. Stephen Greer.
	Stephen Greer, yeah.
	Mind blanks out there momentarily.
	Stephen Greer has made many claims that he's talked with people in the mainstream who claim that they knew nothing of what he was discussing because if it was going on, it was going on in a clandestine cell-like project That they did not have access to.
	Which is... Even said generals have told him, I'm astonished because I should know and I don't know.
	Which is what you would expect, though, of that kind of operation, right?
	Yep.
	And there can only be, in my mind, honest to God, Richard, there can only be one reason why we would not have been told, and I think that reason is as valid today as the day it was first considered, and that reason is because if we were indeed the seeds of many people believe we
	earthlings human beings are the seeds of the or the maturity of what was seeded
	from mars and that could mean all kinds of impossible to digest
	things like well gee we were created in a way other than
	for example genesis lays out so carefully and boy you got real trouble
	when you try to start to Well, this, of course, is the central point of the new book that I'm working on, The Heritage of Mars, Remembering Forever.
	It's also, though, the central point, really, of what we're about to discuss next.
	Yes.
	Isn't it?
	Well, that's why I wanted us to do this show tonight, because The reason I went to Roswell, among other things, was to appear on a panel with Mike Kaiser that was basically a face-off with a group of Christians.
	And what's the name of the panel?
	Well, the panel in Roswell was called Ancient of Days.
	The panel that we're doing at the University of Wisconsin in a couple weeks is called God, Man, and E.T.
	And we're going to confront with some mainstream theologians and myself and Mike and David Flynn and a couple other folks The question that we're going to entertain over the next hour, which is, if this is all real, if the human race is not alone, if we have company out there, and lo and behold, if some of it is related to us, what does it mean for all of us, and when do we confront the huge meanings, the big picture, the ultimate questions, which have to do with how we relate
	To the infinite.
	Remember earlier on the telephone we were talking about, you said you enjoyed last night's show with Dr. Plath, and one of the things was that a lot of people actually expressed total disdain for the concept of not dying.
	Total disdain.
	I mean, they're just happy to pass on.
	They're happy to die.
	It seemed impossible, and yet that's what they want.
	That's what they believe.
	That's what they think is true.
	And there's a relationship here, a parallel.
	And you're right.
	And we're going to find out all about that.
	So Richard, hold on.
	We'll scratch up Mike Heiser, and we'll have this discussion about man.
	Well, no, let's put God first.
	God, man, and E.T.
	and what it all means, coming right up.
	In the night time from the high desert, this is Coast to Coast AM.
	Be it sight, sound, smell or touch, there's something inside that we need so much.
	Bye!
	The sight of a touch, or the scent of a sound, or the strength of an oak leaves deep in the ground.
	The wonder of flowers to be covered and then to burst up through tarmac to the sun again.
	Or to fly to the sun without burning a wing?
	To lie in a meadow and hear the grass stink?
	And all these things in our memories haunt?
	I need you to slow to help us to follow Ride, ride my sweet soul
	Take this place, on this trip Just for me
	Ride, take a ride Take my voice, my voice it's for free
	Wanna take a ride?
	Well, call Art Bell from west of the Rockies at 1-800-618-8255.
	East of the Rockies at 1-800-825-5033.
	First time callers may reach Art at 1-775-727-1222.
	to the Rockies at 1-800-825-5033.
	First-time callers may reach out at 1-775-727-1222.
	The wildcard line is open at 1-775-727-1295.
	And to reach out on the toll-free international line, call your AT&T operator and have them dial 800-893-0903.
	This is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell on the Premier Radio Networks.
	Is there just one God?
	Man's God?
	Or do you think that he's God for all?
	Bill Filling will talk about stuff like that coming up.
	Mike Heiser!
	Mike earned a master's degree in ancient history with emphasis in Egyptology and ancient Palestine, and earned a second master's degree in Hebrew and Semitic languages.
	Mike's graduate work has resulted in his ability to do translation work in over a dozen ancient languages.
	He recently completed work on his first academic paper in English in the last 50 years on the subject, make that the first paper, not his, on the subject of Nibiru.
	You know Nibiru, right?
	Mike has also had a lifelong interest in the paranormal, particularly ufology.
	His interest prompted him to write The Facade two years ago, which is a fictionalization of Mike's thoughts on two questions.
	Could mainstream Christianity and Judaism accommodate a genuine E.T.
	reality?
	And is there any relationship between the modern E.T.
	and abduction phenomena and various ancient texts, biblical and otherwise, that describe human encounters with serpentine beings?
	I guess that's really serpentine.
	Anyway, coming up in a moment, we're going to talk about this and whose god he is.
	Anyway, that kind of thing.
	thanks day right there once again richardson
	you know when Here he is, Richard.
	Hi there.
	Hi.
	And let us now add to the mix Mike Heiser.
	Mike, are you there?
	I'm here.
	Hello, Art.
	Hi, Richard.
	Hi, Mike.
	Oh, good.
	All right.
	Mike, you're going to have to be very careful to kind of breathe away from the phone.
	Otherwise, it kind of comes through like... So anyway, here we gather to sort of give people, I guess, a little bit of a A preview of God, Man, and E.T.
	Is that fair?
	I would say that's fair.
	When you all do this conference, you're going to have members of the clergy available there to be part of it?
	Well, there's one.
	I think Hugh Ross is technically a clergyman right now, but he would be the only one I think that's Well, he'll fit.
	Believe me, he'll fit.
	He'll be your guy.
	You have to realize, we actually have quite a mix here.
	It's kind of an interesting setup.
	This all started, actually, this was initiated by a listener of yours.
	Oh?
	Yeah, two years ago, actually.
	Someone at the University of Wisconsin at the Parkside Campus heard Our show, the one I did with you almost two years ago now.
	She told me, when I heard that show, I said, if I'm ever the head of this organization that I'm in now, I'm going to invite Mike Heiser to campus.
	Lo and behold, she became head of something called the Parkside Adult Student Alliance.
	Six or seven months ago, she sent me an email and invited me, and I thought that was great.
	I accepted.
	Richard and I met over email and started corresponding a lot and wound up in Roswell.
	We were sitting there at dinner the last night of Ancient of Days and Richard said, Boy, wouldn't it be nice if we had a university context to take this show on the road.
	I thought of her right away, so when I came back from Roswell, I got an email from her and actually called her on the phone.
	Her name's Donna.
	I'd love to come.
	It's a wonderful offer, but what would you say to this idea?
	What if we could get Richard Hoagland here and a few other people, and here's the issue, the whole thing about intersecting religion with these questions?
	She went for it immediately.
	Well, she's a very smart lady.
	This is, I think, the central core issue.
	We were discussing prior to your arrival the possibility that we've already been to Mars, for example.
	Not suggesting we have evidence that we have, but just, you know, perhaps, perhaps so, and done in a clandestine way.
	Now why?
	And why don't we know about it?
	Well, because of this very reason we're about to discuss.
	I think it's a central That's a core question that's going to have to be answered and resolved.
	Mike, let me ask you just straight out.
	Do you think that there exists evidence of extraterrestrial presence, whether it's abductions or crop formations or other hard physical evidence or maybe crashed aliens, bodies we still have from Roswell.
	Extraterrestrial presence is a reality?
	Well, the way I would answer that is I think that what Richard is doing is the best, most scientific way to go at that issue.
	I know to the Coast audience, Richard Hogan and Mike Heiser would seem like the odd couple.
	Then that's a no, isn't it?
	I mean, is that a no?
	It's an I'm not sure.
	Okay, that's fair.
	I need to be persuaded, but I think it would be really neat.
	Alright, then let me try this approach.
	Well, can I interrupt for a sec?
	Well, you may.
	Hold on one second, Richard.
	With what you know about religion, you've studied it, you write, you translate.
	You must know, Mike, the deep, deep, deep trouble that religion would be in if ET presence was a reality.
	Don't you?
	Do you agree with that or not?
	Well, I think it depends on a couple things.
	I don't want this to sound superficial, but it might, but that's not the intention.
	I think it depends on how it's packaged and what the claims actually are.
	To me, theologically, and this isn't new with me, this goes all the way back into the Middle Ages, the idea that there could be other worlds and other inhabitants of those worlds is an old question that you know that the church was divided on but the bearer of
	the mere fact that it was divided means that a lot of people
	within the church had no problem with it and there have been some significant theologians along the
	way that said well this would be neat
	you know that this is this would be great well i i don't know a lot of that say it would be neat but
	i do know a lot of them who get really angry
	they send me emails and all boy i'm telling you we are toying with concepts
	given directly by Lucifer.
	I've always come on the show and called myself the equal opportunity offender, so here we go.
	That's because I agree with you, and I do think that the scenario painted in Brookings is real.
	Me too.
	But I think it's because, again, I said how it's packaged, and let's divide it into points A and B.
	Part of the problem with the need for packaging, even bringing that up, is that people, in my estimation, have a superficial knowledge.
	Religious people have a superficial knowledge of theology and the Bible.
	They don't really read very far into it and actually think very broadly.
	But we're not talking about how well you wish they were educated.
	We have to talk about what they do know.
	Right, and that's point B, and that's why I do think that Brookings does paint a realistic scenario, and what it's going to take is the real crux of the issue for many people, and I'm going to put Christian, Muslim, Jew here in one category, and educated and non-educated in one category.
	The real crux of the issue is this issue of human origins.
	Now, that question is actually separable.
	from the question of is there intelligent extraterrestrial life and we tend to connect
	them but there's no necessary logical connection well let me interrupt you know go ahead Richard
	your time if you if you claim that we're doing the most scientific
	stuff in this area the central thing we have been looking at for twenty years
	on mars is an effigy a statue
	a memorial an icon which is human
	or humanoid in a place where it has no business being.
	This is why the mainstream crowd, from planetologists to biologists, basically have given a short shrift, because by everything that they think they know about independent evolution of life, finding a human face on another planet, even the one next door, Is impossible.
	This is serious.
	Mike, this is real trouble for you.
	Which means... I don't think so.
	In having these things separated, yes it is too, it is... Guys, which means, if you extend the logic, if it isn't independent, if the face on Mars is not the Martians, if it really refers to the human species on this planet... Here it comes.
	It says, big letters, Hollywood sign size, Intervention by someone, some alien presence, and that's the third rail of the theological debate.
	There you are, Mike.
	All right, well, there's a large difference between human and humanoid.
	Richard, you used both terms.
	Because if you actually look at the numbers and the biology people and their independent evolutionary statistics, even humanoid is impossible, unless it's related.
	Well, that would be like saying... I mean, to me, that's a logical jump.
	That would be like saying, because... That's where they are.
	You were saying where theologians are?
	That's where they are.
	Oh, yeah.
	I would agree that a number of people make that connection.
	Well, I'm talking fairly like George Gaylord Simpson, who was a huge, big biologist back in the 50s and 60s at Harvard.
	He basically coined the phrase, if you threw the dice again, you might get intelligence, but it wouldn't look anything like us.
	And that has been the canonical standard.
	Finding a human face on Mars means it's humanity somewhere involved, and that would be the theological no-no, a la Mr. Bell.
	Right.
	It would be.
	That's accurately stated.
	It would be the theological no-no.
	But what I'm saying is there's a logical disconnect there.
	Well, disconnect, of course.
	Let me just give you the disconnect.
	We resemble apes.
	Does that mean they created us or we created them?
	No, we're related.
	We're part of the same family.
	We're genetically related.
	See, that's a whole different question.
	No, it isn't.
	Aha!
	We evolved from, or they evolved from, that kind of relatedness.
	I thought we evolved from.
	Well, but I'm saying if you didn't know, you didn't have a genetic.
	If we're all related.
	And again, I don't see a problem with that here.
	If we're all related.
	Hold on now.
	Hold on, you guys.
	One at a time.
	If we're all related, then that speaks to common origin, which in a theistic model, and again, theologians have been here and done that, in a theistic model, that's what you would expect.
	You would expect God to have created both, and you would expect there to be similarity, you would expect there to be relationship, using the family metaphor.
	Again, this is nothing new in the realm of theology, but the jump that's being made Is the displacement of a common creator for both, in sort of, from like an umbrella creation, to a sort of lineal, I create you, then you create something else, and then he creates something else.
	That's where the logical disconnect is.
	Okay, but here's where I've got a problem.
	If there's a relationship, then what about that whole big important part of Genesis, where, you know, the world got created, and then Man, then Adam and Eve, and then all the... You know, it's so specific in the way it all occurred that if it turns out we were seeded from Mars, that's a really big problem!
	Well, let me put it this way.
	It looks specific.
	Yeah.
	Okay?
	But there are lots of ways... You're going to tell me it's metaphorical?
	No.
	No.
	Not at all.
	There are lots of ways within... I mean, I'm a text person.
	Yes.
	But the question I ask myself, you know, in this issue or whatever issue, is what can the text sustain?
	What does the text allow?
	There are lots of ways, you know, to look at Genesis and not see, grammatically, I'm not just making it up, I'm saying grammatically, that there is a lineal progression from a specific point in time.
	My own view, actually, is that Genesis 1.1 does not speak of the original creation event.
	I think it refers to a subsequent creation event, to the original point of origin, big bang, whatever you want to call it.
	grammatically you can have great stretches of time in which everything is all theoretical i was there so i don't know
	in which you have lots of things happening so again the only people
	i'm not sure what you just said I mean... Okay, what I'm saying is... See, I'm with literal people, Mike.
	Let me illustrate it with the first verse of the Bible.
	Day by day, it said what he did.
	Okay, let me illustrate it with the first verse.
	It says, In the beginning God created... Now, in Hebrew, the very first word of the Bible is Bereshit.
	Okay?
	That word does not have the word the in Hebrew in it.
	So you should translate the verse without using the word the, which is really difficult.
	What it means is it's indefinite.
	It is an indefinite time.
	The verse could be translated like this.
	Mike, Mike, Mike, Mike, Mike.
	I understand technically how you can go and make this case, but my point is, and we already talked about this, That isn't what people believe, Mike.
	What people believe is written quite clearly, and they take it quite literally.
	In the King James Version.
	You better believe it.
	That's part of the problem.
	So we're talking about a political reality as opposed to an academic or scholarly reality.
	Yes.
	And who is the guy here on the panel who has done more politics on this than anybody else over the last 20 years?
	One of my most interesting and surprising results, data folks, real data, is when I was asked to do a piece on CBN, Christian Broadcast Network, for Pat Robertson.
	This was back, oh, I'm trying to remember, it was right after Monuments was published, which means it would have been in the summer, fall of 87, spring of 88, somewhere around there.
	The other thing that happened is that I got called, before you and I hitched up, Art, I got called by Christian radio networks, including One very bright guy out there in Southern California.
	And what astonished me, I had been on Good Morning America, I'd been on, what's the one on ABC, not that, Good Morning America, I'd been on with Charlie, I'd been on all the mainstream shows.
	The most penetrating, the most careful, thoughtful presentation of our data, and I've got the tape, to date, Then was done by CBN, by the Christian Broadcast Network, by Pat Robertson 700 Club.
	What do you make of that, Art?
	I was astonished at how thoughtful and how probing and how big they thought, and how they weren't afraid to ask the unthinkable questions that the mainstream guys, like my old friend Morton Dean, he just snickered and giggled when I was on Good Morning America.
	You know, I worked with him at CBS and he couldn't look me in the eye.
	Well, they snicker and giggle a lot on those morning shows.
	But not on CBN.
	And then the radio experience, I was invited back several times, I found listeners.
	Now we're talking about the rank and file.
	The people that you're so worried about.
	The people who would tune in, and this was steeped in fundamental Christianity.
	Yes.
	These people, again, asked really good questions, and wherever I wanted to go, in terms of speculating, Or posing a this, or looking at it like a that?
	Yes.
	They would follow, and there didn't seem to be the castigation and the shame on you for thinking those outrageous thoughts.
	Okay, but Richard, did you... And that's data!
	We must factor that into this equation.
	But did you really talk about the possibility that everything that they believe to be true, sorry Mike, because that's what they believe to be true, is wrong?
	Did you hit them in the nose with that?
	Alright, how well do you know me?
	What do you think?
	I don't really know.
	Would I pull my punches if I could support it?
	In front of a bunch of fundamentalists, I'd sure pull one of mine.
	Well, I didn't.
	You didn't.
	No, and I would fight it back.
	You hit him right in the nose with, look, everything you believe may be incorrect.
	Incorrectly interpreted.
	That was my out.
	We're not talking about there not being God and there not being a plan.
	We're just talking that we're not smart enough to really have figured it out yet, and we need more data, and that data is on Mars.
	The purpose of the conference is to do just what Richard described, okay, in front of people.
	It is to confront the Church with, you know, what I think is good work that needs to be pursued and followed.
	And we all know that, you know, Richard's work is going to get criticized, it's been criticized, people don't like it, whatever, but it's something that I think should be looked at.
	And on the other hand, just as Richard's trying to educate, we'll just say, the lay naturalist or materialist public, even though his audience is much wider than that, as he just described, what I'm saying to the church side of this is, look, You need to think more broadly than this because... I'll tell you what, Mike, I'm going to have to ask you to hold on.
	We're here at the bottom of the hour.
	We'll come back and we'll resume with God, Man, and E.T.
	From the high desert in the middle of the night, this is Coast to Coast AM.
	Missed part of the show?
	Listen online with Streamlink.
	Log on to coasttocoastam.com.
	It's only a motion break Oh, I can get it off my mind
	I can't fall a lie for me I remember a Saturday
	I'm...
	I remember a Saturday I remember a Saturday
	I remember a Saturday Once upon a time Once when you were mine I remember those cries Reflected in your eyes I wonder where you are I wonder if you think about me Once upon a time In your arms
	Wanna take a ride?
	Call Art Bell from west of the Rockies at 1-800-618-8255.
	East of the Rockies, 1-800-825-5033.
	First time callers may reach Art at 1-775-727-1222.
	to the Rockies 1-800-825-5033.
	First time callers may reach our debt 1-775-727-1222.
	The wildcard line is open at 1-775-727-1295.
	Want to take a ride?
	Maybe go where someone else has actually gone before?
	Call your AT&T operator and have them dial 800-893-0903.
	This is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell from the Kingdom of Nile.
	Want to take a ride? Maybe go where someone else has actually gone before?
	I wonder if that's the kind of ride it would be if we went to Mars.
	God, man, and E.T.
	Richard C. Hoagland and Mike Heiser are here.
	By the way, Mike, I don't mean to cut you short on your interpretations of why what's
	written in Genesis may have an alternative meaning.
	I simply think if this panel, God, Man, and E.T., is to be effective, it has to deal with what people believe and probably won't have a chance to teach them something else.
	And Richard, R.G.
	in Rockville, Maryland says, Why is CBN receptive to Richard H.?
	Because they put a human face on God and Satan, why not Mars too?
	In other words, it's still They're still just saying, sure, God could do something of that magnitude.
	That's man!
	You know, and they're pretty, pretty... But isn't that what we've been saying for a while now?
	That the data indicates that Cydonia and Mars is somehow part of the family, the human family.
	And this is what, with all this other... See, look, when Mike and I met and actually did this panel at Roswell, it was clear to me from the discussions we had with the Religious and theological people that we met there, some pretty neat people.
	But this is an issue whose time has come.
	In fact, it's well overdue.
	We have now assembled a body of evidence, apart from the whole EETUFO question, which stands still.
	We've got official government imagery, which even blows Art Bell's mind.
	Yeah, all of that's true, but the issue... And so we put it together, and we present it to these people, and we say, Given that this is testable, given that this is the information we've assembled in 20 years, and the research that's been done, our conclusion is probably that it's real.
	What do you make of it, and when will we discuss the implications?
	And what Mike and I are hoping, and I'll lay out tonight exactly for the country what we're hoping, we're hoping that between the live conference, where we have a very limited of membership.
	We can only fit about 250 people into that auditorium, and Mike will get into how you can get a ticket while there's still tickets to be made available.
	Yeah, you know what?
	We better cover that, because I'm about to jump on you for something.
	Okay, you can do that.
	All right, so come on.
	Tell people how to get tickets or promo it, whatever you want to do.
	Godman and E.T.
	is going to be where, when, and... You want me to take this, Richard?
	Yes, Mike.
	Well, there are links on both my site and Richard's site to a page on my website that has all the information.
	It's October 25th, Saturday.
	It's an all-day event, 8 in the morning until 9 at night.
	We're having five speakers.
	There will be an extended hour-and-a-half panel discussion attached.
	There will also be an extended hour-and-a-half question-and-answer session.
	The number, can I give out the number, Art?
	Oh, sure.
	The number that people would call To register is 262-595-2200.
	Do that again.
	262-595-2200.
	And you should call during business hours, which is 8 to 5.
	It's not going to be like calling coast to coast, I'm sure, but we think it's going to sell out pretty quickly.
	And if you get a busy signal, if you hit the voicemail box, you can leave a message there to order or call back, but just keep trying.
	And our advice, I'm sure Richard would agree, is if you want to come to this, you better get on the phone real early in the morning.
	Now, for those who are not going to make it, because they're going to delay and dally and put it off and procrastinate, we've arranged to have this videotaped, Art.
	And we're going to be very quickly, after the conference, within four to six weeks, we will have the tapes of the entire day available.
	And there's a pre-order form on Mike's site for that.
	And what we're going to do with these tapes, and this is very important, we're going to send them to other departments, university departments, all over the country, so people can see how this plays in Peoria.
	It's actually not that far from Peoria.
	And it's basically a grassroots campaign to put this question front and center, whose time has come, If this is real, what the heck does it mean?
	Well, alright, I can play a part here, Richard, very easily.
	You say, I look at this, you put all of this in front of me, and as a fundamentalist, what do I think?
	I think it's the devil's work!
	I think you're being led down the path you're being lied to because that is what Lucifer does!
	That's what he does.
	And you're going to be led down the path into worshipping false gods.
	You're led away from God's path.
	It's the devil's work.
	You know what, Art?
	When you came back on the air, you expressed a little concern about us using the conference time to teach people something different.
	That isn't actually what's going to take place at the conference.
	Well, no.
	I was just saying that... We have an old Earth creationist.
	We have a young Earth creationist.
	I'm actually both.
	And we have Richard... How can you be both?
	It's real simple.
	Either man and the... No, there's a prior creation in Genesis 1.1.
	I can justify that grammatically.
	After which, there was a recreation in literal 24-hour days.
	I think... I don't... I'm amazed that the people, especially grammarians, people who do Hebrew, just haven't seen... Boy, talk about having your cake and eating it, too.
	Ay yi yi.
	In other words, we were here with the dinosaurs, Mike.
	We were here with the dinosaurs.
	Created, boom, just down there like that.
	No.
	6,000 years ago?
	On Tuesday night, here on the coast, George is going to have Hugh Ross on, and Hugh Ross is a very well-known Old Earth creationist, PhD astronomer, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	Right.
	And the audience will get a lot of stuff that they may not be familiar with as far as that perspective of creationism.
	The other guy, he's going to be at the panel, the other guy we have just finished a PhD at the University of Chicago in philosophy, and he critiqued The logic of evolutionary theory, common descent.
	He's a creationist, but that dissertation is getting published by the University of Chicago in their evolutionary monograph series.
	So all this is to say there's lots of ways to look at this.
	There are, but Mike, honest to God, we don't care about the people who will not go beyond The English Bible, who will not think outside the box.
	You have to take them into consideration.
	They might even be close to the majority in this country.
	You guys, if you could only be in my seat when we do some of the programs we do and get some of the emails that I get, you'd have a better understanding.
	I've heard a lot of the shows.
	I have my Art Bell hat here.
	I have my Art Bell mug.
	I'm a dedicated listener.
	I get a lot of faxes, particularly after we do a show.
	Of very dedicated, serious, honest folks trying to convert me.
	Why do you two think the Brookings Institution concluded that it would be basically a social disaster if E.T., if contact was made, if it was imminent?
	It was 40 years ago.
	So what?
	We're not saying, I'll speak for myself, I think Richard would agree, but we're not saying that the group that would be upset by this has gone away.
	What we are saying is that it's smaller.
	What about the fundamentalist outlook has changed 40 years ago to now?
	I would say very little.
	Damn right, very little.
	And so what would be changing?
	I think you're overestimating the percentage of the Christian world that is fundamentalist.
	I think you're underestimating them.
	No, I live in this world and even within Christianity Fundamentalism, I mean, if it's defined historically, is a very small percentage of the evangelical, the believing, Christian world.
	Well, they sure like to write email.
	See, to me, this is the fun and important part of this.
	We're all basically speaking kind of theoretically.
	Art has one database, which is the email that he gets.
	But most people, Art, you will agree, who write email, particularly nasty, negative email, ...are predisposed against what they're writing about.
	You get far less positive, supportive email than you get, you know, hoots and catcalls if they think you've done something wrong.
	I was on CBN.
	I have been asked on Christian Radio many times.
	The response I got, my database is that the people who are interested, who show up, are very curious and very open and are willing to see where this leads.
	But you know Richard, see this person is right.
	Why is CBN receptive to Richard? Because they put a human face on God and Satan, why not Mars too?
	So from their perspective, they allow you to fit in only as far as they want you to fit in, Richard.
	If it's a human face, it's because they're human-centric and humans are the only thing.
	And if it's on Mars, it's because God put the human face there as a dedication to the work he did here on Earth.
	Which is the only work he did.
	And how is this any different than the Saganites?
	Those people who think we're unique, or the nearest ETs are light years away, and can never come here because they don't know how to build spaceships.
	Or anybody who just would oppose even looking I have found that the most religious, dogmatic, knee-jerk reaction, to use the common clichés, have come not from religious people, but from sectarians, from so-called scientists.
	I would agree with that, by the way.
	Well, that was another finding of the Brookings Report, was it not?
	The group most threatened would be the scientists.
	Well, I feel, and Mike and I put this together because it's time to again test the model.
	Well, Mike ought to know something about this, the way people are when they write something, they put the careers on the line.
	Scientists do that.
	They write papers, publish or perish, right?
	They write papers saying, it's this way, and if it's some other way, they're in deep doo-doo.
	Right?
	Given that we've got a scientifically defensible data set, the stuff from NASA, this extraordinary stuff on Mars that screams for answers, and given that the centerpiece of it looks hauntingly like us, and by both the religious perspective And the scientific perspective in the 21st century, it shouldn't be there.
	We thought it would be a heck of a thing to get a discussion going around, and this is going to be a test model.
	If nobody shows up, we'll know.
	Oh, they'll show up.
	We've been, you know, spurned.
	Yeah, don't worry, they'll show up.
	If people show up, and the tapes sell out, and we can get other institutions, like Georgetown.
	I would love to hold this in Washington at Georgetown.
	Because among the people that we could get in the audience would be congressional people and congressional staff people to listen to other real people responding and debating and discussing this third rail of this issue, which is the theological implications of man created only here.
	Well, it may be the first year, really, because until this gets settled or dealt with in some way or another, It potentially is stopping everything, Richard.
	Missions to Mars, and a lot of other things that I can think about.
	I think, you know, another thing we're trying to offer, just from my perspective, is that, look, we don't want to create the impression that Richard and I, or anybody else on the panel, agree in toto.
	We do agree, I think, in principle, that, hey, we want to know, we want the truth to be known.
	People do have a right to know.
	From my side, I'm thinking, look, theism can bear the weight of this.
	On the one hand, you're correct, Art, that there will be a lot of people who will not bother to think.
	Well, welcome to the world of theology.
	This is just the way it is.
	Richard's accustomed to uphill battles, trying to get people to think about these things in his line of work.
	It's not just the world of theology, Mike.
	It's the world.
	Yeah.
	Most people would prefer not to think.
	What makes this audience and art different, what he's created with this venue, is an audience of people from sea to shining sea who stay up night to think.
	To think about the unthinkable.
	Yes.
	And many of them, when I take the positions I'm taking, and I am taking a position here because I want you guys to know what you're up against, so I'm taking a pretty rough position.
	But a lot of people just go berserk out there and they say, oh no!
	I'm as Christian as you can get.
	I have no problem with this at all.
	Well, I do have a very open-minded audience.
	Richard, you're right.
	But it's atypical.
	It's not the general population and it sure as heck not the Bible Belt.
	Look, given my proclivities for the political side of this, which I came into the hard way because initially I thought it would just be science, it would just be data, it would just be testing it.
	And I found there's this huge impediment.
	The elephant in the room, the 800-pound elephant that nobody wants to talk about.
	Although I think elephants weigh a bit more than that.
	Whatever the agenda is to keep it down on the farm, I think it goes back to Brookings.
	The difference between me and Mike is that Mike, I think, believes that Brookings was an honest effort to assess The state of the country in the fifties on these issues?
	And you don't think so?
	I think it was a politically spun document to seal the deal before any real evidence was in.
	I think that the fix was in before Brookings was ever written.
	For those who are not familiar with Brookings, would somebody... Richard, why don't you do it?
	Just give a very brief... Well, Brookings basically was this NASA study commissioned in 1959 Just as NASA was being formed.
	Yes.
	Of the Brookings Institution, the most famed think tank in Washington.
	Yes.
	To basically study the impact of the space program on all different facets of American society.
	A few what-ifs.
	Meteorology.
	Meteorological satellites.
	The feeding of hurricanes.
	Urban development is monitored by satellites from space.
	Teflon.
	New materials.
	New energy sources.
	The whole gamut.
	400 page book, which I've got one copy of.
	But as part of it?
	As part of it, there's a section on NASA and the subject of extraterrestrial life.
	And it did two things that were stunning.
	It predicted that NASA in the next 20 years, which remember from 59, 69, that's 79, 1979, would find evidence of ruins elsewhere in the solar system, either on the moon, Mars, or Venus.
	It didn't say may, it said would.
	And then it said that the implications of this were that serious consideration should be given to the role of the discovering scientists in making this information known.
	I believe that Stanley Kubrick and Arthur Clarke's film, 2001, was written as a response to Brookings.
	Well, I'm not sure if you covered this well enough exactly.
	I mean, it predicted that it would have extremely serious impact on... Oh yeah, the bottom line was that civilization could be destroyed.
	Thank you.
	I mean, you don't want to leave these things out.
	If this information was improperly handled, and by improperly, they then question the role of scientists who are involved in discovery in making it public.
	There's an official public document through NASA which questions whether something will be ever made public.
	suggest that such discovery would perhaps better not be made public?
	Yes!
	It did.
	So it set a kind of a policy... And it questions the role of several groups in society, such as religiously minded people.
	It set a kind of a policy baseline, right?
	Which says you're not going to... And it recommended further study, which we can't find.
	But if you look at the shape of what's happened on the Sedonia question for the last 20-30 years since 1976.
	It has all the hallmarks of a Brookings response.
	Namely, keep it covered, keep it secret, keep it dissembled, keep it deflected, don't deal with it seriously, so the culture never has to grapple with the fundamental question.
	Well, speaking of fundamentals, I ask, do you think fundamentalism has changed much in, say, 40 years since Brookings?
	No, it hasn't.
	But it's still a marginalized thing within the Christian world.
	It's a very small percentage.
	We're not shooting for the periphery, we're shooting for the middle.
	You want the Episcopals, you want the Methodists, you want the Baptists, you want the Catholics, you don't need the so-called marginal groups at the edges of the bell curve well even
	small my like what happened in in in waco with uh... what did you know also
	correct small marginalized groups of fundamentalist can do a lot of
	things like knock down buildings in new york city
	what's interesting is that the brookings report was far more worried in its
	handling of theology and a theological response to this
	by buddhists than they were of American fundamentalist Christians.
	Is that right?
	Yes.
	Now that, that alone will generate a reason for people to come back in the next hour and to hold on.
	I don't even know about this one myself.
	That there was more opposition from Buddhists than there was the Christians.
	I'm really going to have to try and understand that one.
	Anyway, we've got a good group together to do that.
	Mike Heiser and, of course, Richard C. Hoagland.
	We're talking about God, Man, and E.T., which is also going to be the subject of their big get-together, which they'll tell you more about.
	from the high desert in the middle of the night this is coast to coast AM
	he's got his dream apart, find some land, he's gonna give up the booze and the one night stands
	and then he'll settle down, it's a quiet little town and forget about everything
	but you know he'll always keep moving No, he's never gonna stop moving
	His feet rolling He's the Rolling Stone
	When you wake up it's a new morning The sun is shining, it's a new morning
	You're going, you're going home Call Art Bell in the Kingdom of Nye
	From West of the Rockies at 1-800-9-4 East of the Rockies, 1-800-825-5033.
	First time callers may reach Art at 1-775-727-1222.
	East of the Rockies, 1-800-825-5033.
	First-time callers may reach out at 1-775-727-1222.
	And the wildcard line is open at 1-775-727-1295.
	To reach out on the toll-free internet, Maybe that's the question.
	God, man, and E.T.
	is what we're talking about with Mike Heiser and Richard C. Hoagland.
	This is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell from the Kingdom of Nye.
	Yeah, you're going home, but where's home?
	Maybe that's the question.
	God, man, and ET is what we're talking about with Mike Heiser and Richard C. Hoagland.
	We'll get right back to them.
	Once again, Richard C. Hoagland and Mike Kaiser.
	I'm Art Bell.
	Gentlemen, before we launch back into this, because it's hard to stop once you start, go ahead and promo Godman and E.T.
	when it's going to happen, how they get tickets, that kind of thing, one more time.
	Okay, it's October 25th, which is a Saturday.
	It's two weeks from now.
	Yep.
	Boy, it seems just so short.
	It's an all-day event.
	Eight in the morning until nine at night.
	Eight o'clock is the registration on site.
	By the way, we'll go into the wee hours of the night, so to speak.
	The number again is 262-595-2200.
	That's what you call to register.
	And the cost, I don't think I mentioned the cost last time, is $25.
	Now this is an all-day pass and two catered meals.
	So, I mean, you just can't beat it.
	Okay.
	All right.
	All right.
	But the tickets are going.
	And for all those who listen who can't get in and look at how the website gets jammed every time we do this, our videotape discount.
	We are taping it.
	And if you go to Mike's site, you'll see a videotape discount.
	If you can't get in through the computer, I can give you an 800 number to preorder the video for those people who don't have computers.
	A lot of people are going to want to do that.
	Exactly.
	So that number for the God Man and E.T.
	video Actually, it's seven videos, nine hours total, is 1-800-350-4639.
	That's 1-800-350-4639.
	There are people not there right now.
	There's a tape machine.
	If you leave your phone number, they will call you back.
	Everybody who calls will get a call back, and you just put your name on the list for the pre-order discount.
	And that's good up until the day of the conference.
	All right.
	Richard, you mentioned Buddhists.
	I have got Brookings.
	I went to my Bath library and found my Brookings document.
	I am sitting here, open to page 225.
	This is a fascinating paragraph, Art.
	And it says?
	It says, the fundamentalist and anti-science sects are growing apace around the world.
	Remember, this was written in 1959.
	And as missionary enterprises, They have schools and a good deal of literature attached to them.
	One of the important things is that, where they are active, they appeal to the illiterate and semi-illiterate, including, as missions, the preachers as well as the congregation, and can pile up a very influential following in terms of numbers.
	See where they're coming from.
	I know that if someone actually said that on this program they'd get a lot of really nasty email.
	This is a government document circa 1959.
	Let me emphasize that.
	Here's the part that's really intriguing.
	For them, meaning these fundamentalist anti-science sexes used by NASA, the discovery of other life rather than any other space product would be electrifying.
	Since the main ones Among these sects are broadly international in their scope and are in some places a news source, the principal distributors of mass media materials, an important source of value interpretation, a central social institution, an educational institution, and so on.
	Some scattered studies need to be made both in their home centers and churches and their missions In relation to attitudes about space activities and extraterrestrial life.
	Additionally, because of the international effects of space activities, and in the event of its happening, of the discovery of extraterrestrial life, even though space activities are not internationalized, it is very important to take account of other major religions.
	So, for example, Buddhist priests ...are heavily politically engaged in Ceylon.
	So, too, in Burma, many politically active men, including U Nu, I think he was a member of the UN, are professionally active Buddhists.
	The Burmese convoked the Sixth Great Buddhist Council, which brought together a huge international group of Buddhist lay and ecclesiastical leaders, and it seems likely that, at least in the case of Theravada Buddhism, With the wide participation of modern, educated, politically active men, Buddhist beliefs and principles are being reinterpreted.
	We need, and we do not have, good observations or interpretive statements about the possible repercussions of space activities, etc., for these Buddhists.
	Well, that's saying they don't know.
	It didn't say... They were astonished!
	Well, they didn't say it would go further.
	It'd be worse than... What they were worried about was political activism.
	Yeah, okay, well... And they were most concerned not about domestic American fundamental political activism, but in this context of 59, they were worried about Buddhists as an example of a coherent religious political response in the international community.
	Now, let me leapfrog here.
	When they wrote this, remember how they said that these missions overseas were the centers of education, publications, literacy, etc.?
	Yes, yes.
	We now live in the internet satellite television era.
	So the fears that they had, that the fundamentalist anti-science doctrine as they saw it would have a monopoly on their followers, on their parishioners, no longer obtains.
	There's a wide spectrum of communications now to these people, the same people we want to talk to.
	And what Mike and I are trying to do with this first conference is to get a groundswell going so people will engage in the conversation.
	And frankly, I think there's going to be an extraordinary conversation to engage in.
	Lou in Phoenix, Arizona says, um, hey Art, you know, you missed the biggest fundamentalist threat.
	What will the Muslims do?
	This would drive them insane.
	They'd want to start a jihad against the rest of the galaxy.
	Absolutely wrong.
	Absolutely.
	Mike, do you want to tell them why?
	The Koran, of all the three major book religions, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, the Koran is probably the clearest in allowing for other worlds.
	It allows for ETs, Art, right in the Koran!
	Alright, well then Lou's wrong.
	Well, he's looking at the terrorist spin-doctoring of a tiny, tiny percentage of the Muslims of the world.
	Well, again... That would be like taking out a tiny percentage of fundamentalist Christians and making them the problem.
	Right.
	Well, you're saying, you keep saying of every religion that the only problems are going to be a tiny, tiny percentage.
	But gosh darn it, you guys!
	I'm telling you right now, this tiny percentage, first of all, I'm not so sure it's so tiny, and secondly, they're definitely not quiet.
	They are the most aggressive, verbose, active, People that you're ever going to want to meet your whole life, and you can't marginalize these people.
	I'm telling you right now.
	We're not marginalizing.
	We're talking to them.
	Well, but by your very statements about how small their numbers are, and I'm not even sure you're right about that.
	Well, I'm quite confident in that.
	I mean, that is the environment I initially, religiously speaking, came from.
	When I use the word marginalized, I'm referring to their numbers, I'm not referring to them as people or anything like that.
	My concern is with the broader evangelical world.
	The resistance is going to be there, if, as I said, depending on how it's packaged.
	The Christian community, the academic Christian community, and there is a very large active academic Christian community within The evangelical spectrum has always adapted to things like this.
	Let me just give you an example.
	The whole quantum model, the whole quantum physics thing.
	Initially, when that came out, it was like, oh, this is just the boogeyman.
	This is just a tremendous threat.
	I mean, once people started thinking about it, they realized, wow, you know, this can really give us a lot of insight onto a number of theological issues.
	And once again, and I think the E.T.
	thing, if Richard's right, I mean, if this actually pans out into reality someday, once again, I think theism can sustain this.
	It has sustained many things, you know, from a theistic perspective, we believe that God is the Creator, He knows how the universe ticks, we discover it, and we go on.
	Well, a lot of this though, gentlemen, is going to depend on how this occurs, and many qualified guests have said to me, Okay, Art, fine.
	If we get a signal from 10,000 light years away and that's announced to the world, the world will handle that reasonably well.
	Yes, there'll be a lot of speculation and nervousness and all that, but it'll be handled pretty well because it's 10,000 light years away and we'll just have lots of questions about it like we do about religion anyway now.
	However, If there's something really traumatic, like a real-time landing in Atlanta, for example.
	You know, something really serious.
	And we're presented with the fact, for example, that we've been authored and tampered with for some time now.
	And our genetic fathers just walked down that corrugated, unknown, metallic thing there from the saucer.
	And these are our fathers.
	These are our creators.
	That would not be handled so well.
	Well, the first question a thinking Christian is going to ask is, how do we know that?
	How do you prove that?
	And what I usually get is, oh, well, there's the genetic similarity.
	Oh, well, there's a visual similarity.
	Oh, well, there's this.
	Oh, well, there's... Well, hey, we got that on the planet Earth, and again, there's a logical disconnect to it.
	So what if there's a genetic similarity?
	That doesn't mean that one species created another.
	Let me read it.
	There is a significant disconnect here.
	But, again, I have to agree with you, Art, that people aren't going to...
	I understand what you're saying.
	A lot of people aren't going to even ask the question, is there a disconnect?
	They're going to just react.
	Now, I don't minimize what you guys are doing because it is my belief that the Brookings
	report governs what we do now.
	It governs what we're not told right now.
	It certainly allows for secrecy and top secrecy and levels a million times above that of things that we're never going to know about.
	It laid the groundwork for that.
	It was the baseline for all of that.
	And they like to keep secrets anyway, so they just will cite that forevermore and maybe they're not wrong.
	Just below the religious paragraph I read before, there's another line that I really had not read until this moment, carefully.
	And it says?
	Well, remember my spin on this, is that Brookings is a political document designed to keep the in-crowd in line.
	It's designed to keep honest scientists and bureaucrats and civil servants from blowing the whistle by laying out that the stakes are all of civilization and You know, cats and dogs living together and all the other terrible things that could happen versus keeping the secret careful until the appropriate time.
	And they decide the appropriate time.
	Listen to this line.
	If plant life or some sub-human intelligence were found on Mars or Venus, for example, there is, on the face of it, there is, on the face of it, No good reason to suppose these discoveries, after the original novelty had been exploited to the fullest and worn off, would result in substantial changes in perspectives or philosophy in large parts of the American public, at least any more than, let us say, the discovery of the coelacanth or the panda.
	I wonder how they reached that conclusion.
	Well, one wonders a lot about this document because all the supporting studies they call for... Well, one doesn't more than wonder about it.
	It said some things about fundamentalists, Richard, that were just downright insulting.
	Yeah, but think of the... I mean, fundamentalists does not automatically, unless you're an intellectual stuck way up there somewhere kind of person, it called them sort of backwoodsy and not too intelligent and I forget what it was they said in there, but Hard.
	Remember the culture of the 1950s, what was happening in the South?
	Yes.
	We were lynching human beings.
	Oh, yes.
	People were running around in sheets.
	We just defeated a guy over on the other side of the world that slaughtered six million of a particular race.
	That's right.
	So, we've come light years.
	I really agree with Mike.
	We are not the culture that spawned this document, regardless of its honesty.
	And we need to engage in the conversation now.
	Not tomorrow, not next week, but now.
	And that's what this conference is about.
	But you see, I don't think their basic conclusions were as true today as they were then.
	You can't say that!
	When I refer to that, I refer to the fact that society couldn't handle it any better today than it could then.
	I don't see what's changed that's going to allow... Nothing's changed!
	Look, I have always argued, from the moment I got into this and realized that these ruins on Mars could be real, might be real, possibly could be real, that the safest way to back down from the Brookings position, to educate the middle of the bell curve, ...was to start dealing with the most unthreatening aspect, which to me is ruins lying on another world.
	Not guys landing on the White House lawn, but ruins, boys and girls.
	Libraries, technology, wonders, medical advances.
	I mean, you talked to your friend last night, the good doctor, about anti-aging.
	Do you realize that if we sent an expedition, even a robotic expedition that could bring samples back, and we went into laboratories at Cydonia, and simply took the bottles off the shelf and sent them home, we might find the most astonishing cures for the top 50 diseases of humankind in the world, particularly if those folks were related and more advanced than us.
	The benefits so far outweigh not knowing And if the impediment to not knowing is a political hang-up... Okay, you know what else we might find out, Richard?
	I mean, I'm glad you said that.
	But suppose, for example, we found out that what killed Mars, and killed all the previous residents of Mars, is soon going to kill us.
	That might be something that you might not want to put on tomorrow's daily news headline.
	Unless there's something you can do about it.
	Unless there's something you can do about it.
	And I have argued strongly based on the physics, remember?
	That's all the whole show, the hyperdimensional model.
	That what we are being shown, even in the layout of what they built, is an extraordinary, empowering science of energy, information, and new physics that allows us to do almost magical things.
	Well, alright, one might ask... You have my name in the can on the other night.
	One might ask, though, that if all that's true, then how come they're dead?
	Ah, because in the theological plan, in the flaw of the human condition, there is the awful, awful conundrum that men and women, for reasons that border on the insane, in fact they are insane, go to war with each other again and again and again.
	Who is to say, in terms of Mike's perspective of the gap between Genesis One and Genesis 1-1, that somewhere in that gap, Mars falls, and it in fact is after a fall.
	It's after a decrease of enlightenment.
	It's after a proximity to the Godhead, and that our problems can be looked at from a totally new perspective, with totally new solutions, based on greater insight, if we only encompass the insight.
	We should... Richard, you should run for the governor Go ahead, Mark.
	After they recall Arnold.
	I was going to say, Richard, we should bring in Dave Flynn's work here.
	Well, do we want to really give it away?
	Because that's a really cool... Oh, yeah, we do want to give it away.
	What is it?
	What is it?
	Well, what... Go ahead.
	We want to give anything away on the show, so... What Dave is doing is exploring Mars-Cydonian connections in Old World mythology.
	I'll just leave it at this.
	He would say that what Richard just said about the fall of Mars, so on and so forth, that ancient mythology and megalithic structures on Earth actually reflect a belief that that happened.
	Really?
	We'll just leave it there.
	Remember I had a section in Monuments, or I have a section called the Search for the Terrestrial Connection?
	Yes.
	What Flynn has done, and he's really done a hell of a good job, and I don't say that about a lot of people because, you know, I'm really, really, really persnickety about good research, but David Flynn has done some really cool stuff and he's on the panel.
	What he has done is a solid documentation of the Mars Echo.
	In terrestrial mythology, ranging from the Christian fundamental story laid out in Genesis, all the way through the Middle Eastern, Sumerian, Assyrian, Babylonian, etc.
	And he's got the most astonishing surprise, even for me.
	Richard, you know, you're a cool chap, but I'm not sure there's any feline in you at all.
	I might like that anyway.
	If you look at the face, of course, it's half humanoid and half, well, feline, actually.
	Kind of feline, and so, if there's a direct line, there ought to be a little bit of... Meow.
	You know, somewhere, right?
	from the high desert in the night time this is coast to coast a m
	the the
	the East of the Rockies, 1-800-825-5033.
	First time callers may recharge at 1-775-727-1222.
	East of the Rockies 1-800-825-5033. First time callers may reach out at 1-775-727-1222
	or use the wildcard line at 1-775-727-1295. To reach out on the toll free international
	line call your AT&T operator and have them dial 800-893-0903.
	This is Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell on the Premier Radio Network.
	A walloping version of it, indeed.
	The reason perhaps we haven't gone to Mars, at least with the mission we can see, the reason we perhaps haven't done a lot of other things, don't know a lot of other things, is what we're talking about right now.
	The fact that frankly, a lot of people don't want to know.
	The fact that frankly, a lot of people don't want to know.
	Once again, Richard C. Hoagland and Mike Heiser on the show.
	Once again, Richard C. Hoagland and Mike Heiser on the show.
	It looks like you guys get a chance to, uh, yet one last time promo, because Susan here brings up a good point.
	Every time you promote this, you have left out the geographic location of the presentation you're going to make.
	Godman and E.T., where is it going to be?
	It's the University of Wisconsin.
	Where could that be?
	Well, there are many campuses, so I guess we should clarify this.
	Yes, please.
	Okay, it's on the University of Wisconsin Parkside campus, which is in Kenosha, Wisconsin, which is just south of Milwaukee.
	Okay.
	And again, you know, if you can't make it there, then there's going to be a videotape available, and I suspect because... Seven tapes.
	Seven tapes.
	Hours and hours, and the number for that is 1-800-350-4639.
	1-800-350-4639.
	If you call now, you'll get a nice tape recording.
	Leave your number, they'll call you back, they'll take down your information, and you will get a discount for pre-ordering.
	Up until two weeks from now, which is the 25th, the day of the conference.
	Richard and Mike, if Brookings, just for the sake of discussion, if Brookings was right then, and they're right now, and you wanted to change that, how would you do it?
	Mike, you want me to do something, or do you want to do it?
	Well, I'll speak for the Christian community.
	Sure.
	I think that the Christian community needs to be exposed, again, to what Richard's doing.
	And I don't want to misrepresent Dr. Ross or Paul Nelson, our other speaker.
	I mean, they're going to be skeptical about extraterrestrial life from a scientific perspective.
	But if Richard's model is correct, especially the hyperdimensional, the mathematics and all that, that screams intelligent design.
	And the Church needs to be confronted with that, with reality.
	If this is reality, The church needs to be confronted with that, and I think slowly it will acclimate.
	The mind will become open.
	God will come out of the box, as God has done many times within the church, and people will start to think about it and see.
	Theologians, pastors, and whatnot will start wrestling with this and articulating for the laity that theism can sustain this, and this is just one of those things.
	It's exciting.
	It means something.
	But theism can sustain this.
	So I think it's just a gradual educational process in thinking through the issues.
	But again, there are some non-negotiables.
	The whole creative aspect.
	Yes, it's the non-negotiables.
	The fact that there is a non-negotiable does not damage the pursuit of what Richard is trying to do.
	In other words, does everyone have to agree 100% with Richard Hoagland to say yes?
	You're onto something, and this matters.
	But the larger issue here is not whether Richard is precisely right or wrong.
	It's even a larger issue.
	Well, there probably are aliens, and if their presence If it didn't bother Aquinas, it shouldn't bother us.
	People just need to go back.
	They need to start thinking about their theology again.
	The panel has to deal with what if we run head-on into a non-negotiable.
	If it didn't bother Aquinas, it shouldn't bother us.
	I'll give you another name.
	C.S.
	Lewis.
	Very common name.
	Very familiar across Christian and non-Christian perspectives.
	He actually wrote a trilogy.
	Philandria out of the silent planet?
	Philandria out of the silent planet, that hideous strength, where he dealt with this.
	I mean, this is old stuff that Christian theologians have tackled.
	Is our origin negotiable?
	Well, theism is not negotiable.
	As far as what God did, when he did it, how he did it, the mechanism, these are all the things that, within the scientific and the philosophical world as we know it now, So that's more or less a no, right?
	Excuse me again?
	I mean, it's a non-negotiable.
	As far as our creation is concerned?
	Yes, our creation is concerned.
	the non-negotiable is theism that god created
	the mechanism of creation some christians embrace evolution so that's
	the moral lesson no right excuse me again i mean it's a non-negotiable
	as far as god as far as our creation is concerned that's not
	negotiable so that uh... if we were to go to the mechanism is negotiable
	and that's how we're going to make it more accessible.
	The mechanism is.
	So you think it's... How negotiable?
	Let's see how negotiable you think it is.
	If we went to Mars and we found out that indeed it had been populated and there was substantial, extremely strong evidence that we are Martians, for example.
	Is it that negotiable?
	What does the phrase, we are Martians, mean?
	That we're common ancestry?
	It means that we both descended from the same creator?
	No, not necessarily.
	What it means is that we came from Mars.
	We came from Mars.
	Mars was dying somehow.
	You haven't answered the question of how we came from Mars.
	All you've done with that question is to move the, who is the human species, back one planet.
	It's the same question, which is historically been with us, it's just been moved one planet over.
	So we had a migration.
	So we had a California Gold Rush to Earth.
	That doesn't change the fundamentals.
	What does change the fundamentals... But it said something about Earth being created.
	Yeah, but Earth is an ill-defined term!
	And Genesis says that God created everything in the heavenly host.
	I mean, you have to realize, Art, that again, this is not a road that theology has not been down.
	The laity doesn't realize that because the laity, quite frankly, is complacent.
	And the negative way of saying it is they're smug.
	They're theologically smug.
	And I just think that if this is reality, and again, I'm not omniscient.
	I don't know if Richard's right.
	I look at what he's doing as a credible attempt to try to establish this.
	And I'm not going to compare him to people I don't think are credible that I've dealt with before.
	But this is not a road that theology has not been down, and if he's right, this is part of general revelation.
	It's part of the creation.
	It's part of what God did, and we need to understand it.
	You want to hear something really freaky, gentlemen?
	When Mike and I planned this, you know, and discussed it, and he finally got the go-ahead from the university, I had no idea that the lead story in this month's Atlantic Monthly, which is a main mainstream Uh, publication?
	Indeed.
	They bill themselves as the smartest magazine on the rack?
	Yes.
	Is an article by Paul Davies.
	Now, Mr. Davies, Dr. Davies, is a professor of natural philosophy at the Australian Center for Astrobiology at Macquarie University in Sydney.
	He's written something like 25 books.
	Anyway, his lead article this month, or last month, in the Atlantic Monthly, was ET and God.
	Could earthly religion survive the discovery of life elsewhere in the universe?
	And what fascinated me by the article, which of course I carefully saved as part of my arsenal when I go up against Mr. Ross and others, are the number of mainstream theologians who, as Mike has been saying all night, have grappled with this successfully and want to know.
	If all of this is true, then Brookings was wrong then and is wrong now.
	I don't think that much has changed.
	It's a matter of degree.
	It's not an either-or.
	This is the either-or fallacy.
	Either Brookings is right or it's wrong.
	Why can't the answer be yes?
	There are people who would react the way Brookings does.
	That is a no-brainer.
	They're going to be that way.
	The question is how much.
	If the world hasn't changed since 1950, what the heck are we doing here?
	If you are our government, it's hard to be that, but if you're somebody very high up in government, and you're reading the Brookings Report, and you're considering what your policy is going to be, or in fact maybe is... Now you're getting close to what I think is the real issue.
	Well, sure.
	I read you that paragraph so that you could all out there listen to the overwhelming political fears inspired by Brookings.
	They're not concerned about Christians believing this or believing that.
	They're concerned about fundamentally religious people of many different stripes enacting their beliefs at the ballot box.
	Well, let me tell you something, brother.
	In our Constitution, religion and the state are separated.
	But in reality, in politics, there is nothing at all separated.
	And politicians have to act all the time with religious belief in mind.
	Oh, you bet.
	What Brookings did not forecast, which I found interesting in hindsight, is the rise of the fundamentalist Christian political perspective in the central mainstream American body politic, particularly in the 1980 election.
	Fundamentalist Christians helped Ronald Reagan get elected.
	You betcha.
	They then helped George Bush get elected.
	You betcha.
	They did not help Bill Clinton get elected.
	Right.
	They were incredibly, shall we say, put off by Mr. Clinton.
	Part of the backlash, part of the political war that we have, which is called the Cultural Divide, by people like Bill Bennett, is between the The state of values as held by that constituency versus what they perceive to be the liberals, the Hollywood left, etc.
	So you're seeing it again reflected in the last tortured days of the California recall campaign.
	That divide on cultural values, I have believed for quite a while, is politically what's holding up the train here.
	And the only way to get past this station is to directly confront it, show mainstream Christians this is not against their religion, and in fact it could enhance their religion, but we're not going to know unless we go!
	So, you're going to try and demonstrate this, in essence, to the political powers that be, that they need not Be afraid of this.
	It's going to be your goal, right?
	That's our goal, and what will be the criteria of success will be if other universities pick up on this conference.
	If they invite us to take this show on the road, to Georgetown, to UCLA, to Podunk U in Iowa, wherever, we will know we've got something by the tail that the interest of the body politic is bigger than the fear.
	Well, I certainly agree that is your goal.
	I'm just thinking, though, that you're going to run into a brick wall and, you know, I could be wrong.
	I could be, but I don't think I am.
	Hey, you've got a front row seat, my friend!
	You know, Art, one of the things, you know, Richard has had a lot of experience, like you said, with CBN and so on and so forth, but one of the things I think that Richard took from Roswell, and he's alluded to it tonight, is, again, being in this environment, Where you have Christians discussing these issues and seeing the openness.
	Do you have that email handy from, what's his name, Mike?
	You have to give me the contents.
	One of our panelists in Roswell wrote this really affirming post-conference email.
	Well, that was Chris.
	Okay.
	Yeah, I bet I have it somewhere.
	If you could quickly find it, because that would tell Art a lot about how the straws are blowing in the wind.
	Well, I'd like to invite Art to the next one.
	AOD 204.
	I know you... Art doesn't... I know you don't do too many things, but you're... I don't.
	But you're welcome.
	You might not want to have me there, because I really do have certain beliefs that... Art, we had Richard Hoagland there.
	Let that sink in.
	You know, and along those lines, what we wanted to show... The only ungodly thing, Art, is they made me get up at 7 o'clock on a Sunday morning.
	As I said, I've never been anywhere on a Sunday morning talking about God for many years.
	Well, we wanted to show, look, it's not the Christians who have this interest that are shutting the non-Christians out, or the non-evangelicals, or whatever label you want.
	It usually works the other way around.
	I mean, we don't get invited to a lot of things.
	I've said before on the air, and I'll say it again, and I'll stand by it, Coast to Coast is one of the few shows that will even have me on.
	It is the other side that tends to be closed-minded, and I appreciated what Richard said earlier about there is a significant section of Christianity that's used to thinking cosmically, the big-picture kind of thing.
	So I'm inviting you right now, Art, I mean, come to 2004.
	Be a spectator, be a speaker.
	I think you'll be surprised.
	I'm telling you that even though this, and we covered this earlier, is a very open-minded audience, probably 10, 20 times more open-minded than the average audience for, you know, a talk radio program, but even this audience has a high percentage of people who would just utterly I can't even.
	If you could sit in my seat and read the emails, you would know these people believe what you're discussing is absolutely the work of the devil.
	That's why we're devoting three hours to an interchange, questions and answers, panelists responding.
	I think a lot of that that you see in your email, Art, if I may be so bold.
	From this open-minded audience.
	Is from the perspective of frustration.
	There's a conversation they have not been even invited to join.
	What we're trying to do is invite people to join a crucial conversation, which I think is the imperative of the entire species.
	It's got to be thrashed out.
	It has to be thrashed out before we know, before officialdom deigns to tell us.
	And the upside could be that if we get a groundswell going here of people who are thinking on their feet about these cosmological and theological issues, And we can create a political visibility for that.
	It could help advance the day when they'll finally get around to telling us.
	These people would say to you, though, I don't go anywhere to negotiate my faith.
	But no one's asking anyone to negotiate their faith.
	I don't think they need to go any further than their Bible.
	I understand.
	Telling you how hard a mission you have in front of you.
	Not that you're not used to hard ones.
	Richard's used to uphill battles.
	You guys don't know who I am, but I'm no stranger either.
	I have great sympathy for the Schwarzenegger campaign.
	The nonsense has been thrown at us for the questions we have raised.
	It's time we raised serious questions so we get serious answers from serious people.
	Well, one thing it will not be is boring.
	I guarantee you that.
	Well, I am preparing a special paper.
	I've never done this before, in this, because I've never had... It has not been the time for the critical mass that I think we've now achieved.
	Yes.
	So I have titled my talk, very provocatively, for certain people, The Gods of Cydonia.
	Knowing that... I see you didn't look at my page.
	And we shall go from there.
	The Gods of Cydonia.
	And that is an updated title, too.
	The last couple of weeks.
	You just threw that in to totally plaster somebody.
	Oh my.
	Well, all right.
	It has been a pleasure having you both on.
	And one final time, it's going to be when, where, and phone number.
	Quick.
	Mike.
	It will be in Kenosha, Wisconsin, which is just south of Milwaukee.
	And the number, again, is 262-595-2200.
	2-2-0-0, October 25th, 8 in the morning till 9 at night.
	$25 for two meals and the whole show.
	That's a good deal.
	All right.
	And there are links on Enterprise main page, and if you want an 800 number to get the videos, if you can't make it to Kenosha, it's 1-800-350-4639.
	All right, you two, good night.
	Good night, Mr. Bell.
	Thank you, Art.
	Yes, good night.
	Well, what an intriguing Intriguing night and a little taste of what I guess they're going to try to do.
	It's probably the question to be answered and that is, of course, how the religious world, not just the Christians, but the entire religious world, would handle the news of, and I mean the hard news, of an E.T.
	presence and perhaps something even a little further that has to do with our roots and our beginnings and all of that.
	Indeed.
	A very non-trivial question.
	That's it for this weekend.
	It has been, as always, a great pleasure.
	My pleasure.
	From the high desert, I'm Art Bell.
	Here's Crystal to take us out.
	Good night.
	Midnight in the desert, shooting stars across the sky This magical journey will take us on a ride
	Filled with the longing, searching for the truth Will we make it till tomorrow?
	Will the sun shine on you?
	Midnight in the desert And we're listening No!

▲