Customer Reviews

The Monuments of Mars: A City on the Edge of Forever (5th Edition)

5 star:		(37)
4 star:		(17)
3 star:		(7)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(26)

 

 

I read some of the negative reviews here at Amazon and they all struck me as inane drivel of the highest degree. If you're going to agree or disagree with any thesis you have to show why. If all you're going to come up with is name-calling and arguments about "math in cereal" (!!!, man, give us a break) or other , even worse, "arguments" like "NASA says it aint no face and that's what i believe" you're in my mind absolutely and positively hopeless. If, in the end, NASA and any institution of that order is for you a credible source, why bother thinking? Turn your brain OFFICIALLY off and let whomever, may that be NASA or anybody else, programm it for you. Why read what Hoagland or a number of other researchers out there profess?

"The Monuments Of Mars" is a book for people who are keen of doing something rare: think for themselves. In order to do that, you need to entertain whatever available notion out there even if it totally comes in conflict with the definition of the world in your mind. Especially if such a notion is well argumentated and has been hardly refuted with adequacy.

For those not familiar with what's presented in this book, here's a very ( and i mean, very) short summary: Hoagland along with a team of scientists ranging anywhere from geologists to physicists to computer programmers who resoluted photos, to historians and other specialties, analysed a vast series of photographs taken by NASA of the Cydonia region in Mars, photos in which the infamous "Face" appears, along with other clearly geometrical features such as pyramids or the clear designs of a former city. All these features, and their undisputed geometry, one would have to be either blind not to see, or terminally brainwashed.

The only question which remained, was to first verify through statistical probability, what the odds were of these features having been made "naturally". The odds are so staggeringly low that it would be a travesty to dismiss these as natural creations. The next, and more important questions have to do with who made them and why.

Why resort to odds when we could have more and clearer photographs of these features so the matter could be put to rest? Well, that's just it (especially for the naysayers), because Nasa refuses to rephotograph the region with a high resolution camera saying there's nothing there to be seen..And that despite all the "noise" about these features. Mysterious if not downright conspiratorial? Yes, obviously and undoudtedly so.

I don't intend to go more into what Hoagland says. You can pretty much imagine in broad lines, and besides it's your decicion and your inclination whether you'll invest the effort in reading his book anyway. To me, if your inclination is beforehand negative, you would've easily fit in in a past world who thought the world is flat because the church or "scientists" say so. And i could list a high number of such embarrasing examples, there's no shortage of them nor will there ever be.

As to the book itself, it is one which is incredibly researched. The degree of scholarship in it is superb, and more importantly, it is not the work of ONE person. Hoagland did not sit down and think all this up as some would like the case to be. There's a vast array of people who worked with him from the scientific community and who agree with him. There's also a number of other resarchers who did NOT research this subject but yet came to the same conclusions with him. Sitchin would be one. Robert Temple would be another. And the list does go on you know, as any search on alternative archaelogy in Amazon or elsewhere would show you.

The fact that we know only 5000-7000 years of human history when this planet numbers over a million years of existence means that we are actually in the dark about our origins. At least as far as "mainstream science" is concerned and this is a fact they accept themselves while offering us all kinds of comical explanations and tons of "missing links" in the process. The truth might be in fact very simple, that is, simple if you actually realise that the Universe is very probably bursting with intelligent life, not only now, but for millions of years in the past, and that the chance that we, are in very intriguing ways connected with the "out there" is also nothing shocking. It only is if you allow the world in your mind to be something painfully small.

Only reading this book will more than likely not be enough to provide you with all the data supporting such theories. Yes i mean data, and not speculations. Raw data. You will need to pick up some Sitchin, some Temple, some Colin Wilson, or others. Only then will you able to form a more spherical and stronger opinion.

But if you haven't done so up to now, Hoagland's book is a great place to start.
Absolutely essential material for people not content with the hilarious version of the truth spoon-fed to us on a daily basis.

In "The Monuments of Mars: A City on the Edge of Forever," author Richard Hoagland gives a heavily referenced history of The Face on Mars and other suspiciously "non-natural" structures and features of the Martian surface. He describes how The Face was first discovered shortly after the Viking Mission started sending back images from Mars. NASA immediate pooh-poohed the possibility of its artificial origin. The images of The Face were too startling to be ignored, though, and research by Vince DePietro, Greg Molenaar, Hoagland and others resulted in the discovery of other unnatural, pyramid-like structures located in the vicinity of The Face. Hoagland provides solid arguments for the claims he makes. Often, this slows the pace of reading this thick book. But, by taking his time in explaining his claims, he tackles many of the arguments that might arise in the reader's own mind. Hoagland's book describes how NASA has pointedly ignored evidence from noted scientists and organizations verifying the suspiciously non-natural nature of the Cydonia region on Mars that is home to these anamolous features. Finally, Hoagland documents how NASA has refused to PUBLICALLY rephotograph Cydonia and suggests that NASA may have already done so in secret. He offers that there may be dark reasons for this suspected duplicity. "The Monuments of Mars" describes an engaging (and ongoing) real-world mystery. But, it is also frustrating in that the evidence that could solve this mystery is being withheld by the very government agency that is supposed to be honestly and publicly disseminating it...

This book is absolutely compelling reading from page one. I've been following this since I read the first (?) edition of this book published in 1987. That book (348 pages, much smaller than this updated version) caused me to begin questioning the human belief system. That is to say I began to wonder about whether what we all have been taught to accept as 'fact' was in fact real. I began talking to everyone I knew about this, and discovered that even people I had previously thought to be open-minded were actually pretty closed minded on this subject. Since then, I've been on kind of a personal quest to find out why people have such a problem accepting anything Hoagland says. I personally still have not been convinced of anything on this 'Face on Mars' one way or the other, but Hoagland's theories are fascinating and well thought out enough that I don't think they can be dismissed out of hand. I've read reviews from others who just laugh and say that these formations are just coincidental and formed by nature. This could be true, but how can these people be so sure? Would these same people dismiss the Egyptian pyramids as natural formations too? (Obviously not, since they are close by and easy to study. Apparently, just because Mars is so far away, this automatically disqualifies it from further study). Why are they so intent on dismissing Hoagland's theories so quickly, without really knowing? I think it has something to do with a fear that their own belief systems are threatened by any seemingly implausible evidence or theories.

To me, this book is much more than a book about strange Martian constructions. It is more a criticism of the closed-mindedness that is stopping mankind from making progress and discoveries that could change the world as we know it. Do we really think we already know all there is to know about this? Hoagland doesn't ever claim to know everything about this. All he wants is answers, and apparently the 'scientific' community doesn't, or at least doesn't care. What has happened to humankind's curiosity? Our curiosity is what got our civilization this far. Why stop now?

This is a heavy book. Not only does it have more than 1000 pages filled with information about these monuments and the journey the author has gone through to try and make it public, but it also asks very heavy questions, questions NASA's policies and arises the idea that Mars was visited more than 500,000 years ago.

Although I would have like to see more pictures, the ones included in the book, along with the mathematics calculations the author - along with many other sicentists -does on them are used to prove their point.

Even if you do not believe there's actually a face in Mars - I'm convinced there is - this book will prove a very interesting read and may convince more than one esceptic.

I have read this book three times and each time I found myself absolutely intrigued. Hoagland has done extensive research for more than a decade on this subject, and you can look at the evidence yourself. It is something worth exploring many hundred more times than less importrant soil samples on Mars. The mathematical evidence is overwhelming. The critics that have reviewed this book do not state why this is nonsence and why it is fantacy. Nothing in the book is unscientific. Carl Sagan himself stated that more photos are needed on this interesting subject. Yet, in his recent book, he stated that he looked at the "face" and it didn't look like anything worth studying. If this is the attitude among the scientific community then we will never fully explore possibly one of the greatest discoveries of human-kind. If Sagan were still here, I would challenge him to read the book and take a look at the evidence, and then write in his book what he thinks. You can't just look at the pictures. Don't let your past conspiricy theories, comic books, or television programs stand in the way of reading this book. It may be similar to 2001, but 20,000 leagues under the sea turned out to be a reality too! This book is a must-read. When NASA takes more pictures of the structures, and we find out that the images are in fact built structures, you can be happy that you read the book first!

I hate to break the string of 33 reviews, but the Egyptair crash had enough 33s for many reviews. Contrary to critics claims, the face and Cydonia aren't just hills and sand dunes and the pyramids were not built just for the heck of it by Egyptians. A scientist, Thomas Van Flanderen gave billion to one odds against all the features at Cydonia being natural. It's been documented that NASA and other scientists dissmissed Cydonia without investigation. And what's wrong with accepting that there has been a higher culture that either humans or Martians built? His website alleges that the Egyptian god Osiris was a real person (or thing) and that NASA planned their missions to coincide with the stars. What's wrong with those ideas? To all the dedicated people who say that NASA is covering nothing up, why would they align their missions with the stars? If Cydonia is insignificant, why do they plan for the targeting of it to have a star in a crucial position? His hyperdimensional model keeps on getting confirmed, one piece at a time. The book's allegations about Cydonia have been proved right by recent photos. I ask that people put aside their ideas about life outside Earth and listen to the guy. There is nothing wrong with what he presents. (And by the way, he may be right.)

When I first saw this book, I wasn't sure what to think, but as I read, I was impressed. Mr. Hoagland methodically lays out a cogent case for the former existence of sentient life on our near neighbor. The computer enhancement, the geometric relationships, and other data from Viking (i.e. the presence of nontronite in Martian soil, indicating a former ocean), all give weight to what must at first appear a bizarre claim. Personally, I find the yowling and shrieking about it all quite interesting, and a bit entertaining, too. Curious, is it not, that the majority of the apoplectic denial is not coming from so-called "fundamentalist Christians", but from those, who by virtue of calling themselves scientists, should be the first to join the search for the truth. But, do they? No, they sling mud, and try to tear down a messenger whose message they do not like. Perhaps these closed-minded dogmatists should drop the title scientist, which they certainly do not deserve, and go by the appelation "cynic", for that is all they seem able to contribute. If they are an example of the "scientific method", then perhaps we need a new one. Keep it up, Mr. Hoagland. Illegitmatus non carborundum!

Hoagland is a conspiracy theorist of the highest order. He believes that there are ancient alien artefacts on Mars and that NASA has pictorial evidence of these objects but has chosen to conceal them from the public. The reason for this subterfuge is a 1960 government paper called the Brookings Report which recommended that if proof of alien civilizations were ever to be found on the moon or Mars, it would have to be supressed because of the profound religious impact it could have on humanity.

Hoagland's starting point is a handful of photos originally taken by one of the Viking orbiters in 1976 which shows what could be a face carved into the Martian rock in a region called Cydonia. Encouraged by this discovery, he has identified numerous other structures in the vicinity of this object, some of which could be pyramids. He also has found several numerous mathematical relationships linking these structures, which he believes add up to a message for humanity. Like Zecharia Sitchin and Erich von Daniken, Hoagland favours the alien intervention theory to explain Man's origins. (For those interested in the math, the related book is "The Monkey and the Tetrahedron" by David Jinks).

The main problem with Hoagland's book is its length. Hoagland is obviously not a writer so he writes as he speaks. The outcome is a long-winded dialogue on alien life, NASA cover-ups, photo analysis and mathematics which could easily be condensed into less pages. Some of his claims also stretch credulity to new limits - see for instance his theory about the Arabic writing that is supposedly apparent in one of the Mars photos, where he says this was intentionally inserted by NASA to spite his efforts!

Still, given the lengthy delays before NASA released the photos and the secrecy with which the organisation operates under, it's possible the pix were doctored to suit a cover-up agenda. If you read the book with an open mind you'll probably find it thought-provoking. The fact that it's in its 5th edition is perhaps testimony to the quality of its contents.

I had not heard of Mr. Hoagland until a recent appearance on a late-night radio show, during which he spoke about his book. Curious, I bought a copy and read it cover to cover.

After reading the book, my opinion changed. I thought I would be given realistic information to back up the extraordinary claims that he makes. Instead, I got a mass of mathematical trivialities that were elevated to a near religious importance.

As a mathematician, I understand how someone with limited understanding of statistics and mathematics in nature can convince themselves of the importance of groupings that appear in nature. It is also important to note that in almost any system, one can pull out seemingly "stunning" mathematical relationships, IF they ignore all the information that falls outside of their self-defined parameters. That is what Mr. Hoagland does, and he is as guilty of "dogmatic thinking" as those he criticized during his radio appearance.

Since I assume this is Mr Hoagland's livelihood, I didn't want to simply criticize the fantastical "evidence" in the book without doing a small test. So here is what I did. I took a series of rocks from the woods near my home, and threw them into my son's sandbox. I then kicked a little sand at them to simulate the "raging winds of mars". Then I stood over the sandbox and looked. Not amazingly, there were several items that looked like they had sharp edges, as long as the definition of "sharp" allowed for slight sand cover and didn't require an actual straight line (much like Mr. Hoagland's criteria). Then I began measuring angles between the larger, more "significant" rocks. Again, not surprisingly, I quickly came up with multiple angles of 19.5, 33, and just for good measure, 47 - my age. Am I to make something of this "stunning" appearance of my age in my son's sandbox? No.

Mr. Hoagland's "math" and "science" are just as trivial. If someone chooses to read this book, it needs to be done with an open mind - not blind acceptance of one man's apparent obsession.

This book is fantastic. Richard Hoagland is brilliant. The work he has done says it all. While other scientists "take credit" for his work, Hoagland delivers quality theory that has motivated NASA and many other agencies to pursue that theory. Hoagland was the co-creator of the Pioneer Plaque, the first person to theorize that Europa might be a water based moon (which now has been proven, yet other scientists claim "they found"), and insofar as his work with Mars is concerned, most of what the public sees is a result of his courage, his brilliance, and obvious superior intellect in astronomy, physics, and astrophysics. Hoagland may not receive the credit he deserves during his lifetime for his work, like many talented scientists before him, but I am convinced he will eventually. But read this book and go to his website enterprisemission.com to sample his outstanding theories. And, many of those theories are now in a new movie, Mission to Mars, which will be released shortly. Unfortunately, again, Hoagland is not given the credit he deserves in the making of this movie, yet the producer's brother consulted with Hoagland as to the facts of the "FACE" on Mars as well as other facts, as Hoagland developed them, many years ago. If you want the truth about the factual evidence of extraterrestrial "structures" on Mars, solidly backed up by concrete scientific evidence, buy this book. You won't be disappointed.