736 of 804 people found the following review helpful
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: Dark Mission: The Secret History of NASA (Paperback)Dark Mission by Richard C. Hoagland
Book Review by Dr. Ali Fant, WB5WAF, 12DE2007
This review is from the perspective of a former NASA Manned Spaceflight Controller, so it is more technical than expository. I first encountered Hoagland's claims through the NASA Technical Alert Briefing viewed by many controllers at the Johnson Space Center in 1989-90, found his claims creditable, and then discovered the briefing tape "disappeared" from the closed JSC Technical Library - from both the open card catalog and the closed shelf listing catalog. As a former university library page, I was shocked to find all references to the briefing tape we controllers viewed were gone two years later. When I began investigating the matter, I was told in no uncertain terms to cease any search for the missing library records.
Key Findings from Dark Mission:
1. NASA is a defense agency of the US Government per the original agency charter.
2. NASA withholds data of non-human intelligence for the good of human society per "Brookings."
3. Brookings Institution advised US in 1959 report "Proposed Studies on the Implications of Peaceful Space Activities for Human Affairs" to beware social-economic chaos resulting from alien artifacts found on the Moon or Mars as the 1938 "War of the Worlds" radio broadcast traumatized America.
4. Arthur C. Clarke based the 1968 novel/film "2001: A Space Odyssey" on the Brookings Report.
5. According to Clarke's 1968 Playboy Magazine interview, Stanley Kubrick quoted from Brookings in the film. The following movie dialog being based upon the "Brookings Report":
"I'm sure you're aware of the extremely grave potential for cultural shock and social disorientation contained in the present situation, if the facts were prematurely and suddenly made public without adequate preparation and conditioning. Anyway, this is the view of the [Space] Council... there must be adequate time for a full study to be made of the situation before any thought can be given to making a public announcement. Oh yes ... as some of you know, the Council has requested that formal security oaths be obtained in writing from everyone who has any knowledge of this event." -- Dr. Heywood Floyd, 2001: A Space Odyssey.
6. As a Manned Spaceflight Controller for NASA's last publicly acknowledged military shuttle mission, I remember taking this formal security oath to safeguard information on such flights. However, unlike all other US Government security oaths I have had in my lifetime, the NASA oath was never "terminated." That is, I never went through a formal debriefing. I questioned this lack of a debrief with NASA Security at the time and was told the Security office was already disbanded and no debriefing would be held.
7. Hoagland's retelling of the "Monuments of Mars" matches the NASA Alert Briefing the controllers and I saw in 1989-90 in the now "non-existent" tape from the JSC Technical Library.
8. Hoagland's explanation of "hyperdimensional physics" is too complex to be included here. Suffice it to say that I have studied the data, examined the historical connections between Oliver Heaviside (1850-1925), James Maxwell (1831-1879), Nikola Tesla (1856-1943), Thomas E. Bearden (1930-), Bruce DePalma (1935-1997), and Harold E Puthoff (1936-); and found the evidence convincing.
9. The multiple-sourced, publicly available NASA photographs of the pyramids, buildings, and connecting roads between the structures on Mars demonstrate the presence of ancient peoples on the planet. This is old news to most space news junkies. Second Astronaut on the Moon, Buzz Aldrin even released a "fiction" book Encounter With Tiber (1996) incorporating many of these Mars details. Aldrin's book had a storyline about ancient lunar structures being discovered by Apollo Astronauts. Arthur C. Clarke (surprise!) even wrote the foreword to Aldrin's book. Because the story line is fiction, any revealed details would not violate Aldrin's formal security oath. This was the same approach Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) took with his book "proving" the revolution of the planets - the book was originally written as a work of fiction. Unfortunately, the Catholic Church did not appreciate the humor of Galileo putting the words of the Pope into the mouth of Simplico (the fool).
10. And, just in case you missed it, there is a connection between NASA's Werner Von Braun and the Disney World "Mission to the Moon" (later restaged as "Mission to Mars," and featured in the excellent Disney produced films "Forbidden Planet" and "Mission to Mars." The latter film's climax is the "Face On Mars." However, coincidences do not make conspiracies.
11. Hoagland does an excellent job detailing the "Operation Paper Clip" removal of Nazi Germany rocket scientists to Texas as detailed in the James Michener's book and 1985 mini-TV series "SPACE" - even including National Archives photographs of Von Braun in his black SS uniform alongside Reichsfuhrer Heinrich Himmler. The occult history of Hitler is well documented by other authors, but Hoagland claims the occult influence extended from the SS to Von Braun to even the selection of NASA Mission Patches.
12. Hoagland sees a connection between Freemasonry (33rd degree), Von Braun\Disney production film "Man in Space," and the "fiction" film's representation of an alien base on the farside of the Moon. It is just another coincidence that CIA Remote Viewer Ingo Swann saw an operational alien base in the same location prior to 1998.
13. The spiritual aspects of UFOlogy, Adolf Hitler's birthday (April 20), 19.5 degrees location of planetary "hotspots" (on the Earth, the Moon, Mars, Jupiter, etc), the number 33 (Launch Complex 33, Shuttle Runway 33, 333 degrees from Egypt's Great Pyramid at Giza leads to JPL in California), and more and more numbers are overwhelmingly discussed by Hoagland in detail.
14. Finally, the greatest surprises in Hoagland's book are in the last ninety pages. These last few pages contain the explosive description of Lunar ruins, mechanical artifacts, and even an (I kid you not) ancient robot head not unlike the one shown in the Star Trek: The Next Generation Mark Twain episode of "Time's Arrow" when Data discovers his death lies in the past of San Francisco. The color photographs Apollo 17 Astronauts Eugene Cernan (1934-) and Harrison Schmitt (1936-) took of the robot head in Crater Shorty have recently been released to Italian websites by NASA. Italy? Hey, the Catholic Church is headquartered in that nation ... just another coincidence. Hoagland postulates that the mechanical head could have easily been transported back to Earth.
15. Other NASA photographs show crystal domes once covered many of the Maria on the Moon. Apollo 10 photographed at least one unbroken crystal dome, blacked-out in the official NASA print catalog, but if ordered by anyone today shows the intact dome. Since the 1990s, many researchers are specifically ordering these "black-out" lunar catalog prints to be stunned by what actually arrives in the mail. Hoagland publishes many of the photographs.
16. Remember when Apollo 17 deliberately crashed the ascent stage into the Moon to measure the moonquakes using previously implanted seismic monitors? Such a moonquake map would show the placement of the newly revealed structures on the NASA photographs. However, after more than thirty years, the results still remain classified - on a civilian scientific Moon mission.
17. Hoagland's book is having an effect on NASA today. Last year, NASA engineers suddenly "found" high-quality TV recordings of the Apollo 11 mission in Australia. Then, high quality "close-to-the-original" Apollo photographs were released to international public websites detailing the shattered crystal domes on the Moon. Next, NASA began posting thousands of never-before-seen "best" scanned pictures. This year (2007), NASA released for the first time the truly spy-camera quality photographs of the "Face on Mars" - showing details down to 11 inches. The vehicle and wheel tracks of the Opportunity Rover are clearly visible, as is the Face.
18. Living astronauts refuse to comment on much of Hoagland's expose citing various reasons. Apparently, even the Coast-to-Coast Radio Show scheduled a "debate" between Hoagland and an astronaut, but the astronaut cancelled the engagement at the last minute.
19. Twice flown astronaut, war hero, and Senator John Glenn requested a March 2001 appearance on the television NBC comedy Frasier. In the unusual episode, Glenn makes some very-unfunny comments directly to the viewing audience (out of earshot of Frasier and Roz) that are significance enough to repeat here: "Back in those glory days, I was very uncomfortable when they asked, you know, were you alone out there? We never gave the real answer, and yet we see things out there, strange things, but we know what we saw out there. And we couldn't really say anything. The bosses were really afraid of this, they were afraid of the `War of the Worlds' type stuff, and about panic in the streets. So, we had to keep quiet. And now we only see these things in our nightmares, or maybe in the movies, and some of them are pretty close to being the truth."
20. Astronaut Neil Armstrong began his highly emotional address on 20JL1994 at the White House with the statement that he compared himself to a parrot - saying only what he had been told to say. Armstrong ended his strange remarks with the phrase "truth's protective layers."
21. Astronaut Alan Bean draws his colorful Moonscapes paintings with diagonal markings perhaps to show the presence of shattered glass domes fragments.
22. Don't be too hard on the astronauts. I know former NASA employees who have had their lives thrown into turmoil by losing retirement pensions or having unexpected deaths.
23. Dark Mission lacks an index and perhaps the second edition will include one. I am reminded of the United States Central Intelligence Agency selling their entire data collection on Remote Viewing (on CD-ROMS) without an index. An index would have made it too easy for someone, somewhere to censor Hoagland's book.
24. Recent Moon News: Japan SELENE arrived Moon 05OC2007, China CHANGLE arrived Moon 27NV2007, India CHANDRAAYAN to arrive Moon 2008, US LRO to arrive Moon 2008, Russia Lunar Rover to arrive Moon 2010, and US GRAIL to arrive Moon 2011.
25. After thirty years of no manned missions to the Moon, why the sudden race for governments to return there? Even in the midst of a major war in the Middle East, governments are making a decision to return to the Moon as soon as possible. Check out the recently released Apollo photographs on the web and decide for yourself.
Tracked by 2 customers
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-10 of 94 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Dec 13, 2007 6:34:48 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 13, 2007 10:07:37 AM PST
"Don't be too hard on the astronauts. I know former NASA employees who have had their lives thrown into turmoil by losing retirement pensions or having unexpected deaths."
Any examples of cause-and-effect from unauthorized disclosures, that somebody might be able to independently verify? Tossing around insinuations of 'official murder' usually requires more solid backing to distinguish your claims from run-of-the-mill paranoid crackpottery. Can you do that?
<delete question about real name>
In my reference files I show STS-53 (Dec 1992) as the last classified DoD payload deployed. Is that the one you were referring to? <delete phone book reference>
Posted on Dec 13, 2007 6:54:20 AM PST
My apologies to Dr. Fant, who is indeed a real person with a real name. He has a respectable internet presence with an impressive range of interests and activities (including reviewing books and TV shows). I hope he can share with us his own NASA experiences relative to these claims in the book. My questions remain; my suspicions are gone.
Posted on Dec 13, 2007 7:38:11 AM PST
> 1. NASA is a defense agency of the US Government per the original agency charter.<
No, NASA is a defense agency of the US Government FOR THE PURPOSES OF US CODE TITLE 35 (emphasis added). This is purely legal language, bringing NASA into line with DoD policy in respect of patent applications by US Govt employees. Big difference, and Hoagland is either dishonest or ignorant in not acknowledging it.
> Apparently, even the Coast-to-Coast Radio Show scheduled a "debate" between Hoagland and an astronaut, but the astronaut cancelled the engagement at the last minute.<
No, the debate with Ed Mitchell took place on May 15th 1996. The transcript can be read on the enterprisemission web site. Mitchell categorically denied the possibility of artificial glass domes.
> Hoagland's book is having an effect on NASA today. Last year, NASA engineers suddenly "found" high-quality TV recordings of the Apollo 11 mission in Australia. <
How can a book published in October 2007 have caused the finding of tapes in 2006?
> After thirty years of no manned missions to the Moon, why the sudden race for governments to return there? <
I would say the most likely explanation is that it has only recently become a feasible option for these nations.
Posted on Dec 13, 2007 11:40:01 AM PST
Adam Parfrey says:
Excellent post; thank you. As the publisher of "Dark Mission," we're looking for verification of Mr. Hoagland and Mr. Bara's writings from people who are in the position to know. It appears that you are such a person. I invite you to contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org so we can get in touch more directly. Again, my gratitude for your post, and I hope we can communicate. Best wishes, Adam Parfrey, Feral House
Posted on Dec 13, 2007 12:17:16 PM PST
> Astronaut Neil Armstrong began his ... address on 20JL1994 at the White House with the statement that he compared himself to a parrot <
You've got that backwards, Dr Ali, and so did Richard Hoagland when he commented on the reference. Armstrong (and Wilbur Wright, who said it first) is excusing himself for not being a gifted public speaker. He's saying that he's like a bird that flies well but doesn't talk. In other words, NOT like a parrot. Dear me, you conspiracy theorists, don't you ever THINK??
In reply to an earlier post on Dec 13, 2007 2:12:02 PM PST
Parfrey: "As the publisher of "Dark Mission," we're looking for verification of Mr. Hoagland and Mr. Bara's writings from people who are in the position to know."
Wouldn't that have been the proper step BEFORE publishing the book? <grin>
And we can count on you to put aside commercial concerns, of course, and report completely and honestly what you discover in your search, right? <double grin>
In reply to an earlier post on Dec 13, 2007 4:32:09 PM PST
Parfrey: Glad to have you in the discussion. If you have time, please scan these reviews and review-comments. You'll find references to several factual errors in the book, and I hope you will require Hoagland & Bara to correct them for future editions.
In reply to an earlier post on Dec 14, 2007 1:01:02 AM PST
Adam Parfrey says:
Hello Mr. Oberg and Mr. (or Mrs.) Harris:
I've been a big NASA fan from a very young age, when I read Willy Ley and Wernher von Braun and searched the radio and television for even the smallest shred of Apollo mission broadcasts.
As a teenager I became friendly with Deke Slayton, and even helped write his unproduced story for the screen.
Perhaps more than anyone I am aware of the ridicule and abuse heaped on Richard Hoagland and Mike Bara, and I can understand why some see him as an arrogant terrorist clawing away at science and reason. But instead of trying to knock the man down at every possible opportunity, why not look into the following issues raised by "Dark Mission":
Why was Ken Johnston told to destroy images when he worked at the photo archives? What are all those strange things on NASA images from the Moon? Is every last one of them a scratch on the film? If not, what are they?
Is NASA an adjunct of the Department of Defense? Does the DoD reveal every single of one of its findings to the public at large? Why would NASA be different from its parent body?
What about the Bookings Report that suggested that NASA hide every one of its findings of potential ET discoveries to prevent against mass upheavals?
How many Nazis were incorporated into NASA through Operation Paperclip? Did all those Nazis relinquish every bit of their ideology when they worked at NASA in major positions?
Is Freemasonry just a ridiculous Fez-wearing social group? Why did Buzz Aldrin bring a Masonic flag to the Moon? Why are so many high level NASA employees affiliated with Freemasonry? Was there Masonic ritualism involved in the landing of Apollo 11?
Sure, there are probably very good answers to all the questions above, but personally, I find them worthwhile to ask and investigate out of sheer curiosity.
You've got it wrong when you suggest that I published "Dark Mission" out of "commercial concerns." I'm certainly in the wrong business for "commercial concerns." The book received poor initial orders, and shocked me when it became a brisk seller. Sure, I might not agree with some of Richard Hoagland's speculations and conclusions, but I believe the book is a totally valid inquiry into unanswered and overlooked questions.
Additionally, I feel that the venom spewed on Hoagland and associates is truly nasty stuff, and not a gentlemanly and even honest thing to do, and this stuff has backfired if the intent was to "kookify" Hoagland to knock him out of public consideration.
Mr. Oberg, Mr (or Mrs. Harris), disagreements aside, here's my wish for a cheerful and happy holiday season!
In reply to an earlier post on Dec 14, 2007 5:45:26 AM PST
Adam: "Additionally, I feel that the venom spewed on Hoagland and associates is truly nasty stuff.. "
Ever hear the phrase, "What goes around, comes around..." ?
And I think you'd have a hard time actually finding any 'venom' in my posts, or Mr. Harris's, or most of those critical comments here -- particularly when compared to the undisguised venom in the writings of Hoagland and Bara.
Can you provide us these examples of 'venom', or is it just a whining 'appeal to sympathy'?
Adam: "Sure, there are probably very good answers to all the questions above, but personally, I find them worthwhile to ask and investigate out of sheer curiosity."
Again, it seems to me a bit late (after publishing the book) to be claiming to be curious about the answers to these questions, if you really had been interested in the answers. Permit me a little cynical skepticism here, even in the Christmas Season and the joys it should bring us all.
In reply to an earlier post on Dec 14, 2007 8:10:48 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 14, 2007 9:06:30 AM PST
Parfrey: It's "Mr", not "Mrs". You were right to make no automatic assumption.
I can't answer all your questions but I have some comments.
>What are all those strange things on NASA images from the Moon? Is every last one of them a scratch on the film? If not, what are they?<
Well, the "robot head" in Shorty is just a rock, for a start. The "glass domes" are Hoagland's imagination. We can't know what "the castle" and "the shard" are, but the point is, the least likely possibility is that these things are artifacts of a dead civilization. Publishing a book that alleges this is no service to science, knowledge, or the public interest. In my opinion, it's irresponsible.
>Is NASA an adjunct of the Department of Defense?<
No, as noted earlier, US Code Title 35 is concerned exclusively with policy regarding patent applications. Hoagland has misunderstood.
>What about the Bookings[sic] Report that suggested ...etc<
An interesting suggestion, made in the context of a Cold War 46 years ago and having no force whatsoever. Several NASA spokesmen have commented on that, pointing out that the discovery of signs of extraterrestrial biology would have entirely beneficial results for the NASA annual budget, and therefore would be publicized in any way they could think of, Brookings be damned. But, unlike Hoagland and Bara, the JPL crowd are trained scientists and would await actual evidence before making sensational announcements. Case in point -- the discovery of water leaking from the wall of a crater on Mars, which they waited an entire Martian year to announce so that they had a matched photo-pair taken under the exact same seasonal conditons. By the way, I urge you to read the wikipedia page 'Brookings Report'. It casts plenty of doubt on Hoagland's interpretation of it.
>How many Nazis... etc....Why did Buzz Aldrin bring a Masonic flag to the Moon?<
I can't answer that stuff. Oberg might know how many Nazis, but it isn't at all clear why we should care. Hoagland's allegations about the positions of certain constellations at certain moments are utterly laughable. Ask him to predict the position of anything at the time of the _next_ launch.
Regarding venom, I'd say the venom is flowing in quite the other direction. I've made many (some would say too many) contributions to this discussion. Review them at your leisure and see if you find venom. Now look at "Dr. French" addressing me. "Pull your arrogant head out of your a-s S. Harris" .... "Who do you think made the hardware idiot?" .... "I could go on and on, but why should I with a turd like you?". Take a look at the author's blog at darkmission.net. You won't have to look far before finding similar epithets from Bara.
I have a few recommendations for you:
If the "Armstrong-as-parrot" comment is in the book it should be taken out. It's based on a complete misunderstanding.
The very first sentence in the book is based on a complete misunderstanding.
Hoagland's accusation that the space agency murdered the Apollo 1 astronauts was based on a complete misunderstanding of a remark by Betty Grissom.
The statement in the book that Dr Farouk El-Baz was "the most important figure in the Apollo program" is an error and should be corrected.
Hoagland and Bara allege that NASA "carefully concealed" the results of the Viking biology Labeled Release experiment. Wrong. The raw data and the contents of the investigator's notebook are on a NASA-sponsored, publically accessible, web site.
In short, Hoagland and Bara are incompetent reporters who do not deserve to be published. My opinion, obviously.