AS11-38-5564 – Why the Daedalus Ziggurat is Not a Fake -- And NASA's image Is...

“as1120pyramid20smallue2.jpg”The original Daedalus Ziggurat image as I found it on the web

Last week after Richard C. Hoagland posted the image of Daedalus Ziggurat that I had forwarded to him to the Coast to Coast AM website, a mini-controversy exploded on the web over it, with the usual suspects claiming that Hoagland had “hoaxed” the image or that it was a “fraud,” and if it wasn’t a fraud, then his inability to see it as a fraud was proof he was either a “liar” or “incompetent.” The chief purveyor of this nonsense was somebody named Stuart Robbins on his blog.



Of course, before Richard presented the image to the Coast to Coast AM listeners, Richard and I had done our due diligence on the it. Having found the image a few days before, I had already decided to make it a centerpiece of my new book “Ancient Aliens on the Moon.” I did not make this decision lightly, nor did it worry me that the image currently posted by NASA on the Lunar and Planetary Institute website had obviously been altered to reduce the chances of anybody spotting the artifact if they downloaded the source image, AS11-38-5564 (see my previous post, The Daedalus Ziggurat - The Real Story).

My original pyramid image “as1120pyramid20smallue2.jpg” came from the “Call of Duty Zombies forum. The original page where I found it seems to have disappeared, but there is another page in the forum with a colorized version of the image: http://callofdutyzombies.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=18032. However, the Google cache page still shows that the original un-colorized image was posted there recently, but has since been removed or the link is broken.

I also found a smaller version of it on this blog: http://themurkynews.blogspot.com/2008/08/introduction-connecting-current-events.html

The current NASA scan available online comes from: http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS11-38-5564 and is the full 3 MB “Print Resolution” version.

Now in terms of Mr. Robbins “analysis” of the images, I will simply say that it leaves a lot to be desired. Let me also state that I am no Photoshop expert, like he claims to be, and lack the artistic talent to create anything like Daedalus Ziggurat. I found the image, posted by someone else, period. I enhanced it as best I could and passed it on to Richard for his opinion.

I do however know enough about image enhancement to know a few things that are relevant. First, because both “as1120pyramid20smallue2.jpg” and the currently posted NASA image are jpegs, they have quality issues and are not acceptable as research quality documents. In order to do a proper analysis, anyone accusing Mr. Hoagland or myself of fraud would have to obtain a research quality original of AS11-38-5564 and do a high-resolution scan of it under controlled conditions. Neither Mr. Robbins nor the other self-appointed defenders of science have done so. In fact, all they are doing is comparing one lossy jpeg document of dubious origin to another. Then, based only on their irrational bias toward NASA and against myself and Mr. Hoagland, they are jumping to the conclusion(s) that we are “frauds” or "incompetents." As I will soon demonstrate, we are neither.

One of the arguments that Mr. Robbins makes on his blog that he cites as evidence that we have “drawn in” the Ziggurat is that the image presented by Hoagland has a lot of “noise” in it. Since he was working with Hoagland’s enhancement of my enhancement, I guess we can cut him some slack on that. Or not.

The reason there is more noise in the original Ziggurat image “as1120pyramid20smallue2.jpg” is that it was probably scanned from an original and then cropped, enlarged, processed, and then prepared for publishing on the web. This is easy to see by the 72 DPI resolution, which is standard for images on the internet. This process will invariably make an image a bit noisier, but also easier to upload and download from. There is nothing nefarious or questionable about this. In fact, the “Save for Web” tool in Photoshop automatically changes the document resolution from say, 300 Dots Per Inch (the resolution of AS11-38-5564 on the LPI website image) to 72 DPI. This alone will induce noise at deep levels in the image, and contrary to Mr. Robbins assertion, is indicative of nothing except his desire to deceive his readers into thinking there’s something unusual about it. Jpeg’s are always noisy. It’s as simple as that.

Of course, if your intent is to deceive your readers into buying into your own petty biases and jealousies against people that are more important than you are, you go the extra mile, don’t you? What Mr. Robbins didn’t tell you is that a large chunk of the “noise” that appears in the image he “processed” was deliberately induced – by him.

On his blog post, as he’s describing his method of analyzing the image I gave to Hoagland, he lists this little gem:

“For the record, I took the original LPI image and rotated it clockwise 90°. I knew this was the starting point because of the shadows of craters in the image Hoagland presented. After finding the location, I rotated Hoagland’s image by 10.96°, and then I scaled Hoagland’s by 85.28%.”

Now, there is no question that the LPI image contains more information than “as1120pyramid20smallue2.jpg,” which was the source of the enhancement that I sent to Richard. This does not necessarily make it "better," as you will see. But given that, why would anyone of fair mind, especially a self-appointed expert in Photoshop who claims that “my work over the past twenty years doing image processing and analysis” qualifies him to pass judgment on myself and Mr. Hoagland as “frauds,” reduce our image to “85.28%?” That folks is exactly what he means by "scaled." In fact, anyone who knows anything about image enhancement knows that scaling/reducing an image induces more noise and reduces detail by design. Any competent image enhancement specialist would have enlarged the NASA image instead to bring it in line with the size of the original Ziggurat image. This upsampling process would have the effect of actually making the NASA image better, rather than making the original enhancement worse.

Original Ziggurat image (above) and reduced version (below) readers may judge for themselves which one is "better," but obviously the scaled down image is much worse and contains less information than the original.



Given that he claims that Hoagland and/or me “deliberately added noise and reduced the quality” elsewhere in his blog, this would seem to be kind of a big mistake, wouldn’t it Mr. Robbins? Unless of course, it wasn’t a mistake. Unless it was a deliberate act of deception designed to fool his less technical minded readers.

And of course, as usual, the gang that can’t shoot straight has made another huge error, one that proves that it is the official NASA image, and not ours, that has been manipulated. An error that anyone who claims to know anything about image enhancement would never make.

You see, Photoshop has a tool called a histogram. What a histogram does is analyze the dynamic range of a given image (or highlighted section of an image). This can act like a digital fingerprint to help us determine if an image or a part of an image has been manipulated or enhanced. In a grayscale image such as “as1120pyramid20smallue2.jpg,” or the official AS11-38-5564 image from the NASA/LPI website, the image has a possible range of up to 256 shades of gray. In reading the histogram, absolute black has a value of zero (0), and occupies the spot on the graph at the very far left. Pure, bright white would have a value of 256 and occupy the spot on the far right of the histogram graph. When we apply the histogram to the original image, “as1120pyramid20smallue2.jpg,” we can see that it has a fairly wide dynamic range, from color/shade 24 on the left of the graph (meaning something less than black) to color 184 on the right, which is something less than pure white. What this means is that the image has a dynamic range of 160 colors, or shades of gray, and the colors at the extreme dark and light ranges of the spectrum have been lost somewhere along the way. This is not ideal, but it does mean only that my original image has probably lost some shading information at some point.

The official NASA image however, is a different story. It contains the full range of 256 shades of gray, which would seem to mean it is a “better” image and more likely to be the authentic article. But the histogram graph for it also contains something curious.

There, at the far left of the graph, is shade zero, or absolute black. What is curious is that by far the most pixels in the NASA image are absolute black. In fact, color zero and the next few colors over (near absolute black) make up more than 33% of the entire image. What that means is that somebody put a lot of black and near black into the NASA image. Because in real life, almost nothing in any image is ever absolute black or white. So to find that (by far) the biggest number of pixels is absolute, perfect black is more than a little suspicious. On a properly processed image, the histogram should be pretty much a bell curve, bulging in the middle and then dropping off at both ends. The NASA image doesn’t do this. It spikes dramatically on shade zero; absolute black.

So what’s the most likely reason for this? I can think of only one. Somebody got this "official" NASA scan, took a paintbrush tool, set it to color zero, or absolute black, and went to town on it.

And I can prove it.

As you look at the Ziggurat image, obviously some of the most tell-tale signs of artificiality are in the shadowed areas, particularly the shadow cast by the west wall. In my enhanced version of the original, you can plainly see the wall and how it casts a dark – but not completely black -- shadow into the depression below.

The "Bara" Enhancement

But on the NASA version, this shadow is so dark that there is virtually no detail there at all. No wall, no shades of gray in the depression, just pitch-black darkness. Everything you need to see to confirm the wall and the artificiality of the Ziggurat is simply not there. It’s gone.

Adobe, the makers of Photoshop, are crystal clear on the meaning of this:

“If many pixels are bunched up at either the shadow or highlight ends of the chart, it may indicate that image detail in the shadows or highlights may be clipped—blocked up as pure black or pure white. There is little you can do to recover this type of image.”

The unenhanced NASA "official" version

In other words, it’s a deliberate manipulation of the image in question.

What the histograms show us is that while the image produced by NASA has a wide dynamic range, the areas of shadow, where the details that make the Ziggurat stand out as artificial might be found, have virtually no dynamic range. They’re absolute black. And that can only mean one thing; they were painted over by someone at NASA with a black paintbrush tool.

To test this, all we have to do is select one of the areas in question, and examine their histograms. The results are conclusive.

In the shadowed area where we can see the wall in the original version, virtually all of the pixels are absolute, indisputably black. The same applies to the dark area just behind the temple section of the Ziggurat. These specific areas of the image – the ones that would provide the smoking gun for the Ziggurat’s artificiality – have been “blocked up as pure black” by NASA.

Case closed.

Oh, I’m aware that the deceptive Mr. Robbins has tried to cover his ass by claiming that because of the lighting conditions on the Moon some areas are absolute black. But the fact is that, contrary to his fallacious claims that there are “no crater wall nor mountain to scatter light onto it,” there is a very bright, sunlit area just to left of the selection marquee that should be scattering plenty of light into the shadowed area, but isn’t.

Because NASA blacked it out.

Still don’t believe me? OK, here’s one more test. I’ll show you exactly where the brush strokes are...

You see, in Photoshop, there is another enhancement tool that’s commonly used in cases like this. It’s one that somebody with “20 years” of experience doing Photoshop should know about, but Mr. Robbins appearantly doesn’t. It’s called the “Adjust Lighting... Shadows/Highlights” tool. It contains a nifty little slider named “Lighten Shadows:” that allows you to, well, lighten shadows. Let’s see what it does to the shadows on NASA’s image.

Well golly, look at that. It allows us to see exactly where the goons at NASA applied the pure black paintbrush to the shadows around the Ziggurat. I’m shocked! Shocked I tell you!

OK not really. But one final point, if you look at the shadow where the western wall of the Ziggurat has been blocked out by the NASA paintbrush artist, you can see that he made a mistake and only covered the offending parts and not the complete shadow. Some of the area appears gray, and if we zoom up and scan it we can see that it contains a moderate range of gray shades. What this means is that Robbins assertion about there being “no light scattering” in the area is also proven wrong. Absolutely, completely wrong. It’s patently obvious to any competent Photoshop user that the original lighting in this area was almost certainly very close to the lighting seen in “as1120pyramid20smallue2.jpg.”

Which makes Mr. Robbins and his petty, venal lap dog "expat" flat, dead wrong. On all counts.

But I won't hold my breath waiting for an apology from the Confederacy of Dunces that are the "pseudoscience" attack crowd.

So as it stands, while we may not know the exact origins of the original Daedalus Ziggurat image, we know with absolute certainty that the NASA version of AS-11-38-5564 has been deliberately faked to hide something from us. My bet is it’s a really big Ziggurat on the Moon. They first tried to hide the Ziggurat by reducing the contrast to delete key visual clues (see my previous post, The Daedalus Ziggurat - The Real Story) and when that didn't do the trick, they took out the airbrush tool, set it to absolute black, and started spraying away.

As you examine your own copies of this image, you'll find many more obvious and artifcial structures on it. You'll also see that the sky above has been backed out, obviously to hide evidence of the glass ruins that Hoagland has theorized for more than a decade and a half. This is all par for the course with NASA, who has steadfastly lied for decades about what's really on the Moon, among other places. They have been aided in this over the years by a collection of what Lenin once called "useful idiots," like Bill Nye the Science Guy, Dr. Phil Plait, and others. Robbins and expat are wannabes, but they are no better at playing this game than big boys.

What I have proven here is that the chief critics of the Daedalus Ziggurat are not only wrong, they are foolishly and sloppily wrong. Either they didn’t want to study the images in the depth that I did before releasing it to Mr. Hoagland, or they simply lacked the intellectual capacity to do so. I lean towards the latter, but let’s face it, buffoons like Mr. Robbins and his expat are just haters who attack everything we do, no matter how many times we embarrass them. I doubt this will be the last time I choose to respond to these louts, but I certainly hope it’s now obvious they don’t know what they’re talking about.

I would say they were liars and/or idiots, but that’s their territory. The difference is I can actually prove what I say.

I shall pillory them no further...

The Daedalus Ziggurat - The Real Story

OK, Since Richard Hoagland decided to post the image of the Ziggurat near Daedalus that I sent him a week or so ago, a bunch of ... what's the right word, Haters? Morons? Have been attacking him over it and accusing him of fabricating it. I didn't really want to take any time from proofing my new book over this, but lies are lies and sometimes you can't let them stand. So here is my explanation and response, as posted to Facebook.

First of all, it is not Hoagland's Ziggurat, it's my Ziggurat. I'm the one who found it, I'm the one who named it, I'm the one who researched it, I'm the one who sent it to him, and it's going to be in my new book, Ancient Aliens on the Moon: http://astore.amazon.com/darkmissinet-20/detail/193548785X. so if you are going to accuse someone of fraud, it should be me not him. All Hoagy has done is improve on the image I sent him. Second, I do not know the source of the original enhancement, but it is said to be John Lear. Third, any competent photoshop user can easliy see that all of the features are there on the image from the LPI, but they have been contrast reduced to erase the visual cues that would make it stand out the way it does in the original. How NASA usually does this is to take an image, print it out, scan it again and then mess with the contast and then print it out (reduced) and scan it again. They probably reposted AS11-38-5564 after people started looking at it. Unfortunately, ever since we caught NASA red-handed in a bald faced lie with the internet archive in 2002, they pretty much don't let their pages be archived. That's what liars do. Liars also assume that others who disagree with them are liars, too, right Expat?

Next, if you enhance the Ziggurat area enough, you can bring out most of the features, including the ramps, the walls and the dome atop the temple. All you have to do is put the original side-by-side with an enhancement of the current 5564 and then stand back a few feet. If you have the ability to see 3D in your head it will jump right out at you, even though the "official" version has obviously been altered. But the best part is this isn't even the most interesting thing on the image. Can you find the tank? Can you find the gun emplacement? Can you find the flying saucer in a hanger recessed inside a mountain? Can you find the miles long retaining wall that terminates in some massive machine latched to a mountainside? They are all there, and more.

In closing, we may be able to find the original, unaltered version of 5564 in our analog archives, but even if we don't, I can promise you this; there is a lie here, and as usual, it's NASA's image, not our research.

PS - John Lear, or at least John Lear's Facebook page, has now declared he's not the source of the original Ziggurat image. The mystery deepens.

-- MB 7/25/2012

Ancient Aliens on The Moon is Complete!

I just completed the draft of Ancient Aliens on the Moon today! I'm very excited! It came out at 52,329 words, which will probably shrink a bit in the editing process. Now I have to proof it and get it to the publisher by the end of the week. Woo-hoo!

What is "ObamaCare" Exactly? - a Definition

ObamaCare, aka “The Affordable Health Care Tax” is a private product offered by a few companies which we will be forced to purchase or face a “penalty” which the Supreme Court has ruled is actually a tax. The amount of this tax has yet to be fully defined, but those imposing it have promised it won’t be very much. ObamaCare purports to cover 10 million more people (it does not purport to cover 10 million “Americans” or “American citizens” but only people living in the United States, i.e. illegal aliens). It purports to cover these additional 10 million people but has no provision for adding even 1 doctor. It does however provide for 16,000 new IRS agents to collect the “penalty” which the Obama administration  insists is not a tax, even though we all know that the IRS is only empowered under the law to collect “legal and lawfully due taxes” and as previously mentioned the Supreme Court has ruled that ObamaCare IS, in fact, a tax.

ObamaCare was passed by both houses of a democratically controlled congress in spite of the fact that the chairman of the committee who wrote it stated he didn’t understand it, the then speaker of the House (Nancy Pelosi) stated that she hadn’t read it, and it was passed by a vote along party lines by a democratically controlled Congress who exempted themselves from it. It was signed by a president who smokes and wholeheartedly endorsed by a Surgeon General who is obese.

The “penalties/taxes” collected will be administered by a Secretary of the Treasury that cheated on his taxes, and we will be taxed for 4 years before anyone -- American or not – receives a single penny of benefits. The bureaucracy will be run by the same people who have bankrupted Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security and financed by a government that has gone from $10 trillion dollars in debt to $15 trillion dollars in debt in just 3 ½ years. Oh, and the estimated  $2,085 per family “penalty” will fall mostly on families with a combined income of $120,000 or less.

That about sums it up.

Excerpt From The Choice - Why Today's Venus Transit is Important

Today's Venus transit will take place around 6 p.m. EDT (2200 GMT/3PM Pacific) and end at roughly 12:50 a.m. EDT (0450 GMT/9:50PM Pacific). This will be a significant event in tersm of how it affects our consciousness, as I wrote about and discussed in my book The Choice. To explain it's importance and the place this once in a lifetime event in it's proper context, I've snatched an exerpt from the book.


The Choice, chapter 13:

As we learned in Chapter 8, the Mayan’s were fascinated with Venus and more specifically, with its infrequent transits across the disk of the Sun. In astronomical jargon, a “transit” is essentially a mini-eclipse in which a planet or other body passes between the Earth and the Sun. Transits of Venus are very rare. In fact, before 2004 there had been only six Venus transit cycles since the invention of the telescope; 1631, 1639, 1761, 1769, 1874 and 1882. Because of the oddities of Venus’ orbit, pairs of transits eight years apart are separated by long gaps of 121.5 years and 105.5 years. In other words, Venus passes in front of the Sun on two occasions, eight years apart, separated by 121.5 years and then 105.5 years. Or, there are four Venus transits every 243 years. The last such transit was a spectacular display recorded on June 8^th, 2004 by telescopes and cameras all over the world. The next transit of Venus occurs on June 5-6, 2012, just a few days after a solar eclipse (the May 20th annular eclipse at Mt. Shasta) and obviously in the same year that the Mayan Long Count ends. Now, given the Mayan proclivity for tracking the motions of Venus in the Dresden Codex and the fact that the codex refers to the start of the current Long Count cycle as the “birth of Venus,” it seems just a little improbable to me that the Long Count calendar cycle ends in the same year as such a rare astronomical event. Just as John Major Jenkins and others argue that the Mayan’s must have known that the Long Count ended on the 2012 Winter solstice, so must they have known it ended in the same year as a Venus transit. They were just too smart to have missed it.

Clearly, the Maya considered the Venus transits to be important, but the obvious question is why. In looking back over the many historical Venus transits, they always seem to occur in periods of great change and social upheaval. A pair of Venus transits occurred in 1518 and 1526, the very period where Hernan Cortez landed in Mexico and conquered the ancient Aztecs. Because of the circumstances, the Aztecs had been expecting the feathered serpent god Kukulkan to return and basically laid down for Cortez, thinking that’s who he was. The next transits were in 1631 and 1639, and were followed by a near complete suspension of the sunspot cycle. This lasted for about 70 years and coincided with the “little ice age” which occurred between 1645 and 1720. The next transit pair occurred in 1761 and 1769, which coincided with the early events of the American Revolution.  The period between the 1874 and1882 transits saw the rise of the early New Age movements and fevered interest in all sorts of occult societies, including the Theosophical Society and Order of the Temple of the Rosy Cross. What this implies is that just as I alluded to in chapter two, there might actually be an underlying physical affect here on Earth that is driving these behavior cycles.

If we look at the 1631 and 1639 transits, it was after that cycle that the Sun seemed to go dormant. In the transits in the late 1700’s and in the 1874-1882 transit periods, we see instead a change in human thought processes. Perhaps there is a pattern of conscious change in between the transits and physical change after the transits. If that is the case, then we should be in the midst of such an energetic shift right now.

According to some Mayan scholars, Venus represents the so-called “divine feminine,” an astrological concept that argues that the female energy of love, nurturing and compassion will replace the more male characteristics associated with conflict and national identity. They see the Venus transit of 2012 as a marker that closes the loop between the birth of Venus – the beginning of the current Long Count cycle, and coming of the new female energy of the New Age. Venus has always been associated with such Goddess energy as well as love, beauty, art, and the heart. I do find it interesting that there seems to be a shift in our thinking in the years since the 2004 transit. More and more Americans have tired of the overseas wars, and the economic instability is being driven by an underlying lack of faith in our current monetary system. Suspicion of the motives and honesty of those in government is at an all-time high. Certainly, like the 1761-1769 Venus transit cycle which pre-dated the American Revolution, change seems to be in the air. A growing number of Americans are questioning the very basic tenants of our society in a way that they have not done since at least the Great Depression, if not the Revolution itself. Does this mean that Calleman, Jenkins and the other Mayan scholars who argue that the Codex and the Calendar are just a road map of human consciousness are correct? We’ll get to that question later, but more worrisome to me is the possibility that the Venus transits of 1631 and 1639 somehow affected the Sun’s energy output.

If, as the argument goes, the end of the calendar cycle is somehow linked to solar output, what would be the physical mechanism? Again, could it have something to do with the transit of Venus as opposed to the influence of Jupiter and Saturn, as some scientific papers have argued? We already know from the “Allais Effect” that eclipses cause subtle vibrations through the hyper-dimensional Aether which can be measured by our instruments, like Allais’ pendulums. With this in mind, my co-author on Dark Mission, Richard C. Hoagland, conducted a series of experiments in 2004 and in 2006. What he hoped to do was establish once and for all that planetary alignments, like Allais’ solar eclipses over France and the coming 2012 Venus transit, can and do create a “tremor in the force,” a measureable physical torsion effect which can change our thinking, and perhaps our planet.

-- Mike Bara

Mike Bara Reaches Agreement with Adventures Unlimited Press for New Book

I’m pleased to announce that I have come to an agreement with Adventures Unlimited Press for my third book, “Ancient Aliens on The Moon.” This is the first of what I hope will be three “Ancient Aliens” themed books in the next 18 months. I expect to have the book completed before summer and hopefully in bookstores by the holiday season. All three books will be aimed squarely at the Ancient Aliens audience, and will be filled with images of extraterrestrial ruins and structures. I look forward to writing these books in the coming months. You can keep track of my progress over on my blog at http://mikebara.blogspot.com/ .

Special thanks to those of you submitted cover ideas for this book.

Mike Bara is a New York Times Bestselling author and lecturer. His first two books, "Dark Mission - The Secret History of NASA" and "The Choice"have sold more than 60,000 copies worldwide.





Did Earth Get Hit With a Blast From Deep Space?

A few days ago, a video surfaced on the internet purporting to show the Earth being blasted by energy from (presumably) deep space. This is very interesting because such an event is pretty much unprecedented in the history of the observation of the solar wind. The so-called solar-wind is actually a constant flow of energetic particles from the Sun consisting mostly of protons and electrons ejected from the sun’s upper atmosphere. No one knows exactly what causes the solar wind, but besides heat there is an accepted realty that an “unknown force” (I suspect torsion – see The Choice) is also at work in the flow of energy. The solar wind interacts with Earth’s protective magnetic field (called the Magnetosphere) and this constant flow of particles and their interaction with the Magnetosphere is monitored by a variety of instruments and space probes in near-real time on the internet.

A few days ago, some intrepid conspiracy types noticed that the majority of these sites (primarily ISWA, the Integrated Space Weather Analysis site) experienced some kind of outage or drop in data for more than 24 hours. From March 12^th, 1400 UTC to March 13^th 2100 UTC, more than a day later, there was no data available on any of the monitoring or simulation sites.

This was more than a little odd, and a few days later a video appeared on Youtube that may explain why. Some users had been recording the data as it happened, even during the blackout period, and discovered that the magnetosphere was abruptly bombarded during this period by a powerful burst of energy from deep space. The image below shows the normal flow of particles from the sun and the intensity of the magnetopause, the actual boundary of the magnetosphere.

As one would expect, the solar wind is flowing around the Earth, deflected by the magnetosphere. The night side, behind this flow, is very calm with almost no energetic flow to speak of.

Now, contrast that with this image, recorded on one of the ISWA simulations during the period which is now blacked out in the data archives. As you can see, at around 16:30 UT on 3/12/2012, during the window for which data is not currently available, the magnetosphere was blasted from behind, from the dark side of the Earth, as it were. This enormous burst of energy hit the magnetosphere, disrupted the magnetopause and temporarily caused the entire magnetosphere to essentially reverse direction.

Such an event is unprecedented, and it’s easy to see why NASA and the other space weather sites quickly covered it up.

The most obvious question is what could cause such a disruption? Obviously, whatever it was would have to be nearly as energetic as the Sun, at least on a short-term basis. But as several other videos show, this was not a single event, but a series of blasts against the backside of the Earth protective magnetic field which took place during the data blackout period.

It is possible that this blast wave was a remnant from some far-distant stellar event, like an ancient supernova or gamma ray burst that is just now hitting the Earth. However, there’s another perhaps more disturbing possibility; what if the burst of energy came from an object within our own solar system?

This has a load of disturbing implications, beginning with the usual “Nibiru” scenarios and ending with some of the most enduring mysteries of ancient times, up to and including answering the riddle of precession.  There is also the possibility that this sudden burst of energy comes from “Vishnu’s Navel,” the local energy source theorized that Sri Yukteswar in his epic book “The Holy Science” (You can read more about these in The Choice). The truth is though, the question of which of these mythical objects may have generated the energy burst is less important than whether it came from inside or outside the solar system. That question, believe it or not, may be answerable.

Another recent video circulating on YouTube shows what appears to be a huge object eclipsing the Sun between it and a NASA probe called the Solar Dynamics Observatory, or SDO. The object seems to pass from the upper right of the image to the lower left.

 

Now, there’s really no way of telling from these two frames how big this object is, how close it is to the camera, or really anything about other than it is somewhere between the SDO camera and the Sun. It is most certainly not a camera anomaly, because it was recorded on a second camera with a different filter:

At any rate, the one thing that is really clear from these two videos is that something rather interesting is going on in our solar system right now, and NASA seems less than thrilled that we’ve found out about it. Here’s links to the two videos below. What do you think?

A Few Thoughts on The Ides of March

Today is March 15^th, also known in the old Latin/Roman calendar as “The Ides of March.” It was on this day in 44 B.C. that a group of senatorial conspirators, led by Marcus Junius Brutus (who may have been Julius Caesar’s illegitimate son) assassinated Caesar in the portico of the Roman senate.  I have a fascination for this period in western history, and I often wonder how different the world may have been if Caesar had lived. The post assassination period was tragic for Rome, as Brutus and the other co-conspirators were hunted down and killed by the forces of Caesar’s young nephew Octavian (later Augustus) and the brilliant but troubled Marc Antony. Antony and Octavian then began to vie for power against each other, with Antony eventually allying with the Egyptian Queen Cleopatra. The whole conflict ended nearly a decade later with the defeat of Antony and Cleopatra’s forces at the Battle of Actium and the eventual suicides of the tragic lovers Antony and Cleopatra.

The world was forever changed by this one tragic act, and the Republic of Rome fell into a decadent empire that was doomed to extinction by its own excesses. While most of us will spend the day working and watching the NCAA basketball tournament, I’ll spend it watching “Cleopatra,” one of my favorite films of all time, and marvel at the brilliant script and virtuoso acting of Richard Burton, Rex Harrison and Liz Taylor.

And I’ll wonder how different the world might have been...

Ancient Aliens - The NASA Connection

Welcome Back!

OK folks, I know it's been a while since I posted anything on my web site, and along the way I let the registration for mikebara.com lapse. I never really liked the Wordpress interface anyway, so I just decided to start over again with a new Blogger page. Hope you like it and more coming soon!

Mike

It is Done!

And the Lord God did look down upon the Work, and he saw that it was Good. And he gathered his angels, including Michael the Scribe, and he said, “Let it be Done.” And the angels cheered with joy. And Michael the Scribe did smile, and he did email the manuscript to the Holy Publisher, and he said “Let there be Choice t-shirts and mugs, and Choice logo spaghetti strap tanks and thong panties…

And the Lord God did smile upon Michael the Scribe, and he told him to celebrate and go to the land of Vega$, and to frolic amongst the ecdysiasts and to go clubbing with Lenka the Fetching, and to do so during the week when the room rates were lowest…

The Choice of NOW June 18th, 2010

I will be speaking at the Portal to ascension event "The Choice of NOW" on Friday June 18th, 2010 @ Gingers Garden. 2488 Newport Blvd Suite A1 Costa Mesa, CA I will be appearing along with Mark "Dr. DREAM" Peebler. The event is 6:30 PM to 9:30 PM. Tickets are $30. For more information, call Neil @ (949) 302-4194.