Mike Bara - 21 Nov

Ancient Aliens on Mars

by Mike Bara

Copyright 2013

ISBN 13: 978-1-935487-89-0

All Rights Reserved

Published by:
Adventures Unlimited Press
One Adventure Place
Kempton, Illinois 60946 USA

www.AdventuresUnlimitedPress.com

Opinions expressed by the author are solely his own and do not reflect the opinions of Adventures Unlimited Press or its officers.

Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge these special souls who helped, loved and/or supported me during the writing of this book: Denise Zak, Shana Paredes, Sara Vasquez, Steven Jones, Derrell Sims, Maureen Elsberry, Simon Rockell, Ben Fox, Sherri Gaston, my publisher David Hatcher Childress, Alan Pezzuto, my brother Dave, Bailey & Barkley, Sebastian and my little lights The Lady Aurora and Miss Fluffy-Muffy.

Dedication

This book is dedicated to my friend and former co-author, without whom the many mysteries of Mars would have remained forever buried in the sands of time.

See Mike Bara at:

FOREWORD

B efore we move on to Mars, there are a couple of loose ends to clear up from my previous book published by Adventures Unlimited, Ancient Aliens on the Moon (AAOTM). Because of time and space constraints, this new information didnt get published at that time but I feel it is important enough to include here.

Just before the completion of AAOTM, I came across an image of an object which stirred great controversy amongst the debunker elite. But it caused even more angst amongst the skeptical smalltime bottom feeders. One of these was a man named Stuart Robbins, who I mentioned in the last chapter of AAOTM. After I responded to his absurd accusation that either I or Richard Hoagland had fabricated the Daedalus Ziggurat image, he went out of his way to answer back on his blog.

As usual, he made a lot of assertions, many of which are false, most of which are misleading, and some of which are just plain deceptive. As I skimmed his detailed collection of claims and statements, some of them backed by actual math, I debated not responding at all. But then I noticed at the bottom, where he made it a special point of emphasis to say that he was Dr. Robbins not Mr. Robbins, and I got curious as to who he really was. Because of his association with an obsessive nutcase who has cyber-stalked me and Richard for more than six years, I assumed that he was just another useful idiot of the type that NASA depends on to keep the lid on whats really on Mars and the Moon. But then I got curious as to what his doctorate might be in (I was thinking maybe forestry) so I started to look at his personal information. And then I noticed somethinghis education was funded by NASA.

According to his own website, for his other research projects, most of which include studying craters. I posted on Twitter about it:

Stuart responded on his blog on August 8th, 2012, admitting that this is accuratehe does indeed get funding from NASAbut downplaying it of course:

I make a meager living like most scientists and, like most astronomers, a fair amount of my salary does come from NASA-awarded grants, but I literally have less connection with NASA than a custodian who sweeps the floors of JPL.

Dr. Stuart Robbins

Yeah, no connection at all, except for the part where they pay you You can no more be a little bit on the take from NASA than you can be the proverbial a little bit pregnant, Stuart.

Now to be clear, Im not implying that he is taking money directly from NASA (hush money, he called it) to post attacks against Richard and I on his blog. Although, to use his own phrasing, I wouldnt put it past him. But being financially dependent on the very institution that Mr. Hoagland and me have challenged and exposed on a regular basis for more than a decade and a half for his rent, food and car payments by definition creates a pernicious bias that cannot be overcome. It is an inherent conflict of interest, and it permeates everything he does and writes about us. How can it not?

This changed everything for me. He wasnt attacking me and accusing Hoagland and me of fraud because he was just a psycho, like most of the other critics, he was doing it because he was a paid shill for NASA. In fact, it wouldnt surprise me if he was able to respond so quickly and extensively to my posts because he was writing on his personal blog using taxpayer or university funded equipment and internet access while he was supposed to be working. (Note: This suspicion was confirmed when Dr. Robbins posted an update on his personal blog on 8/16/2012 at 3:45 PM in the afternoon, the middle of the work day. It obviously must have taken him at least a couple of hours to write up. Im wondering which government funded project you charged these hours of work on your personal blog to, Stuart?)

As my dad used to say, Its good work if you can get it.

At any rate, now that I knew he was being paid by NASA to attack me and Mr. Hoagland, I calmed down a bit. After all, like James Oberg and Dr. Phil Plait before him, NASA has constantly trotted out one paid shill after another to distort our claims, spread disinformation about us and generally charge us with one nefarious deed or another. Its old hat, and the fact that they are on the NASA payroll completely discredits the shopworn Im just an independent skeptic defending the people against pseudoscience line.

That of course doesnt stop Sheldon from using it.

Sorry, I mean Stuart.

The fact is, no one who is taking money from NASA, and therefore financially dependent on NASA, has any kind of credibility as a skeptic. A true skeptic is someone who reserves judgment and questions established orthodoxies, paradigms and dogmas. I for instance, was initially skeptical of the Daedalus Ziggurat image, but inclined to lean toward its authenticity because of a variety of reasons Ive already stated and will cover in this Foreword. I am also skeptical of NASAs honesty and the integrity of the data they present, due to years of catching them fabricating data and painting over things they dont want the public to see on images from all over the solar system. I also am fully convinced that the official NASA version of Apollo photo AS11-38-5564 has been deliberately altered by NASA to obscure not only the Ziggurat, but a lot of other artifacts all over that image (see AAOTM). I will provide further proof of that later in this Foreword. But Stuart, like Oberg, Plait, Sagan and a whole gaggle of others before him, is not a skeptic. He is a professional, paid debunker. He is not interested in the truth, and he will never admit to anything that would cast NASA in a bad light. If he did, it would be career suicide.

So lets keep the issue of his credibility as an independent voice out of this. Hes on the take, plain and simple. He can no more do a fair and independent analysis of this or any other claim made by me or Mr. Hoagland than Dr. Sheldon Cooper can sit on a spot on the couch other than his spot. Its just not in his DNA.