Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here Our Bookstore is OPEN Over 5000 new & used titles, competitively priced! Topics: UFOs - Paranormal - Area 51 - Ghosts - Forteana - Conspiracy - History - Biography - Psychology - Religion - Crime - Health - Geography - Maps - Science - Money - Language - Recreation - Technology - Fiction - Other - New Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Location: Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1999 -> Oct -> Re: Processed MGS Data - Maybe The 'Face' _Is_

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: Jim Mortellaro <Jsmortell@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 1999 00:34:16 EDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 10:19:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Processed MGS Data - Maybe The 'Face' _Is_


 >Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 15:17:38 -0700
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com>
 >Subject: Re: Processed MGS Data - Maybe The 'Face' _Is_

 >>From: Mac Tonnies <Alintelbot@aol.com>
 >>Date: Wed, 29 Sep 1999 18:49:57 EDT
 >>Subject: Re: Processed MGS Data - Maybe The 'Face' _Is_
 >>To: updates@globalserve.net

 >>Steven J. Dunn writes:

 >>>In April 1998, NASA released imaged of the Cydonia region and
 >>>the "face on Mars" that looked to most, including this humble
 >>>correspondent, to be a very natural formation.  The "face" was
 >>>dead.

 >>The MGS shot of the "Face" on Mars was handled horribly from the
 >>beginning--by the news media, predictably, but also by NASA, who
 >>released an unprocessed version of the Face to the media in an
 >>arguable attempt to kill the issue before any intelligent
 >>discourse could materialize.
 >
 >>In a way, NASA was being honest: it released the first halfway
 >>intelligible image it had right away, killing the otherwise
 >>inevitable attempts to shout "cover-up"!  But for an agency who
 >>publicly claimed a "neutral stand," the horrid April image was
 >>used as a "straw man" by the very geologists who insisted it was
 >>a non-issue and not worthy of discussion.
 >
 ><snip>
 >
 >>Sadly, NASA has also informally retracted its earlier promise to
 >>rephotograph the site "until everyone is satisfied."  It wasted
 >>a perfect opportunity to do just this on Aug. 26--a chance to
 >>get a clean overhead shot of the Face under good light and
 >>weather conditions (even NASA grudgingly conceded that the April
 >>'98 image was taken through a layer of atmospheric haze).
 >
 >>Our next chance is in November.
 >
 >>The Face and its associated landforms represent a legitimate
 >>scientific anomaly, and one that can be falsified--but only with
 >>good data!  A failure to pursue this mystery, whether out of
 >>cowardice or bureaucratic apathy, may well turn out to be the
 >>defining intellectual catastrophe of our era.
 >
 >>--Mac Tonnies
 >
 >
 >NASA is supposed to be a "public funded" organization, receiving
 >it's money from Congress and supported by tax payers.
 >
 >Since NASA chooses to "exclude" the very people who are funding
 >their space exploration, why do we continue to support them and
 >request Congressional funding???
 >
 >If they feel we are not entitled to "know" what their machines
 >along with the "sensors and cameras," are detecting, then why
 >should we "collectively," not demand of Congress a complete
 >cut off of "public funds?"
 >
 >I personally feel and have felt for over 25 years that most of
 >the work done by NASA was for the Military Complex anyway.
 >When you understand that the majority of astronauts have been
 >Military Test Pilots in the past, then I think this may support
 >my contention.
 >
 >I realize there are more civilians involved with the "shuttle"
 >missions now, but still, who is reaping the benefits from NASA's
 >budgets?
 >
 >Do we really want to know what they have kept from us over the
 >years?  If so, then let us demand it now or forever "shut up!"
 >
 >I am the first to admit I am a "dunce."  The fact that I have
 >sat idlely by for all these years and said nothing should
 >prove that.
 >
 >REgards, Mike


You've already done something.  You said something.  Now, all
you must do is say it again, and again and again.  And to some
folks who you helped elect.  It's still a free country.  It's
still a place where you may more easily than ever, communicate
with your erected.l... uh, sorry, "elected," representatives via
the Internet no less.

Just do it.  This is one time and one place where if it feels
good, you can and should do it.

See!?  You aint no dunce.  You've managed to stay way from
Gripple haven't you?

Jim Mortellaro