SUBJECT: WHITEPAPER BY RICHARD HOAGLAND FILE: UFO1735
Context and Implications of the Discovery of Extraterrestrial
Life:
A Whitepaper
by Richard C. Hoagland
(C) 1989
Introduction
One of the things I have tried to understand, as my research and that
of others has revealed ever more suggestive data, supportive of the
phenomenal idea that these objects in the Viking images could in fact be
artifacts, is the curious "historically anomalous" position of the agency
which took the pictures in the first place: NASA.
Despite "a billion dollars plus" spent by Viking in the Search for
Life on Mars, NASA has refused throughout these ensuing thirteen years to
even once reexamine its original "political" position on these images --
that the objects they contain are merely "tricks of light and shadow" --
despite now published and peer-reviewed good science to the contrary. This
reaction, increasingly at odds with both outside scientific assessments of
our work and rising public calls for swift resolution of this question, has
resulted in this paper -- a serious attempt to place NASA's curious "non-
reaction" in some historical context and perspective.
The Ancient Roots of Our Obsession with 'ETs'
Scholars who have studied the history of our involvement with the idea
of "extraterrestrials" have been more or less amazed to discover the
ancient roots of what has been generally perceived, until these studies, as
a minor and relatively recent "pop" cultural reaction to the Space Age --
you know, "Star Trek", "Close Encounters of the Third Kind", "ET", etc.
Dr. Michael Crowe, Professor of the History and Philosophy of Science, at
the University of Notre Dame, has published the most current (1986) in-
depth treatment of the subject: "The Extraterrestrial Life Debate 1750-
1900: The Idea of A Plurality of Worlds from Kant to Lowell." Crowe's own
words summarize best what he and others have discovered:
"The question of extraterrestrial life, rather than having arisen in
the twentieth century, has been debated almost from the beginning of
recorded history. Between the fifth-century B.C. flowering of Greek
civilization and 1917, more than 140 books and thousands of essays,
reviews, and other writings had been devoted to discussing whether or not
other inhabited worlds exist in the universe . . . the majority of educated
persons since around 1700 have accepted the idea of extraterrestrial life
and in numerous instances have formulated their philosophical and religious
positions in relation to it."
Notwithstanding Crowe's all-too-familiar Western Civilization
chauvanism -- that all human intellectual thought began in Classical Greece
-- he is pointed in the right direction; it is amply demonstrable that we
are heir to several thousand years of intense preoccupation with ETs prior
to the Greeks -- such as Sumer's fascinating "Oannes Myth," and their
attribution of their entire civilization and culture to visitation and
specific instruction by a representative of an advanced extraterrestrial
society, in about the 4th Millennium B.C. (the full "Oannes Legend" is
carefully cited in detail in ^BMonuments^B). The ancient documents and
cosmologies that Crowe then cites as evidence for Grecean origins of human
ET curiosity -- such as Epicurus' "Letter to Herodotus" -- actually reflect
an already very old tradition, which the Greeks (along with all their other
supposed cultural "inventions" -- according to Stanley Kramer, noted
"Sumerologist" at the University of Pennsylvania) simply passed along to us
from Sumer, several millenia before.
The 'Extraterrestrial' Roots of 'The Enlightenment'
Crowe's recounting of the involvement of more recent historical
figures in the great Extraterrestrial Life Debate is more original -- from
the written works of fundamental religious revolutionaries, such as John
Wesley (founder of the Methodist Church), to extraterrestrial musings of
that "great man" of pre-Einsteinian physics, Sir Isaac Newton, to discovery
of detailed conversations carried on around the subject by such
geopolitical giants as Napoleon -- and amply confirm that even theoretical
interest in ideas of other worlds has had a remarkable effect in shaping
human thought -- and thus the current world. Rather than merely making the
claim that "the discovery of extraterrestrials would powerfully influence
human ideas," the historical record reveals direct evidence that the
extremely ancient, widespread belief in extraterrestrial life has
repeatedly and directly affected life on Earth -- beginning with Sumer 6000
years ago. Furthermore, its captivating hold on leading philosophers and
intellectuals of what has since been termed "The Enlightenment" (c. 1700-
1800) -- from Descartes to Kant -- reveals the fascinating, and heretofore
unappreciated, extent to which the quest "for extraterrestrials" actually
created the context for the rise of modern science.
Which makes all the more inexplicable NASA's adament refusal to either
take a second scientific look at the anomalies on its own Viking
photographs -- the first demonstrable hard evidence favoring the existence
of extraterrestrials in the millennial-long history of this Debate -- or to
take new and better pictures of Cydonia, when the unmanned Mars Observer
mission returns to Mars, in 1993.
Why -- against the historical backdrop of documented, overwhelming
interest in the idea of "a plurality of worlds" -- this apparent paradox?
The Search for Extraterrestrials as Inspiration
for Major Astronomical Discoveries
One of the most revealing new insights regarding the history of
questions relating to extraterrestrial intelligence, is the extent to which
the science of the times followed prevailing religious doctrines on the
subject -- contrary to our general understanding of how science has
supposedly developed.
Countless quotes from the technical papers of legendary scientific
figures of the 18th Century -- the heyday of the Enlightenment -- ranging
from men like Immanuel Kant (and his Nebular Hypothesis -- how solar
systems form) to Sir William Herschel (and his theories of star
distribution and formation in the Milky Way) make clear that their
revolutionary insights and discoveries were impelled by something other
than pure "science." Their theories, which have led directly to our
present understanding of the Universe were, it turns out, inspired in
significant measure by a search for extraterrestrials! -- by a fundamental
acceptance and pursuit of something termed "the doctrine of the Plurality
of worlds." This basically religious inclination was spurred by a deep
theological conviction, prevasive of the times, in "the principle of
Plentitude" -- the assumption that a truly Infinite God could not help but
create an infinitude of other, habitable worlds . . . if not Inhabitants
themselves.
The Rise of Modern Science --
and the Rejection of 'the Plurality of Worlds'
Only increasingly sophisticated telescopes, and other instruments of
astronomical research (which eventually enabled acquisition of real
information on the stark inhabitability of the other planets in this solar
system) finally produced the sharp divergence of scientific thinking --
beginning with the question of extraterrestrials -- from this curious
religious heritage. This break thus marked the true beginnings of
"rationalist science" -- and an increasing intellectual embarrassment by
later scientists, over the religiously-based cosmologies which originally
gave birth to the idea of "a plurality of worlds." At its height, it was a
sweeping theological assumption that populated even the surface of the sun
with "beings whose organs are adopted to the peculiar circumstances of that
vast globe" (according to one memorable quote from Herschel).
NASA's Intellectual Timidity Based on Fear
of Intellectual Embarrassment?
It is easy to see, in this brief overview, one element of NASA's
obvious discomfort with reawakening ideas relating to even a formerly
inhabited planet in the solar system. Much of current science seems to
operate by "fear of intellectual embarrassment"; with a history like this,
it's no wonder that the idea of a plurality of worlds seems more
appropriate, in the eyes of some of NASA's scientists, to the Book of
Common Prayer than to the pages of the scientific journal ICARUS!
But this is not the whole sad story, of "extraterrestrials and modern
science."
The Scientific Death-Knell to
'the Plurality of Worlds'
By the beginnings of the twentieth century, all scientific expectation
of actually verifying the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence
essentially had died -- with the singular "anomaly" of a continuing
intellectual flirtation with a place called "Mars."
With this one, agonizing exception -- which almost singlehandedly
destroyed modern astronomy and modern planetary science, according to Carl
Sagan -- that should have been the end of it, no more "God given Plurality
of Worlds"; the new scientific evidence in hand simply made life-bearing
planets -- except for Earth (or "earth-like" worlds, like Mars . . .) --
impossible.
The rapidly ascending theory of planetary formation, in the early
decades of this century, was now focusing on planets as "random by-products
of near stellar collisions" -- events calculated as so rare, that in the
entire several-billion-year history of the Milky Way Galaxy itself, there
had been literally only one near-collision, with the resultant freak
creation of the sun's nine planets!
Thus, by virtue of the immense distances separating stars, sheer
statistics argued implacably against more than "one or two" collisions in
the entire history of time and space. Meaning, that in all the Galaxy --
if not the Universe -- we were quite
alone . . .
The Scientific Resurrection of the Nebular Hypothesis --
the Modern Basis for a Real 'Plurality of Worlds'
The scientific process, if it's properly pursued, has a way of quietly
continuing, leading to continuing developments in fundamental theory, new
observations which throw out old ideas, etc. Within a few more decades, by
the middle of this century -- the 1950's -- from the confident, premature
pronouncement that Earth was undoubtedly the only inhabited planet (with,
of course, the possible exception of Mars . . .) in the entire Galaxy,
several fundamental astronomical breakthroughs came about -- and with
these, came a return to a Galaxy potentially filled with stars as central
suns, orbited by countless other worlds . . .
In 1959, as the Space Age itself was just dawning, two astronomers
proposed a radical approach to actually establishing contact with all the
new potential beings on all those new potential worlds far beyond the solar
system -- they proposed that technology might enable "ET to phone home" --
or at least, try "to ring up good ol' Earth."
The modern, scientific "SETI Paradigm" -- the Search for
Extraterrestrial Intelligence -- was born.
The Politics of SETI --
Even Recognizing ET Artifacts as Opposed to ET Signals
Morrison and Cocconi, the two astronomers just cited, proposed using
microwave radio equipment -- technology developed for the fledgling science
of radio astronomy after World War II -- in a bold program of interstellar
listening for signals. The SETI Paradigm that they created by announcing
this proposal was simply this: that, because of the vastness of the
interstellar night and the immense difficulty of even approaching a
reasonable fraction of the speed of light with any spaceship technology
known to human science (especially in the 1950's!), any truly intelligent
entities seeking conversation with other intelligent entities, separated by
the almost inconceivable interstellar distances, would inevitably turn to
radio transmissions . . . and "phone" their messages at the speed of light
between the stars.
That was thirty years ago . . . and the idea that it will always be
easier and more economical to send radio transmissions then to send a fleet
of spaceships, like the ancient theological obsession with "a plurality of
worlds," has now became the new, unquestioned wisdom of the age-old Search
. .
All opposing scientific concepts -- such as the very real
technological possibility that spaceships someday might be good enough to
do the job (to a truly advanced race of interstellar beings) -- quietly
were banished. If it isn't a radio signal, whispering in from somewhere
deep in interstellar space, no one currently looking for ETs is even
interested . . .
And therein lies the second cause of NASA's rejection of our
Intelligence Hypothesis: there simply can't be artifacts on near-by
planets!
Not only are they all demonstrably lifeless (after all, not even a
microbe lurks beneath the Martian sands, according to Viking's trusty life
experiments) -- so there's no one "home" to build such artifacts -- all
possibilities for visits from beyond the solar system have been effectively
ruled out -- by the basic "theology" of the SETI Paradigm itself: to travel
is engineeringly too difficult . . . and too expensive!
The 'Ultimate' Reason for NASA's Apparent Fear of
the Intelligence Hypothesis: It's on the Wrong Planet!
And, if "they" -- interstellar beings with a spendthrift propensity
for wandering around the Galaxy in spaceships -- by some miracle had
visited the solar system, "they" certainly wouldn't have wasted great
amounts of time and energy building silly "pyramids" and "faces" on the
surface of a dead and cratered Mars! Shades of those fantasies about
canals . . .
Because . . . when all else is said and done . . . that's the ultimate
reason NASA, by their own admission, hasn't bothered to scientifically
examine one frame of Viking's Cydonia photography: the planet Viking
photographed--
The planet Mars itself.
The ultimate reason NASA hasn't taken seriously our Intelligence
Hypothesis is simply this: Mars is scientifically bad news!
No other single planet in the solar system, or in the history of the
pursuit of the plurality of worlds, has been more abused or ridiculed than
Mars. With the scientific excesses and downright vicious namecalling of
the last century, over the "reality" or "non-reality" of Martians, still
ringing in their ears, planetary scientists -- not a generally courageous
lot -- are loath to reopen anything even remotely resembling the "circus"
that surrounded Schiaparelli's Canals . . . Lowell's "valiant canal-
constructing Martians". . . or Orson Welles' Invasion . . .
Or, in the words of Sagan:
"It became so bitter and seemed to many scientists so profitless, that
it led to a general exodus from planetary to stellar astronomy . . . the
present shortage of planetary astronomers can be largely attributed [to
this]."
Conclusion
If Sagan's assessment is correct, the present treatment of the entire
issue of the "Face" by NASA and its small cadre of planetary scientists (
led, it must be noted, by Carl Sagan) -- who vividly recall the sad and
bitter scientific history of Mars and its "canals" too well -- is driven by
a fervant fear that history will once again repeat itself -- only this
time, in addition to intellectual embarrassment, the stakes are now
perceived as cataclysmic: potentially, a disastrous loss of funding from
the Congress, and with that -- as NASA is the only game in town which pays
for "looking at the planets" -- the imminent destruction of the very
profession of "planetary scientist" itself!
Or, as one planetary researcher put it to me candidly: "If you keep
this up, you will destroy the planetary program!"
Which, of course, is a revealing personal statement -- regarding the
nature of true scientific curiosity versus the desire for security . . .
pursued merely in the name of "science."
Ultimately, now that "good science" (as acknowledged by many reputable
researchers, in a variety of fields) has been done outside of NASA with
regard to Viking's Cydonia photography, the dispoition and implication of
what's on those images lies, not with "science" or with fearful men and
women pretending to be scientists . . . but with people.
The meaning of potential artifacts on Mars is almost incalculable --
and must lie somewhere nearer that millenia-old quest for answers to what
Albertus Magnus termed "one of the most wonderous and noble questions in
all Nature," than to NASA's 13-year timid and myopic "non-response." So,
how do we find out?
The problem ultimately is not with most scientists not really being
"scientists," or with an agency called "NASA" worrying more about survival
than with scientific Truth . . . but with our own individual response to
"Do we really want to know . . .?"
Because the wonder of this data is: we can.
**********************************************
* THE U.F.O. BBS -
http://www.ufobbs.com/ufo *
**********************************************
