By Takis Tz.
I read a great deal of of the negative reviews here at Amazon and they all struck me as inane drivel of the most eminent degree. If you’re going to agree or disagree with any thesis you have to show why. If all you’re going to come up with is name-calling and arguments with regards to “math in cereal” (!!!, man, give us a break) or other , even worse, “arguments” like “NASA says it aint no face and that’s what i believe” you’re in my mind utterly and in a positive manner hopeless. If, in the end, NASA and any establishment of that order is for you a creditable source, why bother thinking? Turn your brain OFFICIALLY off and let whomever, may that be NASA or any person else, programm it for you. Why read what Hoagland or a number of other researchers out there profess?
“The Monuments Of Mars” is a book for people who are keen of doing something rare: think for themselves. In order to do that, you need to entertain whatsoever available notion out there even if it totally comes in conflict with the definition of the world in your mind. Especially if such a notion is well argumentated and has been scarcely rebutted with adequacy.
For those not intimate with what’s staged in this book, here’s a very ( and i mean, very) short summary: Hoagland along with a team of scientists ranging anyplace from geologists to physicists to computer programmers who resoluted photos, to historians and other specialties, analysed a tremendous series of photographs taken by NASA of the Cydonia region in Mars, photos in which the illfamed “Face” appears, along with other without doubt or question geometrical features such as pyramids or the clear designs of a former city. All these features, and their undisputed geometry, one would have to be either blind not to see, or terminally brainwashed.
The only question which remained, was to basi verify through statistical probability, what the odds were of these features having been made “naturally”. The odds are so staggeringly low that it would be a travesty to dismiss these as natural creations. The next, and more indispensable questions have to do with who made them and why.
Why resort to odds when we could have more and clearer photographs of these features so the matter could be put to rest? Well, that’s just it (especially for the naysayers), because Nasa refuses to rephotograph the region with a high solution camera saying there’s not one thing there to be seen..And that in spite of all the “noise” with regards to these features. Mysterious if not downright conspiratorial? Yes, plainly and undoudtedly so.
I don’t intend to go more into what Hoagland says. You may beauteous much imagine in wide lines, and besides it’s your decicion and your inclination whether you’ll invest the venture in reading his book anyway. To me, if your inclination is beforehand negative, you would’ve effortlessly fit in in a past world who thought the world is flat because the church or “scientists” say so. And i could list a high number of such embarrasing examples, there’s no shortage of them nor will there ever be.
As to the book itself, it is one which is fantastically researched. The degree of scholarship in it is superb, and more importantly, it is not the work of ONE person. Hoagland did not sit down and think all this up as a heap of would like the case to be. There’s a tremendous array of people who worked with him from the scientific community and who agree with him. There’s likewise a number of other resarchers who did NOT exploration this subject but yet came to the same determinations with him. Sitchin would be one. Robert Temple would be another. And the list does go on you know, as any search on substitute archaelogy in Amazon or elsewhere would show you.
The fact that we recognise only 5000-7000 years of humane history when this planet numbers over a million years of existence means that we are genuinely in the dark when it comes to our origins. At least as far as “mainstream science” is concerned and this is a fact they receive themselves while providing us all kinds of comical explanations and tons of “missing links” in the process. The truth might be in fact very simple, that is, simple if you in truth grasp that the Universe is very probably bursting with intellectual life, not only now, but for millions of years in the past, and that the chance that we, are in very intriguing ways connected with the “out there” is also not one thing shocking. It only is if you concede the world in your mind to be something painfully small.
Only reading this book will more than likely not be sufficient to provide you with all the data supporting such theories. Yes i mean data, and not speculations. Raw data. You will need to pick up a great deal of Sitchin, a great deal of Temple, a good deal of Colin Wilson, or others. Only then will you capable to form a more spherical and more inviolable opinion.
But if you haven’t done so up to now, Hoagland’s book is a great place to start.
Absolutely necessary material for people not content with the hilarious version of the truth spoon-fed to us on a daily basis.
52 of 66 humans found the following review helpful.
The finish history of the NASA coverup of The Face
By Glenn R. Holcomb
In “The Monuments of Mars: A City on the Edge of Forever,” author Richard Hoagland gives a to a great extent referenced history of The Face on Mars and other suspiciously “non-natural” structures and features of the Martian surface. He describes how The Face was firstborn came upon shortly after the Viking Mission started sending back images from Mars. NASA prompt pooh-poohed the possibleness of it is artificial origin. The images of The Face were too startling to be ignored, though, and exploration by Vince DePietro, Greg Molenaar, Hoagland and others resulted in the invention of other unnatural, pyramid-like structures located in the vicinity of The Face. Hoagland provides solid arguments for the claims he makes. Often, this slows the pace of reading this thick book. But, by taking his time in explaining his claims, he tackles some of the arguments that might arise in the reader’s own mind. Hoagland’s book describes how NASA has pointedly ignored proof from noted scientists and organizations verifying the suspiciously non-natural nature of the Cydonia region on Mars that is home to these anamolous features. Finally, Hoagland documents how NASA has refused to PUBLICALLY rephotograph Cydonia and proposes that NASA may have already done so in secret. He offers that there may be dark reasons for this suspected duplicity. “The Monuments of Mars” describes an engaging (and ongoing) real-world mystery. But, it is also discouraging and hindering in that the proof that could solve this mystery is being withheld by the very government agency that is supposed to be candidly and publicly spreading it…
62 of 80 persons found the following review helpful.
Really makes you think!
By Mark Lahren
This book is utterly compelling reading from page one. I’ve been following this since I read the basi (?) edition of this book published in 1987. That book (348 pages, much littler than this modified version) caused me to get started questioning the humane faith system. That is to say I started out to wonder with regards to whether what we all have been taught to receive as ‘fact’ was in fact real. I begun talking to everyone I knew in regards to this, and encountered that even persons I had antecedently thought to be open-minded were actually gorgeous closed minded on this subject. Since then, I’ve been on kind of a personal quest to find out why persons have such a problem accepting anything Hoagland says. I personally still have not been convinced of anything on this ‘Face on Mars’ one way or the other, but Hoagland’s theories are arousing and attention holding and well thought out sufficient that I don’t think they may be dismissed out of hand. I’ve read reviews from others who just laugh and say that these establishments are just coincidental and formed by nature. This could be true, but how may these humans be so sure? Would these same humans dismiss the Egyptian pyramids as natural establishments too? (Obviously not, since they are close by and easy to study. Apparently, just because Mars is so far away, this mechanically disqualifies it from further study). Why are they so intent on dismissing Hoagland’s theories so quickly, without in truth knowing? I think it has something to do with a fear that their own faith schemes are threatened by any seemingly implausible proof or theories.
To me, this book is much more than a book with regards to strange Martian constructions. It is more a criticism of the closed-mindedness that is stopping mankind from making progress and discoveries that could modify the world as we know it. Do we actually think we already recognise all there is to recognise when it comes to this? Hoagland doesn’t ever assert to know everything when it comes to this. All he wants is answers, and apparently the ‘scientific’ community doesn’t, or at least doesn’t care. What has happened to humankind’s curiosity? Our curiosity is what got our civilization this far. Why stop now?
See all 90 client reviews…
