Sent on 12/27/2006
(Incidentally, this is the Editorial that will be in the new double issue of Legendary Times, going to press soon. If you enjoy reading this, much more can be found in the next issue of Legendary Times. If you're not already a Member, don't delay and subscribe today!)
Dear Friends, Colleagues, and Legendary Times Members - -
Settle back, pour yourself a cup of your favorite beverage, and light up your pipe or favorite stogie. This is going to be a long one…
Happy Holidays, and a Happy New Year to everyone!
Before I begin, please indulge me one affectionate observation: aren't you all a bunch of sweethearts?
Moments after I sent out my last E-Mail of the Gods (#3, regarding National Geographic's Ancient Astronaut special), positive and supportive messages poured in from all over the world. HUNDREDS (!) of you replied to that e-mail to voice your support, regardless of the outcome of the then-unaired program. So, here's a big “Thank You of the Gods” to each and every one of you who took the time and effort to write such encouraging words. It is people like you who make what I do enjoyable and worthwhile.
OK, so a few weeks ago, on Monday, November 27th, at 8:00 pm Eastern and Pacific, I appeared on the National Geographic Channel in a program called Is it Real?: Ancient Astronauts. I've been extremely busy since the airing of the show, but here's my reaction and a general overview/analysis of the show:
I must admit, overall I was pleasantly surprised. Compared to other episodes in the Is It Real? series that I've seen, the Ancient Astronaut episode was not too bad. It could've been worse.
Let's remember that the National Geographic Channel describes the Is It Real? “documentary” series as follows: “Ignoring common sense and reason, people continue to believe in a host of supposed 'supernatural phenomena'…National Geographic Channel exposes the myths and malarkey behind enduring modern-day tales of the unexpected. Is it Real? Decide for yourself.” So the writing was on the wall. Despite this, I've always been a big believer in of “There's no such thing as bad publicity.”
Lloyd Pye, Ted Strain and I were each interviewed and given an ample amount of time to explain our side of the Ancient Astronaut Theory, but many of our crucial points were left out. Erich von Däniken had only a few sound bites, and strangely, Zecharia Sitchin was cut out completely.
For some bizarre reason that I still don't quite understand, the program contained many snippets from hokey old sci-fi movies. Maybe they were trying to appeal to the current “MTV” generation of younger viewers who enjoy a goofy retro “blast from the past,” but I wonder if it was also a deliberate attempt by the producers to associate the Ancient Astronaut theory with camp and silliness? Regardless of this observation, anyone with half a brain must have been a bit intrigued by what the Ancient Astronaut Theory has to offer.
I'd like to address some of the program's inaccuracies. The narration contained many mistakes and false assumptions about what the narrator kept calling the “Ancient AstronautS Theory.” Based on the know-it-all sarcasm and condescending ridicule that oozed from the narrator's voice throughout the entire show, you'd think he'd put in the effort to at least find out the proper pronunciation of the subject matter before making a fool of himself. But it gets worse.
Narrator: “…not far from Teotihuacan, in ChichAHN ItzAHN (sic), with a built-in landing pad on top of its main pyramid, and Baalbek, in Northern Lebanon, an ancient ruin of a massive stone 'something.' But perhaps the most mysterious landing site of all: the Nazca lines of Peru.”
Here we go again. It's always the same old story. NO ONE representing the Classical Ancient Astronaut Theory has ever claimed that the tops of ANY pyramids were landing pads, nor did we EVER say that the Nazca lines are some kind of ET airport. All we ever said, especially EvD in Chariots of the Gods, regarding Nazca was this: “Seen from the air, Nazca LOOKS LIKE an airport.” No one ever said it WAS an airport. There is a big difference. And seen from the air, Nazca really DOES look like a gigantic airfield.
Back to the program: In his interview as the main Nazca debunker, Joe Nickell stated that there are no mysteries at Nazca and that the figures were made by human hands. He then proceeded to demonstrate how the ancients allegedly did it by recreating the spider, a popular Nazca geoglyph. What the program did not specify is that in the Classical Ancient Astronaut field, no one has ever denied that the animal figures were created by human hands! Nickell then went into what sounded like an incoherent rant, claiming that the Ancient Astronaut Theory states that if a “flying saucer” hovered above the Nazca workers and directed them in their work, “this would have created a great problem with dust,” so the Nazca helpers would “of course” have to wear “dust masks” and this would have obstructed their vision. Come again, Joe? No such ideas were EVER uttered by any supporter of the Ancient Astronaut Theory, at least that I'm aware of. WHERE exactly Nickell came up with such weird, unfounded ideas is anyone's guess.
Even though it was discussed at length in my taped interview, the following Nazca information was never aired on the program: Everybody's always fixated on the animal shapes found at Nazca, yet NO ONE (except the Ancient Astronaut camp) talks about the countless lines, bands and vast geometric figures. Also, what about the flattened mountaintops? At Nazca, ENTIRE mountaintops are missing, looking as if they were sheared off by a gigantic knife. And what about the zigzag lines that go underneath the larger lines? No mention of them either. So why were the discussions of these particular mysteries never aired? Mainstream science has NO answer to these questions.
And what was Nickell's final conclusion about Nazca? Ready for this one? According to Nickell, the Nazca lines were “ceremonial walking patterns.” OK, interesting. So let's say we agree on this idea. My next question would then be: Ceremonial walking patterns for what? To worship WHOM? Nickell would probably answer, “The gods, of course.” My next question would then be: WHAT gods? WHERE did these gods come from? Read on.
Mainstream archaeologists are always quick to explain that the ancients worshipped nothing more than gods of nature: the gods of fire, thunder, wind and lightning. And I'll be the first to admit that forces of nature were indeed worshipped by our ancestors. BUT…, with all due respect, WHAT force of nature suddenly descends from the sky in a noisy vehicle and then starts speaking to the ancients and instructing them in various disciplines such as mathematics, agriculture and astronomy (as is written in the ancient texts and passed down in the oral traditions of the world)? NO force of nature from this planet can do such a thing. Extraterrestrials can.
Now on to my favorite parts of the program: the major debunker, my good ole' buddy and arch nemesis Kenneth L. Feder. I have to say, Erich von Däniken, Lloyd Pye and I came across as rather calm and collected, delivering our thoughts in a composed and thoughtful manner, when compared to Feder, who appeared a little too wound-up and shrill to be taken seriously.
For example, there was one point in the program where the narrator talked about the Ancient Astronaut interpretation of ancient statues and figurines as possible artists' renderings of extraterrestrials: “Many were hard-pressed to explain images like these (camera panning over ancient cave drawings and statuettes), what appear to be men in spacesuits with helmets and antennae. Since the dawn of the field of archaeology, the accepted explanation has been that these images depict gods, nothing more.”
Explains Feder: “When I see an artifact that looks like there's a god and there's somebody floating up in the air, and I go: well, that matches what we know about their origin story, I'm guessing that they're depicting a god! I think that's a simpler explanation than somebody else saying: no, it could be an extraterrestrial who happens to have a levitation device.”
With this statement, Feder exposes the fact that he hasn't the slightest clue what the Classical Ancient Astronaut Theory is really about. Both the narrator and Feder repeatedly state that the images are nothing more than depictions of gods. Well, that is exactly what the Ancient Astronaut Theory is asking: what gods are depicted here? Where did these alleged gods come from? From the primitive imaginations of our ancestors? No.
And let's look more closely at Feder's statement. He mentions something very interesting, not realizing that he's digging himself even deeper into his hole when he says: “…that matches what we know about their origin story.” He's obviously completely unaware that origin stories are an integral part of Ancient Astronaut research. I urge everyone to get a book that contains a collection of the world's origin stories and sooner or later, one fact will leap out at you: they ALL begin the same way! In general, they all go something like this: At first, there was complete darkness (space), and out of the vast darkness came the silver or golden egg of life (a spaceship? Why would it be silver or golden in color? Normal eggs are not silver or golden in color), from which the heavenly ladder was lowered to Earth and the gods climbed down the ladder to seed all life. And when mankind begins to multiply, the guardians of the sky taught mankind in various disciplines. I'm starting to get a bit tired of repeating myself, but obviously Feder and Co. simply don't get it yet: MY question in regards to ALL origin stories is: WHAT gods are described here? WHERE did they come from? Again, from the primitive imagination of our ancestors? I offer a resounding NO.
To my longtime readers, I must apologize for repeating an idea that I presented some years ago:
After the fall of the Soviet Union, my high school welcomed a few Russian students. I remember sitting in art class. Our assignment was to draw a fantasy castle, a dream castle floating up in the sky surrounded by clouds with shining towers made of gold, jewels, magnificent windows and whatever else we wanted. Everyone was very excited about the project, and we all started drawing with zeal. Everyone, that is, except our three Russian friends. They sat there in silence in front of their large, blank sheets of paper. None of them touched their pencils. “What's wrong?” the teacher asked. “Why aren't you drawing?” Completely befuddled, the Russian students asked: “What's a fantasy castle? We've never seen one. What does it look like? Since we've never seen one, we can't draw it.”
The students' response was extraordinary and highly relevant to the discussion at hand. It is quite clear that something cannot be invented nor imagined if the basic elements are missing! Nothing happens without initial inspiration. Therefore, all mythologies, legends, tales and folklore discredited by mainstream scientists as mere inventions of fantasy and imagination cannot possibly be unfounded inventions or mere fantasy. Something had to be there, a spark that served as the basic element, as the initial inspiration to create “more” ie. to “enhance” the basic idea, which was sparked by some earth-shattering event.
Another case in point: it is absolutely impossible to create, let alone solve, mathematical equations without knowing the basic mathematical elements. It simply cannot be done. As hard as this is to swallow for our critics and debunkers, there is no way around this fact. Before you solve algebraic problems, you must know basic math. And the mathematical basics are the “inspiration” for solving algebraic equations.
It has been said that every legend has a true core. It is this core that represents the base element. Without a base element, or initial inspiration, nothing is possible. Therefore, if something like this occurred to my Russian friends in the 20th century, why couldn't something similar have occurred thousands of years ago to our ancestors?
Think of it this way: Hundreds of years from now, after we've established permanent bases on the Moon and Mars, we will surely explore deep space. With one of our generation spaceships, we'll eventually come across a planet harboring intelligent life. If it happens that the life we encounter is still technologically primitive, what will we do? Will we just stand back and study them from afar, as Star Trek's “Prime Directive” dictates? No way! Our inflated human egos couldn't handle a “hands-off” approach. Of course we would give that species a gentle push by teaching them the basics of science, such as mathematics, astronomy and agriculture.
Because their frame of reference will not be as advanced, they will not understand the concept of space travel. Similarly, they will not grasp the fact that we are mere flesh-and-blood space travelers. As a direct consequence, they will mistakenly turn us into gods and worship us, or at least what they think we are. Eventually, WE will become an integral part of their legends, myths and lore. We will become their heavenly teachers, their “gods.” Why? Misunderstood technology.
Many generations after our initial arrival, and long after our departure, the real, tangible presence and influence of our contact with their world will be regarded by their “modern” scientists as a mere figment of their ancestors' imagination and thus relegated to the realm of mythology. Does this arrogant behavior sound familiar? Thought so.
Therefore, my question is: If hundreds of years down the road, we intervene on a faraway planet, give a primitive society a gentle technological push, and thus become “ancient astronauts” ourselves, why couldn't this have happened here on Earth thousands of years ago? Legendary Times readers know the answer to this logical question.
Perhaps the most important point, never addressed by Feder and the other self-appointed “expert debunkers,” is this: When the accounts of ancient gods were first documented, the practice of writing was a fairly new invention. When people realized that this new invention was an incredibly powerful knowledge preservation tool, is it logical to propose that the first stories put into writing were only fantasy stories? Figments of their imagination? Of course not. With the invention of the written word, for the first time in the history of mankind, people were able to record the most significant events of the time. So if there are intricate, detailed descriptions of beings that long ago descended from the sky in flying machines and taught mankind in various academic disciplines, then we should give more credence to these accounts. In that period of great uncertainty and upheaval, when the most important order of the day was raw survival, the first people empowered with the written word had better things to do than to gather around a fire, get drunk and invent fantasy stories. No, they immortalized what was most significant: their history as it was happening to them at that very moment! Let's also remember that writing was a tool mastered only by the select few, the initiates, the high priests etc.
And, as we can see today in countless accounts, including origin stories, their history obviously had to do with some type of gods. I therefore ask again: What gods are they talking about? Where did they come from?
Back to Feder. His first comment on the program was “Until they come up with some positive evidence supporting (the Ancient Astronaut Theory), scientists are just going to ignore it.” Is that so, Kenny? With all due respect, after more than 30 years and hundreds of books written on the subject, why is there still enough interest in the year 2006 in the Ancient Astronaut theory that we could appear on a National Geographic special about it? If you say that we're being ignored, Kenny, how come you have written multiple books debunking the subject, many of which are in their umpteenth edition? It appears as if there are many people not ignoring the subject, and you seem to be first on that list.
You see, contrary to your claims, we DO have the “positive evidence” you require. For some reason, you've made it your life's mission to distort what the Ancient Astronaut Theory actually proposes. The Center for Ancient Astronaut Research works towards completing a gigantic puzzle, gathering pieces from all around the globe. Anyone who's ever worked on a puzzle knows that even if the puzzle's not yet complete, with each piece you add, the picture becomes clearer. Similarly, with each day that passes and each new piece of evidence we discover, the Ancient Astronaut Theory picture becomes increasingly clearer.
There was one moment when I did actually agree with Feder. His phrase describing the Ancient Astronauts as an “extraterrestrial Peace Corps” was a great quote! I actually used the line a few nights later when I appeared on a TV show in Los Angeles to talk about the National Geographic program. Thank you, Kenny!
However, I took umbrage with Feder when he described the Ancient Astronauts' attitude towards the primitive humans they found: “These poor dummies, we need to help them out.” I challenge anyone to find even one passage where supporters of the Classic Ancient Astronaut Theory claim that our ancestors were dummies! We have never said such a thing. Our ancestors were NOT dumb; they were simply technologically primitive, and thus unable to understand that these beings from the sky were flesh-and-blood space travelers.
Even though I like the idea of an Intergalactic Peace Corps, I must point out that I'm also certain that it wasn't all cake and ice cream back then; visitations were not always educational, and some were possibly rather aggressive and malevolent. You see, good and evil permeates the entire Universe, so just as there are good civilizations out there, there are others that are evil. Similarly, in our remote past, there were “good” ancient astronauts and “bad” ancient astronauts, and some crews were somewhere inbetween.
Continues Feder: "We're down deep in the ground looking at these ancient levels, and if there is physical evidence of extraterrestrials, we'd be the ones to find them." Wait a second, Kenny. Why would YOU be the one to find them? When did the archaeological community get together and declare you King of All Discoveries? What wasn't mentioned by Feder or addressed in the program at all is the universally agreed-upon protocol that unorthodox discoveries that don't fit into the accepted chronologies are suppressed.
Feder then once again exposed himself as completely ignorant regarding the Ancient Astronaut Theory when he said: “I call it the 'horny astronaut theory'…and Earth was a party planet.” I suppose he was trying to ridicule the stories in countless ancient texts that speak of guardians of the sky thinking that Earth women were fair, and wanting to mate with them. For me and probably many in the Ancient Astronaut community, the joke fell flat because it tried to downplay or ridicule what was specifically referenced in the ancient texts. It was a facetious attempt at humor, so do us all a favor, Kenny: stick to your day job dusting off pottery shards. Comedy isn't your thing.
Later, Feder invoked Carl Sagan: “Sagan said it best that a human has a better chance of mating with a petunia than with an extraterrestrial, because at least the petunia and the human evolved on the same planet.” What Feder fails to understand is that in the old texts and traditions, it's not the petunia we're related to; it's the extraterrestrials (the gods). According to the Bible (and countless other “holy” books), the godS (plural according to the word Elohim) “created man in their own image.” We are indeed made of star stuff. We are the hybrids.
Feder seems to be fixated on the need for a “physical piece of evidence” to be found within the realm of archaeology before we can accept the Ancient Astronaut Theory. And Feder is wrong again: no one in the Ancient Astronaut field has ever claimed that the ultimate piece of evidence is restricted to the realm of archaeology, or that the “piece” has to be some sort of crashed pod, a communication device or some other technological tool. See, we here in the Ancient Astronaut movement are already one step ahead. Unlike Feder & Co., we think outside the box. What if the ultimate proof is not a physical object at all? What if the ultimate proof won't be discovered as some sort of long-lost, buried treasure, but actually resides deep within each and every one of us? Embedded within our genes…? Crazy, you say? Not necessarily.
Remember one of the basic tenets of the Ancient Astronaut Theory: a long time ago, in our remote past, extraterrestrials performed a deliberate, targeted mutation of our genes. Today this is called genetic engineering. Not a day goes by without a new story appearing in the paper about the latest achievements in genetics. After decades of research and tedious work, we are fortunate enough to live in a time when the entire human genome has been decoded: scientists succeeded in “translating” human DNA into a “genetic alphabet.” The conclusions were stunning: in theory, in order to “create” one entire human being from the DNA of another, what is the percentage of the original genetic material required to perform such a task? 80%, maybe? Wrong. 96%? Nope. 99%? Wrong again. The answer is THREE PERCENT! The rest of the genetic material is what geneticists today refer to as “genetic junk,” but it is my firm opinion that the “ultimate proof” will be found within the other 97% of our genetic material. If, as the Ancient Astronaut Theory dictates, a deliberate, targeted mutation of our genes took place in the remote past, sooner or later geneticists will have to stumble across traces of this artificial manipulation.
What about the 97% of genetic material that today is referred to as “junk?” As has become crystal clear to ALL geneticists, that DNA is a vast storage device for information. Theoretically, DNA could be used as a “device” in which to store “messages.” My question is: just because geneticists currently cannot make much of this (alleged) “junk DNA,” who is to say that there aren't any messages hidden away in that “junk” somewhere? I suggest that geneticists start to take a closer look at “junk DNA” to search for mathematical “discrepancies” and/or “anomalies” in the alphabet “sequence.” I predict that an intensive search will lead to the most revolutionary discovery in human history: We're not alone, and it says so right here in our DNA!
Crucial evidence is starting to pour in from geneticists around the world confirming that “something” did indeed happen to our genes in the remote past, and that none of us would exist today had it been left to chance and natural selection, as Darwin dictates. In fact, a movement is already entrenched that tries to prove that there was indeed a deliberate mutation in our genes in the remote past. This movement is called “Intelligent Design.” Unfortunately, supporters of ID have one thing wrong: they believe that it was “God” - some intangible supernatural power - who performed this genetic change. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: replace the word “God” with “extraterrestrials” and we're on the right path. Wilder-Smith's books are prime examples of this idea.
Therefore, I propose a combination of Darwin's Theory of Evolution with the Intelligent Design theory, and introduce what I will introduce as “ETID” - Extraterrestrial Intelligent Design. A type of evolution DID occur, the fossil record proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt, and I am not debating that. BUT… ETID answers the questions Darwin's Theory and conventional ID cannot satisfactorily explain: ETID bridges the vast gaps between species that not even Darwin (or anyone else, by the way!) can sufficiently explain: the missing link! A direct genetic manipulation of our genes by extraterrestrials.
The ETID theory also specifically addresses the QUANTUM LEAP that occurred when humans went from banana-munching cave-dwellers to pyramid-building architectural master engineers! We hop out of the cave, and before any progressive technological evolution takes place, we construct monuments that would be nearly impossible to recreate even today. It is an irrefutable fact that the older ancient monuments, the more perfectly and precisely the massive slabs of stone were assembled. Any monument built later, anything “younger,” seems like junk when compared to the older stuff. Why? Simple: ETID.
Towards the end of the program, Feder resorted to insults by claiming that supporters of the Ancient Astronaut Theory “live in Fantasyland,” believe in the Easter Bunny and believe in extraterrestrials in the place of God. Feder: “So I think it's this desire to find this force, this god-like force, and if we can't believe in the supernatural god, well, maybe there are god-like creatures with god-like powers, who ultimately are going to save us from ourselves.”
Statements like this bother me greatly, mainly because nothing could be further from the truth. It is glaringly obvious that Feder has never read any of my work concerning the question on “God,” which again exposes his ignorance on the entire topic. NO ONE in the Classic Ancient Astronaut Theory has ever proposed that the aliens were actual gods, nor that they will they ever swoop down from the sky to save us from our problems. Certainly not me! I am strongly opposed to the idea that we can simply let this planet go down the toilet because we'll be saved by aliens swooping down from the sky. This planet is our own responsibility and we will not (and should not!) be “saved” by extraterrestrials.
And please, just what “god-like” powers is Feder talking about? Once again, Kenny, this time even more slowly: Ancient astronauts did not, repeat, did NOT, have ANY god-like powers! O-U-R A-N-C-E-S-T-O-R-S falsely interpreted advanced technological capabilities as god-like because of their limited frame of reference! Jeez! Is this really SO hard to grasp? Maybe an ancient astronaut needs to visit you for some tutoring.
It also bothers me that programs such as Is It Real? refer to supporters of the Ancient Astronaut Theory as “believers.” I'm not a believer. What I do for a living has absolutely nothing to do with “belief.” I don't need to “believe”; I have been convinced, based on the facts speaking for themselves. When you see a manhole, you don't have to believe there is a sewage system underneath; you know it's there based on readily available, easily ascertained facts. No “belief” is necessary.
NO ONE reading Legendary Times has to “believe” anything. And you most certainly don't have to “believe” in aliens and build them an altar or worship them. You can if you want to, it's certainly your right, but no one representing the Classical Ancient Astronaut Theory has ever proposed “believing” in ETs as some sort of supernatural entities to be worshipped like, say, a Jesus at a church. Legendary Times tries to stay as far away from organized religion as possible. As my long-time readers know by now, I am for the abolition of all organized religion. The most heinous atrocities of mankind's history were carried out in the name of organized religion. I don't want any part of such insanity. In order to find spirituality and/or the divine, a human being does not have to go to a church, a temple, or any place of worship. The divine is deep within all of us, we're all ONE in this great Universe that I call “IT,” an overall Spirit of Creation. And by the way, you don't have to believe that, either. This idea simply makes the most sense to me when you put all these things together.
I must admit, I did get a hearty laugh from Feder's serious suggestion that the carvings of the Dendera lightbulbs at the Hathor temple in Egypt were nothing but renderings of giant eggplants! By now I've watched this National Geographic program multiple times with supporters and skeptics alike, and even the skeptics had to laugh in disbelief at Feder's downright strange proposal that the Dendera lightbulbs were eggplants. Horus, give me strength!
But it doesn't end there! After the narrator states in a condescending voice, oozing with thick superiority: “But there's still room for the idea that this place (Teotihuacan) was an alien landing pad, right?” Feder, in that endearingly shrill and hysterical way of his, says: "Think about this, these guys, these extraterrestrials are able to traverse interstellar space, and they need to eyeball where to land? Don't they have GPS or something?" Are you kidding me? Again, for the hundredth time: NO ONE representing the Classical Ancient Astronaut Theory has ever claimed Teotihuacan was a landing site. But go ahead, keep regurgitating the same rubbish other debunkers have been falsely perpetuating for decades. Is that true science, Kenny? Forget about analysis, fact-checking, research, free thought and an open mind; just do what everybody else does, and say what everybody else says.
I could go on. I've listed the most blatant inaccuracies that needed straightening out because I refuse to be “debunked” by someone so strikingly ignorant of the Ancient Astronaut Theory's true message, so obviously hell-bent on distorting things that he doesn't really know about, and so completely willing to sacrifice scientific honor and fellowship. Nice going, Kenny - your so-called debunking got you on TV, but your scientific methods will get you nowhere.
Ultimately, who suffered the most? I think the National Geographic organization did. After carefully examining the program, I believe that they made some questionable if not unprofessional decisions: the inclusion of those campy old sci-fi clips, the participation of uninformed and ineffective debunkers, and the overall sensationalistic and condescending attitude of the show - these things served only to diminish National Geographic's credibility. I've always held a high opinion of National Geographic's science and research integrity; however, if they have to resort to hokey sci-fi clips and half-witted debunkers to illustrate their program, they've done nothing but undermine the National Geographic brand.
They could've broken the mold and done something different, but instead of tackling exciting new mysteries, they chose to fixate on the tired old Nazca animal figures, completely ignoring the REAL mysteries at Nazca. It could have been a cutting-edge, informative program, with compelling new footage and balanced information. Hey, we gave them the material to do just that (four hours' worth, in my case!). Yet they chose to remain conformist by trivializing the topic. National Geographic was trying to be edgy and cool, but this program exposed their true colors: that same creaky, dusty, tired old worldview.
Let history be the judge. Despite the program's shortcomings, this WAS a victory for us. Our flag's still flyin' high! Why? Because they didn't have the guts to address the REAL questions. Lucky for those “debunkers” - they wouldn't have known what to say.
National Geographic bestowed upon me the honor of the program's final word, for which I was truly thankful. Their gesture, and the quote they chose to end with, indicated that there might be a glimmer of hope after all:
“The only way the Ancient Astronaut Theory can be disproved is if the extraterrestrials show up and say they were never here.”
Upward and onward, and may the light shine brightly up your alley in 2007!
Owner, Legendary Times Books
Don't Die Wondering! Crack the Code...
"Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds." Albert Einstein