Wednesday, October 7, 2009

The New Edition Hits the Stores!


I was out with my friend Alyssa the other day and we stopped by the local Borders to look for some items. We found 7 copies of the new edition of Dark Mission, one of which you see here. That's quite a few for an updated 2-year old title in one store, and they were also face out, which likely means they were expecting to sell them all. This is a good sign.

I put most of them on the front table next to Dan Brown's new book. This one I stuck in front of Carl Sagan's books in the astronomy section.

47 comments:

gilbavel said...

Yay! Good idea, I love your social engineering idea of "author control".

T'Zairis said...

"This one I stuck in front of Carl Sagan's books in the astronomy section."

How very appropriate of you! Rock on!!!

Peace,

T'Zairis

Omom said...

LOL! Love it!

tr4nce said...

Mike

I loved the new content and the improved cover.

Concerning the LCROSS mission, did you notice that if you lay the letter "L" down 4 times as a cross you get a nazi swastik? An "L"-CROSS!

JimO said...

I note that Ken Johnston is no longer described as a Marine jet fighter pilot. Correcting errors is easier if people don't fight over who gets the credit, so attaboy.

Mike Bara said...

Ha. Round to James.

lincoln said...

The advance promo on Amazon says this: "Authors Richard C. Hoagland and Mike Bara include a new chapter about the discoveries made by ex-Nazi scientist and NASA stalwart Wernher von Braun regarding what he termed 'alternate gravitational solutions.'"

I see no additional chapter.

The promo also says this: "Buyers of the new edition will be provided a code that will enable them to log on to DarkMission.net to download hundreds of images discussed within the book."

I'm a buyer and I've been given no such code.

Is this just a blunder by Feral House, or is the current edition going to be replaced soon by one that lives up to its advance?

MaxtheKnife said...

Really? You're a 'buyer', Lincoln?

From:http://keithlaney.net/TheHiddenMissionForum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=10528&start=323
Quote, Keith L.: "what, did you buy it Lincoln?"

Quote, Lincoln: "No, it's already in my local Border's, in the Metaphysics Section (ha-ha.) They have reasonably comfortable chairs."

So what're you whining 'bout given the fact you've paid for nothing and your predisposition to the subject matter is that it's all bunk anyway?

Is this the best protest you got?! Or just the best one you dare to present here?

soniktemple said...

I love the new edition! Also can't wait for part II.

The title also has the word "history" in there so don't forget to do some strategic book placement in that section! As long as we're at it "Mission" could qualify it for the religion section too! :-)
Are you guys thinking of doing an audio version? I think it would be a hit!

lincoln said...

Was the content of the missing Von Braun chapter essentially the same as this page?

If so, it's perhaps our good fortune that it was never published. The mathematical calculation underlying "Von Braun's Secret" is grossly in error. When the calculation is done correctly, and separately for each of the three solid rocket stages of Juno, the total delta-V is 14,189 ft/sec, not 3,520 ft/sec. Therefore the on-orbit velocity represents just a 4.2% overperformance, not 20% as the Enterprise Mission page proposes (still less 30%, as Richard Hoagland stated on the overnight radio show Coast to Coast AM.) There is absolutely no need to resort to exotic explanations to account for this margin of error in solid rocket fuel of the 1950s.

moclips1 said...

Mike Bara! This is the ghost of Carl Sagan, and you've dissed me for the last time, brother! You and your wrestling partner Hoaglund are gonna pay the piper, brother, next Thursday at the Civic Arena, when you and that pipsqueek take on me and Isaac "Muttonchop" Asimov! Three rounds in a coal miners glove cage match! The last one standing wins, and it ain't gonna be you, brother! You and your giant crystal structures on the moon are gonna come tumblin' down, baby, in front of a live paying audience, as mentioned at the Civic Arena. If i could take physical form right now, i'd hit you in the back with metal folding chair whilst Muttonchop put Richard in a sleeper hold! Tickets are on sale now, and bring the kids!

Valkyrie Ice said...

You might find this interesting.

Buzz Aldrin speaking for a co-operative effort internationally to return to the moon.

Could Nasa be losing it's grip, or is this an attempt to grab hold of the world space program??

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/buzz-aldrin/a-different-kind-of-moon_b_317786.html

Anti-revolutionary said...

Nice work covering Sagan's book! That is too neat!

lincoln said...

Max Kiejzik dropped this pearl of wisdom:
"Is this the best protest you got?! Or just the best one you dare to present here?"

Max, old son, it isn't a question of who dares. On this blog it's a question of who gets published. The moderator, Mike Bara, increasingly uses this blog as a waterhole for sycophants like you, and, despite the fact that the front page of this web site contains the message "Want to Argue About it? Visit the Dark Mission Blog," in practice argument is minimal simply because Bara censors most critical views of his pal Hoagland's fantasies. You'll have to look elsewhere if you'd like to read protests about the content of "Dark Mission." They are fairly abundant, in places that are not censored.

MaxtheKnife said...

Bought my copy today and got my wheels turning... duh...

Re: LCROSS' lack of plume and high sodium spectrometer reading:

Nobody's figured it out yet?

No plume seen, Sodium detected.

LCROSS hit a ~~GLASS DOME~~ before it hit the Moon's surface.... Read More...

Just google "sodium in glass": http://www.google.com/search?q=sodium+in+glass&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-US&ie=utf8&oe=utf8&rlz=

Couple that with this recent IR image (http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l231/maxtheknife/LCROSS-Swing-by-Features-IR-Vis.jpg) referred to in RCH's recent "Smoking Gun" exposé(http://www.enterprisemission.com/SmokingGun.htm) and one is left with few, if any, alternative explanations.

Mike Bara said...

Nice try Expat, but 4.2% is still well beyond the margin of error, and Hoagy and I will correct it in the the next book.

MaxtheKnife said...

Lol... so far, no censorship!

And in the relatively ~recent~ Explorer I chronicle on History channel(or maybe Nat Geo, don't recall), NASA 'officially' stated the JET STREAM as the cause of Explorer's unexpected extended orbit.

No mention of Lincoln's much touted '4.2% margin of error'.

You might want to let NASA know for future reference, old man. :-)

Mike Bara said...

Yeah, the "Jet Stream" argument is laughable.

T'Zairis said...

Valkyrie Ice--

Thanks for the link to the Huffington article. I think that any 'joint mission' stuff that is broached at this point is a futile effort to sustain the gate-keeping of data. Independent countries' independent space missions can come up with independent findings that directly contradict U.S. space program obfuscation, a la the European Space Agency Mars pics that showed the 'black swatches' on Mars are actually green. They were later 'color adjusted', but the damage was already done.

Funny thing is, this gate-keeping push is already coming too late-- there are already too many leaks as well as increasing evidence of fudged data-- and India making noises about 'making NASA admit there's a heck of a lot of water on the Moon, along with extraterrestrial life' is the just first foretaste of what truly independent programs will precipitate. I can only see Aldrin's proposal as a last-ditch effort to shut the barn door against a livestock stampede that's already underway.

Max--

Here's a scientific paper abstract at the CNRS website, which hints at some very interesting research being done with sodium silicate glass.
____________________

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=15705014

Document title:
Photosensitive properties of a tin-doped sodium silicate glass for direct ultraviolet writing.

Abstract:
In this letter, the fabrication of channel waveguides by direct UV writing into a bulk tin-doped multicomponent silicate glass is presented. Different laser powers and scan rates were employed and optimized to avoid surface ablation. The best results were obtained at a laser power of 95 mW and at a scan speed of 10 mm/min, where a refractive index change of 1.5 × 10-3 was estimated and an attenuation loss of 3.3 dB/cm was measured using the cutback method. A morphological investigation of the glass end facets was performed in order to assess the surface effect of the laser exposure.
____________________

I'm with you on the 'smashing lunar glass' idea-- I think they are not looking for water, which they already know is there. They want, rather, to study the chemical composition of supposedly-nonexistent lunar domes...

Peace,

T'Zairis

marsandro said...

Greetings All,

Linoln overlooks one simple fact
that negates all his arguments:

Von Braun was surprised by what happened.

FACT: Von Braun was not known for his technical
incompetence, neither for his...how should I put
this..."surprisability"....

:-)

Hathor -- Hammering the last nail firmly into the
coffin...or sarcophagus....

;-)

MaxtheKnife said...

T'Zairis writes: "They want, rather, to study the chemical composition of supposedly-nonexistent lunar domes... "

Exactly.

lincoln said...

Mike Bara wrote:
"Hoagy and I will correct it in the the next book."

That's the best news I've had all day. You could correct the web page without waiting for the next book.

Max Kiejzik wrote:
"Lol... so far, no censorship!"

Good. Well that worked, then.

Marc said...

Mike,
As you and Richard covered JFK in the book, I thought you might like to see the new article at stuartwilde.com, if you haven't already.

lincoln said...

hathor considered this worth posting:
"Von Braun was surprised by what happened."

And this proves that a 4.2% aggregate over-performance by a total of 15 Baby Sergeant solid rockets was due to an anti-gravity phenomenon???

:-)

Lincoln -- rolling his eyes....

;-)

Mike Bara said...

Bye again, expat.

MaxtheKnife said...

Mike writes: "Bye again, expat."

His strawman debate tactics aside, seeing as he started w/ a lie about 'buying' the book and didn't deny being expat... he deserves the boot.

marsandro said...

Well, Mike...

He *could* have pointed out
that I missed the "c" key....

:-)

Hathor -- One last hammer blow to that nail...

;-))

marsandro said...

I might add...

As pertains to issues of
device rotation...

The late Dr. Erwin J. Saxl wrote upon this subject
in a paper published in the July 11, 1964 issue of
the journal "Nature", concerning his experiments
with an electrified torque pendulum.

:-)

Hathor -- Citing the research...

;-)

Zakhur said...

"'Von Braun was surprised by what happened.'

And this proves that a 4.2% aggregate over-performance by a total of 15 Baby Sergeant solid rockets was due to an anti-gravity phenomenon???"

No. There are other explanations; like our theories of the mechanism behind gravity being ignorant. The fact, though, that so many of the Ranger probes missed the Moon after being fired at it with as much Newtonian precision as possible convinces me that we don't understand what's really happening in this solar system. There's something else going on besides what we call "gravitational attraction."

Read thunderbolts.info

WE LIVE IN AN ELECTRIC UNIVERSE!

Valkyrie Ice said...

I think the combination of Hoaglands Physical model mixed with the Electric Universe model may go extremely far towards being a GUT.

Massive Birkeland currents moving through the universe produce massive magnetic fields which in turn create electrostatic forces capable of accounting for the structure we see in the universe. No "missing mass" no
dark matter" no "Black holes" simply massive electric currents flowing through plasma can explain most of what we see in space.

But on a quantum level Hoagland's model could account for a lot of quantum behavior including the Origin of the electric flows that power the universe

marsandro said...

Hi Zakhur,

Again, I stated *specifically*
that this fact "negated lincoln's
arguments," such as they were.

A "4.2% aggregate over-performance by a total
of 15 Baby Sergeant solid rockets" would have
resulted not merely in an erroneous final altitude,
but in serious thrust asymmetries that would
have produced a significant gound flight path
error as well.

Unless I'm missing something here, except for
the altitude, the rocket was otherwise on course.
Does anyone care to correct me?

That fact ALONE suggests that there was no such
"4.2% aggregate over-performance by a total of
15 Baby Sergeant solid rockets" as lincoln claimed.

In other words...

Just precisely *which* of the 15 Baby Sergeant
solid rockets "overperformed"?

And would said "overperformance" necessarily be
in any wise uniform? (I mean, if there was so
little quality control in the manufacturing....)

IT MATTERS....

...TO THE *TOTAL* THRUST VECTOR....

Don't forget I'm an engineer.

No wonder Von Braun was surprised.

He, too, realised this.

:-)

Hathor -- Reviewing Engineering Mechanics...

;-)

Zakhur said...

Marsandro,

I have read Hoagland's essay on Explorer. You are absolutely right. Von Braun's surprise is NOT negligible.

I should have specified that I was agreeing with Lincoln ONLY in the fact that none of it proves that Explorer's altitude was increased by an "anti-gravity effect" induced by its rotation; because we are so in the dark about the mechanism behind what we call "gravity" that we cannot be sure what "anti" gravity even means.

T'Zairis said...

The Plasma Cosmology folks over at thunderbolts.info do understand higher dimensional input, as they have the necessary grounding in plasma studies and electromagnetic physics. Tom Bearden has some nice explanations of the higher dimensional stuff on his website-- in order to completely model what goes on in and around an electrical circuit, one needs 11 dimensions to track all the action.

The main reason standard cosmological models are so badly off is that while astronomers do study math, they are not required to take any courses in plasma physics or electrodynamics. Without studying these things, they completely misunderstand/misinterpret what they see. Case in point, gravity. Standard Cosmology says that space is electrically neutral and that 'gravity runs the show', while electrodynamics says that gravity is a kind of sometimes-variable 'side-effect' of electromagnetic processes. Thus, the plasma-based cosmology model says that the main driver of what we see in the universe around us is electromagnetism-- for example, stellar mass is accumulated by strongly magnetic Z-pinches in Birkeland currents, *not* by gravity. That's a *huge* difference in paradigm.

The point I'm making here is that higher dimensional activity has been a part of electromagnetics for a long, long time (see Maxwell's quaternions), but because plasma physicists and astronomers are not routinely studying in each other's fields, knowledge that could help both fields isn't being shared. Now that plasma physicists have looked at astronomy pix critically (as in 'Holy sh*t! Those are galaxy-sized Birkeland currents!') we are about to experience a much-needed course-correction in astronomy.

Also, because of the utterly stupid 'my own private Idaho' mentality present in most science specialties, everybody keeps reinventing the wheel-- higher dimensional electromagnetics-- instead of taking advantage of the understanding of what was already implied in Maxwell's equations before Heaviside artificially truncated them.

The sooner we can be shot of the whole 'I am king of my own little data-world' mindset in *all* fields of human endeavor, the better!

Peace,

T'Zairis

Valkyrie Ice said...

hear hear T'zaris.

Specialization and compartmentalization are the two biggest problems in science today, even Drexler makes this point repeatedly when discussing the multi-dimensional knowledge needed for practical nano engineering projects to occur. It's not enough to simply "know your field" anymore, because too many breakthroughs are occurring in those areas BETWEEN fields.

Take for example a combination of different developments from this year alone. The guy who made the segway has created a very sophisticated artificial arm. It has the full abilities of a normal human arm. But how does it get controlled? By a shoe with various controls built into it.

Now take a new device created by Emotiv for use in computer gaming. It's a headset that is non invasive yet can read the impulses in your brain well enough to allow it to not only act as a control in video games just from thinking, it can read with enough resolution to control the expressions of a VIRTUAL FACE in Second life.

So tell me again, why is the Artificial Limb using FOOT CONTROLS?

Combine this with the HULC body suit created in California, and what you get is a complete body suit that can enable a paraplegic to be able to resume basic functions of movement. Zero surgery.

And yet none of these people seem to be aware of each other.

The same goes for the EU theorists, who are so busy trying to prove the mainstream cosmologists wrong they are ignoring such work as Bearden and Hoagland's physics model. Even though both Hoagland and the EU people are providing evidence for the existence of a civilization prior to our currently accepted historical timeline.

Aliens aside, those ruins on the moon and Mars are probably ours. Knowing how much we've damaged the pyramids by using it as a lazy mans quarry (all the marble sheathing that they once had is now so many building blocks in Cairo) I have no doubt we've destroyed almost all the evidence of our ancestors on the surface of Earth. But the Moon and Mars are untouched archeological treasures, and the sooner we can open them up to those who aren't interested in hiding the truth the better. the same goes for taking the pyramids away from the Egyptologists.

Cross Disciplinary Science must become the RULE, not the exception. And simply dismissing any theory as CRACKPOT without conclusively PROVING IT WRONG, needs to stop. Science is not about defending your pet theory, it is about finding out how the world REALLY works.

Marsandro, you're an engineer, have you heard about the Black Light Power process or the Gravion Kasimir Well ZPE device? BLP claims to have created a fully functional power device that harvests ZPE from hydrogen, taking energy from a zero ground state hydrogen atom to create a low energy Hydrino. the Gravion device seems to be based on the same principle using micro machined wells to induce the Kasimir effect and reduce hydrogen to lower than ground states as well. IMO I would have to bet they are human made examples of the ZPE devices supposedly found on the moon. Should be interesting to see how they develop

Aiwass said...

Marsandro: "except for the altitude, the rocket was otherwise on course."

That reminds me a bit of "Apart from that, Mrs. Lincoln, what did you think of the play?"

The excess velocity of Explorer 1 may easily be calculated from published orbital parameters. It was 640 ft/sec (26,950 ft/sec actual vs. 26,310 ft/sec planned).

Marsandro: "That fact ALONE suggests that there was no such '4.2% aggregate over-performance by a total of 15 Baby Sergeant solid rockets'"

What kind of engineer did you say you were?

marsandro said...

Hi T'Zairis,

As usual, you've nailed it.

'Nuff said.


Hi Val,

I have indeed heard of the Black Light Power
process, and discussed it with my CEO. We are
looking at...well, I can't say anything about
that!! :-))

I've heard of the Gravion Kasimir Well ZPE device,
but I hadn't had time to check it out as of yet.

From your description, it sounds like a variant
on the Correa device, which uses Argon.

I have experimented with a version of the Correa
device. Using plain air, it was producing outputs
of negligible current, but voltages headed for
the teravolt range, reading off a 1K ohm output
resistor.

It kept blowing meters, no matter how many steps
I put in the divider network.

When it went over 100 GV, I gave up. I had run
out of 1 & 10 megohm resistors for the divider....

:-)

Hathor -- Watching for static cling...

;-)

marsandro said...

Hello Aiwass,

Re:

"What kind of engineer did you say you were?"

The kind who realizes that the point was---:

that an "aggregate" deviation from performance
of some FIFTEEN INDIVIDUAL rockets mounted
"en circum" of the main rocket VERY LIKELY would
produce an off-vector net thrust not necessarily confined to one particular plane, to wit, the
vertical only.

THAT kind.

Same kind as Von Braun.

One with AN EYE FOR DETAILS---the details that
certain "other" kinds tend to MISS.

(So you are dealing not only with an "over thrust"
situation, but an off-vector thrust that is not
confined
to any particular plane---and for which
the on-board guidance might not have been able
to compensate, seeing as it missed the altitude
component.)

:-)

Hathor -- Nails on chalkboard to see who's awake

;-)

MaxtheKnife said...

Aiwass writes: "The excess velocity of Explorer 1 may easily be calculated from published orbital parameters. It was 640 ft/sec (26,950 ft/sec actual vs. 26,310 ft/sec planned).

If this is true, then why is NASA's official explanation the Jet Stream?

Valkyrie Ice said...

teravolts hummm.

If I remember my reading on the Befield-Brown lifters the higher the voltage the better they worked.

I've been noticing with interest the recent Mach Effect lifters which seem to be the current versions of the BB work from the 50s (right about when UFO began being common and the research on electrogravitics suddenly disappeared)

The BLP device seems to work well enough to have been sold to 8 different power companies, and even though it was by a small college, it's research has been duplicated. Supposedly all the info to replicate everything but the loop back process is available to all on the BLP site. I would be very interested in the results of further attempts to duplicate, but so far all I keep seeing is "it's impossible so why bother to try and duplicate the research" from all the naysayers

I don't know enough physics to tell if Mill's "Classical Quantum Dynamics" is simply a restating of Hoagland's and Bearden's extrapolations of Maxwell's original equations. I am a rather poor mathematician though my language comprehension and abstract thinking is quite good. I can visualize anything put in written form, but not math formulas.

Still it should be quite interesting to see how things develop of the next few years and if BLP (which as it currently stands looks like it can replace EVERY sort of fossil fuel using system from cars to powerplants) will indeed fulfill it's promise or be crushed under big oil interests.

T'Zairis said...

Max--

"If this is true, then why is NASA's official explanation the Jet Stream?"

More gate-keeping. If they admit to an anomalous effect, that opens the door to the higher dimensional physics (in an electromagnetically driven Universe), which in turn, opens the door to 'exotic' technology (like the Motionless Mag Motor and the Priore Devices that are explained on Tom Bearden's site) that flows from the physics.

I personally think that is one of the main reasons they buried Tesla's stuff so darned fast (via FBI confiscation) after his death. Yeah, they ( and by 'they', I mean greed-heads both corporate and political) did want the technology, but mainly, they wanted to bury the physics around Tesla's inventions, because if people understood the physics, then they too could create Tesla-type devices that *the greed-heads can't put a meter on*. We should have been tapping the zero-point energy field since the early 1900's, because the basic physics was there, as were the inventions, via Tesla. The whole situation is beyond disgusting...

Peace,

T'Zairis

Valkyrie Ice said...

I commented on Huffpo about an article discussing the findings by the probe out near the edge of the solar system that the particulate matter (gases ions, and atoms) were clustered into a "ribbon" which is pretty much what you would expect to find if the matter driven by the solar wind was meeting the inside of a double walled plasma shell. As such it further strengthens the case for an Electric Universe.

I was immediately attacked as a lunatic, told not to dismiss a theory just because I didn't understand it, and "disproven" by little more than personal insults.

When I pointed out that the attacker was "dismissing a theory without understanding it himself" and directed him to a link showing the IEEE's research papers on plasma cosmology, he refused to even read the abstracts because it was obvious they were just written by crackpot Fringe nutjobs.

When I pointed out he was basically denying any evidence against his belief system and asked him to link one single paper which verified the actual existence of "Dark Matter" as anything other than a mathematical placeholder for the missing mass needed to verify a "gravity only" universe, he flat out refused.

Then I got a second poster telling me I was spreading "junk science" again without any evidence to back him up.

Well, time will certainly tell, no?

marsandro said...

Why Val!

I'm surprised at you!

Don't you realize that these people OBVIOUSLY are
crack observers?

After all, like I always say---:

"The First Duty of Science is OBSERVATION."

(...wink - wink...)

:-)

Hathor -- Speeding up the clock...

;-)

P.S.: And as I said before...

...when the theory and observations don't agree...

...you knowwwwww what must be done....

:-))))

T'Zairis said...

Valkyrie--

When they start trotting out the 'junk science' and ad hominem attacks, it is because they have *nothing* with which to refute your actual data. Standard Cosmology has been in serious trouble for decades-- black holes and dark matter are simply mathematical ad hocs to get the right numbers for a gravity-only model of the Universe. When the ad hocs are accompanied by 'data adjustments' to make everything fit the preconceived theory, that's a major sign that said theory has the equivalent of a sucking chest-wound and is about to expire.

So I'd say, pity those who resort to ad hominem nonsense-- they are trying to hide the unpleasant fact that their own data bolsters your position, which in turn means they have completely misunderstood what the heck is going on. Plus I am sure that they are massively displeased to find out that, at the end of the day, they are every bit as wrong and as hidebound as the church fathers who castigated Copernicus for daring to propose that the Earth orbited the Sun. Since their reputation for erudition and expertise in their chosen field(s) is crashing down around them as we speak, it's natural to think that some of them might be a wee bit peeved and cranky...

Peace,

T'Zairis

T'Zairis said...

I also pity those who are finding out right about now that kissing miles and miles of thesis-advisor cellulite-data-butt does *not* constitute rigorous academic research...

Peace,

T'Zairis

marsandro said...

Hi T'Zairis,

HEAR-HEAR!!!!!


Hi Val,

I trust you realize that I was merely being

"sar(ca)s(t)ic"

of course!

< o\|/
(= o-)p
< o/|\

:-)

Hathor -- Enjoying morning tea with Val and the Tigress

;-)

T'Zairis said...

Marsandro--

I am making a batch of refrigerator tea (organic Green Jasmine) as we speak, so that I can sip something both fragrant and refreshing as I keep tabs on the latest NASA nonsense...

Peace,

T'Zairis

Valkyrie Ice said...

I've been doing a lot of laughing at the naysayers and denyers of reality lately, especially the republican party.

What most people don't realize is that until this year, I had never heard of EU or plasma cosmology. I have been an avid follower of most science for my whole life and as a amateur futurist, I have followed Physics and Astrophysics as closely as a non mathematician self trained in the fields avid reader can.

But I am also a very firm believer in EVIDENCE. EVIDENCE trumps THEORY at every turn.

I am not convinced of the Electro machining of planetary surfaces section of the theory, nor 100% certain of the Saturn myth (earth once having orbited the sun with saturn in a polar stack as part of a system slowly mergeing into this one) but the Plasma cosmology parts are pretty sound, and contain better explanations for observed data than the "official" ones do.

I'm a computer repair tech. I understand electricity. electricity in plasma works in vacuum tubes and CRTs why would it not work in space?