Andrew D. Basiago & Time travel & Life on Mars
Wednesday, September 2, 2009 at 11:57AM This conversation with Andrew D. Basiago shares Hidden History of Life on Mars. He claims that life not only exists, but thrives here beyond common understandings of what is possible. He is a figure in the disclosure movement who pinpoints how time travel and teleportation technology exist and have been suppressed by authorities for eons. He is a real-life chrononaut. In this segment of a fascinating, six-hour interview, you gain insight into time travel and soul-level remote viewing that reveal how the cosmos actually is.
Using teleportation, Basiago discovers forty years before he published a seminal paper, that Tesla-based teleportation technology existed. In fact, the U.S. government was involved in Project Pegasus. Andy's father was on a team building high performance jet engines for aerospace projects for the U.S. defense department and achieved supersonic speed. Andy was taught quantum access data and prepared for what is now.
The government was sending humans forward in time to gather artifacts and bring them back. His father had future insight into how his son would be involved in disclosure of Martian life later in life. As it stands, Andy is expanding the understanding of science and technology in the perception of time.
Listen to this (and other segments) and share your impressions. How does the interview invite you to re-think your conditioned notions of time, fear, advanced technology and what is realTake the idea to your own dreamscape and discover for yourself what is real?
Reader Comments (78)
Sounds very interesting ..
Hilary Melton-Butcher
Positive Letters Inspirational Stories
The composition of Mars' atmosphere:
95.3 percent carbon dioxide
2.7 percent nitrogen
1.6 percent argon
0.2 percent oxygen
In contrast, Earth's atmosphere consists of 78.1 percent nitrogen, 20.9 percent oxygen, 0.9 percent argon and 0.1 percent carbon dioxide and other gases. Conclusion, the atomosphere on mars is not breathable. Yet, Mr. Basiago claims that he could readily breathe the air upon the surface of mars without the aid of a respirator.
The average recorded temperature on Mars is -63° C (-81° F) with a maximum temperature of 20° C (68° F) and a minimum of -140° C (-220° F). Even if we assume the Mr. Basiago arrived when the temperature was at its peak, his claim that the “breathable” air was “hot” does not ring true.
The mean daily barometric pressure observed by Viking Lander 1 was as low as 6.8 millibars; at other times of the year it was as high as 9.0 millibars. The pressures at the Viking Lander 2 site were 7.3 and 10.8 millibars. In comparison, the average pressure of the Earth is 1000 millibars (sea level). According to the Armstrong Limit, often called Armstrong's Line, an atmospheric pressure below 61.8 millibars causes water to boil at the normal temperature of the human body (98.6 °F). The very low levels of atmospheric pressure found upon the surface of Mars would have vaporized Mr. Basiago blood within minutes of his arrival; consequentially, he would die of asphyxiation, even if he had enough oxygen to breath.
Conclusion: Andrew D. Basiago is lying when he says that he was teleported to the surface of mars.
Admittedly, different perspectives exist on this topics discussed by Basiago. In fact, what Basiago shares is discussed in part since the days of Percival Lowell. In case you are unaware, he studied Caparelli's work and built the Lowell Observatory in Arizona to help prove Mars exists. If you go back as far as the 1880s, evidence has been gathered to corroborate what Basiago is saying. Yet he offers expanded insights.
It is useful to recognize that what governments and space agencies publish in the name of Science, and which peer reviewed articles are published, do not always reflect the truth. You are invited to listen to more of the interview and also listen to a rebroadcast of Dr. Steven Greer's speech entitled "The Promise of New Energy" at the European Exopolitics Summit 2009. Also check this-http://www.theorionproject.org .
I, too, believe that “governments and space agencies” are capable of telling mis-truths. However, in the doing, they run the very real risk of being publicly discredited by competing interests. For instance, China is planning to launch its first Mars probe in Oct of 2009, in a joint mission with Russia. How would it look if its’ sensors generated a set of physical measurements that completely contradict those published by NASA?
If I were to tell you that my background was in astrophysics, would that fact lend additional weight to my perception that Mr Basiago’s story must be false? The veracity of his claims need only stand up to the test of reason.
Consider that reason does not determine whether a claim is true or false. In fact, reason can be the very thing that obscures a clear view of truth. It is said the rationale behind positions taken is shaped by one's beliefs and underlying mentalities. Why every person thinks as he does is shaped by external influences. Why you trust some info sources more than others tells you a lot about self.
If you assume "what is" is based solely on what you think you already know, you could be missing something. Take the example of NASA's research into extra-terrestrial life. The public is told this is based on carbon. If you presume all life forms are like yourself or what is familiar, then this may be seen as presumptuous and could overlook key exceptions.
Another interesting case is what is sometimes viewed as 'The Pluto Controversy.' NASA launched The New Horizons spacecraft in January 2006 and it is said to require 9 years to reach the celestial body. A key motivation to obtain photos is to build a case for the supposed identity of Pluto. Historically, it was deemed a planet officially by the an international authority, but this gesture has political and other motives that are not consensus. Some of the Scientific community claims its an asteroid, a piece of a comet, and other things. Additional photos are viewed as potential evidence to prove a case. Yet, ultimately, does identity matter? Consider to whom the identity matters and why. A power struggle raises issues of fear and pride.
As a person does some research, turns out Andrew does offer scientific corroboration for his claims. His work refers to such individuals as Schiaparelli, Lowell, Tesla, DiPietro, Molenaar, Carlotto, Hoagland, Drasin, McDaniel, Pillinger, Hancock, Van Flanderen, Skipper, Brown, Webre, and other respected scientists. Yet, the claims matter less perhaps than why certain people feel threatened by them.
If Mars is indeed inhabited, this has implications some people are not ready to accept. If what you have been taught is no longer valid, what next? In this case, let's say the planet is inhabited. If so, it belongs to Martians. This raises questions with scientific, diplomatic and environmental implications that humans have not even begun to ponder, much less publicly debate. Issues of control and possession are delicate. Consider how more than 8 countries claim ownership of Antarctica and multiple countries stake claim on resources in the arctic. If everyone agreed to equal ownership and vested interests were not at play, reasons for competition and conflict over control of territory would not exist.
In regard to teleporation, consider possible implications for current controlling interests of energy, transport and military industries. Implications are significant. Dr. Steven Greer presents startling points in a talk on "The Promise of New Energy" at the European Exopolitics Summit 2009. Consider the well-documented case for the electric car. Such vehicles were experimented with years ago by car companies who loaned them to celebrities. The cars were deemed to be too efficient by controlling interests and many were destroyed. Now, look at the state of the car industry. Truth cannot be suppressed forever.
Readers interested in part of Andrew's basis for his claims are invited to read his landmark paper, entitled Discovery of Life on Mars:
http://exopolitics.blogs.com/files/mars---andrew-d.-basiago---the-discovery-of-life-on-mars---12-12-08.pdf
Galileo Galilei was placed under house arrest by the Pope for offering "evidence" to prove the sun-centered universe (currently accepted doctrine).
Nicolaus Copernicus did not know a similar fate for similar views, but he died before his main books were published. Copernicus documented vast celestial observations 100 years before the telescope was invented. Many of his initial observations of the universe were rejected because they were made with an un-aided eye and went against the mainstream thought of his era. Just after his death, his books caused huge commotion for the Catholic Church. Johannes Kepler shared similar views as well, but was not arrested by the Pope as he was Protestant and an imperial astronomer in another country. Nonetheless, he experienced resistance.
Each occasion one encounters thought that goes against what one believes, does not mean new ideas are necessarily incorrect. Underlying reasons for resistance invite deeper self-reflection.
You may be interested in a book called The Faith of Scientists (in their own words). This work offers insight into such scientists as Galileo, Johannes Kepler, Francis Bacon, Isaac Newton, Charles Darwin, and Albert Einstein, to modern-day scientists like Carl Sagan, Stephen Jay Gould, Jane Goodall, Freeman Dyson, Stephen Hawking, Edward O. Wilson, and Ursula Goodenough. Every one encountered opposition to seminal ideas. One very well-known quote by Einstein is "Great spirits have always encountered opposition by mediocre minds."
A thought provoking perspective is that ALL scientists are on some level inventors and this requires anti-science thinking. The Wright brothers said: "Science theory held us up for years. When we threw out all science, started from experiment and experience, then we invented the airplane." Someone once said, when in doubt, ask a bumblebee why it is not scientifically possible for it to fly.
If I understand you, what you seem to want Basiago to do is put his information into a context you understand. Human beings are conditioned to do this. Each person trains his mind to see information through the senses and context he has. What form of information about life on Mars would you view as credible and believable?
Among the points you make, you say you "believe there is a strong possibility the earth is being visited by ETs," yet you do not specify the basis for this "feeling." Could this be faith? Intuition, a sixth sense or, other insight? Please elaborate.
In essence, all humans are energy. Some are more awakened to the inner truth than others, although everyone is in the process of awakening. This site is created to encourage people to grow more aware of the reasons behind their own beliefs and resistance so they can be understood and released. As people grow more accepting of what they already know deep inside, they align their sense of expanding consciousness and multi-sensual experience with how they limit their waking life.
The reason I ask the question that prompted your last reflections is to invite you to be more aware of an opportunity to align levels of your conscious awareness. You reply you know inter-dimensional existence and have a strong sense of the presence of formless and even non-terrestrial entities. You state there is a strong possibility ETs visit us now. You refer to metaphysics and other scientific theory to help the mind accept what it cannot explain in "human terms."
Nonethless, the scientific side of you still seems to resist accepting Basiago's claims about entities on Mars and inter-dimensional travel because this does not fall into your rational context of understanding. In essence, a falsely conditioned part of you resists what other parts of you state quite clearly you experience. It is always possible to align different levels of consciousness. Insodoing, you gradually accept more of your true self.
Consider why scientific theory cannot be fixed, why it is evolutionary. Recall before Columbus sailed to America, the accepted scientific belief was you would sail off the horizon as the world was believed to be flat. We have a very different sense of 'truth' now, and it is still evolving. Stephen Hawking, for instance, is constantly pushing the boundaries of quantum physics. In fact, concepts raised in programs like Star Trek are limiting because realities are in fact, unlimited. The human mind cannot grasp infinity. To suspect the truth involves more than you consciously realize, to believe in this possibility, know and then experience it, are different levels of awareness that can be aligned. One perspective is this is why humans exist now. In this view, space is not the final frontier, nothingness is.
When you claim that that “reason does not determine whether a claim is true or false,” I am forced to question your judgement. Are you saying that, in some rare instances, reason fails to be the final arbiter of what's true? Or, are you making a blanket statement that reason is never capable of revealing the truth? Do you honestly believe that material claims should not be viewed with an eye to logical consistancy? Is there no such thing as objective, verifiable truth? Can you demonstarte to me where in the physical universe One plus One does not equal Two? Clearly, the claim that One plus One equals Three should not be taken at face value. Respectfully, I suggest that you examine closely your own need to mitigate the veracity of appropriately applied reason.
In response to my claim that many UFOlogists are cynically exploting belief in UFO related phenomena to their own financial advantage, you respond by stating “People do exist who's intention it is to mislead. Yet, that does not mean everyone has this intention.” I never said that “everyone has this intention.” Armed with this gross mischaracterization however, you go on to surmise that “what you see or do not see in someone else is proportional to how you accept or reject parts of yourself.” The import of this statement is clear… if someone finds fault with the unsubstantiated claims of others, then the propensity to do so must be interpreted in terms of projection only. Respectfully, I suggest that if you use the same falacious model to examine your unwarranted criticisms (however subtle) of my reason-based perspective it wouldn’t speak kindly to your own intent.
In the three examples above you have made assumptions that clearly service the view that it is appropriate to accept Mr. Basiago's entire story at face value. In each case, I believe that I have demonstrated that your “reasoning” is either false or misleading. Yet I wouldn’t be so presumptuous as to lecture you on the “falsely conditioned part” of youself that prevents you from gradually gaining acceptance of your true self. Rather, I would focus on the fact that you have afforded me the opportunity to air my views unreservedly. Furthermore, I would close by applauding your courage to defend Mr. Basiago's case in his absence.
If I were to ask you if your background was in intelligence, would that fact lend additional weight to my perception that you are a spook and a debunker at all costs? The veracity of your claims need only stand up to the test of reason... I believe Andrew's story more than your encyclopedia entry.
By "falsely conditioned," my intention is to suggest that external conditioning trains the conscious mind to think and react based on presumed limits when the inner self has a very different understanding of the way things are. This internal dis-alignment exists regardless whether you choose to believe in Basiago's claims. To recognize part of you believes in or knows something and part of you also resists, draws attention to imbalance. You can reconcile internal differences and align or, not. One can choose to raise awareness or not. That is free will. Many perspectives exist. Each is a valuable teacher and potential opportunity.
“The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge.” Albert Einstein
"Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted, counts." -Sign hanging in Albert Einstein's office at Princeton.
"We must be willing to let go of the life we planned so as to have the life that is waiting for us." - E. M. Forester
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." -Mahatma Gandhi
One perspective in circulation is that human beings actually came from the stars. Some people resist ideas that seem too different from what they are taught. If human ancestors are indeed from the stars or somewhere other than Earth, and this becomes a collective revelation, then this would have profound implications for expanded awareness, consciousness, and changes that would bring the world closer together. As people learn to tell the difference between the truth and a lie, what is constructive and destructive, and you realize you have choices, perception shifts dramatically. What are you creating or destroying with your thought? How does what you do help or hinder humanity as a whole and affect your true self?