Dr. Liara Covert

Holistic Coach
Breathwork Psychotherapist
Sunshine Coast, Queensland


Quote of the Day

"Conscious breathing synchronized with simple body movements, can be the fastest way to feel inner balance, peace and well-being.  It is also the fastest way to energize and shift your state of mind. - Colin Chenery


 Dream Builders Australia

Life Coach Australia



Linked In


*Mastering Time

(Feb 2018)

Amazon UK

Amazon US

365 Paths to Love

Contact us directly 

Be Your Dream

Amazon UK

Amazon US

Transform Your Life

Amazon UK

Amazon US

Daily inspirational quotes about life from the book Transform your life - 730 Inspirations

Cosmic Synchronicity

Amazon UK

Amazon US

This book helps your recognise challenges and overcome fear


Amazon UK

Amazon US

145 inspirational quotes to motivate your to be honset with yourself and solve your problems.




This area does not yet contain any content.
This area does not yet contain any content.
« Soul work invites attention | Main | Caroline Myss & what is soul-level thinking? »

Andrew D. Basiago & Time travel & Life on Mars

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, high technology and what is realTake the idea to your own dreamscape and discover for yourself what is real?


PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (78)

Hi Liara .. I would like to watch this .. and I'll come back to it .. sometime, just now I need to get on.

Sounds very interesting ..
Hilary Melton-Butcher
Positive Letters Inspirational Stories
September 3, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterHilary
People, think critically..

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.
September 7, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterFranco
Franco, we welcome your views. It would be helpful if you would share your background and connections to Project Pegasus, Scientific or other affiliation and credentials. Someone can easily look up the data you provide in an encyclopedia. Just because you read something, does not mean its the truth. Many examples reveal media condition the mind for ulterior motives.

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 .
September 7, 2009 | Registered CommenterLiara Covert
Hilary, human beings are conditioned to have selective awareness about different levels of truth. People adopt views based on sources of information and forget the real issue is actually why you make a particular choice. What would happen if it came to a person's attenton perceived differences and judgments are actually a matter of preference or avoidance of fear? As a person asks honestly the basis for beliefs, that person realizes they are the substance behind every decision, perception, thought and behaviour.
September 7, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterLiara Covert
Thank you for your thoughtful response. I agree with you when you say that “someone can easily look up the data… in an encyclopedia.” That having been said, I believe that it is important to present the scientific basis of my arguments if I am going to take exception to Mr Basiago’s story. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary substantiation. In absence of verifiable, contravening data, one is left little choice but to accept the data in hand. Although I want to believe Mr Basiago, I will not do so at the expense of reason.

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.
September 7, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterFranco
Franco, dialogue is welcomed. Thanks for sharing a bit about your background. This helps people understand your viewpoints. One's community naturally shapes what one perceives as truth and mental tools used to '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:
September 7, 2009 | Registered CommenterLiara Covert
Liara, you make some fine points about open-mindedness. I, too, believe that we cannot be so dogmatic in our point-of-view that we fail to recognize its limitations. We must continually allow for the emergence of contradictory evidence in our explorations. It is through the resolution of these contradictions that more comprehensive “truths” arise. Most often, contradictions are an anormalous aspect of a larger set of congruent data, exceptions to the rule if you will. Mr. Basiago’s subjective, first–hand account of his alleged teleportation to Mars demands that we abandon a larger set of verifiable data to accommodate a subset of unverifiable data which arose from his singulary unique experience. In the doing, we move from the world of scientific reason into the realm of fanciful conjecture. Mr. Basiago’s capacity for baseless claims undermines the entire body of his ideas.
September 8, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterFranco
Franco, dialogue can be helpful to broaden perspective and understanding. As one reflects on History of Science, one finds many examples of claims made by scientific individuals that are initially rejected by authorities because new ideas threaten control and collective "knowing" of a given era. Consider these examples;

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.
September 8, 2009 | Registered CommenterLiara Covert
Liara, thank you for another fine response. I cannot take issue with your brief synopsis. Indeed, new ideas very often meet fierce resistance from the established order. This is why everyone of the individuals you cite were meticulous in the collection of data through observation and experimentation. They understood that the validity of their ideas rested squarely upon the veracity of their data. To a person, they were careful not to present an idea for “peer review” that was not backed up by ample substantiation. Upon review, they provided the means by which their data could be verified independantly. Conversely, Mr. Basiago has provided zero substantiation of his most exraordinary claim, his teleportation to Mars. I, therefore, suggest that you would be better served by comparing him to Dr. Robert Lazar, Dr. Bill Deagle, and Dr. Dan Burisch (to name a few).
September 8, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterFranco
Franco, let's take a different approach. What would you require as "evidence" or "substantiation" to alter your current beliefs about Andrew Basiago and your current perception of Life on Mars?
September 8, 2009 | Registered CommenterLiara Covert
Liara, I need no convincing that there is extra-terrestrial intelligent life in the universe. I do not subscribe to the notion that vast distances negate the possibility of interstellar travel. In fact, I believe that there is a very strong possibility that earth is being visited by EBEs. I, also, believe that interdimensional visitations by EBEs may be occuring. I have been an enthusiast of these Ideas for more then fifty years. However, I see scores of oppurtunists cynically taking advantage of those who desperately want to believe. Each new claim, is more fantastic then those that went before. Yet, the standard by which we traditionally measure these claims is now considered passe from a post-modern perspective. In absence of a reasoned approach, UFOlogy has become little more then a pop religion. The idea that an unqualified belief in EBEs is a necessary precursor to our entrance into a 21st century paradigm has become the new dogma; and, many of the high priests of UFOlogy have become the money changers in the temple. If an individual fails to accept their extraordinary claims, at face value, then he/she is considered to be a doubting Thomas. I refuse to allow those who are capitalizing from their claims to dictate to me where the threshold of credibilty should lie. I reserve the right to challenge their claims in the name of objective, verifiable truth. If you want me to believe that there is life on Mars, then provide me with the means by which I can arrive at the same conclusion
September 8, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterFranco
Franco, your points are well-taken and this dialogue is meaningful. People do exist who's intention it is to mislead. Yet, that does not mean everyone has this intention. How do you discern someone's intention and interests? One perspective is that what you see or do not see in someone else is proportional to how you accept or reject parts of yourself. It is through interacting with others that humans are invited to better understand themselves. Thoughts are powerful forces. You change your reality by altering your beliefs about both 'it' and yourself. The physical eyes you use to see actually shape what you see. This is shown now in quantum physics. Perception is not passive, it is an act of creation.

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.
September 8, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterLiara Covert
Liara, I have experienced altered states of being that defy explanation. I have experienced the cessation of time and space, where all polar opposites become integrated into a unified state of beingness. I have experienced a point of psychic singularity where all things emerge from nothingness. I have experienced the fount of infinite joy that comes from union with the Word that comprises all being. I know what it means to be in a state of perfect innocense. These are the type of claims that you, as a reader, would have to take at face value; they are admittedly non-verifiable. They fall squarely in the realm of meta-physics. If another individual has had like experiences, there is no need to explain to him/her the profundity of such states. To the person who has not experienced these states, no amount of words are adequate to the task of providing an apt description. It is for this reason that I refrain from talking about such experiences. Yet, these experiences have defined the outside limits of my world view. Even though I know that all of creation has the same essence, my senses tell me that our four dimensional reality is comprised of an infinite variety of forms. It is by means of this divide, that I understand that there are realities beyond the range of our five senses. Are there dimensions higher than time/space? String theory contends that there are. Do conscious beings have access to these dimensions? I do not know for certain… but consciousness certainly does; if our four dimensions are an indicator of the way that consciousness becomes self realized, then I would have to conclude that there is in infinite variety of forms in all higher dimensions. Are some of these forms conscious? More so then us, I suspect. Do these being have the capacity to move interdimensionaly? I suspect that they possess the faculties to experience all of the dimesnsions, to which they have access, simultaneously. If they occupy time/space then why can’t we see them? If they exist, they could be standing directly next to us and we would never know it. For that matter, they could be occupying the same space as us and we would be unaware of their presence.
September 8, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterFranco
Franco, thank you for your profound reply. When I worked a space agency, my perception was quite different than it is now. My Ph.D. grew out of a unique case study which may interest you in another place. Life experience teaches that school and society do not offer "complete" education. Practical experience opens you to things nobody ever tells you, yet you slowly figure them out for yourself.

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.
September 9, 2009 | Registered CommenterLiara Covert
Liara, I appreciate your indulgence. In my last post I uncharacteristically shared with you a few experiences that have defined the outside limits of my field of experience. I did so, in part, to demonstrate that I do not rely soley on ‘reason” to strike a balance between my inner and outer worlds. I readily acknowledge that reason has its limitations. I understand the folly of shoehorning certain experiences into a rational framework. This having been said, I believe that it is perfectly appropriate to put certain claims to the test of reason when they fall within its domain. You have attributed my resistance to Mr. Basiago's claims to a “falsely conditioned part” of myself while basing this conclusionon on the misperception that I strongly resist “accepting Basiago's claims about entities on Mars and inter-dimensional travel.” If you review my original post you will see that I only take exception to the claim that human life can sustain itself on the surface of mars without the aid of a pressurized suit and respirator. The test of this claim falls well within the realm of reason. I went on to state that if any element of Mr. Basiago's story proves to be false, then his entire story must be viewed with a jaundiced eye. Respectfully, I suggest that you examine closely your own need to misinterpret my statements.

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.
September 9, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterFranco
Hey Franco,

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.
September 9, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterSeattleGator
Franco, dialogue is always useful if you choose to view it that way. It is possible to misinterpret words and you may have done so here.

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.
September 9, 2009 | Registered CommenterLiara Covert
SeattleGator, some people make decisions based on intutive choices. Other people use reason or contemplate. This raises the timeless exchanges involving Science & Faith. Many people are unaware how they come to their own conclusions, how they rationalize, what influences their thought process or even why they believe what they do. Dialogue brings many hidden things to the surface.
September 9, 2009 | Registered CommenterLiara Covert
SeattleGator, thank you for your response. Here is an “encyclopedic” quote for you:

“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
September 9, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterFranco
Consider food for thought;

"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?
September 10, 2009 | Registered CommenterLiara Covert

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.