Michael Bara is an aerospace engineer. Many strange things are going on in NASA and he and Richard C. Hoagland have written a book entitled "Dark Mission", which talks about what is really going on in that agency. It will surprise you, to say the least.

Ken, webmaster of About Facts Net. http://aboutfacts.net Webmaster@aboutfacts.net

Graphic Source: Michael Bara

Ken:

Would you describe the face on mars for us and the structure that it is on top of.

Face On Mars From Original Viking Mission
Photo Source: Enlarged Portion Of NASA Photo

Michael Bara:

The face as it is called, is a pretty popular feature. It appears to be sitting.... the people that argue that it is natural I think, to me, they would have to be blind. Basically what you have is this platform that rises up off this flat plane in a place called Cydonia. It has two parallel very long side edges to it that are running around the top and on the bottom, so that the platform is beveled. It comes up to a point that is equal all the way around, in others words it is beveled all the way around this mesa or this object. It comes up to a certain point where it is level then there seems to be other stuff on top of that level. Basically you've got all the features of a face that you would want. You have a couple of brow edges, you have a couple of eye sockets in the right place. The highest point on this face, if you were looking at the object straight on, the highest point would be the tip of the nose. The nose goes down pretty much what would be the proper distance for a human face. There are what certainly seem to be, under higher resolution, nostrils in the nose. There is something that looks like a rudimentary mouth and there are earlier images that show that there might be teeth in the mouth. On none of the newer and better images have we seen those. It still raises the question in my mind if we are really getting the real pictures or unaltered pictures of the face, especially on the left hand eye socket as you are looking at the face? It appears to be a very human eye. There is an oval shape exactly like a human eye, there is an object that appears to be a pupil within the eye and there is a little area that even seems to represent a tear duct. You have all the structure that you would expect to see in an eye on that right hand side and at higher resolutions you have sort of got this grid like pattern. It clearly looks artificial to me, like a cellular structure on this part of the face that is exposed, supporting the eye and the eye structure. It's a little bit better. The eye structure on the other side the eastern side of the face might be a little more degraded or collapsed or as some people have suggested including Richard, it may have been meant to be two different faces, one half human, one half more feline. That is kind of an interpretation, I am open to that, but I don't really know. In any event, it looks so much like a face, it has so many features of a human face or a half human half feline face, that at any point I can't argue that it is anything but an artificial construct.

Ken:

Why do you think that NASA is guarding the true identity of the Face On Mars so closely and is doing everything in their power, including altering photos, to hide the fact that this is a true artificial monument?

Michael Bara:

They are giving us data, they are not giving us data that is good enough to prove the thesis one way or another. And/or another possibility is and I believe that they are altering the Mars Global Surveyor Images and the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter Images, to take out features that would clearly mark the face as artificial. I think that they are doing this and you asked the question why? I think that the last thing that NASA wants to admit is that there was an ancient, highly advanced race, because it would have had to be highly advanced to build some of the structures we see around the face and the face itself. They do not want to admit that ancient advanced civilizations ever existed on Mars. The reason is that they would have to give out an explanation of what happened to them, how they were suddenly wiped out, because that is apparently what happened. So as to exactly why they would want to cover it up. I am not sure, other than the fact that they would have to answer some very uncomfortable questions.

Ken:

Do you think that we are familiar with the type of material that the face is made of?

Michael Bara:

That is a really interesting question, again, That is something that Richard really covers extensively in his first book, "The Monuments of Mars". He comes up with a lot of ideas about how this thing is a truss structure, but the thing of it is we do know by some thermal images that we got from the THEMIS spacecraft in 2002. What we know is at the left side and right side of the face or that the west side and east side of the face appear to be made of different material. Now whether that means that one side had the casing or the top part of it eroded and one side hasn't, I don't know. Whether it means that they were constructed from different materials I am not sure, but clearly you can see the compositional separation. The two sides of the face are made of different materials. Exactly what those materials are we don't know, because we don't know how to calibrate the images that we have gotten from the infrared, the THEMIS images, so that the point is that we have all the data that can tell us that the left side and the right side are different and it goes right down to what we perceive to be the center line of the face. It doesn't really tell us what those materials are.

Ken:

I am interested in the reflective properties of the face. It is said that it reflects 99.9 percent of all light that shines on it. Could the face be coated with some sort of material that glows or could there be some sort of power source inside the monument that lights it up and that light is what we see?

Michael Bara:

Again there is another THEMIS image taken in I think 2003, which we do discuss again in Dark Mission, that shows this incredible reflective property of the eastern half or the right side of the face when you are looking at it in the normal way. It is a pre-dawn image where the sun hasn't even risen yet. It is like the early part of dawn, where you just begin to see the light. It was taken at 4:30 in the morning, local Martian time. There is an incredible reflective aspect to that that implies that it is made of some highly reflective mirror type material or as you say, it is made of some material that is retaining an incredible amount of heat through the Martian night, which is an incredible feat in and of itself. It is a pretty incredible feat, if it is really doing that. We have some good stuff from some thermal infrared imaging from Cydonia that was leaked to us in 2002, or was leaked to anyone that went to the right website at the time. When it is properly processed it seems to show this vast city below the monuments of Mars, below the Cydonia plane. We think that the ground below the Cydonia Plane is not ground, it is really ice. On top of that ice is a very thin layer of reddish dust, the kind that you see everywhere on Mars. This imagery may have been penetrating down into the underneath part. The problem is what we saw, the detail that we saw in these leaked images was so bright and so extensive that you really wouldn't have seen that much on the return of the signal, unless the power was on. Somebody had left the lights on down there. That is a possibility that we have to consider, because we firmly believe that the imagery we received is real and it is definitely in conflict with what is now posted on the THEMIS website. We have already proven that they have changed the specific website with the image on it after our guy Keith Langley downloaded it, the original, so that everything is on the table. The issue is once you say that there is something artificial on Mars, then every explanation is automatically on the table. You can't say that there couldn't possibly be anything alive down there, there couldn't possibly be anything still active down there. The data pushes you to say that the only way we can explain this is that there is still power down there, there is still heat.

Ken:

This brings a question to mind that I hadn't written down, but it would seem to me that if this is the case and there is a power source it would have to be nuclear or it would have to be coming from inside the planet itself to still be around after millions of years, what do you think?

Michael Bara:

Yeah or it could be some alternative source of power that we haven't figured out yet, what Richard likes to talk about, a hyper dimensional source of power. The thing is that even nuclear....., we place the civilization that was wiped out on Mars, at least the civilization that built the monuments on Mars at about 65 million years ago. I don't know of anything that could stay going for 65 million years. The question is that the underground city that we see, is that a previous epoch or is it a more recent epoch? Either way, it appears to be abandoned, it appears to be in ruins. and yet there still does seem to be some energy emanating from it, or at least heat, because heat is what is showing up in the thermal infrared. Yeah I could speculate, but I really don't know.

Ken:

You state in the book that the face is made up of polygonal segments such as is used on computers to build images in programs like games. Could this image be constructed that way to alert us to the fact that the face might contain some fantastic futuristic computing facilities?.

Michael Bara:

No, that is not what we meant. What we talked about was that the face does have, this one thermal infrared image you can clearly see geometric panel structure on the right side and on other images around the eye structure we see the grid pattern that vaguely resembles some of Buckminster Fuller's petra eagle. They seem to be built up of a lot of little triangles. The analogy we were making was that, that is how everything is archived now. They build billions of little triangles put together to make the shape, either smooth, round or 3D shapes that we see in computer games like Doom 3 and Quake 4 and things like that. So that is the kind of analogy that we are making, that maybe there is something fundamental about that type of construction. that makes it inherently strong or inherently desirable as a means of building.

Ruins In Crater On Mars
Photo Source: NASA's Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter

Ken:

You weren't intending to say that, that might be a message of any kind?

Michael Bara:

No, I don't know because of the mathematical message that Richard talks about that seems to be focused on tetrahedrons and really when you are talking about triangles you are talking about little solid tetrahedrons. building all these shapes up in the 3D software, so that's interesting, an interesting analogy, maybe the face is made up of a lot of little pyramids.

Ken:

How long do you think that NASA can keep this secret and do you think that they can ultimately prevent private companies and other countries from getting into space and discovering these things?

Michael Bara:

Well that is an interesting question again. How long can NASA keep a lid on this? I think that they can keep a lid on it as long as they want, because there is a massive segment of the population that doesn't believe anything until they are told by the anchor on CNN, or they are told by the president, or some authority figure like NASA scientists, to believe it. If they are not told to believe it, they never will. I think that is a huge amount of our population that thinks that way. As we look at our culture, in my opinion we are becoming dumber and dumber. Our schools are useless, I am not going to tell you what my political affiliation is, but I am appalled by the way the schools have just deteriorated in the last 20 or 30 years since I went to school and they weren't that great then. We don't teach science anymore, we don't teach critical thinking anymore, we teach our kids what to think, we inoculate them with all this propaganda and tell them what to think and not how to think. As a result of that we just don't have kids that are very bright anymore They just don't think for themselves. They are dependant on experts to tell them this is real and this is true, or that's real and that's true. So I think that unless NASA wants to come out for some reason and say yes this stuff is for real, a huge segment of the population is never going to believe it no matter how much evidence we might amass.

Ken:

I agree with you on that.

You infer, you already spoke about this, you inferred that Mars contains ruins of cities, both in Cydonia and other areas. Tell us about the photos that were taken of them by the Russian infrared cameras

Michael Bara:

Back in 1989, about 13 or 14 years previous to the THEMIS infrared images of Cydonia and some other parts of Mars, there was a Russian mission called, .Fobos-2 that went to Mars and took a series of thermal infrared images. These were the first ones ever taken of the planet. They took an image that showed a pattern basically underneath the ground that looked like a city scrape. It looked pretty much like Los Angeles. At the time there was a program on British tv where a scientist came out and said, if this photograph was taken on earth we would assume it was a buried city and we would go out and excavate it and try to see what was under there. I think the guy's name was Arthur John Dekel and there was also some Russian scientists at the time who revealed the data and they concurred with that opinion. Later on we had kind of a confirmation of that in the same thermal images of Cydonia. That sort of city type pattern is around on more than one place on Mars.

Ken:
Since we are talking about photos, would you please tell my readers, what a pixel is and the difference the size of the materials makes in the photographic process.

Michael Bara:

Sure, a pixel is just a picture element and a unit, I guess, of measurement in a digital image. In other words one pixel can make up a certain amount of space, if you have a certain amount of information in it. In cases of thermal infrared images, it can have color values assigned to it. In a gray scale image, which is what most of the photography on Mars is, it generally has a color value from 0 to 255. That is 256 different shades of gray that pixel can represent. Using digital enhancement techniques you can sort of take one pixel and from that pixel you can determine what other pixels around it, what color they are and you can use that to take a guess or do an average of the whole area, so when we talk about pixel resolution as a for instance, one meter per pixel resolution is really good, meaning about a yard stick, 39 inches I guess it is, One meter, imagine that distance. What it means is that each pixel in a given digital image represents one square meter of space, so it would be, you know a 39 inch stick, about a yard stick in a square shape would be represented by one pixel. At that resolution you can resolve highways, roads and you can resolve vehicles on the road. You can't tell what the vehicle is. I mean you can tell semi trucks and tractor trailers from individual passenger cars. That is a good example of what one meter per pixel will get you. Some of them, the new images like the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter gets down to much smaller than that, just a few inches per pixel and really the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter images, they are better than one meter per pixel most of the time, depending on lighting, depending on contrast values and a whole bunch of camera settings, whether there is clouds in the sky at the time. That thing can be so good that it should be able to...., in other words if you and I were sitting in a room together with no roof on it, you should be able to see the room and the couch and the chairs and you and me sitting there. You won't maybe be able to tell it's you and I, but you would be able to tell that there were two people sitting in a chair talking to each other. That is how good some of these cameras are.

Ken:

Right, so in other words what you are saying is that when NASA took a photo and maybe it was a hundred meters wide, that hundred meters represented one dot in the photo.

Michael Bara:

Yes a little dot and if it is the Viking images, 30 meters. Its not enough to say a yard stick. It's like 30 yard sticks wide and 30 yard sticks tall represented one dot. With the Mars Global Surveyor the theoretical image resolution, I mean at the altitude of the space craft anyway, could get as good as one meter per pixel. It never really achieved that, it got about 4 meters per pixel. The Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter is even better than that.

Ken:

Another problem with some of the NASA photos of objects on Mars seems to be the angle that the camera was at when taking the photo. Would you tell us how this effects the photo and the object's appearance?

Michael Bara:

Yeah, a good example of that is the first Mars Global Surveyor image of the face on Mars taken in 1998, when they waited until the space craft had passed from above the face, passed over the face and started looking back, upstream basically towards it. Imagine that somebody put a camera underneath your chin and was looking up at the bottom of your nose and then took a picture of your face.

Ken:

That is a disgusting image, you know.

Michael Bara:

Yeah. That is what the image was. It was actually off to the side. It went across from left to right and then at a downward angle across the face and then shot up across the face. So it ended up with the left side of the face being very distorted and we couldn't see much of it, you did get a good view of the nostrils and that clearly upset them, they really didn't want you to see that, they were probably really upset when they saw real nostrils in the nose. The thing about that angle..., there is a whole bunch of other factors that made that image really bad.

Ken:

When you speak about a mathematical message left for us by the builders on Mars, exactly what are you referring to?

Mars Infrared Photo Of A Cityscape Like Image
Photo Source: NASA

Michael Bara:

What Richard and another researcher named Erol Torun found was that this one pyramidal object, a terminal object, in the Cydonia region very near the face, called the D & M pyramid had an internal geometry. It had certain specific, repeating, geometric angular measurements. That same set of mathematical constants and measurements also was present in the broader Cydonia complex involving a bunch of previously identified, potentially artificial structures in the area. That mathematical message seemed to have something to do...the geometry focused on tetrahedrons. A tetrahedron is a very simple base four sided pyramid made up of four sides of equilateral triangles, 60 degree equatorial triangles. Imagine a pyramid with 3 sides and a bottom, all shaped that way, that is a tetrahedron. Basically it is the simplest of the so called Platonic solids. These are the simplest, almost solid shapes that you can get. What they decided was, what the message seemed to be was look at tetrahedrons. In fact look at circumscribed tetrahedrons. In other words tetrahedrons wrapped and incased by a sphere. This led them to look at a lot of old mathematics, very early stuff that was done back in the early days of physics, that also seemed to point to this tetrahedron geometry as somehow being in electromagnetism and physics all though it was eventually stripped out of some of James Clerk Maxwell's original equations and the tetrahedral component was sort of lost. That was the mathematical message and it was not a thing where you started drawing lines when they found something that looked like a monument. There were always objects that were geomorphicly analogous, that didn't belong, that looked artificial. There was this internal geometry in the D & M and the same geometry repeated on the bigger, broader complex of different monuments. Truthfully on Earth there are a lot of significant mathematical relationships on all the ancient ruins like Teotihuacan. in Mexico and Giza Plateau and things like that.

Ken:

I was just going to ask you that.

Michael Bara:

Yes what we seen on Cydonia on Mars led Torun and Hoagland to really dig into what is tetrahedral physics, what does tetrahedral geometry really mean. That led them into the whole hyperdimensional physics concept.

Ken:

Well there is a question that I just have to ask, because I was kind of stunned by it. I would like to know why you or Hoagland or both of you thought to go back to the original work of the mathematician Maxwell who worked on hyperdimensional physics, when we thought that we already knew all about his work? In case those people out there don't know what I am talking about, I just want to refer to one thing. His mathematical truths had certain things left out by people that followed after him. What made you think that maybe this was the case?

Michael Bara:

Well I think after Richard came to the conclusion that the message of Cydonia was look to your tetrahedrons as he likes to put it, look at tetrahedral physics, look at tetrahedral geometry. He met a guy named Tom Beardon who told him that this type of geometry was important in some of the early work of Maxwell and I think it was Tom Beardon that turned Richard on to the work of Maxwell and some other people. He went back and he bought old text books and he eventually found the old mathematical treatises that Maxwell had done and realized that originally Maxwell was trying to solve certain problems like electromagnetism and gravity and he had in all of his equations. included a scalar component, in other words a higher dimensional component In order to solve a problem of how waves propagated through space, he had always concluded the idea there were more dimensions than just the three we perceive, length, width and breath. So a 4th dimension, a 5th dimension and a 6th dimension were necessary. What those dimensions looked like, no one really knew. They were somewhat modeled mathematically, but you don't need to know what they look like, or how they operate in order to determine if they have an effect.

Ken:

Sort of a Hutchenson effect that you are talking about.

Michael Bara:

Yeah, I guess so. I don't really know enough about that to make an analogy.

Ken:

That is how he explained it to me when I interviewed him.

Why do you think that a scientist, even one working for the government, would want to hide the fact that there are artificial structures on Mars, when ultimately this may be proven and they will look incompetent? I mean why would they want history to remember them that way?

Michael Bara:

Well that is a really good question. Again it leads me to two possibilities that we have talked about over the years. We think that the first issue is that they don't want to admit that there are ruins on Mars, because the first question that they are going to get at the press conference after you say, "by the way artificial structures are on Mars", what happened to them? What happened to that civilization? The answer to that question is not particularly comfortable. They would have to admit that there was some sort of very intense cataclysm, that destroyed a civilization, that was obviously more advanced than we were. That would be in my opinion extremely destabilizing to society. It would probably result in some War of the Worlds hysteria which is currently what they were concerned about and are currently concerned about and I just think that this is a very destabilizing concept, so I don't think that they are ever going to admit it. Again I don't think that there are that many guys on the inside that really know about it. I think that there are only a handful.

Ken:

It would seem to indicate that if there was a war for example, then who ever destroyed these people actually hopped from the Moon to Mars, to who knows where to do it. In other words they were spread out along the solar system and they were systematically eliminated.

Michael Bara:

Right. We talk about the Mars tidal model on paper and it was put up on the web on 2001 and it is also included in Dark Mission. We talk about our belief that we have proven beyond any doubt that Mars is not a planet, that it was a moon of another planet that was destroyed, which is what exploded, which is the reason for what happened to Mars, wiped out the civilization, ripped out the planet's atmosphere and made it almost uninhabitable. You just don't want to say that to people."By the way, either A, planets can explode which is kind of scary considering that we live on one, or B, there was a war 65 million years ago, or however long it was ago and a planet was blown up deliberately. Either way, people are not going to be happy about that. You are not going to be able to get people to go to work, be productive and be calm and not overthrow the power structure, so I think it is essential to preserving the power structure.

Ken:

Do you really think so? I know that you are saying what the government thinks will happen, but your own view, do you think that this is really true?

Michael Bara:

Well, I think it is a lot less true now than it used to be. The Brookings Report, which NASA commissioned, which is a big part of the thesis in our book, which was commissioned by the agency itself, says that if you do discover artifacts within the solar system, you should consider withholding the information, or you should consider telling people by means of conditioning them through the mass media, through movies, tv, popular books, novels, science fiction, comic books, all these kinds of things that we pretty much see throughout our culture and society, so I think a culture that has been raised on Star Trek and Lost in Space and Star Wars and all this stuff, is probably less threatened by the concept, but there are still, as we found out on September 11, 2001, there are still a lot of people that have primitive, fundamental religious beliefs that are going to be desperately threatened by this news. It doesn't take very many people to cause a lot of chaos, I mean look at the situation in Iraq, where you had 20,000 people essentially, this is how big that that they initially thought how big the so called insurgency was, out of a country of 25 million you have 20 thousand guys, most of whom aren't even from Iraq who caused a lot of chaos for four or five years before we finally got tough with them.

Ken

Well that is assuming you believe the numbers to be.......

Michael Bara:

Well yeah I mean again, I don't see any reason to doubt the numbers and the thing is it doesn't take very many people, less than one percent of the population, to go nuts on you and cause an awful lot of issues.

Ken:

That's true, yeah.

Michael Bara:

I mean yeah, that is my only point. Maybe I used a bad example. It doesn't take that many people to cause a lot of problems.