Interview with Robert Bauval
Ever since bestselling authors Robert Bauval and Graham Hancock entertained capacity audiences at the ‘Monuments To Life’ Conferences in London and Leeds on 25 May and 1 June respectively, enormous public interest has been generated. In this exclusive interview with Graham Birdsall, Robert Bauval offers a revealing insight into current speculation surrounding the possibility that Mars not only once harboured intelligent life, but that evidence for such might exist closer to home…
GWB: I understand that you and Graham Hancock are planning a new book that will investigate the so-called ‘Monuments on Mars’, could you tell us more about it and what has led you to get involved and research this issue?
Robert: This is correct. Graham and I are presently preparing the ground research for our next book which will deal with the Cydonia enigma. We had to shelve another book project on the Hermetic tradition through the ages; this latter is now put on the slow burner until early 1998. Our London-based publisher, William Heinemann Ltd, have now commissioned us to investigate the Mars enigma and to look into the scientific implications should the monuments on Mars prove to be artificial.
GWB: Do you think that there may be a terrestrial connection between the Mars monuments in Cydonia and the pyramids of Egypt in Giza?
Robert: That is, of course, the 64,000 dollar question. Well, let’s put it this way. If the monuments on Mars actually prove to be artificial – and the odds are 50-50 – then a link between Cydonia and Giza becomes a real possibility. NASA provides us new images that take a closer look at Cydonia – which we hope will be in March 1998 by the Mars Global Orbiter – then this is high speculation. But it does not mean that such eventuality must be ignored and brushed under the carpet like NASA has done in the past with the Cydonia enigma. The proper way to investigate this matter is to examine the evidence at our disposal and keep a very open mind. For the last decade or so a group of independent researchers around the world have devoted much of their own time to the Cydonia enigma. These in the United States include Richard Hoagland, Dr. Mark Carlotto, Erol Torun, Vincent DiPietro, Gregory Molenaar, Dr. Stanley McDaniel, Dr. Horace Crater; and in the United Kingdom Chris O’Kane, Ananda Sirisena and Malcolm Smith of the Mars Network UK.
For a while Graham Hancock and I were rather skeptical about the monument on Mars, but a closer look at the evidence has led us to support and join this investigation. The evidence we have seen so far is compelling. Statistically speaking, there is a high probability for at least some of the Cydonia monuments to be artificial. If this proves to be the case, then by extension the argument inevitably moves towards a possible terrestrial connection.researchers, however, feel somewhat uncomfortable to go in that direction. Although I can sympathise and see their point of view, sooner or later this issue must be deliberated and evaluated, and this is where Graham and I come in. So far the only two serious researchers I know who have gone all the way the terrestrial connection are Richard Hoagland and David Childress. We met David recently in Boulder, Colorado, and we connected with Hoagland last May in London when we lectured alongside him at the ‘Monuments To Life’ Conferences at Imperial College and, later, at Leeds University.
GWB: What do you think of Hoagland’s conclusions?
Robert: Hoagland is a rather colourful character. He’s a very articulate and witty speaker who does not hold his punches. I’m not sure if we agree with all his conclusions and lines of investigation about Cydonia and, more recently, the Moon, but I admire his boldness and tenacity for facing and coping with the tremendous opposition. It is certainly thanks to him that a very wide audience around the world has become aware of this very important issue.
Hoagland has been accused by the scientific community of being a sensationalist. It is true that he does play the media a lot. But personally I go along with that. We live in a fast world of communication and fast media. If you want an issue to get out there in the public arena, then you have to do it that way. Hoagland certainly seizes every chance and opportunity to make his point, and that is O.K. Like him, we stand for the democratization of science and for the freedom of information.
“Research and information that concerns humankind should not be monopolised by a few experts and officials…”
For the last four years Graham and I have been fighting for the same thing for the Giza necropolis in Egypt, where a close-door and ‘confidentiality’ policy plagues all explorations there. Research and information that concerns humankind should not be monopolised by a few experts and officials and filtered down as they please. Through the efforts of Graham Hancock and myself, and also by John Anthony West and others, we have managed to draw the public’s attention to such problems at Giza and are urging the authorities to come clean and transparent on what they are doing at the Sphinx and the Pyramids. They have heard the public’s voice, and it works. These establishments – NASA, the Egyptian Antiquities Department and so on – are accountable to the public. The public, who after all pays for all of this through taxation, has a right to be fully informed. Period.
GWB: And do you think the British public needs to be more aware of the Cydonia enigma?
Robert: Yes. Very much so. But getting the news out can be a tricky business. Some researchers feel that if they deal with TV and the press they may be blamed for trying to sensationalise the issue. But you can’t have it both ways. I’m not against making news interesting and even sensational – well, why not? – provided you do not go over the edge. You want to bring the people in on an issue, then that’s the way to go. My gut feeling is that we are on the verge of answering the big questions: “who are we? where do we come from?” through research of this type.
I believe we have been short-changed by pussy-footing experts and their prosaic interpretations. The new breed of independent researchers are not restrained by political, career and academic pressures restraints. We can look with an open mind at alternative views without such limitations. We feel it is high time that the general public is allowed to get involved in such matters and to demand accountability from those whom they have entrusted these matters to.
GWB: Do you think there is a deliberate cover-up from NASA on this issue of Mars?
Robert: No, not in the sense of a secret plot or conspiracy. I personally do not think that the ground level scientists and technicians working on the space missions are covering up anything. But it is not they who make policies. These are made way up there in the corridors of power. Still, we must not imagine that a bunch of powerful officials occasionally meet in secret and decide to keep this or that information from the public. But I do think that certain data which is either politically ‘unsuitable’ for public scrutiny is heavily filtered or played down.
Sometimes the bias from the top ‘expert’ is so staunch and embedded that new and important evidence which does not go with the grain is swept under the academic carpet. There are many subtle ways in which this can happen.the case of the famous Viking frames 35A72 and 70A13 of the ‘Face’ on Mars which were ‘misfiled’. Also new ‘classified’ research or exploration may be presented as boring routine jobs. Take the case of the explorations in the shafts of the King’s Chamber to improve the ventilation of the monument. Unknown to the general public, a daring exploration was in progress in the mysterious shafts of the Queens Chamber below using a mechanised robot.
Even when a secret ‘door’ was discovered in one of the shafts, the authorities involved did not go public. When we stumbled on this story and brought it to the attention of the world’s media, we were treated with anger by the Egyptian authorities and the Egyptological community accused us of being sensationalists and amateurs.
The same has happened recently with explorations around the Sphinx. Officially, we are told that an American team from Florida State University was given a licence in March 1996 to ‘conduct seismographic and radar tests to repair chasms and faults’ under the bedrock at Giza for the protection of personnel and tourists. Yet we have found out that the team is funded by private donors whose real objective is to search for secret chambers and tunnels under the Sphinx. When we broke this story in the Daily Mail in April 1996 we again received abuse from the authorities and Egyptologists, as well as legal threats from parties I don’t wish to name here.
Recently even the Director-General of the Giza Pyramids, Dr. Zahi Hawass, has poured abuse and threats against us. Although we are baffled by this attitude we are not intimidated. The pursuit of this knowledge is not the privilege of a few who think they are custodians of such a universal legacy. This is a legacy that belongs to us all and it’s time they get this straight.
The same goes for NASA. We have nothing against the honest scientists and researchers who go about their jobs with diligence and rectitude; but we are against those ‘policy makers’ who act as ‘Big Brother’.
GWB: Will these issues be dealt with in your new book?
Robert: Yes. Very much so. We will also take a closer look at some rather intriguing goings-on that have taken place between officials and scientists and rich-funders involving both the Giza and Cydonia enigmas since the early 1970s.
GWB: Can you elaborate on that?
Robert: At this stage of the investigation, I don’t wish to go too much into details, but let’s say the story reads like an ‘X-Files’ episode and an ‘Indiana Jones’ movie all rolled into one.
GWB: But at least can you tell us more as to what induced you to suspect a possible connection between Cydonia and Giza?
Robert: I want to keep it simple at this stage. From the purely analytical level, there are several major factors that need to be carefully considered.
First, there is the obvious ‘symbolic’ factor, meaning that on both Cydonia and Giza we have a ‘face’ and various pyramidal structures that form a unified architectural complex.
Second, there is the ‘mathematical’ factor, where the geometry and trigonometry of the monuments of Cydonia and Giza bear the same two special universal constants: ‘e’ (the base of natural logarithms) and ‘Pi’ (the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter).
Thord, there is the ‘location’ factor, where the latitude of Cydonia is obtained from the tangent ‘e’/Pi and that of Giza being the Cosine ‘e’/Pi., there is the ‘alignments’ factor, where two main directions of Cydonia and Giza are defined by two key rising points of the Sun, one at the summer solstice and the other at the equinox in connection. These connections alone should compel any open-minded investigator to take a closer look at a possible terrestrial connection, no matter how controversial or sensational this may be.
The correct process of science is to explain such anomalies without bias, without prejudice and without intimidation or preconceived opinions. That is what we are doing.
We have one hell of an anomaly at Cydonia and Giza and we are pursuing it, no matter where the arguments leads us. We are pursuing the science, and the science so far is telling us that there could be a connection between Giza and Cydonia. To jump to conclusions at this stage would be unwise – but to ignore it would be a crime.
GWB: Lastly, when is your book due and what will be its title?
Robert: Around Christmas time of 1997. The working title at this stage is ‘Pyramids on Mars’, but this is likely to change eventually before publication.
GWB: Well Robert, we all await this book with much anticipation. Best of luck and thank you for sparing us your time.
Robert: You are very welcome Graham.
Copyright Quest Publications International Limited
* Robert Bauval will be joined by Graham Hancock and several leading researchers in their respective fields at The Terrestrial Connection Conference (Solihull) on Sunday, 23 February 1997. Tickets are sure to be in great demand so our advice is to book early to avoid disappointment for what promises to be a fantastic series of illustrated lectures.