Author of the Month :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
Join us at this forum every month for a discussion with famous popular authors from around the world. 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Well ... "Miller"--

I'm not quite sure how to respond to this "question."

But, I AM responding -- even if I find your tone "accusatory," and your intimations "offensive." Because, in the era of the Internet, you're bringing up a very valuable point: where does the line defining real "intellectual property" end ... and "silliness" begin?

So--

What, exactly, are you so upset about?; that I used a PUBLIC-DOMAIN NASA image, from a NASA spacecraft -- without "crediting" Wil Faust for "finding it" first? Or, that I didn't credit a THIRD PARTY (George Haas) for "sending it to me" ... first?

I think you're also saying that I "used" Wil's "property" -- his processed image -- without credit or permision, in the book. Right?

How do you KNOW what image I eventually used in DM; if it looks "like" Wil's ... maybe that's because he got the processing RIGHT -- and brought out small detail which is REALLY there, on Mars ... which I independently reproduced when I did MY processing of the same SOURCE image?

Did you ever think of that? :)

I mean, I (and everyone of any public profile on the Net) receive a LOT of images ... all the time ... from a wide variety of folks, all wanting comments on everything from "this buillding on Mars" to "that artifact on the Moon." If these images look like ANYTHING, I (and any other true professional ...) immediately "go to the source" -- the official NASA (or ESA ... or JAXA ... or Russian, etc.) websites, WORLD-WIDE, which carry the ORIGINAL imaging data.

I then download the NASA (or other space agency ...) "raw" image, of whatever someone sent me.

Then, if I'm STILL intrigued--

I carry out MY OWN image-processing on THAT specific image -- from the actual NASA (or other original data ...) source.

That's the way REAL science is done -- from ORIGINAL SOURCES.

And, because I've learned a few "imaging tricks" over the years, and -- except for Keith Laney ... sometimes -- usually can bring out the MOST detail in any NASA image (better than 99% of those that are sent to me from "processed" secondary sources) ... I ONLY post (or publish) MY OWN versions of these images.

So, yes, I freely acknowledge that I received George's e-mail, with the stunning "tetrahedron on Mars" attached, initially processed by Wil Faust. And, I'm sorry that in the formatting of "Dark Mission," Wil didn't receive the acknowledgement originally intended for finding THIS new example of a most important architectural form on Mars ....

But -- does that mean that Wil "OWNED" that NASA image?

Of course not.

NASA -- and the Amercian tax-payers -- own ALL the original NASA data. Wil just FOUND that particular image on a publicly-available NASA webite ... and then processed it with commercially available imaging software; thus, yes, Wil "owned" HIS enhanced version of that image -- but NASA still maintained its (and our taxpayer) simultaneous rights to the ORIGINAL.

Now, as I said in my e-mail to George, the object itself WAS a definite "wow" ... which I (dimly) remembered also seeing "somewhere" before ....

By the time we got ready to illustrate "Dark Mission" (about a year AFTER I was sent this Wil's version of this striking tetrahedral pyramid ...), I finally remembered WHERE I had seen the "other" VERSION of this object--

RIGHT IN MY OWN FILES!

A "Giza-sized, tetrahedral pyrmaid" located right at CYDONIA that I'd had Mark Carlotto, YEARS before Wil's "discovery," create as a close-up -- from one of the original NASA-VIKING Cydonia images!

So yes, on page 306 of "Dark Mission," we placed these two, separate, "tetrahedral pyramids" -- the original Carlotto blow-up of one of the "Giza-sized" pyramids I'd discovered back in 1989, together with MY OWN PROCESSED VERSION of the striking "tetrahedral pyramid" George had sent me vis a vis "Wil Faust" -- the latter clipped from the full MGS frame -- E0600269.

And, I COMPARED them, in the book ....

Now, here comes the "intellectual property" point.

What Faust did originally was LOCATE this object, but on a data source OWNED collectively by ALL of us -- the Amercian taxpayer. And then, he had it sent to my mailbox (or, Geroge did it on his own initiative, after Wil had died. I don't remember).

So, Wil deserves some form of acknowledgement for bringing it to my (and others ...) attention.

But, you're inferring something MUCH more sinister; that I, somehow, "stole" Wil Faust's "original" pyramid image!

However, inexplicably (by your own admission in your post), you also say "... the MSG original is SO PURE and OBVIOUS all that needed to be done was to simply crop the thing as is WITHOUT ANY CHANGES OR ENHANCEMENTS."

So, where then, is the unique "intellectual property value" of Wil Faust's work ... that I've, somehow, "stolen without credit?"

Which, while "defending," you also seem equally willing to THROW AWAY -- by casually admitting that anyone can see EVERYTHING present on "Faust's image" ... on the NASA ORIGINAL without (quoting) "any changes or enhancements."

As noted, my original intention in "Dark Mission" was to tell the story of how George had sent me Wil's striking image, as a lead-in to the startling comparison I planned -- a way to illustrate that there's "an entire CLASS of consistent, precise, GEOMETRIC Martian artifacts on Mars ..." which CANNOT be dismissed (as NASA's consistently doing ...) as "just more natural hills."

But, in the last-minute editing process of "Dark Mission," that section (along with a number of other explanatory anecdotes, stories and examples that I'd planned ...) got dropped.

As Graham can attest, these things happen ... when you publish PHYSICAL "books" where, unlike the web, you do NOT have "the last editorial decision" .... :)

On Amazon:

We -- Mike and I -- have NOTHING to do with Amazon's decisions, or who puts "what" on the Amazon website.

In fact, when a recent "reviewer's" thinly-veiled attack against the book was posted by a "reader," with quoted material which was not even IN our book (!), it took us (and our publisher) WEEKS of e-mailing Amazon management, to finally get this offending "non-review" removed!

That said, the source of the actual "Faust tetrahedral pyramid image" on the Amazon website is TOTALLY unknown to me; one day it (like the F-16 breaking sound barrier -- what the hell does that have to do with "Darlk Mission?") "just appeared" (from another reader ..?) -- who obviously had access to the SAME Faust image George Haas sent to me, and thought (I guess ...) it would help the book.

Perhaps Wil directed George to send a LOT of copies of "his" images around before he died, to MANY other folks (I'll have to ask George, someday) ....

One final thought:

In this era of the Internet, where EVERYONE nas now become a potential publisher of "original intellectual content," no one can possibly keep track of ALL the sources out there. So, those of us who write and publish professionally DEPEND on sharp readers, who are constantly searching the Net, to "keep us honest."

If it weren't for your obvious "attude," Mr. Miller, I'd be a bit more gracious and thank you for bringing this to my attention. I will indeed try to get Wil's "credit" -- for possessing a sharp eye, re "real Martian artifacts -- restored to the Revised Edition we are now planning of the book.

But, frankly, Wil's REALLY unherolded discovery of "Parratopia" -- in another section of the Red Planet -- is, in my opinion, MUCH more significant!

We are currently trying to get the MRO folks to reimage THAT amazing, literal BURIED MARTIAN CITY (which Geroge also sent me) ... which, if we succeed, WILL be Wil's true "lasting legacy" to Martian studies ....

I'd suggest, since you're such a public "Wil Faust fan," that a little more energy in THAT direction could be considerably more important to Wil's lasting memory -- than "attacking me" for another boring example of one more stupid screw-up in the book publishing business.

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
A missed opportunity 166 Starjim 05-Dec-07 23:11
Re: A missed opportunity 86 MarsRevealer 06-Dec-07 09:30
Re: A missed opportunity and a second image! 85 Starjim 06-Dec-07 14:28
Moderator note: 101 Hoppy 06-Dec-07 16:25
Re: A missed opportunity 97 RichardHoagland 10-Dec-07 04:10
Re: A missed opportunity 93 Starjim 10-Dec-07 15:49
Re: A missed opportunity 82 SphinxGirl 10-Dec-07 18:05
Re: A missed opportunity 48 Starjim 10-Dec-07 19:01
Re: A missed opportunity 92 SphinxGirl 10-Dec-07 20:48
Re: A missed opportunity 93 Starjim 10-Dec-07 22:13
Moderator Information Note 57 Ghia 14-Dec-07 01:20
Re: Moderator Information Note 81 SphinxGirl 14-Dec-07 07:47
Re: A missed opportunity 93 SphinxGirl 14-Dec-07 07:46
Re: A missed opportunity 84 Starjim 14-Dec-07 20:46
Moderator Warning: 121 Hoppy 14-Dec-07 22:30
Re: A missed opportunity 103 Starjim 10-Dec-07 18:51
Re: A missed opportunity 37 Starjim 13-Dec-07 13:06
Re: A missed opportunity 86 emil 17-Dec-07 01:04
Re: A missed opportunity 79 snc 18-Dec-07 02:45
Re: A missed opportunity 81 emil 19-Dec-07 13:02
Re: A missed opportunity 86 Starjim 19-Dec-07 14:12
Re: A missed opportunity 87 emil 20-Dec-07 13:01
Re: A missed opportunity 79 Starjim 20-Dec-07 13:28
Re: A missed opportunity 86 emil 21-Dec-07 08:12
Moderator Warning 122 Hoppy 20-Dec-07 15:25
Re: A missed opportunity 92 snc 19-Dec-07 16:19
Re: A missed opportunity 73 debraregypt 16-Dec-07 11:03
Re: A missed opportunity 88 snc 15-Dec-07 15:44
Re: A missed opportunity 48 Starjim 27-Jan-08 23:57
Re: A Cather among the Christians 80 Starjim 14-Dec-07 20:30


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.