John A Keel - Our Haunted PlanetAFuturaBook First published in Great Britain in 1971 by Neville Spearman Limited. Fint Futura Publications edition 1975 Copyright © John A Keel 1971 This book is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, re-sold, hired oat or otherwise circulated without the publisher's prior consent in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser. ISBN o 8600 71537 Printed in Great Britain by Cox&WymanLtd, London, Reading and Fakenham CONTENTS Introduction 7 1 PART ONE Chapter One: 'You Can't Get There From Here' 13 Chapter Two: The Continent That Vanished 22 Chapter Three: If's a Nice Place To Visit But… 29 Chapter Four: Towers of Glass and Theories of Putty 40 Chapter Five: Strong Men and Stupid Enterprises 45 Chapter Six: A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Extinction 56 Chapter Seven: Scientists in Collision 6$ FART TWO Chapter Eight; Mimics of Man 79 Chapter Nine: Men-in-Black Lore and the CIA 90 Chapter Ten: Rendezvous with the Damned 101 Chapter Eleven: Not One of Them, Etc____ 113 Chapter Twelve: The Demise of the Gods 125 ' 'tTb» Secret of the A^es 137 PART THREE Chapter Fourteen: 'HeUoj Central. Give me Ganymede' 155 Chapter Fifteen: Where Is Everybody Going? X71 ^Jüfipfer Sixteen ■ TheRerohitioaoftieMind 184 INTRODUCTION In September 1953,1 spent right hours inside the Great Pyramid in Egypt producing a radio programme which was aired throughout Europe over the American Forces Network (AFN) the following month. Egypt so impressed me, and archaeology so fascinated me, that I returned to Cairo the next year and lived there for several months, wading through the musty libraries and museums, prowling the desert, and visiting the ancient tombs. During a trek to Aswan and the Upper Nile I saw my first flying saucer, a metallic looking disk, with a rotating outer rim, which hovered for several minutes above the Aswan Dam in broad daylight. I had written and produced a radio documentary, Things in the Sky, in 1952, and my earlier researches into unidentified flying objects had already convinced me that such things not only existed, but that they had been present in our skies since the dawn of man. Eventually my travels took me to Beirut, Damascus, Baghdad and a thousand places in between. I walked among the ancient ruins and puzzled over man's illustrious but forgotten past. In India I wan­dered alone into the Himalayas and crossed the border of Tibet (which has since been sealed by the Chinese). As I travelled, I inter­viewed archaeologists, historians, and assorted experts and Spent endless hours in remote libraries poring over rare old books. I was puzzled at first to discover that none of the leading authorities seemed to agree on anything. Indeed, a large part of the scientific literature is devoted to theorization and incredibly vicious attacks on the theories of other theorists. Most perplexing of all was the fact that some of the literature about the ruins I had visited smacked of pure fiction, because the authors had not visited the sites but laboured instead to couple fictitious theories with dubious facts. This led, of course, to conclusions that bordered on the imbecilic. An offshoot of this process is, understandably enough, an enor­mous quantity of crank literature created by unqualified researchers who attempted to interpret the scientific material in their own ways. In many areas of the less popular sciences the crank material out­weighs the scientific because few if any scientists have tackled those subjects. So 98 per cent of all the available literature on Atlantis, flying saucers, Tibet, and prehistoric ruins falls into the crank cat­egory. The task of sotting all this out and developing a valid syn­thesis is a formidable one - one which! have undertaken with great trepidation. In his book, In the Name of Science, Martin Gardner defines the characteristics of the common crank or pseudoscientist. He lists the four chief attributes as being: (1) The crank considers himself a genius… even a towering genius who is years ahead of hi&time. (2) He considers his colleagues and fellow researchers 'ignorant block­heads', largely because they fail to recognize his genius. He assaults his opponents by impugnation, questioning their honesty, intelli­gence, and motives. They respond in kind, naturally, and so great storms are whipped up in the trivial teacups of the scientific and pseudoscientific journals. Controversy is the lifeblood of crankism. (3) The pseudoscientist is paranoid and feels he is the victim of a vast conspiracy designed to suppress his brilliant work. In many instances these imagined conspiracies become a vital part of the subject itself, as for example, the endless literature discussing how the U.S. Air Force has been keeping the truth about flying saucers from the public. (4) The crank delights in focusing his attacks 'on the greatest scientists and the best-established theories'. He goes after big game. He is wiser than Einstein, knows more about astron­omy than Fred Hoyle, and is better informed about the moon than Neil Armstrong. The crank also invents his own terminology: a jabberwocky understood only by him and his closest allies. So, we find the litera­ture filled with confusing and complicated terms which are merely displays of pseudoerudition, or what psychiatrists call neologisms. Over the years I have met the leaders of many peculiar cults and pseudoscientific factions of belief. With very few exceptions, they have all lived up to the above criteria. Most were friendly and co­operative with me until they realized that I did not share their beliefs in Atlantis or visitors from Andromeda. Then they turned on me with wrathful vengeance and launched such campaigns of un­founded slander that I could only be amazed and amused. I have now been accused of being everything from a Communist con man to a secret agent for the Central Intelligence Agency; from a religious fanatic (I'm a lifelong agnostic) to a pawn of the devil. Typo­graphical errors, over which I have no control, in my many articles and books have been lovingly dissected by these groups and prompted countless letters and essays reviewing their sinister im­plications. After twenty-five years as a writer and reporter dedicated to collecting the facts as objectively and as honestly as possible, my integrity has been attacked from all angles. For these reasons this book is written in a style which discusses known facts with the popular and unpopular beliefs they have in­spired. I am not supporting any