From time-to-time, I find it necessary to clarify why I might use this space in SciFiHistory.Net – of all places – to review things that are fundamentally not Science Fiction, Fantasy, and/or Horror on the face of it.
First off, it’s my website. As such, I’m free to do with it as I will.
Second, it’s still my website. If I choose to cover something beyond the scope of the core communication, I usually do it to either refresh my own brain (it helps to think outside the usual box occasionally) or because I’ve been offered an opportunity by a friend, fan, or colleague that I think is a worthwhile endeavor.
Lastly, I think the subject – if even in a small way – coincides thematically with what I already do in this space.
For example, today I finished reading Bart Sibrel’s exceptionally interesting Moon Man: The True Story Of A Filmmaker On The CIA Hit List. For those unaware, Sibrel explores entirely the foundation behind why he alleges (if not proves) that the Apollo moon landings were faked by agents of the U.S. government, and – whether you ultimately agree with his premise or not – he presents each and every one of his arguments in an entirely cogent fashion, so much so that I challenge folks to read it and not become a believer.
Now … for the haters and general charlatans …
No, no, and no: in no way, shape or form am I casting my own judgment on the veracity of Sibrel’s scholarship by covering it on the MainPage. Of course, I realize that this part of my site has been dedicated over the years to reviewing works of fiction and/or publishing my own bits of commentary about the state of fandom, SciFi, Horror, Fantasy, etc. As I often caution readers, I don’t exist to change your minds: if you do see things the way I see them after reading some of my humble works, then that’s grand. But it isn’t my intent to convince you one way or another on any such topic: you do you, I do me, and should we meet? All well and good. But my review in this space is not meant to disparage Sibrel’s positions at all: I’m merely promoting his efforts with a bit of my own.
For what it’s worth, I’ll go to my grave arguing that Fox TV’s stellar serial The X-Files is one of the greatest intellectual properties to ever grace the Boob Tube. The show played both the long game (with its central mythology stories) and dozens of short games (with its monster-of-the-week format); and it did both surprisingly well. Of course, I say this to a degree because I’ve lived a life fascinated with so much subject matter that the FBI Special Agents investigated and/or debunked; and it’s because of my affinity for conspiracies – be what they may be – that I think Sibrel’s book is worth whatever bit of light I can shine upon it. Fans of the show – and similar fare – will likely find a good deal of interest in Sibrel’s efforts, as well. They might even see the author as a professional inspiration.
For those who’ve never heard of the author, I encourage you to first take a gander at his website – Sibrel.com – so that you can effectively be brought up to speed. A great deal of what he discusses in the book gets a fair amount of coverage in no small fashion there, but what I found particularly captivating in the book is the highly personal recounting of the man’s journey. Both as a hunter and as the hunted, he’s an Old School journalist who knows how to ask questions in such a way that a non-answer is as good as a deliberate choice of words; and that’s something so shockingly in short supply in what accounts for the mainstream media today I shudder at where we’ll be ten, fifteen, or twenty years from now. Indeed, that institution – culturally – needs to be entirely re-invented, and that’s even the subject the author discusses in the book’s closing chapter (among other things).
But the method to Sibrel’s madness is – dare I say? – entirely convincing.
He makes a compelling case, one that should definitely have readers thinking about what was scientifically possible decades ago and how the loss of such technology (if not outright destruction, mind you) requires an explanation. Why is it we accept certain events blindly when they seemingly cannot be replicated? How could NASA – or any government agency, for that matter – systematically destroy evidence of mankind’s greatest achievement unless they wished to avoid probing eyes from uncovering the truth? What would be gained in such demolition? How far up the authoritarian Food Chain must one go to get what should be an easy answer and, yet, none are forthcoming? His is a journey few have undertaken, and it shouldn’t be dismissed casually or lightly. If nothing else, the truths exposed in here should set you free … if not encouraging you to seek out and explore your own career in like-minded research.
Highly recommended.
-- EZ
First off, it’s my website. As such, I’m free to do with it as I will.
Second, it’s still my website. If I choose to cover something beyond the scope of the core communication, I usually do it to either refresh my own brain (it helps to think outside the usual box occasionally) or because I’ve been offered an opportunity by a friend, fan, or colleague that I think is a worthwhile endeavor.
Lastly, I think the subject – if even in a small way – coincides thematically with what I already do in this space.
For example, today I finished reading Bart Sibrel’s exceptionally interesting Moon Man: The True Story Of A Filmmaker On The CIA Hit List. For those unaware, Sibrel explores entirely the foundation behind why he alleges (if not proves) that the Apollo moon landings were faked by agents of the U.S. government, and – whether you ultimately agree with his premise or not – he presents each and every one of his arguments in an entirely cogent fashion, so much so that I challenge folks to read it and not become a believer.
Now … for the haters and general charlatans …
No, no, and no: in no way, shape or form am I casting my own judgment on the veracity of Sibrel’s scholarship by covering it on the MainPage. Of course, I realize that this part of my site has been dedicated over the years to reviewing works of fiction and/or publishing my own bits of commentary about the state of fandom, SciFi, Horror, Fantasy, etc. As I often caution readers, I don’t exist to change your minds: if you do see things the way I see them after reading some of my humble works, then that’s grand. But it isn’t my intent to convince you one way or another on any such topic: you do you, I do me, and should we meet? All well and good. But my review in this space is not meant to disparage Sibrel’s positions at all: I’m merely promoting his efforts with a bit of my own.
For what it’s worth, I’ll go to my grave arguing that Fox TV’s stellar serial The X-Files is one of the greatest intellectual properties to ever grace the Boob Tube. The show played both the long game (with its central mythology stories) and dozens of short games (with its monster-of-the-week format); and it did both surprisingly well. Of course, I say this to a degree because I’ve lived a life fascinated with so much subject matter that the FBI Special Agents investigated and/or debunked; and it’s because of my affinity for conspiracies – be what they may be – that I think Sibrel’s book is worth whatever bit of light I can shine upon it. Fans of the show – and similar fare – will likely find a good deal of interest in Sibrel’s efforts, as well. They might even see the author as a professional inspiration.
For those who’ve never heard of the author, I encourage you to first take a gander at his website – Sibrel.com – so that you can effectively be brought up to speed. A great deal of what he discusses in the book gets a fair amount of coverage in no small fashion there, but what I found particularly captivating in the book is the highly personal recounting of the man’s journey. Both as a hunter and as the hunted, he’s an Old School journalist who knows how to ask questions in such a way that a non-answer is as good as a deliberate choice of words; and that’s something so shockingly in short supply in what accounts for the mainstream media today I shudder at where we’ll be ten, fifteen, or twenty years from now. Indeed, that institution – culturally – needs to be entirely re-invented, and that’s even the subject the author discusses in the book’s closing chapter (among other things).
But the method to Sibrel’s madness is – dare I say? – entirely convincing.
He makes a compelling case, one that should definitely have readers thinking about what was scientifically possible decades ago and how the loss of such technology (if not outright destruction, mind you) requires an explanation. Why is it we accept certain events blindly when they seemingly cannot be replicated? How could NASA – or any government agency, for that matter – systematically destroy evidence of mankind’s greatest achievement unless they wished to avoid probing eyes from uncovering the truth? What would be gained in such demolition? How far up the authoritarian Food Chain must one go to get what should be an easy answer and, yet, none are forthcoming? His is a journey few have undertaken, and it shouldn’t be dismissed casually or lightly. If nothing else, the truths exposed in here should set you free … if not encouraging you to seek out and explore your own career in like-minded research.
Highly recommended.
-- EZ
RSS Feed