Why Did The History Channel Censor
Mike Heiser The Author Of "The Facade"
From "UFOs In The Bible"?

by Michael S. Heiser

Perhaps you saw the History Channel's special, "UFOs in the Bible," which aired recently. Let me tell you what you didn't see.

Last February, Weller-Grossman Studios (hereafter WGS) flew me out to Los Angeles to be interviewed for the "UFOs and the Bible" special. The reason was simple: they had heard of me from Guy Malone (also interviewed) of Roswell, NM's "Alien Resistance HQ." They learned from Guy that I had academic credentials in biblical studies and biblical languages, and an interest in UFOs. The choice was natural.

When I received my list of questions from WGS prior to the interview, I noticed the questions were very stilted toward "confirming" that the Bible indeed gave evidence of ETs and UFOs, neither if which I believed. I called my contact at WGS, and told them up front that if they interviewed me, they would not get the answers they evidently wanted. I was told this was no problem, since they wanted to give all sides to the issue. I also sent Gabe the link to the ancient iconography behind the visions of Ezekiel 1, which obviously did not look like a flying saucer (ancient sculptures which account for all the "craft" details in Ezekiel's vision — in effect, the polaroids of the day). I went to LA and had a great time. In fact my planned one hour interview was extended about half an hour at their request. They let me know that the show would likely air in January of 2003. I also got to meet my friend Lynn Marzulli (author of "Nephilim") at the set, who had arranged his own schedule so he could take me back to the airport. It was a lot of fun. A month or so ago I got a courtesy call from WGS informing me of the airing time. I then relayed the information to my newsletter subscribers and others on my email lists. I hadn't planned to watch it, but I was very curious as to how it would be edited. It was evident to all but Gabe (who sort of knew what to expect) that the crew was surprised that I didn't gush about aliens in the Bible, but rather gave clear, coherent reasons that such ideas were bogus and completely contrived and inserted into biblical narratives. I expected that my part would be small, since I wasn't following the party line (but at least, I thought, people like WGS were interested enough to do a show on the subject).

If you watched the show, you'll know that my part WAS small — in fact, I didn't appear in it at all. WGS completely cut my entire interview out of the production (at least Guy Malone made it into a few frames). Instead, the audience was treated to the wild, baseless speculations of pseudo-authorities on the Bible who told us things like:

• The three "men" who met Abraham in Genesis 18 were aliens
• Two of these aliens went to Sodom and Gomorrah, which city was destroyed by alien technology
• Elijah was taken to heaven in a UFO
• and, of course, Ezekiel saw a UFO in his vision

I've had people ask me if I was upset at not being in the show. My answer is that, personally speaking, this worked out well, actually. Sure, it would have been nice to be on TV (providing I didn't have to watch myself). No, I wasn't afraid about my academic reputation being tarnished (I went on to demonstrate that ancient astronaut ideas were ludicrous, which would hardly damage me). Rather, this decision by WGS is powerful evidence at the utter falsity of the claim that they wanted to give their audience the truth, or even more than one view. I couldn't have asked for more striking evidence that my own work matters — and so I say to the pusillanimous effort by WGS: thanks for the shot in the arm. I feel re-energized.

What do I mean by all this? Ask yourself some simple questions:

• Why is it that, in a show about UFOs and the BIBLE the only person interviewed with recognized graduate credentials in the Hebrew BIBLE and all the related ancient languages was excluded from the show?
• Why is it that WGS did not show the ancient artwork I sent them that SHOWS us what Ezekiel saw (his vision's descriptions match these artistic representations of the throne-chariot theophany in every detail)?
• Why is it that other ufologists who have broad media exposure, like Whitley Strieber, refuse to interview me (There have been a few courageous exceptions, most notably the stellar staff and hosts of Coast to Coast AM).
• And, most telling, why is it that Zecharia Sitchin has refused to debate me - nearly two years and counting after I was asked by Art Bell on the air for such a debate?

The (longer) answer is pretty obvious: I'm the only guy in this game who,

1. has taken real classes for real credits from real professors at real universities in the ancient languages of the Bible and its surrounding civilizations, which means
2. I can demonstrate from these texts, using sound scholarly methods and resources, that the ancient astronaut idea is an intellectual dogpile.

The short answer is FEAR. These people, all of whom want to portray themselves as "digging for the truth," are doing anything but that when it comes to analyzing the data of ancient texts. They refuse to look at the demonstrable ineptitude of Zecharia Sitchin's work in the ancient languages (as well as those who defend him) because they WANT to believe his hypothesis. I'm the fly in their ointment, so censorship is the response. I have the goods on Sitchin's bogus scholarship, and these individuals don't want to be confused by the facts. The truth doesn't make for good TV (and, more importantly, doesn't help them get their intended message out to the public).

As I noted above, people like George Noory, now having taken Art Bell's mantle on Coast to Coast, are the noteworthy exception. It is no secret that George is a fan of Sitchin's views, but to his credit, he truly wants to engage all sides for his audience. He had me on recently about the James ossuary, and still decided on his own to bring up Sitchin. My guess is that his genuine journalistic curiosity got the best of him, and the thought of bias never occurred to him. I have to agree with Art Bell about George: he "gets it" when it comes to delivering for his audience. He deserves to be publicly commended, since his actions stand in such stark contrast to the super-evident bias and intellectual cowardice of others.

What's especially energizing about all this is that this wholesale, gutless censorship will be duly noted by thousands who click to this editorial. Even more encouraging, those same thousands will get to read my not-so-amazing predictions and my open challenges below to other media cravens. If they had nothing to hide, if they had real scholarship on their side, they would have no trouble with interviewing me, inviting me to their conferences, and even taking it upon themselves to arrange a debate with Zecharia Sitchin. Don't anyone hold their breath.

Finally, and this may be a bit optimistic, I hope the open censorship encourages some of YOU to take action, especially those of you who are professing Christians and orthodox Jews. Rather than dozing off or laughing when the topic of UFOs and aliens comes up, you should come back here and re-read my questions above, and then get others to do likewise. There is a REASON that Sitchin (or any of his intellectual spawn) will not debate me. As I said, the reason is FEAR. No, I am not saying that the forces of spiritual evil empowering this claptrap are afraid of me or Christians or orthodox Jews. Hardly. As I noted in "The Facade" (see the Watcher rant against Father Benedict toward the end), serious Christians and Jews are the two groups that the evil ones seek to marginalize. It will be these groups alone who, because of their fidelity to the biblical TEXT (not what's inserted into it) will not believe the new paradigm, and who will need to be removed. So what does the evil behind this facade fear? Only that my work, and the work of others, will mean less of a damnable body count; that people won't buy the lie, and so evil's thirst for the souls of humanity will not be as completely quenched.

Sound weird? Try this scenario / set of predictions on for size:

I predict (and I am no prophet), that in my lifetime (assuming it extends another 30 years or so to a natural endpoint) the following will transpire:

1. We will hear that life exists on Mars, and that intelligent life once existed on Mars. To prop this up, we will be treated to certain anomalous pictures, reports, and even artifactual evidence brought back from Mars once we get there. These anomalies will be produced for our consumption through official channels, namely NASA. This is of course Richard Hoagland's dream (former science adviser to Walter Cronkite). In case you've never heard of him, I'd advise you to go to his website and keep track of his soap opera relationship with NASA over the release of Mars images — and his "counter-mythology" about NASA's own agenda. The former is more important to monitor if you're just getting your feet wet on this. I should point out that the existence of artificial structures on Mars (if they are actually real) does not threaten a biblical worldview in the least. Only when wedded to number two below do we have an anti-biblical agenda.
2. Once the above happens, the panspermia paradigm will be forced on the public with even more energy. The idea that life was accidentally seeded from space has already gone mainstream (my subscribers know this well). What the Mars anomalies will do is raise the stakes. It will make the mainstream consider the question of intelligent ET life — and the question of any relationship to us. Christians who think that the intelligent design movement has been their greatest weapon for the biblical account of origins will soon see their artillery stolen from them completely.
3. Come on — intelligent panspermia? Who'd buy that idea? When the above forces are in operation, people will suddenly rediscover what my readers and subscribers know: the idea that human life was put here by aliens was NOT first articulated by pseudo-scholars like Zecharia Sitchin and Eric von Daniken. That honor goes to Dr. Francis Crick, the co-discoverer of human DNA. I can just hear it now: "Hmmm ... what was it about DNA that led Crick to consider and believe such an idea? Maybe a Nobel winner like Crick was onto something -especially now that we know there was intelligent life out there at one time." The same idea has recently been offered by famous physicist (and Templeton Prize Winner — for academic service to religion) Paul Davies, albeit in "accidental" panspermia form (see vol. 1, no . 7 of Behind the Facade). Readers should also recall that in the April 8 issue of the New York Times (the early one, before it was re-edited), intelligent design, a movement largely propelled by Christian scholars, was linked to extraterrestrial creators.
4. Once intelligent panspermia hits the mainstream, people will conclude that everything we thought we knew about our creation, our history, our belief in God - has been fundamentally flawed. Many will give up a theistic world view. This will only really happen, in my mind, by the linkage of intelligent ET life with panspermia. An ET reality alone would not have this force, since it leaves the identity of the Creator — of us and ET — intact, biblically speaking. As I have noted many times before (and it's part of the storyline of The Facade), an intelligent ET reality alone does nothing to harm the Christian worldview. This is not a new question for theologians. It's the linkage of ET and our creation, and the distortion of the biblical text to prove that idea, that are at issue.
5. But, to the rescue will come the ancient astronaut devotees! They will argue, "don't give up your faith in the Bible — all you need to do is look at it through a different lens." That lens, of course, will be the ancient astronaut theories of Sitchin and others. "The Bible really IS true after all — it's told us the whole time that the elohim (plural, not singular) created us, and that alien visitors from space, called angels by the non-technological people of antiquity, have visited us many times. Just look at the visions of Ezekiel and the fiery chariot of Elijah. Our creators have remained interested in us for millennia; they have our best interest in mind," yadda, yadda, yadda. The point is not, and will not be, the eradication of the Bible. The goal is to re-invent it, to twist the text so that it props up the ancient astronaut idea, that the ETs put us here and are the gods of antiquity, one of whom just happened to use the name YHWH. And one of their children (human and divine) just happened to be Jesus (see the note on Laurence Gardner below). The goal is to use the Bible against orthodox Christian theology and belief in the Torah. This is the facade. Who would want this to happen? Read The Facade.

Naturally, it is reasonable to believe the church, that group of people least likely to believe in the supernatural, will snooze through all this until the points of intersection are firmly in place and the new intelligent panspermia paradigm will have been granted scientific credence. Even now as I write, a new NASA project has the emerging paradigm written all over it: "Project Prometheus". If you've read "The Facade," once you learn who Prometheus was in Greek mythology, you'll likely wonder how people can miss what I'm saying. You might also wonder why NASA always seems to name their projects and gizmos after mythological figures associated with the Titans, the classicla Greek version of the Genesis 6:1-4 event. "We will be as gods," and our Mars research will take us there.

This brings us full circle for now. Why exclude my voice? Because I can show the entire "aliens in the Bible" paradigm is a contrivance that lacks any substance or coherence. With this in mind, I issue the following challenges (none of which I expect to be taken up):

1. I challenge Zecharia Sitchin; his webmaster, Erik Parker; Lloyd Pye; Alan Alford; William Henry; Jordan Maxwell; and anyone else who rapes the biblical text to say that it contains accounts of extraterrestrial spacecraft, aliens from other planets, and that humanity was created by alien intervention, to publicly debate me on these topics. Any time, any place.
2. To WGS, I challenge you to actually produce a show on these same topics with credentialed biblical scholars being substantially featured (maybe totally featured, to offset the censorship in this latest special). Better yet, why not tape the above debate, assuming it ever happens?
3. To the History Channel, I challenge you to demonstrate where the show "UFOs in the Bible" actually represents real history and sound historical methodology. To put tripe like that on the air is akin to pimping the heritage of western civilization.
4. To Whitley Strieber, I challenge you to interview me on the teachings of Zecharia Sitchin.
5. To the professing (esp. American) Christian church, I challenge you to start believing in intelligent evil, to consider the incoherence of your comfortable view that you cannot be touched by intelligent evil (whether manifest in the guise of alien phenomena or otherwise). You could start with my critique of Hugh Ross's book on the UFO subject (a great book overall, but see the end of my review). Or maybe just start reading. I know the UFO / ET stuff is laughable to you, but it isn't funny when the two leaders in alien abduction research teach at Harvard and Temple respectively; when intelligent panspermia is proposed by a Nobel prize winner; when the Freedom of Information Act has yielded dozens of pages of documents, which have survived critical scrutiny, that talk about "aliens" (what are presumed to be genuine ETs); when our own country has revived a nuclear space propulsion project (calling it "Prometheus") to get us to Mars in the next decade (what's the hurry ?); when an official promotional poster for such a journey proposed under George Bush, Sr. features a landscape of Mars with artificial structures [loads slow, but worth it]; and when scholars like royal genealogist Laurence Gardner ("Bloodline of the Holy Grail" and "Genesis of the Grail Kings") link the ancient astronaut theories of Sitchin to genealogical bloodlines that end with Jesus of Nazareth. It's time to wake up and see the paradigm being erected under your noses.

Again, the issue isn't whether the intelligent panspermia paradigm is real, or that it is scientifically provable, only that this facade will be believed.

So thank you, Weller-Grossman. Sometimes the truth becomes more clear when people try to obscure it.

Source: Raiders News Update