P. 1
The Sirus Mystery

The Sirus Mystery

|Views: 15|Likes:
Published by astrid444

More info:

Published by: astrid444 on Aug 11, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

07/08/2014

pdf

text

original

THE SIRIUS MYSTERY

:

Answering the Critics

by

Robert Temple

Copyright © J 997 by Robert K. G. Temple. Printed for private circulation by Century Publishing Ltd., London

I would like to do a reply. with me in it. 12 of your Novem ber issue and yet another letter from a reader on p. why bother to do so dishonestly? I immediately wrote to the Edi tor of Omni aski ng for the ri ght 0 f reply. There is a Nova TV program which has been shown in the States about three times now. If you can't criticize someone honestly. . saying: wrote a book called The Sirius Mystery which is still a can trov ersial subject. You published two letters from readers about his article on p. So your readers do seem interested in the s u bj e c t. wh ich contai ned not h i n g that could not be easily dismissed. can answer hi m poi nt by poi nt and that in i(self is an in te r e s tin g exercise. she was the arts editor) to get a n i ntrod ucti on which 1 thought might enable me to wri te a let te r suggesting a reply. entitled 'White Dwarfs and Green Men' (pp. Do you feel willing to gran! . 18 of your December issue. The fact that Sagan was launching a public attack on me on such a false basis seemed to me pathetic in the extreme..The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet Part I The Struggle to Publish My Reply to Carl Sagan Carl Sagan published an attack on The Sirius Mystery in the A u gust 1979 issue of Omni Magazi ne. r managed through myoId friend Bibi Wein who had a tenuous acquaintance with one of the Omni editors named Kathy Stein (i n fact. as everybody takes Sagan's word so seriousl y on any subject these days that a I i ttle dissent might make a change. nor did the Do go n exist in ancient ti rnes for any ancient astronauts to v isit. of co u r s e. but did not receive any reply to my letter.. 44-9 and 116--8). I brooded on this matter for some time and wondered how I might manage to publish a publ ic reply to Sagan's ridiculous attack. In you r August issue you ran a piece by Carl Sagan discussing my theories and purporting to explain them away. The subtitle was 'Did ancient astronauts visit the Dogon?' A nyone who has read my book will know that I have neve r suggested that ancient astronauts vi si ted the Dogon. So I wrote to Kathy Stein on 3 January 1980. as witness recent issues of Omni.

Letter to Sagan immediately commencing: Dear Dr Sagan. The double standards of Omni were depressing. The trouble with agan is that be is carele sand s lips hod now that he is so famou .. 1 \ rate back to Lebelson 6 February: Thank you for your recent letter. if you would would consider wrote an Open The Sirius Mystery Pan I Pamphlet to thi letter..) If you would like to submit a 1500 word manuscript on peculation dealing with a r buual LO Carl agan piece in Omni we would consider it for our 'UFO Update' column. larke happened to drop by to ee me in September. However. could see that th ings were not looking promisi ng. but had bee n published anyway.. whether you are going to print my reply to agan. riddled with errors. It i not an attack to l r y and set the record straight. The dangers of success! I have never heard from you in reply to my Jetter of February 6th. Could you please confirm that you intend to publish my Open Letter written to you r specifications? I would hate to think that you have still taken no decision. J could not give up. and [ have never heard from you at all. I am sure. I would like to write ornething w hie h was more than just a critical piece about his errors. I wrote again to Omni . much less read them.. Lebelson s h 0 u Id have real ized if he had read Sagan's article that UFOs were not involved in the discussion. But the r e are various point [ should like to correct which are of considerable importance . Omni feels L hat there an interest in the subject of UFOs. . The editors of Omni have kindly suggested write you this Open Letter after r had contacted them about your a rticle which a p pea red in an earlier issue of Omni and which formed a chapter of your recent book Broca' s Brain.. plea e.. who was not only Lebelsons boss but 2 3 . If you are exclusively concerned with UFO. I am still waiting to learn whether I may be allowed to reply to Carl Sagan and have no! heard any th in g fu rther from you or any other Omn i editor. perhaps you could steer me towards [he right person for this arl agan m at te r . I took the occasion to get his support. when. When my friend Arthur C. but \ hich would cover them in the course of discussing the important issues of ex traterrestri al i ntell igenee. To have my reply placed in a 'UFO Update' column was in itself denigrating. The next day. On 29 January another editor 1980. [wrote a reply to him to which he could not pos s i bl y take offence. a a reply to Sagan was important to set the record straight. Indeed.. if r could manage it in any way. June r wrote again and to 1 believe it is about three months now since I sent you my Open Letter to Carl Sagan. that I have the right to reply to Sagan's criticisms of myself in your pages by replying a you suggested. However the piece must be objecti v e and backed up with documentation in order for us to publish the manuscript. I am highly flattered that you have wi hed to enter the debate about the a tronomical knowledge of the Dogon tribe. .n's article had not been placed in a 'UFO Update' column: why should my reply? Carl Sagan's article had not been backed up with documentation.The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet equal time' to somebody who can show that agan i loppy. [1 had of course not mentioned UFOs. Lebelson: III On April 30th but heard notbing. My book The Sirius Mystery was the result of n in e years' research and there is hardly a statement in it which is nOL backed up by a footnote. and If so. but this time to Ben Bova. [ would ~ike to know. Omn i published an article b him criticizing my book The Sirius My tery and Sagan's article is full of errors. replied to me: we like to reply to agan in the form of an open letter pub!i hing it providing its lone is not hostile. I estimate it would take anybody about six month just to locate all the books in my bibliography. arl Saga. on 7 September. the reply came not call ed Harry Lebel son: from Kathy rein but fro m r There March: was no reply On I April Lebelson . You will agree.. Still no reply came from Omni. nor were they anything to do with my book. a you will have noticed. We do not wish to get involved in a personal attack against Carl Sagan. and el cr his ev idence La accord with his preconcei ved desire to sv eep m theories under the carpet? I we u Id like a right of reply.. You need never worry that r would write anything which was not 'objective and backed up wit h documentation'. sent the Open Letter to Omni received no acknowledgement. The matter of Carl Sagan's article and my wish to reply to it (not attack' him) has 110 connection whatever with UFOs. There has been some confusion over two separate issues. first brought to public attenti n b my book The Sirius Mystery in 1976. so I wrote to Lebelson again on 27 Thank you for your letter of Jan uary 3rd..

. my Open L tter i entirely harmless and lacking in an form of hostility whatsoe er. I am sure you will agree and there will be no problem. . Arthur was here at my house yesterday and he told me 0 f how you had sent hi m some man uscri pts many years ago when you were a struggling young writer of what a considerate person he thought you were. That is why be urged me to contact you di rectly because he said if I did t hat. After all. I'm sure. I a ked my friend Bibi Wein to intercede for me with Kath Keelan. I am very keen not to have this edited OUL. drafted a reply on 28 September: letter of September 16. We are goi ng to pu bl ish the mate rial and would appreciate having you condense your reply and re ubmit i L to us for publication. and indeed immoral. You my reply but you do not bother to say how man y words ir hould be! .. It is essential for my credibility for people to know that I have answers to Sagan's points.prod ucti ve. This i what I discussed with Arthur.. and il was not until 5 that J posted to Harry Lebelson my article with the Omnititle of 'The Nommos Are Coming'. then decided not to send the letter. Perhaps I should stress that. It was a plea u re tal ki ng wi th au the other day and I look. and Decem ber ..The apparently magazine: the person Sirius who really Mystery made Pamphlet the editorial decisions at t h e The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet I am writing to you personally at the suggestion of our mutual friend Arthur C.500 word arricle about Sirius... Events January friendly prevented me from doing this quickly. hov ever insulting. I think you will agree the piece 1 have sent is provocative of new thinking and does not go over any old ground. I would at least attempt lO retrieve something from the situation and accept the invitation to write a 1. However. 4 5 . He said the decision at Omni IVa that they did not want to 'offend Carl agan' and that therefore they were not pre pared to publish my Open Letter or allow me to reply to hi critici ms in any way. who specifically told me to mention hi name to you as supporting my grievance. Iarke. Lebelson replied [0 my letter to Ben Bova immediately. 'I Omni. oon afterward on 7 October. Therefore I shall have to await you r reply before ha vi ng suffi ci entl y specific guidance La know jus t \ hat it i that is nece sary.. as it wou ld be cou mer.. Omni publi hed an article b Carl agan criticizing me and my book The Sirius Mystery. [agreed to wri te the piece. \ hich [ shall e plain in a moment. on J 6 September: I'm sorry for tbe inconvenience caused by the delay in e v a l u a t in g your reply to Carl Sagan. ( decided during the can ersation that. forward to receiving y ur material a soon as you can get it to me. Lebelson sent me a remarkably friendly note commencing 'Dear Bob.. Once again. And if you want to use any illustrations.'! It read: thought you might like some interesting reading matter from I'm enclosing the last two issues for your enjoyment." I cannot possibly do anything until you tell me \ hal h Is that needs doing. and be was disturbed to hear that Omni had apparently not been willing [0 let me have the right of reply. they were prepared to commission me to write an article about the Sirius Mystery as long as I did not attempt to i ncl ude in it any reply of any kind to Carl agan. he was sure you would sort this situation OUl. I hope you are happy with it. helpful if you would specify what you mean. our regrets for the delay. I don't reply to agan at all but merely refer tbe reader to my reply to Sagan in a scholarly journal.... It appears t ha[ my Open Letter is not going to be published by Omni and aflerm 0re than a year I have every justification for being extremely d issat i sf i ed by being refused what I look upon as rn right of reply to criticisms of my book and my reputation made in your pages. J must 'not go over any old ground. which I believe she did . But I have never managed to gel Lebelson lO write to me again. The piece could be 1. and letters from several reader appeared in issues for October. November. I have many available . . and it seems clear to me that if you had k now n what I am about to tell you. gave a further account of what had happened to date and added: ' .. I would be paid. ' I added some grumpier comments than that. I look fan ard to hearing from you in the near future.500 word long. and he does not reply to my letters. In August 1979. thing would not have been allov ed to go the way they have. I am delighted that Omn i to publish my reply to arl Sagan. Thi caused a considerable reaction.. I wrote to Omni asking for the right of reply La agan but no one would even answer me.. as I didn't reply to Sagan the least Omni can do i allow me to announce that I have replied to him elsewhere and leave it at that. I can idered this attitude and these remarks. Here it is and you will note -to Omni' great delight.1 was plea ed to have your phone call when you commissioned me to do the piece. A few days Iater. I said in my letter: Thank you for your have at last decided It would be more ask me to condense . H a r r y Lebelson phoned me.t h r e e successive months..

It is not always easy to arran ge t his. Of course. So they are basically only appeasing me because Arthur Clarke was disturbed about their treati ng me badly. they phoned and commissioned me to write a piece about Sirius but still say they don't want me to answer Sagan. If he replies. published a long article in t he A nci en t Astrona u ts S oci ety peri od ica I A nci e IU Skie s (V 01. James Oberg. also include your rejoinder (should you wish) In the same issue. After all. J will.. November. 29 appeared my 'On the Sirius Mystery: An Open Letter to Carl Sagan'... I try [0 reply to critics of The Sirius Mystery when there is an obvious forum in which to do so. Probably I should have had the sense 10 realize that I had been wasting my ti me from the very beginning. 1981. 1 think. J will send him a copy of your letter as soon as you re-do 1 h e begi nning and get that to me. G. they wi II not publi sh it because I hey do not. However. At least he had good things to say about me and quoted extensively from my work i n support of hi s view. and was followed by assorted [etters from readers in the issues of Omni for the following October. You r co ntr i'bu tion to til is subject fj rS1 appe ared in the rnagazi ne 0 m 11 i for August 1979. '.The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet before although we have I never had another friendly note from Harry Lebelson again. I wi II try to pu bli sh it i n the same issue. Grayling in Issue Six of 6 7 .' So.] Your article also formed a chapter in your book Broca's Brain.Dece m ber. the person attacked. which I answered full y. [The arti cle Which. judge for yourselves: AN OPEN LETTER TO CARL SAGAN Robert K.J u n e 1981). repl ied on 14 November: contact Good to hear from you. went un publ ished after a 1.u ps urging him to reply to my Open Letter.. first brought to public attention by my book The Sirius Mystery in 1976 . It is reprinted in full below. and it was about the Nomrnos.lance wri ter formerly UK) Editor for Omni Magazine'. 1990).5. and on p. In any case. author of The Sirius Mystery. one has to note that I was t rea ted with less consideration chan an ord i nary reader: several readers had written in and had their remarks about my book published in the Correspondence section. to in terv ene and ask the Editor to let me have my say. Michigan. the 0 nl y man they think more bi ghly of than Sagan. But at this point I expected it to appear. or as early as I would have wished. Temple ON THE SIRIUS MYSTERY: Dear Dr Sagan: I am highly flattered that you have wi shed to enter the debate abo u ( the as tronorni cal knowledge of the Dogon tri be of Africa. But t hey still will not agree to 'antagonize' Sagan by publishing a complete refutation of his critici srns of my book. Sagan and J by 1990 had end ed up lumped together. even thou gh I had been officially commissioned to wri te the article (not to men ti 0 n commissioned by rrnplicauon for the Open Letter earlier).. C. but I. with whom I had had some never met. wrote a len gthy cri rique of The S iri us Mystery in Fate Magazine for November 1978. 1 enclose an open Letter to Carl Sagan which T wrote at the r e que s t of Omni Magazine to reply to an article by Sagan against my book The Sirius Mys t e ry . despi te fo II 0 IV. I was pleased to see t hat 'Robert Temple. is this not the best comic irony of all? [ did not give up trying to publish my reply to Sagan. what could Sagan say? Admit that his attack on me was superficial and shallow nonsense? Apologize? Not quite in his character." Though I am fra nkl y not too opti mi stic that Sagan will reply. Marcello. Everyone seemed to be allowed to have [heir say about me in Omni but myself. and then this year (1981) by an article in Omni by myself.1." 1 would be most indebted to you if you would consider this. A lengthy critique by A. and December. Car! Sagan never answered Marcello Truzzi. I wondered. After I got A rthu r Clarke. He had the excellent good sense of humour 10 say: 'The astronomer Carl Sagan seems to be in agreement . 17. The article was never pri nted.. and jf time will allow.. In 1990 Harry Lebelson. want to al ienate Sagan. supports the rheory. . Novem ber. I was never paid a penny. in the issue of Fate for October 1980. I wrote to him on 30 October: . I would be delighted to publish your reply to Sagan in issue after next (that is. As soon as I realised in October. 1980. I wrote to Dr Marcello Truzzi. in issue 8 due out around· . Many months of iIIness prevented me earl ier fro rn maki ng severa I replies such as I would have wished. the r e fore. was note ven allowed that courtesy. A friend of yours. whether you would consider publishing my reply (0 Sagan in Zet e tic Scholar? I want to publish it somewhere . published by the Department of Sociology of Eastern Mi c hi g a n University at Ypsilanti.' I would hate not to support a theory I had originated. . It was enti tIed 'The Search for Ancient Aquanauts'. that Omni would never allow me any right of reply at all. and also: 'Sagan and Temple cautiously present their information in a n atmosphere of reserved scepticism. Issue Number 8 of the Zetetic Scholar duly came OUI in July." Thanks fo r thinking of ZS for your reply . by then descri bed as 'a free. No.. com pletely refuti ng all poi nts of cri tici sm. though commissioned. who edited a scholarly Journal with a fairly ti ny ci rc u Iarion called The Zetetic Sell 0 lar .

3ndconlrary story in an account in w hie h he discussed the mallet. it is claimed.' You have raised the suggesti on that this information cam e to the Dogan from modern Western sources . bill will rather welcome in the true spirit of scientific enquiry. Father Dubreul at Mopti. I am in fact an American. This omission [Q which I refer wo u Id probably have led you unwittingly i ato error on thi s su bject.' featured a fascinating i nterv iew with Dr Dieterlen in which she made t his remark very strongly and held up in front of the cameras a Dagon artifact representing the three stars which the Dagon claim are at the Sirius system. The Editor of Nature has also refused to allow me proper right of reply to a ernie. After a year of my insisting.. I do nOI bel i eve ilis true that any Dagon tri besrnen fought in any trenches in Eu r o p e in the Fi rSI World War. But alas. fooling all dating experts.The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet the British magazine Ad Astra was fully answered by me in Issue Eight of the same magazine. Omn! fi na Ily agreed to let me wri te an a r t j c I e about The Sirius Mystery as long as it did not consist of a reply to you r points raised earlier in their pages. the Secretary General of the Societe des Africai n istes at the M usee de I'Homme in Paris. Please allow me to send you sometime a photocopy of this letter from Father Dubreut.l n j iy to correct you. symbols. Eventually I came to realize that this section of the progra m was a p paren II y edi ted-out for American relev ision! So t hat wouldexpl ain why you also appear to be unaware of the 0 pin ion expressed on this subject by the world's leadi ng authori ty. These Dogan soldiers. and which she said was 400 years old. etc. offend' you. I thought it best (Q take this a p pan I. Dr Germaine Dieter!en. You rneurion t h at this book was widely popular and translated into French. My third point relates to Western missionaries. mate!y than anyone else alive. But let us assume that they did: j t is ph y sica II y impossible that ibis could explain the 'Sirius Mystery' for the simple fact that the Dagon tradition of the superde ns ity of the star 5 ifi us B could not have been obtai ned that early in the West. who wear ri ght a head a 11 y way and published a quite false .. How all of this was then supposed to have filtered down through Ih e enri re Dogan and surround] ng cultures of over Iwo mi I! ion people and been embodied ill the hundreds or thousands of Objects. You can imagine. who repl ied sayi ng that none of their miss ionari es had had any can ia c t with the Dogan before 1949.etc. There are various points you made in your arricle/chapter which should like to correct. My fourth poi I1t relates to a suggestion made by you. long after the Firs I World War had ended. how grateful I am to the Zesetic Scholar for allowing me to respond 10 YOIlT own points in thei r pages. a therefore these missionaries are ruled out as a source. and as you yourself mention. I have this on video-tape at home. her opi rnon on a possible Western origin for the Si r ius tradi tions of the Dogan is of the highest im porrance. And how these hund reds or thousands of objects are meant !O have been expertly fabricated fakes purporting to be centuries old. which exist in those c til t u re s relating to the 'Sirius Mystery' in only two or three years baffles me. The Dogan tribe of Mali in Africa possess highly advanced astronomical information. IV h i c h originated with an earlier writer whom you consulted. This is the lea s t important of the fifteen points llvish to make. Just for the record. by 1931 the an th ropolog is ts were al ready with the I he Dagon and wo II Id have known if some group of Western amateur astronomers had rushed out to the desolate hi n ie rland of Mal i to implant t his knowledge in the presumably pliant minds of the Dagon priests in that narrow period of two or three years before thei r own a r rill a I . She an s we r s such suggestions with a single word: 'Absurd!' The BBC-TV Horizon Program which was shown three [j mes nationally as a Nova P TO g fa m in America. You can therefore appreciate some of (he difficulties ha ve encountered in attempting to discuss these matters and respond to cri ucisms. BUI as you did de sc r j be me in you r article as Bri fish. therefore. As she bas spent most of her life living with the Dogan and knows them and their traditions more inti. is the anthropologist who together with the late Dr Marcel Grraule first published an account of the Sirius traditions of the Dogon. much of it concerning the system of !h e star Sirius. his considerations like these and many more (such as the rti bal sacredness of the tradi lion Tn a kin g it unlikely [hal it could have come from Westernin(ruders who would not have been highly regarded or in the confidence of the meticulous 8 9 . carved statues. ] did send a copy of it to a not her person who m we both know. Long ago r wrote to the head of the While Fathers ia Mali. who shall be nameless. that Dagon were conscripted by the French to fight in the trenches in World Wa r I. . WOllen blan kers. and this is what has come (0 be referred (0 as 'the Sir ius Mystery . baffles me even more. Ed din gto n revea red the superdensi ty of S iri us B about !926. . Let me first say that although you obviously thought I was British IV hen we mel in London . but was often puzzled why friends in America who saw the TV program never seemed to have 'registered' Dr Di ete r l en's forceful remarks.. They repeatedly told me they did not wi sh to publ ish res ponses to you r poi rus beca use [hey did nOI w ish to . But I have experienced some difficulty in persuading certain magazines to grant me the right of reply. would have had access to mode r n Western scientific tradi tions about iri us. of which I have a first edi lion in my Iibrary wh ic h Slates that the work is a publication of his Gifford Lectures of 1927. But as you know. you mi ght be interested to know that I have yet to encounter a single cnucisrn of The Sirius Mystery 10 which there was not a satisfactory reply. 'The Case for the Ancient Astronauts. Fi f51 of al I. tn 1928 h e published' this in his popular book The Nature of the Physical World. a discuss] on I feel sure you will 11 0 t find in any way the slightest degree offensive. the information of the Dogan Sirius traditions had by that time already been gathered by t h e an thropologists. and which are of considerable importance.

despite her being the co-author with Dr Gri aule of the 0 r j gin a I ani h Topol og ical report.' This might lead others who do not agree with you j n rejecting the theory into error. .. but by the anthropologists. which is invisible now to the naked eye (one of the reasons for 'the Si ri us Mystery being a mystery). It is my interui on to publ ish Ih e results and a full bibl iography when Ii me permi ts. Sirius B. and you also say that 'there is some e vi den c e that the Dogan like to frame pictures with an ellipse. But my further points would be to agree with you that it is asrrophysically impossible for Sirius B to have been such a large 'red gia nr' star anyway wi t hi. Thus my ten t h poi nt: three stars do not make twi ns. But some ancient Greek sources describing Sirius as po ikt ios are said to descri be it as bei ng red. 40 of my book there is another diagram of the orbit to which yo LI do nOI refer. (I also asked Father Dub re ul whether any of the admittedly too late White Fathers were knowl edgeab!e about aSI ronomy and he said no. the 'twin' argument actually is seen to be evidence against. of a much smaller scale. II was red du ri n g the e ar I y Dog Days each year in the M ed i te rra nean area because it was at the hori zon and was reddened JUSl as the ri s mg and setti ng Sun is reddened. taken from the book Le Renard Pale by Griaule and o ieterlen.' (l tali cs mine). Here we see a speci fi call}. 45 of my book. A fu I I account of the matter wi!l be published in my complete survey of t h a! parricu Iar subject in the future. For if looked at with suffiei ent at te n Ii v e ness . If they had fabricated a tradi lion of two stars 10 accord with the sacredness of twi ns. you have d raw n a too hasty concl usi on..lliptical orbit and a planet going around the star Si ri us C also in a. not for.' There are a number of ancient quotations w h ic h ei ther refer to Sl ri LIS as red.The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet and tradi tional priests) which lead Dr Dieterlen to reject the suggestion of Western origins as absurd.) A nd as regards Dr Dieterlen. These few remarks. but the Dogon themse I ves. Si ri us was not actually red in antiqui ty. I I dare to hope (hat the twohundred-year controversy will (hen: be settled in the negative: No. You have neglected aIL of this ev idence. It mea n t monIed'. There the anthropologists make quite explicit Ihe elliptical nature of the orbit by reproducing the stationary position of Si ri us A and the I IVO ex trerne posi tions of Siri us B with the ell ips e showi ng the mov emen ( between the two extremes and which th e y specifically say 'gives an idea of this trajectory'. The Greek 1V0rd poikilos never at any ti me had the mea n ing 'red' as some astronorne rs wrongly supposed.! My next point is an astronomical one. i ncl udi n g Ira nsl ati ng the enti re texts of the man y German articles on the subject. You say 'Temple says' the Dogan mal ntai n the SUIT Si rius B orbits a ro u n d 5 irius A in an ellipse. and Eddi ngton have taken part. s (which some others appear 10 have obscured on purpose because il did not sun the ir arguments) is that the Dagon insi st that t here are no I two but three stars in tile Sirius system. This effecti vel)' destroys a II argu men t s for the v isibil ity of S iri us B in the past wi thout need for further discussion. For you neglected to realize that eve n at that earlier stage in its evolution millions of years ago when il was a large star.n the pas! one or two m i Ilion years at I east. I regret to say. ~ 1997 note. Such reports are s i m pi e mtstranslations and show only that astronomers are not always good classical scholars. and secondly. On p. it is not Temple who says anything aI all! This part of my book is not writ/en by me. should go some way towards clari fyin g the information which you fOll nd i0 Horace. 6 also you may see Figure 8. 'The redness of Sir ius in antiquity' problem has been a major controversy in a srr o norny si nee the ei gh teen th century. You briefl. which evolved from an earlier massive star. 10 11 . My seven tb and eighth poi nts are highl y importan l. . hi ghly e l 0 n g a ted elliptical orbit of its own. the Dogan Si ri us tradi lions bei ng as they are. It is they who say explicitly that the system of! Ii e three stars at S i ri us 'is represented by a pattern . my sixth point is that you now here even men rion her. If you look at p. consisn ng of a n oval [ell ipsoid] in which one of the centers is Si rius. in which leadi ng fi gures such as Herschel. the y would never have ins lsted on a th ird star's existence.' which is certainly true. Although you reject this theory. 'The relati ve Illations of the two stars about each other could be dis ce r ned with the eye. I am not m is Ia ken about it because there is more ex pl icit evidence than you noticed.y mention that in the Dagon mythology 'twins play a central role. asrronorn ica I diagram: it s h a IV s the star Sirius C going around Sirius Ain an e. where I publish an English translation (v cued for accuracy by Dr Dieterlen) of the original anthropological report by Griaule and Diererlen. chiapare! li. you remark that if it were true.. Hence my fifth point: I he J928~1931 gap is too narrow and {OO late.. The reason for t hi. I have n ear I y fin ished the most com plere historical rev iew of this controversy eve r undertake n. But when you suggest that thi s might explain why the Dagon gave Sirius a companion star (a n argument advocated at great len gt h by some others). would sti I! h a v e been i ndi s ti n gu i shable from its cornpani on star as a separate a bj e c t beca use of the mi flute parallax. then. And yet she is sri II very much al i ve and acwally rejected your thesi s on lel·e vision years before your boo k advocati ng it was pu bl I shed. and also to comment on your in re re sti ng q uotati on from Horace a b au l "The red dog star. or are said to do so . it is not Temple ·w h 0 says this.' Fi rst of all. [I ne ver found the opportuni ty to do !his. and referred to the hi gh degree of sc inti II arion for w h i c h Sirius is well noted. On p. something which evidently Slipped your mind when discussing (before rigluly rejecting) the idea that the tiny Sirius 8. migh t 113ve been vi SIble to the naked eye in the historical pas t. and that Temple may be mistaken about the claim that in Dogan mythology the planets and Sirius B move inell iptical orbits.

And knowledge of the invisible moons of Jupiter is hardly pnrmtive. But there is more to the matter than that. if I were a Dogan r would be very proud of il and look at the materialistic West with some degree of pity.' You r account of thi sacred basket is misleading. It is to be regretted I hat you chose the example of the basket as an intended illustration of thei r backward ness. one of the leading cultures of the world. the voluntary expression of a complicated cosmogony. the tazi basket or which you speak represents the second ark of Ogo and the third ark of Ogo is represented by another basket called n u g or o .in the d i sj a in ted sense. while the first is represented by the nukaro basket. frankly. r a sure you. 12 I3 . The ame i true of the Dagon. or the Mohammedan's bowing towards Mecca and journeying there in order to walk in ci rel es around a rneteori te as exam pi es . as clearly seen in Plates 6. In my personal opinion. My fifteenth and final poirn is where I rush to the defence of the Dogan when you mention their tradition of the Creator and the plaited basket. they are happy. And. A s u p er f i ci a I glance at it could offer any number of disconnected subjects of ridicule and derisi on. this was true ani y for a re Iai i vel y brief period and was not the primary significance of the heliacal ri ing. j USl as in the same way one could take the eros s of Christianity. you might study the Dogon cosmogony more thoroughly. their philosophy and religi n are a a whole not a whir inferior to an other in ex istence on this planet. the smallest common object reveals by its shape and its decorations. a basket used for carry i ng represents when it is upside down. it is one of the richest. All three baskets are meant to portray what we Westerners would call space ships. often amongst the stars. from the year I have studied the m through reports. this ba ket may be a urvival of the basket invariably carried by the Babylonian Oannes/Dagon. but their moral fibre equal or surpasse our 0\ n. the candlestick of Judaism. fulfilled people with rich and meaningful lives. They may be indifferent to modern Western technology. the Dogan are. the belly of the Buddha. But they are too magnanimous to pi t y u . In the Introduction to Le Renard Pale. although you are correct in saying that the he. after all. and prove them morons. due to 1 h e precessi on of the eq u i noxes. In fact.of barbari c pri mi ti v ism amongst all 1bas e peoples. The reason why this was a transi tory aspect of the matter is that the date of the hel iacal rising continually shifted. The two latter ones are a sociated to rites related to the four major moons of Jupiter (which are also in isible to the naked eye). the square bottom represents space and the four cardinal points. And yet in those more familiar cases we know full well that the apparently ridiculcu details form part of larger and deeply meaningful philo ophies and religions.. the rites of Shinto. Dr Germaine Dieterlen speaks of the basket: 'For the Dogan a well a for the other societies of West Africa. con ten ted. Their thought are.The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet J should li e to remark in passing that.. and the conversations r have had with the anlhropologi ts who have lived \ ith them over decades. . 8. And this may also be the ource of the sacred basket of Demeter from tbe ancient Greek mysteries. most profound system of thought in the entire world. Thus . and 9* in my book. in the se nse of the in rri n sic val ue of thei r thought. Space shi ps are really rather fa rwa rd. Actually.. \ hich you find tempting to regard as an in ferior or p rim i Liv e myth. t. [ would hope that IV hen one da you have the time. the ark on IV hich h urna n bei ngs descended from hea v en to the earth. out of context . the tetractys of the Pythagoreans.l iacal rising of Sirius was used in ancient Egypt to si gnal the in unda tion by the Nile.. 7.

and had criticized my book elsewhere. published In London.s i nv isible to the naked eye. REPLY TO A. C G rayli ng'. Because of the minute parallax between the two bodies and the impossi bi liry 0 f resolving them without a good telescope and a lot ofexpenise. Who wou ld dream 0f deny in g Sirius B this small comfort in the lonel iness of the vas t reaches of space? But will it work? I mean. Grayli ng is a pseudonym. and it is unfortunate for those who li k e simple solutions that Mr Grayling's will not work. and I m us! therefore rem ind hi m of . Or it might have been someone who knew me and wanted to remai n anonymous. The trouble is that S iri us A and Siri us B are so close together thaI they cannot be di su nguished.. possibly much [anger. which I did in Issue 8 (1979). If they were both of the same size the y would sull appear to the naked eye to be one body in space. will it solve the Sirius Mystery? Can we see Sirius B blowing off steam when it has had enough of Sirius A's a ttentions and wants 10 be left alone for a whi le? Is th is the s imp l e answer we have all been looking for? The answer is No. which would then cross over and form a' ski n ' around the smaller star. He has made a far more sophisticated attempt to come up with a scenario which could ena ble Sirius B to be larger and v lsi ble to the na ked eye." ' What these stars won't get up to in their hi ghjinks! If two stars are left alone together for long enoughi n space they begin to fiddle wi l h each other. C G rayl j ng. pp. Since Ian Ridpath was a contributor to the rnagazi ne. I have been invited by I he editor to reply to the article 'Solving the Sirius Mystery'. no matter. by A. C. this is most inge nious. And it is to Mr Grayling's credit that h e does not advocate this. I thought it would be helpful to reviewers to have ready availability to them. but must have been at least one OJ two rnl Ilion yea r s ago. Perhaps they should be considered The Sirius Mystery FAQ (Fr equenrty-Asked-Quesuons). He has c er t a i n l y done a better job of trying to solve the mystery than many other people who have made similar attempts and failed. under the title • No Easy Sol ution to the S iri us Mystery'. for it implies that people think I am so stupid I never thought of such things myself in the nine years [ worked on preparin g this problem for pu bl icaiion.The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet Part II Replies to Other Critics Besides the reply 10 Carl Sagan re printed in Part I. si nce there is no poi nt). This in itself is not new. to use t h e conventional phrase which has now become common on the internet. which appeared in Issue Six. 14 I5 . Well. as a means of explaining [he evo! ution of thi s bi nary system. C. he might possi bl y be 'A.i t wi t h sl ight impatience. GRAYLING (1979) I strongly suspect that A. 9-10. I wondered about thi s at the very begi nni ng 0 f my research. . I must confess that it is rather annoy i ng to h a v e people can ti n ualty comi ng up wi til si mpl isric schemes to sweep rhe Sirius Mystery under the carpet. This exchange took place in a v e r y obscure and now entirely forgotten magazine called Ad Astra. as I have n eve r heard of him in any other context. Since these answer so many questions which have been raised about The Sirius Mystery. is that Sirius B was in ancien! times not invisible. The poi nt I have just made of the parall ax u nfo rtu natel y did not occur to Mr G rayli ng. w hi eh i. t Basically. The as t r o nom e r s a nd astrophysicists wi th whom I have discussed these matters mention mass transfer in the other direction.. as the case varied. and has been suggested by many people before. Bur.. This 'skin' would heat up and begin to bur n . Here we have Sirius A getting familiar wi I h its Ii ttle companion star. which say thai this could not possibly have happened as recently as that.. The ani cle by Grayl i ng en ti tl e d 'Solving the Sirius Mystery' appeared in Issue 6 (1978) and twas invited to reply. This phenomenon is known as a no va. Mr G rayli n g' s proposal wi II no! hold up even if his astr op hysi cs are correct (which I have not bothered to check. what Mr Grayl ing proposes for an expl anaiion as to how a nei en I peoples kn ew of the ex is re nee of the sra r S i ri us B. But theori es that Si ri us B collapsed into its white d war f state in hi storical ti mes go agai nst all the know n pri nei ples of astrophysics. Indeed . G rayl i ng has made herculean efforts to come II p wi th an astrophysi cal fa ntasy wbi ch wil! hold up to sci en t ifie scr uti ny and Ihe reby sol v e the problems of the Sirius Mystery. He el aborates a com p Ii ca ted process w her e b y the large-sta r Siri us A would have hydrogen drawn from irs a u I e r layers by S iri us B. Mr Grayling proposes to have solved the Sirius Mystery by what he hopes is an ingenious theory. such as Carl Sagan. My a rti de follow s: NO EASY SOLUTION TO THE SIRIUS MYSTERY As author of the book The Sirius Mystery. It's shocking. Eventually the temperature of the 'skin' would rise so much (hal i I would 'burst outwards ina great bu rni ng flare. the following replies to critics were either published or suppressed.

Nor does he provide any explanation of how the Dogon I6 17 . For Grayling thereby commits the reverse of the same fault which he criticizes in others. There is no lise his criticizing credulity based on wishful thinking when he himself is guilty of in-credulity based on wishful th i n ki n g. who takes an interest in astronomy. I disagree in principle with people who have preconceptions in their own minds against the possibility of a visitation of our planet by in tell igen t extrarerrestri al s at some time in the past history of L h e planet. How can Mr G ray lin g make s uch an obv ious error? Is he more intent on his theory than 0 n the facts? If you are offering a 'better' theory you shoul d at leas! pay attention to the one you are 'bettering'. If he wishes to enter into a debate on the subject. !tis merely Mr G rayl ing ' S personal bias which is expressed in the s taternertt.inded.m. People who do not wish to h a v e to bother to consider each other's opposi ng poli tical views can s mea r each other with the epithets 'commies' and 'fascists'.. called by me Sirius C (and w hic h several astr onorne rs clai m to have observed. Grayling merely puts. There is no reasonable basis for Mr Grayling to he certain t he I there is an "inhe rent implausibility' to the Earth having been visited at some time in its history by intelligentex traterrestrials.. He gives no reasons why a VI suauon is i nh eren [I y i lTI pi ausi hi e The implausibility is an opinion only.The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet In noting that the separation between the tWO bodies is just no 1 sufficient for them to be resolved by the naked eye even if they we r e the same size. Not only is il not sci erui fica!!y more respectabl e. rarhe r Iike 'commies' . then if Mr G ray Ii ng thinks this is simpler. We are presumably to i magi ne an ci en t astronomers sitli ng crosstegged and brooding ana sri II u n in v e n re d modern physics. 'pigs'. M r Grayl ing stales that the Dagon mai ntai n that the home planet 0f the beings from S iri us A' is attached to Si ri us B. Grayl ing has the nerve to say 'This is a far sim pier. '! If we are willing to admit that the i mpossi blei s possible. Mr Grayling discusses 'wby so much crede nee is accorded vis i La t i on theories' . a body smaller than the Earth and closer [han Saturn is to our own Sun to a star 10. and far m 0 r e sci e ntifi call y respectabl e sol uticn to the "Si ri us M ystery" I han Temple's offeri n g. but are about n in e I ight-years away from us! It should be common knowledge to any 0 n e. it is important to remember that they are closer together than our Sun and the planet Saturn. he on Iy and obv ious ex pi ana ti on of this flare in the sky. i I is in fact scientifically impossi ble. hi mself in the poi rul ess role of a Pharisee. gIVing you some sort of easy v ictory.000 times brigbter than our Sun would immediately become an easy object for ancient man to observe. He is merely raki ng up the tired and sag gi n g conservative stance versus the J i beral 'bel ievers '. It is not as if this were burl ed in small pri nt. I will state my opinion: a visitation is probable. but which 1s u nconfi rrned). all you have to do is drag in the phrase' "little g r e en men' and immediately you can conclude that your opponent is hu mil ia ted and ridicul ed. 'queers'. People fall back on these cl iches to dismiss what they can no ( and do not want to understand or face. on pa g e 26 of my book (page 46 in the paperback) I reproduce a Dogon diagra m of this pi anet goi ng around Siri us C. I agree with him that 'people are ever hungry for a neal and inclusive theory whi chex plai ns rbei r origins and their world' one has only to look at the nonsense people will accept as part of t h e bel ief-systerns of certai n of the world's rei igions! No doubt t his motive. But this is a cheap betrayal of the hu man powers of reason and logic and is rorall y u nscien tific. Iike Mr Grayl ing. But I do not intend to enter into t hat di scussion on this occasion. it is simple-. Somehow. He then goes on to observe thai this unstable state of affai rs had to last a l least a hundred years (longer than any nova I have ever heard of) for the precise orbital period of this body around S i ri us to be de t e r m i 11 e d (by whom"). 'f'asci s ts ' . and also 1 hat such superdense matter did not exist anywhere on Earth (which 1S specifically maintained by the Dogan). Mr Grayling nowhere mentions the information from the Dogan about the possible existence of a Sirius C. the elliptical nature of its orbit was real ized by the ancients. and concl udi n g that superdense rna trer was 1. if we are willing to abolish the laws of optics and take J iberti es with the pr inci pi es of astrophy 5i cs. B LI I this does not excuse Mr Gray! in g' s wanting /0 disbelieve it. which makes a dialogue of the deaf. A reading of my book which was truly atteruive would reveal clearly that the Dogan rna in tai n that this planet orb! rs a round a third st a r which they claim isin (he system. BUI why do we ne e d to divide into hawks and doves on such an issue? While his observation that von Daniken has helped to create a new mythology is valid. is a strong one for many people wanting /0 be lie ve that our civi Iizati ons on th is planet a re ex t rate rre stria! in on gl n. which is as old as humanity and not something Mr Grayling has discovered.' This is not true. also. In discussing extraterrestrial visitation possi bi I iti es.I co ul d present ev i dence in fav au r of the probabi I ity and he rni ght pre sen I evidence for the nnpteusibitiry. then we might wri te ani des represen ti 11 g the two poi nrs of \I iew . that we h a v e great di fficu I ty in detecti ng the ex istence of planets in other sol ar systems even with our most sophisti cared eq u i pmen t (ali such detections remai neon trov ers ia I). And yet he bel ieves that by s imp I y flari ng up. How? An understand in g of de g e n era I e superdense matter was then arrived at by some wonderful intuitive leap of the a nci e nt mind. Why is this so startling a notion? Because we were not toldi! at school? Are we so j ncapabl e of s peculati ng about these matters t hat we deny them solely because such a visitation seems to us extraordinary? Mr Grayl ing displays a serious and unscientific bias against extraterrestrial visitations by dismissing the possibility IV i L h the mocking phrase 'little green men This cliche has now taken 0n the value of a sl ur-word. penetrating to the mysteries of atomic matter and the na tu re of electrons.

83-88.y'. The Dogon know. They know that Sirius B is composed of a special kind of material which is called sagala. has now indeed been confirmed. which i very different. But that is not all they know.The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet MYSTERY knew of other invisible bodies in space . Te~ple writes. He disputes the contention that an earthlike planet could exi ( in the Sirius y tern and q uesrions Temple's assertion that he has traced the Si ri us my t h into antiquity. 1976). however. And yet any number of people in the street today in a modern city. They know that the star's orbital period is 50 years. which it really is.the four major moons of J u pi ter and the ri n gs of aturn.' Would that be so terrible? REPLY TO JAMES OBERG (1980) IN DEFENSE OF THE SIRIUS Tn the November 1978 issue of the American magazine Fate.eve n thouah this star is invisible from Earth. for example. Sirius C. November L978 issue) James E. of the universe. We t Africa. The Dogon also say that Nommo. In an arti cle pu bl ished in Fate (' A ncierit Astronauts in West Africa?'. has attracted re pectful attention even in England's presti gious sci en t i fi c journal Nature: Robert K. pp. In the introductory remark written by the Editor preceding my reply. James Oberg published a long second attack on my book entitled 'Ancient A tronauts in West Africa?' I was invited by the editors to repJ and did so in the October 1980 issue. has not as yet been confirmed by astronomers. Temple's reply follows: . from a root meaning "strong". founded civilization on Earth. would have to be changed radically. which it is. that I have been able to 'establish the certainty that r h e informants were extraterrestrial. possesses about the Sirius star system may have come from extraterrestrial sources. They know that Si rius B is the smallest kind of star. all of which i perfectly true. unlike the others. Thi bel ief. The key word here is may. Temple's The Sirius Myste. th us providing a splendid confirmation of the Sirius Mystery hypothesis by the ultimate scientific method: confirmation of a prediction. do Dot know the difference between a star and a planet much less all the other t h in g . And he even gives his motive: '(My theory) does not demand a radical change in our views. He is nOI interested in explaining. G. One book. but in ex plaining away. around wh ich orbits a planet popu Iated by intelligent bei ngs. has not as yet been confirmed from the by astronomers. ' T his means that be wants at all costs to be rid of it. as James Oberg claims [do. In my book The Sirius Mystery I suggested that astronom ic a l information \ hich the Dogon tribe of Mali. and that this material is heavier than all the iron on earth.' contains a The Dogon make a further claim: that the Sirius system th i rd star.. about a srnal ler star (astronomers call ir S iri us B) whic h ci rei es Siri us . the third star. Oberg takes issue wit h Temple's conclusi ons He suggests that the S iri us bel iefs are not nearly so old as Temple contends. They know that Sirius A is not at the centre of its orbit. then 0 f course our view of history. and of ourselves.y (St Marti n' S Press. a being Siriu system. describing not one but two solar systems separated by in terstell ar space? How did they know that OUf Galaxy is swirling in space and contains countless worlds? They correctly understand the distinction between planers and stars and between the olar y [em and the Galaxy. Where are M r Grayli ng s sol utions to these problems? He admi ts t hat his theory is intended to' ex pi ai n a way "The S iri us Mystery". he stales: 'The Dogon make a further claim: that [he irius system contains a third star around which orbits a planet populared by intelligent beings. The book deals with the mythology of West Africa's Dogon tribe. and that the Earth rotates on its axis as well as revolving around the Sun') How did they have a concept of a solar system. u nl ike the others.' he says. and it nee r ceases to astound me when I frequently encounter it. which posses es information about the composition of the irius s La r system (and our own solar sy tern a well) that conforms to modern astronomical knowledge.. who hold that uch peculations are based on poor re ea rc h. Most theories about 'ancient astronauts' have failed to impress scholars. etc. who have had supposedly good education. Did these 'flare' too? How do the y know of the superdense matter which composes the while dwarf S fa r and express it so dearly? How did they know that cosmic orbits are elliptical? How did they know that all cosmic bodie rotate on th e i r axes. This bel i e f . 'We need more reliabLe evidence -especially theories that can be tested. flim y evidence and bogus information. which it is. that in fact they may have bee n passed on to the Dogon by European mi ionaries.' And also: •If Temple's theory is right. They also speak of in te II i ge n t beings in yet other solar systems of whom they say they know only by repute. T nowhere 1 8 19 . They know that Sirius A is at one of the foci of S iri us B's ell i plical orbit. and that 0 the r solar systems attach to other stars.' I make crystal-clear at all ti rn e s that what I have suggested i an hypothe is only: Oberg says that I remark on the absorption of a hrist-figure into Dogon culture -'obviously a recent addition' in his view.' As we have seen in Chapter One of my revised edition of The Si r iu s Mystery. Nowhere do I say. in an article entitled "I n Defence of The Sirius Myste. which it i not. Even in thi • pace age' such ignorance is widespread.

To the contrary. not qui te true. al though later in vesti ga ti ons rul ed OUL L hat possi bil i ty. In recent years we h a v e discovered that red dwarf star can be flare stars.. has been disproven. thought to have been detected earlier and linked to a third star in the s stem. from an observatory based on the moon. lal ked about the discovery of a th i rd s tar in the Si ri us system. Such a search of the Sirius system should be carried out. might bring results. everal stars [Q the observer. Oberg writes. What makes this so interesting i that the Dogon information'" not only predates astronomy's discovery (made in the 1970s) that red d IV a r (s can be flare stars but also prov ides a possi ble ex pI anati on of how a star in the Sirius system could be seen and later not seen. Again.Osiris for one prominent example existed in mythology long before Christ was born. He negl CIS 10 mention that Jupiter has only four major moons. This however has no bearing whatever on the que tion of whether or not an outer star exists. I will conclude that the Dagon inf rrnation has been fully alidated. Not true. Orevenrually a spinning infrared interferometer. predictions are the e sence of science and here we have some. which in modern astronomical terms ~vould mean that it is what astronomers call a red dwarf star. The orbiting observatory of (he 1980s will carry equipment full capable of making a search for iriu . The Dogon also mention a period of rotation of Sirius B: 'It revolve upon itself over the period of one year and tbis revolution [sicrotation] is honoured during the celebration of the bado rite. The Sirius system is the only star system for whi eh we ha e re table pre d i c t ion s made by a possibly extraterrestrial source from the past. entirely in passing. the Dogon have S how n Sirius B as 'a small cluster of dots [which] represent the star when it is furthest from S i ri us. On page 65 I refer. is a nether datum to be in v est i ga te d when it is possible. the rest are t i ny insignificant bodies by compari on. According to Oberg I maintain that 'the inhabitants of irius are aq uatic because in Greek the word for "S i ri us" sounds like the word for "siren". There are some such elements present but I believe them to be indigenous: there is no anthropological evidence this i a recent addition to the Do zons '" belief-system.' does he mean a II as tro no rner s . Bra ewell. 'Christ figures' . Page 40 of my book contains a Dog n diagram of the elliptical orbit of Sirius B around Sirius. Sirius become brighter and \ hen it.' When it becomes possible to observe the Sirius system from a satellite. 'Europeans.~r jus L those with whom he has discussed the subject? He certainly cannot include (he many astronomers I have talked with. it remains a distinct possibility. Can it be that there is indeed a Sirius C and that it is a red dwarf which in t h e 1920s flared and became briefly visible from Earth before s u b s id i n e s a g a in? It may be possible to know thi within our lifetimes. named IfI us C by the astronomers who saw it. was 0 b s e r v ed repeated Iy by different as tronorner in the I 920s. A notber is the Dagon descri ption of a sua nge prox i mi ty effect in the irius ystern. If a Si ri us C is ever found again th is would go a Ion g way toward confirming the accuracy of the Dogon claims. So the possible existence of a th i rd star in the S i ri us system has no l been 'ruled out' by any means. Here.seems to be that a Ii f e- 20 21 .. Although technically 'moon'. the description by the Dogon tribe of a third star in l h e Sirius system maintain that it i four times li ahter in weight than Siriu B. When Oberg says rhat astronomers [do not] bel ieve that any earthlike planets could exist [in the Sirius system] long enouah for life to emerge and develop. as I have said. The consensu of a tronornical opinion . The Dogon maintain that when Sirius B is close to irius. I dealt with this matter on page 28 of my book. they ay. N. Sirius B give off a twinkling effecL uggestlng. with the closest and furthest positions of Sirius B indicated on the diagram in relation to Sirius A. iriu A. regardless of our 0wn preconceptions. to the Greek word for siren and its similarity [0 the word for irius. if a InU C is ever discovered and found to be a red dwarf. the proximity effect and the twinkling -if they truly exist -in less than the fifty years i t takes for irius B to move around Sirius A? Although it may be years or even decade before we know the answers these questions should be clearly stated now because. sugge led recently by Dr R. in other words they flare up by one or two magnitudes and then subside asain. will we discover something of this kind? Will it be possible La detect. Oberg remarks that Dogan beliefs about the four moon of Jupiter are wrong because Jupiter has over a dozen moon. Attempts to see t his star in recent years have been unsuccessfu I and an a p par en L perturbation in the motion of the primary star. then.[ hope Oberg note the phra eology and learns something from it . they are hardly in the same category. We have in the Dogon info rrnat i on apr ed i c ti v e mechanism which it is our duty 10 test. More specifically.The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet ugge t that a Christ-figure was absorbed into the culture. drawing absolutely no conclusions of any kind. A ib i rd star in the Si ri us sy s te m. Tn fact. they tell me that a life-bead ng planet could have evol ved i 11 tbe Si ri u sy tem. a "mermaid' .' Thi rotation is astronomi cally possi ble but IV hether it is correct or not we cannot yet know. as anyone who had read my book carefully would know. is furthest away. The basis 0 f science IS supposed to be the use and testi ng of p r ed i c t i v e rnechani s ms. For the representation of its fart hes I po i rion. An apodized optical telescope might be capable of doing the ame from Earth even ooner. uch a star would cause a pertu rba ti on over a much Ie n gth ier period than the 0 n e scientists thought they had observed.

if it is (0 have a stable orbit close enough 10 i rius A to support life co n v en t ion a l l y. But even so. would have to be in orbit around an outer star in the Sirius system. one would assume they would do the same with Sirius C.ne under w hat conditions a third body could be present in the Sirius system w i t ho ut disru pti ng the system. 'navels along a greater trajectory' than Siri us B. if it existed. I n II iew or this. this is precisely what the Dogon mai main is the case. This pia neta ry orbi tis represen ted as bei ng dearly el J i ptical and it protrudes outwards fro m what appears to be a widely distant orbit of Sirius C around the inn e r Sirius system. Could other white men have given this information 10 the Dogon? We must remember that 1926 is the earl lest date at whi ch iri us B IV a s known in the West to be a white dwa rf star.3 and would be nearly circular. although they not e that resea rchers in celestial dynam ics have known si nee 1972 that a n orbit of a third body need not be on such a plane at all But wi Ihi 1'1 the limitations of the plane.929. then.ga rdi ng a possi bl e Si ri us C. Critics of The Sirius Mystery. an outer s ta r . To check this possi bi Iity. By that time anthropologists had already obtained the Dogon S i ri us info rrnati on.. conditions would not be favourable. 'No visual detect: on has bee n made of such a companion since 1. starti n g with the shortest possi bl e s ta b l e orbit of 275 years. the greater eccentric uy it could have and the more elliptical it could become. using computers at the Universtty of London. the stable orbits are so nearly ci fCU Iar as to make qui ie a contrast to the hi ghly ell i p tical orbit of Si rius B. 1978. Drs Richard Donnison and Iwan P. then. The II isual detection made in the late 1920s rni ght then be ex plai ned in terms of projecti on effects making Band C appear cl os e for a short time.' In order to simplify the problem Williams and Donnison conceive an orbi t on the same plane as Si ri us A and Si nus B. I IV rote to the Father uperior of the White Fat her s Mission in Mali and asked when the firs! missionaries were sent to ! h e Dogon areas. It is obv iously. BUl they do not! The nearly ci rcu Iar 0 r b iL which the Dogon assign to Sirius C is in full agreement with the recentty eluci dated req u irernents of eel esri a I mechan ics. Sirius Cwe may call it. claim (hat the Dogon could have received their extraordinarily detailed information about the irius system from while men. ]n their 1978 paper Dennison and Wi lliarns report on hypo t h eli c. The longer (h e period of the stable orbi t. On page 26 of my book I show a Dogan diagram of the orbi t of the planet nyifn 1010 around Siri us C. Since the Dagon lay such stress on the ell iplical nature of Sirius B' s orbit. it is a remarkable fact . Iherefore . Once again we find Dogan i. Thus we see thai sti II a 11 a l her aspect of the Dogan information has. It is. He chose to ignore the letter: ina subsequent account he faded to mention what the Father S uperio r said and asserted !hat missionaries arrived earlier to implant the Sirius material into the minds of the Dogan. 479-82) in which they pain! out that the visual observations of a Si ri us C did not a g r e e with the perturbation thought to be detected in the 1930s in can nectlon wit h an inner thi rd star but d isproved in the 1970s. their interest stimulated by The Sirius Mystery. Oberg included. Williams of the University of London. The impl ication of this diagram is that S iri us C not a n I y has a 'greater trajectory' but is a very far outer star. however. Williams and Dennison established thai the Sirius system would be stable if a Si rius C were present at a sufficient di stance. were in orbit around an inner s tar. I! was discovered that. pp.The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet bearing planet. orbits even up to 425 years would still have only a tiny eccenrrrcrry of 0.a I studies which demonstrate quite clearly that Sirius C. these figures of fifty years and th irty-two years may represent peri odiciti es in the orbi t de pe n den t on C's proximities to Sirius B or something of a similar nature. The Dogon state that this star. of i uterest to dele rm i. they say. so an 0 l! t e r Sirius C cannot possibly have an orbital period of thirty-two yea r s around Sirius A. He replied thai the earliest missionaries arrived in 1949.one that goe s even Iu rrhe r to su bstanti ate the Dogan information . Re. In fact. decided 10 take a closer look at the matter. especial Iy 5i nee the planet goi ng around S iri us C also is gi yen a high IY el Iipucal orbi t. This does n01. specifically missionaries. Another aspect which remains to be verified is I h e I r contention that S iri us Band S iri us C Ira vel in {he same direction. rule o ut the presence of a thi rd com ponent orbi ti ng the bi nary pai r at I a r g e di stances.alLhough another account says thirty-two years. The Dogoninformation about Sirius C's orbital period. suggests t hat the orbi tal period may 11a II e become garbled. According to Kepler's Jaws an outer star could no! have an orbi tal period less than that of an inner star. 1 sent a photostat of this letter to a IV e 11.. Recently the questi on of a possi ble third star in the Siri us s y s t e m has received renewed attention in the astrono m ical commu n i ty.that the Dogo n draw a nearly circular orbit for Sirius C (see page 26 of my book). They also say that its orbital period is the same as that of Sirius R namely fifty years.k no IV n journal lst. for ifi l. Therefore we m us t env isage a wh i te physicist who rushed OUI to A fri ca ina hurry to te II the Dagon before the French anthropologists arrived in t931! Every a nth ropologi s t with whom J have di scussed the possi bi lity that IV hit e 22 23 . The ex istence of these IwO d iff ere nt fi g u res. been confirmed and found to be accurate. They hall e publ i shed an a rticl e ca II ed 'Possi ble Orbits for a Thi rd Star j n Ihe Siri us System' in the t e c hili c a I journal Astrophysics and Space Science (56. The Dogon clearly state that th is Ii fe-beari ng planet known as II y if n toto or ene g ir in or e m me=g ir i n (the latter IWO names being puns 0 n each other) orbits around the star emme ya which they say is L h e thi rd star in [be S iri us system and whi ch ] have referred to as Si r ius C. must be not only garbled (or perha ps concea led in li ne with a sec r e [ i v e tradition) but only partially true. both trea ted as a uthenric by the priests. n fo r mat ion conform ing (0 scientific knowledge. must have a nea rl y ci rcular orbit.

111Ce Oberg cannot do so. Temple's c nclusions are so unorthodox . I actually watched [he c a r to g rap her check my map.The Siriu Mystery Pamphlet long and The Sirius Mysiery Pamphlet men were responsible for the Dogan ideas ha di mi ed the idea as impo ible. for example. on the theme of 'Assorted Ancient Astronauts'. that the information possessed by the Dogon was known in r e m ot e antiquit . and thus continued t he friendly astronomical coverage of my book which had commenced In The Observatory and Nature. EVIDENCE FROM E. Which. Sever had obviously done this by responding to the journal's invitation to review my book. To date no one ha ucceeded in showing that I have erred in any of this material. He rid i cui ed ~he fact that the Dogan spoke of the four invisible Galilean satellites of J u pi ter by sarcasti call y saying: 'J upi ter has at least f 0 u rt e en satellites. wrote an article called 'More iriu Difficulties' inspired by the discus ion of my book but consisting entirely of his own ideas e er. and did so 5. The Griffith of the Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles was Dr Observator published a small magazine called 1h e Observer. acidly observing that whereas 'We are very grateful. \ e nee d not concern ourselves with his criticisms of The Sirius Mystery.page postscn pt 0 f hi 0\ n to Sever' article entitled 'On Not Taking It Seriously'.' This implies that some pacemen landed and chatted with the Dogan. then. But the pattern published in my book was drawn bya professional cartographer who earns his living by drawing reliable maps for an international corporation. she said. Krupp cast aspersion on my work and concluded the whole mystery was more likely 'either a collection of good and bad guesses or a aarbl ed record of old and recent astronomical tradi 1 ions'. and that extrater re trial visitors spoke to earthlings of the moons of Jupiter and said there were four large and ten small. But in the issue for October 1977. In my view it is pointle s to attack someone in print unle you can su bs tantiate what you are sayi ng. o we ace this problem: the cartographer' m asuremeru do not agree with [hose claimed b Oberg. Oberg criticizes a geodetic pattern I discovered. In the epternber 1976 issue f this masazine a v e r y favourable re iew of my book appeared by Thomas Lee M Donnel Planetarium In I Louis.' The article gave detailed attention [0 many of my most important points. He produce iren. Krupp. who pu bl i shed a! 11'0. and visiting spacemen inclined 10 pass this kind of fact along should have been more accurate. This . and the rest are tiddly little bit of rock which are only called moons' for lack of a twofold terminology excluding such space rubbish from bei n g srarued the di snit of the name of 'moon'. Marvin Arnold Luckerrnan. should we dismiss the en tire Sirius Mystery because the Dogon didn't mention it? The Griffith Observer brought out a special issue in July 1977.. This pattern for m an aproximately equi lateral triangle. The tatue.. The cartographer took all such factors into account. whether Pluto should really be called a planet. the world s authority on the Dogon and Secretary-General of the ociete des Africainiste.500 years ago. KRUPP (1977) C. Did Oberg? I suspect not. i at least 400 years old. examining them and commenting on them favourably. he then held up In front of the cameras an ancient Dagon statue portraying irius A. Oberg criticizes me everely for my work in ancient languages but 110 e ample to fail to substantiate any of his arguments. Dr Germaine Dieterlen. since J refuse to publish any map that has nOI bee 11 experrl y vetted in that way. 1977. to Mr Tom Sever for his report . the Director Krupp. Sirius B and Sirius C together. 8-15) containing twelve illu tration and saying that I had written 'an e urernely wel l-wri uen and docu men ted book. Suggestions that white men gave this knowledge to the Dogan involve other improbable assumptions. therefore. C. a Jewish scholar of the Hebrew Union College in Los Angeles. But even assuming that none of this were rele ant. and weren't specific enough . we shall have LO refine our terminology.. C.. C. t h a t hi evidence and his handling of it demand the most careful review. of the 24 25 . DISTORTED In E.a complete nonsense supposed to be my fault! For a n astronomer to make thi cheap poi nt about the III ons of J upi ter i a II the more di appointing in that any astronomer knows perfectly \ ell that there are only four major moons of Jupiter. E. When we start gelling out and about in space more. He measured the same distance \ ith his customar accuracy and found them to be n ear I equal to one another and b no mean the lengths Oberg claims.seems LO have infuriated E. in fact. said in a BB television interview that this notion i aburd'. I attempt to show. Perhaps he is unaware that the d i ffe renti al cu rv atu re of the earth va riou Iy distorts distances shown on maps. which is show where I am wrong except f r the one about the somethins I never said. Missouri (pp. And they also ignore the larger body of evidence my book cites. He say that one side is rea II y 376 miles and another side is 432 miles (which of course would make it nonequilateral). Krupp wrote a very long article called 'The van Daniken Phenomenon' in which I was mercifully not mentioned. Nor is there any certainly " those bits "of space junk were circling that Jupiter anyway in 3500 BC when 1 have proposed a possible extraterrestrial visit to Earth. correct? Oberg does not tell us what techniques he used to do the mea urement and instead makes an unsubstantiated statement. Superficial critics merely a either that they cannot read that section of my b ok (which may ay om thing about their reading abilities) or that it is 'unconvincing But omethi 11 g that is unconvincing can surely be shown to be unconvincing. Anyone actually travelling through space must differentiate terminologicall between a genuine moon and a bit of rock! Our own astronomers often que rion.

They had already publ ished the very same article in The Observatory. C. The chief attraction of the article to me was the spectacular photograph of Siriu B taken by Lick Observat ry which accompanied it. He used this di rorted evidence ~ hich he himself r the Griffith Observatory had created and implied that my conclusions were therefore wrong! The audacity of his doing that still makes me catch m breath. and which I had never seen. There is no t rut h whatever in Dr Pe ch's assertion. He ha at no time contacted me. '" You do not ha e my p rmission to reproduce your drawing as it stands in any edition of your b ok . They pointed out that one of the Dagon diagrams looked more like an oval than an ell ipse. M eanwh i Ie. Meanwhile.. The use K TU P P intended 10 make of this distorted evidence would soon appear. Vol.fi v e years later! At lea t. One such article that readers of Nat u re might \V ish to know about is Pesch. and they said i ( was a cosmic egg. 10 my literary agents in New York. Meanwhile Krupp brought out his book In Search of Ancient Astronamies. such asi n Figures 4 and 8 of the (revised) Sir i 11 s Mys tery They also claimed that the Dogan only suggested that S i ri us had a companion tar because of a necessity to give Sirius a 'twin' due to their obsession with 'twin-ness'. their article was so feeble it wasn't worth replying [0. 28 February 1980. One such is a letter written by him and Dr Roland Pesch in The Observatory three years ago. If they had granted a routine perrni sion Krupp could have aid I had approved.. the one named not Poland but Peter. where they v ere called Roland and Poland! E. But this ignore the fact that the Dogan specified that there were three tar in the Sirius System -and unless the nature f mathematics has been drastically changed. requesting permission to reproduce in a forthcoming book by himself an illustration from The Sirius MYSTery. Krupp finally sent it to me in August 1978. P. The Sirius Mystery. R. He had re c e i v ed permission from The Observatory to give a further amng La I his attack. from my own non-professional drawing. C. aying of the Pesch and Pesch article that ' till more reinforcement have a rri v ed in thi article'. My reply to Krupp of 5 December expresses my awareness of his intentions and refuses cooperation: 'The illu tration to which you refer [Figure 9 in the revised edition of the book] was originated by myself and then profes ionally drawn for reproduction by an artist. and enclosing his version. He accused me of 'carefully avoiding any reference to articles critical of the claims he makes in his book The Sirius Mystery. But so superficial was their familiarity with the subject that they stated (in their footnote 3) that the anthropologist Germaine Dieterlen had only worked with the Dogan until 1952! The true fact are that as far a I know she is still going [here fa rty. IV h i c h he had gone ahead and published despite III protests. accu ed me of 'carefully avoiding any reference to article critical of' my book. 0 could hardly be expected to reply.. ev idently a father and son. and he was sti II ev idently smartt ng from the len g t h y prai se [had recei ved in his own pages from Sever. I have neve r man age d to catch up with my work .. E. which contai ned a section on The Sirius Mystery and I was attacked on the ba is of Krupp's own redrawn illustration. Luckerman wrote to me in July 1978. ' What Krupp or the Griffith Observatory had done was to m i s-d fa w the Dogan diagram of the orbit of irius B and use thi t recreate my "ex te nsion-rbrou gh-t ime ' drawing so that it no longer corresponded to the modern astronomical version of the same thing. except in a sacred song. But thei r se lecti v e use of e vi den c e was such that they com plerely ignored the very clear Dagon d fa IV i n g s of an ellipse. The Pesch and Pesch article largely concerned itself IV i t h Dogon information. to an attack in in the context Nature of his by the rev iew 26 27 . That was the first time I had ever heard of the Griffith Observer and I immediately wrote asking for copies of the earlier material. the last I heard three does not make twins.. The Pesches claimed that (he Dogan had not said that the orbit of Sirius B was an ellipse.. and Pesch. One of the Pe che . fortunately. 283. and some others.. Iaunched a second c ri tiq ue of me in the Dece m be r 1977 issue of the Griffith Observer.. I could never condone its use in connection \ih m name in a n y event. In any case. appeared. she was the last I saw olange de Ganay in Pa ri s about three year ago.. ' Iinslanl1y wrote the Following reply which Nat ure refused to publish: < 'Dr Peter Pesch ha in yOUT Correspondence columns . and di ine venaeance got their fir t name wrong on the article. The top left of your redrawing is a gro distortion of the Dogan diagram. and ent the article. 'I cannot extend to you permission [0 use the illustration . Now they publi hed it again and called it 'The Last Sirius Inquir ?'. They passed this request on to me. had an 0 the r go at me in ature. He thus clearly saw an amassing of attacks against me as a crusade. which were very interesting. p. "I would caution you to lake note of the qualifications expressed in the caption.. Krupp wrote the introductory remarks. nobod wa sending me the e issues and I was not awar for orne time that 1 had been re-attacked by Pesch and Pe ch in thi periodical. Finally. n am e d Pesch and Pesch. nor has he any way of knowing that I have seen any such articles. I shall reprint astra-physicist Michael here my reply Rowan-Robinson. 810. two as tro no rners.The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet about ancient Sirius lore. The Observatory ... Krupp wrote on 21 November 1977. It is necessary for me to respond publicly to his assertion by informing readers that I was ill for a year and unable to work properl y for many mon ths on end at the ti me IV hen the letter 0f Pesch and Pesch. which [ eventually received.

and a for 'uncritical thinking'. anyone truly i nterested in this subject is per f ec t J Y aware that they are referring to myself when discussing this rnauer. 17 January 1980: Readers of Nature may well be aware from the review of my book T'h e Sirius Mystery in the issue of 17 June 1976 (pp. that 'the problem of the remarkable knowledge of the Dagon people of Mali'. 176-7). 283. it is not widely thought. referred to by Michael Rowan-Robinson in hi review of Carl Sagan's Broca's Brain (8 November 1979. who in any case had themselves only discovered the superdense nature of Sirius B in about 1926. or connected \ ith my subject.The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet The Sirius Mystery Pamphlet of Carl Sagan's critique of me (see Part I for that saga and my reply). who insisted that it was 400 yea r s ?ld and said that the European contact theory (e poused by Sagan) was "a bsurd '. What i so remarkable about this per se'l Are we so incapable of speculating about these ma ue r s that we deny them solely becau e such a v isuation seems to u s extraordinar? The electric light bulb would have seemed ex traordi nary to Plato and A ristoile.. But I would like to reply to statement made by Rowan-Robinson. and in his b ok Sagan barely refer to my seminal po ilion with regard to public knowledge of thi material except in passing. Knowledge of Sirius B amongst the Dagon goes back hundred of years.11 ex pi icirl y hypothetical. I strongly object to the inference that I have been guilty of fraud i n bamboozling a gullible public. especial. 617-8). a hown by physical evidence. I went out of my way in my book to say that I do not believe that UFOs are extraterrestrial craft 0 f any kind. was fi rst brought to pub J i c attention by myself. p.Jy amy conclusions were a. ome of which was even held up in front of television cameras by Dr Germaine Dieterlen. and Rowan-Robinson' remarks are there fore a slur agai nst my i 11 tell j gence and qual ity 0 f work which I mOSI strongly reseal. who says that 'Sagan has performed a useful service in collecting together examples of public gullibilit and demonstrating how a mixture of deliberate fraud and uncritical thinking has allowed millions to be bamboozled . nor do I obviously think my elf. Although in his re lew Rowan-Robinson does not mention me by name. but does that rule out the possi bi Ii ty of iIS eventual i nvention? This is the ki nd of inverted log i c demonstrated by those who e minds are too small for large notions. It is in the context of aying that Sagan has shown that the Dogan information 'could all have been learnt from contacts with Europeans' (which is untrue) that Rowan-Robinson does me less than justice by saying t his is better than it having 'been learnt from little green men in UFOs'. My letter was published in Nature. It would b inappropriate for me to discus agans own error here. the many seriou and thoughtful reviews of my book in this very j 0 urn a I as well as others of d isti nction testi fy to the fact that al though the implications of my work have aroused controversy. Vol. ' He says this immediately after discussing my material. that uncritical thinking' is a fault of which I have been obviously guilty. J have never at any time suggested this. But I do not wish to open this controversy again here. Rowan-Rob i nson also betrays an indef'ensi ble bias agai nst the serious possibility that our planet has at some time in its histor be e n visited by intelligent extraterrestrials. The anthropologists who have spent the forty-eight years from 1931 living with the Dogon tribe are agreed that the knowledge of the Sirius system which they possessed could not have come fro m Europeans. 28 29 .

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->