The Giant Sandworm Theory on the Creation of the Channels and

The Giant Sandworm Theory on the Creation of the Channels and other Features of Mars
Updated with evidence for the existence, sometime in the past, of Giant Sandworms on the Moon,
Venus, Earth, Europa, Ceres, Phobos, Enceladus, Dione, Tethys, Ariel, Miranda, and Triton, as well.
Rod Tritton 2011. Rev. 1 - 2014. Rev. 2 - Jun2016. Canals16h
Abstract
This thesis presents images of extraordinary landscape features on Mars, (including: channels; caves;
ridges; dune trains; labyrinths; chaotic areas; hills; mesas; inverted channels; back-to-front rivers;
crater chains; and sinkholes) which cannot be adequately explained by current theories (including:
water; lava; meteors; faulting; lightning; and venting).
This intriguing anomaly has spawned a new hypothesis: The Giant Sandworm Theory on the Creation
of the Channels and Other Features of Mars, first published in the chapter on Life on Mars, in my
book, Exploring Mystery, in 2011.
Once it has been established that there is a conspiracy to hide the truth about Mars, and that the
existing theories of channel formation are questionable, we can entertain the possibility of an
alternative explanation for the creation of these otherwise anomalous features. So, firstly, in order
to understand the scientific and cultural environment within which this hypothesis appears, the
introductory chapter examines the credibility of the authorities, and the movie industry habit of
‘hiding the truth in plain sight’. The second chapter discusses existing theories of channel formation.
Thirdly, the concept that giant sandworms, on seasonal migrations, and hunting and foraging forays,
were the biological agents responsible for the creation of most, if not all of the channels, and many
other prominent landscape features of Mars, is introduced. Some possible answers to questions
about giant sandworm biology are given in chapter four.
Lastly, this thesis presents evidence of similar channels on the Moon, on Venus, on Earth, and on
other nearby bodies (including: Europa; Ceres; Phobos; Enceladus; Dione; Tethys; Ariel; Miranda; and
Triton), suggesting that giant sandworms were, at one time, a common feature of this part of our
Solar System.
(275 of 18 883 words with 71 illustrations on 56 pages)
Random Swirls in a Channel Floor
Frontispiece – This image clearly shows both linear and sinuous swirls in the floor of the channel on Mars called Coloe
Fossae, that look to be biological rather than geological or artificial in origin. (Image from Google Mars 35.5N, 56.6E).
1
List of Figures
Contents
1. Introduction
1.1 Background
1.2 Aims and Methods
1.3 NASA
1.4 The Authorities
1.5 ‘Dune’
1.6 ‘Alternative 3’
2. Existing Theories
of Channel Formation
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Water
2.3 Lava
2.4 Meteors
2.5 Faulting
2.6 Lightning Scarring
2.7 Venting
3. Giant Sandworm Evidence
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Channels
3.3 Sinkholes
3.4 Ridges
3.5 Dunes
3.6 Mesas
3.7 Back-to-front Rivers
3.8 Glass Tubes
4. Giant Sandworm Biology
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Size
4.3 Survival
4.4 Movement
4.5 Hunting and Foraging
4.6 Migration
4.7 Population
5. The Moon, Venus and Earth
5.1 The Moon
5.2 Venus
5.3 Earth
5.4 Europa
5.5 Ceres
5.6 Phobos
5.7 Enceladus
5.8 Dione
5.9 Tethys
5.10 Ariel
5.11 Miranda
5.12 Triton
6. Conclusion
7. References
Frontispiece - Random Swirls in a Channel Floor
Fig. 1. Extensive Channelling on Mars
3
Fig. 2. Extensive Furrowing on Mars
4
Fig. 3. Directional Channelling
4
Fig. 4. White-tailed Antelope Squirrel on Mars?
6
Fig. 5. A Dune Scene from ‘Dune’
8
Fig. 6. A Dune Scene from Mars
9
Fig. 7. Squiggly Channels in the Flats
11
Fig. 8. Tyrrhena Fossae – Back-to-front River
12
Fig. 9. Crater with Horizontal Trench
12
Fig. 10. Vallis Marineris – A 2000km Channel
15
Fig. 11. Channels Across The Face on Mars
16
Fig. 12. Sinuous Channels
16
Fig. 13. Sulci on Mars
17
Fig. 14. Mars Chaos
17
Fig. 15. The Channels Cerberus Fossae
18
Fig. 16. Catena Showing Sinkholes and Craters
19
Fig. 17. Cave Entrance or Sinkhole
20
Fig. 18. Sinkhole in a Forest
20
Fig. 19. Sinkholes With and Without Bottoms
21
Fig. 20. Catena on a Ridge
21
Fig. 21. Inverted Channel or Sandworm Burrow
22
Fig. 22. Sinuous Ridges Called Dorsa
23
Fig. 23. Dune Network
23
Fig. 24. Dune Ridges or Sandworm Skeletons
25
Fig. 25. Dune Trains or Fossilised Sandworms
25
Fig. 26. Linear Tubular Feature
25
Fig. 27. Exposed Giant Sandworm Fossils
26
Fig. 28. Ribbed Ridges in Cerberus Fossae
26
Fig. 29. Sandworm Skeletons in their Burrows
27
Fig. 30. Mensae on Mars
28
Fig. 31. Colles on Mars
28
Fig. 32. Regular Raised Rings in Rows
29
Fig. 33. Anomalous Channels
30
Fig. 34. A Bombed Giant Sandworm
31
Fig. 35. Glass Tubes, Dunes, or Sandworms
31
Fig. 36. Regular Rows of Mounds
32
Fig. 37. Dune Train with Nested Ribs
34
Fig. 38. Sandworm Cemetery
34
Fig. 39. Ribbed Ridges in Rows
35
Fig. 40. Foraging in Crater Ejecta
36
Fig. 41. Parallel Channels with the Contour
36
Fig. 42. Rima Hadley on the Moon
37
Fig. 43. Komarov Crater on the Moon
38
Fig. 44. Channel in Karpinsky Crater
38
Fig. 45. Baltis Vallis on Venus
39
Fig. 46. Tubes off California
40
Fig. 47. Tubes as Ribbed Ridges off California
41
Fig. 48. Trench off Baja Mexico
41
Fig. 49. Atlantic Sea-floor Intricately Burrowed
42
Fig. 50. Anomalous Channels in the Atlantic
42
Fig. 51. Channels called Labyrinth in Antarctica
43
Fig. 52. Mars Squares of Channels and Catenae
44
Fig. 53 + 54. Europa
45
Fig. 55 + 56. Ceres
46
Fig. 57 – 70. Phobos, Enceladus, Dione, Tethys,
Ariel, Miranda and Triton
47 - 53
3
3
5
5
7
8
9
10
10
10
13
13
14
14
14
15
15
15
19
22
24
28
29
30
32
32
32
33
33
33
36
37
37
37
39
40
45
46
47
48
50
51
51
52
53
54
55
2
1. Introduction
1.1 Background
There are highly anomalous, gigantic features visible on publicly available images of Mars for which the
scientific community have not given adequate explanations, and that intriguingly, look as if they could have
been created by a prolific species of giant sandworm. These anomalies have provided a challenge to find out
the truth about the formation of the channels and other features of Mars.
Since 1877, when Italian astronomer Giovanni Schiaparelli first described what he saw on Mars as “canali”
(canals/channels), speculation has been rife about life on The Red Planet. Irrigation canals would indeed be a
sure sign of intelligent life, but now with better magnification, it is evident that the channels on Mars are
certainly not straight, and not by any stretch of the imagination do they look artificially constructed for any
form of transport system.
We are told by NASA, the supposed authority on the subject of anything extraterrestrial, that the channels that
do occur on Mars are evidence of flowing surface water at some time in Martian history. However, most of the
channels do not follow the slope of the land. In fact, what makes the features of Mars quite so anomalous, is
the ‘unbelievability’ of the official explanations.
Canals, channels, trenches, gutters and gullies are all direct translations of Schiaparelli’s Italian word canali, so
it does not matter what we call them, especially as ‘science’ labels the multitude of ditches that liberally scar
The Red Planet, variously in Latin, as: ‘fossae’, ‘valles’, ‘sulci’, ‘chasma’, and ‘chasmata’, which is confusing
because they are all canals, that is: gullies, furrows, trenches or channels, that meander across and criss-cross
the landscape, without regard to the slope. Many hundreds of thousands, if not millions of such canals
randomly criss-cross much of the surface of Mars, and, it is most intriguing that the official explanations (and
even the unofficial explanations) for the creation of such predominant landscape features, make no sense at
all. They are literally non-sense.
The first three images below show the extent of the channelling on Mars. (Most of the images included are
from Google Mars, which can be found by clicking the Saturn icon on Google Earth, and can be investigated
further by flying to the co-ordinates supplied and scrolling in to see the detail.)
Fig. 1. Extensive Channelling on Mars
3
This image (from Google Mars 1S, 110W) shows the extent to which this area of Mars has been criss-crossed by channels,
and how these prevalent features, whatever you call them, ‘form’ the landscape. NASA labels the channels in this one
image alone variously as: fossae; chasma; vallis; labyrinthus and chaos. None of the linear features or channels in this
image are perfectly straight, and they do not look intelligently constructed for any form of transport system.
Fig. 2. Extensive Furrowing on Mars
Thousands of channels,
in this image called
‘sulci’ (Latin for
furrows), (from Google
Mars 24N, 136W),
plough across the
landscape, crisscrossing the area
extensively, without
regard to the gradient
of the terrain. The
white spot to the lower
right of the image is
the snow-covered peak
of the volcano called
Mount Olympus, and
the terrain slopes away
from the peak in all
directions. These
channels can therefore
not have been caused
by water or lava.
Fig. 3. Directional Channelling
This is an area (from
Google Mars 33S,
100W) where the
channels are not
labelled but it is clear
that thousands of
trenches run across
and over each other, in
a roughly north-south
direction, straight
through craters,
without regard for the
slope of the terrain.
These channels can
obviously also not have
been made by water or
lava.
4
From gigantic scars traversing thousands of kilometres across Mars, to intricately furrowed plains, the channels
of Mars are clearly a major feature of the history of The Red Planet. A search around Google Mars shows that
there is hardly an area of Mars in which channels are not found. I have spent many hours flying over the detail
of Google Mars with the eyes of a naturalist, and I have seen ancient features with fresh eyes.
The masses of channels on Mars are such prominent features that it would be ignorant to ignore their method
of creation. And, however much we would like to believe the authority on the matter, it would be unwise to
accept NASA’s explanation that they were created by water or lava flowing downhill, as most of the channels
do not run with the slope.
In 1976 the Viking 1 space probe sent tantalizing images of Mars back to Earth. A controversy has existed ever
since about the origin of the feature that Viking 1 captured, in two separate frames, dubbed ‘The Face on
Mars’, for obvious reasons. NASA claims this to be a naturally formed mountain, and yet many independent
Mars researchers such as DiPietro and Molenaar 1, Carlotto 2, Hoagland 3, and McDaniel 4, believe that it
displays the hallmarks of artificiality, as do the pyramids on Mars. Hancock et al. 6 provide a thorough
examination of the research, and they quote an artist, Jim Channon, who found that ‘The Face on Mars’ has
classical proportions, and that the base upon which it stands also has classical proportions. Channon says that:
“There is overwhelming evidence that the structure… [The Face on Mars] …is a consciously created monument
typical of the archaeology left to us by our predecessors”.
The very reason a controversy exists over the origin of many of the features of Mars, is simply because the
explanations given by both NASA and independent authorities do not adequately explain their creation. There
are so many inconsistencies in NASA’s explanations for landforms on Mars that we can only suspect a coverup, and at least entertain the idea of another theory to explain the creation of these otherwise-anomalous
features that are so predominant that they ‘form’ the Martian landscape. To understand this controversy, and
before the evidence of giant sandworms can be introduced, the lack of credibility of the authorities must firstly
be established. And, all the existing theories of channel formation must first be considered before we can test
the biological hypothesis for the creation of the channels of Mars.
1.2 Aims and Methods
The aim of this thesis is to present evidence for the biological agency hypothesis: that many giant sandworms,
over many years, carved out most, if not all of the many channels evident on Mars, by burrowing below the
surface in the loose topsoil, on migration routes and on hunting and foraging forays, and that the collapse and
erosion of these burrows over many years has formed the open channels plainly visible all over Mars today.
Part of the testing of this hypothesis is testing the null-hypothesis, so each of the current theories for channel
creation will firstly be considered to see if a logically coherent explanation exists for the channels being
created by something other than a biological agent.
NASA have been tasked with being the public face of American space exploration, and they have published
images taken by a number of spacecraft to Mars over the years since the 1970s. These images and Google
Mars are the main sources of visual information on the features of Mars that are available to the general
public. I have an interest in mysterious phenomena, ancient civilizations, geology, and extraterrestrial
influences, and these have given me an overview in my study of the images that NASA do release to the public.
This has provided the method of my enquiry: the study of the available images of Mars with an open mind,
without bias, and through the eyes of a scientist, in this case a naturalist.
1.3 NASA
NASA is a US government agency (National Aeronautics Space Administration), set up in 1958 and charged with
reporting everything they find to the American government. They are also charged with not reporting issues of
‘national security’ to the public. It is therefore NASA’s job to make sure that nothing of national security
importance leaks out to the public. It would seem that everything extraterrestrial has been deemed to be a
‘national security’ issue. So, NASA cannot only be accused of avoiding telling us the truth, which is their
5
mandate, they are also guilty of purposefully telling us lies in order to deceive. Stanley McDaniel, a Mars
researcher notes in The McDaniel Report 4, that NASA scientists were using “such faulty reasoning” that he
“finds it difficult not to believe that they were following some sort of hidden agenda aimed at suppressing the
true nature of the data”. NASA have been convincing the public that Mars does not have an atmosphere by
tinting every picture that ever comes from Mars with a reddish hue. The article Revealing Mars’ True Colors by
Richard Hoagland 5 proves this, and proves that Mars has a blue sky and patches of green.
It is considered amongst many within the alternative research community that NASA is a propaganda
institution for the elite controllers. There are stories from NASA whistleblowers confirming that their job was
to airbrush out UFOs from pictures before they were released. The following scientist’s testimonials confirm
that Carl Sagan was the chief propagandist for NASA for a number of years from the 1950s to the 1980s. I have
heard three people who provide personal testimony that Carl Sagan released a touched-up photograph of ‘The
Face on Mars’ to make it look like a natural mesa. Richard Hoagland 3 says he discussed this with Sagan and
showed him an original, untouched image. Stanley McDaniel, in a lecture at the ‘Quest for Knowledge’
conference in 1997, also pointed out this fraud. And, Brian O’Leary, an astronaut who worked with Sagan, said
in a Red Ice Radio interview that he challenged Sagan about publishing a touched-up image of The Face on
Mars. He said that Sagan told him that he had to do it because otherwise it would turn society to chaos if
humans were to find out about alien civilisations. This is the poor excuse that the powers that be have been
giving for non-disclosure, and is direct evidence of NASA’s policy to obfuscate the evidence of extraterrestrial
life. ‘The Mars Mystery’, of 1998 by Hancock, Bauval and Grigsby, presents an excellent historical account of
Mars exploration and NASA’s cover-up of the artificiality of structures on Mars 6.
It turns out that the word ‘nasa’ means deceive in Hebrew, so it is not unreasonable to assume, knowing what
we do about the Moon landing hoax, that NASA was instituted to deceive the public, and named in cruel
sociopathy, actually telling us that they are deceiving us. It is not for nothing that they have earned the titles
Never-A-Straight-Answer and National-Academy-of-Space-Actors. I have had to sit through a NASA
presentation of utter poppy-cock in support of global warming and the carbon scam. Either she was lying or
she was so stupid that she was towing the party line in ignorance.
Fig. 4. A White-tailed Antelope Squirrel on Mars?
This image is a screenshot from a NASA
image 7 that is supposedly from Mars,
sent to us via satellite by the ‘Curiosity
Rover’. Christopher Bollyn 8 has
identified this animal (circled in the
image) as a White-tailed Antelope
Squirrel, a native of the Californian and
Nevada deserts, co-incidentally, in the
same place as the top secret military
installation of Area 51.
The above image shows what looks to be a White-tailed Antelope Squirrel in a NASA image supposedly from
Mars, where, we are told, Californian rodents cannot survive. The fact that this image shows an animal native
to the top secret military installation of Area 51, is evidence that ‘Curiosity’ is roving Nevada and not Mars, and
6
that Mars exploration is a billion-dollar bad joke being played on the public, and, rather than any sort of
scientific enquiry, is a propaganda exercise to do quite the opposite, to stifle curiosity and obfuscate the truth.
It is doubtful that NASA scientists are stupid, so their implausible explanations for landforms on Mars, such as
the so-called back-to-front rivers (chapter 3.7.) (that NASA claim are rivers but they are shallower further down
the slope), the lines of sinkholes (chapter 3.3.) (that NASA claim are impact craters but they have no ejecta
ridge), the ridges (chapter 3.4.) (that NASA claim are “inverted channels” but they do not flow with the
terrain), and even the channels themselves (chapter 3.2.) (that NASA claim are created by water or lava but
they also do not follow the slope), leads one to suspect that at least some NASA officials know the truth, and it
is their goal not to disclose it.
NASA would have access to the best and highest quality photographic and satellite imaging equipment
available, and yet they release grainy, pixelated, obviously touched-up and blurry images with the detail
obscured (see Fig. 10.). It is very obvious that NASA is hiding something on Mars. This is particularly evident in
the overlays that they apply over Google Mars images that patently obscure the detail (see Fig. 39.). My
understanding of the UFO and alien cover-up, is that there is a cabal of humans who control NASA and who
have traded and retrieved alien technology which they are using to profiteer and to control, and that the
disclosure of extraterrestrial life is a threat to their source of money, control and power.
We can perhaps understand why the controlling cabal (and their various mouthpieces including NASA) are
going to deny the artificiality of The Face on Mars, but it is difficult to see how the disclosure of extraterrestrial
biological life could be a threat to national security. Perhaps they simply do not want any attention on Mars
and if it is habitable for sandworms then it would be for humanoids as well. What we do know, from their
mandate, from their implausible explanations for landforms on Mars, and from the evidence of Sagan’s Face
on Mars conspiracy, is that NASA scientists will lie where they feel it necessary to hide information of so called
national security importance. And, because we cannot separate the truth from the lies, we cannot believe
everything NASA tells us. And, if we cannot believe everything they say, how can we believe anything they say?
1.4 The Authorities
There are many Mars researchers who set themselves up as authorities on the subject. Hundreds of books and
thousands of articles have been written about Mars. Some researchers even claim to have been there and
therefore have ‘the authority’ to dismiss theories that might contradict their particular story. Hundreds of
bloggers and commentators exist and thousands of forum-goers enter the fray with varying degree of
intelligent comment. These include a surprising number of ‘trolls’ who are also out to obfuscate the truth with
distraction, ad hominem attacks, time wasting and irritation. There are so many Mars researchers claiming to
see statues in rocks that I think that at least some of them are part of the disinformation campaign to
obfuscate the truth by bringing scorn and disrepute onto the field of Mars anomaly research.
Although Wikipedia is supposed to be freely editable, there seems to be a fleet of sub-editors employed who
immediately re-edit edits back to reflect the ‘official’ position. As a researcher into alternative and mysterious
phenomena, I have noted that every time I read the Wikipedia entry, I only get the officially-accepted,
government-approved, politically-correct version of the story, the one promoted by the powers that be. So,
from their party line, Wikipedia is also a mouthpiece of the controllers of humanity and also cannot be trusted
to report the truth.
And, there is good evidence that Google is also part of the cover-up. (This is possibly because they, along with
IBM, Apple, Microsoft, etc., were given their technology on condition that they do exactly as they are told.
Research ‘The Story of the Transistor’, an insiders story about receiving technology.) There are many examples
of Google’s complicity in the UFO and alien cover-up. I have three personal examples of blatant cover-ups. One
of them is on Google Mars as it opens up on one particular area containing many explanations and overlays
(near 23S, 33W. See Fig. 39.). There is a clear image that turns indistinct within a second as it is obscured by
the overlay. This looks like an area of many fossilised, whole, giant sandworms in rows, where the segments
are clearly visible as regular indentations. They look like giant earthworms, and so obviously obscured by an
overlay, that it is clear to me that many people at NASA and even Google must know about this gigantic
7
biological life on Mars. What is not so obvious is why this information has not leaked out beyond their secrecy
and obfuscation campaign, as so much other information has done.
Part of the UFO cover-up that has been in place since the 1940s (search ‘The Battle of Los Angeles’ of 1942 and
‘The Roswell Incident’ of 1947), seems to be an enormous effort by the powers that be and their mouthpieces,
including NASA, Wikipedia, and Google, to deny the existence of extraterrestrial biological life. Over the last 70
years they have spent an enormous amount of money on this propaganda campaign to convince humanity that
we are alone in the universe. And this, I believe, is in order to protect the source of their trillion-dollar alien
technology industry and the source of their power and control.
Clearly the powers that be have an agenda to hide the truth, so it is difficult to separate out the facts from the
fiction and to know who the authority is on any subject. We were told that Carl Sagan was the authority on
anything to do with space exploration, but it would seem, from the evidence, that it was quite the opposite: he
was part of the scam to keep humanity in the dark about alien civilisations. It is foolish to believe anything
anyone tells us without verification, but it is very difficult to verify information that comes from outer space,
and especially when it comes from only one source. Perhaps independent space programmes will not succumb
to the pressure of the cabal and will reveal information that the American space programme has been hiding.
As we have seen, more independent research is necessary to verify the information from ‘the authorities’
before we can believe anything they say.
1.5 ‘Dune’
The movie ‘Dune’, in true Hollywood style, has sensationalised the sandworm phenomenon, and this has the
two-fold purpose of hiding any truth in the matter as fiction, and simultaneously providing ammunition for
‘debunkers’ to be able to negate claims by researchers into the subject. This has been the case with many
movies, including ‘Star Wars’, ‘Contact’ (that Carl Sagan wrote), ‘Close Encounters of the Third Kind’, and even
the Animal Planet feature about Mermaids. Interestingly, Frank Herbert who wrote the book, ‘Dune’ 9, in the
early 1960s, first had it set on Mars before he changed it to the fictional planet of Arrakis. Perhaps he knew
something that has somehow successfully been kept hidden from humanity, and, by writing it as fiction, he has
successfully continued the deceit. The next obvious, but unanswerable questions then of course are: who
stands to gain what from keeping information about giant sandworms secret?
An interesting correlation between Mars and the movie ‘Dune’ is the fact that in the movie one of the scenes
of the sandworms approaching looked as if it is an image of channels and dunes on Mars. I include a
screenshot from the movie and a similar-looking area from Mars to show the comparison.
Fig. 5. A Dune Scene from ‘Dune’
This image is a screenshot taken from
the movie ‘Dune’, of the fictional planet
called Arrakis, but, interestingly, in
Frank Herbert’s original manuscript of
his 1965 book ‘Dune’, he named this
planet Mars. These dunes look similar
to areas of interconnected channels on
Mars called sulci.
8
Fig.6. A Dune Scene from Mars
These channels (from Google Mars
26N, 149W) are called sulci (Latin for
furrows), and leave between them
ridges that look very similar to the
dunes in the movie ‘Dune’. (the Sun is
shining onto the Eastern slope of the
ridges, from the right hand side in this
image.)
Knowing that information is often hidden in movies as fiction, ‘in plain sight’, on purpose, I suspect that the
director used an image taken from Mars to create the above scene of a sandworm approaching in the movie
‘Dune’. The $40 million that the movie cost in 1985 was a substantial investment in the mindset of the
population, especially so as it was a box-office failure. Hollywood is the obvious place to position propaganda
so it is reasonable to suspect that ‘Dune’ was made to reinforce the mindset that sandworms are fictional and
that alien life does not exist. Considering all the ‘co-incidences’, including the facts that the sandworm planet
was first called Mars, and the movie includes scenes similar to Mars, this assumption becomes even more
valid. The 1988 movie Beetlejuice 13 shows giant sandworms on Titan, so I looked up images of Titan, and sure
enough, there are channels on Titan as well, indicating that sandworms could also have inhabited Titan.
1.6 ‘Alternative 3’
Another coincidence is the timing of “Dune” and “The Ballantine Tape”. Perhaps Frank Herbert received the
information for his book of 1965 from having seen the ‘Ballantine Tape’, supposedly of 1962, that first came to
light in 1977 in the ”docudrama” (“fiction based on fact”), Science Report episode called ‘Alternative 3’ 10. This
showed scenes, supposedly from a joint US-Soviet mission flying over Mars, and landing at a docking facility,
and the commentary of an astronaut witnessing something burrowing on the surface of Mars in 1962. Herbert
said he received his inspiration for ‘Dune’ from flying over dunes on Earth, but perhaps he was talking about a
fly-over the dunes of Mars that he undertook vicariously.
‘Alternative 3’ was purported to be a realistic look at a human colony on Mars as an alternative to human
survival, in the eventuality of the Earth being damaged beyond repair. This Science Report episode linked up, in
a credible way, recruitment for this colony, to the ‘brain drain’ from England, and the disappearances of many
people in the early 70s. They suggest that people have been abducted into a colony on Mars as either a ‘brain’
or as a ‘worker’. The brains were desensitised and the workers were fractured and de-sexed. Although the film
was proclaimed to be an April Fool’s joke and a hoax, where actors were used to play the parts of both real and
fictitious characters, the author Leslie Watkins (aka David Ambrose) suspiciously says that he “inadvertently
stumbled upon a truth” with ‘Alternative 3’.
Another strange coincidence is that the name NASA has given to the original image supposedly from ‘Curiosity’
on Mars that includes the white-tailed antelope squirrel, is Watkins, and it was David Ambrose who wrote the
book ‘Alternative 3’ in 1978 10 under the pseudonym of Leslie Watkins. He based it on the Anglia TV Science
Report 9 show of 1977, and supporting documents. He quotes the ‘Ballantine Tape’ of a supposed Mars landing
9
and an astronaut proclaiming: "That's it! We got it...we got it! Boy, if they ever take the wraps off this thing, it's
going to be the biggest date in history! May 22, 1962! We're on the planet Mars - and we have air!” 11. During
the screening of this tape in the Science Report show called ‘Alternative 3’, aired once only in June 1977, the
astronaut, after seeing a burrowing movement in the soil, as if it were a giant sandworm, exclaims: “We’re on
the planet Mars – and we have life!” Ambrose has meticulously transcribed all the other details of the Science
Report screening, and added even more detail from supposed source-documents and credible sources, and
yet, he changes “life” to “air”. Maybe the powers that be have convinced him to make this change as a part of
a compromise to continue to keep extraterrestrial life a secret. Maybe it is all supposed to be so confusing that
it takes us so long arguing with each other to work out all the details to find out the truth.
The ‘Alternative 3’ documentary and book have precipitated a storm of controversy and denials. Looking at all
the features of this story, it would make sense that it is a propaganda film. The fact that the Science Report
programme shows a live ‘mole’ means either Mars has an oxygenated atmosphere, or this footage is
propaganda. The original tape says “life”, and now having seen the footage from Alternative 3 of a ‘mole’ on
Mars, this is exactly as a burrowing giant sandworm might look, and it could have been a scene from ‘Dune’.
Because there is so much controversy and so many grey areas, it is reasonable to assume that ‘Alternative 3’
was also made in order to confuse the truth, and to set ‘truthers’ arguing amongst each other. Not only does
this hide the truth in plain sight, but it sets up obvious flaws to throw researchers off the scent, and to make
‘believers’ seem ludicrous. This common Hollywood tactic makes it very difficult to find out the truth, or to be
taken seriously when you have. Movies such as ‘Beetlejuice’ imprints the idea that sandworms are cloth
puppets and makes it easy to write-off any claims that they might be an integral part of the history of many
planets and moons in our Solar System.
The efforts of the powers that be to promote their agenda through propaganda, and to vilify people who
research conspiracies (deceptions by the powers that be), has created the cultural background of scepticism of
anything extraterrestrial or conspiratorial. And yet, people often blindly believe so-called documentaries that
‘the authorities’ put out as fact, that turn out to be blatant lies and propaganda, such as, for example, ‘The
Inconvenient Truth’, which the British High Court found to contain “substantial inconsistencies”, or in layman’s
terms, “blatant lies”, and yet this movie is still being punted as the truth, with a following of many people who
now believe all the lies, only one of which being that carbon dioxide is a pollutant.
As Hollywood is wont to do, ‘Dune’ and ‘Alternative 3’ have succeeded in propagandizing people and creating
the dismissive reaction in many on hearing of the giant sandworm theory, or of a colony on Mars: “Yeah, I saw
the movie too”. I suspect that this was the intention of the powers that be, to hide the truth about
extraterrestrial life, so that they can continue profiteering and controlling.
2. Existing Theories of Channel Formation
2.1 Introduction
Various ‘authorities’ have published various theories on the agency of channel formation, and these include:
water; lava; meteors; faulting; lightning; and venting. Many of the ‘authorities’ on Mars have proven to be
unreliable so we cannot take their word for it. We must study the explanations that exist for features of Mars
and come to our own conclusions. In this chapter the six existing theories of channel formation are put to the
logic test.
2.2 Water
NASA have said that the channels on Mars are evidence of surface water, and this is the commonly accepted
explanation for the formation of the channels on Mars. It is true that a few of the channels that I have studied
do run with the slope, but by far the majority of the channels on Mars run completely independent of the
10
slope, as can be vividly seen in the image below and in many images from all around Mars, and as any plotting
of the contours of Mars will ascertain. Scientists should know better than to claim that the channels that are
visible on Mars were created by water, because they often travel across slopes, and not with the slope, as
water would do. Channels that occur without regard to the slope cannot be formed by the erosion caused by
water, or any fluid, flowing downhill. Further questionable explanations have to be invoked to explain the
water hypothesis such as continental drift or plate tectonics, hypothesising that the continental shelf somehow
tipped while the gullies were being formed so that downhill kept changing and somehow that caused the
channels to meander across slopes and flat lands as they do. Even if this could happen, it does not explain the
so-called back-to-front-rivers (see Fig. 8. below) that are shallower further down the slope. Also, channels on
Mars are often parallel and often intersect at right angles and, logically, from evidence of drainage channels on
Earth, water cannot do that as it flows down a slope. Water forms herring-bone drainage patterns with more
water collecting further down the slope and cutting deeper channels further down-river, and in the process,
leaving erosional and depositional features, neither of which are found associated with the channels of Mars.
Fig. 7. Squiggly Channels in the Flats
The contours in this image (from Google Mars 0N, 0W), shown in white, show this to be a flat area, rising by only 100m
over almost 10 kilometres. The entire area is covered with short squiggly channels that were certainly not created by water
or lava flowing downhill as they are not oriented with the slope. Even the argument that subsequent tectonic activity could
have tilted the landscape is flawed because whatever the angle of the terrain, squiggly channels similarly oriented cannot
form from erosion without the associated erosional features such as herring-bone drainage systems, ox-bow cuttings and
alluvial fans. The creation agent looks to be biological, as the formations display a natural randomness that do not look to
be geological nor artificial.
11
Fig. 8. Tyrrhena Fossae – Back-to-front River
This is an image (from Google Mars 20S, 107E) of the mountain Tyrrhenus Mons showing the 2500 metre contour in white.
The so-called ‘back-to-front river’ heading off downhill to the north-east has a side channel coming into it on the contour,
which, being horizontal, was logically not created by water, nor any fluid. The fossa gets shallower further downhill, and if
it were created by water it would get deeper further downhill. Note that the channels and catenae immediately to the
south and east of the peak also travel around the peak, on the contour, so all of these so-called river beds were certainly
not created by a fluid, so are not likely to be river beds at all.
Fig. 9. Crater with Horizontal Trench
The crater in this image (from
Google Mars 30S, 9W) has a
horizontal canal that runs all the
way around the inside of the rim at
the base of the crater wall. Water
or lava cannot have created this
canal, and lightning is unlikely to
create a circular trench at the base
of a crater, and, there are no
geological processes that I know of
that can explain the formation of
this trench either. Giant
sandworms, however, could easily
have created this canal, and, are the
only logical creation agents, as they
attempted to find a way out of the
crater.
Surface flowing water might have created some of the channels on Mars, but I have not found any examples. It
is certain that by far the majority of channels on Mars could not have been created by water because of their
parallel and interconnected course, without regard to the slope of the landscape. As can be seen in the images
above, the channels do not travel downhill and do not show any erosional or depositional features that one
would expect to find associated with a river.
12
2.3 Lava
Lava also flows downhill, so the same arguments exist for lava as they do for water. Even ‘lava tubes’ will flow
downhill. And even if some of the channels can be accounted for as remnant lava tubes, as has been suggested
by NASA, the remainder that do not follow the slope, clearly cannot. For this reason alone, the explanation of
‘lava tubes’ does not satisfactorily explain channel formation. But even if a lava flow did form a tube, the lava
would still be visible that created it. The channels on Mars are clearly uniformly open and without solidified
lava edges and without any lava flows visible.
The ‘lava tubes’ hypothesis for channel creation is so outlandish that it does seem a bit stupid to claim, (or
stupid to think that we are stupid enough to accept the claim) that the channels on Mars could be formed by
flowing lava forming tubes, when by far the majority of the channels do not run with the slope, and, they are
uniformly open without jagged edges. The soil of Mars looks to be mostly sandy, and as it erodes it leaves
uniformly rounded edges. Solidified lava tubes would not erode uniformly but leave jagged edges. To this
amateur geologist there is no evidence of lava having created any of the channels on Mars. I would be very
interested to have an independent geologist show me an example of one channel on Mars that can be shown
to have been created by lava.
2.4 Meteors
A Mars researcher by the name of Robert Morningstar, on a Red Ice Radio broadcast, said that he sees
evidence that the huge channel in Mars, called Vallis Marineris (see Fig. 10.) was created by a meteor impact.
He points to Oudemans Crater which is exceptionally deep and he says that this obviously enormous impact,
immediately to the south of Vallis Marineris is what caused this huge gash to be rent into The Red Planet. This
theory is implausible as there is no reason why a huge crack should open up in a planet, even a short distance
away, when hit by a meteor. Do we know if this has ever occurred in the history of the Earth? How can we
assume a pre-existing weakness existed in the crust? It does not seem feasible, but, even if this does explain
the creation of some of the channels, meteor impacts cannot explain the formation of the complexity of
interconnected channels that exist in many places on Mars, such as all the regions of parallel fossae, of sulci, of
labyrinthus, and of chaos. There are areas of interconnected channels that form a ‘crazed’ patterning that
cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be ascribed to one, or even many meteor impacts.
Another meteor theory comes from Hancock et al. 5, but they say instead that the meteor came in through
Mars from the Hellas Planita area, bursting the side of the planet causing Vallis Marineris to tear open. They
say it stopped short before bursting through the planet, creating the enormous bulge on the other side called
the Tharsis Bulge. This theory is so implausible that it seems as if the proponents are trying to confuse readers.
Such a theory is untestable but, logically, even a titanium-tipped meteor travelling at an incredible speed, if it
did not burst the entire planet apart, would meet with sufficient density in the bedrock of a planet to stop it
over a few hundred kilometres, let alone the few thousand kilometres of bedrock that possibly lie beneath the
surface of Mars. Some of the impact would be taken up in a directional change of the planet, and that would
also reduce the depth to which a meteor would penetrate.
My assessment is that the reason Oudemans Crater is so deep is because this area of Mars is very sandy, and
the meteor did not contact bedrock for a number of kilometres. This is evidenced by the depth of the adjacent
channel, Vallis Marineris, which has been carved out to a depth of, some say, up to 10 kilometres. The sandy
topsoil could be that deep in the nearby area of Oudemans Crater as well, so, they could both be so deep
because of the depth of the sand in that area. I refute the logic in the assumption that the depth of an adjacent
crater can be taken as evidence for the meteor theory of channel formation. There is no precedent for this,
and no logical connection between an impact crater and a canal.
The fact that there are masses of channels on Mars, in intricate, interconnected patterns, makes it plain that
meteors could not have created all of the channels on Mars, or even a small percentage of them. The meteor
theory, therefore, has major shortcomings in explaining channel formation. There is no evidence to suggest to
this amateur geologist that meteors created any of the many channels on Mars. The so-called authorities could
conceivably be wrong in their claim that any channels on Mars were created by meteors. And, they could be
13
wrong for two reasons: either because they do not know of a more plausible theory, or that they are
purposefully trying to mislead the public.
2.5 Faulting
Faulting is the only geological process that could create linear channels that traverse the landscape irrespective
of the slope, such as are found on Mars. Faulting is the official explanation for Cerberus Fossae, shown in Fig.
15, Fig. 28, and Fig. 29. This presupposes some tectonic activity such as continental drift, or the buckling of the
crust caused by the expansion of the planet. There is, however, no other evidence that I can see for either of
these processes on Mars, so they are unlikely to have contributed towards the formation of the channels. Also,
fissures created by faulting on Earth are jagged and deep, and not evenly sinuous nor consistently shallow.
Even allowing for weathering, geological faulting is unlikely to have created the evenly wide and deep channels
called Cerberus Fossae. And, even if these channels could be argued to have been created by faulting, what
could explain the presence of the ‘ribbed ridges’ in the trenches shown in Fig. 28 and Fig. 29?
Catenae are often associated with channels, but lines of depressions cannot be the results of faulting, and so,
because they are associated with channels, faulting is unlikely to have created the channels or the catenae.
And, even if faulting was responsible for some of the channels, it cannot explain the curved or intricately
crisscrossed channels that are evident on Mars. As faulting does not create curved or interconnected channels
on Earth, there is no reason to assume that this process would do so on Mars.
Although faulting may be shown to be the cause of some of the channels, it is clear, for the reasons above, that
by far the majority of the channels and associated features on Mars were neither caused by faulting nor any
associated tectonic or volcanic activity. Faulting is therefore also inadequate as an explanation for channel
formation.
2.6 Lightning Scarring
In the absence of any other credible theory on the creation of the channels, the theory of ‘lightning scarring’,
as espoused by David Talbot, is compelling, but there are fatal flaws. Logically, from a layperson’s perspective,
lightning could not have created the channels on Mars for the following reasons: there is no evidence of the
ejected material (as there is around impact craters); the channels are evenly curved with a rounded profile
(lightning leaves a jagged scar on Earth); and, many channels occur around the base of craters (a discharge
would be expected from a high point, not a low point). Also, many channels criss-cross extensively in intricate
patterns, and it is difficult to imagine the scenario in which electrical discharges would cross each other to
create these patterns. And, an electrical discharge that occurs at the speed of light, is more than likely to have
shorted itself out on a high point before it can create a scar thousands of kilometres long. Also, the lines of
depressions associated with channels called catenae cannot be explained by an electrical discharge, or
lightning in any form. So, as the explanation for the channels and associated features on Mars, the electrical
discharge theory is also flawed.
2.7 Venting
It has been claimed by NASA that the channels on Triton were caused by venting of nitrogen gas. There is no
precedent for horizontal venting. Gasses escape the Earth vertically, and there is no reason to assume that on
Triton, or anywhere else in the Solar System, that gasses will ever vent horizontally and be able to cause a long,
even, winding channel to be formed in the soil. Logically if a vent was capped and it sprayed out sideways, it
would form a spray, causing scars to radiate outwards from the hole, and not a single, sinuous channel. As an
agency for channel formation, venting seems extremely unlikely as there is no logical way this could happen.
Clearly the above six ‘official’ explanations for channel formation on Mars by ‘the authorities’ are, at best,
inadequate, and, by their complete lack of logic and far-fetched reasoning, are more likely to be propaganda
for political purposes.
14
3. Giant Sandworm Evidence
3.1 Introduction
Since 2007 I have held the theory, that giant sandworms were the biological agents that created the channels
of Mars, many eons ago. I have continued to study the evidence and look at all the features of Mars in the light
of this giant sandworm theory, and, so far, I have found nothing to contradict it, and everything to support it.
My assessments are purely visual, and are of the images of Mars that are available on the Net. They are based
on logic and are informed by an interest in geology and natural history. In this chapter images of otherwise
anomalous features on Mars are presented as evidence for the giant sandworm theory.
3.2 Channels
The channels of Mars are the dominant feature of The Red Planet. They are such pervasive and monumental
features that they are named variously as: ‘fossae’, ‘valles’, ‘sulci’, ‘chasma’, ‘chasmata’, ‘labyrinthus’, and
‘chaos’.
A number of channels run for over 2000 kilometres in one general direction across the face of Mars. This
includes one particular channel called Vallis Marineris, shown below, which is said to be the longest and
deepest valley in the entire Solar System.
Fig. 10. Vallis Marineris – An Over 2000km Long Channel on Mars
The canal, or channel, or valley, in this image (from Google Mars 6S, 68W), marked by the red line, is well over 2000
kilometres long, 100 kilometres wide and over 6 kilometres deep, making this feature the biggest valley in our solar system,
and visible from Earth. Others have reported that this channel is 4000 kilometres long, 200 kilometres wide and 10
kilometres deep. To the west of this channel is Noctis Labyrinthus and to the east, Eos Chaos, both vast plains of
interconnected channels, which could be seen as continuations of Vallis Marineris, but are labelled as separate features.
15
Fig. 11. Channels Across The Face on Mars
This is an image of ‘The Face on Mars’ photoshopped to
look like a natural mesa and released by NASA in 2001.
(From Google Mars 40.7N, 9.5W). This highly symmetrical
mountain is two and a half kilometres long, over one and a
half kilometres wide and over half a kilometre high.
Smudging is evident in the lower left hand side and the
shadows have changed from previous images of The Face
released by NASA. As a tree specialist, if this was a wooden
carving, I would say that it has wood borer. The right hand
side is scarred by channels winding across the slope,
ensuring that no one can claim that they were created by
water or lava flowing downhill, even given subsequent
tectonic activity. The most likely agent is biological, such as
a mole or an earthworm. The burrowing in this image
corroborates other evidence of giant sandworms and is
evidence that the sandworm colonisation of Mars was after
the colonisation by the humanoids who created ‘The Face
on Mars’.
Fig. 12. Sinuous Channels
These channels of different, yet individually
regular size, have rounded bottoms, and they
wind their way across the Martian landscape
without regard to the slope. The most logical
explanation for these sinuous channels is
that they are giant sandworm burrows with
the roof having collapsed in from so much
traffic, and are now highly wind-eroded.
(Note that there is a challenge with
perspective in this image, and if you cannot
see that the Sun is shining from the left, you
might think that these features are dunes
and not channels.)
16
Fig. 13. Sulci on Mars
Sulci (Latin for furrows) is a label given by NASA to areas on Mars of extensive channel systems that have undergone much
weathering. This area (from Google Mars 29N, 137W) shows thousands of channels that cannot be explained geologically.
Biologically they can be easily explained as areas where thousands of giant sandworms have been burrowing for thousands
of years.
Fig. 14. Mars Chaos
‘Chaos’ are areas on Mars that look chaotic, and must represent chaos to the people who named them. These five distinct
areas (from Google Mars 4S, 25W) called ‘chaos’ are, on closer inspection, actually a network of thousands upon thousands
of channels, so dense that the channels can hardly be seen because all that separates them are small outcrops, often called
‘colles’ (hills) or ‘mensae’ (tables) if they are larger. Chaos areas look like sulci that have been even further furrowed.
17
Fig. 15. The Channels Cerberus Fossae and Athabasca Valles
These channels (from Google Mars 13N, 154E), called fossae and valles, cut straight up and down across a mountain slope,
irrespective of the slope (note the -2000m contour in blue outlining a mountain spur), so they were quite obviously not
created by water or lava flowing downhill. The image Fig. 28, is an enlargement of the top portion of the grey area on the
left, labelled ‘ribbed ridges’, and is a detail of the channels.
The giant sandworm theory proposes that the channels called Cerberus Fossae in the image above, were
created by sandworms burrowing underground on a migration route, and, the reason the burrows are exposed
as channels in this place, is that the harder substrate rises with the terrain of the spur. It is because the
bedrock is closer to the surface that the burrows are closer to the surface, and it is here that their roofs have
collapsed in, creating these open channels, as eroded burrows, in this place only. These channels are presumed
to extend for many kilometres underground in both directions, as other channels on Mars can extend in one
direction for thousands of kilometres. To this naturalist’s eyes, the giant sandworm theory is a more
comprehensive and credible explanation for the creation of Cerberus Fossae than water, lava, meteorites,
faulting, lightning or venting.
All of the examples of channels illustrated above, including all the intricately dissected areas of chaos and all
the other remnant channels on Mars that I have studied, could conceivably have been created by many giant
sandworms over many years. I see no evidence of any history of flowing surface water on Mars, in direct
contradiction of NASA’s claim. The visible erosion that has weathered the channels can easily be ascribed to
the action of giant sandworms on the soil and eroded by wind and gravity. There is so much weathering
evident that this suggests that the channels were traversed over many years, many years ago.
The number of areas of chaos, labyrinthus, sulci, colles and mensae, because they are so finely dissected, are
evidence that a great many giant sandworms have been burrowing on Mars for a great many years. Many of
the channels are so deep that they seem to have been burrowed so often, and the loose soil over the burrows
blown away so many times, that the level has dropped, in the case of Vallis Marineris, by well over six
kilometres. This must surely have taken millions and millions of years to achieve.
18
3.3 Sinkholes
The circular, vertically-sided holes in Mars, the so-called ‘possible cave entrances’ on Arsia Mons and
elsewhere, often termed cavi (Latin for caves) are best explained as sinkholes into a tunnel system, of an equal
or greater diameter, immediately below. These holes have been measured at over 200 meters in diameter,
indicating that the tunnels that run beneath them must be at least that size, and this indicates that this is the
diameter of the being that made the tunnel. (See the image labelled ‘Fig. 19. Sinkholes With and Without
Bottoms’.)
Fig. 16. Catena Showing Sinkholes and Craters
This image (from Google Mars 20N, 97W) of a catena (Latin for chain) clearly shows that none of the depressions in this line
have an ejecta ridge around them. The other features randomly dotted around this landscape and not in a row, are impact
craters and clearly show a raised lip, or ejecta ridge around each one, as would be expected from a meteor impact. The fact
that there are catenae that are directly associated with channels indicates very strongly that they are sinkholes into
sandworm burrows beneath. (Note that the Sun is shining into the holes from the left. If you perceive the sun to be shining
from the right hand side of this image, these holes might appear to be mounds).
There is a major inconsistency in NASA’s explanation of the catenae, or so-called ‘crater chains’, visible on
Mars. If they are impact craters why do they not have ejecta ridges, and how can these depressions be
associated with the channels, as they are, if they are made by completely separate processes, i.e.; meteors and
erosion. It is obvious to this amateur geologist that the catenae are not made by meteors (as they have no
ejecta ridge, and, meteors do not fall in a line), and the channels are not made by erosion (as they do not run
downhill or show any fluvial features). Instead of being impact craters somehow occurring in a line, the giant
sandworm theory neatly and simply explains catenae as sinkholes into sandworm burrows, without having to
dredge up fanciful cosmological, electrical or geological hypotheses.
The catenae even look like lines of sinkholes, and if they are, then the material must have fallen through into a
tunnel beneath the surface, as the catenae are in lines. And as the catenae are often associated with channels,
the explanation that best fits the evidence is that both the channels and the catenae are artefacts of eroded
sandworm burrows. Lately NASA scientists have said that some of the catenae may be sinkholes into
underground cavities or lava tubes, but they have not provided a good explanation for how the cavities were
created, or why the lava tubes do not run with the slope.
19
Fig. 17. Cave Entrance or Sinkhole
There is a series of holes on Arsia Mons on Mars
that have been labelled by researchers as cavi or
‘possible cave entrances’. They are vertical shafts,
the bottoms of which cannot be seen, and that
infra-red heat tests have confirmed have
connections to some sort of tunnel system. They
look like sinkholes and some of them have been
measured at over 200 metres in diameter. They are
explained by the giant sandworm theory as
sinkholes into similar-sized burrows running
immediately beneath.
Fig. 18. Sinkhole in a Forest
This image (from Google Mars 5S, 118W), through an obfuscating layer, of an over 100 metre wide vertical shaft down into
the surface of Mars, was taken from Google Mars (5S; 118W), and looks from the detail, as if it is set in a forest of trees.
This hole cannot be a meteor crater as there is no ejecta ridge around the rim and the bottom cannot be seen. The most
logical explanation is that this is a sinkhole into a cavern or into a giant sandworm burrow running beneath it.
20
Fig. 19. Sinkholes With and Without Bottoms
These images of depressions on Arsia Mons show that they are often in lines, called catenae, indicating that the
depressions with bottoms and the bottomless pits are associated, and if they are linear, then they are more likely to be
sinkholes into an underground tunnel, or sandworm burrow, of equal or even larger diameter than the largest of the
sinkholes.
Fig. 20. Catena on a Ridge
This is an image (from Google
Mars 9S, 119W) of a dune
directly associated with a
catena, or line of depressions,
running along the top of it,
strongly indicating that the
dune is hollow and that the
depressions are sinkholes into
an empty tunnel beneath. This
image shows that catenae can
also be associated with the
dunes of Mars.
Sinkholes, or cavi and catenae, as NASA call them, seem to be artefacts of weathering, or erosion by gravity,
and this is more likely to occur when the climate and the sand are dry. When sinkholes extend by edge creep,
they join up to form open channels. The fact that any of the sinkholes are sometimes associated with channels
and with dunes, makes it likely that they are caused by the same agency, and so far, the most logical
explanation for the creation of the cavi, the catenae, and most, if not all of the channels on Mars, is biological;
the burrowing of giant sandworms.
21
3.4 Ridges
Apart from the channels, the sinuous dunes, or what are sometimes called ‘inverted channels’ by NASA, and
other times ‘dorsa’, (Latin for back) are anomalous ridges running across the Martian landscape, without
regard to the slope. NASA explains ‘inverted channels’ as: “these ridges were once the bottoms of river
channels that were more resistant to erosion and were left high-standing after erosion wore down the
surrounding areas”. This official explanation sounds impossible, is counter-intuitive, and completely unlike
anything found on Earth. This cannot happen in my view, as the hard layer at the bottom of the river would
extend over the landscape and leave a table rather than a ridge exactly where the river was. Even if the river
bottom suddenly formed concrete and set, to explain it as a river still requires it to run with the slope and to
show fluvial erosional and depositional features that the ‘inverted channels’ do not. To explain why these
channels do not run with the slope, subsequent tectonic activity has to be assumed, and even that cannot
explain how these channels could then curve.
The people who tell us that the top of a ridge running independent of the slope, was once a river bed that has
been subsequently subjected to plate tectonics that has tilted the landscape somehow so that each separate
channel and ridge in an area would have at some time been flowing downhill, must think that the public are
stupid to believe such a concocted scenario. If they did not know what created the ridge in the following
image, then surely they should say so. Unless they are trying to deceive us, why would NASA make up a story
about inverted channels and plate tectonics, when there is no evidence that I can see on Mars for fluvial
weathering or continental drift?
Fig. 21. Inverted Channel or Sandworm Burrow
The ridge in this image (from Google Mars 23S, 33W) has been labelled as an ‘inverted channel’ by NASA scientists who
make the dubious claim that it is an ancient river bed that is resistant to erosion, while the rest of the entire landscape
around it eroded away completely to below the river bed that now forms the ridge crest. This ridge runs across the slope,
so it could not have once been a river without some tectonic tilting of the entire landscape. The giant sandworm theory
holds that sinuous ridges and ‘inverted channels’ on Mars are giant sandworm burrows that have not collapsed, and
proposes three possible reasons for this phenomenon.
22
Fig. 22. Sinuous Ridges Called Dorsa
This image (from Google Mars 55S, 41W) shows the
ridges called Auxo Dorsum and Charis Dorsum. Dorsa
are sinuous ridges running through the Martian
landscape and are explained as ‘inverted channels’ by
NASA who propose that the tops of these dune ridges
were once the bottoms of river beds. A more
believable explanation is that they are giant sandworm
burrows that have not collapsed.
Fig. 23. Dune Network
The ridges in this image (from Google Mars 30N, 65E) cannot be explained as being the accumulation of wind-blown sand
alone. I know of no geological process or landscape feature that could have caused dunes to naturally form in this pattern.
They intersect at right angles so they cannot be ‘inverted channels’ as these ridges could never have once been a river bed.
The best explanation for this network of dune ridges is that they are giant sandworm burrows that have not collapsed.
23
The patterning of the dunes in the image above and the patterns created by many channel systems around
Mars are similar, making it highly likely that both the dunes and the channels were created by the same
agency. And, as there is no other adequate explanation, the giant sandworm theory is the most likely
explanation for the creation of both the ridges and the channels of Mars.
No evidence can be seen of any plate tectonics or continental drift on Mars, and in order for all of the sinuous
ridges, called dorsa and ‘inverted channels’, to have once been flowing downhill, a very intricate series of
tectonic movements has to be hypothesised. The entire plate, or continental shelf would have to be pushed
up, without breaking, so that entire areas drained in different directions. To explain the changes in direction,
successive tectonic events must be hypothesised. It is ludicrous to suggest that these ridges are sinuous
because the tilting of the plate altered the course of a river while it was being formed. Every time the plate tilts
rivers will only flow downwards, and there would be evidence of this erosion between each event.
This is so contrived an explanation that it must be part of the deceit for which NASA is named, specifically
designed to confuse people and to obfuscate the truth. I find it difficult to believe that any geologist would
seriously consider this explanation, especially in the light of the giant sandworm theory. The official
explanation seems highly unlikely and it is far more likely that all of these ridge features of Mars are intact
giant sandworm burrows.
There are three possible reasons for the fact that these ridges have not collapsed. Maybe they still contain the
skeletons of sandworms that died in their burrows. Another reason is that the sand immediately around the
tunnel was compressed by the expanding sandworms as they moved within their burrows, and because it was
compacted it was harder than the surrounding soil and so has not collapsed. A third possible reason for the
intact dune ridges might be that giant sandworms, as do earthworms, may have secreted a mucous to ease
their way through the soil, and this could be the glue that still holds the sand together around the burrows.
3.5 Dunes
Another feature of Mars is what NASA calls ‘dune trains’, which are regular rows of dunes that are supposedly
created by wind-blown sand alone. They possibly do have a sand covering, but because of the regularity of the
ridges with respect to their length and breadth and curvature, their position within the channels, their
orientation perpendicular to the channels, and their orientation in all directions (see Fig. 27.), it is doubtful
that a prevailing wind could have created the structure over which the wind-blown sand has deposited. The
reason that these dunes are in trains could be that they form a sand covering over the segments of dried out
and fossilised giant sandworm skin. They might not even have a sand covering at all, and it might just be that
these ’dune trains’ are ridges of dried out giant sandworm skin.
Fig. 24. Dune Ridges or Sandworm Skeletons
24
Fig. 25. Dune Trains or Fossilised Sandworms
These images show evenly spaced, curvilinear ridges, perpendicular to, and similar in size to the channels within which they
run. NASA calls these ‘dune trains’ and propose that they are purely wind-blown sand and presume no underlying
structure. The giant sandworm theory proposes that these are dehydrated and fossilised giant sandworms that died in their
now eroded burrow, with segments, contracted into ribs that stick up, of dried and hardened skin, so thick and hard that it
is resistant to wind erosion.
The ‘dune trains’ in the images above look very similar to a NASA image, reproduced below, of a linear,
tubular, ribbed structure with vertical sides about 70 meters high, so this one is obviously not made of sand. I
have seen dry elephant hide in the arid bushveld and I can imagine that segments of giant sandworm skin, in a
completely dry environment since they died, might last intact for ages, and might look similar to the structure
in the following image.
Fig. 26. Linear Tubular Feature
This feature of the Martian landscape looks similar to what NASA claim are ‘dune trains’, and yet it has vertical sides of
many metres in height, making it certain that this is not a dune made of sand. The claim that this is an artificial construction
is totally improbable as a functional transport system, and even more improbable as an artwork. A transport system would
be straight, and an artwork is unlikely to have cryptic statues encoded into a structure that looks like a bombed, giant
sandworm that has contracted in agony. (See Fig. 34.)
25
Fig. 27. Exposed Giant Sandworm Fossils
Labelled as dune trains or dune ridges by NASA, these features (from Google Mars 30N, 36W) may be covered by
windblown sand, but the structures that form them have the regularity of size, spacing and orientation, to look like giant
sandworm segments, now exposed because the loose sand covering of their burrow has blown away over the years.
Fig. 28. Ribbed Ridges in Cerberus Fossae
This image (from Google Mars 10N, 156E) is an enlargement of the left hand side of the image Fig. 15, and shows that
Cerberus Fossae is a channel that looks as if it is a ‘sink trench’ where the sand has sunken into tunnels running beneath.
The ‘dune trains’ within the fossae above look as if these channels are filled with lines of evenly spaced, curved, ribbed
ridges, looking much like the segments of fossilised giant sandworms that died in their burrows, enlarged in the image
below.
26
Fig. 29. Sandworm Skeletons in their Burrows
This image (from Google Mars 10N, 156E) is an enlargement of the right hand side of the previous image, and clearly shows
the evenly spaced curved ribs of this structure in Cerberus Fossae, looking like a sandworm that died in its burrow. There is
even evidence of a liquid that has spilled out over the landscape from these features indicating that it might be the
coelomic fluid of the giant sandworm that leaked out and seeped into the sand when it died. The open channel on the left is
a ‘sink trench’ where the entire roof has collapsed in on the burrow beneath, and where no sandworm was buried. If the
scale and ruler on Google Mars are accurate, measurements indicate that this sandworm is about one hundred metres wide
and over two kilometres long, and, as can be seen in the previous image, Fig. 28, is small compared to the giant sandworms
that must have created the larger channels.
The dunes and ‘dune trains’ in the images above could indeed be made of wind-blown sand, but, because they
are so even, not aligned to a wind direction, and perpendicular to the trenches that they are within, it is highly
unlikely that they are purely aeolian. It is more likely, due to their size, shape and orientation, that if they are
indeed sand, that these dunes have formed over the segments of fossilised giant sandworms that died in their
now eroded burrows. The presence of these otherwise anomalous dunes on Mars is good evidence for the
giant sandworm theory. They might not even be dunes at all, but rather dehydrated and perhaps fossilized skin
segments, with the thicker, harder segments forming the ribs and the softer segments having collapsed in.
3.6 Mesas
Mesas are ‘blocky’ hills with flat tops that occur in many places on Mars. Areas of such mesas have been
labelled both mensae (Latin for tables) by NASA, presumably because they look like table-tops, and colles
(Latin for hills) because they look like hills.
27
Fig. 30. Mensae on Mars
Labelled as mensae, the blocks of mountain in the terrain in this image (from Google Mars 35N, 70E) have no official or
logical geological explanation for their formation that I have heard. A valid biological explanation is that burrowing giant
sandworms created these interconnected channels and that the blocks of mountain are what are left standing after many
years of giant sandworm traffic, and many years of wind erosion. (Note that the Sun is shining from the right in this image.)
Fig. 31. Colles on Mars
Although colles means hills in Latin, it denotes a fracture in medicine. The name is used in both senses on Mars to denote
areas where thousands of hills seem to be separated by fracturing, or highly eroded channels. The giant sandworm theory
interprets the landscape in this image (from Google Mars 34S, 173E) as an area where so much sandworm activity has
taken place, and the burrows are so interconnected, that only small hills are left between them, and after many years of
wind erosion, the channels are not recognisable anymore. (Note that the Sun is shining from the left in this image.)
28
Although the mensae and colles could have been created by extensive burrowing, the mesas in the following
image are more regular, and circular and do not look geological or artificial. In the absence of any official, or
unofficial explanation for the formation of these regular rings in rows, the most logical explanation is that they
are fossilised giant sandworm segments.
Fig. 32. Regular Raised Rings in Rows
It can be clearly seen that these rows of
regular mounds sticking up out of the
landscape in this image (from Google Mars
16N, 84E) are quite distinct from the impact
craters, which are randomly sized, recessed
into the landscape, and have an ejecta ridge
around the rim. These mounds are not
labelled by NASA. They are not similar to
colles or mensae, and certainly cannot be
impact craters. So far, these round mounds
do not have a better explanation than that
of fossilised giant sandworm segments.
The fact that the mounds in the image above are all of a similar size could be that the giant sandworms
associated with other sandworms of a similar size. This would be logical if they were cannibals as similar-sized
sandworms would be of no threat to each other. This theory is corroborated by other images of what could be
similarly-sized sandworms together.
The giant sandworm theory proposes that all the mesas of Mars, excluding those of volcanic origin, but
including all the areas labelled as mensae or colles, were created by burrowing giant sandworms, followed by
many years of wind weathering.
3.7 Back-to-front Rivers
The anomalous ‘back-to-front rivers’ are deeper further up the slope, and this is the opposite from erosion
gullies found on Earth. When it rains on Earth, the further down the slope, the more water has accumulated,
so the greater the flow, the more erosion there is, and the deeper the gullies that are created. This terminates
where the slope loses gradient and the velocity of the water slows down enough to deposit the silt in an
alluvial fan. This is not evident on Mars. The channels called ‘back-to-front rivers’ run independent of the slope
and do not show erosional or depositional features, so they cannot have ever been rivers by any stretch of the
imagination.
29
Fig. 33. Anomalous Channels
This image (from Google Mars 19N, 125E) shows two ‘sources’ on higher ground with channels leading to or from them, or
both. Anomalously, these channels become shallower further down the slope, which is the opposite of what would be
expected if they were created by a fluid. They can, however, be perfectly explained by the giant sandworm theory as two
giant sandworm dens with runs leading to and from them that are collapsed burrows and now open channels that have
eroded down through continual burrowing and weathering of the loose covering material, over many, many years.
The so-called back-to-front rivers are anomalous features of the Martian landscape that are simply explained
by the giant sandworm theory as eroded burrows, where the roof has collapsed and the eroded material has
blown away and filled in the channels further down the slope over many years. It would be stupid to try and
convince the public that these channels were created by water as they are shallower further downhill, but this
is what NASA seems to be trying to do. It is surprising that geologists are not up in arms about the
implausibility of NASA’s explanations.
3.8 Glass Tubes
The so-called “glass tubes” of some Mars researchers are unlikely to be a “transport system” as proposed.
There is no logical reason to create a winding tube with randomly sized ribs for any form of transport system. It
would be more difficult and costly to build than a straight tube, and the friction would make it so inefficient
that it would not be worthwhile.
Other apparently authoritative Mars researchers make claims that intelligently carved statues can be seen in
the features of Mars. The explanation for these features as ‘carved statues’ does not make any sense at all.
They do not have any proportion or symmetry, or in fact any design at all, as is exhibited in the ‘Face on Mars’,
with its “classical proportion”.
The following image of a feature on Mars is unlikely to be artificial and cannot be rationally explained as a
transport system or a statue.
30
Fig. 34. Glass Tube, Carved Statue, Dune Train, or a Bombed Sandworm?
This landscape feature of Mars has no logical artificial or geological explanation. From the broken and damaged sections,
and the dark streaks on the substrate, this feature looks like a giant sandworm that has been bombed in two places with
projectiles from the South. The two lighter, wider sections could be explained as the animal contracting in agony during its
death throes, as an earthworm would do if it was damaged in two places.
Fig. 35. Glass Tubes, Dune Trains, or Sandworm Skeletons?
Researchers who believe these structures are an artificial transport system built by a race of humanoids, call them ‘glass
tubes’. NASA has labelled similar looking features as ‘dune trains’. One explanation for these features is that this image
shows four or five giant sandworms that died in this channel, as Mars dried up, and all the sandworms of Mars died in their
burrows, during a major extinction event, many years ago. The loosened soil over the roof of the burrow has, since then,
blown away, leaving the sandworms exposed. The sandworm in the top right hand side of this image looks as if it has
‘nested ribs’, or another set of smaller ribs within it, providing evidence that the giant sandworms were cannibalistic.
It is highly unlikely that the features in the images above are geological or artificial. So far there does not seem
to be a better explanation for the so-called ‘glass tubes’ than the biological one of preserved giant sandworms.
31
4. Giant Sandworm Biology
4.1 Introduction
The observations made about giant sandworm biology are an attempt at interpreting the evidence in the
images provided. For example, we observe sinuous features in the Martian landscape, and the giant sandworm
theory provides three possible reasons to explain why these sinuous dune ridges, sometimes called inverted
rivers by NASA, have resisted erosion. Firstly, there might still be a dead giant sandworm in the burrow,
secondly the soil immediately around the burrows might be compacted by the sandworms expanding against
the walls of their burrows, compacting them as they move, and, thirdly, as earthworms do, perhaps giant
sandworms secreted a mucous to help them slide through the soil, and this is the glue that still bonds the sand
together. These factors could conceivably create ridges resistant to erosion. Unlike the geological explanation
that cannot provide a rational explanation of the formation of inverted rivers, consideration of giant
sandworm biology provides a perfectly adequate explanation for the sinuous ridges in the Martian landscape.
4.2 Size
It is the size of these sandworms that is the biggest stumbling block in the path of the acceptance of the giant
sandworm theory by the general populace. They are too big to be believable. Measurements of the channels,
the dunes, the caves, and even the skeletons, however, all provide evidence that these creatures achieved
gargantuan sizes of up to an incredible 250 metres wide, and 10 kilometres long. This does seem outrageously
large for any single being, but, theoretically, unless one of the limits to growth are reached in any
environment, bigger and bigger sandworms would be naturally selected, as the sandworm with the largest
mouth would dominate. A genetic selection for gigantism would result if they killed unrelated, smaller
sandworms, and then, over the millennia, larger and larger sandworms would evolve.
The arguments that the skin would not hold together at that size, and that gravity would restrict sandworm
size are untestable as we do not know what the skin was made of or how thick it was, or in fact anything about
it. We are merely looking at the images of what exists and interpreting the phenomena to explain the creation
of landscape features. And, the evidence suggests that flexible, segmented worms 10 kilometres long, existed
on Mars, whatever we believe about the conditions on Mars, then or now.
Fig. 36. Regular Rows of Mounds
32
The mounds in this image (from Google Mars 8N, 83E) have no official explanation that I have found. They are clearly not
impact craters, many of which are visible in this image, and the individual mounds are clearly associated with each other
into a line. This particular row of mounds measures 250 metres wide and 10 kilometres long, and looks as if it could be a
row of fossilised giant sandworm segments.
4.3 Survival
The dunes and the channels that are visible either look as if they could have been formed by giant sandworms
burrowing in the loose topsoil immediately below the surface, as moles do on Earth. Being below ground
would mean that giant sandworms had excellent protection against the dust storms that would accompany
such a sandy and windy place, as well as from dust clouds that the frequent meteor impacts might throw up
into the atmosphere. They would also be protected underground from drying out, from the extremes of heat
and cold, and from radiation of any kind.
Giant sandworms would spend their life below ground, and so I expect they would have dens where they bred
and reared their young. An image of a back-to-front river labelled Fig. 33, shows what could be runs from giant
sandworm dens under the two ‘sources’ in the bottom right hand corner of the image. From these sources, the
sandworm community would make forays to get food or water, and there would be more traffic closer to the
entrance, and, apart from being higher up, that is another reason why it is more eroded here.
The best chance of survival in a harsh environment is below the surface, so it could be that giant sandworms
are one of the first species to colonise a planet.
4.4 Movement
The more-or-less linear nature of the dunes and channels shows that whatever made them did so as
segmented worms commonly do on Earth, by peristalsis (a muscular expansion, a streaming of body fluids, and
a contraction) and not as a snake would do, by winding its musculature on a spine. This is supported by a lack
of evidence in any images of a spine connecting the ribs. Giant sandworms would therefore be much like
earthworms having segments of elastic skin around a muscular sheath enclosing coelomic fluid which provides
a hydrostatic skeleton. They would have to have very flexible segments, and this is supported by the evidence
in the image above labelled Fig. 34, where the undamaged sections of the sandworm seem to have contracted
in agony, and the segments are much larger in those places.
Evidence for the giant sandworms having a hydrostatic skeleton comes from the ‘spill’ out from the ‘dune
train’ in the images labelled Fig. 28 and Fig. 29, where it looks as if a liquid spilled out from these giant
sandworms when they died and stained the sand around them.
Earthworms have setae (Latin for bristles) which are tiny hairs that stick out and anchor the expanded end of
the worm in their burrow, so that they can stream their body fluids forward and move through the sand. They
draw the rear end up against the expanded and anchored front end and force the front end through the soil
against the expanded and anchored rear end, a process called peristalsis. The sandworms in the movie ‘Dune’
also have setae, so there is every reason to assume, until we hear otherwise, that this is the method of
locomotion of the giant sandworms on Mars as well.
4.5 Hunting and Foraging
The evidence of open channels suggests that the soil was loose enough to erode, and that the giant
sandworms did not ingest the soil as do earthworms, rather they forced their way through it, as a mole does.
This would mean that they would have to have had a mouth hard and pointed enough to be able to force
through the topsoil, but also big enough to kill slightly smaller sandworms, and maybe even eat them. The
three-lobed mouth and the ‘crysteeth’ of the sandworms in the movie ‘Dune’ would be perfect. With such a
large mouth, it is anomalous that the movie portrays them as eating ‘sand plankton’, especially as the
sandworms of Arrakis are said to routinely devour spice-harvesting machinery, mistaking them for prey.
Another major contradiction in the portrayal of the sandworms in ‘Dune’ is that they are repelled by water.
Water is required for essential biological processes including digestion, absorption and excretion. Liquid water
33
is a prerequisite for life as we know it, so it is therefore only the planets within the so-called ‘goldilocks zone’
(including Mars, Venus and the Moon) where liquid water could exist, and that could support life.
Rather than a diet of sand-plankton, it is more likely that a giant sandworm would eat anything that moves,
including sandworms slightly smaller than itself.
Fig. 37. Dune Train with Nested Ribs
This raised ‘dune train’ is within an ‘inverted channel’,
with smaller ‘ribs’ regularly included within larger ‘ribs’,
similar to the ‘nested ribs’ in the image labelled Fig. 35. A
far more logical explanation for this ‘geological’ feature is
that it is biological instead, and that it is the fossilised
remains of giant cannibalistic sandworms in their eroded
burrows.
Fig. 38. Sandworm Cemetery
This is an image (from Google Mars 8N, 84E) of a low-lying area that would have been one of the last remaining moist areas
of Mars as it dried up during an extinction event, and where giant sandworms might have congregated to try and survive
the drought. These mounds are explained by the giant sandworm theory as preserved segments of dehydrated skin lying in
34
rows as the sandworms fell apart and the segments fell over after rotting to a certain extent, before drying up completely
preserving these rings in the landscape. These rows of mounds look, as cannibalistic sandworms might have done, as if they
have positioned themselves evenly spaced apart to reduce the threat of being eaten, whilst coping with the stress of
dehydration, during the extinction event that killed the giant sandworms of Mars.
Fig. 39. Ribbed Ridges in Rows
The ribbed ridges in this image (from Google Mars 23S, 33W) have lined up neatly in rows, aligned in one direction, without
regard to the contour, on a low-lying flat area, possibly one of the last remaining damp areas as Mars dried up. There is no
geological or artificial structure on Earth similar to these rows of ribbed ridges and no geological process that can explain
these features. The giant sandworm theory posits these to be fossilised or somehow preserved giant sandworm segments.
This area on Google Mars is covered by an obscuring overlay that obscures the detail. As you scroll into this area, and for a
split-second, as the overlay opens up, these ridges can be clearly seen in the underlying image to be enormous, segmented
worms, looking much like giant sandworms. The ‘respectful’ distance that these ribbed ridges have given each other as
they line up, due to some unknown environmental factor such as sunlight, could be an indicator of a biological agency. And
if these ridges are indeed giant sandworm skeletons, then this even spacing could be an indicator of their cannibalistic
nature.
The evidence of ‘nested ribs’, the indication that giant sandworms spaced themselves evenly apart to die, that
similarly-sized giant sandworms would associate with each other, and the fact that there is no evidence of any
other kind of animal on Mars, are all evidence for cannibalism in this species. Certainly giant sandworms would
have a guaranteed food supply if they were cannibals. However, the species could not be completely
cannibalistic and would have to have had an extra food source, because two adults cannot physically produce
enough offspring to feed themselves. Perhaps the younger sandworms fed on something else such as algae, or
‘sand plankton’ while they fattened up to form the sustenance for the larger sandworms.
The areas that have been extensively burrowed, in a ‘crazed’ sort of patterning, suggest that the sandworm is
foraging here, rather than hunting or migrating. It is logical that the sandworms would be burrowing where the
food source was abundant and the comprehensive grazing pattern would exploit the entire area, as they seem
to have done in the ejected material around the crater in the image below.
The sheer size of the giant sandworms, however, would argue for cannibalism. To metabolise that body-weight
would take a phenomenal amount of energy, and there are after all, all the nutrients a cannibal requires for
35
optimal growth in abundance in their diet. The evidence suggests that giant sandworms were omnivores and
both hunted and foraged for their food.
Fig. 40. Foraging in Crater Ejecta
This image (from Google Mars 36N, 101E)
shows a crazed patterning of channels in the
ejected material from this meteor impact
crater. This would suggest that the giant
sandworms were either foraging here for
some available mineral nutrient in the
ejecta of the impact crater, or that they
were feeding on the life form that was
feeding on the available nutrients.
4.6 Migration
The fact that many of the channels are parallel and seem to traverse the landscape for many miles in one
direction, indicates that the sandworms of Mars were migratory, possibly due to seasonal changes in
temperature and moisture related to the orbit and wobble of the planet.
Fig. 41. Parallel Channels with the Contour
The channels in this image (from Google Mars 30N, 107W), called fossae, run on the contours (marked in blue) of this
landscape of Mars. Water flows to the lowest point and does not create parallel channels, and certainly cannot flow with
the contour. Water only ever flows perpendicular to a contour. Note the associated catena or lines of holes. These are
explained as sinkholes into sandworm burrows running beneath them.
36
The number of channels called fossae in the image above, and their consistent orientation, could indicate a
seasonal migration route between the northern and southern areas of Mars. And, knowing that Mars also
spins and wobbles much like Earth, it is logical to assume that biological life will respond to this change, if it
can, as it does on Earth, by migrating with the seasons between more favourable climes.
4.7 Population
Not only all the channels, variously called: ‘fossae’, ‘sulci’, ‘chasma’, ‘chasmata’, and ‘valles’, but all of the
many areas called ‘chaos’, ‘labyrinthus’, and even ‘colles’ and ‘mensa’, are areas where it looks as if a huge
amount of sandworm activity has taken place over many years. The channels can be so dense that they hardly
look like channels any more. This evidence of the existence of literally millions of channels all over Mars
suggests that at some time in the past, Mars was host to millions of giant sandworms. The size and depth of
many of the channels and their obvious erosion, leads this amateur geologist to imagine that this took place
over millions of years.
It can be assumed that many more burrows exist underground that cannot be seen, so the estimate of millions
of channels is not an exaggeration. The human population is in the billions, and dinosaurs existed on Earth for
hundreds of millions of years, so it is not unreasonable to assume that many millions of giant sandworms
ploughed across Mars for many millions of years.
5. The Moon, Venus, Earth, and Other Bodies
5.1 The Moon
The image below, from Google Moon published in 2011 in Exploring Mystery, showing a pyramid and a giant
sandworm burrow, provides evidence of humanoid habitation, as well as giant sandworms on the Moon. And if
there was biological life on the Moon as these features suggest, then there would have been an atmosphere
and a climate sufficient to support it, and if that is the case then this information is being kept secret from the
people of Earth by a cabal who are exploiting this knowledge for personal gain.
Fig. 42. Rima Hadley on The Moon
37
In this one image alone (from Google Moon 25N, 3E), there are seven anomalies to the text-book-science we are taught
about the Moon, providing evidence that the Moon was inhabited by people in ancient times and is still inhabited today. A
well-eroded pyramid, pock-marked with impact craters, nearly one kilometre high, is evidence that a sophisticated
civilisation inhabited the Moon in ancient times. And a light flash and an escaping cloud are good evidence for the Moon
being currently inhabited. The channel called Rima Hadley, is of even width over hundreds of kilometres, and runs both up
and downhill, irrespective of the slope. This eroded channel is very similar-looking to what I believe to be giant sandworm
burrows on Mars and is evidence that giant sandworms colonised the Moon at some time in the past as well.
Fig. 43. Komarov Crater on The Moon
The floor of Komarov Crater on the
Moon (from Google Moon 24N,
152E) is flat, and yet it is crisscrossed
with trenches intersecting at right
angles that could not have been
created by water or lava flowing
downhill, whatever NASA tells us.
This network looks similar to the
channels on Mars, and provides
evidence that a colony of giant
sandworms scoured the Moon as
well.
Fig. 44. Channel in Karpinskiy Crater
Karpinskiy Crater on the Moon
(from Google Moon 71N, 162E)
with the -3400m contour shown in
blue, indicating that the channel
network around the base of the
crater runs roughly horizontally.
(Note that the Sun is shining from
the south.)
38
The fact that this channel in Karpinskiy crater, illustrated above, is roughly horizontal, proves that whatever
created it was not a fluid flowing downhill. It cannot be explained by previous or subsequent tectonic activity
either, because it curves, and the continental shelf is unlikely to have tilted progressively in a circle, even if
there was a scenario where continental drift could be argued. And, faulting occurs in straighter lines than this
so this channel is unlikely to have been created by geological faulting. Also, there is no logical way a meteor
can be responsible for this curved channel. And, the base of a crater is an unlikely place to experience a
lightning strike, and certainly not one that could conceivably leave a curved channel. And, a vent is unlikely to
make a curved scar with side-channels from the escaping gasses. So, even if there was some merit to any other
theory for the origin of this channel in Karpinskiy crater, the most logical explanation is the giant sandworm
theory, where a colony of giant sandworms would have ploughed up and down in the same channels for many
years, even after the roofs of the burrows collapsed, burrowing lower and lower as the wind blew the loose
topsoil away.
5.2 Venus
The following image of Venus shows a channel that rises and falls 2000 meters over the 6800 kilometres of its
length, ensuring that no-one tries to claim that it was created by water or lava, as it does not run perpendicular
to the contours.
Fig. 45. Baltis Vallis on Venus
David Talbot of
Thunderbolts.info
proposes that the 6800
kilometre long channel
on Venus in this image,
indicated with arrows,
called Baltis Vallis, was
created by a lightning
strike.
The image above of a channel across Venus called Baltis Vallis, is said by David Talbot, who has extrapolated
the ‘electric universe’ theory onto Venus, to be a scar created by a lightning strike. The fact that it rises and
falls by 2000 metres rules out any fluid as its origin, so, in the absence of a more plausible theory, a lightning
strike might seem to be an adequate explanation. The electric universe model assumes that the channels on
Mars were similarly created, and if pushed, proponents might argue that the channels on the Moon and on
Earth could also have been caused by lightning strikes.
39
From a layperson’s perspective, this seems impossible for four or more reasons: firstly, the channels are often
sinuous, and electrical scarring would, as it is on Earth, presumably be jagged; secondly, there is no evidence of
the ejected material along canals as there is around impact craters; thirdly, an electrical discharge would surely
be connected to a high point from where the charge would escape the planet; and fourthly, it is logical that a
charge would have shorted out long before a scar 6800 kilometres, or even 2000 kilometres, is created. Also, it
is inconceivable that lightning could have created all the other interconnected channels on these planets,
visible on Venus in the image above.
As it is so similar to channels on Mars, Baltis Vallis, and all the other channels visible in the image above, look
more like eroded giant sandworm burrows than the result of water, lava, meteors, faulting, venting, electrical
scarring, or anything else. This image is good evidence that giant sandworms inhabited Venus, particularly as
the giant sandworm theory explains the origin of the many other interconnected channels as well.
5.3 Earth
Since it is proven that the sea level has risen substantially on Earth over the millennia, as the sea now covers
monuments of ancient civilisations off the coasts of many continents around the world, it is possible that the
giant tubes and channels that are visible off the coast of California, were also created by giant sandworms
when this area was above water. If this species of worm had established itself on Mars, the Moon and on
Venus, it is probable that it was a terrestrial animal at some time in the distant past, especially so as similar
canals are seen here on Earth.
Fig. 46. Tubes off California
This image (from Google Earth 27N, 115W) shows tubes off the coast of California that are similar to the giant sandworm
burrows evidenced on Mars, the Moon and Venus.
40
Fig. 47. Tubes as Ribbed Ridges off California
This is a closer view of the
tubes off the coast of
California where they form
rows of ribbed ridges as
they do on Mars. This looks
much like the ‘dune trains’
on Mars and is evidence of
giant sandworms having
died and fossilised in their
burrows on Earth, many
thousands or even millions
of years ago, at a time when
this area was above water.
Fig. 48. Trench off Baja Mexico
The one kilometre wide trench
in this image (from Google
Earth 22N, 110W) winds along
the sea-floor looking much
like Rima Hadley on the Moon.
This channel could possibly
have been created by giant
sandworms when this area of
Earth was above sea level.
41
Fig. 49. Atlantic Sea-floor Intricately Burrowed
This area of the Atlantic seafloor (from Google Earth 2S,
83W) looks as if it has been
extensively burrowed,
reminiscent of the damage to
wood caused by woodborer,
and looking much like areas
of Mars, as if it was burrowed
by giant sandworms when
this area was above sea-level.
Google representatives have unsuccessfully tried to dismiss similar channels underwater, shown in the image
below, as “mapping anomalies”. Now they have simply put an obscuring overlay over this area and blurred the
detail. I took the image below of this region of the Atlantic Ocean from Google Earth before they obscured the
detail. This is a blatant example of obfuscation by Google.
Fig. 50. Anomalous Channels in the Atlantic Ocean
42
West of the Strait of Gibraltar, where Plato said Atlantis could be found, at the bottom of the sea, lies this ‘Atlantic Citadel’.
It is a rectangular area of about 160kms x 120kms consisting of straight channels, each one about one kilometre wide. This
image was taken from Google Earth (31N, 25W) in Aug 2010, before Google had been questioned about it, and before a
debate had taken off on Internet forums about this construction being evidence of Atlantis. Google’s response was to say
that it is a “mapping anomaly” and to obscure the detail so that now it cannot be studied. If you fly to this spot on Google
Earth today, you can hardly even notice this feature anymore.
Straight canals are obvious signs of intelligent design and construction. It is quite obvious that the 160
kilometre by 120 kilometre ‘citadel’, shown in the image above, was designed and constructed for a purpose,
by an intelligence. And this could indeed have taken place at the time of Atlantis or even earlier, long before
the sea-level rose to cover this area. There is good evidence that technically-advanced, civilised humanoids
have colonised Earth for millions of years. (For more evidence search ‘ooparts’. The London Hammer is
particularly convincing evidence for civilized humanoids on Earth 100 million years ago.)
Certainly the construction of straight channels cannot be credited to giant sandworms, unless they were
intelligent (which is unlikely without opposable thumbs, and therefore were probably unable to make things or
to read and write). Or, perhaps giant sandworms were steered to create these straight canals by an ancient
race of humanoids. There is evidence that has been uncovered that humanoids domesticated dinosaurs (see
the Ica Stones), and that must have been well over 65 million years ago, so this might not be quite so fanciful
an explanation after all. If humanoids rode dinosaurs, why not giant sandworms? The book and movie ‘Dune’
loom ever larger into reality, making it even more likely that Frank Herbert knew something that we are only
now starting to find out.
Fig. 51. Channels called Labyrinth in Antarctica
This is a photograph of an
area in the Wright Valley in
Antarctica called Labyrinth,
where a maze of
interconnected channels
exists, above sea level, on
Earth. These channels look
remarkably like eroded giant
sandworm burrows on Mars,
that are also, perhaps not
coincidentally, called
Labyrinth.
All these channels pictured above, in images of Earth, look strikingly similar to those on Mars, the Moon, and
on Venus. And, as there are no other more logical explanations for these features, the extensive channelling
visible in Antarctica and underwater off the coast of California, is enough evidence, until proven otherwise, to
assume that giant sandworms colonised Earth at some time in the distant past as well.
Flying back to Mars quickly, we see an area of the Hellas Planita pictured below that has been called Quadrata
Martis, where channels exist in straight-ish lines, similar to the ‘Atlantic Citadel’ pictured above. This is
inexplicable by any known mechanism, and could, from their regularity, be mistaken for irrigation canals to
observers from Earth. I know of nothing on Earth that could have created such a grid pattern of channels in the
landscape, and it is very difficult to imagine how this could be a natural phenomenon.
43
Fig. 52. Mars Squares of Channels and Catenae
This image in Hellas Planita of Mars 12 (38,4S, 55,8E) shows an area of rectilinear patterns, looking like cyclopean walls,
etched into the surface of Mars, with channels and catenae delineating them. There is even a 25 metre long hill carved as
another ‘Face on Mars’ on this plain, with its wry smile aligned to the grid pattern. This second face on Mars is an obviously
intelligently-designed feature and is further proof that Mars was colonised by an ancient civilisation.
The giant sandworm theory explains these grid patterns as eroded burrows of giant sandworms. How they
could have been made is that either the giant sandworms were steered to burrow in lines by some ancient
humanoid race, or, more likely, the sandworms were following the grid pattern of the buildings of a city that is
still vaguely visible as squares in the landscape. So, these canals could represent the random burrowings of
giant sandworms through a city precinct, whether ancient or inhabited at the time. And if that is the case, then
that indicates that Mars was colonised by humanoids prior to or during the giant sandworm colonisation of
Mars.
Until someone can provide an alternative and more convincing hypothesis for the creation of the channels and
catenae in the above image, the most logical conclusion is that they were created by burrowing giant
sandworms, tracking the grid-patterns of the buildings of a city.
The channels of Mars are such prominent and widespread features of The Red Planet that they can be said to
‘form’ the landscape. And, so many conflicting hypotheses exist about the origin of these channels that it
behoves our civilization to find out exactly what created them. And, if the same channel systems can be seen
on other nearby planets, including Earth, and if the evidence points towards giant sandworms, then surely
everyone would want to know about this gigantic life-form on Mars, and in our Solar System, and surely this is
the biggest news to astrobiology this side of the Galaxy.
The following images show canals similar to those found on Mars, on bodies around our solar system.
44
5.1 Europa
Fig. 53. A satellite image of Europa, the second largest of Jupiter’s over 60 moons, showing an extensive naturalistic
looking canal network.
Fig. 54. Europa streaked and crazed with channels.
45
5.5 Ceres
Fig. 55. Ceres is a dwarf planet situated in the asteroid belt.
Fig. 56. This image of Ceres with fake stars, shows the surface to be liberally scarred with channels.
46
5.6 Phobos
Fig. 57. Phobos is the larger and innermost of Mars’ two moons, said to be on a collision course with Mars
as it is getting slightly closer with each orbit.
Fig. 58. Phobos showing extensive channelling and associated catenae.
47
5.7 Enceladus
Fig. 59. Enceladus is an icy moon of Saturn with very naturalistic swirls in the surface, looking very like giant sandworm
burrows on Mars. These channels would have obviously been made during a previous era when the planetoid was not iced
up and conditions favoured a giant sandworm colony.
Fig. 60. Enceladus showing extensive channelling around the globe.
48
Fig. 61. Enceladus showing an orientation to the channelling suggesting a seasonal migration of
the giant sandworms.
Fig. 62. An image of Enceladus showing channels running through craters, without regard to the slope, up and down the
ejecta ridge on the one side, across the crater floor, and up and down the ejecta ridge on the other side. This proves that
these channels were not made by a fluid. (Note that the Sun is shining from the left hand side in this image)
49
5.8 Dione
Fig. 63. Dione is another icy Saturnian moon with channels running through impact craters.
Fig. 64. Dione showing directional channelling.
50
5.9 Tethys
Fig. 65. Tethys is another heavily scarred moon of Saturn.
5.10 Ariel
Fig. 66. Ariel is the fourth largest of Uranus’ twenty seven known moons. The heavy scarring is said by
NASA to be ’rift valleys’, insinuating that these scars were created by faulting.
51
Fig. 67. An image of Ariel showing extensive channelling looking much like the channelling on Mars.
5.11 Miranda
Fig. 68. Miranda is the innermost of Uranus’ moons with highly unusual geometric features as well as channels that look
like giant sandworm burrows.
52
5.12 Triton
Fig. 69. Triton is the largest of Neptune’s thirteen moons and it looks to be covered in channels.
Fig. 70. This is a composite image of Triton taken from Voyager 2. On the caption to this image NASA says: “This area
exhibits a plethora of unusual morphologic features, including the long lineations at the centre of the frame”. By the
evidence in all the images above, these ‘lineations’ or canals on Triton are nowhere near unusual in this part of the Solar
System, as many similar canals can be seen on all thirteen of the planets and moons illustrated in this thesis.
53
6. Conclusion
The giant sandworm theory provides a mental exercise in logic because we cannot go there to check. And
logically, it would seem, from the evidence that is available, that: 1. NASA is lying to us; 2. the existing
theories of channel formation are inadequate; and, from the evidence of Vallis Marineris on Mars, to Rima
Hadley on the Moon, to Baltis Vallis on Venus, to the tubes on Earth, to the myriad canals of Europa, Ceres,
Phobos, Enceladus, Dione, Tethys, Ariel, Miranda, and Triton, that; 3. this part of the Cosmos has been
scoured by millions of giant sandworms over millions of years.
The giant sandworm theory suggests that the only features of Mars that are not created by giant sandworms
are constructions by humanoids such as the pyramids and The Face, and of course, the mountains, volcanos,
and impact craters. Having searched around the grainy images we are given of Mars, I see evidence of giant
sandworms almost everywhere, and, I see no evidence of channel formation by any other means other than
giant sandworms burrowing, including any of the ‘official’ explanations of: water; lava; meteors; faulting;
lightning; and venting.
For the first time since Giovanni Schiaparelli discovered them in 1877, the giant sandworm theory provides a
comprehensive explanation for the creation of the canals of Mars, and this includes canals or channels on the
Moon, on Venus, on Earth, and on all the thirteen planets and moons illustrated in this thesis. The landscape of
Mars is highly eroded but there is no conclusive evidence of any recent disturbance that would indicate that
giant sandworms might still be extant on Mars, or in fact, on any of the thirteen bodies shown.
The theory that giant sandworms carved out many of the channels on these bodies, at some time during their
history, is imperative to bring into public debate as it is indicative of the un-scientific and political nature of
NASA, and indicative of the deceptiveness of our authorities, providing us with propaganda instead of
information. It would seem that NASA is a political lobbying group, lying to us that they are in any way
objectively scientific.
And, if it is the case that we are all being conned by an evil cabal of controllers who are hiding their sources of
alien technology, and that there is already a human base on Mars, then we all should know about it. Perhaps
the exposure of this gigantic feature of the history of our Solar System will wake people up to the fraud, and,
perhaps lead to exposing the reasons why giant sandworms have been kept such a big secret for the last fifty
years.
The supposed landing on Mars in 1962, and the visuals of a giant ‘mole’ burrowing on Mars from the
‘Ballantine Tape’ 9 are evidence for the possibility that Frank Herbert knew about the Mars sandworms when
he wrote ‘Dune’ published in 1965. My observations are based on the evidence contained within the images
from Mars alone, and are not informed by ‘Dune’ nor ‘Alternative 3’ in any way, as these movies are more than
likely to be obfuscatory in nature.
It is hard to understand why, amongst all of the myriad alternative researchers out there, that no-one else has
identified this species of worm, so gigantic that it is hard to miss. Perhaps people cannot see the wood for the
trees (or the macrobes for the microbes), but I am convinced that there are many humans who do know about
the giant sandworms, and that they are simply not telling the public, for some obscure ‘national security’
reason.
The chapter on Life on Mars in Exploring Mystery, published in 2011, presented the giant sandworm theory for
scrutiny. It remains the most cohesive and logical theory on the creation of the channels of Mars, especially so
as it also answers questions about the origin of many other otherwise anomalous features on Mars, including:
so-called caves; ridges; dune trains; labyrinths; chaotic areas; hills; mesas; inverted channels; back-to-front
rivers; crater chains; and sinkholes, with more feasible explanations than have been put forward to date.
54
7. References
1.
DiPietro, Vincent, and Molenaar, Gregory, 1982 – Unusual Martian Surface Features
2.
Carlotto, Mark, 1997 – The Martian Enigmas – A Closer Look
3.
Hoagland, Richard, 1996 – The Monuments of Mars
4.
McDaniel, Stanley, 1993 – The McDaniel Report
5.
Hoagland, Richard, 2002 – Revealing Mars’ True Colours of NASA – From The Enterprise Mission.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/marte/esp_marte_56.htm
6.
Hancock, Graham, Bauval, Robert, and Grigsby, John, 1998 – The Mars Mystery
7.
http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/694114main_Watkins-2-pia16204_full.jpg
8.
http://bollyn.com/are-there-chinchillas-on-mars-3/
9.
Herbert, Frank, 1965 - Dune
10. Watkins, Leslie, 1978 - Alternative 3
11. Anglia TV 1977 Science Report – Alternative 3. This 50 minute television show was flighted once only
on 20 June 1977 as a serious look into the conspiracy that a secret base exists on Mars and that a
landing by humans in 1962 witnessed a live animal burrowing just below the surface, as one would
imagine a giant sandworm would appear. The next day, after the station was inundated with calls for
more information, it was claimed to be an April fools joke and a hoax. The contract papers have
mysteriously been lost and everyone surrounding the affair says that Alternative 3 was ‘fiction based
on fact’. The author, Leslie Watkins, aka David Ambrose, however, did say that he accidentally
stumbled upon the truth.
12. Quadrata Martis from http://gigapan.com/gigapans/149497
13. Beetlejuice – The 1988 movie by Tim Burton, with screenplay by Warren Skaaren, based on a story by
Michael McDowell and Larry Wilson, where Saturn (or Titan) is infested by giant sandworms. Final
script says on page 32, “Barbara plunges into the dusty surface of Titan with an enormous Saturn
looming in the sky.” They are chased by giant sandworms that “could be right out of Dune”, also on
page 32. On page 72 Betelgeuse says “Hey you’ve been on Saturn! I hate those sandworms! Yecchhh!
I’ve lost a lot of buddies to sandworms.”
http://www.dailyscript.com/scripts/beetlejuice_skaaren_final.html
The End
Back to the Beginning
55
Image of Titan from Cassini.
Battersby, Stephen (October 29, 2004). "Titan's complex and strange world revealed". New Scientist.
Retrieved 2007-08-31. In which he says Titan’s “diverse geography is crossed by channels, ridges and great
windblown streaks.” And “These linear features are only about 200 metres wide, but 100 kilometres long.”
"Spacecraft: Cassini Orbiter Instruments, RADAR". Cassini–Huygens Mission to Saturn & Titan. NASA, Jet
Propulsion Laboratory. Retrieved 2007-08-31.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/4995386/Giant-sand-worms-lived-in-Torbayscientists-claim.html
56