top of page
MollyCon 38
 Deception Point, Part 1


NOTE: “IF” is often called the biggest word in the English language, but its bigness depends on what it’s referring to. In this essay, Molly and I apply it to the Sagan Signal, and I start with the following:

“IF” my claim that the Sagan Signal is an alien encrypted Bible code is formally confirmed, it would be the most significant event in human history!

This bold (some would say ludicrous) statement needs an explanation, so consider:

  1. “If” the Sagan Signal is confirmed, it would prove that humans are not alone as the only intelligent species in the Universe.

  2. “If” the Sagan Signal is confirmed, it would prove that the God of the Bible is real.

The goal of this website is to organize and present the evidence in such a way that it gets it into the hands of experts for critical analysis. For the past fifteen years this is exactly what I’ve been doing, and a tentative verdict is in:

To date, not a single scientist or academic, religious or secular, has mounted a credible rebuttal to my discovery claim, while several, as hostile witnesses, have generated confirmative testimony.

In this conversation, Molly and I discuss Dan Brown’s 2001 novel: Deception Point, about the NASA discovery of an 8 ton meteorite buried in Artic ice that contained fossilized life from another world - conclusive proof that we are not alone.

It was Carl Sagan who famously stated that “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” As an object of intense scientific scrutiny, the meteorite in Deception Point is analogous to the Sagan Signal, and its exhaustive analysis exemplifies the confirmation process I’m currently engaged in. Following are a few excerpts that demonstrate what I mean:


“Two weeks ago, Ekstrom said, PODS passed over this ice shelf and spotted a density anomaly that looked nothing like anything we’d expected to see.”


“Ekstrom looked vaguely amused. “The stone weighs more than eight tons. It is embedded under two hundred feet of solid ice, meaning it has been there untouched for over three hundred years.”


“The object hanging before her was from another world, millions of miles away. And trapped within it was evidence – no, proof – that man was not alone in the universe.”




Don: Quantitatively and qualitatively, the Sagan Signal is physical evidence no different than the 8 ton meteorite in Deception Point.

Molly: I agree. There’s no smoke and mirrors, special pleadings, or evasiveness. There is unanimous agreement among secular and religious scholars that the Sagan Signal satisfies the Sagan Standard.

Don: Here’s a follow-up excerpt that makes your point:


“So, Ms. Sexton, is the professional skeptic convinced?”

“Stunned is more like it.”


Don: Rachel Sexton’s reaction is similar to what I get from most experts when they first look at the Sagan Signal. They go in thinking, not unreasonably, that the Sagan Signal is just another run-of-the-mill Bible code. But it doesn’t take long before the data jumps out at them as something that’s not supposed to be there, something that demands an explanation. So they do a double-take, then a triple-take, and then ask themselves: “How in the hell did this avoid detection?”

Molly: In Deception Point, the discovered meteorite set the stage for a formal confirmation process. Where does it begin?

Don: At the top, with Zachery Herney, the President of the United States:


“The magnitude of this find is well beyond anything NASA has ever announced. It will make landing men on the moon seem insignificant. Because everyone, myself included, has so much to gain – and lose – I thought it prudent for someone to double-check the NASA data before we step into the world spotlight with a formal announcement.”

“Rachel was startled. Certainly you can’t mean me, sir?”

“The President laughed. No, this is not your area of expertise. Besides, I’ve already achieved verification through extragovernmental channels.”

“Rachel’s relief gave way to a new mystification.

“Extragovernmental, sir? You mean you used the private sector? On something this classified?

“The President nodded with conviction. “I put together an external confirmation team – four civilian scientists – non-NASA personnel with big names and serious reputations to protect. They used their own equipment to make observations and come to their own conclusions. Over the past forty-eight hours, these civilian scientists have confirmed the NASA discovery beyond the shadow of a doubt.”

“Now Rachel was impressed. The President had protected himself with typical Herney aplomb. By hiring the ultimate team of skeptics – outsiders who had nothing to gain by confirming the NASA discovery – Herney had immunized himself against suspicions that this might be a desperate NASA ploy to justify its budget, reelect their NASA-friendly President, and ward off Senator Sexton’s attacks.”        


Molly: So tell me Don, what would do if you were President?

Don: I’d do the same thing President Herney did, get a double confirmation from two different schools of skeptics, which, in fact, I’ve already done, albeit on a much smaller scale.

Molly: Please explain.







Gerry Breshears  


Confirmation #1 - religion:

In 2007, Dr. Breshears, former president of the prestigious Evangelical Theological Society, accepted me as a student at Western Seminary, Portland, Oregon, with the understanding that the Sagan Signal would be formally investigated. In May, Gerry confirmed my claim that the Sagan Signal is an encrypted code, calling it “At the very least, a new hermeneutic.” I was awarded independent study status and participated in further research.

Unfortunately, at the end of the year, Gerry, without explanation, told me that I would not be allowed to write my master’s thesis on my discovery, effectively forcing me out of school. When I requested a copy of all research that went into his investigation, I was turned down. No announcement of discovery or request for further research was made. The entire project went dark.



SETI scientist Paul Shuch


Confirmation #2 - science:

After leaving seminary I contacted the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence (SETI), a science-based organization co-founded by Carl Sagan. I started with an email request to the CEO and received no response.

But I didn’t give up, I started emailing individual scientists working at SETI, with a polite request to investigate the data. I got through to about a dozen of them before I was cut off, but one scientist who I got through to was SETI pioneer, Dr. Paul Shuch. Paul looked at the evidence and saw enough merit in my claim that he connected me with anthropologist and senior SETI advisor, Kathryn Denning. (See Literary Convention tab).

Eliminating random coincidence and algorithmic manipulation as scientifically viable explanations, Kathryn suggested literary convention as a null hypothesis, which led me to Bible code skeptic, Jason Colavito. Jason conducted a deep study of Ancient Near Eastern literature searching for analogous sequences that might confirm Kathryn’s suspicion and debunk my thesis – and he didn’t find any! (See Literary Convention tab).

Molly: So what happened with SETI?

SETI: “We leave no stone unturned.”


Don: SETI, an organization that boasts that in the search for ET it will leave no stone unturned, found in the Sagan Signal the equivalent of an 8 ton meteorite - and it did nothing, at least not openly.

Although I can’t prove it, I have absolutely no doubt that SETI and NASA have tested the Sagan Signal in secret and confirmed that it is what I claim: irrefutable evidence that ETS exist and have visited Earth. Unfortunately, for nefarious reasons, SETI chose to do with my discovery what they did with Carl Sagan’s Direct Contact paper (Left tab on home page), and what Gerry Breshears did at Western Seminary – bury the research.


Molly: What did you do next?

Don: Getting stonewalled by Western Seminary and SETI was an adrenalin rush. Being denied research results was evidence that my claim was true. Knowing that I had discovered a legitimate code, I decided to contact a coding club and hope that they would openly test the data.

Molly: Were you successful?

Don: Oh yeah, I was more than successful!






Monkey Asses

 Don: I contacted the president of one of the world’s leading coding clubs and he emailed me back, that, while he felt my claim had merit, for my data to be investigated by club members I needed to become a member myself. He offered to accept me as a member if I agreed, which I did.

I didn’t (and still don’t) know the difference between an algorithm and a monkey’s ass, but there I was, an official member of one of the most elite coding clubs in the world!

That’s when the shit hit the fan. When the other members found out that a guy with a Bible code claim had been accepted as a member, they went ballistic! They demanded that the president withdraw my membership, which, to his credit, he refused to do as long as my claim remained standing. The members next threatened to take a vote among themselves to force me out, but the president, a profile in courage, still didn’t budge.

The coders saw that the sequences have all the necessary metrics of a code, so they knew that there had to be an algorithm. But to their dismay, they couldn’t find it – because there isn’t one! The code was encrypted by God!

Having gotten what I wanted, and not wanting to put the president in further jeopardy, I emailed the group and surrendered my membership, thanking all of them for their participation.

Molly: I see a pattern here. You sneak your Bible code claim into a reputable organization for investigation, and, when it’s over, you don’t get debunked and the research gets buried.

Don: Yeah, it’s getting old, but I’m not giving up. Somewhere there has to be an expert with the ability to conduct a serious investigation - and the courage to do it with full transparency.

Molly: There seems to be no shortage of ability, but a massive absence of courage.

Don: You got it. My latest success, featuring a well-known theologian, ended the same way.

Molly: Tell me.



S. Michael Houdmann

President & CEO of


Don:, a popular online Evangelical apologetic website, invites questions about the Bible from the public that, if accepted for investigation, will be answered within ten days. The question I submitted was: Is the Sagan Signal a real Bible code?

Much to my delight, Shea, the founder and CEO, accepted my question. It’s important to note that Shea’s organization has a stable of over a hundred biblical scholars and reputable academics on standby, ready to assist in any investigation.

After ten days and not hearing anything, I sent Shea the following email:


Dr. Houdmann:


On July 23rd, after submitting an inquiry to GotQuestions regarding the possible discovery of a Bible code, I was told that I would receive an answer within ten days. That time has come and gone and I have not received an answer.

Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I assume the reason for the delay in sending me an answer is because your investigation of the data is still active and on-going. I completely understand how an exhaustive investigation of the Sagan Signal could last longer than ten days, and I accept your failure to send me an answer in the time frame promised as evidence that my question is being taken seriously by you and your team. Please feel free to contact me if I can assist in any way.

While I don’t want to interfere with your investigation, I would like to check in occasionally to see how things are going. Would this be okay?

Thank you for your diligence and for your dedication to the Word of God. I look forward to your response.


Don Zygutis


Don: The next day, I received the following reply:


“Praise be to God! Jesus is the Lord! Thanks for asking a question.

So, what is this signal? Sagan claimed a few times that Jesus was an extraterrestrial. Mr Zyguits has taken it from there, in an effort to prove Sagan's claim. Zyguits says that there are 54 times where grain, wine, and oil are mentioned in the same sentence or short paragraph inside the Old Testament of the Bible. Sagan did not notice this; only Mr Zyguits. That is the only thing Zyguits has noticed. He can't explain the code in any way. That code is for aliens / alien communications according to him.

Are there any other reasons that grain, wine, and oil would be mentioned like this in the Old Testament?

We have grain, wine, and oil listed many times. What is the context of this saying; what does this mean? Well it speaks of the bounty of the earth from the land via agriculture. These three things all require some human action to tend the crops, and eventually the harvest arrives. So the statements can generally point to the bounty of the earth. This is a little different from livestock, which could be listed as "cows, sheep, and goats." There is no harvest of these but rather milk and wool and slaughtered meat and so forth.

Three things are listed. When a short list is given, people like for the list to have three things. And so the oil might have been left out, leaving grain and wine (food and drink). But we naturally like to see three things in such a list because then it is nicely complete.

Many idioms and coordinated triplets are used in English.

'My sister is looking for a tall, dark, and handsome man.'

For the sake of brevity, here are some familiar triples outside of a sentence: / Tom, Dick, and Harry / Good, bad, and ugly / Hook, line, and sinker / Signed, sealed, and delivered / Lock, stock, and barrel /

Well anyway, there is no code that can be seen here. There is also no difference between my made-up Warren Buffett example and the one Mr Zyguits proposes. So you can see there is nothing to this claim about the Sagan Signal.”


Don: For those familiar with this website, you know that Shea’s response, aside from misspelling my name, comes across as strange, to say the least. It’s as if Shea wasn’t aware of the Western Seminary investigation, or the Center for Inquiry investigation, both of which acknowledged that the Sagan Signal is a real code.

Making it sound like my advancing the code hypothesis is one-man show - rather than a 15 year effort involving hundreds of skeptics and academics, Shea conveniently ignores serious testimony submitted by serious scholars posted on my website. It is actually Shea who is the one-man show, failing to mention the names of the Bible scholars listed on his website who participated in his investigation.

So what in the hell is going on?

Unfortunately, I’ve received similar infantile responses from other academics - and they all served one purpose: to muddy the water enough to allow them to slither out of the catch-22 they found themselves in.

Most skeptics, after analyzing the data, simply ignore my request to engage, knowing that to do so would put them in a trap. But there are others, like Shea, who promise a response - and then find themselves backed into a corner. Yes, the tactic is shameful and cowardly, but it works, at least for a while.

My response to Shea’s facile answer?

 “Shea, thank you for giving me clear and convincing evidence that evangelical Christian scholars are more fearful of the Sagan Signal than atheists. Your dark answer makes the light of God’s Word that much brighter.”


Molly: Excuse my French, but the guy’s answer is pure bullshit! Your question said nothing about extraterrestrials. All you asked was if the Sagan Signal is a real Bible code, and what he sent you back was pure drivel!

Don: Right. Shea, after consulting his supporting staff, was unable to debunk my claim. How do I know this? Because after I submitted my question, my visitor analytics site lit up like a Christmas tree! The failure of Shea and his team to falsify my claim compelled him to resort to the age-old strategy of bait-and-switch, falsely claiming that my question was about something it’s not, about Jesus being an ET.

Molly: But after throwing out a smokescreen and totally distorting your claim, he does finally gets around to the sequences.

Don: He does, dismissing them as literary convention. But to prove literary convention, Shea would have had to produce identical or similar examples from the Bible or other Ancient Near Eastern literature. There are almost 2000 triadic sequences in the Old Testament and around 700 in the New Testament – but all he offered were a few common idioms from modern times, with no statistics of their rate of usage in any particular written text. It makes absolutely no sense.

Molly: Is this guy legitimate? He comes across as something of a quack.

Don: Shea has a bachelor’s degree in theology, a master’s degree in theology, and a doctor’s degree in theology – from Dallas Theological Seminary, rated by evangelicals as one of the leading research seminaries in the world – and, I’m somewhat embarrassed to say, the institution I was planning on attending before I got recruited to Western Seminary.


Molly: Okay, so why the lame answer? It makes him look like a moron, like he never looked at the Literary Convention tab on this website.

Don: He read it carefully, and all the other content, which is why it took him so long to respond. His answer reveals not only his fear, but his determination to wiggle his way out of an embarrassing episode with a minimum of damage to his reputation and ministry. Shea’s answer is essentially a mirror image of the way the atheistic Center for Inquiry responded after their investigation. When I finished reading it, I decided to rub it in by offering him a do-over.


Following is my return email:



July 31, 2023


Shea - Are you SURE you want this as your official reply? I would call it sophomoric, but that would be an insult to all sophomores. My website is directed to academics for critical investigation, and your response is the polar opposite. Keep in mind that I may use your reply in future essays - so let me give you a chance to do better. If you can respond to my primary evidence, the material on the left side of my website, and do so in a professional manner, I promise not to use your disastrous reply in a way that could seriously diminish your reputation and that of your ministry. Please pray about this.





Molly: So you gave him a chance for a do-over, and you never heard back.

Don: Shea, realizing I had him in a catch-22, had no way out. He accepted my question, with a promise to give me an answer. But when he and his team realized that the Sagan Signal is a real Bible code, they had a decision to make, to either tell the truth - or send me a non-serious answer filled with bald-faced lies. His specious “answer,” not unexpected, makes me more determined than ever to stay with the Sagan Project until the truth prevails, which it will.

Molly: I checked out his website. It’s filled with all kinds of grandiose allusions to truth-telling, honor, integrity, academic rigor, transparency, and faith in the Bible. How can the guy sleep at night?

Don: He’s not a stupid man, Shea knows the consequences of telling the truth would likely cost him his standing in the greater evangelical community and the subsequent loss of his ministry. Like Gerry Breshears and so many other “born-again” evangelical scholars I have engaged over the years, his “answer” makes it clear that he lacks the courage to speak truth to power.

Molly: Now that you’ve “outed” him, do you think he’ll respond?

Don: No, he’s buried his research and he’s on the run, praying like hell this whole episode blows away and everyone forgets it ever happened.

Molly: But that doesn’t keep people from going to his blog and asking questions.

Don: I suspect his blog has a filter. Such questions will never be posted.

Molly: So let me put you on the spot. Do you think Shea is working for Satan?

Don: Only Shea can answer that question. I’ll leave it there.



Don: Whether it’s the Center for Inquiry, SETI, Western Seminary, or, when it comes to the Sagan Signal, atheists and evangelicals have the same response: a frantic flight away from truth and transparency.


Molly: Don, I hate to tell you this, but you’re sounding like a whiner again.



Don: Sorry! You’re right as usual. The day when the Sagan Signal will have its time in the sun will come. I just need to be more patient.



A sampling of relevant quotes From Deception Point:


“Just tell them the truth. How hard is that?”  Ch. 32


“The public has a right to know.” Ch. 47


“The Law of Parsimony, she thought. Her NRO instructors had driven it into her subconscious. When multiple explanations exist, the simplest is usually correct.”  Ch. 42


“For years I have suspected proof was forthcoming,” the old man said. “I did not know how or when, but sooner or later we had to know for sure.” Ch. 76


Also, in the Introduction:

President Clinton


“If this discovery is confirmed, it will surely be one of the most stunning insights into our universe that science has ever uncovered. Its implications are as far-reaching and awe-inspiring as can be imagined. Even as it promises answers to some of our oldest questions, it poses even others even more fundamental.”

-President Bill Clinton, in a press conference following a discovery known as ALH84001 on August 7, 1996


Note: After further analysis, the above discovery claim was debunked.


Stuart Russell

Don: This highly recommended, well-written book by AI pioneer Stuart Russell is filled with cogent, thought-provoking insights into the New Reality that humans are surreptitiously being drawn into. Following are two excerpts:


“This book is about the past, present, and future of our attempt to understand and create intelligence.”

“. . . we must plan for the possibility that machines will far exceed the human capacity for decision making in the real world. What then?”

bottom of page