Thursday, April 21, 2011

Ceci n'est pas une blogpost

        Last night on Coast-to-Coast AM, Richard Hoagland made reference to me specifically as one of his principal critics. Although this would ordinarily be a fine topic (or excuse) for a blogpost, if I responded we would very quickly descend into the topic of patent law. I think we may all agree that would be BORING. So I'll spare you, chers lecteurs.

        You can listen, if you must, here (04-20-11, hour 3, at 25:15). Take delight in Hoagland's many errors, as when he states that the launch of STS-134 was deliberately postponed to clash with the Royal Wedding (at 8:47pm London time?????)

23 comments:

Chris Lopes said...

My guess at 8:47pm London time William and his bride won't be engaging in anything they'd want to share with the public anyway. ;)

Chris Lopes said...

After some quick research, I've discovered the Royals are schedule to exchange vows at 11am (London time), with the last scheduled event being a family dinner at 7pm. So the wedding and all the TV coverage that goes with it should be over long before the launch. So if you want to catch both (nope, not me) you can. :)

Chris Lopes said...

Here is the latest Hoaglandism. Apparently, Pink Floyd can be added to the ( agonizingly long) list of people and organizations trying to "send us a message".
-------------------------------
Juan Manuel Leiro
wait a minute...pink floyd, the dark side of the moon, there is a prism in the cover , year 1973... hmmmm, what knew that guys in that year
12 hours ago · Like ·

Darren Reeve likes this.
Richard C. Hoagland
Juan,

Yes, you're on to something .... :)

There is a ton of other "cultural" evidence that what NASA REALLY found on the Moon was, later, carefully and quietly "seeded" into the general culture ... as "fiction" and "art."

Good eye. :)
7 hours ago · Like
Richard C. Hoagland
Actually, it makes PERFECT sense:

If the REAL data ever "leaked" -- it could THEN be casually dismissed as "merely science fiction" ... or "pot smoking musicians" ... or "far-out art." :)

They thought they'd covered ALL the bases.

They just forgot the Physics (!) -- which is "turning up" ALL folks consciousness and awareness these days.

Just look around .... :)
6 hours ago · Like · 1 person
Juan Manuel Leiro just look their album covers...there is a clear message, always
6 hours ago · Like
Juan Manuel Leiro yeahhhhh, diferent messages...think with your head , please
6 hours ago · Like
Richard C. Hoagland
David,

From your last post, I'm assuming that you are NOT aware that we have now found (and published) literally DOZENS of examples of real, prismatic "rainbows on the Moon!"

They are THE most convincing evidence of the "ancient, glass-like lunar domes"--

Seens at brilliant "rainbow STREAKS" against the background lunar sky ... in DOZENS of Apollo surface images!

That's the "inside information," appearing on THIS album cover, I believe Juan was alluding to in his original post.

Just the other day, in a conversation with an intel agent (a long-time source ...), he was "thinking out loud" ....

About--

"The curious symbolism of the 'Darkside of the Moon' album ....

Just sayin'. :)
-----------------------------------
If he really believes this crap, he's nuts. Just sayin'. :)

Biological_Unit said...

Seens at brilliant "rainbow STREAKS" against the background lunar sky ... in DOZENS of Apollo surface images!

Scotchlite Screen.

As seen on Movie Sets. Where important things are hoaxed.

Chris Lopes said...

BU, your explanation is at least as plausible as Hoagland's. :)

Biological_Unit said...

My comment about this was deleted on Facebook. It ruins his story - it can't be seen by Hoagies, evar!

expat said...

It's news to me that there are DOZENS of examples of "prismatic rainbows" in lunar photography. I challenge Hoagland to cite more than two.

This is what he calls his favorite -- follow the line of the core tube in Schmitt's hand up into the sky to see a faint red streak.

It's not a prismatic rainbow. It's a neg scratch that didn't go through all three color layers.

D'oh!!!!

Chris Lopes said...

Expat, what I found interesting wasn't the truth of the assertion (there are a number of more plausible explanations besides "giant glass domes on the Moon"), but the fact that Hoagland was willing to entertain the idea that an album cover was yet more "stunning confirmation" he was right. If he was really as sure as he claimed that such things exist, he wouldn't need to go there. He'd have simply told the poster that sometimes an album cover is just an album cover.

This infantile need to connect everything in the news, on television, and now in the record stores to his "theories" just shows how fragile the whole thing is. No rational person would have to make the kind of connections Hoagland is forced to make, on a daily basis no less. He's over compensating for the fact that he has no real evidence of anything, and he knows it. The desperation of the thing is what makes it so funny. :)

Biological_Unit said...

The "Scratch" is lined up with the direction of the Light Source shadow.

Chris Lopes said...

I always thought it was a hairline crack on the surface of the camera lens.

Biological_Unit said...

Not visible on other pictures?

I'll buy a Steak dinner for all yous when we "return" (yeah right) to the Moon with Men.

Esteban Navarro said...

Just say hello

Esteban Navarro said...

Just greetings from Madrid, Spain.
Thank you expat. I´m trying to draw that Hoagland Dóh , sorry for my trashy english.

expat said...

>>Not visible on other pictures?<<

Here's a list of everything on that magazine. Help yourself.

Biological_Unit said...

When there's talk of humans going back there, I'll look at them closely. There are no manned missions in any stage of planning.

Chris Lopes said...

BU, while NASA might not be talking about going back to the Moon, plenty of other people (like the Chinese) are. Google is even offering a prize for such an effort. Granted, they are only talking about putting machines there at the moment, but clearly that's a prelude to sending people.

The problem is that putting people on the Moon is (at the moment) a VERY expensive proposition. The only reason it happened the first time around is because of the enormous geopolitical and ideological struggle it was a part of. Going there was a demonstration of the technological superiority of one system over another. Once that point was made, the will to continue with the expense faded. It's really as simple as that.

Esteban Navarro said...

My name is Esteban Navarro.I´m a professor of arts and visual techniques in secondary education here in Madrid. I did a job on this 7-minute video on YouTube one year ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v = QnyEN8cymkE
I realised the horrendous errors which contained about decomposition of the light color and clearly fraudulent "evidences" (treated with infographic texturing and colored filters of the official photos at high compression.) Phil Plait's blog and yours gave me a great help. I simply felt like I owed you this cartoon ....

http://estebannavarrogalan.blogspot.com/2011/04/hoagland.html

Thanks and greetings from Madrid.I do not know the address of your E-Mail, so I leave the link to my cartoon blog.

Chris Lopes said...

Esteban,
That was very cool. :)

expat said...

Esteban: La caricatura es muy buena. Gracias.

Biological_Unit said...

It's odd that New Manned Missions are having to do so FROM SCRATCH!

expat said...

Isn't that a bit like finding it odd that 2011 automobile designers aren't making more use of the design of the Model T?

Biological_Unit said...

Oh right, the whole controversy is all about saving a few bucks.

Chris Lopes said...

Apparently the flight was postponed once again due to technical issues. Does that mean Obama is no longer at war with England, or did the British manage a counter attack? :)