"When we come back we're going to find out if the inventors of this time capsule figured out a way to make it 19.5 magnitude, to fulfill the hyperdimensional model."
It was the right idea because he was obviously groping for a way to expose Hoagland's totally invalid ex post facto reasoning. It is perfectly true that the first-observed apparent magnitude of Elenin was 19.5. Hoagland sees that figure pop out at him, and that's good enough for him. "We're off to the races," as he put it during a previous radio show. It simply doesn't occur to him that there is no conceivable way that an ancient civilization, sending this "time capsule" on its way 13,000 years ago, could have contrived for it to have that magnitude when first observed. They would have had no idea what our telescopes would be capable of in the year 2010, no idea how we would measure magnitude, nor whether anyone would happen to be looking in the right place in the sky at the precise moment that the magnitude had that value.
Unfortuntely, Rob Simone didn't follow up after the break. He went off on another tack, asking whether anything was actually left of Elenin after the CME zapped it in September (Good question.) Neither did he pick up another spectacular example of post facto, much later in the show. Hoagland announced, as he also did during the Awake and Aware drivel-athon, that "Occupy Wall Street" had its beginnings on September 17th, when Elenin's position was 19.5° from the Earth-Sun radius (he didn't say how he measured that.) Then he added, "exactly in accordance with the model." But that's completely unacceptable rhetoric because the so-called model never made any such prediction.
The True Believers, the Branch Hoaglandians, are up in arms on Facebook today because they think Rob Simone dissed their idol. "He talked over Richard and never answered Richard's question," was a typical complaint. The truth is the exact converse. Hoagland interrupted Simone's questions at 20:30 and 26:30, talking over him loudly as he did with Robert Zubrin in May 2010. It's his way of dealing with anyone who isn't going to worship his theories.
I heard the show as it went on the air, and I reviewed it again on Youtube in the not-so-cold light of day. To my ears, Hoagland came off like a raving, crazy, loony who's been hearing voices in his head and is trying to explain what they're saying because he's sure the message will save the world from destruction. Much of his material last night really did have the messianic touch to it.
So what about this "time capsule" Hoagland claims Elenin actually is? It's never going to come any closer to us than it did yesterday, and there was no sign of a message. Hoagland, typically, hedged his bets on that. Here he was on FB early yesterday:
I think Elenin will NOT create any "space spectaculars"; that's not how "consciousness raising" works ....
The "student" has to REACH for truth and insight ... by, like, figuring out the OVERWHELMING "hyperdimensional message" of Elenin's simple appearance ... as it INVISIBLY complete's[sic] its "Hyperdimensional Mission ...."
Overwhelming, eh Richard? Pardon my laughter.
Any attempt to pin him down will certainly fail, and I give Rob Simone credit for even trying. The one concrete statement Hoagland has made, to my knowledge, on the "message of Elenin," is that the message is 19.5.
In other words, the magnitude is the message. How unbelievably lame.
Update:
Hoagland posted this at 16:30 PDT Oct. 17th:
George Noory may have me back on this week, to "make up" for the overt "rudeness" of his guest-host last night.
Wouldn't it be more appropriate to NOT have him on, as payback for his rudeness?
13 comments:
I loved the bit with the Gregorian calendar. Apparently Hoagland believes that our entire western system of keeping track of time and dates was designed to coincide with this comet. Simone wasn't buying it of course, even when Hoagland tried to bring the Vatican into the story.
I think the problem for Hoagland was that Simone has as big an ego as he does. Since he was hosting, he was under the impression that it was (for the night) his show. Hoagland never sees it that way. To him, the host is merely a prop in his performance. Simone didn't want to play that role, so Hoagland came off the worst for it.
One more thing. Given the (surprisingly) negative reaction Hoagland got on his own page last night, I'd say there are more than a few of his (former?) fans who'd agree with your last line. Variations of the phrase "That's it?" were in abundance before Hoagland started attacking and deleting people. His responses got down right petty and personal. So he was not in the best of moods to begin with in that interview.
Chris: Yes, I agree with your assessment of Rob Simone. I guess the Vatican stuff was what the Hoag-disciple was complaining about when she wrote "He didn't answer Richard's question."
I don't think a radio show host is under any obligation to answer a guest's question. Hoagland does have this schoolmasterly habit of checking whether someone is following him by asking questions. If I were interviewing him I wouldn't stand for it.
"Wouldn't it be more appropriate to NOT have him on, as payback for his rudeness? "
In a fair and just Universe, yes that would be the way to go. Unfortunately we are talking about C2C here. If they see an advantage to bringing him back this week they will.
It could be a matter of how good he is at generating an audience, or how sick Noory might be of this whole subject. Noory might also not want to set a precedent of letting the guest dictate the choice or actions of the host. Depending on what's more important to C2C, it could go either way.
Do any of yous want to go to a 4 hour lecture where an idiot says 19.5 degrees over and over??
BU,
Some of us caught the 3 1/2 hour version, and that was a bit of a chore. I had to do it in sections myself, as more than an hour or so at a time would have been too much. I can't imagine the pain the audience had to be in, having to sit through it all at once.
I have no opinion of Rob Simone. Never even heard of him. I do however have an opinion of Hoaxland. He apparently doesn't take kindly to people with real academic qualifications. Unless of course he can ride on your coat-tails and name drop like a bastard.
Well he banned me as well. Don't ever question mr Hoaxlands "stunninly impeccable" pseudomaths.
Binary,
As Expat has shown (time and time again), math (along with science and logic) isn't Hoagland's best subject. If you were as incompetent as Hoagland appears to be in those subjects, you'd be real defensive too. In fact, you'd be scared to death of anyone on your page who demonstrated even a high school level of knowledge of them. The illusion of expertise is very difficult to maintain (and that's all he has) under such circumstances.
For those following at home, Hoagland's new thing is that the capture/death of Qaddafi is a comet inspired HD event. Apparently the comet is now at 90 degrees to the Earth/Sun line (I have no idea what that is supposed to mean) and that is some kind of magical HD thing. Every world event is just a plot point in his narrative. It's really all about him. :)
Chris, he just means that the time capsule (ha-ha) is approximately crossing the tangent to Earth's orbit. It would of course have been possible to assign an exact date and time to that event, but he cunningly allowed himself 2 days' slop.
He wrote that the HD significance of this event was even stronger than the closest approach time. In which case, one has to ask, why did he place such emphasis on the close approach during the Leeds and Irvine drivel-athons, and fail to even mention this right-angle magic?
"In which case, one has to ask, why did he place such emphasis on the close approach during the Leeds and Irvine drivel-athons, and fail to even mention this right-angle magic?"
Obviously, he hadn't made it up yet. To keep the sales of the Irvine presentation going, he had to keep the comet in play. Once the prior magic dates came and went (with the negative reaction when nothing "wonderful" happened), he had to come up with an alternative. So now it's the 90 degrees date. Since Qaddafi (who was never important to Hoagland's narrative up until now) was kind enough to die on this day, perhaps he'll let Elenin disappear.
BTW, does anyone know where Hoagland ever mentioned the magic of 90 degress before, and if he explained why it would be important?
Re: Rob Simone. I love his voice, actually. But other than that, and other than NOT caving to Richard talking over him, he does as much harm as George or George do on C2C. The first show he hosted had the Bosnian Pyramid guy on in the first hour, and since then he's done shows on Planet X's supposed connection with 2012, an interview with JZ Knight (which was at least semi-incredulous), astrology, and spirit communications. He also helped lodge several lawsuits against the government demanding disclosure of UFOs.
astroguy,
It's clear that Simone is a "believer" of sorts. In a way, that's what makes his interview with Hoagland so interesting. He wants to believe, but Hoagland provided him with holes in logic to big to ignore. It's the price Hoagland pays for being such a control freak on his FB page. When you are only preaching to the choir, the flaws in your sermon go unnoticed and uncorrected.
Post a Comment