Today I sent the following message to Richard Hoagland:
If you seek to show that huge pyramids amplify "torsion waves," you must have a minimum of three experimental sites as follows:
- Unaffected by the Venus transit, as a control
- In the path of the transit, but remote from the pyramid
- At the pyramid
You should also provide a baseline recording captured a week before the transit, and you should make a specific prediction about what the three sites will sense.
If you do anything less than this, your results are junk science.
I would add that much the same applies to today's annular eclipse. If anyone is to take Hoagland's "experiment" seriously, we need at a minimum a) A specific prediction, b) A baseline, and c) A control.
I very much doubt we'll get any of that. More likely it'll be the usual "Oh look, squiggles on a laptop screen. If I fake the timings a bit I can make those synchronize with the eclipse/transit/whatever."
Note to anyone new to this blog: We're talking about some childish "experiments" Richard Hoagland has done in the past involving 1960s wristwatch technology, and says he'll repeat today and at the Venus transit. For more info, refer first to this post.
Update:Meanwhile, Hoagland's former co-author, college drop-out Mike Bara, is at Mt. Shasta giving some kind of a speech to some New Age loonies who've been suckered into paying to hear him. In Facebookistan, Mike writes:
"Today, both before, during and after the eclipse, your thoughts prayers, dreams and intent have a special power. The closer you are to Shasta itself, the more amplfied[sic] this effect. Use this power wisely. "
I don't think it will do any good to ask Mike to cite a reference for that unusual information. We've basically heard all his insults already, some many times. And that's all I think an inquiry would elicit.
Reminder: In his dreadful book The Choice, Mike wrote that an annular eclipse occurs when the Moon is unusually close to Earth. That's how much of an authority he is on the question.