Monday, December 11, 2017

Billy Carson displays his ignorance for us all

        I'd never heard of Billy Carson before he swanned onto Coast to Coast AM last Saturday night to be interviewed by Richard Syrett. Having listened through the two hours, I'll be quite pleased if I never hear of him again, and my teeth are sore from gnashing.

        Carson runs a web site called 4bidden knowledge, which markets trivia like urban survival kits. He seems to have recently completed a video documentary series for Gaia TV about the so-called "Secret Space Program." He claims detailed technical knowledge of space technology, but since his show features some of the usual suspects of pseudo-knowledge like Mike Bara, Linda Moulton Howe and Erich Von Danikin, I don't think it was facts he had in mind when he threw the show together. Sensationalism, more like.

Anti-gravity, and other myths
        Like all the other theorists of "Secret space programs," Carson maintains that the publicly-announced space missions of NASA and all the commercial companies such as Space-X are mere "window dressing" stunts diverting our attention from what's really going on. He says that hot technologies such as anti-gravitics and zero-point energy were mastered long ago by US aerospace, and have been used for deep space missions including manned journeys to Mars. He even alluded to a Reagan-era program which took 300 people en masse into space on one of those thingies. Richard Syrett—bless him—enquired why nobody noticed such a huge expedition at the time, and Carson suggested that "cloaking" was the answer. Damn clever, these pseudo-space-technologists—they think of everything in their quest to create the perfect unfalsifiable propostion, don't they? To them, it's quite good enough for the likes of Linda Moulton Howe to merely assert that such things have happened, and it automatically becomes true. "Evidence? Of course there's no evidence. Are you daft? The whole point is it's SECRET."note 1

        So what would an anti-gravity space mission be like? There would be no earth-shaking roar as mighty rocket engines come to life, no majestic rising of a rocket on a plume of smoke. Instead, somebody would throw a switch and the spacecraft would simply lose weight. They never say what energy source would achieve this little miracle, it just IS. So then the spacecraft would be free to rise vertically using virtually no propulsion at all—a squirt of monomethylhydrazine should do the job— until it was out of the atmosphere. It would not actually be in orbit—there would be no need for that. Initially, it would hover directly over its launch site, because relative to the planet beneath it, it would still have whatever tangential velocity the Earth's surface has at the launch site latitude.note 2 But over time it would slowly drift westward, as micro-drag reduced its horizontal speed. As a matter of fact, there's no particular reason to take a weightless spacecraft out of the atmosphere at all—all the benefits of zero-g could be had in the stratosphere, or even just staying on the ground.

        You could keep going upwards, of course, but in that case your lovely anti-gravity technology is a rapidly declining asset. The force of gravity is inversely proportional to the  square of your distance from the center of the planet. By the time you reach the orbit of the ISS it's already declined by 10%, and at geosynchronous altitude, where the comsats are, it's 0.023g, so you're not getting much benefit from switching it off, are you?

        But anyway, the time comes to set off for the Moon or Mars. Here's where you're really going to need some oomph, because even though your spacecraft has no weight, it still has mass, and you'll need to accelerate that mass in some major way if your journey time is going to be anywhere near reasonable. Zero-point energy, perhaps? Nope, that won't work. Zero-point energy does exist, as a concept in physics, but it cannot be used to do useful work. The proof involves mathematics that Mike Bara and Linda Moulton Howe are unlikely to understand.


       So it looks like you're stuck with the "outdated" and merely "window-dressing" technologies of rocketry. Awwww, what a shame.

        By the way, at some point you're going to want to turn your anti-grav gismo OFF, since the gravity of the planet or moon you're approaching is helpful. Then ON again as you come in for a landing. It gets quite complicated.

Ken Johnston gets another five minutes of fame
        To illustrate the tired old theme of NASA's deceptions, Carson told the story of Ken Johnston's photo collection. He explained that Ken was an astronaut candidate and a US Air Force officer who ended up working for a NASA contractor in Houston. He had in his posession a unique collection of Apollo photo-prints, and when he was ordered to shred them, he made copies first. Behold, Johnston's versions show things that the NASA official release prints do not—alien cities and geometrical craters, for example.

        The problem with that narrative is that it's NOT TRUE. Ken was never an astronaut candidate—he applied for the 1977 astronaut selection but was summarily rejected on grounds that his academic qualifications were inadequate.note 3 He was never in the US Air Force—he enlisted in the US Marines in August 1962 and reported to Pensacola for flight training in September 1964. He left the Marines two years later without ever qualifying as a pilot. James Oberg has documented this in meticulous detail. During Apollo, Johnston worked for Brown & Root, which had the contract to manage the Lunar Receiving Laboratory and curate the collection of moon rocks. There was nothing unique about the Apollo photo-sets he had, and he didn't make copies but simply took one set home. Johnston himself never claimed that his photos showed evidence of alien cities on the Moon or geometric craters.note 4 It was only when, in 1995, he showed them to Richard Hoagland, that the rumor got started. By that time they had been in Johnston's ring binders for 23 years. I can guarantee that if you held one of Johnston's prints in your left hand and a NASA release of the same picture in your right hand you would see no difference. It was only when Hoagland scanned them and slammed the brightness way up that artifacts appeared. How do I know this? Hoagland himself said it; or rather wrote it.
"In scanning Ken's priceless Apollo 14 C-prints, [I'd] discovered that the computer could "see" what the human eye could not—incredible geometric detail in the pitch black areas, like the lunar sky. The sensitivity of modern CCD imaging technology, in even commercially-available image scanners, coupled with the amazing enhancement capabilities of state-of-the-art commercial software — like Adobe's Photoshop—allowed the invisible detail buried in these supposedly black layers, of these thirty-year-old emulsions, to ultimately be revealed—a "democratization" of technology that no censor at NASA could have possibly foreseen over more than thirty years." --Dark Mission, 2nd edn p. 226 (emph. added)note 5

        There you have it—Hoagland is admitting that something was added in the scanning process. In my opinion, what was added was contamination on his scanner glass. Here's the NASA release of image AS10-32-4820, showing crater Triesnecker in Sinus Medii:

credit: NASA/LPI

Now here's Hoagland's version:


        Look closely and you can see what looks like a stray beard hair in there. An honest researcher would never increase the brightness to that extent, since it guarantees that any imperfection on the scanner glass or the photo-print itself will show up in the perfect black of the lunar sky.

Billy Carson lies about the Apollo 1 tragedy
        On the subject of Ken Johnston, Billy Carson was merely wrong. When the subject got around to the Apollo 1 fire that killed Gus Grissom, Ed White and Roger Chaffee, my teeth got their major gnashing and my bedside radio was in danger of being hurled violently against the wall. Carson went beyond wrong into utterly dishonest calumny, alleging that mission controllers knew there was a fire in the spacecraft but did nothing to save the crew, instead callously allowing them to burn alive. What can be said about a man who makes such a vile accusation with no evidence at all? At a minimum, I would say that he does not deserve any public recognition at all, and certainly not two hours on a radio show with millions of regular listeners.

        Carson added that "Betty Grissom could never get any answers out of NASA," and that's not true either. Betty Grissom sued NASA for negligence, and she got her answers although she never considered the $350,000 settlement adequate. For obvious reasons, NASA tore the remains of that spacecraft apart and undertook a meticulous post-mortem analysis. The verdict was an oxygen fire caused by sparking from worn electrical cables.

        Carson added that "the spacecraft is hidden away under tight security." Well, what does he expect? Guided tours for elementary school kiddies?note 6

Not for me, no thanks
        I'm not going to watch Carson's documentary series Deep Space. Created as it was by a man with such a slender contact with the truth, and such a nauseating habit of making vile accusations against the true heroes of our space history, what could it possibly teach me?


========================/ \==========================
[1] That's not a verbatim quote from Carson or anyone else. Just my mockery.  :-)

[2] 1471.5 km/hr eastward at Cape Canaveral.

[3] It was then that Ken obtained a mail-order Ph.D. in metaphysics from the Reform Baptist Theological Seminary in Denver, Colorado, and began using the title "Dr. Johnston".

[4] Interviewed by Kerry Cassidy in February 2016, Ken said "A lot of these anomalies that people will see -- I don't necessarily see them, 'cause I'm pretty much a straightforward engineer .. We know that if we stare at the wall long enough we can make all kinds of pictures."

[5] In August 2015, on his radio show The Other Side of Midnight, Hoagland totally contradicted himself. Answering a challenge from astronomer Stuart Robbins Ph.D., on this very topic, he said "You don't have to scan. I can't show you an analog print because you're not in the same room. So I have to scan it and put it on the web. But the originals show what we're showing."

[6] As a matter of fact, in January this year, on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the tragedy, the hatch of Apollo 1 was put on public display alongside artifacts from the Challenger and Columbia disasters.

Friday, December 1, 2017

Name-calling as a substitute for commentary

        Reacting to the summary dismissal of NBC host Matt Lauer, Mike Bara tweeted on Wednesday:
"Wow what a great morning it is to wake up to the fall of another pious Libtard media icon."
        A day later, his twitter account was suspended, although we cannot know if that particular message was what found disfavor. Pious? Libtard? I'm not a regular audience for the Today show but Matt Lauer strikes me as a talented television host with nothing in his résumé to indicate either piety or inappropriate political opinion. It's perhaps noteworthy that some sources accused him of powder-puffing presidential candidate Trump during a September 2016 interview. So I conclude that Bara's choice of words is just juvenile name-calling. Bara himself, remember, is not innocent of physical contact with random women.


Bara expresses his appreciation of actress Shana Eva at the Conscious Life Expo 2013



At the launch party for Bara's book "The Choice"


With Maureen Elsberry. A new meaning for "Contact in the Desert"?

       It certainly has been an astonishing series of revelations, the current spate of sexual misconduct accusations, from Harvey Weinstein to Geraldo Rivera. In the new atmosphere, powerful men in entertainment, sports and government are going to have to keep their hands off the women. I make no excuses at all for boorish behavior, but my other comment is that it's also going to be a hard time for women in those fields who actually want recreational sex with alpha males.

Update:
        Yesterday morning Bara posted a picture of Al Franken along with the line "Bye bye you piece if shit." When he doesn't have an editor to correct his copy, his spelling and grammar are both tragic.

Friday, November 17, 2017

Which is it, Robert Morningstar?

 James Concannon writes...  

       The civilian intelligence analyst who is wrong about almost everything seems now to have arrived at a final version of his article about the Las Vegas massacre of 1st October. The piece is titled LAS VEGAS VIDEO IMAGES AND SOUNDS PROVE MULTIPLE GUNMEN COMMITTED LAS VEGAS MASSACRE, and his serial amendments have served only to confuse the issue.


        Morningstar writes "I’ve corellated [sic] the videos linked below with this external photos [sic] of the hotel to triangulate the postion of the 2nd Mandalay Bay Hotel shooter who fired from a low platform atop the green roof porch shown above." (emph. added) The videos referred are the taxi driver's video and the video from the hotel across the street (that would have to be the Desert Oasis Motel, a crappy one-storey building.)

        My comments about that are, first, that at no time did the taxi driver have a view of that platform. As she approached the drop-off from the north she could see the sloping green canopy edge but not the gray platform AM* wants for a gun position. My second comment is that the Motel video is useless—the flashes seen on it are from around the tenth floor, and there are no broken windows at that level. I also note, as I have previously, that triangulation is not what the intelligence analyst did. But anyway, that's a clear statement of where he thinks a second gunman was.

        He continues "The Las Vegas Taxi Driver’s Video caught a shooter firing from the lower floor of the Mandalay Bay from a very close vantage point, i.e., pulling out of the Mandalay’s Drive-Though entrance." That would have to be something like this frame, at 04:59:



Here's an approximate daylight version of that view from Streetview:



        Again, the absence of broken windows absolutely rules out gunfire from any floor of the hotel except Paddock's suite on the 32nd.

        He continues "By comparing frames and correlating the driver's position and the camera angle to the shooter's position (indicated by the gun flash) in that frame, and using a triangular section of the unique roof (poviding two 90 degree angles for precise referencing,  I was able to calculate the shooter’s position to be outside the hotel and shooting from a balcony that covers the drive-through entrance of the hotel."

        Once again, the taxi driver had no view of that balcony area at any time. At the moment when she pulled out of the covered area, such a view was doubly impossible since the roof area was above and behind her (see image above.) I've looked at that section of the video multiple times and I do not see a gun flash, and neither do I see two 90° angles. It's my belief that the shooting had stopped by that time anyway. No used shell casings have been found anywhere on that balcony or rooftop.

         So Morningstar has offered us four gunnery positions, all of which are impossible:
  1. The balcony
  2. The 10th (ish) floor
  3. A lower floor
  4. A platform on the canopy roof.
WRONG AGAIN, frisbee genius.

Friday, November 10, 2017

Scott Kelly nails it

       Scott Kelly writes that, when his phone rang and it was Steve Lindsey, Chief of NASA's Astronaut Office, offering him command of a long-duration mission in the ISS, he was actually having dinner with his sister-in-law Gabrielle Giffords in Washington D.C. He also writes that his first reaction was to turn it down."Honestly, I'd rather fly as a shuttle commander again," he replied. But then he writes "I also knew I would take any flight assignment I was given." He eventually accepted, even though he'd just been diagnosed with high PSA and there were unmistakable fault lines in his marriage.

        The PSA reading turned into full prostate cancer, and Kelly underwent surgery in November 2007. Just three months later he officially separated from his wife, Leslie Yandell, and started multi-lingual training.  On the flight that followed, he was in space from 9 October 2010 until 16 March 2011, serving as Commander from November on. A year later, the phone rang again and the question was "Would you rather be promoted to Chief of the Astronaut Office or go back to ISS for a full year?" Kelly opted for the Astronaut Office, but was assigned the year-long mission anyway. He retired in April 2016 having clocked an aggregate 520 days in space over five missions.

        Those are just a couple of highlights from Endurance—a national best-seller published last month and written by Kelly. As a space junkie, I have a full library of astronaut memoir books and I can honestly say that this is probably the best of the bunch. The book may lack the heart-stopping drama of a lunar landing, but it more than makes up for it with its intricate detail both human and technical. Kelly writes of the exhilaration of spaceflight, and the pride ISS crews take in the science they are able to accomplish, but he does not hold back (at least, doesn't seem to) on the pesky annoyances of life up there.

        A case in point: Long-duration spaceflight put an end to the Apollo-era technology of lithium hydroxide canisters for removal of carbon dioxide from spacecraft atmospheres. A six-month mission would use hundreds of the bulky cartridges and the storage space just isn't available. So the ISS has a high-tech system called Seedranote 1, and it seems to be the bane of Kelly's life in space. He writes that he can check the CO2 level any time he likes on a computer readout "...but I don't need to—I can feel it. I can sense the levels with a high degree of accuracy based only on the symptoms I've come to know so well: headaches, congestion, burning eyes, irritability." He points out that the US Navy Submarine Service doesn't allow CO2 to get any worse than 2mmHg partial pressure, but the ISS considers 6mm acceptable. Add to that annoyance that the Seedra machine keeps breaking down and is a bitch to repair, and you have the recipe for a lot of pissed-off astronauts.

Scott Kelly and Terry Virts repairing one of the Seedras, from p.88 of the hardcover edition

        Kelly tries to be a boy scout and not complain, but he does wonder if Houston really understands how totally exhausted an astronaut can become after a spacewalk, and he speculates that some training tasks are deliberately set up to be impossible, just to see how the trainees react.

No errors, comrades
        Speaking of complaints, he reveals an interesting difference between astronauts and cosmonauts. As a NASA astronaut, Kelly's base pay was generous and his per diem minimal—actually just $5. For the cosmonauts, it's the other way around—the majority of their remuneration is in per diems, which can be reduced if they are found guilty of "errors." Kelly surmises that complaints can be viewed as errors, and that explains why, when Moscow mission control asks how things are going, the answer is always v'syoh prekrasno (everything's fine) even when it patently is not.

        Kelly reports that relations between the American and Russian crews were always very cordial. During the working day they mostly stuck to their own areas of the huge space station, but they would get together for some meals, particularly on Friday evenings. Exchanges of food were commonplace, as were more important items like tools or replacement hardware. Informal exchanges, however, did not suit the bean counters on the ground, who were charged with adhering to the terms of formal international agreements. Their rules meant that every exchange, be it equipment, water, computer software, even urine—yes, urine, for urine is a resource on the ISS—has to be accounted for, placed on a balance sheet and eventually compensated in cash. Kelly tells the story of one time when the Russian crew offered him some unused space on a Progress module that was due to be detached and sent to burn up in the atmosphere. Kelly gladly got rid of several kilos of trash. The time came when the bean counters discovered the discrepancy in the trash inventory and asked Kelly to explain it. "I guess the trash fairy came in the night" was his wry reply.

Kelly with cosmonaut Mikhail Kornienko

        Scott Kelly is an authentic American hero, because he overcame early learning disabilities, and other setbacks, to become one of the most skilled aviators and spacefarers of his generation. His book is a gift to all of us.

Endurance: A Year in Space, A Lifetime of Discovery by Scott Kelly with Margaret Lazarus Dean. Knopf, October 2017. ISBN 978-1524731595 (hard cover)

=========================/ \========================

[1] Seedra is just a pronounceable form of the acronym CDRA, Carbon Dioxide Removal Assembly

Monday, October 16, 2017

Hoagland's radio show goes from bad to worse to FAIL

Back story: In July 2015 Richard Hoagland, the former museum curator who hasn't had a job since the 1970s, launched a two hour, five-nights-a-week radio show The Other Side of Midnight, live on  Dark Matter Digital Network, and archived for members only. This blog commented several times as he first lost his best producer, Ross Campbell, then got kicked off DMDN, went to KCAA-AM for a while and thence to the cheaper WBCQ ($50/hr cf. $150.) In October 2016 the show folded.

        It was back in June this year, on a reduced "weekend only" schedule. In July the membership fee was doubled from $5 to $10 per month. From 15 July until 8 oct there should have been 26 shows, but seven of them were cancelled for various reasons, mostly technical issues. It became obvious that Hoagland was no longer paying a professional engineer.

        A week ago the announcement was made that Hoagland was abandoning the radio medium and falling back on the oh-so-cheap ($99/month) BlogTalk Radio. The announced show for Saturday night 14th October was Barbara Honegger: Historic 9/11 breakthroughs. NB: BlogTalkRadio is supposedly foolproof.

        What follows is a verbatim transcript of the train-wreck that ensued. The "Keith" referred to is not Keith Rowland of DMDN, the original tech. manager of the show,note 1; but Keith Laney, an imaging expert who had guested on the show numerous times. Laney has no known experience at managing radio or even podcasting.

[JAZZ MUSIC TRACK]
00:05 BH: "I'm hearing music."
RCH: "Yes, yes, you and I should not be going out over the air."
00:20 RCH: "Keith can you hear me?" [MUSIC VOLUME INCREASES]
[..?..] Can you call Keith and tell him..?? I need Skype
00:58 RCH: "OK, well, that's good. ?..?...you should hear it.
01:09 RCH: "OK, Barbara, what are you hearing?
BH: "I keep hearing music."
RCH: "No, I mean, when I called on you, you said you could not hear. What could you not hear?"
BH: "You mean when we were on the air?"
RCH: "Yes, yes, what could you not hear?
BH: "No, I can hear everything but there is a delay. When I spoke..."
RCH: "Ohhh it's..it's...it's a delay. Keith... You.. you're cutting out horribly, I can't hear you.
01:40 BH: "You talking to me?"
RCH: "I'm talking to Keith. My engineer. My temporary engineer. [LOUD THROAT-CLEARING] Keith I cannot hear you.  ... OK. Well obviously we can't solve this so we're gonna have to go to a back-up show, and we will recycle the ?show?, have the proper filters in place by tomorrow night. Guys I am so sorry. .. All right?
BH: "So are we on tomorrow night?"
RCH: "OK, I'm hearing a terrible delay. So this is a technical catastrophe. I guess....?? But, er... yeah, let's try and recycle the ?show? for tomorrow night."
BH: "Yes, that's fine."
RCH: "OK, good. So let me goodnight you, and then goodnight the music. And... good night everyone, and we'll go to a backup show, and tomorrow night same time, same bat-channel. We will try it without the echo. OK?"
BH: "Same time, same place. Tomorrow."
RCH: "Yep, yep.Thank you."
BH: "OK, all right."

==================================
The FB announcement was "OUR APOLOGIES, POSTPONED TO TOMORROW NIGHT DUE TO UNEXPECTED LAST MINUTE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES THAT WE HOPE TO RESOLVE BY TOMORROW EVENING…"

After a similar experience the following night we were told "DUE TO CONTINUING TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES THE PROGRAM WITH BARBARA HONEGGER ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED FOR SATURDAY NIGHT TONIGHT, SUN / MON OCT. 15-16 HAS BEEN POSTPONED UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE."

[Insert Homer Simpson D'oh icon]

Update:
        The 21st October show was CANCELLED, Hoagland complaining that after "hours and hours of checking" the settings suddenly changed. Personally I don't find that credible. However, he did get through an entire 3-hour show on 22nd October—Robert Morningstar commenting on the Las Vegas massacre. Now why, I hear you ask, would AM* be considered an expert on the topic, considering that he can't even get the name of the perp right? He first called him Steven Pollack, then half-corrected it to Steven Paddock. The actual name is Stephen Paddock.

Thanks to Bellgab commenters "Nobody" and "Pablo Smash" for info

===========================/ \=============================
[1] The very first three words ever heard on the show were from Rowland. The words were: "I said go!"

Sunday, October 8, 2017

Robert Morningstar gets the Las Vegas massacre story hopelessly wrong

James Concannon writes...

        First we have Kerry Cassidy listening to the voices in her head and reporting them as if they were factual, and now we have Robert Morningstar, frisbee expert, publishing 3000 words on the Las Vegas massacre and getting almost nothing right. I will respect his claim of "All Rights Reserved" by not quoting from the piece, but I will review it and comment on it.

        For a start, Morningstar gets the name of the perp wrong. Throughout his essay, he writes "Steven Pollack" instead of Stephen Paddock. He may have corrected the text by the time you read it, but the original version was wrong. OOPS.

Original text © 2107 Robert Morningstar

        Reading this essay through, we don't have to wait long for the first major error. In the very first line Morningstar claims that this event was the worst killing in the history of the United States. Well, compare 58 dead with 268 (Battle of Little Bighorn), 2,996 (World Trade Center) and 700,000 (American Civil War.) What Morningstar is unsuccessfully grasping for is that the death toll was the largest of any mass shooting by an individual.

       Morningstar's whole thesis is that Paddock did not act alone—that there was at least one additional gunman at the Mandalay Bay. He gets started along that road by telling us that Paddock must have had help getting 23 firearms and hundreds of rounds of ammunition into Suite 32135. Well, perhaps... my remark on that is that bellmen at the Mandalay are quite used to carrying heavy equipment, since many pornographic videos are shot in Vegas hotel rooms.

        Morningstar embeds this video in his text, purporting to show gunfire from around the 10th floor of the Mandalay Bay. But that's impossible—there are no broken windows at that level, and the alternative explanation that the flashes are reflections is infinitely more credible.

        A second embedded video, recording the onset of the attack and almost all the carnage, is used by Morningstar as if it proves the "second gunman" case. Very few of the gunshots sound like the weapons fire we're used to hearing in films and TV—some sound almost like a slow drum roll, and some are more like loud clicks. The distinction between the two sounds is the heart and soul of Mr. Frisbee-man's case. But bump stocks were found on 12 of Paddock's 22 rifles, and two of them were mounted on bipods. Does it somehow strain Morningstar's logic to suggest that more than one weapon was used, perhaps even simultaneously, by a single shooter?

         Morningstar originally stated that he had triangulated (how?)note 1 the position of the second shooter to the ledge at third floor level.


        That idea has too many problems to be credible. How would a sniper get access to that ledge, and come back down after the event, without being observed? Why were no shell casings reported on that ledge? Is that vantage point too low to be effective, considering that bleachers at the concert venue would obstruct the view from that angle?

        Morningstar next alleges that both the Bellagio and Flamingo hotels were sprayed with gunfire that night—a claim that has specifically been denied by authorities. He shows us smartphone video made by René Downs, but that video does not show what he says it shows. It shows crowds of excited people in the lobby and corridors of the Bellagio, prevented from exiting because the hotel (like all others on the Strip) was in lockdown.

        Our favorite frisbee expert wraps it all up by alleging, with no evidence whatsoever, that Pollack [sic] was working with the FBI over an arms deal that "backfired badly." Morningstar styles himself a "civilian intelligence analyst" but if this essay is a fair sample of his analysis I'd say he's a major, major failure.

Credentials
        In addition to making himself his own CIA, Morningstar writes that he is "a specialist in photo interpretation, geometric analysis and computer imaging." The Rational wikipedia lists six specific examples of where Morningstar's photo interpretation has been dead wrong. In May 2016 this blog listed 28 errors of interpretation by him. Once again, OOPS.

Update:
        Morningstar re-worked his essay into an article for UFO Digest. In it he suggested that a second gunman could have been positioned on the balcony over the main entrance to the hotel. The image below shows how more than half the concert audience would be obstructed by the stage and bleachers from that position:



=================/ \====================
[1] Let's remind ourselves how triangulation works, shall we? You take optical bearings on the object of interest from two different places as far apart as is practical. Transferring your bearings onto a map then pinpoints the object.

This, however, is not what Morningstar did. He took a single freeze-frame from the taxi driver's video (perhaps around 03:00?) and visually matched a part of the canopy to arrive at what he now says is a position on the balcony over the drive-through hotel entrance. Fatal to his case is the fact that no shell casings have been found at that position—many windows overlook the balcony and canopy and it's inconceivable that such obvious evidence would have been missed.

At exactly 03:03 there are two flashes, but they are not associated with any sound of gunfire and it's impossible to tell what the actual source is. They look a lot like flash photography to me. If this is what Robert AM* claims to have "triangulated," he's a flim-flam man, not an intelligence analyst.

Friday, October 6, 2017

Kerry Cassidy on the road to Mandalay

        Kerry Lynn Cassidy wants us all to believe she has secret information sources that enable her to interpret current events more correctly than the professional media. Judging by her track record, I'd say that's just what Kerry wishes were true as opposed to anything with any actual truthiness. Yesterday she wrote "Years ago Camelot was told that 2017 was to be the final date for the showdown related to the currency reset." Well, there's not much of 2017 left for that one to play out, and there's no sign of this "reset" at all. Sean David Morton was another one who fretted about conspiracies in relation to currency, and look where that got him (in Federal jail, in case you hadn't already heard.)

        If you've guessed that the context of Kerry's remark is the horrible massacre that killed 58 country music fans in Las Vegas last Sunday night, you're correct. In a blogpost titled "War of Worlds: Pirates of Mandalay Bay : Illuminati versus U.S. Navy?" Kerry lays down her usual mix of paranoia, untruth and misunderstanding. She begins:
"The location of this latest false flag however real the human casualties relates to the history of Mandalay and Kipling, the British illuminati versus possibly what they may see as the U.S. Navy "pirates".  This may well be a turf war between illuminati factions over who will run the financial system and how and when it gets taken down and reformulated into the NWO currency.
::
No doubt this is also all about controlling the guns (and getting the U.S. populations under control by attempting once again to take away their guns).  One would think by now they would know this will never work."
         My reformulation of that last comment would be "One would think the likes of Kerry Cassidy and Alex Jones would have realized by now that relentlessly interpreting shooting tragedies this way has no basis in fact or experience. From Sandy Hook to Pulse to Dallas to San Bernadino, such speculations have been shown to be hopelessly wrong. Guns have never been confiscated or even significantly reduced as a result."

Shooting blanks
She continues:
"The claimed shooter Stephen Paddock is a Manchurian Candidate if I have ever seen one...  Avid gambler, accountant and property manager.  Why?  Gamblers are heavily under mind control and in this case Paddock was an avid video poker player.  This only facilitates inserting subliminal commands necessary to activate a sleeping assassin.  Most likely he had no idea what he was doing. However, with the number of other shooters operating that night there may be no real way to tell if Pollack's gun was shooting blanks as a distraction or not."
        I'm not a poker player at all but I believe hundreds of thousands of men and women play video poker. How anyone would "insert subliminal commands necessary to activate a sleeping assassin" without activating everyone else is a problem for me. Besides, I doubt Cassidy has any evidence that Paddock spent any more time at video poker than the average teenager spends nattering and texting on his or her smartphone.

        The speculative connection to the British Illuminati via Kipling would be hilarious if it didn't show such gob-smacking ignorance and insensitivity to the agony of families who have lost sons, daughters, mothers and fathers. Not that we expect anything approaching sensitivity from Kerry—four days after the Charlie Hebdo assassinations she wrote "Where are the bodies?" as if she wouldn't even believe it had happened without seeing for herself the mutilated corpses of cartoonists.

        In a much briefer post a day earlier, Kerry Cassidy wrote "The signs are everywhere that the shooter in the Mandalay Bay massacre was a patsy and that shots were coming from other directions as well as on the ground"—to which I have to say WHAT signs? She also revealed just how gossamer-thin her "evidence" is, writing "I think there are some striking similarities to shooting in Manchester concert in the UK.  Man-dalay / Man-chester / Manchurian." That's about as convincing as the connection Kerry Lynn Cassidy / Killing LasVegas Concert / Kinky Laughable Codswallop.

Update:
Snopes has now looked at the evidence for a second gunman and confidently declared it FALSE.

Sunday, September 24, 2017

The Extinction Event Did Not Happen Yesterday

        I'm not even going to write the name of the ignorant liar who made a few hundred dollars by telling everyone that Planet X, or Nibiru, would impact the Earth yesterday and wipe out all life. I do not wish even my microscopic influence on public opinion to add to the publicity this liar has already had. Still less am I going to name his wretched, wretched book about a non-existent planetoid. If any readers wish to read 115 pages of self-published poppycock they can surely find it for themselves.

        I understand this nincompoop is now claiming that he's been misquoted by the media and he never said September 23rd—the true date is some time next month. That's what end-of-the-world liars always do, isn't it? Keep advancing the date. It's truly pathetic.

        Last night Coast to Coast AM, with Jimmy Church as relief host, poked a bit of fun at this prediction, as the hours of September 23rd ticked away. Quite a lot of fun, actually. In my opinion they should have been poking fun at themselves, for having helped to make this nonsense credible in a show aired 19th January. The other guest that night was a numerologist—they made a nice pair of delusional con-men (con-persons, I should say.)

        C2C's bio-note tells us that this ridiculous person studied astronomy "at a mid-Western university," but it also noted:
"[This barefaced liar] has concluded that the prophetic Book of Revelation actually foretells the apocalyptic arrival of Planet X in our time period, and he added that Bible Code expert Rabbi Glazerson also backs a similar timeline."
So this is not just nonsense but biblical nonsense.

        This barefaced liar writes of his own work "This book is a must-read and a Survival Guide to the most important story of the century." Fuck You. It never happened.

Update:
        Exposing Pseudoastronomy also tackles this topic this week, being a bit kinder to the barefaced liar than I am.

Update:
October came and went. No Nibiru—what a surprise.