expat to RCH:
Greetings. During the 'Awake & Aware' conference last year you stated as follows (times relate to the Youtube video set):
"Elenin is NOT a comet." Part 1, 04:15
"Something is active on board." Part 5, 07:50
"So we've got a spacecraft of some kind, flying in an orbit of some kind..." Part 5, 09:52
On Coast to Coast AM, 2nd April, you shouted down a caller with the words "I NEVER SAID ELENIN WAS A SPACESHIP."
Do you think you owe that caller an apology?
RCH to expat:
A "spacecraft" is NOT axiomatically a "spaceship" .... :)
"Mariner 9" was NOT "Apollo 11."
"Something active on board ..." described anything from "a possible active, automated control system ..." to "a real AI."
Never once mentioned "living beings" -- driving an crewed [sic] "spaceship."
Words HAVE meaning.
expat to RCH:
In this page you use the word "spaceship" three times to describe Phobos, yet you have never said that Phobos is "occupied" and indeed it certainly is not. It follows that the definition, to you, includes any celestial object that has ever been under intelligent control. Incidentally, your assertion, in support of your ideas about Phobos, that "You can't have a natural object that's 30% hollow" is laughably incorrect. To name but two contradictory examples, Hyperion is about 40% hollow. Kelp floats are >90% hollow.
In another interesting example of words having meanings, the meaning of "geodetic latitude" is the angle made by the extension of the local vertical with the equatorial plane. The geodetic latitude of the Port-au-Prince earthquake was NOT 19.5°.
BandyI hesitate to bandy words (Bandy? How did something describing dodgy legs also come to mean verbal sparring?) with one so totally skilled at picking the nit, but I'll just point out that wikipedia says 'spacecraft' and 'spaceship' are synonyms. I realize wikipedia is largely the work of bored twelve-year-olds in the Manchester suburbs, but I think if there were originally two separate articles the kiddies would have had a hard time merging them.
I've waited most of today, like a Tennessee Williams spinster longing for a gentleman caller, for the continuation of this dialog, but I don't think it'll continue. If it does, you'll be the first to know.
Meanwhile, back in Facebookistan, nothing but dead air on the subject of the Inaccutron "experiment" during the Venus transit. Even some of the Branch Hoaglandians are getting testy. No doubt the testiest are the ones who gave Hoagland money for nothing.
Update:Just for fun I hit the translate button, and translated this post into French, a language I understand a bit. Here's what the frenchies would read as the first line of RCH's e-mail:
Un "vaisseau spatial" n'est pas axiomatiquement un «vaisseau spatial»What's French for "WTF"?
German: Ein "Raumschiff" ist NICHT axiomatisch ein "Raumschiff" ..