GN: ..will we ever go back to the Moon, Mr Hoagland?
RCH: "Yes, we will. What's really astonishing, and the reason I wanted to do a little update tonight is... I've sent over to Lex, to be posted on the Coast website, an astonishing image taken from orbit ... on the lunar far side, on the opposite side of the Moon from the Earth -- almost as far away from the Earth as you can get, almost 180° -- almost on the equator, just south of the equator, a mile-size -- each side is a mile -- ziggurat. It looks like an Egyp....a Sumerian pyramid. It's extraordinary. It's enormous. It... you gotta go look because this is just absolutely astonishing -- and I've spent now several days trying to make sure this is real, and to the best of our analytical abilities it's real, there's a whole bunch of little "tells" around it that tell us. For one thing, hoaxes are never subtle. This is subtle. This is the kind of thing that an expert would instantly recognize -- and unless you have trained eyes it's going to take you a minute or two maybe to see it, but once you see it, you're never going to not see it. And the most amazing thing, George, is where it's located. It's almost exactly opposite the Earth, on the far side of the Moon, where you would put a massive pyramid -- because we now know from the Enterprise studies, including what I did with the eclipse here in May -- that pyramids amplify torsion field energy enormously. That's why there are pyramids all over the world, you were asking your guest last night "Why are there pyramids all over the world? Do they talk to each other?" Yes, they do. They're linked by hyperdimensional physics -- and whatever the reason for this thing being built on the far side of the Moon was -- part of it had to be, to look with this energy through the core of the Moon -- which we now know from our eclipse studies amplifies torsion energy ENORMOUSLY -- and to look through the core at the Earth and to monitor the torsion field changes in the Earth. If some hoaxer had put this thing on the [..?..] they figured out all the right things to do to put it in the one place in the whole solar system where it would make sense from a hyperdimensional perspective, which is one of the reasons I think it's real. And you all ought to go and look at what Lex has posted ... and I've got Steve Troy working on the footprints, on which orbit.. which astronaut took the picture. It may have been Collins, all by himself in the CM orbiting around the Moon while Neil & Buzz were down on the surface. But this is only a tip of the iceberg, George, as to what they've been hiding for 43 years, that we have got to take control of now."
GN: "You've got that right..."
Does any of that make any sense at all? Yes, his first three words, "Yes we will." After that it's unmitigated, unrelenting, total poppycock. Here are just the main reasons for its rubbishness:
1) How can anyone possibly "spend several days" making sure this is real? There's simply no way. Yes, it's "real" in the sense that it exists on a photograph. [Update: Perhaps not even that.] That does not make it a ziggurat -- at best it makes it something that looks vaguely pyramidal. You'll see in a minute that spacecraft motion introduced a smear effect over the whole frame.
2) "Hoaxes are never subtle." Oh yeah? Tell that to the people who were fooled by the Piltdown Man or the FeeJee mermaid.
3) He says "we now know from the Enterprise studies including what I did with the eclipse here in May -- that pyramids amplify torsion field energy." Only one problem with that -- his eclipse "study" in May WAS NOWHERE NEAR A FUCKING PYRAMID.
4) Also "...the core of the Moon -- which we now know from our eclipse studies amplifies torsion energy..." WHAAAAAATT? Was his "eclipse study" any closer to the core of the Moon than 240,000 miles? No. Is anybody going to be fooled by this bollocks? Probably -- the disciples think he's brilliant.
5) So "they" have been hiding this for 43 years, eh? Funny that the image, AS11-38-5564, has been available from the JSC photo library, and from the LPI library, all that time.
I'm sure you're dying to see this ziggurat, right? Well, to save you some clicky-clicky, here it is:
image credit: public domain ?shopped by Mike Bara?
Now you need some clicky-clicky to confirm that the image is online, in the LPI lunar atlas. Now you see that motion smearing I mentioned. What's more, this "anomaly" has been known to the conspiracy community for a very long time. More clicky-clicky required to confirm that it was posted by Disclose.tv back in February 2011, and by Holloworbs even earlier (ATS claims 2003.) So once again Hoagland has been caught red-handed stealing other people's work.
Why? Could it be that we are witnessing the opening stages of a war between Hoagland & Bara over which of them can now lay claim to the title "King of the Lunar Anomalies"?
Update:Astroguy has found the ziggy, or the place where it ought to be, in the original Apollo image, and provides this analysis:
[T]hey darkened the image so there are more shadows, then increased the contrast. Then selectively increased the contrast of the "ziggurat" and then literally drew in lines to make it seem like an actual structure. My original analysis of "fraud/hoax" stands, though now that we can actually see that they at least used the photo they claimed they did to start from.
Here's astroguy's comparison:
Expat, I can't find it on the NASA archive photo. Can you give a rough indication of where it's located?
I can't seem to see this "pyramid" anywhere in the NASA photo either. I've rotated my screen around and around and now I'm seeing straight lines and right angles and structures all over the place (maybe that's how Hoagie does it?)
I wonder what Hoagie makes of the 'Hubble moon pyramid' image (http://i48.tinypic.com/d5wmh.jpg) and the over-exposed AS17-136-20680 frame...
I'm honestly not sure where in the total image this piece of nonsense is, but I assume it's in that smeared terrain at far left.
I've also rotated the picture, but can't seem to see it that way, either!
I'm not sure what size object I should be looking for, which makes it more difficult. I've been trying to match light and shade patterns, but can't see any that correspond. Without knowing exactly where it is on the Apollo photo, it's impossible to locate it on the LROC map.
Yeah, without an idea of size, it's pretty tricky to spot, especially the more you rotate the image around.
I've had a go at circling what might be possible areas for their shape, depending on which way you're looking at them... http://i48.tinypic.com/19no1.jpg
I've now linked to a higher-res version of the image. I'm still not sure where to look, however.
I've spent the last half hour trying to figure this out, too. Obviously the rotation is roughly 80° clockwise. But other than that, I cannot match it to this image at all. I've been using the shadow curve near the upper left corner to match features. I found only one potential location (third from the top of the last "Anonymous" comment), but though it matches one or two craters plus that shadow, most of the image Hoagland presents does not match.
I'll also note that the image on C2C is Bara's (didn't see that mentioned in Expat's post, maybe I missed it). It's file name is "AS11-38-5564-Mike-oirginal-enhanced3" on the C2C website.
At this point, I'm going to say it's a fraud ... err, hoax. The light shadow on the sides of the ziggurat that are supposed to be in shadow, to me, indicate that this is a hoax because they should be in pitch black shadow but are clearly a lighter color than the crater floor. It's remotely possible that the feature, if real, could be reflecting a bit of scattered light from the lit part of the crater, if it's in a crater, but there's no context to tell. Or lit up with torsion energy.
It seems Tom o' the faithful is asking the same question... (which probably makes him a "troll"??)... http://i48.tinypic.com/2dhb23n.png
OK, found the location, Anonymous! Rotate your annotated pic 90 degrees clockwise and take a look at the ellipse which is furthest to the right - (you have three ellipses close together on the right). Look for the patch of light that looks like a bright mushroom (look at Hoagie's ziggurat and note the mushroom-shaped light just behind it) and you should find the location. Needless to say, there's no ziggurat there!
Trekker, you're right! Gimme 10 minutes and I'll post a much better version ...
I'd rotated my image 90 clockwise but I still can't see it Trekker - I never was very good at magic eye pictures, and I can't say I expected to see a giant ziggurat on an old NASA photo (including 'parking available' and 'now open on Sundays' sign right out front).
Of course, we cannot trust our own eyes - we must accept Captain Enterprise's word for it (he knows about these things).
Shrunk from Hoagland's to 86.578%, rotated 10.96° after rotating original image 90°
Going to post a comparison in a few minutes.
Well, there's no ziggurat, naturally! I don't know who put one there, or how...but Hoagie didn't do his homework and take a good look at the photo!
Did you find it again? For me, the greatest help was the mushroom-shaped lighting behind Hoagie's ziggurat. You can see that in the right-hand-most ellipse of yours, so just zoom in on that, and it should become apparent.
That's it, Astroguy!
Revised scaling of Hoagland image: 85.28%.
Cutout of original NASA photo and Hoagland/Bara "enhancement" http://podcast.sjrdesign.net/images/HoaglandLunarZiggurat02.jpg
Yeah, so it looks like overall, they darkened the image so there are more shadows (see bottom left), then increased the contrast. Then selectively increased the contrast of the "ziggurat" and then literally drew in lines to make it seem like an actual structure. My original analysis of "fraud/hoax" stands, though now that we can actually see that they at least used the photo they claimed they did to start from.
Intriguing how we figured this out in an hour, but Hoagland, after several days, claims that he's determined it was, indeed, not a hoax.
Wow - that comparison photo does indeed make it really clear. What a total fraud by Hoagie (surprise surprise - I mean, it's not like he's edited photos in his books or anything).
For a moment there, I almost caught myself saying someone should show Noory this and have him question Dick on it; but then that would go against everything C2C is and what it presents.
Well done astroguy, good work! (even if it now makes you an FB Troll for questioning the great man's evidence).
Thanks, anon. BTW, I've now written this up in my own blog along with a bit more detailed analysis: http://wp.me/pjMYE-mk
Great work Astroguy. I guess actually knowing what you are talking about is very helpful in these kind of situations.
I tend to enjoy bad SyFy original movies, and watched Stonehenge Apocalypse a couple of weeks ago. The main character is a nutty ex-scientist who hosts a radio show much like Coast to Coast AM, without the popularity.
I bring it up because during the opening credits, a voiceover of this main character doing his show plays over panning camera shots of his bulletin board. On the bulletin board is none other than Richard C. Hoagland's modified image of the Shorty Crater rock from Apollo 17. A Post-It note next to the image reads "Robot Head!". That the main character believes that he found a robot head in a photograph of a crater on the moon becomes a running joke through the entire movie; it's even the last line yelled by the main character as he dies saving the world at the end (sorry about the spoiler).
The movie definitely treated it as a tongue-in-cheek acknowledgment of the fringe nature of the main character, not as an amazing scientific discovery. As far as I know, RCH is unaware of this (presumably) unsanctioned use of his fraudulent image for other purposes, which is ironic enough to make me smile all week.
Astroguy, your spot-on analysis of Hoagland's fraud reminded me of the above. Very nice job.
First, the phrase "bad SyFy original movie" is redundant. Second, I'm going to have to look into this one because it sounds like fun. Laughing at Hoagland is the best response.
You did not get that right, Hoag - and George Noory is a terrible host!
Astroguy has produced a Youtube video of how he put Hoagland's enhancement and the original image together:
This is priceless. Loved the video Stuart. I hope people post it on Hoagland's FB page. He appears to be absent from FB these past few weeks. So if someone does post it, perhaps it will be a few hours before either he or the redhead deletes it.
There's now a thread running on ATS about the 'ziggurat'!
I took a look at that ATS thread and all I can say is OUCH! Some of those people make Expat look like a true believer. That's not a place Hoagland would be feeling the love.
To all you commenters here who keep on rotating that ziggurat pic 90 degrees:
STOP ROTATING IT IMMEDIATELY!
Pyramids and ziggurats AMPLIFY torsional physics! If you continue to rotate the pic, you will create a HYPERDIMENSIONAL TORSION FIELD WHIRLPOOL on your computer screen!
Very nice write up expat as ussual! I hope u don't mind I linked to this story in my new blog http://dallastek.blogspot.com/
Anyways keep up the good work!!
Bravo, Astroguy!!! Bravo, Astroguy! If I miss my appointment with this blog four days I lose everything!!!
@FlightSuit - Don't worry, I put my laptop behind a fish tank when I rotate the image, so I'm protected by the water..........
Post a Comment