Yes, I'm sure we all believe that Trump sat down for three hours, digested this message, then sent immediately for the NASA Adminstrator telling him to get moving Moon-wards.
Two megatons under China Lake
At the time of the Unicus interview, the sequence of earthquakes at Ridgecrest and China Lake was still fresh on everyone's minds. Mag 4.6 on July 4th, 5.4 on the 5th, finally 7.1 on the 6th. Depths were 1.9km, 7km and 8km respectively. Hoagland declared that the energy of the big one was equivalent to a 2-megaton nuclear weapon, and it could only have been achieved by creating a huge void at 8km depth, which then collapsed. This, he said, was done the same way as the World Trade Center was "dustified"—with a torsion field weapon.
1:33:32 RCH: Where's my proof that this is what was done? Look at when it was done. 20:19. Take those two numbers, take [...] 20:19 military time. Add those two numbers together. What do you get?I swear, from the tone of voice and the way he made this statement, he was not just having a joke. He really believes some evil galactic warlord worked through the reverse numerology and planned this event for 8:19 pm. Only he, Richard C. Hoagland, is smart enough to figure it out. Since the other two major seismic events in the series were not at that time, I guess he'll have to work out a different numerology for them.
RCH: Divide by two. 19.5!!!. The signature of hyperdimensional torsion field physics! Whoever did this communicated the message of how it was done.
What I don't quite get is how a weapon can create a huge void at a depth of 8km. Even if the ground is "dustified", as he puts it (quoting JudyWood), surely the amount of material would be unchanged. It's not like the World Trade Center, where 80% of the towers can simply blow away on the breeze, as Judy Wood claims.
Hoagland next drew attention to the fact that there wasn't much structural damage, and only one death (some unfortunate guy was fixing a jeep, which then fell on him).
1:34:55 Somebody went to great lengths to make sure there was no collateral damage. Now what does that tell you? It tells me someone was trying to be benign... was trying to raise the threat level without killing people but showing overwhelming technological supremacy, because in the [.?.] we have nothing that can match this.So far I haven't noticed the U.S. Navy stopping anything, unless you count an Iranian patrol boat in the Strait of Hormuz. Either they're foolhardy for brushing off this dire threat, or perhaps Richard Hoagland is a nincompoop who lives in the fantasy land of sci-fi comics, and nothing he says or writes is true.
1:35:29 Here's the capper. I have a report from one of my contacts on the East Coast ... One of her students reported that among other bizarre stories coming out of Ridgecrest was that the bees—ordinary honey bees—were observed on the ground, dazed, writhing around, and dying. Now bees do not respond to earthquakes in this way. But bees ... this would have been a side effect of the detonation of a torsion weapon, the bees would have been discombobulated and/or killed, 'cause bees resonate to those frequencies.note 2
Dazed and dying bees right after the Ridgecrest earthquake to me was a "ding-ding-ding" that this was a technical torsion field weapon being demonstrated to our guys, basically saying "stop doing whatever you're doing or it'll get a lot worse."
 The video starts with a caption that will go down in the annals of brown-nosing:
« The President who finally ends NASA's 60 years of 'deep state' cover-up of its real solar system discoveries — beginning with 'ancient ET ruins on the Moon and Mars' — will inevitably go down in history as 'the greatest President of the United States ...' "If not the World...." »
[punctuation exactly as in the orig.]
 Hoagland is bullshitting here. Bees have chordotonal organs that allow them to respond to ultrasonic fequencies, but these would have a range of a few metres only. There's not a shred of evidence that they can detect or react to high-frequency transmission of any kind.
He made the same bullshit allegation in his 2007 web page The Bees' Needs—writing that torsion waves were responsible for Colony Collapse Disorder. Neonicotinoids are now generally accepted as the main cause of CCD, which hit its peak in 2006 and is now perceived as less of a problem than was thought then.
Part 2 of "The Bees' Needs" never appeared.
At one time, 2010 was the year of disclosure, as "my old friend Arthur C. Clarke" was supposedly in on the secret. So when 2019 comes and goes without the government confirming Hoagie's fantasies, he'll just dump it down the same memory hole as 2010. Hoagland never changes formula of his act, just some the particulars.
I'm not sure Hoagland even has his own mythology right here. 19.5 is the latitude on a sphere at which, he claims, energy is preferentially released. The examples he cites (Jupiter's red spot, e.g.) are spurious, but never mind that. He has called this energy "hyperdimensional", so if 19.5 is the "signature" of anything it's energy at a certain latitiude.
Torsion waves, on the other hand, he has described as the result of interactions between rotating bodies, or as generated by a single rotating mass, but at ALL latitudes. Thus it really isn't legitimate, even in the upside-down world of Hoaglandia, to call 19.5 the signature of a torsion weapon.
It's hyperdimensional! To create a void, simply move the material through a higher dimension.
I must admit I would like to know how he calculated the frequency of a torsion weapon.
Yes, he's been asked about the mathematical relationship between the frequency of the torsion wave and that of the Accutron tuning fork. He doesn't answer--I think he probably just assumes they're identical. Fool.
19.5 is the INTERNAL HD point of a sphere. Torsion fields are the result of massive rotating spheres upon each other.
I thought it had to do with the tuning fork gaining or losing mass and thus changing frequency. I could be wrong though, as the experiment has never been fully explained.
Dr. Monk: 19.5 cannnot be a single point. It's two latitudes. RCH has shown data from the wacky-acky even when there is no eclipse or transit in progress (Tikal, 2009).
Chris: You're correct. But he's never shown a steady trace at 360 Hz turning into a steady trace at some other frequency when the torsion hits. It's always spikes. Since he's stated many times that he's MEASURED the field, and he wrote that he never claimed to measure the amplitude, only the frequency, logically there ought to be some math back there. Except that it's all bollocks anyway.
Correct; 19.5 North and South. It's all, good.
I've just had an epiphany on the subject ..... 19.5 x 16 + 53 = 365 :-)
53 being the original 53 weeks of 7 days with 6 creational hidden days nobody seems to be aware of since "somebody" turned the Hyper Drive on :-) hence our torsion field year of 365 days :-)
The reason RCH is comfortable citing the time on the local clock as hyper-dimensional would be usually defended by him as being the power of symbolism, especially with dates, clocks and calendars, as to be part of some "resonator" between time and space. Hence the claims of "ritualism" of NASA which has been a central part of his work.
In the end Hoagland wouldn't need any scientific cover at all: just drawing the right symbols with the right intent would have some effect, like the old schools of magick!
It's probably better not to see him as someone trying to be scientific or technical. At the base there's simply a magical system, with magical thoughts, which just tries to implement, to incorporate, space science as merely a linguistic, symbolic addition.
This kind of thinking will also invite extreme cherry picking, forcing round pegs in square holes and generally misinterpreting things, or changing meaning at will.
But yeah, it might have at least sounded all a bit more coherent once upon a time.
FFS, he is still at it.
Dee: You're a scholar. TVM for the comment.
Hoagland has overtly made the point that it is NASA who believes in the magic of symbolism, and in order to understand NASA, one needs to grasp Masonic symbolism.
« Hoagland has overtly made the point that it is NASA who believes in the magic of symbolism »
He's as wrong about that as he is about everything else NASA-related.
« and in order to understand NASA, one needs to grasp Masonic symbolism.»
I seriously doubt NASA puts a lot of confidence in symbolism. Symbolism does not substitute for commonsense, critical thinking or getting men to the moon.
None the less, Jack Parsons of JPL fame was deep into the occult. Despite that I do tend to think the rocket engines were more driven by math and chemistry and not symbolism.
Okay then Patrick, what's your take on Jack Parsons?
Brilliant engineer with a strange weakness for religion. He founded JPL with Theodore von Kármán in the 1930s but his association with CalTech and AeroJet ended in 1945.
Parsons is not NASA. Hoagland & Bara are both fond of asserting that NASA is riddled with "magicians", to which my question is "Jack Parsons and who else?"
Why does NASA invoke such a preponderance of names for projects and missions, from Egyptian cosmology?
Check the list. Preponderance?
Now Patrick, you know what a horrible speller I am. The most frustrating thing about that is the fact that Spellcheck auto-correct, will give you the absolute correct spelling of the exact wrong word, so quickly that I don't even notice, but I believe that 'preponderance,' is the accurate spelling. Anyway, the word I meant to use is, 'plethora'. The real names of NASA missions are contained as symbolized in the mission emblem uniform patches.
Plethora? How careless of them to miss out Isis, Horus and Ra.
Perhaps I've missed it, but how about a review from you, Patrick, of Graham Hancock's, 'Fingerprints Of The Gods, Mystery Of The Sphinx, and The Mars Mystery'?
Nah... I just don't care to wade through all that marijuana-inspired dreamland.
"So I have not smoked any more, well over a year has passed, and I remain resolutely determined never to smoke again. I feel free now. Liberated. As though a whole new chapter of my life has opened up in front of me. I find myself enjoying little things I didn’t enjoy before, appreciating every moment that I am not stoned and that my head is clear. It feels GREAT to have a clear head! My concerns about the effect on my writing have also turned out to be completely groundless. I had feared I would loose my inspiration without the herb as my muse but quite the opposite has turned out to be the case. I am buzzing with new ideas and creativity. Also I’m MUCH more efficient – writing between three and five times as many words a day as I did before." --Graham Hancock, January 2013
Claims about NASA's alleged obsession with symbolism usually says more about the claimant. My reaction to it is usually 'so f***ing what?'. It's up there with 'Nazis were involved' - it neither proves nor disproves anything other than a desperate need to try and pin their own belief system on something that functions perfectly well without one.
One might well wonder, though. Why doesn't NASA use images of sheep, and nice, fresh little candies, instead?
"One might well wonder, though. Why doesn't NASA use images of sheep, and nice, fresh little candies, instead?"
Other than toilet paper manufacturers and well... candy manufacturers, who would?
If the subject matter is still the "ritualistic" naming of NASA programs (hard to tell right now), then what kind of names would you propose for large, expensive pieces of equipment hurled at huge velocity into the cosmos... Shaun?
Say Patrick, what's your take on the Face that has been revealed on Antarctica?
Google Antarctic 72°00' 36.00'' S , 168° 34' 40.00'' E
It's not a face but a series of crevasses. Crevasses are very common down there.
Post a Comment