The
Rational-wikipedia page on John Hogue characterizes him as "a woo-meister and bullshit artist." It notes that "In a stopped clock moment of remarkable quality, Hogue had the foresight to title the biography he hosts on his website as
An Idiot’s Autobiography.
Hogue himself says he's a world authority on Nostradamus, and his talents at astrology and other ephemera make him a remarkably accurate predictor of world affairs. He used to claim that he correctly predicted the outcome of the last so-many presidential elections. Since he had Clinton for 2018, he's cunningly amended that to "the last so-many presidential elections
by popular vote." Har-har.
Well, of course, we know how it goes. All these clairvoyant people who appear on the media inevitably predict ghastly things in our futures. I guess they think nobody would pay any attention if they said "I've looked at the prophecies and everything's going to be hunky-dory."
Richard Hoagland had Hogue as a guest on his blogtalkradio show
The Other Side of Midnight, 29th December. The on-demand public audio
has just been posted, so I was able to review it (the link will probably expire in about a week). For an hour and a half, the two Hoags discussed the decade to come. We were, indeed, warned about "a decade of destruction" to include catastrophic climate change, overpopulation, famine...bla bla bla. But then things took a different turn, as Hogue (rather reluctantly, I thought,) revealed that he was not an adoring fan of RCH and his whacko ideas. It went like this:
==============================================
[after RCH declares emphatically that Hurricane Dorian was deliberately manipulated to stall over the Bahamas]
1:37:52 RCH: That was not accidental. That was a designed catastrophe. It can't...
JH: That's your belief.
RCH: No, it's technology..
JH: That's your belief.
RCH : It has nothing to do with belief, i
t's science, John. I have sources.I know there's technology to manipulate hurricanes. I know there's technology to provide unlimited energy with no pollution. I know there's technology to provide anti-gravity lift so we can take giga-tons into space to make...
JH: You've got it all figured out, Richard.
RCH: No, the part I don't have..
(together)
RCH: The part...
JH: ...listening to a guy like me..
RCH: The part I don't have...
The part...
JH: You've got it all figured out.
:::
RCH: The part I don't have figured out in my research is the transition politically,
with hope, to a future that we want, and not the terror that you are forecasting.
JH: Well, I'll tell you. I... First off, I definitely would love to see what you're saying. And all the climate change that's coming...
RCH: No, it's here.
JH: No, it hasn't even started yet. You wait, the next five years....
RCH: Have you watched what's going on in Australia lately?
JH: Yes.
RCH: Do you know
why it's been Australia?
JH: Well, you tell me what you
think it is...
RCH: No, it's based on science, and research The hemispheres... this has nothing to do with the sun This has to do with the physics of planetary and stellar energy sources. The problem we're facing tonight, John, is not so much greenhouse because of burning fossil fuels—it's because the physics is cyclic, and it's not cyclic together in both hemispheres. The southern hemisphere is going to be hit worse than the northern hemisphere. That's why we're seeing this incredible problem in Australia, in their northern [sic] summer. The only way out of a scientific problem is with a scientific solution. The problem is those solutions have been suppressed in decade after decade after decade, because the élites either didn't believe this was going to happen, or they really want 90% of the world to die.
JH: Richard, this is what I call, um, basically, conspiracy-itis. It is something I've dealt with.... and it's where—you know, I just have to say it for the record. I consider, as brilliant as you are, that you sometimes take a possibility and make yourself believe you have the evidence. And then, when the evidence is questioned, you perhaps do what conspiracy people do, they end up saying "Oh it's been suppressed." And, I mean, I have to go all the way back to the face on Mars. I have to go all the way back...
RCH: (laughs) What does the face on Mars have to do with 90% of the world dying because of climate change?
JH: It has something to do.. Look, I'm sorry I don't want to have to go to...I told you I didn't want to go to..
RCH: You have a choice, John.
JH: I have to.
RCH: You have a choice.
JH: I have.. and I chose to go there. You can throw me off, or you can let me tell it. Hey, it's your show, you wanna do that, that's fine. Wanna kick me off—that's fine. But the
reason why I'm going there... it's the only way I can respond to what you've just said. Is that I have a serious problem with your research—patterns of research. I think a lot of it, in my experience, is belief-based, and, you know, all this stuff about all these phantasmagorical things being ... I think it's a bit over-active, er, over-reactive. It's intuitive, and I have to go back to the face on Mars. I remember in the 70s, hearing you on radio, hearing you talk about all that, and I ... and I thought "Well, I hope that's true." But when I looked at the pictures, I wondered... God the pictures aren't that clear. What if we...maybe some day we need to get clearer pictures, when our technology is better, when we land on Mars. But, you know, NASA came up with the pictures, and there's no face. But all the years ....
:::
RCH: Let's go back. You looked at the latest imagery from NASA of Cydonia. And your conclusion, based on looking at the pictures—you don't see a face. Right?
JH: There is no face.
RCH: No no no no no, let's talk.
To you there isn't a face.
JH: And to you, there is.
RCH: And a whole bunch of colleagues all round the world, who have invested thousands of man-hours and woman-hours in researching not only Cydonia, but all the rest of Mars, and all the other artifacts we've found, and the book we're working on, and the videos we've produced, and the briefings...
JH: [over] ...religion....
RCH: There's no religion, John.
JH: Yeah, I can look at all the people from the Catholic faith, and the Moslem faith, and all the theologians who say "God exists" and all that, but the truth is unless we go on Mars ... unless we actually set foot on Mars and see these things, there's some doubt.
RCH: There's always doubt. Science is nothing if it's not, you know, prediction. The way you know it's...
JH: You've got all this army of people that agree with you.
RCH: People doing independent research coming to the same conclusion.
JH: There's a lot of people who've come to the same conclusion in history, and it's been wrong.
RCH: John, you seem to have an emotional...
JH; (together)...technical enquiry...
RCH: You seem ...
JH: I didn't want to go here.
RCH: You don't have to. Because you're attacking the essence of my science. And what I would like you to do...
JH: No, I'm attacking the essence of your
belief system, which is why...
RCH: My work has nothing to do...
JH (together)...
RCH: ...has nothing to do with belief. Believe me, after thirty years,
[
Keith Morgan interrupts and makes a point supporting RCH, emphatically]
JH: The difference between you and me is that you're angry about this...
KM: I'm not angry.
JH: Yes you are, you're angry. You're shouting at me now. If you want to be factual, be factual about what's happening between you and me right now.
[
Keith Morgan makes another point, even more emphatically]
:::
You're disempowering your argument. That's what I've learned, when I get angry like this, is that it bleeds off my energy, it bleeds off my ability to argue my point because of my
attachment to the point. This is... This is not how you're going to convince me of ...of... of what you're doing, because you're getting angry, and that is disempowering.
KM: Because, you, right now, you're saying all of this is a joke.
JH: Did I ever say it was a joke? You said...
KM: I get the impression....
JH: You said... Hey! Say it right! You're getting impressions that's what it is.... No, you accuse, you said "You think this is all a joke". That's you projecting on me, my friend.
RCH: John, just a couple of minutes ago you accused me of having a belief system as opposed to a scientific process.
(together)
JH: It's my feeling...
[...and general squabbling until Kynthea intervenes]
[ends 1:48:41]
==========================================
It was classic Hoagland. He was talking bullshit but doing it so eloquently that he made it sound plausible. If his sources promise hurricane control, free energy and anti-gravity, then his sources are rubbish. And my other point would be; if you can't cite your sources, it ain't science.
