Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - expat

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 34
Sunday: Nurse Ratched on the Metaphysics of the Trump presidency. There's a real eye-roller...

Commentators who resort to such ad hominem fallacy are incapable of prevailing in reasonable debate.

You might be right. Hoagland & AM*'s "troll" and "clueless" ad homs aren't going to win any debates.

I think RCH has a poor understanding of what "trolling" is. Trolling IS NOT "showing mathematically why the proposition being discussed cannot be correct."  Cheers.

Coming on Saturday night:
"Did President Kennedy's abrupt decision in 1963 -- to end the "Space Race" ... and go to the Moon together with the Russians -- stem directly from the CIA's sudden, top secret, "Project Corona" confirmation, in 1963 ... of ancient ET ruins on the Moon?"

ANSWER: No, because the Corona satellites didn't image the Moon. Duhhhhhhh.

Mnuchin is from a Jewish family but Louise Linton is an actress from Edinburgh. So I think you must be wrong, whatever your intended point was.

My guess is Richard's made himself persona non grata in a milieu that welcomes almost anybody no matter how weird/old/ugly they are with his diva act of intellectual superiority. He's the aristocratic grand dame of kook science and people don't like him. His 'research' is no nuttier than others but his personality is overbearing.

He makes himself impossible to work with, yes. Insists on a co-producer credit and, if there's travel involved, first class travel/hotel for himself AND "Doctor" Falkov.

he became a big TV star like Carl Sagan, and ....

Actually NOT. Ever wondered why he's never appeared on that piece of shit called Ancient Aliens? Even when the prime topic is NASA?

Another person who's a reliable source on the color of Mars (other than astroguy, I mean) is the artist Don Davis. Don made a special study of the problem of rendering planetary color accurately.

Jim Bell is a third trustworthy expert. In his book Postcards From Mars he tells how the first few images from Viking 1 lander didn't include the color reference strip, so the graders basically just guessed. Once the refstrip came into view they re-graded the original images. Jim is adamant that the daytime sky on Mars is "butterscotch" unless a sandstorm is in progress.

As usual Theadora has the story about the TV monitors wrong. According to Hoagland, it was at JPL and it was in the press room, not "mission control," which indeed would have been off limits to a journo accredited to an airline inflight magazine (as RCH was at the time.) There's no independent RED control on the monitors--if anything, the chrominance would have been increased across the board.

I was there and I don't remember any such event, but then admittedly I was mostly in a moblie control room parked on Sergeant Road, when I wasn't pointing a camera at Carl Sagan.

I will guarantee 100% Sleep-with-Robin-if-I-am-Wrong that the badge you posted is NOT from 2008 or later. NASA went to a single type badge long before that. All centers use the same badge.

You're dead right squire, no fear of getting red pubes between your teeth. That badge dates from when RCH was contracted to write technical documentation for the Orbiting Astronomical Observatory sats. Would have been mid-60s, GSFC was the prime Center. Nothing to do with Mars, skies, or the (mythical) red control on TV sets of 1976.

PS: Hoagland cashed his advance but never delivered any publishable MS. His inability to see projects to completion goes way back.

PPS: Next month will see the anniversary of RCH declaring that the new book is "just recently completed."

Somebody call in, please, and ask about the mathematical relationship between the frequency of the torsion field and that of the Accutron.

Here's the whole story about that HH interview, for those who would like more deets.

And here's the story on the blue flares, seen in nine frames from Apollo 14 Mag#66 and on no other magazine.

What if RCH's spiel became so totally FUBARed that even he could no longer deny it?

We know the answer to that. He'd point-blank refuse to discuss it. from Howard Hughes' radio show, 2nd June 2015 (when Hughes said he'd had e-mail claiming that RCH was wrong about Explorer 1):

  I'm not going to waste time answering stupid ridiculous accusations from known trolls. ... I will not answer any of these stupid accusations. None, zero.

I've shot pool.

Saturday night should be interesting. Hoagland totally disagrees with Jay Weidner about Apollo.

Radio and Podcasts / Re: George Noory Sucks! - The Definitive Compendium
« on: February 07, 2018, 09:06:45 AM »
"The proof is the pudding."  No, George, that's not the right idiom.

M 6.4 - 21km NNE of Hualian, Taiwan
2018-02-06 15:50:41 UTC 24.158N   121.680E 9.5 km depth

...with the Moon at last quarter.

Here it is professionally scanned.

Yeah. I haven't heard that one discussed, oddly enough!

About the two-hour mark. He seems quite unaware that the lines are parallel to the film frame rather than the lunar limb.


Oh lovely, Richard. Brilliant example of scanner contamination. Looks like some kid has been pawing at the glass after eating a donut.

At 49:00 Ken tells his oft-repeated story of showing 16mm film of crater Tsiolkovsky shot by Apollo 14. He has never explained how a spacecraft in an orbit inclined at 14 can overfly a crater at 20.4.

Here's the map of photo targets for Apollo 14.

So this Johnson dude is legit?

Well, it depends. When he says he worked for Brown and Root in the Lunar Receiving Laboratory, as a dispatch clerk packaging lunar rocks, he's legit. When he says his collection of Apollo 10x8 glossies is unique first-generation prints, he's mis-remembering. When he says he's a former NASA astronaut, he's lying.

Wow - how wide in miles is that view?

I think it's 360.

JPL has just released a marvellous panorama of Mars, stitched from 16 high-res images from Curiosity. So much for Hoagland's idea that Sharp Mountain is the artificial construct of a dead civilization.

If anyone here has no cloo who Ken Johnston is, here's a bio including his relationship to RCH. Cheers.

To be fair, though, if Hoagland is right about those mischievous little spooks hacking his gear, as he has asserted for many years, now, that isn't something which ought to be dismissed.

You appear to have missed the point as usual. Hoagland's claim cannot be true since all the shows that the so-called spooks "block" get on the air eventually.

So the "Deep State" allowed that show to go ahead... there's a surprise.

Hoagland is a liar.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 34