Topic: Steve Warner's Dark City

[Meanandnasty]

Do you believe in angels?  And does the hyperdimension physics model address portals and how do they if they do?

I'm late!  My computer clock was off by two hours, can that happen hyperdimensional physics, too?

[WOTR]

I am probably too late... I would like to know if he has been contacted directly or if he works with any "contactees" to provide support for his theories or help develop them.  I do not think I have ever heard him reference direct contact (though I could be wrong, and if the question is something he has answered and I should already know, please ignore it.)

I will actually have to tune in.  Hoagland on Coast was a bore and I usually turned the radio off.  Hoagland with Art proved that his performance can be influenced by the host.

[bateman]

I am probably too late... I would like to know if he has been contacted directly or if he works with any "contactees" to provide support for his theories or help develop them.  I do not think I have ever heard him reference direct contact (though I could be wrong, and if the question is something he has answered and I should already know, please ignore it.)

I will actually have to tune in.  Hoagland on Coast was a bore and I usually turned the radio off.  Hoagland with Art proved that his performance can be influenced by the host.

25 mins left. Next segment is Q&A.

[jazmunda]

25 mins left. Next segment is Q&A.

Are you taking live calls?

[jazmunda]

Can you please do this?

[bateman]

Are you taking live calls?

I should have. That was a WILD two hours. I did ask a couple of your questions, we got into his work at CBS too, so for people wondering about his background, we did get into that. He goes SO fast it's hard to get things in sometimes, but it was a "lively" back & forth. I think you guys will love this one.

[Marc.Knight]

I should have. That was a WILD two hours. I did ask a couple of your questions, we got into his work at CBS too, so for people wondering about his background, we did get into that. He goes SO fast it's hard to get things in sometimes, but it was a "lively" back & forth. I think you guys will love this one.

When will this one air?

[WhiteCrow]

I truly enjoy your broadcasts, nice to hear an interviewer that is so well prepared and actually listens to the guests.
You have qualities that made Art and Rush great; asked questions that the listener would like answered and put into concise words what the listener is thinking.
Looking forward to future shows!

[bateman]

Thank yeeewww! Even Hoagland said I 'really did my homework' so I'm glad that it sounds that way. It'll air next Saturday night at 10.

[Spinner]

Thank yeeewww! Even Hoagland said I 'really did my homework' so I'm glad that it sounds that way. It'll air next Saturday night at 10.

I wish I could have heard this show live.
But, okay, I guess I can wait. Not really.
But I guess I'll have to. 

[nika01]

Thank yeeewww! Even Hoagland said I 'really did my homework' so I'm glad that it sounds that way. It'll air next Saturday night at 10.

Why interview Hoagland? Seriously. What has he actually done of any importance? If there is something substantial, I would like to know about it. I have listened to him for years and have yet to hear one independently substantiated thing he has contributed. I know the excuse that AB gives, good radio. I think hogland muddies the water for the truly serious investigators.

[gringomisio]

Does darkweekend.com or darkweekend.net load on anyone's mobile?  I've got a nexus 4 chrome and it just has a spinner that says loading.

Also, can someone provide the podcast RSS link to the show?  Thanks!

[Miranda]

Does darkweekend.com or darkweekend.net load on anyone's mobile?  I've got a nexus 4 chrome and it just has a spinner that says loading.

Also, can someone provide the podcast RSS link to the show?  Thanks!

http://www.stationcaster.com/stations/wabc/rss/?c=14563

[Marc.Knight]

Why interview Hoagland? Seriously. What has he actually done of any importance? If there is something substantial, I would like to know about it. I have listened to him for years and have yet to hear one independently substantiated thing he has contributed. I know the excuse that AB gives, good radio. I think hogland muddies the water for the truly serious investigators.

He discovered:


1. Data heads on the moon
2. Giant crystalline caves on Mars
3. The USA's secret space program
4. NASA lies and cover-ups
5. Ancient monuments spread across the solar system


Beat that.

[gringomisio]

http://www.stationcaster.com/stations/wabc/rss/?c=14563

Thanks.

[nika01]

He discovered:


1. Data heads on the moon
2. Giant crystalline caves on Mars
3. The USA's secret space program
4. NASA lies and cover-ups
5. Ancient monuments spread across the solar system


Beat that.

 .....cricket....

You left out his magic wrist watch.

Cant believe that anyone buys what he sells.

[jazmunda]

Cant believe that anyone buys what he sells.

I must admit that I bought his book in the 90s prior to having seen the light and because I was fascinated with the face on Mars since I was a kid. It was nice toilet reading but would have been more useful as toilet paper.

Having said that I thought his show on Dark Matter was one of the better DM shows even though I wasn't buying what he was selling or even seeing what he thought he saw in the photos. He can make for a very entertaining show. Perhaps that is the charm of a seasoned charlatan. Or maybe it might have helped that I listened to the second half of the show out in the country on a farm whilst lying in the grass looking up at a trillion stars on a clear night. I can't wait to hear Bateman's interview with him too. I'll be listening to that one in the dark with the lights turned out.

[Marc.Knight]

I must admit that I bought his book in the 90s prior to having seen the light and because I was fascinated with the face on Mars since I was a kid. It was nice toilet reading but would have been more useful as toilet paper.

Having said that I thought his show on Dark Matter was one of the better DM shows even though I wasn't buying what he was selling or even seeing what he thought he saw in the photos. He can make for a very entertaining show. Perhaps that is the charm of a seasoned charlatan. Or maybe it might have helped that I listened to the second half of the show out in the country on a farm whilst lying in the grass looking up at a trillion stars on a clear night. I can't wait to hear Bateman's interview with him too. I'll be listening to that one in the dark with the lights turned out.

For me, Hoagland is 99% entertainment factor and 1% science.  As long as you keep a ratio like that he's a harmless distraction on a star-lit night in the country.

[nika01]

I must admit that I bought his book in the 90s prior to having seen the light and because I was fascinated with the face on Mars since I was a kid. It was nice toilet reading but would have been more useful as toilet paper.

Having said that I thought his show on Dark Matter was one of the better DM shows even though I wasn't buying what he was selling or even seeing what he thought he saw in the photos. He can make for a very entertaining show. Perhaps that is the charm of a seasoned charlatan. Or maybe it might have helped that I listened to the second half of the show out in the country on a farm whilst lying in the grass looking up at a trillion stars on a clear night. I can't wait to hear Bateman's interview with him too. I'll be listening to that one in the dark with the lights turned out.

Yes, he is entertaining sometimes. The sheer nonsense of it is fun. What scares me are those that believe. It would make a great Phd thesis for some budding sociologist.

[nika01]

For me, Hoagland is 99% entertainment factor and 1% science.  As long as you keep a ratio like that he's a harmless distraction on a star-lit night in the country.

What I cant figure out is whether be believes his own bullshit, or not.

[Marc.Knight]

What I cant figure out is whether be believes his own bullshit, or not.

Hard to know.  It pays the bills so that's a motivation to convey a perception of belief.

[nika01]

Hard to know.  It pays the bills so that's a motivation to convey a perception of belief.

must make it hard to look in the mirror.

The bug that has crawled up my ass is that all of the intentional pseudoscience makes it really hard for ethical fringe scientists. This is what I have against most of the purveyors of science fiction as fact. Lord know there is enough fakery in the hard sciences. 

[Marc.Knight]

must make it hard to look in the mirror.

The bug that has crawled up my ass is that all of the intentional pseudoscience makes it really hard for ethical fringe scientists. This is what I have against most of the purveyors of science fiction as fact. Lord know there is enough fakery in the hard sciences.

Interesting, you're suggesting that true scientists who are pushing the theoretical envelope tend to be lumped in with pseudoscience practitioners.  I also have an issue with the title "scientist" thrown around like anyone can wake up one day and proclaim themselves to be a scientist.  How about earning a Ph.D. first, then start claiming one is a scientist. 

[nika01]

Interesting, you're suggesting that true scientists who are pushing the theoretical envelope tend to be lumped in with pseudoscience practitioners.  I also have an issue with the title "scientist" thrown around like anyone can wake up one day and proclaim themselves to be a scientist.  How about earning a Ph.D. first, then start claiming one is a scientist.

Why yes I am suggesting that, level of degree notwithstanding. Happens every day.  People that do paradigm bending work are harassed by the old guard. This is really not an observation new with me. What I meant more specifically referred to people involved in already controversial areas, like metaphysics, ufos, esp research, etc.

[WOTR]

must make it hard to look in the mirror.

The bug that has crawled up my ass is that all of the intentional pseudoscience makes it really hard for ethical fringe scientists. This is what I have against most of the purveyors of science fiction as fact. Lord know there is enough fakery in the hard sciences.

I have a bit of a problem with this.  Who gets to decide what is pseudoscience, what is an ethical fringe science and what is "legitimate" science.  Please do not get me wrong... I think it is safe to say that Hoagland is mostly entertainment.  The problem comes when somebody decides that he should not be allowed to represent himself as presenting science (again, I do not think that he really presents science that can / should be taken too seriously.)  If you want proven science, look to something peer reviewed and ignore the likes of RCH. 

I have the same issues with global warming science.  It seems that everybody wants the right to tell those who they deem pseudo scientists to shut up (invariably those scientists who come down on the side that they do not agree with.)  Hoaglands science is one area where the victims are almost non-existent (vs. Coast putting on medical quacks.)  Even if somebody actually believes that the face on Mars is located at 19.5 degrees from the sun which proves the life forms took off on an asteroid, who cares?

I hate to be the black cloud on the forum, but take away all of the Hoaglands of the world and the "ethical fringe scientists" that you refer to are still going to be laughed at, shunned and ignored.  The fact is that the "old guard" that you refer to, in all areas, has a vested interest to see that their thoughts and theories remain relevant. 

[George Drooly]

Bateman, please interview William T. Vollmann:

Vollmann worked odd jobs, including as a secretary at an insurance company, and saved up enough money to go to Afghanistan in 1982. His experiences traveling with the mujahideen, then engaged in warfare with the Soviet Union, inspired his first non-fiction book, An Afghanistan Picture Show, or, How I Saved the World, which was not published until 1992.

Upon his return to the USA, Vollmann started work as a computer programmer; he had virtually no experience with computers. According to a New York Times Magazine profile by the novelist Madison Smartt Bell, for a year Vollmann wrote much of his first novel, You Bright and Risen Angels, after hours on office computers, and subsisted on candy bars from vending machines and hiding from the janitorial staff.[7]

In addition to full-length (and notably lengthy) books, Vollmann has written articles and had stories published in Harper's, Playboy, Conjunctions, Spin Magazine, Esquire, The New Yorker, Gear, and Granta. He has also contributed to The New York Times Book Review. Vollmann identifies as a "hack journalist;" he often does travel writing and reportage while doing research for his larger fiction or non-fiction projects. Both genres have a hybridized and journalistic feel.[according to whom?]

In November 2003 (after many delays), his book Rising Up and Rising Down was published. It is a 3,300-page, heavily illustrated, seven-volume treatise on violence. It was nominated for the National Book Critics Circle Award. A single-volume condensed version was published at the end of the following year by Ecco Press. Vollmann justified the abridgment, saying, "I did it for the money."[8] Rising Up and Rising Down represents more than 20 years of work in which he tries to establish a moral calculus to consider the causes, effects, and ethics of violence. Vollmann based it on his reporting from places of warfare, including Cambodia, Somalia, and Iraq.

Vollmann's other works often deal with the settlement of North America (as in Seven Dreams: A Book of North American Landscapes, a cycle of seven novels); or stories of people (often prostitutes) on the margins of war, poverty, and hope. His novel Europe Central (2005) follows the trajectories of a wide range of characters (including the Russian composer Dmitri Shostakovich) caught up in the fighting between Germany and the Soviet Union. It won the 2005 National Book Award for Fiction.

In 2008, Vollmann was awarded a five-year fellowship/grant from the Strauss Living Award, which provides $50,000 a year, tax free. In 2009, Vollmann published Imperial, a nonfiction account of life in Imperial County, California, on the border of Mexico.[9] In 2010, Vollmann published a critical study of Japanese Noh Theater, entitled Kissing the Mask: Beauty, Understatement, and Femininity in Japanese Noh Theater.[10]

As of 2007, Vollmann was writing ghost and supernatural stories for a collection to be published by Viking ("Widow’s Weeds" was published in AGNI #66 in 2007).[11] He was also working on the fourth and fifth volumes of the Seven Dreams series. In interviews, he has mentioned a book about abortion called The Shame of Our Youth, as well as a study on rape cases in court.[12]

Vollmann's papers were acquired by the Rare Books & Manuscripts Library of Ohio State University.[13]

In Harper's Magazine (September 2013), Vollmann details his discovery, following a Freedom of Information Act (United States) request, that the FBI was watching him, and that he was suspected of being a domestic terrorist.[14]

[Yorkshire pud]

I have a bit of a problem with this.  Who gets to decide what is pseudoscience, what is an ethical fringe science and what is "legitimate" science.  Please do not get me wrong... I think it is safe to say that Hoagland is mostly entertainment.  The problem comes when somebody decides that he should not be allowed to represent himself as presenting science (again, I do not think that he really presents science that can / should be taken too seriously.)  If you want proven science, look to something peer reviewed and ignore the likes of RCH. 

I have the same issues with global warming science.  It seems that everybody wants the right to tell those who they deem pseudo scientists to shut up (invariably those scientists who come down on the side that they do not agree with.)  Hoaglands science is one area where the victims are almost non-existent (vs. Coast putting on medical quacks.)  Even if somebody actually believes that the face on Mars is located at 19.5 degrees from the sun which proves the life forms took off on an asteroid, who cares?

I hate to be the black cloud on the forum, but take away all of the Hoaglands of the world and the "ethical fringe scientists" that you refer to are still going to be laughed at, shunned and ignored.  The fact is that the "old guard" that you refer to, in all areas, has a vested interest to see that their thoughts and theories remain relevant.

I see your reasoning, but the thing that Hoagland and similar don't have the restriction on, is professional reputation or accountability. They have the luxury of spouting any crap they like and not have to a)prove it and b) held to account.

Take the well trailed 'prediction' that the Earth was going to be wiped out by a fictitious planet called Nibiru; Wasn't it december 2012? Twelve months afterwards it hasn't happened, and never was going to. Such as David Wilcox and others were telling any radio show who would listen that it was going to happen. In 2012, the alarm by some was such that a website was set up by 'old guard' scientists, who surprisingly did know what it was they were talking about and systematically dissected scientifically and in laymans terms why it wasn't going to happen. Unfortunately they did it too late to stop one 15 year old girl who took her own life, so terrified was she that there was no point in carrying on; this was in spite of her family, friends, teachers telling her otherwise..

So yes, pseudo scientists or as they should be better known as, charlatan, lying, snake oil salesmen and women who are touting fear, should be held to account, not as scientists though. But as psychotically disturbed individuals.

[nika01]

I have a bit of a problem with this.  Who gets to decide what is pseudoscience, what is an ethical fringe science and what is "legitimate" science.  Please do not get me wrong... I think it is safe to say that Hoagland is mostly entertainment.  The problem comes when somebody decides that he should not be allowed to represent himself as presenting science (again, I do not think that he really presents science that can / should be taken too seriously.)  If you want proven science, look to something peer reviewed and ignore the likes of RCH. 

I have the same issues with global warming science.  It seems that everybody wants the right to tell those who they deem pseudo scientists to shut up (invariably those scientists who come down on the side that they do not agree with.)  Hoaglands science is one area where the victims are almost non-existent (vs. Coast putting on medical quacks.)  Even if somebody actually believes that the face on Mars is located at 19.5 degrees from the sun which proves the life forms took off on an asteroid, who cares?

I hate to be the black cloud on the forum, but take away all of the Hoaglands of the world and the "ethical fringe scientists" that you refer to are still going to be laughed at, shunned and ignored.  The fact is that the "old guard" that you refer to, in all areas, has a vested interest to see that their thoughts and theories remain relevant.

I agree with what you are saying. My bone of contention is about freely giving air time to people that are obvious disingenuous, over and over and over again.
Yes, the only way to get rid of the old guard is to wait for them to die. I am a scientist and work with many scientists, and most of them are far more open minded than the vocal critics like the yahoos at CSI, or whatever they are calling themselves now. However, I don't think it helps at all to trot out the lunatic fringe on the same venue as people doing research into NDE's, for example. It merely gives them ammunition, guilt by association, right or wrong.  There is a big difference between people attempting legitimate research into controversial areas and those that use enhanced photography or wrist watches with "special" tuning forks to make mysterious measurements. If any of this was valid, it should be able to stand the light of day in a laboratory setting, especially the wrist watch nonsense. It would have been done already if it were real. That is why I claim it is all disingenuous BS. 

[SaucyRossy]

I should have. That was a WILD two hours. I did ask a couple of your questions, we got into his work at CBS too, so for people wondering about his background, we did get into that. He goes SO fast it's hard to get things in sometimes, but it was a "lively" back & forth. I think you guys will love this one.

I cannot wait to hear about his past and him explain why there is little to no documentation backing up his "credentials".

That said, I enjoy Hoagland and am betting you had a crazy couple of hours haha can't wait to listen

[Agent : Orange]

I'd like to make a guest request. Please have Grant Morrison on the show.

He is a prolific writer, who has worked mainly at both DC and Marvel comics, but has also produced some work outside of comics. However, you really wouldn't need to know much of his work to get a prolific interview out of him.

Bobgrau should really be credited with this, he suggested Dark Weekend as a possible way to hear an interview with Morrison on the "reading minds" thread.