Well, me for one. I have twice as many published titles as RCH does, in fact.
And I have recognized some of your points as credible. Take for instance an assertion that RCH suggested NASA uses astrology to determine launch dates. Anyone who has been involved with a space launch knows the engineering issues, weather, budgets and the rest really are the sole drivers of this. The amount of rescheduled launches or payloads that died on the vine between the drawing board and launch day are staggering.
I've just wondered expat, why Hoagland? Clark McClelland spews enough bull to fill a bucket - 8 foot aliens in the payload bay and surprisingly he really was a Shuttle SCO or at least in training to be one when the United Space Alliance contract consolidation was likely what got him the boot.
Or what about the more serious mental damage inflicted by the Apollo was a Hoax folks or flat/concave/hollow earthers. I'll take them on anytime.
Even the odd assertions of Phil Schneider pushing stewing puke about the secret shuttle missions (aka STS-51C, 51J, 27, 28, 33, 36, 38) being filled with gold from asteroids? (nobody wants to point out real things like SDS-B, DSCS-III, Lacrosse, Prowler) Even Ted Molczan is fudging things to a degree.
There is strong evidence Apollo 12 had a standup EVA - though those presenting the best evidence contaminate their own premise by co-mingling the ideas with UFOs when the reality is simple - probably had to do with the sensitive nature of the accuracy of Apollo's guidance capabilities or that used on certain rockets like the Titan II used on Gemini.
I'm just saying there are plenty of things to debunk and explore out there.