You might think Mike Bara, world-class expert on interpretation of
space photography, would be quite pleased with himself. Taking his book
from Amazon ranking 33,989 to 10,546 overnight, plus (according to him)
"putting the critics in their place" should be worth some
self-satisfaction.
He's definitely taking some pleasure in the sound of his own voice. Re-running old episodes of Ancient Aliens and gushing on FuckBoo "I LOVE watching myself on TV. Seriously. It never gets old." But he definitely seems annoyed:
"A new truth I have learned from being an author; the world is sure full of demented fucktards."
"[the critics] are lying sacks of sh**"
I can't think who he's talking about. Certainly not Stuart
Robbins and me. We're not demented fucktards, and we're not liars. A
demented fucktard would be someone who writes that oceans look dark from
space because the light has to travel all the way to the bottom of the
ocean and back, and it gets tired. A liar would be someone who... let's
see, perhaps deliberately misquotes his own book to try and cover up a
crashing, screaming error.
Update:
Charles Sokasian has provided a possible clue as to Bara's mood today. Read his comments on this blogpost.
1 – 123 of 123
Tara Jordan said...
You might want to check the Paracast radio show Forums : http://www.theparacast.com/forum/threads/mike-bara-p.11664/ Most posters are giving Mike Bara a really hard time, basically implying that Bara is either a crackpot or a fraud.
Your's and Stuart Robbin's biggest sins are of
O'mission; selectively isolating a certain set of facts, out of context,
while ignoring crucial data, as with Jim Berkland, for instance.
September 29, 2012 4:21 PM
Tara Jordan said...
Expat. It doesn't make any difference for Mike Bara if
you`re anomymous or if you are critical of his "researches"
(dysfunctional garbage) under a real identity.On Facebook, Professor
snake oil peddler accused me of being "an Expat fake account" & a
NASA shill. We should petition Paracast to get you on
It may make no difference to Mike, but the producers of
Paracast may demur at having a pseudonymous main guest. Once again, I
insist on anonymity for these reasons:
1) Both Hoagland &
Bara have specifically threatened me with legal action. I don't think
they stand a chance of succeeding, and I seriously doubt that either of
them is flush enough to retain counsel, but if it ever did happen it
would obviously turn my entire life upside down.
2) Both of them take any opportunity for ad hominem mockery. You need look no further than Mike Bara's blog to see what fun he had with Stuart Robbins' photo. IT'S NOT ABOUT ME.
That's the thing. I had a
very long (and fruitless) exchange with Hoagland about that with regards
to James Concannon. He kept claiming that knowing James' identity was
important to the discussion. I countered that his identity would not
change the arguments he was making as he was not asking anyone (unlike
Hoagland) to take his word for it. Hoagland's response was to knit a
flag while while talking about being able to "face his accuser". He
never seemed to understand that the accuser in this case was reality.
September 29, 2012 5:12 PM
Trekker said...
Even his Facebook 'friends' are not immune. He's just
called one of them an 'AssFace', for the crime of pointing out that it's
he, Mike, and his charming brother who hurl the insults.
September 29, 2012 5:32 PM
Tara Jordan said...
It would be extremely difficult -quasi impossible for
Bara & Hoagland to engage legal action against you any individual
critical of their "researches" ,since both of them are public figures
& professional authors-lecturers.They make a living out of
publishing & conferencing,& being subject to criticism comes
with the territory. If you live in the US,you`re protected by The First
Amendment
From the start, Hoagland threatened all kinds of action
for which he had no grounds. He's not even smart enough a poker player
to know not to bluff unless he is dealing the cards, which he isn't.
Most high school graduates, having had at least one
science class, learned that a cubic foot of fresh water at standard
conditions of temperature and pressure weighs 62.4 pounds. That fact may
have little impact on you unless you have carried buckets of water for
livestock, or for landscape irrigation, or for camping, or have packed
"Indian tanks" on your back for firefighting. I have participated in all
of those activities and I have a healthy respect for water weight.
As
a geologist I have appreciated the importance of underground water
pore-pressure in de-stabilizing hill slopes, and I have participated
with engineers and other geologists in preparing plans and procedures
for controlling concentrations of water to prevent damage of various
kinds to both natural landscapes and artificial constructions.
In
relatively recent years it has been recognized that water can be an
important factor relative to triggering earthquakes, although each step
along the way has been highly controversial at the outset. Now it is
generally accepted that pumping fluids in or out of deep wells can
stimulate earthquakes. Often construction of large dams and reservoirs
is also associated with subsequent earthquakes (R.I.S.), even in areas
that have been historically stable. Similarly there are a number of
significant papers in the scientific literature that show clear
correlations between earthquakes and local flooding or unusually heavy
and prolonged precipitation.
Furthermore, the rhythmic
oscillations of tide waters have been studied as another means of
triggering earthquakes in Coastal areas. Several hundred articles in the
world's scientific literature have explored this mechanism, along with
the undulatory effects of "earth tides" that affect the interiors of
continents, more than a thousand miles from the seashore.
These
tidal effects are mainly the result of the phases of the Moon, although
the Sun contributes about 42 per cent to the range of ocean tides. When
the Earth is in a tug-of-war between the Sun and Moon, the earth tides
can attain three feet, and in sea coast areas of unusual topography,
such as in the Bay of Fundy, the ocean tides can range more than 50 feet
in a six hour period. (Contrast this with the island shores of the
mid-Pacific, where tides may range less than two feet.) All this talk
of water loading and unloading needs a quantitative basis for clear
understanding. There is no question that the crust of the Earth behaves
elastically and massive ice sheets depresses it many hundreds of feet.
In fact, in Scandinavia and Canada where continental glaciers exceeded
two miles in thickness as recently as 12,000 to 18,000 years ago, the
solid crust is still slowly rising in response to relief from the great
load of ice.
At the Golden Gate, where a normal range in daily
tide is four to five feet, the daily difference between high and low
tide often exceeds eight feet at the time of a new or full Moon
(syzygy.) The range may reach 8.5 to 9.2 feet on the rare occasions when
a syzygy occurs on the same day as the monthly closest approach of the
Moon to the Earth (perigee.) This rare event takes place only from two
to five times per year and the maximum gravitational force between 1600
AD and 2200 AD took place at such a time on January 4, 1912, the day of
the strongest West Coast earthquake in two years. Was this just
coincidence? Let us analyze some forces that may cause old Mother Earth
to "slip a disk" (or a plate?):
One acre = 43,560 sq. ft. ; One acre-foot of water = 43,560 cu. ft.; x 62.4 lbs./cubic foot = 2,714,439 lbs. = 1,357.22 tons
One square mile =640 acres; 640 x 1,357.22 tons = 868,620 tons/ ft. (of pure water)
Sea
water (specific gravity 1.035) weighs more. 1.03.5 x 868,620 = 899,022
tons/sq. mi. (per foot of sea-water). In addition, for each foot of cold
turbid sea-water (maximum density at 39.4F), the load for each square
mile would be about 920,000 tons. To make it memorable, I refer to the
loading as "nearly 1 million tons per square mile." Now look at the
500 square miles of the San Francisco Bay and Delta, where eight to nine
feet of saline water surges back and forth within a six-hour cycle: 9
ft. x 500 sq. mi. x 1 million tons equals a rapid load change totaling
about 4.5 BILLION tons No wonder Mother Earth occasionally slips a disk
in the San Francisco Bay Area!
There's a difference between hypothetical possibility,
even when it has a mechanism, and what the data show. I don't see you
actually analyzing 50,000 earthquakes for the last century and seeing if
they line up with syzygy.
Misti: The CONTEXT of, for example, Bara's comment "..the 1202 alarm that no one could figure out." is page 90 of Ancient Aliens on the Moon. That's the CONTEXT. Since I have the entire book on my desk, I'm in possession of the CONTEXT.
It's
a historical FACT that Steve Bales correctly called that the alarm
could safely be ignored. That's why Bara's comment, IN CONTEXT, is
TOTALLY WRONG.
September 29, 2012 8:55 PM
Strahlungsamt said...
Re: Update
So Mikey did own mikebara.com. You
know, it only costs $7.99/year to renew a domain with godaddy ($15/year
for a more reputable service). This would suggest that Mikey didn't have $7.99 to rub together when that domain expired.
Tsk, tsk Mikey. What did your mommy tell you about those Vegas strippers again?
Ancient Aliens Debunked. Good link from Chris Lopes.
Most
of the charlatans - so called "ancient aliens experts",like Mike Bara,
are 11th Grade ignoramuses who never attended a single class in
classical archeology, geology or antiquity studies. Historical records
show no interaction whatsoever between human civilizations & Extra
terrestrials. At best,the only metaphorical schemes that might be
remotly associated with "Extra terrestrials visitations",are creations
myths,but these particular creations stories are subject to
spiritual,societal & religious interpretations of "space gods".
However
I have serious problems with Mike Heiser, his debunking of Sitchin is
fairly accurate, but Heiser does it from a Judeo Christian perspective.
As a Christian scholar, Heiser is the personification of the academic
who leaves his rationality & critical thinking at the door of his
church on Sunday
Granted, the film maker has his own woo issues. I think
he did a good job though of going through the standard ancient alien
"evidence".
Before I forget, I should mention the link I posted is from this thread at "JREF"
September 30, 2012 11:02 PM
Tara Jordan said...
@FlightSuit Mike Bara homophobic rhetoric &
constant references to male genitalia, is the result of a psycho
pathological projection.Bara is most certainly a self loathing closet
homosexual.
Tara - I completely agree with you about Heiser. I
referenced him in my podcast episode on Sitchen, and I like that Heiser
is willing to go on shows like Coast to Coast and very adamantly show
that Sitchen is wrong ... but he definitely has his own sacred cow.
It's like how Hoagland and Bara will go after Moon hoax proponents with
guns-a-blazin' only to say that we had to have gone to the Moon to get
the alien artifacts.
A Fraud yes, a crackpot...no! He knows like all
charlatans where to peddle his form of snake oil. In Ufology the Science
that I wish would dare not speak its name. Of course I use the term
Science in reference to Ufology figuratively, and indeed in no way was
that statement made to imply Ufology is a Science. Just a cash Cow, well
if the cow is not being subjected to Alien Mootilations. There you go
Mike another subject for your next Bullshit, or indeed Cowpat book.
Expat you use the Science I will use my superpower. Sarcasm.
MB
on the other hand will use the block button and his razor sharp
repartee. No just the usual "FTard", and you "Trolls". See I told you I
was.
October 1, 2012 8:19 AM
Tara Jordan said...
I love to play the Devil advocate.In Mike Bara`s
defense, I`d like to make the following statement: When one's own
credibility becomes such an issue of embarrassment, acting like a hyper
emotional prepubescent becomes the diversion
October 1, 2012 8:57 AM
Michael D said...
It doesn't make a really strong case that you say this...
Update: Charles Sokasian has provided a possible clue as to Bara's mood today. Read his comments on this blogpost.
Michael D, read the comments posted under that 2010
post, and you will see that one of the comments is very recent. That's
what Expat was referring to.
October 1, 2012 8:57 PM
Tara Jordan said...
@Expat is booked on the Paracast show to present his counterarguments.I should be very interesting.
October 1, 2012 9:37 PM
Tara Jordan said...
@Chris Lopes What about our modest contribution to
assist Expat on the archeological perspective (in regard to the
Ziggurat,"artificial structures" & Lunar artifacts).
Now isn't that interesting? Paddycakes reads every
little blog post of Dickiepoo and arass', reviews Dork Mission, ad
nauseam, yet has never even bothered to pick up a copy of Monuments.
Well,
there seems to be a lull right now, while Hoagy waits for the prunes to
unclog his blockage, why not skim through his first book and let us
know what you think of it?
I quite enjoyed "The Monuments of Mars: A City on the Edge of Forever" back when I was very young and gullible.
Hoagland
was slightly less insane back then, and I had not yet become a skeptic,
so his very appealing arguments were easier for me to swallow.
As
for the writing style, it's not radically different from Dark Mission,
but if I'm remembering correctly, the book did seem less grammatically
troubled than Hoagland and Bara's more recent works.
October 4, 2012 12:38 PM
Tara Jordan said...
Misti Farmer is a funny character, but she needs some kind of exposure with humility.
I don't understand the antagonism at all. Why is Misti always angry at everybody?
October 4, 2012 1:33 PM
Tara Jordan said...
@FlighSuit
From a dialectical & behavioral
perspective, Misti is quite interesting.She is the closest thing to a
MIB. She frequently uses semi-profane & (or) lewd
language,incoherent rhetorics & always drops out of nowhere ;)
You have no chance to tell Expat what does or does not
to do about anything, Mistyc, Don´t you hear the cars and the black
helicopters coming to your house right now? This is what you get for
messing with secret disinformation agents like Hoagland and us ...
Booooo ....Scary, isn´t it?
Are you sure that Preston Nichols wasn't Hoagy's first ghost writer?
October 4, 2012 6:16 PM
Anonymous said...
So book sales equal accuracy? Does Mike really think
that because his doorstop of a book made some sales that his argument is
valid? in what bizarro world does this make sense other than in Mike's
hooker filled, cat hugging, homophobic world?
I read Hoagland's first book (MoM) some years ago and
IIRC, it was quite the mess. I don't know if Hoagie had a ghost writer
for that one (if he did, I hope he graduated from middle school by now),
but I do remember it being very long and very boring. The writing style
was pretty much what you'd find in his papers.
DM is a much
cleaner work. While it's still full of crap, it's at least readable. So
Bara has more writing skill (and a better work ethic) than Hoagland
Alan Archer has been doing excellent work over the last month improving and expanding Hoagland's wikipedia page (and I have a feeling he's not done yet.)
As
a result we can now see the steady buildup of his magazine pieces
during the 70s and early 80s. In that same period he was contracted to
NASA GSFC for some technical documentation. It's a fairly safe bet that
somewhere in there he ran into a publisher or an agent who bought his
spiel about the need for a book, leading to MoM in 1987. What's the
betting he delivered the MS six months late?
October 5, 2012 7:15 AM
Tara Jordan said...
You`d be surprised to know (some amongst you,probably
already know) who sponsored & financed Richard Hoagland when he
started to become involved in the Mars debate in 1983. If you know who
financed him back then, you also know who is financing him now....
October 5, 2012 8:03 AM
Trekker said...
Are you going to tell those of us who don't know, Tara? ;-)
I've never seen that particular Wikipedia page for
"Chuckiepoo". I almost go myself kicked out of the computer lab, for
laughing out loud, just now.
North Atlantic Books, was the
publisher for Monuments. It's located in Berkeley, California, where
Hoagland went to school at UC Berkeley, where they have their own, cute
little nuclear power plant, and do secret government research.
As far as anyone (including Hoagland) can tell, Sir
Richard of Albuquerque never went to college. If you have different
information, I'd like to see it and where it comes from.
Richard C. Hoagland is an agent of influence for the Center for Security Policy. Hoagland's handler is Dr. George A. Keyworth II, former science advisor to President Ronald Reagan.
The Center for Security Policy uses Hoagland and his "Enterprise
Mission" to bolster public interest in Mars exploration in order to
apply pressure to President Bush to support a significant increase in
funding for the space program under the auspices of Project Prometheus.
The goal of Project Prometheus is the development of enabling
technologies for the military control of space under the cover of
peaceful space exploration. The program has the backing of Vice President Dick Cheney and NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe.
NEWS & UPDATES
Parallel operation to "Martian revelations" policy: Center for Security Policy scares soccer moms with asteroid hysteria. President Bush under pressure to announce expanded space program (National Review Online).
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2003/01/24
Date: 01-24-03 Host: George Noory Guests: Open Lines
"This
is a defining moment," said Richard Hoagland (enterprisemission.com(1))
kicking off Friday night's program. He was on the air to spearhead
support for Project Prometheus, NASA's recently announced
nuclear-powered propulsion system which could triple the speed of
current space travel. Hoagland suggested listeners email or fax the
White House endorsing Prometheus and missions to Mars that could be
facilitated by this technology. He believes it is crucial to do this
before Pres. Bush's State of the Union address on Tuesday. Click here(2)
to send your email.
Jack Dyer Crouch, II, former Deputy National Security Advisor Monica Crowley, talk radio host Douglas J. Feith, former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Frank Gaffney, Project for the New American Century Caroline Glick, American-Israeli journalist for Makor Rishon and deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post, Richard C. Hoagland, author and conspiracy theorist Linda Moulton Howe, contributing correspondent to Coast to Coast AM Laura Ingraham, talk radio host[4]
Richard Perle, former chairman of the Defense Policy Board Advisory
Committee and United States Assistant Secretary of Defense James G. Roche, former United States Secretary of the Air Force
Hoagland has said many things that aren't really true.
October 5, 2012 10:22 PM
Tara Jordan said...
In December 1983 upon a meeting at Institute for the
Study of Consciousness Berkeley (founded by Arthur M Young) with former
intelligence officer Paul Shay (SRI vice president for corporate
affairs),Hoagland received $50,000 from the SRI (Stanford Research
Institute) & formed the Independent Mars Mission with physicist
Lambert Dolphin Jr.
Many amongst Hoagland early "associates"
& "professional contacts" (SRI,Institute for Noetic Sciences etc...)
were individuals & (or) organizations associated to the CIA &
the defense community. These organizations & "scientific
institutes" were cover fronts for the CIA & the defense community to
conduct elaborate psychological-social experiments
The
notorious SRI (Stanford Research Institute) who initiated remote viewing
experiments under the under the auspices of the CIA & the Defense
Department
Since I have no intention on hijacking Expat`s Blog,I
wont list all the individuals & institutions who became associated
or collaborated with Richard Hoagland during the early years of his
"Mars years".I`ll leave it to Expat & the rest of debunking
community to do the researches & home-works.
October 6, 2012 12:44 AM
Strahlungsamt said...
Just looked at Facialbook. Mikey's got himself a way
with the ladies. Plus, he's a lot fatter than the picture on his own
site. Ron Jeremy better watch out. :))
@Tara Jordan Links please.
@Misti (from that link) As
a result, NASA is viewed by much of the general public as being
synonymous with space. Support space exploration? Support NASA!
No S**t Sherlock. Somebody nominate this guy for the Nobel Prize.
October 6, 2012 5:12 AM
Strahlungsamt said...
@Tara
Oops. Found the link from Misti's earlier post. More conspiracy nonsense from the Big Man himself.
October 6, 2012 5:37 AM
Strahlungsamt said...
Ooops again!
I stand corrected. That fat guy is Mikey's brother.
Anyway, sit back and enjoy some recent pictures of Mikey's successful career. https://www.facebook.com/mike.bara/photos
Here's one of his love interests. Pinups for Ron Paul 2012. http://www.dawnmarieanderson.com/the-act-of-play.html
Hoagland drums up
support for NASA, by making outrageous claims that NASA wouldn't dare to
make. There likely is an internal struggle between special interest
groups within NASA for control of the agency. I don't think Hoagland's
group is the good guys, anymore than is the group that seems to think
that NASA can do no wrong.
October 6, 2012 12:52 PM
Neville Parchemin said...
Mike Bara posted this in Facebookistan last week:
"NOTICE:
Any person and / or institution and/or Agent and/or Agency of any
governmental structure including but not limited to the United States
Federal Government also using or monitoring this website or any of its
associated sites DO NOT have my permission to use any of my profile
information nor any of the content contained herein including, but not
limited to my photos, and / or the comments ma de about my photos or
any other "picture" of art posted on my profile. You are hereby notified
that it is strictly prohibited to disclose, copy, distribute, disclose
or take any other action against me with regard to this profile and the
contents herein. The previous prohibitions also apply to your employee,
agent, student, or any personnel under your direction or control. The
contents of this profile are private and confidential information and
sensitive."
By way of explanation he later added "I'm laying this out for people who aren't my friends on this social network."
Oops, silly me -- I've violated his terms of use already.
Neville, it's really funny that Bara thinks a piece of
copied and pasted status update spam is somehow going to supersede
Facebook's Terms of Service. A lot of people on my friends list have
posted the exact, same notice that Bara posted, and they're all idiots
if they think it's going to have any effect on how their information is
used, much less give them some kind of legal standing if it's used in a
way they don't approve of.
I'm laughing at Bara for being just another chump so propagates status update spam on Facebook.
FlightSuit, I was about to make that very same
point. Hoagland also thinks his FB page belongs to him, but as you point
out, it (thanks to the ToS) all belongs to Face Book. As long as Bara
and Hoagland insist on using their servers and code, neither one has the
right to dictate any kind of copyright limits on the material posted
(by them or others) there.
October 6, 2012 2:40 PM
Tara Jordan said...
@Misti If you go to the genesis of the Mars ordeal
that started in mid 70`s with individuals like James Hurtak (Hurtak was
the man who originally refered to the Face on Mars as "Sphink like"
& back in 1975 Hurtak "predicted" the existence of a Sphinx image on
Mars),you`ll find some prominent members of the school of "new
Egyptologists" who generated the Egypt-Giza-Mars connections
storyline.Some of these individuals were also connected to the SRI &
various CIA sponspored scientific institutes (Schor Foundation-Florida
State University etc..)Also involved were Remote viewers (& former
US Army ambiguous characters) such as Schnabel,Morehouse.Mc Moneagle,Ed
Dames.
So Tara, what are we to make of this supposed CIA
connection? I tend to think of the CIA as being a pretty no-nonsense
organization. Why would they want to have anything to do with Hoagland
or any of his fellow Mars Face believers?
I've certainly seen
people on the Web suggest that Hoagland is a disinfo agent, but to my
mind, that's almost as far-fetched as any other conspiracy theory.
Yes,
Hoagland is technically spreading disinformation every time he makes a
statement that is untrue, but to suggest that he's doing so as part of a
government conspiracy?
What would be the goal?
More importantly, do we have solid evidence for this government connection?
October 6, 2012 3:05 PM
Tara Jordan said...
@Flighsuit
Pyschological experiments,which the intention of creating "new
religions" & societal mass control mecanisms.Take a look at what we
inherited since the mid 70`s (& I am not even talking about the
UFO-New Age fields),a large proportion of the Western public believe in
Space gods- ancient Aliens, Egyptian-Sumerian-Mars connections....A
brand new religion
October 6, 2012 3:14 PM
Tara Jordan said...
@FlightSuit
Dont call it "government conspiracy",
these are "governmental programs" from which the general public is
unaware of. Just like the US government psychotronic experiments &
human behavioral modification of 1960`s-1970`s You tell me why the
CIA would sponsor Scientific institutes involved in remote viewing
experiments,studies of consciousness,paranormal phenomenas etc...The SRI
which has been the major player in this game, was also involved in
researches & project creations for DARPA
October 6, 2012 3:32 PM
Trekker said...
As an amusing diversion to while away a few minutes, I
did an online search of the Chapters bookshops within a hundred kms of
home, to see how many were stocking copies of Ancient Aliens.
Out
of 61 stores, only six had copies, and only one copy each at that! For
added amusement, they're shelved under 'New Age and Occult', not
'Science', (as I imagine Mike would have liked).
October 6, 2012 6:55 PM
Tara Jordan said...
Before dismissing my theories as Crackpotism,please
consult the CIA, Defense Dept records.Throughout official statements
& FOIA requests, they have released documents acknowledging
researches & experiments into the
Occult,parapsychology,paranormal,psychological experiments using UFO
lore, New Age concepts etc...One of the most publicized programs was the
bizarre First Earth Battalion project that took place at the U.S. Army
John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center & School at Fort Bragg.It is a
matter of public records that both the CIA & the US army had
explored New Age, Occult & paranormal concepts for
practical,operational,psychological & tactical applications.
October 6, 2012 10:40 PM
Tara Jordan said...
I intentionally refrained from mentioning the Remove
Viewing program at Standford Research Institute (co-sponsored by the
Defense Dept & the CIA), because it was without any doubt the most
publicized ( at least in terms of mainstream media coverage).Most of the
participants from the RV program (all of them,former military &
intelligence officers) eventually became prominent & influential
spokespersons for the UFO community.
Thank you Tara, very much. This will keep my busy for
awhile. I find it just as interesting how people like to try and
dismiss what you say, yet accept blindly, anything coming out of NASA
and totally ignore everything about the X-37B and Monuments of Mars.
Tara, also the Soviet Union had an even more substantial
parapsychology R&D program, so naturally during the Cold War
especially, the US military couldn't permit a psi-corp gap. No doubt
this research contributed substantially to applicable techniques of
propaganda, or disinformation as Hoagy likes to call it; like the pot
calling the kettle, black.
October 7, 2012 10:32 PM
Tara Jordan said...
@Misti Thank you.This is essentially my beef with the debunking community. Debunkers
& their arch-enemies (the UFO buffs & pseudo science believers)
pretty much behave in the same way, when challenged & confronted by
extreme critical thinking.Denial.....(cannot really blame them since
denial is a natural& fundamental part of the psychological defensive
mecanism).
The debunking community is relentlessly willing to
"investigate the paranormal, fringe science, pseudoscience,&
extraordinary claims of all kinds, promote critical thinking", yet
debunbers take anything for granted as long as it comes from "official
channels", & are extremely reluctant to question & deconstruct
the political establishment shenanigans. Deceptions & manipulations
are essential elements of the governing process. Look no further than
the Pentagon Papers,the Iraqi aluminium tubes,the yellow cakes &
weapons of mass destructions fairy tales, etc...you may call use the
term "conspiracies" but these happened to be real governmental programs
with the sole intention of deceiving & manipulating public opinion.
But
to be clear,I dont think that NASA as an insitution,or most people
working for the CIA & Defense Department are aware about what is
going on behind the scene. Given the institutional secrecy,the size of
the government bureaucracy and high degree of compartmentalization that
exists within it,most people dont have a clue about what is going on
next door.
Tara, back when I was a True Believer, I used to have
similar feelings about debunkers. I don't feel that way any more,
because most of what I've seen of the skeptic community has been pretty
honest. Sketpicism is just a process of asking good questions, really.
October 8, 2012 1:56 AM
Tara Jordan said...
@FlightSuit. The only difference is, I have never
been a "believer". We alrealdy had this conversation on your site.I
refuse to swallow the garbage that comes out of the New
Age-paranormal-UFO communities, but I am equally inquisitive &
critical of what originates from "official channels".Call me extra
skeptical;)
Tara, I am confused when you say "we already had this conversation on your site."
What
site are you referring to? I do have a couple of Google Blogger blogs,
but I definitely haven't talked to you or anybody else on those blogs
about the matters we're discussing here.
Have you and I talked on Facebook? Or are you possibly mistaking me for somebody else?
FrightSoot, obviously, Tara is talking about this blog,
and other contributors here. She can't mean you, because you never
offer anything of interest. Scroll down.
Misti, I do not understand why you're hostile toward me or anybody else here. What is the reason for this?
October 8, 2012 1:11 PM
Tara Jordan said...
@FlightSuit "Or are you possibly mistaking me for somebody else". I think I did. My apologies ;).
@Misti.You
don`t have to be so aggressive;).We don`t need to agree with each other
in order to respect each other,or at least engage & exchange in a
civilized manner.I think you`d agree that Expat provides a platform for
freedom of speech. He doesn't necessarily always agree & enjoy our
contributions, but he is not preventing us from expressing ourselves.
Misti, if I've said something that's upset you, perhaps we should address the matter directly?
Beyond
that, you should learn to play nicely with others. Your hostility does
not serve you well. It just adds to the perception that you're kind of
nutty.
I'm trying to figure out what you mean, Misti. Are you
saying it would be hypocritical for you to be civil towards me because
you and I have some great philosophical or factual disagreement which is
as great as the ones separating Expat from Hoagland and Bara?
I think that's what you're implying, but I'm not sure. If that is the case, what do you see as being our major disagreements?
It's
kind of hard for me to guess, because I honestly don't know what you
believe. I just know that you seem to be very angry at people for no
reason that I can discern. Have I ever insulted you without realizing
it? If I have, I'll apologize.
It's like Tara says, you pick on Hoagy but not on NASA. That's hypocritical.
Let's try this again.
Why
don't you guys hold NASAss' butt to the fire, about not releasing all
the images in the archive; particularly any time they filter out green
and blue with red on pictures of Mars, without explanation for the
reason, and without side by side comparison of the original image?
Do you think nobody notices how you all duck direct questions, just like Hoagland does?
Scroll down.
October 8, 2012 9:21 PM
Tara Jordan said...
@Misti To set the record straight, 1)I neither
blamed-attacked FlighSuit nor NASA in particular.I was critical of the
Debunking community & its sacro saint symbiotic relationship with
the "mainstream intellectual establishment",& its reluctance to
question "authority". 2) I`m not going to post any longer on this
Blog.My politically incorrect comments are at best ignored or at worst
taken out of context.
Since I am at it,I have a question for
Chris Lopes.You gave me your email(for the purpose of archeological
anthropological chitchat),I mailed you twice, never got any
response,& recently you ignored the comments I am addressing you on
this blog.I never intended on having an extramarital affair with you,
but I have questions about your attitude
Tara, I enjoy your posts and will be sorry to see you leave if you really are leaving.
Misti,
I can't say I know too much about these issues you've brought up. I
know Hoagland has always claimed NASA is "hiding the true color of
Mars," and I know Phil Plait has addressed those claims and I know that
I, personally, possess less technical knowledge of the issues involved
than either of those people.
Your comment seems to imply,
however, that NASA and Hoagland are on equal footing and should be
treated equally. In my mind, they kind of aren't.
>>It's like Tara says, you pick on Hoagy but not on NASA. That's hypocritical.<<
No
it isn't. NASA doesn't come up with fanciful ideas about anti-gravity
and attempt to justify them with atrociously wrong math.
NASA doesn't take a 35-year-old wristwatch up a Mayan pyramid and publish the results as though they were science.
As
regards images of Mars, the HiRISE catalog currently has 26,000
excellent images and the library continues to grow. Don Davis is the
expert on Martian color. He doesn't run a blog but he's written tons
about it.
Thanks FlightSuit,you`re quite a Gentleman. I am not a
barometer for egocentric activity but it feels good to know I am
becoming popular among the debunkers club ;) @Chris, why don`t you
create a Facebook account? its free & only takes a minute to do so. I
have a bunch of interesting friends, from field ethno-anthropologists,
journalists-writers, to notorious astrophysicist
See Paddycakes, once again you duck the issue. The link
you provide does not specifically address the issue. The tax paying
American public pays NASA and gets nothing but obfuscation. There is no
difference between Hoagland and NASA, except that NASA steals more
money. The only difference between NASA, Hoagland, and you, is that you
don't charge.
FrightSoot, what did I just say? Can't you read? You ask questions, then ignore the answers.
One more FLICK'n time.
NASA
releases images of Mars, filtered in red, which absorbs the colors blue
and green. NASA does so without explanation as to why they use the
filter, or what they are trying to find, by filtering out the green and
blue.
Furthermore, NASA fails to provide those same images as they were originally, without the red filtration.
NASA does not say what is green and blue, that they have to filter out. NASA is hiding everything blue and green.
NASA is hiding the vast majority of images in it's archive.
Now
here's a question. What could possibly be a good reason, that you
would find acceptable, for NASA to have to hide what is green and blue
on Mars?
It's like some geezer on a dating site, posting a
current image of himself in sepia-tone, and cropping off the top of his
head, in order to hide the grey and shiny spots.
Under what circumstances is it acceptable to you
bullshitters, for NASA to present red filtered images of Mars, without
any explanation as to what is blue and green that they want to filter
out, or the reason for so doing, and why should they not also present
side by side with the red filtered image, the original, unretouched
image for comparison?
This isn't science. Peers need to be able
to recreate the test in order to validate the results, including
Hoagland, Bara, or any American citizen who wants to take a crack at it.
The fact is, that NASA doesn't even know the true color
of Mars, because they don't record it with color accurate settings. One
more reason why photographs are not acceptable as evidence in a court
of law. Of course the standards for scientific proof are much higher
than even for a court of law. Hoagland's fallacious use of photographs
are just as valid as NASAss', butt you guys kiss NASAss' ass.
Of course, it's not that NASA doesn't have the
capability to record images in accurate color, but if the do, they don't
release them. Instead, they provide an approximate grey scale so that
peers can create false setting on their own, and NASA can't be blamed
for providing altered images.
expat said: "Misti: Would you say this http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/ESP_028598_1900 is a good example, or just an average example?"
Misti Parker says... Perfect
example of arbitrary grey scale approximation of whatever NASA wishes
to convey. Pretty colors though, even the white is extra crisp.
October 9, 2012 7:01 PM
Tara Jordan said...
@Misti. I used to believe NASA was hiding something
about Mars, but after researching the issue in depth,I became more
pragmatic & critical of the "life on Mars - ancient ruins" debate.
Having
said that,I still have very specific questions about particular
"geological formations" on Mars, but the Face, the D&M pyramid, I
know there is nothing there (but that`s only a personal opinion).I dont
like dropping names on the Internet,but I'm privileged to be a personal
friend of Paul Estrada, the main investigator at SETI Institute (Paul
was Carl Sagan`s student & assistant,he`s extremely honest &
very open minded to the idea of the possibility of "archeological
remains or life in Outer Space)& he helped me understanding what
"might be there" & "what cannot be there". A couple of months ago,I
submitted Paul a little analysis I made about the "Elysium pyramids", to
my surprise Paul gave me very interesting feedback & encouraged me
to do further research.I am willing to share it with you & show you
Paul`s comments & criticisms.
I appreciate that Tara. It sounds most interesting.
I
"believe" that David Flynn makes a credible case from a Biblical
perspective for there having been life on Mars, but I don't necessarily
believe that there actually was.
I certainly do not believe
that NASA is at all open or honest in the slightest, but I do believe
that NASA as under the DoD is operating in the supposed interests of
National Security.
As far as SETI is concerned, that's a bigger
scam than NASA; with the sole aim to counter public opinion of reports
of extra terrestrial contact.
When the Orbs contacted me, they
didn't mention anything about their having to get the okay from SETI,
first. I'm really glad that tax payers aren't being bilked to support
SETI any longer.
SETI is like the lottery winner who gets the only
hunting license in the World. Sets up camp in Yellowstone Park,
figuring that that's where the last of the buffaloes will most likely be
found, if at all. Then assures all the other sidelined hunters, that
there is no need for them to go out scouting around in the Mid-West
anywhere, because SETI's got it covered. In the meantime, something is
eating all the farmers corn in Nebraska.
Mike has posted a video of his impromptu banquet speech
at the Conscious Life Expo (filling for an absent John Major Jenkins.)
I've said it before and I'll probably say it again -- judged purely as a
performer, he's really pretty good. If only he'd stick to topics he
actually knows something about, he'd be OK.
>>In the meantime, something is eating all the farmers corn in Nebraska. <<
So,
in this analogy, what does the corn-eater represent? Radio signals from
extraterrestrial intelligence that SETI is not getting? Who is
receiving these signals and why aren't they announcing it?
The Orbs don't use radio, or carry matches, but
considering that Steven James Hawkins warns that we ought not talk to
ET, I think we'd better send that new sub-light craft out to shoot down
Voyager, before it's too late.
It's funny. Carl Sagen was touting pyramids on Mars,
before Hoagy put the fake-o spin on the subject. Then, curiously one
day, Sagen changes his tune about ET, and writes a book about fairy
tales.
"Mike Bara seems to be annoyed about something"
123 Comments - Hide Original Post
He's definitely taking some pleasure in the sound of his own voice. Re-running old episodes of Ancient Aliens and gushing on FuckBoo "I LOVE watching myself on TV. Seriously. It never gets old." But he definitely seems annoyed:
"A new truth I have learned from being an author; the world is sure full of demented fucktards."
"[the critics] are lying sacks of sh**"
I can't think who he's talking about. Certainly not Stuart Robbins and me. We're not demented fucktards, and we're not liars. A demented fucktard would be someone who writes that oceans look dark from space because the light has to travel all the way to the bottom of the ocean and back, and it gets tired. A liar would be someone who... let's see, perhaps deliberately misquotes his own book to try and cover up a crashing, screaming error.
Update:
Charles Sokasian has provided a possible clue as to Bara's mood today. Read his comments on this blogpost.
Most posters are giving Mike Bara a really hard time, basically implying that Bara is either a crackpot or a fraud.
Your's and Stuart Robbin's biggest sins are of O'mission; selectively isolating a certain set of facts, out of context, while ignoring crucial data, as with Jim Berkland, for instance.
1) Both Hoagland & Bara have specifically threatened me with legal action. I don't think they stand a chance of succeeding, and I seriously doubt that either of them is flush enough to retain counsel, but if it ever did happen it would obviously turn my entire life upside down.
2) Both of them take any opportunity for ad hominem mockery. You need look no further than Mike Bara's blog to see what fun he had with Stuart Robbins' photo. IT'S NOT ABOUT ME.
That's the thing. I had a very long (and fruitless) exchange with Hoagland about that with regards to James Concannon. He kept claiming that knowing James' identity was important to the discussion. I countered that his identity would not change the arguments he was making as he was not asking anyone (unlike Hoagland) to take his word for it. Hoagland's response was to knit a flag while while talking about being able to "face his accuser". He never seemed to understand that the accuser in this case was reality.
http://www.nytimes.com/1987/01/02/us/syzygy-when-high-tides-run-very-high.html
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqarchives/significant/sig_1987.php
As a geologist I have appreciated the importance of underground water pore-pressure in de-stabilizing hill slopes, and I have participated with engineers and other geologists in preparing plans and procedures for controlling concentrations of water to prevent damage of various kinds to both natural landscapes and artificial constructions.
In relatively recent years it has been recognized that water can be an important factor relative to triggering earthquakes, although each step along the way has been highly controversial at the outset. Now it is generally accepted that pumping fluids in or out of deep wells can stimulate earthquakes. Often construction of large dams and reservoirs is also associated with subsequent earthquakes (R.I.S.), even in areas that have been historically stable.
Similarly there are a number of significant papers in the scientific literature that show clear correlations between earthquakes and local flooding or unusually heavy and prolonged precipitation.
[continues]
Furthermore, the rhythmic oscillations of tide waters have been studied as another means of triggering earthquakes in Coastal areas. Several hundred articles in the world's scientific literature have explored this mechanism, along with the undulatory effects of "earth tides" that affect the interiors of continents, more than a thousand miles from the seashore.
These tidal effects are mainly the result of the phases of the Moon, although the Sun contributes about 42 per cent to the range of ocean tides. When the Earth is in a tug-of-war between the Sun and Moon, the earth tides can attain three feet, and in sea coast areas of unusual topography, such as in the Bay of Fundy, the ocean tides can range more than 50 feet in a six hour period. (Contrast this with the island shores of the mid-Pacific, where tides may range less than two feet.)
All this talk of water loading and unloading needs a quantitative basis for clear understanding. There is no question that the crust of the Earth behaves elastically and massive ice sheets depresses it many hundreds of feet. In fact, in Scandinavia and Canada where continental glaciers exceeded two miles in thickness as recently as 12,000 to 18,000 years ago, the solid crust is still slowly rising in response to relief from the great load of ice.
At the Golden Gate, where a normal range in daily tide is four to five feet, the daily difference between high and low tide often exceeds eight feet at the time of a new or full Moon (syzygy.) The range may reach 8.5 to 9.2 feet on the rare occasions when a syzygy occurs on the same day as the monthly closest approach of the Moon to the Earth (perigee.) This rare event takes place only from two to five times per year and the maximum gravitational force between 1600 AD and 2200 AD took place at such a time on January 4, 1912, the day of the strongest West Coast earthquake in two years. Was this just coincidence? Let us analyze some forces that may cause old Mother Earth to "slip a disk" (or a plate?):
One acre = 43,560 sq. ft. ; One acre-foot of water = 43,560 cu. ft.; x 62.4 lbs./cubic foot = 2,714,439 lbs. = 1,357.22 tons
One square mile =640 acres; 640 x 1,357.22 tons = 868,620 tons/ ft. (of pure water)
Sea water (specific gravity 1.035) weighs more. 1.03.5 x 868,620 = 899,022 tons/sq. mi. (per foot of sea-water). In addition, for each foot of cold turbid sea-water (maximum density at 39.4F), the load for each square mile would be about 920,000 tons. To make it memorable, I refer to the loading as "nearly 1 million tons per square mile."
Now look at the 500 square miles of the San Francisco Bay and Delta, where eight to nine feet of saline water surges back and forth within a six-hour cycle:
9 ft. x 500 sq. mi. x 1 million tons equals a rapid load change totaling about 4.5 BILLION tons No wonder Mother Earth occasionally slips a disk in the San Francisco Bay Area!
By: James O. Berkland
http://web.archive.org/web/20040403200603/http://www.syzygyjob.org/Proofs/waterwt.shtml
It's a historical FACT that Steve Bales correctly called that the alarm could safely be ignored. That's why Bara's comment, IN CONTEXT, is TOTALLY WRONG.
So Mikey did own mikebara.com. You know, it only costs $7.99/year to renew a domain with godaddy ($15/year for a more reputable service).
This would suggest that Mikey didn't have $7.99 to rub together when that domain expired.
Tsk, tsk Mikey. What did your mommy tell you about those Vegas strippers again?
-Mike Bara
Most of the charlatans - so called "ancient aliens experts",like Mike Bara, are 11th Grade ignoramuses who never attended a single class in classical archeology, geology or antiquity studies. Historical records show no interaction whatsoever between human civilizations & Extra terrestrials. At best,the only metaphorical schemes that might be remotly associated with "Extra terrestrials visitations",are creations myths,but these particular creations stories are subject to spiritual,societal & religious interpretations of "space gods".
However I have serious problems with Mike Heiser, his debunking of Sitchin is fairly accurate, but Heiser does it from a Judeo Christian perspective. As a Christian scholar, Heiser is the personification of the academic who leaves his rationality & critical thinking at the door of his church on Sunday
Before I forget, I should mention the link I posted is from this thread at "JREF"
Mike Bara homophobic rhetoric & constant references to male genitalia, is the result of a psycho pathological projection.Bara is most certainly a self loathing closet homosexual.
You ever check your Email? ;)
http://news.sky.com/story/991654/newly-discovered-comet-may-outshine-the-moon
No doubt it will be an intelligently controlled, 19.5 degree, game-changer!
Expat you use the Science I will use my superpower. Sarcasm.
MB on the other hand will use the block button and his razor sharp repartee. No just the usual "FTard", and you "Trolls". See I told you I was.
Update:
Charles Sokasian has provided a possible clue as to Bara's mood today. Read his comments on this blogpost.
. . . and link to a post from 2010.
Mayvbe you need to fix that......
What about our modest contribution to assist Expat on the archeological perspective (in regard to the Ziggurat,"artificial structures" & Lunar artifacts).
Well, there seems to be a lull right now, while Hoagy waits for the prunes to unclog his blockage, why not skim through his first book and let us know what you think of it?
Hoagland was slightly less insane back then, and I had not yet become a skeptic, so his very appealing arguments were easier for me to swallow.
As for the writing style, it's not radically different from Dark Mission, but if I'm remembering correctly, the book did seem less grammatically troubled than Hoagland and Bara's more recent works.
From a dialectical & behavioral perspective, Misti is quite interesting.She is the closest thing to a MIB. She frequently uses semi-profane & (or) lewd language,incoherent rhetorics & always drops out of nowhere ;)
DM is a much cleaner work. While it's still full of crap, it's at least readable. So Bara has more writing skill (and a better work ethic) than Hoagland
As a result we can now see the steady buildup of his magazine pieces during the 70s and early 80s. In that same period he was contracted to NASA GSFC for some technical documentation. It's a fairly safe bet that somewhere in there he ran into a publisher or an agent who bought his spiel about the need for a book, leading to MoM in 1987. What's the betting he delivered the MS six months late?
North Atlantic Books, was the publisher for Monuments. It's located in Berkeley, California, where Hoagland went to school at UC Berkeley, where they have their own, cute little nuclear power plant, and do secret government research.
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/hoagland_owls.htm
from Odessa 322 Website
recovered through WayBackMachine Website
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Richard C. Hoagland is an agent of influence for the Center for Security Policy.
Hoagland's handler is Dr. George A. Keyworth II, former science advisor to President Ronald Reagan.
The Center for Security Policy uses Hoagland and his "Enterprise Mission" to bolster public interest in Mars exploration in order to apply pressure to President Bush to support a significant increase in funding for the space program under the auspices of Project Prometheus.
The goal of Project Prometheus is the development of enabling technologies for the military control of space under the cover of peaceful space exploration.
The program has the backing of Vice President Dick Cheney and NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe.
NEWS & UPDATES
Parallel operation to "Martian revelations" policy: Center for Security Policy scares soccer moms with asteroid hysteria.
President Bush under pressure to announce expanded space program (National Review Online).
http://www.coasttocoastam.com/show/2003/01/24
Date: 01-24-03
Host: George Noory
Guests: Open Lines
"This is a defining moment," said Richard Hoagland (enterprisemission.com(1)) kicking off Friday night's program. He was on the air to spearhead support for Project Prometheus, NASA's recently announced nuclear-powered propulsion system which could triple the speed of current space travel. Hoagland suggested listeners email or fax the White House endorsing Prometheus and missions to Mars that could be facilitated by this technology. He believes it is crucial to do this before Pres. Bush's State of the Union address on Tuesday. Click here(2) to send your email.
Prominent members
Jack Dyer Crouch, II, former Deputy National Security Advisor
Monica Crowley, talk radio host
Douglas J. Feith, former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy
Frank Gaffney, Project for the New American Century
Caroline Glick, American-Israeli journalist for Makor Rishon and deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post,
Richard C. Hoagland, author and conspiracy theorist
Linda Moulton Howe, contributing correspondent to Coast to Coast AM
Laura Ingraham, talk radio host[4]
Richard Perle, former chairman of the Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee and United States Assistant Secretary of Defense
James G. Roche, former United States Secretary of the Air Force
Many amongst Hoagland early "associates" & "professional contacts" (SRI,Institute for Noetic Sciences etc...) were individuals & (or) organizations associated to the CIA & the defense community.
These organizations & "scientific institutes" were cover fronts for the CIA & the defense community to conduct elaborate psychological-social experiments
The notorious SRI (Stanford Research Institute) who initiated remote viewing experiments under the under the auspices of the CIA & the Defense Department
Since I have no intention on hijacking Expat`s Blog,I wont list all the individuals & institutions who became associated or collaborated with Richard Hoagland during the early years of his "Mars years".I`ll leave it to Expat & the rest of debunking community to do the researches & home-works.
@Tara Jordan
Links please.
@Misti (from that link)
As a result, NASA is viewed by much of the general public as being synonymous with space. Support space exploration? Support NASA!
No S**t Sherlock. Somebody nominate this guy for the Nobel Prize.
Oops. Found the link from Misti's earlier post. More conspiracy nonsense from the Big Man himself.
I stand corrected. That fat guy is Mikey's brother.
Anyway, sit back and enjoy some recent pictures of Mikey's successful career.
https://www.facebook.com/mike.bara/photos
Here's one of his love interests. Pinups for Ron Paul 2012.
http://www.dawnmarieanderson.com/the-act-of-play.html
Hoagland drums up support for NASA, by making outrageous claims that NASA wouldn't dare to make. There likely is an internal struggle between special interest groups within NASA for control of the agency. I don't think Hoagland's group is the good guys, anymore than is the group that seems to think that NASA can do no wrong.
"NOTICE: Any person and / or institution and/or Agent and/or Agency of any governmental structure including but not limited to the United States Federal Government also using or monitoring this website or any of its associated sites DO NOT have my permission to use any of my profile information nor any of the content contained herein including, but not limited to my photos, and / or the comments ma
de about my photos or any other "picture" of art posted on my profile. You are hereby notified that it is strictly prohibited to disclose, copy, distribute, disclose or take any other action against me with regard to this profile and the contents herein. The previous prohibitions also apply to your employee, agent, student, or any personnel under your direction or control. The contents of this profile are private and confidential information and sensitive."
By way of explanation he later added "I'm laying this out for people who aren't my friends on this social network."
Oops, silly me -- I've violated his terms of use already.
I'm laughing at Bara for being just another chump so propagates status update spam on Facebook.
I was about to make that very same point. Hoagland also thinks his FB page belongs to him, but as you point out, it (thanks to the ToS) all belongs to Face Book. As long as Bara and Hoagland insist on using their servers and code, neither one has the right to dictate any kind of copyright limits on the material posted (by them or others) there.
If you go to the genesis of the Mars ordeal that started in mid 70`s with individuals like James Hurtak (Hurtak was the man who originally refered to the Face on Mars as "Sphink like" & back in 1975 Hurtak "predicted" the existence of a Sphinx image on Mars),you`ll find some prominent members of the school of "new Egyptologists" who generated the Egypt-Giza-Mars connections storyline.Some of these individuals were also connected to the SRI & various CIA sponspored scientific institutes (Schor Foundation-Florida State University etc..)Also involved were Remote viewers (& former US Army ambiguous characters) such as Schnabel,Morehouse.Mc Moneagle,Ed Dames.
I've certainly seen people on the Web suggest that Hoagland is a disinfo agent, but to my mind, that's almost as far-fetched as any other conspiracy theory.
Yes, Hoagland is technically spreading disinformation every time he makes a statement that is untrue, but to suggest that he's doing so as part of a government conspiracy?
What would be the goal?
More importantly, do we have solid evidence for this government connection?
Pyschological experiments,which the intention of creating
"new religions" & societal mass control mecanisms.Take a look at what we inherited since the mid 70`s (& I am not even talking about the UFO-New Age fields),a large proportion of the Western public believe in Space gods- ancient Aliens, Egyptian-Sumerian-Mars connections....A brand new religion
Dont call it "government conspiracy", these are "governmental programs" from which the general public is unaware of. Just like the US government psychotronic experiments & human behavioral modification of 1960`s-1970`s
You tell me why the CIA would sponsor Scientific institutes involved in remote viewing experiments,studies of consciousness,paranormal phenomenas etc...The SRI which has been the major player in this game, was also involved in researches & project creations for DARPA
Out of 61 stores, only six had copies, and only one copy each at that! For added amusement, they're shelved under 'New Age and Occult', not 'Science', (as I imagine Mike would have liked).
Thank you.This is essentially my beef with the debunking community.
Debunkers & their arch-enemies (the UFO buffs & pseudo science believers) pretty much behave in the same way, when challenged & confronted by extreme critical thinking.Denial.....(cannot really blame them since denial is a natural& fundamental part of the psychological defensive mecanism).
The debunking community is relentlessly willing to "investigate the paranormal, fringe science, pseudoscience,& extraordinary claims of all kinds, promote critical thinking", yet debunbers take anything for granted as long as it comes from "official channels", & are extremely reluctant to question & deconstruct the political establishment shenanigans. Deceptions & manipulations are essential elements of the governing process.
Look no further than the Pentagon Papers,the Iraqi aluminium tubes,the yellow cakes & weapons of mass destructions fairy tales, etc...you may call use the term "conspiracies" but these happened to be real governmental programs with the sole intention of deceiving & manipulating public opinion.
But to be clear,I dont think that NASA as an insitution,or most people working for the CIA & Defense Department are aware about what is going on behind the scene. Given the institutional secrecy,the size of the government bureaucracy and high degree of compartmentalization that exists within it,most people dont have a clue about what is going on next door.
The only difference is, I have never been a "believer". We alrealdy had this conversation on your site.I refuse to swallow the garbage that comes out of the New Age-paranormal-UFO communities, but I am equally inquisitive & critical of what originates from "official channels".Call me extra skeptical;)
What site are you referring to? I do have a couple of Google Blogger blogs, but I definitely haven't talked to you or anybody else on those blogs about the matters we're discussing here.
Have you and I talked on Facebook? Or are you possibly mistaking me for somebody else?
@Misti.You don`t have to be so aggressive;).We don`t need to agree with each other in order to respect each other,or at least engage & exchange in a civilized manner.I think you`d agree that Expat provides a platform for freedom of speech. He doesn't necessarily always agree & enjoy our contributions, but he is not preventing us from expressing ourselves.
Beyond that, you should learn to play nicely with others. Your hostility does not serve you well. It just adds to the perception that you're kind of nutty.
I think that's what you're implying, but I'm not sure. If that is the case, what do you see as being our major disagreements?
It's kind of hard for me to guess, because I honestly don't know what you believe. I just know that you seem to be very angry at people for no reason that I can discern. Have I ever insulted you without realizing it? If I have, I'll apologize.
Let's try this again.
Why don't you guys hold NASAss' butt to the fire, about not releasing all the images in the archive; particularly any time they filter out green and blue with red on pictures of Mars, without explanation for the reason, and without side by side comparison of the original image?
Do you think nobody notices how you all duck direct questions, just like Hoagland does?
Scroll down.
1)I neither blamed-attacked FlighSuit nor NASA in particular.I was critical of the Debunking community & its sacro saint symbiotic relationship with the "mainstream intellectual establishment",& its reluctance to question "authority".
2) I`m not going to post any longer on this Blog.My politically incorrect comments are at best ignored or at worst taken out of context.
Since I am at it,I have a question for Chris Lopes.You gave me your email(for the purpose of archeological anthropological chitchat),I mailed you twice, never got any response,& recently you ignored the comments I am addressing you on this blog.I never intended on having an extramarital affair with you, but I have questions about your attitude
Misti, I can't say I know too much about these issues you've brought up. I know Hoagland has always claimed NASA is "hiding the true color of Mars," and I know Phil Plait has addressed those claims and I know that I, personally, possess less technical knowledge of the issues involved than either of those people.
Your comment seems to imply, however, that NASA and Hoagland are on equal footing and should be treated equally. In my mind, they kind of aren't.
Anyway, do you think NASA is hiding something?
No it isn't. NASA doesn't come up with fanciful ideas about anti-gravity and attempt to justify them with atrociously wrong math.
NASA doesn't take a 35-year-old wristwatch up a Mayan pyramid and publish the results as though they were science.
As regards images of Mars, the HiRISE catalog currently has 26,000 excellent images and the library continues to grow. Don Davis is the expert on Martian color. He doesn't run a blog but he's written tons about it.
http://www.donaldedavis.com/PARTS/colors.html
I have received no emails from you.
@Chris, why don`t you create a Facebook account? its free & only takes a minute to do so. I have a bunch of interesting friends, from field ethno-anthropologists, journalists-writers, to notorious astrophysicist
One more FLICK'n time.
NASA releases images of Mars, filtered in red, which absorbs the colors blue and green. NASA does so without explanation as to why they use the filter, or what they are trying to find, by filtering out the green and blue.
Furthermore, NASA fails to provide those same images as they were originally, without the red filtration.
NASA does not say what is green and blue, that they have to filter out. NASA is hiding everything blue and green.
NASA is hiding the vast majority of images in it's archive.
Now here's a question. What could possibly be a good reason, that you would find acceptable, for NASA to have to hide what is green and blue on Mars?
How about this?
This isn't science. Peers need to be able to recreate the test in order to validate the results, including Hoagland, Bara, or any American citizen who wants to take a crack at it.
http://discovermagazine.com/2004/dec/color-of-mars/article_view?b_start:int=1&-C=
"Misti: Would you say this http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/ESP_028598_1900 is a good example, or just an average example?"
Misti Parker says...
Perfect example of arbitrary grey scale approximation of whatever NASA wishes to convey. Pretty colors though, even the white is extra crisp.
Having said that,I still have very specific questions about particular "geological formations" on Mars, but the Face, the D&M pyramid, I know there is nothing there (but that`s only a personal opinion).I dont like dropping names on the Internet,but I'm privileged to be a personal friend of Paul Estrada, the main investigator at SETI Institute (Paul was Carl Sagan`s student & assistant,he`s extremely honest & very open minded to the idea of the possibility of "archeological remains or life in Outer Space)& he helped me understanding what "might be there" & "what cannot be there". A couple of months ago,I submitted Paul a little analysis I made about the "Elysium pyramids", to my surprise Paul gave me very interesting feedback & encouraged me to do further research.I am willing to share it with you & show you Paul`s comments & criticisms.
I "believe" that David Flynn makes a credible case from a Biblical perspective for there having been life on Mars, but I don't necessarily believe that there actually was.
I certainly do not believe that NASA is at all open or honest in the slightest, but I do believe that NASA as under the DoD is operating in the supposed interests of National Security.
As far as SETI is concerned, that's a bigger scam than NASA; with the sole aim to counter public opinion of reports of extra terrestrial contact.
When the Orbs contacted me, they didn't mention anything about their having to get the okay from SETI, first. I'm really glad that tax payers aren't being bilked to support SETI any longer.
The video is here.
So, in this analogy, what does the corn-eater represent? Radio signals from extraterrestrial intelligence that SETI is not getting? Who is receiving these signals and why aren't they announcing it?
NASA and SETI are at best, obsolete.