THE long and the short of it
Sunday, November 4, 2012
""There's a sneaker on Mars" --Richard C. Hoagland, last night on Coast to Coast AM" 20 Comments
The Emoluments of Mars
""There's a sneaker on Mars" --Richard C. Hoagland, last night on Coast to Coast AM"
20 Comments -
Hide Original Post
...and not just
sneaker, but a
sneaker. Hoagland said he's putting together a video presentation of the many "unmistakably artificial" objects captured by the cameras of Curiosity since the triumphant landing on 6th August. Apparently he showed some of these to a paying audience at the recent Conscious Life Expo in Los Angeles, and was rewarded by "an audible gasp" when the sneaker had its Powerpoint moment of fame. We'll have to wait for his video to see what he means (and by the way, he said it will be free—that produced an audible gasp from me), but I suspect it'll just be this smooth rock imaged by the navigation camera quite early in the mission.
[Image] credit: NASA/JPL
This may not be "the authentic" sneakerpic. See comment by Anonymous, comment #15.
You have to wonder about the mental age of his audience, who apparently didn't stop to think a) How Hoagland knew it was a Nike, or b) WTF a sneaker of any kind would be doing on Mars, where they don't play basketball or even tennis.
However, the primary
sujet du jour
was not sports footwear, but methane.
Methane on Mars
"The bottom line is that we have no detection of methane so far," said Chris Webster at a JPL press conference yesterday. Webster is
on the Tunable Laser Spectrometer, which could have detected methane at a concentration as low as 10 parts per billion, if it had been present. Richard Hoagland was hustled (or maybe hustled himself) onto the radio show to comment.
Hoagland, actually, did not get it all wrong. He reminded us that methane in the Martian atmosphere appears to be a seasonal phenom, and Curiosity is in winter conditions right now. He said "this is a first look, just one data point." All that is true. He reminded us that micro-biological activity is not the only possible explanation for the emanations, and that the true test will come if and when the JPL boffins can detect which carbon isotope Martian methane favors (C12 would be a strong indicator for biology rather than volcanism.) True again1. Well done.
If only he'd stopped there, we could all have gone back to sleep a little wiser. But no, he had to spoil it in the second hour by proposing a third possible methane theory—namely, that the gas was periodically oozing out of the long-buried rotting remains of the Great Martian Civilization that built the Face at Owen Mesa before being obliterated by a planet-busting impact 65 million years ago. That, of course, has no chance whatever of being the correct explanation because if there were such a civilization, there would be plentiful other remnants of it to examine. And I don't mean Nike sneakers.
Lack of evidence, of course, has never deterred Hoagland in the slightest. If he needs some, he invents it. Not just the so-called Face, but a Sherman tank, a crashed spaceship in the side of a crater, bits and pieces of machinery. These he has pointed to in images from previous rovers. Now, with Curiosity offering superb image quality, he finds the sneaker, a 100ft metal plate, and a printed circuit board ("looking like it was exposed to a nuclear flash," he said, as if he knew perfectly well what that would look like).
The man's mind simply doesn't work like yours and mine. He says that NASA statements at press conferences are coded—"You have to know how to read between the lines"2 (in other words, the statements can mean whatever he wishes they meant.) Last night's runaway prize-winner for zaniness was "We're dealing here with two separate missions, one all about the usual geology and the other about the technology of the ancient civilization" (not a
quote but close). The image of a duplicate "mission control" full of Hoagland clones gasping as the next Nike sneaker comes into view had me guffawing into my pillow.
2] He didn't say that last night. He said it about a JPL press conference on Vesta, which I blogged about at the time.
posted by expat at
on Nov 3, 2012
1 – 20 of 20
Dear Richard C. (u next tuesday) Hoagland: please, for the love of god, shut up. The sound of you loving the sound of your own voice on an "international ground-breaking science" radio show is just so pathetic. I know you love the ego-massaging from the brain dead callers C2C allows on air, and I know Noory is your biggest fluffer-fanboy, but please, just stop talking sh!t. You are not the eminent world expert on everything, that you think you are.
Wait, what am I saying?! I mean, -thank you!!- for taking it upon yourself to "get involved" with the lying NASA - as you said, you have decided to promote yourself to the position of representative for the entire C2C audience as the "press core doesn't have the wit of out of the box thinking" to ask the key questions and force the *real* issues - ONLY Captain Enterprise is capable of such a thing and going toe-to-toe with these clueless NASA jokers. I expect stunning confirmation of martian pyramids and alien life by the end of the week, now that Richard C. Heavyweight is getting involved.
Congrats on your being able to take a lovely December cruise with your science sidekick - after all those hours you put in as a Walmart greeter, and all those years of pioneering science, you deserve the break. I'm so glad torsion waves don't disappear in winter like methane does on Mars otherwise that trip might not be as ground-breaking as we know it will be. Which of course reminds me of my favorite quote from your show: "I have no idea what we're gonna see, George, but basically it's gonna be extraordinary" - spoken like a TRUE scientist if ever I heard one!! (And yes, I did have to listen to it a few times to make sure I heard it right, word for word).
PS. I look forward to seeing this photo of a "fossilized nike shoe" and computer circuitry that you said you had - I know from your vast qualifications and expertise in photography, there will be no doubt you are correct (I cite the elenin forcefield overlay and the robot head on the moon as evidence of my absolute certainty of the unquestionable credibility of your photos).
Go team Hoagie!
November 3, 2012 2:41 PM
Sounds like the usual Hoagland nonsense. Now he's down to anomaly hunting in the land of Pareidolia, with a few side trips into the kind of pulp sci fi cosmology that would make L. Ron Hubbard sue for copy right infringement. Rather sad really. Anyway, that's another 2 hours sleep you saved me Expat, so thanks.
November 3, 2012 3:09 PM
Indeed. Speaking of reading between the lines, no mention of the confidently-predicted October surprise. Among RCH's most favored non-tactics are either not mentioning his failed predictions at all, or waiting until he has a chance to futz around with RedShift until it shows he was right after all.
It doesn't seem as though he's still excited about the reverse speech stuff he was on about back in the late '90s. Back then, he didn't have to read between the lines of officials' words, because reverse speech allowed him to hear it firsthand.
November 3, 2012 5:16 PM
The Log on Mars.
Presented without further comment.
November 3, 2012 6:54 PM
Leave us all remember, that it was Richard C Hougland who convinced the Heaven's Gate Cult, that object Hale-Bopp had a companion vehicle, controlled by intelligent beings.
The result was, that 39 nerds in
, castrated themselves, then overdosed on reds washed down with vodka.
November 3, 2012 8:33 PM
Amid all the highly controversial events surrounding Hale-Bopp's initial March apparition (closest approach to Earth), none caused so much furor as the contention, by some, that riding along with the comet was some kind of companion, or--
The "Heaven's gate" tragedy -- with its intimately connected and discredited "UFO associations" -- was ultimately the overriding factor in dismissing all such allegations out of hand. This was in addition to the simple fact that these initial observational claims of "unnatural objects ... moving in orbit with the comet," were eventually found to be based on a) merely mistaken amateur observations of background stars, seen briefly in optical proximity to Hale-Bopp, and b) publication of deliberate photographic hoaxes.
Significantly, no ultra-high-resolution images of Hale-Bopp when it was closest to the Earth (in March), were ever "officially" secured by Hubble; the closest NASA ST (Space Telescope) images were supposedly obtained over 6 months before -- when the comet was still ~ .5 billion miles from Earth. Thus, in the intervening 6 months the potential for Hubble being used "in secret" -- and seeing something "totally anomalous" regarding Hale-Bopp, thereby being the cause of Savage and Villard's otherwise completely inexplicable sub-conscious utterances -- cannot be totally discounted.
Our own Hale-Bopp analysis, in stark contrast, has been based in part on an analysis of the basic orbital parameters of Hale-Bopp itself -- and the discovery of a set of striking "pattern matches" with previous NASA "hidden capabilities," and celestial mechanics--
All of which seem intended to highlight, over and over again, the ritual observance of the ancient Egyptian constellation of Osiris ("Orion") and mythologically associated companion constellations and their brightest stars ... such as Sirius ("Isis").
November 3, 2012 8:42 PM
I do remember Richard Hoagland on Art Bell saying that because NASA was refusing to use the Hubble telescope to view Hale Bopp while it was at its closest point to earth, that it could indicate that Hale Bopp was artificial, perhaps a vehicle being driven by astronauts, something placed by NASA in the sky to cover up that there was no real comet, why else the refusal to focus the Hubble on it, and their argument that it would reflect too much light he also countered by saying they had imaged other bright objects with no problem, so why the refusal of this once in a lifetime opportunity to view "the most spectacular comet ever" with our best telescope, the Hubble. I looked on enterprisemission for an article related to that Art Bell show and didn't find the artificial theory in writing, but I well remember that show, which related to this article http://www.enterprisemission.com/nasabell.html. Also see other 4/97 links at http://www.enterprisemission.com/bridge.html
November 3, 2012 8:47 PM
(Other web sites that we feel address related or connecting topics)
Chuck Shramek's Hale-Bopp Companion Page Hale-Bopp Companion
The Art Bell Web Page #1 Late Night Talk Radio Program
NASA Images from NASA
Whitley Strieber UFO News!
November 3, 2012 8:53 PM
Ah yes, heavensgate, where a bunch of Hoagland-esq shills, propelled to national celebrity status inadvertently trigger a mass suicide.
Fools like Hoagy are tangibly dangerous to the more gullible and disassociated aspects of our society.
Simply put, the lies of characters like Hoagland and Bara can have serious implications for those ignorant or weak minded fools who listen and believe wholeheartedly and uncritically.
November 3, 2012 9:41 PM
Heaven's Gate was creepy! Those guys were rich and talented Engineer types. I'm thoroughly confused.
November 4, 2012 12:40 AM
Richard C Hoagland,Ed Dames and Dr Courtney Brown from Emory University, all share responsibility for the Heaven's Gate tragedy. Marshall Applewhite was already on a dangerous path, but the publicity surrounding (courtesy of Art Bell promotion) the "Hale-Bopp Companion" story was extremely influential on his feeble mind.These despicable characters are "accessory to mass murder" & should be brought before a court of justice
November 4, 2012 12:46 AM
There is something such as Irony:
Mike Bara "... And when has Ed Dames ever been right about anything?.." October 25 at 2:56am
November 4, 2012 12:54 AM
no ultra-high-resolution images of Hale-Bopp when it was closest to the Earth
It was a fuzzy object. Think for one second.
November 4, 2012 3:32 AM
I'm so sick of hearing woo peddlers spinning the word "CONTROVERSIAL".
Whenever I hear that word, I substitute the word "BULLSHIT" and stop reading.
November 4, 2012 3:56 AM
It seems you were wrong, Expat. HERE is the real Nike shoe on Mars... http://i47.tinypic.com/30argvm.jpg
[insert dramatic musical sound effect here]
I can speak with some authority on this as I happen to be fully qualified in the field of rockology and I can say with absolute certainty from my first hand experience of seeing every single rock in the entire universe, that this is 100% a Nike shoe. There is absolutely no chance whatsoever this could be a natural rock - rocks simply cannot take on that shape.
In fact, if you look real close, just behind it, you can see the fossilized remains of the 65 million year old NBA star who was promoting said footwear just before Mars was hit by the death star and invaded by storm troopers.
November 4, 2012 6:17 AM
All right guys. You can give it up and go home now. All NASA's Mars missions are fakes.
The Flat Earth Society says so.
(They also share Hoagland's misconceptions about false color photography but who cares about that?)
November 4, 2012 12:17 PM
Richard C Hoagland is un-remorseful about his complicity in the Heaven's Gate tragedy, but perhaps he is in denial about it. Therefore, it follows, that if a Nike can be found on Mars, then perhaps the deceased really did beam up to the Hale-Bopp Companion, and were then dropped off on Mars, where one of them lost a shoe.
Hypothetically, this could be possible, considering how angels can materialize, fully clothed, and be able to blend in with any society that they might chose to visit.
Has Hoagland ever admitted to being wrong about anything?
How many more people have to die, because of Hoagland's musings?
November 4, 2012 2:26 PM
Bioillogical Eunuch, for once you present a very interesting question. Why aren't there any clear images of Hale-Bopp? How could there possibly NOT be any? NASA and clients of most observatories must certainly have some excellent, clear, high resolution, close ups of Hale-Bopp.
November 4, 2012 2:37 PM
It's a fuzzy ball of light. You would need to get very close to get a "clear" image.
November 4, 2012 3:07 PM
All scientific models, to be deemed "scientific," must be testable; in other words, they must contain specific predictions against which later observations ultimately can be compared. Van Flandern's developing model of "a planet that one day decided to blow up" turned out to contain ample observational predictions (apart from the resulting solar system orbits of the "pieces"); the most striking prediction was that both comets and asteroids, if they originated as fragments of a formerly "exploding" planet, should have company... they should be intimately associated with a cloud of orbiting companion fragments -- all circling around each other, as the center of gravity of each resulting "fragment cloud" also orbits the center of the solar system.
Because both asteroids and comets are literally only miles across (as opposed to planets, which measure thousands of times larger), directly seeing these tiny orbiting companions from the Earth has proven all-but-impossible. Historical "occultation" observations of asteroids, as they pass across chance background stars, has only given tantalizing hints of the existence of such invisible companions ("asteroid satellites," as they've been termed), causing some stars to blink on an off rapidly during rare encounters; are these tiny satellites, briefly obscuring background starlight in "satellite eclipses," as the fragments pass across the star? No one's really sure. What's occurring deep inside a comet -- pictured in Van Flandern's model also as a similar host of "whirling fragments" circling each other (above), but this time generating clouds of evaporated water and other gasses as they are heated by strong sunlight, that ultimately expands as visible cometary "tails" typically measuring millions of times longer -- is even more impossible to accurately determine with existing observations... at least so far, from Earth.
November 4, 2012 3:25 PM
Share to Twitter
Share to Facebook
Post a Comment
Post Comments (Atom)