The Richard Hoagland appreciation thread!

Originally posted by jedimiller
He explains things in detail and knows exactly what he's talking about.

Jed, no. I don't think he knows exactly what he's talking about, much of the time. (Like the example I gave in my earlier post, above). The problem is he is so totally convinced by his own arguments that he dishes them out as FACTS. And that's what gets my goat. I don't see him use the words, 'probably or 'IMHO' or 'possibly' or 'could be', etc.

Get my drift? For him, everything he says is the gospel truth!

Cheers!

mug2k, yes. Dark Mission: The Secret History of NASA

I am half way through it already, pretty interesting, but I agree with Mike,

The problem is he is so totally convinced by his own arguments that he dishes them out as FACTS.

I think he has spent so much time on some of this stuff that he believes in it. He has this glass dome theory, that he pushes hard in this book. He thinks that a long time ago, some of the craters were covered with a glass dome, and the evidence is in the pictures.

Glass Dome(s) in Mare Crisium?

Way farfetched. But he is convincing nonetheless.

I especially like his Hyperdimensional Physics model. It really makes sense, and is not all that unbelieveable.

Originally posted by mikesingh

Jed, no. I don't think he knows exactly what he's talking about, much of the time. (Like the example I gave in my earlier post, above). The problem is he is so totally convinced by his own arguments that he dishes them out as FACTS

disagree. Heard him last week on the show. he is very, very intelligent and knows much about NASA missions. better than anyone on C2C. Why do you guys refuse to see that he is truthful? and that's the reason he works for them and he didn't get there by making stuff up. Even if his theories are somewhat extreme..he's a very good information officer for NASA.

I've just reached the part in Richard's book where he's finished discussing the 19.5 degrees/33 phenomenon and I'm starting on the 1997 return to Mars material.

Thanks, Richard. Really interesting stuff!

I've always thought that Richard is part kook, part genius, and recently, part opportunist. He seems to passionately want to inform the world of the truth, but be that the case, why must the world need a credit card to acquire said truth? Why not just spill it purely for the benefit of mankind? Oh well, I guess I can't besmirch him of trying to make a buck on it, it's the sign of the times. If Jesus descended from the sky tomorrow, there would be a long line of opportunists claiming the rights to Jesus so they could market him, sell shirts, lunch boxes, action figures, and visitation time blocks. Yes, I'm being a little facetious, but you know there would be a load of people thinking how they could make money from it.

I digress. Richard might really be onto some things. The whole mathematics of Cydonia compared to the Egyptian pyramids is interesting. The whole 19.5 theory is equally interesting. He's been holding onto the Mars tidal model for many years, and the rovers recently proved that it did... hold water. But I find some of his other theories as reaches.

Nonetheless, I catch him whenever he's on because I find what he has to say as being very thought-provoking. And in the end, he could be right about 95% of what he believes is there from the data he's accumulated. Or wrong about 95% of it. I certainly don't know, and neither does anyone here. Time will hopefully reveal the truth, whatever that might be.

A special show will air sunday May 18 2008 on the sci fi channel "Mystery of the Crystal skull-with Richard Hoagland- heres a clip below

video.scifi.com...

Originally posted by RUFFREADY
A special show will air sunday May 18 2008 on the sci fi channel "Mystery of the Crystal skull-with Richard Hoagland- heres a clip below

video.scifi.com...

thanks for that info ruff, unfortunately..I have no cable.

Still, thanks for the support, I still don't understand why ATS trashes on Richard, he was on with george again the other night talking about the NASA announcement. he was dissapointed by the news and said that NASA hiped it all up. great guy and I follow his work entirely.

I think that lots of people on ATS probably share my opinion of RH, like many I’ve read and actually been to one of his ‘shows’ and met him in person, many years ago. I too listened to C2C with much lip licking and yes awe at his topics. But, you know what, 12 years on and I can safely say that RH starts lots of things and finishes or concludes NOTHING! Whilst I don’t agree with everything John Lear says or believes I at least give him his credit for putting himself out there on a limb and sticking to his story and beliefs. The kindest thing I can say about RH these days, is that he consistently disappoints.

If you look at his site and remember what it used to be like say 6 years ago it just smacks of someone that’s in it for the money and not as he says, for disclosure? My warning bells always start a-ringin, when someone tells me of things that they know and won’t reveal because….. we’re too fragile or he wants to protect his NASA sources…….? That’s when I know I’m being taken for a (in RH’s case) long hard ride.


[edit on 18-5-2008 by mlmijyd]

Originally posted by mlmijyd
But, you know what, 12 years on and I can safely say that RH starts lots of things and finishes or concludes NOTHING!

It's hard to prove that there's a pyramid on mars Mlmijyd. Like all of us, we have no way on knowing if he's telling us the truth or not because he has not landed on mars and visited the site. why don't you give the guy some time? it may take 10 more years to find that face on mars ancient site and RH might even be dead when we find it. 12 years is nothing. the man knows something and he deserves some recognition for all the work he's done. he needs more support than personal attacks.

reply to post by jedimiller


I like listening to and reading Hoagland's material. He does a tremendous job at tying together disparate pieces of conspiracy theory but reads more into it than likely really exists.

I like how he relates the Freemasons, Kennedy assassination, silly Nasa hi-jinks on not revealing everything they find but puts in a bit more overlap than I believe accurate. For example I think the Freemasons is just a college fraternity used by politicians to develop careers...still means they are satanists but only by choice of profession.

Unfortunately he does seem weak on pure science and physics and should stay away from theories on physics, life science, color science unless he can work with true experts like Mike Bara.

Overall I'd give him a B+ in a area that only contains C and D quality people publishing reports and info.