Richard Hoagland discusses artificial structures on Saturns B Ring

This is linked to another post but is worthy of its own.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I was at the Beyond Knowledge Conference in Liverpool yesterday (13/09/2009) and the last speaker was Richard Hoagland.

He presented apparently ground breaking new evidence of structures on Saturn's B ring photographed by Cassini.



[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/6bbce95a7e7b.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b04a7d23e83f.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/33a915d69bf4.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/2c132e388409.jpg[/atsimg]

Ufo in the B ring that is not apparently a satellite or moon orbiting within the B ring.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/8752a849b24d.jpg[/atsimg]

So basically, in a nutshell, from what I can remember (and im sure the video of the event will be released soon) Hoagland, suggests that these 'structures' could be the remains of a potential ring world?? A ring around the planet which effects the gravity and physics of the planet resulting in a northern Hexagonal pole.

I'm gonna stop because I don't want to describe what i cant really remember it word for word..im sure it will be out soon.

Im open minded about the information but would like to see the re-run....what do you guys think?



[edit on 14/9/2009 by davidifty]

reply to post by davidifty


I was there and it certainly wasn't what i expected from Richard.

It was fascinating but i have little knowledge of these issues and so couldn't assess their validity. I just sat back and enjoyed it.

Richard was more 'far out' than i expected him to be. From past experience of hearing Richards ideas/theories, this seemed a lot more controversial than usual. Took me by suprise.

Here's some extra info on his speculation.

Ringworld

Did he mention anything about the moon Daphnis and how its gravity causes "waves" to form in the rings? Did he mention that because of the angle of the sun these waves are now visible to Cassini? No? What a surprise.
saturn.jpl.nasa.gov...

Did he provide the image IDs of any of the pictures he presented?

reply to post by davidifty


Can't imagine what Hoagland's presentation would've been like in person. If those can be confirmed as Phage noted...then damn strange. Until then, I'm definitely on the sidelines. Good thread though Staying tuned....

Originally posted by davidifty
A ring around the planet which effects the gravity and physics of the planet resulting in a northern Hexagonal pole.

I believe that the hexagonal clouds at the pole are due to a phenomenon discovered by Thomas Bhor. As liquids spin at an increased rate, geometric pasterns start to emerge...even Hexagonal.

Here is a link to an article discussing this. I once saw a video of this, but can not seem to find it now, but will update if/when I find it.

www.bioedonline.org...

EDIT: here is a pic of what I'm talking about...but this is pentagonal.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/f5b80572b075.jpg[/atsimg]

[edit on 14-9-2009 by Aggie Man]

Oh, not what I was looking for, but I found these from Hoagland too:





[edit on 14-9-2009 by Aggie Man]

reply to post by Phage


reply to post by Phage


He went into some detail about Daphnis and its effects. However he was proposing that these images in question were independent of Daphnis.

He also assured us that all images were from the JPL database and provided screen shots to prove so.

reply to post by Phage


True RH did not provide that information that NASA puts out and it could very well be a good debate. The whole topic RH presents is just his ideas and thoughts - However, it is true that NASA does not put forth all the facts and hides information very well. I enjoy Richard's information and presentations, and do listen to him very carefully, but I reserve judgement for another day, when more information can be put forth.

reply to post by LiveForever8


I have been looking for the jpl pics but cant find them the ones he is referring to.........

I love this guys stuff. I don't necessarily believe any of it but it gets you thinking outside the box.

I think he is a good storyteller and has a great imagination.
Does not mean its not true.

Just saying....

reply to post by LiveForever8

It is true that Daphnis is not near the outer edge of the B ring (it's at the edge of the A ring) but it shows dramatically the influences of gravity on the rings themselves. The "texture" of the B ring is likely to be in part a product of the influence of Mimas which resides in the Cassini division between the A and B rings.

I have no doubt that Hoagland is using images from JPL. I do question his interpretation of what can be seen when the images are manipulated and/or over-zoomed. I have a hunch that he's right about the "UFO" not being a satellite or a moon, but did he mention the possibility of it being a star? I think this is the image he's showing but an ID would be helpful to those who would like to get a better look.

reply to post by Phage


I cant say whether that was the exact image, but it was something similar for sure.

He was pointing out how there seemed to be symmetries and order within what should have been randomness.

As for the UFO. I remember him stating that because of its geometric symmetry and location it couldn't be a star. Like i have said, im no expert.

He also stated that the reason he believed it was a UFO was because he saw an identical UFO in the STS-48 footage.

What, he didn't dazzle you with his "C3P0" head on the moon pics? They are clear as day...well clear that he is not firing on all cylinders.

Before anyone give this raving madman any more free stage time, they should check out the number of times he has been on the Kevin Smith show. Any one of those interviews is enough to make you laugh yourself silly, that is until you realize what he and anyone who gives him the benefit of a doubt are doing to Ufology.

How he can point to pics of the rings of Saturn and take the flying leap of absurdity and ignorance by embracing the least possible conclusion just astounds me. But then I remember there are far too many that hang on this fool's every word, so I kinda can see why he does this, lol.

reply to post by davidifty


Flagged, not to go off topic (or hopefully not too much, but)...did he have any new material on that huge long wall on Iapetus, that he brought up at this event?
That huge long wall, it is an odd thing to look at...I guess in a big universe a whole bunch of forms will eventually randomly permutate themselves into existence...that big long wall is unaccountable-looking, to my taste, however...makes you go "hmmm"...

I'm continually disappointed by Hoagland. Every time he posits something like this, it dilutes his groundbreaking theories about the "city" on Mars. Now that over twenty years have passed since City on the Edge of Forever, Hoagland has been forced to come up with new things that are bigger stretches. Frankly, for years I thought RH had something special with the Mars findings. Now I fear he borders on the edge of charlatanism.

Yeah RH has kinda gone off the deep end I think. I mean, not too long ago he was saying Obama was going to be this wonderful president and was going to do AMAZING things for us, he learned this through hyperdimensional physics or something. He lost me there.

I was there also and Richards presentation was flawless. I agree that at times it was difficult to follow and understand everything he was saying, but we all got the jist as to what he was gettin at.

I agree that yeah a 'ring world' is difficult to believe but i respect how he uses geometry and psysics to support his theory.

Also to add on that note, who else in this world is trying to decode this type of stuff. Who else is really looking into what NASA (never a straight answer) release and say is hundred percent ligit. Richard and ourselves know that NASA has been hiding information from the people.

RH explained that Arthur C Clarke knew more than he let on. Richard uses Space Odessey 2001 as an example, they actually went to Jupiter in the film, but really in the book version it was Saturn. Remember in the film when the guy is running around in a circle in shuttle, like a running track, another clue.

The Apollo 11 shuttle that lifted the guys from the ground was called 'Saturn V'. A coincidence or a clue?. Why was it not called Moon V or jupiter, why did it have to called Saturn?

Thoughts?

The problem with the RCH's of this world is that they have to keep coming up with new stuff if they want food on the table. Unfortunately, the most effective mechanism to achieve this end is to embellish and sensationalize. Though I'm not telling anyone to totally discount everything the man suggests, I am suggesting we keep this in mind when weighing up his 'evidence'.

Another thing to consider is that much of this stuff is unfalsifiable when it's too far to be confirmed in person - and the only analysis that can be made is on grainy, low res pictures. In respect to imagination, the sky is the limit really!

RCH's face on Mars theory has for want of a better term, fallen flat on it's face. The high res pictures that were released show it to be nothing more than a natural structure. The theory has well and truly lost it's currency. I guess the rings of Saturn now seem like a 'safer' bet for Hoagie. I would suggest that the rings are just as likely race tracks for unicorns... but who can tell eh?

IRM

Hoagland...how shall I say this politely....entertainment purposes only. Lest we forget Carl Sagan sent him a personal message in code upon his death.

I am beginning to realize that RCH may be a slick charlatan. Let me give you folks a clear example even crazier than this one, about 10 years ago after the first mars rover was sent up Hoagland came out with a conference here in Pasadena where he showed supposed images of miniature tanks and vehicles on the planet. I guess what he was doing was playing up the old "small green men from mars" fable. I think it's like looking at cloud formations where your mind sees certain shapes and fills in the blanks. We were looking at rocky formations that you could sort of make into anything you want especially if somebody was leading you to see it that way in a "convincing" manner. For a long time i ignored some of the "red flags" just because i wanted to believe there were structures out there etc. Funny thing is he hasn't brought up the mini mars stuff since that time, maybe he realized he was really pushing his credibility with that angle and thought better not to bring that up again. By the way, that conference is the one video you cannot buy from his online store. You cannot buy that one, it's like it never happened.