The DEATH of Enterprise-mission...

I have been, and still am, a fan of Richard C. Hoagland's work. From his books on Cydonia and his *previously extensive* articles on www.enterprisemission.com to his latest endeavor "DARK MISSION," --I've loved his insight, research, investigation and persistence.

However, he has been bitten by an unknown bug. Proverbial "unknown bug." Perhaps he has reached new heights of success (financially, relationship-wise, celebrity, etc.) previously unknown. Perhaps he has taken up golfing, or is now in the "in crowd."

No matter the reason, he has UTTERLY AND COMPLETELY NEGLECTED his website (www.enterprisemission.com). "Upcoming reports" are years in the promising. "Paper to be published soon" might as well read: "Never going to publish." I have had his site bookmarked, but, after over a YEAR of no new content, I am now resigning to the fact that he was BOUGHT OUT or just DOESN'T CARE. His site is going to be removed from my favorites bar. I love his work, but he has neglected his site into APATHY.

I highly respect him. His website, however, has suffered from too long of a neglect. Your thoughts? There must be Hoagland fans out there (heck, I'm one). Why has he let enterprisemission go? It was wonderful while it lasted.

It is my gut feeling that Hoagland might have been "BOUGHT OUT" so to speak. He's now in the "in crowd" or has fallen to the TRAPPINGS OF SUCCESS. Is he so comfortable as to neglect the site that helped him rise to stardom? We/I love enterprisemission.com... It's just that the site is DEAD. Goodbye EnterpriseMission.

Thoughts?

MODS: Please feel free (not that you needed my permission) to move this to a more appropriate forum.

reply to post by GhostLancer


Never heard of him. I doubt he is big enough to be a concern to even be considered to having be bought out. His fans might adore him but he's certainly not on any mainstream radar.

Originally posted by kro32
reply to post by GhostLancer

 

Never heard of him. I doubt he is big enough to be a concern to even be considered to having be bought out. His fans might adore him but he's certainly not on any mainstream radar.

--The **truth** will not be mainstream. If you have not heard of him, then I doubt you have much interest in NASA and Moon/Mars exploration. He is rather prolific when it comes to matters of our solar system and its anomalies. It is HIGHLY RECOMMENDED that you read "Dark Mission" amongst other books written by him. If you go to www.amazon.com you can find the entire list of his books. He is big. He is, in fact, MAJOR. However, many are upset that he has neglected his website for more than a YEAR.

The guy is pretty old man. Last I saw was when he was going on about prisms showing up in lunar photos so he deduced that there were glass buildings and structures on the moon

Originally posted by GhostLancer
--I've loved his insight, research, investigation and persistence.

he is just a hoaxer only interested in making money - remember his "face on Mars"? He got shown up very badly there!

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow
The guy is pretty old man. Last I saw was when he was going on about prisms showing up in lunar photos so he deduced that there were glass buildings and structures on the moon

So, would you say, then, when YOU are 20 years or 30 years older that your opinions and research would be invalidated by the fact that you would be 20 or 30 (or more) years older? Are you saying that people above 40 or 50 or 60 years of age are stupid or untrustworthy or prone to daydreams? You insinuate that age equals WHAT? Does age INVALIDATE thought? You also used a "straw man" tactic to reduce his extensive research into something complex into something basic. Anyone with an open, scientific mind might realize that his thoughts on what may or may not be on the Lunar surface are quite valid.

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by GhostLancer
--I've loved his insight, research, investigation and persistence.

he is just a hoaxer only interested in making money - remember his "face on Mars"? He got shown up very badly there!

edit on 10-6-2011 by spoor because: (no reason given)

We're all entitled to our opinions, right? However, as much as I'm upset with the DEATH of www.enterprisemission.com, I must admit that Richard C. Hoagland presented quite an astounding case. NASA deliberately filtered the images that "proved" that the face was not a face. NASA distorted the images and inverted them to make it seem like nothing was there. Hoagland and Bara, in their book "Dark Mission" prove that NASA distorted images to make an unsuspecting public *believe* there was/is nothing there. They even made Mars REDDER.

Originally posted by GhostLancer
You also used a "straw man" tactic to reduce his extensive research into something complex into something basic.

What "extensive research" are you on about? Hoaxland has done none, he just makes silly claims about what he sees in photos.

Anyone with an open, scientific mind might realize that his thoughts on what may or may not be on the Lunar surface are quite valid.

Except that they are not valid at all, they are based on what he claims to see in photo's

Originally posted by GhostLancer
NASA deliberately filtered the images that "proved" that the face was not a face. NASA distorted the images and inverted them to make it seem like nothing was there.

Another Hoaxland lie - later images were made by the Mars Express probe of the European Space Agency - not NASA.

You really should not believe anything Hoaxland tells you!

I am /was very interested in what he had to publish, but I think he simply ran out of stuff to put on his website.

He ran his course on the UFO circuit and he has nothing new to offer. Plus I think he was propped up by Project Camelot and after that fell to pieces because of Kerry Cassidy he no longer had a free plug for his work.

reply to post by GhostLancer


I bought his book . . . whatever hefty one was one of his latest or his latest.

I was greatly disappointed.

Perhaps some of his points are valid. It just seemed like he was groping and reaching far too far for the conclusions he came to.

I respect that he worked for NASA and has a fine mind and good connections.

And, he has likely released some good information on cover-ups etc.

However, I have also wondered if he was some sort of disinformation stooge . . . seeding enough nonsense into partially true stuff to discredit some far out stuff that was true but needed to be still hidden for the globalist oligarchy's tyrannical purposes.

I still enjoy listening to him on C2C from time to time.

But mostly I consider him a blowhard . . . that seems to think more of his stuff than he likely should . . . or else he knows a lot of stuff he dare not share so ends up hyping overmuch what he can share.

imho.

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by GhostLancer
NASA deliberately filtered the images that "proved" that the face was not a face. NASA distorted the images and inverted them to make it seem like nothing was there.

Another Hoaxland lie - later images were made by the Mars Express probe of the European Space Agency - not NASA.

You really should not believe anything Hoaxland tells you!

edit on 10-6-2011 by spoor because: (no reason given)

No. If you READ AND EXAMINE the data *provided by NASA* the images were GRANDLY DISTORTED. This thread is about the *death* of EnterpriseMission due to APATHY from Hoagland and anyone involved with its FORMER MAGNIFICENCE. This thread in now way asserts that his research was invalid.

IF YOU ACTUALLY READ his books and consider his theories based on FACTS.... you might change your opinion(s). From what it seems, you have dined on the "common paste" that nourishes close-minded minds. I hope this is not the case.

Originally posted by BO XIAN
I respect that he worked for NASA and has a fine mind and good connections.

Except that he never worked for NASA - why do you think he did?

And, he has likely released some good information on cover-ups etc.

What cover ups has he released information on?

Originally posted by kro32
reply to post by GhostLancer

 

Never heard of him. I doubt he is big enough to be a concern to even be considered to having be bought out. His fans might adore him but he's certainly not on any mainstream radar.

That because his real name is Richard Hoaxland.

Common error...

reply to post by GhostLancer


I totally agree with you. he turned a lot of people on to a whole load of ideas. Dark Mission was something very out of the ordinary and informed us of the extraordinary lengths nasa et al have gone to to keep us all in the dark for so long. Maybe he just got sick of all the hoax labels that sites like ATS pin on anyone that has anything valid to say.
Or maybe he is working on something fantasitc, and is about to break cover again to shock and entertain us.
I sure hope so.
All the best
Elvis. thankyouverymuch.

Originally posted by Elvis Hendrix
reply to post by GhostLancer

 

I totally agree with you. he turned a lot of people on to a whole load of ideas. Dark Mission was something very out of the ordinary and informed us of the extraordinary lengths nasa et al have gone to to keep us all in the dark for so long. Maybe he just got sick of all the hoax labels that sites like ATS pin on anyone that has anything valid to say.
Or maybe he is working on something fantasitc, and is about to break cover again to shock and entertain us.
I sure hope so.
All the best
Elvis. thankyouverymuch.

Good reply. Hoagland is not a hoaxer. He is someone brave enough to venture into areas THOROUGHLY FORBIDDEN by mainstream media, mainstream academia and *conditioned* mainstream mindset. He has a thick enough skin as to have gone there and taken the cheap shots (as we've already seen on this thread in various replies). He has gone there and provided us with information about which we NEVER WOULD HAVE HEARD ANYWHERE ELSE. For example, America bringing in SS Nazi scientists at the end of VE (Victory Europe) under PROJECT PAPERCLIP? These same SS Nazis rising to prominence and leadership in the development of the atom bomb and space flight (the formulation of NASA Itself)? Masonic and other occult/ritualistic rites and dates involved with the specific dates and launch times for NASA projects? And the list goes on and on. He even called NASA out on changing the color values on televised images from Viking in order to make Mars APPEAR REDDER.

Hats off to Hoagland. I just wish that ENTERPRISE-MISSION had not died. I was good while it lasted. And, it is a great archive of OLD news. Great and fantastic and (now) incomplete news.

Originally posted by GhostLancer
Good reply. Hoagland is not a hoaxer.

Yes he is. Remember his "face on Mars" hoax?

. For example, America bringing in SS Nazi scientists at the end of VE (Victory Europe) under PROJECT PAPERCLIP?

Hoaxland never "discovered" that, it has been common knowlefge for many years....

Masonic and other occult/ritualistic rites and dates involved with the specific dates and launch times for NASA projects?

Just another Hoaxland hoax, there were no "occult/ritualistic rites", nor were the launch dates chosen for Masonic reasons. You really are gullible to believe Hoaxland!

And the list goes on and on.

So does Hoaxland, he just goes on and on and on making crap up, that the gullible believe.

I just wish that ENTERPRISE-MISSION had not died.

hoaxland was not making enough money from it.

And, it is a great archive of OLD news

yes, it is a good archive of Hoaxland's many hoaxes and made up stories.... remember his claim about the “ECO” low-fuel sensors in the space shuttle main fuel tank - of course he was proven wrong there as well!

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by GhostLancer
Good reply. Hoagland is not a hoaxer.

Yes he is. Remember his "face on Mars" hoax?

The only hoax was what NASA did to the original images by running them through so many FILTERS as to render them nearly meaningless in any accurate visual accounting of what was really imaged. In other words, NASA Itself DISTORTED the images to make a mountain into a molehill. They even presented the image(s) from the opposite angles meant to disorient the public. You should really do more research before you make attacks on Hoagland without backing them up with accurate facts.

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by GhostLancerFor example, America bringing in SS Nazi scientists at the end of VE (Victory Europe) under PROJECT PAPERCLIP?

Hoaxland never "discovered" that, it has been common knowlefge for many years....

I don't think "discovered" was used in my statement. It doesn't matter if he was the first or the fiftieth person to "discover" that fact. The FACT is that he brought it into MAINSREAM PUBLIC AWARENESS, for until his book shed light on that subject, VERY FEW "average citizens" were aware of that fact. Now, thanks to Hoagland's proverbial flashlight, a great deal more people are aware. "Common knowledge for years..." might be true for the FEW who knew. But, until Hoagland blew his trumpet, mainstream American's didn't know. In fact, MOST still don't know and are astonished to hear about it.

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by GhostLancerMasonic and other occult/ritualistic rites and dates involved with the specific dates and launch times for NASA projects?

Just another Hoaxland hoax, there were no "occult/ritualistic rites", nor were the launch dates chosen for Masonic reasons. You really are gullible to believe Hoaxland!

Wow. You're really spectacular at "investigation by proclomation." You are slinging out anti-assertions with absolutely no facts whatsoever. Simply saying, "...there were no 'occult/ritualisitc rites...'" Please tell us HOW YOU CAN PROVE A NEGATIVE? Were you there?

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by GhostLancer And the list goes on and on.

So does Hoaxland, he just goes on and on and on making crap up, that the gullible believe.

You seem to be a spinner of the *yarn* you're accusing him of handling. You have absolutely NO proof or examples to back up your assertions, yet you sling them out like rancid pork. How would you feel if someone were to blatantly accuse you of the same things you're accusing Hoagland of?

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by GhostLancerI just wish that ENTERPRISE-MISSION had not died.

hoaxland was not making enough money from it.

This is the one true thing you've said in your post. Sadly, it's probably the truth. Yet, the guy has to pay his bills, just like you and I. I am sad that the website is dead, but I do understand.

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by GhostLancer

And, it is a great archive of OLD news

yes, it is a good archive of Hoaxland's many hoaxes and made up stories.... remember his claim about the “ECO” low-fuel sensors in the space shuttle main fuel tank - of course he was proven wrong there as well!

I am not familiar with the "ECO" low-fuel sensors. I can, however, state that IF such a thing were true (and your mentality is dubious to begin with), I can only state on Hoagland's behalf is that NO ONE (not you, not me) is 100% accurate with everything, especially when fringe topics are involved. Do you think the guy is not human; do you think he is a robot? He is someone who is doing his best to illuminate NASA and the world about some of the most exciting (yet COVERED-UP) discoveries mankind has made. And you sit back like an envious armchair quarterback and discredit someone who is working to make the world a better place. He is opening the eyes of millions. You are trying to confuse and shut them.

Originally posted by kro32
reply to post by GhostLancer

 

Never heard of him. I doubt he is big enough to be a concern to even be considered to having be bought out. His fans might adore him but he's certainly not on any mainstream radar.

Man, if you haven't heard of Richard C Hoagland, I don't even know what to say.

He may even be one of the most mainstream conspiracy theorists out there, next to Alex Jones and a few others.

He's heard frequently on Coast to Coast AM overnight, broadcast to millions of people.

Read up:

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by Pseudonaut

Originally posted by kro32
reply to post by GhostLancer

 

Never heard of him. I doubt he is big enough to be a concern to even be considered to having be bought out. His fans might adore him but he's certainly not on any mainstream radar.

Man, if you haven't heard of Richard C Hoagland, I don't even know what to say.

He may even be one of the most mainstream conspiracy theorists out there, next to Alex Jones and a few others.

He's heard frequently on Coast to Coast AM overnight, broadcast to millions of people.

Read up:

en.wikipedia.org...

STAR! (sigh) I was about to think that this thread was mainly attracting Hoagland-attackers. It was feeling like a shark frenzy or a hyena attack. The sheer volume of attackers alone says that "they" are trying to squelch Hoagland's message(s). In the end, however, he might have been seduced by the most enticing seduction of all: money.