It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Richard Hoagland - Hartley 2 comet is a Space Ship? Update on Hoaglands Mars Warrior Skulls

page: 4
13
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 08:07 AM
link   
The sad thing is that Hoagland, as far as I know, doesn't say he's made a mistake (anywhere in his career) and that he's mistaken about a premise.

What that lack of personal accountability has caused is the unintentional personal cover-up and lack of publicity for his best find, the possible Mars fossil which was taken when one of the Rovers landed in a crater and explored the crater wall. That's one of the best potentials for being a fossil I've seen.


edit on 3-7-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 12:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: amazing
But you know Hoagland has brought up some good points, brought to light some really interesting anomalies and posited some really good theories. Don't hate him for that. Not everything the man has done is crazy or out there. Some really interesting things that should be looked at and thought about and discussed. However, he does take things too far many times and some of his conclusions are very weak.


Hoagland is a fraud and a charlatan who takes advantage of scientifically illiterate/ignorant people. End of story.


LOL Wow. Talk about ignorance in that post. If these types of anomalies or astronomy in general doesn't interest you that's fine, but to insult those that find these things interesting is ...well ignorant.



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 12:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: amazing
But you know Hoagland has brought up some good points, brought to light some really interesting anomalies and posited some really good theories. Don't hate him for that. Not everything the man has done is crazy or out there. Some really interesting things that should be looked at and thought about and discussed. However, he does take things too far many times and some of his conclusions are very weak.


Hoagland is a fraud and a charlatan who takes advantage of scientifically illiterate/ignorant people. End of story.


LOL Wow. Talk about ignorance in that post. If these types of anomalies or astronomy in general doesn't interest you that's fine, but to insult those that find these things interesting is ...well ignorant.

LOL Wow. You're saying this about JadeStar, who is VERY interested in astronomy and participates in search for the ET? (Besides, nowhere did she insult those who find astronomy interesting.)

Ignorance is in blindly believing anything you see on the Internet, including Hoagland's "theories". Have any of his claims been shown to be true?

If you find astronomy and space interesting, pay attention to the proper research and science, not to some self-appointed experts that see faces and machinery in blurry slow-res photos of rocks.
edit on 3-7-2014 by wildespace because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 12:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: wildespace

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: amazing
But you know Hoagland has brought up some good points, brought to light some really interesting anomalies and posited some really good theories. Don't hate him for that. Not everything the man has done is crazy or out there. Some really interesting things that should be looked at and thought about and discussed. However, he does take things too far many times and some of his conclusions are very weak.


Hoagland is a fraud and a charlatan who takes advantage of scientifically illiterate/ignorant people. End of story.


LOL Wow. Talk about ignorance in that post. If these types of anomalies or astronomy in general doesn't interest you that's fine, but to insult those that find these things interesting is ...well ignorant.

LOL Wow. You're saying this about JadeStar, who is VERY interested in astronomy and participates in search for the ET?

Ignorance is in blindly believing anything you see on the Internet, including Hoagland's "theories". Have any of his claims been shown to be true?

If you find astronomy and space interesting, pay attention to the proper research and science, not to some self-appointed experts that see faces and machinery in blurry slow-res photos of rocks.


You guys are missing the points of my posts and interest in Hoagland in general. I do read much research and don't believe everything I see on the internet. I do read the "Proper" research and many scientific articles by well respected scientists.

Facts are...that Hoagland has posited some very interesting theories worth taking a look at. He has also brought to light some very interesting anomalies. That's basically it. I agree that he sometimes seems to be stringing people along and he makes some wild unsubstantiated claims, yet only a fool would disregard everything without taking a closer look. I have a very open mind. Perhaps you do not. I'm not one of those guys that yells "It's a rock" every time someone posts an anomaly. That is the very definition of ignorance and close minded ness.
edit on 3-7-2014 by amazing because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-7-2014 by amazing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 12:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing
yet only a fool would disregard everything without taking a closer look. I have a very open mind. Perhaps you do not.

I also sometimes take a closer look at Hoagland's claims and theories. But all I see is imagination and pareidolia. I would have respected him much more if he were just a sci-fi writer, than trying to pass his fantasies of as real.


I'm not one of those guys that yells "It's a rock" every time someone posts an anomaly. That is the very definition of ignorance and close minded ness.

Some "anomalies" can be due to the play of light and shadow, low resolution of the image, optical or digital artifacts, and many other reasons. There might be a fossil visible on a photo from Mars, but we do not have any proof other than "it looks like a fossil", which can be very subjective. Some mineral concretions and formations can look like fossils.

Being open-minded doesn't mean unquestionably accepting any claim or "theory".


Facts are...that Hoagland has posited some very interesting theories worth taking a look at.

Care to name some of them? Have they been looked into by scientifically-literate people, and if yes, what is their verdict?

In general, would you listen to and trust a person who's been proven wrong time and again, but refuses to admit it?

What are Hoagland's academic and professional credentials? (P.S. working as a science museum curator and delivering a talk for NASA employees doesn't make one a scientist or a "former NASA employee")
edit on 3-7-2014 by wildespace because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 02:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: amazing
But you know Hoagland has brought up some good points, brought to light some really interesting anomalies and posited some really good theories. Don't hate him for that. Not everything the man has done is crazy or out there. Some really interesting things that should be looked at and thought about and discussed. However, he does take things too far many times and some of his conclusions are very weak.


Hoagland is a fraud and a charlatan who takes advantage of scientifically illiterate/ignorant people. End of story.


LOL Wow. Talk about ignorance in that post. If these types of anomalies or astronomy in general doesn't interest you that's fine, but to insult those that find these things interesting is ...well ignorant.


Anomalies interest me. I am an Astrobiology student. That means I want to find ET, whatever and wherever it may be.

I've devoted my life, my own savings and part of my families income going to school to learn how to spot REAL anomalies and pursue them with scientific vigor so that perhaps I can help in some small way to find what's really out there.

Which even at my young age is more than what Hoagland has done.

Misrepresenting legitimate scientific research, twisting it to sell lies to the uneducated is like walking into my house and intentionally peeing on the floor and then demanding I clean it up. Most real scientists feel that way about Hoagland.

It is only the truly ignorant that defend him or follow him.
edit on 3-7-2014 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 03:24 PM
link   
I find more intriguing anomalies in Mars photos every other week. You don't see me making any money from it.



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 03:44 PM
link   
Is it this what rattles the haters?

edit on 3-7-2014 by symptomoftheuniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 04:30 PM
link   
Again, not trying to attack anyone here, and I understand that Hoagland is way off the mark at times and at other times he's trying to make a buck. That doesn't take away from some of his theories or or some of the anomalies he's found and posted for free. It just irks me when people just throw around the words "fraud" "rocks" "Pareidolia" as soon as they see an anomaly posted in any thread here or if someone even mentions the names Hoagland or Sitchen for that matter without bothering to take a look at what's being presented before making/forming an opinion.

We've all seen some good, odd images from Mars and the Moon that we can't explain yet without taking a better, closer look and in many cases we would need boots on the ground to really know what they are for sure.

There's nothing wrong with a theory that there may have been an ancient civilization on Mars or that there could be something on the moon. Science tells us that it's possible. Nothing wrong with a theory that ETs have visited earth, we don't have any solid proof of any of that yet, but again, science tells us it's quite possible.

What I keep seeing on these Mars, ET, Moon, and anomaly threads is a rampant disregard and blatant insulting of anyone that brings up any theories that you guys disagree with or don't have proof of. It used to be you could posit a theory on a site like this and then work to try to prove it. Now, you get belittled and insulted for it.


Ignorance. Let's try to deny it, yes?
edit on 3-7-2014 by amazing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 04:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: symptomoftheuniverse
Is it this what rattles the haters?


What rattles rational people (which you call 'haters') about Hoagland is that the non-rational minions who lack critical thinking skills get duped by him into believing pure fantasy.

In a few instances, real people have let their irationallity and need to believe in fantasy take the down a dark path leading to injury or even death.

Like the Heaven's Gate suicide which was based belief in a myth that Hoagland/Courtney Brown/Stephen Greer put forward on Art Bell's "Coast to Coast AM" show.

You probably won't read this but this was an article written at the height of 1997 when another comet, Hale-Bopp was being called a spaceship by Hoagland et. al but before Heaven's Gate.

The article is written by one of the discoverers of the comet, Alan Hale.

Hale-Bopp Comet Madness - Alan Hale - Skeptical Inquirer - March/April 1997

Like I said, you probably won't read it but you probably should.

It basically provides an overview into the same 'rinse and repeat' nonsense Hoagland and others continuously foist upon the weak minded/scientifically illiterate populace they live (or is that leach) off of for a living.

Beyond that, there is the whole issue of confusing the public.

There are plenty of scientists searching for REAL anomalies, artifacts and signs of alien life from microbes to megacivilizations, from within our Solar System to beyond our Milky Way Galaxy.

There are around 40 peer reviewed research papers on ArXiv on the search for extraterrestrial artifacts or intelligence.

Hoagland is not an author, co-author or even mentioned in any of them.

Of course none of these papers draws wild conclusions about actual anomalies, some of which are far more interesting and more compelling than looking at rocks or a hill taken from orbit and letting one's pareidolia take over.

Its fine to be interested in this subject. I am myself. Many planetary scientists are. One of the greatest drivers of the science we do is the search for other life.

However, I also am smart enough to know snake oil and well versed enough in science to spot pseudoscience and sci-fi masquerading as science to unknowing, susceptible people.

Hoagland does a disservice to all who are interested in these subjects because people who don't know any better often confuse Hoagland's own brand of snake oil with the very real search for very real anomalies.

This has had very real negative implications.

More than once, legitimate research was drawn under fire and even lost funding by Congress by politicians who don't know the difference between Hoagland and people of his ilk's "research" and actual legitimate, research projects whose goal is to find out what or who, if anything, might be or have been out there.

If one wanted to attack legitimate research into the question of life in the universe, one could hardly find a better person to confuse, obfuscate and outright misrepresent such legitimate research with their own sci-fantasy dressed up as actual science.

Psuedoscience like Hoagland's can provide all the "answers" with fanciful theories but provide little evidence to back them up. And when one looks carefully, they find there is nothing there but a man looking to profit off of ignorance.

Such psuedoscience undermines real searches for the truth by more sane, competent people. After all why fund a rover to look for life on Mars when Hoagland claims a whole ancient civilization constructed megaliths?

In short, it promotes ignorance.

Deny Ignorance.
edit on 3-7-2014 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Catacomb

I remember spending hours reading his material, years ago. Seeing this just makes me feel embarrassed for him. It's hard to believe this stuff is from the same person.



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 05:10 PM
link   
a reply to: JadeStarif someone wee weed on my carpet id hate them! Its alright for jamie oliver to make millions from books but not hoagaland? Real chefs might look at his work and think"twat". Everyone is entitled to an oppinion.



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 05:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: symptomoftheuniverse
a reply to: JadeStarif someone wee weed on my carpet id hate them! Its alright for jamie oliver to make millions from books but not hoagaland? Real chefs might look at his work and think"twat". Everyone is entitled to an oppinion.



The difference is cuisine is a matter of personal taste.

Science is a matter of discerning truth from the unknown.

One is slightly a bit more serious than the other. I'll leave that for you to decide which one.

And while everyone may be entitled to an opinion not all opinions are equally valid. Some are actually supported by testable facts.
edit on 3-7-2014 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: jamie6737

This is my take on Hoagland. He washed out of NASA and to make some money he uses his old job at NASA to get popularity with the masses of people who really do believe that life could have existed on Mars at one time.

Now with that being said, no one possible can predict by looking at rock how old it is. That is just crazy.

Stari



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 07:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Stari

The only reason i know about moon/mars structures is because of one of Hoaglands videos i seen back in 2007 so i would like to thank him for that.
edit on 3-7-2014 by jamie6737 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 07:43 PM
link   
I will be making a new thread about Hoagland, he has just found a house on mars with a door.


Hoagland humanoid skull
edit on 3-7-2014 by jamie6737 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 07:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: jamie6737
a reply to: Stari

The only reason i know about moon/mars structures is because of one of Hoaglands videos i seen back in 2007 so i would like to thank him for that.

You'd like to thank him for alerting you to nonexistent structures? Hell, I can do that. There are giant mosques on Venus. Thank me later.



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 07:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Rob48

yes

edit on 3-7-2014 by jamie6737 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2014 @ 11:43 PM
link   
Keep in mind that Hoagland believes that Obama is a living god walking on Earth. Does any more need to be said? He said as much on Coast to Coast. Surely I'm not the only one that remembers. a reply to: jamie6737



posted on Jul, 4 2014 @ 01:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Stari
a reply to: jamie6737

Now with that being said, no one possible can predict by looking at rock how old it is. That is just crazy.

Stari


To be fair it is possible to do that, providing you already have an understanding of the geological setting from which the rock came and the ability to inspect the rock with your own eyes, and lots of specialist experience and knowledge.

Hoagland has none of these things.

Claiming he an carbon date a rock that he does not even know is carbonaceous is just ludicrous. Carbon dating works by looking at the amount of Carbon isotopes in an object, carbon usully fixed by respiration. We don't even have evidence of life on Mars, let alone that it works on the same basis as our own biological pathways.

You don't carbon date material that has no carbon.. His claims clearly demonstrate that he has absolutely no understanding of carbon dating, or geology, and anyone who believes his ramblings are falling for spurious claims of authority with no foundation in reality.




top topics



 
13
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join