Richard Hoagland - Not Credible, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times


reply posted on 20-5-2005 @ 02:20 AM by LeftBehind
Carl Sagan and Richard Hoagland are very different.

Carl Sagan is a scientist.

For those of you who don't know what Hoagland is about, here are some choice pages from his website.

www.enterprisemission.com...

The above link takes a picture taken by the Spirit rover and then enlarges small parts of the picture to prove artificial artifacts on mars.

Click on the link and discover Hoagland's lunacy/profiteering.

www.enterprisemission.com...



The above picture is Hoagland's evidence for glass structures on the moon.

That's right. Buildings made of glass. On the moon.


'Nuff said.


reply posted on 20-5-2005 @ 08:13 PM by GoldEagle
How do you know that an ancient race used our "aircraft grade" metals we have today? I highly doubt that, they would need some sort of highly resistant alloys in order to allow for space travel. Those alloys would survive for thousands of years because they should be resistant to corrosion and impact.

On the same note, I seriously doubt that humans were highly technologicaly advaced as that man claims in the recent past. Humans are a very persistant and surviving race, a global cataclisim would not go unoticed and forgoten, especially one so recent. If so recent there would be some legitimate evidence! You people should understand and answer the following questions for yourselves.

1. Why are no cities, structures still standing? Even structures dating ten thousand years with relativly simple construction are still around, and your going to say that an advanced races will not.
2. How do you know that a nuclear war was evident??
3. Are bases on the moon a "written in stone" fact or a conspracy theroy, how about mars?
4. Why don't we have ancient texts pertaining to this advanced race from races that existed about 5000 years ago? If there is how sure are you that it is not folklore, myth, or legends?
5. What would be the point of a giant "ringworld" orbiting saturn? Hoagland claims is millions if not billions of years old.
6. How about Hoaglands terrible scientific and mathematical inaccuarcys during the study of his "findings" and his fear to "debate" his findings with real, genuine; mathematicians, astronomers, and scientists.

Just think about these few points for a bit.


reply posted on 20-5-2005 @ 09:23 PM by GoldEagle
Did Aliens use the same units of measure we did? Surely and logicaly the answer is a giant NO! I'll do some of my math and see is he's on to something or not.



In this picture he uses to discribe his point that the numbers are too perfect for it to be a natural occurance. Except the numbers he uses are going to produce the answer he wanted. Iapetus has an orbital tilt of not ~16° but 7.52°. This inacuaracy in his data may have been due to an unreliable source of information (himself) or he used a protractor against the comupter screen. As for it's diameter, which he should have used SI units, kilometers (to make his calculations with formulas correct but also make him sound more like a scientist). In miles 892.29 miles is the accurate number, it should be in kilometers which is 1436 kilometers. He uses Saturn's radiis did he tell you what the radii is? No. He just says that is 60 of them far. It's radii is 60268 kilometers.

60 * 60268 = 3,616,080 KM < This is the orbital radii
Iapetus' actual orbital radii 3,561,300 it has a good half a million kms over his answer.

Accuracy = (3616080 - 3561300) / 3561300 = %accuacy
Accuracy = 1.5%

I'm not going to lie to you people, but he is close, very close, only 1.5% off what is the accepted value I have assigned, this shocked me, big time. Run that again substituting miles.

Accuracy = (2246927.940826 - 2212889.226915) / 2212889.226915 = %accuacy
Accuracy = 1.5%

If his calculation was off by 15% then we have a BS. 1.5% is amazingly accurate.

I guess math works both ways, right? 1 point for Hoagie

What about that inaccuracy in in the orbital angle? The use of a "~" means in other words anywhere on the number line resonable close to 16, or in his math from 0.00 - what ever I feel like. How do you get ~16° from 7.52° which is the know fact? Did aliens use degrees? How about Radians? or Gradians? Did they even use the same system of measument of angles we do? Or the same way of counting altogether? We are using high school math, aliens are bound to have a more sophisticated form of it. Okay enough of that. Lets see what we learned can change his answer in the picture.

Hoagland:

~15 * ~60 = ~900 < scary alien math

GoldEagle

7.52 * 60 = 451.2 < sounds natural to me

SCORE:
Hoagland: 1 - GoldEagle: 2

I'll be back with more so stay tuned.



reply posted on 20-5-2005 @ 10:18 PM by Chakotay
Originally posted by GoldEagle
How do you know that an ancient race used our "aircraft grade" metals we have today? I highly doubt that, they would need some sort of highly resistant alloys in order to allow for space travel. Those alloys would survive for thousands of years because they should be resistant to corrosion and impact.


I don't know- I simply state that it is possible. Super alloys should be corrosion resistant over the ages. They aren't. I have seen this over and over, on digs at 18th and 19th and early 20th century sites. I have seen it on modern airframes- and spaceships- and even precision stainless steel firearms. Put them in the right natural conditions with dis-similar metals and salts present, and BAM! they visibly pit and corrode. There are only 92 natural elements, and a limited number of alloys. A few hundred thousand years and you have an oxide pile. Wait for several million years and you have magma, if your civilization was coastal and located near a subduction zone. If your founding numbers were small to begin with, the odds of artifact survival go way down.

Humans are a very persistant and surviving race, a global cataclisim would not go unoticed and forgoten, especially one so recent.


Assumption. We may be far older than surmised; we suffer from Genesis dating myopia, earth-origin hypothesis bias, and reliance on dating methods proven to be inaccurate.

Why don't we have ancient texts pertaining to this advanced race from races that existed about 5000 years ago?


We do. Cuneiform tablets- but they may be ancient science fiction.

What would be the point of a giant "ringworld" orbiting saturn? Hoagland claims is millions if not billions of years old


An ancient precontact Iroquois legend tells of a 'hollow world in the sky'. Modern design studies for interstellar arks done under government contract in the 1960's and 70's showed the advantages of engineered asteroids as arks for interstellar migration. If such an ark were constructed, you would want to keep it far, far away from inhabited worlds- in case the engines blew up.

How about Hoaglands terrible scientific and mathematical inaccuarcys during the study of his "findings" and his fear to "debate" his findings with real, genuine; mathematicians, astronomers, and scientists.


Hogie is weird. But- so is Iapetus.


reply posted on 21-5-2005 @ 07:05 PM by GoldEagle
No doubt about it, it is one wierd place. You can really see the things that can make it artificial. That big ridge in the middle, polygonal surface features, that odd ice cap that seems so out of place, massive cliff faces, and contrasting surface textures. But, you people must understand that the universe is a weird place too. Stuff like this can't always be blamed on aliens.


This picture I got of Hoagie's website, no doubt it's one heck of a sight.




So you be the judge on this one. I personaly am in the grey on this, If Hoagland did his math right, it would be more understandable. This is a weird place, and Hoagland is a weird guy, no wonder he can find stuff that is out of place so easily.

The thing that get me ticked is that he is trying to be the leader in the field of planetary discoveries. Leave that to the real scientists! Don't use your numerology and home-made math here! Dosen't he realize that if he keeps releasing these crackpot theorys it's just going to snowball into bigger crackpot theorys that will cause problems in the future?

He also covered his tracks with the "Face on Mars" thing. He said that NASA nuked it! Why? What would NASA benifit from doing that? Absolutley NOTHING!

The old photos look like blured versions of the new one The blur overexagerated the features and thats why it looks like a face. You be the judge.

Mars Face







I also belive that ancient cultures may have been infulenced by aliens, this can be shown in their artwork. UFO Artwork


reply posted on 21-5-2005 @ 07:19 PM by dgtempe
www.archaeologyanswers.com...

Did This Ancient Civilization
Visit The Moon Before Us?

Did you hear about the shock discovery on the moon that was “hushed up” after the first live broadcast? Do you know what was seen from the orbiting spacecraft, something so shattering that eleven minutes of the original broadcast was cut out?

I think some of the man made structures in space could be due to this ancient civilizations- Its all been here before, and destroyed before.

Check out this website.

Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



Nibiru Video Explains It All (Conspiracy)
  Posted 19 days ago with 8 member flags
Mark Dice calls out Alex Jones
  Posted 8 days ago with 5 member flags
Any radio operator notice very sharp increase in testing the EBS
  Posted 11 days ago with 2 member flags
what I think about how bad our wolrd is.
  Posted 2 days ago with 2 member flags
Hollywood finds one more way to shove Nazis up our ... noses!
  Posted 1 days ago with 2 member flags
The spirit of JESUS is here!
  Posted 15 days ago with 1 member flags