NASA Scientist Fired - Promises Disclosure

Here's my question:

When will Hoagland produce an annotated MAP of the moon with his claimed anomalies located precisely, so they can be correlated with the flood of new imagery coming in from Europe, China, Japan, and soon, India? For the claim to be falsifiable, enough information needs to be provided so that investigators can independently seek and find new, different-source imagery that OUGHT to also show the anomalous structures -- if they are real. As far as I can tell, this detailed documentation has never been provided by Hoagland and his associates (Laney, Bara, et al.).

Originally posted by JimO
find new, different-source imagery that OUGHT to also show the anomalous structures -- if they are real. As far as I can tell, this detailed documentation has never been provided by Hoagland and his associates (Laney, Bara, et al.).

That's a good point, Jim. Heck, they should really have a web site with automatic links to all the data, so you can click the map and study the area in detail based on most recent surveys. Ain't gonna happen, methinks.

reply to post by buddhasystem


The same could be said of NASA. Release the full image libraries. Don't worry about there being a lot of "chaff", we will pick out the wheat. They are a civilian, public institution. Those are OUR pictures, anyway.

The knife cuts both ways.

"The same could be said of NASA. Release the full image libraries. "

I've sorta been 'spoiled' by living on the south edge of Houston, and have been able to drive over to the Lunar Science Institute (more recently, the Lunar and Planetary Science Institute"), and view the tens of shelf-feet of bound 8x10 images. Several times in the past twenty years I've taken 'UFO buddies' to visit, and pulled down the books or looked up special numbers, and they suffer temporary 'cognitive dissonence' about "You-mean-it's-ALWAYS-been-fully-available?" but then are thrilled to wander and wonder through the hardcopy (and on-line) images.

There's also the ALSJ, a MUST site for moonophiles.

I don't know if he is the best person to answer this, but as we can not get Ken Johnston to answer some questions (yet ), here goes.

Who was Ken Johnston's supervisor of which he speaks on the following quote and why did Ken decided to deposit the photos in the Oklahoma City University after talking with him?
(It looks like they are two questions, after-all. )

After Apollo15 I was directed to destroy all but one set of the pictures and negatives. After discussing it with my supervisor I made the decision to take one set of everything and deposit it at the Oklahoma City University science department. I then did as I was told and destroyed all but one other set.

reply to post by JimO


I guess oour friend BigFurryTexan can take a ride to Houston and see these Lunar pics for himself. I'd love to, but it's way far for tme.

Since Mr. Oberg is going to refuse to tell us who in NBS News authroized him to investigate Mr. Johnston with such a one sided and slanderous emial to MS. Ferrari, we'll just HAVE to presume that the NBS person in question is very happy with the work done with that email and the Swedish UFO site used as a 'source' and the comments made at that site against Mr. Hoagloand mostly and not Mr. Johnston.

Just re-inforces my view that MEANSTREAM MEDIA is being fed from the bottom up.

As for access to Apollo images Mr. Oberg again attacks another person who has high credentials that NASA itself has found ectremely useful in the past:

keithlaney.net...


In fact Mr. Laney's image processsing skills surpased even those of the PI of the MGS using the MOC for the site selection for the two rovers running around Mars now:

MERC landing sites Keith Laney work
marsoweb.nas.nasa.gov...
marsoweb.nas.nasa.gov...

And again let's not forget that we are are only NOW gettting the FULL APOLLO DIGITAL IMAGE ARCHIVE going through the work of Mr. Laney and others out here like him, who have been lobying for this for years and years.

Perhaps Mr. Oberg's easy access to the images FOR HIM...meant that ONLY those people who could make the trip to Texas should be allowed to view these images? Why wasn't this done a long long long time ago???

Why is this project only beginning now about six months ago?

keithlaney.net...

And again...if NASA has nothing to HIDE about the Moon...where are the missing 690 plus boxes of PRISTINE television tapes for which NO COPIES were made?

Why isn't "someone" at NBC News interested in finding them by keeping constant presure and at least monthly updates on the supposedly "search" for these missing tapes?

I again ask anyone to view Mr. Oberg's ORGINAL email to Ms. Ferrari and decide if that was an unbiased and neutral inquiry...or was it written with the slanderous intent it gives when reading it?

Nuff said...and Mr. Oberg said earlier:

"I would like Bob to address his comments about Dr. Gonzalez and whether he now agrees they were unjustified. "

I do hereby apologize to Dr. Gonzalez that the "vehemence" of my statements were unjustified, however, my view that not ALL 'adminstrators' may know what is going on in their institutions remains accurate from my perspective and experience.

Mr. Oberg has used the same argument saying Mr. Boyle would have no knowledge of someone else in NBC presumably hiring him to attack Mr. Johnston, rather than the BOOK itself. Since Mr. Oberg refuses to divulge this information...we have only his side of this supposed job offer.

Now maybe Mr. Oberg would like to apologize to Mr. Keith Laney at least since it seems NASA deems HIS WORK of such high quality and his integrity of such high caliber that they would OPENLY use him, despite his anomalous views of the Moon and Mars, for NASA websites and relying on the QUALITY of his work in deciding where to place a BILLION BUCKS of hardware on the surface of Mars?

Bob...


[edit on 18-12-2007 by rhw007]

reply to post by buddhasystem


Low res copies are not what i refer to.

btw...did anyone watch the youtube video of Apollo 8 footage of an ACTIVE smoke stack on the Moon?

From the 1999 NOVA program Moon Smokestack with puffer:

ie.youtube.com...


Bob...

reply to post by rhw007


This video has been debunked soooo many times .. Thats the fun part of being able to read in more than on subjet category here on ATS.

Have a read ..
www.badastronomy.com...

www.youtube.com...
Hoagland Commentary Pt.1/4

Richard C. Hoagland commented on the recent Mars mission plans calling them "bunk." It's simply PR, he said, and any technology they propose now would be outdated by the time mission rolled around in 2031.

www.youtube.com...
Dark Mission Update Pt.1/4

Richard C. Hoagland of Enterprise Mission discussed the explosion of comet Holmes, the 'secret space program,' and the JFK assassination. According to Hoagland, president Kennedy had been in private negotiations to merge the Soviet and US space programs to create a joint Moon mission. He believes JFK was killed because certain government agencies did not wish to have potential discoveries (of ET ruins and alien technology) shared and made public.

www.youtube.com...
NASA's Deceptions Pt.1/12

Coast to Coast AM Science Advisor Richard C. Hoagland and former Boeing aerospace engineer Mike Bara introduced their just released book Dark Mission. It's a compendium of NASA's lies and deceptions, Hoagland declared.

NASA presents itself as a civilian space agency. It's actually a military agency, that won't allow private enterprise space missions to leave orbit, said Hoagland.

NASA views the solar system as a dead place. Then why would discoveries be classified?, asked Bara.

Colored photos from Viking and Pathfinder were doctored to make the Martian sky look red. The first images of Mars actually looked like Arizona with blue skies, but NASA wants us to think that Earth is the only place for life, said Hoagland.

A Martian rover pulled up a rock that appeared to contain a fossil. But it was subsequently ground up into dust rather than studied, Bara noted.

The two also recounted that in 1963, JFK offered a deal with Khrushchev to team up for a joint Russian-American mission to the moon. And then, just days after Khrushchev reportedly agreed to the proposal, JFK was assassinated in Dallas. The Americans weren't going to the moon as part of a space race, but for the prize of discovering a long-dead civilization, Hoagland asserted.



[edit on 19-12-2007 by andre18]

Originally posted by JimO
Here's my question:
When will Hoagland produce an annotated MAP of the moon with his claimed anomalies located precisely, so they can be correlated with the flood of new imagery coming in from Europe, China, Japan, and soon, India?

I will put that on the list

However I have had no difficulty locating the areas in question... it doesn't take that much time. For example the "Data's Head" Image well okay so there was an error in the reel number but I found the whole set

Now as to the "FLOOD" of data from Europe (which craft? Smart 1 crashed) and Japan ( yup some REALLY good clear images coming in from there... and China? Seen ONE image so far and it was the same as Google Earth with an alignment error the Chinese called a new crater..

Originally posted by JimO
I've sorta been 'spoiled' by living on the south edge of Houston, and have been able to drive over to the Lunar Science Institute (more recently, the Lunar and Planetary Science Institute"), and view the tens of shelf-feet of bound 8x10 images.

Well I guess if you consider those 8X10 versions to be of any use... it would be worth the trip However we have ordered prints from there and asked for the "high res" ones and guess what? They take those low res 8x10s and blow them up so the "high res' print you get is worse that the standard jpgs you can get online...

Now since you have 'special access' perhaps you could be so kind as to slip in and scan a couple for us... just as a Christmas present to all those taxpayers who cannot afford a bus ticket to Houston

Now you also mentioned they were online.. so that means you could provide us with a link then yes?

I kinda like this one myself...
eol.jsc.nasa.gov...

Originally posted by andre18
he said, and any technology they propose now would be outdated by the time mission rolled around in 2031.

25 plus years from now? Yup That would be true all right

NASA presents itself as a civilian space agency. It's actually a military agency, that won't allow private enterprise space missions to leave orbit, said Hoagland.

That it is now under the DoD I have official documents to that effect and have posted them

As to the second part Robert Bigelow would agree with you... his term for NASA is "No Access to Space for Americans"

Well, it's the mentality that "we own space." NASA stands for "No Access to Space for Americans" -- that's what it stands for to me and to most Americans. NASA has exclusive control and a lock on everything having to do with space, except for the Russian side. And they were just beyond belief in being rude and obnoxious [in response to Dennis Tito's trip]. It was just embarrassing to this country.

Robert Bigelow

The first images of Mars actually looked like Arizona with blue skies, but NASA wants us to think that Earth is the only place for life, said Hoagland.

Well I would say Nevada but same idea... I found a directory of images that shows that... sky's a little dusty this shot but the rocks are correct for vesiculated basalt



Here is the same material on Earth



I'd post the link but they were at lyle.org... and got moved after I posted that in two Mars threads

A Martian rover pulled up a rock that appeared to contain a fossil. But it was subsequently ground up into dust rather than studied, Bara noted.

Nope on that one... the holes and rock texture don't match up... but the fossils are real and there are others... The data is on this page...
www.thelivingmoon.com...

But even if they did grind a fossil it would not be a bad thing... If there is one fossil there will be many just go to any fossil site on Earth... If you grind one you can than analyze the dust and check for signs that it was organic.

Here is a page on Fossils with actual notes from NASA
www.thelivingmoon.com...

This page has my favorite..
www.thelivingmoon.com...



Now as to what NASA thinks of all this "Life on Mars" stuff... I thought that this NASA presentation is probably closer to the truth than we think...



And the other day out a John's mine we ran into a very curious thing...




But seriously I have a question for JimO... and seeing as you stop in at Houston a lot perhaps you can ask Dr Jim Garvin to explain this to us because quite frankly I think this is outrageous behavior...

Below is another slide from that NASA presentation by Dr Garvin... (You all will notice that the image under "null" matches my other one for color)



I direct your attention to the section I increased below...



Now that fossil is obviously a trilobite... and that area circled as the supposed source... well we found that rock its called "Humphrey"



And then of course the Rover started to drill into it as well...



But in both images there is no fossil.... so why does Dr Garvin post a slide presentation with this obvious misleading image? Not only that but that rock is supposed to be volcanic... last I checked you don't find trilobites in volcanic boulders...

But heck its Mars so who knows

Now I direct your attention to the other section in that slide... the one marked "unfathomable" Here is an enlargement of that section... now this image CLEARLY shows an ARTIFACT... and this is presented by DR JIM GARVIN





So what I want to know is what is the image number of that example? You called for Hoagland to be specific about his anomalies... So I only expect it reasonable to have NASA point us clearly to that ARTIFACT image... We found the other one and it does not show a fossil as presented...

Now since this was presented at a science symposium... what is going on? Seems like an out right lie or at the very least deliberate misleading information...

In either case I am not to happy to have my taxes spent for nonsense like this... when people like yourself so 'enthusiastically' go after us nut cases who see anomalies... when the big wigs at NASA themselves are doing it in official presentations.

So if you would be so kind as to contact Dr Garvin and have this explained with the same fervor you show with Ken Johnston et al I would be much obliged... If you need his contact info I can provide that as he 'declines' to return my letters on the matter

Thanks


[edit on 19-12-2007 by zorgon]

I'm being asked to assist in a number of investigations and explanation-seekings by folks, but since they are outside the scope of this particular book and its authors' misbehavior, I must humbly demur. I have already significantly exceeded my budget for this original subject.

My interests are focused on persuading Bara and Hoagland to admit that their attack on me is not based on any evidence, just their own imaginations. At some point, as pillar after pillar of the supposed 'space technology evidence' in their book collapses, the pain may reach the point they reluctantly resort to their last option, a reality check.

As for their eager-believer hit-man Robert, he appears to be unwilling to conceive of the possibility that he was wrong to even attack Dr. Gonzalez -- it's not his 'vehemence' he needs to apologize for (that trait is actually kind of cute), it's the very basis that Gonzalez deserves any criticism at all for telling the absolute, brutal truth -- and Robert was unable to recognize it.

Originally posted by JimO
I'm being asked to assist in a number of investigations and explanation-seekings by folks, but since they are outside the scope of this particular book and its authors' misbehavior, I must humbly demur.

Ah I see... well okay perhaps just a personal opinion then on why NASA would officially show these obvious anomalies in a scientific presentation yet not give answers on why or supply photo numbers so we can see ourselves....

Something that you are challenging Hoagland et al on in this very thread to do..

I have already significantly exceeded my budget for this original subject.

So there is a 'budget' for your participation here... very interesting... and the goal has not been met as you say...

My interests are focused on persuading Bara and Hoagland to admit that their attack on me is not based on any evidence, just their own imaginations. At some point, as pillar after pillar of the supposed 'space technology evidence' in their book collapses, the pain may reach the point they reluctantly resort to their last option, a reality check.

So you are on a mission then... with a budget... but can't take a moment to examine why NASA is doing exactly the same thing...

Well that about says it all... Sorry for the 'distraction' by all means continue your 'mission'

Zorgon,

You see the Brutal Truth Reality of Mr. Oberg's ORGINAL "Mission" as wellas I do...it was to get Ken Johnston's affiliation with NASA distanced from Dark Mission book itself...he succeeded with that one biased email.

Since his 'budget' for this 'mission' has run out...think he will be disuaded from continuing to attack Dark Mssion and those associated with it and move on? Doubt it.

As for NASA's "Science by Press Releases"....

And MEANSTREAM MEDIA holding NASA's feet to the fire for facts?

And Mr. Oberg's journalism 'inquiry technique'...

He's been CAUGHT


Throw away the key.

Bob...

Zorgon: "Something that you are challenging Hoagland et al on in this very thread to do.. "

Hoagland has a book out and is attacking me as part of his sales campaign, which gives me direct connection to that project. Your alternative issue is not similar in any way.

I budget my time for projects that promise to produce sellable articles and consulting services, plus a small amount for whimsy and curiosity. Don't you budget your own time?

Originally posted by rhw007
Zorgon,

You see the Brutal Truth Reality of Mr. Oberg's ORGINAL "Mission" as wellas I do...it was to get Ken Johnston's affiliation with NASA distanced from Dark Mission book itself...he succeeded with that one biased email.

Would somebody please explain to me what Robert thinks this passage is supposed to convey?

Since his 'budget' for this 'mission' has run out...think he will be disuaded from continuing to attack Dark Mssion and those associated with it and move on? Doubt it.

I still have time for debunking Dark_Mission's campaign of defamatory delusions against me -- just not for spin-off curiosities of the rest of the folks here, as interesting as their questions are (and they are).



And Mr. Oberg's journalism 'inquiry technique'...

He's been CAUGHT


Throw away the key.

Bob...

My technique: when an extraordinary claim is made, ask around if there's any corroboration of it.

Robert's technique: when an extraordinary claim is made, swallow it immediately and viciously denounce anybody who expresses doubt.

Which approach has traditionally performed better in ferreting out the brutal truth?

[edit on 19-12-2007 by JimO]

reply to post by zorgon


Oh, Zorgon,

your post at 19-12-2007 at 0340 EST, Page 49...

Not to mix threads, but I AM NOT an English teacher!!! OK, that's between you and me.

I just could not, as much as I enjoy a lot of what you post, let you get away with that picture of the Mars Rover you included in that particular post. It's not April Fool's, you know. Seriously.

Somewhere I had seen us admonished to maintain this as a 'scholarly' forum. I put it to you, sir, that posting a photo of a 'duplicate' Mars Rover while being tested here on Earth in the above referenced post of yours is, well...either it was meant as a joke, or.....I will stop there.

Please, sir. I know I mentioned once that I'd keep my tongue in cheek, but at times it has to come out of hiding and say what it says....

I love a good joke, now and then...but I don't think this subject is the time or place for jokes.

Just my humble opinion.

Thanks