Anybody heard anything about Hoagland's newest moon stuff?

Richard C. was on C2C not too long ago, teasing us with the possibility that he might reveal, at an upcoming conference or event (I can't recall which one, but it was something where he was scheduled to speak), some startling, new evidence for artificial structures on the moon.

Hoagland said that for various reasons, he wasn't quite certain whether he'd make this revelation at the event in question.

Yes, yes, I can already hear what you skeptics and Hoagland-haters are thinking.



But anyway, has anything more been said on the subject?

I know the obvious thing would be to check his site, but quite frankly, enterprisemission is one big, confusing mess. I was there earlier today, and I couldn't even find the link to Richard's blog.

I am a fan of his, but I gotta be honest about his site, which has, for years, been screaming for a make-over.

I haven't heard anything knew from C2C... theenterprisemission website isn't really updated ever I don't think...he has advertisements on the front page for events in 2003- perhaps he needs a new webmaster?(hmm...I should email him about that...).

The old enterprisemission site was even more easy to work with. I also wonder what ever happened to parascope.com as it is shut down. It had very important files. I use to post there a lot years ago back when I had webtv.

Hulk Hoagland has to be the single largest egotistical,smarmy,idiotic vile little man to have walked the earth.He is a joke,and he doesn't even fit into the funny kooks you can have a nice laugh at once in a while,he makes me cringe and weep in sorrow for humanity everytime he opens that disgusting little mouth of his.He doesnt have any super secret information,he wants you to buy his books and pay for tickets to see his circus show.If there is something he needs to tell everyone because its just soooo unbelievably important,i can guarantee its geometric.

Originally posted by flightsuit

I know the obvious thing would be to check his site, but quite frankly, enterprisemission is one big, confusing mess. I was there earlier today, and I couldn't even find the link to Richard's blog.

Hoagland's blog is called "The Dark Mission Blog". I wouldn't take anything he says or writes too seriously, but here is the link to to blog anyway:
darkmission.blogspot.com...

This is the link to Dark Mission.net, basically a site that promotes his book:
www.darkmission.net...

reply to post by Solomons


Why so bitter? You are obviously a critic, but offer no substantial evidence. We all know Richard has a large ego, but he is entertaining and presents interesting information and theories. I hope he does come out with some break out news!

Thanks for the links! Regarding Richard, I've yet to see anybody successfully refute his arguments. If some of the people who hate him so much would actually read his essays and attempt to address his well-reasoned assertions, rather than responding to what they assume he's saying, they might realize he's on much firmer ground than they are.

Sorry if that angers some of you, but the man meticulously supports each and every one of his claims with a mountain of hard data and valid arguments. The same can not be said for the vast majority of his detractors.

Well, it is hard to refute Hoagland because he is, as we all are, discussing a subject where the evidence can't really be examined. If he sees a C3PO head on the moon and the rest of us sane folks don't...well, there is nothing to argue about. That’s like arguing with my next door neighbor’s 4 year old daughter about the fact that Scooby Doo and Mickey Mouse floating above her backyard are in fact clouds.
What most folks dislike about Hoagland, is he represents some very out there things that well.....tend to paint us all in a bad light. He has a habit of appealing to the lowest common denominator of the community, and that is the fanatics with their heads on backwards.

Hoagland has, in the past, made some good points that even I would have loved to see him follow up. But, as with most folks in this hobby that get ANY sort of notoriety, he flew off the deep end of absurdity. Making anything he states about something impossible to take seriously due to the out-there nature of the source, whether it can hold water or even stand up to a real discussion based on logic, reason and common sense at that point is useless, as those that have the mental ability to actually expound on anything he accidentally gets right wouldn’t bother….because of the source.

Folks like Hoagland are their own worst enemy, and in my opinion do nothing for the subject. The farther out there he gets the more the fringe of this community support and feed him…cause a cycle of ignorance that is never ending. Many of you that support Hoagland will also be the first ones to complain when a news story is on mainstream media and the newscaster has to crack a joke, chuckle or put up a funny graphic during the story. I get it.

I have read his essays. Some points he makes are interesting. That’s about it. He has nothing in his essays that would even remotely convince me of his assertions of such absurdities as interstellar war and alien robots on the moon though……

Needless to say, can't wait for his revealing of some new information, at the minimum it will be entertainment, and there is always an odd chance that he stumbles onto something that can actually be followed up on.

Originally posted by Solomons
Hulk Hoagland has to be the single largest egotistical,smarmy,idiotic vile little man to have walked the earth.He is a joke,and he doesn't even fit into the funny kooks you can have a nice laugh at once in a while,he makes me cringe and weep in sorrow for humanity everytime he opens that disgusting little mouth of his.He doesnt have any super secret information,he wants you to buy his books and pay for tickets to see his circus show.If there is something he needs to tell everyone because its just soooo unbelievably important,i can guarantee its geometric.

So I receive an EXTREME VIOLATION????????? another joke in itself

I will summarise politely

There are too many jokers on ATS and you are one of them!

Have watched all of his stuff and read his literature - probably not, because if you had you wouldn't have such an opinion.

He maybe proved to be off the mark on stuff, but his work on NASA and Cydonia is fascinating. I cant believe anyone would disagree - if you do, then you need to wake up!

He is one of the good guys out there who YOU should be watching and listening too.

Hogland is a joke. In it only for the money. The only evidence he can give are always old, out of focus, manipulated photographs in which he says he can see structures, etc. He never used new higher resolution photos cause they don't show what he says they show.

He's still using the old original picture of the "face" on mars to say it was artificially constructed.

He's a hack, and had no credibility.

Originally posted by sensfan
The only evidence he can give are always old, out of focus, manipulated photographs in which he says he can see structures, etc. He never used new higher resolution photos cause they don't show what he says they show.

This is completely untrue. All you need to do is look at his site or pick up a copy of his latest book, and you'll see that you are quite mistaken.

He's still using the old original picture of the "face" on mars to say it was artificially constructed.

Again, totally untrue. In fact, based on older "face" photos, Hoagland made very specific predictions as to what sort of other, face-like characteristics might be revealed if or when higher-resolution photographs were taken and made available, face-like characteristics which one would only expect to see if the face was, in fact, an artificial representation of a human face.

Well, lo and behold, higher resolution photographs were taken, a few have even been made available to the general public, and every one of the additional details which Hoagland predicted would be revealed were, in fact, seen in these photos.

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
Well, it is hard to refute Hoagland because he is, as we all are, discussing a subject where the evidence can't really be examined.

Much of the evidence is photographic. The photographs are in the public domain. Examine them.

What most folks dislike about Hoagland, is he represents some very out there things that well.....tend to paint us all in a bad light.

In science, there are no "out there" things. There is data, there is math, there are observations, predictions, and experiments.

You remind me of the foolish phrase which people often spout, about how "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof."

As Hoagland so rightly points out, this as an unscientific notion and a logical fallacy, because "extraordinary" is a matter of opinion, just as "out there" is a matter of opinion.

Claims require proof.

Proof is proof.

Making anything he states about something impossible to take seriously due to the out-there nature of the source...

I'm sure I don't need to remind you that attacking the source of a claim does not invalidate the claim itself. That's another one of those logical fallacies they teach you to avoid in an introductory course in critical thinking.

But perhaps I'm being unfair. If somebody's a known crackpot, (cough: David Icke) I'm certainly going to view any new claims that he makes with a higher-than-average degree of skepticism. Hoagland just doesn't strike me as a crackpot, and believe me, I know a thing or two about crackpots.

Regarding his ego, you know what? It's been my observation that brilliant people are often seen as being full of themselves and a bit narcissistic. And, in fact, we sometimes are. That doesn't make us any less brilliant, nor does it make us wrong.

It just means we should continue to work on our spiritual development.

My vision years ago of these pre Egypt people that built the structures on the moon and Mars.

I was walking down a hall at work when I was in vision seeing the ground with dirt with a small rock. I then looked up and saw a world void of all forms of life. Then three man walked by all dressed the same. silver pants with no seams or pockets or fly in front. They were all bare chested and had Egypt style head gear white with narrow black stripes. There expressions were of rage of anger. Then it ended.

You will likely see a wall painting in some hidden extremely old cave in the future of them. From the woman statue seen on Mars it seems they dressed in robes.

Wow. To what do you attribute this vision? Forgive me if this is an obvious question, but have you explored the possibility that it may have been symbolic, as opposed to a literal representation of what something actually "looked like?"

I ask this not out of skepticism, but because spiritual sight can be very different from the ordinary type of seeing that we do with our eyes, and the language that souls use to communicate is often a language of pictures, rather than words.

Remember, also, that one half of the human brain is non-verbal.

Regarding the Martian lady statue: My gut feeling is that the object in question probably isn't a statue and probably isn't artificial. But that's a whole different discussion...

Originally posted by Markafeller
The old enterprisemission site was even more easy to work with. I also wonder what ever happened to parascope.com as it is shut down. It had very important files. I use to post there a lot years ago back when I had webtv.

They had a discussion forum too, that's gone.

RCH is always a quality guest on C2C. I'll listen to him talk for hours.

Food for thought:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/02c1f0953273.jpg[/atsimg]