• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Hoagland's pseudo-science fantasy vs real science.

Forums New posts
hoagland was right about the the high altitude critters, the fella decieved the audience by changing subject, hoagland should of shut him down quick, it was about live samples, not mars rocks, i dont really know much about hoagland, first impression, camp.
 
The Torsion Field theory Hoagland is alluding to has a surprising correlation to Frame Dragging. Perhaps the two are somehow related. I also agree with Hoagland on his position regarding ECREE ( extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence ), but that being said, I still think Haogland's fringe claims need to be taken with a whole lot more skepticism than established science.
 
pickles said:
Really a shame he had to go a little nuts. He and Strieber are in the same camp of not quitting while they were ahead.
Click to expand...
I've heard rumors from behind the scenes that Hoagland tends to freak out on people in a really nasty way when they question his claims. That's not very cool ( if true ). You can see the shark fin swimming just below the surface in the video when he cuts short Ross and launches his little personal jibes. Fortunately the audience finds them more amusing than serious.
 
Last edited:
trainedobserver said:
Click to expand...
I can't resist, I need to pull your leg here, trainedobserver, considering you view on Christian 'science'. Did you know that Hugh Ross is a pastor and wants to show that we have been created basically like the Bible says? :D

The video you posted led me to watch this last night:

But wrt the video you posted, yes, there's a really good point there. When Ross is asked by Hoaxland to consider a specific experiment which goes against all our scientific observations, Ross insists that the likelyhood that the individual experiment is flawed is very, very much higher than the likelyhood that our entire body of scientific work is wrong. And it's revealed that Hoagy is the arrogant one when he casts away decades of collective production of knowledge with the flick of the wrist. That type of anti-scientific arrogance is something we see very often in this field.
 
Last edited:
Jimi H,

I knew someone would bring that up. How embarrassing is that? Yes, I don't agree with everything Ross stands for, I just dig this segment and can't disagree with anything he says there.

Hoagland is only good for a laugh, and there is always a great laugh any time he talks for more than two minutes. He loves to drop names and never fails to bring up Cronkite, who must spin in his grave every time he does. His theories and wild exaggerations are for entertainment purposes only. I enjoy expat's emoluments of mars blog where Hoagland and his buddy Bara's misconceptions, lies, errors, and downright stupidity are raked over the coals on a regular basis.
 
trainedobserver said:
..
I knew someone would bring that up. How embarrassing is that? ...
Click to expand...
Nah, I wouldn't worry about it, Ross seems very much a scientist, but then he goes into questionable speculation trying to argue his Biblical interpretations. On the other hand, the other guys were on very shaky ground too imo., when they went for the quantum explanation for creation, but I digress.

Tbh. I never really knew about Hoagland till just a couple of years ago when I started looking at stuff on the web and saw some of the more out-there stuff. When I went to take a peek his websites all looked sci-sfi and over the top and with the typical graphics with measurements with random lines drawn between random stuff on maps and images which are supposed to mean something profound. What made him so 'famous'?
 
Jimi H. said:
Nah, I wouldn't worry about it, Ross seems very much a scientist, but then he goes into questionable speculation trying to argue his Biblical interpretations. On the other hand, the other guys were on very shaky ground too imo., when they went for the quantum explanation for creation, but I digress.
Click to expand...

I confess that I could not make it very far into the creationist video.

Jimi H. said:
Tbh. I never really knew about Hoagland till just a couple of years ago...What made him so 'famous'?
Click to expand...

The "Face on Mars" thing. He has been around in the UFO/Paranormal subculture for quite a while. A bigger gas bag you will be hard pressed to find.
 
It always cracks me up when pseudo scientists state that no one will look into a claim because of the so-called implications of that claim. "Oh, it'll change 'everything'" or some other supposedly paradigm-shifting find. True scientists will research any valid claim, but the keyword there is 'valid'. Odds are that if a scientist in a particular field won't research a claim is that he doesn't consider such a thing valid, he doesn't have the time to do the research, or he doesn't have the funding to do the research, not because he fears it will disrupt his view of reality and cause him to go insane. Hoagland didn't give those highschool students a manuscript on worshiping Cthulu with a warning that just reading it will cause you to go mad.

I just don't by into the whole concept that skeptics and scientists fear what researching stuff like this will do to their pretty little world view. One person, perhaps, but every scientist in a particular field? Come on.

My 2 cents.

J.
 
wasnt hynek a scientist, how far did his conclusions get him, airforce employed him as a game keeper, evidence that went against the status quo turned him into a poacher, yet all he did was come to logical conclusions about the data he was presented.
 
manxman said:
wasnt hynek a scientist, how far did his conclusions get him, airforce employed him as a game keeper, evidence that went against the status quo turned him into a poacher, yet all he did was come to logical conclusions about the data he was presented.
Click to expand...

I think I see your point but there's a difference between a scientist who doesn't want to study the paranormal because of the stigma involved, and one who supposedly doesn't study the paranormal because it will disrupt his conscious understanding of the world or interrupt his logic base.

Hynek as a scientist who applied his methodology toward the study of the UFO phenomenon. Sure, he was outcast for it but I think he got to the point where he didn't care about the stigma any longer. He had a genuine interest in UFO reports and followed his path to research them.
 
Back
Top