PDA

View Full Version : Hoagland's latest: secret Apollo photos revealed



ToSeek
2007-Oct-30, 02:29 PM
Fired NASA Whistleblower to Reveal New Apollo Secrets Kept Classified by Space Agency for Over 40 Years. (http://npc.press.org/calendar/caldbevent.cfm?eventid=14033)


Dr. Ken Johnston, former Manager of the Data and Photo Control Division at NASA's Lunar Receiving Laboratory during the manned Apollo Lunar Exploration Effort in the 1970's, was abruptly terminated Tuesday morning, October 23rd, from NASA's prestigious "Solar System Ambassador" (SSA) Program at JPL. The firing was direct reprisal for Johnston's published account in a New York Times Best Seller, "Dark Mission: the Secret History of NASA," of how NASA ordered him, 40 years ago, to destroy key Apollo lunar images and data -- rather than allow them to be preserved for academic study and public view. Johnston will testify at an Enterprise Mission sponsored National Press Club news conference this Tuesday, October 30th (Zenger Room, 9:00 AM) , how he disobeyed these NASA orders, secretly preserving the critical Apollo images. Johnston will then show some of the "missing" Apollo frames -- which confirm the existence of long-rumored "ancient artificial ruins and technology on the Moon," discovered by the Apollo astronauts but legally classified under the 1958 Space Act by NASA for over 40 years.

Johnston will be joined by Richard C. Hoagland, former NASA consultant and CBS News Science Science Advisor during the Apollo lunar missions. Hoagland is coauthor of "Dark Mission: The Secret History of NASA," and head of The Enterprise Mission. Hoagland will present an imaging analysis of Johnston's 40-year-old rescued Apollo images, comparing them to modern versions apparently currently being "leaked" by other "whistleblowers" on official NASA websites. He will also demonstrate and analyze one of the secret technologies retrieved by the Apollo crews, relating to the artificial control of gravity.

See also http://www.enterprisemission.com/NPC2007.htm

I'll refrain from commenting on the rest of it, but being a "Solar System Ambassador" isn't all that prestigious - it's a one-year volunteer position doing public outreach for JPL.

ZappBrannigan
2007-Oct-30, 02:44 PM
I hope The Daily Show is there...

Fazor
2007-Oct-30, 02:57 PM
Now that's one press conference I wish I could be at!.... ...wait, no I don't.

Particularly since it was held at 9:00am...that's much too early in the morning to have my head implode.

JayUtah
2007-Oct-30, 04:41 PM
This is simply more of Hoagland's (and company's) characteristic inflation of affiliations, honors, and credentials, much like his self-award of the Angstrom Medal (of which he is the sole awardee), likely in the hope that it would be confused with the prestigious Angstrom Prize, for which Hoagland is ineligible and didn't win.

The Solar System Ambassador program is hardly prestigious. Anyone with an interest in space exploration can become one. The Solar System Ambassadors are simply people who volunteer as local resources for space-related education, and thus appropriately identified by NASA's PR department. The only requirement for affiliation is the submission of a biography and contact information to NASA Headquarters, so that requests for local help can be dispatched accordingly. One does not actually need even to do anything. There is no education or experience requirement to becoming a Solar System Ambassador. It's more for the benefit of the participant than for NASA.

Since Johnston is clearly biting the hand that feeds him, his severance from the Ambassador's program is hardly unexpected. Johnston apparently has little more than his word for his claim that he was ordered to destroy original NASA data from Apollo. Alleged insiders with allegedly never-before-seen Apollo data that no one else has ever seen or heard of, and about which everyone else is supposedly sworn to secrecy, is the biggest scam in the book. From the reader's point of view there is nothing that differentiates that from someone simply having made stuff up.

Nicolas
2007-Oct-30, 04:42 PM
First of all, my eyes!! (enterprisemission link). The background interferes with the text in ways I never thought possible, and on top of that there's Capitals Being Used as far as the eye can see.

Second, my brain!!

Third:


Japan is currently in lunar orbit with the most sophisticated lunar mission since Apollo.

I propose we start a conspiracy theory in which we accuse RCH of being an illuminati who accidentally talked about the ultra secret space program that launched the whole of Japan into lunar orbit. What? It's only using his own tactics.

sts60
2007-Oct-30, 05:19 PM
I could have made it if I'd known about it ahead of time. How disappointing to miss one of the truly Earth-shaking events of our time.

(Pauses briefly to collect himself)

Darn, looks like I missed the "Monsters from Congress" press conference too.

ToSeek
2007-Oct-30, 05:55 PM
Since Johnston is clearly biting the hand that feeds him, his severance from the Ambassador's program is hardly unexpected. Johnston apparently has little more than his word for his claim that he was ordered to destroy original NASA data from Apollo. Alleged insiders with allegedly never-before-seen Apollo data that no one else has ever seen or heard of, and about which everyone else is supposedly sworn to secrecy, is the biggest scam in the book. From the reader's point of view there is nothing that differentiates that from someone simply having made stuff up.

According to our own James Oberg, Johnston dropped out of the Ambassador program when asked to provide documentation for his list of degrees (including one in "meta physics") given in his bio on the Ambassador website. See discussion here. (http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=109684)

Casus_belli
2007-Oct-30, 06:45 PM
Well at least this conspiracy theory admits that there was a moon landing.

jrkeller
2007-Oct-30, 06:55 PM
Well at least this conspiracy theory admits that there was a moon landing.

Hoagland never denined the moon landings, just that NASA is hiding alien artifacts/structures/etc.

samkent
2007-Oct-30, 07:22 PM
Wasn't it Marsrevealer that said "very soon" about something a short while ago?

I hear the theme song for Twilight Zone in my head.

ToSeek
2007-Oct-30, 07:28 PM
Well at least this conspiracy theory admits that there was a moon landing.

Hoagland and Bara have actually written some of the better attacks on the Moon landing hoaxers. Of course, it's to defend their claim that the astronauts found alien technology on the Moon.

KaiYeves
2007-Oct-30, 07:28 PM
I'll refrain from commenting on the rest of it, but being a "Solar System Ambassador" isn't all that prestigious - it's a one-year volunteer position doing public outreach for JPL.
Really? Maybe I'll try that my first year out of college. Either that, or OCMC missionary work. Not really sure.
I bet Hoagwash found the secret photos in Patrick Star's secret box, while wearing his secret socks, and watching his secret TV channel on his secret TV... SECRETLY!

PhantomWolf
2007-Oct-30, 08:22 PM
Hoagland and Bara have actually written some of the better attacks on the Moon landing hoaxers. Of course, it's to defend their claim that the astronauts found alien technology on the Moon.

Yes because they think that a) the Apollo missions had to be real for them to use them to find their artifacts and b) because they claim that such theorys are so dumb that they hurt genuine conspriacy theories, like theirs.

peter eldergill
2007-Oct-30, 08:26 PM
I find it humourous to see how many "secrets" just happen to find their way into Hoagland's hands..for him to expose, of course

Pete

Alan G. Archer
2007-Oct-30, 09:08 PM
According to our own James Oberg, Johnston dropped out of the Ambassador program when asked to provide documentation for his list of degrees (including one in "meta physics") given in his bio on the Ambassador website. See discussion here. (http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=109684)

The Dark Mission Blog (http://darkmission.blogspot.com/2007/10/ken-johnston-answers-commentors.html) has Mr. Johnston providing more detail concering his credentials:


I hold a ** in Aerospace Engineering from Oklahoma City University and two advanced degrees from the Reformed Baptist Seminary, one in Theology and the other PhD in Metaphysics.

If the "Reformed Baptist Seminary (http://www.rbseminary.org/index.php)" is the one located at 1709 Arial Street, Easley, SC, he may have a problem. I cannot find any mention of a doctoral program being offered by them.

JayUtah
2007-Oct-30, 09:20 PM
Oklahoma City University appears to be a liberal arts college. It does not currently offer an Aerospace Engineering degree, nor does it currently offer any engineering curricula -- accredited or otherwise. Since few are the schools who teach aerospace engineering, and fewer still the schools who offer accredited programs, I wonder if any of Mr. Johnston's education turns out to be real and relevant.

BertL
2007-Oct-30, 09:25 PM
Where are these secret photographs?

The Backroad Astronomer
2007-Oct-30, 09:30 PM
Where are these secret photographs?
They are in a secret location.:)

The Backroad Astronomer
2007-Oct-30, 10:35 PM
Most of the major news groups probably did not cover it, googled Hoagland and Johnston, found only coast to coast had anything out. I can just see a lot of people coming here with youtube videos.

KaiYeves
2007-Oct-30, 11:52 PM
They are in a secret location.
As I said:

I bet Hoagwash found the secret photos in Patrick Star's secret box, while wearing his secret socks, and watching his secret TV channel on his secret TV... SECRETLY!

Nowhere Man
2007-Oct-31, 01:59 AM
Johnston will then show some of the "missing" Apollo frames -- which confirm the existence of long-rumored "ancient artificial ruins and technology on the Moon," discovered by the Apollo astronauts but legally classified under the 1958 Space Act by NASA for over 40 years.
Let's see. 2007 minus "over 40 years" equals (let's be charitable) 1966. Apollo 8 went to the moon in 1968. What, I wonder, took these "'missing' Apollo frames?"

Fred

PhantomWolf
2007-Oct-31, 02:54 AM
Let's see. 2007 minus "over 40 years" equals (let's be charitable) 1966. Apollo 8 went to the moon in 1968. What, I wonder, took these "'missing' Apollo frames?"

Fred

Surveyor 1 landed on June 2, 1966. It returned nearly 11,000 frames before it ceased activity on the 14 July.

ToSeek
2007-Oct-31, 04:05 AM
Surveyor 1 landed on June 2, 1966. It returned nearly 11,000 frames before it ceased activity on the 14 July.

And if you look carefully, you will find ONLY 10,986 frames in the NASA archives. Clearly, 14 have been REMOVED from public view!!!

The Backroad Astronomer
2007-Oct-31, 04:10 AM
Surveyor 1 landed on June 2, 1966. It returned nearly 11,000 frames before it ceased activity on the 14 July.
I think 10, 986 is close enough to 11,000, but the cters might claim alot of infomation out those 14 frames.

Serenitude
2007-Oct-31, 04:27 AM
If there's a good thing to come of this, it may be to expose the "Ambassador" program to tens of thousands of enthusiastic people who would have otherwise not known about it, and thereby generates grassroots interest in NASA, Space Exploration, and Astronomy :)

Maksutov
2007-Oct-31, 04:28 AM
Let's see, "Dr. Ken Johnston,...Solar System Ambassador (SSA) and Richard Hoagland,...CBS News Science Science Advisor [SSA]..." Man, it's a good thing I've noticed how dyslexic my typing has become and made a couple corrections before posting this.

Meanwhile, get yer scorecards, get yer scorecards, ya can't tell the SSAs without a scorecard!

The Backroad Astronomer
2007-Oct-31, 04:38 AM
Dyslexia yeah right, no you would not type something like thst on purpose.

publius
2007-Oct-31, 04:42 AM
I'm not sure, but this may Oklahoma *State* University. It apparently has several campuses over the state, and one of those does offer aerospace engineering.

Gordon Cooper received an honorary Ph.D. from there, and note the bio here lists it as "Oklahoma City University":

http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/Bios/htmlbios/cooper-lg.html

It's possible that it may have been called that in the past, or that may be a common, but unofficial name.

-Richard

laurele
2007-Oct-31, 04:44 AM
"The Solar System Ambassador program is hardly prestigious. Anyone with an interest in space exploration can become one."

I'm surprised to hear this claim, as the one Solar System Ambassador I know is a very knowledgeable amateur astronomer who does several public presentations every month with a special focus on the Mars rovers and Cassini mission to Saturn, all of which are very well attended. He has also worked with an international team that published Mars images on the covers of Aviation Week and Space Technology magazines and has written an article on the rovers for The Explorers Club in NY. His knowledge of and love for astronomy are impressive to say the least. He is also in regular communication with NASA personnel on these unmanned missions. From his qualifications alone, I would assume Solar System Ambassadors must meet significant standards in astronomical knowledge and understanding to be given these positions.

JayUtah
2007-Oct-31, 05:13 AM
I'm surprised to hear this claim, as the one Solar System Ambassador I know is a very knowledgeable amateur astronomer...

No doubt he is. I don't mean to disparage the program or its participants. The local SSAs in my area are also dedicated to space exploration and are good people. What I mean is that the program is voluntary and open to a wide variety of people, thus not necessarily as selective and rigorous (in the appropriate way) as other opportunities might be. I suppose prestige is subjective and varies, but I would consider membership in professional organizations, ASME or AIAA for example, to be of greater prestige.

From his qualifications alone, I would assume Solar System Ambassadors must meet significant standards in astronomical knowledge and understanding to be given these positions.

Actual qualifications differ from participant to participant. Ambassadors are trained after selection; they don't necessarily have to come to NASA with the appropriate knowledge of space missions. They just have to present a viable PR plan. Here is the official description. http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/ambassador/AO.html

The problem with Mr. Johnston is that he doesn't seem to bring any credible qualifications to the post; instead he's trying to use SSA membership as the qualification itself. That's what's fishy to me.

DALeffler
2007-Oct-31, 05:19 AM
"The only real requirements for becoming a Solar System Ambassador are a desire to talk about space and the willingness to fill out the application form. "

From http://www.thespacereview.com/article/954/1.

I'd put down Solar System Ambassador on a title page under the heading, "Community Involvement" or some such and no where near "Qualifications".

JayUtah
2007-Oct-31, 05:27 AM
I'm not sure, but this may Oklahoma *State* University.

I doubt it. People remember the names of the schools they attended. "Oklahoma City University" is what Johnston wrote himself. OCU is also affiliated with a religious institution; and Johnston's graduate degrees are in theology. It is more likely he got the name of the school right.

It apparently has several campuses over the state...

But only lately in Oklahoma City. Oklahoma City University was founded there in 1906, long before OSU opened its Oklahoma City campus.

The Cooper bio lists an honorary PhD in science from OCU, which isn't at all incredible. The college offers some scientific curricula, but science is not engineering. There's nothing in Cooper's bio that casts ambiguity on Johnston's identification of his alma mater.

It's possible that it may have been called that in the past, or that may be a common, but unofficial name.

Highly unlikely, in my opinion. OCU predates OSU-OC, so there would be no older name under the OSU banner on which OCU would lately have stepped. Further, no campus will refer to itself informally by a name that happens also to be the official name of another, unaffiliated school in the same city. That's like CUNY students naming one of their campuses "NYU," hoping it won't be confused with the other NYU.

Johnston was asked specifically to clarify his educational background, and it is not likely that his officially-published response would be careless on such an important detail.

The Backroad Astronomer
2007-Oct-31, 05:39 AM
Nobody has thought of checking his credentials before. I little of topic here but I attended a school named St Marys University in Halifax now I sell hotel rooms, one of the hotels is in Dallas where there is Southern Methodists University, once I got the mixed up on a reservation:doh:. But no University would on purpose name chose such a similar name to one already in that cty.

publius
2007-Oct-31, 09:07 PM
Well, I'll tell you how I got that in my head. I Googled "Oklahoma City University aerospace engineering" and one of the first things that popped up was a astronaut bio page that had Gordon Cooper listed as receiving an "honorary Ph.D in Aerospace engineering" from OCU. So I got to looking for Gordon Cooper. Some links, including Wiki, say the honorary degree was from Oklahoma State University. Most of them say OCU. So that's why I wondered if confusion between the two was common.

But if Johnston said OCU himself, which he apparently did, then indeed he ought to know the name of his own alma mater.

He also says he was some manager of photo something or another in the lunar receiving laboratory. Has this been verified?

As for Cooper's degree, while not related, that is interesting. Only one site called it a "Ph.D". All the others seem to say "doctorate of science". Now, a doctor of science, D.Sc. is an actual degree in the US, just not as common as Ph.D. It's basically the same thing, a research doctorate. I think there is a move to use Ph.D all around just to standardize.

So, I'm wondering if OCU used D.Sc instead of Ph.D for honorary doctorates, maybe to make it clear it was honorary.

-Richard

Jim
2007-Oct-31, 09:44 PM
My father attended OCU, studying civil engineering, so it did offer engineering courses at some point. However, that was pre-WWII, so any aerospace engineering degree would be dated.

Currently, OCU does not offer any engineering courses. And it does not award any PhDs, except maybe honorary.

It's hard to imagine anyone confusing the names of OCU and OSU, especially if he attended one of them.

JayUtah
2007-Oct-31, 09:55 PM
But if Johnston said OCU himself, which he apparently did, then indeed he ought to know the name of his own alma mater.

Yes, especially when the purpose of the statement was to resolve his ambiguous credentials.

He also says he was some manager of photo something or another in the lunar receiving laboratory. Has this been verified?

I haven't been able to verify it with NASA. But I'm not to the point of saying that failure to verify is evidence of a false claim.

Here's another interesting bio. http://thespaceshow.com/guest.asp?q=107
In this one he claims to have three bachelor's degrees in "Aviation and Aerospace." That's suspicious. He would generally not be admitted to the same bachelor's program at one school having already received a bachelor's degree in the same field from another school. And in this bio he now claims to be a test pilot. What's even funnier is that TM-5, the "lunar module" he claims to have been in charge of, was an engineering assembly prototype. The notion that he "taught the astronauts how to fly the LM" is completely incompatible with the role of TM-5.

The Backroad Astronomer
2007-Oct-31, 10:17 PM
Would it not be useless to have two bachelors degree in the same area?
I have the feeling that he got his degrees from a degree milll?

JayUtah
2007-Oct-31, 10:59 PM
My father attended OCU, studying civil engineering, so it did offer engineering courses at some point.

That's why I was careful to limit my skepticism to what they currently offer; I allowed that they may have taught engineering at some point in the past.

In pre-WWII days it was not common for engineering programs to be accredited as a means of ensuring their quality. Which is to say, anyone could offer a degree program in an engineering field without incurring suspicion. A small college could offer a civil engineering diploma or even an aerospace engineering diploma. It wouldn't be on par with one from, say, Purdue or West Point, but there was no way of knowing that except to know the school personally.

As accreditation become more common and more important, the smaller colleges dropped those programs rather than meet the cost of bringing them up to accreditable standards. Especially in aerospace engineering, only the larger schools had the student and faculty base and funds to achieve accreditation. This is one likely reason why a small, private, liberal arts college would offer an engineering program at one point, and then drop it later.

Ken Johnston may very well have a legitimate engineering degree from OCU, although I doubt it's an accredited degree. It's normal convention to list the year in which one's degree was obtained so that one can have a basis for dating the laureate's education. Johnston has not done this. I figure he would have gone to college in the early 1960s.

In addition, Hoagland et al. insist on referring to him as "Dr. Johnston" even though his doctorate is from a theological seminary and has nothing whatsoever to do with aerospace or image processing. Sometimes Johnston says he worked for NASA; sometimes he says he worked for a contractor.

Nowhere Man
2007-Nov-01, 12:07 AM
Surveyor 1 landed on June 2, 1966. It returned nearly 11,000 frames before it ceased activity on the 14 July.
Their claims don't say Surveyor, they say discovered by the Apollo astronauts.

Fred

KaiYeves
2007-Nov-01, 12:53 AM
Let's see. 2007 minus "over 40 years" equals (let's be charitable) 1966. Apollo 8 went to the moon in 1968. What, I wonder, took these "'missing' Apollo frames?"
Like how they kept saying the Declaration was three hundred years old in National Treasure?

Actual qualifications differ from participant to participant. Ambassadors are trained after selection; they don't necessarily have to come to NASA with the appropriate knowledge of space missions. They just have to present a viable PR plan. Here is the official description. http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/ambassador/AO.html
Sweet stuff! And, most importantly, the qualifications do not include the dreaded "over 18 years old." ;-)

jrkeller
2007-Nov-01, 01:16 AM
My father attended OCU, studying civil engineering, so it did offer engineering courses at some point. However, that was pre-WWII, so any aerospace engineering degree would be dated.


According to darkmission site, he says that he is 65 years old, so that would put his birth year as 1942 and his college graduation date around 1964. Hardly pre-WWII.

jrkeller
2007-Nov-01, 01:18 AM
Sometimes Johnston says he worked for NASA; sometimes he says he worked for a contractor.


In his defense, its not uncommon to say that one works for NASA even if they work for a NASA contractor (at least in Houston).

PhantomWolf
2007-Nov-01, 02:13 AM
In his defense, its not uncommon to say that one works for NASA even if they work for a NASA contractor (at least in Houston).

Actually even in normal business it isn't. I work for Shell, in a way. I actually work for a joint venture they have here, but even then I am employeed by a temp agency and contracted to the joint venture.

Egregious Philbin
2007-Nov-01, 06:32 AM
Hoaxland, he will tell you all the secrets if you just buy his book, come to his convention, enroll in the seminar, and take the special studies course.

Its all vital information, so vital, he has to charge you for it.

JayUtah
2007-Nov-01, 02:47 PM
[jrkeller]In his defense, its not uncommon to say that one works for NASA even if they work for a NASA contractor (at least in Houston).

[PhantomWolf]Actually even in normal business it isn't.

Yes, I agree. And I'm specifically familiar with the convention at JSC. Especially when one works on the contractee's site, it's certainly okay to say one works "for" the contractee. I'm certainly willing to cut Johnston some slack on that respect for reasonably standard practice. The problem is that ten years ago he was saying he worked for Brown & Root, one of the major contractors. Nowadays you only hear about him working for NASA. Why is he now distancing himself from the truth?

The time for semantic games is not when you're using your former employment as the sole basis for a very extraoardinary and potentially damaging claim, and people are asking you about it precisely so they can verify that part of your claim with the right authority. We might search all day for records of him being employed at NASA, in vain, only to find out we should have been asking Brown & Root.

Johnston's claim relies upon him being in a position of high authority at NASA. If it turns out he was instead a low-level functionary or attache -- or not there at all, his story is less credible. The only difference between Johnston's story and a completely fabricated scenario is his ability to document himself as the person in it.

Ereece1
2007-Nov-01, 09:42 PM
I may have originally chosen the wrong thread. For a Hoagland/Johnston news update, please see my post today in (Another?) NASA conspiracy site. Judging from my Google news search, Pravda was the only journal there. If it's Pravda it must be "Truth" right?

KaiYeves
2007-Nov-01, 09:56 PM
If it's Pravda it must be "Truth" right?
Uh... no.

gwiz
2007-Nov-01, 10:07 PM
Reminds me of the Russian joke about the two official Soviet newspapers Pravda (Truth) and Isvestia (News): No news in Truth, no truth in News.

Laguna
2007-Nov-01, 10:44 PM
I would not even trust Pravda's weather forecast...

KaiYeves
2007-Nov-02, 12:13 AM
Reminds me of the Russian joke about the two official Soviet newspapers Pravda (Truth) and Isvestia (News): No news in Truth, no truth in News.
Those Russians come up with a lot of good jokes.
What is the difference between a realist and a dreamer?
A realist says that someday, aliens may land in front of the UN building and tell us how to fly to the stars.
A dreamer says we can do it by ourselves.

I'm proud to be a dreamer.

PhantomWolf
2007-Nov-02, 03:54 AM
Judging from my Google news search, Pravda was the only journal there.

That's cause the World Weekly News has closed down.


If it's Pravda it must be "Truth" right?

No, no, no, no. It's "I found it on the internet so it must be true."

Ereece1
2007-Nov-02, 11:17 AM
[QUOTE=PhantomWolf;1103248]That's cause the World Weekly News has closed down.

God, I miss the Weekly World News. Since Glen Beck joined CNN it's hard to find more credible news sources. Anyone heard anything about Bat Boy since he went on Broadway?

Orion437
2007-Nov-03, 06:10 PM
http://www.sys-con.com/read/450055.htm

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/news_press_release,204242.shtml

eburacum45
2007-Nov-04, 03:44 AM
So, what evidence did Johnson provide, about these missing photos or about his credentials?

djellison
2007-Nov-04, 06:48 PM
So - did any main stream media attend? Any of the reliable, trustworthy, insightful journos - like Jim O or Bill Harwood, or Craig Covault?

What images did they present - or do you have to give them money to see them ( proving that the entire exercise is about profit rather than sharing the 'truth' )

And how long before someone find out exactly what input Bara made to Boeing. I'd imagine they would be rather quick to distance themselves from this guy such that any boeing involvement would thus have to have the word 'former' added to it.

Doug

KaiYeves
2007-Nov-04, 09:45 PM
http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/s...e,204242.shtml
You'd think that a former corespondant would know that it's "a member of The Fourth Estate" and not "a member of Fourth Estate".

ToSeek
2007-Dec-17, 04:22 PM
So - did any main stream media attend? Any of the reliable, trustworthy, insightful journos - like Jim O or Bill Harwood, or Craig Covault?


The Space Review has a belated report. (http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1022/1)


But the problem with Hoagland is that he lays it on really thick—really really thick—and then totally fails to deliver anything. As they say in the biz, this is all tease and no tickle.

JayUtah
2007-Dec-17, 04:24 PM
I still prefer "All hat and no cattle."

torque of the town
2007-Dec-17, 05:15 PM
Would it not be useless to have two bachelors degree in the same area?
I have the feeling that he got his degrees from a degree milll?



Ah yes, another graduation from the Unseen University

JayUtah
2007-Dec-17, 05:29 PM
Now, a doctor of science, D.Sc. is an actual degree in the US, just not as common as Ph.D. It's basically the same thing, a research doctorate. I think there is a move to use Ph.D all around just to standardize.

Be careful. Because of the "ivory tower" implications of the PhD, there was a short-lived initiative in academia to establish professionally-focused doctoral level degrees that would go farther toward conveying a sense of actual practical expertise in a professional field. In my field especially, one's utility in professional practice is often considered to be inversely proportional to one's academic rank.

So, for example, the ArchD (Doctor of Architecture) was a markedly different degree experience than a PhD in the field of architecture, and EngD would be different than PhD in engineering; although it would be proper to style the holder of any of them as "doctor." The holders of professional degrees would be understood to have undergone research and training more applicable to industrial practice, while the holders of academic degrees would be more suited to an academic career.

While all accredited degrees conferring the title Doctor would have an equivalent academic rank (which means little outside academia), they are not merely different names for the same courses of study.