Replies

Sorry for being gone for so long, was kicked off the Internet here for a time. I even missed Hoaglands return to Coast to Coast (full show since, no Internet, no radio).

Anyways, believe it or not, I don't completely disagree with every of Hoagland's theories. When I see some of the pictures, I too, am completely facinated with them, and do ask the question, are they artificial, was some sort of life involved? The problem is, when I look at something, like the wall on Iapetus, or the 'face' on Mars, I go, wow! I wonder how that happened? That could actually be something interesting! Problem with Hoagland though, he immediately goes with the alien must have made it as he draws line on pictures to somehow prove that they are artificial. While in some cases, he does have a point...

Could be what Hoagland thinks it is, a fossil of an ancient life form on Mars. Which NASA grounded to dust with the rover.

However, the face on Mars...new pictures appear that the mountain is acutally just that, a mountain! Yet he STILL insist, aliens made it.

And when he goes off on some sort of conspiracy, it is difficult to agree with him. He also seems to think, everytime someone discovers something (water on Mars, life on Mars, etc.) he believes HE should have the credit for discovering it first or something. Too much ego for me. I mean, I like his enthusiasm, but not he does go overboard WAY too many times for me to take seriously.

yes, he does go overboard.

"G E R O N I M O!!!!!"

...and then we are plunged into a masonic ritual conspiracy theory that stretches openmindedness to its limit. i know it is hard to take that kind of pseudo-science seriously, but that is not what RCH is doing with iapetus. that 3 part presentation is hoagland the secientist at his best, and [as a quick read-through of this thread will attest to] it is really hard to give pat answers to the planetary geology questions screaming out to us from this data.....the MOST telling of which has not been released by JPL yet [to my knowledge].

my advice to the openminded is, for now, to ignore the largest of the image blowups hoagland uses- they are too potentially flawed- and instead concentrate on the rest of the article. once you do i trust you will see that this "moon" is quickly becoming the most anamolous object in the solar system.