Dark Mission co-author Mike Bara will appear on the Shadows in the Dark internet radio program on Thursday, January 17th, 2008 at 10PM Eastern, 7 PM Pacific.
I find your post almost incomprehensible. You take some supposed quotes --from 15 years ago-- and then act like this is some huge discrepancy?
The answer is simple, and completely obvious. Our position re the EPH has changed because the DATA has changed in the last 15 years. In 1993, when these alleged quotes were made, there wasn’t much published at all on the EPH. By 1998, after a lot of back and forth with Tom Van Flandern, Richard had changed his position. By 2001, when we published our own Mars Tidal Model, we had come to the conclusion that there was indeed a “Planet V,” and that Mars had indeed once been a moon of that planet. So by 2005, our position was different based on the new accumulated evidence.
It’s really pushing it to go back to 1993 to find some minor discrepancy in (alleged) public statements and then claim this somehow undermines our credibility. I’m sure Expat and Oberg (itchy and scratchy) will agree with you, but honestly, I don’t even see the logic behind your “thinking.”
"I’m sure Expat and Oberg (itchy and scratchy) will agree with you, but honestly, I don’t even see the logic behind your “thinking.”"
Mike, my favorite attack-gerbil: every time you try to imagine what I must be thinking, you make a bigger fool of yourself. You substitute your own wild (and nasty-minded) imagination for checkable reality and ratchet several more clicks towards zero credibility.
Richard's early-career charm and strength was his imagination and eloquence, modulated by his wide knowledge of and understanding of planetary science. The quoted passages (above) reflect those traits as they evolved, as in any rational person's life, based on subsequent theorizing and learning. I don't agree with the directions they evolved, but I still agree that the "Fool's" much-vaunted "gotcha" is empty.
Enjoy yourself on your media blitz today. Just try to control what you say about me (if you do at all)to what you can prove with checkable evidence, not what you are super super CERTAIN must be true to make you feel insightful and important and superior. Don't get over excited and wind up making your gracious host into an accessory after the fact to slander -- that's tacky.
I would agree, assuming that the person making the request is in any way open minded, fair, or truly interested in something other than playing NIGYYSOB.
Since expat is just trying to get me to waste my time with doing his homework, and is not in any way open minded or fair, I think I'll pass.
Fool,
ReplyDeleteI find your post almost incomprehensible. You take some supposed quotes --from 15 years ago-- and then act like this is some huge discrepancy?
The answer is simple, and completely obvious. Our position re the EPH has changed because the DATA has changed in the last 15 years. In 1993, when these alleged quotes were made, there wasn’t much published at all on the EPH. By 1998, after a lot of back and forth with Tom Van Flandern, Richard had changed his position. By 2001, when we published our own Mars Tidal Model, we had come to the conclusion that there was indeed a “Planet V,” and that Mars had indeed once been a moon of that planet. So by 2005, our position was different based on the new accumulated evidence.
It’s really pushing it to go back to 1993 to find some minor discrepancy in (alleged) public statements and then claim this somehow undermines our credibility. I’m sure Expat and Oberg (itchy and scratchy) will agree with you, but honestly, I don’t even see the logic behind your “thinking.”
"I’m sure Expat and Oberg (itchy and scratchy) will agree with you, but honestly, I don’t even see the logic behind your “thinking.”"
ReplyDeleteMike, my favorite attack-gerbil: every time you try to imagine what I must be thinking, you make a bigger fool of yourself. You substitute your own wild (and nasty-minded) imagination for checkable reality and ratchet several more clicks towards zero credibility.
Richard's early-career charm and strength was his imagination and eloquence, modulated by his wide knowledge of and understanding of planetary science. The quoted passages (above) reflect those traits as they evolved, as in any rational person's life, based on subsequent theorizing and learning. I don't agree with the directions they evolved, but I still agree that the "Fool's" much-vaunted "gotcha" is empty.
Enjoy yourself on your media blitz today. Just try to control what you say about me (if you do at all)to what you can prove with checkable evidence, not what you are super super CERTAIN must be true to make you feel insightful and important and superior. Don't get over excited and wind up making your gracious host into an accessory after the fact to slander -- that's tacky.
So how did it go? Would anybody who listened please post a summary?
ReplyDeleteIt's tonight, Jim.
ReplyDeleteJim,
ReplyDeleteI would agree, assuming that the person making the request is in any way open minded, fair, or truly interested in something other than playing NIGYYSOB.
Since expat is just trying to get me to waste my time with doing his homework, and is not in any way open minded or fair, I think I'll pass.
FACT: Apollo astronauts took a picture of
ReplyDeletesomething on the Moon that looks an awful
lot like the head of a robot.
Question: What sort of details do you require?
Beyond those that are self-evident, I mean?
Just curious....
:-)
P.S.: I happen to LIKE "Art Bell woo-woo." It makes life interesting!
;-)