Re: Hoagland's Dark Mission...

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 11:55:24 -0800 (PST), The Translucent Amoebae
<transamoebae@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

i would expect from Hoagland; to include all his nutty theories &
elaborate conspiracies, but i was hoping for a better presentation of
them.

* High-quality pictures = No artifacting and/or accuracy degredation
due to quality loss.

* No artifacting and/or accuracy degredation due to quality loss =
Nothing on the picture that Hoaxland can claim is a ten-mile tall
structure of alien origin, much less something NASA covered up just to
piss him off.

* No hoaxes, No bucks for Hoaxland from the suckers who buy into his
insanity.

....Want another example? Do a Google Groups search on the various
discussions regarding the "research" and "conclusions" John Maxson has
tried for foist on everyone based on 5th generation films and pictures
of the Challenger Accident, including claims of the SRBs "crossing the
streams" when it's clear from even *3rd* gen footage that they
haven't.

Bottom Line: The lower the quality of the photo used as evidence, the
higher the probability that this dip***'s also got a bridge in the
Florida swamplands to sell you along with the swamp.

OM
--
]=====================================[
] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [
] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [
] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [
]=====================================[
.

Quantcast