BellGab.com Archive

Wow, that "state of the art" image may have been great until RCH again "enhanced" the f--- out of it to be useless.  The ringing above the moon's limb looks to me like - again - JPG noise (JPG represents images as sine waves, so you can get a ringing), or slightly misaligned images that were merged to make the final image to reduce the atmosphere's effects.

Quote from: CronkitesGhost on March 12, 2018, 12:43:28 AM
I don't know why I get so much pleasure listening to Hoagland - I am the polar opposite when I listen to C2C, the guests and Snorch make me angry.

I'm a bit from column A and a bit from column B for both/either.

No, Richard, the moon was not wrapped in Saran® wrap of glass, the north polar "grid" being the same as in the south just means that both detectors used square pixels (imagine that) and they are not 100% perfect, having some bias where rows and columns are slightly more sensitive - brighter - which comes out when you "enhance" the crap out of them beyond any utility other than to demonstrate your incompetence.

Ah, bringing up LCROSS again.  I briefly blogged about that horrible image manipulation RCH did.

Quote from: CronkitesGhost on March 12, 2018, 12:34:31 AM
When Hoagie dies will the Accutron go to the Smithsonian or more likely to a pawn shop in Los Cruces?

I vote (B).

They are talking about image noise!  Geeze people.  The very fact that you can see blocks of 8x8 pixels is clear evidence that if nothing else, the image is horribly compressed and you're looking at JPG noise, among other things.

Tsiolkovskiy is centered at -20.4°N, not 19.5, you liar.

Speaking of which, Tsiolkovskiy crater is front and center in Wikipedia's image for the Lunar Orbiter 3.  It's flipped in that the south pole is at the top, but Tsiolkovskiy and its mare are right in the center, and its almost unique (on the moon, but very common on other solar system bodies) flow-like ejecta into the older and larger Fermi crater (just to the right in that image) is nicely evident.

Quote from: astroguy on March 11, 2018, 11:43:48 PM
Yes, as I said, Apollo from the ground.

They were claiming they are on Lunar Orbiter images.  I just looked up some random Lunar Orbiter images and I do see an array of diagonal dots, but not crosshairs, and I certainly did not see them in the horrible versions posted on RCH's website.

Quote from: crankshaft on March 11, 2018, 11:41:23 PM
As I understand it, the 'crosshairs' or reticles/fiducials were in the cameras and set close to the film; they served to help determine perspective in spite of distortions so that accurate measurements could later be taken from the film.

"The lunar surface Hasselblad cameras were fitted with a device called a reseau plate. The reseau plate is a clear glass plate on which is etched small black crosshairs, called "fiducials" by some and "reticles" by others. As each film frame is drawn into place, it is pressed against the reseau plate so that the picture is taken through the plate. This results in an image of the fiducials being superimposed over the image focused through the lens. ..."

http://www.clavius.org/photoret.html

Yes, as I said, Apollo from the ground.

Pretty sure fiducials (crosshairs) were only on the Apollo images they took from the ground?  I don't see them at all in "Image 3" or "4" that they're talking about.  No idea what they are actually talking about because I see no crosshairs period, so how are they talking about seeing them and that they were moved?

Quote from: Hoegee on March 11, 2018, 11:08:59 PM
I suspect that when Hoagie says NASA stands for "Never a straight answer," he sees that as a double entendre.

I don't get it.

Quote from: AlternativeSide on March 11, 2018, 10:15:18 PM
Isn't he in Arizona , I don't think they use Daylight Saving Time ...

No. México Nuevo.

Quote from: Hoegee on March 11, 2018, 10:13:23 PM
Johnston's story is getting thinner and thinner which each telling.  The photo trashing was supposed to be part of some grand NASA coverup.  Now it's because Johnston himself had ordered way too many sets of copies, so his boss finally demanded he dispose of all sets but one.

It also completely ignores the fact that these are for-profit companies, and if NASA isn't going to pay them to archive a huge number of sets of images, those for-profit companies aren't going to spend money on doing it themselves.

RCH somehow manages to sound astounded each time he hears the same story.  I'll give him props for that.

Quote from: =Schlyder= on March 11, 2018, 07:16:01 PM
Tonight will be a clusterfuck of delusion.  LOL  I can't wait

Incidentally, I'll be listening to the show while mapping the moon for some work.  Remember: There are no coincidences!!

The person playing the part of Annette sounds drunk. Or high.

Quote from: albrecht on March 10, 2018, 06:30:21 PM
But how Old Navy stores, the Masonic CIA, carrot gifts to the Pope and the Chinese moon mission naming, the naming of publicly disclosed NASA missions, the "Miami Circle," Pyramids, torsion fields, secret Antarctic goings-on, and  the 19.5 model all tie together??

If he told you, he'd have to take at least 19.5 hours to do so, and ask "boys and girls" at least 33 questions per hour.

Europa:  Going back to 1997, I'm okay with 2 weeks' difference, close enough!  It's possible one of ours is labeled wrong, or that he discussed it twice.

Old Navy:  Based on an archive of Snopes, it appears sometime around March 1998, based on their archive of a source being a link to the Lunar Anomalies site from March 1998 (which no longer exists, I'm getting that from the URL).  Based on a link from RationalWiki to a YouTube labeled as September 2, 1998, it might instead be from then.  Or, just something that Hoagland decided was worth milking for nearly a year.  Which is plausible since the YouTube clip starts with a letter from a listener asking for a follow-up.  You should listen to the clip, it's amazing.  It's as though Richard at the time was thinking, "Okay, let's see how far I can push people until they know I'm a shyster ..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfEeIkihOB4

Quote from: zeebo on March 09, 2018, 10:56:19 PM
Been going through my old Art shows lately, and there was one where Hoagie was scandalized by some NASA announcement on Europa.  He wanted the Coast audience to start mass calling/faxing ABC news to put some kind of pressure on.  Anyway the funny part was in typical Half-Ass Hoagie style, he didn't actually have the direct number with him, so instead he just gave out the general number for Information and instructed millions of Art's listeners to call in at once to get the same stupid number.

Airdate? April 09, 1997?

Richard thinks that he will get more listeners than Coast to Coast AM?  For srs?  I knew he was deluded, and I know C2C ain't what it used to be, but ... seriously?

Yup.  And so far 3x intro music.  I'm recording.

Quote from: crankshaft on March 04, 2018, 09:00:56 PM
Again, the burning question: "Will RCH claw his way onto air tonight?"

A better question, if it's Richard Spence as he said last night, do we care?

This might work even after they crop it to 1 hour, feel free to try and let us know: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/tosom/2018/03/04/water-water-everywhere--a-torsion-field-game-changer.mp3?localembed=download

Quote from: AlternativeSide on March 04, 2018, 01:28:46 AM
They should have a breakthrough any time now...The Serendipity factor is off the charts...

Helped by the straight hyperdimensional consciousfield physics.  (Those last four words are a direct quote from RCH from about two weeks ago.)

If you would like a chemistry lesson by a nerd who invites his nerdy friend to help, while their senile grandfather stands in a corner and sometimes interjects to try to sound smart, by all means, listen to hour 3.  :

Wow, this guest is even worse.

So ... what happened to water?

Quote from: CronkitesGhost on March 04, 2018, 12:04:55 AM
Moray B. King is an internationally known physicist, author and speaker with specialities in Zero-Point Energy, Tesla Technology and Quantum Physics.

Can't find anything via Google to substantiate whether this guy is a legit physicist and engineer, all I see is self promotion and some conferences that appear to be alternate/kook science oriented.

I'm guessing not legit.  A key (if subtle) statement:  "Finished coursework for a Ph.D. ..."  RCH used something like that in the intro.  That's very often an indicator, when the person is on this kind of show, that they're a crackpot.

RCH setting someone up so RCH can brag about himself:  "You studied field X a lot.  Did you ever hear about person Y, one of the founders of the field?"  Then after the inevitable "Yes, what's your fucking point?" we get, "Well, he was my good friend who ..."