Be aware dear readers. The interview linked below may damage your intellect. Hoagland in full flow. Lying once again like an absolute bastard.
Hi Richard,
I recently heard a post conference interview with yourself and James Tyberonn.
During the interview when you are describing your proposed torsion field. You stress that certain angles of orientation of your torsion detector with respect to the torsion field are very important. Tyberonn then asks you, "what angles" ? To which you curtly and quickly reply, "I don't remember."
I would have thought that such important data would have been etched onto your memory since you have been wittering on about your watch and laptop set up for decades.Perhaps your curt reply was simply code for, "I don't know because I am making it all up."
Kindest Regards
DJE
In the only video of Hoagland actually using the 40-year-old wristwatch -- the hilarious episode when he was thrown out of Chichen Itza -- it's totally plain that he is making no effort to control the orientation of the tuning fork at all.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_woVHaJKw0
Indeed Expat.
ReplyDeleteI got the distinct impression that Hoagland during that interview got a bit of a shock when the interviewer actually came back at him, albeit weakly. Hence his quick and evasive "I can't remember" answer. I'm not a trick cyclist nor an expert on any facet of psychology. But 50+ years of human interaction has afforded me the ability to spot a complete fucking liar at quite some distance. He's lying through his teeth. He doesn't even believe his own shite.
Even more astounding part of the whole story, at least to me, is that it seems RCH never tried to setup better experiments using different materials and systems. He insists on relying on that one old watch! Anyone with basic scientific curiosity would try to repeat and expand it any way he can, convince the rest of the doubting world of this miracle force field!
ReplyDeleteTo me this whole theater shows more a sign of some personality disorder and actual delusions than conscious lying and manipulating. There's just so much more to lie about and concoct -- if that would be the game. But even the current lies seem so shoddy and helpless! Perhaps scoring sympathy points, like "it's too simple to be false" or attracting similar minds who enjoy shoddy reasoning? It's known from observation that minds caught in delusional thought can become extremely brazen and creative in the manipulation of discussions and contrary evidence, just to uphold the status quo. The alternative is of course a full collapse, not just of that one bad idea but everything tied up with it! And in this case that's everything, a whole life, personal as well as profession and calling. Which is exactly why a person should not be caught up too much in particular science based ideas. Who knows when you have to admit defeat?
So far my attempt at analyzing someone's mind using psychic "remote viewing" LOL.
Oops. The above was supposed to be signed, Dee.
ReplyDelete