(11-09-2009, 05:01 PM)sos Wrote: What I was trying to say didn't come out right at all. My apologies. I do not find the material to be pretentious or intentionally glamorous. In fact, it's just the opposite, and that has been largely what has drawn me to it. I only meant that I was blown away by all of it, sometimes to the point of overload, it seemed.
No prob! I feel the same way about it.
(11-09-2009, 05:01 PM)sos Wrote: But as to Hoagland, I have read all of his books, and I still do not know what to make of him. He is either a true courageous whistleblower, or he is severely misguided. I honestly do not know which.
I don't know either whether all his conclusions are correct. I think he's at his best when he deals with tangible physics and math...like the geometry of the monuments and the planets, etc. - I find that stuff brilliant! But that might be a topic for another thread! For now, I mainly want to point out that the whole idea of moon bases isn't so far-fetched...I find his premise that the population was deemed 'not ready' for the knowledge of ET's entirely plausible...even today, if there were Disclosure, I can think of some people whom I know would probably freak out!
Hoagland makes a plausible case of it, and does a pretty good job of backing it up, imo. Without ever referencing the Law of One, to my knowledge. Whenever there are whistleblowers out there as intelligent as Hoagland, that is reason enough to consider the possibility that there might be something to it! My main point being that what may seem at first glance to be 'wrong' science might actually be cutting-edge science that's just not yet recognized by the mainstream.