• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Expat Interview

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Mystery-Student said:
yeah i agree with where you are going. all the names given by different people seem to be referring to or have its main forces related to one theory ... ( see original post )
Click to expand...

So it seems we're at a standstill. A bunch of different people have all had some kind of theory about what happens to space and/or gravity in close proximity to a spinning mass. Experiments here on Earth with weights have been done that demonstrate the attractive force of gravity, so planet sized objects may not be needed in order to observe the effect. Perhaps the comparative mass of a tiny little tuning fork near a heavy spinning metal disk might produce some effect that manifests itself as a small change in the tuning fork's vibrational rate, and the supposed repeatability of the observations makes it even more curious. However there are also other variables that could conceivably account for the observations.

So we've neither validated nor invalidated Haogland's "Inertial Field Detector". There is at least some evidence that it could actually be showing us something other than noise. Wouldn't it be something if Hoagland and his IFD turned out like the stereotypical crackpot in all the sci-fi movies who ends up having his pet theory validated!
 
Just finished listening to the Expat podcast. OMG, what a breath of fresh air, hearing someone who actually seems to know what he's talking about. Clear, calm, reasoned and not selling anything. It probably disappointed the 'I-wanna-believe-in-UFOs' and conspiracy bunch, but as far as I'm concerned he made a long-overdue change!

But... the podcast never let him develop his ideas about the 'spidery' objects on Mars before the commercial break. The same thing happened when he was asked about his thoughts on UFOs. When asked on his blog about UFOs he said that his opinion had been expressed on the Paracast and has nothing to add, or something similar. What was his opinion?

Anyway, damn good show chaps!!

Ian
 
Good show, just quick question? Why the use of the pseudonym "expat" if this person believes completely in the information he is presenting?
 
I already explained that. Once again -- both Richard Hoagland and Mike Bara have specifically threatened me with legal action. While I do not believe for one minute that either of them would have a chance in court, any sort of attempt like that would disrupt my life.
 
Expat said:
I already explained that. Once again -- both Richard Hoagland and Mike Bara have specifically threatened me with legal action. While I do not believe for one minute that either of them would have a chance in court, any sort of attempt like that would disrupt my life.
Click to expand...
Gee that was quick?! What would be the grounds for suing you? They have put forward a "theory" that you questioned, with evidence, to support you position.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Richard Hoagland says that my persistent questioning of him amounts to cyber-stalking, which is a crime in most States of the USA (notwithstanding that an essential feature of criminal cyber-stalking is threats, which I have never issued.)

Mike Bara, this very day, posted to his author FB page that he expected cyber-stalking from me tonight. On a radio show ten days ago he stated that he's hired an investigator to track me down and he will soon file a restraining order against me.

Once again, these allegations have no merit but the mere filing of such complaints would be a burden on me.
 
ADD: It is also an established fact that Mike Bara uses any information he has about his critics as a basis for juvenile ad hominem attacks. You do not have to look far in his online blog to find grotesque caricatures of Stuart Robbins and Phil Plait, both of them qualified astronomers who have questioned Bara's writings. I don't care to be the subject of such attack if I can avoid it.
 
ADD: Yesterday on his personal FB page, Mike Bara wrote that Stuart Robbins is arrogant and insecure, and Phil Plait is a moron. Remember, these people are qualified astronomers who know infinitely more about the Moon than Bara does. He has accused me, Derek Eunson and Stuart Robbins of being homosexual because for some reason he considers that an insult.

Mike Bara is not a pleasant person at all.
 
Back
Top