Slashdot Mirror
'Civilization on Mars' Claims Debunked
StarEmperor writes "Bad Astronomy's Phil Plait has finally taken some time to
debunk conspiracy theorist Richard Hoagland's claims about life on Mars. There's also a CNN story about this here."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Russians found liquid water on Mars!
http://www.libo.ru
Iraq: war to save the U
This sort of thing simply exemplifies the sad state of science education in the general public. People when presented with the most superficial of data will adopt as truth the most extreme or absurd of claims with no critical assessment. This sort of blind trust allows folks to be taken in by claims of better health through unproven herbal supplements or claims of penile enlargments. On more serious notes, the lack of critical thinking among some has led to political and international policy that threatens to influence the state of world affairs.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
Daffy Duck told me Marvin the Martian was there and was going to destroy the earth! Don't tell me television has been lying to me all these years.
Hold up, wait a minute, let me put some pimpin in it
Oh come on, laugh. It's silly AND funny!
More seriously, why is it that the US seems to get more than its fair share of crackpots like this guy? Is it just because they're more able to make themselves heard (high tech, relatively rich society), or is it [tin hat] something more sinister [/tin hat] ? Perhaps it just seems that way from over here in the UK (officially the worlds least-likely to believe the walking-on-water and rising-from-the-dead thing - can't find the link though it was a bbc report recently), but there seem to be more potential tin-hatters from across the pond than just about anywhere else, even if you take into account the population differences (the US is less than 5x the UK...)
Simon.
Physicists get Hadrons!
WTF? So now Total Recall is all fake too? There's 2 hours of 'science learning' I'll never get back.
Can I take off my tinfoil hat now? It's kind of itchy. And hot.
Hoagland has some wild theories based on the flimsiest of evidence and even doctored photographs (introducing symmetry where none existed for example). He's a guy who just can't let go of his pet theories in the face of mounting evidence refuting them.
What really gets me annoyed with this guy though is when he starts criticizing NASA & accusing them of dishonesty & coverup when the data don't match his preposterous theories. Half the time it's his own technical ignorance that's the problem.
The guy just doesn't understand that we'd all like to find evidence of life on Mars, bipedal walking around life most of all, but we can't let that cloud our judgement.
If mankind ever does find evidence of life on Mars it'll be no thanks to fools like Hoagland, although I'm sure he'll be the first to say "I told you so".
Claims on the basis of the most tennuous of evidence and outlandish conjecture are worse than useless.
If any of you tinfoil hatters are interested... (via anomalist.com)
....
....
... now 25 years old.
... such as Plait and Greenberg.
... and a lesser tidal input maintaining a current possible "liquid ocean for Europa."
I found it hilarious that the photo link Hoagland provides at the end goes to a page with a caption that mentions him as an "unidentified guest".
http://www.enterprisemission.com/response.htm
Email Exchange From Rob Roy Britt of Space.com
And Richard C. Hoagland on the Plait\Greenberg Allegations
In a message dated 3/12/2004 3:14:35 PM Mountain Standard Time, rbritt@HQ.SPACE.com writes:
Hi Richard:
I will be going into some of these issues. Your serious criticism of NASA
requires that I discuss your credentials as well. I just spoke with Ralph
Greenberg, who has analyzed some of your biographical claims that on your
web site. I've read them too, and indeed your web site clearly says that you
claim to have been the first to propose the Europa ideas. If you'd like to
respond to Greenberg's comments, feel free to e-mail me back.
Rob
Here is what Greenberg said to me:
"It's clear that [Hoagland] deserves no credit for proposing an ocean under
the ice on Europa." And regarding the notion of life: "Others before him
wrote on the same topic with more merit."
Greenberg says Hoagland deserves some credit for helping to popularize the
Europa ideas. But he is bothered that Hoagland does not make an effort to
clear the record.
"He never made it quite clear that this was not his original idea in any
sense," Greenberg said. "I think it's really shameful that he hasn't been
willing to make it crystal clear."
Rob,
OK, here's the real story behind Plait's current accusations
Greenberg is the source. It is his long-standing "Hoagland obsession" -- which has been going on for years, and can be characterized as nothing less -- that is a clear example of how far certain people are willing to go to smear our reputation and our work. This is a classic case of what I pointed out a couple days ago, about these baseless accusations being fundamentally "political"
I would hope, as a good reporter, you would prefer to rely on "primary sources" for your story -- as opposed to merely "hearsay" from third parties -- certainly third parties with an obvious political agenda. I would therefore strongly recommend that you begin by actually reading my original 1980 article, "The Europa Enigma" (on the Enterprise website -- http://www.enterprisemission.com/europa.html) -- which appeared in the January, 1980 issue of Star & Sky Magazine
In the entire article -- at no time -- do I take undue credit for the original idea of a potential ocean under Europa's icy surface. That is a skillfully spun fiction -- created specifically by our less than honest critics
What I actually do in this extensive paper is clearly credit Cassen, Peale and Reynolds -- who originated and published in Science Magazine the first tidal model for internal Jovian satellite heating, just before Voyager 1 arrived at Jupiter in early 1979. I clearly credit their original calculations regarding the possibility of tidal heating of Io
But, I also carefully cite their strong caveat (in the then just-published Science tidal paper) that, depending on certain "incalculable factors," such an originally liquid Europan ocean could have frozen solid in the 4.5 billion years of subsequent solar system history.
In other words, in their published model, there was a more than even chance that Europa's ocean now was no longer liquid -- but had become a 100 miles-deep glacier of solid ice! And, if this was the case, if such an original Europan ocean had ever frozen solid, their own tidal calculations in Science clearly stated it could never be unfrozen!
This is where the dishonest critics have carefully,
You know, for the longest time I thought Hoagland's website was a joke - kind of like Villain Supply. I didn't think he actually took it seriously. He really does seem to believe what he writes, enough to go onto the radio.
It's really quite sad.
The guy just doesn't understand that we'd all like to find evidence of life on Mars, bipedal walking around life most of all, but we can't let that cloud our judgement.
On the contrary-- I think he understands this fact very well. I think people want there to be life in space, especially close to home. Hoaglad feeds off of this, and uses it to his advantage. And he makes money in doing so... I would be very surprised if he honestly believed his own crazy ideas. People believe because they want to, not because there is any substantial evidence...
[FromTheMorning]
While I agree with your assessment on the state of public education, for the Hoagland's of the world this is not about science, this is about religion. These extraterrestrials amongst us believers need to live a world with an external purpose and reason for being. They will never get that from science and feel conventional religions are beneath them or just too unbelievable. For these folks its not just about extraterrestrial life, which rational science types like me find totally plausible, it's the whole they live amongst us, they are so much more advanced, they created us and have a purpose for us (that is only reveled to the occasional abducted prophets), and they have given us all the technological advances since WWII. This is a new-age religion that had nothing to do with science education.
People like this nutcase must be debunked for the damage they do to serious astronomy. By allowing this kind of infestation to manifest just because you know how ridiculous it is you end up giving credibility simply by way of not having debunked it. Much as eco-terrorists like ELF and ALF damage the environmental cause, people like this guy (not saying he's a terrorist) damage the credibility of things like SETI.
Think how many people now believe in crap like Roswell and little green men. Now think how people like this make it hard for the public to take this science seriously. The idiot wants pr, but by not giving him the smackdown he so desperately needs, they'll get unearned credibility instead. The lack of pr will of course just be proof of a conspiracy against them.
Just think, to believe this guy you'd have to accept that we've spent hundreds of millions of dollars just on this one one mission to look for signs of life and that we would then turn around and ignore it when we found it. Too bad they don't teach logic in schools anymore.
Here is the deal. Hoagland makes extraordinary claims. It is up to the claimant to provide extraordinary evidence. For instance, Hoagland's proof for life on Mars includes an old blurry pixellated photo of a "face". Plait points out that this is not proof. Plait doesn't have to disprove there is life on Mars to "debunk" Hoagland, he merely needs to point out the lack of evidence for it. Now, even with a high resolution photograph of the face, Hoagland refuses to back down from his claims and keeps selling books on the subject. I think his credibility and motives are open for speculation. Hoagland also misrepresents his credentials and this should be open to scrutiny.
Never overestimate the end user. -jeramy b. smith
"This sort of thing simply exemplifies the sad state of science education in the general public."
Not just science ed, but the basic skill of critical thinking. I can't speak for how things are going in the rest of the world, but here in the US it's gotten particularly sad. People as a whole just don't seem able or willing to be bothered by thinking for themselves.
Seems to me that many moons ago, even those who lacked formal higher education could be counted on to have "horse sense" - the simple ability to call "Shenanigans" when faced with something fishy, and run the snake oil salesman out of town.
These days it seems everyone's simply lining up for snake oil subscriptions. What's up? Too much "Reality" TV? Sure folks have always been duped, but damn it seems like a national pastime these days.
If I'm driving around at night, I try to listen. Actually, they're not all crazy. Once I heard the physicist Micio Kaku on there, and that was a pretty cool interview.
Komi
The ultimate goal of science is to unify all forces of nature to a single law that can be silk-screened onto a T-shirt.
...You see this Slashdot headline and the first thing you think of is a new Sid Meier game.
you'd love an intro polysci class.
yes and no; born-again evangelican christians (also known as religio-loonies) are apt to fervently disagree with something just on the basis that it was said by a "scientist". Eg, Scientist: "global warming could potentially have a negative effect on the world's ecosystem and agribusinesses." Christian nut: "...another liberal lie, god bless Texaco!"
People tend to trust and believe things said by persons they identify with. People on slashdot are probably more likely (as a group) to identify with "scientist"s than are say, people in a baptist church in dixieland. Just like people in that church would be more likely to agree with their minister that "the plight of coconut harvesters in equatorial guinea has got to STOP!" based on who said it than say, a crowd of random people on the street. (don't read too much into these example... as far as I know there are no coconuts in Eq Guinea).
It's just an information processing shortcut.
Oh come on, don't pretent you hold up every single assertion to a microscope. We all take this shortcut. Some of us just have better bs detectors. Also happenstance is everpresent (some people call this luck).
PS: I am not denying the existence of stupidity, or of stupid people. I also don't think I am shocking parent's author with blinding wisdom. Just sayin'.
"A witty saying proves nothing." ~Voltaire
"d'Oh!" ~Homer
Still better than 'Fox News' though...
There was an interesting article in Discover magazine several years ago about why humans always think they see faces in random patterns (such as the Martian surface, or the smoke rising out of the World Trade Center ruins).
Basically, our brain is hard-wired to quickly recognize human faces. This is for survival purposes, of course. But when you stare at these non-human shapes - such as the Martian rock - it is obvious these are NOT faces. The brows are wrong, the nose is fitting only for Michael Jackson, and the mouth is horribly formed.
Hoagland regularly appears on Coast to Coast AM, an overnight syndicated talk show with something like 12 million listeners.
They get the listeners to email NASA demanding ridiculous things. Another poster pointed out that they got a Mars probe to drop other important work to take more photos of the "face on mars."
When NASA did it, Hoagland went on the radio and accused NASA of faking the photos to hide the evidence. He's a classic delusional type, who sees any evidence that proves him wrong as proof that there's a conspiracy.
A lot of the problem is the radio show, which is irresponsible, in my view. During the whole Y2K scare, one of the hosts hyped the hell out of it, and sold people overpriced bunker food on the side.
I understand the appeal of the show, and I enjoy that sort of thing myself. The argument for it is that it's sort of like pro wrestling -- it's just a show, everyone knows it's just a show, and the few people who don't just make the whole thing that much more entertaining. I can buy all of that.
The problem comes when these guys start scaring people and exploiting them (with the bunker food), or when they create real problems for NASA. NASA has enough troubles now, they don't need this crap.
I'm *NOT* calling for any kind of government action, or any sort of censorship. I don't support what's happening to Howard Stern, and I wouldn't support anyone hassling Coast to Coast AM.
I do think it's appropriate for other people to wake up to how many listeners these guys have, and to try to keep them relavtively honest. These sorts of articles are a great start.
...why in earth would NASA want to cover up such a thing?
If you enjoy his web site and the service he provides to the public buy his book, Bad Astronomy.
The link to his book on Amazon can be found here
He covers a wide range of misconceptions, myths and outright falsehoods about astronomy and associated topics. My favorite topic he covers is the "Apollo Moon Landing Hoax". He gives the subject an excellent treatment.
Maybe this claim is true. Maybe it isn't. However since for the moment all evidence of this claim has explanations that are much simpler we are required to accept this simpler explanation that fits the evidence.
We are skeptical, as science requires us to be. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and there doen't appear to be any such evidence for the moment. Furthermore the burden of proof is on Hoagland and others who make such claims.
Share bicycle touring info worldwide: http://wheretocycle.com
To NASA, an actual fossil of something on Mars means big headlines and (more importantly) big funding. I can't find any reason they would destroy one that doesn't involve donning a tinfoil hat first.
Ita erat quando hic adveni.
Science is full of dogma, unfounded beliefs, lack of proof, unstated assumptions, errors, etc. And science education usually does no more to address these problems than other academic disciplines.
At the fringes, yes -- there is a point where all some scientists do is the intellectual equivalent of mastrubation. There's also the crackpot fringe whose diplomas by-and-large come from mail-order diploma mills, but who write convincing-sounding books on the scientific validity of numerology in the bible and staple a 'PhD' at the end of their name -- just to sound credible.
Mainstream science, however, is all about proof, and if you don't have it, you get reamed. If you rely on unstated assumptions that turn out to be false, you get reamed. If you make errors, you get reamed when someone double-checks your work. This is why all of the Cold Fusion nuts have been sent to the fringes, along with the 'young earth' and 'flat earth' types -- because they refuse to acknowledge their mistakes.
Seriously. Show me an unfounded belief, error, or unstated assumption that has stuck around in physics, chemistry, biology, or any other scientific field for a signifigant period of time. Something that is clearly and demonstrably false, yet which the mainstream community refuses to correct. Good luck.
--
I Hit the Karma Cap, and All I Got Was This Lousy
What's really disgusting is the way the media is cynically exploiting these beliefs. But I view that as just another symptom of the "1000 channels and nothing's on" syndrome. Which is a result of so much media being controlled by so few companies, so that real creativity or insight has no chance in the mass media. Crap is easy to produce and has a high profit margin, so that's what the media monopolies give us. That's of a lot more immediate importance that any silly arguments over the Mars Face.