Angstrom gives his side of the story
igor...@hotmail.com
Here is the latest reply I received from my correspondence with
Lars-Jonas Angstrom. I asked him for a list of the "65" Angstrom
Medal awardees, but as you can see he treats it as guarded information.
Others are free to dig deeper by e-mailing him at the address given
in one of my other posts.
--- BEGIN reply --- (21 April 1998)
Igor,
Your e-mail 98-04-19. I do not know who you are and must therefore refrain
from discussing details. Of course there is a list of who have received
the medals with reservation for historical record being ok. The first
awarded 1902.
The Angstrom Foundation was founded in order to preserve my ancestors old
premises and to make it available as a miniconference center to researchers
and scientists in various fields so that they could meet in a peaceful
surronding for free discussions of interesting problems and questions. The
idea was also to preserve the memory of the family and to show that true
sience could origin also from poor financial backgrounds.
The Foundation should support the field of natural science, economy and
education. As the Foundation lacks any larger financial funds the idea was
born to use the medal (struck by the Royal Mint for the Royal Society of
Science in 1874 in memory of my great grandfather Anders Jonas Angstrom)
and award it as an act of encuragement for spearhead theories and
hypothesis i order to encurage research before you have a break-through.
The idea was to have different levels from high school and up and to make
it international as an effort of bringing people together. No definitive
achivements or break-throughs should be required but a genuine interest,
hard work and an interesting hypothesis. To give an example. The Wright
brothers should have been encuraged in 1900-something before they had a
positive lift off and proved the possibilities of aviation. I do think
encuragement at the right time is important.
As for Hoagland he was awarded the medal not for his investigation of
Cydonia but for his hypothesis of the possibility of different laws of
physics in our solar system outside the special conditions on earth. For
example the physics and energi in rotating gas masses. Also his old theory
of water existing on Europa was of interest. Hoglands appearance in UN and
later professor McDaniels report and Dr Craters report (Tennessee Space
Institute) seemed to substantiate some of the ideas. Pure conspiracy
theories are of no interst what so ever.
As I see it Igor, my, my ancestors and the medals name and reputation has
been rediculed from the US (which I by the way like very much) over the
NET, completely killing the concept to encurage, destroying years of work
and ideas and causing unrepairable damage to what I believe was a good
idea. It is my fault.
You write: "It might be time for you to set the record straight". Igor, I
do not have the means, the funds or the knowhow to change or straighten
anything. I simply would not know how and anyway it seems to be too late.
I do not want to hurt or damage anything or anybody but will protect
everyone in this country and accept the full responsibility and personally
take all the blame - if a wrong choice was made in good faith. It is sad
to se a basically good idea go down the drain but such is life - sometimes.
Jonas
--- END reply ---
I'm still very curious about the 65 recipients other than Hoagland, plus
the fact that Angstrom says the award has been around since 1902. Why was
it claimed that Hoagland's 1993 award was the first? It looks like Angstrom
doesn't buy Hoagland's Cydonia theories and the award was given for the
"boldness" of his other ideas. Angstrom admits that it was given for
controversial theories, and he can't be faulted for wanting to see such
research. This whole matter makes a lot more sense now.
Unless Angstrom gives a URL with a list of awardees, I will keep any other
correspondence private. He doesn't strike me as someone who deserves public
ridicule. It was Richard Hoagland, not Angstrom, who portrayed the Medal as
a *mainstream* science award.
- Igor
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Dr Tim.BsD
igor...@hotmail.com wrote in message <6hirnb$dmj$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>Lars-Jonas Angstrom. I asked him for a list of the "65" Angstrom
>Medal awardees, but as you can see he treats it as guarded information.
>Igor,
>Your e-mail 98-04-19. I do not know who you are and must therefore refrain
>from discussing details. Of course there is a list of who have received
>the medals with reservation for historical record being ok.
It's a secret award! No wonder it's hard to find out more about it. Has
Hoagland committed some kind of treason by speaking about it?
Dr.Tim, BsD
Art Bell, Dr. Laura, Militia Satire Websites
http://extra.newsguy.com/~satire
ZOG Agent
Skepticultist
Master Baiter
Official Jackyl, Pack O'Jackyls (TM)
Proper Usenet Authority
High Counselor, New Usenet Order
certified psychic
Lord Supreme Being and Reigning Monarch of afa-b
Owner of a super-inflated ego
DrPostman
igor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>Lars response to Igor snipped for brevity<<<<<<<<<
>The idea was to have different levels from high school and up and to make
>it international as an effort of bringing people together. No definitive
>achivements or break-throughs should be required but a genuine interest,
If this part of the criteria were better known then Hoagland would not
be so anxious to flaunt it about. I agree with Igor that Lars does not
deserve the ridicule that could come his way but Hoagland is to be
blamed most of all for it. He is not a mathematician or a physicist so
his Hyperdimensional Physics is nothing more than an idea of someone
else that he promotes - that he should get a medal for promoting it is
strange. I can only think that he bamboozled Lars into thinking more
of him. Just another con.
--
Dr.Postman USPS, MBMC, BsD; "Disgruntled, But Unarmed"
High Counselor of the New Usenet Order
Addicted to Art Bell? http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Lair/1282
Member,Board of Directors of afa-b, Lifetime member of the
Art Bell Internet Fan Club, SKEP-TI-CULT® member #15-51506-253.
You can email me at: jamiemps(at)mindspring.com
Dr Tim.BsD
DrPostman wrote in message <353f27ab...@news.mindspring.com>...
>I agree with Igor that Lars does not
>deserve the ridicule that could come his way
Why? He gives awards that are too secret to explain. He sounds like a
Kettler class kook to me.
--
DrPostman
"Dr Tim.BsD" <Dr_...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>DrPostman wrote in message <353f27ab...@news.mindspring.com>...
>
>>I agree with Igor that Lars does not
>>deserve the ridicule that could come his way
>
>Why? He gives awards that are too secret to explain. He sounds like a
>Kettler class kook to me.
I suppose it would be because he doesn't flaunt it like Hoagie does.
igor...@hotmail.com
In article <353f27ab...@news.mindspring.com>#1/1,
It...@mysig.emailthere wrote:
> >>>>>>Lars response to Igor snipped for brevity<<<<<<<<<
> >The idea was to have different levels from high school and up and to make
> >it international as an effort of bringing people together. No definitive
> >achivements or break-throughs should be required but a genuine interest,
>
> If this part of the criteria were better known then Hoagland would not
> be so anxious to flaunt it about. I agree with Igor that Lars does not
> deserve the ridicule that could come his way but Hoagland is to be
> blamed most of all for it. He is not a mathematician or a physicist so
> his Hyperdimensional Physics is nothing more than an idea of someone
> else that he promotes - that he should get a medal for promoting it is
> strange. I can only think that he bamboozled Lars into thinking more
> of him. Just another con.
We agree that it's quite likely Mr. Angstrom was deceived or misdirected.
I will admit that Hoagland fooled me big time when I first tuned into the
Art Bell show several years ago and heard him talking about towers on the
Moon. Knowing nothing about Hoagland (or Bell) at that time, I got fairly
excited and thought it was new breakthrough information. Hoagland
definitely has a way of sounding legit at first listen. Maybe Angstrom
barely knew him at the time the 1993 award was given.
I feel a bit sorry for Angstrom since he seems to take the "failure" of
the award concept personally, and it looks like he may have fallen on
financial hard times. But having said all that, I'd still like to see
the list of 65 recipients.
Spencer W Hunter
In alt.fan.art-bell igor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> We agree that it's quite likely Mr. Angstrom was deceived or misdirected.
> I will admit that Hoagland fooled me big time when I first tuned into the
> Art Bell show several years ago and heard him talking about towers on the
> Moon. Knowing nothing about Hoagland (or Bell) at that time, I got fairly
> excited and thought it was new breakthrough information. Hoagland
> definitely has a way of sounding legit at first listen. Maybe Angstrom
> barely knew him at the time the 1993 award was given.
> I feel a bit sorry for Angstrom since he seems to take the "failure" of
> the award concept personally, and it looks like he may have fallen on
> financial hard times. But having said all that, I'd still like to see
> the list of 65 recipients.
I want to confirm Igor's claim that Jonas Angstrom is extremely
approachable, and his English is excellent.
In his correspondence with me, he is still reluctant to release
names to my "group" (meaning the readers of alt.fan.art-bell)
until we are "identified in a much better way." However, he
insists that the information wouldn't help us very much anyway;
it "only consists of the names and the year as: Doctor of Philosophy
Ture Rudberg 1902. Only in one case I have the reason: 'For
his work on electron spectroscopy with rotational resolution'.
It does not say very much does it?"
He provided me with some more background. Apparently, there was
some money left over for the gravestone of his great grandfather
that was invested, and the interest on those funds are what is used
for the award. Today, the prize is awarded with the medal, but
only for achievements "related to spectral analysis... scientists
tend to spend the money quickly but are very fond of their medals."
An additional project funded separately from the prize and the
medal involves remodeling the "Angstromsgarden" to accomodate
work meetings and mini-conferences of from ten to twelve researchers.
His comments on Hoagland are particularly relevant here:
"I do not want to say that Hoagland conned me in any way. I do
believe that it is quite possible that other and/or additional laws
of physics might prevail once you leave earth. I also believe that
we still do not know all there is to know right where we are and I
have always believed that water would be available elsewhere in the
universe [a reference to Europa?]. But I must admit that I am a
little disappointed that H. did not develope or researched his
hypothesis any further - at least not to my knowledge as the
communication is 0. So I made a miss - for which as I said I will
take the blame. But I was happy to give the medal to an American.
I am afraid that's all."
--
Spencer W. Hunter Tucson, AZ. | veni, vidi, vamos.
shu...@u.arizona.edu | they came, they saw, they left.
gopher://www.u.arizona.edu:80/hGET%20/~shunter
Dr Tim.BsD
Spencer W Hunter wrote in message
<Mr. Hunter quotes Angstrom:>
>"I do not want to say that Hoagland conned me in any way. I do
>believe that it is quite possible that other and/or additional laws
>of physics might prevail once you leave earth.
Woo woo alert woo woo alert...
J.P. Randolph Jenkins
It's wonderful to know more about Angstrom and the medal, it is very sad
to see the pain, it is now causing the desendants of J. Angstrom.
If Lars Angstrom were to write an explantion of the award, and provide a
list of the recipients, it would be no trouble, to post on a geocities
or tripod site, all it's own, verbatum.
That seems a fairly simple and inexpensive way to help Mr. Angstrom
straighten this all out, and clear the family name, from the likes of
Hoagland.
For more information on free websites, go to www.geocities.com or
www.tripod.com
>
> Igor,
> Your e-mail 98-04-19. I do not know who you are and must therefore refrain
> from discussing details. Of course there is a list of who have received
> the medals with reservation for historical record being ok. The first
> awarded 1902.
> The Angstrom Foundation was founded in order to preserve my ancestors old
> premises and to make it available as a miniconference center to researchers
Much appreciated, heartfelt response deleted.
> You write: "It might be time for you to set the record straight". Igor, I
> do not have the means, the funds or the knowhow to change or straighten
> anything. I simply would not know how and anyway it seems to be too late.
> I do not want to hurt or damage anything or anybody but will protect
> everyone in this country and accept the full responsibility and personally
> take all the blame - if a wrong choice was made in good faith. It is sad
> to se a basically good idea go down the drain but such is life - sometimes.
> Jonas
>
> --- END reply ---
>
--
"The law is like life, the more there is, the less precious it will
become."
J.P. Randolph Jenkins
igor...@hotmail.com
In article <6hldcf$h7g$1...@news.ccit.arizona.edu>#1/1,
Spencer W Hunter <shu...@u.arizona.edu> wrote:
> His comments on Hoagland are particularly relevant here:
>
> "I do not want to say that Hoagland conned me in any way. I do
> believe that it is quite possible that other and/or additional laws
> of physics might prevail once you leave earth. I also believe that
> we still do not know all there is to know right where we are and I
> have always believed that water would be available elsewhere in the
> universe [a reference to Europa?]. But I must admit that I am a
> little disappointed that H. did not develope or researched his
> hypothesis any further - at least not to my knowledge as the
> communication is 0. So I made a miss - for which as I said I will
> take the blame. But I was happy to give the medal to an American.
> I am afraid that's all."
Mr. Angstrom strikes me as a honest, well-meaning guy who has been
misrepresented by circumstance. When I first saw his picture (giving
Hoagland the 1993 award) he didn't look like a slick con artist at all.
That motivated me to investigate further. I was surprised that nobody
else had really contacted him. Just luck on my part?
I probably shouldn't have posted his e-mail and replies here, but I
thought more good than harm would come from it (apparently that has
been the case). My apologies for any partial invasion of Angstrom's
privacy. I would ask that "Skep-ti-cult" members remove or modify
the Angstrom Medal parody page and focus attention where it's *really*
due: on Richard Hoagland, Ed Dames, David Oates and anyone who claims
to be a scientist but is mainly in it for book and tape sales.
As for Art Bell, I find him to be mostly a harmless mediator, and
quite good at what he does (like him or not). He may give his wacko
guests a forum, but this is a free country.
igor...@hotmail.com
In article <6hlisq$3...@enews4.newsguy.com>#1/1,
"Dr Tim.BsD" <Dr_...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> <Mr. Hunter quotes Angstrom:>
>
> >"I do not want to say that Hoagland conned me in any way. I do
> >believe that it is quite possible that other and/or additional laws
> >of physics might prevail once you leave earth.
>
> Woo woo alert woo woo alert...
Please give Angstrom a break for being open-minded and consider the full
context of this situation. The Angstrom Medal was/is apparently given to
acknowledge new (plausible) *ideas* and it doesn't imply a theory has been
proven.
Indeed, Hoagland was the first (if not only) American to get the award
and I'm sure there's a lot more to that story. I have no doubt that hours
of smooth-talking went into the process, if not outright lies. The details
of Hoagland's award would make good reading. How quickly we forget that
details can mean *everything* with regard to public perception.
Unless I see the list of 65 awardees and it includes crop-circle
investigations, I'll give Angstrom the benefit of the doubt.
Dr Tim.BsD
igor...@hotmail.com wrote in message
>privacy. I would ask that "Skep-ti-cult" members remove or modify
>the Angstrom Medal parody page and focus attention where it's *really*
>due: on Richard Hoagland, Ed Dames, David Oates and anyone who claims
>to be a scientist but is mainly in it for book and tape sales.
Why is everyone so eager to give Angstrom the benefit of the doubt. His
medal is being used by a flim-flam man and he is doing nothing about it.
He's as responsible as Hoagy. If Digger removes the page, I'll set up a
much more critical site, directed at Angstrom himself. Now you might think
that hyperdimensional physics is a real discipline, but no one, other than
Angstrom and Bell give it any credence. It's just another marketing stream.
>As for Art Bell, I find him to be mostly a harmless mediator, and
>quite good at what he does (like him or not). He may give his wacko
>guests a forum, but this is a free country.
I've never called for his banishment from the radio, but he's far from
harmless. He markets this crap. Do you think NASA would have received enough
pressure from the woo woo fringe to spend all those extra bucks to re-film
Cydonia without Bell's popularization of the issue? That cost us a lot of
money and the opportunity to research more scientifically compelling areas.
--
Shadowrunner
Dr Tim.BsD <Dr_...@newsguy.com> wrote in article
<6hjn5r$l...@enews2.newsguy.com>...
> DrPostman wrote in message <353f27ab...@news.mindspring.com>...
>
> >I agree with Igor that Lars does not
> >deserve the ridicule that could come his way
>
> Why? He gives awards that are too secret to explain. He sounds like a
> Kettler class kook to me.
just out of curiosity, exactly how many classes of kook are there, and
what are they?
-- just a thought,
shadowrunner
dr. digger
If Mr. Angstrom will show that the Angstrom Medal is a legitimate
award, and intended to encourage true science, I will remove all
references to the Angstrom family and name from the Angstrom Medal
Page.
The Angstrom Page is intended to ridicule junk science and con
artists, like Hoagland and Bell and their ILK. It was never intended
to ridicule A.J.Angstrom, nor L.J.Angstrom, nor their name.
I hope Mr. Angstrom will continue to provide us with more information.
I also hope there is hope for this world after all.
dr. digger
DrPostman
igor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>Please give Angstrom a break for being open-minded and consider the full
>context of this situation. The Angstrom Medal was/is apparently given to
>acknowledge new (plausible) *ideas* and it doesn't imply a theory has been
>proven.
>
>Indeed, Hoagland was the first (if not only) American to get the award
>and I'm sure there's a lot more to that story. I have no doubt that hours
>of smooth-talking went into the process, if not outright lies. The details
>of Hoagland's award would make good reading. How quickly we forget that
>details can mean *everything* with regard to public perception.
>
>Unless I see the list of 65 awardees and it includes crop-circle
>investigations, I'll give Angstrom the benefit of the doubt.
>
>- Igor
There is still the information that this was an award presented by
Uppsala University in Sweden until Angstrom took over the process of
presentation of the award - he didn't address this and I would
be surprised if he did. So far he only mentioned one person
involved in the award process, himself. That should make it
suspicious enough. Add to this his admission that the only criteria
is that you come up with something wild with nothing to back it up
and I can understand why Hoagland and Angstrom are so secretive
about the medal.
dr. digger
igor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <6hldcf$h7g$1...@news.ccit.arizona.edu>#1/1,
> Spencer W Hunter <shu...@u.arizona.edu> wrote:
>
> > His comments on Hoagland are particularly relevant here:
> >
> > "I do not want to say that Hoagland conned me in any way. I do
> > believe that it is quite possible that other and/or additional laws
> > of physics might prevail once you leave earth. I also believe that
> > we still do not know all there is to know right where we are and I
> > have always believed that water would be available elsewhere in the
> > universe [a reference to Europa?]. But I must admit that I am a
> > little disappointed that H. did not develope or researched his
> > hypothesis any further - at least not to my knowledge as the
> > communication is 0. So I made a miss - for which as I said I will
> > take the blame. But I was happy to give the medal to an American.
> > I am afraid that's all."
>
> Mr. Angstrom strikes me as a honest, well-meaning guy who has been
> misrepresented by circumstance. When I first saw his picture (giving
What circumstances have possibly misrepresented him? That he gave the
Medal to Hoagland?
> Hoagland the 1993 award) he didn't look like a slick con artist at all.
> That motivated me to investigate further. I was surprised that nobody
> else had really contacted him. Just luck on my part?
About a month ago I also tried to contact the "other" Lars, Dr.
Lars-Jonas Angstrom, the biochemist at the Angstrom Laboratories who
is the author of Teknisk Aktieanalys I - IV. No reply. It is indeed
to your credit that you tracked this guy down.
I have also contacted Jonas. He told me essentially what he told you
and Spencer -- very little.
Again, though, if there were any legitimacy to the Angstrom Medal, I
would have thought that its trustees would have come howling to *me*
to stop infringing on their name, maybe even at Hoagland's urging.
That never happened.
> I probably shouldn't have posted his e-mail and replies here, but I
> thought more good than harm would come from it (apparently that has
> been the case). My apologies for any partial invasion of Angstrom's
> privacy. I would ask that "Skep-ti-cult" members remove or modify
> the Angstrom Medal parody page and focus attention where it's *really*
> due: on Richard Hoagland, Ed Dames, David Oates and anyone who claims
> to be a scientist but is mainly in it for book and tape sales.
I don't think he would mind that you posted his message. He told me I
could post his as well, which I would have if it had any new
information.
As I said before, if it can be shown that the Angstrom Medal is a
legitimate award given for the encouragement of bona fide science,
then I will remove the Angstrom name from the Angstrom Medal Page.
Hell, I'll even put up a page for the "real" Angstrom Medal, if
there's anything to tell about it.
No such evidence has been forthcoming yet. Mr. Angstrom sounds like a
nice guy, perhaps a bit harried about the way things have gone. But
nothing that he didnt bring about himself. Instead he has not only
refused to name any but one of the 65+ alleged recipients, but he has
not even explained a reason why he can't provide the list. The only
reason I can think of is the obvious one. Indeed, Mr. Angstrom hasn't
actually answered *any* of the questions, although his English is
quite functional.
So, until then, The Official Angstrom Medal Page stays. Perhaps it
hurts Mr. Angstrom's feelings; I'm sure it hurts Hoagland's, too. So?
> As for Art Bell, I find him to be mostly a harmless mediator, and
> quite good at what he does (like him or not). He may give his wacko
> guests a forum, but this is a free country.
I don't understand how peddling junk science, misinformation,
disinformation and outright lies is harmless, and I'm not sure how
Bell is a "mediator".
This is indeed a free country. People can and do freely lie. We are
also free to call a wacko shyster an idiot, and to parody and lampoon
all purveyors of woo-woo.
dr. digger
igor...@hotmail.com
In article <353eaa0d.517317@news>,
bhe...@spamfree.polarnet.com.gov (dr. digger) wrote:
> If Mr. Angstrom will show that the Angstrom Medal is a legitimate
> award, and intended to encourage true science, I will remove all
> references to the Angstrom family and name from the Angstrom Medal
> Page.
>
> The Angstrom Page is intended to ridicule junk science and con
> artists, like Hoagland and Bell and their ILK. It was never intended
> to ridicule A.J.Angstrom, nor L.J.Angstrom, nor their name.
>
> I hope Mr. Angstrom will continue to provide us with more information.
> I also hope there is hope for this world after all.
That sounds fair enough. I personally suggested to L-J Angstrom that
he post here, and his English is certainly up to the task.
Getting Hoagland to post here would be classic, but he'd probably be
ripped to shreds!
igor...@hotmail.com
In article <353f45dd...@news.mindspring.com>,
It...@mysig.emailthere wrote:
> >Unless I see the list of 65 awardees and it includes crop-circle
> >investigations, I'll give Angstrom the benefit of the doubt.
> >
> >- Igor
>
> There is still the information that this was an award presented by
> Uppsala University in Sweden until Angstrom took over the process of
> presentation of the award - he didn't address this and I would
> be surprised if he did. So far he only mentioned one person
> involved in the award process, himself. That should make it
> suspicious enough. Add to this his admission that the only criteria
> is that you come up with something wild with nothing to back it up
> and I can understand why Hoagland and Angstrom are so secretive
> about the medal.
I'm mainly going on my gut instinct that Angstrom is an honest old-timer
who means well. I could be wrong, but his tone does not sound like a
con-artist in private correspondence. Others here seem to agree.
J.P. Randolph Jenkins
Have you asked Lars to listen to Hoagland on Art Bell's real audio
archives? It might help make it clear to him, why we ridicule Hoagland
so.
igor...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> That sounds fair enough. I personally suggested to L-J Angstrom that
> he post here, and his English is certainly up to the task.
>
> Getting Hoagland to post here would be classic, but he'd probably be
> ripped to shreds!
>
> - Igor
>
"The law is like life, the more there is, the less precious it will
become."
J.P. Randolph Jenkins
dr. digger
Apologies if this is posted twice, the first one didn't seem to take.
igor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Please give Angstrom a break for being open-minded and consider the full
> context of this situation. The Angstrom Medal was/is apparently given to
> acknowledge new (plausible) *ideas* and it doesn't imply a theory has been
> proven.
In what way is he open-minded? Because he apparently accepted
Hoagland as a bona fide researcher without any scientific review?
What does this say for the legitimacy of the Angstrom Medal?
>
> Indeed, Hoagland was the first (if not only) American to get the award
> and I'm sure there's a lot more to that story. I have no doubt that hours
> of smooth-talking went into the process, if not outright lies. The details
> of Hoagland's award would make good reading. How quickly we forget that
> details can mean *everything* with regard to public perception.
If this is the case, why can't he come right out and say it? Ignoring
the truth doesn't make one honest.
>
> Unless I see the list of 65 awardees and it includes crop-circle
> investigations, I'll give Angstrom the benefit of the doubt.
I would have thought otherwise. All we knew before is that Hoagland
received an Angstrom Medal. All we know now is that Hoagland received
an Angstrom Medal. There's one good reason to think the Medal is less
than shining, zero reasons to think otherwise.
dr. digger
igor...@hotmail.com
In article <3540045b...@news2.polarnet.com>,
bhe...@spamfree.polarnet.com.gov (dr. digger) wrote:
> > Please give Angstrom a break for being open-minded and consider the full
> > context of this situation. The Angstrom Medal was/is apparently given to
> > acknowledge new (plausible) *ideas* and it doesn't imply a theory has been
> > proven.
>
> In what way is he open-minded? Because he apparently accepted
> Hoagland as a bona fide researcher without any scientific review?
I guess his sad story didn't work for you! Did you have a tense private
correspondence with him? I still give him the benefit of the doubt because
of my general impressions and the possibility that he's too weary to care
anymore. One would have to put themselves in his shoes, which we still
know little about.
> > Unless I see the list of 65 awardees and it includes crop-circle
> > investigations, I'll give Angstrom the benefit of the doubt.
>
> I would have thought otherwise. All we knew before is that Hoagland
> received an Angstrom Medal. All we know now is that Hoagland received
> an Angstrom Medal. There's one good reason to think the Medal is less
> than shining, zero reasons to think otherwise.
A true skeptic I see. It's definitely up to Angstrom now. I wonder if he
understands how Usenet posting works? Lars, are you reading any of this?
Mars to Lars...come in, please...
Spencer W Hunter
In alt.fan.art-bell igor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <353f45dd...@news.mindspring.com>,
> I'm mainly going on my gut instinct that Angstrom is an honest old-timer
> who means well. I could be wrong, but his tone does not sound like a
> con-artist in private correspondence. Others here seem to agree.
> - Igor
I, too, think he means well, but in my additional correspondence with
him, he seems to express a sympathy for "fringe science" (at least on
the "face" of it ;). That in itself does not make him con-artist, but
it could mean that the medal he gives out is no special indicator of
scientific competence.