Do you take offense when 'Gargantua' Graces your thread?

@Imperious:

That guy who owns that site is crazy. He is always on Art Bell’s radio show and late Night coast to coast.

He inferred that it was “the death star”…waiting for the right time to head to earth and blow it up. Rediculious

That’s the issue with pseudo-science. Peoples need to make outrageous and never eared announcements to get attention and eventually money.

This guy puts a lot of interesting facts on his site but when it put them together,
he is like Richard Castle telling a murder story to Lt Becket who’s trying to figure the puzzle out of a bunch of facts.
Castle’s story remains false but it provides new hints to get further in the investigation of the case.

In the first video, at 55 minutes and 00 second, Hoagland talk about this Saturn’s moon (Iapetus) and about artificial moon.
http://www.enterprisemission.com/videos.html

This moon was in the book of Arthur C. Clark, as the goal while it was change in the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey for a Jupiter’s moon:

In the background to the story in the book, an ancient and unseen alien race uses a device with the appearance of a large crystalline monolith to investigate worlds all across the galaxy and, if possible, to encourage the development of intelligent life. The book shows one such monolith appearing in ancient Africa, 3 million years B.C. (in the movie, 4 million years), where it inspires a starving group of hominids to develop tools. The ape-men use their tools to kill animals and eat meat, ending their starvation. They then use the tools to kill a leopard preying on them; the next day, the main ape character, Moon-Watcher, uses a club to kill the leader of a rival tribe. The book suggests that the monolith was instrumental in awakening intelligence.

The book then shows the year C.E. 1999, detailing Dr. Heywood Floyd’s travel to Clavius Base on the Moon. Upon his arrival, Floyd attends a meeting, where a lead scientist explains that they have found a magnetic disturbance in Tycho, one of the Moon’s craters, designated Tycho Magnetic Anomaly One, or TMA-1. An excavation of the area has revealed a large black slab, precisely fashioned to a ratio of exactly 1:4:9, or 1�:2�:3�, and therefore believed the work of intelligence. Floyd and a team of scientists travel across the Moon to view TMA-1, and arrive as sunlight falls upon it for the first time in three million years. It then sends a piercing radio transmission to one of the moons of Saturn, Japetus (Iapetus),[2] where an expedition is then planned to investigate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001:A_Space_Odyssey%28novel%29

@Cromwell_Dude:

@DarthShizNit:

Yes I laugh at a lot of the decisions the rebs made, almost as much as I cry at some the north made�  :roll:. But even if given command in 64, not sure Forrest would have prevented the eventual fall of the deep south to Sherman’s armies, as I consider Sherman the superior general, who above all had the resources to throw at the south. But if had been Forrest opposing Sherman in Sherman’s March, I think it would wind up being one of the most nail bitting and interesting military campaigns to read about ever�  :-D.

Sherman the superior general? I must disagree.

Feel free. Though I must say, that a man holding the Confederate battle flag in front of the Lincoln Memorial would disagree with me about something Civil War related is truly shocking  :wink:

For anyone who may be interested in the Enterprise, of WWII fame at least, and her legacy, please read: The Big E by Edward Stafford.

Not only is it the best book on the Enterprise, but it is one of the best written books on WWII that I have ever read. I guarantee you will enjoy it.

http://www.amazon.com/Big-Story-USS-Enterprise/dp/1557509980

@dezrtfish:

Just curious, is that the day they tell her secret?

you don’t want to know.

Oh, as far as the Chinese zodiac, I’m a pig. (or boar)

@F_alk:

Still, that does not explain why you chose that era to use the names from. It was not the correct time (as during the NATO and Pact times the Germanies were “independent” nations), and not the current time (as there is noWarsaw Pact anymore).
Actually, “it turned out after the war that all of it was NATO” …
What was the reason to use the intermediate era and thus historically misleading names?

I thought it was occupied until the wall fell in the 80’s/90’s?

Thanks. And you weren’t bored?

Yeah, there are different ways to make that cut.
Some say Columbus, some say Fall of Byzantine…. I don’t think that you can make that up on one event. It happened around 1500, that’s good enough for me :)