I debated him for months. I feel if he had been a clandestine anti-hoaxer, he would have come clean to me at some point.

Scary.

You don't think maybe we're all his lab rats then?

Yes, I saw some of your exchanges with him, and he was pretty obnoxious. Thinking about it, I agree he isn't anti-hoax.

So he either genuinely believes the things he says, or does it out for some sort of perverse pleasure. I'm not sure which is more worrying.

I want to know how he managed to become a NACA research scientist with only a bachelor's degree.

Easy. The standards were simply lower back then. The NACA was not a crack squad of the top scientists in the world. They were scrambling for qualified people. He could easily have been a "research scientist" at NACA for the same reason that a 19-year-old can be "chief operations officer" for a start-up company.

It is rather pretentious, in my opinion, to insist on being called "doctor" when one's doctorate is honorary.

I don't think Mister Bergrun's site is a spoof. Spoofs are usually more blatant. And funnier. And he's obviously gone to a lot of effort to put this together.

Of course I don't know what to say about a man who has apparently never seen a lens flare and thinks a patch of footprints is a mysterious wrinkle. We would expect an engineer to be able to tell the difference between an RCS plume deflector and a landing strut. And he's never seen the visors on a helmet cover.

I simply can't fathom how someone so obviously misinformed can expect to be taken at all seriously. His "findings" are clearly crap, but to his credit they are meticulously documented crap.

who has apparently never seen a lens flare

No, no, no. What you're seeing there are quite obviously the disc-shaped lunar life forms excited to luminescence.

So I was born either too early or too late. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

[quote]
On 2002-04-29 16:41, Art Vandelay wrote:
I was checking out the links on crank.net and saw this piece of work:

http://www.anomalog.com/bergrun.html</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE>

That's pretty incredible.

At Turtle Rock, and the subsequent slides, he claims that missing hunks of rock mean that there is life on the moon.

In Hammer and Cup he discusses "growths" that appear on a rock hammer. Same conclusion.

If you check the transcript at ALSJ for the appropriate interval, you'll find that the Mitchell was grabbing pieces off of Turtle Rock and specifically stating that he would take shots before and after he did so:

ALSJ, Apollo 14

__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.