On Sun, 16 Oct 2011 13:52:43 -0700 (PDT), Gordon wrote:

On Oct 16, 12:28*pm, Sam wrote:
On Sun, 16 Oct 2011 03:16:07 -0400, Painius wrote:

Hoagland, imo, like anyone who predicts and prognosticates with
time/date certainty (e.g. "Disclosure by Obama in 2010 of aliens")
begs to be criticized. It is wholly presumptuous to suggest that one
is capable of time/date certainty, crystal ball notwithstanding

Is Iapetus artificial? At this time, no one knows

Occam's Razor...

...is a flawed perceptual principle. Reality is much more complex than
humans perceive it to be so there is no merit in the idea that simple
explanations have more validity than complex ones. Simple explanations
are more likely to be generalistic and run a greater chance of
ommitting relevant information.

A better name for Occam's Razor would be Occam's Perceptual
Limitation. Be assured you are incorrect.

at least Hoagland is
willing to call for a direct investigation of his own claims by
retrieving Iapetus evidence via a landing. Fair enough.

Sure thing, but he gets to pay for the trip, right? I mean he isn't
the project manager or anything, but he can certainly fund the
mission, if that is his wish.

I don't know what to say...??

it seems much better to keep our imaginations at work searching for
ways to unveil the secrets of Nature, which to me is always the job
of science.

That is, when science can be of assistance.

Beats using a Magic Book of Spells though, doesn't it?

When science is our only friend.
This is The End. ~Jim Morrison