Hoagland a fraud?

On 16 Mar 2004 15:46:34 -0800, (George William
Herbert) wrote:

In article ,
* wrote:
On 16 Mar 2004 15:09:43 -0800, (George William
Herbert) wrote:

{...}

Again: this is grossly off topic in the sci.space newsgroups
and because of that in violation of your internet service
provider's acceptable use policy. If you keep posting this,
eventually, everyone who normally posts in the sci.space
groups will complain to Earthlink and your account will go poof.

Okay Mr. Arrogant Scientist, why did the scientific community allow this:

NASA never allowed independent scientific peer review of Malin's Mars MOC
photographs and instead allowed Malin to keep and own US government property
which is against the law.


That is a false statement.

No at all, and you're hedging and not being honest. I doubt you're a
scientist at all. Science is supposed to be about honesty.


All the MOC images older than the proprietary period are in
the National Space Science Data Center set, which can be
accessed by the public or independent researchers.

Please explain 'proprietary period' and who owns the photographs during that
period.

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/database/...1996-062A&ds=*

They are also on Malin's website:

http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery

Why aren't any independent scientists allowed to peer review NASA's raw
data? Why aren't any independent scientists not employed by NASA, Lockheed
or under contract by the same allowed to view the raw Mars MOC data as it is
being transmitted?




-george william herbert