I have difficulty listening to, or trusting, Hoagland because he cannot answer a question.
A knowledgeable person should be able to summarize an answer into a few short sentences.
Or better yet, a clean, Yes or No, followed by brief summary.
If supporting proof is needed, it will be requested. Or credit given to data source. Period.
Hoagland spirals off in three different directions at extreme length,
detailing the expanded history of topic, and all various supporting documentation.
Bait and switch, razzle dazzle, you can never tell if there was an answer,
let alone if it addressed the question.
As experiment, find transcript of any Hoagland interview.
Underline any question.
Then, wander through multiple paragraphs of text until you find answer. Maybe.
So, I have a problem listening to him because of his around-the-block presentation.