• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

UFOs Debunked?

P

Pete Younger

Venerable and Missed
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Jul 31, 2001
Messages
5,823
What are we to make of this report, seems the government says it's all mass hysteria, so we can all forget about it and go about our normal business.
 
p.younger said:
What are we to make of this report, seems the government says it's all mass hysteria, so we can all forget about it and go about our normal business.
Click to expand...

there is no government in the world that would admit to knowing the exhistence of UFO's. if they did it would debunk all religion and what government is willing to do that?
 
Lord Mountbatten beleived in UFOs because he saw one himself!

Look here, near the bottom of the page.


The book being reviewed seems to have a narrow agenda of debunking UFOs as alien, ET, craft. Probably they're not, IMHO, but I think there's more to the phenomenon than simlpy "cultural mass hysteria". We need to avoid throwing out the baby with the bath water.

Still, why worry? You can't keep reality down. In every generation there will be some people who used to say " I don't believe in UFOs, ghosts, whatever" - until they have an experience of their own.
 
What annoys me though is that if this really is a social phenonema then why are the worlds phycholoigists showing so little interest in the UFO phenonema?
 
Good point Adam, they dont seem to interested in alien abuctions either.
 
The guys that wrote this book have a web site st:

http://www.flyingsaucery.com

The majority of it is to debunk the Rendlesham Forest incident. They take great pride in claiming that they have been given exclusive files from the MOD to prove it was nothing to do with ETs. But then you read the Nick Pope interview and he maintains that it was.

So the website comes across as one of those where you are not actually sure if the creators are believers or debunkers. Mind you, I'm not even sure they do.

Next they will try and say that the Philadelphia Experiment never took place.
 
I have a book by a religion historic about alien abductions.
 
The majority of it is to debunk the Rendlesham Forest incident. They take great pride in claiming that they have been given exclusive files from the MOD to prove it was nothing to do with ETs. But then you read the Nick Pope interview and he maintains that it was.

A major problem with ufology is clearly highlighted by the above statement and Rincewind's attitude. Just because an investigator discovers evidence that explains a UFO sighting or event - they are classed as debunkers. (How many times has the word "debunk" been used in this thread?)

With any subject especially UFOs - make sure you see both sides of the arguement and then make your decision. (Or not if a Fortean)

BTW IMO Nick Pope knows nothing about UFOs - look at his books! He then produces an article for UFO magazine (with his hand puppet Georgina Bruni) based on the sceptics he claims are debunkers! If you think Nick Pope is an authority on UFO's, then you are sadly mistaken.
 
Stepping off the thread o so very slightly:

In reply to Martin's very kindly worded post, my comments are based entirely around the one incident I mentioned and what I know of Andy Roberts and David Clarke.

I do not class all investigators that discover evidence that explains a UFO sighting or event as debunkers. Far from it.

And I most certainly did not say that Nick Pope was an authority on UFOs. I have early interview footage of this guy when he admitted that all UFO activity was simply Military Testing and that the Government was merely using the UFO smoke screen as a cover up. He is even on record to agreeing that he was used by the government to propagate these rumours. And now surprise surprise, he is making money from selling books on alien visitors to Earth. Hmmmm?!

My comment about Nick was to high-light the way in which Andy Roberts and David Clarke were trying to outline the evidence they had of Rendlesham. Pushing the issue that it was all a cover up and then having Nick saying "Am I allowed to give my answer as extra terrestrial spacecraft? That's the answer I'm going with on this case."

Rather than being a straight down the line look at clearly laid out evidence, it moves from one angle to another leaving un-educated people like myself, scratching around for a conclusion.

Being interested in UFOs is not all about believing that everything is real. It's about the mystery. And like watching Penn and Teller on TV, we all want to know how the trick was done.

And Martin, thanks for the three extra "debunks" you kindly added to this thread.
 
My comments weren't directed to you totally, Rincewind, I apologise if my message came across as that. :(

Over the years I have seen a great deal of sterling investigations put down as "a debunking excercise" and then being ignored by ufologists based on this idea.

"Rather than being a straight down the line look at clearly laid out evidence, it moves from one angle to another leaving un-educated people like myself, scratching around for a conclusion. "

I totally agree with you, the problem is that this subject isn't "straight down the middle" either. Cases can have its explanations like Rendlesham, but there is always an element of mystery and certain issues are not cleared up.
 
No problem Martin. I agree though, alot of interesting investigations do get dismissed purely because people want to believe.

I remember when Jonathan Reed first showed his photgraphs of the supposed "Alien in the Freezer" and pictures of the alleged artifact found.

When I first came across an indepth investigation into the matter, I was heartbroken that such a story could be a hoax. But I sat down and studied every angle of Reed's (if that's who he really is) claims against the evidence and it becomes clear that a clever hoax was constructed.

My lesson learned, I sit on the fence with any case presented. We all should understand that not every light in the sky is an Alien being looking for it's next bovine experiment.

But there are those that remain unsolved and those are the ones I pin my hopes to.

Sorry to P Younger for going off topic.
 
Rincewind said:
No problem Martin. I agree though, alot of interesting investigations do get dismissed purely because people want to believe.
Click to expand...
I suspect an equal number of cases get debunked because people do not want to believe. Too many people start from a position and then select suitable evidence, and diss unsuitable evidence.

There was an interesting link on yesterday's Breaking News that's relevent to this thread - I'll go look for it.
Here - http://www.floridatoday.com/!NEWSROOM/columnstoryA18534A.htm
 
The government cant say that aliens dont exist. Even if aliens have never come to Earth and we have no knowledge of them there is still the fact that the universe is infinate and noone really knows what is out there. I cant understand it when people dismiss aliens and ufos as mass public histeria and then pop off to church to prey to somthing which has even les evidence to support it.
 
If it's bunk then it's bunk and no amount of belief or disbelief will change that.

Oh, and the universe is a lot smaller than previously thought, apparently.
 
After 50 years of the modern UFO scene there is still no empirical evidence for a single UFO (in the ETH sense) encounter. I won't deny the myriad of photographs and videos that might be unexplained but personaly I think on a subject as important as this then the burden of proof must lie with those who 'believe'.

All the blacked out documents and video photage of strange lights are all very well but it just isn't good enough. After all this time, imo, physical proof is now needed. Actual proof of an alien artifact or preferably an actual alien would be great!

50 years of talking is enough - let's have the evidence. Not the 'I was witness to UFO back engineering/abduction/war with human Special Forces type evidence but actual physical evidence.

Coming across as not very Fortean again but what the hey!!! :cool:
 
I agree - a long time with nothing to show for it. But I don't see that this remotely lessens the importance of the phenomenon. That the phenomenon exists is beyond question. The fact that it isn't aliens visiting Earth in aluminium dishes doesn't cause me much concern. It was never conceivable anyway, IMO. But something that is even less likely is that 50 years of reports and stories are all hoaxes. Because if they're not, there is something going on that is a lot stranger than dwarves from Venus and the fact nobody is any nearer in identifying its nature only adds to its validity.
 
UFO'S

will be around for as long as people can make a buck off 'em(per "Art Bell",Linda Moulton Howe", Whittley Strieber,"Stanton Friedman", ad infinitum..) though I have seen some "mighty" strange things in the sky..I want real on the table "nightly News ,In your Face Proof >>Once and for all..so much stuff is repeated over and over again with each new generation(how many more times do we have to open a UFO book and here the Kennth Arnold story again ..jezzz!!and Roswell !!every darn new UFO TV show always has to spend twenty minuets going over the roswell crap (a mogul balloon--I dont believe a real alien craft crashed there for a second!!) roswell is just a money factory its gone on to such a point and finacial frenzy, that it will be like that "word " or saying you pass around and it changes with each new telling that it is "Mute" no worth a darn..UFO'S are just that UFO'S and there will always be the "professional ufo investagators saying(twenty years from now also) that release of the truth is coming soon!!! the greatest story of mankind is about to break!! in other words ,they are all saying "BUY MY BOOK''!!
 
As usual with such 'reports', none of it can be proven - hence, it adds nothing.
 
One of the more academic books describing these sites is "America's Space Sentinels" by Jeffrey T Richelson. I recommend it. :)
 
That Pine Gap stuff is pretty incredible and it doesn't surprise me that it's viewed as science fiction.
Especially as no witnesses are named which of course makes it seem untraceable.
Say, though, that these were true stories with real witnesses and real events? Why does this stuff never make the international media?
This is what frustrates us fence-sitters. You can't just say it's a load of bollocks because there's no tangible proof, nor can you say it's real because of all the circumstantial evidence. What UFOlogy needs is more of the level-headed and rational investigators and less of the cranks and out and out debunkers.
That is why it has festered for 50 years without getting anywhere. Everybody's laughing at us.
 
The More Things Change...

from: http://rense.com/general31/pion.htm

Amazing Quotes By Pioneers Of
The Flying Saucer Era
From Bill Hamilton
[email protected]
11-13-2

I was curious about some of the pioneers of the UFO/Flying Saucer era
and how much we have learned since then, or have we? It is amazing
how some of the same themes are still playing out after 50+ years of
study.
_
One of the pioneers was Major (ret) Donald Keyhoe, a Marine Corp pilot,
a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy (1920), and a man who was
dedicated to finding the truth about UFOs.
_
He wrote -
_
"Since January 1950, when TRUE published my first article on UFO's (see page 6), there has been a tremendous change in the public attitude toward Unidentified Flying Objects. Before, the "flying saucers" were ridiculed by most Americans. Only a small number knew the dramatic evidence - confirmed reports by veteran pilots and other competent witnesses. Even fewer knew of the Air Force Top Secret Estimate of the Situation - that the Flying Saucers - officially Unidentified Flying Objects - were interplanetary vehicles engaged in a long observation of the earth.
_
Today, according to national polls, half of our population is convinced that the UFO's are real (see page 52). Over five million people claim to have seen strange flying objects. Some newly convinced Americans, reluctant to believe we are being observed by a technically superior race, first ask if the UFO's aren't highly secret devices - American or Russian. But the massive documented evidence of tremendous speeds and maneuvers far beyond any earthmade craft has proved this answer impossible. More and more millions now accept the long-hidden AF explanation: The UFO's are interplanetary probes from another world."
_
Little has changed. Maybe slightly more than half of our population
is convinced UFOs are real and a lesser percentage believe they are
interplanetary craft, but the Air Force's position has radically
changed since those early years when it considered the interplanetary
answer. What changed behind the scenes?
_
Another pioneer who was not as well known as Keyhoe played a significant role in giving scientific weight to the UFO question and that was Dr. James McDonald who received his Ph.D. in physics from Iowa State University in 1951, then worked there as an assistant professor in meteorology and served as professor in many other universities.
_
Here is what he had to say -
_
"Curiously, I have said this both in NASA and fairly widely reported public discussion before scientific colleagues, yet the response from NASA has been nil...Even attempting to get a small group within NASA to undertake a study group approach to the available published effort seems to have generated no response. I realise, of course, that there may be semi-political considerations that make it awkward for NASA to fish in these waters at present, but if this is what is holding up serious scientific attention to the UFO problem at NASA this is all the more reason Congress had better take a good hard look at the problem and reshuffle the deck....I have learned from a number of unquotable sources that the Air Force has long wished to get rid of the burden of the troublesome UFO problem and has twice tried to 'peddle' it to NASA -without success". (1967)
_
Has anything really changed with NASA and UFOs? Not really, and this
after 35 years! Has Congress had a hard look at the problem? No,
they seem more concerned about keeping their jobs.
_
How about early rocket pioneer Hermann Oberth. Here is a quote:
In 1955, Dr. Werner Von Braun invited him to the U.S. where he worked on rockets with the Army Ballistic Missile Agency and later NASA -
_
"It is my thesis that flying saucers are real and that they are space ships from another solar system. I think that they possibly are manned by intelligent observers who are members of a race that may have been investigating our Earth for centuries."
_
(Oberth, H., "Flying Saucers Come From A Distant World", The American Weekly, Oct 24, 1954)
_
Hmmm, did the good professor know something positive about his thesis?
_
How about the head of Project Bluebook, Air Force Captain who wrote
a book about UFOs.
_
He says -
_
"UFO BRIEFINGS BY PROJECT BLUE BOOK TAKEN SERIOUSLY IN EARLY YEARS.
(1956) Capt. Edward J. Ruppelt:
_
"The one thing about these briefings that never failed to amaze me, although it happened time and time again, was the interest in UFOs within scientific circles. As soon as the word spread that Project Blue Book was giving official briefings to groups with the proper security clearances, we had no trouble in getting scientists to swap free advice for a briefing. I might add that we briefed only groups who were engaged in government work and who had the proper security clearances solely because we could discuss any government project that might be of help to us in pinning down the UFO. Our briefings weren't just sqeezed in either; in many instances we would arrive at a place to find that a whole day had been set aside to talk about UFOs. And never once did I meet anyone who laughed off the whole subject of flying saucers even though publicly these same people had jovially sloughed off the press with answers of 'hallucinations,' 'absurd', or 'a waste of time and money.' They weren't wild-eyed fans but they were certainly interested." (1956)
_
Scientists not laughing at UFOs! Heavens! I am glad to see that the
interest has spread among scientists over the last 46 years.
_
The UFO situation got so serious in 1952 that a meeting was convened with
Air Force officials and the CIA (Robertson Panel).
_
Captain Ed Ruppelt -
_
"...and it was up to them to tell us if they (UFOs) were real---some type of vehicle flying through our atmosphere. If they were real, then they would have to be spacecraft because no one at the meeting gave a second thought to the possibility tha the UFOs might be a supersecret U.S. aircraft or a Soviet development. The scientists knew everything that was going on in the U.S. and they knew that no country in the world had developed their technology far enough to build such a craft that would perform as the UFOs were reported to do."
_
With all the rumors around today that some UFOs are secret aircraft
this statement seems like a definite anachronism.
_
Astronomer Morris K. Jessup was one of the first to suggest that
UFOs were not a modern phenomena.
_
He stated -
_
"Flying Saucers are not new! For thousands of years men have seen mysterious objects in the skies...
Probably the oldest, and almost surely the most prolific of sources bearing on wingless flight, are the records of the Indian and Tibetan monasteries. These in themselves are almost conclusive. Records of 15,000 years ago imply wingless flight at least 70,000 years prior to that. Add this to the recorded visit of a space fleet to the court of Thutmose III, approximately 1500 BC, and we are close to paralleling the sightings of today."
(From THE CASE FOR THE UFO, 1955)
_
What about those MJ-12 guys? The head of the group was supposedly
Admiral Roscoe Hillenkoetter, surely dedicated to keeping the whole
subject secret, but then we read what he says -
_
"It is time for the truth to be brought out. . . Behind the scenes high-ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about the UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe the unknown flying objects are nonsense."
- Admiral Roscoe Hillenkoetter, Director of the CIA (1947-50)
in a letter to Congress, 1960 quoted in Above Top Secret
_
Hey Admiral, I guess no one listened then, are they listening now?
_
Speaking of MJ-12, what about the President said to have started this
secret group. He said -
_
"I can assure you that flying saucers, given that they exist, are not constructed by any power on Earth."
_
- President Harry S. Truman
April 4, 1950, White House Press Conference
_
Perhaps there were deliberate attempts to debunk the subject from
the beginning. Here is what one early pioneer said -
_
"Blue Book was now under direct orders to debunk. . . I remember the conversations around the conference table in which it was suggested that Walt Disney or some educational cartoon producer be enlisted in [the] debunking process."
- Dr. J. Allen Hynek
in The Hynek UFO Report
_
Thank goodness they stopped all of that nonsensical debunking. Wake up folks, there is something alien in our atmosphere.
_
We are told there is nothing above top secret, not even UFOs, but
the late Senator Barry Goldwater (Ret USAF Brig. General and pilot) said -
_
"I made an effort to find out what was in the building at Wright Patterson Air Force Base where the information is stored that has been collected by the Air Force, and I was understandably denied this request. It is still classified above Top Secret."
- Senator Barry Goldwater
In a letter dated March 28, 1975
_
And of course, our friendly famous scientist from Canada said -
_
"The matter is the most highly classified subject in the United States government, rating higher even than the H-bomb. Flying saucers exist. Their modus operandi is unknown but concentrated effort is being made by a small group headed by Doctor Vannevar Bush."
- Wilbert Smith
in a Top Secret Canadian government memorandum, 21 November 1950
quoted in Above Top Secret
_
Scientist Bush was said to have orchestrated the scientific study
and reverse engineering of these interplanetary craft.
_
I have only skimmed the surface of numerous writings and statements
made by the pioneers of the UFO space age, yet we do not see in
any of these that the subject was taken lightly or laughingly.
UFOs were considered a serious problem, especially by the Air Force,
yes, the same Air Force who debunks UFO sightings and UFO crashes.
_
We will continue to explore the new terrain we are on today, but
let us not forget history for it can teach us many lessons and
who wants to wait another 50+ years to advance another few inches?
_
Sincerely,
_
Bill Hamilton
Executive Director
Skywatch International, Inc.
Website:
http://www.skywatch-research.org
Fiat Lux et Veritas
 
Anonymous said:
No problem Martin. I agree though, a lot of interesting investigations do get dismissed purely because people want to believe.

I remember when Jonathan Reed first showed his photographs of the supposed "Alien in the Freezer" and pictures of the alleged artifact found.

When I first came across an in-depth investigation into the matter, I was heartbroken that such a story could be a hoax. But I sat down and studied every angle of Reed's (if that's who he really is) claims against the evidence and it becomes clear that a clever hoax was constructed.
Click to expand...

I've just listened to an old Art Bell interview with 'Dr. Jonathan Reed'.

I had no supplementary information until after I finished listening and went to the Internet to find it largely discredited.

https://www.ufocasebook.com/reedalien.html

He came across as very polished--in the sense of having both rehearsed his delivery and having anticipated and included the details that listeners would need in order to give credence. In other words, he had pre-patched the holes before everyone pointed fingers at them.

The dog angle was the clincher for me--most dog owners I know would be able to produce a number of photographs with their dog in their home or with them alongside. They would also, if they had the kind of relationship he described with his pet, not be able to relate the story of their dog being dismembered in such a cool tone, if you ask me.

Interesting nonetheless: see images and story at link above.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top