Isaac Koi to leave UFOlogy after Ted Roe NARCAP allegedly threatens to expose his anonymity.

How do we know Ted Roe is who he says he is?

Anybody can use a pseudonym

He may be a supreme hypocrite as well as a self-righteous person as he appears to be to want to harm another honorable person such as IK.

As I said before if you Google Ted Roe you get a 40’s 50’s gangster who was gunned down by the Chicago mob.

None of us really know who each other is and that’s fine. You always give a person the benefit of the doubt that there not a secret serial killer or whatever and if they were so what.... It's none of our business.

What does this man want…someone has to give out their resume to contribute to Ufology commentary?

Resumes are filled with lies and exaggerations too

Nothing is totally transparent but a persons conscience

Ultimately trust has to exist somewhere and in this arena what we offer on its face has to do unless people willingly want to go further; that’s what private email is all about.

It takes a lot to bring me out of the shadows here these days, but this is really upsetting. I don't like seeing a fellow UFO researcher being bullied in this way. I am pretty open about my identity, but that is because I am a public figure in a manner of sorts, however I remember a time when I was not comfortable with sharing my identity and in a field of research like this I can fully understand and respect why some may not want that revealed. For someone to challenge and even threaten that is beyond reproach and for it to lead to making someone who has made tremendous contributions to the field of research through his efforts to feel like he has to stop doing his lifes work... it just isn't right.

This makes me angry to say the least. I can understand someone being a little skeptical of a pseudonym at first look, but there's no basis for it. Isaac's research speaks for itself, all you have to do is read it! I've been lurking around here for a long time and some of the best written, informative, interesting, best referenced work I've seen has come from Isaac. This is not to mention the efforts he's made with projects like the FBI files and the "alien body" picture. I know I don't need to remind anyone of this here on ATS. How dare some guy we've never heard of take issue with one of our own who's put his heart and soul into doing solid work and made it all available for free? Start a slap fight and kick up a fuss on social media all because Isaac wants to remain anonymous for personal reasons? Ridiculous.

Even if all this started as a misunderstanding like Ted seems to suggest, instead of just being a man about it he goes on to lie and say Isaac has been abusive to him. It's just sad. All I can say is I hope this is resolved and that Isaac can continue the work he clearly enjoys. It'd be a real shame to lose someone like him because of trolls.

originally posted by: duke396
How dare some guy we've never heard of take issue with one of our own who's put his heart and soul into doing solid work and made it all available for free? Start a slap fight and kick up a fuss on social media all because Isaac wants to remain anonymous for personal reasons? Ridiculous.

Indeed. Fortunately, IssacKoi himself has acted with the upmost decorum and civility so, unlike Ted, has maintained his dignity and integrity in the matter. I think that at the very least we can follow his example and behave accordingly, respecting IssacKoi's decision. Ted Roe clearly does not understand that some people have greater responsibilities and have to work for a living, that is what being an adult is. I am sure that once this has all died a death, and Roe has regained his dummy, that IssacKoi will be able to carry on much as before. I hope so.

a reply to: zazzafrazz
Seems to me that everyone in Ufology should be working in the open and not using a pseudonym. We need credibility not anonynimity. I agree
Isaac should reveal who he is. That's not bullying, that honesty. Issac is acting like a delicate snowflake. Who cares if he leaves!?

Dbl post glitch

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: zazzafrazz
Seems to me that everyone in Ufology should be working in the open and not using a pseudonym. We need credibility not anonynimity. I agree
Isaac should reveal who he is. That's not bullying, that honesty. Issac is acting like a delicate snowflake. Who cares if he leaves!?

So far, almost everybody posting in this thread cares if he leaves, except you apparently.

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
reply to: IsaacKoi

So long snowflake. Can't take the heat, but you sure can dish it out. You really lambasted Donald Schmitt, but someone riles you and you grab your stuff and stomp out like a butt hurt little boy.

ATS has a saying, "attack the ball, not the player". In this case the ball is the so-called Roswell slide of the "alien" that turned out to be a photo of a mummified boy, or are you talking about something else?

If that's the "attack" you're talking about then yes that slide was attacked by a whole group of people because the placard said what the body really was and it wasn't what Don Schmitt and others claimed, so the question is, are you defending that slide? There's no reason to know who Isaac Koi is to analyze that slide, you can duplicate the research of the The Roswell Slides Research Group yourself if you don't trust their research.

Your research was good, but you regularly used it to ridicule instead of help other Ufologists.

At least you admit IsaacKoi's research is good, thanks for admitting that much, and that's why nobody here besides you wants him to leave ufology. If Donald Schmitt is a UFO researcher interested in the truth, then why wouldn't he welcome information about what the slide of the mummified two year old boy really shows?

It seems to me like the only reason he wouldn't welcome that information is if he had a different agenda besides the truth.

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
No one will miss your sour attitude. Your research was good, but you regularly used it to ridicule instead of help other Ufologists. Good riddance.

Since I don't see your full name and photograph as a signature to your posts I wonder if perhaps you could be a touch hypocritical. What do you think?

Beyond that, you make a valid point, people do put their names and reputations on the line every single day for causes that they believe in, principles they feel compelled to defend. Writers of fiction may use pen names, but if you are touting 'truth' then transparency is expected otherwise it can be used to shed doubt on your legitimacy and the courage of your convictions. I think IssacKoi has had a wake up call, we all should have had, if we take the opportunity to look at it critically. The lesson here is not that we are not able to criticise others with impunity behind a screen of anonymity and that we can be made answerable for our comments and what we write, most of us know that, the lesson is that it is ultimately worthless unless, when pressed, we are willing to stand behind what we have said in 'real life'.

originally posted by: Anaana
The lesson here is not that we are not able to criticise others with impunity behind a screen of anonymity and that we can be made answerable for our comments and what we write, most of us know that, the lesson is that it is ultimately worthless unless, when pressed, we are willing to stand behind what we have said in 'real life'.

I don't see that lesson at all. The criticism I saw was of the slide of the "alien" that was actually the mummified body of a two year old boy. Isaac Koi is not relevant to what the text on that slide says, you can analyze that slide yourself, so you're obfuscating the issue by claiming it's got anything to do with Isaac Koi. You don't need anything from Isaac Koi to analyze that slide yourself, so I'll ask you the same question Ted Roe was asked countless times but refused to answer:

What specific claim has Isaac Koi made that requires his identity to be known? Certainly not the "Roswell slide" and not any other claims I can think of but if you have any I'm listening.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

I am sorry that obviously wasn't clear, I know what the specific criticism of IssacKoi was, but what I was pointing out was that in the wider community we can be dismissed and marginalised because of our anonymity. We value that, others see it as suspicious, and that is why Ted Roe was able to behave in the way in which he did, and IssacKoi was without any other option but to stand down, or go public. He took a cheap, low shot, but it delivered. That's the lesson. ATS is a bubble, what we do or do not accomplish here can be dismissed, ridiculed and ignored from the outside, by those we criticise unless we are willing to put our names behind it.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

I saw that Isaac was all too eager to keep his research into the Roswell mummy slides to a small circle outside the original mummy slides investigation team and laid in wait to ridicule other primary investigators instead of sharing his research. I don't laud Issac like the others because I was aware of his actions. Maybe the others didn't see his actions and his petty differences and his acting out over it. I suspect his identity was brought up for deeper reasons than have been shared by him. Finally, all good researchers are challenged. If he cannot take it, he doesn't have the qualities needed to be an investigator.

originally posted by: Anaana
He took a cheap, low shot, but it delivered. That's the lesson. ATS is a bubble, what we do or do not accomplish here can be dismissed, ridiculed and ignored from the outside, by those we criticise unless we are willing to put our names behind it.

I have a completely different perspective.

Ted Roe put his name behind his comments but by referring to Isaac as "it" and other demeaning comments he has brought shame on his own character regardless of his anonymity.

As for his attempts to "ridicule" Isaac buy doing so, it seems he was largely successful and most people support Isaac Koi and think the ridicule attempt backfired and reflects badly ion the accuser Roe rather than reflecting badly on Isaac. So I think your observations are way off here.

That Isaac prefers to maintain his anonymity by leaving ufology doesn't lessen the contributions he has already made nor the respect he has already earned in any way and I'm surprised that your comments seem to infer otherwise. It's unfortunate if he won't be able to make further contributions but none of what's happened has detracted from or affected the credibility of the contributions he has already made.

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
Finally, all good researchers are challenged. If he cannot take it, he doesn't have the qualities needed to be an investigator.

But that is exactly the problem here, it's not the research that's being challenged. If something is wrong with the research on the Roswell slide why isn't the focus on that? Challenge that all you want, but I don't see how whether the barrister's name is Joe Smith or Frank Presley or something else has any bearing on the caption of the mummified boy slide...it doesn't.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
Finally, all good researchers are challenged. If he cannot take it, he doesn't have the qualities needed to be an investigator.

But that is exactly the problem here, it's not the research that's being challenged. If something is wrong with the research on the Roswell slide why isn't the focus on that? Challenge that all you want, but I don't see how whether the barrister's name is Joe Smith or Frank Presley or something else has any bearing on the caption of the mummified boy slide...it doesn't.

The thing I saw is that Issac wasn't a team player and laid in wait to ridicule other researchers with his walled off investigation team. Tearing others down instead of working together. That adds a huge liability to UFO research and brings ridicule to an already ridiculed subject matter. His actions made him a poor choice for an investigator. It is best he moves along to let other team players take over. His ego makes him a liability to the field.

The thing is... anonymity is a choice. And there are all sorts of reasons for it. It is a person's right and sole discretion as to whether they wish to reveal their name and identity on the internet or elsewhere. People can dislike it, they can hold that it calls into question credibility (although in Isaac's case, imo, the research credibility in question is about as close to being above reproach as one can get,) they can huff and puff and demand otherwise, they can call people "snowflakes" and cowards, but it is NOT their right to expose or threaten to expose someone who has made a conscious choice to conceal their identity.

To do so is unethical and wrong (except perhaps in the extenuating circumstance in which doing so saves lives or because the person is secretly a serial killer or some such, or prevents people from being misled by exposing a known hoaxer, etc.) because it has the potential to cause real harm full stop. Even if a person isn't perfect or is a bad "team player" or whatever it is people are levelling against Isaac, that's not justification for threatening to expose private information. I know we live in this new age where doxxing people you have a disagreement with online is the cool "top lel top kek" thing to do now, but seriously... it's wrong on so, so many levels.

Isaac's reasons are livelihood and family. But there are myriad reasons why someone involved in UFOlogy would want or need the cloak of anonymity.

One hypothetical scenario: if I were a more serious and public UFO researcher (I'm *not* a researcher, or any caliber, just to be clear - I'm a passionate reader and enthusiast,) my reason for anonymity would be my social anxiety disorder. Being exposed in such a way, my name let alone - God forbid - likeness getting out there, would destroy me mentally. I would end up in the ER with a panic attack. I would feel as though I could never leave my home again. I can't even imagine being able to cope with such a thing. I guess that makes me a weak "snowflake" who "can't take the heat" too, especially since, "Help is available, if you haven't availed yourself of it it's your own fault!" (I cite that as an example of the sort of erroneous assumptions - given that I have a neurological condition which gives rise to my anxiety, not just a psychodynamical one, and HAVE sought help for it literally all my life to no avail. This is analogous to those saying, "If he's a serious researcher, there's no reason he should hide his name and face," in Isaac's case. Because there are ALL KINDS of scenarios where someone would need/want anonymity. Just because people can't imagine or relate to those scenarios does NOT mean they don't exist!)

Fortunately, I'm not anyone of note in any community, let alone a field as controversial as UFOlogy, so I don't have to worry about that (unless someone sees this and someday decides to be sadistic because this being the internet and 2016, little would surprise me now.)

That's just one, very different obviously, example among COUNTLESS others people could have for wishing to remain anonymous. Some I likely can't even imagine. Point is, that is their choice and taking away that choice from them, or threatening them with the same, is both cruel and a bullying tactic.

When you take someone who has never harmed anyone (criticizing a specific area of research and critiquing its flaws while remaining civil the entire time is not harm! It's just something people dislike,) but who has an Achilles heel that you know of, one you don't have because you've chosen to be un-anonymous and your circumstances differ or your world view differs, and hold it over their head like the sword of Damocles because of some petty, essentially political at the end of the day, point of disagreement ... there's ONE word for that: bullying.

Peace.

a reply to: thepixelpusher

It's not often I post, but I'll make an exception here. I take people as I find them, anonymous or otherwise. Nothing I've read in Isaac's brilliant threads has ever come across as egomaniac. The thing is, Isaac's personal research doesn't have to be team based, further more, he shares his findings with the world. I don't really see how teaming up with people who get everything arse backwards is going to help, frankly.

Take 10 researchers and expect 10 different results. Certain people didn't like the fact that Isaac's research is meticulous and arrived at a conclusion they didn't personally want to hear. It's really that simple. I respect people's right to remain anonymous, especially when they do the kind of job Isaac does. Who in their right mind would share who they are, what they do, where they live etc etc on a public forum? That kind of information is surely reserved only for those we trust.

The people who kicked off over Isaac's excellent work are clearly not to be trusted. They've only served to shoot THEMSELVES in the foot. Both feet actually. I personally look forward to Isaac moving on from this and changing his mind about leaving Ufology. His threads are needed.

a reply to: AceWombat04

Honestly the UFO research field is better off without Issac. He is not a team player and plays politics and actively divides the community with his political actions. Better that he goes away. I applaud him for firing himself from the field. Good call.

a reply to: thepixelpusher

I will never concur with that assessment. I respect your opinion, however. Agree to disagree.

Peace.

a reply to: thepixelpusher

Screw the team. Most research teams are hoaxers and money whores.

The guy is an information power house that doesnt need to listen to idiots just so their feelings arent hurt. Not when it comes to his specialty.

Everyone else is NOT in a position to dictate, rather they can only LISTEN and LEARN.

People knocking him are lame small people on ego trips. The guy is a gentleman and a scholar. Humble and smart.