It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Comment by Colin Andrews:
I am aware of several other important cases involving the UFO and crop circle subjects in which Linda Moulton Howe has been informed of vital facts which she has chosen to ignore in favour of telling the stories as pumped up inaccuracies, which is fine for show biz, and her regular radio programs but does nothing to enhance the professionalism surrounding these subjects nor most importantly the truth.
Prof. A.J. Gevaerd, the well known and highly respected researcher from Brazil tried to tell her what he knew about a hoaxed abduction claim in that country but she ignored his vital information (Open letter HERE).
I am also aware of several cases where those who have made certain crop circles and have admitted this to her, one which she claims formed in front of her as she watched from a nearby hill. She again chose not to accept the rational truth in favour of the irrational magic. That said her early work into cattle mutilations was well done. I agree with George Wingfield, that we expect a much higher standard from such prominent researchers as Linda Moulton-Howe.
Carrots & Crop Circles
From: A. J. Gevaerd - Revista UFO
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 19:04:36 -0300
Fwd Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 22:39:35 -0400
Subject: The Last Open Letter To Linda Moulton Howe
To the International UFO Community:
To: Linda Moulton Howe
I have just visited Linda Moulton Howe's website: www.earthfiles.com and I noticed that she really has no limits to her absurd campaign of promoting the biggest Brazilian UFO fraud ever, the fabricated abduction of Urandir Fernandes de Oliveira. It is a sad thing. I reached to that conclusion by observing her conduct towards this case today, as did many members of the international UFO community, who sent me e-mail messages. In face of that, up to this point, when nearly everything was tried to show her how poor her investigationis is over that case and how deceiving are her reports, I just give up helping her to see what she refuses to see and tell her what she refuses to hear. It seems just useless and a waste of my time to show to this "investigative reporter" the very single points that she entirely missed when she started this campaign, that she calls an investigation. I don't know what motivates Linda Moulton Howe to keep this up and the risk to her credibility and reputation is all hers.
Brazilian UFO Magazine
PS.: I obviously won't comment about other absurdities published by Linda Moulton Howe in her report today, either coming from her or from her interviewee, Felipe Castelo Branco. Her word means very little to me to this point and his word, as Urandir Fernandes de Oliveira's partner in the outrageous scam, never meant anything at all.
Just exactly how does an investigative journalist conduct an investigation without investigating the facts? Maybe we should ask Linda Howe. The one time pillar of scientific UFO research seems to have fallen straight off the cracker truck within the last few years, plunging head first from forward fact-based journalist to what some call a sensationalistic hocus pocus promoter who supports cases that appear to fit her views and beliefs of the government having knowledge of extraterrestrial visitation.
Aliens Abducted My Common Sense
After seeing the above, ufowatchdog.com just wants to remind folks of a little known scientific report compiled at the request of Linda Howe. In the report seen below, scientific technologist Nicholas A. Reiter examined the alleged UFO crash debris, he also successfully replicated the metal and presented Howe with a sample. ufowatchdog.com was told by Reiter that Howe reportedly scoffed at the results of the report because the replicated material was not 100% "exactly" like the alleged UFO crash debris Howe has been advertising as being mysterious. Reiter stated in a letter to ufowatchdog.com, " [Linda's] opinion was that what I had offered had no resemblance to her sample. But she never did make any detailed and accurate reference to it either."
Is Alleged UFO Crash Site all it's Cracked Up to be?
Howe interviewed one Scott Van Arsdale, a Wildlife Technician with the Bureau of Wildlife for the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. During the interview, Howe appeared to make every attempt to find something extraordinary or unexplainable about the incident. In the end, Van Arsdale simply told Howe, "How it got up in the tree is another story and I think Ward Stone (the pathologist) and myself believe that somebody put it, some human, put it up there. We're reasonably sure of that." Top that off with the conclusion from the pathologist that "a three-blade broad head arrow" was the type of arrow used in killing the deer and the fact that it would not be difficult to drag the animal up the tree with a rope, and what you're left with is a very plausible explanation of the event. But plausibility and reasonable evidence just doesn't suit everyone.
Turning an Explainable Event into an Encounter with the Unknown
Most recently, Howe was quite taken with the tale of Dan Burisch, the man claiming to be a microbiologist working on a top secret black ops military project involving an alien named J-Rod. Howe wrote several stories for her website about Burisch, personally interviewed Burisch, and made appearances on radio shows addressing the claims of Burisch as being factual, even referring to Burisch as a 'doctor' and 'government whistleblower'.
In a radio interview, Howe was asked if she had verified the background claims of Burisch, specifically Burisch's alleged education. Howe responded by saying she didn't need to see such proof because she believed Burisch was telling the truth due to his sincerity. Well, now everyone knows Burisch's story is an absurd work of bad fiction after the tale was exposed by UFO Magazine. Howe failed to return multiple calls for comment on the findings of UFO Magazine according to its publisher.
How do you make a proclamation without having any hard supporting data? Since when do we substitute sincerity for solid evidence? Some people said Lee Shargel was sincere. Taking sincerity on its face value and having a blatant disregard for the facts or investigation of facts is becoming an all too often favorite past time of those who dare associate their name with the title investigative journalist in the UFO field, let alone those claiming to be UFO researchers/investigators.
Well, if this is supposed to be proof of Burisch's contact with an alien, then a lot of people are in for a major disappointment: The photo below made the rounds on the Internet during January 2000 and caused quite a stir, if not some heated debate. That was until it was discovered the alleged alien was the work of FX Masters.com, a website formerly dedicated to the art of special effects. You can view a page from the website showing a picture of the alien and a description stored at Archive.org by clicking here. Below is a copy of the original photo circulated by Russell Dowden of the now defunct setlab.org. Dowden was the person who had originally made the photo public via his website after anonymously receiving it. Dowden was on Coast To Coast AM with Art Bell after the photo was first received. Word quickly spread of the bogus photo and many websites, including Whitley Streiber's, posted stories about the photo not being legitimate. The photo was well known among UFOlogy to be fake...or so all thought.
Alleged Photo of J-Rod Alien is a Special Effects Hoax