Larry King Live to talk about UFOs Friday

Unplugged, I have to agree with you, the show was a horrible mess. Larry King didn't moderate at all and kept letting Michael Shermer interrupt, talk over and generally distract and disrupt everything anyone else said. Larry King is a jerk, make that a double jerk. I can't stand his condescending attitude and Michael Shermer is an absolutely rude jerk - the constant smirk on his face was maddening, I just wanted to smack him and tell him to shut up. The look on Stanton's face at one time said it all, he looked astounded, as if he couldn't believe what a mess it was turning into. There were many times I couldn't hear what anyone said because Shermer kept talking over and interrupting everyone.

I will be interviewing Jesse Marcel, Jr. within a week or 2 and I will ask him how he felt about the show. I'll bet he was disappointed. I know I sure was. It was such poor quality that it wasn't even up to television's standards. Geez, I can't stand Larry King and Michael Shermer.

You know what? The show might have been not so good, but just imagine what it would have been like on FOX NEWS. *shivers*

And are you really interviewing Jesse Marcel, Jr.? At what date? I'd love to hear/view the interview between you two.

I wanted to smack Michael Shermer upside the head. He kept blocking anyone from saying anything, except Buzz Aldrin whom was very reserved and therefore fit into Shermer's mold. If Shermer was in Phoenix when tens of thousands of people saw the craft, maybe he wouldn't be acting like such a moron today.

What a disappointment Buzz Aldrin was!

I think Outrageo is dead on on his post regarding Buzz Aldrin's oath reminder.

I wasn't expecting anything from the skeptic, other than total non sense, but Larry King was disgusting.

The whirling movements and sounds he did before cutting to one of the commercial breaks was of bad taste, to say the least.

Thank you corporate news once again for being fair and balanced or even professional...

Friedman needs to let go of roswell & mj12 if he is to have any credibility whatsoever.

theres no doubt Friedman is very engaging when he talks- but after the mj12 fiasco which he still claims is genuine i just see him as another ufologist trying to make money.

[edit on 14-7-2007 by yeti101]

Just like what art bell always says. Ufolgy is its worst enemy, one problem is so many people in this business are obsessed with there egos. There is always so much infighting, between ufologists.

Beats me why anyone would even watch something like this, because we all know by know how its treated.

In my opinion, if the debate was on ATS and in the Aliens and UFO's forum, it would have gone quite differently.

Larry King (as the OP) would have asked the initial questions and then the participants would have been able to respond in full.

As it was, the annoying skeptic would start mouthing off over top of everyone else's comments. That just can't happen here.

The real hope for meaningful debate is not the commercial-ridden sound bite world of television where the loudest and the most obnoxious wins... it's in places like this website where each is given the right to voice their opinions with ample opportunity to back it up with the available evidence.

I liked the governor at the end, who relentlessly kept talking about what he thought of the Phoenix lights even though the skeptic tried to mess up his final statement.

Of all the remarks made during the show, that rang the truest to me.

Now, can we get those characters to join ATS in the future...

Originally posted by yeti101
Friedman needs to let go of roswell & mj12 if he is to have any credibility whatsoever.

theres no doubt Friedman is very engaging when he talks- but after the mj12 fiasco which he still claims is genuine i just see him as another ufologist trying to make money.

When are you gonna stop talking about Stanton Friedman and the MJ12 documents without a clue of his position on the documents?

I suggest you read his work before saying unfounded things like this. You can read this on his website to get at least some clue on what Friedman's position is.

Originally posted by andy1033
Just like what art bell always says. Ufolgy is its worst enemy, one problem is so many people in this business are obsessed with there egos. There is always so much infighting, between ufologists.

I agree that some people in ufology can be ufology's worst enemy, but I fail to see where it applies to this specific situation.

The problem with the Larry King show wasn't the people in ufology. It was the lack of respect for the subject and lack of professionalism by Larry King and the rude, uninformed and misleading statements by the 'skeptic'.

hi danx,

his position is he still thinks some of them are genuine. Lets take the truman memo- which was examined by peter tytell who said it was 1960s typewriter not 1940s & that the truman signature was a copy. Friedman got his own expert to examine it but he says it was 1940s typewriter but ALSO thinks the truman signature is forged.

Lets give him the benefit of the doubt on the typewriter- but when your own examiner is telling you the signature is a copy- why would you ignore it? this is not the actions of a rational person.

Like it or not, the 'research team' of Moore, Shandera, and Friedman are suspects in the manufacture of the MJ-12 documents, and planting at least one of those documents among genuine files at the National Archives.


[edit on 14-7-2007 by yeti101]

For those that may have missed it here's a rush transcript of the show:

transcripts.cnn.com...

Also, here's a transcript of the older show from July 1, 2003.

transcripts.cnn.com...

Hope this helps.


[edit on 14-7-2007 by Badge01]

Originally posted by yeti101
hi danx,

his position is he still thinks some of them are genuine.

That's a bit different than saying that he is trying to 'pass the whole mj12 documents as genuine'. Not to mention that he has always explicitly raised questions regarding the veracity of all documents and willingly, and more extensively than anyone else in my opinion, researched and got them checked to assert their authenticity.

If only everyone in ufology would have this sort of behavior and integrity...

Lets take the truman memo- which was examined by peter tytell who said it was 1960s typewriter not 1940s & that the truman signature was a copy. Friedman got his own expert to examine it but he says it was 1940s typewriter but ALSO thinks the truman signature is forged.

Lets give him the benefit of the doubt on the typewriter- but when your own examiner is telling you the signature is a copy- why would you ignore it? this is not the actions of a rational person.

Once again Friedman has always been upfront about the findings, including the signature authenticity. He has given his take on that matter and you can agree or not with it.

However, even if you don't agree with that in particular, there are other documents and details that indicate the possibility that some of the MJ12 documents are genuine or at least, that an organization like MJ12 was really assembled. And that's what Friedman claims.

What about the Eisenhower Briefing Document?
What about references to MJ12/MAJIC and people allegedly part of MJ12 in connection to UFOs/flying saucers/Project Moon Dust, in other documents such as the Bowen Manuscript?

Are they all fake and were planted at the national archives?

Friedman (and myself) is not saying that ALL the documents are authentic. - most probably aren't - but you can't deny all the details and 'coincidences' in various documents, such as matching dates of meetings between the people allegedly involved and so on.

I guess that you could deny... but I don't think that would be considered the 'actions of a rational person'.

That's a bit different than saying that he is trying to 'pass the whole mj12 documents as genuine'.

i never said that.

In the case of the Eisenhower Briefing Document, by his own account, Friedman was pulling documents out of his own files that seemed to support the EBD, even before he saw the EBD! Amazing! What a magnificent researcher he is!.

Unfortunately, it is all too easy to create fake documents, especially when the perpetrators have the raw materials in their own filing cabinets, gathered from years of researching the Roswell incident, as in the case of Moore, Shandera, and Friedman.

btw there are only about 3 ufologists who believe some of the mj12 documents are real, they are Moore,Shandera and Friedman- the ufologists who say the documents are fake but the content is real i regard as cranks.

p.s thanks badge01 for the transcript- sounds funny.

[edit on 14-7-2007 by yeti101]

To me, the biggest red flag on the MJ-12 stuff is the method that it was delivered to Shandera, on a roll of photographic film.

From Wiki:

What came to be known as the "MJ-12 papers" -- detailing a secret UFO committee allegedly involving Vannevar Bush -- first appeared on a roll of film in late 1984 in the mailbox of television documentary producer (and amateur ufologist) Jamie Shandera. Shandera had been collaborating with Roswell researcher William Moore since 1982.

This precludes the majority of document testing since the paper and ink is not available.

This tells me the person is someone in the UFO field and is aware of how someone might check for fakery.

The fact that they 'checked into it' and sat on the material for a couple years doesn't give it any credence.

One of the perpetrators, Bill Moore, is a self-admitted hoaxer and shill.

From Wiki:

Bill Moore admitted in 1989 at the Mutual UFO Network that along with USAF Sergent Richard C. Dotty he "played a part in haveing Paul Bennewitz involuntarily committed to the New Mexico State Hospital on three separate occasions."

Thanks Outrageo, my sentiments exactly. I know disclosure is a messy topic and that's exactly why it needs to be handled as professionally as possible. Larry King failed miserably at that last night. Oh...and his Koo-koo finger twirl right before he cut to Anderson was rediculous.

Wicked

Originally posted by yeti101
btw there are only about 3 ufologists who believe some of the mj12 documents are real, they are Moore,Shandera and Friedman- the ufologists who say the documents are fake but the content is real i regard as cranks.
[edit on 14-7-2007 by yeti101]

Patently untrue, Yeti. If you bothered to read Marcel Jr.s book which just came out, he says in there that a govt man spoke with him and told him that MJ-12 is real.

Well, for my two bits (Cdn), I thought the show was a pretty good mix. Everybody came off reasonably well balanced, though it was a little messy.

Michael Shermer may not be the best spokesman for the nay-sayers because he does sport a pretty strange grimace but I thought he held his own fairly well. If he is talking science...science has rules. You can cite the legal admissability of anecdotal and circumstancial evidence as much as you want, but science has a duty to be ironclad. The UFO phenomenon is anything but...the alien connection is a pretty good catch-all, but you simply can't bet the farm. I think Shermer was trying to make a point about the changing cultural perception of 'aliens' using his plastic EBEs...and a legitimate one at that, but in King's loose forum he ended up looking stupid. I have to say, too, that he didn't get into Marcel's assertion of having seen the artifacts. It's one thing to discount anecdotal evidence...it's quite another to call somebody a liar.

Aldrin, too, had a point to make about his oft-cited Apollo sighting, but he couldn't finish a sentence. Friedman and the others sounded sane...that's pretty important to King's Joe Six-pack audience and can only give the UFO community a boost. All-in-all, I would have preferred a real debate, but that's not King's format. Cynical me, though...I think that for better or worse, this broadcast was another calculated step towards 'disclosure'. Of what?...well that remains to be seen.





[edit on 14-7-2007 by JohnnyCanuck]

My $0.02?

Buzz Aldrin: Buzz should have got straight to the point and simply said that he doesn’t believe he’s ever seen an alien spaceship period. True believers aren’t interested in a lengthy technical explanation so don’t confuse them with the facts.

Stanton Friedman: “I am a nuclear physicist!” And your point is?

Carl Sagan’s Baloney Detection Kit: Arguments from authority carry little weight (in science there are no "authorities"). Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it's yours. If there is a chain of argument every link in the chain must work. "Occam's razor" - if there are two hypothesis that explain the data equally well choose the simpler.

Nuff said.

Skeptic: “Show me the evidence!” Right but please wipe that stupid smile off your face.

Carl Sagan’s Baloney Detection Kit: Straw man - caricaturing (or stereotyping) a position to make it easier to attack.

Nuff said.

“Out of the Blue” Guy: “If you want the evidence buy my DVD!” (smiling too much)
Stanton Friedman: “If you want the evidence buy my books!”
Jesse Marcel Jr. “If you want the evidence buy my new book!”
Walter Haut’s Daughter: “If you want the evidence, visit my museum and buy the new book about my Daddy and everybody else’s books and video too!”

Nuff said.

Fife Symington: “I saw the Phoenix Lights… not the ones that were video taped and thousands of people thought was a giant triangular craft until they were debunked and ridiculed by me as flares… I mean the other earlier ones.”

Nuff said.

Larry King: “Why keep it a secret?” What secret? Everybody’s talking about it.

Nuff said.

[sigh]

What do you expect from an unmoderated talk show circus atmosphere? I would LOVE to engage Stanton Friedman mano-a-mano in a formal debate about Roswell right here on ATS.

Springer, you’re the Man, can you make it happen?

patently untrue....he says in there that a govt man spoke with him and told him that MJ-12 is real.

1. i said ufologists
2. your going to have to do better than some anonomous source, its funny the "research team" of Moore, Shandera & Friedman talked alot about "inside sources" too- none of it could be verified....



[edit on 14-7-2007 by yeti101]

I saw all of it, except for the very last segment, I dozed off during the commercial. I feel all the guests except the debunker and Aldrin did a pretty good job overall. Was Aldrin saying before that the object had to be a ufo? Now it was a panel? I'm not positive, but I thought that was the case. If so, he's blowing any credibility he had out of the water. The show was utter chaos. If the debunker (Skeptics at least have an open mind) would have wiped that smirk off his face and actually listened to Stan, Jesse, Fife, and the others, maybe a response from him would have been a bit more welcome. But instead, the only thing he could do was talk over everybody so it was too indistinguishable as to what was being said.

Originally posted by yeti101

patently untrue....he says in there that a govt man spoke with him and told him that MJ-12 is real.

1. i said ufologists
2. your going to have to do better than some anonomous source, its funny the "research team" of Moore, Shandera & Friedman talked alot about "inside sources" too- none of it could be verified....
[edit on 14-7-2007 by yeti101]

1. You don't consider Jesse Marcel, Jr. a UFOlogist? He's been doing research himself for years.
2. You said only 3 UFOlogists believed in MJ-12 - I debunked that and that's all that point was about, not who told him or whether or not he was anonymous.