Stanton Friedman says: Some UFO's are Alien Spacecraft

Well the entire field of UFology has been discredited by the liars, hoaxers and scamsters. What is left is very little. Maybe I have joined the ranks of the amateur debunkers but I would rather have that label that of the blind follower. To say the waters of UFology have been muddied is probably an understatement.

Given the level of light pollution I am not amazed that the field has so much misidentification of planets and meteors.

reply to post by andy1033
I agree with your points about Stan Friedman although there are guys like Jerry Clark who are equally as sober. Paul Kimball is Stan's son in law or some such relation and also takes a very objective stance in the subject. There's a few out there who just aren't as well known as Stan.

I think you guys should listen to what william cooper said about friedman.

Not Cooper!OMFG!!! The guy's detested by most people who ever knew him...friends and colleagues. He's been proven to have lied consistently throughout his years in the spotlight. I know you probably relate to his outcast status and NWO fears, but he wasn't a very nice guy. People were scared of the guy and he enjoyed the feeling. He was a bullying liar and undeserving of your support.

Originally posted by Heliocentric
As to his failure-rate... if only ONE of the cases he has reported on turns out to be authentic, it's good enough for me.

Then you are wasting a lot of time. I think it is a matter of what basket you put your apples in. Maussan (Greer, Burisch, Reid, etc.) have been discredited so many times that it does not make sense to pay attention to them just in case ONE of the cases they have reported turn out to be authentic. How can you tell? Would it be that alien "dr" Reid put in his refrigerator? How about the angelic being that turned out to be a woodland moth? These guys keep throwing feces on the wall seeing if they can get one to stick. Given the paucity of time I would think it would be more effective to pay attention to people who have proven their worth.

I don't agree with everything Friedman says. His 'nuts & bolts' story line hasn't changed in fifty years and I'm unsure he got it right on Majic, but at least he's consistent and credible. People like Maussan have led us down false paths so many times that it's difficult to understand why anyone would follow them yet again "just in case" something they turn up is real. Let's just say the odds are against it. Didn't Einstein say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result?

Any Mod lurking about that might be able to fix that link in the OP?

Thanks

Originally posted by Untergang
reply to post by zorgon

 

Because Stanton Freidman does not spend his time presenting every questionable video he gets his hands on as absolute proof of extraterrestrial visitation. Personally, I feel it is very unfair to compare the two. One is a reknowned nuclear physicist and the other is what? A journalist?

Regarding Friedman, and I base this on his own writings and interviews, I'd call him a working scientist for a number of years who sort of stumbled into becoming a UFO researcher as a result of his own armchair enthusiasm and a demand for someone to speak credibly on the subject. He filled a need and found his true calling.

Originally posted by schuyler
People like Maussan have led us down false paths so many times that it's difficult to understand why anyone would follow them yet again "just in case" something they turn up is real. Let's just say the odds are against it.

You know, there is no 'path' to follow. Maussan's not a guru, you don't have to 'believe' or 'not believe' in him.

The cases he reports on are not his own. They are reported by people from all over Mexico. Are they all confused or hoaxing simply because they happened to send their videos or witness statements to his show, and not some (in your eyes) 'credible' ufologist?

I've got all the respect in the world for 'serious' UFO investigators. But you know, people like James Fox (Out Of The Blue) have difficulties finding money and distributors for his work.
The joint production between MUFON and Discovery Cannel (UFOs Over Earth) ran what, four episodes (of which one was the episode "Mass Sightings Over Mexico, where they took Maussan's team apart), then it was cancelled.

Maussan on the other hand has his weekly show, running since several years, where he exposes case after case (real deal or hoaxes) that otherwise would only get 5 minutes of fame on Youtube, or perhaps no exposure at all.

So in that sense, he's doing his part to give people a chance to tell what they've experienced.

Originally posted by Heliocentric
All I'm saying is that a UFO incident or video reported on by Maussan is not automatically a hoax, it doesn't work like that.

Yes my point as well... A UFO report comes along, say covered by main stream media. Well the media gets on with it and next day there is a new story about something else.

What happens to the UFO report? Well it goes 'down the line' so to speak. Now reputable searchers may pick it up and try to do an in depth study... but invariably the not so reputable guys will also pick up the story, and because those people are more outspoken and flamboyant, more people will see it from them.

I have seen many posts at ATS where someone will see that a good story, just because it is ALSO covered by Muassan or Icke, will just say "I don't trust this story because so and so is 'involved'"

As to 'fluff' vs 'good stuff' presentation... looking at ATS lately I would say this place is getting to be worse than Maussen for sensationalist believe everything posts...



So Stanton says "Some UFO's are Alien visitors" Where is his proof? I wanna see it

I have also noticed a trend amongst 'whistle blowers' and 'insiders' to play the "My info is the real deal, your just a faker" game, just adding to the confusion. I believe Stanton uses that against Bob Lazar

reply to post by sparrowstail


"One thing he talks about is not laying everything out on the table. He believes in keeping some things secret. He has worked for many of the big industrial research companies that do top secret things. Have you? He has held top secret clearance. Have you? I'm sure he has seen things and knows things that we have no clue about. He has forgotten more than we probably know about the subject."


Ironic, isnt this the same behvaior you UFO'ers criticize the government for allegedly performing? Yet if Stan-the-man Friedman does it, its A-OK

Originally posted by tiger5
Well the entire field of UFology has been discredited by the liars, hoaxers and scamsters. What is left is very little. Maybe I have joined the ranks of the amateur debunkers but I would rather have that label that of the blind follower. To say the waters of UFology have been muddied is probably an understatement.

Given the level of light pollution I am not amazed that the field has so much misidentification of planets and meteors.

edit on 31-10-2010 by tiger5 because: typo

UFOlogy will fade away I think once the need it fulfills is met elsewhere: IE: When we find out were not alone in the universe via scientific means (NASAs planet quest program) The need for UFO stories will seem less significant, since the believers will have the answer they want through scientific means, and wont have to resort to faith in such questionable tales any longer.

Originally posted by sparrowstail
Well please do share if you're all about denying ignorance.

if he did that he would have to shoot you

But I tend to agree that the noise to signal ratio is way out of whack. So much so that I find I cannot even waste the time to look at these youtube UFO threads anymore... so if a good one does come by, I will most likely miss it.

As to Stanton not telling all, I can relate to that. Sometimes you stumble on something that you cannot tell, unless your okay with spending a little time at that CIA 'retirement resort'

I sometimes wonder if such info is leaked as a trap

Originally posted by NavalFC
reply to post by sparrowstail

 

"One thing he talks about is not laying everything out on the table. He believes in keeping some things secret. He has worked for many of the big industrial research companies that do top secret things. Have you? He has held top secret clearance. Have you? I'm sure he has seen things and knows things that we have no clue about. He has forgotten more than we probably know about the subject."


Ironic, isnt this the same behvaior you UFO'ers criticize the government for allegedly performing? Yet if Stan-the-man Friedman does it, its A-OK

Oohh come on....
Just because one is a believer in ufos, and would like confirmation or validation that they exist, it doesn't mean that they have the right to, or should be privy to, all national security threats and or secrets. Knowing some things would probably truly be in our worst interests.
To what end would you want full disclosure? To the end that causes people's pain and suffering? Some selfish folks would say sure.

This is like the parent who breaks into his or hers teen's room, rummages through all his or her things, finds his or her stash and confronts them with it and grounds them over it only to rant on trust, responsibility, and respect, all the while ignoring the teens right to privacy. If you want to break in and rummage through to discover secrets you have to be responsible with the knowledge you find out and not make matters worse by provoking resentment and hatred and nuturing dishonest behavior.

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by sparrowstail
Well please do share if you're all about denying ignorance.

But I tend to agree that the noise to signal ratio is way out of whack. So much so that I find I cannot even waste the time to look at these youtube UFO threads anymore... so if a good one does come by, I will most likely miss it.

This reminds me of a trip to the thrift shop. While there are reams of crappy worn out clothes in bin after bin, you occasionally do find a great Gore-tex jacket, or a Hugo Boss suit, or any other number of quality gems that people let go for any number of reasons.

For me it still is worth a routine visit even though the crap to quality item ratio is way out of balance. I still will make time to take a look and consider the gray basket. Better cameras, better tech, better computers, mean more hoaxes but possibly more average people able to record what they see. Just like the thrift shop.

reply to post by zorgon


reply to post by zorgon


If one person in a subject is a transparent liar, he should be given a pass because others are being honest. I'm confused. Makes no sense to me.

A person who will lie once will lie again and again. An honest person will always be honest and say I don't know if they don't know. I actually assign additional credibility to people who say I don't know.

I'd rather not trust a person who I'm convinced knew he was making false reports. The skinned Capuchin proved that and others. Poor little guy.

Somehow I think any credible reports he accidentally comes across will eventually be reported by an honest person at some point. A guy like him who is looking to scam people would hardly make any effort on a subject he probably does not believe in himself. He will just keep fabricating stories and events to hang on to the easily fooled fans he has.

At the very least I'd always place in the largest text possible above anything that came from him, this is from a well known hoaxer.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/6e68a9b80ff3.jpg[/atsimg]

At the very least, he helped cover up the crime committed by the person who slaughtered one of these innocent little guys. Trust him on anything???????????????

"After 50 years of study and investigation.." "...He is convinced that the evidence is overwhelming that some UFOs are intelligently controlled extraterrestrial spacecraft,..."
www.youtube.com...

Can I see some of this "overwhelming evidence" please?

Thank you

Originally posted by zorgon
"After 50 years of study and investigation.." "...He is convinced that the evidence is overwhelming that some UFOs are intelligently controlled extraterrestrial spacecraft,..."

Can I see some of this "overwhelming evidence" please?

Thank you

I don’t know if I understand the real meaning of your question correct zorgon, but are you implying here that you have seen so far no evidence whatsoever from which you could draw the conclusion that some of those UFOs/UAPs can be nothing else than intelligently controlled extraterrestrial spacecraft?

And if not, may I ask you what you think all those UFOs/UAPs are then?

Originally posted by NavalFC

UFOlogy will fade away I think once the need it fulfills is met elsewhere:

Smug SOB aren't you? I can tell you from almost 15 years of reseaching sightings for MUFON that most people who see UFOs weren't looking for them and had no real interest in the subject prior to their experience. The best sightings, and most of the ones that remained "unexplained", came from credible, well educated people who were just going about their everyday lives when something extraordinary happened to them.

I'm college educated, trained as a scientist but don't work as one, and hadn't given much thought to UFOs until five friends and I saw a large disk shaped UFO hovering several hundred feet from us for close to ten minutes. It's kind of hard to get past something like that. Even though I know "some" UFOs APPEAR to be alien spacecraft (based on the silent defying gravity thing) I'm still very critical of most sightings. The only thing that drives me today is a DESIRE, not a need, to know what I saw and have other people know it as well.

Believe me, if you have your own close and personal sighting your views will change

Originally posted by UFO Partisan
Regarding Friedman, and I base this on his own writings and interviews, I'd call him a working scientist for a number of years who sort of stumbled into becoming a UFO researcher

Friedman really was a "working" scientist. There are no theory's named after him. His name appears in no textbooks. He learned enough physics to earn a Masters degree (still no small feat) and spent most of his career crunching numbers. The last "science" work I know of he did was designing the radiation shielding for a food irradiation plant in FL in the 1980s. He learned long ago lecturing and writing about UFOs was much easier and more lucrative than journeyman physics.

If he would even say "it appears likely" or "evidence suggests" SOME UFOs are alien spacecraft, I would have a whole lot more respect for him.

He has no more concrete proof some UFOs are alien than I do. To claim different, while claiming to be a scientist, is disingenuous at best and a flat out lie at worst. Also, he HAS been giving the same lecture for 30 years with very little new material thrown in. Time to give it a rest.

reply to post by wasco2


Come on now, you accept that quantum physics exists, although you cannot see or prove it, lol. Its all just a theory. Loads of science is just theory, never proven.

Look at evolution, no prove beyond the realm of the peopels minds it exists.

Originally posted by spacevisitor
I don’t know if I understand the real meaning of your question correct zorgon, but are you implying here that you have seen so far no evidence whatsoever from which you could draw the conclusion that some of those UFOs/UAPs can be nothing else than intelligently controlled extraterrestrial spacecraft?

Correct. I have not seen any hard evidence presented in the public sector that shows that 'some' of these sightings are craft controlled by ET's

I have seen tons of good CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence, however, enough to make me say it is 'likely' that some are of alien origin.

What I asked to see was this 'overwhelming' evidence that convinced a man of science that they are ET Craft. Just because he has been saying so for 30 years makes it no difference than anyone else saying it.

It does show that people in general chose who to believe not based on the facts, but the status of the person.

And if not, may I ask you what you think all those UFOs/UAPs are then?

I have said many times on ATS that in my opinion 80%ish of all sightings after eliminating the obvious things like balloons etc are 'plasma critters' A naturally occurring life form native to Earth and area. 15%ish are our black ops craft and 5% are the true visitors.

Why do I believe that those 5% are the real deal? From private sources that I know I can trust that are NOT in the UFO circuit

The reason I think we see so many more of the 'critters' right now is because of Solar changes and the lowest recorded solar wind..

The reason I think we see so many triangles lately is because that is the current design the military is fond of.. and I have photos and data on those

The reason I think we haven't had a really GOOD case of a UFO lately is because there are few visiting us currently