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.
Even if one is a Darwinian to the extreme, and consider that human evolution was just the result of the permutations of non-intelligent matter, a kind of cosmic fluke, it would stand to reason that the same coincidence would occur elsewhere, under the right conditions, in the universe.
Originally posted by Mr Mask
Good interview. I really enjoy Bill's interview skills. He jumps in there and asks a lot of good questions.
As for Stan, well, I still remember him in old Vampire documentaries talking about Dracula and the possibility of vampires being real. I sorta hold that against him...also his early work within UFO documentaries of the late 80s where he was just "not believable".
But on the other hand, I like his personality as shown over the years. Dunno, Stan seems like a good guy to drink with and shoot the breeze. He obviously isn't dumb and shows a working sense of humor over the years.
So...good interview. I don't invest much in Stan's work or views, but I don't think he should be destroyed for what he does.
If he is making money (and he always is), god bless the guy...as long as he isn't making profit off Dracula documentaries anymore.
One thing I DO agree with Stan on is- Screw Bill Nye.
edit on 6-3-2011 by Mr Mask because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by vertedtwylight
The longer someone studies and researches something.... makes you suspicious??? What the hell....
Originally posted by vertedtwylight
Ok a nuclear physicist says science is wrong? You are wrong sir... All I need to do is NAME HIS BOOOK... I suggest you READ it before posting again. "Flying Saucers and SCIENCE" Ahem ty
Originally posted by Chillax
I don't like Stanton Friedman. Regardless of what anyone will say ( I know they will come after me), I agree with Bill Cooper's taking on Stanton Friedman and possibly Stan Deyo. He believed they were intention disinfo agents planted within the UFO community to keep the distraction ongoing. He also believed that some documents produced by Stanton Friedman to be false.
Originally posted by GhostLancer
Originally posted by m0r1arty
Originally posted by Kargun
Scientists can be so blind.
And so ends my relationship with ATS.
Friedman is the best of the bunch - but he's still peddling, albeit in how not to accept paddlers, and has been built up within the U2U I got to be something of a celebrity. He's not. He's a guy with an interest and tries to keep others steady on the basis that they will go AWOL based on nothing.
Good guy - but hanging around this field for this long makes me suspicious.
Still, nice interview ATS and well done for getting it!
This is the typical "debunker" attitude. "Don't bother me with the evidence. I've already made up my mind!" It's a shame that people base their *beliefs* that there is nothing to the UFO topic on character assassination. To insinuate that there is something categorically wrong with the fact that Freidman has been in the field for "this long" and is therefore "suspicious" is in and of itself: wrong. Freidman is not a peddlar. The reason his has risen to prominence in the field is that he brings a high level of scientific professionalism and quality to a field that desperately needs it. The fact that he wins the majority of his debates ruffles many feathers. When "debunkers" find themselves on the end of a losing debate, they will resort to attacking the person instead of the theories, facts, ideas and evidence presented.
For someone to end their relationship with ATS over a post concerning one of the best minds exploring and investigating the UFO field is simply juvenille. The church closed their minds to scientific facts in the days of Leonardo DaVinci, so determined that their *beliefs* about the universe were correct. So closed-minded they were, people were put to death over controversial ideas that later proved TRUE. Thank goodness there is no powerful institution as that these days, for "debunkers" would have a long list of murdered folks who just happened to think beyond conventional wisdom and discover the universe as it really is, not how they *believe* it to be.edit on 7-3-2011 by GhostLancer because: Typo
"When you mention the ar.... working to expose the Debunkers don't you think though there is some valuable debunking ar.... do you think it exposes a lot of the fakes that are out there and than puts maybe some of the sightings to a harsher test that with out Debunking may not necessarily exist"
"There's a difference between a skeptic and a Debunker. A skeptic says maybe lets check the facts. The Debunker says I know what the answer is these things can't possibly be real and if the first explanation doesn't not work well than lets try a second one and if that doesn't work lets try a third one cause we know what the answer is. Skepticism we need, no question . Debunking we don't need I don't think it deserves a useful function other than the person making the noise"
So Mr Friedman has DEBUNKED theory's, cases and people! That makes Mr Friedmen a Debunker
"I'm a skeptic I have exposed a number of people who haven't been telling the truth Bob Lazar for example and some of Colonel Coso's proclamations and other people"