MUFON director defends actions, denies exaggerations of "Blockbuster UFO Discoveries"

Maybe it would be a sound idea to wait and see what the Stringfield memoirs will relate before judgment is cast on MUFON's excitement and the quality of he memoirs themselves?

reply to post by stiver

I admit that I didn't know about Stringfield's too, but more I read his stuff now, mostly in the old MUFON journals, more it looks to me like he was one of the myth-makers himself and maybe one of the mighty ones. What do you think?

I don't know. Which is why it'd be good to have the files looked at by someone looking for people and not crashed saucers or dead aliens. People like Jan Aldrich and the guys at SHG who are historians and know the names of ufology more than others. It's easy to understand if MUFON prefer to use their own guys though and who can blame them?

Guys like Kevin Randle have the Kingman crash as a hoax and it's hard to see how it could be anything else.

If he's actually backing down like he seems now, and claims it is for security of the people holding the information, it is likely he has something significant and has already been approached to keep quiet. It would be hard for anyone to take retaliation against him once the evidence is seen by enough people tho, because it would only fuel the fires that someone has something to cover up. He's likely shaken and scared right now. He might want to get it out, but I think places like MUFON have been infiltrated by people to spread disinformation, IMO, and to shatter hopes and discourage others of thinking such things as the possibility of ETs. Yes, MUFON may hold to the belief that the majority of what they have has been faked -- and it probably has, but there are still some legitimate encounters and the like that keep my mind open, despite humanity's capacity to try and get a laugh by deceiving other people and thus creating hoaxes out of a need to satisfy some sick sense of humor...

reply to post by anathema777

POOFON has zero credibility with me. They are old news and not a source I would give any attention. What the hell makes any of them an "expert"? It's like how Stephen Hawking all of a sudden came out as this expert on alien intentions- what makes him (or doofon members for that matter) an expert on something he didn't experience or even study to begin with? GOOFON comes around after the fact and throws a blanket on the subject, it's an ego trip with them.

I cannot for the life of me understand why anyone is surprised at Mufon's behaviour... They lost the plot
years ago and joined the 'lets make as much money as we can in this field while the goings good"
The only exception to this is the excellent UFO;S over earth 3 part series which was excellent..
Still its not to late for Mufon they just need to sort themselves out I hope they do it....

Originally posted by interupt42

That would be worth the claim of "Blockbuster UFO Discoveries" , but only if it truly had EVIDENCE to back up the claims besides just dates and names. Unless they have footage or other physical evidence those notes won't have much value and will be no different than what evidence we already have. IMO, it was premature of them to state a "Blockbuster UFO Discoveries" without thoroughly going through the documents and verifying sources or evidence.

IMO MUFON just did a disservice to its organization by using the same marketing ploy as all the other documentaries and programs on TV.

However, I'm glad to see more people seeing through the hype.

edit on 8-8-2012 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)

Regarding names, please consider all the elections coming up.
If any names running for any offices are at risk of being put in any kind of light that could be unfavorable to their campaigns, then, that may be all the reason needed for any one or several shadowy politicos to take an unsavory interest in attempting to see that these documents do not come to light.

Dru, you have got to be kidding us. I'd be floored if Stringfield's files contain any legitimate information that has not already been explored. All that's left is probably ancient unverifiable saucer rumors by minor military figures. None of this will have an impact on elections at any level.

Originally posted by CardDown
I be floored if Stringfield's files contain any legitimate information that has not already been explored. All that's left is probably ancient unverifiable saucer rumors by minor military figures. None of this will have an impact on elections at any level.

I repeat.

Maybe it would be a sound idea to wait and see what the Stringfield memoirs will relate before judgment is cast on MUFON's excitement and the quality of he memoirs themselves?

Maybe? In the name of truth and honesty, is this asking too much, ATS?

Originally posted by CardDown
Dru, you have got to be kidding us. I'd be floored if Stringfield's files contain any legitimate information that has not already been explored. All that's left is probably ancient unverifiable saucer rumors by minor military figures. None of this will have an impact on elections at any level.

You may want to go back an read my initial posting.
I'll make it easier though ...

“In those 60 volumes we have government interference, the FBI and CIA stopping the ufologists at any cost,” Ventre said. “He names Donald Rumbsfeld ...

Last I checked, that name was still alive and well and viable in politics.
Hmmm, I wonder what other names might fall out of those 60 volumes?

It's not improbable.
We've yet to see these papers anyway, so, it's all a matter of speculation at this point.
Relax.
Have fun with it.

For instance, a curious part of that EXTEXT has misspelled that name. The last name should be spelled 'Rumsfeld', without the 'b'. Thus, is the article talking about the very same Donald Rumsfeld we all know, or, some other Donald Rumbsfeld with that troubling 'b' in the last name?

reply to post by Druscilla


Consider the elections coming up?

I doubt you're going to find names like Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, or even Barrack Obama in UFO files from the 50's and 60's. That seems a little far fetched to me.

Maybe I'm cynical, or maybe it's this quote from MUFON Pennsylvania State Director John Ventre that has me giggling

He even has actor Jackie Gleason’s contact information in there. There is a lot of explosive information in there.
www.examiner.com...

but I'm not going to get my hopes up about this one. Hopefully there won't be anymore shenanigans and the files will be released for us to judge ourselves how explosive they are.

Originally posted by Druscilla
For instance, a curious part of that EXTEXT has misspelled that name. The last name should be spelled 'Rumsfeld', without the 'b'. Thus, is the article talking about the very same Donald Rumsfeld we all know, or, some other Donald Rumbsfeld with that troubling 'b' in the last name?

Or maybe The Examiner.com just has low standards and quality of reporting.

reply to post by freelance_zenarchist


Please, let me say again, until we see the files, it's all speculation.
Top names as you've mentioned will likely not have any telling at all in the files.
On the other hand, elections aren't as simple as just the names on the tickets. There's names endorsing these personalities. There's names contributing funding to these personalities. There's friendly associations, photo ops, and other such. Additionally there's names working on campaigns, and associated with the ticket runners as staff, and/or potential running mates.

Sully any of these names in the press, and support for whatever candidate may falter with all the hungry press more than eager to ravage any candidate or candidate's associations for any bit of dirt that might be picked off of any skeletons dug up form even decades ago.

Don't be so naive. Elections are complicated. If any names contained in these volumes could implicate a load bearing column in a candidates campaign structure, the the potential for such occurring could very well get some dominoes falling in the direction of attempting to suppress that information from coming out.

Once again, of course, this is all speculation, this being a conspiracy site and all.

So... You seem to have assumed that everybody knows what the 2 supposedly major releases of information were, and why they were a let down. So, I cannot agree or disagree as you did not give enough Information... Nothing like a thread that requires work to be done in order to understand the context of it. Many of us are surfing the net from our phones and so it is not very convenient for us to do the research required to answer your question.

Not EVERY ATS member is sitting at home or in their moms basement on a computer they spend every dollar they have on upgrading that has like 8 monitors, and even if they were, not all of those people have the time to look up all this crap so they can know what the hell you are talking about.

And even if they did have the time, you have already stated that its a bunch of BS and a total underwhelming letdown... So, I ask you, sir! Where is the motivation??? Where, dammit!!!???

I do hereby declare that THIS THREAD is the ONLY underwhelming letdown I've had today! I could've had two, but, you LET me DOWN. Good day sir!

Originally posted by 3n19m470
So... You seem to have assumed that everybody knows what the 2 supposedly major releases of information were, and why they were a let down. So, I cannot agree or disagree as you did not give enough Information... Nothing like a thread that requires work to be done in order to understand the context of it. Many of us are surfing the net from our phones and so it is not very convenient for us to do the research required to answer your question.

Not EVERY ATS member is sitting at home or in their moms basement on a computer they spend every dollar they have on upgrading that has like 8 monitors, and even if they were, not all of those people have the time to look up all this crap so they can know what the hell you are talking about.

And even if they did have the time, you have already stated that its a bunch of BS and a total underwhelming letdown... So, I ask you, sir! Where is the motivation??? Where, dammit!!!???

I do hereby declare that THIS THREAD is the ONLY underwhelming letdown I've had today! I could've had two, but, you LET me DOWN. Good day sir!

Did it ever occur to you that I also dont have a computer? I'm on mobile phone too. Had you read the link you would have known exactly what the two major announcements were, so take a pill and dont be so butt hurt.

Whilst I find the 'blockbuster' language at MUFON distasteful, I have to agree with Druscilla- these documents may have potentially sensitive information within them, that is very relevant today.

If it can be proved that the US cannot control its own airspace, that objects can turn up over sensitive areas and the authorities can do nothing about it, have no idea how to stop it or why it is happening, and have known about it for decades, I would say that is extremely relevant. Also, the cloak and dagger work of known politicians still on the world stage (I cant believe that people would think Rumsfeld is no longer of any importance) and the ongoing cover up of UFO evidence is of tremendous significance now, and if there is a genuine paper trail, then their (MUFON's) reticence is understandable. Cant say I would feel particularly safe if I had that sort of information about my person.

Just because they havent wheeled out a live alien in the press conference doesnt mean this isnt important, but we wont know until all the evidence has been properly studied.

MUFON Blockbuster #1 The acquisition of UFO crash researcher Leonard Stringfield's files.
Leonard Stringfield bio & bibliography from NICAP

MUFON Blockbuster #2 a cold crash case: the Kingman Arizona saucer crash.
Kingman UFO crash as presented by Harry J. Drew

MUFON has much bigger blockbusters than this locked away in their files, but they don't share those with anyone (except billionare Robert Bigelow).

I guess I'm going to reserve my final judgement until those files are fully released and reviewed by many of us in the ufo community.

Originally posted by Phage
Well times are tough.

Do you think you're going to bring people in if you say "Well, we don't really have anything that great but we do have some documents with some names on them."
2012symposium.mufon.com...

Too cynical?

edit on 8/8/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

HaHa Nailed it.

Hi everyone. I was a certified Field Investigator for MUFON. From my experience, we were pushed hard to recruit members first and investigate UFOs second. So in a sense, increasing funds to sustain their enterprise was a priority rather than investigating UFOs. Moreover, at the meetings, they were not true investigative meetings. Most meetings were quite boring and they spend a considerable amount of time still debating about Roswell.

Originally posted by UFOskeptic
Hi everyone. I was a certified Field Investigator for MUFON. From my experience, we were pushed hard to recruit members first and investigate UFOs second. So in a sense, increasing funds to sustain their enterprise was a priority rather than investigating UFOs. Moreover, at the meetings, they were not true investigative meetings. Most meetings were quite boring and they spend a considerable amount of time still debating about Roswell.

On a few occasions, I've attended some MUFON meetings, and, suffice to say, the impressions with the gathered, what can only be described in each case as a "Menagerie" of characters did very little to instill a sense of critical investigation into whatever this phenomenon is.

reply to post by Druscilla


On dozens of few occasions, I've attended some MUFON meetings, and, suffice to say, the impressions with the gathered, what can only be described in each case as a collection of astute individuals did greatly instill a sense of critical investigation into whatever this phenomenon is.