Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Lazar Camp Vs. Friedman Camp

page: 3
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jchristopher5
William Cooper said that both Friedman and Lazar were agents.

I am not sure what to really believe. I absolutely believe in the "UFO phenomena" and in visitation by more advanced races, but I am just not sure who is telling the truth. It is very frustrating, this enduring UFO mystery. Yet, it has me anticipating more.
edit on 1-10-2012 by Jchristopher5 because: (no reason given)


I don't see how they can be considered "agents" as they have not accomplish anything that a real agent would. Friedman writes UFO fiction and tries to pass it off as real and Lazar hasn't shown any evidence of his claims.

The reality of UFOs is no longer doubted and doesn't need any mouthpieces to declare them so and science has nothing to deal with so calling for scientific research is just so much hot air. Advance race(s)? Don't think so. No evidence either. Just a worldwide aerial mystery.




posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Shrike

Originally posted by Damsel
I would absolutely disagree with the notion that Stanton Friedman is a fraud. In my opinion, he'll forever be one of the best ufologists of all time.
(snip)


There is nothing special about Friedman. He knows what side his bread is buttered on and that's the side that contains the most gullible people who accept everything he reports whether he is saying something or nothing. He has no special knowledge. What he knows anyone can know. He supports bs 'cause it sells and he's in the business of selling. He doesn't have to provide proof 'cause no one requires or demands it. He takes what is known, maybe gives it a new form and the gullible just eat it up. He promotes Roswell 'cause he knows he doesn't have to prove that a UFO crashed there since the popular tale overrides critics such as myself. He sells and sells and doesn't deliver anything new, just old news. In my opinion he is worthless.


Applaud your objective views!
I myself am honestly skeptical of every UFO claim.

What specific cases hold the most evidence to you?



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ubeenhad

Originally posted by The Shrike

Originally posted by Damsel
I would absolutely disagree with the notion that Stanton Friedman is a fraud. In my opinion, he'll forever be one of the best ufologists of all time.
(snip)


There is nothing special about Friedman. He knows what side his bread is buttered on and that's the side that contains the most gullible people who accept everything he reports whether he is saying something or nothing. He has no special knowledge. What he knows anyone can know. He supports bs 'cause it sells and he's in the business of selling. He doesn't have to provide proof 'cause no one requires or demands it. He takes what is known, maybe gives it a new form and the gullible just eat it up. He promotes Roswell 'cause he knows he doesn't have to prove that a UFO crashed there since the popular tale overrides critics such as myself. He sells and sells and doesn't deliver anything new, just old news. In my opinion he is worthless.


Applaud your objective views!
I myself am honestly skeptical of every UFO claim.

What specific cases hold the most evidence to you?


People see aerial objects that are not always identifiable. Not all unidentifiable aerial objects are UFOs. So a report without convincing evidence is not reliable and becomes just a statistic. When said objects are recorded in some kind of media, the images have to be clear enough to state that it is a UFO. Not everyone who submits such images can be trusted. So, it's up to the individual to accept, or not, what is presented as evidence. Not everyone is a hoaxer so there are real, recorded UFOs. Some are impressive but one has to stay skeptical without being obnoxious about it. Some individuals such as skeptic Robert Sheaffer are obnoxious.

There is only one case that holds evidence for me that what is shown is real but at the same time I know that he is a hoaxer. That person is Eduard "Billy" Meier. His photos are gorgeous and some of them have been proved hoaxes. But his films are an enigma for no one has proven them to be fake. He shows, in his films, UFOs dematerializing and materializing. He shows UFOs at a distance. He shows UFOs with him in the film.

I've watched videos of his films and I've played them over and over in slow motion and frame-by-frame and there is no one that can explain what one sees as being the result of hoaxing.

There are thousands of videos available showing what could be real "craft" but none have the "reality" of Meier's films.





new topics
 
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join