Your question wasnt answered? Here's why...

CagliostroTheGreat
reply to post by SecretKnowledge

 

Mine was short and to the point but Mr. Friedman must have missed it... I was quite disappointed. Didn't help that others were spamming their own questions and even asking multiple questions after their original was already answered and addressed, including a mod or two.

He didn't miss it. He just answered someone else who asked the same question. I think the word "know" was accidentally left out below after "don't"

I am a physicist. I don't what I can do about reptilians. I have heard some stories but not much else. I look for evidence.. data. I am not a social worker. Not all stories told with a UFO connection are true.

olaru12
reply to post by SecretKnowledge

 

I really wasn't surprised that my one line, to the point and concise question was ignored.

There are some questions that so called experts in UFOlogy avoid like the plague. They know the answer but don't want anyone else know they know.

First of all, it wasn't just one line and also, you felt compelled to phrase it as your opinion, which you had been warned by Springer not to do. Secondly, Friedman DID address the issue of the paranormal at least twice, making your question redundant. He is, after all, a "nuts & bolts guy" and it's not surprising he doesn't offer grandiose and wide-ranging opinion on it as someone like Vallee would likely do. Third, your response after waiting less than 90 minutes for an answer, was rude: "By my first question being ignored, actually speaks volumes." Really? So he's supposed to jump to it, huh? Perhaps he found it uninteresting or poorly phrased. You weren't owed an answer and your supercilious attitude, apparent in both your posts, may have simply caused him to ignore you. Even here you are derisive in your post about him and "so-called experts." And what makes you superior?

And, for the record, I agree with you completely. There definitely is a paranormal aspect to the issue. I alluded to that when I asked him about the IDH and the idea that there were no "aliens from space," which he answered with a full paragraph.

The GUT
reply to post by Snarl

 

Yeah, I noticed. You were gentle & diplomatic, but still ignored.

Did you learn anything? Me neither.

It's not like I mind. I prefer dialogue ... and the AMA is question:answer format. My expectations were well managed and I DO respect the owner's efforts in bringing a 'celebrity' before us.

I didn't learn anything. That's why I went back through the responses a second time.

Here's my analysis: The guy's been doing this since '58. We're not an inch closer to 'knowing.' The only 'leads' thrown out there were references to material I have to buy ... with no guaranteed return on investment. I'll leave it at that.

Again, if I really wanted an opinion on UFOs or ETs, I Know you're going to give me your best effort ... and you're going to stick around to defend your position on your stance. We may not agree, but I'm not going to walk away empty-handed.

The collective knowledge of the regulars on this site is something I Truly admire. Mr. Friedman's AMA really emphasized that, so color me a satisfied customer.

999zxcv
i just got a blank reply back from stan when i asked him about the events over washinton in 52

why did he even bother maybe he was pissed i said from one former busboy to another

who friggin knows

I saw that exchange and figured Friedman DID answer, but he lost it and thought it went through. He's obviously not familiar with the format, or of typing, or of forum mechanics such as quoting. I wouldn't take that one personally. I think he just screwed up and didn't know it.

It would seem that the AMA forum needs some more thought...just a thought!

How about only one question per person, so others have a chance to participate? A second question deleted immediately by mods? It might require a mod,or mods, volunteering to watch the thread closely.....

How about being a little more strict on 'no walls of text'. It reminded me of children at recess; posters kept pushing the envelope, and far too many seemed to have been given a pass. Not saying favoritism; I just don't understand rules if they're not going to be enforced equally.

I would sure like to see future guest instructed to answer EACH question, in the order it was given. I have been pretty disappointed in guest not answering some really high-quality questions! A " I refuse to answer" would be better than ignoring the question, while answering other silly, off-the-wall questions in detail. IMO.

I like the idea of the AMA forum, but am disappointed in its quality.

reply to post by Snarl


Yah, good points. Schuyler's above, too. I certainly don't feel that every question asked must be answered on any thread. Having said that, I somewhat expect a little more effort on an AMA to field the hardballs, but can't legitimately bitch too much when they are ducked...other than to point it out heheh.

schuyler
I saw that exchange and figured Friedman DID answer, but he lost it and thought it went through. He's obviously not familiar with the format, or of typing, or of forum mechanics such as quoting. I wouldn't take that one personally. I think he just screwed up and didn't know it.

Yeah, slipped through the cracks, otherwise he would have picked up the pom-poms and rah-rahed that one loud I would think. Other than the fact that he did mention some form of radar spoofing at some point unless I'm mistaken and might not have wanted to have to go there on D.C.?

schuyler

999zxcv
i just got a blank reply back from stan when i asked him about the events over washinton in 52

why did he even bother maybe he was pissed i said from one former busboy to another

who friggin knows

I saw that exchange and figured Friedman DID answer, but he lost it and thought it went through. He's obviously not familiar with the format, or of typing, or of forum mechanics such as quoting. I wouldn't take that one personally. I think he just screwed up and didn't know it.

Really? I could see that too ... but that 'response' seemed to me the most profound in the entire thread. I mean, that one Really got my attention. I also thought that was 'one' of the Very best questions in the entire thread. We're talking a concrete question ... and had I not already asked mine (twice), I would have been interested in his take on the Phoenix lights. Mass sightings by groups dispersed over a geographic area are so tough to deny.

reply to post by SecretKnowledge

Hello Mr. Friedman.

I have read your books, listened to your lectures and interviews and respect your position. However, I remain unconvinced of ET. My current thinking is that since this is a phenomenon based almost entirely on subjective accounts or memories of perceptions, this should be in the realm of psychology, neuroscience and related fields that deal with human perception. It seems to me that there is a lack of input from these fields.
my question would be in what direction could you point me in to convince me otherwise and does thinking like that make me noisy and negative?

IGNORED!

1. He finds my screen name offensive."ZetaRediculian" It was taken from his assessment of the Betty Hill Star map! chances of it matching zeta reticuli are "one in several thousand" that's zeta ridiculous!

2. He reads stuff here and knows what an ass I am.

3. He didn't know how to answer. I zinged him!

4. He has no sense of humor. "does that make me noisy and negative?" zing!

5. He could have missed it. Understood. but I wasn't allowed to post it again!

6. my question sucked!

Possible answers could have been "you are not looking hard enough", "I recommend book by X", "that's nonsense" , "are you retarded?"

All acceptable!

Here is one he did answer

Me again


If ET made themselves known to everyone do you think the human race could handle it? or would we just panic and all go a bit mental?.

answer:

I imagine the galactic federation has rules about an advanced civilization interfering with ours... a primitive society whose major activity is tribal warfare. I don't think our society would panic.. every government would want to get its hands on the saucers for military purposes. We are not equals with our visitors. Remember the planet is 4 billion years old but our civilization is only thousands
I am calling it a day until tomorrow

OK. now I have/had a lot of respect for Stanton Friedman because he took the hokeyness out of ufology for me. The galactic federation? really?

Now I understand that Springer et al. don't really care because they don't get anything from me being here. They can delete me and no one would care. even me! I would probably come back as mork from ork singing the praises of the galactic federation! Stanton generated a ton of traffic. That equals money.

he was here to sell his books and reassure people that aliens and the galactic federation are real. Your question didn't get answered simply because he didn't have to and no one cared or really gave a crap. get over it.

The thing with Friedman is that he's an old-school Ufologist, a traditionalist. He reminds me of some professors I had that no matter which course you took from them, they would find a way to dust off the same old lecture notes they had been using for 30 years and romp through the class with those. His basic message is the same as it was in the sixties, which itself is based off stuff from the fifties. He was laid off from work as a physicist and has made his living on the same lecture ever since. Why did he get laid off? Partially because he intentionally gave it up, but the fact is he didn't complete his education and did not get a doctorate, and that made him uncompetitive in the physicist marketplace.

His basic schtick is not surprising.

"UFOs are aliens from space. They're here because we set off some atomic bombs, so they noticed we were the kids with matches. Now they are observing us, but we so bad that they won't let us into the Federation of Planets. Some people in government know some stuff, but they aren't telling. And a lot of people are lying about the whole thing."

That's about it, really. He knows a LOT about some cases, and he's RIGHT about a lot of cases and a lot of charlatans in the field, but his repertoire is somewhat limited. He's extremely mechanistic in his approach and doesn't really want to deal with such things as the IDH. The Gut and I both tried to bring him out on this and he didn't really budge all that much. So Stan is an old hand who has been around a long time and is kind of a senior statesman in the field.

And the fact is he has never been touched by any sort of scandal. He's never been caught lying or cheating in any way. he's never gone out afar afield and been caught over-reaching or in a corner from which he could not extricate himself. He never pulls this irritating scheme of telling you, "I wish I could tell you, but I just can't!" kind of BS that some of these so-called "in the know" Ufologists will do to us. He's kind of conservative and kind of plodding, and kind of repeats himself, which you could see in the number of "stock answers" he gave, and that's how he wants to be. These answers are old, but quite frankly, so are your questions! If you persist in asking the same old questions again and again, why are you surprised you get the same answers? And whose fault is it?

Friedman does not know or keep secrets. He's not working for the government. He promotes what he knows a bit about and kind of ignores those aspects he doesn't know much about. He's not going to be stretching the boundaries of Ufology making new breakthroughs. He's not going to be telling us that aliens have figured out The Other Side and help us reincarnate our souls into new bodies. But he is a rock solid pillar of this field, someone you can rely and depend on.

And if that's not good enough for you, show us your stuff. Do better. Display your expertise. Take us through the morass. Lead, follow, or get out of the way.

I feel fortunate in that he did address my post, and it was one of the more lengthy answers given:

Greetings and welcome to ATS, the best site on the Internet!

My question for you is this:

In regards to UFO research, Jacques Vallee has been quoted as saying:

What have I learned? (1) The phenomenon is real but it offers multiple levels. (2) No simple extraterrestrial explanation fits the facts. (3) The governments of the U.S., Mexico and France have a keen level of interest (and the Russian and U.K. as well) but no scientific research project seems to exist. (4) Some of the brightest people in Intelligence get involved but the real data must be hidden at a different level. (5) Much of the official involvement is directed at faking data, not at discovering the truth. (6) Animal mutilations are real but probably unrelated to UFOs. (7) No solution will be found by mediocre, amateurish research.

Have you seen any evidence of this?

That is data faking, and if so do you have an idea of why that might be the preferred response?

And his response:

Couple of points.. don't know anything about data faking, but do know that government officials have flat out lied. Secretary of the USAF Donald Quarles made the following statement in an official press release in October 1955 "On the basis of this study we believe that no objects such as those popularly described as flying saucers have overflown the United States. Even the Unknown three persent could have been identified as conventional phenomena or illusions if more complete observational data had been available". This was a flat out lie the data in the study to which he was referring (but did not name--Blue Book Special Report No. 14)) showed that 21.5% of the 3201 cases could not be explained completely separate from the 9.3%listed as insufficient Information .The better the quality of the signting the more likely to be unidentified, etc etc. Colonel Weaver and his associates grossly misrepresented the Roswell Incident with both the Mogul and crash test dummy explanations. None of the dummies were dropped until 6 years after Roswell. they were 6' tall and weighed 175 pounds and were in flight gear!! I met with the colonel who had been incharge of the program. there are many other lies.

Now, while that response does, I suppose, constitute an answer, it does not really go to the heart of my question.

However, he did answers others' questions with what I felt would be applicable to the intent of my question:

I think there are several reasons for the coverup:

1. Everybody wants to determine how they work so new technology can be used for military purposes.Theymake excellent weapons delivery and defense systems. We have wreckage from Roswell, Aztec, and the Plains of San Agustin. You cannot tell your friends withour telling your enemies. They read the papers do.

2. Each country worries about its enemies learning proipulsion secrets before they do.Don't want those other guys to know what they know.

3. If an announcement were to be made.. say by the queen and the pope.Consider the consequences. Church attendance and mental hospital admissions up, the stock market down, and a push by the younger generation towards an earthling orientation. No government wants that.Nationalism is the only game in town.

4.Certain fundamentalists such as Pat Robertson insist that all the intelligent life in the Universe is here on earth which was created in 4004 BC and UFOs are the work of the devil, so nobody out there much more advanced than we are.

5. Some insist that if aliens are visiting and undoubtedly more advanced than we are. If we develop more advancd energy production, and a ground transport technique there would be economic disasters.(I have no pity on buggy whip manufacturers.

6. I have heard 7 different stories about military pilots being sent aloft to chase UFOs (the order was "ShootThem down if they don't land when instructed to do so..back in 1952) and not returning. Can't admit that.

Too bad the thread is now closed as good sir Gut mentions and we are unable to see how members judged the different responses, I believe his answer to my question was one of the 'higher rated' ones.

It would have been nice for him to give us the names of the large studies he referenced a couple of times so anyone interested in further follow up would have a place to begin.

reply to post by schuyler

The thing with Friedman is that he's an old-school Ufologist, a traditionalist.

That is pretty much it. He seemed real eager to take on Phil Klass (deceased) though. I'm not sure where I fit in his world, Skeptic, debunker, jackass? I think in the old days you had the 2 sides. Pretty black and white. Classic debate. Now? I read Blue Book and acknowledge that it possible to get here. After he throws his debunker rules at me and I accept them, Now what? There is nothing left to fight against, not that I wanted to fight him. I just wanted affirmation that I was on the right track. Judging from his answers or lack of, I got that. Its a whole different world.

Here's my thoughts from the Vallee thread repeated here


In my short sojourn on ATS I have only once participated in these AMA’s, a question I asked John Alexander about Puharich in which he answered suitably. I dare say I was surprised he answered it. My point is that these AMA’s seem to appear a bit too much for the visiting celebrities, in terms of the barrage of questions thrown at them…it may be too much to handle, imo.

It may actually defeat the purpose of any possibility of deep conversations to have all those questions thrown at these guys.

As far as Stanton goes...well he's not a spooky, spiritual, or mystic type UFOer…indeed he’s no Allan Greenfield.
That’s all right with me, that’s his scientific secular training.

At least we won't see him going around trying to steal secrets from lost mystics.

they won't get anything btw cause...
as the secret protects itself-- pearls are not cast at the feet of swine!

reply to post by SecretKnowledge


I feel your arrogance.
There were clearly some One Question posts that he skated over.
Which is fine.

He was a guest.

It was clear that after a couple of pages, he was swamped.

I would like to believe that all in all, he enjoyed his experience

with ATS, and found it ... Entertaining.

Maybe an alternative option would be to have members post questions they would like to ask a quest on a forum for a day or two ahead of time, then let the mods select 20 questions from all the posts to submit to the guest, or have the question period far enough in advance where the readers could vote on the questions they would most like submitted.

reply to post by nugget1


Well, there is something to be said about letting "the guest" choose the questions or letting them ignore them. I like that because that is information. Staff filtering seems like censoring. I hate that. There is no reason it has to be done in "real time" either.

reply to post by FlyersFan

I still have high hopes that Dan Akyroyd will be a guest

I would be willing to pay to see him on here!

I, too, was pretty frustrated with this particular AMA because of the lack of observing the rules. People asking multiple questions and too much info about themselves. But what has frustrated me with ALL the AMA's is the guests WILL NOT use the quote to reply and every thread becomes a tangled mess to read. I do think the mods should be on hand during these to edit the thread when rules aren't followed but I also think that the owners could do a better job of explaining how the site works and the quote button to the guests. As far as Stan Friedman goes, I am surprised he doesn't delve into the more recent sightings such as Chicago's O'Hare, Phoenix, and Stephensville.

reply to post by missvicky


if you click on the "reply to post by missvicky" at the top of this post it will bring you to your post.
So during the AMA do the same and you will be brought back to the question that was asked...

SecretKnowledge
reply to post by missvicky

 

if you click on the "reply to post by missvicky" at the top of this post it will bring you to your post.
So during the AMA do the same and you will be brought back to the question that was asked...

edit on 13/3/14 by SecretKnowledge because: (no reason given)

I have done that with these AMA threads. It's also just as easy to hit the quote button as it is the reply button as I have done here. Helps to give a very busy thread some continuity.