Boyd Bushman Kicked-Off Wikipedia

a reply to: maxzee

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: maxzee
Boyd B. has been "de-existed!"

Wikipedia Deletion of Boyd Bushman

If a person lies about who they are and what they've done they will be deleted. Wikipedia does fact checking unlike much of modern American UFOlogy.

originally posted by: and14263

originally posted by: Qumulys
a reply to: Mandroid7

Maybe you need a closer look?
Notice that one of the images is actually flipped, now look at the nostrils. What are the chances of them both having just one black nostril?

Eyes are different shapes/sizes between the two.

Edit: If it is flipped the ears are different too.

Because a factory can not make more than one model?

Occam's Razor dude.

Not really sure what to think about Bushman anymore. He certainly did come across as sincere and believed in what he presented. The alien toy is certainly cause for concern but if the image of the alien was real, a perfect way to discredit it would be to have similar toys made.

a reply to: JadeStar

so if that's the logic for deletion , why is Wikipedia full of biographies of liars, murderers, cheats, swindlers etc. surely he did some good work at Lockheed to remain part of the crew ?

dodgy reasoning there Jade

as for the doll ... wasn't that hammered out enough already.?



funbox

originally posted by: kissy princess
When I saw the Bushman vid, I was pretty much convinced of its authenticity, especially alongside the aggressive attempts by youtube and other media hosting sites to erase the interview. I did a little internet research & came across the snopes blurb on Bushman - then my enthusiasm was deflated. Thinking it all over, I had the thought, "what if these freaky toys were modeled, intentionally, after these alien beings for some reason?" (like maybe for the intentions of discrediting abductees or those in 'the know' like Bushman or whomever. Anyway, now I really don't know what I believe about the Bushman interview. I do believe, however, that he comes off as sincere & genuine; very much the converse of a UFO nutcase or pathological liar. Weird that wikipedia deleted him.

I felt exactly the same, then I tried to find these toys and could not find them except the one photo which is on the internet. People have now gone into detailed comparison of the toy and photos and found discrepancys such as size, pattern on face, eyes and mouth

a reply to: maxzee

Maybe they made the toy to discredit him, but it's a real alien.

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: maxzee
Boyd B. has been "de-existed!"

Wikipedia Deletion of Boyd Bushman

If a person lies about who they are and what they've done they will be deleted. Wikipedia does fact checking unlike much of modern American UFOlogy.

It is also up to the user community to revise Wikipedia entries for errors/BS. Like the segment I had deleted from the "Bob Lazar" wiki page in January 2012, about the BS story that he and Lear drove "deep within Area 51 territory in an RV to watch "flying saucer" test flights".

originally posted by: DJMSN
a reply to: Urantia1111

There was no testimony what so ever. Testimony is provided in a court room under oath with both physical evidence as well as documented evidence provided. This simply smacks of someone taking advantage of an older frail man about to die so they could make a buck or support some other agenda yet to come in the future in the form of a book, or a pay for view doco.

You want to believe as do I but I would rather Deny Ignorance instead. How could someone make a toy of a supposed top secret alien life form and why would they ? Funny how the aliens always appear to look similar to ones from the science fiction movies we all loved from the many years of television and movies.

I believe it would be completely arrogant for humans to believe that we are all alone in the vast universe that lies beyond our local space how ever I have yet to see any evidence of that life and this video is no different from the other frauds perpetrated thru the years to support someones life style, not even strong ideas or opinions but only so they can make a buck.

Don't stop believing, but stop looking to you tube for any evidence as you will only find charlatans.

Actually, the word testimony isn't reserved only for courts of law...

Testimony: a formal written or spoken statement, especially one given in a court of law.

Evidence or proof provided by the existence or appearance of something.
"his blackened finger was testimony to the fact that he had played in pain"

synonyms: testament to, proof of, evidence of, attestation to, witness to; More
a public recounting of a religious conversion or experience.

originally posted by: funbox
a reply to: JadeStar

so if that's the logic for deletion , why is Wikipedia full of biographies of liars, murderers, cheats, swindlers etc.

If they were notable then there will be a bio on them. If it was established that they were a liar, murderer, cheat, etc then that will be mentioned.

In this case all we have is a claim that he has done things which were unsubstantiated. His very identity hasn't been substantiated. Hence the deletion.

a reply to: DJMSN

I have to ask, what your opinion on Dr. Greer and his Disclosure Project?

a reply to: JadeStar

so what evidence is being presented from wikipidia ? evidence of him not working at Lockheed martin ? looks to me like some wikiGnomes got their feathers ruffled, maybe they got in touch with Lockheed, or maybe they were bred there


all the same, there's enough people on Wikipedia with unsubstantiated claims

see the spoon?

His very identity hasn't been substantiated. Hence the deletion.

so if you cant substantiate his identity , there is no evidence to conclude.
if there's not a conclusion yet, how can there be a decision to delete?

*wikignome1* -" I cant find any records of this mans employment Perky"
*wikignome2* - " non Pinky?, wow .. where's that eraser?"
*wikitroll1* " did you chimps check behind the Sofa ?"

funbox

originally posted by: kissy princess
I do believe, however, that he comes off as sincere & genuine; very much the converse of a UFO nutcase or pathological liar. Weird that wikipedia deleted him.

The reason he doesn't come off as genuine to me is, a senior scientist would know things that he claims not to know like why a magnet falls slower than freefall when dropped through a metal pipe. Also the experiment he described where he dropped a couple of objects by hand and had a group of witnesses say which hit the ground first was not very scientific. A competent scientist would have used a mechanism to drop the objects simultaneously and used timer circuits to record exact timings. Maybe he sincerely thinks a scientist would conduct the experiment in a manner like he described, and this might make him sincere, but it doesn't make him a genuine scientist.

originally posted by: JadeStar
In this case all we have is a claim that he has done things which were unsubstantiated. His very identity hasn't been substantiated. Hence the deletion.

I don't think his identity is a real issue though it was mentioned. This was the real issue from the link you provided:

en.wikipedia.org...:Articles_for_deletion/Boyd_Bushman

What is needed are independent sources about Bushman's accomplishments and I do not really see those."

I don't see any problem with the deletion, though I had to read up a bit on Wikipedia's standards for notability to see what criteria they use for inclusion versus exclusion.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
en.wikipedia.org...:Articles_for_deletion/Boyd_Bushman

What is needed are independent sources about Bushman's accomplishments and I do not really see those."

I don't see any problem with the deletion, though I had to read up a bit on Wikipedia's standards for notability to see what criteria they use for inclusion versus exclusion.

Exactly: If he were that accomplished he would have been written up somewhere, local paper, trade journal, company newsletter, etc.

The absence of such puts him in the box of another guy with a tall tale. Kinda like the guy who said he was an astronomer and worked at NASA because he looked through a telescope once.

People with a need to believe will believe.

People with a need for evidence will challenge.

a reply to: JadeStar

hmm what about the patents ?

patents

proves nothing I guess well apart that he worked at lockheed

funbox

originally posted by: funbox
a reply to: JadeStar

hmm what about the patents ?

patents

proves nothing I guess

well apart that he worked at lockheed

funbox

But it doesn't prove he is notable enough for a Wikipedia article not that the alien toy from Walmart is real.

Also, looking through his patents I can say that much of what I've read of him in UFO circles on UFO/conspiracy sites has been greatly exaggerated his importance but since it "sounds sciencey" you lap it up.

My boyfriend worked at Boeing and holds several patents but he has no Wikipedia article, nor should he.

a reply to: JadeStar

I try to take a step back and assume anything that pops up on my Facebook feed is total bull.

a reply to: JadeStar

well, if Lockheed sponsored/employed him , it certainly puts him above the fisherprice physics telescope type of scientist, as is being asserted by you and validates his claim to work for them in the deathbed confessions video, albeit with no bed and no live death, what it says to me is that part of the storey is true and he did in fact work for Lockheed martin,.. maybe asking them would reveal some more about the guy.. surely you just don't want to believe he was a lame scientist

had your boyfriend made any claims about secret government projects regarding aliens offworld tinkerings ?
maybe he should have ..he could have ended up with a place in Wikipedia , just like bob lazar

funbox

a reply to: sfbread

Mr. Greer is someone else who has taken "evidence" and claimed it to be one thing when in reality it was something else entirely. Maybe he believes in what he offers up as evidence but when it comes out that its not what he claims it to be as in genetic evidence then he needs to admit to those facts and move on to something.

I am a general skeptic plain and simple. Outlandish claims by people who want to sale something is the worse lind of fraud. If I had information on disclosure I sure as heck wouldn't remain silent for 50 years and I wouldn't charge for the information either.

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: funbox
a reply to: JadeStar

so if that's the logic for deletion , why is Wikipedia full of biographies of liars, murderers, cheats, swindlers etc.

If they were notable then there will be a bio on them. If it was established that they were a liar, murderer, cheat, etc then that will be mentioned.

In this case all we have is a claim that he has done things which were unsubstantiated. His very identity hasn't been substantiated. Hence the deletion.

There are plenty of things out there is one looks, his schools are given in his obit and there is the lawsuit among other trackable things.

The National Law Journal July 2, 2001

ROCKET SCIENCE

MICHAEL RAVNITZKY

Boyd Bushman, an engineer and inventor at Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., the nation’s largest aerospace company, has sued his employer, claiming that the company, directed by the government, suppressed an invention that he believes has implications as a portable and inexpensive way of generating energy.

www.tumblr.com...