Debunking the Debunkers??? Help here

Hi there guys, does anyone can recommend a books which is only focused on the skeptics and debunkers flaws?
I want to find a book where it is documented most of them and their arguments in most cases and where we can spot their dishonesty. I am referring to Donald Menzel, Klass, Carl Sagan, the flip flops of Vallee and so on. I have seen all these guys been making fallacies but it is all scattered around so many books, if anyone does know a single one where most of the data is put together it would be a really great.
Could be a site or a thread as well, but must be good stuff.
Thanks in advance.

a reply to: flamengo

Only thing? Would you accept a book or books where its the same as your basic interest here? Written perhaps by someone or ones who only want to DEBUNK these guys...whereas its THEY as well...who are debunkers or provers themselves?

Their own motives may be a-skewed ! In others words...read what we will....but who do you believe? We have pros and con books on every person and subject in the world. Obviously...one or the other is right....or its a combination of both!

This is one where you'd have to study both sides by the "experts" on a particular person or subject....then make up your own mind!

Good luck!

a reply to: mysterioustranger

Hi, Nice, you went kind of philosophical here, I appreciated, but as I posted, most of the "debunking side" have already premises or expectancy to be found in the UFO phenomena and so on. I know most of their works, I just want to know about someone who made a book only addressing their points. Does anyone knows such a book?
thanks.

What do you have against Carl Sagan?

Is he and the others really skeptics?

What are you trying to prove ?

Research , a healthy dose of skepticism before coming to conclusions is the best path.

a reply to: Groot

Friedman has stated strong views against SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) research. Friedman contests the implicit premise of SETI that there has been no extraterrestrial visitation of the planet, because it is his claim that SETI is seeking only signals, not extraterrestrial intelligence or beings. He maintains that the prominence and widespread public claims of those involved with SETI have tended to prevent serious research, including research by journalists, of UFOs.[2](p. 129)

Friedman has criticized Carl Sagan, a proponent of SETI, for ignoring empirical evidence, such as "600-plus UNKNOWNS" of Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14. Friedman argued that this empirical data directly contradicts Sagan's claim in Other Worlds that the "reliable cases are uninteresting and the interesting cases are unreliable". Specifically, Friedman refers to a table in Project Blue Book Special Report No. 14 that he says "shows that the better the quality of the sighting, the more likely it was to be an 'unknown', and the less likely it was to be listed as containing 'insufficient information'" [2](p. 42).


------
I don;t even know what are you talking about regarding to skeptics, have you ever met one that was honest or seriously deluded in relation to science? I never.

a reply to: flamengo

just my opinion - but :

this thread smells of " i want to believe - how can i ignore the skeptics "

why not look at each case - and find valid reasons to bellieve it ?

a reply to: ignorant_ape

LOL, no man, most of the classical arguments are already predictable, I just wanted a compilation of them, that is all there is.
Menzel for instance was putting forward a completely flawed argument that it was a reflection, and so Klass, and other people saying it is everything on the mind. and so on. All the classical guys show terrible flaws or wilful ignorance in most cases.

a reply to: flamengo

The most damning cases I have seen are some of the old Blue-book file cases that ridiculed what witnesses saw, and then when the (then) classified version of that report was declassified, it showed that Hector Quintinella, (blue-book director), knew the case wasn't misidentified mundane things, and that the witness truly saw something real and unknown. That all by itself shows that there are plenty of good and unexplained cases where there were debunking programs happening that were true garbage with just one intent, which was to keep people from thinking anything unexplained was happening.

What is really ironic about much of this is that the debunkers that still exist today are actually doing it all for money and to keep their other jobs where they get government money and funding, or where their job has government connections, and if they were to actually be honest and state their true feelings publicly, they would lose that funding source. This categorizes them with the same class of folks as hoaxers that are also doing what they do to make a buck.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Great man, there is a book about this one.
www.amazon.co.uk...=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1496109096&sr=1-1&keywords=ufo+yes

Found it, it is called
UFOs? Yes! Where the Condon committee went wrong

But I thought there were more books, I think stanton friedman has one that has a whole chapter about it, and Richard Dolan also talks quite a bit about it but it is all scattered.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Why not make a fortune if youre a mouthpiece and can do it relatively easily, with support from major sources and enterprises?

Has it become profitable to disguise, obfuscate, block truth about e.t. life?

If so, why? How does it benefit the human race to ignore or be unaware of something many ancient civilizations on Earth were already becoming privy to, or were aware fully?

Perhaps we are alone. Perhaps "they" dont know about us.

Or...

a reply to: flamengo

Yes, unfortunately I have never seen an actual book that has synthesized all of the cases that were erroneously debunked by someone, only seeing them here and there in books or documentaries. They are indeed scattered around.

It is certainly a very good idea, or would be a great project, to write a book detailing every single high profile case where debunking occurred, but was totally done to destroy witnesses erroneously, or where it was undeserved. Most if not all higher profile cases were debunked and it was indeed undeserved. That pattern of debunking is definitely well established in blue-book and thousands of other cases.

a reply to: CreationBro

Well, if you are serious, all you have to do is to study the subject seriously, then watch videos and photos, read what the debunkers were saying back then, and what they are saying now.
It is not only in the UFO lore, but about everything, science and history for instance, and the same crappy arguments and strategies.

Why? Well it seems we live in a kind of bubble, we live a kind of narrative that we created for ourselves, if we really understood reality our civilisation would collapse really fast, people would become unruly and unmanageable, that is no good.

a reply to: flamengo

Carl Sagan?

I can't imagine anyone that would have been more over joyed to find evidence of the existence of intelligent alien life.

Sound like you've simply decided that you'd rather eat up everything that everyone ever puts out and simply ignore any one that offers a more mundane answer.

Instead of wasting your money on a book, just ignored those who debunk or are skeptics.

a reply to: flamengo

You might check Stanton Friedman's website, sounds like you already have though...

Stanton Friedman

Stanton T. Friedman Fact, Fiction, and Flying Saucers

NVM, I must be getting slow, or the shills were sure in a hurry to derail the thread...

originally posted by: CreationBro
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Why not make a fortune if youre a mouthpiece and can do it relatively easily, with support from major sources and enterprises?

Has it become profitable to disguise, obfuscate, block truth about e.t. life?

If so, why? How does it benefit the human race to ignore or be unaware of something many ancient civilizations on Earth were already becoming privy to, or were aware fully?

Perhaps we are alone. Perhaps "they" dont know about us.

Or...

The only benefit I know of for obfuscating real UFO cases is to our alphabet agencies and the military. They can investigate covertly, and do research on the technologies involved in total secrecy, while everyone else is laughed at for even discussing the same things. It only benefits their particular mission goals to do that. And that is all they care about, at least officially. Many of them have divulged things later though, like after retiring. It seems to be more a mission of information control, and everyone else can stuff it. I can see the point of it though. The ones who are really in control of these secrets don't want their enemies getting the information.

a reply to: eriktheawful

See controversy with Stanton Friedman. Also would be good see the controversy with Michael Bara, you are well off the course if you think he opened up stuff.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

So anyone familiar enough with blue book to know of the misdirection and obsfucation that was the true purpose of the program should also know that the point was to hide the U2 and A12/SR71 programs under the guise of something fantastical like extraterrestrial visitation,. It was a little too successful as 60 years later the topic continues to be framed in the same light.

If you are interested in facts and truth, not just your own confirmation bias, why leave that out?

originally posted by: eriktheawful
a reply to: flamengo

Carl Sagan?

I can't imagine anyone that would have been more over joyed to find evidence of the existence of intelligent alien life.

Sound like you've simply decided that you'd rather eat up everything that everyone ever puts out and simply ignore any one that offers a more mundane answer.

Instead of wasting your money on a book, just ignored those who debunk or are skeptics.

Carl Sagan is a prime example of a debunker who didn't actually believe his own debunking efforts.
Carl Sagan believed UFO's were real

a reply to: Drunkenparrot

Not really, they always come up with this excuse, the latest was the "AURORA PROJECT" who never happened in reality, so nope, it was not the case.

originally posted by: Drunkenparrot
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

So anyone familiar enough with blue book to know of the misdirection and obsfucation that was the true purpose of the program should also know that the point was to hide the U2 and A12/SR71 programs under the guise of something fantastical like extraterrestrial visitation,. It was a little too successful as 60 years later the topic continues to be framed in the same light.

If you are interested in facts and truth, not just your own confirmation bias, why leave that out?

Your logic will only work in your reply if every single UFO case in Blue-Book was actually the U2 or other top secret aircraft being misidentified.
And that idea is pure rubbish.