Saturday, January 26, 2008

Is There No End to the Excuses We’re Given?

By Dennis Balthaser

Dennis Balthers, UFO, Excuses, Michael Shermer, James McGaha, Skeptics, Larry King     In a previous editorial I mentioned that I don’t normally research UFO topics such as sightings, abductions, crop circles or cattle mutilations, while concentrating on Roswell, Area 51, Underground Bases and the Pyramids of Giza. I do however have an interest when a high profile case comes along, trying to stay abreast of how it develops, is reported, and normally swept under the rug in a short time period.

In the last 10 years, 3 cases of sightings have surfaced which have generated an interest for me, and the official response to each case by the military and/or government agencies have followed a similar pattern, as well as the major media outlets handling of the information.

Recent television “news” shows such as Larry King Live on CNN is a good example. Devoting too much airtime to skeptics and debunkers like Michael Shermer and James Magaha, does absolutely nothing to educate the public on the information available, from credible witnesses. Both of these gentlemen have an obvious agenda that appears to feed directly into the television show host’s biased reporting of these events. Just once, I would like to hear Shermer or Magaha admit that we possibly don’t know what these witnesses are seeing, and allow a serious investigation to transpire. In my own research I welcome opposing views that have factual information presented, believing that I can become a better researcher by such views. Shermer and Magaha cannot accept the fact that many of these witnesses that come forward are simply asking for someone in authority to explain to them what they saw. In my opinion neither of these two gentlemen fall in to the “someone in authority”category. Those that are in authority of course seem to have had a lot of experience in not being truthful with the witnesses and the public when making an official statement, going as far back as the Roswell Incident 60 years ago.

Retired military personnel, serious researchers like Stanton Friedman, and others are invited on the shows, but often times are cut off or interrupted by the host or skeptics not giving a fair balance to the viewing public that is desiring information, consequently coming away with distorted information

Another serious mistake hosts like Larry King make are comments such as, “do you believe in UFOs?” UFOs EXIST, and have for many years, and have been admitted to by the military as far back as the 1940’s and 50’s, so it’s not a matter of “if” they exist, but rather in my opinion, what these UFOs are, which have not satisfactorily been explained in the three cases I will mention later.

Many television documentaries on the subject of UFOs follow the same biased approach. A good example of one such show was the National Geographic special, in which researchers Stanton Friedman, Don Schmitt , myself and others devoted our years of research freely to filming of the show, only to have the debunkers override the show to an extremely biased conclusion.

Many shows on television (documentaries and news shows), as well as newspaper articles that do report UFO incidents, insist on bringing what I refer to as the “woo-woo” aspect into what could, and should be reported as a story that could well be the story of the millennium. Why then do the people in tinfoil hats, sci-fi film clips have to be included? If that is their way of being balanced they obviously don’t understand the subject of Ufology to begin with, and is it any wonder that the subject is not taken more seriously than it is, due to the reporting it receives?

If we are ever to have objective coverage of this subject, changes must be made not only how television documentaries are presented, but news media outlets should also be presented differently than what has become the norm. Many radio show hosts are trying to do this in live interviews they conduct with serious researchers and witnesses, and I compliment them for doing so.

As for the military and government agencies that do publicly get involved in trying to explain a certain case, their historical record is also extremely questionable, and seems to get worse with each case. Remember we have had four excuses for what happened in Roswell in 1947 in the past 60 years, and many of us believe we have still not been told the truth. The excuses given in most cases are not satisfactory, and it is disheartening to me that witnesses must be made to look like they are not qualified to comment on what they saw, when the truth in most cases is the simple fact that the witnesses don’t know what they saw, and the excuses given do not correlate with what they saw. Is it any wonder that most sightings go unreported because of the ridicule, embarrassment or threats the witnesses will have to deal with, if they report it?

Having been in the military myself, and a proud life-long American supporter of our troops, I believe those military personnel in the United States that are supposedly in a position of authority, and in fact speaking for the military, are deceiving the public and in some case outright lying to us, and it must stop.

The three cases that I mentioned earlier that I have been interested in following the developments of are the Phoenix lights, the O’Hare airport case, and recently the Stephenville, Texas case. In all three cases credible witnesses have come forward asking someone to explain to them what they saw and experienced.

Of the three cases, the Phoenix lights probably had the most witnesses, with many taking photographs and video film of the event. The excuse given by those in authority and still used by skeptics and debunkers, was that the Phoenix lights were flares being dropped by the Maryland Air National Guard. Since the government is experienced in spending our tax money without accountability, why not notify the public in Phoenix that the Guard will again drop flares over the same location, same time of night and altitude, so they can again be filmed and compared with the original event.

The O’Hare airport case also had credible witnesses, (pilots and ground personnel) that witnessed a craft over the second busiest airport in the country and our government and military didn’t seem concerned with National Security, waving it off as a weather phenomenon. United Airlines even tried preventing the witnesses from commenting.

And now we have the Stephenville, Texas case, again with what appear to be several credible witnesses, and the military original stated no aircraft were in the area of the sightings. “TWO WEEKS LATER”, in the interest of public awareness, the military admits it was in error, and had “TEN” F-16 Fighters in the air near Stephenville on the night of the sightings. How the hell does the military loose or not be able to account for 10 F-16’s, (that are not quiet), being in the area of the sightings 2 weeks later. MUFON investigators and others are still investigating the Stephenville case, and I’ll await their findings, but I feel the military explanation after a 2-week delay was again unacceptable.

In all my years of doing research, I thought the Air Force had shot themselves in the foot several times, particularly with the 1997 “crash test dummies” excuse for Roswell, but I really believe they have outdone themselves with the Stephenville Texas sighting, by not accounting for ten F-16s for two weeks. How much longer will the American public have to put up with the excuses we are being given, when all we want to know is what is actually being seen by credible people who help to pay the salaries of these individuals in authority, that continue to give us lame excuses. It’s time for accountability.
McGaha Antics

No comments :

Post a Comment

Dear Contributor,

Your comments are greatly appreciated, and coveted; however, blatant mis-use of this site's bandwidth will not be tolerated (e.g., SPAM etc).

Additionally, healthy debate is invited; however, ad hominem and or vitriolic attacks will not be published, nor will "anonymous" criticisms. Please keep your arguments "to the issues" and present them with civility and proper decorum. -FW