Showing posts with label Debunker. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Debunker. Show all posts

Saturday, January 31, 2026

UFO Skepticism at a Crossroads: What Michael Shermer Leaves Out About UAP

UFO Skepticism at a Crossroads - What Michael Shermer Leaves Out About UAP © All Rights Reserved - www.theufochronicles.com


     Long time, noted skeptic, Michael Shermer, in his new column on UFOs/UAPs is a familiar, articulate expression of classical skepticism: most sightings are misperceptions, the evidence for extraterrestrials is thin, and extraordinary claims still demand extraordinary proof. As a broad framing, that much is uncontroversial. The difficulty is
By
The UFO Chronicles
1-30-2026
© All Rights Reserved
that his piece leans too heavily on yesterday’s talking points and underplays the significant, empirical shifts in how governments and scientific institutions are now treating UAP.

The result is an essay that reassures hardened skeptics but does not quite engage with the data-rich environment that has emerged since 2017.

© The UFO Chronicles. All rights reserved.

Saturday, October 24, 2020

James Randi, Magician, Debunker of Paranormal Claims, Dies at 92

James Randi, Magician, Debunker of Paranormal Claims, Dies at 92


     James Randi, a MacArthur award-winning magician who turned his formidable savvy to investigating claims of spoon bending, mind reading, fortunetelling, ghost whispering, water dowsing, faith healing, U.F.O. spotting and sundry varieties of
By Margalit Fox
The New York Times
10-21-20
bamboozlement, bunco, chicanery, flimflam, flummery, humbuggery, mountebankery, pettifoggery and out-and-out quacksalvery, as he quite often saw fit to call them, died on Tuesday at his home in Plantation, Fla. He was 92.

Sunday, November 26, 2017

Former NASA Scientist Debunks All UFO Sightings

Former NASA Scientist Debunks All UFO Sightings

     This week, again, UFO enthusiasts saw a phenomenon and an explanation they didn't believe matched up. The phenomenon was a bright, second-long streak across a time-lapse video filmed by astronaut Paolo Nespoli; the explanation, as provided by the
By Meghan Bartels
Newsweek
11-22-17
European Space Agency, was that a meteor was burning up as it entered Earth's atmosphere.

[...]

James Oberg, who used to work in mission control at NASA, is used to this sort of approach to UFO sightings, and in a fascinating interview with Atlas Obscura, he explains why space phenomena trip people up. As a hobby, he has traced back decades'-worth of UFO sightings to more mundane explanations, drawing on his professional expertise in space missions.

Monday, January 11, 2016

Kidnapped By UFOS: Interview with Philip Klass

Kidnapped By UFOS: Interview with Philip Klass

By www.pbs.org
2-27-1996

NOVA: Phil, you've been following the so-called alien abduction movement very closely, perhaps more closely than anyone. Tell us how long you've been studying this, and how much evidence you have found to date, that supports the contentions of people like John Mack and Budd Hopkins?

KLASS: ... I've been interested in and investigating and following claims of UFO abductions for almost 30 years.


NOVA: In all that time, how much hard evidence have you found?


KLASS:...In nearly 30 years of searching, investigating famous cases, I have yet to find one that cannot be explained in down-to-earth prosaic terms. Therefore, if somebody says to me, "I have been abducted by strange looking creatures that do these dreadful things to me," I'm quite confident that they could not possibly be extraterrestrials. Maybe they're mischievous Irish leprechauns; maybe they're the mischievous elves of Santa Claus; maybe they are agents of the devil—now I don't believe in any of these. But I have not spent 30 years investigating whether the leprechauns exist. But I am quite confident that there is no scientific credible evidence to show that we've had alien visitors, let alone that they're doing these dreadful things. [...]

Friday, October 31, 2014

"...The 60-Year Anniversary Of The UFO That Brought An Italian Soccer Game To A Screeching Halt..."

Bookmark and Share

Sketch of UFOs Over Stadio Artemi Franchi- Florence, Italy 10-27-1954
A sketch of UFOs over the stadium by Silvio Neri (Credit: www.bbc.com)

Another audience with the priesthood


By Billy Cox
De Void
10-27-14

     Nice job by BBC World Service last week on the 60-year anniversary of the UFO that brought an Italian soccer game to a screeching halt. In case you missed it, the Brits managed to corral a few of the players and some of the 10,000 fans who watched as an egg-like object flew in slow and brazen fashion, in broad daylight, above the stadium, and created enduring memories. One described the thing as shaped “like Cuban cigars.” All reported how the object, or objects, discharged a glittering material; some researchers called it “angel hair” which, according to some anecdotal accounts, is a sticky, fibrous and rapidly dissolving substance sometimes associated with UFO sightings.

Some witnesses actually retrieved this stuff, which reportedly covered rooftops in the immediate aftermath of the 10/27/54 incident; before the material dissolved, one Italian scientist put it under a scope and identified elements of boron, silicon, calcium and magnesium. Unfortunately, none of the material is available for analysis today.

But what was perhaps more instructive was astronomer/”skeptic” James McGaha’s interview with the BBC. McGaha, who never met a UFO he couldn’t explain, said his first take on the case was that the Italians had actually been startled by a daytime meteor. But then he began to focus on another bizarre phenomenon involving the autumn migration of young web-spinning spiders.

“The spiders use these webs as sails and they link together and you get a big glob of this stuff in the sky and the spiders ride on this to move between locations,” he told the Brits. “They just fly on the wind and these things have been recorded at 14,000 feet above the ground. So, when the sunlight glistens off this, you get all kinds of visual effects.”

And certainly, if you check out the “ballooning spider” videos posted on the BBC link, a case could be made for McGaha’s explanation. Dissenting BBC sources argue that spider silk is an organic protein made of nitrogen, calcium, hydrogen and oxygen, none of which jibe with the original findings. But the point is moot because there's none of the 1954 residue left to assess.

What’s interesting about McGaha is his certitude. Asked if the material could’ve come from a UFO, he replies “It’s an absolutely silly idea. Science totally rejects this idea.” Wow. This isn’t just a personal pronoun issue — this man has singlehandedly appropriated an entire noun for himself and assumed the mantle of science incarnate. De Void feels for McGaha; this is one hell of a cross to bear. Do go on: “You know the whole UFO phenomenon is nothing but myth, magic and superstition, wrapped up in this idea that somehow aliens are coming here either to save us to destroy us.”

In a way, McGaha’s reduction of the world to a tableau of facile binary choices is reassuring. It means everybody else doesn’t have to think so hard.

But for those who actually pay attention to inconvenient details, strap on your hip-waders. This is the same guy who dispensed with the meticulously researched 2008 Stephenville UFO incident — reconstructed through federal radar records — as the work of agenda-driven conspiracy freaks cherry-picking skin-paint pingback patterns. Their agenda, for as-yet-unexplained reasons, was apparently to obfuscate a military flare-dropping exercise over rural Texas back in January 08. Never mind that the eyewitnesses were evidently so stupid they couldn’t tell the difference between a solid, aircraft carrier-sized UFO cruising slowly over their town and F-16s with afterburners. Never mind how the radar data confirmed the direction in which these stupid eyewitnesses claimed the UFO was flying. Never mind that the USAF, which refused to release its own radar results and initially denied it had planes in the air that night, was forced to admit these stupid eyewitnesses actually got it right about seeing its F-16s in the sky that evening. Never mind that McGaha never produced any military confirmation of his flare-drop pronouncement. Never mind that McGaha’s single eyewitness to his flare-drop pronouncement is unnamed.

When it comes to UFO coverage, it's always best to consult with authorities whose identities are interchangeable with Science itself; without them, reality might look frail and tenuous. And defending reality, especially the reality that conferred their vestments upon them in the first place, is far more preferable to looking weak by issuing pantywaist statements like "I don't know."

Friday, August 08, 2014

A Critical Analysis of Brian Dunning’s Explanation [Re His Conviction for Wire Fraud]

Bookmark and Share

Brian Dunning

By Rebecca Watson
skepchick.org
8-7-14

     Yesterday, I broke the news that Skeptoid’s Brian Dunning was sentenced to 15 months in prison for wire fraud after previously pleading guilty. Since then, I’ve received a number of complaints from people in the skeptic community who believe that it was wrong for me to report on this, that Dunning was set up, that he is guilty but not that guilty, and/or that it’s wrong for me to be glad that he’s going to prison.

This morning, I read Dunning’s own defense, which I see being passed around amongst skeptics, many of whom seem to accept it as a valid explanation and a confirmation that this is all a big mistake.

One of the reasons why I enjoy skepticism as a tool is because it does not (or should not) discriminate. I tend to be equally skeptical of things I like or agree with – sometimes more skeptical, because the things we want to believe are the easiest things to believe, regardless of whether they are true.

That’s one reason why I am very skeptical of other skeptics. The other reason is because I believe that if the skeptical movement wants to be taken seriously as a force that genuinely cares about helping people, about protecting them from scam artists, we need to make sure that the people who speak for us are honest and forthright and above all else ethical. If a person lacks those traits, I cannot in good conscience recommend their work to others. This doesn’t mean that leaders need to be perfect, or that I always need to agree with them: it only means that they cannot demonstrate to me a willful interest in manipulating the truth for their own benefit. It’s the reason why I can no longer recommend any of Ben Radford’s work after finding he purposely misrepresented scientific studies to suit his interests, and it’s the reason why I stopped promoting Brian Dunning’s work once I realized he admitted to stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars. . . .

Noted Skeptic, Brian Dunning Sentenced To Prison for Wire Fraud

Bookmark and Share

Brian Dunning

By Rebecca Watson
skepchick.org
8-5-14

     As I mentioned in a previous post, Brian Dunning, creator of the Skeptoid podcast and the world’s worst “science” rap video, pled guilty to wire fraud that had allowed him to collect more than $5 million. Sentencing has finally occurred, and the result is 15 months in prison starting on September 2, 2014, followed by three years of supervised release.

This is great news for the skeptic community at large, since it may be a long enough sentence for Dunning to fade from memory and stop publicly representing the very people who are supposedly trying to stop people from defrauding others.

Meanwhile, this case had brought to light an actual skeptical activist who appears to be smart, hilarious, and actually effective at stopping frauds: Assistant United States Attorney David R. Callaway. In the government’s sentencing recommendation to the court last week, Callaway* argued beautifully against the idea that Dunning deserves to be insulated from the consequences of his actions, saying that “There is no “Get out of Trauma Free” card for white-collar criminals or, unfortunately, their families.” In fact, Callaway argues that Dunning should be punished harshly in part because his crime wasn’t motivated by desperate need . . ..

Sunday, November 03, 2013

Paul Kimball's UFO Debunking and Irrationality

Bookmark and Share

Paul Kimball's UFO Debunking and Irrationality

By Stanton Friedman
www.stantonfriedman.com/
11-1-13

"The definition for balderdash is senseless prate,
a jargon of words, noisy nonsense.”

     Every so often I find a UFO debunking piece that illustrates the irrationality of the debunkers’ arguments despite the educational background of the debunker. For example, Dr. Isaac Asimov who wrote more than 300 books, mostly on scientific topics and many Science Fiction tomes made the following claim, “If aliens were visiting Earth, they would either land and make themselves known, or keep hidden. If they do neither, they are not visiting.” How extraordinary that a world class sci-fi writer can’t think of other scenarios, some place in between the noted extremes. He certainly gives no rationale. He has not claimed to be himself in touch with ETs or to have studied the evidence presented by witnesses to actual ET behavior. One might say it illustrates arrogance combined with ignorance.

My nephew Paul Kimball has a law degree and has spent a lot of time “studying UFOs”; in mid August he penned a piece about which one can only shake one’s head and ask where that nonsense came from. He starts by saying “here are the reasons why I am completely convinced there was no ET Crash.
If aliens had sufficiently advanced technology of the kind that would permit travel to the stars (and I have talked to enough scientists to know just how mind blowingly advanced this would have to be, Stan Friedman and his nuclear rockets balderdash not withstanding) then it beggars belief that they would crash in spaceships that looked like something out of a 1950s sci-fi B movie once they got here (much less crash multiple times, as some posit, including Stan).” As noted in the book “"Science Was Wrong"” by myself and Kathleen Marden, there were loads of scientists who were totally negative about flight in the air and then flight in space. I don’t know how Paul knows what the Roswell crashed saucer looked like . . . lots of reports of small light weight pieces of wreckage . . . not like a spaceship at all.

Notice the assumption that the same small vehicle that crashed at Roswell, or Aztec, or the Plains of San Agustin came to earth directly from another star system. Is he really unaware that flight in the atmosphere of a planet is a very different business than flight in deep space between stars? Wow! Lift, drag, heating, gravity etc., are very different for airborne vehicles than for deep space rockets. We have many reports of huge mother ships into and out of which the small earth excursion modules fly.

The Lunar excursion modules which landed on the moon were extraordinarily different from the huge Saturn V rockets which were launched from Earth with the LEMs on Board. Surely he (with a very strong background in history) is aware that even as far back as the epic battles of World War II, there were huge aircraft carriers which carried a bunch of small airplanes to the locations from which these aircraft flew. The carriers didn’t fly, and the aircraft didn’t float on the water. The carriers carried fuel for the airplanes and provided housing, food, ammunition for the pilots, etc. The aircraft are far more maneuverable than are the carriers. Despite all the aircraft in a huge variety of sizes, speeds, etc., there are loads of crashes. Two huge and expensive space shuttles crashed.

Paul has another sword which he wields, ”However, allowing for the equally infinitesimal [based on what?] possibility that Murphy’s Law applies to super advanced aliens, It beggars belief that they would just leave the remains of the ship and their dead comrades to be found by beings, who, as Stan puts it, were here to observe us because we might be dangerous someday soon.” In actuality, I have suggested more than 20 reasons for coming here. Furthermore we are already dangerous. We killed 50 Million of our own kind in WWII. We destroyed 1700 cities. We have exploded 2000 nuclear (there is that word again) warheads. Not dangerous?

Additionally, there certainly were later sightings near the Roswell crash site that might well have been aliens looking for their fallen comrades. I doubt if they worried much about our duplicating their technology. Christopher Columbus could not have duplicated a nuclear submarine or a radio or computer chip. After all we Earthlings have left many of our dead behind. Check out "By Any Means Necessary: America's Secret Air War in the Cold War" by William Burrows. 166 US military men were in planes “tickling” radar sets in North Korea, China, and Russia just after World War II . . . and being shot down. We didn’t go after them (starting WW III) and their families weren’t told about what happened to them until 50 years later in 2001. We didn’t attack Russia when they downed Gary Powers U-2.

Yet Paul asks “How can we be asked to believe that they would let we warlike creatures have their technology? “ Why does he think we would have been able to duplicate it? Has he no concept of how difficult it would be? Moreover, he pontificates as a supposed expert on alien behavior and technology, “if they had the ability to get here from another star system, then they would certainly have had the ability to collect or vaporize the wreckage.” One might note that we earthlings have had the ability with nuclear (that word again) weapons to vaporize all the civilizations. Yet we have exploded 2000 nuclear warheads, but only 2 on people; funny how countries agree not to use poison gas.

Paul also pontificates about keeping secrets, “It beggars belief again that the United States government could have maintained what must be [why?] such a vast conspiracy to this day to keep it all quiet. History tells us that the reason they are kept for a very long time successfully is that they are always confined to only a few people. As soon as they start expanding the circle of knowledge, then the wheels fall off.” Now that is real balderdash! The definition for balderdash is “senseless prate, a jargon of words, noisy nonsense.” Yes, Paul you hit it on the head. There were 12000 people at Bletchley Park in the UK secretly working on intercepting, decoding, translating and carefully distributing German military communications in the early 1940s. Not one word in public until 25 years after the war was over. The Lockheed Stealth aircraft was developed at a cost of $10 Billion over 10 years in secret utilizing thousands of people. At one time the Manhattan Project involved 60,000 people in secret. The National Reconnaissance Organization contracted with Boeing on new spy satellite architecture and then cancelled the program. That involved thousands of people in secret at a cost of $13 Billion. The development of the first successful US spy satellite in the “Corona” program was kept secret for more than 30 years. The first one (after 12 expensive failures), obtained more information about Soviet military installations than all the U-2 spy planes that preceded it. Many more than a few people were involved.

Now let us look at “Stan Friedman’s nuclear rockets balderdash.” It is quite clear that when engineers and scientists want to control large amounts of energy, they go nuclear. When it comes to bombs, a big bomb in WWII released the energy of 10 tons of dynamite in 1944. In July 1945 the first nuclear fission bomb released the energy of 16 thousand tons of dynamite; by 1952 the first nuclear fusion weapon (Mike) released the energy of 10 million tons of TNT. The Russians later set off a fusion (H-Bomb) one releasing the energy of more than 50 million tons of TNT.

The US Navy, admittedly a bit larger than our Canadian navy, built their first NUCLEAR submarine in 1956; able to sail around the planet underwater. Submarines in WWII could stay underwater for all of 24 hours. Years later the first NUCLEAR fission powered aircraft carriers operate for 18 years without refueling. Three different organizations successfully operated NUCLEAR fission rockets at the NUCLEAR test site in Nevada. They were Westinghouse Astronuclear Laboratory (I worked on their NRX A-6 at a power level of 1100 megawatts); Aerojet General operated the XE-1 at a power level of 1000 megawatts. Los Alamos operated the Phoebus 2B at a power level of 4400 megawatts or twice the power of Grand Coulee Dam, less than 8’ in diameter. There are no fission nuclear reactors in Nova Scotia where Paul lives. We here in the neighboring province of New Brunswick have the Point Lepreau Nuclear Generating Station, a fission power- plant producing 2200 megawatts. I and many others worked on studies of fusion rockets able to eject charged particles having ten million times as much energy per particle as in a dumb old chemical rocket. Many papers have been published but I suppose Paul hasn’t seen any.

It should be noted that almost all the energy in the universe comes from nuclear fusion in the stars. Why Paul is in denial about nuclear rockets I don’t know, though I suppose lawyers don’t dig into such matters. I should note that my book “Flying Saucers and Science” has pictures of several real nuclear rocket engines

The real balderdash is that one should theorize for ever about alien activities and motivation, but avoid the facts; however—it is the evidence that matters. Of course there might be advanced propulsion systems that can outdo nuclear fusion. They are not needed to get us out there and certainly not needed to get aliens here. Let us not forget that nearby stars are already within reach, if we want to spend the money. We didn’t even find out that there was such a process as nuclear fusion until 1938—a very short time ago indeed. We now know that there are planets all over the place many of them have to be much older than earth.

Paul may think “nuclear rockets are balderdash” and only small groups can keep secrets. He probably is aware that many nuclear facilities had UFO sightings back in the 1940s. These included reports near Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee and Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and the Hanford Atomic works up in eastern Washington state. Furthermore as delineated by Robert Hastings and Robert Salas, there have been UFO observations where missiles on which were mounted nuclear weapons had been shut down by the aliens. The notion that that only small groups can keep a secret is put to rest by the fact that this year the US black budget is about fifty billion.

Sunday, September 29, 2013

Professional Skeptic Debunks UFOs and More; $100k Offered for Proof


Bookmark and Share

Professional Skeptic Debunks UFOs (and More)

Professional skeptic debunks paranormal at SMC

By Alci Rengifo
www.thecorsaironline.com
9-28-13

     James Underdown is dedicated to prove that UFOs, psychic powers and paranormal abilities are all impossible.

Underdown is a professional skeptic and investigator, and director of the nonprofit Center for Inquiry in Los Angeles. He is also the founder of the organization Independent Investigator Group, which investigates fringe science, paranormal and extraordinary claims from a rational, scientific viewpoint. . . .

. . . For Underdown, the mysterious, enticing world of ghosts and aliens is nothing more than a product of our cultural, sometimes psychological makeup, or potentially of hoaxers trying to scam a quick buck.

And there is a buck to make, Underdown announced. The Center for Inquiry is offering $100,000, in partnership with the Independent Investigator Group, to anyone who can provide definitive proof of psychic powers plus a $5,000 finder’s fee for whoever brings in a real psychic. . . .

Sunday, January 20, 2013

Kevin Randle & Phil Klass Debate The Roswell UFO Crash on Larry King Live | VIDEO

Bookmark and Share

Kevin Randle & Phil Klass Debate UFOs on Larry King Live





See Also:

UFO Debunker, Philip Klass and the FBI

Walking in Phil Klass' Footsteps

Philip J. Klass - Ufology's Arch Nemesis has Passed Away at 86


SHARE YOUR UFO EXPERIENCE

UFO Debunker, Philip Klass and the FBI



Bookmark and Share

Phil Klass & The FBI

Philip Klass and the FBI

By Dr Kevin Randle
A Different Perspective
12-29-13
      A while back we discussed Phil Klass’ habit of writing to the employers of those who thought they had seen a UFO, or who investigated them, or just disagreed with him. He seemed outraged that there were people who didn’t accept everything he said, and took great offense at that. He would express his disappointment with those by creating a little trouble for them.

A few skeptics who visit here thought I was being overly harsh and a little unfair to Klass. They thought several examples were needed. But even with some acts I thought were over the top, those skeptics thought Klass had done nothing wrong. With Klass it seems to have been an on-going thing.

While going through the FBI files that dealt with UFOs, I came across a series of letters that Klass had sent to them. Apparently Klass was offended by an article written by Dr. J. Allen Hynek that had appeared in the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. It was an article that didn’t actually advocate any particular position but suggested that UFO sightings reported to law enforcement entities would be of interest to those at Hynek’s new Center for UFO studies. It provided a way for law enforcement to respond to the concerns of the citizens without having to actually do anything. A sort of win - win. Law enforcement cleared the report and the CUFOS received it for further investigation, if necessary.

According to a Memorandum dated February 21, 1975, Mr. Heim, reported that Klass had called the editor of the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. According to that document, Klass, “In strong terms laced with sarcasm, he derided our publication of the article by Dr. J. Allen Hynek, ‘The UFO Mystery,’ in the February, 1975, issue of the LEB. Klass suggested that by publishing this article, the FBI had given its endorsement to a hoax (that UFOs are extra-terrestrial in origin) and to a fraud (Dr. J. Allen Hynek).”

Importantly, according to the memorandum, “Mr. Klass was politely reminded that nowhere in Dr. Hynek’s article appearing in the Bulletin, or in numerous other of his writings which were examined by us, does Hynek suggest UFOs are extra-terrestrial in origin…” (Remember, this is 1975, about the time he was establishing CUFOS).

A letter dated June 14, 1975, written to then FBI Director Clarence Kelly, Klass renewed his assault. He wrote, “The enclosed photo-copy of a headline and feature story in the recent issue of ‘The National Tattler’ is a portent of the sort of ‘FBI endorsement’ for the flying-saucer myth that you can expect to see, repeatedly, as a result of an article about UFOs carried by the February issue of The Law Enforcement Bulletin.” While his source for this claim of FBI endorsement outrage is The National Tattler, hardly the pinnacle of journalistic excellence, that didn’t matter all that much to Klass, he quoted it anyway.

Klass added, “That article was written by Dr. J. Allen Hynek, the spiritual leader of the vocal group of ‘believers’ and ‘kooks’ who claim we are being visited by extraterrestrial spaceships. And while the FBI did not endorse Hynek’s views per se, the decision to publish his article and to alert law enforcement agencies as to what to do ‘if they land,’ has embroiled the agency for all time.”

The telephone call then, was not enough to slander Dr. Hynek. When he didn’t receive the response he wanted, he renewed his attack, but toned down the rhetoric in the written communication. He just claimed that Hynek was the “spiritual leader” of, what to Klass, would be the other side. But he had learned that the FBI had not endorsed the opinion that some UFOs were alien craft merely that they approved of the idea of the UFO reports being relayed to a non-governmental agency to investigate. Hynek had offered the various law enforcement agencies an alternative to telling the public to call the Air Force or the local college authorities if they felt a need to make a report.

I am not sure what so annoyed Klass about this. Hynek asked for the various law enforcement agencies to relay the reports to the Center. I don’t know why Klass would object to this. It wasn’t as if he was attempting to force his belief structure on anyone. He was merely asking for information. Klass was actually attempting to somehow inhibit that flow.

There is nothing wrong with Klass contacting the FBI to respond to their publication of Hynek’s article. There is nothing wrong with Klass offering to write a rebuttal piece giving his opinions about the reality, or lack thereof, of UFOs. There is nothing wrong with Klass writing, “I would welcome the opportunity to present the other side of the UFO issue in The Law Enforcement Bulletin, and to thereby help remove the earlier seeming FBI endorsement of flying saucers.”

It was the language, the allegations and the name calling which is out of place. Reasonable people can reasonably disagree, but Klass wouldn’t leave it at that. He crossed a line, repeatedly, with his personal attacks and his shading of reality to suit his purposes. He was uninterested in debate; he was in a campaign to inflict his views on everyone else.

The point is that Klass did carry about a campaign against those with whom he disagreed. I know that I don’t attempt to suppress the opinions and beliefs of the skeptics who visit here (except when the insults become too personal) and welcome, for the most part, their view of the issues. But for a few, such as Klass, it wasn’t enough that he had what he believed to be the ultimate truth; everyone had to agree with that truth as well.

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Paul Kurtz, UFO Debunker, Skeptic And Secular Humanist, Dies At 86 | UFO NEWS

Bookmark and Share

Paul Kurtz

By Charles Poladian
www.ibtimes.com
10-22-12

     Paul Kurtz, a skeptic, philosopher and secular humanist as well as UFO and psychic debunker, has passed away at the age of 86.

Kurtz died at his home in Amherst, N.Y., Saturday of natural causes, reports The Associated Press. Kurtz founded the Center for Inquiry in 1991 to debunk psychics and UFOs and promote reason and scientific inquiry.

Kurtz also founded the magazines Skeptical Inquirer and Free Inquiry. He was a popular skeptic who applied scientific reasoning to supposed paranormal activity as well as the claims of homeopathic medicine, psychics, UFOs fans and various healers. . . .

Saturday, May 05, 2012

The UFO Bestiary; A Rebuttal By Stanton T. Friedman


Bookmark and Share


By Stanton T. Friedman
www.stantonfriedman.com
© 5-4-12
     I read your article with interest. I will give you credit for consistency. When you attended my “Flying Saucers ARE Real” lecture on the Queen Elizabeth 2 in 2003, you didn’t raise your hand as having read any of the 5 large scale scientific UFO volumes that I spoke of. In 2004 when we debated on Coast to Coast Radio, it was quite clear that you still hadn’t read any. That may be one of several reasons you lost the debate to me by 57% to 33% for you and 10% undecided .
When some time later we were both on Larry King, it was still clear that you hadn’t done your homework about the UFO evidence or the easily demonstrated government cover-up. You pointed to the government’s mishandling of the FEMA/Katrina event and their mismanagement of the post office as proving they couldn’t cover up anything. I will admit that wasn’t as silly as the claim made by your colleague Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson that the proof of no cover-up was how much the public has learned about President Clinton’s genitalia. I gather neither of you know anything about how security works. No mention of the NRO, NSA, CIA,DIA, OSI, ONI? They are some of the agencies which keep secrets. Their cumulative annual budget has been estimated at well over $30, billion. Perhaps you can tell me what is under the whiteout used by the NSA on better than 95% of the material on 156 pages of old TOP SECRET UMBRA NSA UFO documents? All one can read is about one sentence per page. How about the many pages of TOP SECRET UMBRA CIA UFO documents, almost all of which are blacked out? No Cover-up?

I was glad to see you mention the Betty and Barney Hill case. Too bad you didn’t mention the 2007 book “Captured: The Betty and Barney Hill UFO Experience” by myself and Kathleen Marden, Betty’s niece. It has an entire chapter on the star map work relating to Zeta 1 and Zeta 2 Reticuli. Your readers would have learned that they are the closest to each other pair of sun like stars in our local neighborhood being 30 times closer to each other than the sun is to its nearest neighbor. By the way, they are also a cool billion years older than the sun. Reticulans would have had a much greater incentive for developing interstellar travel than do we(with such close neighbors) and also considerable more time. Of course one must ask the SETI community why ETI’s would send messages to earth in the first place and why they would use a primitive technology such as we Earthlings are limited to. After all, Marconi’s first long distance signals were sent only 111 years ago. Do you really believe any advanced civilization, maybe only 1000 or a million years older than ours , would still be using such primitive tools? Are you still using a slide rule? Using your strange reasoning, I presume the fact that SETI has picked up no signals from any target means there is nobody out there. Right?

It sounds likely from your article that you think the only sources of UFO information are the emails sent to you. I have a list of 10 old PhD theses about UFOs in my “TOP Secret/MAJIC.” MUFON has had over 40 annual Symposia with Proceedings published every year. Most of the papers are prepared by engineers and scientists who, unlike you, have studied the relevant evidence.

As you will recall, I, with your permission ,sent you my 2008 book “Flying Saucers and Science.” I know you received it because on a later Coast to Coast program you claimed it was on your night stand. Too bad you still haven’t read it. You are, of course, mentioned in it in the chapter on The Cult of SETI. The studies are discussed in detail as is the cover-up, star travel, motivations for visiting Earth, etc

I agree with you that it is hard to believe that governments are the only ones able to obtain evidence . . . witness the Hill case. I don’t think that is true. However, you must admit that governments are the ones in charge of large radar networks, spy satellites, sophisticated signal receiving equipment and the right to grab and keep wreckage such as that from Roswell and Aztec They also have strong powers of witness intimidation. I suspect the ridicule offered by the SETI community has helped intimidate people.

90% of the people in my audiences who claim to have seen a flying saucer have not reported what they has seen . . .. They have expressed fear of ridicule from “Experts“ such as you and Dr. Tyson. I don’t agree with the notions of your email critics that the only reason that few scientists give much credence to the visitation idea are that 1. The government is keeping all the good evidence under wraps and scientists are knee jerk debunker, unwilling to take any of this stuff seriously. I have had only 11 hecklers in over 700 lectures and, as you know, I come on very strongly. I think the primary reason is a combination of ego and ignorance. Look at you. You haven’t paid any attention to five large scale scientific studies that you have been told about by a scientist who has now been studying the subject for 54 years and who has worked under security, and on systems for deep space travel, and been to 20 archives.

It is obvious that if significant data were released proving alien visitations, that nobody would need to waste money listening for hypothetical SETI signals. Better to learn sign language. It is also obvious that you and Dr. Tyson and others in the astronomical community abide by 3 major rules:
A. Don’t bother me with the facts, my mind is made up.

B. What the public, and my colleagues, don’t know, I won’t tell them.

C. I will do my research by proclamation, investigation is too much trouble. These are hardly the way of science. Ignorance may be bliss, but it is no excuse for ignoring the relevant data when there is so much of it.

Thursday, May 03, 2012

Flying Saucer Fiziks II: A Rebuttal By Tim Printy



Bookmark and Share


By Tim Printy
SUNLite
May-June 2012
     Recently, Stanton Friedman wrote an article on The UFO Chronicles blog, where he declared that I was an irrational, uninformed, ignorant debunker! This had a lot to do with him reading a four-year old article I wrote called “The UFO disclosure myth”.

For some peculiar reason, Mr. Friedman took offense at my portrayal of his “cosmic Watergate” story. Of course, he uses the epithet of debunker to describe me. I don’t mind being called a debunker because, according to the dictionary, it means that I am exposing false claims. However, Mr. Friedman uses it as an ad hominem. It is a UFOlogical insult meant to demonize an individual. This is nothing new for some UFOlogists and appears to be standard operating procedure (SOP) for Mr. Friedman. . . .