Sage or The Sage, whatever, what are you doing here in the UFO(Alien
Visitors) newsgroup?
Find something that really interests you. You have no desire of learning
anything new and no interest in the extraterrestrial beings etc. Right?
Then GO AWAY..
Don't make any more noise in this group.
"The_Sage" <theeSage@azrmci.net> wrote in message
news:bu92mv4e6av0lk5e2dfp033qbgef4i19uo@4ax.com...
Reply to article by: Sir Arthur <nospam@newsranger.com>
Date written: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 14:12:09 GMT
MsgID:<Zo%7b.19593$cJ5.2550@www.newsranger.com>
The UFO Challenge
December 1997
By Stanton Friedman
You call this a challenge?
As a nuclear physicist...
Hold on a moment here! Stanton *was* a nuclear physicist years and years
ago,
but nowadays he is merely an author of New Age-like books. His former
career has
absolutely nothing to do with his current career. In my opinion, I believe
he
likes to hide behind the title "Nuclear Physicist", even though nuclear
physics
has absolutely nothing to do with UFOs, maybe because it adds
respectability to
an otherwise silly belief. I mean think about it: if a Rocket Scientist or
Nuclear Physicist says there is a "Cosmic Watergate", then by golly, there
certainly must be a "Cosmic Watergate" because Rocket Scientists or
Nuclear
Physicists are so damn intelligent that it is physically impossible that
they
could be wrong or could be suckered into a UFO cult!
...who has had a serious interest in flying saucers since 1958, I have
reached four major conclusions:
The evidence is overwhelming that Planet Earth is being visited by
intelligently controlled extraterrestrial spacecraft. In other words,
SOME UFOs are alien spacecraft. Most are not.
Research by proclamation, eh?
The subject of flying saucers represents a kind of Cosmic Watergate,
meaning that some few people in major governments have known since
July, 1947, when two crashed saucers and several alien bodies were
recovered in New Mexico, that indeed SOME UFOs are ET. As noted in
1950, it's the most classified U.S. topic.
None of the arguments made against conclusions One and Two by a small
group of debunkers such as Carl Sagan, my University of Chicago
classmate for three years, can stand up to careful scrutiny.
The Flying Saucer story is the biggest story of the millennium:
If its so big, then why has MUFON basically closed its doors in Phoenix
due to
lack of support? If its soooo big, then why are there extremely few
articles
about it in any legitimate newspapers -- big or small?
visits to Planet Earth by aliens and the U.S. government's cover-up of
the best data (the bodies and wreckage) for over fifty years.
Okay, Stanton throws out these four bold claims, now lets see if he
follows
through on those bold claims with some of that good ol' fashioned
"overwhelming
evidence" he alludes to -- or not:
Since 1967 I have lectured on the subject "Flying Saucers ARE Real" at
more than 600 colleges and over 100 professional groups in all fifty
US states, nine Canadian Provinces, twelve cities in England and nine
in other countries, with only eleven hecklers. I have also appeared on
hundreds of radio and TV shows. Overall, I have probably answered
about 35,000 questions about UFOs and secrecy.
So what? None of this is relevant to or supports Stanton's very bold
claims. It
seems as though Stanton is trying to impress us with credentials instead
of
facts, ie -- please, for Stanton's sake, let's not question his claims
because
he is a rocket scientist and a famous lecturer/author/movie star and no
one in
their right mind should question the opinion of a rocket scientist or
famous
lecturer/author/movie star.
It's clear that over 97% of the people have NOT read any of the five
major scientific studies I discuss, and are unaware of the mountains
of evidence that support my conclusions.
How come it would never cross Stanton's rocket scientist brain that one of
the
reasons that people have not read (or have remembered reading) any of what
he
personally considers the "five major scientific studies of UFOs", is
because 97%
of the people don't believe what he personally considers the five major
scientific studies of UFOs, worthy of reading? Maybe 97% of the people
know
something that Stanton does not, namely that no actual evidence has ever
been
presented in any scientific study he discusses, just merely reports of
evidence?
They are also unaware of the scientific data, as opposed to tabloid
nonsense.
One can say the same thing about 97% of all UFO researchers. Make that
99%.
However, it is also clear from the Opinion Polls and from my own
experience that indeed most people accept the notion that SOME UFOs
are alien spacecraft.
Uh oh, now we are getting to some of that "overwhelming evidence" that
Stanton
alluded to earlier: Opinion polls. Now Stanton is implying that if most
people
are of the opinion that UFOs exist, then by golly UFOs must exist because
most
people wouldn't keep an opinion about something that doesn't actually
exist,
right? Of course, we will then have to blindly ignore all those many times
throughout history when it was everybody's opinion that the Earth was flat
as a
pancake and the Sun and the planets and the stars all revolved around the
Earth
or that the humanoid monster of Columbus' time are out to get us or that
Allah
is greater than Jehovah. Yes, so if we ignore all of history for the last
5000
years, we might be able to make Stanton's assertion work...sorta.
The greater the education, the MORE likely an individual is to accept
this proposition.
What is interesting here is why 97% of the people who have no clue what
"overwhelming evidence" exists in support of Stanton's beliefs, yet "most"
choose to *blindly* believe in it anyway. And many of those believers are
"highly educated" to boot, yet they too "have no education" when it comes
to the
"mountains of evidence" in favor of their beliefs in UFOs? This sounds so
contradictory but it can't be contradictory because nuclear physicists
would
never contradict themselves with their own arguments now, would they?
But this isn't really about science or facts anyway, is it? What this
appears to
really be all about is that Stanton wants you to believe that only
complete
idiots would NOT believe in the UFO fad/phenomenon. So please, don't be an
idiot
and refuse Stanton's offer to believe, go out and get an education --
preferably
an education in nuclear physics or rocket science -- and then blindly
start
believing in UFOs...or at least pretend you are as intelligent as a rocket
scientist by blindly believing in UFOs.
In an October 25, 1995, Oxford University Debate on the resolution
"Planet Earth is being visited by intelligent extraterrestrial life",
the affirmative side, of which I was a part, garnered 60% of Debate
Union Member votes on the question. Ninety-two percent of 100,000
people calling during a TV Debate in London on June 27,1997, said
Earth has been visited by aliens!
Wow! You mean that the kind of audience that would call in for a show with
a
title like "Planet Earth is being visited by intelligent extraterrestrial
life"
would be composed of almost nothing but believers! That's unbelievable! I
would
have never guessed! With irrefutable facts like that, no wonder no one has
ever
taken Stanton up on his UFO challenge -- either that or they think he
isn't
worth their time or effort.
The problem is NOT that there is not enough evidence to justify my
conclusions; but that most people, especially the noisy negativists,
are unaware of the real, non-tabloid evidence.
Has Stanton ever listed any actual physical evidence instead of the
hearsay from
someone else in some ancient book?
Debunkers seem to employ four major rules:
Oh, good strategy! Now that we've gone over all the "overwhelming
evidence" of
the UFO fad/phenomenon, we are going to attack the debunkers of Stanton's
pet
theory before they attack him first.
What the public doesn't know, we certainly won't tell them.
We? Who is this "we" Stanton alludes to?
The largest official USAF UFO study isn't even mentioned in twelve
anti-UFO books, though every one of those books' authors was aware of
it.
PROJECT BLUEBOOK was mentioned in at least twelve of the anti-UFO books I
read.
Don't bother me with the facts, my mind is made up.
Stanton wouldn't know anything about that now, would he?
If one can't attack the data, attack the people. It is easier.
For example, like your attacking the debunkers instead of attacking the
debunker's data?
Do one's research by proclamation rather than investigation. It is
much easier, and nobody will know the difference anyway.
Well it is working for you, isn't it? If only all of science were that
way.
Imagine what it would be like if all nuclear physicists had that attitude:
Do
neutrinos exist? Why don't we all get together and conduct an opinion
survey and
whatever the most people decide they believe about the existence of
neutrinos,
we will accept as the truth of the matter. Imagine the progress science
would
then make with such an attitude!
Many major media people will concede that if indeed aliens are
visiting earth, that would be a major story. But because they take
great pride in their KNOWLEDGE of major stories, if this were
happening they would know about it. But they don't. Therefore, anybody
who says visits are real must be a crackpot.
I have noted four major reasons why the big names in science and
journalism haven't jumped on the pro-UFO bandwagon:
Ignorance of the data. Scratch a debunker and one usually finds
somebody who is putting down what he is not up on.
Therefore if one debunker is bad, they are all bad? Sorry, that just
doesn't cut
it. Imagine if Stanton were to be honest enough to admit that some
debunkers are
very much up on what they are putting down, why wouldn't he quote those
debunkers and attack their data instead of bullying on the other alleged
debunkers who have no argument anyway? Fear of negative noise? Ignorance
of
their data? What?
Fear of ridicule in sponsoring a thesis (only about ten have been
submitted relating to UFOs) if a professor, or sponsoring a detailed
reportorial investigation if an editor. I check all my audiences and
find that, while in agreement with polls, 10% have had a sighting but
only 5-10% of these witnesses have been willing to report what they
saw. Biggest reason? Fear of ridicule.
Inquiring minds would like to know what kind of things do people ridicule?
If,
as Stanton asserts, that, "most people accept the notion that SOME UFOs
are
alien spacecraft", ie -- that most people believe in UFOs, why in the
world
would they ridicule what they believe in? I mean who cares if a small
minority
of people ridicule your thesis when, according to Stanton's Opinion Poll
"research", you would have most people (92-97%) on your side?
Ego. If aliens were visiting Earth, they would call a press conference
or ask to talk to the National Academy of Sciences. They haven't, so
aliens must not be visiting. Flying saucers finish the job Copernicus
started in taking man out of the middle of the universe. Priests
fought Copernicus's ideas. Today guys in lab coats, rather than
priestly robes, fight alien visitations.
Now Stanton is comparing himself to other geniuses of past, geniuses like
Copernicus? And if certain people fought against geniuses like that way
back
then, then by golly they always have and always will. So guess what?
Stanton is
being "fought against". Might that imply that Stanton is a genius with all
the
facts, hence the reason that some people are against him?
Failure to use our knowledge of technology to understand UFO behavior.
They say "It is impossible," rather than "I don't know how."
A more appropriate response would be "Why play the game of drawing
conclusions
where no physical evidence exists to draw conclusions with?".
Despite the absurd claims of certain ancient academics and fossilized
physicists, it is clear on the basis of solid engineering studies that
trips to nearby stars are feasible with round trip times shorter than
the average person's lifetime -- using, for example, staged fission
and fusion propulsion systems. I have worked on both. It's clear that
technological progress comes from doing things differently in an
unpredictable way. The history of science is littered with challenges,
leveled by people who know nothing about the job at hand, against
traditionally "impossible" claims.
Who is this "they" Stanton alludes to? Someone, please tell us by all
means who
still gives that outdated argument today?
The cult of S.E.T.I. (Silly Effort To Investigate) with its crazy
notions that nobody would travel -- but that aliens, stuck at the
level of radio, are trying to attract our attention -- mocks the
notion of flying saucers, not by dealing with the evidence, but by
proclamations about the ABSENCE of evidence. This ignores science.
Sheesh, now Stanton is resorting to childish name calling. This
"challenge" is
degrading fast, isn't it?
I prove at every lecture that the NSA and CIA are withholding UFO
data.
And is that a proof by filibuster or proof by actual evidence we can hold
in our
hands? Proof by filibuster is a logical fallacy, Stanton.
Having worked under security for fourteen years, visited seventeen
document archives, and having become aware of the huge black budgets
of the NSA, NRO, CIA, DIA, etc., I know how easy it is to keep
secrets.
Stanton should also know that this doesn't prove he knows any actual
secrets,
nor does this make him an expert on authenticating top-secret documents
from the
American government. What Stanton also fails to realize here is that, as
Ronald
N Giere puts it in his textbook, UNDERSTANDING SCIENTIFIC REASONING,
"...the
basic data consist of REPORTS of UFO sightings, not the EXISTENCE of what
was
reported. This distinction is crucial because the fact that some people
have
reported such things has been verified by many investigators. There can be
no
doubt that people have made such reports. That the people in question
actually
saw or experienced what they say they did, however, is open to question"
(pg
166). PROJECT BLUEBOOK is one such example of a collection of mere reports
of
UFOs and not any actual study of some objects. I can think of numerous
other
major, alleged scientific studies that follow under the same logical
fallacy of
failing to verify a phenomenon by collecting reports instead of legitimate
physical evidence. I can now add Stanton Friedman to that list.
My nineteen years of study about crashed saucers, and thirteen years
on the Majestic-12 documents have convinced me these are real.
Real what? What Stanton fails to realize is that his fourteen years of
working
in security doesn't make him an expert on authenticating top-secret
documents
from the American government. This is just another case of THE EMPEROR'S
NEW
CLOTHES only the title has change to THE EMPEROR'S MJ-12 DOCUMENT.
The challenge for us all, as we enter the new millennium, is to
recognize that while our future is in space, we are not alone. I truly
hope we qualify for admission to the Cosmic Kindergarten.
I just hope our first ambassador to ET isn't a UFO researcher.
The Sage
=============================================================
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"The men that American people admire most extravagantly are
most daring liars; the men they detest the most violently are
those who try to tell them the truth" -- H. L. Mencken
=============================================================