Bob Casanova wrote:

...nothing new,

Cassy, let's start at the beginning, YOUR SIDE, you know, the side of
hedge hogs, ball lightning, crash test dummies and stealth blimps,
have failed miseably.  At best there are a handful of debunkers on
This Planet Earth.  We know who they are and we let them continue, for
their own sake!!!

The 3 Golden Rules of the Debunker/Anyone Can Become One!--Even You!

     You've seen them on television talk shows, you've read them in
Parade magazine (hint-hint), now you would like to be one too.  Of
course we are talking about the fine art of "debunking".   You say you
don't have a science degree from Harvard or Stanford, no problem,
anyone can be a debunker.  Although real professionals make it sound
so easy, you can learn "right now" the skills of this noble
profession.  Discover the secrets in three easy-to-learn lessons.
Write them down and practice the instructions until they become second
nature, and even you can earn your "Degree" in de-bunkology.

     First off, why would you want to become a debunker?  It's simple,
really.  The other side has all the good evidence in their favor.
When you stack up the voluminous amount of exemplary "science" that
has been done on crop circles, animal mutilations, human abductions,
government cover-ups, crash retrievals, landing sites, artifacts,
implants, sightings, video analysis, . . . well you get the picture,
we can't really substantially argue against the data.  The amount of
really first-rate evidence is overwhelming in the positive for proving
the existence of extraterrestrial life interfacing with the planet
Earth.

     So we have to resort to the three "D's": deny, dispute and
debunk.  First "deny" there is anything there, when that fails, go to
"dispute" the facts, and then as a last resort: "debunk" everything.
It's easy and quite "necessary" really to maintain a functioning
society and avoid economic disintegration, which would certainly
follow the announcement of beings from other Planets regularly
visiting ours.  Many industries would become obsolete over-night,
including energy, transportation, chemicals and many more.  Free-
Energy alone would put the oil, nuclear, and coal industries out of
business.  Although that would be for the good for ALL mankind since
it would reduce the amount of global warming and ozone depletion that
these industries contribute to.

And now: the three Golden rules of the UFO debunker:

1) Attack the person not the evidence.  ---- As listed above, the
preponderance of evidence to establish the existence of
extraterrestrials and their other-worldly crafts is overwhelming.  So
instead of acknowledging the evidence, ATTACK the persons'
credibility.  Call them "crackpots" and "lunatics."  If they don't
have a college degree, assault them for that.  If they do have a
degree, even a Ph. D. ask them the relevance of it to the subject
matter.  To quote Vince Lombardi: "The best defense is a good offense"
so be offensive.  Perhaps use a Phil Klass technique, and declare
people who claim to have been abducted by aliens,  "little nobodies,
people seeking celebrity status."  That usually pisses a bunch of
people off.  Another Phil Klass technique which is also very clever,
(as quoted from the Don Ecker radio talk show) just yell out this nice
expletive: "BULLSHIT" and hang up the phone.  That leaves the audience
bewildered and bothered,
and makes you look like the Authority-Figure.

2) Have a closed mind or "Don't bother me with the facts my mind is
made up." --- Unfortunately, sometimes you will have to address the
evidence.  It can be quite ugly and you really don't want to hear it.
So rule #2 is keep a stiff upper lip, perhaps roll your eyes and just
drown out the other person when they are trying to make a point or
quote a statistic.   Try to dismiss the facts, here is another quote
from the Messiah, Phil Klass, "Even airline pilots can be grossly
mistaken."  Wow!  Would you really want to fly commercially if that
was true, I sure wouldn't.  But by the time the audience tries to
figure out what you meant, just move on to another one liner, such as
"Wrong, wrong, wrong!"

Now, whom is the audience going to believe someone who just
illuminated a point by using some great research, or you, the
"debunker" who only has to say "wrong, wrong, wrong."  You may try
throwing in some obscure references and words like "confabulation."
Gets them every time!

3) Come up with any kind of flimsy explanation, it makes people feel
better.  Yes students, it's still really potent, spouting a reason
that lacks substance.  Remember, American's are science-illiterates,
and they wouldn't know an isotope from ice cream, or an electron from
a election. So razzle-dazzle them with b.s.  Here are a bunch of
official-sounding  denials that lack merit, but sound plausible: swamp
gas (but only where there's swamps!), atmospheric mumbo-jumbo,
temperature inversions, funny looking clouds, planets, hallucinations,
shadows and light, smoke and mirrors,  mistaken this or that, hoaxes,
and that old standby, "Doug and Dave" which was recently used capably
in Parade magazine by you know whom!!!!! (He is deceased now but his
memory lives on!)

     Once you've mastered these three golden rules - you can be a
debunker too, and have a degree in 'Debunkology."  There will be a
test given so study and practice.

UPDATES:  Other techniques of the debunkers:  A) Ask for endless
references.
This technique only purpose is to stall for time and lulls the
audience to sleep!
B) What the public doesn't know - we won't tell them.  Obviously, the
Pentagon who is in control of the "Black Budget" has a greater data-
base than most researchers, and they are keeping that information to
themselves.  The collaboration between certain
Military Contractors, the Pentagon, Private Individuals with
Intelligent Agency
Connections are the ones who have kept this information outside of
reach.

Thank you Stanton Friedman for all you have contributed to discovering
the real truth.

A reader added the following Golden Rules of the UFO Debunker
(Graduate Program):

1.)  Guilt by association. The idea of this tactic is to directly or
indirectly yoke UFO research to more bizarre areas. For example:

a)  Psychics; especially those of the amazing Kreskin variety.

b)  Witchcraft, voodoo, apparitions, snake handlers, spiritualism, and
other Bovine eschatology. Everyone loves a good ghost story.

c)  Parapsychology. ESP, Imply sickness of the mind.

d)  Linkage to elaborate and incredulous conspiracy theories
rather than facts. Sows lots of doubt and makes UFOs consigned to the
lunatic fringe.

e)  Imply a tradition rooted in mythology and spiritual fairy tales.
Employ false exegesis of various religious scriptures for support. Why
not blame the devil?

f)  Gather UFO support from extremist groups, assorted crackpots,
criminals, secret societies, cults,,...etc..


2.) Misinformation.

a) Encourage men with "credibility" to testify of Government cover-
ups, secrecy, and collusion with alien malefactors. The idea here is
that the most dangerous lie is the one closest to the truth. Somewhat
like offering a fine steak laced with just a bit of arsenic. However,
to be real good at this you need reliable source of true information.
Lacking this offer a creative theory of your own; no doubt someone
else will embrace it.


3.) False bifurcation.

a) Make people choose between limited and unacceptable alternative
"either-or" explanations.

4.) "Totalism"

a) Encourage the belief that a theory is entirely true or entirely
false. No grey areas permitted. Use this to promote heated and bitter
debates between UFO researchers. Make people draw lines between
science and chicanery over minute differences of understanding.


5.) Straw man attack.

a) Fashion a dummy position held by a UFO researcher. Then proceed to
rip it apart. Many will discredit the researcher on this false
premise.

6.)  Whipping Boy.

a) When a UFO researcher is caught in some error, use this as a
platform to debunk the field.

Warning: Prospective graduates are going to have to work at this
degree. No matchbook universities or mail-order sheepskins here!

Thanks to  Joe Byczko for the Graduate Program!
byczko@gdc.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thirteen Techniques for Truth Suppression
by David Martin

Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring
down
a government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based
defense,
other techniques must be employed. The success of these techniques
depends
heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token
opposition
party.

1. Dummy up. If it's not reported, if it's not news, it didn't happen.

2. Wax indignant. This is also known as the "how dare you?" gambit.

3. Characterize the charges as "rumors" or, better yet, "wild rumors."
If,
     in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn
about
     the suspicious facts, it can only be through "rumors."

4. Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspect of the
weakest
     charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild
rumors
     and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the
charges, real
     and fanciful alike.

5. Call the skeptics names like "conspiracy theorist," "nut,"
"ranter,"
     "kook," "crackpot," and of course, "rumor monger." You must then
     carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you
have
     thus maligned.

6. Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting
     strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are
     simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make
money.

7. Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition
can
     be very useful.

8. Dismiss the charges as "old news."

9. Come half-clean. This is also known as "confession and avoidance"
or
     "taking the limited hang-out route." This way, you create the
     impression of candor and honesty while you admit only to
relatively
     harmless, less-than-criminal "mistakes." This stratagem often
requires
     the embrace of a fall-back position quite different from the one
     originally taken.

10. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as
     ultimately unknowable.

11. Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With
     thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is
irrelevant. For
     example: We have a completely free press. If they know of
evidence that
     the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) had prior
knowledge
     of the Oklahoma City bombing they would have reported it. They
haven't
     reported it, so there was no prior knowledge by the BATF. Another
     variation on this theme involves the likelihood of a conspiracy
leaker
     and a press that would report it.

12. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely. For example:
If
     Vince Foster was murdered, who did it and why?

13. Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or
reporting a
     distraction.

http://www.Public-Action.com/SkyWriter/WacoMuseum
or http://206.55.8.10/SkyWriter/WacoMuseum
SkyWriter@Public-Action.com
Postal Address: Carol A. Valentine, Public Action, Inc., PO Box 10933,
Burke, VA 22009