Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here UFOs | Paranormal | Area 51 People | Places | Random Top 100 | What's New Catalog | New Books Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Our Bookstore is OPEN Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1999 -> Jun -> Here

From: David Clarke <crazydiamonds@compuserve.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 05:23:11 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 02:32:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Max Burns BUFORA Lecture

>From: Roy Hale <roy.hale@virgin.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: Max Burns BUFORA Lecture
>Date: Sun, 13 Jun 1999 22:13:18 +0100



>Hi Joe,

>I would agree with you 100% but I think the point to get across
>here is, that Max is a marked man I dont think this will change
>for a long time to come, I'm sure Max is aware of this.

>Roy..

If Max is a "marked man" it is through his own making, and no
one else's.

If someone persists in making patently ludicrous claims in
spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, they should
expect those  claims to be independently questioned and
scrutinised.

If that scrutiny does not exist inside the subject itself, what
will the outside world make of our standards?

But Max appears to think his material is sacrosanct, and we
should just accept his word without question.
Well tough.

At no stage during the last two years has he took a step down
from his arrogant standpoint, or accepted on one single occasion
that the evidence for his stance over this case does not stand up.
On at least three occasions of which I have recorded evidence,
Max has told witnesses and investigators not to share
information and data about the case with me - and this is the
man who is claiming there is a cover-up over this case!

Not only that, but he continues using testimony on a public
platform that has been completely discredited.

It is his insistance on carrying on with this charade, ever more
ludicrous now in the face of general disbelief even amongst
 hardcore believers, that has placed him in the position that
he finds himself at the moment.

Ask yourself this Roy: What will it take for Max to accept he is
wrong about his interpretation of this case?

He has built it up to such a level of absurdity that he stands to
lose face and reputation (if he has any left) if he compromises
on any of his claims.

This situation has been created by the man himself - any other
objective ufologist would by now have looked at the evidence
once again and found it wanting or changed their opinion.

That is the important lesson of this whole saga: namely, ufoLOGY
needs skeptics.

The UFO community should be grateful that there are people out
there who are willing and able to investigate claims in a
rigorous. objective fashion and accept the often unpalatable
conclusion that "nothing happened."

Skepticism for its own sake is equally unhelpful; but open minds
are fine as long as they are not so open the brain dribbles out!
Belief-driven investigators like Max Burns simply cannot
function in this objective way, which is what leads to the
subject having such a bad reputation.

Ufologists are continually moaning that the outside world
refuses to take it seriously, but is it any small wonder in a
subject so full of loony claims, credulity and lack of objective
investigation?

If it were not for my efforts to get to the bottom of this case,
even further ridicule would no doubt be visited upon the
reputation of British Ufology.

If we can't be honest and open about our own material, how can
be expect anyone out there to take anything we have to say
seriously?

I believe there are enough real mysteries - and yes, unexplained
aerial phenomena too - without making up new ones out of
imagination and wishful thinking.

It's time some of the true believers started getting their house
in order too, and facing the facts.