These blogs are, as always, just thoughts that come to mind. I am not aiming my remarks at serious researchers of UFOs. I always welcome contact from them -we are a rare breed after all. Bare that in mind when reading this.
I was not surprised to find that a number of CE3K/AE cases
from the United States
have turned out to be hoaxes perpetrated by ufologists. I am aware of a very strong rumour that
certain American debunkers -not sceptics who look at the evidence but people who
debunk, probably out of fear- have "seeded" one or two fake cases to
draw in ufologists who can then be humiliated for having fallen for "an
obvious and deliberate hoax".
In the UK
it has been known that at least on TV company has had plans, with debunkers, to
carry out a similar hoax.
Let me make it very clear that none of this is backed by the
governments of the United Kingdom
or the United states . This comes from an idea by debunkers (who are
people just scared of the possibility of what the phenomenon means) and TV
people who do not give a damn so long as it is “sexy TV”.
Why call yourself a “ufologist” is you are sceptical to the
point of simply debunking? Get out of the subject if it is all fake or admit
that you are in it to make money and for the publicity.
The state ufology has been in goes back to before the 1990s.
I heard and read of Max Burns and his search for evidence that an RAF Tornado
crashed in 1997 –the initial report of a “flying triangle” UFO has become…not
even a side issue. RAF aircraft have
crashed over the years. It happens. What I was ‘slightly’ surprised at is how so
called prominent British ufologists behaved.
If you read the following, printed in full on a number of blogs, wait
until you reach the “Stage 7: Hoaxing to Orders” part. If that does not change
your mind about British ufology then your reality check must be a Dr Who story.
How does all of this affect the CE3K/AE project you ask –or
I hope you do. Since the 1970s I kept
all correspondence with ufologists, prominent or otherwise. I also kept files on these people and their
groups. Almost 40 years of background information and it is what led me to shun
ufology.
The 1978 Frodsham “Cow-measuring” report I had up-dated and
then received two emails (“Truthseeker47” and “The Frod-sham-man”) the first in
2015 simply said: “Regarding the Frodsham cow case. I hear you are looking into
it. You will get nowhere. It never happened”. No response from the emailer later. The other email was three months ago: “I see
you mentioned the Frodsham case. Why?!
Don’t you know it was a hoax?” Again, no response when I emailed back.
In that The Usual
Suspects: Anatomy of a Disinformation Campaign in Ufology Andy Roberts
admitted that he and other prominent British Ufologists had “seeded” fake reports since the
1980s. My information is that this
started much earlier. Roberts flatly refused to state which cases had been faked and for what purpose which indicates that any -any- reports with certain names attached should be suspect. I do not care
about Ufologists or their petty arguments.
There is only one thing I am interested in and that is the information
and data. Unless others have spoken to
certain witnesses/percipients then I need to add a very large question mark to
many cases from the late 1970s on.
For the record I did message Max Burns twice to get more information and I also messaged Clarke and Roberts but received no responses.
The Berwyn Mountains UFO crash. Firstly, this was not the crash of an unknown type of craft but an earthquake and the facts about this are scientifically acknowledged. Ufologists want to add faulty memories and faking into the mix so we can have another "British Roswell". I have already related the account of the Wales based Ufologist and conspiracy nut who out of the blue demanded in an email that I turn over all paperwork and materials relating to my work on Welsh 'UFO crashes'. Oh, and I had to do so immediately. This person identified me as a Ufologist living in Wales who had appeared out of the blue to sabotage his "great work" and that I was obviously a "security services stooge". I did respond politely to this person and sent him my full Cv as well as the chapter from my book on the subject in question. I was unaware that he was unable to read (I assume) since he continued his "man out of nowhere" storyline and some UFO groups also continued to publish the story. I ought to add that these UFO groups let alone the people running them never existed when I started in UFOs in 1974.
My background is well known and Margaret Sachs in her (1983?) UFO Encyclopedia has an entry on me and I am still known in European as well as American Ufology and I have written well over 50 articles on ball lightning, CE3K and AE reports, aircraft-UFO encounters (in FSR) and given lectures and talks. But the mind of a conspiracy theorists and Ufological cronies is not set in a real work.
It is also a European Ufology thing; there are three Spanish CE3K cases from
1966/1967 that are still being quoted and used as ‘evidence’ despite my
attempts over six years to get people to understand they are hoaxes –but that
means giving up “good cases” so that means keep on quoting. In Spain these
cases were known to be hoaxes in the 1960s but Vallee and company continue to
use them. Oddly, one of the cases was known to Spanish investigators who would not name the "prominent Ufologist" responsible
for the hoaxing. I think that "unknown report" (which they had details of?) and the source reveals who did
what. You see, a big light in the sky is
‘proof’ of extra-terrestrials but the known source of hoax reports…well,
“concrete evidence” is apparently not available.
At times I almost give in.
We have organisations promoting themselves as "scientific
truth seekers" but are only interested in money and publicity. Their organisation heads switch and change
beliefs dependent on what prominent paying members are pushing –abductions,
orbs –whatever. Investigators are asked
to change reports to fit in with the current money-making trend (shades of the
Bigfoot Field Researchers Organisation and the scandal that rocked them) while
senior members seem to go unpunished over open racist remarks and even worse behaviour.
There is the “it ain’t gonna make us money so screw you”
attitude hidden behind a statement that when used by the United States
Air Force saw them vilified (MUFON): “The case was too long ago to open an investigation at
this date”. But if I investigate and discover a great case I can hand it
over to them (TV beckons).
This is why Science will not take ufology seriously. Ufology
constantly jumps and shifts to whatever trend is “hot” –and makes money. Sensationalise reports and jump deep into
some fantasy about "mysterious intelligences behind orbs" and then indignantly
pout and scowl at the camera and growl: “Science will not take us seriously!” Ufologists have now been called "UFO fans" in documentaries and TV items for over a decade and they are UFO "fans" -and some act like zealots and if you state that you do not believe that battles are taking place in space around Earth -a real life Star Wars- then you will be attacked online and become the victim of trolling. Clearly recorded (on video) flares ARE a small fleet of extra-terrestrial craft and if you say they were not -the zealots move in. You do not accept the mass abduction of millions of Earth people by "Grey" aliens for generations which defies all logic and -out come the zealots.
Facts mean nothing because giving those facts make YOU part of the cover-up. The very dubious Ufologists will even use their social media such as Twitter and Face Book to stir up their followers and actively encourage online attacks or attempts to make a 'critics' social media unviable. They encourage (with a nod and a wink) online fantasy posts created about their 'critics'.
There is a reason for there being peer review in
science. Others can test your theories
and data and will either say “The claim is correct” or “We have some doubts on
this aspect –can you clarify?” We have seen that this has never been the case within Ufology.
This is why I say that Ted Philips’ trace case evidence
should be widely available; it needs peer reviewing to make its case. What I have seen of the cases listed, and it is a rather brief list, known hoaxes are included as are reports from pre-1900 that cannot even be proven to have actually happened.
Jacques Vallee the "must never be questioned" godfather of Ufology; his Landing case catalogue is so full of hoaxes and misidentifieds -some known as such before they were even placed into his listing- going back decades. Some historical reports he has promoted in his works simply never happened and I proved that by going to the claimed sources, hoping to get extra information.
None of this is new because when I was going through as many sources as possible for The British Report on UFOs one case after another was negated as having no back-up or original source reference. Desmond Leslie (a former editor of Flying Saucer Review) and George Adamski's book, The Flying Saucers Have Landed , was so full of misquotes and downright fake-up reports that it had to be excluded as any type of reference.
A very prominent American Ufologist and author actually told me, quite openly in an email, that specific cases still quoted today were from a "well known" flying saucer hoaxer who came up with "all sorts of stories". He has never set the record straight.
We have the deliberately faked accounts from Ufologists -not just aimed at deceiving other Ufologists but everyone. In the UK Eric Morris faked symbols allegedly seen during (equally faked) UFO abductions cases. he faked documents and even physically threatened people and yet was a regular guest at UFO events and very likely colluded with well known Ufologists to fake reports. Someone who worked with him during the late 1970s and early 1980s clued me in on a lot of what was going on but then left Ufology after threats from Morris. During the 1990s when I got the evidence that Morris was hoaxing I received a phone call from him threatening to kill me -police had words with him. However, after he died Morris was still being hailed as a great Ufologist.
J. Allen Hynek, who was a trained astronomer and who served
as a scientific advisor for Project Blue Book, was initially skeptical of UFO
reports, but eventually came to the conclusion that many of them could not be
satisfactorily explained and was highly critical of what he described as:
"the cavalier disregard by Project Blue Book of the principles of
scientific investigation."
Hynek, J. Allen (1972). The UFO Experience: A Scientific Inquiry.
One could legitimately write "the cavalier disregard by
Ufology of the principles of scientific investigation." It would be very
accurate. But even now Dr Hynek's work with Blue Book and his involvement with UFOs has been heavily fictionalised for TV shows and online the barrier between entertainment and reality are blurred.
Budd Hopkins I was an original supporter and promoter of his abduction work and furnished him with material and some sponsors. Then I realised that his work was not making much sense but he told me that everything he published was being peer reviewed. A quick check proved that was not true and as he went further and further into his topic so claims became far more outlandish. He -against all principles on evidence gathering- "decked the cards" in favour of what he was promoting and later it was even out-rightly proven that he had lied to the world when it was revealed that his star witness, Linda Cortile made phone calls to him pretending to be someone else and even faked documents which Hopkins endorsed as real.
Dr David M. Jacobs I also supported in articles and talks until things began to seep through that something was very wrong. It later transpired that he and Hopkins would often discuss abductions and cases and work out numbers of abductees based on their tainted work. Later still Jacobs claimed that "If you see a UFO then you were abducted!" and that in itself can spark any number of false abduction reports. What was then revealed about Jacobs' private practices was a big enough of a scandal to have destroyed anyone working professionally in a genuine field of research.
Jacobs and Hopkins are still looked upon as legitimate researchers who cannot be questioned. Then we have Vallee, Phillips and all the others who have become deities in the UFO religion who cannot be questioned and when you do prove something they promoted was incorrect you become the government patsy out to destroy UFO truth seekers. The real truth seekers either left the field or carried on working privately because they were attacked or ridiculed.
The X-Files, Dark Skies and most other sci fin TV shows and movies are not reality based they are fiction. A star-like dot filmed moving in the sky proves nothing at all. It could be anything other than an extra-terrestrial craft.
The "major UFO Waves" of the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s probably never happened. The 1954 UFO wave falls to pieces once you look into it and when you consider that probably 97% of the cases then as well as 19578 and 1964/1965 and 1973 were never even investigated you realise how you have been deceived through blind belief in "noted Ufologists" and their works.
You begin to see how rare actual UFO (ie constructed looking craft) events are. You see how rare alleged abductions are. You will also note how unscientific and ill educated Ufology/Ufologists are and if you offer a checkable and therefore provable solution to an incident you will be met with silence, anger at your attempt to call their work into question or, again, being a government patsy. They will always make it seem that you are attacking them when you are not because that distracts from the facts of the case and allows them to stir up their devotees -especially in the internet age.
I can see a point when the brain-washed "Ufology drones" will accept at their word ex-government people who kept UFO secrets from them and will attack true researchers who question those people -it is already happening. The deceiver becomes the truth seeker and the truth seeker becomes the deceiver (in their eyes). There is and never will be any "UFO Disclosure" (we have been waiting 22 years now for this "imminent event") because no world government knows what UFOs are. No world government has crashed saucer wreckage or alien bodies. This is fantasy added to by false memories as well as hoaxing and faking by Ufologists.
It is entertainment and money making and the same applies to the alleged events at Marley Woods and Skinwalker ranch.
I am not
attacking serious researchers though I do note that there are not that many prominent in Ufology -not since the 1990s. I am quite
sure that there are some out there but at times they must look around and ask
“Am I the only one being serious?” I do
wonder that some times but….
I see that a case I investigated and presented evidence on
(see Unidentified
– Identified for the details) –the 1987 or was it 1988(?)
Nottinghamshire UFO crash is now being presented as a proven and is so
full of fantasy and fiction that watching a video presentation on the case I
had to triple check it was the same incident.
No house was “partially demolished” by the way. The "main" investigator in that case was not the ones promoting themselves today. It was me. I was in contact with police, fire services and many others and presented the evidence to the inexperienced |UFO investigators who concurred with my conclusion -in writing (see the book for details).
“Flying saucer” reports are not dropping in number. They were never
as frequent as bad ufology reported. “Orb sightings are taking over from flying saucer reports” is such a false
statement that it shows bad ufology at work: these “orbs” were always counted
as “UFOs”/flying saucers in the past but Ufologists did their investigations
from armchairs and via news-clippings.
Now, of course, as MUFON will tell you, “Orbs are just so de rigueur”
Checking, double-checking and triple checking CE3K/AE
accounts is proving the rarity of these incidents. Sadly, Mexico and South America I cannot even
begin to touch on because there has been so much fakery, sensationalism and
lack of real investigation in the past; some cases plain do not exist and
others –still included in ufology despite having been proven hoaxes decades
ago.
This is now a millennial hobby or a money earner for some (just as the paranormal and Bigfoot or cryptozoology is). Why leave your room –copy and paste what
someone else copied and pasted from the fella who copied and pasted it before
him. Oh, add the odd detail that does not exist in the original source
because you know that your audience does not read serious books…or books in
general unless they are sensationalist trash.
I have, on a number of occasions, asked blogging Ufologists for the page
number of an item they quoted or even the source quoted (and we are talking
about some very prominent Ufologists as well).
They could only give me “Oh, I took the report from such-and-such a
site” (the exact name of which they cannot recall but "it had something about UFOs") or even “I’ve never seen the book but if you find out more info let me
know!” or the best "A person I know told me about having read the details online".
In June 1957 J. P. Herraerd of Antwerp , Belgium
Copy and paste that one. How serious is interest today in genuine double and triple checked UFO incidents or UFO history? Sales of the AOP Journal were so low I stopped publishing. The books -ditto. John Hanson has put together the best UFO source books -some incidents previously unknown- with his Haunted Skies series but struggles for sales. In the meantime the liars (proven) and fakers (proven) appear on TV, podcasts and events and sell box loads of their trash info books.. Ufology is serious?
It is entertainment. There are some very questionable things going on in Ufology today where those who covered up and lied to the public about UFOs have come out into the open and make assertions and they are the new people to have UFO cults surround them. The people who have worked hard to get at the truth are now the targets of these people because they are being guided by the former deceivers. Stop. Take a deep breath and think about it and it almost seems like the susceptible have been gas-lighted and turned and are accepting the former deceivers at their word and directing hate, accusations and more at those openly questioning facts.
You are being deceived.
"Trust no one" is a good motto to have. Check, double-check and quadruple check sources. Or just sit back and let social media, Ufology and the deceivers educate you.
I conclude with an image from a recent MUFON convention
No comments:
Post a Comment