Richard Dolan and the Roswell Slides

a reply to: ignorant_ape

I don't have a problem with you or any other veterans here dissecting Mr Dolan. Those are just your opinions and stances. What I have a problem with, is someone creating a new account for the sole purpose of slamming someone (right or wrong) its bad form. Its perfectly clear that he created an account here JUST to throw dirt on Mr Dolan. Its also perfectly clear that he has a personal vendetta against Mr Dolan. I seriously doubt he'll post in any other threads on ATS. He has an ax to grind and hes beating that horse well past its expiration date.

a reply to: JimOberg

I was not addressing "subconscious" attitudes nor a "inevitable" fog related to observing and analyzing the unexplained cases.

I truly believe that those conclusions and my own assertion speak for themselves. But we can lift it a little and see what may be underneath (even without touching on a very important aspect of this, which is the actual number of anomalous cases - a bit higher than some conveniently consider).

While science is constantly evolving and explanations of phenomena are subject to change, while the territory of the object of study of science is also subject to change (most notably, enlargement), I am of the opinion that the anomalous ufo cases will NOT be explained as natural phenomena (common, rare or odd) - ever - given how stable our knowledge of some of the pillars of the universe is.

We're left with the obvious candidates for explaining those anomalous cases.

a) UFO's are of human origin
b) UFO's are NOT of human origin

If we are dealing with anomalies caused by Man, then we must take into account the following:
1. Some of the anomalous cases date back to the mid-1930's. [Those who are willing to learn and understand what I am referring to should dive into documented cases in countries such as Spain and Portugal. I am aware, however, that similar cases have been discovered in other countries. But these two countries alone raise questions that till today baffle those that look into them.]
2. The capabilities of the unidentified objects far surpass anything human beings had developed, particularly in the 30's, 40's and 50's.

The above has serious implications. What are we dealing here, with an unbelievably advanced branch of the German, US and Soviet (keep in mind the decades I mention above) military? If so, the obvious questions:
1- why did the Third Reich lose the war, when they could have dealt a deadly blow at the heart of the US, UK or the USSR?
2- why then use the atom bomb? Why allow millions to die due to attrition war, carpet bombings, atomic bombings and in concentration camps?
3- why didn't the Soviets strike at the US if indeed they possessed such technology? Was the threat of mutual nuclear annihilation enough? Somehow, I doubt it.
4- why go the moon (boldly, no doubt) in such a fragile manner and with absurdly low computational power (by today's standards)? Why haven't we gone more frequently, permanently, to the Moon and beyond?
5- Who funds these "advanced" branches of the military? Where's the money? Where is the supervision, where are the oversight committees?
6- MOST importantly: why not use such technologies to save lives instead?

If we are dealing with something caused by non-human entities, the consequences will have tremendous (revolutionary?) weight on human societies due to the questions raised in regards to security, religious beliefs and science itself.

Plus, and most importantly, we, The People (all over the planet) will know governments, elected by us, using our money, have been hiding something of significant impact (perhaps with further consequences due to keeping off-limits technology that might have saved millions affected by health problems and natural disasters).

Either way, of human origins or otherwise, we have a Pandora's Box in front of us and we must deal with it.

---

Finally, what I wasn't referring to with my previous posts:

no, I would not subconsciously ASSUME anything. Subconsciously "assuming" things is the mark of bad science and bad data analysis. We may have a theory that seemingly explains some phenomenon quite well; if an anomaly is found and the theory is unable to explain it, we either modify it or we scrap it.

No "subconscious assumptions" are needed in science and for men and women with real intellectual honesty.

Everyday life demonstrates to us that the existence of a residue -- I use the term deliberately and non-prejudicially -- of 'unexplainED' events cannot alone be reasonably used to demand the existence of a fundamentally non-explainABLE stimulus.

On the contrary, you shouldn't use the "fog-factor of of all human-related activities" to demand the dismissal of unexplained events. What you can effectively dismiss as "human-factor" is already part of the explainED-part of the "ufo anomalies". Whatever persists as fundamentally non-explainable should demand a more rigorous, truly scientific attitude than simply dismiss events/data as being as "human related" (mischaracterized).

What's more, the real interesting thing you passed over is what I mentioned as the basis for my own conclusions.

I was not talking about folk tales or some "excited eye-witness" accounts, or the pseudo-investigations led by a certain sector of "ufologists" or the ramblings of authors whose livelihood depends on the fantastic hypothesis delivered on their books.

NO, I was/am talking about actual research with scientific methods, diligent and accurate, long enough to observe, collect and analyze a significant number of "anomalies", done by military and scientists in different countries.

originally posted by: Telos

originally posted by: -Blackout-
Dolan has been a respected pillar of the UFO community for a long time and all of this seems so weird to me.

I used to think the same about Dolan until the moment when he and some of the same group went high wire on the idea of the ufo underneath Giza pyramid and how it would materialize from another dimension. That's when I lost not only respect (obviously the materialization never happened) but also started doubting everything he ever said on UFO matters. I remember trying to communicate with him via e-mail about the whole ufo from another dimension thingy and I recall getting a reply that was absolutely a reply but a words play. Things like that have made ufo subject laughable such as it is today. Agenda or not, I don't know. All I know is that the majority of the so called researchers at one point in time have said and done things that have hurt not just the acceptance of the phenomena but the whole ufo community.

I think quite often in Ufology, people don't learn to just stay in their lane. Dolan's lane is researching the government's historical interest in UFOs. That's his wheelhouse. You used to be more measured and based in facts. Dolan gets in trouble, IMO, when he branches out and starts speculating and talking about stuff he probably should stay away from, like other dimensions, or ancient aliens, or talking about the slides and things like that. He shouldn't allow himself to get roped into that stuff. But like most things, when money gets involved, it tends to poison the whole thing. Far be it for me to tell him to turn down a bunch of cash to show up on some TV show though. He's allowed himself to be a part of some terrible presentations and TV shows lately that take away from his credibility. And I do generally find him to be a credible voice, for the most part.

a reply to: -Blackout-

Me also respect Richard Dolan very much but he must be aware of the perfect liers that knock on his door. And I am afraid he is being drawn to much towards the esotheric side of the alternative science community. He should keep presenting himself as a neutral and objective researcher/historian/reporter and not become an active defender of stuff that can not be regarded as fact (yet).

As for these slides... I think he relied on the word and reputation of one of these guys, Don Schmitt or Tom Carey.

UH OH!!!!

originally posted by: zatara
a reply to: -Blackout-

Me also respect Richard Dolan very much but he must be aware of the perfect liers that knock on his door. And I am afraid he is being drawn to much towards the esotheric side of the alternative science community. He should keep presenting himself as a neutral and objective researcher/historian/reporter and not become an active defender of stuff that can not be regarded as fact (yet).

As for these slides... I think he relied on the word and reputation of one of these guys, Don Schmitt or Tom Carey.

Esoteric does dot mean fraudulent material.

The fact that one does accept fraud as truth means they are NOT esoteric for esoteric only means inward reality…something nearer to reality it is the opposite of exoteric( outward)


If Dolan has been hoodwinked then he should fess up

Unfortunately you are way off. When you advertise something for sale you better deliver it or you are committing Fraud. They sold "Proof of the Roswell Alien, they delivered old vacation slides" FRAUD! Esoteric does not apply in the least.

I think some are being a little too hard on Dolan. He was right about the slides being real. They are real, and they are slides of a mummy, as I understand it. I don't think he ever signed off on them being aliens. "May be", or "could be" aren't saying they are aliens.

I think we need to give a little leeway to these guys for researching areas that others say are fake in hindsight. I'm glad he got involved, and that brought some more attention, and possibly some more scrutiny to figure out the truth of the slides. He admits they were not alien, and certainly isn't a strike against him for getting involved and giving the organizers the benefit of the doubt.

originally posted by: batmmannn
UH OH!!!!

Did Dolan say they couldn't be a mummy?

I think the criticism of Richard Dolan is "being hard" as he once said to me in a C2C Toronto appearance a few years ago. Richard is a good man.

I met him in Toronto at a C2C appearance He, Noory and Freidman were there. I asked Freidman about the Dulce Base phenomena. He said it was "rubbish". I later asked Dolan that same question. He said there could be something substantial there. I reiterated Freidman's comment to Dolan, he was sympathetic and said "That is just Stanton being hard". Dolan also made an earlier appearance in Toronto previously of that year. But he was a member of the audience(I had better a seat than did, He sat in the nose-bleed section). He paid out of his own pocket to attend that C2C event. That indicated to me that he is a humble man and had no airs about him. Dolan was willing to sit among the masses, the other UFO followers without hesitation. He has earned my respect and trust by these moments of humbleness.

I think the Mexican exhibition was deemed a failure because the event didn't sell out as it was planned to. Leslie Kean made some retraction on the genuine aspect of the Roswell slides a few months prior to the Jamie Mussaun sponsored event.

I give Richard Dolan a mulligan on this fiasco.

A new great idea for their next scam to bring in the Big Bucks!

originally posted by: batmmannn
A new great idea for their next scam to bring in the Big Bucks!

Thank goodness I never had an ex-girlfriend who had graphic design skills.

a reply to: RossWellOldMexico

um, well, yeah...

Here's someone tweeting about your "Good Man" Richard Dolan... Check it out.
Richard Dolan the Good Family Man

originally posted by: batmmannn
Here's someone tweeting about your "Good Man" Richard Dolan... Check it out.
Richard Dolan the Good Family Man

Maybe I'm not following. What am I supposed to be seeing?

a reply to: taxed

In a word. Libel.
But since it's on twitter, it doesn't count.
Seems Dolan got someone's panties in a serious bunch.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

any one else confused ????????????

maybee its my flexible moral compass - but i am struggling to comprehend how mr dolans serial adultries [ with , assumed for this argument consenting adults ] has any bearing on this ?????????????

the VALID reasons why mr dolans role in this farce are abhorent have been laid out in many posts in many threads

this [ citing him as an adulterer ] is a IMHO scraping the barrel of prudishness

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: taxed

In a word. Libel.
But since it's on twitter, it doesn't count.
Seems Dolan got someone's panties in a serious bunch.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

It's a little too weird. I've had crazy ex-girlfriends less obsessive than this.