originally posted by: introufo2
I'll buy Levendas book--he is a credible established researcher but not Elizondo--- I'll pass.
It will probably sell since most people will be persuaded he is an expert( which he is not) or just the general UFO hoopla may sell the book...
Elizondo is not an expert in UFOs. For example he gave a talk about the photos of UFOs over Washington DC in 1952, which shows his complete
lack of expertise because there were no known photos of those UFOs. One of the UFOs was a radar reflection of a steamship on the river, confirmed by a
pilot sent to search for the souce of the radar reflection.
But Elizondo is an expert in counter-intelligence, which could be described as the art of telling lies, among other things.
The proposition that an alien species could build a space ship and travel to earth is a scientific possibility worth considering and mainstream
scientists search for signs of alien intelligence via SETI. But when people deviate from such a scientific proposition and delve into pseudoscience
such as remote viewing, or worse, claiming that UFOs are angels or demons, those subjects are very far from scientific, and can even be considered
toxic if a scientist were to try to research "was that UFO actually an angel or a demon?". Then we wonder why we don't have good scientists
researching the UFO topic, well that's one reason.
There are some very incompetent "scientists" "researching" UFOs under the guise of SCU, the Scientific Coalition for UAP Studies, though many are not
really scientists like the retired computer programmer that claims the pentagon tic-tac video shows some incredible acceleration of a UFO when in fact
it doesn't show any sudden moves at all, since a competent analysis shows the apparent acceleration is an opitcal illusion. Any decent scientist
should be very embarassed to belong to that organization if they are not going to call out such ridiculous errors published by SCU in a peer review
process.
So the one organization that claims to be scientifically researching UFOs appears not to be very scientific, and what we are left with is entertaining
stories with little or no evidence and often second or third hand accounts which cannot be verified.
In the case of Lue's remote viewing claim, how do we know the man wouldn't have dreamed about angels even if Lue and company hadn't done a remote
viewing experiment? People have dreams, and some of them are about angels, even in the absence of any remote viewing.
But people like hearing entertaining stories, and Lue is a storyteller. I am highly skeptical of anything Lue says, but I may read his book myself
someday anyway, just to see what kind of stories he's telling.
a reply to:
Ophiuchus1
Good one, that's probably more like it!