Which UFO theorists are believable

I have been assigning a BS factor to all theories about conspiracies, UFOs, and paranormal. Like:

BS factor 100% - Blossom Goodchild. Purely for entertainment purposes.
BS factor 50% - This dude has some things right and some wrong.
BS factor 0% - The TRUTH!

So this week I read the latest books by Richard Hoagland and Stanton Friedman.

Richard Hoagland: Dark Mission
Stanton Friedman: Flying Saucers and Science

So Richard Hoagland's theories to me seem to have a high BS factor, maybe 75%. Sometimes he seems almost believable, but he is extremely speculative. He also uses really weird methods, like basically Photoshopping images until he sees something interesting. It does seem he is partially right with NASA covering up something and there possibly being some weird artifacts on the Moon and Mars, but... Mostly I call 75% BS on Hoaxland.

Then again Stanton Friedman seems quite sane. He only sometimes speculates too much, like when he thinks that the aliens are coming from Zeta Reticuli - not enough evidence for this one, I think. He also is strongly biased against the SETI research, although I think SETI would be a good way to get some hard evidence about aliens. You know, the kind of evidence that is approved even by sceptics, those mad cultists of unbelief. So I think now that Stanton Friedman has a relatively low BS factor of only 25%.

So what do you think? Which UFO researchers have a low BS factor? Who should I trust? Whose books should I buy, read, study, and take into my heart?

Jacques F. Vallée has a BS factor very close to zero, if you ask me.
Another one that comes to mind is Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos: what they have in common is that they never deliberately try to pass something as the unique truth: they study the phenomenon in all its complexity then they present the results of their studies in a very detailed way.
Needless to say, their view is skeptic, but not of those blind skeptics that won't believe in aliens even if abducted and brought to some exoplanet .

Here there's a good list of UFO researchers:
www.ufoevidence.org...

Richard Dolan is my favourite so far and his book UFOs and the National Security State. This is an excellent author to get an over view of the UFO phenomenon as it relates to the US and most telling for me, the actions of the US government in covering it up.

BS factor 2% from me.

Originally posted by ukuli
Then again Stanton Friedman seems quite sane. He only sometimes speculates too much, like when he thinks that the aliens are coming from Zeta Reticuli - not enough evidence for this one, I think. He also is strongly biased against the SETI research, although I think SETI would be a good way to get some hard evidence about aliens. You know, the kind of evidence that is approved even by sceptics, those mad cultists of unbelief. So I think now that Stanton Friedman has a relatively low BS factor of only 25%.

Is he actually against SETI or does he feel they aren't doing enough? Most people will say SETI is a waste, but they usually mean that they don't think SETI is doing everything possible (and that's probably due to funding problems and lacking technology). Anyway, I don't see a problem with speculation as long as it's not presented as a fact. Anything that is eventually proven usually starts off as speculation.

So I wouldn't give Stanton Friedman a 25% BS rating, but that's just me.

I'd say Richard Dolan has a BS factor of about 2-3%, and Stanton Friedman has a BS factor of about 10%. Sometimes he is a bit biased, while Dolan most often appears objective about things, while presenting the facts

Originally posted by Shere Khaan
Richard Dolan is my favourite so far and his book UFOs and the National Security State. This is an excellent author to get an over view of the UFO phenomenon as it relates to the US and most telling for me, the actions of the US government in covering it up.

BS factor 2% from me.

Thats a great book from a great researcher

Timothy Good has also done some fine work:


As has John Greenwald Jr:

Google Video Link

All have a bull # factor of zero and are telling the truth.

reply to post by GrayFox


I don't have the book with me right now, but I think Stanton Friedman mentioned a number of reasons why SETI is not a good idea:

- Advanced aliens would probably use something else than radio for communication

- Our ideas about the frequencies and modulations in use might be completely mistaken

- SETI doesn't bother with some stars Friedman thinks that are likely, such as Zeta Reticuli: It was listened to by some other project earlier, which is why SETI doesn't listen to it again

- Friedman thinks it would be better to use SETI money on Ufology, since we already have aliens here, why bother listening to radio

This is just what I remember from the book, so I might misrepresent what he was saying...

Originally posted by ukuli
reply to post by GrayFox

 

I don't have the book with me right now, but I think Stanton Friedman mentioned a number of reasons why SETI is not a good idea:

- Advanced aliens would probably use something else than radio for communication

- Our ideas about the frequencies and modulations in use might be completely mistaken

- SETI doesn't bother with some stars Friedman thinks that are likely, such as Zeta Reticuli: It was listened to by some other project earlier, which is why SETI doesn't listen to it again

- Friedman thinks it would be better to use SETI money on Ufology, since we already have aliens here, why bother listening to radio

This is just what I remember from the book, so I might misrepresent what he was saying...

This is an interesting read.
Stanton Friedman's SETI challenge:
www.v-j-enterprises.com...

The basic rules for the lack of attention to the relevant data by well educated, but ignorant-about-UFOs-professionals, especially SS, seem to be:

1. Don't bother me with the facts, my mind is made up.

2. What the public doesn't know, I won't tell them.

3. If one can't attack the data, attack the people; it is much easier.

4. Do one's research by proclamation. Investigation is too much trouble and nobody will know the difference anyway.

None of them are creditable IMHO.

Jacques Valle is one of the few professional honest and ethical UFO investigators ever. That's wh, in his last couple books he politely said it's a con and most of his peers are either well intentiond but delusional, or outright con artists.

Then you get to an academic loser like Stanton Friedman who gets undeserved media attention and some low level celebrity status out of the interest level. These frauds know they have to push the buttons people expect or no one buys their books or pays them to go on talk shows.

There may be alien intelligences among us now, and we aren't even aware or able to communicate with them. How do you talk to or see a complex algorithm, a cluster of highly organized electronic activity, etc.

The flying saucers hovering in the atmosphere observing, with humanoid types behund a high tech steering wheel os straight from bad 50s movies, and has pretty much played itself out. After a zillion photos, accounts, video footage, still not one solid undisputable piece of evidence.

But a lot of guys making a career trying to convince you it's coming.

In the 18th Centruy they were looking for evidence of angels and fairies, in the 19th Century they looked for ghosts. The 20th Century it was aliens.

A lot of unexplained mysteries on earth, many in the ocean. So far nothing to indicate beyond the hypothetical, that any life form from another planet has entered our atmosphere.


Mike F

Mikesingh B.S factor =0 thats my entry I believe everything the man says no matter what
Second line, same answer as above but this time

[edit on 12-1-2009 by alyosha1981]

Michael Horn is 100% BS, stay away from this guy. Unless you want a laugh, just email him and say you don't believe the Meier case, then sit back and await the abuse.