Stanton friedman, michio kaku, niel degrasse. Are they all disinformationists?

Michio Kaku stated in one of his interviews that if we were to find intelligent extraterrestrial life that the public should NOT be informed.

Neil Degrasse is on the typical "there is no proof" argument about extraterrestrial life.

Stanton Friedman talks a lot about ufo's, but for every statement he makes that could possibly support ufo's, he makes another statement that is twice as skeptical.


Personally i dont listen to these talking heads, they are all just full of B.S. to me..

reply to post by BanMePlz

Ehh I have caught Kaku saying some questionable stuff but I think that these scientist can't say what they really think for fear of going under fire by their peers

Hey, you forgot Carl Sagan!

Nah, these are just people who are scientists. But they also have great personalities and are great at explaining things in a way that anyone can understand. That is why their names are so big....

They can explain things, with out using any of them there fancy, big school words.

Makes us little people feel smarter.

reply to post by gimme_some_truth


Carl Sagan was in no way a disinformationist IMO, he was more like a pioneer.

True, these people are supposed scientists. But what better material to fit the mold of a disinformationist than a scientist?

Its so sad to see that most of the ufo lore today is being soiled by foolish disinformationists who sell out to the highest bidder, or too ignorant to see that mankind needs change to develop into the future.

We are headed down a path of corruption and nonsense.

Shouldve realized that a long time ago during the retarded bush regime.

Kaku is obviously enjoying his pop culture fame and who could really blame him. He probably took some crap in the school system and now it's time to shine and a theoretician is fairly free to let his imagination run wild.

Friedman, on the other hand, seems to me to be a blight on ufology. He has garnered attention to the issue which I guess is good, and then he turns around and "buys" into bogus information supplied--it seems--by intelligence agencies for whatever purposes.

So, is Friedman, like Bill Moore and sooo many others a willing pawn in the dissemination of misinformation?

Either that or he ain't too bright afterall.

"Neil Degrasse is on the typical "there is no proof" argument about extraterrestrial life. "

LOL there isn't! omg he must be nwo....

Kaku says that global government is a prerequisite for an evolved planetary civilisation so he's not to be trusted. He's selling one world governance to the sci-fi crowd. It's all very cutesy but there's poison in this pill.

Yay big economic trading blocks!
Yay one world language!
Yay European Union!
Yay Planetary American Culture.
Yay 'Type One Government' !!!

Do you oppose this? Well that means you're a TERRORIST, bubba.

It's all in the vid.

A few are destined to be, i mean, theres a few acronyms for it somewhere that finds talent and does what it can, but i guess it makes me a conspiracy theorist. and yes, some of the most genius minds are controversial a good portion of time, but you gotta remember peoples views on life change quite a bit, it happens with everyone to varying degrees.

i can still respect their genius, even if working for the otherside. to me, thats just a challenge.

Originally posted by BanMePlz
reply to post by gimme_some_truth

 

Carl Sagan was in no way a disinformationist IMO, he was more like a pioneer.

.

"Pioneer?" Hardly. He was adamently pro-UFO as a young university grad student, but he caught the wind of how it must be to succeed in Science and changed his colors accordingly.

He was not a disinfo specialist--whatever that means. He used the strict rules of science in specific areas to batter down many cases. I saw he and Hynek in 1973 back-to-back in lectures. Hynek laid out a good case for the "swamp gas" case in Michigan which he fully investigated for the air force and which turned him into a believer in UFOs. Sagan ignored any good cases that could not be explained in some conventional manner. Sagan was a social gad-fly scientist, hated by many scientists and wrong on some of his major scientific arguments (nuclear winter, etc.), but he was a great spokesman for the government in helping to keep the lid on UFOs while opening up the whole cosmos (pun intended) to the virtually ignorant public at large. Thus, he did a service for the UFO community and the government in staking out the middle ground via a common sense (if misleading) approach.

I suggest you read William Poundstones' 473-page bio of Sagan, entitled "Carl Sagan." It is my opinion that Sagan died an early death because he so much wanted everything to be revealed so that he could actively work within the innards of it, but it never happened. (I know he died of a specific ailment, but that is beside the point.)

reply to post by BanMePlz


I don't trust Professor Kaku one bit. I will tell you though..
Stanton Friedman is in my book
The other one, I have never heard of before.

reply to post by Aliensun


Sagan was probably murdered, just like all of the other people who were smarter than the stupid little government.

You have to remember we are dealing with spoiled little politicians and officials with long histories of abuse and bad parenting. (I assume. Why else would they be so messed up in the head?)

Smart people to say the least. Do they feed disinformation to the public...yes they do. Seen it too many times with these people.

Originally posted by Aliensun
Sagan ignored any good cases that could not be explained in some conventional manner. Sagan was a social gad-fly scientist, hated by many scientists and wrong on some of his major scientific arguments (nuclear winter, etc.), but he was a great spokesman for the government in helping to keep the lid on UFOs while opening up the whole cosmos (pun intended) to the virtually ignorant public at large.

You're right that Sagan completely ignored the best evidence for many phenomena, at least later in his life. One of his books, which I read as a science undergraduate, shocked me to the core. I was amazed to discover how often he demonstrated biased, less than critical thinking and ignored a lot of the best evidence. Up until then I had really looked up to the guy.

After reading The Demon Haunted World I was inspired to start investigating the "paranormal" and UFOs. Even then, I had a great eye for BS and knew that what he was saying just didn't add up. His own baloney detection kit is something you should use when reading his book! Follow the evidence, not the popular mass media heroes.

I like this review. Please read it rather than skipping to the next post at this point. Go on.

Carl Sagan, the great American space scientist and extraterrestrial investigator. An honest, down-to-earth chap who believed in the classic guiding principles of science - fairness, inclusion of all data no matter where it might lead you and open-mindedness.

All good, lofty scientific ideals. And on reading the first few chapters, Sagan carefully constructs the image of scientist as impartial truth seeker and destroyer of charlatans. However, Sagan rapidly falls prey to the very traits he claims to abhor. UFOs and crop circles can all be neatly explained away as hoaxes or grand hallucinations, `alien abduction's' are all the result of some vaguely-explained form of sleep paralysis or some kind of contemporary religious mania.

Unfortunately for the many people who are not widely read in any of these exotic subjects, one could come away the impression that Sagan had solved it all. Even though he would like to have the reader believe that "he could be wrong", time and time again, well-known debunkers are used as rock solid evidence to prop his spurious conclusions and relevant researchers and substantial evidence that contradicts Sagan's beliefs is just ignored completely. Whatever happened to following the data no matter where it might lead?

Frequently, Sagan offers no evidence to support his claims. Indeed one could be forgiven that he tried to argue his case by simply thinking we would credulously accept his opinions on the basis that they were written by Carl Sagan. He never really shows any evidence or appeared to have done any research into these controversial subjects. For those who would like to have an object lesson in evidential sleights of hand and wholesale misrepresentation of events, please buy this book.

PS: I see in the gushingly sycophantic reviews that Sagan is now attributed with having disproved the existence of UFOs! Well I never thought proving a negative was considered rational...at least not since the witchhunts.