Which UFO researchers do you trust?

reply to post by alldaylong


That's your other mistake, again don't confuse me with beleivers. I absolutely do not follow what some UFO researcher says cause that would be brainwashing like the 'official explanations' you get on TV which may not be always so.

I filter the useful and more plausible things and information from all researchers, I take none for somene saying the truth. I do not trust contactees, I just take the best of what some more credible people have to say, and it is enough to verify the existence of unknown objects.

That there are secrets - this is also nonsense? I have evaluated many times what would be the reason to hide any secrets or military technology with such stories and the conclusion is: Completely unreasonable. No reason to hide for 60 years some slightly more advanced weapons for so many years and with such a propaganda, and such high level of classification.

You have a right to post, but if you like posting with zero knowledge, wow that's really bad, unscholar, unscientific, scoffing,

Jenny Randles must be one of the best. Very insightful and intelligent. Also Timothy Good for sincerity and diligence.

Originally posted by alldaylong
reply to post by Jay-morris

 

Last week on my local radio station, they conducted an interview with Timothy Good. Good claimed that in 1989 he was sitting in his London office and he ha
ppened to glace out of the office window. He claimed he saw a triangular craft slowly moving 300 feet above the building rooftops.
He grabbed his camera and run down the stairs to the outside of the building to take a photograph of the craft. However the craft had vanished from sight. No one else saw the craft apart from Good (surprise surprise)
It's episodes such as this that makes these "UFO experts" look like complete fools. Or even maybe attention seeking personality disorders ( with making money as an added bonus)

And what does this have to do with the subject of ufos?
Thats right, nothing! Why do you nip pick these things? And
why do you stay well clear of the interesting cases ?

Please answer me that!

reply to post by thesearchfortruth



Had to do it!

Originally posted by alldaylong



You are just a sheep being led by money grabbing UFO research fools. Read my above post about the prize fantasist Timothy Good. I nearly crashed the car when the interview was being broadcast over the car radio last week. If you had heard the listener comments afterward you would still be laughing now (like i am )

Sheep?

I offer a challenge. Accompany me on a trip to the San Luis valley; I'll even buy the hamburgers, soda and gas and give you a lesson in flyfishing.

I can guarantee you that when you return, you will be offering apologies to the members here and your life will be changed forever. As a skeptic you should jump at this opportunity. I doubt if you will find anything to laugh at though.
www.metroactive.com...

What no David Icke Stan Friedman fans??


Thank God.. This thread is brighter than I thought.

Originally posted by liquidsmoke206
reply to post by vardas

 

I don't know much about the breakaway civilization, but according to someone else in here Dolan has gone maybe a little nuts. I've listened to him speak, and I've read UFO's and the national security state vol. 1 cover to cover. He always seemed like a great source to me.

I mentioned Richard Dolan. His first two books on the UFO subject "UFOs and the National Security State Vol. 1 & 2" are very good and much like the classic works harking back to an earlier age. At the time he was clear about what he knew and when he was speculating. Not so afterwards.

No third volume covering the post 1991 period every followed. Even though he gave hints at times it was in the works in many an interview. And then came "A.D After Disclosure". No problem with that as it was speculative fiction with co-writer Bryce Zabel. However it seems to me Richard Dolan has lost his way these days and feels the need to fill a niche market in the UFO circuit with talk of his "Breakaway Civilization"

Here is the link to his basic theory. Or you could also watch the John Carpenter movie "They Live". He is no longer clear on what is fact and what is pure speculation. My gut feeling is that he's got so far but suddenly realised there isn't much money to be made from continuing the progression in his first two volumes and completing a third. But that's me speculating now.


So that all said I think, as others have also mentioned, that we give due credit to the ATS members who contribute greatly to the topic on here as well in a balanced factual way. Although I will refrain from naming them for fear of forgetting and insulting someone.

Stanton Friedman, Nick Pope, UFO Hunters. Some of the top...

reply to post by libertytoall


Icke seem kinda crazy...

I believe types like Timothy good, Stanton freidman, Bob Lazar really do believe what they are telling people.

I think some are mid rangers because they arnt telling the full truth, the likes of Charles hall is an example he could certainly be a disinfo agent. Nick Pope in the mid rangers because he doesn't offer anything more than the usual rhetoric that Ufos are of no defence interest to her majesties gov, again has a tone of disinformation.

Then we have the fully blown liars which is most of them and are only saying stuff to get attention and con people of their money.

Heres a point to think about Ufo researchers are interested in Aliens/Ufos but the later isn't interested in them. Name a researcher who has been visited by an Alien or taken aboard a Ufo for an afternoon tea and venison crumpets. Aliens/Ufos have zilch interest in ufo researchers.

reply to post by Gu1tarJohn


'As ancient astronaut theorist believe' lol and yes that was great.

I can't trust the word of anyone I have never met, and have not gotten to know personally, at least not fully. It seems to me the sensible thing is to learn as much as you can about this subject, and form opinions based upon the best evidence available. I have a strong interest in UFO phenomena, and have read a number of the well known books. I have seen the majority of TV shows and movies as well concerning UFO's. I personally have never seen a UFO, so from that standpoint, I am going to place more faith in someone like Stan Friedman, or J. Allen Hynek. I would be more inclined to place faith in a man of science.

I trust no one. I consider all, but unless you were there you can't know. I have my own experiences. I even question my own senses because we do not know the nature of that which we do not understand. It is for that reason we have to take everything even our own experiences and examine them with the finest tooth comb we can metaphorically speaking. The best we can do is consider theories once we have come to a point where we cannot explain it away.

I also like ufobc alot.

An interview.

vimeo.com...
The Unidentified - Vancouver Film School (VFS)

Originally posted by thesearchfortruth
There are so many frauds making up false claims, hoaxes, and stories to try to make money off of UFOs. I wanted to hear some responses to the following question: which UFO researchers do you trust, and why?

for me, my most trusted UFOlogist has always been Jacques Vallee. I believe he looks at the issue completely objectively, and is not afraid to admit where he has made mistakes/gone wrong. I also enjoy the works of Kevin Randle and Richard Dolan. All three, in my opinion, are genuinely interested in finding the true answer to the UFO question.

If you are a skeptic, (or not) please remember this researcher does not have to be pro-UFO. Skeptics are of course completely allowed.

So, ATS, which UFO researcher(s) (if any) do you trust the most?

edit on 3-7-2013 by thesearchfortruth because: (no reason given)

Steer away from any researcher that think Roswell UFO crash was true.. and steer clear of the whole US UFO Lunatic Fringe movement aka Lear, Lazar, Cooper, Dean, Greer, etc

The good researcher should be : Hynek, Vallee, A.Michel, Ruppelt, Sanderson

Originally posted by Druscilla
Anyone already believing in ETH, or some other narrow non-objective pet speculation is suspect for injection of their own belief into their investigations.

Objectively, everything needs be left on the table as a possibility and even probability, especially those possibilities and probabilities that could very well be considered 'boring' explanations like uncategorized natural phenomenon.

Thus, I side with the detractors and skeptics as the only real HOPE for "UFOlogy".

The Skeptics are really the same if not worse than believer. They are just the other side of the coin. While ETH believers try to make everything to suit their beliefs, ditto the Skeptics are trying to do everything to suits their skepticism.

Detractor/skeptics are worse because they are denying other people's witness statement on the phenomena, just like the skeptics who think earth is flat and earth is the center of universe and use all their powers to make other people submit to their beliefs.

Don't trust anyone, look and think for yourself.
I do believe the paradigm is shifting. With 17 billion Earth-sized planets in our galaxy the concept that 'Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence' seems no longer valid in respect to extratrestrial life. If we see something that looks artificial its as much the sceptic's job to proof it a natural formation as it is the believer's job to proof it's not.

reply to post by thesearchfortruth


simply none they are all in it for the money

my own sightings are enough me

and the ones where my family were with me

edit : maybe that copper who logs all the cop sightings gary hessletine i think is name is

Originally posted by thesearchfortruth

So, ATS, which UFO researcher(s) (if any) do you trust the most?

I'd say Brad Sparks is definitely up there as one of the most objective researchers on this topic - his work on the Project Bluebook files has been excellent and here he is discussing Alexander Wendt's work and unresearched government UFO documents:

Many documents are now being disclosed for the first time only after a half century of unwarranted secrecy. There are approximately 225,000 pages of USAF UFO documents languishing in the National Archives and never yet fully studied by researchers since their public release in 1976.

link

I'd say the work of Jan Aldrich, Barry Greenwood, Dr James Mcdonald, Dr Michael Swords, Francis Ridge, Mark Rodeghier, Jerome Clark, Jacques Vallee, Julian Hennessey, John Timmerman, Dr Willy Smith, Dr Frank Salisbury, Dr Peter Sturrock, Ivan Sanderson, Jim + Coral Lorenzen, Ted Bloecher, Richard Dolan, Loren E. Gross, Robert Powell and James McCampbell is also definitely worth a look - as is the research of Terry Hansen, Patrick Gross, John Greenewald Junior, Kenny Young, Tom Tulien, Clas Svahn, Richard Hall, George Fawcett, Jerry Cohen, Carl Feindt, Ted Phillips, Henry McKay, Mac Tonnies, Gary Heseltine, Keith Basterfield, David Marler, Antonio Huneeus, Daniel Ropkin, Bill Chalker, Paul R. Hill, David Cayton, Martin Shough, Colonel Ariel Sanchez and General Ricardo Bermúdez.


reply to post by The GUT


Gut, am truly honoured to be included on your list my friend - ATS member Internos was one of the first people to get me interested in the UFO subject and it's been said before but it really is a great shame he's not posting here anymore.

I'd also say your work and that of other members like Isaac, Easynow, Kandinsky, Xtraeme, SkyFloating, Zorgon, Orkojoker, Firemoon, A51Watcher, TeaAndStrumpets etc.. is thoroughly well researched and a joy to read when I actually find the time to do it.

Originally posted by karl 12
I'd say the work of Jan Aldrich, Barry Greenwood, Dr James Mcdonald, Dr Michael Swords, Francis Ridge, Jerome Clark, Dr Willy Smith, Dr Peter Sturrock, Ivan Sanderson, Ted Bloecher, Loren E. Gross, Robert Powell and James McCampbell is also definitely worth a look - as is the research of Terry Hansen, Patrick Gross, John Greenewald Junior, Kenny Young, Tom Tulien, Clas Svahn, Richard Hall, George Fawcett, Carl Feindt, Ted Phillips, Gary Heseltine, Keith Basterfield, Jenny Randles, Antonio Huneeus, Daniel Ropkin, Bill Chalker, Paul R. Hill, David Cayton, Martin Shough, Colonel Ariel Sanchez and General Ricardo Bermúdez.

After reading your list, I feel somewhat ashamed for not going deeper. LOTS of superb names up there that we do owe much to. McDonald, Swords, and Sturrock immediately jump out at me. Not to mention Keith Basterfield--he certainly deserves to better known among us lay folk although it's obvious that he is known and respected by most ufologists of any account.

And: INTERNOS! We miss you!!!