Phil Klass: "Skeptics UFO Newsletter" now online (large collection)

Blue Shift

Still, I wouldn't mind having Klass's media representative job. Although I'd try to do it without the acrimony. It used to be that every news program would go out of their way to ensure that both "sides" of the argument were presented. Pro-UFO folks were easy to find, but finding a good, articulate skeptic seemed to be harder, and Klass was always available. I'm available and relatively articulate.

Eh, who has that kind of time?

I think that you'd do better than Bill Nye and Neil DeGrasse Tyson. Their attempts are laughable. Even Klass would be groaning.

I think the replacement for Klass should be a woman.

And no I don't want that gig.

reply to post by IsaacKoi


Yay, more resources for skeptics ...

Don’t we see that “researchers” often eventually become ardent believers: from the objective to the subjective.

That’s a part of this endeavor, the search for truth.

It doesn’t always happen but often it does

I believe there is a place for the advocate if they are honest

I believe Tim Good is honest though he may be a believer now…I know that so I can adjust my research and realize his work will be as a believer and not an objective or non objective skeptic.

reply to post by The GUT


Right back at you mate, appreciate the comments and couldn't agree more about Isaac -his contribution to future UFO research really is astounding and find him to be a very fair, balanced and knowledgeable chap.

The GUT

So here's my question and I hope it's appropriate here: WHOM--and I ask this to everyone--in your personal opinion, can we trust to be balanced researchers?

For my part I'd say the folks involved with this book are up there -it really is one of the best I've read when dealing with the UFO subject (and government documentation) and I really would be intrigued to know how many self styled 'debunkers' on these boards have actually taken the time out to read it.

UFOs And Government: A Historical Inquiry

The story, which is unmasked by the governments' own documents, explains much that is new, or at least not commonly known, about the seriousness with which the military and intelligence communities approached the UFO problem internally.

link

Also, I may be bias about this (as I think the USO subject is a really important aspect to the UFO subject) but always found the research of Carl Feindt very intriguing and the sheer number of naval reports is pretty mindblowing.

blackz28

i will give him credit for keeping ufoligy honest..

Blackz28, I know quite a few folks who'd disagree with you there and some of his 'hoax' claims are rather dubious to say the least.

Here's a good example around 41:00.

An in-depth (re)view of the Cash/ Landrum case

reply to post by IsaacKoi


To not take into consideration the work of the late Phil Klass would be a mistake to anyone interested in making any sense muddled stew of lies. Best advice would be to prepare yourself in advance with info from both sides of the fence.
Thank you OP for making the info easily available.
Also, I would have to say (as have others), that had his attitude been a little less cantankerous personally I think he may have been received better results. Perhaps that made him more of a media draw??

Most now know the modern skeptic works from within by Disguise themselves as pro only to go on to propagate bad info into the field. End result being what appears as an ever increasing amount of innacurate info giving the impression that the entire 60 year old story is nothing more than a ploy to gain attention or make money.


tom

I don't know of this man past this thread but if this is
an opportunity to give gratitude to skeptics I would like to
put my hat in.

The reason I frequent this site looking for the point of view
from many others, is because there is an obvious dominance
of sceptisism here.

A little off topic but I just had a thought thanks to this.
Ufo sceptics are trying to debunk strories of UFOs.
Well, now we are hearing stories of terrorism....
Shouldn't sceptics be trying to debunk THOSE stories, rather
than try and debunk fellow sceptics (in actuallity) attempts
to rationalize claimed events??

If you are going to respond to that you cannot come back at
me with obviously outrageous theories that would sound crazy
if it were an attemt to."rationalize". I didnt post any examples
so no cheesey cheap shots.

Klaus was a closed minded jerk with total disregard to the facts. Being skeptical and critical is mandatory when it come to investigation of the topic at hand however he was counter productive. His personal bias obvious and he just projects his disbelief of the possibility IMHO. He is just as moot as the lunatic fringe.