 |
| Paul Stonehill |
Sunday began with Paul Stonehill, who was born in the Soviet Union, speaking on "UFOs of Russia and USSR."He explained that there were all kinds of UFOs in the Russian territories, ancient and modern. UFOs are depicted in ancient rock carvings, and there are "out of place" artifacts in ancient rock strata. The KGB was very interested in UFOs and paranormal phenomena, but Stalin had the records destroyed. Later there was an official Soviet military program for recording and studying UFO reports. In 1982, a UFO almost started World War III by initiating a nuclear missile's launch sequence for 15 minutes. Unlike UFOs in the U.S., which are reported to be peaceful and try to interfere with nuclear-tipped ICBMs, in the USSR UFOs apparently are warlike, and try to launch such missiles.
Stonehill also talked quite a bit about USOs - Unidentified Submersible Objects. Soviet divers have found themselves next to underwater humanoids working on recovering something, wearing no breathing apparatus.
Stonehill also talked quite a bit about USOs - Unidentified Submersible Objects. Soviet divers have found themselves next to underwater humanoids working on recovering something, wearing no breathing apparatus.
 |
| John Greenwald, Jr. |
The final speaker was John Greenwald, Jr., who spoke about "A Common Sense Reality Check on the UFO Phenomenon." A television producer and director, Greenwald has filed over 3,000 Freedom of Information requests on the UFO subject. He talked about mostly well-known cases, like Roswell, the 1952 Washington, DC sightings, and the 1976 air and ground sighting in Iran. He spoke about the 1985 Bob White encounter in western Colorado (he said, near Las Vegas). White supposedly recovered a piece that fell from the UFO, and kept it in the trunk of his car for many years. Eventually it was analyzed, and supposedly found to consist of completely unknown material. Greenwald forgot to mention that, according to a 2011 article in Skeptic Magazine, a professional in the steel industry states,
But I suppose letting in a few relevant facts might spoil Greenwald's talk.The object in question is made of accreted grinding residue. It forms in a manner similar to a common stalagmite when metal castings are “cleaned” on large stationary grinders.
 |
| Karyn Dolan getting ready to play UFO Jeopardy |
 |
| UFO Jeopardy with John Greenwald, Jr. (wearing tie) and Karyn Dolan. |
On the final panel on Sunday Afternoon, "UFOlogy in the 21st Century" were Stanton Friedman, Richard Dolan, and Micah Hanks. Hanks sounded somewhat reasonable when he and I were talking not long before this, but in front of the audience he denounced "skeptibunkers," who propose outrageous explanations for credible UFO cases. Stanton Friedman admonished people not to be afraid to speak out, people will listen to your message. And Dolan worried whether UFO groups are doing enough to reach out to women and minority communities (echoing some of the same concerns certain skeptics have been saying!).
At this point, I packed up and headed off to Tucson, where I stayed a few days as the guest of James McGaha, where we did some astronomy and watched science fiction movies. Then I headed off to Old Tucson Studios, where I was in a group participating in a SteamPunk event, and then finally, home.
But now, a few photos from the UFO Congress, in no particular order:
 | ||
| James from the Future |
 |
| Leda, the "Glamour Queen" of the UFO Conference |
Her claim that she received several cell phone calls from her alien hybrid children, after last year's conference but before this one, attracted a lot of attention, and even some envy, from "experiencers" whose hybrid offspring are apparently less communicative. I'm sure Leda is sincere about this, but I told her somebody must have been playing a joke on her. How could they break into my cell phone calls? Not knowing the circumstances of the calls, I could not say.
Leda was examined for signs of alien activity by Steve Colbern of Alien & Scalpel Research, as she was last year. A photo of the 'open' part of that exam is in Part 3 of this report, in the middle. I am told that the people with Alien & Scalpel were very nervous when they saw me taking pictures. Here is my photo showing the A&S tool box, and examination room.
 |
| Alien & Scalpel's tool box, and examination room |
Leda was quite worried about this "dye" when she related it to me afterward. I told her this was silly, and not to worry about it, as did James McGaha who was also there. She had been told that there was also an 'ancient symbol' on her thigh, and markings that seemed to show the imprint of presumably alien hands around her neck and wrist. She was told to come back for a follow-up examination the first thing next morning. She did, and was told that the "dye" had, thank goodness, disappeared, as had the 'ancient symbol.' She said that A&S had promised her drawings and photos illustrating their findings, but when I spoke to her on March 18 they still had not yet arrived.
 |
| Ben Hansen |
Ben Hansen of the SyFy channel's "Fact or Fake" show. He is working with Night Optics USA, a Bushnell company, to promote its night vision devices. He is a very friendly fellow. The night vision skywatch at the conference was free for attendees, but on other occasions Hansen participates in sponsored skywatches that are paid events for the participants.
 |
| The author with Dr. Lynne |
I also met Dr. Lynne Kitei, the indefatigable crusader for the Phoenix Lights. (If you Google "Phoenix Lights," her website is listed first. It is a cornucopia of questionable UFO claims.). At the Congress she was certainly a force to contend with in her leather outfit and stiletto heels. She came up to me to say hello, asking, "Do you know who I am?" "Certainly, Lynne, I was just looking at your website a little while back." Dr. Lynne, as she is fondly called, is friendly and personable, and certainly fully sincere. When I referred to the "first part" and "second part" of the Phoenix Lights sighting, she corrected me: there was no "first part" or "second part," it was just all UFOs, all night long. Even at sunrise, crews coming into work at Sky Harbor Airport saw a giant UFO a mile in diameter hovering above the airport, but unfortunately no photos were taken, and it didn't turn up on radar. I'm very glad that no aircraft collided with it! Dr. Lynne somehow manages to see more UFOs than just about anyone, in Phoenix or anywhere else, and she does it with panache.
And the second link you get on Phoenix Lights is Wikipedia.
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Lights
Dear Mr Schaeffer,
ReplyDeleteI was not nervous on seeing you at the Congress, and do not recall seeing you photographing me, or our booth, as I was occupied most of the time. I do, however, feel that it is a bit odd to have someone critical of our work follow us around to these events. Apparently, though, that means our work is being noticed, and that is a good thing.
The scans are not meant to be a definitive finding of the presence of implants, but we can get a good indication of the possible presence of an object, and the person can then go to a doctor and get the area of concern X-rayed to see if an object is there. These objects usually, but not always, show up on X-rays, and have about the same X-ray density as human bone.
One man I scanned at the Congress already got a possible object in his shoulder X-rayed, and something showed up, providing further proof that these techniques work in locating these objects.
We scan clients with a small metal detector, a gaussmeter, RF energy detector, UV light and geiger counter. Areas which are metal detector "hits" and are also magnetic, and/or giving off RF have a high probability of being implants.
The UV light scan checks for highly UV-fluorescent dyes that appear to often be left behind on the body during alien encounters.
There are three dyes which are commonly observed on abductees; yellow-green, blue, and orange. We have seen what appear to be finger marks, and 4-fingered handprints on people's bodies and bedroom walls in the yellow-green dye, so we hypothesize that this substance may come from the skin of the alien beings.
All of these dyes are very difficult to wash off, although the yellow-green is the easiest to remove. The dyes typically last at least several days on the human body, and are completely invisible in normal room light.
We are currently doing analysis of the blue dye, and have gotten some preliminary structural data, using NMR and FT-IR techniques. A problem we have run into is that it is extremely difficult to remove the substance from whatever substrate it is on, for analysis. If it turns out to be an unknown compound, it should create quite a stir.
I really cannot comment on specific scanning cases, as they are confidential, but we did find a symbol, in yellow-green UV-fluorescent dye on one of the people we scanned with the UV light. I am not sure if it is "ancient" or what it means, but it appeared to be drawn on, and not random.
We will be sending out the UV pictures to people scanned at the Congress next week. I would include some sample images here, but I am not sure if there is any way to upload them.
The geiger counter scan checks for traces of radioactive material on people, resulting from alien contact. This scan is usually negative, and radioactive material is more commonly seen at UFO landing sites, but we got a few "hits" of about background radiation on people at the Congress, including some possible implants.
We have laboratory analyses which indicate that the implant objects are sophisticated nanotechnological devices which give off radio signals, use carbon nanotube electronics, are made of extraterrestrial material, and do not provoke an immune response in the body. I invite you to read my papers on the last two implants which Dr. Leir removed from two of his patients. I will send you copies, if you wish, or you can get them from www.alienscalpel.com. One of these papers, on the "John Smith" implant, Object #15, is also available on the Open Minds website, www.openminds.tv.
Steve, thanks for explaining what A&S claims to be doing with its scans. I took some pictures of the A&S table because, frankly, a lot of people don't know about this, and would find it hard to believe that such astonishing claims about supposed evidence of alien abduction are being openly made to many people, and widely accepted.
DeleteI am wondering what calibrations or controls, if any, you have performed with the instruments you are using. Does every random spike in a needle suggest the presence of some astonishing alien technology? Is there a control group - people who do not have implants (!) - whose scans are performed double-blind, to calibrate the validity of the instruments and the examination process? If not, this is just a bunch of hooey that someone made up, a private game of 'find the alien.'
First and foremost: whatever small effects or minor anomalies that you claim to find on peoples' bodies, you are leaping to the least-likely conclusion - that alien beings are traveling here across many light years, unseen, and are invisibly abducting and affecting individuals, not on a small scale, but massively - all the while still invisible. Instead of that monstrous absurdity, what prosaic causes have you considered, and excluded? By what means have you excluded all ordinary explanations for your findings, assuming that those findings themselves are not the result of the examiner's self-delusion?
I am relieved to hear that the alien dye is on the outside of peoples' bodies, not inside their blood. Again, is there any scientific literature on what is to be expected from UV scans of peoples' skins? Will one pick up residues from dyes in clothing, bed sheets, etc? Perhaps what you are seeing is completely ordinary stuff. Even if somebody does have dye on their skin, which is far from certain, does that mean that it must have come from an extraterrestrial? Or is everything you see on a "scan" evidence of alien abduction?
By purporting to do a body scan finding illusory markings and implants, many people will take it seriously, especially given the semi-medical context (A&S is affiliated, after all, with Dr. Roger Leir). Some people find it upsetting to be told that their bodies are filled with alien implants and dyes - this we know already - not realizing that the entire "analysis" is delusional. This, by itself, is a grossly irresponsible thing to do. Someone might well become suicidal after being told that their body has become a plaything for alien beings, and then you will have a big scandal, as well as probably a lawsuit.
As for posting photos of supposed alien markings, either you can post them on your own website, and put a link here, or else you can send them to me and I will do a Blog posting about them, and open it for discussion.
Robert, many thanks for that.
DeleteI'm reading "The Men Who Stare at Goats" right now, which includes the author's accounts of several people that supposedly worked on high-security military matters who, albeit cagily, revealed loads of information. What the same people were reluctant to talk about, however, was their involvement with the "mysterious object" accompanying comet Hale-Bopp and the subsequent Heaven's Gate mass suicide.
How anyone might react to a particular bit of information is not something that, rationally, anyone can be held responsible for. Without qualifying information, however, it is easy for people to believe that confidence and scientific-sounding mumbo-jumbo is a mark of authenticity.
It's much easier not to "get involved," not to confront someone, not to challenge their statements, and most especially not to deal with emotional or defensive responses. But silence often implies consent, or at least a lack of information that throws assertions into doubt. People can get quite upset when their belief systems are questioned or challenged, and we might react to that and forget about those who, for whatever reasons, can come to ill because they believe they're acting on solid information. Sometimes this ill is simply their pocket change - sometimes it's more.
Robert, you're very good about reporting these conventions objectively - sometimes, I think, too objectively. I realize accusations can be a dangerous thing in our litigation-prone society, but pertinent questions like your reply here are perfectly fair. I myself would like to hear how Mr. Colbern can distinguish the countless sources of UV reflectance that exist naturally, how he identifies a radio-frequency implant, and most especially why any race would use such decrepit technology. Since he's here and participating, I think a post is certainly warranted. Someone with solid results would have nothing to fear.
Keep up the good work!
No, I certainly have nothing to "fear". There are no "countless sources of UV reflectance" UV is invisible to the human eye, and a substance either fluoresces under UV, or it does not.
DeleteIn fact, Fluorescence testing is one of the most sensitive analytical tests. Please tell Mr. Shaeffer to provide a way to upload images and I will post a few examples.
Please send me your e-mail address and I will send you my reports on Dr. Leir's last two implant objects.
Colbern Steve: "UV is invisible to the human eye, and a substance either fluoresces under UV, or it does not."
DeleteYou are right - I didn't say that correctly. Replace the word "reflectance" with "fluorescence," though, and we're back to square one, and something you still have to answer. White shirts fluoresce under near UV; so do some older kinds of false teeth, ringworm fungus (actually an excretion of such,) scorpion exoskeletons, some minerals, glow-in-the-dark toys, hippie posters, and on and on. How you can possibly take this to mean, "one of the most sensitive analytical tests," has yet to be demonstrated.
"Please tell Mr. Shaeffer to provide a way to upload images and I will post a few examples."
He told you himself, and I don't have an inside line to Mr. Sheaffer (you could at least spell his name correctly when you're on his own website) any more than you do, possibly even less. I really couldn't care less about examples, however, because producing a photo of something glowing is trivially easy, even without digital editing. What I said I wanted to hear is how you differentiated your evidence from all of the other methods of producing fluorescence.
"Please send me your e-mail address and I will send you my reports on Dr. Leir's last two implant objects."
I'd be interested in seeing the reports if they actually addressed the questions either Robert or I have just asked, but not if they're full of the typical misuse of scientific terms that I've seen too many times before. All such discussions, however, can take place right here, where there is an audience - I think more people can benefit from this than just you and I, don't you agree?
All I was pointing out is that fluoresence is very easy to detect; that is a fact.
DeleteYes, there are many things that fluoresce, but these dyes appear to be unique (bright blue, yellow-green, and orange), and occur most often on people who claim alien contact. They are also easy to spot, brightly fluorescent, and very difficult to wash off.
In fact, they are pretty much indelible, and often will not come off until the layer of skin they are deposited on is shed.
This is very unusual, and I am currently attempting to determine the chemical structures of the dyes. If they turn out to be substances manufactured by the earthly chemical industry, I will be the first to say so.
Steve, a little Google searching showed that a number of papers have already been written about UV fluorescence and human skin. The abstract of one of them says, "Epidermal and dermal fluorescence signals are each produced in distinct spectral regions. Biological processes modulate the fluorescence signals in predictable ways. Such cases include aging, epidermal proliferation, and photoaging as well as diseases such as psoriasis, acne and non-melanoma skin cancer." http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924203101001424
DeleteThere are more papers, but I don't have access to scientific article databases.
So if somebody has psoriasis or acne, their skin will fluoresce in UV, and also if their skin is old and wrinkled. Also we did not address the issue of substances that people put on their skin: moisturizers, sun block, makeup, medications, oils, etc. How many of these fluoresce? Plus the idea of foreign dyes or other substances from clothing, bed sheets, etc. But UFO Logic says, "anything I can't immediately explain, it's aliens."
And as I told you in private email, if you have photos of UV fluorescence or anything else that you think is good evidence of alien abduction, go ahead and send it to me. I'll do a separate Blog posting about it, and we'll see what people have to say about it.
Colbern Steve: "Yes, there are many things that fluoresce, but these dyes appear to be unique (bright blue, yellow-green, and orange), and occur most often on people who claim alien contact."
DeleteSo, let me get this straight: you're going to UFO conventions, taking volunteers to examine for evidence of alien contact, and the UV fluorescence you detect is how you're determining correlation? Seriously?
I mean, you openly admit that you have no idea what it is or even if it's actually of mundane origin, and have no useful test results. But you're okay with running this as an "exam for alien activity"?
Well, that certainly assures me that you know what the hell you're doing. I might just have to attend next year...
If you do not think that indelible, brightly fluorescent dyes on people, which sometimes show up in the shapes of strange symbols, fingermarks, and 4-fingered handprints are unusual, then I wonder what you are using for brains.
DeleteI already stated that I am trying to analyze these substances; if you were really using the scientific method, and had some intellectual curiosity, you would encourage this research.
I strongly suspect that these are unknown compounds; we should know for sure soon enough. We do have a good fluorescence spectrum of the blue dye, and preliminary NMR and FT-IR results, and these analyses certainly are consistent with that hypothesis.
Colbern Steve: "If you do not think that indelible, brightly fluorescent dyes on people, which sometimes show up in the shapes of strange symbols, fingermarks, and 4-fingered handprints are unusual, then I wonder what you are using for brains."
DeleteIt has nothing whatsoever to do with what I "think." The very first thing that is done in any serious investigation is establish a baseline and determine, to the greatest extent possible, what occurs naturally and how - not assume that there is nothing that produces fluorescence, so everything that occurs is mysterious. I already mentioned how many things fluoresce, and Robert pointed you to studies (you know, real science) that illustrate how it occurs naturally in the skin among other things, so I wouldn't even be rash enough to use the word "dyes." You haven't even cleared that hurdle yet.
As for four-fingered prints, I could produce those easily, simply by shaking hands and gripping arms with everyone I could around the convention while my hands (sans thumb) were treated with a substance. That would produce lots of results, wouldn't it?
"I already stated that I am trying to analyze these substances; if you were really using the scientific method, and had some intellectual curiosity, you would encourage this research."
I made this clear in my last comment, but if you want to highlight your lack of experience, fine by me. Research is one thing; producing some potential conclusion without the slightest support for it is something else, and not even remotely related to science. Your comment about "indelible" doesn't work very well when we have Leda Beluche's account (or Robert's version of it, to be perfectly fair) that her dyes, of an "ancient symbol" [whatever that's supposed to mean], had vanished overnight. Sounds like something that washes off easily, to me. But you know, what am I using for brains?
And if it comes off that easily, how long ago did it get applied? Funny, that's the first question I come to, and it raises lots of follow-ups.
"We do have a good fluorescence spectrum of the blue dye, and preliminary NMR and FT-IR results, and these analyses certainly are consistent with that hypothesis."
They're consistent with the hypothesis of Atlanteans, elves, and Eohippus as well, since all you really have are an unknown substance and a "four-fingered handprint" - make up any four-fingered story you like and you have consistency. Science does not, in any way shape or form, support the idea of wild-assed guesses without supporting evidence and testable factors, and any scientist worth the carbon in their tissues would demonstrate how they removed as many potential explanations as possible before they offered a tentative conclusion - seriously, science websites abound, you can check these for yourself.
All this, for the easiest question you were even posed. We can get into the radio-frequency bit any time you like, especially when you're testing in an enclosure with fabric walls, with no control over stray signals, and electronic equipment sitting right outside. Even an idiot like me knows about Faraday cages and controlling the conditions, but I guess that's all unnecessary with your special tests, right? Or are you still researching that too?
@Colbern Steve
Delete> I do, however, feel that it is a bit odd to have someone critical of our work follow us around to these events.
Because that's where the juice is, Steve. If Mr. Sheaffer got all his UFO info from skeptics, he'd be guilty of using only second-hand sources, right? Or do you insist skeptics to be uninformed?
> the yellow-green dye, so we hypothesize that this substance may come from the skin of the alien beings
Just a clarification: are you saying 1) you detect alien skin metabolites by attaching dyes to them or 2) alien skin metabolites are dyes of themselves?
> There are no "countless sources of UV reflectance"
Plants are a source of UV reflection and absorption, Steve. Lots of plants. And I believe plants are just about everywhere, Steve!
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2424103?uid=3739448&uid=2&uid=3737720&uid=4&sid=21101817123303
But if you're looking for higher life forms, Steve, butterflies also use UV reflectance to communicate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraviolet_communication#Ultraviolet_light_reflection_and_absorption_in_butterflies
Definition of COUNTLESS: too numerous to be counted
I certainly can't count all the plants and butterflies in the world. Can you, Steve?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/countless
I can see the toolbox on the chair, but what goes on in that 'examination room', i.e. that area that resembles a curtain-covered wardrobe?
ReplyDeleteThat is a dark tent to do the UV light scan. It needs to be dark to get pictures of the dye fluorescence.
ReplyDeleteIn addition to the "UFO Jeopardy" game, another game that could be played at the conference could be
ReplyDelete"Who Wants to be a UFOlogist!"
Here's a few sample questions for the contestants:
The International UFO Conference is held annually for this primary reason:
A. Sell stuff and make a few bucks
B. Meet some very, very interesting people
C. Examine hot women for alien implants
D. See a real UFO in the hotel lobby
National Geographic had a popular TV show called "Chasing...?"
A. Missing Coat Buttons
B. TV Stardom
C. Lights in the Sky
D. Network Ratings
Where do UFOs come from from?
A. A galaxy far, far away
B. Adolf Hitler's hobby room
C. You Tube
D. Your imagination
Any answer is correct as long as you believe it's true.
TS4072
Robert, I would like your opinion as to what percentage of the attendees are kooks and what percentage are not. I went to a MUFON convention a few years ago just for fun, and I estimated that 80% were kooks and 20% were sincere.
ReplyDeleteTranspower, I honestly don't say this to pick on you, but I'd like to illustrate something that's too common, from every "side" of the issue.
Delete"Kook" is a subjective term, and you and I would have different definitions of it. More importantly, someone can have certain beliefs regarding alien life and not be noticeably aberrant. I have personal experience with one, who has given an account (to a mutual friend) of his abduction experience. He believes it; I see every sign of sleep paralysis. Near as I can tell, to him his experience makes him more interesting and/or special, which underlies his reluctance to accept that sleep paralysis is much more likely an explanation. In all other accounts, you likely wouldn't spot him as odd, and he's more rational than many fundamentalists and sports fans ;-)
I encourage people to concentrate on the details, and not succumb to a label or overall impression of anyone. It makes it easier to be accepted, and helps prevent a subtle attitude from coming through that is likely to work against any efforts at mutual understanding.
Transpower, I don't like to think in those terms. Besides, the great majority of those you might think of as "kooks" are nonetheless entirely sincere. There are some we might label "phonies," but these will be found exclusively behind the tables in the dealers' room or autograph table (not to imply that there are not also sincere persons among them). There is no incentive for a Phony to go to such a conference unless there is money to be made from it.
DeletePoints well-taken. I will therefore rephrase my question: what percentage of attendees would you estimate to be critial thinkers and what percentage to be non-critical thinkers? Again, at the MUFON event in Bucks County a few years ago, I would estimate 20% and 80%, respectively. A relative of Betty and Barney Hill was there and gave a presentation about that case and mentioned that both Barney and his psychiatrist were dead. In the Q & A which followed, I asked her if Barney's medical records were ever made available, and she said "No." Obviously it would be up to the family whether or not to reveal such sensitive material, but it sure would be interesting to get the doctor's opinion!
DeleteI went to a local UFO meeting group here in New Jersey and it only took 5 minutes into a 2 hour meeting to realize most of the people in there (including the head honcho that was running the entire thing) were mentally delusional. It was embarrassing. They were passing around photo's of known fraudulent pictures and saying they were authentic UFO's. The comments I heard people making were cringe worthy. I wanted to leave but I stayed to the end. Then some guy got up there to explain how God of John is real and that he can perform miracles on people. I was looking around the room thinking "is this guy joking? Is anybody going to call him out on this?" So right there and then I figured all meetings are like this (MUFON & otherwise). It's like the Nielsen ratings. They don't monitor what everyone in the entire country is watching. They analyze a few thousand people in one area and then extrapolate that data to the entire country. I got a feel for the amount of nut cases at this one meeting so that gives me a pretty good idea of what other meetings throughout the country are like.
DeleteMr. Schaeffer,
ReplyDeleteI have answered your questions, and you may, of course, believe whatever you wish. I will let our data speak for itself. In addition, the response to our work has been overwhelmingly positive; stay tuned for some major discoveries.
We do have a lot more to learn, and will go on investigating this field. I do take issue with being called delusional and irresponsible; nothing could be further from the truth, and I would like to add that I have always thought the same of you! Why don't you get a life, and do something constructive, for a change?
Steve,
DeleteIf the response to your work and that of Dr. Leir has been "overwhelmingly positive," that is because it has been largely ignored by skeptics. I think that is starting to change.
I said that the analysis using trivial things as proof of alien abduction is "delusional," I don't see how it's possible to disagree with that. You may substitute "deluded" for "delusional," if you wish. Of course it is irresponsible to tell people that aliens are manhandling their unconscious bodies, and on a regular basis. But actually, I think there is relatively little danger of a lawsuit to you or Dr. Leir in that. Many others have done the same: John Mack, Edith Fiore, Yvonne Smith, etc., and they seem to have escaped any consequences from telling, under the banner of Therapy, that peoples' problems are due to alien interference.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMany people come to me with accounts of encountering aliens; that is the main reason most of them want to be scanned in the first place. Unlike you, Mr. Schaeffer, I am not pushing my opinions on anyone, and people are free to disagree with me.
ReplyDeleteClient's responses to our scanning service have been overwhelmingly positive. What armchair critics like you think of me, or this field, really is not that important to me. Who cares what you believe?
I am only here responding to your criticisms, in order to set the record straight. It is you who is deluded; you seem to think you are infallible, and have the right to tell others what to think, just because you say so. Believing one's self to be perfect is often a sign of a delusional mind!
If someone comes to me concerned about chest pains or being poisoned, I can confirm their self-diagnosis and get a positive response from them, but this has nothing whatsoever to do with being correct, experienced, or responsible. For me to then hide behind the "they are free to disagree with me" dodge does not absolve me of any blame, even if it makes it hard to file a lawsuit. I've never seen a qualified doctor or scientist attempt this excuse, but it's used routinely in quack medicine and crystallography and such. Funny that.
DeleteI fail to see how a website serves to push opinions on people - I guess Robert would be okay if he instead charged people for quasi-professional exams? It's the idea of a professional service that makes it objective, right?
You have been asked simple questions about how you control for variables and environmental factors, and how you can possibly offer the idea that you know what evidence of alien contact would even be. Your failure to support your views rigorously is not the fault of those requesting it, and there's no reason why such questions should produce a defensive response from someone who has performed due diligence - it's the same idea as peer review, after all.
@Colbern Steve
Delete> What armchair critics like you think of me, or this field, really is not that important to me. Who cares what you believe?
What you're saying is that anyone who criticizes you is THEREFORE unqualified to criticise you???
If I am wrong -- and I might be, because I once sat in an armchair as a child -- please detail the qualifications required to ask questions of you about your work.
Steve, I'm sorry, but you've posted far too many comments for me to accept that you don't care what the skeptics believe. If they're not important, what is the sense in setting the record straight?
Deletehttp://politicized-science.blogspot.com/2007/05/skeptics-and-debunkers.html
ReplyDelete> a giant UFO a mile in diameter
ReplyDeleteGoodness. I wonder if a moving object that size would displace enough air for effects to be noticed?
Robert,
ReplyDeleteI think skepticism is an incredibly important part of our world today. Too many young people who were born in the digital age believe everything they read on the net. As has been pointed out many times, it is increasingly difficult to separate the signal from the noise. that's why I find it particularly frustrating when a site such as yours that claims to be concerned with the "truth" posts links to articles containing misleading information. I was excited when reading this article to see that Bob White's "alien anomaly" enigma had been solved. Mr. White lived near me and I used to drive by his UFO "Museum". I always thought it was a crock, but no one has been able to explain the scientific analysis' that have been done on the object. I eagerly went to the site you linked to hoping that finally someone had done the analysis needed to explain the anomaly. What did I get? An article by a foundry supervisor who explained that the object was a "foundry stalagmite". Great! Only one problem. I looked for the so called expert's analysis and couldn't find it. In other words, IT WAS NEVER EXAMINED! So based on a picture, this guy claims he "knows" what it is, even though the object HAS been the subject of many tests by labs including Los Alamos. If the Los Alomos tests had conclusively proved that the object was terrestrial, why would we need this guys opinion? If you want to be taken seriously as a "skeptic" rather than another person who spreads rumor, innuendo, and distortions to promulgate his own point of view (just as many in the UFO field do), you should refrain from providing links to such dubious sources.
You sound like you're pulling the old 'skeptical of skepticism' maneuver, with a lot of false praise heaped on top to cover it up.
DeleteYou know full well that the specimen was never and will never be furnished to anyone who can conclusively prove what it is, because like so many UFO proponents, Bob White is profiting from his stories. Nobody's going to pay any money to a guy who intentionally or accidentally claimed a lump of crud scraped out of a foundry was an alien artifact.
You also repeat the idea that these Los Alamos tests prove it's unearthly. Everything I've seen (beyond White's cock-and-bull promotional material) says the object was not subjected to strenuous testing, and that none of the examiners found it more than a curiosity. I'm not sure why you say a foundry worker with years of jobsite experience is a 'so-called expert' or dismiss his comments as 'an opinion' - he's the only one offering an explanation for it besides Bob White!
Chefjames, see this report on Bob White's supposed artifact, written by George Wingfield. He shows how the "artifact" was literally a sideshow exhibit, and how White's story does not hold up:
Deletehttp://www.ufoupdateslist.com/listers/bobwhitesufoartifact.rtf