Saturday, January 2, 2016

It's a "Forgery," Marden Charges!!

I frankly didn't expect to get a lot of response to my posting of December 23, Dr. Simon Reveals his Real Thoughts on the Hill "UFO Abduction" Case. I scanned and posted a 48-page PDF of old letters and documents related to the case, most of them about 40 years old. In a sense, it did not reveal anything new, but merely added more detail to what we already knew: Dr. Benjamin Simon, the Hills' psychiatrist, did not believe their story of having been abducted on board a flying saucer. I wrote about this as far back as 1981. It was also in my book UFO Sightings, published in 1998. Indeed, if you go all the way back to The Interrupted Journey (1966), the book that started it all, we find Dr. Simon saying [chapter 12] that he found the most tenable explanation for the abduction story to be that the dreams of Mrs. Hill had "assumed the quality of a fantasised experience." In very diplomatic terms, he is saying, "I don't buy it." So the fact that Dr. Simon did not accept the abduction story is not exactly news, or at least it should not be to anyone carefully following both sides of this controversy. (We all know how few people that is.)


Yours Truly with Kathleen Marden and the "Flying Saucer Physicist," Stanton Friedman, at the MUFON Symposium, 2011, perhaps in happier days.

I realized that this ran counter to what Kathleen Marden, Betty Hill's niece and heir to her celebrated Saucer Story, was saying. What I didn't realize is how fiercely invested Marden is in preserving the illusion that Dr. Simon accepted all of the Hills' account as being factual, including the abduction story.

On December 26, Marden wrote on her Blog, "Debunkers at it Again." In it she says,

I received an email message from Andre Skondras on Christmas day informing me that debunker Robert Sheaffer, an associate of Philip Klass and longstanding member of CSI (formerly CSICOP) , had found a never before published letter allegedly written to Klass by Dr. Benjamin Simon. The letter dated March 1, 1976, was mailed by Klass to Betty in 1988. It spoke of Dr. Simon’s intent to “give the true story of the Betty and Barney Hill affair.” It is our opinion that Dr. Simon would not have stated that his untested, unproven conjectures were the truth. He was circumspect and professional in voicing his opinion. The intentions voiced in the letter would have been a violation of his contract with John Fuller and a violation of doctor-patient confidentiality.
Of course, that confidentiality had already been breached, with permission, by the entire commercial enterprise exploiting the Hills' account, including John Fuller's 1966 book The Interrupted Journey, and by 1976 the NBC-TV movie dramatizing their account, The UFO Incident. Once a story gets that far out into the public eye, and questions arise about its interpretation, you can't claim that further discussion constitutes a "violation." Once the Hills' sessions with Dr. Simon have become pillars of support for the pro-UFO abduction argument, you can't release that information selectively.

The late Karl Pflock gave Betty Hill this T-shirt (photo by author at the Indian Head conference, 2000)
But there was something in that letter even more upsetting (and ultimately threatening) to Marden's enterprise than Dr. Simon's skepticism about the abduction story. In his letter of March 1, 1976 to Philip J. Klass, Dr. Simon stated that "my interest in UFOs was almost entirely on the phenomenon of Barney Hill's developing racial paranoia which seemed to me to have been the best representation on the matter I have seen." But that was not Marden's biggest problem. In the letter Dr. Simon writes,

the Today show [Oct. 20, 1975] was the first time I did this openly to the public at large [state his skepticism about the abduction account]. A few days later I did the same thing on the NBC TV station here, WBZ, which resulted in  Betty telephoning and implying that I was lying when I said (what you have said in your book) that Betty's sister [Marden's mother] was much interested in UFOs and served as a stimulus, and that the idea of a true visitation had been suggested by her narration in the presence of her sister and her supervisor. She promptly telephoned WBZ and undoubtedly was looking for my appearances and affirmed that her sister was not interested in UFOs and that she had never told the story. Aside from the fact that this is a lie denying her own statements on the tapes we also received a letter from Betty's mother proclaiming that while I have the right of free speech, I was telling lies abasing her beloved daughter! I revealed the entire story on an hour an a half radio show with Larry Glick.

So that is the true dark heresy, which cannot be admitted: that Betty's sister was a UFO buff, and encouraged Betty's fantasies. Every time this was mentioned, Betty Hill (and now Kathleen Marden) would pop up to deny it. But here we have Dr. Simon saying that it's true.

Marden says that Klass sent a copy of the March 1 letter to him from Dr. Simon to Betty Hill in 1988. I do not know anything about that, but it does not surprise me. Klass and Mrs. Hill exchanged many letters, and he must have sent it along to prove a point he was trying to make. Marden continues,
I had thought about publishing the letter in my book Captured! The Betty and Barney Hill UFO Experience, with Stanton Friedman, but decided not to, due to uncertainty about the identity of the writer. Betty had marked "Forged Letter!” at the top of the letter. 
Now, it does not surprise me one bit that Betty Hill had said such an absurd thing. Mrs. Hill wrote and said many absurd things, and not just about her famous UFO incident. Even Marden admits in her book Captured (p. 275), "After Barney's death, she turned away from careful, objective evaluation, and with subjective enthusiasm began to identify any lights in the sky as UFOs." Although as I showed in my review of this book in The Skeptical Inquirer (November/December, 2007), after Barney's death was not the only time Betty Hill said absurd things about UFOs and aliens. There is much evidence of Betty making wild UFO claims with Barney sitting right beside her.

Taking complete leave of her senses, Marden joins in her aunt's delusion:
 I have had it and other letters that Dr. Simon wrote to Betty examined by several individuals, including three who were close to Dr. Simon, and all believe it is probably a forgery. The style and phraseology were not characteristic of Dr. Simon's writing. An important piece of information is the fact that Dr. Simon signed a non-competition clause with John Fuller. He could not have legally written a book. It is doubtful that Klass would have known this. Dr. Simon was circumspect with regard to sharing his opinions about the Hill case, and it would have been highly uncharacteristic of him to opine or violate doctor-patient confidentiality. 
Between the two of us, Marden and I have recently posted four letters from Dr. Simon, three from me (one of which she claims is a "forgery"), and one from her. As I understand it, she has clarified her claim to mean that only the letter if March 1 is a "forgery," the others are genuine. If you're inclined to believe her absurd claim, I urge you to compare the four letters. They are all very similar. None of them are "forgeries."And in all of them, Dr. Simon maintains the same thing: he believed that the Hills had a "sighting" (as do I), but he believed that the abduction story was not real and came from Betty's dreams. How did Barney learn about Betty's dreams? Betty always maintained that she never told him about them. But as Dr. Simon explained on the Larry Glick show, Betty was telling the truth saying that she did not tell him directly. However "she did tell it in Barney's presence [to Betty's sister, and her supervisor], and that's where he got it."

And to settle the matter of Dr. Simon's skepticism about the abduction story once and for all: you can go to the wonderful audio archive CEIV An Audio History Of Alien Abduction And Animal Mutilation 1957 1976 compiled by the well-known UFOlogist Wendy Connors. Click on track #21,
Betty Hill and Dr. Benjamin Simon are interviewed on the Today Show to promote the NBC TV movie, the UFO Incident, on October 25, 1975.  08:30
You will hear Dr. Simon describe the abduction account as a "fantasy," and plainly state, "the abduction did not happen."

Perhaps Ms. Marden will say that this recording is a "forgery," too?

 If you click #5, you can hear Dr. Simon on Larry Glick's radio show, saying more "heretical" things.


72 comments:

  1. Very good! I had always wanted to learn the view of the Hill's doctor.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Here is something interesting (hat tip to Chip Plescher):
    Angela "Overkill" Hill, a UFC fighter (!!!), is the granddaughter of Barney Hill. And she talks about her family's reaction to the UFO abduction story. Many of the are quite skeptical. Apparently Betty Hill is not exactly popular with them. (Skip forward to 53:00)

    https://soundcloud.com/uprn/mind-cemetery-angela-hill-talks-about-the-hill-abduction-also-discussing-carrion-going-in-on-mufon

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Mr. Shaeffer,
      I am a graduate student in a masters program at Cal Berkley where I am studying neural network psychiatry; essentially the connecting pathways of the brain involved with perception and other functions. My team has been studying the continuum of human perception and various cognitive stages of reality testing utilizing brain imagining and other technologies in clinical settings. Our work is strictly confidential and follows ethical protocols established decades ago. Among the spectrum of phenomena explored are the constellation experiences reported by a large sample of the U.S. population and other subsets. We have also been monitoring carefully how groups such as yours interact with such individuals. Within that context we found the content within this blob perplexing and quite frankly somewhat irresponsible and represented. I hope as a fellow professional, you will take this critique in an objective manner. At issue are several comments ascribed to Dr. Simon. One indicated that Mr. Barney Hill, according to Dr Simon and conveyed to a Phillip Klass suffered from "racial paranoia". My team has two issue with hat. 1) There is no definition of such a condition in peer reviewed literature of merit, nor is there a defined condition as labeled in any early or more contemporary DSM manuals. Dr Simon would not have advanced such a "hack" diagnosis to a third party in an off handed manner as written and such a communique would have broken a number of ethics codes. He also did not indicate that Mr Hill was being treated for that condition and if he were would not have been referenced in such an arbitrary manner without consent. In fact from the historical record Mr Hill showed no sign of an Axis 1 disorder as manifest in a fugue state and in any of the accounts of his experiences. We are therefore left with the disturbing conclusion that the alleged letter from Dr Simon to Dr Klass was forgery and for purposes of discrediting a number of parties. We have also concluded that that letter as a forgery was likely originated by Mr Klass himself, given his linguistic profile exhibited elsewhere. If true, this would call into question his ethics and motivations as an objective scientist in his own regard and in fact infers not only a disquieting personality style but that in fact if we are to categorize anyone, he might be framed as having antisocial personality disorder. We would like to know what experience you may have had with Mr. Klass and as distinct from those pictured above. Further, what background do you have in transactional cognitive therapy that affords the kind of rhetorical narrative contained herein? We look forward to you input sir.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    3. It is "Blog" not "Blob".
      "We" sounds like a "royal We".
      If you are the professional you claim to be, feel free to give everybody the names of the people on your team and some documentation to support the conclusion you have presented here. A professional will respond appropriately. A fraud will not respond or will respond with "how dare you question my authority" type statements. Your reply, like the claim you made here, will tell us much about the significance of the post above. BTW, Phil Klass was not a "Dr."

      Delete
    4. I would never reveal other students names sir and why are you targeting them. This provides validation for some people perception of you as being predatory and why sensible students and researchers should remain anonymous. This is only sensible and especially since your first inclination is to attack. No one does that to you.

      Delete
    5. My Shaeffer. I have nothing against you whatever. In fact just about all of us in who grew up California have an uncle who looks like yourself. Kind of a cross between Gallagher and Caitlyn Jenner and that's not a bad look. America is about diversity. Might be best to stay clear if you're carrying any watermelons though and if you know what I mean. And speaking of melons. The comb over was big in the 70s and thank heavens that ended and has been replaced by the beret. Be peace. http://www.gallaghersmash.com/pictures-2/

      Delete
    6. You were the one who posted first with the claim that the document is a forgery and that Klass was the likely suspect. You claimed that you had a "team" that had analyzed the document and drew these conclusions. Instead of presenting this evidence/analysis, you retreat to the "how dare you question my authority" position. We also learned that these were not professionals but "fellow students". Is this a case of the "blind leading the blind"?
      IMO, Anonymous is the same thing as being "just some guy from out of town". It carries absolutely no weight. Let us know when you have an actual paper that proves your claim.

      Delete
    7. So what? I'm looking for information without distraction regarding the concerns expressed. Who cares what you think?

      Delete
    8. Mr. Westfall:

      Try using paragraphs.
      Commas are also useful.
      How could an educated person lack even rudimentary spelling skills?
      You may want to double-check with a dictionary before you toss around important-sounding words.
      Some of your sentences are missing words necessary to make them complete thoughts.
      "...in his own regard and in fact infers..."- it doesn't infer anything. You infer. Denote would be correct for the sentence, although incorrect in context.

      So, you're performing "strictly confidential" "clinical studies" by reading a blog and its comment section. All this while naming the University and degree program, along with its areas of study. Sounds extremely confidential. Not to mention ethical. You truly represent your "team" well.

      Delete
  3. Mr. Westfall,

    Your letter above is rather peculiar, especially inasmuch as you say that 'your group' has been monitoring 'my group'. Sir, I don't HAVE a group here. It's just me writing.

    "We have also been monitoring carefully how groups such as yours interact with such individuals. Within that context we found the content within this blob perplexing and quite frankly somewhat irresponsible and represented."

    I seriously think that this is quite bogus, as psychology researchers at a prestigious university have better things to do than to read Blogs such as mine, and complain about them.

    Here is the current directory of psychology graduate students at UC Berkeley. It is nicely in alphabetical order. There is nobody on that list named "Westfall."
    http://psychology.berkeley.edu/people/graduate-students

    Also, Cal Berkeley DOES NOT HAVE a Master's program in Psychology. It is a PhD program only.

    You, sir, are a fraud. Who put you up to this?????

    P.S.: I've copied the letter you posted below, because I think you might try to "hide the evidence"(the second posting, already deleted, was just an accidental re-post of the first one.)

    Paul WestfallJanuary 7, 2016 at 6:44 PM

    Dear Mr. Shaeffer,
    I am a graduate student in a masters program at Cal Berkley where I am studying neural network psychiatry; essentially the connecting pathways of the brain involved with perception and other functions. My team has been studying the continuum of human perception and various cognitive stages of reality testing utilizing brain imagining and other technologies in clinical settings. Our work is strictly confidential and follows ethical protocols established decades ago. Among the spectrum of phenomena explored are the constellation experiences reported by a large sample of the U.S. population and other subsets. We have also been monitoring carefully how groups such as yours interact with such individuals. Within that context we found the content within this blob perplexing and quite frankly somewhat irresponsible and represented. I hope as a fellow professional, you will take this critique in an objective manner. At issue are several comments ascribed to Dr. Simon. One indicated that Mr. Barney Hill, according to Dr Simon and conveyed to a Phillip Klass suffered from "racial paranoia". My team has two issue with hat. 1) There is no definition of such a condition in peer reviewed literature of merit, nor is there a defined condition as labeled in any early or more contemporary DSM manuals. Dr Simon would not have advanced such a "hack" diagnosis to a third party in an off handed manner as written and such a communique would have broken a number of ethics codes. He also did not indicate that Mr Hill was being treated for that condition and if he were would not have been referenced in such an arbitrary manner without consent. In fact from the historical record Mr Hill showed no sign of an Axis 1 disorder as manifest in a fugue state and in any of the accounts of his experiences. We are therefore left with the disturbing conclusion that the alleged letter from Dr Simon to Dr Klass was forgery and for purposes of discrediting a number of parties. We have also concluded that that letter as a forgery was likely originated by Mr Klass himself, given his linguistic profile exhibited elsewhere. If true, this would call into question his ethics and motivations as an objective scientist in his own regard and in fact infers not only a disquieting personality style but that in fact if we are to categorize anyone, he might be framed as having antisocial personality disorder. We would like to know what experience you may have had with Mr. Klass and as distinct from those pictured above. Further, what background do you have in transactional cognitive therapy that affords the kind of rhetorical narrative contained herein? We look forward to you input sir.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    2. My Shaeffer. I have nothing against you whatever. In fact just about all of us in who grew up California have an uncle who looks like yourself. Kind of a cross between Gallagher and Caitlyn Jenner and that's not a bad look. America is about diversity. Might be best to stay clear if you're carrying any watermelons though and if you know what I mean. And speaking of melons. The comb over was big in the 70s and thank heavens that ended and has been replaced by the beret. Be peace. http://www.gallaghersmash.com/pictures-2/

      Delete
    3. Oh...further...the letter is not "above"..it is "below" Your x,y, z coordinates are off. How are we to take you as a serious investigator. And why did you delete my post above. I just asked objectively whether you have otherwise contributed to society in any meaningful way and at an advanced age. Why would you avoid that question? Is that not reasonable?

      Delete
    4. Mr. Westfall, my you are bringing up weighty issues here. I look like somebody's uncle, and you don't like how I wear my hair! Oh my! Don't forget, I'm a grandfather, too. Gotta mix that in.

      I did not delete anything in this thread. It says, "This comment has been removed by the author." Sheesh.

      Actually, when I wore a hat like Gallagher some people believed that I was Gallagher!

      Delete
    5. and that's okay. now what about the poor behavior by Mr Klass that the other man referenced. If you are a legitimate skeptic and wish to be considered objective, you will divulge what that behavior was to be credible to me and others. You have far more experience than a 19 year old and should accept that responsible to remain contemporary to those of us whogrew up in the age of social media and can cross reference claims very quickly. Mr Klass has a very poor reputation that you can validate or not and as a reflection of your own character. You were far more intimate than the others that he and you and the others here have attacked. That is reasonable and logical. Praise be.

      Delete
  4. That believers are religiously compelled to actually lie in order to please Saucer Jesus is hilarious.

    When not lying outright, they spend a lot of time complaining about dishonest skeptics as though skeptics are the ones who make their evidence so crappy.

    Lance

    ReplyDelete
  5. "I am a graduate student in a masters program at Cal Berkley where I am studying neural network psychiatry; essentially the connecting pathways of the brain involved with perception and other functions."

    More a subset of psychology which there are many...perhaps a topic of a master's thesis dissertation which means nothing in itself. More masters programs are into group projects these days, relegating the lone wolf dissertation obsolete.

    One does not study a psychiatry field without finishing 4 years of med-school with follow on residencies and fellowships. So Mr. Westfall's claims are suspect.

    I know that there is a subset of psychiatry: neural molecular psychiatry. But most are practicing the flavor of the current paradigm...cognitive behavior theories.

    Perhaps Mr. Westfall will reply to all here and clarify what the heck he is really into and how his studies intersect with blogs such as Robert's.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As I explained in another place I am in fact an undergraduate student in psychology and eventually I wish to study neural networks and conscious perception. I was sterred here by another student and I found Mr. Shaffer's narrative somewhat amateurish given his proposals and wished for clarifications. His responses validated my concerns as ad hominem and are in there own right and in a more mundane manner; interesting as part of the continuum of content. It is all part of a composite sir. Have a nice weekend.

      Delete
    2. So you basically lied about your position to inflate your claim. What else are you lying about?

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. I'm sorry. Whom were you speaking to? would that be me? I am making no claims. I am merely doing my best to avoid poorly socialized people such as yourself so that I acn do my undergraduate research. Lets try to not put words in my mouth. Are we clear?

      Delete
    5. But these were your words! I put nothing in your mouth. YOU made the claim, "I am a graduate student in a masters program at Cal Berkley where I am studying neural network psychiatry". We now know that you were not truthful. Can you answer why? Because of this statement being false, we have to question just about everything else you stated.

      Delete
    6. you don't need to question anything my friend when you have Jesus in your heart. I may be a sinner but at least I have grace.

      Delete
  6. He can't even spell the name of his own college, or the state it is in. What on earth is 'Cal Berkley' anyway?

    Perhaps the writer is one 'Kal Korff' (or 'Cal Corff' if you prefer).


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chris, "Cal Berkeley" is a commonly-used abbreviation for "University of California at Berkeley." Also "UC Berkeley" or "UCB". Actually, since the Berkeley campus was the original campus for the UC system, often it's simply called "Cal", as if there were no other UC campuses.

      As for Kal Korff, he is on the "other side" of this issue, i.e. anti-Hill case.

      Delete
    2. But you're right - he can't even spell "Berkeley" correctly!

      Delete
    3. Ignorant irrationals almost always spell "Berkeley" wrong, and make other spelling errors.

      Korff may have been rational in the past, but his behavior these past few years is anything but. That's why cda is goofing on Kal.

      I agree: someone put this person up to this crudely kooky, worthless post, and "Paul Westfall" is most probably fictitious.

      Delete
    4. You wrote about KK's claims in 2007 that, "Colonel Korff" is probably about as official as "Colonel Sanders."

      Funny stuff.... So you know all about it, of course.

      How was KK ever published by a skeptical organization when he's so obviously prone to fantasy?

      I've never read his books, and now I'm glad.

      Delete
    5. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    6. you are erect mr Shaffer. I did not spell Berkeley in a correct manner and I explained why.

      Delete
    7. My Shaeffer. I have nothing against you whatever. In fact just about all of us in who grew up California have an uncle who looks like yourself. Kind of a cross between Gallagher and Caitlyn Jenner and that's not a bad look. America is about diversity. Might be best to stay clear if you're carrying any watermelons though and if you know what I mean. And speaking of melons. The comb over was big in the 70s and thank heavens that ended and has been replaced by the beret. Be peace. http://www.gallaghersmash.com/pictures-2/

      Delete
    8. No need to be a grammar-nazi when there's no ambiguities about internet abbreviations, but it should be pointed out that Mr. Westfall misspells 'Sheaffer' in two different ways, alternately, and on my first scan, has never spelled it correctly.

      Delete
    9. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
  7. Lie, whine about skeptics, and a dozen other blatant tells that make Paul's post a parody of what not to do.

    Tricks that are as old as the subject, and what did it ever get them?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. why is everyone so reactive here? I am just a student asking some logical questions. We are very fair and open minded. As a young people we could easily point out that Mr. Shaefer is trying to hang on to his youth through his appearance as was pointed out by one of fathers and that may or may not be true but who are we to judge. If he walked into a local Starbucks we would would treat him like anyone sle and that would be fair. There are many people nearing 70 or even older who look like him. Look at Mick Jagger for example. There are people in wheel chairs going to his concerts. Have a nice weekend and thankyou for your input. Be peace my friend.

      Delete
    2. You WERE NOT asking logical questions! My reaction is to this claim you made:
      "We are therefore left with the disturbing conclusion that the alleged letter from Dr Simon to Dr Klass was forgery and for purposes of discrediting a number of parties. We have also concluded that that letter as a forgery was likely originated by Mr Klass himself, given his linguistic profile exhibited elsewhere. If true, this would call into question his ethics and motivations as an objective scientist in his own regard and in fact infers not only a disquieting personality style but that in fact if we are to categorize anyone, he might be framed as having antisocial personality disorder."
      This reaction is demanding for you to present us with the evidence on how you arrived at this conclusion. If you are professional, you certainly could do this. Failure to do so indicates your conclusion is not based on anything but your own personal bias.

      Delete
    3. so what is wrong with that. How do you know that that is not true as a thought experiment. It is possible isn't it? many of the transactions that we see here and on other blogs look pretty rudimentary with no accountability to their veracity. I'm still learning ethics and standards in undergraduate school and you all have an obligation to set an appropriate standard. How is that not reasonable. Prove to me that that is not reasonable.

      Delete
    4. Paul,

      Ok, your still working on your undergrad degree in what psychology? Nothing wrong with that except you lead us to believe that you were doing graduate work...NOT so good.

      I'm afraid that I'm having a difficult time following your frame of thought as you respond to others. I recommend that you learn to frame a proper and coherent argument if you do intend on obtaining a graduate level degree.

      I guess I getting soft as I get older...would have ripped you a new one as I had to work my ass off for my grad degree which included a final dissertation which I had to complete while on active duty in the Air Force.

      Delete
    5. what is it that you find so disagreeable and how do you know I'm wrong. And what's with your hat? Why does everyone in here seem to be obsessed with hats.

      Delete
  8. Mr Westfall: If you really are a student you would know that honesty is important to research and making repeated reference to personal appearance is hardly the way to have a discussion or obtain information.

    I started at the thread above this and was willing to give you some benefit of the doubt as simply being an immature student. But the posts here do not rise to that level. The reference to Starbucks makes me wonder if you were the person I saw typing away in the corner, muttering to himself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. well appearance does count for something in this society and I don't understand why Mr Shaffer can't come to terms with the fact that he is pushing 70 and still feels that he must look 20. I mean, no one can think that is an attractive look. Do you? I mean would you wear that hat? That went out in the late 60s during the great folk scare.

      Delete
    2. Paul:

      To get to the point (in case you had forgotten), please tell us if you believe Betty and Barney Hill were abducted by extraterrestrials from Zeti Reticuli. Or were they possibly abducted by ETs from some other star system and that Betty got confused which one it was? Most important of all: are you, by any chance, writing a PhD thesis on this abduction?





      Delete
    3. I find it amusing that you are obsessed with people's personal appearances. I thought that went out after people graduated from grade school or high school.
      So far, we have determined that your original posting was not very truthful/factual at all.
      1. You tried to tell everyone you were a graduate student. You weren't.
      2. You claimed that there was a "team" of some kind that analyzed the document. The implication is that these were all experts in psychology. It now is determined that your "team" was nothing more than fellow students, who will go unnamed. For all we know, they do not even exist except in your mind.
      3. You claim there was an analysis of some kind. Now you appear to say it was nothing more than a "thought experiment". One would think somebody who was interested in proving a forgery would give us examples of how Klass wrote and show comparisons of his writing to the Simon letter to demonstrate your claim was true. You might even find examples of his typewriter producing similar type in the Simon letter (typewriters can sometimes produce certain traces that can be matched like the way a certain letter appears).

      Your claims indicate your honesty must be questioned. This is why I have challenged you here. If you find that upsetting then you only have yourself to blame because you were not ready to defend your statements properly.

      Robert has corresponded with Phil for many decades so I defer to his opinion on if Phil was capable of creating such a hoax. There are stories, and some proof, that Phil did/said some things that I would not approve. However, hoaxing a letter from Dr. Simon was not one of them. It is the kind of claim that needs better proof than what you have presented so far.

      Delete
    4. Mr. Westfall,

      So, you lied about your educational credentials.

      You lied about your academic affiliation.

      But you expect us to take you seriously as a researcher, along with your supposed (and unnamed) "team". Which very likely could also be a lie.

      In what university are you enrolled? Frankly, you make so many errors in spelling and grammar that it's difficult for me to believe that you could be enrolled at any reputable university, even as an undergraduate. You'd fail English. Perhaps you are at some 'open enrollment' college, that will enroll anyone who pays the tuition.

      But frankly, I'm thinking that you're probably just a High School kid putting on airs. A bright kid, but still a kid. Frankly, that is the level of discourse you have demonstrated, talking about my hair and such.

      Delete
    5. Mr Shaefer.....You don't amd yet you do. And so why are you so paranoid and angry Mr Shaefer. I believe we are back to the hair thing and as I have stated that is nothing to be concerned about. You should just ignore people like myself who are testing peoples reactions to cognitive stimulus. Just think of me as the marshmallow man from your childhood. Perhaps you were humiliated or frightened by such an image. Just learn to ignore such circumstances and ignore the marshmallow man when he comes back in. Ba Ba Booie...

      Delete
    6. CDA...How do I know? I'm much more interested why allegedly grown up men and women are preoccupied and obsessed with disproving a set of phenomena to advance an agenda of exalted sanctimony. And over what? some people that seem to have been trammatized by something they didn't understand? To take advantage of such people make people like Shaefer and Tim and Klass tawdry bloviating self impressed bullies. I would propose that that is far more interesting to examine.

      Delete
    7. So far, I have seen you resort to name-calling and ridiculing people for their appearance/wearing of hats. Time to look at the definition of "bully".

      Delete
    8. Mr Shafer. I don't use my real name because of your poor behavior exhibited towards others in an apparent attempt to ruin their reputations and all that. I am just a 19 year young man starying my career and you are an old fart bent on ruining people you find disagreeable. That indicates a profound lack of conscience.

      Delete
    9. He's now misspelled 'Sheaffer' a third way.

      Delete
    10. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
  9. Tim...well that actually explains a lot. You see and to my earlier thesis you can see why we are on our guard. When we have spoken to people about Mr Klass the phrase "narcissistic miserable prick" has come up several times. So you can understand our caution. That's why we must confront the issues head on. Praise Jesus.

    ReplyDelete
  10. So now we see that you asked some people about Klass. You never met the man and, apparently, have not read much of what he wrote. As I stated previously, Klass had his bad moments and I am not going to defend those events. However, he was also a rather friendly individual to those who knew him. He was always helpful when I requested things from him. Did you just talk to those who had an ax to grind? What about people who knew him (like Robert Sheaffer and James Oberg)? Did you talk to people who knew him professionally (i.e. at aviation week where he worked)? Did you read any of his books? It seems your research technique is only to select the information that supports your position instead of considering other points of view.
    You came onto the blog claiming a lot of things. The more you write the more it appears that your education to date is a failure. Hopefully, you can learn from mistakes otherwise you will continue to repeat them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
  11. So now we see that you asked some people about Klass. You never met the man and, apparently, have not read much of what he wrote. As I stated previously, Klass had his bad moments and I am not going to defend those events. However, he was also a rather friendly individual to those who knew him. He was always helpful when I requested things from him. Did you just talk to those who had an ax to grind? What about people who knew him (like Robert Sheaffer and James Oberg)? Did you talk to people who knew him professionally (i.e. at aviation week where he worked)? Did you read any of his books? It seems your research technique is only to select the information that supports your position instead of considering other points of view.
    You came onto the blog claiming a lot of things. The more you write the more it appears that your education to date is a failure. Hopefully, you can learn from mistakes otherwise you will continue to repeat them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And what are those "bad moments" that you claim but won't be specific about? I never met Hitler but I would believe we both would agree that he was a malevolent fellow. Mr. Shafer never answered the question that you asked regarding that letter. And so we both know that he did bad things and so we are suspect of anyone's associations or admiration of him and especially with the shadow legacy exhibited here and by your's and others behavior. Clearly you don't have Jesus in your life and there is always time for redemption if you will just confess to your misdeeds and maladaptive behavior and those of Mr Klass. As for Aviation week, I am only 19 years old and Mr Klass would be about 97 years old if he was alive. You are exhibiting traits of a feeble mind and are flailing about like a man child imbecile.

      Delete
  12. Those "moments" are a matter of record and I am sure that your sources provided the details. I am not going to hammer out such incidents here. However, I never have heard anybody state he forged documents. He also never lied about who he was or misrepresented himself. This all indicates he might have had flaws but lying was not one of them.
    There are those right here, who met Phil and were friends with him. I am sure there are those at Aviation week that knew him as well that are still alive. Failure to even try and contact people beyond a small sample is not very good research IMO.

    I never claimed to be "gifted" as you have but I do consider myself reasonably intelligent. Calling me an "imbecile" is an ad hominem. Is this the kind of logic you are being taught in school?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. and why wouldn't you spell out his misdeeds? And the headline regarding authored by Mr. Shafer says in bold letters "Forgery" How can you say you've never seem that. It's right in front of you. Are you hiding something that would interfere with your ability to campaign on his behalf in the most favorable light? You are originating a product that we are to believe is objective even though your mission statement as paraphrased is one to proactively discredit others. Not revealing Mr. Klass's character issues that you reference appears disingenuous and actually demonstrates a cover up. Indeed, you yourself are thereby fueling the flames of a conspiracy by admitting misdeeds worthy of such a coverup. How can you now rectify that dilemma that you created? .You are not the only source of the historical record and without full disclosure this sort of non disclosure only discredits you with respect to other sources we read and makes the historical record even more intriguing.

      Delete
  13. The long standing feud between Stanton Friedman, Dr. McDonald, and other UFO personalities is well known and anybody with a little bit of googling can discover them. They are a matter of public record at various UFO websites, where Klass is portrayed as a villain. Feel free to use Google. I have no interest in hashing this out here. That is not what this blog entry is about. The entry is about Dr. Simon's letter to Klass. You need to divorce yourself from your beliefs and determine if the document is a forgery. Based on what Robert has presented, there is no reason to suspect it is. Simon freely expressed these opinions in other correspondence (were these forgeries as well?) and in recorded interviews (also dubbed/edited into forgeries?). Therefore, to declare the document a forgery is going to take a lot more than the say so of a teenager, who has taken "psychology 101" and proclaimed himself an expert.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If the author is an objective skeptic he will display a peer reviewed publically published composite of Dr Simon literature so that the consumer of the information he is publishing can contrast that baseline against the letter in question and then decide for themselves. Anything short of that is unprofessional and confirms some people suspicions that the letter is a fraud. That is the consensus this morning from the Cupertino Starbucks. I mean, come on you dope. Try to grow intellectually a little and stop making frickin excuses. 78% of college graduates believes that there is something to UFOs and related phenomena. Your kind of gas lighting is preposterous and should be embarrassing to you. It just makes Klass and Shafer look even more inconsequential. Praise be and as we walk with the Lord.

      Delete
    2. More personal attacks. Now I am a "dope". I have to consider the source for this comment. I have been called much worse in UFOlogical circles so I suggest you stop with the name-calling. BTW, where did you get the 78% number?

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. BTW, this poll says only 48% of ALL Americans believe that UFOs are alien. Out of that number only 37% are college grads. That is something like 18% by my computations:
      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/11/48-percent-of-americans-believe-in-ufos_n_3900669.html

      Delete
    5. So what? That poll doesn't disaggregate and qualify the questioned asked. The overriding point is as follows. We are not so much concerned about who or who does not believe what and to what extent. There is a sample of U.S. citizens and others across the globe who have had experiences that they cannot understand and are honest and forthright enough to wish to discuss as a means by which to comes to terms with those experiences. As a caring society we should in the least understand that some people are being frightened by something; Not bullied and belittled as Klass, you and the bozo that originates this blog with the intent of humiliating them and those researching the issue. In fact Klass through the lens of his narcissistic pathology went to elaborate lengths to ruin the careers of some researchers in areas that were UNRELATED to ufology. That was personal. That was predatory.That's the stuff of a sociopath; period. And, as stated, the bozo that runs this nuthous identifies with that socioapath. he lacks the capacity for empathy, to out himself in the shoes of those that he intends harm. THAT'S WHAT SOCIOPATHS ARE ALL ABOUT...They se people merely as an abstract; a means to an end and upon whom to exact punishment. And YOU buster; are at least enabling that kind of behavior. I'm surprised that no one ever kicked Klass in the nuts; perhaps he didn't have any. Cowards often don't.

      Delete
  14. Paul:

    How many times will you have to spell Robert Sheaffer's name wrongly (and differently each time) before you finally get it correct? It is plainly there for you to see.

    If in doubt, it is exactly the same as that of a certain Walter Sheaffer who invented a make of fountain pen c. 1912.

    [with apologies to Robert for bringing up this piece of trivia]



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because he doesn't matter to me one bit. The content as expressed on this and other sites and as conveyed or peddled to us trying to do research IS what we're attempting to thread through. That's why. I'm a busy young man and in the process of attempting to find legit information I am attempting to get past the unprofessional and ad hominem nature of the author's content and find some objective content.

      Delete
  15. Paul: I was thinking you may attend Branson since you have just the right amount of entitlement combined with the ability to use certain words without fully appreciating their meaning. But the reference to the Cupertino Starbucks throws that theory into doubt.

    But regardless, if you are really interested in how traumatized people are manipulated or used to someone's advantage, there is plenty of information here or at Jack Brewer's UFO Trail that could inform you. If you are interested in the need for peer reviewed research, then you could look at the kind of information that Dr Tyler Kokjohn has provided in relation to abduction "researchers." But if you simply want to troll around this blog, that is another matter altogether. I am too busy for that. I did not even have time to hang out at Starbucks today to get a consensus on anything.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nope. I actually have become much more interested in Phillip Klass's axis two personality disorder and his investigation by the FBI and Shaffer's long term relationship with him. In than regard I am interested in investigating both's lonf standing bullying people in distress and their mutual creation of straw men as an excuse. I find that fascinating. Don't you? Some people have long thought of the South Bay as being a big cow town. That is so elitist isn't it. We're just a bunch of hard working young folks who don't put up with a lot of bullshit and see through people pretty easily. And to your last comment. Then don't. This is not for you. It's for my generation who see things straight. As I said, the UFO phenomena is one thing. I don't know. I'm open minded. It's probably along a continuum...And then there is the pathology of Klass and his Ilk. Completely unacceptable as described by the FBI and others who apparently came close to throwing him in jail.

      Delete
  16. "If the author is an objective skeptic he will display a peer reviewed publically published composite of Dr Simon literature"

    As if such a thing existed.

    OK, we have wasted enough time with this "Westfall" character, whatever his real name is.At first I thought he was a sock puppet created as part of somebody's strategy. Now we see that he is just a kiddie making up false credentials because he is hungry for attention. I'm not going to give him any more attention.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course it does. Simon was a well regarded and prominent MD. If you compelled to do so in an objective manner, you would have the integrity to legitimately investigate the letter in question. Instead, you act petulant and lack accountability and then blame others. That is the response of someone poorly socialized and predatory and apparently consistent with the way Klass acted. And it took a 19 year old to confront you and the legacy of klass that is carried here. How deceitful. How shameful. What a legacy to leave for your children sir.

      Delete
  17. I have erased asome of Westfall's more abusive and scurrilous comments (leaving a few so folks can see why I had to). From this point on, I'll erase everything he posts. He came on here using a false name, false credentials, and a false academic affiliation. When I exposed his impostures, he became furious and started posting all kinds of abusive material. We do not need that here.

    Please don't feed the troll.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete

Keep your comments relevant, and keep them civil! That means no personal attacks will be allowed, by anyone, on anyone. Commenters are welcome to disagree with me, or with other comments, but state your arguments using logic, and with a civil tone. Comments in violation of these rules will be deleted, and offenders banned.

Comments should be in English, although quotes from foreign-language sources are fine as long as they're relevant, and you explain them. Anonymous postings are not permitted. If you don't want to use your real name, then make up a name for yourself, and use it consistently.