|
Post by JoeGeist on May 7, 2008 17:01:44 GMT -11
|
|
|
Post by ifpthenq on May 14, 2008 14:01:47 GMT -11
I don't always agree with Friedman but he doesn't accept frauds or quacks either...
I enjoyed his refutation of old Bob Lazar--the backward engineer!
PGA
|
|
|
Post by JoeGeist on May 14, 2008 14:27:57 GMT -11
You are right, Friedman has surprised me from time to time. Just when I think maybe Friedman maybe OK he comes out w/ something a little too squirrelly for my pallet. I just watched a show on History about Bob Lazar and his claims. Freidman was on it and it gave me the idea to start this thread. Friedman also has calmed down from his younger days. I had a couple two hour documentary's from the early 70's on tape and Stan was very outspoken about aliens and nuclear technology. I don't recall what they were called, unfortunately.
|
|
|
Post by ifpthenq on May 18, 2008 9:07:16 GMT -11
Stanton Friedman doesn't have a Phd--he has an Msc in Physics. Not trying to be "snarky" I just noticed the original post was in error--and I am trying to resurrect to word "snark"from my original SciFi snark hunt. If Lit wants to claim I am beating a dead horse--forget Manson--welcome to my overindulgent snark fantasy.
I don't always agree with Friedman on his conclusion that evidence backs the UFO are real hypothesis. In all fairness though, I haven't read the same government reports and studies Friedman has; though I have seen a few of them referred to on History and Discovery Channel programs. I am a bit skeptical of examined document research such as that concerning the Majestic 12 documents; I would like to see some neutral parties investigate quite a bit more.
PGA
|
|
|
Post by JoeGeist on May 18, 2008 9:56:12 GMT -11
The majestic 12 documents are his big evidence but as I remeber there were inconsistencies in the dating format, and the type that was used hadn't been invented at the time the documents were referencing. You are of course right He doesn't have a doctorate in anything but alot of people seem to think he does. Including myself apparently back when I originally started this thread. Those were the days I was niave, young, and fancy free. Snark away Ifp I deserve it.
|
|
|
Post by literarysnob on May 18, 2008 10:13:28 GMT -11
Stanton Friedman doesn't have a Phd--he has an Msc in Physics. Not trying to be "snarky" I just noticed the original post was in error--and I am trying to resurrect to word "snark"from my original SciFi snark hunt. If Lit wants to claim I am beating a dead horse--forget Manson--welcome to my overindulgent snark fantasy. I don't always agree with Friedman on his conclusion that evidence backs the UFO are real hypothesis. In all fairness though, I haven't read the same government reports and studies Friedman has; though I have seen a few of them referred to on History and Discovery Channel programs. I am a bit skeptical of examined document research such as that concerning the Majestic 12 documents; I would like to see some neutral parties investigate quite a bit more. PGA I only made the "beating a dead horse" remark when I did NOT remember that you were doing that analysis for your final paper in a class. Then it became ..oops I forgot!!!! But I was in the final weeks of my semester and was only focusing on what my final papers were...not yours!!!
|
|
|
Post by ifpthenq on May 18, 2008 12:06:22 GMT -11
Stanton Friedman doesn't have a Phd--he has an Msc in Physics. Not trying to be "snarky" I just noticed the original post was in error--and I am trying to resurrect to word "snark"from my original SciFi snark hunt. If Lit wants to claim I am beating a dead horse--forget Manson--welcome to my overindulgent snark fantasy. I don't always agree with Friedman on his conclusion that evidence backs the UFO are real hypothesis. In all fairness though, I haven't read the same government reports and studies Friedman has; though I have seen a few of them referred to on History and Discovery Channel programs. I am a bit skeptical of examined document research such as that concerning the Majestic 12 documents; I would like to see some neutral parties investigate quite a bit more. PGA I only made the "beating a dead horse" remark when I did NOT remember that you were doing that analysis for your final paper in a class. Then it became ..oops I forgot!!!! But I was in the final weeks of my semester and was only focusing on what my final papers were...not yours!!! I was just messing with you. Though I am going on another snark hunt soon... PGA
|
|
|
Post by dreamsinger on Jun 1, 2008 10:00:39 GMT -11
Stanton Friedman doesn't have a Phd--he has an Msc in Physics. Not trying to be "snarky" I just noticed the original post was in error--and I am trying to resurrect to word "snark"from my original SciFi snark hunt. If Lit wants to claim I am beating a dead horse--forget Manson--welcome to my overindulgent snark fantasy. I don't always agree with Friedman on his conclusion that evidence backs the UFO are real hypothesis. In all fairness though, I haven't read the same government reports and studies Friedman has; though I have seen a few of them referred to on History and Discovery Channel programs. I am a bit skeptical of examined document research such as that concerning the Majestic 12 documents; I would like to see some neutral parties investigate quite a bit more. PGA I'm very leery of Stanton Friedman. I can't remember the incident off hand but I remember he said it was real and it was later proven to be fake. The big one that he back is Roswell, which amazes me because he doesn't support the original story. He supports the evolved story. The original story didn't mention a craft per se, but a foil, metallic object. He also feeds on the lack of released documents and that according to the freedom of information act, they should have been released. This used to be one of his harping points. Most of what I've seen on Roswell are nothing more than eyewitness stories. Stories that seem to have evolved over the decades. The documents that I saw that had been recently released were that Roswell was the beginning of the stealth program, which makes sense because of all the radar installations in the area at that time. They also showed some of the foil targets that were created with balsa wood, gum wrappers, foil and a weather balloon. Along with that was a video interview with one of the technicians who worked on the project. The reason for keeping the documents sealed for so long was that nobody else had figured out stealth technology until several years ago when the Russians have finally unraveled all the secrets and had sold them. Since they were available for purchase, the secrets were no longer classified in the name of national security and the documents released. I wonder if Friedman has seen that? This page on his site reminds me of that one lady "How to deal with Skeptics". www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfchlng.htmlLike ifpthenq, I haven't seen all the documents Friedman has, but he seems to make leaps to conclusions that don't seem warranted. Like Joe points out, the Majestic 12 documents have some problems. He is usually entertaining and usually has better documents, stories and ideas than most I've seen in the UFO field.
|
|
|
Post by ifpthenq on Jun 1, 2008 10:43:33 GMT -11
Stanton Friedman doesn't have a Phd--he has an Msc in Physics. Not trying to be "snarky" I just noticed the original post was in error--and I am trying to resurrect to word "snark"from my original SciFi snark hunt. If Lit wants to claim I am beating a dead horse--forget Manson--welcome to my overindulgent snark fantasy. I don't always agree with Friedman on his conclusion that evidence backs the UFO are real hypothesis. In all fairness though, I haven't read the same government reports and studies Friedman has; though I have seen a few of them referred to on History and Discovery Channel programs. I am a bit skeptical of examined document research such as that concerning the Majestic 12 documents; I would like to see some neutral parties investigate quite a bit more. PGA I'm very leery of Stanton Friedman. I can't remember the incident off hand but I remember he said it was real and it was later proven to be fake. The big one that he back is Roswell, which amazes me because he doesn't support the original story. He supports the evolved story. The original story didn't mention a craft per se, but a foil, metallic object. He also feeds on the lack of released documents and that according to the freedom of information act, they should have been released. This used to be one of his harping points. Most of what I've seen on Roswell are nothing more than eyewitness stories. Stories that seem to have evolved over the decades. The documents that I saw that had been recently released were that Roswell was the beginning of the stealth program, which makes sense because of all the radar installations in the area at that time. They also showed some of the foil targets that were created with balsa wood, gum wrappers, foil and a weather balloon. Along with that was a video interview with one of the technicians who worked on the project. The reason for keeping the documents sealed for so long was that nobody else had figured out stealth technology until several years ago when the Russians have finally unraveled all the secrets and had sold them. Since they were available for purchase, the secrets were no longer classified in the name of national security and the documents released. I wonder if Friedman has seen that? This page on his site reminds me of that one lady "How to deal with Skeptics". www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfchlng.htmlLike ifpthenq, I haven't seen all the documents Friedman has, but he seems to make leaps to conclusions that don't seem warranted. Like Joe points out, the Majestic 12 documents have some problems. He is usually entertaining and usually has better documents, stories and ideas than most I've seen in the UFO field. Friedman makes the claim that 97% of us out there haven't read the 5 major scientific studies on UFO's--but that "most" people accept that some of the documented cases are UFOs. If people have not been exposed to these 5 wonder studies Friedman has been exposed to--there must be some serious sightings, pseudoscience, and delusion going on beneath the belief in the Stanton fanclub! Friedman is really making the masked claim that only certain Washington scientific insiders should even believe in the UFO phenomenon--the rest of us morons are really up the epistemological river sans paddle. I would love to see these 5 studies, and the peer reviewed discussion regarding their contents. Does Stanton have them on his site? I have certainly seen many documentary programs on Majestic 12, Stanton, and many other UFO topics--but have seen few really good studies that didn't attribute the entire phenomenon to delusion and mass hysteria. Maybe I just have to buy the newest Stanton F. book, Flying Saucers and Science! Everybody in the paranormal seems to have a book, a website, and a Paypal account that needs your money! PGA
|
|
|
Post by JoeGeist on Jun 1, 2008 21:14:44 GMT -11
I'm very leery of Stanton Friedman. I can't remember the incident off hand but I remember he said it was real and it was later proven to be fake. The big one that he back is Roswell, which amazes me because he doesn't support the original story. He supports the evolved story. The original story didn't mention a craft per se, but a foil, metallic object. He also feeds on the lack of released documents and that according to the freedom of information act, they should have been released. This used to be one of his harping points. Most of what I've seen on Roswell are nothing more than eyewitness stories. Stories that seem to have evolved over the decades. The documents that I saw that had been recently released were that Roswell was the beginning of the stealth program, which makes sense because of all the radar installations in the area at that time. They also showed some of the foil targets that were created with balsa wood, gum wrappers, foil and a weather balloon. Along with that was a video interview with one of the technicians who worked on the project. The reason for keeping the documents sealed for so long was that nobody else had figured out stealth technology until several years ago when the Russians have finally unraveled all the secrets and had sold them. Since they were available for purchase, the secrets were no longer classified in the name of national security and the documents released. I wonder if Friedman has seen that? This page on his site reminds me of that one lady "How to deal with Skeptics". www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfchlng.htmlLike ifpthenq, I haven't seen all the documents Friedman has, but he seems to make leaps to conclusions that don't seem warranted. Like Joe points out, the Majestic 12 documents have some problems. He is usually entertaining and usually has better documents, stories and ideas than most I've seen in the UFO field. Friedman makes the claim that 97% of us out there haven't read the 5 major scientific studies on UFO's--but that "most" people accept that some of the documented cases are UFOs. If people have not been exposed to these 5 wonder studies Friedman has been exposed to--there must be some serious sightings, pseudoscience, and delusion going on beneath the belief in the Stanton fanclub! Friedman is really making the masked claim that only certain Washington scientific insiders should even believe in the UFO phenomenon--the rest of us morons are really up the epistemological river sans paddle. I would love to see these 5 studies, and the peer reviewed discussion regarding their contents. Does Stanton have them on his site? I have certainly seen many documentary programs on Majestic 12, Stanton, and many other UFO topics--but have seen few really good studies that didn't attribute the entire phenomenon to delusion and mass hysteria. Maybe I just have to buy the newest Stanton F. book, Flying Saucers and Science! Everybody in the paranormal seems to have a book, a website, and a Paypal account that needs your money! PGA So you are saying I just needlessly blew ten bucks? I had some video's of some old paranormal show from the 70's and if you thought he was full of bs now he was more confident and grandiose then. I wish I still had them or had an idea what the heck the show was.
|
|
|
Post by dreamsinger on Jun 2, 2008 14:43:51 GMT -11
I'm very leery of Stanton Friedman. I can't remember the incident off hand but I remember he said it was real and it was later proven to be fake. The big one that he back is Roswell, which amazes me because he doesn't support the original story. He supports the evolved story. The original story didn't mention a craft per se, but a foil, metallic object. He also feeds on the lack of released documents and that according to the freedom of information act, they should have been released. This used to be one of his harping points. Most of what I've seen on Roswell are nothing more than eyewitness stories. Stories that seem to have evolved over the decades. The documents that I saw that had been recently released were that Roswell was the beginning of the stealth program, which makes sense because of all the radar installations in the area at that time. They also showed some of the foil targets that were created with balsa wood, gum wrappers, foil and a weather balloon. Along with that was a video interview with one of the technicians who worked on the project. The reason for keeping the documents sealed for so long was that nobody else had figured out stealth technology until several years ago when the Russians have finally unraveled all the secrets and had sold them. Since they were available for purchase, the secrets were no longer classified in the name of national security and the documents released. I wonder if Friedman has seen that? This page on his site reminds me of that one lady "How to deal with Skeptics". www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfchlng.htmlLike ifpthenq, I haven't seen all the documents Friedman has, but he seems to make leaps to conclusions that don't seem warranted. Like Joe points out, the Majestic 12 documents have some problems. He is usually entertaining and usually has better documents, stories and ideas than most I've seen in the UFO field. Friedman makes the claim that 97% of us out there haven't read the 5 major scientific studies on UFO's--but that "most" people accept that some of the documented cases are UFOs. If people have not been exposed to these 5 wonder studies Friedman has been exposed to--there must be some serious sightings, pseudoscience, and delusion going on beneath the belief in the Stanton fanclub! Friedman is really making the masked claim that only certain Washington scientific insiders should even believe in the UFO phenomenon--the rest of us morons are really up the epistemological river sans paddle. I would love to see these 5 studies, and the peer reviewed discussion regarding their contents. Does Stanton have them on his site? I have certainly seen many documentary programs on Majestic 12, Stanton, and many other UFO topics--but have seen few really good studies that didn't attribute the entire phenomenon to delusion and mass hysteria. Maybe I just have to buy the newest Stanton F. book, Flying Saucers and Science! Everybody in the paranormal seems to have a book, a website, and a Paypal account that needs your money!PGA Ain't that the truth. I wish I could remember the site that had the Majestic 12 documents posted, and I too would like to see the documents that Friedman cites. I haven't had a chance to fully explore Friedman's site, but I'll take a gander and see what I can find.
|
|
|
Post by dreamsinger on Jun 2, 2008 14:46:25 GMT -11
So you are saying I just needlessly blew ten bucks? I had some video's of some old paranormal show from the 70's and if you thought he was full of bs now he was more confident and grandiose then. I wish I still had them or had an idea what the heck the show was. Good luck figuring out that one. He's been on a lot of shows.
|
|
|
Post by dreamsinger on Jun 2, 2008 14:57:04 GMT -11
|
|