51 UFO/ET Congress

[trainedobserver]

Posey,

Your moon ship photo is a complete bust. I do not understand why you want to keep flogging a dead horse.

You say it is a photo from Apollo 11 on your page when the numbers say it is Apollo 12. You claim this object in your photo followed them (who Apollo 11 or 12?) to the moon while you show a cropped and blurry picture of Saturn V rocket stage from a sequence of photographs that when viewed in their entirety clearly show part of the Saturn V in near Earth orbit.

Now you want to claim they contain a humanoid figure or something. What tripe. That's the full story.

 

[Voyager]

Well, if you're talking about a variation of the old ufowatchdog.com - Home of the undisputed investigation exposing Sean David Morton site, we're looking into ways that sort of thing can be brought up to date.

This is what I find to be disturbing about the so-called field of Ufology. There are so many people either fabricating tales or disseminating utter nonsense; when serious researchers step into the arena they are faced with ridicule and scorn because of all the people who are liars. I am sometimes defensive because I have a low tolerance for dealing with people who are quick to express an opinion but have not invested the time and effort to look at the facts. When I see a spherical object silently moving through the sky, an object that uses gravitational forces for propulsion; I think this is extraordinary and needs to be studied. I don't enjoy the carnival atmosphere that is often encountered when participating in this field. I have to pinch pennies to buy a consumer grade camcorder to try and document what I have been observing. If an unknown species of fish was discovered in the ocean, more effort would go into researching that than has been expended researching UFOs.

 

[trainedobserver]

This is what I find to be disturbing about the so-called field of Ufology. There are so many people either fabricating tales or disseminating utter nonsense; when serious researchers step into the arena they are faced with ridicule and scorn because of all the people who are liars. I am sometimes defensive because I have a low tolerance for dealing with people who are quick to express an opinion but have not invested the time and effort to look at the facts. When I see a spherical object silently moving through the sky, an object that uses gravitational forces for propulsion; I think this is extraordinary and needs to be studied. I don't enjoy the carnival atmosphere that is often encountered when participating in this field. I have to pinch pennies to buy a consumer grade camera to try and document what I have been observing. If an unknown species of fish was discovered in the ocean, more effort would go into researching that than has been expended researching UFOs.

Carnival side show is the best description for the likes of Sean David Morton, John Reed/Rutter, Dan Crain/Burisch, Bruce Goldberg, and everyone else I can think of listed at ufowatchdog.

 

[Qetuoadgjl]

I beg to differ. There is not one single entry in that thing that isn't valid and well researched. Who got a bad shake in there by your estimation? I'd really like to hear that.

Your idea of "research" and mine are miles anmd miles and miles apart.

It's full of copynpasted opinions, yes.

Research?

I think Ed Dames is scum but being a RVer of no repute, I can tell you this copynpaste is full of half-truths twisted to make their point which is for whatever reason or agenda to defame Ed Dames. Dames doesn't need any help which makes this attempt so uncommonly stupid.

Ed Dames

If you ewant to see "reseached" work then go looking for the Joseph Farrells', Richard Dolans', Peter Levendas', Graham Hancocks' and the others - so few - that actually produce something of verifiable value.

Ufowatchdogs? rofl

 

[Wade]

while my non-copy pasted opinion is that much of what is stated on ufo watchdog is dead on...especially the entry on ed dames... I think the bunny rabbit makes a good point. there is plenty of room for abuse on such a site, it can be agenda driven in the wrong hands although I do trust the hands of gene and angelo..the reason why I feel my opinion on the veracity of ufo watchdog is simply this...I have heard many of these people listed open their mouths and speak. If the paracast were to pursue this option I would feel more comfortable by including something like pros and cons links to people or organizations that validate and/or repudiate the listing of all people listed, good and bad. Even if mr. dames did get a glowing review and you were one not to take things sat face value, would it not be nice to hear from someone who disagrees and how would one go about trying to determine that, by googling " people who feel that ed dames is full of bs?". In coming across this post I learned of other names in this field, which is a good start, graham I know of, ive also looked at some of dale graffs writings ( pretty underrated researcher imhO!) and mr. tariq works. For the record I did google dale graff + full of it and got 0 returns. Does that mean that dale is not full of it? No it doesn't it just means i wasn't being driven to any websites who's opinions differs with those of dale's He sound pretty reputable to me though.

 

[Voyager]

while my non-copy pasted opinion is that much of what is stated on ufo watchdog is dead on...especially the entry on ed dames... I think the bunny rabbit makes a good point. there is plenty of room for abuse on such a site, it can be agenda driven in the wrong hands although I do trust the hands of gene and angelo..the reason why I feel my opinion on the veracity of ufo watchdog is simply this...I have heard many of these people listed open their mouths and speak. If the paracast were to pursue this option I would feel more comfortable by including something like pros and cons links to people or organizations that validate and/or repudiate the listing of all people listed, good and bad. Even if mr. dames did get a glowing review and you were one not to take things sat face value, would it not be nice to hear from someone who disagrees and how would one go about trying to determine that, by googling " people who feel that ed dames is full of bs?". In coming across this post I learned of other names in this field, which is a good start, graham I know of, ive also looked at some of dale graffs writings ( pretty underrated researcher imhO!) and mr. tariq works. For the record I did google dale graff + full of it and got 0 returns. Does that mean that dale is not full of it? No it doesn't it just means i wasn't being driven to any websites who's opinions differs with those of dale's He sound pretty reputable to me though.

It is all part of the entertainment business. I try not to get caught up in it. Whether it be Ed Dames being interviewed by Art Bell or Richard C. Hoagland on C2C it all translates to the bottom line. Money. Entertainment that has no intellectual value. You have people like Greer who milk the UFO field for all it is worth to maintain his life style. As long as there are gullible people there will be people who will take advantage of it. Feeding on people's hopes and fears. As if Greer's organization can develop advanced technology to solve our energy problems. Obviously people who buy into his sales pitch are not aware of how much money it costs to conduct research and development, provided you possessed the knowledge to create zero-point energy. In regard to the subject of UFOs: The most important question that needs to be asked is this: What is the importance and relevancy of the UFO phenomenon to humanity? Will they forever be seen in the skies, observing us from afar, without ever affecting the course of humanity; or is there something else happening? I see UFOs here in Montana. Another person in a different part of the world does not see them. The person who is not seeing them wonders if the phenomenon is real. How many more thousands of reports will it take to convince people this is real?

 

[Wade]

Yeah, the ufo/paranormal field does seen to come with it's own black hole that is only all to willing to suck the unwary down. that's just my fancy schmancy way of noting that even the best of intentioned investigators can get caught up the field as well as get caught up in themselves. that is why I have hitched my wagon to guys like chris and albert rosales, they have to be in it more for their passion and less for the money