• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Deconstructing Stan Romanek (Fact, Fiction, or Cult)

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

On a more serious note, I tried posting some of the evidence of Stan's fakery over at the J3 website, those are the guy's doing the documentary about Stan's case for those that don't know, but the guy moderates all the comments and refused to post my comment and the video where Stan fakes the digital voice. I guess objectivity and getting at the truth go out the window when you're trying to make a buck!
 
Muadib said:
ROFLMAO! Awesome video! The voice over is classic. I don't know about you but I wanted to stab the guy in Stan's EMF video every time he said thank you.
Click to expand...
The "thank you" guy is Rick Nelson of the Paranormal Research Forum. He believes ANYTHING that is claimed to be paranormal.
 
Here's an interesting blog post by James Carrion former International Director of MUFON on the strange spelling mistakes that show up in Stan's so called USAF document and supposed third party reports made by people who have never been proven to exist:

Are you fallowing me?


Stan Romanek recently took his story to the air waves on the Angela Joiner report to explain why the word fallow always seem to be showing up in documents related to his alleged claims of alien abduction and government conspiracy. Blogger Chuck Zukowski recently posted an article supporting Stan's claims that the word "fallow" was a commonly misspelled word and was not evidence of any impropriety in his case. Well, I guess every word in the English language is mangled and misspelled to one extent or the other, but that is not what makes this misspelled word a GIANT, IMPOSSIBLE TO IGNORE, red flag in the Romanek case. Let me spell out the problem in plain English.

  • The word fallow shows up in Stan's original UFO reports to the National UFO Reporting Center.
  • The word fallow shows up in the UFO report to the National UFO Reporting Center by a 3rd party witness that allegedly had no relationship to Stan Romanek but corroborates one of his sightings.
  • The word fallow shows up in an alleged Air Force document that Stan mysteriously received in his mailbox, subject "Project Romanek".
  • The word fallow shows up on the Jeff Rense website in an online posting by alleged physicist John Mannon who supports Stan's story.
  • The word fallow shows up on the Above TopSecret.com website in a posting by another alleged physicist (TommyBoy) who supports Stan's claims.
The fact that the word fallow got mispelled in any single document or online posting is not the issue but that the mispelled word shows up in so many third party documents supporting Stan's claims -third parties that allegedly have no relationship or connection with Stan. What are the odds that all of these third parties mispelled this same word (in documents supportive of Stan), is due to chance? The Romanek's don't want you to mull this over using critical thinking but would rather try to refocus your attention on the word fallow being a commonly mispelled word. I don't buy their argument and I continue to consider it a red flag until one or more of these third parties come forward and prove themselves to be real people. Will the real John Mannon please step up? Not by posting again to the anonymous Internet but showing some ID in person so you can be verified to be a real physicist.

Now I have said it before and I will say it again, if the Romaneks want to prove their claims, then they should release ALL of their alleged video and photo evidence for the world and independent researchers to examine and analyze. Instead they have tried to paint that I am on some sort of personal vendetta to discredit their claims. Taking their claims to the airwaves and the blogs with "I don't know how that word got there" and "it is really no big deal" counter arguments is not going to settle this matter. Neither is trying to portray this as MUFON vs Romanek or Carrion vs Romanek.


So critical thinkers, put on your thinking caps and weigh the evidence, and if you are a statistician, take it a step further and calculate the odds. Are you fallowing me here?
 
Here's another interesting blog post from James. Apparently, Romanek didn't like what James was saying about his bullshit case and threatened to sue him to try and shut him up! Need I point out the hypocrisy of someone who claims the government and those evil debunkers are attempting to silence UFO witnesses and abductees, attempting to silence a dissenting viewpoint himself? What a douche. Not to mention the fact that these last two posts are from 2009 and Stan still hasn't released his evidence for independent analysis, as far as I know. What is he afraid of I wonder? Hmmmmm....


Stan Romanek Threatens Lawsuit


Stan Romanek called the MUFON Office yesterday asking for MUFON's legal department and the street address where MUFON can be "served" papers. Unfortunately, I wasn't there to get the call.

Seems like the way you get someone to stop pointing out inconvenient facts about your claims is to threaten legal action. So Mr. Romanek, this is a message for you that I won't have to serve through the Sheriff's office or through a demand letter:

- In a court of law you can't manipulate the facts like you can in the court of public opinion
- You have to swear to tell the truth
- You have to have your claims believed by a jury of your peers, not by your friends, family, and investigators you are buddies with
- You cannot withhold key evidence

So, Stan, if you think I am going to stop pointing out the problems with your claims by threatening me with a lawsuit, you are sadly mistaken. There is nothing illegal about the truth.

Speaking of which, please feel free to post publicly the video/photo evidence that you have yet to release to the world because I have some world class photo/video experts who are dying to analyze them:

- All the ORIGINAL videos of your peeping aliens
- All the ORIGINAL photos that show you with strange "reptilian" eye transformations
- All the ORIGINAL photos/videos of all of your other otherworldly experiences

I will be happy to give you some space on my public web server to upload them and I will make them freely available to any other photo/video analyst.
 
Muadib said:
Here's another interesting blog post from James. Apparently, Romanek didn't like what James was saying about his bullshit case and threatened to sue him to try and shut him up! Need I point out the hypocrisy of someone who claims the government and those evil debunkers are attempting to silence UFO witnesses and abductees, attempting to silence a dissenting viewpoint himself? What a douche. Not to mention the fact that these last two posts are from 2009 and Stan still hasn't released his evidence for independent analysis, as far as I know. What is he afraid of I wonder? Hmmmmm....


Stan Romanek Threatens Lawsuit
Click to expand...

Yep, we suffered this crap as well as other accusations that were untrue. Check it out...

Denver E.T. Commission
 
Baxter said:
We get the same evidence as Stan...
Click to expand...

Oh boy! Priceless! As for Stan trying to sue over this it's called Parody, a brief Wiki summation of the case I'm talking about

"Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (1988), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held, in a unanimous 8–0 decision (Justice Anthony Kennedy took no part in the consideration or decision of the case), that the First Amendment's free-speech guarantee prohibits awarding damages to public figures to compensate for emotional distress intentionally inflicted upon them.
Thus, Hustler magazine's parody of Jerry Falwell was deemed to be within the law, because the Court found that reasonable people would not have interpreted the parody to contain factual claims, leading to a reversal of the jury verdict in favor of Falwell, who had previously been awarded $150,000 in damages by a lower court."

I guess Stan Has money throw around to keep people from using Free Speech.
 
Baxter said:
Stan's feminine side?
images.jpeg
Click to expand...
images-jpeg.2173

OMG, say it ain't so! Yeee-Ickes!
 
@Muadib - lol, the chances of you getting Romanek to send you 'evidence' are likely the same as 'fallowed' appearing accidentally in widely disparate pulications! (practicall nil). Also, your general points about the whole Romanek crock of shit are well thought, well written and well said. You have my 100% agreement on every last letter and period!

We joke, as men and I've lost count of the times I called someone an asshole. Usually in jest but still, I've used the term. Now Stan Romanek - you are an a****e, this time I mean it.

I soooooo wish Romanek frequented this forum. A****e! [EDITED BY CHRIS]
 
Incidentally, I cannot remember a single time in my 38 yrs when I've read the misspelled work 'fallowed'. Not once and I doubt I'm alone.

In my eyes it is very good evidence of fraud. True, might not stand up in court alone, but taken with all the rest it is indeed evidence, nay, proof - in my eyes!
 
I became interested in UFOs as a kid in the 60s, lost interest in the 80s, and just returned to it a couple of years ago. While I was away, a lot has changed, and I'm just becoming familiar with modern characters like Stan Romanek. Tell me-
How can anyone believe those incredible, incredibly bad videos?
Who believes these kind of stories, and are there enough of them to make it profitable for these charlatans?
 
Sentry said:
I became interested in UFOs as a kid in the 60s, lost interest in the 80s, and just returned to it a couple of years ago. While I was away, a lot has changed, and I'm just becoming familiar with modern characters like Stan Romanek. Tell me-
How can anyone believe those incredible, incredibly bad videos?
Who believes these kind of stories, and are there enough of them to make it profitable for these charlatans?
Click to expand...

Just go to almost any UFO conference these days and you'll find legions of new age believers, who've already made up their mind that they know the answer and that it's aliens from another star system. Not only is it definitely aliens from another star system, but they're here to help us evolve. Perfect fit for the Romanek case which espouses all kinds of new agey mumbo jumbo, has benevolent alien encounters, maintains that the aliens are just here to help, has aliens performing miracles of healing, and 13 cute little hybrid alien children that tug at your heart strings.

These people that I'm talking about are, sadly, not the most critical of thinkers. So, I think the answer to the question of whether or not there's enough of these wackos for Stan to make a profit, is a resounding yes. People eat this crap up unfortunately, most of them never do any digging but take Stan at his word on everything and anyone who disagrees is a debunker or CIA agent. Stan's written two books that have become best sellers, holds "Romanek Disclosure" conferences and events and his wife has written a book about what it's like from "The Other Side of the Bed" Besides being on every major name paranormal radio and TV show he's been on Larry King as well.

All you really need to do is look at the shit hole Stan used to live in and compare it to the nice house in the upscale neighborhood that Stan currently resides in. This is a guy who doesn't work for a living, and he's evidently made enough money writing books to afford a beautiful new home. So yeah, I'd say the money is definitely there, for now anyway.
 
I'm curious if Stan is lying too. But this thread is so damn biased it's sickening. Yeah, I think some of the videos might be fake, but you guys are so certain of it. To me most of the folks in this thread are as naive and stubborn as the UFO followers who buy this stuff without question. I'm going to keep browsing for an objective place to discuss this topic. Just search for truth, don't just try to validate your pre-formed opinions.
 
Justin Hamilton said:
I'm curious if Stan is lying too. But this thread is so damn biased it's sickening. Yeah, I think some of the videos might be fake, but you guys are so certain of it. To me most of the folks in this thread are as naive and stubborn as the UFO followers who buy this stuff without question. I'm going to keep browsing for an objective place to discuss this topic. Just search for truth, don't just try to validate your pre-formed opinions.
Click to expand...


It may appear that this thread is biased, but that is only because no one (in this thread) has come out in defense of Mr romaneck. It is my opinion that this is not just coincidence, it is because the "evidence" provided by Mr romaneck is dubious to say the least. I can only speak for myself but I know that there are far more interesting and compelling cases being discussed on this forum, and that their are as many different opinions as there are members. This thread is unusual in that the verdict is unanimous. (at present).
With the greatest possible respect, I would like to suggest that you provide or point to some "evidence" that supports Mr romanecks claims, in order to correct the "bias" that you alluded to in your above post.

Kind regards.
 
Glad to hear a decent response, thanks Han. I'm not here to claim Stan is telling the truth, I'm just curious to find more information about his case.
The evidence supporting Stan's claims are, well, the evidence presented. The videos, pictures, and stories are the evidence on trial, and I'm not going to pretend that most of them aren't questionable, it's really hard to judge. The most compelling thing to me are his videos of UFOs that were on then news and also recorded and seen by others.
I do have to admit that in my personal opinion, after the limited research I've done, I really doubt the full scope of his claims. It could be that he did have some sightings and realized he could run with it, I don't know. He should just release the originals of his evidence for the community of scientists and researchers to comb through. I've been disappointed to see the limited examinations of his content.
He will probably just go down in history as another Billy Meier or Adamski, time will ultimately tell. For now, knowing from personal experience that there are UFOs (personal orb sightings) and abductions (my wife), I will continue to search for the truth and others who claim to know the truth. Which, oh my god, makes me pretty biased I guess. :o/
 
Dear Justin, if you are interested there is a personal experiences thread:
Your Personal Experiences Forum | The Paracast Community Forums

I would like to also say welcome to the forum.

Finally I would like to say that sometimes members here can seem harsh or mean, but I assure you that the majority of us care deeply about other people, and protecting them from "snake oil salesmen". Another factor is that in my opinion people like billy meier, have done untold damage to the credibility to the "paranormal" field, and that makes those who care about it angry and insulted, resulting in threads such as this one.
I think the best way I could describe it is that meier and co, insult our collective intelligence and deserve the same treatment, in my opinion.

Best wishes
 
Back
Top