Fair enough. Let's see what Stan says. You both have one suggested date already. If that's too soon, we can possibly schedule something next week, ahead of Stan's next trip.
-
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!
James Carrion, "The Rosetta Deception," July 20, 2014
- Thread starter wwkirk
- Start date
Free episodes:
James Carrion
Skilled Investigator
I don't believe they are....they are well within reason considering Stan uses the same debunking tactics he criticizes others using .... they are neither malicious or vindictive ... just calling a spade a spade ...
mike_thoth
Skilled Investigator
Hi James, thank you for responding to my note.
I hope you did not think my questions was designed to suggest you had ulterior motives. I'm sure people see conspiracies everywhere, not me.
I agree with your answer 100%. At least these days why would anyone try to disrupt Ufology? The people in the field do that anyway in spades. There is definitely intel manipulation, I have no doubt at all. My interest in your own experience is because of how the intel world works.
I had a security clearance once but not at a high level really, so you bring a distinct perspective. I think we all agree on deception as you describe.
I'm interested also in your opinion on if any UaP are genuine, in that they are not our tech, not carefully planned deceptions, but seem to be genuine & anomalous events. I don't jump to UaP = Aliens but do think there is a real & at times physical phenomena here.
Thanks in advance.
Michael
I hope you did not think my questions was designed to suggest you had ulterior motives. I'm sure people see conspiracies everywhere, not me.
I agree with your answer 100%. At least these days why would anyone try to disrupt Ufology? The people in the field do that anyway in spades. There is definitely intel manipulation, I have no doubt at all. My interest in your own experience is because of how the intel world works.
I had a security clearance once but not at a high level really, so you bring a distinct perspective. I think we all agree on deception as you describe.
I'm interested also in your opinion on if any UaP are genuine, in that they are not our tech, not carefully planned deceptions, but seem to be genuine & anomalous events. I don't jump to UaP = Aliens but do think there is a real & at times physical phenomena here.
Thanks in advance.
Michael
Ufocurious
Paranormal Maven
Because a lot of us have seen UFOs. Once one sees an UFO doing stuff no other aircraft we know can do, we become puzzled by what is behind the phenomenon. All the noise though, it is really a bummer.
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
The noise is also really fascinating in some respects too, so it doesn't have to be a bummer. For example when we look at the subject of ufology in a holistic manner, then the colorful cultural aspects, especially in the arts and entertainment, can become part of the mosaic that makeup the field of ufology as a whole. We can kick back with some popcorn and watch a silly ( but fun ) movie like Paul, or find it amusing when Homer Simpson gets abducted:
Last edited:
From Stan:
This is getting silly. Why should I debate about Ghost Rockets? I don't even mention them in "Flying Saucers and Science" or "Captured..." or TOP SECRET/MAJIC or Science Was Wrong." They are mentioned very briefly in "Crash at Corona". Has he read any of my books? I am convinced that the evidence is overwhelming that Earth is being visited by intelligently controlled ET spacecraft and we are dealing with a Cosmic Watergate. I am the one who focuses on Evidence. James makes claims. I certainly am not of the "what if" or "isn't it possible" school. A good title might be, "Are some UFOs ET Spacecraft? or "Has the US Government been lying about Flying Saucers?" Usually theories come after observations not before them. Think penicillin, X-rays, Neutrons, fission, fusion, DNA, etc.
Stan
Stan
James Carrion
Skilled Investigator
Well Stan, the answer is simple - you should debate about Ghost Rockets because that is what is in my book - a book you called disinformation before you read it. You have nothing to debate because pure and simple you haven't studied the topic enough and when it comes to the matters of strategic deception, historical forensic analysis and code breaking and other matters that fall within the realm of human intelligence you are out of your depth ...
And since when does reading your books become a necessary prerequisite to have a debate on my book when you admit that your books have nothing to do with the subject matter in my book?
Finally, spare me the "theories after observation" one liner ...there is another scientific tenet called falsifiability which for your pet theories you deem exempt from ... Either embrace the entire scientific method or don't bother to use it at all.
You called it bologna ... so pass the mayo...
DissectionStalker
Paranormal Adept
Considering TV and Movies are the greatest visual impact on Mankind now vs all of Human history combining our Historical favorite past times of all time "story telling" and "mythologies", then it should be obvious those visual mediums control UFOs and ET phenomena by 99%. IF ET's have anything to do with UFOs flying around, then our perceptions of them are definitely still being controlled by TV and Movies -not ET. ET is just too "untouchable" for us to believe directly. Heck, even "the proof" of ET's existence will be transmitted from TV or the Internet unless there is that V invasion coming.
V (2009 TV series) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
DissectionStalker
Paranormal Adept
I say pass the Roswell, as soon as you're ready!
There is no way Stan can back down from debating your book about Roswell, when it comes out, or you could debate his book about Roswell (when you're ready) -or each others books about Roswell.
Roswell is the FAT JUICY ET-UFO PIG ready for the slaughter and big-time roasting, imho.
One thing Friedman will be accountable for: He promised to read your book, and he promised to write a MUFON journal article about it too. So, at least, he could provide you with a copy for your website or for Paracast, so you can comment and reply on that commentary and critique from S.F.
Otherwise, Stanton Friedman will not be a man of his word.
junius
Skilled Investigator
I wonder what your thoughts are on this link: PROJECT 1947: A Ghost Rocket Chronology - Joel Carpenter - Part One perhaps Mr Carpenter can give an opinion on Mr Carrions Ghost Rocket theory? Mr Carpenter appears to have conducted some in depth research into the same subject.
junius
Skilled Investigator
I think this is a useful link in relation to the Ghost Rocket subject. PROJECT 1947: A Ghost Rocket Chronology - Joel Carpenter - Part One
Here's another response from Stan to James:
One would think that the Ghost Rockets as portrayed by James in his book are the sumtotal for ufology.I don't buy it. There is a context for pretty much everything in Life. James I can't seem to find a bio on you that makes you an expert on the scientific method, nor any degrees in science, nor seemingly any employment as a scientist.,Do you belong to any professional scientist organizations.? Have you published in scientific journals? How can one debate your book without reference to the huge amount of information that shows there is far more to the question of UFOs than is encompassed in your book? I did indeed say I expected baloney because you had previously published baloney. Most leapards don't change their spots.
Stan Friedman
Stan Friedman
DissectionStalker
Paranormal Adept
It would sure be nice if Ufology was peer reviewed and considered "a science", but there must be some reasons WHY that can't happen. Witnesses from 30+ years ago and missing ET's and missing debris evidence may rarely work in a criminal case, like the evidence Roswell is, but that won't make it to peer review nor could it be considered a science that can be studied.
Most people with common sense can understand that Light-year traveling ET's will not crash their UFOs coincidentally [soooo shamefully] near military test ranges or in proximity of the only nuclear weapons base on planet Earth. BUT. I guess if anyone gets past this obvious WARNING this is all Human and Military related, THEN the Rabbit Hole is all yours to believe what you will. Air Force OSI can really really really frack your minds with "I want to believe". WINK.
Bananas
Paranormal Maven
I've seen a lot of straw men in my time but... goddamn that one has to take the cake.
Wade
FeralNormal master
I usually stay out of these type debates because I am not particularly interested in this part of UFOlogy..breaking down particular events and debating their validity. .and because I'm not interested, I have little knowledge (and have no degrees) of these events.
Having said that I agree with the latter two statements I find stan's 2nd statement quoted above to be very unsatusfactory. James' s possible, maybe probable lack of peer reviewed papers or any degrees have little weight in a field that as DissectionStalker mentioned above as it stands now doesn't in many cases measure up scientifically...YET...although it would appear that Mr. Stanford could be sitting on some info that once released could bust this damn thing open. Sure there has been titillating evidence left over in some cases but when you stack those up against all reports they are in a definite minority, I would even go as far as suggesting maybe in cases where there was something left, it was intentional and therefore begs the question was this case a disinformation based case as many times ufo clean up after themselves.
I still don't think every ufo/uap cases can be attributed to disinformation tactics or Swamp gas or ethnogens (spl?) but Stan's questioning James' s scientific bona fides is pretty disingenuous.
Last edited:
James Carrion
Skilled Investigator
Stan Friedman is accountable - for the debunking tactics he uses. He has already called my book disinformation before he read it and refuses to debate the Ghost Rockets and the evidence in my book. I don't exactly believe his critique in the MUFON Journal will be either fair or unbiased ...I say pass the Roswell, as soon as you're ready!
There is no way Stan can back down from debating your book about Roswell, when it comes out, or you could debate his book about Roswell (when you're ready) -or each others books about Roswell.
Roswell is the FAT JUICY ET-UFO PIG ready for the slaughter and big-time roasting, imho.
One thing Friedman will be accountable for: He promised to read your book, and he promised to write a MUFON journal article about it too. So, at least, he could provide you with a copy for your website or for Paracast, so you can comment and reply on that commentary and critique from S.F.
Otherwise, Stanton Friedman will not be a man of his word.
He's read your book, James. So evidently his view didn't change.
Since it has been posted as a free download, what difference does it make? If Stan only waited....