Marley Woods Unknown Creature

[Paul Kimball]

Coming up on the Paracast is another top top researcher: Ray Stanford. Ray has tons and tons of great daylight footage of UFO's (showing saucers so close that you can see inside 'em) of which he will no doubt speak at length. The 40+ year old footage has not been seen in public because Ray is busy working with top high-level scientists (possibly even teams of microbiologists?) to release them in the best manner. Should be any day now. Really!

It's a familiar refrain, and one that we hear from someone like Steven Greer all the time - I remember at an X-Con in 2007 listening to him talk about how he had an alien baby, or something like that, and they were very close to releasing the research results, etc., etc. In many ways, it's similar to the M.O. that end-of-days types like Louis Jarvis use - everything is always just around the corner, and when you get to the corner, you find that they actually meant another corner - you know, that one just over there.

Or, as the great philosopher Charles Schulz observed:

 

[Angel of Ioren]

It's a familiar refrain, and one that we hear from someone like Steven Greer all the time - I remember at an X-Con in 2007 listening to him talk about how he had an alien baby, or something like that, and they were very close to releasing the research results, etc., etc. In many ways, it's similar to the M.O. that end-of-days types like Louis Jarvis use - everything is always just around the corner, and when you get to the corner, you find that they actually meant another corner - you know, that one just over there.

Or, as the great philosopher Charles Schulz observed:

That really puts in perspective.

 

[The Pair of Cats]

Coming up on the Paracast is another top top researcher: Ray Stanford. Ray has tons and tons of great daylight footage of UFO's (showing saucers so close that you can see inside 'em) of which he will no doubt speak at length. The 40+ year old footage has not been seen in public because Ray is busy working with top high-level scientists (possibly even teams of microbiologists?) to release them in the best manner. Should be any day now. Really!

I listen to this stuff along with the rest of you folks and I wonder... I hear the same words you do. I hear the endless claims. And I listen very carefully but always in vain for even the faintest hint of a ring of truth.

Lance

So Lance, when are you coming on to the Paracast to discuss your no doubt enthralling research on Otis Elevator...oops I mean Otis Carr. Maybe Paul can return to interview you and we can hear a "sceptical" love fest for a change?

 

[Paul Kimball]

I had fun interviewing folks for the Otis Carr thing. I originally thought I would make a documentary and shot a few interviews. For instance, I shot Jim Moseley right at the site of the collapsed Silver Bridge of Mothman fame. I also learned a lot about the 1950's saucer scene, especially the saucer clubs, a subject I have not often seen knowledgeably discussed. And it also introduced me to Long John Nebel, which led to a love for the work of Jean Shepherd.

Later I decided that the money being paid for documentaries was not right for the time I would have to invest (and lose by foregoing paying gigs).

In the end I learned a lot about Otis, probably more than anyone. As I said, I suppose it might not be interesting to most folks (looks like you might not be that enthused) but it is a funny story full of nostalgia, naivety and a nice dose of fraud.

I'm not pushing it on anyone, I just offered if anyone besides me was interested.

Lance

I was speaking at the 2007 Retro UFO Convention (at the Integratron!!), and one of the other speakers was Ralph Ring, who used to "work" with Carr years ago. Surprise, surprise, but there were still people there who bought into the stories that he was telling.

 

[justcurious]

I'm starting to despair that even the supposed top researchers can't come up with the goods.

The top researchers may not be the ones that go public, running websites and the lecture circuits. Jacques Vallée for example often speaks about how he and a group of discreet but dedicated scientists of various disciplines have decided to retire from the front scene to do better work, away from the media and the bickering polemical mindset of mainstream ufology. Ironically some, on this very forum, who mostly complain about the state of the research, may be co-responsible for the withdrawal of the true "cream of the cream of ufology". Sure I'd like to see Lance's (hi !) Sherlock Holmesness, Paul's bitterness (hey there !) and Angel's mono-argumentation (wassup pal ?) responded to by Vallée, but unlike me he knows better...

Now I'm gonna brew my best coffee and await for the response of the cream of the cream of forum dialectics.

 

[Paul Kimball]

Paul's bitterness (hey there !)

It's not bitterness. It's well-deserved contempt. There is a difference.

 

[stphrz]

The top researchers may not be the ones that go public, running websites and the lecture circuits. Jacques Vallée for example often speaks about how he and a group of discreet but dedicated scientists of various disciplines have decided to retire from the front scene to do better work, away from the media and the bickering polemical mindset of mainstream ufology. Ironically some, on this very forum, who mostly complain about the state of the research, may be co-responsible for the withdrawal of the true "cream of the cream of ufology". Sure I'd like to see Lance's (hi !) Sherlock Holmesness, Paul's bitterness (hey there !) and Angel's mono-argumentation (wassup pal ?) responded to by Vallée, but unlike me he knows better...

Now I'm gonna brew my best coffee and await for the response of the cream of the cream of forum dialectics.

Before you invoke Jacques Vallée you best be sure which side of the argument he'd come down upon were he to decide to comment.

The difference in method between Mr. Phillips and Mr. Vallée is vast. Jacques Vallée does not announce to have what is essentially smoking gun evidence and then not deliver. Or worse deliver dodgy stuff that makes anyone capable of critical thought shake their heads. He goes off, does his thing quietly and when he is finished he presents his findings. He makes no claims he cannot back up. Sure, he sometimes engages in some pretty far out speculation but he always makes it clear that is what he is doing.

As far as I know Jacques Vallée has not withdrawn from research. As far as I know Jacques Vallée doesn't care what folks on this forum think

And any researcher who aquired real, quality physical evidence would not worry about the hounds. Their evidence would stand scrutiny no matter how loud the barking got.

 

[justcurious]

It's not bitterness. It's well-deserved contempt. There is a difference.

Point taken Paul , although true contempt is usually less in need of being expressed... Thumbs up for taking it lightly...

Post by stphrz:

The difference in method between Mr. Phillips and Mr. Vallée is vast. Jacques Vallée does not announce to have what is essentially smoking gun evidence and then not deliver. Or worse deliver dodgy stuff that makes anyone capable of critical thought shake their heads. He goes off, does his thing quietly and when he is finished he presents his findings. He makes no claims he cannot back up. Sure, he sometimes engages in some pretty far out speculation but he always makes it clear that is what he is doing.

As far as I know Jacques Vallée has not withdrawn from research. As far as I know Jacques Vallée doesn't care what folks on this forum think

And any researcher who aquired real, quality physical evidence would not worry about the hounds. Their evidence would stand scrutiny no matter how loud the barking got.

Hi, if you read my post (well, the first few lines were the point is), you will see that it is exactly what I meant to say...

 

[Paul Kimball]

Point taken Paul , although true contempt is usually less in need of being expressed... Thumbs up for taking it lightly...

Contrary to popular opinion, I have a sense of humour, particularly about myself.

And in the world of ufology (and the paranormal in general), I think contempt should be expressed more frequently, particularly for "researchers" who talk a great game, but repeatedly fail to deliver the goods.

Which is sort of the point my friend Kevin Randle makes here: http://redstarfilms.blogspot.com/2010/08/kevin-randle-improving-ufology.html

 

[stphrz]

Point taken Paul , although true contempt is usually less in need of being expressed... Thumbs up for taking it lightly...


Hi, if you read my post (well, the first few lines were the point is), you will see that it is exactly what I meant to say...

Oh, you were being sarcastic and I misunderstood? Sorry. Boy is my face red.

You see I just noticed I recently got a nice new red tag under my name, so I figure I need to fly off the handle and bite people's heads off at the slightest provocation. I have a reputation to uphold you know.

 

[justcurious]

Oh, everybody is in such a good mood this morning (its the morning here), it's a pleasure...

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Oh, everybody is in such a good mood this morning (its the morning here), it's a pleasure...

It's better to be in a good mood.
It's really too bad that this picture turned out to show nothing of note. I'm sincere when I say that I hope that my skepticism about the Marley Woods case, and other like it, is put to rest one day. However, as non-evidence is put forth, us bitter, mono-argumentative, Sherlock types will be there to point out the flaws until one day someone shows us something that changes our minds.

A

 

[pixelsmith]

Oh, you were being sarcastic and I misunderstood? Sorry. Boy is my face red.

You see I just noticed I recently got a nice new red tag under my name, so I figure I need to fly off the handle and bite people's heads off at the slightest provocation. I have a reputation to uphold you know.

oh no... the red tag... a marked man... you can hang with the big dogs now kid.

 

[justcurious]

oh no... the red tag... a marked man... you can hang with the big dogs now kid.

Ah hum, I'm not really impressed by the red tag... Check my header kids... It's proudly sporting an INFRACTION FOR INSULTING OTHER MEMBERS, now, THAT is the big league ! Be warned...

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Ah hum, I'm not really impressed by the red tag... Check my header kids... It's proudly sporting an INFRACTION FOR INSULTING OTHER MEMBERS, now, THAT is the big league ! Be warned...

In all fairness, it's there for a reason.

 

[Hoffmeister]

I will leave it to others to ponder the sense of using a "team of microbiologists" to match animal tracks. Is that what microbiologists do now? Really?

Maybe they were really really small animal tracks?

 

[Ron Collins]

I understand the sentiment. I also wish it was better communicated during the interview as to what to expect.

I am not ready to give up on Ted. The man has shown me nothing but sincerity and eagerness to get information out. If anything I think his eagerness to share that information and some unpracticed interview skills, and the natural nature of this forum helped blow this particular case out of proportion. Reading the log and talking to him it is clearer to me that what we see is precisely what I would expect. I think that there are more details in the witness accounts (anecdotal as they are) that showcase the more paranormal aspects of this. I think Ted's excitement in the photo had more to do with apparent ability to possibly capture imagery of the physical animal and perhaps its reported oddities. I cold be wrong but that is my impression. I think he was trying, albeit not clearly, to say that the witnesses say that whatever this is was the same odd animal they are reporting to him. Now if it can be photographed from afar, he can capture images of it closer up. Again, I could be wrong in my assessment, its just my opinion.

At any rate, I am going to try and help him classify, organize, and present a large amount of data on the internet. I completely understand if many scoff at this particular image as I dont think he communicated it clearly in the interview. I think that is a far cry from being deceitful or gullible. He seems to be neither of these to me thus far. He seems to be willing and eager to get his evidence out there. I guess we will need to adjourn at least until he is back home.

---------- Post added at 06:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:03 PM ----------

Ah hum, I'm not really impressed by the red tag... Check my header kids... It's proudly sporting an INFRACTION FOR INSULTING OTHER MEMBERS, now, THAT is the big league ! Be warned...

It is also there for antagonizing. In the interests of full disclosure.

 

[pixelsmith]

It is also there for antagonizing. In the interests of full disclosure.

what other colors are there?

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

At any rate, I am going to try and help him classify, organize, and present a large amount of data on the internet. I completely understand if many scoff at this particular image as I dont think he communicated it clearly in the interview. I think that is a far cry from being deceitful or gullible. He seems to be neither of these to me thus far. He seems to be willing and eager to get his evidence out there. I guess we will need to adjourn at least until he is back home.

Ron: Thank you so much for taking the time to help Ted get his data posted. I know you are a busy guy and myself (and others) sincerely appreciate your hard work!

 

[NTS]

Several years ago here in Hawaii (Maui) there were sightings of a mysterious cat-like animal. Nobody thought it was anything paranormal though -- it was generally believed to be a pet that someone had illegally brought in and was allowing to roam around. Although paw prints, scratch marks, hair etc. were found, the animal was never caught or photographed, and sightings of it stopped after a few months. The state's website on it is still available -- last updated in 2003:

http://www.state.hi.us/dlnr/dofaw/wild/cat.htm