TClaeys,
I know it's not a UFO report. In that thread however, people have been talking about responsible, apparently non-polarized, reporting even though that seems impossible.
You will find no bigger critic of what I call, the “corporate controlled mainstream media” (CCMM) then I. There exists a “cognitive bias” not only with the media, but with “mainstream” science that developed over decades, and finds’ it’s birth in our government’s debunking campaigns.
Here are a couple of examples (regarding my critiques of the CCMM):
UFOS: Keeping Anderson Cooper & CNN Honest
O'Hare UFO Witness Appears in Silhouette on CNN
I guess I'm not all too familiar with your site and I'll take some time to peruse it. You know, it seems when we get a story like this it seems to spread like wildfire. And many people won't even second guess it or even look at the errors made. This is one thing I find troublesome in this field.
The “Knowledge is Power” web-site has a “blogspot” URL, that is probably it’s closet resemblance to its namesake. It was created first to be a repository for UFO reports that occur around the world, and second for me to put the “proverbial pen” to paper so to speak, (written in more of a formal "op-ed" and or essay style, opposed to a casual blog) along with some of my colleagues and co-researchers.
Currently there is between 1500 to 2000 hundred articles on site, and we have regular readers from over 130 countries.
When an individual takes what they read verbatim, regardless of the reason, the damnation falls to the reader, not the author. Moreover, that ignorance knows no bounds, and is present in “all fields.”
In the meantime, I apologize, as I'm under the assumption that many bloggers are in control and manage the material on their site. I guess I didn't know. Some will even link to an article and comment on it, taking some responsibility for verifying the content. Anyway sorry. I know you don't have all the time in the world to review and comment on everything.
No need to apologize, I just thought I would offer some clarity; I certainly “manage” what is posted; however, with the script that enables me to have UFO reports posted in “real time” as they appear on the Internet, there are things that slip through the cracks that needn’t be there; for example, any time the band, “UFO” make the headlines . . . you will see it at “Knowledge is Power.”
Moreover, I have also published articles that I completely disagree with, and I can guarantee you that I have published “images” of bugs, birds, and flying debris that some people believe to be an “aerial craft” of some sort. You are correct in the fact that I don’t have time to add my personal thought on all that appears on site; however, that is one of the benefits of it being in “blog format” . . . anyone can make comment, pro or con on the content; quite frankly, it is welcomed.
“Verifying content” really doesn’t mean much; if one verifies a report from a newspaper let’s say, what does that mean? We find out that yes a reporter from that paper did in fact write the piece and did in fact get the story, from the person that he or she claimed to . . . where does that leave us?
In regards to Ufology, we’ve just verified what we suspected to begin with . . . we’ve got an anecdote; this why I adhere to the rule of people doing their own research.
Do you find the errors in reporting troublesome and frustrating as well? Do you find stories that end up on your site that you would rather not have there? Because in an effort to grasp what may be going on its difficult, time-consuming, and dizzying. I guess my comments were out of frustration, especially considering the article was sorely lacking correct information. I get tired of chasing dead ends. Probably sounds familiar huh??
I find the reporting of the UFO phenomenon by the “CCMM” (in general) nauseating! As mentioned previously there are certainly articles on site that I disagree with . . . some vehemently; however, I don’t have any problem with them being there. To be clear, I believe that a portion of the UFOs reported are of extraterrestrial nuts ‘n bolts craft, (based on my own research) and that certainly shows in “my writing.” On the other hand, I do respect other points of view, and will always listen, unless you “McGaha me” in which case I equate that to “water-boarding” and believe that he and his ilk are detrimental to good mental health.
With all that is going on with Stephenville, and Argentina, in addition to interviewing 3 people simultaneously, along with “other” ongoing research, I haven’t had the time to look into the article in question . . . yet. It does intrigue; I certainly want to know what’s going on. Shostak has been good about responding to my inquiries, and when time permits if this story has any merit to it, I’ll get it from the horse’s mouth.
Unfortunately, “chasing dead-ends” or “putting out fires” is all to common in Ufology.
One more thing. I sincerely appreciate the response you have given here. You've signed up for this forum just to respond to what may have been seen as an attack on you. I am now more informed because of it and would have never known if I hadn't read your response. I guess I kinda feel foot in mouth right now. Thanks for the response.
Actually, I am duty bound to be a part of this forum, first and foremost in appreciation of Gene and David’s work, second to help in “the cause” and finally, I and many of my friend’s and colleagues have been guests on the show. (Besides somebody’ got to keep an eye on Biedny!)
I didn’t see your remarks as an attack, more akin to an inappropriate criticism, without knowing all the facts.
Having suffered from “foot-in-mouth disease” I can safely say, you may have suffered a “minor symptom” of it, but it didn’t blossom into its final stages.
[align=center]
"KNOWLEDGE IS POWER"[/align]
Cheers,
Frank
