Ray Stanford — May 18, 2014 Episode

[Muadib]

I'm curious about the details behind your underscored statement. Have you identified the errors or misrepresentations in Fox's documentaries in a thread here or elsewhere, and if so would you link it? If you haven't identified them elsewhere, would you list the problems you see? Thanks.

I don't think I've ever made a list of the problems I've seen with some of the cases in his various documentaries, though other of our members may have done so. I'd be happy to put one together, but as I don't have time to sit through his two main documentaries and put together a list at the moment, it will have to wait.

I think my point was pretty well served with the one example I provided, the Corsoe material and its prominence in both of his main documentaries (Out of the Blue and I Know What I Saw, if memory serves...) proves that James can and has been fooled in the past (unless, of course, you think Corsoe was telling the truth and we weren't smart enough to figure out things like velcro and night vision goggles without extraterrestrial involvement...) and therefore the statement that he's so up2speed that he couldn't possibly be mistaken as to the value or the reality of Stanford's material simply doesn't hold water.

James frequent presentations of the Phoenix Lights as some landmark case in those documentaries also raises some issues with me, but that is of course dependent on how you interpret that event, I personally believe that it was military flares in the often replayed video and that military aircraft flying in formation can account for the reports from earlier in the evening, but that's just my opinion based on what I've read about it and you are free to disagree. I'm not really here to try and convince anyone of anything, I don't have as much time to post as I used to. You can do your own research on what I've said or you are free to disregard it.

 

[marduk]

Everyone can be fooled.

Everyone. James Fox, Ray Stanford, you, me, Buddha, Chuck Norris, everyone.

That's why you release evidence to back your claim, so it can be verified via reproducibility according to the scientific method.

The term reproducible research refers to the idea that the ultimate product of academic research is the paper along with the full computational environment used to produce the results in the paper such as the code, data, etc. that can be used to reproduce the results and create new work based on the research.​

Reproducibility - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Burnt State]

I don't think I've ever made a list of the problems I've seen with some of the cases in his various documentaries....

I agree with the main focus of what you say about his work. I also like both documentaries as they are coherent presentations with some flare. But, like most of the ufological media, we have sensational stories, retold myths and a real emphasis on what the witness saw, but nothing too tangible.

With the Phoenix Lights there appears to be a strong argument made for the testing of one of those lighter than air inflatable platforms and simultaneous military flare decoy distractions to see how the public would react. The movie, though, makes use of what was a truly media sensationalized event, as there hadn't been many high profile UFO stories in the news up till then, but the Phoenix Lights was well covered, and so it dominates the film as more hype than discovery or proof of anything - just a lot of very excited people.

As for Corso i think that he's another subset of the theme of sensationalism that is attached to UFO movies and books. Historically, with mysteries of any sort, there are always those who are willing to take centre stage and proclaim that they are the space ambassador, that Jesus really talks to them only, that they were the ones that committed those serial killer crimes or that they know the real truth about Roswell. This is an unavoidable plague for those looking for accuracy or a concrete ledge or something. When these myths are retold and replayed in films that try to synopsize history, or introduce "truths" we end up with the perpetuation of confusion and misdirection.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

One thing that really troubles me about the Ray Stanford withholding holy-grail film evidence is that if he does indeed have it, and intends using it at some point to go public about UFOs in general, then I would have to wonder if certain forces would work to prevent him from doing so.

I think most of us can agree that whatever any government or agency does or does not know about UFOs, they haven't done anything thus far to actively promote knowledge of their existence to the public at large. They may or may not already hold smoking gun evidence of their own and choose not to use it, so if the policy is to prevent the public knowing, why would they allow Ray Stanford to do what they appear determined not to?

Of course, unless the policy has been to wait until a member of the public promotes such evidence, then they can sit back and watch any fall-out and then decide what to do depending on which way the proverbial wind is blowing. If it goes well, they can 'allow' a little more released and further releases over time - the slow acclimatisation theory. If it goes badly, then they can kind of back-peddle and say the evidence is manufactured etc.

I am surprised that Ray hasn't been the victim of a Watergate-type burglary leaving him without his evidence. Of course Ray is a very intelligent man and he may have made provision for all such eventualities...

 

[callmesnake]

Put up or shut up

Tired of hearing 70 years of stories.

His paleontology is infinitely more interesting

 

[Burnt State]

Of course Ray is a very intelligent man and he may have made provision for all such eventualities...

Oh, he's made provisions alright. He's buried the evidence under piles of rocks!

 

[Burnt State]

This one has much better lighting and is quite, well
stunning IMHO. But I bet if I tried this at home my
wife would threaten all sorts of things if I did not
dismantle it immediately. I also suspect that the dog
would start doing his business indoors. However can
you imagine a 3 letter agency trying to covertly look
through here, or start rearranging the furniture to
destabilize him?! Impossible, I tell ya!

 

[marduk]

I think if his evidence was real and someone wanted actually want to keep a lid on it, it would have been dealt with decades ago.

It's either not smoking gun evidence or the powers that be don't care.

Or, both.

 

[bobheck]

Look, we are tired of the same old line. Ray, come on, post your proof to the public domain or just shut the F&$% up and retire. Seriously, it's time. No more stories and crap. Post all of your shit. Done.

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

Look, some of us are tired of all this whining. Ray will do what he will do, how he wants to do it and when he feels it's most appropriate. Have a bit of respect for your elders, be patient and "just shut the F&$% up" already

 

[Gene Steinberg]

But you do understand, Chris, why these listeners are frustrated. Ray didn't have to claim he had anything at all. He could just release it when it was ready — as Apple does traditionally with new gadgets — and say nothing more. Then there'd be no clamoring for something.

 

[Wade]

This whole thread seems almost predatory. I'm assuming you guys had Ray on because of the requests from us members NOT because he was badgering you guys to appear just to tease us with more smoke and mirrors. Did anyone actually think the outcome would be any different ?

 

[Gene Steinberg]

The short of it was that I felt it was time to have him back on, and sent an email to Chris to ask him. That's all! Ray has never asked to appear on the show.

 

[Burnt State]

 

[Randall]

In the follow-up discussion on the most recent show Chris calls Ray Stanford "the most important person in ufology". I find that a bit hard to believe. If his evidence is really that good then it should stand on its own merit without the need for years of analysis to prove it. Perhaps I'm wrong, but from what I can tell from the various discussions, Ray's evidence includes no scientifically valid material evidence from an alien craft ( UFO ), which means that at best, it's limited to sighting reports and recorded evidence such as photos or films, and during the show we did hear Ray offer to post some images.

So let's assume that Ray actually has some really good photos or film footage of a UFO ( alien craft ). How does that make him "the most important person in ufology"? IMO the question of personal importance in ufology can't be boiled down to a single individual. Personally, I think the most important people in ufology are the all the witnesses, those who know from the evidence of their own conscious and unimpaired senses, that they have without any ambiguity, experienced the presence of an alien craft.

 

[boomerang]

Much of the enjoyment in this field is provided by the colorful characters who inhabit it. I think we can choose or not choose to listen to whomever. As I have opined earlier, this phenomenon, which is indeed physically real, is inextricably entwined with the psyches of the witnesses themselves. Some presenters may be genuinely entwined and some may not. But it's all part of the larger paradox.

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

In the follow-up discussion on the most recent show Chris calls Ray Stanford "the most important person in ufology".

We are all entitled to our own opinions. I have met (and know) many of the leading figures in this field, so I do say state that coming from a place of some authority, and Ray DOES have what may be some physical evidence, btw...

 

[marduk]

We are all entitled to our own opinions. I have met (and know) many of the leading figures in this field, so I do say state that coming from a place of some authority, and Ray DOES have what may be some physical evidence, btw...

Have you directly seen some of the more controversial evidence like photos of craft with occupants visible within them, and photos with propulsion system details?

If so, could you describe them? I'm dying for more info here.

 

[Randall]

We are all entitled to our own opinions. I have met (and know) many of the leading figures in this field, so I do say state that coming from a place of some authority, and Ray DOES have what may be some physical evidence, btw...

Lot's of people claim to have physical evidence, but then again, so what? We've all heard of the Bob White artifact. Maybe that should make Bob White, "the most important person in ufology". And we've all heard from the "leading figures in the field". So what? Unless Ray shows up with Klaatu and a flying saucer complete with license plates and a registration from the Pleiades Star System Department of Interstellar Vehicles, I think Ray's status as "the most important person in ufology" might be a little exaggerated. But even then, his claim wouldn't be so much one of importance as one on fame.

But don't get me wrong. Ray's an interesting character, and I admire your tenacity to get the goods and openly disclose them. What I'm trying to get across is that my idea of important when it comes to people, in ufology, has to do with those who possess knowledge acquired from firsthand experience. We call them experiencers, and their validity doesn't hinge on whether or not they have evidence stashed away someplace that will make the skeptics finally accept the truth, nor does it hinge on whether or not they're famous.

So far as I'm concerned, talking heads like Nick Pope are less important than the lone truck driver or pilot who has had an up-close and undeniable encounter. A real experiencer doesn't need Nick or Ray or you or me to tell them what they already know, and no amount of BS or ridicule or intimidation is going to change that fact. They belong to a unique, and IMO special subset of our civilization who know that we're not the only highly intelligent species in the universe ( and I'm not talking about dolphins and other intelligent animals we're already familiar with ). You know what I mean, and I think you're probably arguing more for the sake of discussion than to disagree ( which is fine. So am I to some extent. ).

Essentially what I'm trying to say with respect to this issue of importance, is that no matter how different each experiencer might be in other respects, they are all bound by a common, yet extraordinarily profound thread in terms of world views. Being inside the ketchup bottle, sometimes it's easy to forget just how different our worldview is from those who have never had a UFO experience. It's like something that only those inside the family ( so to speak ) can truly understand, and in this context within ufology, there's nothing more important than family, and it doesn't feel right to me to say that any one of us is any more or less important than the other.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

In the follow-up discussion on the most recent show Chris calls Ray Stanford "the most important person in ufology". I find that a bit hard to believe. If his evidence is really that good then it should stand on its own merit without the need for years of analysis to prove it. Perhaps I'm wrong, but from what I can tell from the various discussions, Ray's evidence includes no scientifically valid material evidence from an alien craft ( UFO ), which means that at best, it's limited to sighting reports and recorded evidence such as photos or films, and during the show we did hear Ray offer to post some images.

So let's assume that Ray actually has some really good photos or film footage of a UFO ( alien craft ). How does that make him "the most important person in ufology"? IMO the question of personal importance in ufology can't be boiled down to a single individual. Personally, I think the most important people in ufology are the all the witnesses, those who know from the evidence of their own conscious and unimpaired senses, that they have without any ambiguity, experienced the presence of an alien craft.

Hey Randall, this is just a guess but I think Ray is supposed to be doing some kiind of analysis of photos in which there is some kind of visible evidence of some plasma-using propulsion effect. I think it is to do with preparing the space (air) in front of the craft maybe to reduce drag, or create some kind of field or attraction (total guesses) - anyway the point is, if the photos do show any such thing to such a degree that someone can make good guesses or decent measurements, formulate a theory etc, well that in my book would be a good deal more of an achievement in Ufology than any other of the usual 'top ufologists' roll-call. I mean there may be guys investigating good cases but to be possibly discovering novel physics and the actual propulsion sciences, is way ahead of the rest in my book.