Richard Dolan

[trainedobserver]

 

[ArchieBedford]

Interesting.

Dunno what to think about Rich promoting "The Disclosure Song." You have to respect a guy who states his position publicly and puts himself on the line like that.

 

[trainedobserver]

I enjoyed both of the books in his UFO series and look forward to the next one. Yeah ... "The Disclosure Song" video has several known fake photos and others that are highly questionable in it. But if you listen to the lyrics there is no mention of ETs or whatever in to (if I am not mistaken) just a expression of a desire to hear the truth.

You have to wonder what the reaction of the Disclosure Movement would be if the government came out and said, "We're being visited by gawd knows what and we don't have a freak'n clue as to what they want or where they are from. All we know is we can't touch 'em, they come and go as they damn well please, and oh yeah, they're abducting people and running some sort of long term experiment on the human race for reasons unknown. Now ...back to America's Got Talent with new judge Howey Mandel!"

It'd be good for gun sales I'm sure.

 

[Ron Collins]

Who wants to bet that Dolan shares in the creative rights to the "Disclosure Anthem"? It is kind of interesting to watch him seek out new and interesting ways to sell out his once vaunted credibility. The funny thing is that he represents the after disclosure book as "a study". His books aren't bad. They are entertaining and contain some relevant information. BUT... They are poorly researched and insufficiently documented. But it doesn't stop there. They are filled with second hand investigations and interviews. All of that is coupled with innuendo and glued together with solid facts to show precisely the conclusions he wants to present. Leaps of logic and paradoxical reasoning seem to be the theme in his narrative.


Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?

 

[ArchieBedford]

Who wants to bet that Dolan shares in the creative rights to the "Disclosure Anthem"? It is kind of interesting to watch him seek out new and interesting ways to sell out his once vaunted credibility. The funny thing is that he represents the after disclosure book as "a study". His books aren't bad. They are entertaining and contain some relevant information. BUT... They are poorly researched, insufficiently documented. But it doesn't stop there. They are filled with second hand investigations and interviews. All of that is coupled with innuendo and glued together with solid facts to show precisely the conclusions he wants to present. Leaps of logic and paradoxical reasoning seem to be the theme in his narrative.

Can't disagree with your assessment Ron. Rich does put thousands of hours of fairly diligent research into his books and uses piles of documentation, though the result may fall short of perfection and worse, he has an emotional commitment to the "grand conspiracy" narrative. He lost a lot of credibility with me when he started promoting the "9/11-as-inside-job" cult, because it betrays a lack of critical thinking, poor knowledge of the issues and a gullibility not worthy of a serious mind. He also gets a lot of stick for promoting himself and his books through exopolitics, recording interviews with crypto-racist assholes like Rense and shallow, low-cred fools like Project Scam-a-lot.

He is trying to make a living, without "selling out." He has a family to feed, and some compromise is inevitable. His books do make money, though not a lot. He's in-hock to no-one and retains independent action. You have to at least respect him for that.

---------- Post added at 04:37 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:32 AM ----------

You have to wonder what the reaction of the Disclosure Movement would be if the government came out and said, "We're being visited by gawd knows what and we don't have a freak'n clue as to what they want or where they are from. All we know is we can't touch 'em, they come and go as they damn well please, and oh yeah, they're abducting people and running some sort of long term experiment on the human race for reasons unknown. Now ...back to America's Got Talent with new judge Howey Mandel!"

Just out of interest, this is a very close paraphrase of something Budd Hopkins said publicly (on TV, I think) about 20 years ago. IMO this is precisely the reason there will be no "disclosure" any time soon.

 

[trainedobserver]

They are poorly researched and insufficiently documented. But it doesn't stop there. They are filled with second hand investigations and interviews.

Ron,

Who is writing well researched and sufficiently documented books with first hand investigations and interviews? What should I be reading?

Rick

---------- Post added at 08:08 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:43 AM ----------

Just out of interest, this is a very close paraphrase of something Budd Hopkins said publicly (on TV, I think) about 20 years ago. IMO this is precisely the reason there will be no "disclosure" any time soon.

I think what it boils down to is 'the truth' may not be what the Disclosure movement thinks or hopes that it might be, the government (or at least the bits that interface with public) may not really know much of anything, and given the government's history deceiving the public we aren't going to be able to trust whatever they 'disclose' anyway.

The more I have thought about the disclosure business the more I have come to think that the secrecy surrounding the phenomena is entirely under the control of whoever or whatever is behind it. It seems to have been around for quite some time and hasn't revealed itself yet, what on earth makes us think it is going to in the future?

The way this seems to work is that serious R&D into weapons, reconnaissance, and so forth are funneled into the private sector where FOIA and the public right to know what is being done with their tax dollars doesn't apply. Private companies with government contracts are tightly controlled and monitored by government agencies yet remain outside of the laws and rules that have been put in place for the operation of government. It only seems logical that the study of the UFO phenomena has disappeared down one of these black holes where it can't be touched and where information about can be denied to highly placed Admirals, Generals, and even the President of the United States.

What are the chances that Corporation X, working on some recovered UFO's power plant is going to share it with the public? What are the chances that they would be willing to share intelligence that would give other companies a chance to compete with them in any way, shape, or form? The answer is pretty obvious. It isn't going to happen.

Until such a time that phenomena itself decides to reveal itself to the general public it just isn't going to happen in my opinion.

Whatever any human agency, government, or military knows about the origin of the phenomena seems to be a greater secret than nuclear weapons or the plot to kill JFK. We've been treated to an incredible amount of disinformation by them. Lear, Doty, Moore, Cooper, and a host of others have so muddied the waters that we may never be able to filter out all the dirt. I can't tell how many times in my life I have thrown my hands up and stepped back from the whole thing. For some reason I always come back to it though. It's just such a great mystery and it seems to be so very important I am eventually drawn back into an attempt to keep up with what is currently going on with the subject. But in all reality I acknowledge that I most likely will never learn 'the truth' whatever the hell that is.

 

[Trajanus]

the government (or at least the bits that interface with public) may not really know much of anything

IMO they know the phenomenon is real and ET but not much else.

and given the government's history deceiving the public we aren't going to be able to trust whatever they 'disclose' anyway.

Without indisputable proof, open to verification, they'd only look foolish "disclosing.".

It seems to have been around for quite some time and hasn't revealed itself yet, what on earth makes us think it is going to in the future?

Well you could say to an extent it has already or we wouldn't be discussing it.

What are the chances that Corporation X, working on some recovered UFO's power plant is going to share it with the public?

The raison d'etre of a corporation is to mass produce products to make $. If they had their way, UFO technology might be visible now but IMO the government tightly controls everything to suit its agenda.

Whatever any human agency, government, or military knows about the origin of the phenomena seems to be a greater secret than nuclear weapons or the plot to kill JFK.

Of course.

We've been treated to an incredible amount of disinformation by them. Lear, Doty, Moore, Cooper, and a host of others have so muddied the waters that we may never be able to filter out all the dirt.

Revealed! The Greatest UFO Secrets makes a valiant attempt but it's an obscure and extremely controversial tome.

 

[Sean Elifritz]

My personal take on the "government conspiracy" is this: They don't know jack! I believe that sighting reports, videos, pictures, instrument readings, etc., have been swept under the rug but that's as far as it goes. They are not hiding some ultimate truth, crashed saucers, alien bodies, pacts with reptilians and insectoids, etc. No doubt the governments of the world have had brushes with UFOs that they can't explain. But covering up those incidents is more PR than it is a conspiracy. No one in authority ever likes to say, "I don't know." Sure, in the past they tried avoiding that answer by talking about swamp gas, temperature inversions, and hallucinations but they were ridiculed to such an extent that they decided to clam up completely. Governments don't talk about UFOs because they don't know what to say about them.

 

[ArchieBedford]

My personal take on the "government conspiracy" is this: They don't know jack! I believe that sighting reports, videos, pictures, instrument readings, etc., have been swept under the rug but that's as far as it goes. They are not hiding some ultimate truth, crashed saucers, alien bodies, pacts with reptilians and insectoids, etc. No doubt the governments of the world have had brushes with UFOs that they can't explain. But covering up those incidents is more PR than it is a conspiracy. No one in authority ever likes to say, "I don't know." Sure, in the past they tried avoiding that answer by talking about swamp gas, temperature inversions, and hallucinations but they were ridiculed to such an extent that they decided to clam up completely. Governments don't talk about UFOs because they don't know what to say about them.

Maybe. David Jacobs essentially believes this too, but as a tenured academic historian his burden of proof has to be fairly high. Dolan's different: he has no academic post, he speculates, is more belief-driven and likes narrative.

It seems to me however that there is so much testimony from credible sources about downed ET craft, especially Roswell, over so many years and with such consistency, that there is probably something to it. I'm even prepared to say that though some nit-picking criticisms of Dolan may have merit, overall he might be on to something.

The reasons for non-disclosure IMO are essentially that the monster has grown huge and out of control, and has to be contained and hidden from sight. A great deal is known about this extremely complex issue of the visitors, and it ain't all good news. Open the can of worms to the public in the wrong way and the results, a year or two down the line, might be disastrous.

I'm also prepared to concede that elected politicians may be told little or even nothing, but most heads of government are briefed on the basics - see Margaret Thatcher's multiply-witnessed comment to Georgina Bruni in 1997, the very public pronouncements of Ronald Reagan and Michael Gorbachov, and other examples. It looks like the issue is managed on a need-to-know basis at a high level in the military and the intelligence services, with the recovered tech in the hands of a few proprietary industrial organizations where legal issues of FOIA disclosure do not apply. I would be surprised if anyone in the executive arm of the US Government (the Presidential office) knows much - though Hillary must be in the loop, having been involved with the Rockerfeller Initiative, and Bush 41 must have known plenty about it.

---------- Post added at 07:22 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:40 AM ----------

The more I have thought about the disclosure business the more I have come to think that the secrecy surrounding the phenomena is entirely under the control of whoever or whatever is behind it. It seems to have been around for quite some time and hasn't revealed itself yet, what on earth makes us think it is going to in the future?

The way this seems to work is that serious R&D into weapons, reconnaissance, and so forth are funneled into the private sector where FOIA and the public right to know what is being done with their tax dollars doesn't apply. Private companies with government contracts are tightly controlled and monitored by government agencies yet remain outside of the laws and rules that have been put in place for the operation of government. It only seems logical that the study of the UFO phenomena has disappeared down one of these black holes where it can't be touched and where information about can be denied to highly placed Admirals, Generals, and even the President of the United States.

What are the chances that Corporation X, working on some recovered UFO's power plant is going to share it with the public? What are the chances that they would be willing to share intelligence that would give other companies a chance to compete with them in any way, shape, or form? The answer is pretty obvious. It isn't going to happen.

Until such a time that phenomena itself decides to reveal itself to the general public it just isn't going to happen in my opinion.

Whatever any human agency, government, or military knows about the origin of the phenomena seems to be a greater secret than nuclear weapons or the plot to kill JFK. We've been treated to an incredible amount of disinformation by them. Lear, Doty, Moore, Cooper, and a host of others have so muddied the waters that we may never be able to filter out all the dirt...

Agree 100%. It's obvious that whatever agency/agencies is behind these complex phenomena has no interest in "disclosure" to the wider human population; indeed, such a development might be very damaging to their long-term interests. For all we know, they might be ultimately in control of the secrecy. Certainly if they wanted to disclose their presence unambiguously, all they need to do is park a mothership at low altitude over each of 50 large cities for a few days. They don't do that, nor anything like it - which should tell us something.

 

[Tom From Hong Kong]

I believe one of the issues with individuals such as Richard Dolan is that they start off with a "core of truth" -- some type of government cover-up surrounding the UFO phenomenon -- but then are tempted to continue to see conspiracy in places where the facts are less supportive of their assertions (encouraged by the positive feedback surrounding their initial views). This is a natural human tendency, and I am sure all of us have succumbed to this, generally in a less public fashion, though. This does not invalidate Mr. Dolan's original assertions surrounding the cover-up, however.

People have said it many times before: with buffoons like Lear, Moore, et. al., the government doesn't have to do much of anything to ensure a cover-up and disorganization. The UFO field will twist itself into a pretzel. It is also a magnet for snake oil salesmen such as Sparks and Greer.

The more time I spend thinking about this, the more I believe Dr. Jacobs may be onto something. There are too many people, from too many places around the globe, with too many similar scoop marks, reporting the "same complex narrative" (Dr. John Mack's words). Perhaps 'the conspiracy' is indeed justified? Maybe the government is in fact civic minded and doing what it genuinely believes is in the people's best interest?

 

[dyingsun]

I believe one of the issues with individuals such as Richard Dolan is that they start off with a "core of truth" -- some type of government cover-up surrounding the UFO phenomenon -- but then are tempted to continue to see conspiracy in places where the facts are less supportive of their assertions (encouraged by the positive feedback surrounding their initial views). This is a natural human tendency, and I am sure all of us have succumbed to this, generally in a less public fashion, though. This does not invalidate Mr. Dolan's original assertions surrounding the cover-up, however.

People have said it many times before: with buffoons like Lear, Moore, et. al., the government doesn't have to do much of anything to ensure a cover-up and disorganization. The UFO field will twist itself into a pretzel. It is also a magnet for snake oil salesmen such as Sparks and Greer.

The more time I spend thinking about this, the more I believe Dr. Jacobs may be onto something. There are too many people, from too many places around the globe, with too many similar scoop marks, reporting the "same complex narrative" (Dr. John Mack's words). Perhaps 'the conspiracy' is indeed justified? Maybe the government is in fact civic minded and doing what it genuinely believes is in the people's best interest?

Very eloquently said

 

[Trajanus]

The more time I spend thinking about this, the more I believe Dr. Jacobs may be onto something. There are too many people, from too many places around the globe, with too many similar scoop marks, reporting the "same complex narrative" (Dr. John Mack's words). Perhaps 'the conspiracy' is indeed justified? Maybe the government is in fact civic minded and doing what it genuinely believes is in the people's best interest?

If Jacobs is right, the ETs are the nemesis of humanity. If he's right, it's no wonder we don't see their motherships over our big cities. They're engaged in a "quiet" takeover. The government may feel disclosure is premature at this stage. It would lead to clamoring for action--among those who don't panic--but for the momet the government's means of dealing with the intruders are insufficient. (For a more optimistic view, see The Rise of the New American Patriots 2012-2100.) That might change in 20-50 years. But for now....

---------- Post added at 10:58 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:49 AM ----------

It seems to me however that there is so much testimony from credible sources about downed ET craft, especially Roswell, over so many years and with such consistency, that there is probably something to it.

Right, the government probably has physical proof of ETs but is still in the dark about much else, such as alien plans.

I'm also prepared to concede that elected politicians may be told little or even nothing

Of course most aren't told anything.

 

[Ron Collins]

Ron,

Who is writing well researched and sufficiently documented books with first hand investigations and interviews? What should I be reading?

Rick

In my opinion, Dolan is a hip and more intelligent version of Jim Marrs. He envisions a grand and epic coverup conspiracy manifested by a complacent upper echelon of the military, political, and power elite industrial/corporate sub cultures and then writes a book to support that thesis. He likes to organize facts in language suggestive of both an enlightened intelligence and inside information. He uses "unnamed sources" throughout most of his writings and then fills in the blanks with innuendo and tries to pass it all off as a scholarly work. This is my biggest issue with him, the pass off. Timothy good compiles a hundred or more cases, some good some bad, and then uses them to paint a picture of aliens being somewhat friendly and the government being bad as they don't want us minions to find the truth. BUT, he doesn't try to pull the "I am scholarly" angle. He freely admits his shotgun style is open to interpretation. He believes it shows the path mentioned above but doesn't discount the possibility of an alternate version or interpretation. Dolan wants us to believe that he has uncovered the actual blueprint for the "Extraterrestrial Reality". Those are his words, the "Extraterrestrial Reality"! No other interpretation is needed becauseand has insiders feeding him good solid information and he (himslef) has done all the leg work to prove it to you.

If you want to read some well documented, intelligent, and thought provoking books then read anything by Vallee. The book on Shag Harbour is good. I like the "UFO's: The Great Debate" by J.A. Danelek. Stan Freidman, though his Roswell and MJ12 stuff is written to support conclusions he had already surmised, are good reads and contain first hand research and interviews from witnesses. Dolan will plugin quotes he has mined from other publications when the witness that said them is still alive and kicking. Now for a new author to gain an interview with some of these folks would probably be hard, but Dolan has name recognition and UFO related clout. So I would submit that they would be more accepting of an interview with an author of his reputation.

I just personally do not believe that Dolans work should be given the seminal status it/he has enjoyed. He is not the gold standard of research and credibility. Vallee, Randle, Friedman, Kean, Redfern, and Ledger are good authors that I put the lions share of my respect under.

Sorry for the diatribe.

 

[ArchieBedford]

Timothy good compiles a hundred or more cases, some good some bad, and then uses them to paint a picture of aliens being somewhat friendly and the government being bad as they don't want us minions to find the truth. BUT, he doesn't try to pull the "I am scholarly" angle. He freely admits his shotgun style is open to interpretation. He believes it shows the path mentioned above but doesn't discount the possibility of an alternate version or interpretation.

Generally I'd agree, but the claim that Tim sees aliens as "somewhat friendly" I'd take issue with. I know him fairly well and have spent private time with him face-to-face, and his perspective is deeper, more complex and nuanced than this simple statement suggests. Also he does not consider "disclosure" to be necessarily A Good Thing, and neither does he consider "government is bad". On the contrary, he recognises that the information about the ET issue is heavily compartmentalised and "the government" - elected politicians at least - are mostly kept in the dark, for good reasons.

His best works IMO are still "Beyond Top Secret" and "Need to Know" for reasons which will become obvious to anyone who reads them.

I broadly agree with you about Dolan.

Vallee is a different issue: he is a good literate writer with a fine intellect and generally sound scientific thought process. But he can go off the rails sometimes and his later published work does not IMO even get close to the reality of what's going on - like his recent public pronouncements about crop circles being caused by top secret microwave weapons developed by the military in England, which are tested on the wheatfields: unfortunately an example of a thought process about as sound as declaring that UFOs are probably not ET. He does not, IMO, ask the right questions, and in his belief that his approach is "scientific", in fact he often overlooks the obvious and doesn't employ common sense.

 

[Trajanus]

Randle, Friedman.....are good authors that I put the lions share of my respect under.

They may be the best but it's noteworthy there's substantial disagreement among them. Randle and Friedman have clashed on a number of issues, and both have had problems e.g. Randle's initial acceptance of Dennis and Kaufmann. I was never a fan of Vallee or Redfern.

 

[Ron Collins]

They may be the best but it's noteworthy there's substantial disagreement among them. Randle and Friedman have clashed on a number of issues, and both have had problems e.g. Randle's initial acceptance of Dennis and Kaufmann.

True, and that is exactly why I like them. they disagree and both have valid points of view on a very complex subject. I just think they are good writers and have well though out and documented research to support their views. As for Randle, I respect him because he changed his mind when presented with fresh information.

I was never a fan of Vallee or Redfern.

But, they are thought provoking. Which is why i like to read them. I subscribe to the "no clue what they are" school of thought when origin is brought up. These guys have good theories that while not as probable as the ETH to some, have just as much merit in the esoteric areas surrounding origin theory for others.

---------- Post added at 10:09 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:03 PM ----------

Generally I'd agree, but the claim that Tim sees aliens as "somewhat friendly" I'd take issue with. I know him fairly well and have spent private time with him face-to-face, and his perspective is deeper, more complex and nuanced than this simple statement suggests. Also he does not consider "disclosure" to be necessarily A Good Thing, and neither does he consider "government is bad". On the contrary, he recognises that the information about the ET issue is heavily compartmentalised and "the government" - elected politicians at least - are mostly kept in the dark, for good reasons.

I could be wrong about his points of view. This is just how I read his publications meaning. Perhaps they can get him on the paracast and clear it up.

Vallee is a different issue: he is a good literate writer with a fine intellect and generally sound scientific thought process. But he can go off the rails sometimes and his later published work does not IMO even get close to the reality of what's going on - like his recent public pronouncements about crop circles being caused by top secret microwave weapons developed by the military in England, which are tested on the wheatfields: unfortunately an example of a thought process about as sound as declaring that UFOs are probably not ET. He does not, IMO, ask the right questions, and in his belief that his approach is "scientific", in fact he often overlooks the obvious and doesn't employ common sense.

Agreed, but I like him for his ability to think well outside the ETH box. Plus he has done a bunch for forwarding the field in the area of legitimacy. I was not aware of the crop circle thing. Probably because I generally cold care less about crop circles and have actively avoided anything to do with them for years. I will look into this a bit though. Just to make sure he hasn't gone complete bat-shit crazy.

 

[Kieran]

I read Vallée piece on Crop Circles that can be found online. He had some interesting ideas on the subject and Archie come on Vallée has no history of making crazy statements. So one Article he wrote that you do not agree with. His gone of the deep end come on!!! Some of the ideas while far fetched were not crazy far from it. He is not Alfred Webre for god sake.

---------- Post added at 01:33 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:08 AM ----------

They may be the best but it's noteworthy there's substantial disagreement among them. Randle and Friedman have clashed on a number of issues, and both have had problems e.g. Randle's initial acceptance of Dennis and Kaufmann. I was never a fan of Vallee or Redfern.

Your a true believer in the ETH. No other theory matters to you. So it not a surprise you would not be a fan of Vallee or Redfern. I don't box myself in like that. I think Kevin Randle and Frank Warren and even Paul Kimball are correct. ETH can not be dismissed as a theory. For me it is attractive as the other theories. Aliens visiting from other planets is actually kind of cool!! Ps As long as there not dangerous lol

 

[GDT]

People have said it many times before: with buffoons like Lear, Moore, et. al., the government doesn't have to do much of anything to ensure a cover-up and disorganization. The UFO field will twist itself into a pretzel. It is also a magnet for snake oil salesmen such as Sparks and Greer.

The more time I spend thinking about this, the more I believe Dr. Jacobs may be onto something. There are too many people, from too many places around the globe, with too many similar scoop marks, reporting the "same complex narrative" (Dr. John Mack's words). Perhaps 'the conspiracy' is indeed justified? Maybe the government is in fact civic minded and doing what it genuinely believes is in the people's best interest?

Excellent analysis and so true. I also tend to believe- if the government had gotten their hands on UFO crash material, I wouldn't be surprised if at some point, it just disappeared the same way abductees are taken. This would eliminate all the hype over back engineering and re-enforce how powerless, scared and embarrassed the government is with this phenomenon and add to their need to keep it quiet. Can you imagine them admitting that they can't keep the public safe and just say "we are sorry that people are being abducted and sexually, psychologically and medically abused, but we can't do a damned thing to help you"? Sorry wouldn't cut it.

As far as complaints over the lack of first hand research by most ufologists--- unless someone is willing to fund them with an annual stipend in the hundreds of thousands of dollars--- they can not afford to do the type of research and investigation they are criticized for not doing. They are stuck to only making phone calls and the odd car trip if the researcher or witnesses are close by. Many have sacrificed their standard of life to this field to obtain what? Criticism, disbelief and ridicule for their methods or opinions.

 

[ArchieBedford]

Excellent analysis and so true. I also tend to believe- if the government had gotten their hands on UFO crash material, I wouldn't be surprised if at some point, it just disappeared the same way abductees are taken. This would eliminate all the hype over back engineering and re-enforce how powerless, scared and embarrassed the government is with this phenomenon and add to their need to keep it quiet. Can you imagine them admitting that they can't keep the public safe and just say "we are sorry that people are being abducted and sexually, psychologically and medically abused, but we can't do a damned thing to help you"? Sorry wouldn't cut it.

As far as complaints over the lack of first hand research by most ufologists--- unless someone is willing to fund them with an annual stipend in the hundreds of thousands of dollars--- they can not afford to do the type of research and investigation they are criticized for not doing. They are stuck to only making phone calls and the odd car trip if the researcher or witnesses are close by. Many have sacrificed their standard of life to this field to obtain what? Criticism, disbelief and ridicule for their methods or opinions.

Excellent analysis in turn - especially poignant observation about the difficulties faced by anyone committed to investigating cases using their own resources. I know many genuine people committed to this issue who have suffered financially and in reputation as a consequence of their engagement, which is why I rarely have time for armchair critics who do no investigation themselves but are all too ready to criticise others for making the effort to do what they themselves are too indolent to attempt, if the results do not meet their arbitrary armchair-critical standards.

---------- Post added at 05:43 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:26 AM ----------

Agreed, but I like him for his ability to think well outside the ETH box. Plus he has done a bunch for forwarding the field in the area of legitimacy. I was not aware of the crop circle thing. Probably because I generally cold care less about crop circles and have actively avoided anything to do with them for years. I will look into this a bit though. Just to make sure he hasn't gone complete bat-shit crazy.

Vallee: see this recent forum discussion:

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/04/08/crop-circles-part-de.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+boingboing%2FiBag+%28Boing+Boing%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

There is no suggestion (at least not from me) that Jacques Vallee has gone bat-shit crazy, nor anything like that. On the contrary, I have great respect for his intellect, his scientific mind and valuable contributions to this subject over the past 45 years. As a matter of fact I am currently re-reading his early works "Anatomy of a Phenomenon" and "Challenge to Science." But paradoxically his scientific approach does sometimes overlook the obvious, and he's occasionally myopic and short of common sense. His recent claims that crop circles are caused by British military experiments with microwave weapons as an example look plausible if you just read his own reasoning in isolation, but then if you stand back you begin to appreciate he has failed to consider some obvious questions which might shoot the theory full of holes - unfortunately typical of many a scientifically-inclined mind which develops a pet theory and gallops off down a one-track road. Vallee has a history of this kind of thing.

I stress once more that IMO this does not mean I don't respect his intellect, his prolific legacy and the interesting and original perspectives he has brought to the table. I do. I just don't think he's some kind of god, and sometimes he is obviously misguided and his thought-process suspect.

---------- Post added at 06:08 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:43 AM ----------

I read Vallée piece on Crop Circles that can be found online. He had some interesting ideas on the subject and Archie come on Vallée has no history of making crazy statements. So one Article he wrote that you do not agree with. His gone of the deep end come on!!! Some of the ideas while far fetched were not crazy far from it. He is not Alfred Webre for god sake l

Kieran

Please read my post above to Ron, and try to understand how I feel about Jacques Vallee's work. You're right, he's not Alfred Webre (well realistically, who could compete with Alfred for regular comedy entertainment?) and I would never imply anything of the kind. Jacques has a great intellect, a keen scientific mind and his legacy is considerable. All his work is worth serious study, and all his books are reading time well spent. It's just that his reasoning is not infallible, he doesn't always ask the right questions and sometimes misses the obvious - that's far from what you imply.

 

[Trajanus]

..they disagree and both have valid points of view on a very complex subject.

Right but note that...

.. I subscribe to the "no clue what they are" school of thought when origin is brought up. These guys have good theories that while not as probable as the ETH to some, have just as much merit in the esoteric areas surrounding origin theory for others.

....one thing Randle and Friedman agree on is the ETH. For both, Roswel indicates something far different from the notions of Vallee.

---------- Post added at 10:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:34 AM ----------

I don't box myself in like that. I think Kevin Randle and Frank Warren and even Paul Kimball are correct.

Randle certainly favors the ETH.

ETH can not be dismissed as a theory.

I'll say; it's the most parsimonious and best supported view.