Roundtable (10 May)

[sk4p]

As expected, great show. I was less acquainted with Greg's work -- gonna have to fix that! -- but had encountered Paul and Nick's before through The Paracast and Adam Gorightly's show, so I was looking forward to it.

Some semi-random rambles ...

- dB's observation that a lot of people (not The Powers That Be but the average person) might not want UFOs to be "solved" because as long as they're not solved, they represent good entertainment value. David, I think you are spot on here.

- The discussion about how it's all about abduction or Roswell; classic saucers, soil samples, etc. seem to be a thing of the past.

The late Karl Pflock proposed in Jim Moseley's Saucer Smear (editorial columns, 2001) that "They" were here, but were gone. The survey of saucers and progressively closer examinations seemed to culminate in the Hill abduction (although the earlier Villas-Boas case was certainly more "climactic" if you'll pardon the pun).

At first blush there might be something to this, yet there have been many interesting cases since the Hill case (Stephensville, O'Hare, Trumbull County, Rendlesham, Caracas just to name a very few). So I think the truth of the matter is probably selection bias. Fuller's The Interrupted Journey (about the Hills) came out in 1966, and since then it's become more and more "abduction-a-riffic" in UFOlogy, with Pascagoula and Andreasson in the early 1970s leading into the Strieber and the Jacobs-Hopkins "modern" greys.

The obvious hypothesis would be that sensationalism sells. "Dramatized for TV" is a lot more compelling when grown men wake up sobbing in terror, or "damsels in distress" are floated out of windows for the Nefarious Purposes(TM) of the Mysterious Others(TM), than when it's a troop of Boy Scouts seeing something odd through the trees from hundreds of yards away on a sunny summer afternoon.

But what can we do about this?

Outstanding show, gentlemen.

--Shawn

P.S. I cite Caracas on the list of interesting cases entirely based on dB's accounts of it. As discussed in the roundtable, it would be fantastic if we could get those newspapers ...

 

[themacx]

If we had a name of the Caracas newspaper we might be able to get it.

 

[Gareth]

Yeah great show guys, as expected. I actually really appreciated the pace at which you kept the show rolling along. Im not sure if you planned that Gene or if it just happened by chance, but it seems like the best way to handle a 5-man show (over Skype no less).

If we had a name of the Caracas newspaper we might be able to get it.

I just did a search using the term 'Caracas' in a few forums and didnt find the Newspaper name:

The Paracast Community Forums

Its possible I missed it.

Are you in Caracas? I believe David has searched pretty extensively for it already. I could be wrong though.

 

[Ally]

Good show and a great line up. Even though most people think the MJ-12 documents are disinformation are they worth reading? I don't know too much about the contents of these documents and was hoping this show would go into that a little more. I have some of the MJ-12 material in a home made book that was given to me from a not so trusted indiidual.

I didn't bother reading this 250 ish long "book because I assumed it was crap and probably is. I guess I am asking any one who has read all of the MJ 12 material if they think there is enough truth in the disinfo of these documents to bother?

 

[Paul Kimball]

I guess I am asking any one who has read all of the MJ 12 material if they think there is enough truth in the disinfo of these documents to bother?

The short answer is "no"... and that's the long answer too!

 

[Bixyboo]

Great show, you guys! Do more like this!

 

[max inca]

You should read it like everything else.Decide for yerself

 

[Ezechiel]

Good show but troubled by some aspects of it.

Being a 'nuts and bolts' type, the roundtable approach gave me a 'council of Nicaea' aftertaste and deciding by consensus that MJ-12 is relative crap is a bit analogous to sending gnostic scriptures to the trash bin LOL.

I prefer the archaeological filtering approach where the whole is evaluated and the dicey BS bits and pieces put on the shelf until more data is available/ debated and you can safely flush it.

IMHO, the first brick layer making up the foundations to a credible UFO field should be pure science and experience... otherwise it gets an undesired religious flavour.

Perhaps an up to date session with Stanton Friedman is necessary to complete the picture and close the MJ-12 file. This council was unfortunately unbalanced and sorely missing his input and argumentation which IMHO would have been enlightening.

 

[Hoffmeister]

Ok so when i heard about this show i nearly wet my pants! I really like the shows where you have all the straight talkers putting a lot of the myths to bed.
So far I have only had time to listen to an hour and ten minutes and it has been as good as expected, I was particularly interested to hear peoples opinions on MJ-12.

I agree with everyone that the documents are fake, however I slightly disagree with Paul that we should just completely forget them, and not bother ourselves as to why someone might have put the disinformation out there.

As discussed in the episode, disinformation means good information mixed with bad information. It would be extremely suprising to me if in the last 100 years there wasn't at some time an MJ-12 like organisation, and it may well have contained some of the members who were in the MJ-12 that we know in Ufology.

Consider Graham Bethunes (spelling?) who was the army airforce pilot in out of the blue and also one of the national press club events (i think James fox's one). He was the sober looking chap who was flying across i think northern Europe, and had a similar type experience to the japanese airlines one (he drew pictures which you see in the documentary).

Now in my eyes, this chap is about as believable as Bob Salas (i.e. very) and has documents to prove some of what happened.... and what does he say at the end of his testimony? He says that one of the people he reported the incident to told him that the incident report will go to Navy intelligence, and then on too a join staff commity made up of intelligence officers and scientists... and would probably never go anywhere else.

So it would appear that perhaps some of the MJ-12 stuff might be true... we'll probably never find out which paerts are, but its interesting to think about.

Great show so far guys

 

[CoachMcGuirk]

My feeling with MJ-12 has always been that there is some truth there. Not much, but some, and completely disregarding them is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

In any event, whoever put them together really did their homework as so many obvious mistakes (dates of meetings, etc.) were avoided.

I'll also throw my opinion in that some dissenting opinion would have made for a better show. Don't get me wrong, I think all three guys are great, but someone like Stan with a differing opinion would have made for a more interesting show.

 

[Paul Kimball]

My feeling with MJ-12 has always been that there is some truth there. Not much, but some, and completely disregarding them is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

In any event, whoever put them together really did their homework as so many obvious mistakes (dates of meetings, etc.) were avoided.

Actually, that's one of the great myths about MJ-12 - that clearly the hoaxers must have known some super-secret insider information. In fact, the homework they would have had to do wasn't all that onerous. See:

1. http://www.redstarfilms.blogspot.com/2005/06/real-reason-gen-smith-met-truman-on-1.html

2. http://www.redstarfilms.blogspot.com/2005/06/more-on-gen-smith-1-august-1950.html

That's just an example. There is no information in the original MJ-12 documents (EBD, Truman memo, CT memo) that contains the kind of information that couldn't have been easily obtained by an AFOSI officer like Rick Doty, particularly when he knew exactly what information to seed into the documents to whet the appetite of people like Stan Friedman - because Stan et al had already conveniently provided the hoaxers with the story. Adding Donald Menzel in was a really nice touch.

Sure, have Stan on to talk about MJ-12. Don't expect anything new, however, and definitely don't expect the whole story. But start him off with the 4 questions I posed to him in 2005, at http://redstarfilms.blogspot.com/2005/06/majestic-12-rip.html. He still hasn't provided satisfactory answers.

The fact that anyone is still talking about all of this 25 years later tells me all that I need to know about why "ufology" has singularly failed to make any real progress in finding answers with regards to the UFO phenomenon.

Paul

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Thanks Paul. I've asked Stan to participate and present his point of view. I'm anxious to see what he has to say (he's already joined the forum).

 

[CoachMcGuirk]

OK, Paul, I see your point on the August date in question, and I see where you were going in your argument with Rich Reynolds in that the probability is that the CIA appointment is all that was discussed.

What about Menzel's unknown work for intelligence? How much of that was public knowledge where a hoaxer would have access to it? It seems the documents are just truthful enough in ways that aren't obvious that their creator must have had some in depth knowledge.

Heck, maybe Stan mailed them himself (I kid, I kid.)

 

[sk4p]

The short answer is "no"... and that's the long answer too!

Edit! I should have read the whole thread before posting the question!

Would love to hear this. I'm inclined to doubt MJ-12 but having one of the smartest representatives of both sides square off would be fantastic.

Paul,

Is there even the slightest chance that you and Stan would do an "MJ-12 101" show and present your opposing views of the evidence? I think it would be a good refresher for folks who've glanced at the documents as published but not made a sufficient study yet of the evidence to make up our minds about them.

--Shawn

 

[SR2]

Another great show! I tend to agree with much of what was discussed, so that was a plus.

Some suggestions:

1. I wonder if it's possible to note the date of the actual recording of the shows for each podcast.

2. Have Greg Bishop on as a solo to discuss his book on R. Doty.

3. I think that it would be more interesting if you had a diverse group of guests for your roundtable show. There seemed to be 90-95% agreement on all the topics discussed. I don't know who else could be included. Maybe any of the many authors of Roswell or MJ-12 books.

 

[Paul Kimball]

Edit! I should have read the whole thread before posting the question!

Would love to hear this. I'm inclined to doubt MJ-12 but having one of the smartest representatives of both sides square off would be fantastic.

Paul,

Is there even the slightest chance that you and Stan would do an "MJ-12 101" show and present your opposing views of the evidence? I think it would be a good refresher for folks who've glanced at the documents as published but not made a sufficient study yet of the evidence to make up our minds about them.

--Shawn

The best person to go head-to-head with Stan would be Brad Sparks. I'm going to PM his e-mail to Gene tonight. I would love to hear Brad have a chance to ask the hard questions of Stan, on air.

Paul

 

[CapnG]

I think I experienced a time warp... no way was that show two hours, it flew by! Excellent show on all counts gentlemen, I loves me some roundtable!

Good show and a great line up. Even though most people think the MJ-12 documents are disinformation are they worth reading?

Worth reading to be familiar with the topic, yes. Worth reading as an historical document, not so much.

The best person to go head-to-head with Stan would be Brad Sparks. I'm going to PM his e-mail to Gene tonight. I would love to hear Brad have a chance to ask the hard questions of Stan, on air.

*Cue cheesey motocross announcer voice effect*

"This sunday, SUNDAY SUNDAY! The Paracast presents... an all out, knock-down, no holds barred GRUDGE MATCH! Hear Stan Friedman square off against Brad Sparks on the MJ-12 documents... with EXTREEEEME PREJUDICE! This top secret match has been classified as AWESOME! Don't miss it!"

 

[Gareth]

Gene hows this for a show idea:

Stan Friedman / Ryan Wood as pro MJ12ers. With Paul Kimball / Robert Hastings as anti MJ12ers...

What do you think?

It will be the ultimate debate to end them all. Plus you could promote the crap out of it around the UFO blogosphere.

 

[Paul Kimball]

Gene hows this for a show idea:

Stan Friedman / Ryan Wood as pro MJ12ers. With Paul Kimball / Robert Hastings as anti MJ12ers...

What do you think?

It will be the ultimate debate to end them all. Plus you could promote the crap out of it around the UFO blogosphere.

Sorry Gareth (and others), but I have no interest in debating Stan about MJ-12. There's nothing to be learned or gained, and I've said all that I have to say about it. I've made my views clear over the years, although Stan misrepresented them in his most recent book. I only discussed it on the Paracast because David asked the question. Besides, I've been on enough lately.

I asked Brad, and he's not interested either - he's more or less withdrawn from UFO research at this time to pursue other projects.

Perhaps Barry Greenwood, his co-author on the MUFON paper, would be interested.

Paul

 

[Paul Kimball]

Being a 'nuts and bolts' type, the roundtable approach gave me a 'council of Nicaea' aftertaste

Ahh, the irony - that's exactly how Greg, Nick, Mac and I usually feel whenever we have to deal with the nuts-and-bolts die-hards who have run UFO research into the ground over the past 30 years.

Also, I should note once more that I have always said that I think the ETH is the most plausible of all the non-terrestrial / paranormal theories. My point of contention with the ETHers is that many of them - like Stan Friedman - promote it as a proven fact, when it clearly is not. Science does not accept it, and no court of law would accept it on the standard of beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the only one that can apply to such an extraordinary claim. I doubt any honest and objective jury would accept it even on the lower standard of the balance of probabilities.

What makes it worse - and even more hypocritical - is when people like Stan then lambaste the exopols for what they believe and promote, when in fact all the exopols are doing is taking the position that Stan et al have taken to their logical conclusion. See: http://redstarfilms.blogspot.com/2009/04/myth-of-eth-as-etfact.html