Starchild

[Gene Steinberg]

To add to what Tommy says here, when doing a project of this sort for pay, it is customary to have the client sign some sort of agreement with respect to the rights to the artwork that has been created.

Here, Tommy simply volunteered his efforts and worked really hard to do the best job he could. There were apparently no written agreements involved, and Pye could have done the decent thing and allowed him free use of his material in exchange for receiving the creative work without charge. Pye's behavior is, to my way of thinking, simply reprehensible.

If Pye truly wants to get to the bottom of the StarChild skull question rather than just earn a buck from a book he hopes will become a best-seller, he should apologize to Tommy, shake hands, and stop acting so greedy.

 

[Tommy Allison]

Hey guys, Coast To Coast has my "hybrid" picture up on their site, Hahahahahhahaha

I sent in the pic as a fluke. They posted it, How Cool Is That???

 

[DBTrek]

Doh . .. I re-read the post I was responding to and discovered I misunderstod what was written.

Carry on!

-DBTrek

 

[Richard Bailey]

I think we forget from time to time that the paracast is Gene and Davids show.
That means they are the judge of what is or is not appropiate.

I personally appreciate the fact that a hard or unexpected question may get ask. It is easy to prove your point if you are in your comfort zone but when an unexpected question is ask you have to know what you are talking about or your story will begin to fall apart.

 

[auntiegrav]

Common sense has to rule this one folks - no legitimate peer reviews = no story.

Get your professional 'buddies' to review your research and you're good to go? I'm not sure I like that.

I'm not defending this particular case but don't you get the impression that a lot of commercial research is done this way? You *start with a conclusion* about the benefits of your latest product then commission research to support that conclusion. If the results aren't to your liking you re-commission with a different research group and repeat until you *are* happy with the results.

I'm glad you were here to be sarcastic for me. ;-) I was reading along and was going to say almost exactly the same thing. "The Fluoride Conspiracy" is recommended reading for this, and also, the story of Jane Akre and Monsanto and BGH. If the data doesn't support your sales pitch, bury the data. If someone finds out, bury the reporter. It works so well, that even if the reporter sues and wins, you can still bury their story with outright lies and advertising.