Steven Greer

[TerraX]

Actually, that's not what I meant. I don't dismiss all of the DP witnesses - I made a point of naming one that I've interviewed for whom I have a great deal of respect, Bob Salas (even though I don't agree with him on everything), and who tells a credible story. There are others. My point was - if you'd been paying attention - that in the eyes of the general public, and the media, and casual observers in general, it taints them by association with the bad witnesses, and Greer. Hence the damage that Greer has done to the subject. I'm sorry you can't or won't see that.

My mistake maybe or maybe a lack of clear communication on your part. But I must point out Paul that due to the many criticisements you have on your blog concerning other material out there, my take on your position also became slanted towards the negative. If you say; 'there are some bad apples in that basket', then ok but if you want to send out an objective image of yourself you also need to point out the 'good apples'. When I read your posts that's something I find lacking.

It's also a reality that has to be understood and dealt with. It's a very, very old political tactic, also used by the intelligence community, to taint people by association. To ignore that is to be naive, and live in some sort of fantasy world.

The way I read your comment above actually proves my point. Tainting people by association is a tactical method aimed at a desirable outcome by the initiator. In my opinion you have a tendency to do that as well, you have strong opinions on what ufology should be like and what it shouldn't be like you oppose. That's where tainting material comes in. Face it, what would your first reaction be if another contactee speaks up or if Michael Salla comes up with a new whistleblower. You would be extremely skeptical from the start. My argument here is Paul, show some objectivity at times. Look at both the positive and negative aspects. That's all I'm saying.

Of course, if what people think about UFOs, especially people who matter (i.e. those who could fund and support serious scientific research into the subject), doesn't matter to you, than all of the above is irrelevant I suppose.

Of course scientific research isn't irrelevant. If you think I agree that ufology can strictly rely on hearsay then you have somewhat of a wrong impression of me. The way I see it, many aspects have already been proven. Have you read Timothy Good's book Above Top Secret? It's filled with documents released under the FOIA, clearly showing a profound interest by the intelligence services on the subject of UFOs. Dozens of documents show concern and the secrecy surrounding the UFO phenomenon, the government agencies in fact substantiate that UFOs exist. Tim Good (as did others) already did the work on that. It's all there for people to see.

Out of time for now.
Regards,
TerraX

 

[Paul Kimball]

My mistake maybe or maybe a lack of clear communication on your part. But I must point out Paul that due to the many criticisements you have on your blog concerning other material out there, my take on your position also became slanted towards the negative. If you say; 'there are some bad apples in that basket', then ok but if you want to send out an objective image of yourself you also need to point out the 'good apples'.

Actually, if you read my blog, you'll find all sorts of stuff - some slamming the crap in ufology, and some promoting the good. The point, consistently, has been the need to differentiate between the two, reject the former, and focus on the latter, both internally and for public consumption. Above all else, retain your objectivity and not let the need to believe, or disbelieve, cloud one's judgment.

When I read your posts that's something I find lacking.The way I read your comment above actually proves my point. Tainting people by association is a tactical method aimed at a desirable outcome by the initiator. In my opinion you have a tendency to do that as well, you have strong opinions on what ufology should be like and what it shouldn't be like you oppose. That's where tainting material comes in.

This simply makes no sense to me. I don't taint people by association. Again, let me point out that there are people who were unfortunately part of the DP in the beginning, and who originally trusted Greer (most of whom have long since distanced themselves from him, btw) who I find credible, and interesting.

As for having strong opinions on what ufology should be like, yes, I do, but that's not tainting my view of anything to do with whether a witness etc. is credible, which is the whole point. I judge people and cases on their individual merits. Which leads me to...

Face it, what would your first reaction be if another contactee speaks up or if Michael Salla comes up with a new whistleblower. You would be extremely skeptical from the start.

Yes, just as I would be with any witness or whistleblower. Being skeptical isn't a bad thing - it should be one's default position, because it's neutral. Neither belief, nor disbelief. Don't confuse skepticism with what I call evangelical debunkerism.

As for Salla, the man has no credibility, because he's an out and out believer, and his methodology is non-existent. But that doesn't mean that I would simply reject someone who came forward through him out of hand - what it means is that I would never rely on Salla's word / analysis that the whistleblower / witness was legitimate. Big difference.

My argument here is Paul, show some objectivity at times. Look at both the positive and negative aspects. That's all I'm saying. Of course scientific research isn't irrelevant. If you think I agree that ufology can strictly rely on hearsay then you have somewhat of a wrong impression of me. The way I see it, many aspects have already been proven. Have you read Timothy Good's book Above Top Secret? It's filled with documents released under the FOIA, clearly showing a profound interest by the intelligence services on the subject of UFOs. Dozens of documents show concern and the secrecy surrounding the UFO phenomenon, the government agencies in fact substantiate that UFOs exist. Tim Good (as did others) already did the work on that. It's all there for people to see.

I have both of Good's books, Above Top Secret and Beyond Top Secret, sitting on my shelf. They're full of errors, but they're also full of interesting stuff as well. But none of it proves anything. Yes, various governments have had an interest in UFOs over the years. All that proves is that various governments have had an interest in UFOs over the years. No government agency has ever substantiated that UFOs exist as extraterrestrial spacecraft, or interdimensional travellers, or anything else paranormal or anomalous - they have substantiated that the phenomenon exists, which is a very different thing. No one really argues that point anymore. They, like everyone else, remain unable to explain what it is (ETH, EDH, PSH, null hypothesis... all are possibilities).

Best regards,
Paul

 

[Paul Kimball]

Just for my Paracast pals, here's a clip of the good doctor, from an interview I conducted with him back in 2001.


I find this one unitentionally ironic, but that's just me.

Paul

 

[CapnG]

I find this one unitentionally ironic, but that's just me.

No, it's not just you...

I'm reminded of the Hullabalooza episode of the Simpsons in which Homer tells the attendant crowd of teens "Don't trust anyone over 30!"...

 

[morrison1976]

I have seen the same happen to nick pope in the ufo field. Because he got a bit of media attention, some people went off him and started saying he was not credible, which i find very annoying. In this subject we need people like him to reach an audience, and there is nothing wrong with that. If he makes a bit of money selling books, so what!.
I have heard what greer has to say, and, to me, it is obvious that he devoted a great deal of time and effort doing what he is doing. I have watched the disclosure video and some of the witnesess are very good. No matter what you think of Greer, he has done this, and i only have praise for him. If he makes a bit of money, so what! i would too if i was him. He has dedicated so much of his life to this. Some people saying all this rubbish that he is damaging the subject, thats a load of rubbish. Do people think he will do all this for free? if he wants to plug his book, then thats cool because everyone needs an income, and if you have a family, and you were in his situation, you would do the same, i know i would.
People seem to think that if you work in the ufo subject, you should do it for free! again, rubbish!

 

[mjw]

The importance and relevance of Dr. Greer and the DP and CSETI as it pertains to the UFO/ET field basically boils down to whether or not you believe what Dr. Greer says has personally happened to him. According to Dr. Greer the whole reason he stopped being an emergency room doctor and got involved in the Disclosure Project and CSETI was because of his ET contact experiences. To those that believe Dr. Greer has met and interacted with beings not from this planet the idea of CSETI makes sense. To someone that either doesn’t believe ET contact has ever been made or that maybe it has, just not with Dr. Greer then I think that the idea of CSETI could be looked at the way Paul Kimball sees it - that it harms the serious study of the UFO phenomenon.

It seems that there is such a heavy amount of importance placed on ET contact that if anyone claims to have actually made contact they are castrated by the “serious UFO community” and labeled as either having delusions of grandeur or are simply lying about it to satisfy their egos and gain a cult following. So to the “serious UFO community” I say this - come on… we are talking about beings from other worlds visiting this planet in spaceships using technologies that we can’t even comprehend!! A certain amount of belief is REQUIRED! And if you don’t think so then please show me some solid proof of ANYTHING “alien” in origin. I can show you something "alien" in origin - go look in the mirror. haha

If you look at the whole of it then all you can say is “I don’t know”. Did Dr. Greer really have ET contact? I don’t know. I honestly have no opinion or emotional investment in whether it has happened or not. Is it possible? Sure, based on my own experience I think it could have happened. But that’s all I have – my own experience. It’s really all anyone has.

I would like to think he is being honest about everything (I guess I do have somewhat of an emotional investment in this ) – he has certainly shown no reason for me to believe otherwise so far. But if it turns out that he has lied about the whole thing then oh well. At least it was an interesting story. But if he is telling the truth about it then the only thing I can say about ETs are that they don’t want to be seen by all or known by all. Yet.

 

[CapnG]

I disagree. The importance of Greer and the DP is entirely wrapped up in whether or not he can deliver on the deal. Belief is not an issue here, clearly Greer and his associates consider their testimonials as fact, so belief is out of their context and as for the rest of us, well that's a question of suspension of disbelief rather than actual belief.

I'm tired of "wanting to believe". Facts. Proof! Let's have some!

 

[morrison1976]

I disagree. The importance of Greer and the DP is entirely wrapped up in whether or not he can deliver on the deal. Belief is not an issue here, clearly Greer and his associates consider their testimonials as fact, so belief is out of their context and as for the rest of us, well that's a question of suspension of disbelief rather than actual belief.

I'm tired of "wanting to believe". Facts. Proof! Let's have some!

There is a difference in wanting to believe and believeing. If you are wanting to believe, then maybe you will be disapointed, maybe go join the de-bunking gang, who's all to familier words are, FACTS, PROOF!!.

 

[CapnG]

I'm not interested in "de-bunking". De-bunking starts from the position of assuming something is nonsense and then attempting to prove it IS nonsense. I'm starting from a simple position of curiosity: something either exists or it doesn't. If it exists, SHOW ME.

The DP witnesses have stated over and over again "I will stand before a congressional commitee and swear that what I have said is true." Fine, great, wonderful! DO IT!

Has it happened? No. Is it going to happen? At this rate, I very much doubt it and that's incredibly sad.

 

[Rick Deckard]

If it exists, SHOW ME.

What exactly do you want to be shown?

 

[CapnG]

What exactly do you want to be shown?

Something. ANYTHING. The DP says they have access to genuine records of crash retreivals? Let's see them. Photos of real aliens interacting with humans? Fork 'em over. Detailed analyses of UFOs? I'll clear my schedule to read 'em. But no more "I saw a ufo ONCE when I was all by myself in 1948, honest, I swear!" stories, please, it's just getting so damn tiresome.

 

[morrison1976]

The DP witnesses have stated over and over again "I will stand before a congressional commitee and swear that what I have said is true." Fine, great, wonderful! DO IT!

Has it happened? No. Is it going to happen? At this rate, I very much doubt it and that's incredibly sad.

Its not ther fault they have not . Thats what they are trying to do! the the POWERS THAT BE are not interested at the moment, but thats not the DP FAULT!

We all want the evidence to prove once and for all that we are being visited.Even though these people dont have the phsyical evidence, does not mean they are lying. I have seen the video, and some of these people you just cant disrgard. If you want to blame someone that the DP has not stood before a congressional commitee, dont blame them because it has nothing to do with the, but really, you should know this!

 

[CapnG]

So, let's recap: The DP is trying to expose the workings of the super secret black government by petitioning council with the completely inept, moves-slower-than-a-glacier public government.

Man, that's depressing.

 

[Rick Deckard]

So, let's recap: The DP is trying to expose the workings of the super secret black government by petitioning council with the completely inept, moves-slower-than-a-glacier public government.

Man, that's depressing.

I'm afraid that, even if the Disclosure Project succeeds, it won't make one bit of difference - it won't appear in any of the major media streams and therefore won't recieve the kind of attention it deserves...it will quickly become yesterday's news...

 

[hopeful skeptic]

So, let's recap: The DP is trying to expose the workings of the super secret black government by petitioning council with the completely inept, moves-slower-than-a-glacier public government.

Man, that's depressing.

Testify, brother!

I can count on two fingers of one hand the number of fulfilled promises made by Steven Greer over the years I've followed ufology. One promise had to do with the date of the NPC forum, and the other promise didn't. That's it.

Greer is a confidence trickster with a long history of fudging the truth, failing to produce promised physical evidence, failing to back up allegations with fact, etc. Among other sins, the guy persuades folks to pay him hard cash to walk them into the desert with a flashlight and call down UFOs - said adventures taking place at the precise date and time that visible satellites trek overhead. It's a sad commentary on us all that folks like Greer are still allowed to ply their trade.

Ufology has no internal policing, save the public. And the public won't do its own dirty work.

 

[Tony2007]

I think the guy is nothing more than a salesman. I wrote about this on my blogpage: http://tfondacaro.blogspot.com

Basically, if you can summon alien craft, don't you have a responsibility to share that with all humanity at no charge at all?

 

[CapnG]

I think the guy is nothing more than a salesman. I wrote about this on my blogpage: http://tfondacaro.blogspot.com

Basically, if you can summon alien craft, don't you have a responsibility to share that with all humanity at no charge at all?

Moreover, aren't you somewhat obligated to call one down in a POPULATED area, say TIMES SQUARE?

If a UFO lands in the middle of nowhere... does anyone give crap?

 

[Paul Kimball]

Amen!

Here's another one - Greer literally ripped off the cover of FUFOR's Best Available Evidence and repackaged it as his own, which is one of the reasons why ufologists hold him in such low regard. Plagiarism = guy you can't trust.

Paul

 

[Rick Deckard]

Plagiarism = guy you can't trust.

I think plagiarism is an interesting topic in ufology - if all these UFO stories are 'facts' can I rewrite someone's book and present it as my own? After all, I'm not copying anyone's 'fictional' ideas, just reporting historical facts...

...the flipside to that argument is can anyone retain exclusive rights to publish certain UFO stories?

 

[Tony2007]

I think plagiarism is an interesting topic in ufology - if all these UFO stories are 'facts' can I rewrite someone's book and present it as my own? After all, I'm not copying anyone's 'fictional' ideas, just reporting historical facts...

...the flipside to that argument is can anyone retain exclusive rights to publish certain UFO stories?

Maybe Dr. Greer is trying to put his copyright on this material?

I have to say that the more I find out about this guy the more loathsome he seems. Has anyone here ever been to a CSETI event or known someone who has? What are they like? What happens? On the Podcast I heard that someone who came back from one of those things wasn't eager to share anything.