Richard Hawkins
Paranormal Adept
Let the past be the past and let us all move on.
You should All buy a Paracast plus subscription.
You should All buy a Paracast plus subscription.
-
NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
The UFO Field at its Worst!
- Thread starter Gene Steinberg
- Start date
Free episodes:
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
I would certainly prefer to see more cooperation in ufology. I'm not sure how cooperative Mosley was with Friedman or anyone else. It sounds to me that the route Friedman took to compete was simply to lobby for himself. Was he libelous or slanderous in those efforts? And "sabotage" seems a little dramatic. Did Friedman slash someone's tires? Cut their brake lines? No. It sounds like he made some phone calls on his own behalf.
This all sounds rather trivial to me, but then again I had no personal relationship with either of them. I had never even heard of Mosley until I came here, and the only time I had any communication with Friedman was when I asked to get a deal on some of his VHS tapes of Flying Saucers Are Real to redistribute through USI, and he was totally happy to help.
KDR is almost literally beating a dead horse. He had his own debates with Friedman over Roswell and MJ-12. So how unbiased he is I can't say for sure. But these bits of cultural trivia can still be interesting for some people ( I suppose ). It was at least worth a mention on the forum.
Last edited:
F
Farlig Gulstein
Guest
Even in 2008, when Stanton Friedman was still alive and active, Randle posted on issues involving Friedman that troubled his sensitivities. So this latest post is not some new tendency of a "vindictive" Randle, but seems to reflect his desire to warn of unwitting error or deliberate distortion of information. In Randle's latest post he mentioned that Friedman contacted Randle's book publisher and sowed doubt about the veracity of Randle's work. That is not "trivial" in my estimation, and could have led to cancelling the book. Shining a less flattering light on Mr. Friedman's activities is not enjoyable, but it does reflect the actual "human condition" we all partake of, and that we should be reminded of from time to time.
Last edited by a moderator:
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
Note that KDR's last name is spelled differently than mine ( now fixed ). You definitely have a point that some behavior isn't trivial when viewed in the context of business dealings and personal feelings between Randle and Friedman. However I was looking at the bigger picture. Raising public awareness is fine, and that puts folks like Randle and Friedman in the spotlight, but much of the most significant work, especially in the Early Modern Era of ufology was done by names few people, even in ufology, know, e.g. Lawrence H. Truettner and Albert B. Deyarmond. They were among the first, if not the first, researchers in official active UFO investigations to arrive at the conclusion that UFOs are alien craft.
Last edited:
marduk
quelling chaos since 2352BC
This article, from Kevin D. Randle's blog, "A Different Perspective," paints a very troubling picture of the behavior of Stanton T. Friedman in his Roswell investigations.
Stanton is not here to defend himself, but Kevin provides some very disturbing evidence that is backed up with pictures of correspondence he received over the years, including from my old buddy Jim Moseley:
Stan Friedman vs. Philip Klass - What's the Difference?
When Stan Friedman died, I had thought that it was inappropriate to mention many of the stunts that he had pulled during his UFO career. I...kevinrandle.blogspot.com
This is the stuff that drives me mental in this field.
We keep attacking each other and doing dumb things that doesn't help anyone.
I totally get what KR is doing here and why, but for the life of me I just can't see the point of dragging Uncle Stan through the mud when he's already in the ground. And KR has struck me as pretty grumpy and mired in he said/she said himself enough that he probably shouldn't be stirring the pot here.
It started with the attacks of Dolan and Marsden against Klass, which he felt were overblown.
What bothers me about the whole affair is not that Kevin and Stanton have disagreements. It's about the fact that Stanton evidently pulled some stunts that were just not kosher. It leaves a bad taste in your mouth.
What bothers me about the whole affair is not that Kevin and Stanton have disagreements. It's about the fact that Stanton evidently pulled some stunts that were just not kosher. It leaves a bad taste in your mouth.
marduk
quelling chaos since 2352BC
Sure.
He's also dead, so I'm not sure what it benefits Kevin Randal or the field in general.
It probably shows why nothing has been accomplished.
F
Farlig Gulstein
Guest
Oopsie. Sorry, I usually pay attention to that difference.
I directed a university press for 15 years and saw a number of similar attempts by academicians to interfere with the publication of books by competitors in various fields. Their motivations varied, some of them acting out of personal resentment of and competition with the author they sought to block, others acting out of concern that the author involved was misrepresenting or distorting the subject matter of the discipline involved and thus potentially misleading the book's eventual audience. Ufology has been no different in this respect, and indeed far worse. I would point out that publishers involved have to undertake some detective work and consult a number of additional sources in the given field to evaluate the merits of the individual sending a warning about the quality of the given book versus the merits of the author and book under consideration. Ufology seems to have inspired a great deal of this kind of behavior, to the detriment of the inquiry itself.
Last edited:
F
Farlig Gulstein
Guest
When authors are convinced that their work, personally, is breaking "the story of the century" then there's no telling how they might react to "rivals", whether real or imagined.
No excuse for what happened here. It’s never right to try to sabotage someone’s work prospects because they hold different opinions.
I think Randle is still way off-base in attempting to draw some kind of moral equivalence between Friedman and Klass. The latter stopped at nothing in attempting to silence McDonald, including pressuring the Office of Naval Intelligence to revoke his security clearance and also urging the university where McDonald taught Physics to fire him. Indeed, it's likely that Klass contributed significantly to McDonald's eventually committing suicide.
Last edited:
My main concern about Stanton was his attempts to screw people out of their earning prospects, such as what he tried with Jim Moseley's lecture tours.
I don't disagree. That was certainly shameful behavior.
I'm surprised nobody has, so far, risen up to defend Stanton in the original blog.
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
One of the things I learned early-on is that saying "never" is almost always a bad idea. Maybe if we could actually get inside Stan's head to see the world from his perspective, there might be mitigating circumstances. We don't know. Kevin certainly seems to feel wronged, and I believe he is sincere too. I don't want to have to pick sides here. I just want to maintain the respect I have for both of them. Keven has plenty. I'm not sure this adds to it.