Timothy Good

[trainedobserver]

Ufology = labyrinths within mazes within labyrinths

You are in a twisty maze of passages, all alike.

 

[SRL+]

After listening to this show, I can’t understand how any knowledgeable person could possibly pay to have Mr. Good lecture, especially at the Royal Canadian Military Institute. I wonder just how much he’s paid, per appearance.

 

[enzo]

One by one we are seeing that classic books and well known UFO 'experts' and 'researchers' employ hearsay, nonsense and 'Art Bell methodology.' Many hand-me-down stories. It's all beginning to look like the crop circle scam. Many of the best known authors are pure disinfo agents.

 

[SRL+]

Unfortunately, there’s researchers who have gone underground, and want nothing to do with most of the nonsense occurring up here.

 

[Burnt State]

So with that being said, who out in UFO research land is there left to trust? So many have been corrupted over time by lethargy or faith in stories proven false. The whole thing is starting to become a Sausseurian nightmare - like the alphabet and the dictionary, all the proofs are starting to become purely symbolic or self-referential.

I remember the Toronto dude who ran UFO updates had a great list of trustworthy, grey and goofy baskets on his website. Who is left in your good books for 2014?

 

[enzo]

Who is out there today? I don't know who is better than Chris and Gene. I like their basic skepticism in the 'good' sense. They are quality people. Chris is doing research. I miss Jim Mosely. Nothing better. Who is like that today? Maybe Greg Bishop and Adam Gorightly. They seem to have the correct blend of humor and sanity mixed with the interest to take those things into the nuttiest areas.

 

[SRL+]

I liked Jim Moseley, but he too has gone underground. And apparently, so have you.

 

[Randall]

One by one we are seeing that classic books and well known UFO 'experts' and 'researchers' employ hearsay, nonsense and 'Art Bell methodology.' Many hand-me-down stories. It's all beginning to look like the crop circle scam. Many of the best known authors are pure disinfo agents.

An actual report from a firsthand witness isn't hearsay. A book by someone else that sums up that report is technically hearsay. Does that mean that the book isn't getting the essential facts of the report across? No. In fact, a book consisting only of photographed UFO reports and no analysis or summary would be a lesser work. I've also pointed out before that authors cannot simply waltz into Air Force Space Command and waltz back out with evidence. So we're left with anonymous sources who may or may not be telling the truth. Should authors always simply ignore those sources? No.

As much as we all want definitive verifiable material evidence, we simply don't have access to it. Witnesses and leaks are all we've got to work with. Does that mean we should just fold up our tables and go home a watch Seinfeld reruns all day instead? Even though I still get a laugh now and then the answer is still, "No." Besides, ufology isn't simply about the quest for hard evidence. It's also about the people and places, history and culture, science fact and science fiction. The truth about alien visitation is the core subject matter, but it's overlaid with all kinds of other fascinating stuff that can be both entertaining and educational.

 

[SRL+]

I am holding, at this very moment “Earth an Alien Enterprise.” Between pgs. 214 & 215 are b&w images. One documented image is that of George Adamski’s flying saucer taken on Dec. 13th 1952 in which Mr. Good has proclaimed on this very show, as being authentic. Personally, I don’t buy it, and I don’t buy the suggestion that Mr. Good needs a trainer. He’s had plenty of experience with the public. Just check out his website and most any reasonable person will draw the conclusion that he’s been around long enough to know better. The fact that Mr. Good didn’t interview well, is the same fact which lends credibility to this show, and the lack of credibility toward Mr. Good. As it appears that the simple fact is, Mr. Good does not march very well, unless to the beat of his own drum. Seriously, the more I listen to this show, the more absurd Mr. Good sounds.

 

[Randall]

I am holding, at this very moment “Earth an Alien Enterprise.” Between pgs. 214 & 215 are b&w images. One documented image is that of George Adamski’s flying saucer taken on Dec. 13th 1952 in which Mr. Good has proclaimed on this very show, as being authentic. Personally, I don’t buy it, and I don’t buy the suggestion that Mr. Good needs a trainer. He’s had plenty of experience with the public. Just check out his website and most any reasonable person will draw the conclusion that he’s been around long enough to know better. The fact that Mr. Good didn’t interview well, is the same fact which lends credibility to this show, and the lack of credibility toward Mr. Good. As it appears that the simple fact is, Mr. Good does not march very well, unless to the beat of his own drum. Seriously, the more I listen to this show, the more absurd Mr. Good sounds.

I'm not suggesting that we should automatically believe everything reported by Tim Good, or anyone else for that matter. What I am saying is that well intentioned and sincere writers can and do make mistakes and lapses in good judgement, but that doesn't mean everything they say should automatically be thrown in the trash. What's more, when I see this kind of thing, it makes me curious. What are the mitigating factors ( if any )? Tim Good was born in 1942, which makes him around 72 years old.

So maybe he's just not as quick on his feet as he once was. Maybe he has some medical issues we don't know about. Maybe his editors and publishers aren't as thorough as they were in previous publications. I don't know. I'm not trying to make excuses for Tim, but I'll be lucky to make it to 72, let alone contribute as much to the field and still be making public appearances. So until I see evidence that Good is deliberately trying to dupe us, I'm happy to sift through his work like I do anything else, cut the man some slack, and hope others are as kind to me if I get to be his age.

 

[Polterwurst]

As usual, wise words. There might be more behind his defending people like Adamski or the Friendship case than moneymaking and charlatanery. I watched the Youtube vids on the Friendship case a while ago and although it didn't strike me as obviously hoaxed and faked as Adamski, it's still highly suspicious.

Maybe he just doesn't want to accept the possibility that much of his life's work might be a house of cards and so he goes aggressively in the opposite direction and declares it all real.

Adamski obviously played a key role in the beginning of his "career" in ufology, he was so impressed with what the guy was claiming that he considered trying something wildly irrational like telepahtically contacting hypothetical Venusians. So now he might think to come full circle he has to defend the case despite the obviously faked photos and the claims debunked by history and science (like the green pastures of Venus). The only other option would be to admit to himself that he started his career by buying snake oil from an expert fraudster. And if I imagine myself in that position, that would be a hell of a downer. Sad story, if it's true.

About Adamski's ordnance pass: does anybody know if that's a fact or just another rumor? If it was true, it could mean that someone in the military was supporting him, maybe to further discredit ufology with his silly stories?

 

[boomerang]

One by one we are seeing that classic books and well known UFO 'experts' and 'researchers' employ hearsay, nonsense and 'Art Bell methodology.' Many hand-me-down stories. It's all beginning to look like the crop circle scam. Many of the best known authors are pure disinfo agents.

The history of the UFO phenomenon is indeed riddled with fraud and confabulation. But there are also stable and cohesive researchers, (Stanton Friedman, Jacques Vallee and Richard Hastings come immediately to mind) as well as a strongly documented history of what lies at the core of ufology as we currently know it, which is (my usual mantra) sane and credible people in positions of responsibility who experience bizarre and inexplicable things that come from the sky. Many such cases involve more than one credible witness simultaneously, and occasionally even leave scant but puzzling trace evidence behind. There is simply too much credible testimony to dismiss, but too little hard data with which to conduct hard science. Perhaps most puzzling of all is that something or someone seems actively at work to keep the general public's belief system confined to this fuzzy margin.