UFO Conjecture(s)

Tuesday, September 04, 2007

The Friedman Factor

stanf.jpg

Stan Friedman is the face of ufology and the UFO phenomenon itself.

And this has not been a good thing, although we love the guy.

Mr. Friedman has kept the Roswell debacle alive for 30 years now and his defense of MJ-12 has been and continues to be another thorn in the side of serious UFO researchers.

Media worships Friedman, because he’s articulate and visibly knowledgeable, even though UFO insiders know that Stan Friedman’s views are fraught with wheat and chaff and he has failed to separate them in a meaningful way.

And keeping Roswell on the UFO front burner, along with the bogus raft of MJ-12 documents has had the most deleterious effect on UFO investigation and sensible media coverage than any other aspects of the UFO mystery.

Mr. Friedman has a professorial demeanor, and this has given him cachet with media and many UFO mavens.

But he has been and is wrong, about Roswell, and MJ-12. He also has been an avid researcher, but only to bolster or confirm his views and beliefs; he isn’t an objective truth-seeker, although his pursuit of the UFO truth has been seriously maintained – just wrong-headed.

Stan Friedman – not by anything he has done directly himself – has pulled the spotlight and media or scientific scrutiny away from other “ufologists” who are and have been more rational and more objective about the UFO conundrum: Clark, Randall, Vallee, Aldrich, to name a few.

Stan Friedman has made UFOs his career and source of living, and that is no lame feat. Others would have liked to capitalize on the phenomenon as much as he has (Richard Hall for one) but they don’t have the pull with media that Friedman has, and Stan is not to be faulted for that.

He’s been a willing partner in the media charade about UFOs, giving media and the scientific community a seemingly coherent and sane view about the elusive phenomenon.

But his influence and sway has been the worst thing that could have happened to ufology. It locked UFOs into a stasis of semi-serious study of things that have nothing to do with the real phenomenon.

And Stan’s hypothesis of a “cosmic Watergate” – while a great sound byte that media adores – has created a backlash among scientists and politicos who eschew conspiracy theories at their very premise.

Media created Stan Friedman, and media continues to use him for their own purposes. That’s not his fault, but his complicity, to maintain a livelihood, has not been good for ufology, or those damnable UFOs either.

8 Comments:

  • Dear RRR,
    First I will not dignify your article with defending Stanton Friedman I will let his record do that.
    I think now though you are probably right about the MJ12 Docs as refuted by Brad Sparks. I am still waiting for some rebuttal by Wood and the rest. However I disagree with you on Roswell in fact Dr. Ruby Schild has just changed from being a skeptic to a believer after studding the MOGAL documents. You could actually argue(as DR. Schild does) that the MJ12 documents took away from further research into Roswell and may have been a disinformation tactic.
    The NASA explanation by Brad Sparks does not make sense, something more had to be going on. I consider you and the rest who have laid the case of Roswell to rest have slapped the face Major Marcel a dedicated military man and all the other brave people who came forward.
    Now the oldest living witness of Roswell who handled the debris just step forward. He had been silent because of Military insistence on secrecy. He claims they had a bridge party over Marcel house that night when he brought the debris home. They all handled it. Much later they woke up the kids.They all handled the wreckage that "was very strange and not ours or theirs(Russia). (Fate Magazine: "John Trowbridge Steps Forward")
    Also to confirm that the Marcel's did have bridge parties Jessie Marcel, Jr. in his book "The Roswell Legacy" in fact states that they used to have Bridge parties over there house after the kids went to sleep.

    One other thing. You will never convince me that intelligence officers and the Base Commander who became a four Star General could not tell what a MOGAL balloon looked like - what allot of bull shi* spin. Isn't it about time u separated the two cases. I think there are tons of evidence and just basic common sense that Roswell was never a MOGAL balloon. I am starting to believe Roswell case is not over that a new investigation led by Dr. Schild has just begun.
    Do something different if you are a real skeptic - change your mind.
    Thank You
    Joseph Capp
    UFO Media Matters
    Non-Commercial Blog

    By Blogger Joseph Capp, at Tuesday, September 04, 2007  

  • Joseph:

    Mogul doesn't answer the Roswell episode, as we continue to note, but it does play a part -- an insignificant part however.

    Roswell was a special event, and an alien spaceship crash is not out of the question, but balloons factor in.

    Also, Stan Friedman's harping on the Roswell (and MJ-12) story take serious researchers away from some really strange (and true) UFO incidents.

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, September 04, 2007  

  • If you can't attack the data, attack the people.

    After reading your article, I noticed that you failed to address any of the real issues. You decided to attack Stanton instead of discussing what specific issues you had with his research/findings.

    You wrote:
    But he has been and is wrong, about Roswell, and MJ-12. He also has been an avid researcher, but only to bolster or confirm his views and beliefs; he isn’t an objective truth-seeker, although his pursuit of the UFO truth has been seriously maintained – just wrong-headed.

    How did he get Roswell and MJ12 wrong?

    If you feel so negatively about him and what he's researching/lecturing about, challenge him to a debate.

    Chris Augustin
    Alien/UFO/Paranormal Investigator
    http://www.aliensthetruth.com

    By Blogger Chris, at Wednesday, September 05, 2007  

  • Chris:

    Stan Friedman has been purposeful, but to the point that he has diverted media and science from serious UFO investigation by ballyhooing two questionable UFO-related events: Roswell and MJ-12.

    That's our point.

    Why would we (or anyone) debate Mr. Friedman about issues (Roswell and MJ-12) that are bogus, in part at least?

    It would be the waste of time we are addressing in our post.

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, September 05, 2007  

  • Hello Friends,

    I am an admirer of Stanton Friedman, and I am pleased to see you refer to him in a generally positive way, even though you disagree with his conclusions on MJ12 and Roswell. There should always be room for civil and reasonable disagreement in an intelligent discussion of any subject, even such a controversial one as the nature of UFOs.

    On a completely unrelated note, I am aghast to see "a group of media guys" engaging in the tragic mis-use of the apostrophe here: "Stan Friedman has made UFO’s his career and source of living, and that is no lame feat." I respectfully refer you to the web site of the Apostrophe Protection Society for a review of the proper use of this wonderfully practical and versatile punctuation mark.

    http://www.apostrophe.fsnet.co.uk/

    I hope this brief refresher course in the proper application of the often misunderstood and misapplied apostrophe will help you avoid such instances in the future.

    Obsessively yours,

    Corvus Munnin

    By Blogger Crowbrother58, at Wednesday, September 05, 2007  

  • CM:

    Thanks for your remarks and apostrophe corrective (which was a typo more than careless grammatical gaffe).

    We'll try to be less cavalier next time we post something.

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, September 06, 2007  

  • I think it's really hilarious that despite all the blather about my work on Roswell and MJ-12 there is not even one specific claim of anything wrong with what I have written!Have you actually read Crash at Corona and TOP SECRET/MAJIC and my many other Roswell and MJ-12 papers at www.stantonfriedman.com and in MUFON publications?
    Ever hear of the word fact?
    Stanton Friedman

    By Blogger Stanton Friedman, at Sunday, September 30, 2007  

  • Mr. Friedman,

    All your works have been read by us, all of us here, and we like your scrutiny of Roswell and MJ-12 but your emphasis on those two areas of the UFO mystery has detracted from study of the phenomenon "in toto."

    That's not your fault, but it has been debilitating across the board.

    Nonetheless, as we've written all over the place, you are one of the good guys....or so we continue believe.

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, October 01, 2007  

Post a Comment

<< Home