UFO Conjecture(s)

Thursday, November 04, 2010

Frank Warren's UFO Chronicles



Long-time UFO researcher Frank Warren has a UFO web-site that is chock full of UFO material -- perhaps the most UFO material of any UFO site extant -- and not just shoddy stuff, but the best of the best.

Click here to access The UFO Chronicles

And if you find the material Mr. Warren has accumulated to be worthy of your time, make a donation to offset his cost and time.

This is one UFO place where a donation is justified and worthwhile.

38 Comments:

  • Greetings RRRGroup.

    Hum... My Red Flag. Who cares mine... Just writting what I mean and how Franck Warren site is "special".

    This site have erased James Carlson replies without desire to debate with him, regarding Malmstrom controversy, with NO ONE explanation, prooving then the spirit of "open debate" in this site, between different thinkers regarding the UFO phénomenon.

    I dont understand why UFO iconoclast make such a publicity for this site (and his call to donations).

    I'm very deceived. Sorry to be frank and sincere.

    My best regards and probably my left of ufo iconoclast.

    Good debate, Friends,

    Very Best Regards.

    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Thursday, November 04, 2010  

  • Gilles,

    Frank Warren is an old friend of mine.

    He's listed The UFO Iconoclast(s) blog despite howlings from the UFO geezers that I've denounced over the years.

    I gave him a notice as payback for all he's done for me and with me.

    Frank, like us, often eschews some postings and comments that are hard to take, because of our predilections.

    That said, people will still find lots of interesting material, even if some UFO things are left out of Frank's web-site.

    And he is a good, honest guy. I love him....in a non-gay way.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, November 04, 2010  

  • Gilles, Rich, et al,

    I can't speak for Rich as to why he publishes what he does, although I thank him for any positive or constructive feedback he throws our way.

    As to James Carlson he was permanently banned from TUFOC long ago, after repeated warnings re his vitriolic, ad hominem attacks on Hastings, Salas, et al.

    He (Carlson) is incapable of having a civil debate (in my experience). I might add that he is the only person ever banned from TUFOC.

    Cheers,
    Frank

    By Blogger Frank Warren, at Thursday, November 04, 2010  

  • Eya Richie,

    Mister James Carlson's reply have been erased by moderation in this site, without reason. It is a fact several screenshoots can proove. QED you want?

    Site however giving FULL WINDOW to Hastings and Salas claims (and garbage) and abusing the Gran'Public (at least for Malmstrom incident). Hum.. not at least, it is the same concerning Rendlesham too, but later...

    Hastings recently or before too, is asking a Kabale or "Jihad" against James Carlson.
    Hey, UFO proponents, what's that behavior?
    You want screenshoots how James comment have been deleted?

    WHY? Why this selective choice, in a "serious" site, you are promoting here? It is your conception of Debat or discussion? Not mine.

    The September Conference about "Nuclear and UFOs", Sept,the 27th, have great echo in this site.

    But no James Carlson, which is the person whom are the best documented regarding Echo flight incident.

    Salas, Hastings, Kean, are making "best-sellers".

    During this time (i.e.) James Carlson have writted the true regarding Malmstrom, in FREE access.

    That's ufology: urban legend vehiculated with $$ best-sellers $$, against free sources, available for each and all making an effort.

    No one counter-tons in this site, despite Mister James Carlson have tried and "taken the bridge", as we said here as idiomatic expression in France.

    This site make echo and full window to Hastings and Salas "garbage", but ignore the man who have made the BETTER work, with DOCUMENTATIONS and SOURCES you can ever read about this Echo/Oscar/November (Salas is lost where he was at this period ^^).

    The only real witnesses have been interviewed by R.U great team (Walter Figel and Eric Carlson, the only first hand witnesses). That's ignored. Who cares ?

    As usual in UFO myths, it is prefered second hand than first hand witnesses... In itself, a symbol of some ufologists method.

    Selective choices is one the secret to create a myth. TY Hastings and Salas (and this site promoted here) to help the creation of a new myth in ufology.

    Some people prefer second hands (false) witnesses, cause claiming something extraordinary, despite the first ones and real ones at disposal, or despite the one making echo of them (James Carlson).

    That's ufology... Clap clap ufologists. But, my sadness.

    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Thursday, November 04, 2010  

  • ufo iconoclast is the closest blog I have found with a realistic and objective approach to the whole UFO question. Some current decline in the quality of the posts non-withstanding. You should read your posts from about 6 months ago..classics. Now? so so

    In contrast, ufo chronicles..... I need to go to bed now.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, November 04, 2010  

  • Anon:

    We agree with you. We have been a bit intellectually slovenly lately.

    But I hope we correct that upcoming, with some meaningful and intriguing posts.

    Thanks for the kudos and the mild comeuppance.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, November 05, 2010  

  • Gilles,

    OK, although it appears that "your mind is made up," I'll give this one shot.

    [Rich--thanks for the kind words!]

    You wrote:

    Mister James Carlson's reply have been erased by moderation in this site, without reason. It is a fact several screenshoots can proove. QED you want?

    The fact that Carlson's posts were removed have never been in question--again--he has been permanently banned.

    Again--He repeatedly violated (and was warned) the posted etiquette, re commentary. The only regret was that his post(s) saw the light of day at all. At that time, I did not have "Comment Moderation" enabled.

    You wrote:

    Site however giving FULL WINDOW to Hastings and Salas claims (and garbage) and abusing the Gran'Public (at least for Malmstrom incident). Hum.. not at least, it is the same concerning Rendlesham too, but later...


    Salas, a former Captain in the Air Force, while serving his country in what is arguably one of the most important jobs in the military (controlling a nuclear missile facility) was witness to malfunctions at a nuclear missile base (Oscar Flight) while UFOs were reported in close proximity to the LF. Like so many people (witnesses) that have had UFO experiences he has been enthralled with the subject matter ever since. Accordingly, he is (and has been) a Ufologist in his own right.

    Salas, many years ago found and interviewed "his" former commander Fred Meiwald, as well as the Deputy Commander of Echo Flight, "Walter Figel"; both in their words confirmed UFO activity over their respective LF's.

    Not surprisingly, Hastings trek began because of a UFO event that occurred (ironically) near Malmstrom AFB (which was evidenced by radar) which he witnessed when he was a teenager.

    He has spent decades researching the "UFO Nuke connection," and has interviewed over 120 former missileers et al concerning UFO activity pertaining to nuclear weapons facilities.

    Referring to the a fore mentioned work as "garbage," I'm afraid sheds more light on the author then anything else.

    You wrote:

    Hastings recently or before too, is asking a Kabale or "Jihad" against James Carlson.
    Hey, UFO proponents, what's that behavior?
    You want screenshoots how James comment have been deleted?


    Carlson has been slandering and libeling Hastings and Salas for over two years, and what you mislabel as a "Kabale or Jihad" is a request for any examples of same (around the net that he might not beware of). This is being done for possible legal action.

    You wrote:

    WHY? Why this selective choice, in a "serious" site, you are promoting here? It is your conception of Debat or discussion? Not mine.

    The September Conference about "Nuclear and UFOs", Sept,the 27th, have great echo in this site.

    But no James Carlson, which is the person whom are the best documented regarding Echo flight incident.

    Salas, Hastings, Kean, are making "best-sellers".


    Leslie's book I'm happy to say has been down to #29 on the New York Times bestsellers list--which is a rare exception to the UFO book rule; Hastings & Salas' respective works however--are more in line with the rule.

    That said, your innuendo is suggestive that these men (and perhaps Leslie) are in this for the money! The ignorance that abounds re UFO books and profit never ceases to amaze--breaking even is the "general" goal for UFO book authors of any note.

    Moreover, to discredit over 30 years of man's work on the notion of realizing a rare profit of a UFO related book is ludicrous, as well as another example of being ignorant of the facts.

    --continued in next post--

    By Blogger Frank Warren, at Friday, November 05, 2010  

  • --continued from previous post above--

    [snip]

    You wrote:

    The only real witnesses have been interviewed by R.U great team (Walter Figel and Eric Carlson, the only first hand witnesses). That's ignored. Who cares ?

    Walter Figel participated in a recorded telephonic interview with Bob Salas in 1996; in that interview he confirms UFO activity during the missile shutdown, as well as his commandeer "Eric Carlson" being aware of it!

    Hastings interviewed him (Figel) in 2008--where he confirms same (again)!

    All of these recorded interviews are exclusive to The UFO Chronicles, and for the purpose of this post (and with Rich's permission) can be heard here:

    http://tinyurl.com/28q6l5t

    In conclusion Gilles: as the editor & publisher of The UFO Chronicles, I state emphatically that opinions, debate are not only welcomed--they're encouraged; however, acrimony, vitriol and or ad hominem attacks won't be tolerated.

    Cheers,
    Frank

    By Blogger Frank Warren, at Friday, November 05, 2010  

  • Greetings Franck,

    Thank you for your long reply and interrest, very much appreciated.

    However, well, I "well" known all this standard rethoric: I follow this debate and controversy from September last year, time J. Carlson produced and released his work on line, and I "summerized" from its period for our French network the controversy.

    You can say what you want to believe (same for me), but Mister Salas have changed his version many times, his location assigments (Echo to Oscar i.e.), problem of Squadron ;

    As I readed "all" the documentations (FOIA, etc) showing no incident is supported by any documents in Oscar ;

    I read the recent interviews of Walt Figel or Eric Carlson made by "Reality Uncovered" team ; And many elements not presented or discuted in your great site.

    Same about Rendlhesham incident: the problem with Halt's testimony, embellished step by step, great example of "retrospective falsification" (that's not an insult, that's human in Testimony gognitive field) is not discussed ;

    I'm aware too of Ian Ridpath or David Clarke works on the case ; re-contact with Giles Cowling of NRPB ; the closed analysis of Halt radio tapes this day made by Britanic "skeptic" team ; how the AN/DPR27 Geiger instrument realy works on little measurements of radio-activity, etc. etc.

    As I have discussed this section in Hastings presentation site page "1950 FBI memo that states that the Air Force has secretly recovered crashed flying saucers in New Mexico and reveals what was discovered within them."

    It is noticed in this memo that the source is the famous Leo Gebauer alias the famous "Dr. Gee" who was known for long time for hoaxes ( an "oil detector") and the false flying saucer crash story of Frank Scully's book. That's not serious then and biasing the readers.

    Etc, etc on the "Nuke and UFO" file.

    The fact is that there is no real discussion about all of it (in your network), it have been "cutted" or deliberatly "occulted" in your network, and I regret this, because it presents a biased reading to the readers in order they have (not) free will to make their opinion on this "Nuke and UFOs file.

    Generaly, "readers" avoid skeptic readings, and it is a pity. Taking into account they are discussed or bad presented in "pro" sites, the game is not fair. Anyway, they are several skeptic sources in order readers can decide with free will. Without offense I dont like when a network presents only the things pointing (in disguise) to only one version (extraordinary ones).

    A network, for me, is a source of alternative informations, and not a monologue between people having the same opinion or believings, cause the readers cant decide by themselves where is the maximum likehood. Never you help them to moove their likehood cursor.

    In essence, well, each people are free to have opinion on "Nuke and UFOs", but it could be fine and fair to present ALL elements in order to not bias the readers, deliberatly or not. And, without offense, that's crualy lacking in your network.

    Regards,

    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Saturday, November 06, 2010  

  • I have just tried the UFO Chronicles and find it cumbersome to use. The scope appears wide but the downloads are too long and time-consuming. Too many pages and topics to cope with. Maybe the site needs rearranging. It may take me a while to get used to it, so I have not had time to study the contents yet.

    By Blogger cda, at Saturday, November 06, 2010  

  • I agree that Frank's site is packed with stuff, I also was under the impression that this is how it was intended.

    I like Frank's opinions, and posturing in the subject, i.e. a UFO is simply an aerial something that is not Identified...period. Any of us may improve ourselves as best we can, as often as we can. We are free to do so.

    Thanks to all of you for presenting a place to discuss this subject, and related.
    Reason will win the day.

    By Blogger Bob Koford, at Saturday, November 06, 2010  

  • Dear Franck Warren,

    Concerning Leslie Kean best-seller, the "best" cases are presented without what several have already writted as counter-tons.

    One more time, the readers have no one cue to deplace a likehood cursor between extraordinary and prosaism, bipolar scale. All is biased for the readers by her.

    Just for example, for a case she related in her book - TRANS-EN-PROVENCE- I know better than the others, cause french, and as friend with Eric Maillot, David Rossoni and Eric Déguillaume, authors of the "revolutioning" french skeptic book in our Country concerning UFOs :

    " Les OVNI du CNES. 30 ans d'études officielles 1977-2007" (CNES- our NASA-'s UFOs: 30 years of official studies 1977-2007) - approximativaly,
    book concerning best UFO french cases (not only, but to be short).

    I noticed all this counter-investigation concerning Trans-En-Provence case she related as best ones, is completly IGNORED, lacking.

    The analysis concerning the traces (Bounias ones) have been prosaicaly explained by this french team;

    As there exist many things pointing the main witness (Renato Nicolaï) have been depassed by a "JOKE" and "PRANK" he comitted "privatly" to his wife (that's neighboors who contacted our Gendarmerie and launching an investigation, not the witness himself).

    Renato was then "trapped" in a joke, or prank he commited to his wife...

    It is a pity Leslie Kean didn't contact French investigators for this case. That's realy oriented, despite the chapter of their book is online (in french):

    http://www.zetetique.fr/divers/OvniDuCnes_chapitre13.pdf

    Just as example, in 1989, Renato stated after a TV emission he was invited about the case (difficult to translate cause his french is not the better one, and my english sucks):

    "I saw ... It is a tale, we can say! Proof that you can find on the ground there. People, scientists have found something there! I have to say, I also dream in the night too"

    or, To french UFO investigator Michel Figuet, Renato stated:

    "there are so many idiots ("couillons" in french, more familiar word than "idiots") in the world. One day I will tell you the truth".

    In essence,Leslie Kean is ignoring deliberatly or not the french counter-investigations made for one of her best proofs she presented in her best-seller...

    But it is released now, and readers have one more time not all cues to decide with free will. That's ufology...

    Regards,

    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Saturday, November 06, 2010  

  • Gilles, bonjour

    You wrote:

    Greetings Franck,

    Thank you for your long reply and interrest, very much appreciated.

    However, well, I "well" known all this standard rethoric: I follow this debate and controversy from September last year, time J. Carlson produced and released his work on line, and I "summerized" from its period for our French network the controversy.


    The so-called debate and Carlson's vitriol started long before that; regarding to The UFO Chronicles, it started in July of 2008; one would presume that before an accurate "summary" or opinion could be made, one would have to possess or have reviewed all the minutiae pertaining to the issue.

    Pardon the cliché, but you can't judge a book by its cover.

    You wrote:

    You can say what you want to believe (same for me), but Mister Salas have changed his version many times, his location assigments (Echo to Oscar i.e.), problem of Squadron ;

    When it comes to research Gilles, I try to leave "belief" and or faith out of the picture.

    There is no argument that after Bob received information (via FOIA early on [1994]) concerning missiles shutting down or entering a "no-go status" re "Echo Flight" that he assumed that it was his LF; as former missileers and documentary evidence affirms--these events were unprecedented; having two incidents (Echo & Oscar) occur 8 days apart was doubly so! It wasn't until further research was conducted and more evidence came to light, that in fact "two incidents" occurred.

    That said, insinuating that Salas changed "his" version many times is both erroneous and indicates a certain proclivity on your part (IMHO).

    Salas adquately explains himself here:

    http://tinyurl.com/25mc4j6

    You wrote:

    As I readed "all" the documentations (FOIA, etc) showing no incident is supported by any documents in Oscar;

    Research 101 Gilles, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

    To say that you have read "all" the FOIA documents is rather brash don't you think. There are researchers who think they know all about Roswell, yet "new" information is brought to light and published right here on this site.

    I have personally filed FOIA requests for military records and received "different" amounts of content on some occasions (on the same subject and or person).

    Of course the biggest factor is that anything that might concern "national security" wouldn't see the light of day via FOIA request in any event. Methinks potential tampering with our nuclear defenses would fall under this scenario.

    I read the recent interviews of Walt Figel or Eric Carlson made by "Reality Uncovered" team ; And many elements not presented or discuted in your great site.

    Actually, if you had taken time to read (and listen) to "all" the minutiae (as you've claimed) you'd be cognizant of the fact that these elements have been discussed (thoroughly at TUFOC since 2008); Robert Hastings has rebutted Carlson every step of the way, including the publication of the Figel (and Meiwald) interviews (evidence) where the curious can hear Figel in his own words "verify UFO activity" during the shut down of missiles at Echo Flight.

    For me personally, I banned Carlson (at TUFOC)for his repeated etiquette violations, i.e., acrimony, vitriol & ad hominem attacks; aside for not being able to conform to the rules, his behavior is distasteful to me personally, and I choose to ignore it (and in this instance him) no matter where is appears.

    [-continued below-]

    By Blogger Frank Warren, at Saturday, November 06, 2010  

  • [-continued from above-]

    You wrote:

    Same about Rendlhesham incident: the problem with Halt's testimony, embellished step by step, great example of "retrospective falsification" (that's not an insult, that's human in Testimony gognitive field) is not discussed ; I'm aware too of Ian Ridpath or David Clarke works on the case ; re-contact with Giles Cowling of NRPB ; the closed analysis of Halt radio tapes this day made by Britanic "skeptic" team ; how the AN/DPR27 Geiger instrument realy works on little measurements of radio-activity, etc. etc.

    I'm sure we can agree the Echo, Oscar & Rendlhesham incidents are complex and detailed in nature; making proclamations doesn't serve objective analysis in these cases or any for that matter.

    I consider Dave Clarke a friend & colleague and he has been kind enough to allow us (TUFOC) to publish his penscript on a continuing basis. We've also published Ridpath comments.

    You wrote:

    As I have discussed this section in Hastings presentation site page "1950 FBI memo that states that the Air Force has secretly recovered crashed flying saucers in New Mexico and reveals what was discovered within them."

    It is noticed in this memo that the source is the famous Leo Gebauer alias the famous "Dr. Gee" who was known for long time for hoaxes ( an "oil detector") and the false flying saucer crash story of Frank Scully's book. That's not serious then and biasing the readers.

    Etc, etc on the "Nuke and UFO" file.


    I'm afraid you've lost me here; the Aztec case is an entire "other animal" and if your lack of information re the so-called Carlson/Hastings debate is an example of your due diligence, then I fear a discussion on Aztec would be fruitless.

    You wrote:

    The fact is that there is no real discussion about all of it (in your network), it have been "cutted" or deliberatly "occulted" in your network, and I regret this, because it presents a biased reading to the readers in order they have (not) free will to make their opinion on this "Nuke and UFOs file.

    I'm afraid that this is pure flapdoodle.

    Your statements indicate that you're not even aware of what is on site for the Hasting's/Carlson debacle; this subject matter that you've claimed to be so knowledgeable in, to make further proclamations about the site's "other content" I'm afraid doesn't carry any weight.

    I will reiterate one last time: Only one person has been banned at TUFOC--James Carlson (for not conforming to the rules as mentioned above). Commentary etiquette is as follows:

    Your comments are greatly appreciated, and coveted; however, blatant mis-use of this site's bandwidth to advertise a product or a web-site will not be tolerated.

    Additionally, healthy debate is invited; however, ad hominem and or vitriolic attacks will not be published. Please keep your arguments "to the issues" and salient muniments-FW


    Additionally, the larger portion of content on the site's front page is configured by script for RSS feeds in orders to capture "any and all news" in real time as it appears on the net, via MSM, forums, blogs etc; once the frame work is set, I have no control of what comes through the various segments (ironically even Carlson's acrimony).

    The only "bias" if you will is that it's aimed at "UFO related minutiae."

    You wrote:

    Generaly, "readers" avoid skeptic readings, and it is a pity.

    I'm afraid I have to disagree; to make this "generalization" is maladroit and inaccurate.

    By Blogger Frank Warren, at Saturday, November 06, 2010  

  • [-continued from above-]

    Taking into account they are discussed or bad presented in "pro" sites, the game is not fair. Anyway, they are several skeptic sources in order readers can decide with free will. Without offense I dont like when a network presents only the things pointing (in disguise) to only one version (extraordinary ones).

    A network, for me, is a source of alternative informations, and not a monologue between people having the same opinion or believings, cause the readers cant decide by themselves where is the maximum likehood. Never you help them to moove their likehood cursor.


    Allowing for "translation issues," I think we have something we agree on. There's nothing I like more then a good spirited civil, intelligent debate; this decorum is always welcomed, not only in the "comments section" at TUFOC, but in published articles alike.

    In essence, well, each people are free to have opinion on "Nuke and UFOs", but it could be fine and fair to present ALL elements in order to not bias the readers, deliberatly or not. And, without offense, that's crualy lacking in your network.

    Regards,

    Gilles F.


    I'm afraid your ignorance about TUFOC is repeatedly realized throughout your argument, for reasons (repeatedly) stated above.

    Additionally (as stated above) the very mechanics for a good portion of the site precludes any "editorial bias," not only in opinion, but in quality. The very act or choice of publishing "UFO News" in real time as it appears on the net, from a myriad of sources via RSS feeds precludes this act. Moreover it allows for a lot of "crap" to flow through--which is the trade-off for a speedy delivery.

    I'll end with this final observation; you (erroneously) paint TUFOC (and by default me) with a biased brush you claim that, "there is no real discussion about all of it (in your network), it have been "cutted" or deliberatly "occulted" in your network"--curious . . . why haven't you made comment 'there' in this subject that you seem so fervent about?

    Respectfully,
    Frank

    By Blogger Frank Warren, at Saturday, November 06, 2010  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Saturday, November 06, 2010  

  • "why haven't you made comment 'there' in this subject that you seem so fervent about?"

    Probably because there are no many comments & discussions in your network (that's not an offense), like it is for example here or in Kevin Randle blog. It is not realy a space of discussions, more a space of "UFO informations and news" if you want and without. Or at least, I have always perceived your site like this.

    Probably too because Ufology, as ufo-skeptic, is just an hobby, and I spent already sufficient time in several others networks, french, Quebec one or anglophons, as "animating" our own french skeptic forum to diffuse skeptic sources.

    And of course mainly because I'm not the "skeptic voice", as my english sucks: there exist skeptics more experienced I'm, knowing better several ufo files than I do, having my favorite ones.

    At last word too, regarding the fact Oscar incident is not supported by documents: of course "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.", but generally for some ufologists and conspirationists, the absence of evidence become the evidence of their claims in paralogisms processings.

    And particulary for Malmstrom incident, it is not my fault if Mister Salas claimed first to be in Echo, and changed "magicaly" to be in Oscar to adapt his story when his mistake was pointed. A sort of "ubiquity" for which I have my opinion, as many others, opinion which is not the same as your own. Well, each of us is free to have opinion.

    US agencies have investigated the malfunctionnements of Echo flight, but those "guys" have forgotted to study Oscar alleged one. So, or such agencies have not done their job, or there was no accident in Oscar. I have choosen for my part ;)

    Best Regards,

    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Sunday, November 07, 2010  

  • "I'm afraid you've lost me here; the Aztec case is an entire "other animal" and if your lack of information re the so-called Carlson/Hastings debate is an example of your due diligence, then I fear a discussion on Aztec would be fruitless."

    Yes, you seem completly lost... Will try to enlight you of my lack of information you called for.

    In hastings site, we can read this in this page (I have screenshooted, in case of...) :

    http://www.ufohastings.com/LecturePage.html

    "1950 FBI memo that states that the Air Force has secretly recovered crashed flying saucers in New Mexico and reveals what was discovered within them."

    The memo in question is the following:
    http://www.ufologie.net/ce3/pics/1950-01-01-usa-mojave-fbi.jpg
    or this one:
    http://i20.servimg.com/u/f20/15/20/96/71/office10.gif

    As I stated before, it is noticed in this memo that the source is the famous Leo Gebauer alias the famous "Dr. Gee" who was known for long time for hoaxes ( an "oil detector") and the false flying saucer crash story of Frank Scully's book.

    Robert Hastings seems to ignore all of this and/or is using the credulity of the public about what have been investigated concerning this memo...

    I hope you are now "less lost", Franck.

    I dont understand why your friend Mister Hastings is still presenting this memo as proof of S.V. crash!

    It is funny...

    That's ufology....

    Best Regards,

    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Sunday, November 07, 2010  

  • Gilles, bonjour

    To my question, "why haven't you made comment 'there' in this subject that you seem so fervent about?"

    You wrote:

    Probably because there are no many comments & discussions in your network (that's not an offense), like it is for example here or in Kevin Randle blog. It is not realy a space of discussions, more a space of "UFO informations and news" if you want and without. Or at least, I have always perceived your site like this.

    True the site has evolved into much more then “Blog” it started out to be; however, there is no impedance to open civil discussion—quite the opposite in fact.


    You wrote:

    Probably too because Ufology, as ufo-skeptic, is just an hobby, and I spent already sufficient time in several others networks, french, Quebec one or anglophons, as "animating" our own french skeptic forum to diffuse skeptic sources.

    And of course mainly because I'm not the "skeptic voice", as my english sucks: there exist skeptics more experienced I'm, knowing better several ufo files than I do, having my favorite ones.


    To (erroneously) criticize a site for not having “skeptical input,” while not participating yourself is akin to criticizing the government and not voting! There exists a scent of hypocrisy here I’m afraid.

    You wrote:

    At last word too, regarding the fact Oscar incident is not supported by documents: of course "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.", but generally for some ufologists and conspirationists, the absence of evidence become the evidence of their claims in paralogisms processings.

    Again you speak in generalities, which is imprudent in my view. If a pattern can be established in this instance, regarding behavior pertaining to methodology & documentary evidence, and then there appears to be a gap in one or a few instances without explanation; then this “arguably” can be presented as a “component of evidence. “

    For example: if what Salas & his former commander, et al say is true—and I believe it is, then we know by established military protocol—there would be a paper trail a mile long!!!

    Echo Flight can be used as an example for this. Prior to Jim Klotz’ FOIA requests there was no information re the missile shut down at Echo Flight. Moreover, what has been released, I can assure is just the tip of the iceberg!

    We know by documentary evidence and witness accounts that the presumed day of The Oscar Flight Incident there was ample “up close” UFO activity taking place in the general area; we know Malmstrom was active along with local law enforcement in the investigation etc. Yet, the reports for that time period are lacking (to put it mildly), IMHO given the gravity of the situation and actions taken.

    Like Echo Flight—documents will surface re Oscar Flight!

    -Continued below-

    By Blogger Frank Warren, at Sunday, November 07, 2010  

  • -continued from above-

    You wrote:

    And particulary for Malmstrom incident, it is not my fault if Mister Salas claimed first to be in Echo, and changed "magicaly" to be in Oscar to adapt his story when his mistake was pointed. A sort of "ubiquity" for which I have my opinion, as many others, opinion which is not the same as your own. Well, each of us is free to have opinion.

    Most folks who come into Ufology with a predisposition don’t want to listen to plausible explanations; they would just prefer to believe a man they don’t know or haven’t talked to is a liar; they want to believe that there is some machiavellian motive for him, or them to make up stories e.g., the riches they incur for writing a UFO book; or the notoriety they attain amongst tin-hatters etc. (Or perhaps they just want to put needles in their eyes—[sorry I couldn’t help myself]).

    The fact of the matter is Salas as a Deputy Commandeer of 'Minuteman I' Missile silo (Oscar Flight) experienced a malfunction in the LCF, (March 1967) which caused the missiles to enter a “no-go” status; simultaneously UFO activity was reported from above; In 1994 because of FOIA requests performed by Klotz, it was discovered that an incident occurred at Echo Flight, Now as most former missileers et al have confirmed these events were unprecedented. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand why Salas would assume it was Echo Flight he was involved with. Shortly thereafter he would talk to Figel, Meiwald et al and get a clearer picture of the events. Figel confirmed the UFO activity over Echo Flight and Meiwald (his former boss and commander) confirmed UFO activity over “both” Echo and Oscar Flights! (MEN WHO WERE THERE!)

    You wrote:

    US agencies have investigated the malfunctionnements of Echo flight, but those "guys" have forgotted to study Oscar alleged one. So, or such agencies have not done their job, or there was no accident in Oscar. I have choosen for my part ;)

    Best Regards,

    Gilles


    By your very own methodology prior to the information surfacing from Klotz FOIA requests (17 years after the fact) you would argue that the malfunctions at Echo didn’t happen because there wasn’t any information in the public domain . . . certainly you can see the flaw in this mindset?

    Let me end by repeating: the notion of some outside force, i.e., UFOs or otherwise—is a matter of Nation Security, and by statute is not releasable via FOIA.

    Cheers,
    Frank

    By Blogger Frank Warren, at Sunday, November 07, 2010  

  • Well Franck ,

    You are nervous ... and you are producing wall of texts, as usual.

    You are defending your friends, prooved wrong.

    There was no one incident in Oscar, Dear Franck. NO ONE ;) Sorry for your friends.

    Mister Salas adapted his first claims (I was in Echo, no!, in November, no! in Oscar - no -), in order you have your UFO case. That's ufology.


    Leslie Kean concerning "Trans en Provence" case, is wrong too.

    That's ufology.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Sunday, November 07, 2010  

  • Gilles,

    Oooops last paragraph should have read:

    Let me end by repeating: the notion of some outside force, i.e., UFOs or otherwise, affecting our nuclear defensive (or offensive) weapons—is a matter of Nation Security, and by statute is not releasable via FOIA.

    Cheers,
    Frank

    By Blogger Frank Warren, at Sunday, November 07, 2010  

  • Franck wrote: "Let me end by repeating: the notion of some outside force, i.e., UFOs or otherwise, affecting our nuclear defensive (or offensive) weapons—is a matter of Nation Security, and by statute is not releasable via FOIA."

    Yep Franck: that's rule #1 of conspirationnists and of some UFO (vehicular spacecraft) proponents: The absence of proofs, evidences, supporting our claims, is the evidence of our claims and our demonstration...

    If there exist noone document prooving a malfunctionnement in Oscar, it is the evidence there was malfunctionnement caused by a Flying Saucer in Oscar and then Salas is right, and our gouvernment is lying. QED and elementar, my dear Watson.

    If there are documents prooving an investigation by US agencies in Echo shut-down, it prooves there was an incident in Oscar too with Flying Saucers creating shut-down in order to adresse a peace & love message to USA and to save our planet... But the documents cant be accessed because it is a National security matter. Brrr...

    If Mister Salas claimed first to be in Echo when this myth borned, after in November, and finaly in Oscar in order to adapt his claims step by step, it is the evidence he is right and all of it is not a myth, and Mister Salas Ubiquity supports the claims of true.

    If Leslie Kean have noone knowledge that Trans-En-Provence case is a prank made by Renato Nicolaï to his wife, it will be because she have not writted this "chapter" in her book...

    If Mister Hastings claims in his site "1950 FBI memo that states that the Air Force has secretly recovered crashed flying saucers in New Mexico and reveals what was discovered within them." and we are prooving that's false, it is the evidence Mister Hastings is right about this 1950 FBI memo.

    Tautologies and paralogisms are precious in ufology.

    Regards,

    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Monday, November 08, 2010  

  • I have always regarded the excuse on the lines of 'there are tonnes of official documents on this case (i.e. Roswell, Rendlesham, Trans-en-Provence, Malmstrom, Kecksburg or indeed any UFO case you like) but these are still Top Secret as they affect national security' as a suitable get-out clause that enables ETHers to avoid the request to provide hard evidence.

    If there were any hard evidence for ET presence in any of the above, we would have seen it long long ago, and there would be no need to debate it here. Secrets such as these are beyond the control of any one government.

    What is the purpose of debating such issues anyway? The authorities can never satisfy determined ETHers and can never give completely satisfactory answers to everyone. Stan Friedman has for decades been trying to tell us that zillions of Roswell documents exist, even though the GAO were specifically charged with locating them and found precisely zilch. Peter Robbins, at a London meeting in 1997, seriously told us there were several roomfuls of classified papers on Rendlesham. No doubt he still thinks there are, despite Dave Clarke's extensive research and the recent MOD releases. It was Robbins (with Larry Warren) who sent their book 'Left at East Gate' to every important MP, and even the Prime Minister, at the time! He was simply besotted with the case, as are others with Roswell, etc.

    I know very little of the Malmstrom affair, so I shall spend no time arguing over it.

    By Blogger cda, at Monday, November 08, 2010  

  • What exactly is this 1950 FBI memo Hastings is talking about? Can we have it displayed here, please? If it is the one I think it is, it proves, or indicates, absolutely nothing about ETs in New mexico.

    By Blogger cda, at Monday, November 08, 2010  

  • Yep CDA.

    I suppose it is this one(s) about the Mojave desert (non)crash. As you know, the "source" of this story is the "famous" Leo Gebauer aka "Dr. Gee" who have made several scams (oil detector, ie) as the false flying saucer crash story, popularized by Frank Scully's book too.

    So, as evidence of a crash occuring in New Mexico, it is really questionnable, but that is not a problem for some ufologists...

    http://www.ufologie.net/ce3/pics/1950-01-01-usa-mojave-fbi.jpg

    http://i20.servimg.com/u/f20/15/20/96/71/office10.gif

    http://www.ufologie.net/ce3/pics/1950-01-01-usa-mojave-tg1.jpg

    To claim if regarding this "story" : "1950 FBI memo that states that the Air Force has secretly recovered crashed flying saucers in New Mexico and reveals what was discovered within them."

    is very fast, fallacious, not serious I think and I regret for Mister Hastings again.

    Regards,

    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Monday, November 08, 2010  

  • Gilles:

    Normally I'd accept that a UFO event is discredited when a participant is questionable.

    But Leo Gebauer was discredited by U.S. government fiat, much as Wilhelm Reich and others were, to mitigate UFO events.

    Also, Dr. Gee has been said to be someone other than Gebauer.

    The Scully story strikes me as credible.

    Re-read the book/account and you'll find a reasonable story full of details that transcend fantasy or fraud.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, November 08, 2010  

  • To RR:
    Do you mean the Aztec crash is credible, or that the rest of the book is?

    At one point Scully has the planets in the wrong order, confuses perigee with perihelion, apogee with aphelion and says (in 1950) that 23 extra-solar planetary systems had been detected!

    But that is only a start. The book is a scientific mish-mash. Do you really think any of it is credible? What about J.P.Cahn's expose?

    By Blogger cda, at Monday, November 08, 2010  

  • Christopher:

    Yes, I agree that the Scully tale is a scientific mish-mash, but it wasn't meant to be a scientific rendering.

    It was a retelling of a story that was passed on to Scully,

    And journalism in the 50s was a bit more slovenly than it was later on.

    But the exquisite detail of the uniforms on the alleged bodies of the crashed craft's beings was unique to such stories, as was the detail about the opening that allowed a button to be pressed to open a hatch for entry into the craft.

    The story was fraught with such minutiae, and beyond what one expected from SciFi tales that were presented for public consumption, outside the SciFi fanatic's venues.

    Putting the Scully event inside the Aztec "event" mollifies Scully's story.

    Scully was told a tale, believed it, and created his book.

    He may have been gulled, but the story itself, whether concocted or not, remains a viable tale for the ET believers, and corroborates what supposedly happened at Roswell.

    Art imitating life? Or the other way around?

    Either way, Gebauer and Newton were maligned to discredit the flying saucer story -- a tactic that remains operative to this day.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, November 08, 2010  

  • It appears there are two FBI memos of March 1950. One is the one shown by Gilles, dated March 31; the other is one dated March 22 by agent Guy Hottel.

    The former does not mention the Air Force, and refers to a crash in California. The latter does mention the AF and talks about a crash in NM, but only refers to an "investigator" for the AF. The writer says "it is believed the radar [high-powered installations in the area] interferes with the controlling mechanism of the saucers". It also says "no further evaluation was attempted by [the FBI]".

    Is this the memo Hastings is referring to? Does he really think it proves anything or has any value? The FBI and the AF often had these sort of stories from the public. Maybe they still do.

    By Blogger cda, at Monday, November 08, 2010  

  • Christopher,

    Yes, I have copied the image of the "Guy Hotel" FBI memo above, concerning in N.M. three F.S. "crashed" and "alien bodies" too, you are refering:

    http://i20.servimg.com/u/f20/15/20/96/71/office10.gif

    I suppose it is this one which is Mister Hastings reference of the quote in his site.

    @ Richie: You wrote "[Scully's book"]...and corroborates what supposedly happened at Roswell"

    Hum no, there is no one mention of Mogul or American Merri Lei Corporation radar-targets in Scully's book. Then, I see no one corroboration. Hihi ;)

    Regards,

    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Monday, November 08, 2010  

  • Gilles, bonjour

    You wrote:

    "I'm afraid you've lost me here; the Aztec case is an entire "other animal" and if your lack of information re the so-called Carlson/Hastings debate is an example of your due diligence, then I fear a discussion on Aztec would be fruitless."

    Yes, you seem completly lost... Will try to enlight you of my lack of information you called for.

    In hastings site, we can read this in this page (I have screenshooted, in case of...) :

    http://www.ufohastings.com/LecturePage.html

    "1950 FBI memo that states that the Air Force has secretly recovered crashed flying saucers in New Mexico and reveals what was discovered within them."

    The memo in question is the following:

    http://www.ufologie.net/ce3/pics/1950-01-01-usa-mojave-fbi.jpg

    or this one:

    http://i20.servimg.com/u/f20/15/20/96/71/office10.gif

    As I stated before, it is noticed in this memo that the source is the famous Leo Gebauer alias the famous "Dr. Gee" who was known for long time for hoaxes ( an "oil detector") and the false flying saucer crash story of Frank Scully's book.

    Robert Hastings seems to ignore all of this and/or is using the credulity of the public about what have been investigated concerning this memo...

    I hope you are now "less lost", Franck.

    I dont understand why your friend Mister Hastings is still presenting this memo as proof of S.V. crash!

    It is funny...

    That's ufology....

    Best Regards,

    Gilles F.


    Once again--you are in error. Hastings addressed these issues long ago.

    Actually it’s the FBI doc dated, March 22, 1950. It would seem that your proclamations are now becoming argumentum “dart boardem.” (Apologies in advance as I’m sure the latter will get lost in translation).

    In reference to the doc: GeBauer isn’t mentioned; isn’t famous and wasn’t “known for long time for hoaxes.”

    As to the doc and Hastings, in 2007 Hasting’s clarified:

    "...in my program, I express my own doubts about its contents. I am aware that some folks think it is a garbled version of the Scully crashed UFO story . . .."

    He further states:

    "I have never endorsed it as proof or even evidence of any kind. The media seizes on the memo's contents but almost always fails to mention my own misgivings about it."


    Cheers,
    Frank

    By Blogger Frank Warren, at Monday, November 08, 2010  

  • Gille, bonjour

    You wrote:

    Franck wrote: "Let me end by repeating: the notion of some outside force, i.e., UFOs or otherwise, affecting our nuclear defensive (or offensive) weapons—is a matter of Nation Security, and by statute is not releasable via FOIA."

    Yep Franck: that's rule #1 of conspirationnists and of some UFO (vehicular spacecraft) proponents: The absence of proofs, evidences, supporting our claims, is the evidence of our claims and our demonstration...

    If there exist noone document prooving a malfunctionnement in Oscar, it is the evidence there was malfunctionnement caused by a Flying Saucer in Oscar and then Salas is right, and our gouvernment is lying. QED and elementar, my dear Watson.

    If there are documents prooving an investigation by US agencies in Echo shut-down, it prooves there was an incident in Oscar too with Flying Saucers creating shut-down in order to adresse a peace & love message to USA and to save our planet... But the documents cant be accessed because it is a National security matter. Brrr...


    Rule # 14 for debunkers, is to take comments out of context and try to baffle the readers with bull-puckey.

    First, my commentary pertains to “U.nidentified F.lying O.bjects in general (although they have been reported in space by more then a few astronauts).

    Second, in regards to the absence of data given known patterns I wrote (above):

    If a pattern can be established in this instance, regarding behavior pertaining to methodology & documentary evidence, and then there appears to be a gap in one or a few instances without explanation; then this “arguably” can be presented as a “component of evidence. “

    You wrote:

    If Mister Salas claimed first to be in Echo when this myth borned, after in November, and finaly in Oscar in order to adapt his claims step by step, it is the evidence he is right and all of it is not a myth, and Mister Salas Ubiquity supports the claims of true.

    If Leslie Kean have noone knowledge that Trans-En-Provence case is a prank made by Renato Nicolaï to his wife, it will be because she have not writted this "chapter" in her book...

    If Mister Hastings claims in his site "1950 FBI memo that states that the Air Force has secretly recovered crashed flying saucers in New Mexico and reveals what was discovered within them." and we are prooving that's false, it is the evidence Mister Hastings is right about this 1950 FBI memo.

    Tautologies and paralogisms are precious in ufology.

    Regards,
    Gilles F.


    Gilles, see my responses in the previous comments above.

    Cheers,
    Frank

    By Blogger Frank Warren, at Monday, November 08, 2010  

  • Christopher,

    My argument(s) in this thread concerns UFOs, not ET.

    My reference to "omission of data" or documents is specific to "established patterns," and or factors.

    As to the Aztec Incident: Scully, Newton & GeBauer could be removed from the account completely, and what remains is compelling evidence that an exotic vehicle was removed by the military and the activity was covered up.

    As the conversation (ala Gilles) is just becoming redundant and the horse is long dead, I think I've said all I can (obviously to no avail as far as Gilles is concerned).

    Rich, thanks for the attention to the TUFOC, and the kind words.

    Gilles, Chris, et al thanks for the input.

    Cheers,
    Frank

    By Blogger Frank Warren, at Monday, November 08, 2010  

  • Gilles:

    You get my point but miss it.

    Yes, Scully doesn't mention Mogul or the alleged radar targets that Aztec claims brought down that flying saucer.

    This, Scully keeps the story intact and simple, which is what the Roswell event was, until some ufological asses got their mitts on it, and mucked up the incident.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, November 08, 2010  

  • Dear Richie,

    I added a smiley at the end of my §. It was a sort of joke. My bad!^^

    BTW, I think we have already spocken about the book of british author William Newman "The flying saucer" (1948), which is, even if not a best seller like Scully's book, the first book with Saucer crash in N.M. (not only here), alien body, autopsy, hieroglyphic marks and other "details".

    The general scenario is different than Roswell myth one (Scientists build a general "hoax" in order the 3 main post-war powers make "global world peace" to be short).

    The book have been re-printed BTW recently by US editor "Westholme Publishing" and available in amazon. Good gift for Christmas!

    Again with a point of sarcasm, I'm suprised William Newman have not been added to Roswell "Gospels" (at least on my humble knowledge) taking into account he seems to have a past of "Secret Agent". Inbeforeitwill...

    Regards,

    Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Tuesday, November 09, 2010  

  • Gilles:
    It was Bernard Newman who wrote "The Flying Saucer". (Not William)

    It is very doubtful if Newman had known of Roswell when he wrote it, as the event only got a brief mention in the British press and then only for one day. I guess he based the location of his story on the fact that a number of saucers were reported from NM and neighbouring states in the flap of 1947. Plus the fact that White Sands was well known, as were other desert sites in the general area.

    By Blogger cda, at Tuesday, November 09, 2010  

  • Dear Frank (and not Franck, my appologies),

    It was for others to "discover" what Mister Hastings have in mind as the FBI Memo he "related".

    He didn't quote or marge the sources (that's ufology!) to his supra super site calling of "full disclosure" and "the government is lying and we, the free touch, are showing the true"). Oups.

    It was probaly Guy Hotel one memo. Oki. I have posted below all the FBI memo I knew it could match with Mister Hastings "enigm" as mythmaker.

    Guy Hotel memo is not an "evidence" or hard data, your favorite present to readers... It is? Present us why...

    And you are not discussing James Carlson remarks. You erased his comment.

    Or Trans-En-Provence case, Leslie Kean (another your favorite) is advancing as best one (without knowledge of this french case), prosaicaly explained by french investigator (CIA agents, of course).

    As you have not approved a recent Tim Hebert reply in your supra network super open for a debate.

    WHY ? Why did you not accept Tim Hebert reply in your "open debate" network. Mister Hebert is lying ? He have insulted in TOFOC? Or....

    Regards, Gilles F.

    By Blogger Gilles. F., at Tuesday, November 09, 2010  

Post a Comment

<< Home