Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Pilot reports 'UFO' as he lands at UK airport

airbus 320 ufo pilot glasgow uk airprox board

  • Please log in to reply
227 replies to this topic

#121    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,380 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 04 May 2013 - 02:13 AM

View PostSwampgasBalloonBoy, on 04 May 2013 - 01:38 AM, said:

I disagreed with this pov.

I appreciate that.

Quote

So only people that published are scientist,

Yes.

Quote

what do we call people with PhD that don't publish(beside their dissertation)?

To get to your dissertation you have to publish, it is part of a Ph.D. But Mr. Friedman is not a Ph.D., so I am not sure why this is relevant.

Quote

People that publish are usually researchers that work for university.

No, a lot of researchers working for private entities publish.

Quote

A lot of these people love the recognition.

Some do, some don't. Publishing is just part of the business. And believe it or not, it is actually incredibly helpful.

Quote

Obviously, they also want to advance in their career.

Everybody does.

Quote

But do not discount the recognition part.

You don't know many scientists, do you?

Quote

That's why they always want to be the first to publish their finding.

Because it secures funding. Very simple really.

Quote

Private sector scientists rarely publish their research.

I beg to differ. A lot actually do.

Quote

Do you think a chemist working for a drug company, where patent for a new drug is the end all and be all, would announce to the world on their progress? Do you think scientist working for a military would publish what they're working on?

Of course they do. As per my previous example they don't tie it into what they are doing, they publish a fragment.

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#122    DONTEATUS

DONTEATUS

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 17,847 posts
  • Joined:15 Feb 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet TEXAS

Posted 04 May 2013 - 02:41 AM

It all depends on the Cool art work on the paper,book,document . THe more Flying Saucers,and Little Green men at the pilots seat the more money one can make after its published !
LoL ! :alien: :innocent: :whistle:

This is a Work in Progress!

#123    SwampgasBalloonBoy

SwampgasBalloonBoy

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 330 posts
  • Joined:02 Jul 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:1 Star State

Posted 04 May 2013 - 03:29 AM

View Postbadeskov, on 04 May 2013 - 02:13 AM, said:

I appreciate that.







To get to your dissertation you have to publish, it is part of a Ph.D. But Mr. Friedman is not a Ph.D., so I am not sure why this is relevant.

No, he's not. If you says he's not a scientist, I am not going to disagree with that. He's a smart man, though. I am sure he can be if he put his mind to it.

View Postbadeskov, on 04 May 2013 - 02:13 AM, said:

No, a lot of researchers working for private entities publish.
Percentage? I guess it would be 100%, right? Since people that don't publish can't be called "scientist".

View Postbadeskov, on 04 May 2013 - 02:13 AM, said:

Some do, some don't. Publishing is just part of the business. And believe it or not, it is actually incredibly helpful.
I did said "a lot" which does not meant all.

View Postbadeskov, on 04 May 2013 - 02:13 AM, said:

Everybody does.

Probably, but I can't be sure about everybody

View Postbadeskov, on 04 May 2013 - 02:13 AM, said:

You don't know many scientists, do you?
Not sure if this is sarcasm.  Hard to read sometime. you don't think scientists can be quite egotistical? They're all in it for the greater good, I guess.

View Postbadeskov, on 04 May 2013 - 02:13 AM, said:

Because it secures funding. Very simple really.
Yes, competition is stiff. That's why in the rush to be the "first" some even lie, cheat and steal.
"In the latest study, scientists find that drinking wine can lowered your chance of heart disease (what they forgot to tell you is that you have to drink a barrel a day)."

Again, tell me why private sector scientists would want to secure funding from third party?

View Postbadeskov, on 04 May 2013 - 02:13 AM, said:

I beg to differ. A lot actually do.

Some reasons they do. secure funding? Helping a rival company or gov't with their finding? making good money working for a company, but just wanted some recognition?

View Postbadeskov, on 04 May 2013 - 02:13 AM, said:

Of course they do. As per my previous example they don't tie it into what they are doing, they publish a fragment.

Cheers,
Badeskov

Publish a fragment? Wouldn't they get ridiculed when they don't provide a clear picture? You know, kind of like those idiots that only provide a grainy pic/video of UFOs.


#124    Caledonianwarrior

Caledonianwarrior

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • Joined:31 Mar 2013

Posted 04 May 2013 - 09:08 AM

View Postbadeskov, on 04 May 2013 - 12:10 AM, said:

Interesting is one way of putting it, I honestly wouldn't agree with that label to be honest.



Not really, it is a question of facts. I personally have a very hard time with people that needs to twist facts and misconstrue to argue a case. And undeniably that is what Mr. Friedman seems to require to argue his case. That in itself speaks volumes.



Indeed.

Cheers,
Badeskov
I rest my case.

"Life is a dream for the wise, a game for the fool, a comedy for the rich, a tragedy for the poor." -- Sholom Aleichem

#125    Technocrat

Technocrat

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 351 posts
  • Joined:02 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ireland

  • "In a perfect world, every dog would have a home and every home would have a dog." Anon.

    "Art is what you can get away with." Andy Warhol.

Posted 04 May 2013 - 10:00 AM

Go here everybody for some very interesting stuff from the 'Citizen Hearing on ET & UFO Disclosure': http://www.realufos....alien pictures)

Posted Image


​"​A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely fool proof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams.

#126    Technocrat

Technocrat

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 351 posts
  • Joined:02 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ireland

  • "In a perfect world, every dog would have a home and every home would have a dog." Anon.

    "Art is what you can get away with." Andy Warhol.

Posted 04 May 2013 - 11:28 AM

View Postbadeskov, on 03 May 2013 - 03:22 AM, said:

So? What exactly does this mean?



He worked for 6 companies over the course of 14 years. Frankly, that is not exactly impressive accolades for someone calling himself a scientist, especially as I have personally not been able to find a single, scientific article attributed to him (something scientists do, publish).



If his research skills are reflective of his working skills, I am not surprised he did not last longer at either place.



Again, so? So have many other snake oil sales men (*cough*hoagland*cough*).



How do you define reliable? People that continuously change their stories over the years? Seems like Mr. Friedman relied on people that made their tale more and more "interesting", whereas the importance of the witnesses that did not change their stories were grossly understated. One would think it would be the other way around.



And yet managed to grossly misrepresent them in his books, because if he had quoted honestly and not out of context, there was no way to reach the conclusions that he did. What do you think that means?

I suggest you take your version of "Crash at Corona" and compare his representation of the Twining/Schulgen memos with the actual originals. But you don't really wanna do that, do you? Takes the dream away, I guess.



Haha, you are joking, right?



I would hope not, as that is certainly not a path I would personally take. I would prefer a path of integrity and honesty.

Cheers,
Badeskov

The following is an extract from, 'Is Stanton Friedman For Real?' By Alfred Lehmberg, and the entire article can be read here: http://rense.com/general63/stanton.htm

Note: The first paragraph refers to the flying saucer/alien debunkers. I think you should take some time out from posting negativism onto this forum and to read the entire article which will only take up a few minutes of your time.

"In comparison with Stanton Friedman, though, they fall way short -- their meager shell won't even clear the gun tube. This is ~despite~ the huge amounts of powder provided by the hijacked mainstream to get that round down range.

"This is further illustrated by the ease with which Friedman will dispatch the occasional brave (if haplessly clueless) soul who gathers up the sack required to join the long list of "noisy negativists" crushed, decisively, in debate with him. There are numerous examples of same on Kimball's films. Dispute Stanton Friedman on the issues, bunky, and scamper from a righteous fray with your tail tucked between your legs making whipped-puppy-Ned-Beatty noises... I digress.

"Flatly, the arguments of Friedman's opposition make assumptions based on contrived ignorance, intellectual infidelity, obstinate illogic, wishful thinking, denied fear, and rank complacency. They are arguments larded with confident sounding if baseless assertions based on varying tinctures of the preceding six performance indicators, and they only serve to provide for what, in the final analysis, can only be sack-less cowardice -- intellectual and otherwise. Such is, and has been, the ongoing prosecution of the arguments from the opposition.

"Friedman's pompously ignorant and conflicted detractors ascribes humanistic psychological motives to aliens, facilitating a fallacious relegation of them to dismissible myth. It waxes knowledgably on the physical impossibilities of alien propulsion systems then references their superiority later to preclude us from a possibility of accidentally bringing one of them down... then it blithely leaps back to foregone conclusions on the unlikelihood of alien technologies with which to start. Astonishing! They seem unaware of this strange dichotomy, themselves..."

Edited by MrSerendipity, 04 May 2013 - 11:35 AM.

Posted Image


​"​A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely fool proof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams.

#127    Occams Razor

Occams Razor

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 479 posts
  • Joined:23 Feb 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Perth Western Australia

  • Of two or more competing theories the simplest explanation is most likely to be the right one.

Posted 04 May 2013 - 12:20 PM

View PostMrSerendipity, on 02 May 2013 - 03:29 PM, said:

For your information Stanton Friedman is a BSc. and a MSc. in physics. He worked for numerous companies for 14 years as a nuclear physicist. He has been researching the UFO subject for 39 years. In that time he has lectured at more than 600 colleges and 100 professional groups in 50 US states, 10 Canadian provinces and 18 other countries in addition to various nuclear consulting efforts.  He has published more than 90 UFO papers and has appeared on hundreds of radio and TV programs including Larry King in 2007 and twice in 2008, and many documentaries. He has interviewed many reliable witnesses to the Roswell incident and has studied countless government documents as well. He has yet to be talked down by anybody about the subject of flying saucers. You, on the other hand, haven't done anything that remotely compares to what Mr. Friedman has done and achieved - have you?? :P

I put a line through Stanton Friedman a long time ago for the following two reasons:

1) His favourite phrase is "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". Absolute twaddle, try that one on in a court of law.

2)The "Majestic 12". Documents without provenance peddled as truth.


#128    ali smack

ali smack

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 839 posts
  • Joined:28 Jul 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wertham

  • If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing

Posted 04 May 2013 - 03:47 PM

maybe it was a weather baloon, or army air craft?


#129    Kludge808

Kludge808

    Forum god of all things

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,741 posts
  • Joined:13 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Completely off the map

  • Proud Member of the Geriatric Squadron
    Proud Member of the Thinking Class

Posted 04 May 2013 - 10:25 PM

Oh, my freakin' gawd!  Look at all the FTBs come out of the woodwork to defend Their Hero, Friedman.  And, of course, they quote another FTB for reinforcement.  Never once do they do any real research into his woo woo claims but rather gobble up his BS like it were manna from heaven.  Those debunking his claims have been "swept aside"?  Only by the FTBs, not by anyone who has actually dug into the claims and discovered the reality behind them.

Moving from job to job as he did is not the sign of a top researcher/scientist but rather of one who's not good enough to keep after a project's complete.  That's how engineers who're brought in to fill ranks during a project then are let go because they're not needed anymore are treated.  These are the scut workers, the drones needed to handle the tasks the really good people are too busy to handle.  There's a whole army of such engineers, draftsmen and other transient workers out there who move from job to job to assist in completing projects & contracts, often toward the end when things get a bit hectic.  Do they get to work on Really Cool Projects?  Of course but not at a level that really counts.  But then, a janitor who worked in the same facilities can say with some legitimacy that he worked on those same super duper gee whiz projects ... the first two of which (nuke-powered aircraft & nuke rockets) were canceled because they weren't practical and the third being no real secret at all.  (What do you think is powering the Voyagers?)

Roswell's an excellent example.  Friedman & someone else (Moore?) basically created that story out of whole cloth in 1980 or so, over 30 years after is was supposed to have happened.  No one had heard of Roswell before then even though other sightings around the same time were reported.  It was a non-event.  Again, the FTBs can be bothered with facts, Their Hero claims it happened as he said it did and that's good enough for them.  Never mind that there is absolutely no internal consistency to the story or that Friedman's "facts" have been proven false time after time or that his "credible witnesses" can't keep their stories straight.  Those minor details can be brushed aside like anything else that contradicts Their Hero's version.  Reality fades as a minor irritation in comparison to Friedman's Words from On High.

Sorry, but Friedman is in the same category as Hoagland & Lazar, a charlatan out to fleece the gullible.

Whirled Infamous Author and all around really strange person
Not a complete idiot.  Some pieces are missing.

One of UM's Happy Mutants

#130    Kludge808

Kludge808

    Forum god of all things

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,741 posts
  • Joined:13 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Completely off the map

  • Proud Member of the Geriatric Squadron
    Proud Member of the Thinking Class

Posted 04 May 2013 - 10:48 PM

View PostOccams Razor, on 04 May 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

2)The "Majestic 12". Documents without provenance peddled as truth.
Drat, I forgot about that.

Whirled Infamous Author and all around really strange person
Not a complete idiot.  Some pieces are missing.

One of UM's Happy Mutants

#131    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,380 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 05 May 2013 - 01:37 AM

View PostMrSerendipity, on 04 May 2013 - 11:28 AM, said:


The following is an extract from, 'Is Stanton Friedman For Real?' By Alfred Lehmberg, and the entire article can be read here: http://rense.com/general63/stanton.htm

Note: The first paragraph refers to the flying saucer/alien debunkers. I think you should take some time out from posting negativism onto this forum and to read the entire article which will only take up a few minutes of your time.

<snip utter nonsense>

What a load of male bovine manure. Take your "Crash at Corona" and compare his representation of the Twining/Schulgen memos and compare them to the originals. And that is only the beginning.

But you are not going to do that, are you? You don't even own a copy of said toilet literature, do you? You just follow the ET proponents online and without critique play to their tune. Frankly, you seriously need to up your critical thinking skills a bit and look at what he is actually writing - trust me, it is not pretty when you look at it behind the facade.

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#132    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,380 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 05 May 2013 - 01:49 AM

View PostSwampgasBalloonBoy, on 04 May 2013 - 03:29 AM, said:

No, he's not. If you says he's not a scientist, I am not going to disagree with that. He's a smart man, though. I am sure he can be if he put his mind to it.


Percentage? I guess it would be 100%, right? Since people that don't publish can't be called "scientist".


I did said "a lot" which does not meant all.



Probably, but I can't be sure about everybody


Not sure if this is sarcasm.  Hard to read sometime. you don't think scientists can be quite egotistical? They're all in it for the greater good, I guess.


Yes, competition is stiff. That's why in the rush to be the "first" some even lie, cheat and steal.
"In the latest study, scientists find that drinking wine can lowered your chance of heart disease (what they forgot to tell you is that you have to drink a barrel a day)."

Again, tell me why private sector scientists would want to secure funding from third party?



Some reasons they do. secure funding? Helping a rival company or gov't with their finding? making good money working for a company, but just wanted some recognition?



Publish a fragment? Wouldn't they get ridiculed when they don't provide a clear picture? You know, kind of like those idiots that only provide a grainy pic/video of UFOs.

No doubt Mr. Friedman is smart, I just wish he would use his brain in an honest way and not prey on people with his tale spinning.

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#133    Sheep Smart

Sheep Smart

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 340 posts
  • Joined:28 Apr 2013
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Back in town!

  • Im so happy I bleed it.

Posted 05 May 2013 - 01:58 AM

kludge,
you say it was a " non-event", but do you know this for sure? dont make me ask for proof now,... ; )

i tend to think it was  a military project crash fail and the ufo story being a "we have alien technology" facade to intimidate the world.

Other life in the universe?, you dare to imply there are entities possibly far greater than us almighty humans, creators of canned ham and reality tv. Nonsense. Absurd.

   The reality that stupidy exists in abundance doesnt bother me. Its the fact that theres still no cure.

#134    badeskov

badeskov

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 11,380 posts
  • Joined:27 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please - Mark Twain

Posted 05 May 2013 - 02:14 AM

Hey Kludge,

Old buddy, just wanted to insert a small comment on two points in your post:

View PostKludge808, on 04 May 2013 - 10:25 PM, said:

...

Moving from job to job as he did is not the sign of a top researcher/scientist but rather of one who's not good enough to keep after a project's complete.  That's how engineers who're brought in to fill ranks during a project then are let go because they're not needed anymore are treated.  These are the scut workers, the drones needed to handle the tasks the really good people are too busy to handle.  There's a whole army of such engineers, draftsmen and other transient workers out there who move from job to job to assist in completing projects & contracts, often toward the end when things get a bit hectic.  Do they get to work on Really Cool Projects?  Of course but not at a level that really counts.  But then, a janitor who worked in the same facilities can say with some legitimacy that he worked on those same super duper gee whiz projects ... the first two of which (nuke-powered aircraft & nuke rockets) were canceled because they weren't practical and the third being no real secret at all.  (What do you think is powering the Voyagers?)

Precisely, and especially in the 1950s a research/development position for someone good was a lifetime position. Somebody shuttling between 6 jobs in 14 years is rather disturbing.

<snip>

Quote

Sorry, but Friedman is in the same category as Hoagland & Lazar, a charlatan out to fleece the gullible.

Frankly, I would actually put him in a class worse. He is a charlatan, but he is one clever charlatan and neither Hoagland nor Lazar is as clever as him in my honest opinion. Sadly, he uses his cleverness in a dishonest way.

Cheers,
Badeskov

"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention to arrive safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming: Wow!! What a ride!". Said to to Dean Karnazes by a running buddy.

#135    DONTEATUS

DONTEATUS

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 17,847 posts
  • Joined:15 Feb 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet TEXAS

Posted 05 May 2013 - 03:47 AM

Its called the All mighty $$$$$$$$ Badeskov`s ! THis is why Friedman is still on the sorta best or kinda sorta best seller list in all the Roswell Book stores !
As for the Charlatans in the UFO field there too many to even name,but can be caught sometimes out in the Fields at night walking in circles !,and spirials,and squiggley directions.

This is a Work in Progress!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users