UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2003 > Dec > Dec 9

Re: Re: sTARBABY & A New CSICOP Coverup? - Scherk

From: William Scott Scherk <wss@uniserve.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 07:18:42 -0800
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 14:56:48 -0500
Subject: Re: Re: sTARBABY & A New CSICOP Coverup? - Scherk

>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
>Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 12:20:15 -0600
>Subject: Re: sTARBABY & A New CSICOP Coverup?

>>From: William Scott Scherk <wss@uniserve.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
>>Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 18:28:54 -0800
>>Subject: Re: sTARBABY & A New CSICOP Coverup?

>>The camp that asserts an alien UFO crash at Roswell is the
>>majority, dominates TV programming, radio broadcasts, web
>>sites and newsletter publications. This camp produces and
>>sells the most books, tapes and videos, attracts the most
>>tourists to its 'crash sites,' and the most attenders to its

>What a load of crap.

Well, so you say, but my statement stands. I cited two public
opinion polls that show the belief in an alien/UFO crash at
Roswell is held by a majority of Americans. Moreover, a majority
believes that the US government is covering up information on
this issue.

You haven't really offered any comment on those facts, so I
wonder how you would would counter my idea that a great deal of
alien/UFO crash/coverup material is peddled. For example, there
are at least five videos/DVDs on sale that give the alien/UFO
crash/coverup point of view on Roswell.

Is there a skeptical DVD on the subject?

On the same topic, there are some 350 books on Roswell (as
listed on Amazon.com). How many are skeptical? I counted seven.

Which is the bestseller of these 350? Well, it seems to be
Philip Corso's "The day after Roswell (rank 18,872).

Way down the List is the highest-selling Philip J Klass book,
with a rank of 261,376. Lower down is the book by Saler, Zeigler
and Charles M Moore. Its rank? 244,200.

What is the highest rank of any of the skeptical books? It seems
to be the Korff volume, "The Roswell UFO Crash: What They Don't
Want You to Know," with a rank of 85,049.

>I can attest, as an author of UFO books and friend or
>acquaintance of other writers in the field, that there's no
>money in it, the self-serving debunker mythologies aside.

Dr Clark, self-serving mythologies to one side, one of your
encyclopedias (on cryptozoology) currently sits at 18,872 in the
Amazon rankings.

>In my next life, in fact, I am going to be a professional
>skeptic and ride the gravy train engineered by CSICOP, whose
>budget surely surpasses that of all pro-anomaly groups in
>America combined, with plenty of green stuff to spare.

>>There is Science Frontiers, X-Project, Fortean Times,
>>Strange Magazine, Parascope News, Journal of Scientific
>>Exploration, FATE magazine, The Anomalist, Narratives of the
>>Weird . . . And umpteen thousands of websites and mailing

>Not a single organization interested in anomalies and the
>paranormal from a favorable or open-minded perspective can
>claim a fraction of the money CSICOP possesses.

I don't know this. How do you know? How do you support his

Fate magazine, for example, has a sales ranking of 1,170.
Skeptical Inquirer has a ranking of 1,071.

If SI has much more money than than that of FATE (as you seem to
imply), how do they get it? Does FATE accept advertising?

>Nor do proponents or the open-minded have a fraction of the
>influence CSICOP and the elite media (which virtually never
>cover issues concerning anomalies from a favorable or even
>neutral perspective) have on the thinking of all those in a
>position to encourage, sponsor, or fund research into >ufology,
cryptozoology, or parapsychology.

How do you know this? In any case, what is the 'elite media'?

Additionally, you broaden the remit of my comments to
encouraging, sponsoring or funding research. Does CSICOP fund
research? Can you name some CSICOP-funded research?

>As an officer of CUFOS, I can speak personally to the all-
>but-nonexistent resources going to serious UFO research - as
>opposed to the abundant cash and support that flow, in an
>unending stream, toward professional debunking groups which
>tell elites what they want to hear.

I would like to know more about this unending stream of cash to
professional debunking groups. Which are the professional
debunking groups, in your estimation?

William Scott Scherk