UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2003 > Dec > Dec 14

Re: sTARBABY & A New CSICOP Coverup? - Rudiak

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 13:15:45 -0800
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 15:30:46 -0500
Subject: Re: sTARBABY & A New CSICOP Coverup? - Rudiak

>From: Ed Gehrman <egehrman@psln.com>
>To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
>Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 16:19:48 -0800
>Subject: Re: sTARBABY & A New CSICOP Coverup? - Gehrman

>>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@earthlink.net>
>>To: <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
>>Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 16:27:17 -0800
>>Subject: Re: sTARBABY & A New CSICOP Coverup?

>>The USAF came out with their infamous "Case
>>Closed" time-traveling crash dummy explanation for alien bodies,
>>and Col. Philip Corso also came out with his equally infamous
>>"Day After Roswell", supposedly "pro-Roswell," but possibly a
>>case of stealth debunkery because it was so full of obviously
>>inaccurate BS and exaggerated claims.

>Blunders do not make a hoaxer or a liar. Col. Corso would have
>to be both if he didn't seed alien technology into US business,
>as he says he did. The *Day After Roswell* is about that fact
>and is not intended as a history of the cold war and shouldn't
>be read in that way. It comes down to whether you believe he was
>trying to tell the truth, not whether he produced a mistake free


>He may have make numerous mistakes, but his testimony concerning
>the seeding of alien technology is a lie or it's the truth. It
>is certainly not a "mistake". Was he telling the truth about
>that or wasn't he? If he wasn't, then he's a liar and a fake.


>I have no proof that Col. Corso is telling the truth other than
>my knowledge that he was an honorable and truthful person, a
>super patriot and well respected by his peers.


>When he states that our government has seeded alien technology
>into the US business community and that he should know because
>he was the person who accomplished the task, I believe him. He
>had no reason to lie and there is no evidence that he has done
>so in the past.

Corso's books is so full of serious "mistakes" and exaggerations
that they can't be brushed off as merely sloppy writing or story
telling. Corso was up to something. Whether it was personal
aggrandizement or the "superpatriot" carrying out one last
mission on behalf of someone else we may never know. However, I
think it is indisputable that such a horribly written,
inaccurate book, if meant to advance the case for Roswell,
actually did more of the opposite. That's what I meant by
"stealth debunkery."

Does this mean that Corso was also necessarily lying about alien
technology being seeded into corporate America? No, the book
could have been a mix of truth and lies, the lies eventually
serving to discredit the factual parts of the book. The various
phony "MJ-12 papers" may have a similar intent. The best place
to hide the truth is out in the open surrounded by lies and
half-truths. (Just try figuring out which is which.) Such
disinformation can act to both obfuscate and educate, while
maintaining full plausible deniability.

Anyhow, this is a tangent, not really a part of the main thread,
which is about how the Skeptical Inquirer defended Charles
Moore's Mogul balloon trajectory hoax and thus became an
accomplice to the hoax. However, for all we know, maybe Moore
and CSICOP are carrying out a mission as well.

David Rudiak