From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 10:53:16 -0500 Archived: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 07:18:25 -0400 Subject: Carrion's Conversion [was: Flying Saucers - The >From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul> >To: post.nul >Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 10:13:07 -0400 >Subject: Re: Flying Saucers - The Greatest Lie Ever Told >>From: Stanton Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>To: post.nul <post.nul> >>Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 05:17:29 -0700 (PDT) >>Subject: Re: Flying Saucers - The Greatest Lie Ever Told >>>From: James Carrion <jcarrion.nul> >>>To: <post.nul> >>>Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 10:59:25 -0300 >>>Subject: Re: Flying Saucers - The Greatest Lie Ever Told >>>>From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys.nul> >>>>To: <post.nul> >>>>Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 11:04:36 -0300 >>>>Subject: Re: Flying Saucers - The Greatest Lie Ever Told >>>>Why screw up? The carefully done deception kept the world away >>>>from the Roswell story for more than 30 years and would have >>>>gone on for much longer if a TV journalist in Baton Rouge hadn't >>>>been late for her interview with me in 1978. >>>>The station manager then suggested I talk to Jesse Marcel... >>>>"He handled wreckage of one of those flying saucers you are >>>>interested in when he was in the military..." >>>>Changed my life and the lives of many on this List. >>>A question for the "Roswell Experts" on this List. Who in your >>>"expert" opinion do you think ordered the 509th's press release >>>and what do you base that opinion on? >>Colonel Blanchard ordered Lt. Walter Haut to distribute the press >>release on July 8,1947, according to first hand testimony from >>Walter more than 30 years ago. >Carrion isn't the first person to jump from the fence to one >side or the other in this field, and I've seen most researchers >sway one way or the other as time goes on. But his quick >transition from newly installed International Director of MUFON >to someone who has it all figured out is somewhat incredulous. I agree, Steve, with the point. Carrion's conversion is dizzyingly swift. His desire to depict everybody who hasn't followed him there as intellectually corrupt, stupid, dogmatic, blind, deaf, or whatever (choose your favorite unflattering adjective) is, at the least, unbecoming. Better for him to rein it in and to concentrate on writing up the most compelling version of his case he's able to construct, and then the rest of us can make our own judgments. I've been at this since the early 1960s. Over the decades I've changed my mind about a number of things, and not a day passes that I'm not weighing and pondering in the face of new information. I am struck, for example, at how my thoughts concerning such fundamental matters as abductions and crash/retrieval claims have evolved from my first exposure to them and on to the present, where I hold views I would have found unimaginable or objectionable back then. Right now I'm reading John Alexander's very interesting book and finding his contribution intriguing and thought-provoking, helping me to clarify my own impressions of what we're up against in this very difficult enterprise. Thus, I try to stay modest in the face of new claims that aren't at least obviously crazy or rooted in conspiracy theory or demonology. I encourage others to do the same. We're dealing with phenomena of extraordinary complexity, well beyond current knowledge to all appearances. That being the case, provisional hypotheses are to be preferred to ones cast in concrete. Jerry Clark Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp