From: Don Ecsedy <don.nul> Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 14:34:22 -0400 (EDT) Archived: Wed, 06 Jun 2012 18:44:14 -0400 Subject: Re: Dating Arnold >From: Michael Tarbell <mtarbell.nul> >To: post.nul >Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2012 14:41:20 -0600 >Subject: Re: Dating Arnold >>From: Don Ecsedy<don.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto<post.nul> >>Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2012 11:03:15 -0400 (EDT) >>Subject: Re: Dating Arnold >>>From: Michael Tarbell<mtarbell.nul> >>>To: post.nul >>>Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 10:29:18 -0600 >>>Subject: Dating Arnold [was: Flying Saucers - The Greatest Lie Ever Told] >>>If you haven't already seen it, I highly recommend the ten-part >>>series "The Positively True Story of Kenneth Arnold" at >>>saturdaynightuforia.com, >>>http://tinyurl.com/cgtlk9b >>>which goes into great detail about this and other >>>'inconsistencies', including outright fabrications, in the >>>Coming of the Saucers version of Arnold's involvement in Maury >>>Island affair. And while I suspect most or all of these were due >>>to Ray Palmer, I have distinct unease with Arnold's apparent >>>complicity in their publication. >>After several days of back and forth online comments with the >>author of those articles, I came away with the sense the author >>has... what's a good word for it?... an ideological distaste for >>Arnold which determines his putting the worst possible >>interpretation on anything Arnold wrote. >I didn't necessarily get that impression, at least not until the >final concluding remarks in Part 10, which I would agree were >unjustifiably critical of Arnold, and frankly detracted from the >overall presentation. I also read author's writings the comments section for the series. >I have snipped off the details of your debate with the author, >in which you make valid points that dismiss some of the more >nit-picky issues. On the whole, however, it seems evident that >various incidents, indeed entire sequences of events (meetings, >phone calls, travels, etc.) described in The Coming of the >Saucers were simply fabricated. I agree with Martin Shough that a fair amount of that is a big "so what?", and agree with you that not all of it is a "so what?". Also, simply because the FBI or the AF have a different account doesn't mean theirs is true, and Arnold's false. >My resulting unease is not out of concern that this was Arnold's >doing rather than Palmer's, but that Arnold would have such >little concern for the accuracy of the account (which indeed >contradicted his own report to the FBI), considering the >potential impact on the credibility of the Mt. Rainier sighting, >which he otherwise ostensibly strove to maintain, in spite of >some awkward 'tweaks' to the account along the way. >Mike UFO writers have commented on blogs that editors make changes to their books. I've found quotations of Aldrich's 8/14/47 report (in which Rhodes is spelled Rhoads all four times it appears) in books and articles in which Aldrich's 'Rhoads' was "corrected" to 'Rhodes'. Editors and publishers will do that, and in the pulp genres back in the day, Palmer was not unique in doing so, including rewriting the submitted text, and Arnold would not be the first writer to let it pass (and apparently to this day some UFO writers will let it pass). I'm less interested in questioning Arnold's character than in figuring out which parts of the story in the book were made up out of the whole cloth by Palmer. I don't think Palmer did so for some nefarious purpose, but to make the story more suspenseful, mysterious. He doesn't seem to have realized at the time how mysterious it already was, and would become. He was trying to engage the reader and make the sale. I guess I have a less negative opinion of Palmer than is common around here. At least, I think I understand his motives. They seem harmless. Crisman and Dahl may be harmless, as well. We have Palmer's word it was Crisman who wrote letters to Amazing Stories about his battle with the Dero in Burma, Perhaps Crisman was trying to replicate Shaver's success, and maybe Palmer was playing out that possibility with him, and that was what Maury Island was. What really interests me, though, is why Brown and Davidson would fly to Tacoma right then and there just on a hint from Arnold. The same with Sander on a call from Smith...and why Smith thought Sander was S-2 (not A-2) intelligence rather than a PIO. So, there is Arnold, wound as tight as a spring, and then there are Crisman, Dahl, Sander, Brown, Davidson, Palmer, all with their own agendas, as well Lantz and Morello with theirs, and also Smith and even Dave Johnson with theirs. Were any of them forthright and above board with Arnold? I would not want to have been in Arnold's shoes. Regards, Don http://www.foreshadower.net 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