• SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY A PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, five years young! For a low subscription fee, you will be able to download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive After The Paracast podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! FLASH! For a limited time, you can save up to 40% on your subscription. You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Leslie Kean and Charles Halt

wwkirk

Paranormal Adept
Leslie's knack for critical thinking was refreshing. Halt's terse, no-nonsense manner was also appreciated. Another excellent Paracast episode.
 

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
Thanks for asking my question Chris. I guess Ms. Kean has been more busy promoting her book and setting up conferences and attending to her public image than focusing on her Coalition for Freedom of Information ( CFi ) project.

I want to believe in Leslie, and I respect the work she's done as a journalist, but I found her views on ufology in this interview somewhat hypocritical. She comes onto the Paracast and expresses her opinion about ufology with some notable disdain after having accepted Researcher of the Year award at the International UFO Congress, one of the most prominent examples of ufology culture. She wants to avoid the word UFO because it carries so much "baggage", but at the same time exploits it for the purpose of boosting her popularity. She admits this much during the interview when she says, "I also realize that when you have any other acronym out there [ than UFO ], people don't know what it is [ you're talking about ]". So she slaps it across the front of her book in great big blue letters to boost sales specifically to who? Ufologists and those interested in UFOs.

Then she says she constantly has to explain the word UFO to people because to quote: "The acronym means that [ alien ] to everybody, so it just has to be stated over and over again that that's not what you're talking about." Well Leslie, the whole world is obviously wrong except you, especially us silly misinformed ufologists ( like me ) who actually took the time to go back through the historical records and follow the origin and usage of the word all the way to the present ( oh wait ... isn't that what journalists are supposed to do? ). It's as if she has no qualms about making use of us lowly ufologists when it suits her needs, and the rest of the time she's trying to wash the dirt off.

If Ms. Kean wants to alienate ufologists as well as the government ( oops ... sorry I used the word "alien" there ), she's coming across loud and clear. Despite the quality of her work, her motivation seems less like a genuine and constructive interest in the UFO phenomenon, and more like a genuine and constructive interest in staying at the top of the charts. I'm not sure she realizes just how lucky she is to have the success she's had so far, and that it really doesn't look so good when a celebrity starts dissing their fans, and let's face the facts here, she is a ufology celebrity. She's been on major TV talk shows and is riding out an undeniable wave of popularity in ufology culture. I think it would serve her well to come across a little less aloof.

Still, I suppose a girl can't be blamed for looking out for herself. It's not like there aren't any weirdoes in ufology, and if a Journalist finally gets the Government to talk, it would still be better than one of those "cult of personality" types. So despite her performance, I'm going to go on record as saying that ufology could use more women like her, and that someday I hope she can accept that. In the meantime, let's hope that if she does get the government to open up, she gets them to talk about UFOs ( not UAPs ). If you haven't already got her book, UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go On the Record, get it here.
 

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
@Christopher O'Brien

Chris: What's Ray's interpretation of the Costa Rican mapping plane photo, and are Ray's photos better or worse than this example?

I've got reservations about the 1971 Costa Rican photo myself, and I'd hardly call it "crystal clear".
 

Gene Steinberg

Forum Super Hero
Staff member
Leslie is not playing to the "in crowd." She's trying to interest government officials and scientists on the need to investigate UFOs seriously. So she has to discard the baggage of Ufology and treat the subject very carefully. It doesn't matter what she believes, but what she can prove to the skeptics to persuade them to join in this search for the truth. So I fully understand why she is politically correct about the matter.
 

Gene Steinberg

Forum Super Hero
Staff member
Robert Hastings has given me permission to post the following, which accompanies this week's episode, particularly about radar tracking of the Rendlesham Forest UFO:

The UFO Radar Tracking at Bentwaters

Aside from persons reporting UFO incursions at the Weapons Storage Area, I have also interviewed the two USAF air traffic controllers who were on duty during the period of the UFO activity during late December of 1980. James H. Carey and Ivan “Ike” R. Barker, now belatedly admit to tracking an unidentified target on radar at the Bentwaters Air Traffic Control Tower one night—sometime betweenDecember 26, 1980, and January 1, 1981—as they worked an extended holiday schedule.

This is the first time the now-retired controllers’ testimony has been published. Jim Carey told me,

At the time, I was a tech sergeant, an air traffic controller with the 2164th Communications Squadron. The other controller was named Ike Barker. A major named -------- was also there. I think the incident happened between 10 and 12 o’clock, if I remember right. Ike and I usually worked 6 p.m. to midnight, but it was during the holidays, when we might have to work eight or nine hours. But as I recall, it happened before midnight.

What I remember is seeing was a very fast object on the radar we had in the tower. The scope was variable—it had a zoom as far as its [displayed] range, between five and 60-miles radius, but I think it was at set at a 60-miles when the object appeared. It came in from the east, went straight west across the scope and disappeared off the left side. It took maybe four sweeps—each sweep was two or three seconds—to cross it entirely. So it covered 120 miles in [approximately eight to twelve] seconds. In the 15 years I was an air traffic controller, I’d never seen anything travel across the scope that fast.

A few seconds later, it came back on the scope, retracing its course, west to east, at the same speed. Then—I think it was maybe half or three-quarters of the way across—it did an immediate right-angle turn and headed south, off the bottom of the screen. I mean, it turned just like that, instantly. We couldn’t believe it! I told Ike, ‘Okay, that was not one of ours!’

So, that’s all I remember, except for the chatter on the radio. I think it was on the major’s hand-held radio, which was turned to the Command Post Net. That’s who he always talked to [on other occasions]. I wasn’t really listening to it, so I don’t remember any of the details, but I do know that [the radio] was pretty quiet all night then, all of a sudden, they’re just yakking back and forth. They were kind of excited but that’s all I recall. Besides, if they were going to discuss UFOs or security problems, or that kind of stuff, they would have gone to a restricted channel, which they scrambled. But the chatter did start up a little while after we tracked the object. Anyway, I only saw the unidentified object on radar, but Ike told us that he saw something out the window.

I asked Carey to explain why Barker was able to observe an aerial object out the window, but he was not. He replied, “It all happened so fast,” he said, “Ike said the object was hovering there for just a moment, then it left really fast. So I guess I was looking down at the scope at that time. I believe Ike when he says he saw [the UFO] but I just can not remember [seeing] it.”

I asked Carey if he and Barker had logged or otherwise reported the radar tracking and sighting. He replied, “No, we could not say a lot about this because we were air traffic controllers—a very serious job. Our bosses could have removed us at any time if they thought we were acting kind of funny or weird, so to keep our jobs, we never made a big deal of this. We both loved our jobs and something like this could be cause for removal from the career field for good. But [considering the other reports of UFO activity at Bentwaters] we thought it was funny no one ever talked with us about what we saw that night.”

When I interviewed Ike Barker, he said,

Everything I tell you, well, I would be happy to take a lie detector test. I was a master sergeant, with the 2164th Communications Squadron. There were three of us there that night. I was the tower supervisor, Jim Carey was working for me, and the Supervisor of Flying was Major --- ------. He wasn’t a controller, he was there for emergencies in the air and that kind of thing. He assisted the aircraft, if they needed it, but had nothing to do with air traffic control.

Anyway, that night, it was slow at the time, no aircraft in the area. We had a radar scope in the tower we called the “Bright 2” that had a 60-miles radius around the Bentwaters complex itself. I looked down at the scope and saw a bright streak move across it. An aircraft always appears as a series of blips, one blip for each [radar] sweep, moving slowly across the screen. But this thing almost looked like a straight line, with the blip leaving a ghostly trail behind it. That’s how fast it was moving. It came in from the northeast, directly over the base, directly over us, stopped for a few seconds, immediately reversed course and went back out the way it came in.

After I told Barker that Carey recalled the UFO coming in from the east—rather than the northeast—he consulted a map of the twin bases, and said, “Jim was almost right about the inbound and departure: the thing came in from the southeast, crossed over Bentwaters to the downward leg—which would have been a mile to a mile-and-a-half from the [radar] antenna—and then went back out to the south, or a little bit southeast, probably over Rendlesham Forest, which was south of Bentwaters. It went completely off the scope, so it was 60 miles away when we lost it.” However, Barker does not recall the unidentified target performing a right-angle turn on its way out, as Carey contends.

Barker continued,

And there was a visual on it. When it hovered, I saw it out the window. It was basketball-shaped, and had sort of an orangish glow. Not bright orange, uh, sort of dim, maybe like the full moon would look behind a thin layer of clouds. There seemed to be something across the center of it, lighter-colored shapes like—don’t laugh—like portholes or windows, or even lights, in a row left to right, across its center. Maybe six or eight of them. They were stationary, not moving across the object. But it seemed spherical, not flat like a flying saucer. I couldn’t hear any noise. It wasn’t huge, but I think it was bigger than an airplane. I would say it was maybe the size of an F-111 or a little larger.

Now, there’s a water tower at Bentwaters. If you were in the air traffic tower, facing the runway, the tower is almost behind you. [From my vantage point] the object was directly over top of the water tower, or just past it. The object [appeared] larger, maybe twice as large, as the tank on the water tower. It stopped in mid-air for a few seconds, probably 500-feet, uh, maybe a 1000-feet above the tower, then it left. I didn’t see it turn, uh, rotate or anything like that before leaving.
But what impressed me most was the speed this thing had. I have never seen anything so fast in my life! It was zoom, gone! It headed southwest, maybe 45-degrees to the right of the Weapons Storage Area. I would say the object was slightly higher than traffic pattern altitude. As soon as it left, I had Jim get on the phone to the controllers at the Woodbridge tower. He was patched through by the GCA (Ground Control Approach) radar unit. A British civilian at the tower said, ‘No, we didn’t [track] it. We weren’t manning the scopes. We’re in the break room.’ That tower was manned by Air Force controllers too but, like us, had a British civilian working there. He’s the guy Jim spoke with.

When I told Barker that Carey had said he did not remember seeing the UFO out the window, Barker replied emphatically,

Oh, he saw it! They both saw it! But we weren’t going to admit that. Just after I saw the object out the window, I turned to Jim and --- and said, ‘I didn’t see that, did you?’ One of them responded, ‘No, I didn’t see it either.’ I don’t remember who answered me, but they both saw it. But we made no log entries on anything, including the fast-moving target. We didn’t really have a discussion about not telling anyone, because that was already understood. You may know that there was a deal with the Air Force—I don’t how familiar you are with their procedures and policies years ago—but if you reported a UFO sighting, you might be woken up at 3 a.m. for an interrogation. I once went through that when I was in Japan, earlier, before I was at Bentwaters. I was in the radar unit there too and we tracked a UFO on Yokota’s long-range radar, short-range radar, and final approach PAR radar—and the Japanese unit there got it with a height-finder [radar].

Plus, there was a visual sighting by three controllers in the tower. [In spite of all those factors] the Air Force said it was the reflection of a car on the highway. The controllers were harassed to the point that they said the object they saw were only aircraft lights. That taught me a lesson: Never go on the record. Never open your mouth. So, at Bentwaters, I think we were all scared to discuss it. I know I was. As I said before, we didn’t even record it in the log.

After the object left, uh, maybe an hour later, we could see lights, actually a glow, in the direction of Woodbridge, but the trees blocked our view so we couldn’t see what was causing it. Now that I think about it, I’m not sure if --- was still up [in the tower] at that time, but I know Jim was. The glow seemed like it was coming out of the forest; it wasn’t like lights in the air. It could have even been vehicles on the ground, but I know one damn thing—it wasn’t a lighthouse!

Barker laughed heartily at his own jibe. All of my Bentwaters sources think UFO debunker James McGaha’s notorious lighthouse explanation for the UFO sightings is ridiculous, and have gone out of their way to tell me so. Now that I have secured the candid testimony of the two air traffic controllers who were working in the Bentwaters tower every night that week, I’m certain McGaha will come up with a false-radar-return theory to explain away the tracking, as well as some other mumbo jumbo to explain away the spherical, orange-colored object Barker saw out the tower’s window.

I then asked Barker about the excited radio chatter that Carey mentioned overhearing that night. He replied,

Yes, the major had a ‘brick’—that’s what we used to call a hand-held FM radio. There was so much chatter that, at one point, he turned down the volume. Something was going on, that was obvious, but I don’t recall hearing what they were saying. A few weeks later, I did hear some scuttlebutt about the UFO sightings during the holidays from an OSI agent named ---- ------, who Jim and I played golf with. I think that was the first time I heard anyone mention that others on base had seen them too. But I didn’t let on that we had actually tracked one of them and had seen it over the water tower. ------ was a nice guy, but an OSI agent was the last person I would have told that to.

Barker then speculated that the agent might have been probing him, intentionally mentioning the UFO activity, just to see what kind of response his comments would elicit.

Barker later told me that he or Carey had also called a British radar unit known as Eastern Radar, to report the tracking. British UFO skeptic Dr. David Clarke has interviewed the RAF Commander who was at Eastern Radar in 1980-81, Derek Coumbe, who confirms receiving a call from the Bentwaters tower. According to Clarke, “[Coumbe] was on duty when the UFO report was received in the early hours of 28 December. He said he received a direct call patched through from the Bentwaters tower reporting a ‘flashing light’ overRendlesham Forest.” Coumbe logged the call, noting that although he had the duty controller attempt to verify the track, “nothing was observed.”10

However, despite this supposedly definitive statement by Coumbe, new information has come to light which apparently contradicts it. Former Ministry of Defence (MoD) UFO specialist Nick Pope writes,

Looking at radar evidence is a critical part of any UFO investigation. There have been plenty of spectacular UFO sightings over the years, many correlated by radar…

In the absence of any radar data that might confirm the presence of the Rendlesham Forest UFOs, the investigation petered out. Yet, as I was to discover years later, the UFO had been tracked, after all.

I spoke to former RAF radar operator Nigel Kerr who had been stationed at RAF Watton at Christmas 1980 and had received a call from somebody at RAF Bentwaters. The caller wanted to know if there was anything unusual on his radar screen. He looked and for three or four sweeps, something did show up, directly over the base. But it faded away and no official report was ever made. It was only years later that Kerr even heard of the Rendlesham Forest incident and realized he might have a missing piece of the puzzle.11Leslie Kean's book, p. 171.

In other words, the British Eastern Radar unit at RAF Watton had briefly tracked the UFO, just as the USAF controllers at RAF Bentwaters had. However, as at Bentwaters, no official report about the tracking had been filed. Why Eastern Radar’s former commander, Derek Coumbe, misled Dr. Clarke about there having been no tracking is anyone’s guess. Perhaps, because no report was generated, his memory of the incident was impaired. Or, perhaps, he simply did not wish to discuss the matter publicly.

It is not possible to directly link the UFO Carey and Baker tracked/saw with the unidentified aerial object that maneuvered near the nuclear Weapons Storage Area. The former hovered momentarily near the Bentwaters air traffic control tower; the latter apparently lingered over or near WSA for an extended period, while sending down light beams onto the facility. However, the two controllers’ testimony does confirm that at least one bona fide UFO was present at the base that evening.

The importance of the radar tracking revelations can not be overstated. Two independent military units tracked an anomalous aerial object during the peak week of UFO reports at the twin bases. Moreover, one of those units—the USAF controllers at RAF Bentwaters—had a visual on a hovering, spherical object which correlated with that tracking.

I finally asked Ike Barker for his opinion about the object he tracked. He replied, “I can tell you that this was no manmade technology. I was very familiar with all types of aircraft, obviously, and I can tell you that what I saw was not from any country on Earth. I will never forget it!”
 

exo_doc

Foolish Earthling
Loved the show, Leslie Kean & Charles Halt were excellent guests.

I am attending the 2013 Symposium on Official and Scientific Investigations on UAP in Greensboro, NC....both days. I only live an hour away and I wouldn't miss this for the world.
Are there any other Paracast listeners going?
 

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
Leslie is not playing to the "in crowd." She's trying to interest government officials and scientists on the need to investigate UFOs seriously. So she has to discard the baggage of Ufology and treat the subject very carefully. It doesn't matter what she believes, but what she can prove to the skeptics to persuade them to join in this search for the truth. So I fully understand why she is politically correct about the matter.
I get that rationale. I just don't agree with it. To use a Freidmanism, I think it's better not to be an apologist ufologist. In the end weakening credibility for the field isn't likely to gain it more respect with anyone, including the government. Are we really expected to believe that they don't know what she's really talking about? The government may be weasels, but they're not stupid. In nearly every other respect I applaud Ms. Kean's work.

IMO she should be embracing ufology and making solid allies of those of us within the field who are responsible. Instead she's marginalizing the whole field and using it to prop up her personal agenda at the same time. I don't care what her rationale is. It's just not right. To many ufologists ( including me ) she was a bright star of hope, and now it's hard to describe how disappointing it was to hear the way she talked about the field.

Now we've got the ufologists over here, and the UAPers ( phonetically this would be pronounced "yappers" ) over there, and the Raelians in another corner, and the Greerlians in another, and the list goes on and on. Her strategy although seemingly well intentioned is ill conceived. In contrast USI has adopted NARCAP's acronym UAP in good faith, and we use it as it was intended by them. We also fully endorse the efforts they've made to make in-roads in the aviation community. That's the kind of spirit I'd like to see instead of more fragmentation.
 

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
@Christopher O'Brien

Re: Costa Rica 1971 Air Photo: I dunno if it's just me not knowing how to use Google Earth properly, but when I went to the coordinates for the photo, the area was obscured by clouds. What seemed odd is that when I went to the historical imagery settings and moved the slider, there were several changes in areas nearby, but that particular area remained obscured by clouds in all of them ... exactly the same clouds. I've never run into this problem before.
 

Artyom

Paranormal Maven
Thanks for asking my question, I was glad to hear that the book does help to change people's mindset. The fact the book was translated in several languages was news to me, it's good to know.

Yes, Leslie uses term UFO in the book cause I believe its major audience is general public, which has no idea what UAP term means but really familiar with UFO. But in conversations with government officials it does make sense to avoid UFO term as much as possible. By simply because it triggers laugh and no wish to have anything to do with this subject. I realize that simple names switch isn't the silver billet but it helps.

UFO field has so many angels in terms of people who present it and so I don't see how Leslie can better or worse support it by simply staying aside with her own position. She has people who support her approach to the subject and they are collectively are Coalition for Freedom of Information.
 

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
Yes, Leslie uses term UFO in the book cause I believe its major audience is general public, which has no idea what UAP term means but really familiar with UFO.
Like she says herself, everybody knows it [ the word UFO ] means alien, and it's usually presumed to be some sort of spacecraft. So why does she and and certain other people ( mostly skeptics ) try so hard to to convince us no ... no ... no ... that's not what it means. It just means some vague unidentified lights or whatever off in the distance?
But in conversations with government officials it does make sense to avoid UFO term as much as possible. By simply because it triggers laugh and no wish to have anything to do with this subject. I realize that simple names switch isn't the silver billet but it helps.
I'm not so sure that assumption is as valid as you think. As Gene pointed out on the show, the word UFO was created by a government agency ( the USAF ) for official investigative purposes. Formerly top secret documents from the NARA archives prove this point. So when briefing and discussing the matter with government officials, it doesn't actually make any sense at all to use a completely unfamiliar non-governmental synonym. IMO the so-called "giggle factor" is less for those in government and more for those in the media who enjoy poking fun at UFOs and would try to embarrass her on camera. @Gene Steinberg

Seriously, think about it. The assumption here is that the Government knows more about UFOs than we do and she's trying to establish a liaison program with them. Therefore, by logical extension, the people in the government she's trying to get to disclose information must already know exactly what she's talking about. So it makes no sense to avoid using the word UFO with the government officials at all. Furthermore, if the assumption were that the Government doesn't actually know anything, then why bother getting them to disclose anything in the first place? Where the giggle factor takes place is in the media and Ms. Kean being a UFO celebrity doesn't want to become the target of the giggle factor when she's getting interviewed because that would be bad for PR and book sales.
UFO field has so many angels in terms of people who present it and so I don't see how Leslie can better or worse support it by simply staying aside with her own position. She has people who support her approach to the subject and they are collectively are Coalition for Freedom of Information.
So you're saying that there's so much fragmentation in the field already that adding CFi and bunch of UAPers to the mix won't make any difference anyway? Well ... I suppose just one more celebrity sized crack right in the middle of your windshield won't make any difference either. But you're absolutely right about her protecting her position.
 

Angel of Ioren

Friendly Skeptic
So UFO doesn't mean Unidentified Flying Object? It has to be alien? What if you don't think they are alien in nature? What should one call them? I guess I should say I don't believe in UFOs because I don't think they are alien.
 

Ezechiel

Paranormal Adept
So UFO doesn't mean Unidentified Flying Object? It has to be alien? What if you don't think they are alien in nature? What should one call them? I guess I should say I don't believe in UFOs because I don't think they are alien.

Flight Demonstration Beyond our current Understanding of Physics (FDBUP) .... and documented craft....

IMHO, if you're going to push an initiative supported by a government, the documentation and study of FDBUPs would be a good idea.

Using all the radar data and multi-witness cases you could assemble researchers in various fields and try to evaluate the technology required to execute 90 degree turns at impossible speeds without breaking up for example... Or stuff like noiseless mile long craft hovering above populated areas (Pheonix lights) and then speeding off in the horizon ;)

At least we'd get an approximation of how far ahead of published scientific documentation these things are regardless of whether they are from earth or not. Might even inspire scientists to investigate things that they would not because of the current ridicule factor.

Kelvin, Lord William Thomson (1824-1907) -- from Eric Weisstein's World of Scientific Biography
Another example of his hubris is provided by his 1895 statement "heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible" (Australian Institute of Physics), followed by his 1896 statement, "I have not the smallest molecule of faith in aerial navigation other than ballooning...I would not care to be a member of the Aeronautical Society."
 

Ezechiel

Paranormal Adept
Somehow I've got a bad feeling that the 'approximation' will end up being classified and we'll end up in square one again :D
 

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
So UFO doesn't mean Unidentified Flying Object? It has to be alien? What if you don't think they are alien in nature? What should one call them? I guess I should say I don't believe in UFOs because I don't think they are alien.
Check out the exchange between Gene and I on this issue in the May 26 Newsletter.

Also check out the UFO entry on the USI website here.

For a quick answer here and now. The literal translation of the acronym UFO to it's long form is not a proper definition. It is merely part of the word origin. For meaning, we look to history and usage, where the word UFO has been and continues to be used to convey the idea of an alien craft or the subject of a UFO report. Note here that alien does not necessitate ET and not all UFO reports turn out to be UFOs.

To answer your question: If you don't believe that alien craft have been seen or detected by our civilization, then you don't believe in UFOs. If you do believe that anomalous objects or phenomena exist that aren't UFOs, then you believe in Unidentified Aerial Phenomena ( UAPs ). It is possible to believe in both. The Ufology Society International definition of UFO is included below for your reference. It is backed up by the article mentioned above which includes an in-depth look at the origin of the word and traces it's history through the most salient historical points in time to the present day.

UFO or ufo

Pronunciation: yoo-ef-oh ( plural UFOs ) or yoo-foe ( plural ufos ) noun

1. A craft of alien origin.
2. The object or phenomenon that is the focus of a UFO report or investigation.

Word Origin: [ Mid-20th century (1952) acronym formed from the words unidentified flying object. ]

Synonym: Flying Saucer
 

uforadio

Paranormal Adept
There was some gems between the lines in the show (and some new information).
Considering Joe Wilson that Halt talked about - it took me few hours browsing through my vast audio archives and searching to locate phone call from alleged colonel Joe Wilson to Coast to Coast show. As Halt stated, after the show, he sent emails about the incident.

I was able to recall similar reference that help me finaly to nail the date of the call which was mentioned on Gary Heseltine's night lecture from Day 4 of Citizen Hearing (May 2nd). And here is another confirmation in red from Gary (Gary is probably the colleague in question that Halt mentioned who was working with him on this story together with Hastings):

Source: Rendlesham Forest Incident ~Gary Heseltine ~Citizen Hearing Lectures - Galactic roundtable

I was contacted by a Col by email after my Coast to Coast talk. He appeared to have intimate knowledge of the radar contacts. Asked him to go on the record for me - prove who you are. But then he never contacted me again. It is uncorroborated so the information cannot be used because it may be a made up story. This may have been a test for me by a [disinformation agent] or it may be true.

...

However, I will double check and come back later.

Best Wishes
 

TalkingMeatSuit

Paranormal Maven
Leslie is not playing to the "in crowd." She's trying to interest government officials and scientists on the need to investigate UFOs seriously. So she has to discard the baggage of Ufology and treat the subject very carefully. It doesn't matter what she believes, but what she can prove to the skeptics to persuade them to join in this search for the truth. So I fully understand why she is politically correct about the matter.
Damnit, I hate agreeing with Gene on anything... j/k ;)

I sincerely believe that what she's doing by being "stand-off-ish" about the matter will do far more good than the black eye that folks like Steven Greer give the entire subject matter.

It's frustrating, because she wrote a great book and this field is in dire need of a good new hero or two. Of course we'd like to hear her wax poetic about the greys, reptoids, and space homies, but by keeping herself in as sterile an environment as possible she provides an outlet that is above reproach for those who would not otherwise ever even consider the topic.

She's Bat Lolslie

 

USI Calgary

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
Ufology, that's all well and good, but I don't think everyone agrees with that.
All I've done is create a solution. All that's needed for it to work is for people to use it. If some people prefer to make inaccurate statements that continue to muddy the water instead, then that's their choice.
 


Top