Ted Phillips

[Apocalypto]

Lights floating around, humanoids in hoods and capes walking right past people, floating over fences, stealing basketballs. UFOs. Poltergeists. Cameras being broken and stolen, cables cut. Exploding equus ferus caballus. Guts everywhere. (Wow, that's one angry horse-hating alien.) These are all very dramatic assertions. But there isn't a shred of proof. Not a single spec. No trace, one might say.

Okay, so here I find a video on YouTube. Please bear with me as I make a couple of observations.

Mr. Phillips fumbles along and ends up on the story of Marley Woods somewhere in the middle. If you FF to around the 6:30 mark, you'll be just in time to hear him mention that mysterious and "most recognized" Hollywood dude that he mentioned in this week's PC interview, then he goes on to mention some other fellow who gets stamped as - as far as Phillips is concerned - "the smartest guy that I've ever known". Neither of these people want to disclose their identity but Phillips assures the viewers that "eventually we''ll be able to identify a lot of the people working on this project..."

I hope no one is holding their breath. (The video was posted on YouTube almost a year ago, although the conference might be much older than that)

He mentions that Marley Woods is indeed a fake name (calling it "bogus", interesting choice of words) and that there are 226 witnesses who are bankers, lawyers, farmers ranchers and that not one of them has gone public. (Are they in some kind of a cult or something? What if one of them decides to go rogue and call Peter Davenport?? Just askin')

At 7:07 or so he shows a slide of a "recreation" of one of the events at Marley Woods, but then doesn't explain a damned thing about it! Huh? So what on Earth is the point of bringing up that slide? It appears to show some lights coming down from a tree line. They're pretty dramatic looking, quite bright and in what one might call a sort of formation. The title of the slide (for some unknown reason) is "UFOs: Dramatic Changes in Trace Landing Events". He then blasts into some other slide from some other bizarre trace case report from 1954. Okay.

My point is, Phillips has a way of bringing things up - sometimes very, very dramatic and interesting things - and then kind of brushing over them with a sort of intellectual shrug and just drifting off into some other direction. His talking style requires that the listener digest the mystifying segues without any thought or question. I can't do that. I don't know. Maybe this is something similar to what Paul K. was saying about quantity over quality. Maybe it's just not as bad as I'm thinking it is and I should cut Mr. Phillips some slack.

If no photos, videos or any other "proof" of any of this goes online in a timely manner, one should be extremely disappointed in Phillips. He prides himself on physical evidence, with images and good data. But all we got here is chatter.

So we all wait... When Mr. Phillips comes out with something we can all really chew on, I'll be the first in line to pay to see it. Until then, I'll respectfully pass on listening to him in future.

 

[Walter Bosley]

Your confidence in your experiences is admirable. And, I think you are absolutely right to point out your AFOSI knowledge as being valuable. It was not my intention to demean your professional background. That was a lack of clarity on my part. And, in the interest of clarity, I am not saying that you are purposefully deceiving anyone or using your resume to bolster your claims. Of course, people will always make that credibility-by-association connection between your professional background and your experiences. But there’s nothing you can do about that, I suppose. Frankly, though, I think your position that some people are not entitled to an investigator’s information (whether you intend it or not) borders on a religious attitude of exclusivity—which is never a positive road to follow. The more readily we accept such an attitude, the less we tend to demand of the experiencers making claims. And, the less we demand from such claimants, the more we veer into a belief system. In the end, I suppose we all come to the Paracast with different expectations. Some listeners are satisfied with hearing about interesting experiences and cases without necessarily requiring evidence. Others are more focused on the evidentiary support that accompanies (or doesn’t accompany) a claim. While I can appreciate perceptions and experiences, I would probably consider myself more in the latter camp. And, I feel as though anyone who cares enough to be curious about the subject deserves to assess any information or evidence that an investigator claims exists.

Oh, I was speaking objectively in tone, no offense taken. What you say about my position on 'entitlement' is why I've seriously considered not sharing some experiences publicly because you're right that it will be read like a religious nut -- which I'm not, actually. My position isn't that there is an exclusive club that can experience certain things, it's more along the lines of when you haven't experienced it, it's naturally difficult to understand where the experiencer is coming from --- BUT I do think anyone can have such experiences.

 

[Ron Collins]

Lights floating around, humanoids in hoods and capes walking right past people, floating over fences, stealing basketballs. UFOs. Poltergeists. Cameras being broken and stolen, cables cut. Exploding equus ferus caballus. Guts everywhere. (Wow, that's one angry horse-hating alien.) These are all very dramatic assertions. But there isn't a shred of proof. Not a single spec. No trace, one might say.

Okay, so here I find a video on YouTube. Please bear with me as I make a couple of observations.

Mr. Phillips fumbles along and ends up on the story of Marley Woods somewhere in the middle. If you FF to around the 6:30 mark, you'll be just in time to hear him mention that mysterious and "most recognized" Hollywood dude that he mentioned in this week's PC interview, then he goes on to mention some other fellow who gets stamped as - as far as Phillips is concerned - "the smartest guy that I've ever known". Neither of these people want to disclose their identity but Phillips assures the viewers that "eventually we''ll be able to identify a lot of the people working on this project..."

I hope no one is holding their breath. (The video was posted on YouTube almost a year ago, although the conference might be much older than that)

He mentions that Marley Woods is indeed a fake name (calling it "bogus", interesting choice of words) and that there are 226 witnesses who are bankers, lawyers, farmers ranchers and that not one of them has gone public. (Are they in some kind of a cult or something? What if one of them decides to go rogue and call Peter Davenport?? Just askin')

At 7:07 or so he shows a slide of a "recreation" of one of the events at Marley Woods, but then doesn't explain a damned thing about it! Huh? So what on Earth is the point of bringing up that slide? It appears to show some lights coming down from a tree line. They're pretty dramatic looking, quite bright and in what one might call a sort of formation. The title of the slide (for some unknown reason) is "UFOs: Dramatic Changes in Trace Landing Events". He then blasts into some other slide from some other bizarre trace case report from 1954. Okay.

My point is, Phillips has a way of bringing things up - sometimes very, very dramatic and interesting things - and then kind of brushing over them with a sort of intellectual shrug and just drifting off into some other direction. His talking style requires that the listener digest the mystifying segues without any thought or question. I can't do that. I don't know. Maybe this is something similar to what Paul K. was saying about quantity over quality. Maybe it's just not as bad as I'm thinking it is and I should cut Mr. Phillips some slack.

If no photos, videos or any other "proof" of any of this goes online in a timely manner, one should be extremely disappointed in Phillips. He prides himself on physical evidence, with images and good data. But all we got here is chatter.

So we all wait... When Mr. Phillips comes out with something we can all really chew on, I'll be the first in line to pay to see it. Until then, I'll respectfully pass on listening to him in future.

Admittedly, not his best talk but par for the course given his love and comfort in public speaking. I think he has a problem know how detailed to get in a discussion. I have talked with him about the specifics of a case and he does have the ability to go very granular. But, at conferences and radio/podcast shows you only have a limited time and a lot to talk about. Some people are good at speaking and preparing a presentation. Friedman, Dolan, and even (albeit begrudgingly) Greer are good examples of speakers with good presentation skills and a genuine comfort at the podium. Ted just doesn't have either of these abilities.

 

[tyder001]

Just got back to this thread and wanted to give "kudos" to a couple of really good (imo) post. Or is that "posteses?"

Seriously, I think Pair of Cats said it the way I would have wanted to say it in answer to science and the paranormal. Ron Collins also gives a very intelligent and well thought out post. I don't always agree with Ron (although I'm partial to the Packers helmet) But he does temper his skepticism without the "religous atheist" approach of some. I am not a beleiver in u.f.o.'s but I am interested in discussing the possibilites. I have had enough expereince myself to know that materilism can't account for everything that I've seen. However, neither does religous dogma. Anyway, I was about to give up on this forum. It seems to have deteriorated into just a handful of posters saying the same old "Science is everything or u.f.o's are being covered up stuff." Number one is I've seen some scientist that are religous. I know a very good doctor that is a very devout Christian. I've seen some really good scientist that are agnostic (my personal logical approach)although I'm not agnostic. Well, I kind of call myself an Agnostic Christian Liberal but it gets complicated. Anyway, I don't like the same old circle jerk but there are times when I am pleasently suprised by the debate and civil discourse. So, thanks to both of the two afore mentioned posters for reminding me that not all on here are "raving atheist or true beleivers."

 

[trainedobserver]

If no photos, videos or any other "proof" of any of this goes online in a timely manner, one should be extremely disappointed in Phillips. He prides himself on physical evidence, with images and good data. But all we got here is chatter.

It would seem with all the time and effort put into "Marley Woods" more would have been released over the years. I'm suffering from "coming soon" fatigue.

 

[tyder001]

Lance, I think it is a rather hard to resist target. That's part of the problem. If I say "I've had experience where dreams and prayer and meditation have had a positive affect on my life." You can agree or disagree or think I'm right or wrong. It's (as much as it offends some folks) beyond any tools we have at this time to measure. We are either energy using matter or we are the just the product of matter. Although, I doubt it's that cut and dried.

However, when you say "There are U.f.o.'s and I have physical proof and they are nuts and bolts craft" Then the scientific tools we already possess should be able to "measure" and weigh the evidence. So far I have seen nothing to convince me we are being visited by aliens. I have seen things I can't explain but there could be military or other craft that I'm not familar with. I am very skeptical of the nuts and bolts u.f.o. explanation. I'm not an atheist and I have my own reasons for that. But, I am not a (imo) real gullible person who's looking for a guru or a space brother to save me either.

 

[Ron Collins]

I am also thinking about the hooded humanoid figure in robes who stole the basketball from the boy and was immediately shot by the mother from close range with a shotgun, despite making no threatening moves. Did that have the ring of truth for anyone else? Perhaps Marley Woods is just a tough neighborhood, but how did she know it wasn't a human being (in robes) playing a trick?

The more I think about the claims, the more I am sure that they are mostly bullshit: whether people are just lying to Phillips or what, I don't know.

So I understand the indignation when someone laughs at Ufology. No one likes to be ridiculed. But if this is one of the brightest lights in UFO research, then Ufology makes itself a rather hard to resist target.

Lance

You make a good point. I have lived through good and solid researchers that suddenly go nuts and start spewing all sorts of ridiculous nonsense. Clifford Stone was once a respectable researcher who used FOIA documents and a reasonable logic to his argument. hi book "UFO's are Real" still graces my shelf. Then he started talking about the alien base under Washington D.C. he once visited via an access tunnel and lift in the Pentagon.

As for Phillips, this case and his statements make this a 'fork in the road' moment for the credibility of Ted Phillips. We can all look at the evidence and see what he offers once available.

 

[trainedobserver]

I am also thinking about the hooded humanoid figure in robes who stole the basketball from the boy and was immediately shot by the mother from close range with a shotgun, despite making no threatening moves. Did that have the ring of truth for anyone else? Perhaps Marley Woods is just a tough neighborhood, but how did she know it wasn't a human being (in robes) playing a trick?

It does seem to be an extreme reaction to a minor infraction doesn't it? You would hope that maybe some details have been left out of the story. Maybe the creature sent out waves of supernatural fear and loathing or something like that indicating to the mother that deadly force was a necessity. Maybe it was the third basketball that week.

 

[tyder001]

Yeah, those B-balls get on your "last nerve!"

 

[Artyom]

I've flipped through 10 pages of this thread - pretty impressive! But my hope was to find the link to the new Ted's site, but unfortunately Gene is right about sites launch time delay - it's reality and I can tell from my own experience....
I really enjoyed the show and would really love to watch what Ted has to share with people.

PS. I was a bit confused by Paul's skepticism about Ted's work, but we all have the right for own point of view, no doubts about it.

 

[FletcherMunson]

Oh, I was speaking objectively in tone, no offense taken. What you say about my position on 'entitlement' is why I've seriously considered not sharing some experiences publicly because you're right that it will be read like a religious nut -- which I'm not, actually. My position isn't that there is an exclusive club that can experience certain things, it's more along the lines of when you haven't experienced it, it's naturally difficult to understand where the experiencer is coming from --- BUT I do think anyone can have such experiences.

Ah, I see. That makes much more sense, now. Thanks for clearing that up. It's amazing what you can learn if you just discuss a position, huh? It's funny (and frightening) how people can take something you say and then run with it in any number of directions--like I did with the borderline religion hypothesis or whoever posted previously about some people not being entitled to an investigator's information.

 

[jratcliff]

I haven't read this entire thread yet, so maybe this has already been brought up. It seems pretty amazing to me that Ted has physical biological evidence of a para-physical entity; i.e. the large white-haired creature. Has he submitted this to DNA analysis? This could be extremely valuable. Not just in an attempt to find out what kind of creature it is, but how the DNA differs from normal earth based creatures. How does it compare to dogs, bears, primates?

There is an enormous amount of information that could be gleaned by repeated analysis of this DNA by various researchers in different specialties.

John

 

[jratcliff]

Yeah, looking at the hairs under the microscope at home is not exactly DNA analysis. This is big news, biological physical evidence of a a para-physical creature presumably not of this earth. Unfortunately I am not a DNA researcher but I think plenty of DNA researchers would be fascinated to study this material.

John

 

[jratcliff]

It's "big news" that's happened many times in the Bigfoot world. Always with non-crypto results.

Lance

What do you mean by 'non-crypto' results? You mean they were positively identified as being of a known animal? I'll do some research online for 'bigfoot DNA analysis' and see what's out there.

Thanks,

John

 

[justcurious]

It's "big news" that's happened many times in the Bigfoot world. Always with non-crypto results.

Lance

Or the crypto-terrestrials wear golden-retriever fur coats.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

Just got back to this thread and wanted to give "kudos" to a couple of really good (imo) post. Or is that "posteses?"

Seriously, I think Pair of Cats said it the way I would have wanted to say it in answer to science and the paranormal. Ron Collins also gives a very intelligent and well thought out post. I don't always agree with Ron (although I'm partial to the Packers helmet) But he does temper his skepticism without the "religous atheist" approach of some. I am not a beleiver in u.f.o.'s but I am interested in discussing the possibilites. I have had enough expereince myself to know that materilism can't account for everything that I've seen. However, neither does religous dogma. Anyway, I was about to give up on this forum. It seems to have deteriorated into just a handful of posters saying the same old "Science is everything or u.f.o's are being covered up stuff." Number one is I've seen some scientist that are religous. I know a very good doctor that is a very devout Christian. I've seen some really good scientist that are agnostic (my personal logical approach)although I'm not agnostic. Well, I kind of call myself an Agnostic Christian Liberal but it gets complicated. Anyway, I don't like the same old circle jerk but there are times when I am pleasently suprised by the debate and civil discourse. So, thanks to both of the two afore mentioned posters for reminding me that not all on here are "raving atheist or true beleivers."

I find it so funny that you always bring in atheism, like it's something that's bad. I know that science doesn't have the answers to everything, but it works quite well when one is trying to figure out how the world works. It isn't always right, but it's brought us a lot of what we have today.

 

[Ron Collins]

Ted did detail his scientific methodology:

He got some hair from his own dog and from other pets that he could get his hands on. He compared these hairs to the white manbearpig hair and there was no match!

Using this same methodology, I believe my kids may also be cryptos (something I have often suspected).

Lance

It would be useful for a seasoned field investigator to first compare the hair to known types before going through the expense of having it properly and professionally analyzed. In the past he has followed a very scripted and precise evidence gathering methodology. He has always sought the help of scientists to analyze the samples collected and has been pretty good on separating it all from the 'this is proof of alien origin' stuff. Lets not trash the guys evidence without seeing and evaluating it first.

As for the Hair analysis the Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy would be a great place to start the analytic process. I am sure they would help out.
Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy

They have a very large hair sample database.

For the amateur interested, here are a couple more sites. Admittedly they are geared towards BF research but still they have info.

Hair/Fiber Identification Galleries

IAMA

 

[tyder001]

Hey, I am only referring to what he said himself.
The fact that it sounds the way it sounds isn't my doing.
And we both know how it sounds, yeah?

Just a short time until we get that picture and all my reservations about the paranormal are destroyed.

Lance

I can hardly wait! Also, as soon as that happens I'm gonna start a James Randi fan club and erase all my old Art Bell Coast To Coast Am MP3 recordings. Either that or I'm gonna put on my tin foil hat and climb the highest mountain in North Alabama or Georgia and wait on the Space Brothers to beam me up!

---------- Post added at 09:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:51 PM ----------

I can hardly wait! Also, as soon as that happens I'm gonna start a James Randi fan club and erase all my old Art Bell Coast To Coast Am MP3 recordings. Either that or I'm gonna put on my tin foil hat and climb the highest mountain in North Alabama or Georgia and wait on the Space Brothers to beam me up!

For you Angel:

 

[trainedobserver]

Just a short time until we get that picture and all my reservations about the paranormal are destroyed.

I hope you are preparing yourself for a total revamp of your world-view, religious leanings, and choice of intoxicants. I know I am.

 

[Ron Collins]

Hey, I am only referring to what he said himself.
The fact that it sounds the way it sounds isn't my doing.
And we both know how it sounds, yeah?

Just a short time until we get that picture and all my reservations about the paranormal are destroyed.

Lance

Now in the interests of honesty, you know that no matter what the picture shows it is not going to have that affect on you.