Astronomers Duped On UFOs?

[Karl12]

• "I think Ufologists live in their own world and they believe that everybody knows about this panel - the problem is the vast majority of the populace don't."

Researcher Paul Kimball on the CIA Robertson Panel 'disseminating the gospel'.

Apparently lots of astronomers witness UFOs but back in the 1950's the CIA set up a 'disinformation campaign' which specifically targeted astronomers into believing the UFO subject was nonsense.

The disinformation campaign was hatched out of 'The Robertson Panel' and there are some relevant statements here about that CIA operation.

More info below and suppose if I were an astronomer (amateur or otherwise) then I'd be feeling pretty 'duped'.








From 3:25

• "They were coming up with the conclusion that 'we should debunk the UFO phenomenon' (in essence they should lie about it) and 'here's how we are going to do it'.

One of the key ways this panel commissioned by the CIA pointed as a way of doing this (they called it 'disseminating their gospel') were amateur astronomers.

When you put that in context you say it makes sense that Dr Menzel might be involved in the effort to cover things up because as the nation's leading astronomer who better to convince amateur astronomers that the whole UFO thing is bunk?

Probably no surprise when it came out years later that astronomer Dr. Donald Howard Menzel who was chief debunker in all these shenanigans was in fact secretly working for the NSA and CIA.

Also, considering Paul Kimball's comments there's another video below in which Stanton Friedman describes a 2013 'debunking' article in 'Astronomy Magazine' so it looks like the disinfo campaign is still.active and the 'gospel' is still being 'disseminated'.

• Stanton also brings up the findings of the largest ever official, scientific UFO study which is still being curiously (and willfully) ignored by pseudoskeptics.








From 1:20

• "There's an article in the current issue of astronomy magazine 'The Science Behind UFOs' which mentions none of the large scale scientific studies, mentions none of the dozen PhD theses that have been done about UFOs, mentions nothing about the physical trace cases, the radar visual sightings, the abduction cases - this is the 'science behind UFOs?"

CSICOP/CSI:


Phillip Klass was probably the most infamous pseudoskeptic of the lot so probably no coincidence that the author of that 2013 article (Phillip Plait) was awarded the 'Philip J. Klass Award' in the same year (nor that Plait is a fellow of the notorious debunking cult CSICOP co-founded by Klass).

A bit convoluted but apparently Dr. Menzel was 'mentor' to Klass who also used to boast about citing both the CIA/NSA's Bobby Ray Inman and the CIA/DIA's Daniel O. Graham as references (not bad for an 'electrical engineer').

Here's a good article for those interested:




CSICOP, Now CSI:CSI’s “Scientific” Analysis of UFOs:Thanks, but No Thanks!

[Karl12]

Luckily not all astronomers have fallen for the BS as Bluebook's Dr Hynek (Former Chairman of the Astronomy Department at Northwestern University) states below that quite a large number of astronomers believe the UFO subject is worthy of scientific study and have had unexplained sightings of their own.

There's also some relevant statements by astronomer Dr. Bernard Haisch (Director for the California Institute for Physics and Astrophysics) and reckon the second one just about sums things up.









See 0:40










Quotes:

• "I have learned quite a bit about the UFO phenomenon over the years, certainly more than I had bargained for, and have met many of the leading figures, some credible, some deluded. When Professor Peter Sturrock, a prominent Stanford University plasma physicist, did a survey of the membership of the American Astronomical Society in the 1970s, he made an interesting finding: astronomers who spent time reading up on the UFO phenomenon developed more interest in it. If there were nothing to it, you would expect the opposite: lack of credible evidence would cause interest to wane. And the fact of the matter is, there does exist a vast amount of high quality, albeit enigmatic, data.

Dr. Bernard Haisch - Director for the California Institute for Physics and Astrophysics.








• "I propose that true skepticism is called for today: neither the gullible acceptance of true belief nor the closed-minded rejection of the scoffer masquerading as the skeptic. One should be skeptical of both the believers and the scoffers. The negative claims of pseudo-skeptics who offer facile explanations must themselves be subject to criticism.

If a competent witness reports having seen something tens of degrees of arc in size (as happens) and the scoffer, who of course was not there, offers Venus or a high altitude weather balloon as an explanation, the requirement of extraordinary proof for an extraordinary claim falls on the proffered negative claim as well.

That kind of approach is also pseudo-science. Moreover just being a scientist confers neither necessary expertise nor sufficient knowledge. Any scientist who has not read a few serious books and articles presenting actual UFO evidence should out of intellectual honesty refrain from making scientific pronouncements. To look at the evidence and go away unconvinced is one thing. To not look at the evidence and be convinced against it nonetheless is another. That is not science. Do your homework."

Dr. Bernard Haisch - Director for the California Institute for Physics and Astrophysics.


Scientists UFO/OVNI/UAP Statements.

Links:


• The Amateur Astronomer And The UFO Phenomenon - CUFOS Archive (PDF File)

• Sturrock Report On American Astronomical Society Concerning The UFO Problem (PDF File

• Astronomers And UFOs - Henry Cordova. CUFOS Archives (PDF File)

[Karl12]

Pretty awesome video showcasing the CIA's (and Dr Menzel's) malicious propaganda antics and how the US Gov has bullshitted the public over UFOs.

The CIA's incredibly cosy relationship with CBS and the New York Times is also exposed (with relevant examples).

[AlienSun]

Luckily not all astronomers have fallen for the BS as Bluebook's Dr Hynek (Former Chairman of the Astronomy Department at Northwestern University) states below that quite a large number of astronomers believe the UFO subject is worthy of scientific study and have had unexplained sightings of their own.

There's also some relevant statements by astronomer Dr. Bernard Haisch (Director for the California Institute for Physics and Astrophysics) and reckon the second one just about sums things up.









See 0:40

[Video: https://youtu.be/3h7KD_Fdn88]








Quotes:









Links:


• The Amateur Astronomer And The UFO Phenomenon - CUFOS Archive (PDF File)

• Sturrock Report On American Astronomical Society Concerning The UFO Problem (PDF File

• Astronomers And UFOs - Henry Cordova. CUFOS Archives (PDF File)

[pianopraze]

I think it interesting, and very telling, that the big government Bluebook debunker Dr Hynek became a very firm believer by the end of his life.

[AlienSun]

I take issue with the general theme of this thread that seems to give astronomers an excuse for not being aware that strange things in our skies were exactly what they appeared to be.  Given the times--anytime along the way as the "flying saucers" become noteworthy, they could have started a drum-beat toward recognizing the challenge that the observations and hard data tended to indicate.  Obviously, their positions made them extremely vulnerable, if not by direct control, by governmental control by funding, then by a host of other angles problematic to simple common reasoning.
 
Things have not changed.  A blanket silence was and is still the order of the day as the battle to control the nexus of the UFO situation is on tighter and more expansive than it ever was.  The problem today is a shifting of knowledge and awareness as intricate details of human existence are coming to be within focus from other fields.    Our very beginning as a species is being questioned, while on the other hand we have today's largely fanned, senseless outside studies, reports or discussions, from the public side and even from the (joke) governmental side of the matter as the arguments continue over the reality of ETs here or not.
 
Everybody of any value to science or government knew.  The more they knew, the more they had to control.  And the more they had to cover and deny.  Such as it is....

[Essan]

Most astronomers are not in the USA

Most astronomers are amateurs

[UltraBudgie]

...The problem today is a shifting of knowledge and awareness as intricate details of human existence are coming to be within focus from other fields.    Our very beginning as a species is being questioned....

Thread please!

[AlienSun]

I take issue with the general theme of this thread that seems to give astronomers an excuse for not being aware that strange things in our skies were exactly what they appeared to be.  Given the times--anytime along the way as the "flying saucers" become noteworthy, they could have started a drum-beat toward recognizing the challenge that the observations and hard data tended to indicate.  Obviously, their positions made them extremely vulnerable, if not by direct control, by governmental control by funding, then by a host of other angles problematic to simple common reasoning.
 
Things have not changed.  A blanket silence was and is still the order of the day as the battle to control the nexus of the UFO situation is on tighter and more expansive than it ever was.  The problem today is a shifting of knowledge and awareness as intricate details of human existence are coming to be within focus from other fields.    Our very beginning as a species is being questioned, while on the other hand we have today's largely fanned, senseless outside studies, reports or discussions, from the public side and even from the (joke) governmental side of the matter as the arguments continue over the reality of ETs here or not.
 
Everybody of any value to science or government knew.  The more they knew, the more they had to control.  And the more they had to cover and deny.  Such as it is....

I decided to augment my reply above with an anecdote that rounds out this thread.
I was given an old, brass telescope with a 3.5in. Lens.  I found a buyer on the internet.  He represented a small group of mostly retired astronomers from my old school that were rebuilding the school's observatory from back around the turn of 1900.  It seemed like a nice deal on both sides.  They said they didn't have much funds at that point and offered me $250 for the unit.  We exchanged a couple of letters and I said that I would accept the offer with a stipulation.  The following paragraph is a quote from my letter.

"I would add one stipulation to our potential sale which is rather benign but will be weird from your perspective.  That would be that you share with the members of your group (9) an article I prepared several years ago about Phobos, the inner satellite of Mars done, shall we say, in the manner of Tom Van Flandern.  The article is an original work not much suited for typical outlets and too lengthy for the internet."

I never heard another word from them.  I assume he had passed my message along and all chose to refuse my offer.  Maybe they found a better deal? 

(They knew. What they refused to accept was Viking data that proved that Phobos had been manipulated into its precise orbit by explosive charges in the Hall crater, and that the "grooves" are just that, created by the movement of loose materials on the surface.  I have the NASA CDs that prove that assertion.  But I doubt that the dedicated NASA software is still available online as it once was, and also doubt the availability of the full sets of the images from NASA on the internet.)