Reality Uncovered Network

This is a continuation of James Carlson’s fascinating essay exploring the many and varied ramifications of the 2011 F.E. Warren AFB UFO Hoax. In Part One, James guided us through the blurred reality of the Robert Hastings “Reuters” Press Release, along with a thorough explanation of the F.E. Warren AFB hoax and the methods used by Hastings in order to further his agenda. In Part Two, James explained the real reasons behind the use of anonymous sources and concludes by examining the true motives of those behind the hoaxes.

Part Three continues below with another hard-hitting and refreshingly honest view from James Carlson.

I am currently exploring the numerous works of a select few UFO authors and investigators widely connected to the events they’ve attempted to manufacture and chronicle; they call themselves UFOlogists, so I shall too.  I believe the evidence is plentiful enough to establish their membership in an informal coalition, a loose cabal of similar minded individuals who have shown themselves more than willing to lie, to dissemble, to disable context in order to neglect content, to knowingly reach unsubstantiated conclusions on the basis of faulty information, to remain silent in regard to the known lies and errors in fact committed by other members of the coalition, and to express public support for the unsubstantiated conclusions of these same individuals in order to establish a united front against criticism and to forge a false aura of infallibility surrounding their enterprises and the value of their claims.  These individuals are united by their singular motivation for the deceit they have practiced:  they want to convince the world at large that USAF and DoD officials were knowingly lying when they insisted for years that UFOs as defined by J. Allen Hynek do not exist and are therefore not a threat to the security of the United States of America.  It’s that simple.

Their habits are notable to anyone paying attention to what they do and having the will to examine the same witnesses and evidence that they have made the subject of their claims.  Primarily, they convince those willing to be convinced by showing a united front, giving the false appearance of infallibility by assuming a point of view with vested opinions held by numerous “scholars” and “scientists” and “journalists” and “military witnesses” and “historians” from all over the world, supposedly “independent” minds reaching a natural accord on the basis of well-studied facts and consistent claims.

In actuality, this showboating is simply a pathetic lie that results from their collaborative failure to examine with any honesty the assertions and claims made by those who hold opinions of public regard for their own work and claims.  In other words, they refuse to criticize or otherwise examine the impact of bad research, false justifications, poorly established conclusions and blatant lies whenever such poorly integrated tales and inundations of wasted hours at a word processor support the general tone and structure of their own works and/or beliefs.  By resorting to such tepid strategies, they replace the common standards of peer review with worthless head nodding like nodding dogs on a particularly bumpy road [thanks to Stephen Broadbent for the markedly visual phrase].

Many examples of this behavior and other details of these somewhat erratic attempts to manufacture history will be discussed over the next few weeks in a series of articles divulging the machinations of the like-minded members of this cabal as the clearest method to reveal and condemn their methods.  They are legion, and that fact necessitates a more structured approach to the claims they’ve made.  It insists that relationships be explored and resonant claims appealing more to a unified vision than to actual events be dissected in order to discover the few facts they’ve either tried to hide because they reveal the dishonest core of their claims, or carelessly addressed without knowing the ultimate cost such claims would eventually weigh against their integrity and the worth of their claims.

One example of this behavior, however, will be presented now, because I want to define this aspect of their preferred methodology due to the reliance on its use being so common within the group that it can be measured and calculated upon their own aggressive allegations.  Basically, the act is universal and simple:  when one member reacts to criticism of his own personal claims by changing specific details of his story, other members of this united coalition act as if there were no changes made whatsoever.  They simply agree with whatever the current story on the record is.  The practice is, as I’ve said, common, and for that reason is easily established, and its purpose easily revealed.

For example, when Robert Jamison claimed that UFOs were reported over Malmstrom AFB in correlation with his claims in regard to Oscar Flight missile failures alleged by Robert Salas, members of the cabal were notable and united in their insistence that reports of UFOs over Malmstrom AFB supported Jamison’s claims, and thereby Salas’.  This was accepted as evidence of mutual claims asserted, and was discussed as acceptable evidence of an actual event by other members of the group, such as Richard M. Dolan, author of “A.D. After Disclosure: The People’s Guide to Life After Contact”.  Dolan, in fact, found the measure of worth so valuable, that he later insisted the evidence for Salas’ Oscar Flight claims surpassed even those Salas has addressed for an Echo Flight incident, even though there has never been presented any documented evidence or reasonable assessment of any such event having ever occurred at Oscar Flight.  The circular perambulations these people rely on to make such a weak point could carve tornadoes into the sun.

Unfortunately for those claims, Oscar Flight is at least a hundred miles away from the UFOs reported at Malmstrom AFB, which couldn’t possibly be used to reflect any related claims whatsoever.  When this became public knowledge as a result of critical assessments, Robert Jamison changed his story (not for the first time nor the last) and announced that UFOs were reported over Lewistown in correlation with his claims in regard to the same Oscar Flight missile failures.  He dutifully drafted a new affidavit for Robert Hastings to use and the event was thereby set in stone, another worthless claim for the insensible few who weren’t paying attention to first principles.  Following this, members of the cabal acted as if there was no change at all in his story, and simply insisted that the UFO reports over Lewistown had confirmed Jamison’s claims.

(more…)