Confirmation & Update on Secret United Nations Meeting

General UFO stories

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

Confirmation & Update on Secret United Nations Meeting

Postby ScaRZ » Fri Feb 22, 2008 9:07 pm

----- Original Message ----
From: Shawn and Clay <xxx@yahoo.com>
To: drsalla@exopolitics.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 9:21:17 AM
Subject: Follow up of source's UFO meeting at the UN

Dear Michael,

This email is a follow up of the UN meeting which took place Tuesday 12, 2008 at 8;00AM.
We met our source 7:00PM, Monday, February 18, 2008. Our source stated the following:

1) The meeting went well; however, our source left with a degree of frustration.

2) The meeting covered various topics. The issue of recent UFO sightings was one of many
topics discussed.

3) Security around the meeting was intense.

4) Everyone was searched. Pens, pins, key chain items were collected and not allowed
in the meeting room. There were multiple security checkpoints. UN security cards
were confiscated upon entering the room.

5) 50 to 60 people attended. Everyone was in civilian dress, except one Russian.

6) Other countries may have had military there, but they came under their respective civilian
titles.

7) UFO topic was addressed. The Russians are very paranoid about the west. Putin
is not very trusting. This frustrated our source greatly. Our source believes the
Russians will eventually come around; "They always come back to the table."
This mistrust appears to be an ongoing issue between East & West.

8] The religious implications of contact came up during the meeting. It turned into a
20 minute debate. Our source had to reel it in and refocus the meeting. It seems that
the Indians are very difficult to deal with on this issue of the religious implications
regarding contact. Population is a major factor in how nation-states deal with a new
paradigm. The Indian's world view has led to an unsustainable food, energy and water
demand. Source stated that the world must gets its population and resource use
under control. ET will help, but we must show them that we intend to live within our
constraints. If we don't show some semblance of intent, they simply will not help.

9) Source said the 2013 date of official contact is wrong. That is the date when things heat
up. The real date of contact is 2017. It is on this date when very large craft will appear
above cities and sit. There will be NO use of force; they will just sit there. Source
stated the "Independence Day" film was close, but their ships are not that big and,
again, no use of force will occur. Our source cannot reveal his source for the 2017
date. His source is very high up in the government/military/intelligence structure.

10) Source stated that it is our choice how we embrace this contact.

11) The ET's who will arrive on 2017 are referred to as "The Controllers." They are a
"galactic federation" type group; however, "galactic federation" is not the real
name for their group--it is hypothetical name used as a reference.

12) The controllers have a keen sense of freedom and free will. They will not intervene
and help humanity if humanity does not show them we want their help. If some
entropic event happens (nuclear war), the controllers will not make contact. "This
is something they will not tolerate," our source stated.

13) The controllers will not give us technology to expand our ability to feed ourselves
if we do not recognize the necessity to stabilize our population growth. They don't
want our planet's population to double because of a technological innovation seeded
by them. Our source used India as an example, " India has over 1 billion people. It
is clearly a country out of balance in terms of its population size."

14) A contentious moment in the meeting had to do with the religious implications of
contact. It is this issue which is of most concern. Our source stated that the more
secular societies will adjust more easily to contact than the fundamentalist. He stated,
" The Roman Catholic countries will not have a rough time, except for the population
problem; the Roman Catholics already have three Gods in one, so accepting others
is not that much of a stretch. The dividing point is going to be the containment of
population. The Protestant countries will deal fairly easily with contact. So will
countries with indigenous religions connected to nature. The Muslim, Hindu, and
fundamentalist Christian religions will have the most difficult time, possibly even the
elimination of said religions; we can expect mass suicides, social unrest and
upheaval. The ETs will help with re-programming and the concept of an inclusive
galactic order. However, society will have to step up to the plate to assist - one on
one - those people who have shattered belief systems The Chinese will have no
problem because of the Buddhist and Taoist influences."


Clay and Shawn Pickering

http://exopolitics.org/Exo-Comment-66.htm
Image
User avatar
ScaRZ
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 695
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 1:49 pm
Location: U.S.A.


Postby ScaRZ » Fri Feb 22, 2008 9:08 pm

The way that whole thing reads,I wonder if his source is the same source of good Ole Serpo? :P
Image
User avatar
ScaRZ
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 695
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 1:49 pm
Location: U.S.A.

Re: Confirmation & Update on Secret United Nations Meeti

Postby ryguy » Fri Feb 22, 2008 10:00 pm

ScaRZ wrote:He stated,
" The Roman Catholic countries will not have a rough time, except for the population problem; the Roman Catholics already have three Gods in one, so accepting others is not that much of a stretch. The dividing point is going to be the containment of population. The Protestant countries will deal fairly easily with contact. So will countries with indigenous religions connected to nature. The Muslim, Hindu, and fundamentalist Christian religions will have the most difficult time, possibly even the elimination of said religions; we can expect mass suicides, social unrest and upheaval. The ETs will help with re-programming and the concept of an inclusive galactic order. However, society will have to step up to the plate to assist - one on one - those people who have shattered belief systems The Chinese will have no problem because of the Buddhist and Taoist influences."


These "aliens" are going to be in for one heck of a surprise... lol...

The Chinese will have no problem because of the Buddhist and Taoist influences."


Yes...those who practice "Min Zin" well might, in fact, reach that "enlightened state" where they might even become considered a "Wizard-of-Zin".

---

"For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. "
Ephesians 6:12

***

"Stand now with your enchantments And the multitude of your sorceries, In which you have labored from your youth-Perhaps you will be able to profit, Perhaps you will prevail.

You are wearied in the multitude of your counsels; Let now the astrologers, the stargazers, And the monthly prognosticators Stand up and save you From what shall come upon you."
Isaiah 47:12-15

***

Thus says the Lord: "Do not learn the way of the Gentiles; Do not be dismayed at the signs of heaven, For the Gentiles are dismayed at them.
Jeremiah 10:2

***

"And take heed, lest you lift your eyes to heaven, and when you see the sun, the moon, and the stars, all the host of heaven, you feel driven to worship them and serve them, which the Lord your God has given to all the peoples under the whole heaven as a heritage."
Deuteronomy 4:19


***

oops...this isn't the spirituality forum...lol (or is it?)

:)

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Postby Access Denied » Sun Mar 09, 2008 4:56 pm

Mark Pilkington has posted an interesting take on the alleged UN meeting(s) here…

Dissecting UN UFO rumours
http://www.strangeattractor.co.uk/further/?p=778

Check it out, it’s a good read. I was particularly impressed by Mark’s historical references and Jacques Vallee’s deconstruction of this all too familiar pattern of “disclosure”…

Jacques Vallee wrote:It seems to me this story is falling apart but the structure is very interesting — along the lines of a psywar rumor process:

1. You make up a really intriguing story that seems very legitimate by including respected names: UN, French Ambassador, DSK etc. and precise dates.

2. You leave it full of holes so that people will come up with questions, thus revealing who is interested and why.

3. You imply great secrecy, thus dangling new bits of mystery.

4. You slowly retract the story (since a lot of it was made up in the first place out of pure imagination) but you point to a legitimate-looking person (Lorant) who was there.

5. The legitimate-looking person (whose credentials don’t check out) “reveals” more details but does not confirm the earlier story, thus gaining additional credibility and “dangling” new information.

6. Legitimate journalists reinforce the apparent story by trying to follow this new trail.

7. You throw in new intriguing names like Ted Kennedy and John McCain through new anonymous sources “who could be in danger if they revealed their names…” thus seducing more recognizable researchers into revealing their interest…

8. You use the Internet to circulate the whole mess to an increasing circle of people, hoping to create a mass effect.

9. At that point, any official denial of the story (or part of it) sounds like a cover-up or skeptical reaction, enabling you to claim that you are the victim of disinformation, etc. etc.

All very clever… It is much easier to program human beings than to program computers!

Sad but true. Well done guys!

[I like Mark’s disclaimer at the end too]
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]

Postby Shawnna » Sun Mar 09, 2008 9:24 pm

Otherwise known as a big circle jerk.


:bgovrhd:


And yep - humans are much easier to program - just ask Sony Online Entertainment!


:P


{Mod Edit: removed quote of entire previous post]
"The only thing we found that makes the emptiness bearable is................... each other."

From the movie "Contact"

Shawnna's Reality
User avatar
Shawnna
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1243
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:30 pm

Postby ScaRZ » Sun Mar 09, 2008 10:55 pm

Thanks for the link AD,very good read indeed.
Image
User avatar
ScaRZ
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 695
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 1:49 pm
Location: U.S.A.

Vallee

Postby MikeJamieson » Mon Mar 10, 2008 5:43 pm

Though he's obviously busy in other arenas, thank god Vallee
didn't drop off the face of the earth (when it comes to addressing
manifestations of "silly season" in the UFO world).
MikeJamieson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:53 pm
Location: Ukiah, CA

Re: Vallee

Postby ryguy » Mon Mar 10, 2008 11:07 pm

MikeJamieson wrote:Though he's obviously busy in other arenas, thank god Vallee
didn't drop off the face of the earth (when it comes to addressing
manifestations of "silly season" in the UFO world).


Yeah...he issued a statement some time ago stating that he had "left" this field (UFOlogy) for good.

It's like the line from the Godfather:

"Everytime I try to get out, they keep pulling me back in..."

Poor Jacques...we *feel* your pain. ;)

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Postby ScaRZ » Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:00 pm

From: ted roe
To: Victor Martinez
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 6:21 AM
Subject: Re: UFO Community: UN Denies meetings took place...have we beensuckered?!


Victor,

I do not have the ability to reply to everyone on this list but you may forward this if it is helpful.

I became involved with this discussion on a private list and when I replied to a question regarding my opinion about Michael Salla's crediblity, that response was unscrupulously forwarded to Mr. Salla. Even though it was a private conversation Mr. Salla forced his way into the conversation and accused me of character assassination, sloppy research, etc... I warned him that spreading hearsay first without doing research to verify his claims was not the way to build credibility and his response fell far short of his claims of being an expert at conflict resolution.

Neither myself nor NARCAP have any opinion about aliens or disclosures or UN meetings regarding UFOs though we do have some opinions about making unfounded commentary and the effects of wild claims on the credibility of those who are diligently engaged in careful research.

It is interesting how the story has morphed from Salla's original claim that a disclosure is imminent and an overt alien presence is anticipated in 2013 or 2017 to a claim by Msr Gilles Lorant whose claims are eerily reminiscent of Dr. Vallee's presentation to the UN in 1978 - a public presentation....

It is in the interest of reminding everyone how important it is to keep beliefs in check and follow the rules that are understood by science and journalists when it comes to making claims that I am participating in this discussion at all.

I contacted Dr. Vallee regarding this UN meeting and Msr Gilles Lorant's claims and have provided an introduction and his responses below.

While I will engage responses to this list, I am not able to reply to the list in its entirety as Yahoo does not have a "reply all" capability and I use this email for work that does not involve NARCAP.

Ted Roe
Executive Director
NARCAP

* * *

Hello,

NARCAP EAC member Dr. Jacques Vallee has extensive experience with the UFO matter both inside and outside of government including the United Nations. So I contacted him regarding Michael Salla's claim of a "Secret UN meeting" regarding UFOS that allegedly took place in February of 2008. I asked Dr. Vallee specifically if he knew anything about Gilles Lorant and if he could shed any light on this story.

His comments are below.

To put it simply, Msr. Gilles Lorant is not what Michael Salla claims that he is.

So now we are left with determining the true roots of this story. Michael Salla claims that it arose from the Pickering brothers so the question arises regarding where they acquired it and the veracity of their source.

I contend, and I am sure that many experienced researchers will agree, that such materials need to be thoroughly verified before they are placed in the public domain.

We have watched this story shift from claims of impending "disclosure" and an overt alien presence in 2013 or 2017 to a description that seemed eerily reminicent of Dr. Vallee's own presentation to the United Nations in 1978. While the story
has shifted several times, Michael Salla has yet to retract his various claims.

Hopefully the information below will enlighten Michael Salla and others who may be taking this story to heart and he will make a public retraction of this story, cite the fraudulent claims of Gilles Lorant and take steps to protect his credibility.

This type of situation is unfortunate and underscores the need for caution and for verification of information before publishing it. Credibility is everything in this field and it is very, very easy to damage one's own credibility beyond repair.

Ted Roe



From NARCAP EAC member Dr. Jacques Vallee:
Dear Ted:

My friends in France can find no trace of Lorant at CNRS. He now claims he was an "auditor" at IHEDN but is now beyond the age limit.

You'll notice that the story speaks of "the Secret UN Meeting" even though it appears to have been a routine mid-level gathering (non-secret) to prepare an administrative conference.
The manipulation is becoming obvious. My advice is to stay away from it.

It seems to me this story is falling apart but the structure is very interesting -- along the lines of a psywar rumor process or what is known around the Internet as a "meme war":

1. You make up a really intriguing story that seems very legitimate by including respected names: UN, French Ambassador, DSK etc. and precise dates.

2. You leave it full of holes so that people will come up with questions, thus revealing who is interested and why.

3. You imply great secrecy, thus dangling new bits of mystery.

4. You slowly retract the story (since a lot of it was made up in the first place out of pure imagination) but you point to a legitimate-looking person (Lorant) who was there.

5. The legitimate-looking person (whose credentials don't check out) "reveals" more details but does not confirm the earlier story, thus gaining additional credibility and "dangling" new information.

6. Legitimate journalists reinforce the apparent story by trying to follow this new trail.

7. You throw in new intriguing names like Ted Kennedy and John McCain through new anonymous sources "who could be in danger if they revealed their names..." thus seducing more recognizable researchers into revealing their interest...

8. You use the Internet to circulate the whole mess to an increasing circle of people, hoping to create a mass effect.

9. At that point, any official denial of the story (or part of it) sounds like a cover-up or skeptical reaction, enabling you to claim that you are the victim of disinformation, etc. etc.

All very clever.
Feel free to circulate my analysis. I'd like to know
what other people think of this.

Jacques Vallee




Ted:

Oddly enough, some of the arguments of the alleged UN report
are similar (although exaggerated) to the testimony I presented
quite officially before the political committee of the UN in 1978,
along with Dr. Hynek, Claude Poher, Gordon Cooper, Stanton
Friedman and a few others in attendance. The meeting was non-secret
(it was in fact open to the public and press) and widely reprinted.
Therefore I don't even grasp what Messrs. Salla, Lorant etc. are
claiming in terms of new information, or why there would be such
a pretense of great urgency and secrecy.

Last minute information: Gilles Lorant has been forced to resign
from the FEA in France and has confessed that he was not and had never
been associated with the IHEDN, which told him in no uncertain terms
he would be brought into Court (such false claims and misrepresentation
expose you to 100,000 euro fines, plus time in jail in France) unless
he made it clear he had no such status.

So the whole thing has collapsed.

Jacques Vallee




From: Exopolitics
To: Victor Martinez
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 9:41:18 AM
Subject: Re: OPEN Letter to the UFO Community on the Alleged UFO-UN NON "Meeting!"


Dear Victor, I have read the letters from Ted Roe and Dr Jacques Vallee concerning the information I have disseminated concerning a series of secret meetings that occurred at the UN that discussed UFO/extraterrestrial issues. I will respond to the claims in their respective letters in the order to which I have received them. Could you please forward my replies to the same list where the two letters were sent.

Ted Roe has in the past grossly misrepresented what I have said, and what follows is no exception of his sloppiness when it comes to critiquing the work of others. Firstly he claims:


It is interesting how the story has morphed from Salla's original claim that a disclosure is imminent and an overt alien presence is anticipated in 2013 or 2017 to a claim by Msr Gilles Lorant whose claims are eerily reminiscent of Dr. Vallee's presentation to the UN in 1978 - a public presentation....


Roe's statement that the story has morphed from my "original claim that a disclosure is imminent" is incorrect on two counts. First, my original February 13 article never referred to UFO/extraterrestrial disclosure as imminent in any way. The reader may confirm that here: http://www.ufodigest.com/news/0208/unmeeting.html . The year 2013 was mentioned and was in the next article updated to 2017. I would disagree that the dates 2013/2017 in any way equate to imminent disclosure and shows how sloppy Roe is when it comes to accurately describing what I have said.

Second, it is clear from my initial and subsequent communications on the secret UN UFO meetings that these are not my claims. Instead, I began by relaying information from an anonymous 'Source A' who is currently working at the State Department and claims to have attended a Feb 12 meeting concerning UFOs/extraterrestrial life. The individual is currently assigned to the State Department as a military liaison, and his military credentials have been independently verified by Robert Morningstar. That means three individuals, Clay and Shawn Pickering and Robert Morningstar can vouch for Source A's credentials whom they have personally met, and whose credentials they personally checked. So we have a military liaison currently assigned to the State Department disclosing sensitive information about a Feb 12 UN meeting that he attended. That is significant news, especially since a second source in the form of Gilles Lorant has also come forward to confirm that such meetings took place, and attended some of them on Feb 13 and 14. Roe's effort to depict this unfolding UN UFO story as emanating from my "original claims" is factually incorrect.

Finally, if Roe aspires to write using accepted scholarly standards, then the convention is that if one uses titles in an article, then be consistent, don't refer to Dr Vallee, Msr Gilles Lorant and Salla in the same sentence. I have a Ph.D. in government which you and others can confirm here (http://exopolitics.org/Salla-PhD.pdf ). That entitles me to having the title 'Dr' included when titles are used for others in public letters and articles. So I recommend to Roe that if he uses titles in communications where he signs off as Executive Director of an organization, NARCAP, then don't use titles selectively on the basis of personal likes/dislikes.

Given that verifiable professional qualifications are discussed at length in regard to the sources, Roe's exclusion of titles illustrating professional qualifications when it suits his argument is disengenous and unprofessional. It's very bad form for an executive officer of an organization, NARCAP, that purports to provide objective information on the UFO issue, to be signing off on an Open Letter that convey his personal opinions, and not clearly indicating that these are his opinions only, and not that of the organization he represents. Has the President of NARCAP and its Board of Directors been made aware that its executive officer is grossly mispresenting my own research on the UN UFO issue, and attaching the status of their organization to such misrepresentations which have nothing to do with NARCAP's primary mission?

With regard to Jacques Vallee, I do appreciate his reference to a possible 'meme war'. As a social scientist, I am open to exploring all possible explanations to the information that has been released. However, I would not be presumptive enough at this stage to conclude that a 'meme war' exists. I am certainly wary of Source A's tendency to make unverifiable contentious statements together with what appears to be genuine information, i.e., high level meetings at the UN on UFO's. I have referred to this in my second article on these issues: http://www.ufodigest.com/news/0208/un-confirmation.html so I do not at all discount the meme war Vallee mentions.

As for Lorant's credentials, these have been closely scrutinized after he made claims about professional associations that did not check out. Given that a number of respectable French researchers such as Michel Ribardiere and Gildas Bourdais initially vouched for Lorant's credibility, then had to retract their support after misrepresentations were identified, this casts a cloud over Lorant's credibility. However, Lorant stands by his initial claims of the UN UFO meetings having occurred and that he attended in a professional capacity.

On March 10, I received confirmation from a third source inside France's Ministry of Defense (relayed to me by a respected UFO/exopolitics researcher) that Lorant is well known as an individual who is present at high level military meetings. This source, a Colonel, states that he has seen Lorant on several occasions at such meetings while confirming that Lorant's professional credentials are murky. So while Lorant's precise professional credentials remain in a cloud, there is nevertheless further confirmation that he is an individual who does attend high level military meetings in France, and has some official status in the covert world dealing with UFO/ET issues. So this helps support his initial claims that he attended the UN meetings on UFOs in a professional capacity as an observer. Lorant was scheduled to give a radio interview to prominent French journalist Didier de Plaige where he will have the opportunity to set the record straight about the controversy over his credentials and the UN meeting.

Also, I do disagree with Dr Vallee over his reference to names released for the purpose of promoting a meme war. The naming of the the Papal Nuncio, UK Permanent Representative and UN General Assembly President as individuals who attended some or all sessions of the meetings provides an opportunity for investigators to directly ask these individuals for confirmation or denial of their attendance. So far, no public statements have emerged from these individuals so further investigations and confirmation is needed to confirm or refute the claims made by Source A and Gilles Lorant.

While some may be tempted to jump to the conclusion reached by Dr Vallee that the UN UFO meeting is part of a 'meme war' against the UFO research community, I consider it very premature to conclude this. Another viewpoint is that Source A and Lorant have been given authority to leak genuine information but there are certain constraints under which they have to operate which enable the creation of plausible deniability over their claims.

In conclusion, leads are still being investigated, primary sources are still explaining events and backgrounds, and further independent sources are coming forward to confirm aspects of what has been revealed so far. So the issue of UFO meetings taking place at the UN over February 12-14 is by no means resolved and further investigations are required.

Aloha

Michael Salla, Ph.D.
www.exopolitics.org


"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has!"

Margaret Mead




From: ted roe
Date: March 12, 2008 6:37:35 PM PDT

To: Victor Martinez <VictorGM@webtv.net>

Subject: Re: Dr MICHAEL SALLA responds to the detractors of the UN-UFO Non Meeting!



Hi Victor,

Feel free to share this...

I have no problem with my stated opinion regarding the way this hearsay story is playing out in the public domain and the failure of Salla to verify his sources before publishing it. I am certain that I am not the only one who has a less than supportive opinion of Mr. Salla's behavior and judgement in this matter.

As for NARCAP, as I said before, we have no opinion regarding aliens, space ships, secret UN meetings, etc. The only concerns we have involve the effects that making unfounded claims can have on the rest of those who work diligently to bring credibility
to the study. The negative effects that this sort of thing has on the credibility of us who are diligently working to devolop foundational evidence is precisely the reason that NARCAP has generally avoided associating with all but the most focused and conservative programs.

I am not the least bit concerned with the NARCAP executive body. Mr. Salla shouldn't concern himself, either. Dr. Haines and I founded this organization and have set very high standards. We have documents published on US Gov websites and have participated in US Gov activities related to our work. We have enjoyed those successes because we take our credibility seriously.

I do think that Mr. Salla's behavior with respect to forcing himself into a private conversation to accuse me of "character assassination" was inappropriate and hardly demonstrates his conflict resolution skills. I can state my opinion in any forum I choose and if it is in a private forum then my opinion is none of Mr. Salla's business. Perhaps if Mr. Salla had chosen to mind his own business I may not have bothered to forward any information regarding the meeting that I learned to this list.

The matter of resolving this story after the fact does nothing for Mr. Salla's credibility. I do not know if the event occured which is precisely the problem posed by Mr. Salla. He has publicly anounced that this meeting occured and then has gone
about trying to verify it. Meanwhile the message that it actually did occur continues regardless of the truth of it. Does anybody here remember SERPO? That story had a similar pattern.

The UN denies that the meetings took place. Gilles Lorant has a serious credibility issue after falsely claiming to be a member of IHEDN and being forced to resign from FEA. The rest of Mr. Salla's witnesses are "secret".

Mr. Salla made claims regarding the meeting and its various topics in his first missive on the topic and now the story changes to something different. I didn't write the article claiming that
there would be an overt alien presence. He did.

I would like to think that Mr. Salla will be correct in all of his claims regarding the UN matter and I hope that he is vindicated. He seems to be more than certain that there are aliens and that they are visiting Earth and while he offers no proof that is
actually occuring, he feels satisfied to offer $2600 Exopolotics Diplomas, $875 Galactic Diplomacy Certificates, etc. He is also comfortable in claiming that swimming with dolphins is indispensible to learning to communicate with "Star Beings"....
http://www.exopoliticsinstitute.org/cer ... minars.htm

Mr. Salla is making the claims and its his credibility in question rather than mine.

Ted Roe
Image
User avatar
ScaRZ
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 695
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 1:49 pm
Location: U.S.A.

Postby ryguy » Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:10 pm

Should Mr. Salla be added to the list of proven UFO hoaxers then? Opinions?

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Postby ScaRZ » Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:57 pm

Ted Roe wrote:

Does anybody here remember SERPO? That story had a similar pattern.


Well it looks like I wasn't the only one seeing this pattern. :P
Image
User avatar
ScaRZ
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 695
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 1:49 pm
Location: U.S.A.

Postby You Can Call Me Ray » Thu Mar 13, 2008 1:57 pm

ryguy wrote:Should Mr. Salla be added to the list of proven UFO hoaxers then? Opinions?


He definitely belongs on the list of UFO nutjobs. But in my mind, the problem with saying he is a confimed hoaxer is that he (like Alfie Webre) both insist on co-mingling UFO investigation with their other political opinions and goals. You can't really blame them, as neither of them are qualified in the sciences, so politics is the only thread they can pull on.

Those who "mix" a scientific approach to UFOs with other realms of culture and society are simply misguided and confused (IMO), because they do not understand that doing this is a violation of the scientific method.

Ray
The Universe is an Integrated System. Operational, Functional, and Physical.
User avatar
You Can Call Me Ray
Uncovers Reality
Uncovers Reality
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:49 pm
Location: Huntington Beach, CA, USA

Postby MikeJamieson » Fri Mar 14, 2008 1:12 pm

If we're taking a vote now, I would vote "no". Michael believes in what he puts out. I have no doubts about that. And because he believes in so many wild things, he ends up going on all these wild rides.

ryguy wrote:Should Mr. Salla be added to the list of proven UFO hoaxers then? Opinions?

-Ry
MikeJamieson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:53 pm
Location: Ukiah, CA

Postby ryguy » Fri Mar 14, 2008 1:38 pm

MikeJamieson wrote:If we're taking a vote now, I would vote "no". Michael believes in what he puts out. I have no doubts about that. And because he believes in so many wild things, he ends up going on all these wild rides.


Excellent point - there's certainly a line between scammer and "believer". A fine one - but still a line...

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Postby MikeJamieson » Fri Mar 14, 2008 1:56 pm

Hi Ryan, I was wondering if Michael S. EVER experiences cognitive dissonance.
Whenever he is exposed to the latest story that surfaces. (He probably does experience it in confrontation with the likes of us "debunkers" of the usually lame sci-fi stories he promotes.)

Yes, it's a fine line.

I should check out his yahoo group.....haven't done so in awhile. I have
unlimited computer access over the next few weeks. (Warning: slight post binging period about to begin!)
MikeJamieson
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:53 pm
Location: Ukiah, CA

Next

Google

Return to UFOs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests

cron