Ufology War: Colin Bennett vs. Stanton Friedman

General UFO stories

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

Ufology War: Colin Bennett vs. Stanton Friedman

Postby ryguy » Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:18 pm

Well, there's a bit of a battle brewing in the world of Ufology this week. After Dick Farley distributed an email noting what he views as the impending implosion of "old-school" Ufology (see Steve's post), Colin Bennett responded with his own observations - and in his signature style, in one stroke he laid down the law against several notable old-school Ufologists...most notably the old "expert" many UFO shows approach when they need a Ufologist to feature on camera - Stanton Friedman.

Last night, Stanton threw his own angry response back at Colin's comment that Stanton hadn't actually done any "nuclear physics" work in about half decade. Apparently Friedman took issue with Colin's inaccuracy....it's been more like a quarter century, thank you very much.

Colin's website is named Combat Diaries for good reason. He's never been one to shy away from a war of words, and I suspect this one will be one where sparks fly. I am seeking his permission to post the dialog, and once I receive it it'll be published in this thread.

Depending what surfaces during the debate, this may even be worthy of a mention on the blog!

Stay tuned...
---
"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


Re: Ufology War: Colin Bennett vs. Stanton Friedman

Postby Puppetburglar » Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:18 pm

The wrong man in Riyadh? http://www.gcf.org.sa/en/Program/Program/Welcoming--Networking--0800---900112112/



Interesting list indeed. Have weird, will travel. Note- that traveller of gin in your sock may put you to sword.
God is a comedian performing for an audience too afraid to laugh

Voltaire
User avatar
Puppetburglar
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 57
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:17 am

Re: Ufology War: Colin Bennett vs. Stanton Friedman

Postby astrophotographer » Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:39 pm

Can we have a link to the recent hoopla with SF? I went to the combat diaries website (like UFO chronicles, there is too much garbage and makes for long downloads of the whole page) and could not readily identify the exchange. Maybe I am missing something.
User avatar
astrophotographer
Clearly Discerns Reality
Clearly Discerns Reality
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 5:46 pm

Re: Ufology War: Colin Bennett vs. Stanton Friedman

Postby ryguy » Thu Jan 20, 2011 10:02 pm

Yes - definitely. I asked Colin for his permission tonight, so long as I have permission to post his responses (which include Stanton's statements as well), I'll post it all here. I just wanted to let everyone know what's going on at the moment. I promise not to make you wait too long!
---
"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

Re: Ufology War: Colin Bennett vs. Stanton Friedman

Postby ryguy » Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:52 pm

We'll start the thread from Tuesday, January 18th in response to the Farley email that Steve previously published here.

Colin replies:

From: COLIN BENNET
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2011 7:44 PM
To: Farley; Sarfatti
Cc: [cc list removed]]
Subject: Re: Saudi "UFO panel," site linked to Salla's; laughter goes "global"?
 
Hi Cloudrider,Thank you for this. The whole Saudi event is a scam. No Western author should go near it or report on it.
 
My reply to a panicking Stanton Friedman? Here it is:
 
Jealous? Of  you??? Now there's a joke! Jealous of what? Your boring and almost unreadable books posing as "scientific evidence? Get lost! Jealous of an invitation to lecture in Saudi? I would not touch the evil place with the proverbial bargepole, and neither should you. Jealous of this totally obsolete mechanical view of yours? No way!
As cloudrider says, you and your colleagues have creamed the pseudo-scientific scene for years.

You announce yourself as a "nuclear physicist" and you have not done such for nearly half a century, and even then you didn't do much. As the original Victorian Station Master you sound always like something out old East Germany. Your "scientific" view  on modern Ufology is completely out of date in a world become Media. As for the remotest connection of exopolitics such a thing will finish you off completely as a tired old engine is put into a museum.

Colin Bennett
Author, London
Editor, the New Fortean Times
---
"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

Re: Ufology War: Colin Bennett vs. Stanton Friedman

Postby ryguy » Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:54 pm

Friedman's response this last Wednesday, Jan 19th:

From: Stanton T. Friedman
To: COLIN BENNET ; Farley; Sarfatti
Cc: [cc list removed]
Sent: Wednesday, 19 January, 2011 21:09:28
Subject: RE: Saudi "UFO panel," site linked to Salla's; laughter goes "global"?

Colin:

Thank you very much for demonstrating your arrogance and ignorance and your being a liar. Let us look at some facts. (Obviously you aren’t concerned with facts)

1. What do you know about my background? You say I haven’t done anything in nuclear physics for almost half a century and didn’t do much then:

From 1956 -1959 I worked at General Electric Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion Department. Mainly planning, analyzing and direction radiation shielding experiments at 5 different facilities. The GEANP program spent 100 Million dollars in 1958 alone and employed 3500 people of whom 1100 were engineers and scientists. From 1959-1963 I worked as a nuclear physicist for Aerojet General Nucleonics. Worked on compact nuclear reactors for space applications, conducted a Study under Air Force Contract on Analysis and Evaluation of Fast and Intermediate Reactors for Space Vehicle Applications. Designed the radiation shielding for the Fusion nuclear propulsion system we worked on for the US Air Force.

From 1963-1966 I worked as a nuclear physicist for the General Motors Allison Division mostly on the Military Compact Reactor Program responsible for coordinating all shielding aspects. From 1966-1968 I worked as a senior scientist for Westinghouse Astronuclear Laboratory on the NERVA Nuclear Rocket Program. Had successful experiments on the NRX A6 nuclear rocket test.. 1100 Megawatts, less than 6’ in diameter. Worked  at McDonell Douglas Astronautics .. looking at UFO propulsion when sponsoring program was cancelled. Then worked at TRW systems on evaluation of radiation levels for NASA nuclear power supplies for the Pioneer Spacecraft. Do you know of anybody else who worked on nuclear airplanes, fission nuclear rockets, fusion nuclear rockets, and nuclear powerplants for space and terrestrial applications?

After moving to Canada in 1980 (much less than 50 years ago)I worked on the commissioning of the Point Lepreau Nuclear Generating Station in New Brunswick. I measured radon levels in houses and wells. I did a study on the use of waste heat near Powerplants, on electron beam treatment of flue gas, on Food irradiation and seed stimulation with radiation, even gave a paper at the meeting of the European Society for Nuclear Methods in Agriculture. Did I mention speaking at more than 600 colleges and over 100 professional groups and at the UN and providing testimony to a congressional hearing?.. and even winning a debate at the Oxford Debating Society?
 
And your qualifications for judging my work history??? I take it you have  read many of my technical reports?? I belong to the American Nuclear Society and the American Physical Society, and the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. To which professional scientific societies do you belong?
 
And your qualifications for judging the GCF?? .. besides bias, ignorance and prejudice are??? I take it you wish to tar all presenters and attendees with your ignorant nonsensical brush.. including Tony Blair and Jean Chretien and all the other outstanding people who will participate??
 
In short Colin, I feel sorry for you . I am glad you don’t like my books. I would be concerned if you did. Fortunately many thinking people do.
 
Stan Friedman
---
"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

Re: Ufology War: Colin Bennett vs. Stanton Friedman

Postby ryguy » Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:58 pm

Colin replies with his usual no-holds-barred style (he included the link I sent him via email...haha!):

From: COLIN BENNET
To: Stanton T. Friedman; Farley; Sarfatti

Cc: [cc list removed]
Sent: Thu, January 20, 2011 5:22:40 PM

Subject: Re: Saudi "UFO panel," site linked to Salla's; laughter goes "global"?

http://skepticblog.org/2008/12/04/stant ... t-like-me/

It appears that I have joined an exclusive club!

Stanton,

Nice that I have made you lose your temper. That was exactly my intention. You call me a liar. You sir are a big fat bourgeois fraud straight from the baggage-trains of Melville or Chaucer. I would put you between the Wife of Bath and the Miller with your nuclear (buzz word) " measuring" joke-tackle draped all around you. But don't worry - given the scandalous fraud of the MJ-12 papers alone, your particular set of silver screens will come tumbling down just as they have done with Jacobs and Hopkins. It's all about cultural show business, and as a Prime Time act I must admit you take some beating.  Meantime, many thanks for providing evidence that you are also  a stuffed-shirt Stalinist commissar/bureaucrat/gauleiter whose milieu is essentially that of the "modern" 1950s, when confidence in scientific "progress" was at its height. 

Trying to batter  me down with your blushing boy-scout and Brownie-point "qualifications" reveals that you are not nearly as sure of yourself as your PR would have you.

I am more sure of myself in that I am not tempted to offer mine own equivalent set of crisp-packet merit and good behaviour badges. Frankly I'd rather talk to retired bus drivers than scientists. The lot of you are a menace, and you now stalk the world like the Jesus freaks of 1400, dispensing dangerous crap all over the place. Your  magnificent list is truly a demonological roll of the sins of the meccano-meritocratic world. This is surely as valuable as any cigarette-card collection from the 1950s when both yourself and the scientific world were young, and relegating all views other than scientific views to a pit of fools and madmen.

Viewing such a panoply of customised commercial breaks, for a moment I thought I was in the middle of the Golden Globes Award for 1950. All those glittering baubles, bangles and beads of the military industrial complex past and present! What a wonderful photo-shoot of the Rock of Ages we have here! Your almost religious belief in the machinations of the established bourgeois "scientific" intelligentsia is both amusing and touching. The only thing missing is the corporate Astroturf intended eventually to cover the Amazon Rain Forest.

For your information, science is merely one culture amidst cultures. As Mark Twain said "you pays your money and you takes your choice." Such pre-postmodern mechanical views as yours have been obsolete for some years now. Like most scientists, you have not even reached the TV Age yet. Most scientists think TV is for keeping the kids quiet upstairs. The Age of cyber is pulling you all in like Turner's Fighting Temeraire.

The only thing I envy about you Stanton is your magnificent PR and media operation. Jacobs and Hopkins had similar operations, as do many of the leading  lights of retail Ufology who are now falling like skittles down the Yellow Brick Road. The nuclear physicist act is a good silver-screen turn, a good Prime Time commercial soap rather like  Alf the Alien, or Yogi Bear. With all your calculations, certainties. measurements and  "facts" you are now a form of modern pop art. What a pity Warhol is not around to do for you what he did for Marilyn Monroe.
You are far too straight for Ufology.

You expect something like respectable self  to pop out of a flying saucer with a row of pens in the top pocket and a briefcase full of "scientific" calculations ready to explain all the "facts" of the situation. Now consider this:  any alien culture will contain just as many pan-fried brain-damaged fruitcakes as any similar sample of humanity. Consider the howl-round when one such human basket-case group (Project Camelot and Exopolitics come to mind),  meets a similar pan-fried culture of aliens? Consider again  the howl-round when an alien group A of such a constitution interacts with alien group B of a similar constitution and so on when all alien groups are in different stages of development?

This is the Bennett equation as distinct from the Drake version. Result? a researcher  might well meet the ass-end of an alien Howdy-Doody  show as distinct from resembling some rigid petite-bourgeois structure of a human model. Consider again how all alien cultures might well have their own sets of conspiracies and political plots, indeed their own individual mad sets of ironies and jokes and performances and you have a definite cultural  howl-round which no social-scientific-democratic analysis could tackle any more than mathematics can describe a set of wall-papering clowns. Howl-rounds revealed by Kevin Randle

If you fancy round 4 let me know. I can't wait. As Drake signaled to the Armada, " I have me matches and me powder ready."
Colin Bennett
Author, London
Editor, the New Fortean Times
---
"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

Re: Ufology War: Colin Bennett vs. Stanton Friedman

Postby ryguy » Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:09 am

Jan 20 - Stanton responds to Colin:

Colin:
How about an apology for lying? Obfuscation is no defense though you are good at it.. I will let you know how it turns out.in Riyadh. I presume you have let Tony Blair know your views about his participation?

Stan Friedman
---
"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

Re: Ufology War: Colin Bennett vs. Stanton Friedman

Postby ryguy » Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:12 am

On the 23rd, Colin responded with one of his best emails...actually I'd consider it an article...yet. This really made me smile.

------
from COLIN BENNET
to STANTON FRIEDMAN
cc [removed cc list]
date Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 12:44 PM
subject Re: Saudi "UFO panel," site linked to Salla's; laughter goes "global"?

How about an apology for deliberate fraudulent misrepresentation in the case of the MJ-12 papers as revealed by Kevin Randle? I could mention other things, but the problem with you is not a matter of fact versus fiction. It is a matter of you being totally out of date as regards modern history and it appears many things else.

You mention Tony Blair as a case in point? I wouldn't if I were you! As an non-UK citizen I will excuse you for not knowing much about Tony. As a moral exemplar he has been called the most corrupt man in Britain. I won't into chapter and verse because there are web sites galore which expose his double-dealing with Bush as regards the Gulf Wars alone. At this present time, his head inn in the nooses regarding the Chilcott Enquiry.

There are also darker matters associated with Tony's regime such as the suspicious death of biochemist Dr. John Kelly (the British equivalent to the equally strange death of Vince Foster). Don't you know all this recent history? To choose Tony Blair as an example to be followed is to lead yourself into gross moral error. You accuse me of lying yet you apparently like Tony Blair, one of the biggest liars on the modern scene. You appear not to be well-informed here. Perhaps you think George Bush was an angel too.

Your visit to Saudi will carry the stink of those very few who continued to visit Nazi German up to the outbreak of World War 2 in 1939. This will not turn out good for you. It will damage your reputation far worse than being interviewed by Bill and Kerry of project Camelot. It will provide your critics at every opportunity to shout "fascist sympathiser" after visiting a country which has the worst human rights record in the world. You owe this to your many friends, followers and admirers: do NOT go to Saudi. Stay where you are and get a regular kicking from horrible Colin Bennett for your comfort.

Ufology takes yet another tumble! That's four to five big tumbles in one month. Congratulations Stanton, you are now what some people might call a collaborator. If Jacques Vallee and others wish to go to Saudi, they should bare in mind that they might well find themselves in the cross-hairs of many interests as possible fellow-travellers with principalities and powers that do not have the interests of the USA at heart.
If they wish to hob-nob with the suspected enemies of your race, religion and nation then that is your choice, and you must take the consequences in terms of moral reputation alone.

Back to the main point of this dialogue. In case you didn't notice, scientists are no longer the favourite well-scrubbed mummy's boys of your youth. As the park keeper calls in the boats from the lake, scientists are proven to be up to their necks in all kinds or corrupt crappola, witness the "disinvitation" affair involving myself and Jack Sarfatti where my published letter mysteriously vanished from the comments section of the Times Higher Education Supplement, and a Nobel Prize winner stabbed me in the back in order to protect his wounded chicks. Scientists now wilfully design weapons and torture techniques. They "design" and construct propaganda and lie-systems of mass manipulation. Why the hell should I accept you as a symbol of bourgeois "scientific" authority on anything at all? Am I to hand over a UFO experience to you (or worse) to any one of your extremely limited circle of colleagues, not a single one of whom has ever seen a UFO?
What a corrupt structure you stand upon, sir!

Am I to hand any one of you old Ufological Queens a UFO experience whereupon you will hand it back to me with marks out of ten for its "reality?" Who the hell do you think you are sir, spreading your micro-mechanistic diktat all over the place?

I must say that I don't trust any of you more than I could throw you far enough to frighten the Ufological queens in their dovecotes. Your muddled middle-management view blinds you to the darker side of devious complexity of the UFO problem. This problem does not have a plain Cartesian solution. Roswell cannot be investigated as if it were an air crash investigation. Neither can it be investigated in terms of the structures of the Agatha Christie/Sherlock Holmes universe where the facts are assumed always to sum at the end of the day as they did in the universe of rails and lines and "facts" to which you belong. Events such as the Roswell story contains liminal components as well as pseudo-real components. Different sets of cultural, technological and anthropological settings and staging. A media plasma, in other words. This is a form of matter and spirit you may not have heard of. It means that you cannot approach a liminal event using the facts and figures of that middle-management act you call the real.

In this you are at least a generation out of date. A particular anomalistic event cannot be conceived as a Newtonian atom was once thought of as being a thing finite and complete as the proverbial billiard ball. The further we venture into the interior of any such event we encounter the mysterious complexity of something more like a narrative rather than a finite series of discrete and separate "facts." Within this narrative we meet different kinds of information spectra.

In the case of Roswell incident, we have apocalyptic, mythological, technical, media, and conspiratorial elements. 509th squadron's B-29s receiving the first nukes off the pre-war production line fits the first thee parts of our narrative picture here, whilst the initial Roswell newspaper reports, and the con-trick of the Ramey press conference fit the last two respectively.

We have a theatre here no less whose individual acts and scenes vary from the pseudo-real to high strangeness involving all kinds of technical and psycho-social anomalies which would put your Cartesian ruler in a regular tizzy. Go to the left of such an Escher spectrum as it were, the anomalies flatten out and we have almost a straight line representing to the pseudo-real; go to the right and within the changing mise en scène of the dramatic narrative, we can extend the degree of revealed high strangeness to the limits of our capability. Take the red pill and

There is a new Ufology forming and and as a member of the fossilised Ufological monarchy, you and others are trying to strangle it at birth.

We no longer think or exist in a plain-cake middle-management universe. We are now web creatures. Lines, distances no longer apply to theoretical reasoning. Roswell deconstructed forces us to think in terms of images and metaphors.

The Roswell event exists only a kind of Escher milieu an example of cultural warping (for an example of what non-summing events, see my essay for UFO mag "Putting the Noise Back Into The System") where perception goes right under the hill as regards an aboriginal view of the staging of various techno-anthropological manifestations.

Your career as Principle Boy is over and you should put your spangled tights back into the Victorian chest from whence they came.

Colin Bennett
Author, London
Editor, the New Fortean Times
http://www.combat-diaries.co.uk

PS My wife and myself just ordered some Gefilte fish and bagels. Wish you were here.
Don't ask your hosts for Kosher food, will you?
Shalom
---
"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

Re: Ufology War: Colin Bennett vs. Stanton Friedman

Postby ryguy » Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:13 am

There is a new Ufology forming and and as a member of the fossilised Ufological monarchy, you and others are trying to strangle it at birth.


I LOVE that line!
---
"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

Re: Ufology War: Colin Bennett vs. Stanton Friedman

Postby RICH-ENGLAND » Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:30 am

woah! wow that man can really rant!, in fact im wondering if his fingertips are bleeding from fierce typing?.

thanks

rich
ATS HAS TURNED INTO A "BALLOONATIC" ASYLUM
User avatar
RICH-ENGLAND
Focused on Reality
Focused on Reality
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:06 am

Re: Ufology War: Colin Bennett vs. Stanton Friedman

Postby Puppetburglar » Sat Jan 29, 2011 6:39 pm

Swift and Pope would be proud.
God is a comedian performing for an audience too afraid to laugh

Voltaire
User avatar
Puppetburglar
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 57
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 12:17 am


Google

Return to UFOs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot] and 18 guests

cron