To narrow the subject down a bit (it's huge), we could discuss new cases (I've been researching the documents presented by Raul Julia-Levy to back up his claims of ancient extraterrestrial contacts for his upcoming documentary Revelations of the Mayans 2012 and beyond) or those famous cases that are not generally known to be hoaxes, but should be, like Lubbock lights' photos allegedly taken by Carl Hart on August 31, 1951.
P.S. Reading again your post, I probably misunderstood what you are looking for. Statistics on the motivations of hoaxers? A general theory about the psychology of UFO hoaxing?
sentry579 wrote:There was a UK hoax where they had a light on a car and staged a phony photograph being taken in front of a witness. That was in the early 70s, I believe, and they let the UFO community absorb and spread the story for over a year before revealing their trickery.
There were some interesting reports generated by this 1958 hoax: http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/arch ... e_man_hoax
Several witnesses attributed superhuman characteristics to the "alien".
James Carlson wrote:The motivation is different from those I assume most hoaxes are associated with
I've had contact with quite a few hoaxers. The motives of these individuals have varied considerably.
While many within ufology doubt people would put in the effort necessary to, say, create a photoshopped image the amount of effort involved is generally far less than most people seem to think.
Money - I don't think this one arises as some people think (with plain mischief being far more common...), but at least some characters in the history of ufology seem to be have been prepared to lie in order to make money.
James Carlson wrote:It would be interesting to know just how much of it is self-justification for just "mischief" -- wanting to have a little fun for the sake of having a little fun.
This is just a suggestion, of course, but you should see how many of them would be willing to write up their involvement in hoaxes in association with a very in-depth series of interviews. All of it could be conducted with complete anonymity, of course, but it would be really fascinating, I think, to hear about the whole story from an actual encounter point-of-view.
I also believe, however, that everybody who writes a book, or gets paid to lecture, or happens to be a paid attendee on the UFO circuit is most definitely in it for the money. They're not exactly educating anybody, so what else is there? Once you confirm their habitual need to ignore contrary evidence, or to consciously distort claims, I think you need to factor in the paycheck.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 13 guests