The transcript for Stan Friedman's appearance this past weekend on UFO Planet can be found at:
http://www.ufo-planet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1162
Future chat guests will include authors Nick Redfern (www.nickredfern.com) and Mac Tonnies (www.posthumanblues.blogspot.com), two of my favourites.
Paul Kimball
3 comments:
interesting
i have seen ufo's a couple of times and have seen bizarre things that defy explanation
what i don't get is the back-story people create, like aliens trying to contact earth to build a trade federation, or cloning humans, gov'ts hiding aliens etc.
you know things that have no proof at all (gov't hise lots of things i just don't think one of them is an alien)
at least i can say i saw what i saw
more than that is speculation
I'm truly looking forward to this.
This passage really stuck out to me.
(Typos corrected.)
[jane] 7:37 pm: "I’d like to ask Stan what is the one bit of definitive proof that could be given to a skeptic to say there you go explain that."
[Stanton Friedman] 7:38 pm: "I can't do that. It is the mass of scientific studies (read Jim McDonald's congressional testimony with 41 excellent cases. If I had a piece of a saucer it would be different. Skeptics aren't interested in doing their homework, they are interested in making proclamations."
This prompted me to go back and reread a bunch of Friedman’s stuff. I was curios to see how often he says things like this. In a chat room I can understand but in his more mainstream writing??
Guess what? His proclamation that “Skeptics are only interested in making proclamations” is not an atypical statement coming from him.
Post a Comment