Sunday, February 8, 2009


Journalist Terry Hansen wrote:

"[The Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal] is an organization of people who oppose what they contend is pseudo-science...CSICOP, contrary to its impressive-sounding title, does not sponsor scientific research. On the contrary, it's main function has been to oppose scientific research, especially in areas such as psychic phenomena and UFOs, two topics that, coincidentally or not, have been of demonstrated interest to the intelligence community over the decades. Instead, CSICOP devotes nearly all of its resources to influencing the American public via the mass media. As author Jerome Clark, editor of the International UFO Reporter, once pointed out, 'CSICOP's ability to influence media is legendary. It's Manual for Local, Regional and National Groups devotes 17 pages to 'Handling the Media' and 'Public Relations' and, tellingly, a mere three to 'Scientific Investigations'...' "
Yes! Exactly! These people try to appear as though they are scientists and that they are conducting actual scientific investigations when they are NOT! The only people that actually investigate UFO Sighting are Ufologists. Perhaps some of their investigation are not as scientific as some would like, but at least they are out there interviewing witnesses and investigating -- unlike CSI.

I have always suspected that CSI members have a hat and in that hat are all their silly theories, swamp gas, weather balloons, hedgehogs, Venus, owls and so on. When a case comes along that gets any attention they reach into that hat and pull out a theory rather than doing any actual investigation. Then they get on the phone to various media outlets and push that theory even though there was no real investigation. There are many times that I have noticed that CSI members are not even aware of the most basic facts of a case they may be commenting on and putting forth their theories on.

Robert Hastings writes:

The long-time and still-current Executive Editor of Skeptical Inquirer, Kendrick Frazier, worked for more than two decades as a PR Specialist at Sandia National Laboratories-although one will have to look high and low to find references to that employment in his magazine and even in his self-published online biography. Sandia Labs is one of the U.S. government's most important nuclear weapons labs.
Some snipping

So, who is routinely trying to debunk the reality of UFOs and the notion of a UFO cover-up in CSI's Skeptical Inquirer magazine? Why, a PR guy working for the U.S. government's nuclear weapons program! (Although he is strangely shy about publicly acknowledging where he picked up his paycheck for over 20 years, during the same period he was feverishly debunking UFOs, supposedly because of his "skepticism" about them!)
Why is a PR guy of any sort involved in debunking UFOs, but especially one working for the US Government? These people are NOT skeptics, they are debunkers and the entire situation reeks of a government sponsered disinformation program.

Another good question would be -- why does the media give these people the amount of attention that they do? I will guess there is less conspiracy there and mainly just pure lazyness of not taking the time to find out if these people actually deserve to be called scientific or skeptical.

Perhaps Ufology needs some PR people too? People that could point out the small amount of investigation CSI actually does and that they normally have no actual evidence for their claims. That is aside from them being a bit too cozy with the US government.


  1. I have a hard time trusting the government or those closely associated with them...especially after being lied to by military recruiters...

    As for UFOlogy needing a PR person...I think we sort of already have them (or equivalents) for the most part. Unfortunately it seems the media are to busy listening to the government sponsored debunkary to care about what the voices from within the UFO community have to say, even if some of us have just as much or more credentials then the debunkers.

  2. Everyone I know that has ever spoken to a military recruiter has been lied to.

    I suppose we do have some PR people. I suppose the media is brain washed into thinking the debunkers represent investigative science.

  3. Recruiters still lie? They did back in 1967, too.

  4. They told my nephew he was joining the Reserves when he was really joining the regular army. Some of the blame goes to him -- for not reading the contract. They did eventually give him a discharge when they realized he wasn't army material.

  5. Thought I would use this post to get a message to you.

    Yikes! All I can say is thank goodness it's only in Canada and not the United States. Friedman must be fit to be tied over this.

    It appears that they need funds too so maybe best not to give it any ink.

    The Skeptologists - Pilot
    The Cast

  6. Take backs, it's not Canada like I read. It's going to air in the United States.

  7. It actually isn't going to air anywhere unless they convince some network to put money into it and air it, which they haven't done yet to my knowledge. We will see what happens.

  8. This is getting scary. They actually talked a paranormal investigative group to do the Queen Mary so that they could follow along. That's pretty low.

    Skeptics go along for the ride with Southern California Paranormal Research Society

  9. I could be wrong since myth busters does well, but I don't see a debunker (they are not skeptics) TV show being very entertaining or doing well.

    One wonders if they might have to resort to trying actual scientific experiments to show that their theories could be right? That would be something new. :-)