Nick Redfern’s excellent advice…..”don’t let UFOs rule your life”


by Nick Redfern, MYSTERIOUS UNIVERSE – – July 8, 2016

Nick Refern, in my opinion, is one of the most prolific, highly respected authorities on the FORTEANA topic today. He definitely is the “John A. Keel” of contemporary Ufology and related topics.


“Time and again I tell people that if you’re interested in UFOs, don’t let the subject rule and dictate your life.

The same goes for every other aspect of Forteana, too, whether it’s Bigfoot, ghost-hunting, lake-monsters, etc, etc.

I don’t know why I bother though.

They seldom listen.

But, they should.

As someone who has been in the UFO subject for more than a few years, I have seen plenty of what I call ufological screw-ups of the personal kind.

By that, I mean people who – step by step and bit by bit – go down a pathway that ultimately takes them far away from reality and into a world of downright unreality.

And that realm of unreality is rarely, if ever, a positive one.

The tragic thing, however, is that I have met a significant number of people in Forteana for whom the concept of a social life is as alien as…an alien.

I specifically don’t say that as a criticism.

Rather, I say it as nothing less than a dark and dire warning – and particularly so to those who are new to the subject.

Have you ever seen someone who enters the field of Ufology, and who gradually (or sometimes quickly) gets “taken over” and dragged down by the subject?

I have.

It’s not a pretty sight.

Hence the subject and the warning aspect of this article.



To me, a good example of what Refern is referring to, (i.e., folks suffering from delusion, a form of mental illness), is exemplified by one such individual:



There are tens of thousands of folks who have to rely on Social Security Supplementary Security Income (SSI), for various legitimate reasons, including those with mental illnesses or those who have become mentally ill.

It’s a sad situation. But it’s the reality.

Phil Schneider was one of them.


E-mail =


The end of UFOs……why did America lose its fascination with UFOs?

courtesy of Joe Baran

(illustration, courtesy of Joe Baran)

by Mark Jacobsen, NEW YORK Magazine – – August 9, 2014:


As the news of the day pulsed along the once seemingly unthinkable pathways of the information industry — boots on the ground in Gaza, slide show updates on Mila Kunis’s pregnancy — adherents of an earlier future gathered at the Crowne Plaza Hotel in Cherry Hill, New Jersey. The occasion was the annual conference of the Mutual Unidentified Flying Objects Network, which, in accordance with this year’s theme, “UFOs and the Media,” was focused not on the ephemera of the news cycle but rather on the eternalities of what several in attendance called “the biggest single story in history,” i.e., the existence of extraterrestrial life on Earth and the cover-up of that presence by the United States government, the corporate structure, and their oblivious and/or sold-out lackeys in the mainstream press.

While this year’s symposium attracted a reported 400 people, this was a far cry from the thousands who attended the MUFON conference in the late 1970s, after CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND introduced extraterrestrials to the mainstream moviegoer.

That was at a time when a lot of people actually believed that these mysterious things from the sky represented the biggest single thing in history. Since then, despite the recent astronomical findings of the so-called “Goldilocks zone” that postulates sentient life is possible throughout the galaxy, ufology has apparently lost its grip on the public imagination, and has been demoted to a neo-cult status.

For the populace at large space is no longer the place. Not that this mattered to those gathered at Cherry Hill. Used to marginalization, they were resolved to keep watching the skies.

The tone was set by keynote speaker George Knapp, an Emmy-winning reporter for KLAS-TV in Las Vegas, perhaps the best known above-ground correspondent on the ET beat, if you don’t count people like C.J. Jung, who late in life developed a deep interest in what is called “the phenomena.”

A debonair raconteur, Knapp spoke of the ridicule he’d received from his MSM colleagues. “I’ll always be the UFO guy,” Knapp related with wry j’accuse, recalling how after doing a story about alleged alien medical procedures, he found himself labeled “the Grand Mullah in the Church of Cosmic Proctology.” The point wasn’t whether UFOs were “real” or a mass hallucination. The news was that people kept seeing them. Yet, according to the gatekeepers of supposed reality, Knapp said, “you, me, and everyone in this room are just a bunch of nuts.”

This was fun, especially when Knapp began talking about Area 51, “the world’s best known top secret base.” In 1989, Knapp broke the story of Robert Lazar, a then 30-year-old scientist who claimed to have worked the remote military facility in the Nevada desert. Lazar’s epic account of how the US armed forces were “reverse engineering” alien technology from crashed and captured flying saucers has become a cornerstone of the late stage UFO narrative. As soon as Lazar opened his mouth, “the meme was on the loose,” Knapp said, resulting in many books, movies, and Area 51-inspired product campaigns accompanied by theme music from the X-Files.
In the context of today’s ever-narrowing attention span, there was only one drawback to this 25-year-old story: It was 25 years old.

Not that the old was out of place in this crowd. MUFON has been around for 45 years and the average age of those who ponied up $239 for the conference was way past that. Many of the presenters, most of them long-established figures on the scene (Stanton Friedman, the 79-year-old widely acknowledged dean of the field, had to cancel owing to a mild heart attack) were equally venerable, as were most of the subjects they discussed. Much talk focused on the genre’s greatest hits: the Betty and Barney Hill abduction account (1961), the Lonnie Zamora/Socorro, New Mexico sighting (1973), the Rendlesham Forest incident in the U.K. (1980), and, of course, Roswell, circa 1947.

As noted, it wasn’t always this way. In another post-A bomb time ufology seemed a wholly appropriate response to a newer, bigger, and far more frightening world. Long before the appearance of Ezekiel’s wheel, people knew something was up there, and now that we’d fired off this nuclear bottle rocket capable of killing millions, the watchers had come in for a closer look.

Suddenly palpable millennialism gave impetus to a number of so-called “ufo religions” ranging from the Honorable Elijah Muhammad’s talk of the liberating “mother plane” to ex-sci-fi writer L. Ron Hubbard’s Scientology. It also enabled a breed of typically American loner “independent researchers.” These were the free-thinking, often highly competitive (later highly paranoid) individuals who drove their vehicles into the middle of the desert, looked up into the vast firmament decided that, for better or worse, there had to be another world beyond this one. The fact that the UFO issue represented the first time a large segment of population felt the then-trusted government was withholding the truth from the public only whetted the frisson of the hunt.

It is true that very little beyond a shadow of a doubt forensic proof of alien presence has come to light over the years, but there are a number of subsidiary reasons for the seeming twilight of the UFO moment. With voracious proliferation of vampires, New World Order conspiracies, and the unprecedented rise of evangelical Christianity, the simple flying disc from far, far away has become a quaint, almost nostalgic specter.

The saucer may have been the post-war generation’s signifier of the strange, but even versions of the unknown outlive their usefulness. The end of the era may have commenced with William Gibson’s Neuromancer, which located the drama of the unknown inside the claustrophobic cyberspace accessible to the common keyboardist. Instead of the far-flung wonder to the universe, much of what falls under the rubric of contemporary ufology has become deeply interiorized, resigned to the viscous psych-sexual abduction phenomena described and popularized by people like Budd Hopkins, Whitley Strieber, and John Mack. It is a narrative that bothers many “hard science” ufologists. “I’m trying to evaluate these sightings,” said Tom Deuley, a no nonsense retired Naval officer, former NSA employee and a leading MUFON investigator for 37 years. “When you bring in crop circles, time-traveling and abductions, these things are hard to quantify.”

It made you wonder where, short of a landing on the White House lawn, ufology could possibly go from here. Case in point was the presentation of Steven Bassett, this year’s winner of the “Excellence in Ufology” award (MUFON executive director Jan Harzan called it “the biggie’). The first registered Washington lobbyist advocating the position that humanity is not alone in the universe, Bassett organized last year’s “Citizen’s Hearing” which enlisted several ex-congress people including former Alaska Governor Mike Gravel to hear testimony on what is now being called “exopolitics” so as to avoid being saddled by the ufology brand.

People like astronaut Edgar Mitchell, who walked on the moon, made the case for extraterrestrial visitation. The hope is that the mock hearings would lead to the real thing, which, Bassett was certain would “blow the lid off the Truth Embargo on the alien question that has existed since Roswell.”

After his presentation, I spoke with Bassett, an ardent former business consultant in his middle 60s who described the Disclosure quest as “my life, now.” Victory was inevitable, he thought, saying, “the Catholic Church’s attempt to suppress the Copernican revolution was a doomed enterprise. Now we’re talking about something far more profound than that … when the government tries to contain the reality of the galaxy, that is a task that is Herculean and ultimately can not succeed.” Once the alien presence was acknowledged, humanity would take a meaningful step into “maturity,” Bassett contended.

There was a manic, almost desperate optimism to Bassett’s Disclosure dream that had to be respected. Yet, many conference attendees had their doubts about the program. Bassett had just finished telling me that the Roswell crash probably resulted from the mid-air collision of two alien craft in a thunder storm. This happened, he said, because these were relatively primitive ships. Bassett said he “liked” this explanation. Other people did too. But what happened when the no-doubt heavily redacted “truth” came out and said something different? Wasn’t much of ufology about speculation, peering into the abyss? Besides, several said, what made Bassett so certain the government could end “the Truth Embargo” even if they wanted to? Perhaps the aliens, more powerful and smarter than our lowly bunch, did not want to be Disclosed. Maybe they liked things just the way they are, skulking around the shadowy mythland of the subconscious they’ve inhabited all these eons. Offering a smile, Bassett said. “Well, I guess you’ll just have to ask them about that.”

None of this, however, was a reason to close the books on flying saucers. This would be impossible, since if you happened to have laid eyes on something you sincerely believed to be a UFO, it tends to stick. I will never be free of that cold winter’s night in 1989 when, along with my wife, I saw a saucer-shaped object fly down the East River and soar beneath the Brooklyn Bridge. The way the craft seemed to coquettishly blink its lights as if to say, “even here, I appear, and then disappear” told me, that against all rationality, this particular interface with the ineffable was meant for me.

These are the things you talk about with people like H. Dyke N. Spear at UFO conferences. As George Knapp said, the subject matter does “tend to attract those whose elevator does not got all the way to top,” but you’ll never see Dyke Spear in a tinfoil hat. Past 80, he remained a man of the world, still practicing divorce law in West Hartford, Connecticut. Once he represented the famous featherweight boxing champion Willie Pep. “It was like Willie’s fifth divorce,” Spear related. “He said, relax, this is an easy case. Just give her five rooms of furniture and a fur coat. That’s what they always get.” Asked whether he took any abuse from friends and family about attending UFO conferences, Dyke laughed. “What are they going to tell me, I don’t know what I know?”

Fernando Garces-Soto, a wry, 60-ish Colombian-born music producer from Miami and fellow witness, was taking it more personally. “I’m spending a $1,000 to come to this. That’s a lot of money for the same old stories. This rehash, and more rehash. Probably next year I’ll spend another $1,000. What choice do I have?” Fernando exclaimed, finding the existential humor of the situation. “I’m obsessed,” he sighed. “I’m all messed up.”


(I had the pleasure of meeting Mark Jacobson in early 2014 when he came to visit me in Rio Rancho, New Mexico)

As far as I am concerned (and probably as far as the vast majority of the mainstream is concerned) the only evidence ultimately acceptable would be the revelation of their actual physical spacecraft, along with the revelation of its occupants in front of the global press, the global scientific community and the public-at-large at a globally recognized and viewable venue (such as in the lawn of the White House, or in Central Park or any publicly recognized venue), along with the total live global TV simulcast coverage of the revelation…….so far this hasn’t happened yet.

E-mail =


The fiery crash of TWA 800 in 1996…..questions still linger


by Maureen Callahan, NEW YORK POST – – – July 4, 2016:


On Wednesday, July 17, 1996, at 8:19 p.m., TWA Flight 800 took off from JFK airport and headed out over Long Island toward Paris. It was a perfect summer night, 70 degrees, the sky clear.
Twelve minutes later, TWA 800 exploded mid-air, killing all 230 people on board. The crash was close enough to the coast that plane wreckage washed up on Suffolk County beaches for weeks.

“There was a wall of flame 30 feet high,” Suffolk County police officer Vincent Termine, who witnessed the explosion, told the Independent in 1997. He said it looked like the ocean was on fire.

Termine headed out to sea with rescue crews immediately. “We tried to get close to a piece of burning wreckage at the beginning,” he said. “I remember operating the boat between flames. But we couldn’t get close enough. The smoke was making us sick. One of the guys had to throw up over the side.”

Twenty years later, the crash of TWA 800 remains a subject of horror and fascination: For many New Yorkers, especially Long Islanders, the plane’s sudden, complete explosion remains a traumatic event. It was just five years before 9/11, and there was already a growing anxiety about terror attacks on the US homeland.

Perhaps for that reason, conspiracy theorists still insist that TWA 800 was brought down, deliberately or accidentally, potentially by the US military — despite a four-year-long investigation, the most expensive in aviation history, which found that a short circuit in the plane’s center wing fuel tank caused the crash.

In his new book “TWA 800: The Crash, the Cover-Up, and the Conspiracy” (Regnery), author Jack Cashill maintains that the plane was brought down by external forces and that the government has engaged in a decades-long cover-up.

While Cashill rehashes old conspiracy theories — a US Navy ship, which was in fact in the area, conducted a wartime exercise gone awry, or a terrorist on the ground used a shoulder-mounted surface-to-air missile, or a small plane collided with the 747, or a terrorist smuggled a bomb on board — it’s telling that, 20 years later, these theories still find traction.

Multiple factors contribute. Never before had a 747 been brought down by such a malfunction. It was a time of high anxiety: In the summer of 1996, Ramzi Yousef stood trial in lower Manhattan for the first World Trade Center bombing. The Oklahoma City bombing, which killed 168 people, 19 of them children, took place the year before. The Olympics were days away in Atlanta, and that city was on alert for terrorist attacks.
It was also a presidential election year, and theorists believed the Clinton administration had cause to engage in a cover-up. The internet was in its infancy, and this mystery became one of the first stories to go viral.

On Nov. 8, 1996, Jim Kallstrom, then-FBI assistant director, was forced to hold a press conference denouncing the mushrooming conspiracy theory that the US government was involved.

“What we can say is that the United States military did not shoot a missile at this airplane,” said Kallstrom, who lost a close friend in the crash. “The United States military did not shoot anything. Nothing, nothing like that has taken place, would take place, would ever take place under any circumstances.”

In 2013, a group calling itself the TWA 800 Project, composed of some surviving family members as well as skeptics, petitioned the National Transportation Safety Board for a new investigation. They insisted that “ a detonation or a high-velocity explosion” caused the crash.

One year later, the NTSB denied the request.

“Before responding to the petition, NTSB staff met with the petitioners’ representatives and listened to an eyewitness who described what he saw on the night of the accident,” the board posted on its official site. “After a thorough review of all the information provided by the petitioners, the NTSB denied the petition in its entirety because the evidence and analysis presented did not show the original findings were incorrect.”

Author Cashill doesn’t offer a definitive alternate cause, but the strongest portion of his book are reprints of multiple witness statements, taken by the FBI and CIA in the immediate aftermath. Over 700 of these have since been made public; in them, 258 witnesses told investigators they’d seen a streak of white light approaching the aircraft before the explosion. A few witnesses used the word “rocket” or “missile” in describing what they saw.

These vivid, first-hand accounts remain in stark contrast to the final report — and at the time, every possibility was investigated. The government rented a 747 to recreate the flight. They placed a bomb in another and blew that up. They launched missiles to determine if eyewitnesses could spot them — they did.

Years later, Leon Panetta, Bill Clinton’s chief of staff at the time, said that terrorism was initially their main suspicion.
“The investigation was looking at almost every possibility, including state actors, because we’d known that Libya had been involved with regards to bringing down the airliner over Scotland [Pam Am Flight 103],” Panetta told CNN in 2014. “We were looking at Iraq and Saddam Hussein. We were looking at, you know, the possibility of even Iran might have played a role in this.”

These initial possible scenarios, when added to the real-time eyewitness accounts taken by the FBI and CIA, are likely why TWA 800 conspiracy theories linger.
Witness 364 , who had once served as the crew chief of a Marine Corps helicopter squadron, was sitting on the dock of the Bellport Yacht Club with a female friend. Looking to the southeast, he “noticed an object rising vertically.”

It had a red glow and took about thirty seconds to reach its zenith, then arced downwards for ten seconds, and sped off on a flat, horizontal course for about fifteen seconds. The witness then saw a small red explosion, followed by a “tremendous” bright white second explosion, which evolved into an orange-yellow ball that fell in two pieces to the sea.

“He realized he had seen two different things,” reported the FBI, “namely the rising ‘object,’ and the subsequent explosions.”

After learning of TWA 800’s destruction, “He came to the personal conclusion that what he had seen was a missile hitting the airplane.”

Witnesses 385 and 386, a couple with their young children, were boating in the Moriches Inlet. They told the FBI that a bright orange-red glow “seemed like it came off the horizon and rose slowly, weaving as it continued upward.”

It traveled diagonally at a seventy-degree angle going in a westerly direction and left a white smoke trail in its wake. It then disappeared, and a “large oval ball of fire” appeared just above where the object was last sighted. The two heard no sound as they watched as “the ball of fire came straight down,” breaking eventually into two pieces.

Witness 491 was fishing with some buddies off a dock in Center Moriches when he “observed a red light moving up into the air.” It was moving in an “irregular type arc” in a southeasterly direction.

He followed this “red flare” for an estimated thirty seconds and felt it “was trying to follow something.” The flare then suddenly “turned into a huge ball of flame and fell in two pieces.”

— Witness statements as excerpted from “TWA 800: The Crash, the Cover-Up and the Conspiracy” by Jack Cashill., out July 5.



E-mail =


Ben Rich misquoted by many in the UFO community


Ben Rich (June 18, 1925 – January 5, 1995) was the second Director of Lockheed’s Skunk Works from 1975 to 1991, succeeding its founder, Kelly Johnson. Regarded as the “father of stealth” Rich was responsible for leading the development of the F-117, the first production stealth aircraft. He also worked on the F-104, U-2, A-12, SR-71, and F-22, among others. He is the author of Skunk Works: A Personal Memoir of My Years of Lockheed.

False, unsubstantiated rumors abound when it comes to misquotes cited by many gullible UFO researchers.

Many in the UFO community seem to believe that Ben Rich, stated during a 1993, Alumni Speech at UCLA:

“We already have the means to travel among the stars, but these technologies are locked up in black projects and it would take an Act of God to ever get them out to benefit humanity…Anything you can imagine, we already know how to do.”

This is far from the truth.

Ben Rich never said such a thing seriously.

from SHADOWHAWK (Peter Merlin)- – August 27, 2013:

Peter Merlin, in my opinion, is one of the most knowledgeable and respected military aviation historians at the present time. I had the honor of meeting him in 2005 at the 50th Anniversary Celebration of Area 51 which was held at the perimeters.


Ben Rich is constantly misquoted as saying “We now have the technology to take E.T home.” That is not what he said.

At the end of his presentation he showed his final slide, a picture of a disk-shaped craft – the classic “flying saucer” – flying into a partly cloudy sky with a burst of sunlight in the background and he gave his standard tagline.

It was a joke he had used in numerous presentations since 1983 when Steven Spielberg’s “E.T. the Extraterrestrial,” a film about a young boy befriending a lost visitor from space and helping the alien get home, had become the highest-grossing film of all-time. Rich apparently decided to capitalize on this popularity. By the summer of 1983, he had added the flying saucer picture to the end of a set of between 12 and 25 slides that he showed with his lecture on the history of Lockheed’s famed Skunk Works division.

Rich had long used a standard script for his talks, tailoring the content as necessary to accommodate his audience. Since most Skunk Works current projects were classified, it didn’t matter whether he was addressing schoolchildren or professional aeronautical engineers; he always ended the same way.

At a Defense Week symposium on future space systems in Washington, D.C., on September 20, 1983, he said, “Unfortunately, I cannot tell you what we have been doing for the last 10 years. It seems we score a breakthrough at the Skunk Works every decade, so if you invite me back in 10 years I’ll be able to tell you what we are doing [now]. I can tell you about a contract we recently received. The Skunk Works has been assigned the task of getting E.T. back home.” The audience laughed, as it was meant to do.

If something is successful, it is worth repeating. Rich gave an identical speech at the U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, Maryland, on September 6, 1984, and continued using his script during successive appearances. Sometimes he refined the details a bit. “I wish I could tell you what else we are doing in the Skunk Works,” he said, wrapping up a presentation for the Beverly Hills chapter of the National Society of Daughters of the American Revolution on May 23, 1990. “You’ll have to ask me back in a few years. I will conclude by telling you that last week we received a contract to take E.T. back home.”

Three years later he was still using the same line and the same slide. “We did the F-104, C-130, U-2, SR-71, F-117 and many other programs that I can’t talk about,” he proclaimed during a 1993 speech at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, home of Air Force Materiel Command, the organization responsible for all flight-testing within the Air Force. “We are still working very hard, I just can’t tell you what we are doing.” As usual, he added his by now infamous punchline, “The Air Force has just given us a contract to take E.T. back home.”

Within the UFO community, Rich’s words, and additional statements attributed to him without corroborative proof, have become gospel. He is named as having admitted that extraterrestrial UFO visitors are real and that the U.S. military has interstellar capabilities, and although nearly two full years passed between Rich’s UCLA speech and his death in 1995, some believers have touted his comments as a “deathbed confession.” It was nothing of the kind.

Rich, a brilliant scientist, apparently believed in the existence of other intelligent life in the universe, though only as something distant and mysterious. In July 1986, after Testor Corporation model-kit designer John Andrews wrote asking what he thought about the possible existence of either manmade or extraterrestrial UFOs, Rich responded, “I’m a believer in both categories. I feel everything is possible.” He cautioned, however, that, “In both categories, there are a lot of kooks and charlatans – be cautious.”

There was no “deathbed” confession. His comments, many of which have been misquoted, were taken from presentations he gave long before his death. Ben Rich gave his speeches using a standard script. The content varied a bit over the years; he added new material whenever something was declassified, but from 1983 on he always ended with his joke, “We just got a contract to take E.T. back home.”

No matter how many years had passed since the last time he said it, it was always “we just got a contract” of “a few weeks ago we received a contract.” That was part of the gag, making it sound like a current Skunk Works project. Rich kept copies of his scripts, which he reused according to the needs of his audience, along with photocopies of all of his slides (including the “flying saucer”), so these details are easy to verify.

Jan Harzan, now executive director of Mutual UFO Network (MUFON), attended the March 1993 lecture at the University of California, Los Angeles, with fellow UCLA engineering alumnus and UFO enthusiast Tom Keller. Keller, an aerospace engineer who has worked as a computer systems analyst for NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, wrote about it in the May 2010 issue of “MUFON UFO Journal” and Harzan recently shared his story in a January 2012 interview with Web Talk Radio Network, and another with Alejando Rojas of Open Minds UFO News and Investigations in July 2013.

Harzan says that after the lecture ended a few people remained behind to ask questions. Some wanted to know more about the technology to “take E.T. home.” Harzan says Rich initially brushed off these queries but allegedly told one engineer, “We now know how to travel to the stars. We found an error in the equations and it won’t take a lifetime to do it.” I have also heard Rich’s statement quoted as, “First, you have to understand that we will not get to the stars using chemical propulsion. Second, we have to devise a new propulsion technology. What we have to do is find out where Einstein went wrong.”

Unfortunately, neither quote is verifiable but the second one sounds more like the words of an engineer, especially one with Rich’s stated views as outlined in his letter to John Andrews.

As things began to wind down after the UCLA speech, Rich said, “I’ve got to go now,” and started to walk out of the room. Harzan pursued him, and continued to ask him about the workings of interstellar propulsion systems. it was an unanswerable question in light of our current scientific knowledge.

Rich finally stopped and turned, then asked Harzan an unanswerable question of his own, “Well, let me ask you; how does ESP work?” Stunned, Harzan stammered, “I don’t know. All points in space and time are connected?” Rich responded, “That’s how it works,” then abruptly turned and walked away.

From the tone of the exchange it sounds more like Rich, having been kept well past his planned departure time and tired of being pestered, was simply anxious to leave and not that he was sharing some great technological secret.

Harzan and others have interpreted Rich’s final comments as a tacit admission that interstellar propulsion technology exists, that it is in the hands of U.S. scientists, and that it involves a specific set of known equations. But, taken in context, it sounds more like Rich carried his joke too far and talked himself into a corner. It is likely that he would have said, “That’s how it works,” no matter what Harzan’s answer to the E.S.P. question. Even if Rich had said, “Look, I was just kidding,” it would have done no good. The damage was done.

In 1994, a year after the UCLA lecture, rich told Popular Science magazine, “We have some new things [at the Skunk Works]. We are not stagnating. What we are doing is updating ourselves, without advertising. There are some new programs, and there are certain things, some of them 20 or 30 years old, that are still breakthroughs and appropriate to keep quiet about [because] other people don’t have them yet.”

He didn’t disclose, or even hint at, any advanced interstellar propulsion technologies because there was nothing to disclose.



E-mail =


Unreliable “claims” of self-claimed government UFO whistleblowers

There are so many characters in the field of Ufology who claim to be government UFO “whistleblowers“, it’s becoming almost ridiculous.   They are a dime a dozen.  The vast majority of those, if not all, are nothing but “self-claimed” whistleblowers.  Sure, some of them may have worked for the government but not in the capacity related to their self-claimed position.  They are totally unreliable and their grandiose claims are totally unreliable.   Some of those self-claimed government “whistleblowers” have actually even caused irreparable mental damage to their gullible “victims”.


There are also those who claim unveriafiable, sensational claims even upon their deathbed.

Here is one example, Boyd Bushman:




by Stuart J. Robbins, for SWIFT – – October 28, 2014:


A deathbed confession can be a way to solidify one’s reputation.
The thinking could easily be, “People really believe that people are 100% honest on their deathbed, so I’m going to make sure I go out with a ‘bang’ and make my claims yet again.  People who didn’t believe me before might this time because they’ll think I’m telling the truth ’cause I’m about to die.”

However, in addition to explaining why the common reasons to believe deathbed confession testimony are unconvincing, there’s a better reason why the testimony is not useful:  They’re doing it wrong.

Let’s say I had a bunch of secrets of exotic physics and decided to do a deathbed confession.  Here’s what I would say:  “I’ve been working on antigravity and warp field physics for the last 50 years, in secret, with the US government.”  Then, instead of showing photos of a spaceship or a blurry alien, I would add:  “And, here are the equations.  Here is a diagram for how you build a device.  Here is a working model.  Here is exactly how you put everything together.”

In other words, it shouldn’t matter who I am, what my experience is, or what pretty (or ugly) picture I show.  What I need to show is HOW to do it.  Just saying something doesn’t make it so.  I need to give enough information for someone else to verify it and duplicate it.  Otherwise, what’s the point?  To make a spectacle before I die?

That’s why I find this whole deathbed confession thing unconvincing and, perhaps more importantly, not useful:  We have no more information than we had before.  We have no way to verify any of the information claimed.  No way to test or duplicate it.

At best, we have another person claiming this stuff is real, and while he or she may be proven out with the passage of time, their “confession” contributed absolutely nothing to that advancement.

Until then, it’s no better than any other pseudoscientific claim.


By the way, there are quite a number of gullible UFO researchers who have easily been taken in by such claimants.

Here is another example of unconvincing deathbed confession, this time by a self-claimed former CIA Agent, courtesy of X Unknown & Richard Dolan:

Many folks ask me, “so, who do you trust in Ufology?”

I, for one, have a high respect and trust for Dr. Jacques Vallee.

I also like the logical arguments presented by John B. Alexander who has stated many times that there is no intentional UFO cover-up by the government.  On this I agree with him totally.

My other heroes were the late Dr. J. Allen Hynek and the late John A. Keel.


E-mail =