Individuals
with unique UFO perspectives
George
Adamski
Betty
Andreasson-Luca
George
C. Andrews
Gray Barker
Timothy Green
Beckley
Art Bell
Albert
Bender
Al Bielek
Richard Boylan
William
Bramley
Courtney Brown
Larry
Bryant
Grant Cameron
Glenn Campbell
Jimmy
Carter
Edgar
Cayce
David
Hatcher Childress
Gordon
Cooper
William
Cooper (also)
Philip
Corso
Maurice
Cotterell
Ellen
Crystall
Robert
"Bob"
O.
Dean
Stan Deyo
Jim
Dilettosso
Anthony Dodd
Frank Edwards
Lee and Brit Elders
Bill English
Lucious "Lou" Farish
Raymond Fowler
John G. Fuller
A.J. Geveard
Jackie Gleason
Barry Goldwater
Timothy Good
Gabriel Green
Bill Hamilton
Charles Halt
Norio Hayakawa
Michael Hesemann
Cynthia Hind
Richard Hoagland
Linda Moulton Howe
Antonio Huneeus
J. Allen Hynek
David Icke
M.K. Jessup
Peggy Kane
John Keel
Donald Keyhoe
Mark Kimmel
Dennis Kucinich
George Knapp
Bob Lazar
John Lear
Roger Leir
Joe Lewells
Jim and Coral Lorenzen
John Mack
Shirley MacLaine
Jesse Marcel
Jim Marrs
Jorge Martin
Jaime Maussan
Stanley McDaniel
James McDonald
Eduard Meier
Edgar Mitchell
Doug Moench
Ruth Montgomery
Silas Newton
Jim Nichols
Preston Nichols
Brian O'Leary
Roberto Pinotti
Wilhelm Reich
Jane Roberts
D. Scott Rogo
Edward J. Ruppelt
Michael Salla
Ivan T. Sanderson
Richard Sauder
Phil Schneider
John
Schuessler
Berthold Schwarz
Frank Scully
Zecharia Sitchin
Wilbert B. Smith
Ray Stanford
Fred Steckling
Brad Steiger
William Steinman
Wendelle C. Stevens
Clifford Stone
Whitley Streiber
Leonard Stringfield
Stewart Swerdlow
Vladimir Terziski
Nicola Tesla
Karla Turner
Val Valerian (aka John Grace)
Jacques Vallee
George Van Tassel
Immanuel Velikovsky
Erich Von Daniken
Ed Walters
Travis Walton
Frank Warren
Junichi Yaoi
Lonnie Zamora
|
News about our
guests...
May 14,
2009
Introduction to Dr.
Michael Salla's statement
I have elected to re-publish yesterday's article by Dr.
Michael Salla in order to clarify the identity of another
puppet/debunker in the UFO research community (Michael Horn, associated
with the Swiss group FIGU) who continues to make personal atatcks on
Alex Collier and the Exopolitics Institute.
Other recent attatcks on Exopolitics by UFO
abduction researcher Budd Hopkins (who works closely with Dr. David
Jacobs) at the Int'l UFO Congress in 2008 have demonstrated a distinct
unease for Salla, Collier and the Exopolitics Institute.
Clearly, Horn, Hopkins and their ilk represent
an opposing agenda(s) and are trying to retain control over the spread of
UFO-related information for their own particular profit motives and
control issues, without regard to schisms that they purposefully
are attempting to foster within the UFO research community.
Instead of adding new UFO research and
analysis to the field, there appears to be a community of debunkers
that will stop at nothing to retain control over public opinion, and
find Salla, Collier and Exopolitics and what they are exposing
particularly threatening to their agendas: simply stated, "Divide and
Conquer." Here then is Salla's statement...
May 13, 2009
"Misperceptions and Fables
about Exopolitics"
by Dr. Michael Salla of Exopolitics.org
There
has recently been a number of misperceptions and fables circulated
about leading figures in exopolitics, and of the exopolitics movement
in general. These misperceptions stem from a diverse number of
criticisms over claims that intelligent life was recently proven to
exist on Mars; lack of support for the Billy Meier case; or for
supporting the claims of Alex Collier. In response to these criticisms,
I need to first point out that exopolitics is a distinct
disciplinary
approach that
rises beyond belief in the authenticity of any single case, whether it
be whistleblower, contactee, UFO sighting event, document, NASA
imagery, psychic source, or researcher for that matter. Exopolitics
is
simply
the
study
of
the
political
actors,
processes
and
institutions
concerning
extraterrestrial
life.
That
definition
of
exopolitics
does
not
presuppose
the
existence
of
extraterrestrial
life,
only
the possibility of
extraterrestrial
life.
Those
interested
in
exopolitical
analysis
consider
ALL
evidentiary
sources
pertinent
to
extraterrestrial
life
whether
as
a
theoretical
possibility;
credible
evidence;
or concrete
facts covered up by various government and corporate entities. While
cooperation in the exopolitics field is highly desirable, unanimity is
neither necessary nor healthy. What follows is my personal reaction to
some of the criticisms that have emerged, and the misperceptions and
fables upon which they are based.
As a pioneer in the rapidly
growing exopolitics field, I have set out from the beginning to
establish a firm methodological basis for exopolitics research. This I
did with my very first paper, "The
Need
for
Exopolitics,"
where I categorized different evidentiary sources in terms of their
persuasiveness, and the different perspectives they provide on
extraterrestrial life and technology. I provided an analysis of the
evidence, much of it testimonial, in terms of its impact on global
politics. This was done from the perspective of a university educator
where students of global politics need to consider the content of
different sources rather than focus on filtering them out. During the
early 20th century, for example, many objected to including Marxist
sources into university curricula based on empirical, logical or
political objections. Most universities disagreed not because they
agreed with all the Marxist sources, but as educators their primary
responsibility was to train a new generation of students to
intellectually engage with the content of the Marxist literature.
I
use a similar pedagogical approach with regard to the exopolitical
material. The word ‘pedagogy’ simply means teaching style and the best
teachers are those that consider all sources of information relevant to
their field – period! Sadly, many UFO researchers fulfill the
function of intellectual gatekeepers for a distinct methodological
approach based on empirical verification. They unjustifiably
claim
to be champions of the scientific method and vigorously attack those
using sources they consider unproven or fall into a proverbial ‘grey
box”. Unfortunately, their methodological approach has more to do with
the Catholic Inquisition than any modern scientific approach to the
data in question. More to the point, many critics lack any kind of
formal academic training in social science research based on
qualitative methods where subjective human cognitive processes are
exhaustively analyzed. The result of the filtering process may lead to
a highly restricted set of data that answers the question whether UFOs
are real interplanetary vehicles, but leaves precious little for public
policy analysis of evidence pointing to many related political
processes, e.g., systematic cover-up of extraterrestrial life,
targeting extraterrestrial vehicles with advanced space weapons, joint
government-extraterrestrial bases, etc.
In my own research, I recognized that empirical
verification of sources was often elusive at best, but more often
compromised by various government agencies and corporations directly
involved in a cover up of extraterrestrial evidence. According
to an early
exopolitics
pioneer,
Major Donald Keyhoe, these entities make up the “Silence Group”.
Consequently, the absence of empirical or documentary verification is
not a suitable basis for dismissing evidentiary sources but simply an
additional factor to be considered in one’s exopolitical analysis. That
invites the use of qualitative social science methods rather than a
myopic focus on empirical validation of evidence that can always be
distorted, removed or faked just as easily as witness testimony.
Indeed, psychological warfare specializes in distorting facts and
evidence. Many government/military entities have become very proficient
in misleading the public about UFOs/extraterrestrials through planted
stories, evidence and agents provocateurs.
I wish to now to
specifically respond to several criticisms recently raised against
exopolitics researchers including myself. The first concerns criticisms
of leading exponents of the exopolitics movement for supporting the
contention that there is life on Mars based on NASA image analysis.
There is solid evidentiary support for the existence of ancient life
and primitive life forms based on recent Mars image analysis and
satellite studies of the Martian atmosphere. Prior to modern images
gained by NASA since the early 1960s, astronomers found much evidence
through powerful telescopes of the day that there were artificial
constructions on Mars that pointed to ancient intelligent life. More
recently, the NASA image analyses by Richard
Hoagland,Mike
Bara, Dr
Thomas
Van
Flandern and
others, have supported the existence of either ancient intelligent
life, and/or modern vegetative life. Recently, Andrew D. Basagio released
a
paper arguing that Mars Rover imagery conclusively prove the
existence of modern intelligent life on Mars.
I wish to publicly point out that I do not agree
with Basagio’s conclusions nor his research method. In
a phone conference with Mr Basagio earlier this year, I recommended
that he seek independent expert analysis of the Rover images he
analyzed in his paper before promoting his conclusions. I also pointed
out the error in his reasoning that he had discovered life on Mars
since it ignored the research findings of others such as Hoagland, Van
Flandern, etc. I pointed out that the research findings of at least
three independent experts would be the only way I could support his
research paper since I am not an image analysis expert. He disagreed
with my recommendation, and so I have to publicly part company with
Basagio's research since many are mistakenly associating me as a
supporter of his conclusions.
On the merits of Basagio’s
paper and conclusions, there is disagreement among exopolitics
researchers. That is not to be unexpected since exopolitics like any
research field has different personalities and methodological
approaches. While we may not always agree, we cooperate as far as
possible. As I said above, unanimity is neither necessary nor healthy
for the growth of the exopolitics discipline and movement. While I
agree with evidence of ancient artificial structures and some form
of current
life on Mars, I do not base this on the research of Andrew
Basagio.
With regard to the Billy Meier case, I agree with the
conclusions of the first investigations conducted by Lt
Col
Wendelle
Stevens (USAF, ret.), Gary
Kinder and Lee
Elders that there is much merit in Billy Meier’s claims of
contact with extraterrestrial life. I disagree however with those who
have developed a cult-like environment around Billy Meier as
the only alleged extraterrestrial contactee worth investigating. I
especially
disagree
with
the
claims
that
Meier
is
the
reincarnation
of
religious
prophets
such
as
Henoch/Enoch,
Isaiah,
Jmmanuel/Jesus,
Muhammed,
etc..
and
that
his
warnings
of
future
global
catastrophe
through
a
Third
World
War
have
any
special
merit.
Unfortunately,
the
cult-like
environment
around
Billy
Meier
has
been
encouraged
due
to
the
tight
control
over
him
by
a
Swiss
support
group
called FIGU who
restrict
his
access
to
modern
researchers.
Of
greater
concern
is
FIGU’s
appointment
of
‘publicists’
whose
sole
credentials
appear
to
be
unquestioned
loyalty
to
Meier
as
the
only
“genuine
contactee”
and
prophet
of
the
modern
age.
I now turn to criticisms of Alex Collier whose case I
have actively investigated for several years. I
have found no evidence of fraud in him claiming to have had
extraterrestrial contact, nor has any evidence of fraud ever been
presented to me by any critic making such a claim. Despite
attempts
by Billy Meier’s American publicist, Michael Horn, to persuade an
impartial expert, veteran UFO researcher Lt Col Wendelle Stevens
otherwise, Col Stevens confirmed in an email to me that he has “no
reason to disbelieve him [Collier] or his statements.” Consequently,
Horn’s claim of having proved Alex Collier to be a fraud is false. This
is part of a pattern of willful deception where Horn admitted in a private
email
to
independent
investigatorsof
the Meier material, to be “intentionally posting false and misleading
articles on his website”. Overall, I have found Alex Collier to be a
very warm sincere individual with much personal integrity who has made
great personal sacrifices to talk about his extraterrestrial contact
experiences. The recent savage personal attacks on his character and
integrity have more to do with the personal deficiencies and “questionable
agenda”
of Meier's American publicist, than Alex’s character. For those
interested in my own views or further information about Alex Collier,
please go
here.
In
conclusion, criticisms of exopolitics pioneers and research fail to
distinguish the extraordinary range in their research findings. Like
any movement, we have a diversity of skills, backgrounds, and
conclusions, but promote cooperation as far as possible. I and my
colleagues in the Exopolitics
Institute draw
upon decades of professional experience and research into the
extraterrestrial phenomenon and cognate fields. This research is often
shared free to the general public despite the personal and professional
cost for those of us involved in conducting such research. The same
cannot be said for armchair critics who actively spread many
misperceptions and fables about the exopolitics movement. I thank all
the supporters and readers of my exopolitics research, and look forward
to your continued support of the exopolitics movement.
Michael E. Salla, Ph.D
Kona, Hawaii
5/13/09
www.Exopolitics.Org
Honolulu
Exopolitics
Examiner
Forward
as you wish. Permission is granted to circulate among private
individuals and groups, post on all Internet sites and publish in full
in all not-for-profit publications. Contact author for all other
rights, which are reserved.
July 22,
2007
Peggy
Kane drops a bombshell: Cloned!
Peggy Kane, the very outspoken and
controversial UFO, EVP (electronic voice phenomena) and RS
(Reverse Speech) investigator has re-opened her website, and her blog
contains shocking new information coming largely from her forays
into RS analysis. Among the bombshells that Ms. Kane has revealed
is the recent decree that she believes she has been implanted and
cloned.
For
background information, watch Peggy Kane (Vol. 1)
on YouTube, and then watch Peggy Kane (Vol. 2)
on YouTube.
To proceed to subsequent segments,
CLICK
on the video response by UFO Hypotheses, which is located
under the
YouTube Flash Player under the heading "Comments & Responses: Video
Responses," and then repeat to end.
|
Groups of UFO investigators
AAS (Ancient Astronaut
Society)
Focused on Erich Von Daniken's research.
APRO
(Aerial Phenomena Research Organization)
Status: defunct.
Formerly headed by Jim and Coral Lorenzen of
Tucson, Arizona.
One of the best organizations for UFO case
investigation and reporting.
CAUS
(Citizens Against UFO Secrecy)
Key members: Todd Zechel, Lawrence
Fawcett, Peter
Gersten and Barry
Greenwood.
Political activism for government UFO
disclosure.
CSETI (Center For
Study of Extra-terrestrial Intelligence)
Headed by Steven Greer of Asheville, North
Carolina.
Known for its "Disclosure Project." Seeks
unprotected contact with ETs.
CUFOS (J.
Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies)
Leans towards skepticism, cynicism and
debunking of UFO cases.
Key members: Mark Rodeghier, Michael Swords,
Jerome Clark, Don Schmitt.
FIGU
Swiss
organization for Eduard Meier's Pleiadian material.
Leans towards protectionism of Meier's evidence, and
may exert undue control over Meier.
InLight (2012 Scenario)
A group of reporters organized around the premise that UFO contact is
real and ongoing, that most contact is very benevolent, and that
channeled information is often an extra-dimensional and/or
extra-terrestrial exchange of information with humanity, for our
benefit. Leans toward New Age ideals.
IUFOC
(International UFO Congress)
Key members: Donald
Ware, A.J. Gevaerd, Paola Harris, Haktan Akdogan, Paul Davids, Ross
Hemsworth, Giorgio Tsoukalos.
A truly international effort to promote the highest
levels of UFO research. Incredible video collection of testimonies and
evidence.
MUFON (Mutual UFO
Network)
Wide-ranging membership and wide-ranging
motivations. Difficulties with evidence going in, but not coming back
out.
NICAP (National
Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena)
Beware. Known for its CIA influence and connection.
|
|
