Click here to support the Daily Grail for as little as $US1 per month on Patreon

Friedman on the Skeptologists

As a follow-up to my story on Friday, “Skeptologists Attack Ufologists“: in that article I published Stanton Friedman’s response to ‘skeptologist’ Brian Dunning’s original criticism of the Betty and Barney Hill story. Stan has since sent me a quick response to Dunning’s subsequent ‘hit piece’ on him personally (“Stanton Friedman Doesn’t Like Me“) – I’ve reprinted Stan’s email below in its entirety with his permission.

——————–

Brian Dunning Running for Top UFO Debunker

Debunker Brian Dunning must be congratulated for adhering so closely to the basic rules for debunking: A. What the public doesn’t know, I won’t tell them. B. Don’t bother me with the facts, my mind is made up. C. If one can’t attack the data, attack the people. D. Do one’s research by proclamation, investigation is too much trouble.

He demonstrated these in his off the wall attack on Skeptoid on the Betty and Barney Hill case about which I have written a detailed critique. Then he reacted like a spoiled brat caught with his hand in the cookie charge by insulting me after hearing on a radio station that I had said his piece was loaded with false claims. He said Friedman was “the principal Author of the Roswell, Travis Walton, and Betty and Barney Hill UFO mythologies”. I haven’t written any mythologies and certainly didn’t write a book about Travis Walton. More: “he wrote the most significant books inventing the most popular stories”. Wow, I am impressed. He must be jealous of my being a nuclear physicist.. “in fact his only career since 1970, was writing UFO books”. I must be a very slow writer. My first book, “Crash at Corona”, co-authored with Don Berliner, was published in 1992. My second book “TOP SECRET/MAJIC” was published in 1997. “Captured! The Betty and Barney Hill UFO Experience”, co-authored with Kathleen Marden, Betty’s niece, was published in 2007. My most recent book “Flying Saucers and Science” was published in June, 2008. He quite obviously hadn’t read “Captured!” and I seriously doubt if he has read any of the others either. He thinks TV producers should “call a spade a spade and call me an “Obsessed UFO Wacko”. He then makes the out of this world claim that his claims in his skeptical piece “are corroborated by Stanton Friedman’s own books.” This is hogwash to the 4th power.

He says “the facts of the case aren’t really in question [so why didn’t he get them right?], it’s the interpretation of the facts that are. Betty Hill spent two years writing a UFO story and sharing it with her husband, and then when asked about that story under hypnosis, Barney Hill was able to rattle it off pretty much as she wrote it”. This is a total and complete lie as he and anybody else would know if he had read “Captured”. I can only wonder what the source for this completely wrong claim was. Dunning calls me “a successful author busy with book tours and UFO conventions”. Fact is I have never done a book tour. I have spoken at over 600 colleges and 100 professional groups. After 1970 and prior to “Crash at Corona”, I was involved in a lot of professional activities. I worked on the commissioning of the Pt. Lepreau nuclear generating station. I measured radon levels in houses and wells in the Fredericton area. I did a study for the Canadian Electrical Association on “The Recovery and Utilization of Waste Heat from Power-plants”(visiting a number of facilities) and another for them on “The Use of Electron Beams to Treat Flue Gas.” I did a study “Future Technology Scenarios for New Brunswick” for the Province, and other studies on food irradiation, and seed stimulation. I gave professional papers at meetings of the European Society for Nuclear methods in Agriculture in Piacenza, Italy, and Warsaw, Poland, among others.

So it is clear Brian Dunning is a skilled liar, not a skeptic. He deserves “Debunker of the Year” award. And he should apologize to his readers and me for gross misrepresentation.

Stan Friedman

Editor
  1. Maybe Scientologist?
    Based on the Skeptologists inability to perform basic research in the field in which they are supposedly studying, I don’t think their show is going to be on the air for very long. Maybe those Skeptologists should become Readologists first so that they have half a chance at coming to valid conclusions? Call me a Crazyologist…..

  2. Set Us Straight, Then

    He must be jealous of my being a nuclear physicist. … After 1970 and prior to “Crash at Corona”, I was involved in a lot of professional activities.

    It is clearly important to Mr. Friedman that commentators accurately describe his credentials relative to nuclear physics.

    To that end, why don’t we sort this out right now?

    Mr Friedman, in what year did you last perform any paid work that was unambiguously “nuclear physics”? I don’t mean any old work in which a physics background happens to come in handy as a secondary qualification, but work that nuclear physicists would identify as professional work in their field.

    And, during what period(s) was such professional nuclear physics work your primary source of income?

    1. Fill out Form B in triplicate please!
      [quote=Daniel Loxton]It is clearly important to Mr. Friedman that commentators accurately describe his credentials relative to nuclear physics.[/quote]

      To be clear about Stan’s response on the “nuclear physicist” front in this particular post, I do believe it is a direct reference to Brian Dunning’s original statement: “I didn’t know that his real career, in fact his only career since 1970, was writing UFO books. I guess the TV producers feel that calling him a nuclear physicist gives him more credibility than calling a spade a spade and saying “Obsessed UFO Wacko”.)”

      I trust that you’re checking Brian Dunning’s sources for that one, and asking him for some evidence of his qualifications to be called a “skeptologist”? 😉

      [quote]And, during what period(s) was such professional nuclear physics work your primary source of income? [/quote]

      For the lolz. Chill a little dude…

      Kind regards,
      Greg
      ——————————————-
      You monkeys only think you’re running things

      1. Yes – But It’s Still a Good Question
        [quote=Greg]For the lolz. Chill a little dude…[/quote]

        Your point is taken, but still: Stanton Friedman insists that third parties identify him as a nuclear physicist, even in contexts that have no relation to physics. If he’s to publicly make his physics background such a sticking point, I think it’s reasonable to request the details of that background.

        As to Dunning’s point, it could be rephrased, “For the past 40 years, a much larger proportion of Friedman’s professional activities have comprised discussing or promoting UFOs than have comprised doing professional physics.”

        Dunning’s original statement may not have been perfectly accurate, but his underlying point appears to be exactly on the mark. If it isn’t, I’d appreciate further clarification.

        So, allow me to repeat my questions: Mr. Friedman, when did you last do professional work in the field of physics? And, when was professional physics last your primary career?

        Regards,
        Daniel

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Mobile menu - fractal