UFO Conjectures

Wednesday, May 24, 2023

John Greenewald wraps up the "brouhaha" coming his way for calling out Corbell and Knapp's "slanted" 2021 UAP "tale"

https://youtu.be/wUvUIKz_fK4



 

posted by RRRGroup at Wednesday, May 24, 2023

9 Comments:

  • Greenewald gives a shout-out to "Mick" a few times in the video, so I assume he means Mick West, who was also working to debunk the Corbell video. (But of course.) It's wonderful they both have the same agenda for once. Be it ever so if the situation was reversed.

    But considering that West's agenda is to ultimately tear down Greenewald's work, John's professionalism and courtesy toward West is . . . commendable.

    Or maybe I meant to say condemnable? Damn spellchecker.

    By Blogger Ron, at Wednesday, May 24, 2023  

  • Whatever it takes to expose the shenanigans of Corbell and Knapp is okay with me.

    (Then there are the obsessives: Greer and Bassett.)

    The SCU guys are foolish, but Corbell and Knapp divert the public and some good but naive UFO folks. They need to be outed.

    Greenewald is walking a line, trying not to offend too harshly Corbell and Knapp but it would be better just to discard them altogether. They are, bottom line, worthless.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, May 24, 2023  

  • I'm all for Greenewald being civil. His following of journalistic standards and publishing a full accounting is also right on. But when he wears kid gloves dealing with West, who has been known to overlook (shall we say) or throw out testimony and evidence, and continue to present his biased views knowing that testimony and evidence is still out there -- well, that just doesn't work for me.

    I'm not asking Greenewald to challenge West to a duel, just keep the guy at arm's length and don't let him steal your lunch money.

    By Blogger Ron, at Wednesday, May 24, 2023  

  • Knapp has been a great disappointment.

    BD

    By Blogger Bryan Daum, at Wednesday, May 24, 2023  

  • More on debunking in general:

    Curt Collins' Facebook followers dumped on SCU's study of the Aguadilla case. The reasoning behind it? SCU is the "only" organization to come up a UFO/UAP conclusion; Mick West has "dismantled" their arguments. Collins summarizes West's findings and makes them sound perfectly reasonable. However . . .

    . . . Bryan Sentes notes "The recent head-to-head of West and SCU at the inaugural symposium of the Society for UAP Studies in February made clear the case is more problematic than West et al. make out here..." Good for Bryan.

    West is the current point man, or self-appointed man as it were, for skeptical inquiry; another amateur passing professional judgment on things that go bump in the night sky. His influence in public media continues to grow. Why are ufologists going easy on him? Unless they believe his arguments carry more weight than they're willing to admit? I don't get it.

    By Blogger Ron, at Thursday, May 25, 2023  

  • I'm not current on West, Ron, so your input here is treasured.

    Curt's page didn't show up in my notifications so I'll look for it.

    SCU is trying to make a case and pretending their take is entrenched in science and while some of the methodologies are, the whole result is a mix of unimportant revelations.

    For instance, in that Puerto Rico object that sinks underwater and is alleged to come out as 2 objects, is way off.

    The "second object" is a lens refraction caused by the wave produced by the thing, not a second tangible object.

    (If there are typos or glitches above, forgive me. I'm on my phone and struggling to type as my driver races along a skitzy road outside Ann Arbor )

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, May 25, 2023  

  • I'm not current on West, Ron, so your input here is treasured.

    Curt's page didn't show up in my notifications so I'll look for it.

    SCU is trying to make a case and pretending their take is entrenched in science and while some of the methodologies are, the whole result is a mix of unimportant revelations.

    For instance, in that Puerto Rico object that sinks underwater and is alleged to come out as 2 objects, is way off.

    The "second object" is a lens refraction caused by the wave produced by the thing, not a second tangible object.

    (If there are typos or glitches above, forgive me. I'm on my phone and struggling to type as my driver races along a skitzy road outside Ann Arbor )

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, May 25, 2023  

  • I had a question about the object entering then exiting the water, so you've answered that, thanks. Interesting you come up with the "unimportant" characterization of SCU's findings; that was Collins' take as well.

    I'm not saying SCU has a step on West, and it would be foolish to assume West isn't making points along the way. I guess my long-winded point is that everyone is in desperate need to push their own agenda, and bias on both sides needs to be called, not let slip.

    By Blogger Ron, at Thursday, May 25, 2023  

  • Martin...

    I'm with your comments, entirely!

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, May 26, 2023  

Post a Comment

<< Home