We're tired of "loony" scientists, academics and others who abuse their official titles, offices or capacities to misdirect the public and otherwise shun their duties and responsibilities to conduct legitimate, objective, competent research, science and expert investigation on the UFO/ET/Cosmic Life Reality. This section of our website is devoted to exposing MISLEADING or CHARLATAN SCIENCE AND ACADEMICS that plague this important issue to help raise the "ridicule factor" for it. Our goal is to show these experts that they are making mistakes and that they need to improve by conducting serious work on this subject rather than deriding and downplaying the topic.
Note: Each sentence is numbered at the start of the sentence or segment in the original statement and correspondingly referenced in the Fact Check section that follows it.
(1) “The vast majority of sightings are misidentified natural objects, like bright planets or stars in the sky, or man-made objects like satellites, planes and balloons,” Hammergren said. (2) “The rest of them will be stories that are too detailed and too unusual to be explained by natural or human-made objects, (3) but unfortunately, those stories just aren’t backed up by any physical evidence... (4) Given the complete lack of results in UFO studies over more than 70 years, I just don’t see any justification for the spending of millions of taxpayer dollars on this subject,”
----Astronomer Mark Hammergren, Adler Planetarim
Article: Garcia, Evan, “Secret UFO Program Funded by Pentagon for Years,” Chicago Tonight, WTTW.com (Dec 19, 2017). LINK
(1) This statement misleads the public by inferring the entire subject is misidentified nonsense--that most witnesses are mistaken. In fact, the original Air Force studies used such assumptions in their sighting analysis as a tool to help them quickly sift through sighting reports that lacked strong verification or supporting evidence---they often mislabeled sightings "misidentified' simply because they could find a possible alternative answer for the sighting (not because the alternative answer was correct). Such a process was done even when experts were reporting the sightings and knew the differences between what they saw and "what it might have been." By using such a "speed review" process, the USAF set an early precedent that many others subsequently followed---hence the conclusion that most witnesses are misidentifying what they see remains unsubstantiated as well as "unstudied" and thus "invalid".
(2) This portion of the statement actually infers the answer can only be 'ET' but is used here to disarm the reader in preparation for the 'nonsense bomb' to follow.
(3) Here, a non-factual statement is made as if it is fact. The world if overfilled with cases that include physical evidence, which shows Hammergren is either ignorant of the facts or purposely attempting disinformation--either one disqualifies him.
(4) Again, a nonfactual statement is made as if it is a fact. The reality is there are many studies, starting with Project SIGN by the USAF in 1948, going right through the COMETA study of the 90s and subsequent reports that contradict this statement. Additionally, the US Pentagon is recently verified studying the UFO reality as we speak and revealed it spent $22 million in a previous UFO study.
As you can see, mainstream scientists, astronomers and other experts
can make mistakes on this subject matter at the drop of a hat. This example shows why it is necessary for mainstream science and other experts to properly engage in the research, study and investigation of the UFO/ET/Cosmic Life Reality. By allowing those who deride the subject and know too little about it to continually speak to the world on the subject improperly, the scientific community undermines itself and its reputation, allowing it to be publicly perceived as an industry filled with quacks (which it is not).
Copyright 2017-2018, Z.Bonn. All Rights Reserved.