I agree. I have great respect for Bob Bigelow, & admire all that he did. He is a visionary. I also respect the good men who actually spent time in years past on the ranch, & do not wish to minimize or dismiss their concerns. We should all be focused on one thing: TRUTH.
-
-
Easy to say that the truth is the goal, but these days, to go into business with the History Channel is to lose credibility from the get-go. It implies publicity and entertainment is the point, not serious research into the various phenomena witnessed or suspected at the ranch.
1 Antwort 0 Retweets 9 Gefällt mir -
I understand your concern, but respectfully do not see another medium that can engage the public, explore what many believe to be “controversial” topics & provide a resource to conduct investigation. Academia certainly isn’t interested, & I have yet to see a more effective path.
3 Antworten 0 Retweets 10 Gefällt mir -
One might say History Channel prostitutes "controversial" topics without any regard for "truth" or even for our best understanding of it based on what's been investigated and documented. Maybe that means there is no effective path, depending on what you intend to accomplish.
1 Antwort 0 Retweets 4 Gefällt mir -
Antwort an @LaurieDecatur @BrandonFugal und
If the goal is to create a "rent a phenomenon" resort, History Channel is a great source of publicity. If you ever want the data you collect on the property to be taken seriously, it's probably best done in a controlled, private way, then shared if that's what you choose to do.
1 Antwort 0 Retweets 1 Gefällt mir -
The nature of the data we have been collecting for 4 years on the property in a controlled, private way, has not been taken seriously. Academia & most media outlets have remained dismissive, if not outright hostile. This is not a “rent a phenomenon” resort.
7 Antworten 2 Retweets 17 Gefällt mir -
I'm unclear as to what your research goals are. Does your study require publicity or are you simply having trouble finding real researchers to process the data you've collected? Because an association with History Channel will ultimately hurt those efforts.
1 Antwort 0 Retweets 5 Gefällt mir -
Antwort an @LaurieDecatur @BrandonFugal und
Would have been smarter to seek out the sane segment of ufology and the paranormal instead of going straight to Disneyland. We’ll end up with a highly censored version based on viewers numbers and entertainment value with no objectivity whatsoever.
1 Antwort 0 Retweets 5 Gefällt mir -
Antwort an @memizon @LaurieDecatur und
Not true. There is no censored, exaggerated or fabricated product. No objectivity? I’ve engaged experts who have nothing to do w/ufology. Is there a sane segment of ufology & the paranormal? From what I’ve observed, ufology tends to eat its young, & is its own worst enemy.
8 Antworten 1 Retweet 22 Gefällt mir -
Antwort an @BrandonFugal @LaurieDecatur und
Getting experts on board who have nothing to do with ufology is no guarantee for objectivity either. Yes there is an international network of objective ufologists. It just doesn’t advertise on Facebook or History Channel.
1 Antwort 0 Retweets 6 Gefällt mir
Antwort an @memizon @LaurieDecatur und
Good and valid points. Academia is littered with falsified and biased data as well.
12:22 - 28. März 2020
0 Antworten
0 Retweets
6 Gefällt mir
Das Laden scheint etwas zu dauern.
Twitter ist möglicherweise überlastet oder hat einen vorübergehenden Schluckauf. Probiere es erneut oder besuche Twitter Status für weitere Informationen.