Image of the day

Captured by
GERALD KREITZBURG

Eastern Veil Nebula

My Account

New to Astromart?

Register an account...

Need Help?

Unidentified Funny Object

Started by Doug Peterson, 07/17/2007 01:48AM
Posted 07/17/2007 01:48AM | Edited 07/17/2007 01:53AM Opening Post
Stanton Friedman, the unemployed nuclear physicist who invented the Roswell incident, was on Larry King the other night. A good time was had by all.

The daughter of the press officer who released the flying saucer story first said her dad wasn't allowed to see the hardware, then later said he did. Of course this was the same year the word was coined, so it did not have anything like the baggage it has today.

Stan put down Michael Schermer of Skeptic magazine by erupting: "He's not a skeptic--he's a DEBUNKER!" Mike wanted to know where the evidence was; Stan retorted there were 3000 pieces.

The son of the original leaker--who handled the evidence from outerspace as a child--is convinced.

Buzz Aldrin told his shaggy dog UFO story tongue in cheek.

George Noory didn't have much to say, but would later on his radio show act as though guest Brian Greene, string theorist, was nuts for mentioning James Randi, et al, as sensible skeptics.

I am not a Larry King fan, but looked like even he had a hard time keeping a straight face.

"--Granted, that's a worse case scenario. The destruction might in fact be ... limited to our own galaxy."
Posted 07/17/2007 12:51PM #1
I saw a few minutes of that show, including the part where Michael Schermer was called a debunker.

Mr. Schermer also has a column (regular? irregular?) in Scientific American and was a regular guest on a local college radio station, Pasadena City College's KPCC.

Yes, this particular show was more unweildy than most of Larry King's shows.

Back to Mr. Schermer. Mr. Schermer was given his couple of minutes to make his spiel, when it was Mr. Friedman's turn to speak. Mr. Schermer started repeatedly interrupting and questioning every minor assertion or statement Mr. Friedman said. This is the popular take-no-prisoner's style of debate. This style of debate isn't really debate. It's censorship by pre-emption, so to speak.

I find Mr. Schermer to be at times be insightful, interesting, and largely agree with him on where he stands. But, he and other skeptics often turn me off by their style and attitude. They rely too much on a preachy tone, or holding up to ridicule who they are opposed to. The message they are making can often be distilled down to "our side is smart and their side are fools." At times they can be just mean.

In other words, he's a dubunker, not a skeptic! wink

SL

The only thing wrong with censorship is [deleted].