What happens when a ufo incident

[Carol Nistri]

is called a hoax? I was thinking about The Day After Roswell,the book was reviewed by ONE MAN,this one man Brad Sparks and the whole book fell apart,now why did this one man destroy this book?,because Corso had dates wrong,dates the easiest of all mistakes to make some forty years after the end of WW11. I never thought this was fair but something happens to the human mind when a case is said to be a hoax,my question is who checks the checker? The air force came out and wrote a book regarding Roswell.They said that those "aliens" were really test dummies.But the got a whole snoot full of egg salad on their faces when a sharp eyed blogger said that test dummies wernt even invented until a full five years After roswell.

[orangekea]

Originally Posted by Carol Nistri

is called a hoax? I was thinking about The Day After Roswell,the book was reviewed by ONE MAN,this one man Brad Sparks and the whole book fell apart,now why did this one man destroy this book?,because Corso had dates wrong,dates the easiest of all mistakes to make some forty years after the end of WW11. I never thought this was fair but something happens to the human mind when a case is said to be a hoax,my question is who checks the checker? The air force came out and wrote a book regarding Roswell.They said that those "aliens" were really test dummies.But the got a whole snoot full of egg salad on their faces when a sharp eyed blogger said that test dummies wernt even invented until a full five years After roswell.

Good point, and couldn't agree more, Carol! I simply treat a claim of a UFO sighting and a claim of a hoax as claims(!) and then will examine the evidence provided in support of each claim.

I cannot find more than a handful of major UFO hoaxes I could reasonably defend as hoaxes. Leaving a hell of a lot of UFO sightings/experiences imo worth defending.


orangekea

[Carol Nistri]

My feelings exactly Orange.

" cannot find more than a handful of major UFO hoaxes I could reasonably defend as hoaxes. Leaving a hell of a lot of UFO sightings/experiences imo worth defending."

[dr wu23]

Originally Posted by Carol Nistri

is called a hoax? I was thinking about The Day After Roswell,the book was reviewed by ONE MAN,this one man Brad Sparks and the whole book fell apart,now why did this one man destroy this book?,because Corso had dates wrong,dates the easiest of all mistakes to make some forty years after the end of WW11. I never thought this was fair but something happens to the human mind when a case is said to be a hoax,my question is who checks the checker? The air force came out and wrote a book regarding Roswell.They said that those "aliens" were really test dummies.But the got a whole snoot full of egg salad on their faces when a sharp eyed blogger said that test dummies wernt even invented until a full five years After roswell.

First of all no one has ever said Roswell was a hoax. Govt disinfo or coverup of something else but no one has ever accused them of actually hoaxing it.
Secondly not that many cases have been called hoaxes compared to how many there are out there..and certainly not until they have been looked at by many for a long time and something uncovered to question the case.

[Carol Nistri]

Im referring to those that have been called hoxes,you may be right about roswell,but Soccoro New Mexico?

[dr wu23]

Originally Posted by Carol Nistri

Im referring to those that have been called hoxes,you may be right about roswell,but Soccoro New Mexico?

There are always going to be some who label these things hoaxes. So what?

[orangekea]

Originally Posted by dr wu23

There are always going to be some who label these things hoaxes. So what?

Both of you make sense. On Wu's side, most of the foundational cases of UFOlogy have been skeptically questioned and considered for hoax, plus, just reading on the internet I have seen many posters simply calling ALL sightings and experiences hoaxes collectively. Since the scientific value of such broad statements is nil, imo we can disregard them indeed. (I would pay attention if someone like DrDil gives specific fact-supported criticism, case by case.)

But Carol, you do have a point. Just the endless repeated hoax claims about everything UFO related, creates an atmosphere of doubt, making the subject less accessible, and leading people to dismiss it out of hand.


orangekea

[Carol Nistri]

You know Orange,maybe the people that dismiss all ufo cases as hoxes Should not be included in research of the subject,theve already made up their minds and anything
other than hoax wouldnt enter their minds.

[Carol Nistri]

I thought of this long after I got off the puter,The Cash/Ludrum case,this one had it all.

The Piney Woods Incident, Cash-Landrum

[dfsjr47]

If skeptics were not included in the research then the research would not be valid. All true research needs both sides to respond for the information to mean anything. The side with the best information in the end should point to the obvious result rather true or false.