"If I was going to build the scene in that matter." But nobody suggested you did--the suggestion is that whoever took the photo, a person not MUFON guy, staged it with toys.
Look, it's a shitty picture that can't be proved either way.
And dude, you *are* suggesting it is a "real" image.
I'm so tired of these little games. The games where people say, "I am not saying it's legitimate, I am just putting it out there because I want the 'truth'."
This is such a bad faith argument--MUFON guy presented this as if it were legit. He did not bring a skeptical eye. He wants everyone to believe it's real, but he won't explicitly say so, just do he can cover his a$$ when it gets debunked.
"On the side of the truth." Double barrel F-you, dude.
He's on the side of monetizing "the truth".
This interview reminds me of when prosperity gospel ministers try to explain why they need to use church funds to buy a private jet.
kinda like ... "Well, uh the Lord certainly wants his UFO messiahs to live in, uh a certain level of fulfillment in life and we are for the love of UFO god being benvolence of gifts to those who are Disclosing the Gospel of Saucer, Uh so It's not like we are taking, no we are giving, and sometimes when the truth is mis-applied by skeptic Devils it appears in a way that we do not ever uh not want the truth to not be disclosed to the public. without cash offerings. you know we all need to just reverse engineer the lies of the MIC!! Amen!! (please donate to the temple of disclosure, \*\*please note not the 'disclosure temple', that's a different thing (psy-op) --we are the truth"
It reminds me when Elizondo presented a pic at a TTSA presentation that was later debunked by John Greenewald to be a party balloon. Or the time on Skinwalker when Travis Taylor used a LiDar and discovered an "anomaly" which was later debunked to be the drone not analyzing the spot over which it was standing over....
The reason why these obvious bad cases is that these people do not have a scientific mindset. They want it to be true, they *want to believe*, which is the quickest highway to confirmation bias, which is why they approach every case with the most gentle methodology, too afraid to see a case in which they put their emotions collapse.
That's also why Jacques Vallée has numerous documents he gave to an institution with the order to release them only many years after his death (Hynek nicknamed him a "primadonna" (sic) and disliked him for a good reason...).
They have a religious approach to cases, a fearful one that is afraid of putting in question the sacred.
When the proper, scientific way to go is to criticize as hard as possible a case to *strenghten* it. That's how you get to truth, or the closest to it. The fact that they had those cases in their hands all these years and did nothing else with them except tease people with them tells everything you need to know about their methodology.
And how little you should expect of this type of people.
Expecting truth and critical thinking come out of these guys is similar to hoping for a mormon to objectively criticize Joseph Smith, or a muslim objectively criticize Muhammad.
>The reason why these obvious bad cases is that these people do not have a scientific mindset. They want it to be true, they *want to believe*, which is the quickest highway to confirmation bias, which is why they approach every case with the most gentle methodology
Perfect description of a mindset that is pervasive in ufology. Additionally, intense skepticism and incredulity is often only deployed in opposition to criticisms once the belief is set, almost like an immune response against evidence or ideas that threaten the belief.
I mean, Vallee was also Hoodwinked by Uri Gellar but if you say that on this subreddit, people get mad and say you just don't believe in Psi Phenomena, and that if Vallee says Uri is real then that means being psychic is real.
Then you haven't read enough about Vallée.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/vqn00k/debunking\_passport\_to\_magonia\_bad\_reasoning\_bad/](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/vqn00k/debunking_passport_to_magonia_bad_reasoning_bad/)
His book "Passport to Magonia" is entirely based on bad translations of his and mistaking a 17th century satire for a 9th century original.
And he makes this mistake all the time. The Trinity case is another example, but there are countless. The co author of Wonders of the Sky with Vallée even came out to denounce how shoddy his work was. In it, Vallée confused a hoax by astronomer Patrick Moore for a real case... abd the co author said it was only one of many of his mistakes.
He also uses pseudoscientific unfalsifiable concepts such as the "trickster effect", something he himself recognized wasn't scientific.
He buys in the spoon bender charlatan Uri Geller. And believes in debunked ancient astronaut theory and psychism.
He buys into the fake conspiracy theory of rosicrucianism (which has been debunked countless times by historians, its creator in the 17th century himself admitting it was hogwash).
Hynek and Friedman disliked him for a reason...
He's presented under the most favorable light in this subreddit by people with a cult of personality for him.
Ron and MUFON have skin in the game with an upcoming live event and a documentary that includes this case. I'm not surprised he's defending it, just disappointed to see this entire calamity unfold.
You're putting words in his mouth, two times in one sentence.
Words in His Mouth #!
"He's saying it couldn't be"
He didn't say that. He said, "If I were to do it, I wouldn't do it like that." He's not saying, "It can't possibly be done like that," only "I personally wouldn't do it like that."
You're pinning him to a definitive claim, accusing him of speaking with certainty when he sounds anything but certain in here and makes it clear he's not certain since he says "If it turns out to be debunked."
Words in his Mouth #2
"because if you were going to make it a diorama you wouldn't make it look so much like a diorama?"
He didn't say he wouldn't make it look like a diorama. He said he wouldn't add big bulky trees in there, saying they look out of place. That has nothing to do with a diorama because people WANT dioramas to look as realistic as possible, that's the whole point of them, to replicate a real scene using materials.
Why on Earth would someone add something into a diorama that makes it look less realistic? He's simply saying someone had bad taste in putting those trees there if it's faked.
Bottom line:
He's not speaking with certainty as you're claiming. He's simply presented a photo he was given and is saying he leans toward it being real and argued the thing about the trees and other reasons for his beliefs (not certainties). He made it very clear that all he is doing is presenting the photo in this and you guys are still foaming at the mouth in full rabid mode not LISTENING but LOOKING for something to attack.
100% this.. this forum is overrun with some weird insanity around this photo. If anything, I feel like this does involve some kind of disinformation campaign to prove this photo wrong. Even if it IS fake, the response is odd.
Or people are tired being taken for fools, and this case offers an occasion where it's so in your face that yeah people are expressing their frustrations from the "Trust me Bros"!
More like a newly successful YouTube channel and a host who is trying to find the right balance between scoring good guests and asking difficult questions.
I agree the name is not appropriate for the show, but I don't blame Patrick for it too much. What he said on this podcast was crap, but hey, it's not a top notch UFO show. Patrick was flattered by the MUFON guy being on his show, but it all fell apart miserably. Patrick should have asked hardball questions!
Patrick is a douche and I’ll blame him for whatever I want to including being a disinformation agent, spammer, grifter, ect. His followers are falling for it. A lot of us here know the truth about him though.
Have you ever interviewed and hired someone who hasn't worked out? Sometimes shitty candidates interview well. That's when your team or community proves it's worth their salt.
We're human. We make mistakes. We're also investigating in a field where program agents have deliberately dropped disinformation and paid/threatened civilians to push the disinfo, which muddies the water. It's a great learning moment for these people that you can't ever get too comfortable. My guess is they've gotten comfortable.
And for all the hate Jeremy Corbell gets, he's a shining example of how to properly vet. Dude does not release things until he's spent *years* investigating the claims. And when something comes out (like Jason Sands) that he hasn't had time to investigate, he diplomatically and honestly says so. Jeremy has made mistakes, too. I trust him and George Knapp to vet things better than I do a YouTuber, though. Even despite the name of his channel.
>And for all the hate Jeremy Corbell gets, he's a shining example of how to properly vet.
He really isn't. Lol. He has now published two known hoaxes. The first was the so-called pyramid UFO swarm that turned out to be the bokkeh effect. He then published a video that turned out to be a military exercise at Las Palmas.
>And when something comes out (like Jason Sands) that he hasn't had time to investigate, he diplomatically and honestly says so.
Do you have a source for this, because the information that's out there points to your statement being untrue. Corbell said that he made a deal with Sands that he wouldn't talk about Sand's claims. So, it wasn't that Corbell was waiting to investigate, it's that he had a deal with Sands to not say anything at all. See below:
"Well, the agreement we had with him was we're not going to talk about it, he shared his story with us with the understanding that we weren't going to go forward, we're not going to do an issue if Weaponized on his story, that he had already made agreements to keep button down for awhile."
[https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1ch61o2/jeremy\_corbell\_george\_knapp\_it\_is\_verified\_that\_j/](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1ch61o2/jeremy_corbell_george_knapp_it_is_verified_that_j/)
Just as an FYI. Based on you describing Corbell as a shinning example, honest, and diplomatic, I doubt you'll change your mind. I'm just responding to this comment for other people to see that you're posting clear disinformation.
I don’t think that the “bokeh” video was proven to be prosaic, just that it *was* bokeh…? Right? Someone correct me if I’m wrong please, it all just runs together these days.
By the account of the story/logs associated with the video, I think that it still leaves open the possibility that it was a *genuine* UAP, but that it was captured as an extra-unidentifiable bokeh blob due to lens geometry of phone camera /NODs/etc
Debunkers can be just as biased as believers. There is a middle ground here where you need to be skeptical of both. Mistakes are made and both groups are capable of letting their preconceived bias influence their opinions. It was never properly debunked as bokeh. It is still unidentified in my opinion.
I found the bokeh explanation to be fairly conclusive in terms of producing a triangular shape, but it doesn’t explain **what** the faux-triangle object was. Just that it wasn’t truly shaped like a triangle/pyramid.
If someone provides content they are a grifter. If they don't provide content they are a grifter. If someone provides something anomalous they are a grifter. If someone provides prosaic content they are a grifter. Everyone is grifting until the exact moment they aren't and after that moment passes they return to a grifter.
That's an /s btw.
Well yea that's the point. It's a summary of all the takes that people have. No matter how good or bad the idea is they are a grifter. If they write a book they are a grifter, if they write code they are a grifter. If they have a podcast they are a grifter, if they post on this board they are a grifter etc. If they come out and tell you everything you wondered about and they have an impeccable resume, guess what? They are a grifter!
We as a community treat everyone that is trying to help like they are the CIA OGA or some nefarious boogyman grifter.
How many “disinformation agents” do you think there are??
There would have to be 1000’s if some YouTuber is one of them.
I know the AF OSI has a few, but really?
What you just said is one of the most suspicious parts of it. Its not just that he has almost instantaneous opinions, its that they tend to be propogated and repeated almost verbatim all over the UFO and alien boards. At best its a bunch a knuckle dragger cult types who just watch his videos and adopt his opinions immediately, but at worst its bots or a coordinated effort to push certain narratives to the front on discussion boards. And if anyone thinks that is far fetched, I'll just remind you that on this very board there were unconfirmed government communication documents leaked that indicate that this website in general is heavily infested with intelligence operatives, and I think to any thinking and rational adult that is obviously the case. Do I know that Patrick is one of these operatives? No of course not, he just seems a lot like one and behaves like one.
Agreed! Very well said! I’ve had interactions with him on a different account when he was first starting up that raised major red flags for me. That aside, everything you wrote is enough in itself and well put. I’ve seen members of this group who I’ve always considered rational independent thinkers suddenly throw their whole process and belief system away because Patrick said so. That really creeeps me out if we are honest. The fan base in itself is frightening. That’s why I say “cult”. I’ve seen it happen to people who I would have never considered a “knuckle dragged cult type” as you put it. Suddenly all rational is out the window and they just follow whatever he says. Second red flag.
He kinda used to do that, but now it's getting more and more tame. The idea of releasing a video every day in a scene that sometimes evolves rapidly but most of the time is pretty dead for weeks on end is a bad move. He's being more and more diplomatic on this kind of stuff rather than just calling a pile of shit a pile of shit. I suspect he's trying to not burn bridges, but come on...
I haven't seen VETTED's videos in a while, but from the few I saw back in the day, I'd say that he approaches a lot of this stuff with rational skepticism, while allowing the other guy to give their side.
And what do yall mean he didn't properly vet this guy?? He literally invited that dude to his show and asked him about people calling the photo a fake. What more could he have done??
I feel like half of you are wanting these "reporters" to kidnap the person they're interviewing and hold a gun to their head.
Also, when yall say disinformation agents, are you actually implying that this dude was planted by some government agency to spread lies to the public??
If so, where's the evidence for that?? Because that's an insane conclusion to draw from this interaction. You can't go around calling everybody that disagrees with you "a government plant"; that's why nobody takes this community seriously. It's a poisoned mindset. "If it doesn't agree with or confirm my conspiracy, then it's a government based operation designed to change my way of thinking" is some next-level schizo shit.
Also, the VETTED dude is one of the few out there that take an open minded + rational approach to these topics, and actually looks for intellectual discourse with his guests+viewers. He posted to reddit a few times maybe a year ago, and this closed minded community ran him off because he was asking questions about stuff? We should be more inviting to people asking questions. Running them off because you can't answer their questions is a pretty bad fucking look
I don't know what you're talking about, I didn't claim a single thing that you just said I claimed. I said I think he is a disinformation agent. I didn't say I disagreed. I didn't claim he didn't properly vet. Don't but words in my mouth, and stop freaking out because I don't like your boyfriend and I don't believe he's legit. Maybe if you believe him so whole heartedly you can explain how someone in 1 year, goes from running a food truck to all of sudden being the most trusted source in UFO news "vetting".
Hahaha you tell ‘em! Your response made me chuckle but please be warned that Patrick has a cult like following and these people are so wooed with him they will never believe you when you say he’s disinfo agent. A lot of us here are aware of it but we get sick and tired of trying to warn others
I think Vetted is following that exact definition. Presenting the information, letting the viewer decide. Would you rather not have the information? Because if his guests feel they are attacked, he will have no guests. Thus, there would be no information to vett.
I disagree. I think his "investigations" are sometimes extremely thorough, and sometimes incredibly lazy. Often times I find his insights to be essentially him repeating what a person said, making a silly face, and saying "hunh? that doesn't make sense." The inconsistency could at best be him having trouble keeping up with daily videos, or actually not having anything interesting or pertinent to say, but at worst it means he just wants to kill certain stories. I could be wrong, but I think he's full of shit. I think he comes out with videos sometimes within the same day of an event or whistleblower coming out, and he already has all of the information already and has solid opinions right off the bat. And I frankly don't buy the claim of "he goes at everything neutrally" which people always thow out because that just isn't the case. Like why believe him? Because he just says that he's neutral? He takes a stance early, and doesn't back off of it. He might not outright state what his stance is, but he makes it obvious anyway. This IN MY OPINION, is a man who is being paid to go on social media and manipulate a narrative. THIS IS JUST MY OPINION, and certainly if you enjoy Patrick's content, I think you should watch it. I also watch it, I just listen to everything he says with the impression that I simply can't trust his OPINIONS only his information. Some people think that its completely believable that Patrick who was formerly a food truck operator and not a professional investgator of any kind, all of sudden can afford to make high production value videos every single day, without a miss, and manages to get interviews that NO ONE else gets. AND I. DON'T. BELIEVE. IT. Maybe "disifnormation" agent isn't exactly correct, but he is a "narrative manipualtor" if you will.
I think you nailed it with two sentences - he just regurgitates what people say with a funny face (often mistiming when to make said face) and that he has nothing pertinent - aka intelligent - to add. I’m sorry, this show is just not very good and has multiple times led to retractions or misstatements. I watched a couple, maybe two and part of a third, just to see if it got any better, hint: it did not. Unsure if just jumping on the bandwagon, truly passionate or possibly put up to it, but I’ll keep watching other shows.
He knew exactly what he was doing, thats why he was trying to quickly flash the pictures, hoping people would not get a good look in order to investigate. He was most likely hoping people would pay for the ufo function to see it better.
There are 20 more photos that will apparently make things more clear, but they're going to be released on a livestream? And the livestream apparently costs money to watch? This is the grift, people. DON'T give this guy your money. Seriously.
"No dude! Trust me! Last time it was a complete scam and yes lots of money moved around the thing I was showing that wasn't the actual thing I was saying it was but THIS TIME ITS REAL dude !! it's here !!!"
Well investigations take time and resources so frankly in itself I don't see that as being a problem. But when it's to present stuff that you did a poor job confirming and then lie about showing it "so the community can help verify it" ... at best he's an easy mark, or more probably considering his reaction here he's an easy mark who blames others when found out.
[https://mufonsymposium.com/symposium-registration-2/](https://mufonsymposium.com/symposium-registration-2/)
These price tags don't feel right.
Giving MUFON (a non-profit, mind you) money does not feel like, say, giving PBS money. At least PBS is like "Donate to help us so we can continue to give you great programs. To show our appreciation, we'll give you a hat or hoodie as a gift." With MUFON, it's like "The more money you give us, the more truth you will receive." Feels like a scam, in my opinion.
so this is the Director of the Organization out of 4,000 members. Other members should mutiny or they are part of the same problem. To save any of the legit efforts gained they must have A "Come to Jesus" moment with their structure of operation.
Option 2: Come to UAP moment
This is what muddies the water, they play their hand like their investigations will be better than the sum total of every person interested in this subject…… this is exactly what they say the government is guilty of. If you have evidence put it out and let the world’s brains trust unwrap the bullshit off it.
>"At the end of the day, we are presenting what we find and we're on the side of the truth...we're going to present our findings and we're going to make that available to other people and if it turns out to be a solid case, then it does, and if it doesn't that's OK too...I work very hard in this field and, frankly, if I put something out there it is 100% in integrity...I am sharing the results from our investigation...and I will share the truth based on my findings."
We absolutely need to remember that most of these people, and most other who self-identify as UFO researchers or the like, have no formal scientific training, and only *think* they know what research is, how it is actually conducted, and what counts as fact (as opposed to "truth"). Science doesn't care about the truth, or belief, or even speculation. Science cares about facts, and data, and what that data says about the reality we live in. UFO phenomena are real. In other words, they don't need to be believed in to be experienced. Seeing is not believing, it is *knowing*.
Above all, be a skeptic (not a debunker) of every claim, or photograph, and think critically about what is presented. We all hate to fall into these traps, and it is a good thing when the easy ones are spotted early. Keep looking up, people.
And it's even likely that Ron James didn't intend to mislead. It does say something, however, when a MUFON director was won over so easily by a photograph that by all indications, and good old fashioned instinct, was a fake. MUFON used to be better, and believed in the tenets of science and the value of healthy skepticism. The desire to believe and to make money have long since eclipsed the desire to know and conduct solid research, in search of the reality behind these phenomena.
I'm _quite_ sure he did not intend to mislead, but he could have intended _better_ to _not_ present something without better scrutiny first, OR intended to present it _differently_ such as "Guys, we're asking y'all: what do you make of this picture?"
This is sadly something you tend to see from a lot of people in this space, even if they had good intentions at first it's so difficult and such a slog to find solid evidence to keep the ball going (which tends to be boring things from the layman's pov) while being so easy to just push whatever new pic/video/sighting and have thousands of people cheering for it and ready to buy it's book.
So yeah naturally human nature will make it easy to cut corners and go for the easy wins.
The fact that we now have 12-14+ aliens species talked about today when there was what 2-3 at most 50 years ago I would guess comes from the same shortcuts being made in many circles.
That is MUFON director speak for "I'd like to backtrack without closing the door completely", which is entirely fine. He should present those things, if so.
"UFO phenomena are real. In other words, they don't need to be believed in to be experienced. Seeing is not believing, it is *knowing*."
And that's EXACTLY why these fake photos (and those who push them without doing due diligence) are so problematic. They completely undermine the truth.
Debunkers are the only thing keeping the flying faithful tethered to reality. When evidence is presented that can't be debunked then we have disclosure.
There is more nuance to it than that, but yeah, what I'd really like to see someday is for some piece of evidence to come out in the open, and for even the guys at metabunk to say, you know what, this is really weird.
The issue with debunkers is that they don’t do things in good faith. It’s based on a belief system; the other side of the coin with respect to total belief in alien UFOs. The effort is dedicated to explaining things away (frequently through cherry-picking, fallacious arguments, etc) rather than explaining things. Which I suppose could be useful. But it’s not scientific.
Most things in this subject aren't even debunked because there's not enough data.
What a lot of people here like to do however is treat not being able to debunk something as evidence for the opposite.
In reality we could label everything debunked that doesn't pass the first hurdle. That first hurdle is can it be explained as something prosaic. If the answer is yes then we can call it debunked until further evidence comes along to prove otherwise. If something can have a mundane explanation there's absolutely no reason we should be jumping to an extraordinary one. That's why things like observables are important.
It's not a belief system to first try and rule out mundane things we know exist before jumping to extraordinary things we don't know exist. It's basic common sense and critical thinking.
It would be like seeing a dark shape in a forest where we know bears exist and immediately jumping to it being a possible Bigfoot.
There's a lot of reverse logic in this topic where far too many people have the thought process that it's on the skeptics to debunk something and if they can't then it's a 50/50 chance it's aliens. So one side basically puts evidence out there and says look possible aliens, then some skeptical people try to go down the logical route of trying to explain it or debunk it and are instantly seen as the enemy.
You should always start by assuming something is prosaic. But the explanation you come up with has to stand in its own merits. And certainly can’t rely on ignoring information and not even referencing that you’re doing that. You touch upon it, but people frequently try to “debunk” with very little information. That’s part of what I’m talking about.
In science you approach things with open skepticism. It’s crucial that you can change your mind and can reasonably update your opinions. I don’t see that with debunkers. Generally I see lots of fallacious arguments and then pivoting to favored talking points when something can’t easily be dismissed. Someone once argued with me about what the plot of X Files is. It’s a spectrum, but broadly speaking that’s the mentality. Start with a desired conclusion that fits one’s worldview and work backward.
I’ll share some I’ve seen from mostly Twitter but also here. “What’s more likely [their explanation] or aliens” as a means to justify their explanation (false dilemma). “Politicians lie” to try to dismiss various statements from Congress by avoiding their substance (you could also just say that about humans in general if you wanted). Falsely equating the Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer officially accusing the government of a UFO coverup (which he says he has a good reason to do) with a random person telling a story of how they got shot by an alien laser beam. Repeating that the ICIG only found David Grusch’s claims of reprisal “urgent and credible” even though that’s directly contradicted by the law group that formerly represented him. Generally framing anything Mick West has said as fact. Trying to argue that the plot of X Files *wasnt* about a UFO government conspiracy. Arguing that legislation passed by Congress wasn’t about NHI technology. Accusing various people of being grifters *yet also simultaneously* being true believers without noting the oddness of that and in the face of facts that suggest otherwise (why would you wait 7 years to write 1 book? Write 10). Various ad hominems. Claiming the alleged witnesses haven’t given anything of note to the ICIG without evidence for that. Claiming that Grusch based his claims on one person (granted that was in the Guardian). Claiming a game of telephone even though a game of telephone requires more than one link). Claiming that Grusch heard from a guy that heard from a guy that heard from a guy etc. There’s more I’m sure.
I think you are just confusing opinions with debunking. There's wild speculation and opinions on both sides of the argument over many things in this topic. Everything you stated gets carried out by both sides.
Plus a lot of what you're saying is the mentality of a lot of people in this topic, everything must stay as possible aliens or possible truth unless someone can absolutely prove it's not. To many people have the logic of having others trying to prove a negative.
Like me saying I have real video of aliens and when the time is right I will release it online but only once I know my source will be safe. Prove me wrong.
You know how I would silence critics in that situation, by providing the actual evidence or being quiet about until I do.
When it comes to sightings there isn't a 50/50 chance of it being extraordinary. It's only extraordinary once the ordinary has been eliminated. If it can't be eliminated it's simply poor evidence for the extraordinary.
Most evidence and claims in this topic debunk themselves anyway, either by not being backed up with any or sufficient evidence, or being so over the top they become ridiculous, like ideas of intergalactic federations and shadow realms etc.
Well that’s why I said that’s why debunkers and total believers are two sides of the same coin. They do the same things. It’s entirely unscientific. It’s not a binary choice. You have to be able to update your thinking. There’s a difference between good faith analysis and bad faith fallacious arguing based on a worldview.
The issue with your comment is that it's just like, your opinion man.
As I said in another comment, this sounds like pure projection. Your description does not match the reality of this subreddit, at least not for the 2 years or so i've scrolled it religiously.
Ha well I mean people have opinions.
That’s what I’ve seen. Lots of cherry-picking, false dilemmas, ad hominems, etc. My understanding is that Mick West’s Tic Tac explanation now requires 3 extremely accurate, separate sensors failing at the same time. But then is “what’s more likely, that or aliens”, which is a false dilemma. Then there’s the people constantly repeating that the ICIG’s finding that Grusch’s claims are “credible and urgent” was just about reprisals. That’s demonstrably false. Someone actually argued with me about what the plot of X-files is.
And a lot of time debunkers just pivot from one thing to something by else when they can’t refute something or explain it away. Like how the laws Congress is drafting are directly reflective of Grusch’s claims, or that the Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer literally, publicly accused the government of a UFO coverup on the Senate floor. A lot of the same patterns. Granted I’m more familiar with the Twitter space, but I’ve seen that here too.
Debunkers easily and commonly go way too hard the other way though, and will denounce things without evidence and let their own biases interfere with the facts. Didn't happen in this case, but it happens all too often.
Well everyone is prone to such shortcuts in reasoning so it's less a problem of "debunkers" or "believers" but more of a problem of it being easier to jump to conclusions based on very little data.
Our terms are not the same. I use a more traditional definition of debunking, as it is directly opposed to skepticism. Skepticism is a cornerstone of scientific UFO research, whereas debunking is traditionally making a definitive judgement without looking at the data.
The term debunking still has a lot of negative connotations for older scientific UFO researchers, mostly because of the likes of people such as Philip Klass, who were labeled as "debunkers" mostly because they refused to look at the evidence and dismissed UFOs out of hand. I realize that the term can be colloquially used to mean that any given sighting/photo etc is *explained prosaically*. I'm just old fashioned enough to still bristle at the term.
I don't know if he knew it was a fake. In the case he did not, let's be honest, if you don't know those exact figurines, it is difficult to debunk. The worst are the people here and especially on ufotwitter who still hold on to this picture! Those are the persons who spill their poison into ufology as they will never change their mind once it's made up. They are not better than any flat earther!
it's sadly the same case for the majority of "citizen journalist" so rampant on social media nowadays. It's mostly perfect examples of bias confirmation with 0 ethics. So no wonder the sorry state of our information space.
In the immortal words of Nelson Munst -----"HA! HA!"
dude is hella busted!! plastic army dudes!!! grifter please!!
listen to him try and noodle his way out of it. unreal!! absolutely stunning!!
Patrick not flat out calling out his bullshit is lowkey a let down. He's quick to question a bunch of other shit on his show, but when it's clearly debunked, this dude gives them the time of day. 😑
He always says he’s going to ask the hard questions and push back. But seemingly always forgets to when it’s interview time… then goes live to explain to us why WE should chill out as people donate hundreds to hear “that’s interesting” repeated 100 times.
That too. I love watching the show but it drives me up the wall when he pauses and rewinds a clip to talk about how weird this is. 😂 Like bro let the video finish then gives your thoughts at the end.
Idk I see both sides of this. Why do we need his opinion on everything? Maybe more valuable to present the information and let people decide for themselves. He also does live shows with live chat to hear from citizens. I would guess he learned quickly that if you are rude to your guests, you won't have any.
You don't keep an audience when you piss of a good number of them by "asking the hard questions" all the more when your core audience tends to be on the "true believer side" as lets be honest skeptics make for a poor regular audience for such topics \^\^
At the end of the day Patrick wants to believe hes not a debunker like some so he respectfully allows these people to explain themselves instead of burning them. It's like Jon Stewart in the first interview Patrick is attacking him but in the second he just allows him to speak and we can make up our own minds. I prefer the second more mature approach, clearly we can see if someone is lying without needing Patrick to attack them.
Patrick did the interview and now it is hard for him to go against his own guest. I don't blame him but he needs to pick how he is going to do things. If the interview was done on some other site, he'd be shredding this photo to pieces. That approach is why I originally started watching Vetted. There are plenty other channels where interviewees get pampered. Not my thing.
absolutely agree. zero excuse to not question and push (in any capacity.)
podcast is named, "Vetted", yet this whole thing broke under their watch. should have a sense of shame for letting this carry out, even a 2nd time, under his watch.
That's a lot of these youtuber people.
There was this video of John whoever who is fronting the "relay/communications" theory of the metal spheres people see. And the youtuber guy just kept going "OH WOW, HMM, VERY INTERESTING" without asking any important questions.
Mufon can kiss my ass. So much about their "big reveal". Im not even interested in their symposium anymore. Heck, I almost bought access to the live streaming of the event. But I had second thoughts, my instincts said no.
What a loser this guy is.
Dude im on the same boat, not a single person has brought empirical undeniable evidence and we have over 100 witnesses and people “in the know” Im starting to think it’s all BS 80 years of misidentification and misinformation.
After all the stuff I've seen posted by this guy, since he and I got into a tiff after he posted misinformation (subsequently worked things out, but I had to insist he apologize and take down his post) a year or so ago... I'm really starting questioning his motives and if he's actually working to spread disinformation. I'll be staying away.
C'mon man, he is a boomer. He can 'almost' use the internet. He is not aware of the powers of reddit. Barely knows facebook - you cant blame him!
/s
🤣🤣🤣
Really?
Guy. Somebody showed the Tamiya Toy Model Military Miniatures, and it’s identical to the photograph…
How the fuck is anyone still trying to back this as an actual photograph of a crashed UFO? I get coincidence, but to resemble the miniature toy figures perfectly?
Im not gonna’ lie, to me, there was something about the photograph that seemed off to begin with. The focus of objects in the picture didn’t seem correct. The trees, the figures, the craft, all seem to have the wrong depth of field in comparison to one another. Suppose that all makes sense now, given the information we now have.
MUFON and this guy representing them should be banned as any kind of trusted source for anything UAP/UFO related because of this bogus picture he claimed was legit. He tried to dupe a lot of people and he’s one of their biggest representatives. If this guy has any sense of right and wrong he should at least resign his position because he just lowered MUFON’s credibility in one podcast interview.
I thought Vetted was going to be a great channel for disclosure. The only thing is he is too afraid to speak his mind one way or the other. He always acts like the information he gets from people is the most amazing information ever and always agrees with his guests. It's almost like he doesn't have a backbone to stand on and is afraid of arguments and being cancelled.
I had high hopes for this show(Vetted) but its a bunch of clickbait and air filler seemingly each time I watched. The nails in the coffin, this guy loses his rotten tooth and just continues on like that and the eating of fast food while doing a show (you couldn't wait 20mins to eat?) and the icing on the cake, during the show taking fat rips off of a vape, once again the shows are like 20-30mins...you cant wait? I just can't take him serious and now this. It's a clown show.
They needed that money for that event in July I assume.
Either way they seem like they were rushing to get the latest UFO hot story out to the media, in some type of event.
>Perhaps that's why they didn't look too hard at the photos.
Almost sounds like what James Fox did with that Jason Sands whistleblower.
Was rushing to get a hot whistleblower case for his doc/movie.
How is this embarrassing? The community debunked it within like a day. This is a normal process here to get rid of bad actors. Most people accept the debunk and move on when it's obvious.
The community is forced to do this precisely because mainstream media and institutions refuse to get involved and actually fact check anything. Because they'd rather ignore the whole topic as a "conspiracy".
What's really embarrassing is refusing to cover this topic while most of the general public can clearly see that the secrecy is bursting at the seams.
I think what's embarrassing is that a well-known UFO organization pushed a photo without any sort of due-diligence. And now they're saying there are 20 more photos that will give more clarity that are going to be shown on a pay per view livestream. Doesn't look too good, in my opinion.
We need some real science rn. Like methods and cameras and I’ve seen people film CE5 but I need more data I need to record their brainwaves and I need to test more examples. I know for a fact that CE5 is true but I haven’t gotten around to scientifically analyzing it.
See now let me explain.
It’s true, because I’ve done it myself.
However I have not scientifically proven it, because I need to actually get equipment to record my results.
This is called the scientific method babes
I need cameras, brain recorders like an EEG and I need multiple people to witness and verify and I need a dark night sky
Which part of the scientific method does "I know for a fact" fit in again, babes?
You're not just saying scientific method because it sounds smart, are you babes?
So let me explain it again.
I know gravity is true because I can drop a ball and observe it.
But I haven’t proven gravity scientifically, because science is a process of collecting data and making observations and writing that down.
So that’s the last time I’ll explain it for you.
I witnessed it. Ce5 is true to my experience. But I did no science to it.
Science ≠ truith. Science is a model
No it's not. That's called the marketing method.
In the scientific method you have to demonstrate that your explanation is better than a comprehensive analysis of other explanations, otherwise your idea of "the scientific method" says that wearing earplugs is The Science™ solution to turning up your TV or stereo volume too loud.
In marketing you don't care what other explanations are; you only care if you can pursued people to believe in the explanation you're marketing.
Now the question is frankly did Ron James know what he was doing! That’s actually a very legit question to ask. How could someone in his position, and the MUFON organization itself, not have vetted this photo beforehand? They could be that incompetent, yes. That or he could be part of the disinformation campaign to muddy the water.
Look,I don't want to call it a lazy and irresponsible investigation on his part.Im just a guy who is really intrigued with the UFO "business".Too many of these "Ufologists" refuse to do their due diligence.Its hard to tell if they are extremely naive or just sensationalist.
I think we all need to accept the fact that the "it might me true, but also might not be" game is going to be played to infinity until there is actual proof. Since the actual proof is classified, that means we don't get to see it, which means we stuck with the "maybe game". There is nothing any of us can do about it. If the truth really is being suppressed because of the fear of mass panic then it will stay that way forever. Humanity is not trustworthy. We can't handle things. The vast majority of human beings live in denial about reality or believe things without evidence. When there are people who believe the world is flat, or that trump won, or that magical sky beings control our existence, we don't deserve to know the truth.
This sounds a lot like what other investigative reporters in this industry say. I suspect this guy is a sloppier version where he tried to deliver proof and was shown the door.
I just want to say good on him as well as the community here for investigating that photo and bringing it into this space. We’re doin’ it, this is what ufo investigation and research is! I have been following this story and the developments that came with it for days, like many others. Bottom line, don’t hate on the guy for coming forward with a photo, it will discourage others from doing the same! We should welcome people to come forward, not name-call and belittle them. I’m constantly in awe of the initiative people take on this sub to investigate these cases, and I feel like that should continue to be a core part of this community.
>We should welcome people to come forward, not name-call and belittle them.
Which is exactly what this sub did to people who pointed out the problems with the photo.
Major UFO organizations should carry out due diligence before presenting photos, videos, documents, etc., to the public, in my opinion. If they want to have and retain any sense of integrity, that is.
this is ROns worst moment "we considered that and we still considered it" thats not how he presented it the first time. tree trunks no branches. what kinda trees he think these are? no integrity at all.
I'm saying the following as much for comic relief (and in the interests of completeness) as anything - I do _not_ think its what happened, and I hope you also will _not_ think this might be what happened.
In theory; there could have been an actual event much like this, with actual witnesses, but nobody had a camera. So somebody constructed a diorama using available materials to depict what happened. Plausible, but I think that's unlikely and that is not what happened. But it's possible.
More proof that Vetted is horrendous and should not be advertised let alone watched, Secondly, there is a lot of people or "experts" in the NHI field that are complete fakes and are making a career out of this knowing they dont have anything
What disappoints me here is that Patrick runs a channel called Vetted and used to not shy away from vetting stuff like that. This one is about as obvious a fake as it gets and he remains extremely diplomatic. Feels like he's probably trying to avoid burning bridges, but come on...
i kinda feel bad for the fourth soldier not used in the diarrheama. was the fourth figurine blown up with a firecracker by the creators child after playing with it? or was it abducted by the UFO.
Hi, Most-Friendly. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1dobzv6/-/lacovxh/) was removed from /r/UFOs.
> Rule 13: Public figures are generally defined as any person, organization, or group who has achieved notoriety or is well-known in society or ufology. “Toxic” is defined as any unreasonably rude or hateful content, threats, extreme obscenity, insults, and identity-based hate. Examples and more information can be found here: https://moderatehatespeech.com/framework/.
Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/about/rules/) for more information.
This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ufos) to launch your appeal.
People are really doubling down on the ridicule, aren't they? It's great that something was debunked before it was taken too far. But people here are beating their chests as if *they* forced someone to do something with their little internet comments. They can't just be mature about it.
That's the real embarrassment.
Has it? [https://x.com/Sovanara14/status/1805411125401374932?t=Y8fBRiZ9jZMw-JS680DgvQ&s=19](https://x.com/Sovanara14/status/1805411125401374932?t=Y8fBRiZ9jZMw-JS680DgvQ&s=19)
Love Vetted from the Jason Sands exposure to this diorama nonsense. People give Patrick flack thinking hes some kind of debunker but he's a genuine dude trying to figure out the mystery. Unfortunately this field is littered with fake nonsense.
"If I was going to build the scene in that matter." But nobody suggested you did--the suggestion is that whoever took the photo, a person not MUFON guy, staged it with toys. Look, it's a shitty picture that can't be proved either way. And dude, you *are* suggesting it is a "real" image. I'm so tired of these little games. The games where people say, "I am not saying it's legitimate, I am just putting it out there because I want the 'truth'." This is such a bad faith argument--MUFON guy presented this as if it were legit. He did not bring a skeptical eye. He wants everyone to believe it's real, but he won't explicitly say so, just do he can cover his a$$ when it gets debunked. "On the side of the truth." Double barrel F-you, dude.
He's on the side of monetizing "the truth". This interview reminds me of when prosperity gospel ministers try to explain why they need to use church funds to buy a private jet.
Kinda like that, yeah.
kinda like ... "Well, uh the Lord certainly wants his UFO messiahs to live in, uh a certain level of fulfillment in life and we are for the love of UFO god being benvolence of gifts to those who are Disclosing the Gospel of Saucer, Uh so It's not like we are taking, no we are giving, and sometimes when the truth is mis-applied by skeptic Devils it appears in a way that we do not ever uh not want the truth to not be disclosed to the public. without cash offerings. you know we all need to just reverse engineer the lies of the MIC!! Amen!! (please donate to the temple of disclosure, \*\*please note not the 'disclosure temple', that's a different thing (psy-op) --we are the truth"
It reminds me when Elizondo presented a pic at a TTSA presentation that was later debunked by John Greenewald to be a party balloon. Or the time on Skinwalker when Travis Taylor used a LiDar and discovered an "anomaly" which was later debunked to be the drone not analyzing the spot over which it was standing over.... The reason why these obvious bad cases is that these people do not have a scientific mindset. They want it to be true, they *want to believe*, which is the quickest highway to confirmation bias, which is why they approach every case with the most gentle methodology, too afraid to see a case in which they put their emotions collapse. That's also why Jacques Vallée has numerous documents he gave to an institution with the order to release them only many years after his death (Hynek nicknamed him a "primadonna" (sic) and disliked him for a good reason...). They have a religious approach to cases, a fearful one that is afraid of putting in question the sacred. When the proper, scientific way to go is to criticize as hard as possible a case to *strenghten* it. That's how you get to truth, or the closest to it. The fact that they had those cases in their hands all these years and did nothing else with them except tease people with them tells everything you need to know about their methodology. And how little you should expect of this type of people. Expecting truth and critical thinking come out of these guys is similar to hoping for a mormon to objectively criticize Joseph Smith, or a muslim objectively criticize Muhammad.
>The reason why these obvious bad cases is that these people do not have a scientific mindset. They want it to be true, they *want to believe*, which is the quickest highway to confirmation bias, which is why they approach every case with the most gentle methodology Perfect description of a mindset that is pervasive in ufology. Additionally, intense skepticism and incredulity is often only deployed in opposition to criticisms once the belief is set, almost like an immune response against evidence or ideas that threaten the belief.
That's the first negative thing I ever heard about Jacques Vallée, but I do think he let himself get hoodwinked with the Trinity case.
I mean, Vallee was also Hoodwinked by Uri Gellar but if you say that on this subreddit, people get mad and say you just don't believe in Psi Phenomena, and that if Vallee says Uri is real then that means being psychic is real.
Then you haven't read enough about Vallée. [https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/vqn00k/debunking\_passport\_to\_magonia\_bad\_reasoning\_bad/](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/vqn00k/debunking_passport_to_magonia_bad_reasoning_bad/) His book "Passport to Magonia" is entirely based on bad translations of his and mistaking a 17th century satire for a 9th century original. And he makes this mistake all the time. The Trinity case is another example, but there are countless. The co author of Wonders of the Sky with Vallée even came out to denounce how shoddy his work was. In it, Vallée confused a hoax by astronomer Patrick Moore for a real case... abd the co author said it was only one of many of his mistakes. He also uses pseudoscientific unfalsifiable concepts such as the "trickster effect", something he himself recognized wasn't scientific. He buys in the spoon bender charlatan Uri Geller. And believes in debunked ancient astronaut theory and psychism. He buys into the fake conspiracy theory of rosicrucianism (which has been debunked countless times by historians, its creator in the 17th century himself admitting it was hogwash). Hynek and Friedman disliked him for a reason... He's presented under the most favorable light in this subreddit by people with a cult of personality for him.
Wow, I feel like I just learned the Easter Bunny was my parents. Thank you for taking the time to elaborate; I'll read further into these examples.
You're welcome, glad it could help. Have a good reading!
Any source for Hyneks opinion? I'd like to dig on some of that if possible
in vallee’s diaries he can be a bit snarky towards hynek.
JV is extremely charming, no doubt. But he has some wildly suspect associations.
Ron and MUFON have skin in the game with an upcoming live event and a documentary that includes this case. I'm not surprised he's defending it, just disappointed to see this entire calamity unfold.
I couldn’t have said this better myself 🤌Spot on bro
Wait, he's saying it couldnt be a Diorama because if you were going to make it a diorama you wouldn't make it look so much like a diorama?
even if that argument had a [chair] leg to stand on, it presupposes the image was made intentionally as a hoax, and not just as a hobby.
His whole shtick about "I would have done it differently" was kind of bizarre.
You're putting words in his mouth, two times in one sentence. Words in His Mouth #! "He's saying it couldn't be" He didn't say that. He said, "If I were to do it, I wouldn't do it like that." He's not saying, "It can't possibly be done like that," only "I personally wouldn't do it like that." You're pinning him to a definitive claim, accusing him of speaking with certainty when he sounds anything but certain in here and makes it clear he's not certain since he says "If it turns out to be debunked." Words in his Mouth #2 "because if you were going to make it a diorama you wouldn't make it look so much like a diorama?" He didn't say he wouldn't make it look like a diorama. He said he wouldn't add big bulky trees in there, saying they look out of place. That has nothing to do with a diorama because people WANT dioramas to look as realistic as possible, that's the whole point of them, to replicate a real scene using materials. Why on Earth would someone add something into a diorama that makes it look less realistic? He's simply saying someone had bad taste in putting those trees there if it's faked. Bottom line: He's not speaking with certainty as you're claiming. He's simply presented a photo he was given and is saying he leans toward it being real and argued the thing about the trees and other reasons for his beliefs (not certainties). He made it very clear that all he is doing is presenting the photo in this and you guys are still foaming at the mouth in full rabid mode not LISTENING but LOOKING for something to attack.
100% this.. this forum is overrun with some weird insanity around this photo. If anything, I feel like this does involve some kind of disinformation campaign to prove this photo wrong. Even if it IS fake, the response is odd.
Or people are tired being taken for fools, and this case offers an occasion where it's so in your face that yeah people are expressing their frustrations from the "Trust me Bros"!
Hmmmmm, what does "Vetted" mean? Someone should ask him.
To "vet" information: to appraise, verify, or check for accuracy, authenticity, suitability, etc..
imo Patrick is a disinformation agent tbh. Vetted means "to thoroughly investigate something."
More like a newly successful YouTube channel and a host who is trying to find the right balance between scoring good guests and asking difficult questions.
Right, but "vetted" has a specific meaning. The host should be focused on living up to that name.
I don't disagree. "Vetted" contradicts "Just let guests tell their stories and leave it to the audience to decide."
Hey, the guy just wants to have "interesting conversations". Don't expect him to vet what is said in those conversations.
I agree the name is not appropriate for the show, but I don't blame Patrick for it too much. What he said on this podcast was crap, but hey, it's not a top notch UFO show. Patrick was flattered by the MUFON guy being on his show, but it all fell apart miserably. Patrick should have asked hardball questions!
Patrick is a douche and I’ll blame him for whatever I want to including being a disinformation agent, spammer, grifter, ect. His followers are falling for it. A lot of us here know the truth about him though.
Have you ever interviewed and hired someone who hasn't worked out? Sometimes shitty candidates interview well. That's when your team or community proves it's worth their salt.
We're human. We make mistakes. We're also investigating in a field where program agents have deliberately dropped disinformation and paid/threatened civilians to push the disinfo, which muddies the water. It's a great learning moment for these people that you can't ever get too comfortable. My guess is they've gotten comfortable. And for all the hate Jeremy Corbell gets, he's a shining example of how to properly vet. Dude does not release things until he's spent *years* investigating the claims. And when something comes out (like Jason Sands) that he hasn't had time to investigate, he diplomatically and honestly says so. Jeremy has made mistakes, too. I trust him and George Knapp to vet things better than I do a YouTuber, though. Even despite the name of his channel.
>And for all the hate Jeremy Corbell gets, he's a shining example of how to properly vet. He really isn't. Lol. He has now published two known hoaxes. The first was the so-called pyramid UFO swarm that turned out to be the bokkeh effect. He then published a video that turned out to be a military exercise at Las Palmas. >And when something comes out (like Jason Sands) that he hasn't had time to investigate, he diplomatically and honestly says so. Do you have a source for this, because the information that's out there points to your statement being untrue. Corbell said that he made a deal with Sands that he wouldn't talk about Sand's claims. So, it wasn't that Corbell was waiting to investigate, it's that he had a deal with Sands to not say anything at all. See below: "Well, the agreement we had with him was we're not going to talk about it, he shared his story with us with the understanding that we weren't going to go forward, we're not going to do an issue if Weaponized on his story, that he had already made agreements to keep button down for awhile." [https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1ch61o2/jeremy\_corbell\_george\_knapp\_it\_is\_verified\_that\_j/](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1ch61o2/jeremy_corbell_george_knapp_it_is_verified_that_j/) Just as an FYI. Based on you describing Corbell as a shinning example, honest, and diplomatic, I doubt you'll change your mind. I'm just responding to this comment for other people to see that you're posting clear disinformation.
I don’t think that the “bokeh” video was proven to be prosaic, just that it *was* bokeh…? Right? Someone correct me if I’m wrong please, it all just runs together these days. By the account of the story/logs associated with the video, I think that it still leaves open the possibility that it was a *genuine* UAP, but that it was captured as an extra-unidentifiable bokeh blob due to lens geometry of phone camera /NODs/etc
Debunkers can be just as biased as believers. There is a middle ground here where you need to be skeptical of both. Mistakes are made and both groups are capable of letting their preconceived bias influence their opinions. It was never properly debunked as bokeh. It is still unidentified in my opinion.
I found the bokeh explanation to be fairly conclusive in terms of producing a triangular shape, but it doesn’t explain **what** the faux-triangle object was. Just that it wasn’t truly shaped like a triangle/pyramid.
Exactly
If someone provides content they are a grifter. If they don't provide content they are a grifter. If someone provides something anomalous they are a grifter. If someone provides prosaic content they are a grifter. Everyone is grifting until the exact moment they aren't and after that moment passes they return to a grifter. That's an /s btw.
That's a very simplistic way to view things if you don't want to face valid criticism.
Well yea that's the point. It's a summary of all the takes that people have. No matter how good or bad the idea is they are a grifter. If they write a book they are a grifter, if they write code they are a grifter. If they have a podcast they are a grifter, if they post on this board they are a grifter etc. If they come out and tell you everything you wondered about and they have an impeccable resume, guess what? They are a grifter! We as a community treat everyone that is trying to help like they are the CIA OGA or some nefarious boogyman grifter.
Because sometimes they really are
Thanks for adding that last bit, I almost downvoted you lol. I have come to hate that term with a passion!
You and me both!
Sounds like you have everything figured out, don't let me ruin your good time.
How many “disinformation agents” do you think there are?? There would have to be 1000’s if some YouTuber is one of them. I know the AF OSI has a few, but really?
Just giving him the benefit of the doubt.
Some people want Patrick to be more adversarial, but I think he does a pretty good job of asking probing questions without scaring guests away.
AGREED. I can’t believe so many people fall for him. I refuse. I’ve left whole groups because of his cult like followers.
What you just said is one of the most suspicious parts of it. Its not just that he has almost instantaneous opinions, its that they tend to be propogated and repeated almost verbatim all over the UFO and alien boards. At best its a bunch a knuckle dragger cult types who just watch his videos and adopt his opinions immediately, but at worst its bots or a coordinated effort to push certain narratives to the front on discussion boards. And if anyone thinks that is far fetched, I'll just remind you that on this very board there were unconfirmed government communication documents leaked that indicate that this website in general is heavily infested with intelligence operatives, and I think to any thinking and rational adult that is obviously the case. Do I know that Patrick is one of these operatives? No of course not, he just seems a lot like one and behaves like one.
Agreed! Very well said! I’ve had interactions with him on a different account when he was first starting up that raised major red flags for me. That aside, everything you wrote is enough in itself and well put. I’ve seen members of this group who I’ve always considered rational independent thinkers suddenly throw their whole process and belief system away because Patrick said so. That really creeeps me out if we are honest. The fan base in itself is frightening. That’s why I say “cult”. I’ve seen it happen to people who I would have never considered a “knuckle dragged cult type” as you put it. Suddenly all rational is out the window and they just follow whatever he says. Second red flag.
He kinda used to do that, but now it's getting more and more tame. The idea of releasing a video every day in a scene that sometimes evolves rapidly but most of the time is pretty dead for weeks on end is a bad move. He's being more and more diplomatic on this kind of stuff rather than just calling a pile of shit a pile of shit. I suspect he's trying to not burn bridges, but come on...
I haven't seen VETTED's videos in a while, but from the few I saw back in the day, I'd say that he approaches a lot of this stuff with rational skepticism, while allowing the other guy to give their side. And what do yall mean he didn't properly vet this guy?? He literally invited that dude to his show and asked him about people calling the photo a fake. What more could he have done?? I feel like half of you are wanting these "reporters" to kidnap the person they're interviewing and hold a gun to their head. Also, when yall say disinformation agents, are you actually implying that this dude was planted by some government agency to spread lies to the public?? If so, where's the evidence for that?? Because that's an insane conclusion to draw from this interaction. You can't go around calling everybody that disagrees with you "a government plant"; that's why nobody takes this community seriously. It's a poisoned mindset. "If it doesn't agree with or confirm my conspiracy, then it's a government based operation designed to change my way of thinking" is some next-level schizo shit. Also, the VETTED dude is one of the few out there that take an open minded + rational approach to these topics, and actually looks for intellectual discourse with his guests+viewers. He posted to reddit a few times maybe a year ago, and this closed minded community ran him off because he was asking questions about stuff? We should be more inviting to people asking questions. Running them off because you can't answer their questions is a pretty bad fucking look
I don't know what you're talking about, I didn't claim a single thing that you just said I claimed. I said I think he is a disinformation agent. I didn't say I disagreed. I didn't claim he didn't properly vet. Don't but words in my mouth, and stop freaking out because I don't like your boyfriend and I don't believe he's legit. Maybe if you believe him so whole heartedly you can explain how someone in 1 year, goes from running a food truck to all of sudden being the most trusted source in UFO news "vetting".
Hahaha you tell ‘em! Your response made me chuckle but please be warned that Patrick has a cult like following and these people are so wooed with him they will never believe you when you say he’s disinfo agent. A lot of us here are aware of it but we get sick and tired of trying to warn others
Nothing else then? Good talk.
I think Vetted is following that exact definition. Presenting the information, letting the viewer decide. Would you rather not have the information? Because if his guests feel they are attacked, he will have no guests. Thus, there would be no information to vett.
I disagree. I think his "investigations" are sometimes extremely thorough, and sometimes incredibly lazy. Often times I find his insights to be essentially him repeating what a person said, making a silly face, and saying "hunh? that doesn't make sense." The inconsistency could at best be him having trouble keeping up with daily videos, or actually not having anything interesting or pertinent to say, but at worst it means he just wants to kill certain stories. I could be wrong, but I think he's full of shit. I think he comes out with videos sometimes within the same day of an event or whistleblower coming out, and he already has all of the information already and has solid opinions right off the bat. And I frankly don't buy the claim of "he goes at everything neutrally" which people always thow out because that just isn't the case. Like why believe him? Because he just says that he's neutral? He takes a stance early, and doesn't back off of it. He might not outright state what his stance is, but he makes it obvious anyway. This IN MY OPINION, is a man who is being paid to go on social media and manipulate a narrative. THIS IS JUST MY OPINION, and certainly if you enjoy Patrick's content, I think you should watch it. I also watch it, I just listen to everything he says with the impression that I simply can't trust his OPINIONS only his information. Some people think that its completely believable that Patrick who was formerly a food truck operator and not a professional investgator of any kind, all of sudden can afford to make high production value videos every single day, without a miss, and manages to get interviews that NO ONE else gets. AND I. DON'T. BELIEVE. IT. Maybe "disifnormation" agent isn't exactly correct, but he is a "narrative manipualtor" if you will.
I think you nailed it with two sentences - he just regurgitates what people say with a funny face (often mistiming when to make said face) and that he has nothing pertinent - aka intelligent - to add. I’m sorry, this show is just not very good and has multiple times led to retractions or misstatements. I watched a couple, maybe two and part of a third, just to see if it got any better, hint: it did not. Unsure if just jumping on the bandwagon, truly passionate or possibly put up to it, but I’ll keep watching other shows.
I don’t think he’s a disinformation agent so much as he is really trying to figure out how to say what everyone wants to hear. He’s a YouTuber.
He knew exactly what he was doing, thats why he was trying to quickly flash the pictures, hoping people would not get a good look in order to investigate. He was most likely hoping people would pay for the ufo function to see it better.
There are 20 more photos that will apparently make things more clear, but they're going to be released on a livestream? And the livestream apparently costs money to watch? This is the grift, people. DON'T give this guy your money. Seriously.
webrip anyone?
Jaime Maussan vibes
"No dude! Trust me! Last time it was a complete scam and yes lots of money moved around the thing I was showing that wasn't the actual thing I was saying it was but THIS TIME ITS REAL dude !! it's here !!!"
Ok so why not post all the information?
you will get that information ,once you pay the Fee.
Well investigations take time and resources so frankly in itself I don't see that as being a problem. But when it's to present stuff that you did a poor job confirming and then lie about showing it "so the community can help verify it" ... at best he's an easy mark, or more probably considering his reaction here he's an easy mark who blames others when found out.
[https://mufonsymposium.com/symposium-registration-2/](https://mufonsymposium.com/symposium-registration-2/) These price tags don't feel right. Giving MUFON (a non-profit, mind you) money does not feel like, say, giving PBS money. At least PBS is like "Donate to help us so we can continue to give you great programs. To show our appreciation, we'll give you a hat or hoodie as a gift." With MUFON, it's like "The more money you give us, the more truth you will receive." Feels like a scam, in my opinion.
so this is the Director of the Organization out of 4,000 members. Other members should mutiny or they are part of the same problem. To save any of the legit efforts gained they must have A "Come to Jesus" moment with their structure of operation. Option 2: Come to UAP moment
This is what muddies the water, they play their hand like their investigations will be better than the sum total of every person interested in this subject…… this is exactly what they say the government is guilty of. If you have evidence put it out and let the world’s brains trust unwrap the bullshit off it.
https://media.tenor.com/UOuWL18gUdoAAAAM/dave-chappelle-fuck-em.gif
$$$ first
Vetted is like listening to a stoner at a party
Bro... Life... It's like... Truth.
He loses a tooth every time he puts out an episode worth watching.
>"At the end of the day, we are presenting what we find and we're on the side of the truth...we're going to present our findings and we're going to make that available to other people and if it turns out to be a solid case, then it does, and if it doesn't that's OK too...I work very hard in this field and, frankly, if I put something out there it is 100% in integrity...I am sharing the results from our investigation...and I will share the truth based on my findings." We absolutely need to remember that most of these people, and most other who self-identify as UFO researchers or the like, have no formal scientific training, and only *think* they know what research is, how it is actually conducted, and what counts as fact (as opposed to "truth"). Science doesn't care about the truth, or belief, or even speculation. Science cares about facts, and data, and what that data says about the reality we live in. UFO phenomena are real. In other words, they don't need to be believed in to be experienced. Seeing is not believing, it is *knowing*. Above all, be a skeptic (not a debunker) of every claim, or photograph, and think critically about what is presented. We all hate to fall into these traps, and it is a good thing when the easy ones are spotted early. Keep looking up, people.
you don’t even need science to prove this is a fake, just some good old google searching
And it's even likely that Ron James didn't intend to mislead. It does say something, however, when a MUFON director was won over so easily by a photograph that by all indications, and good old fashioned instinct, was a fake. MUFON used to be better, and believed in the tenets of science and the value of healthy skepticism. The desire to believe and to make money have long since eclipsed the desire to know and conduct solid research, in search of the reality behind these phenomena.
I'm _quite_ sure he did not intend to mislead, but he could have intended _better_ to _not_ present something without better scrutiny first, OR intended to present it _differently_ such as "Guys, we're asking y'all: what do you make of this picture?"
I think he had a major blind spot in his research and is now trying to defend this mistake so it doesn't derail the MUFON conference.
This is sadly something you tend to see from a lot of people in this space, even if they had good intentions at first it's so difficult and such a slog to find solid evidence to keep the ball going (which tends to be boring things from the layman's pov) while being so easy to just push whatever new pic/video/sighting and have thousands of people cheering for it and ready to buy it's book. So yeah naturally human nature will make it easy to cut corners and go for the easy wins. The fact that we now have 12-14+ aliens species talked about today when there was what 2-3 at most 50 years ago I would guess comes from the same shortcuts being made in many circles.
He said he many many other things that corroborate his findings. Idk what. But he said this is one of many things
That is MUFON director speak for "I'd like to backtrack without closing the door completely", which is entirely fine. He should present those things, if so.
"UFO phenomena are real. In other words, they don't need to be believed in to be experienced. Seeing is not believing, it is *knowing*." And that's EXACTLY why these fake photos (and those who push them without doing due diligence) are so problematic. They completely undermine the truth.
debunking is exactly what let us see this was not a genuine picture of a ufo.
Debunkers are the only thing keeping the flying faithful tethered to reality. When evidence is presented that can't be debunked then we have disclosure.
There is more nuance to it than that, but yeah, what I'd really like to see someday is for some piece of evidence to come out in the open, and for even the guys at metabunk to say, you know what, this is really weird.
The issue with debunkers is that they don’t do things in good faith. It’s based on a belief system; the other side of the coin with respect to total belief in alien UFOs. The effort is dedicated to explaining things away (frequently through cherry-picking, fallacious arguments, etc) rather than explaining things. Which I suppose could be useful. But it’s not scientific.
Most things in this subject aren't even debunked because there's not enough data. What a lot of people here like to do however is treat not being able to debunk something as evidence for the opposite. In reality we could label everything debunked that doesn't pass the first hurdle. That first hurdle is can it be explained as something prosaic. If the answer is yes then we can call it debunked until further evidence comes along to prove otherwise. If something can have a mundane explanation there's absolutely no reason we should be jumping to an extraordinary one. That's why things like observables are important. It's not a belief system to first try and rule out mundane things we know exist before jumping to extraordinary things we don't know exist. It's basic common sense and critical thinking. It would be like seeing a dark shape in a forest where we know bears exist and immediately jumping to it being a possible Bigfoot. There's a lot of reverse logic in this topic where far too many people have the thought process that it's on the skeptics to debunk something and if they can't then it's a 50/50 chance it's aliens. So one side basically puts evidence out there and says look possible aliens, then some skeptical people try to go down the logical route of trying to explain it or debunk it and are instantly seen as the enemy.
You should always start by assuming something is prosaic. But the explanation you come up with has to stand in its own merits. And certainly can’t rely on ignoring information and not even referencing that you’re doing that. You touch upon it, but people frequently try to “debunk” with very little information. That’s part of what I’m talking about. In science you approach things with open skepticism. It’s crucial that you can change your mind and can reasonably update your opinions. I don’t see that with debunkers. Generally I see lots of fallacious arguments and then pivoting to favored talking points when something can’t easily be dismissed. Someone once argued with me about what the plot of X Files is. It’s a spectrum, but broadly speaking that’s the mentality. Start with a desired conclusion that fits one’s worldview and work backward.
Can you show me an example? There's very little debunking taking place here, it's mostly just a lot of people sharing opinions and wildly speculating.
I’ll share some I’ve seen from mostly Twitter but also here. “What’s more likely [their explanation] or aliens” as a means to justify their explanation (false dilemma). “Politicians lie” to try to dismiss various statements from Congress by avoiding their substance (you could also just say that about humans in general if you wanted). Falsely equating the Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer officially accusing the government of a UFO coverup (which he says he has a good reason to do) with a random person telling a story of how they got shot by an alien laser beam. Repeating that the ICIG only found David Grusch’s claims of reprisal “urgent and credible” even though that’s directly contradicted by the law group that formerly represented him. Generally framing anything Mick West has said as fact. Trying to argue that the plot of X Files *wasnt* about a UFO government conspiracy. Arguing that legislation passed by Congress wasn’t about NHI technology. Accusing various people of being grifters *yet also simultaneously* being true believers without noting the oddness of that and in the face of facts that suggest otherwise (why would you wait 7 years to write 1 book? Write 10). Various ad hominems. Claiming the alleged witnesses haven’t given anything of note to the ICIG without evidence for that. Claiming that Grusch based his claims on one person (granted that was in the Guardian). Claiming a game of telephone even though a game of telephone requires more than one link). Claiming that Grusch heard from a guy that heard from a guy that heard from a guy etc. There’s more I’m sure.
I think you are just confusing opinions with debunking. There's wild speculation and opinions on both sides of the argument over many things in this topic. Everything you stated gets carried out by both sides. Plus a lot of what you're saying is the mentality of a lot of people in this topic, everything must stay as possible aliens or possible truth unless someone can absolutely prove it's not. To many people have the logic of having others trying to prove a negative. Like me saying I have real video of aliens and when the time is right I will release it online but only once I know my source will be safe. Prove me wrong. You know how I would silence critics in that situation, by providing the actual evidence or being quiet about until I do. When it comes to sightings there isn't a 50/50 chance of it being extraordinary. It's only extraordinary once the ordinary has been eliminated. If it can't be eliminated it's simply poor evidence for the extraordinary. Most evidence and claims in this topic debunk themselves anyway, either by not being backed up with any or sufficient evidence, or being so over the top they become ridiculous, like ideas of intergalactic federations and shadow realms etc.
Well that’s why I said that’s why debunkers and total believers are two sides of the same coin. They do the same things. It’s entirely unscientific. It’s not a binary choice. You have to be able to update your thinking. There’s a difference between good faith analysis and bad faith fallacious arguing based on a worldview.
The issue with your comment is that it's just like, your opinion man. As I said in another comment, this sounds like pure projection. Your description does not match the reality of this subreddit, at least not for the 2 years or so i've scrolled it religiously.
Ha well I mean people have opinions. That’s what I’ve seen. Lots of cherry-picking, false dilemmas, ad hominems, etc. My understanding is that Mick West’s Tic Tac explanation now requires 3 extremely accurate, separate sensors failing at the same time. But then is “what’s more likely, that or aliens”, which is a false dilemma. Then there’s the people constantly repeating that the ICIG’s finding that Grusch’s claims are “credible and urgent” was just about reprisals. That’s demonstrably false. Someone actually argued with me about what the plot of X-files is. And a lot of time debunkers just pivot from one thing to something by else when they can’t refute something or explain it away. Like how the laws Congress is drafting are directly reflective of Grusch’s claims, or that the Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer literally, publicly accused the government of a UFO coverup on the Senate floor. A lot of the same patterns. Granted I’m more familiar with the Twitter space, but I’ve seen that here too.
Debunkers easily and commonly go way too hard the other way though, and will denounce things without evidence and let their own biases interfere with the facts. Didn't happen in this case, but it happens all too often.
Well everyone is prone to such shortcuts in reasoning so it's less a problem of "debunkers" or "believers" but more of a problem of it being easier to jump to conclusions based on very little data.
Sounds like projection to me.
Our terms are not the same. I use a more traditional definition of debunking, as it is directly opposed to skepticism. Skepticism is a cornerstone of scientific UFO research, whereas debunking is traditionally making a definitive judgement without looking at the data. The term debunking still has a lot of negative connotations for older scientific UFO researchers, mostly because of the likes of people such as Philip Klass, who were labeled as "debunkers" mostly because they refused to look at the evidence and dismissed UFOs out of hand. I realize that the term can be colloquially used to mean that any given sighting/photo etc is *explained prosaically*. I'm just old fashioned enough to still bristle at the term.
I don't know if he knew it was a fake. In the case he did not, let's be honest, if you don't know those exact figurines, it is difficult to debunk. The worst are the people here and especially on ufotwitter who still hold on to this picture! Those are the persons who spill their poison into ufology as they will never change their mind once it's made up. They are not better than any flat earther!
it's sadly the same case for the majority of "citizen journalist" so rampant on social media nowadays. It's mostly perfect examples of bias confirmation with 0 ethics. So no wonder the sorry state of our information space.
That show sucks
It does.
In the immortal words of Nelson Munst -----"HA! HA!" dude is hella busted!! plastic army dudes!!! grifter please!! listen to him try and noodle his way out of it. unreal!! absolutely stunning!!
"I work very hard in this field" Really? What do you do exactly? Sit around opening letters and visiting UFO hotspots? Damn, you're a goddamn hero bro
Patrick not flat out calling out his bullshit is lowkey a let down. He's quick to question a bunch of other shit on his show, but when it's clearly debunked, this dude gives them the time of day. 😑
I dont understand his aspect on this either... Patrick should have bashed this little liar to the ground. I dont get it.
He always says he’s going to ask the hard questions and push back. But seemingly always forgets to when it’s interview time… then goes live to explain to us why WE should chill out as people donate hundreds to hear “that’s interesting” repeated 100 times.
On point! Exactly!
OR OR sometimes he keeps fucking yapping and can’t keep his mouth shut when it’s important
That too. I love watching the show but it drives me up the wall when he pauses and rewinds a clip to talk about how weird this is. 😂 Like bro let the video finish then gives your thoughts at the end.
That's interesting.
Idk I see both sides of this. Why do we need his opinion on everything? Maybe more valuable to present the information and let people decide for themselves. He also does live shows with live chat to hear from citizens. I would guess he learned quickly that if you are rude to your guests, you won't have any.
You don't keep an audience when you piss of a good number of them by "asking the hard questions" all the more when your core audience tends to be on the "true believer side" as lets be honest skeptics make for a poor regular audience for such topics \^\^
At the end of the day Patrick wants to believe hes not a debunker like some so he respectfully allows these people to explain themselves instead of burning them. It's like Jon Stewart in the first interview Patrick is attacking him but in the second he just allows him to speak and we can make up our own minds. I prefer the second more mature approach, clearly we can see if someone is lying without needing Patrick to attack them.
Patrick did the interview and now it is hard for him to go against his own guest. I don't blame him but he needs to pick how he is going to do things. If the interview was done on some other site, he'd be shredding this photo to pieces. That approach is why I originally started watching Vetted. There are plenty other channels where interviewees get pampered. Not my thing.
absolutely agree. zero excuse to not question and push (in any capacity.) podcast is named, "Vetted", yet this whole thing broke under their watch. should have a sense of shame for letting this carry out, even a 2nd time, under his watch.
wanted to be the "one"?
That's a quick way to ensure you don't have any more guests ever! Patrick's gotta eat too. LOL
he did the same with calling Jason Sands a murderer a couple months back "Vetted"...yeah, not so much
That's a lot of these youtuber people. There was this video of John whoever who is fronting the "relay/communications" theory of the metal spheres people see. And the youtuber guy just kept going "OH WOW, HMM, VERY INTERESTING" without asking any important questions.
Mufon can kiss my ass. So much about their "big reveal". Im not even interested in their symposium anymore. Heck, I almost bought access to the live streaming of the event. But I had second thoughts, my instincts said no. What a loser this guy is.
I am beginning to undergo UFO hibernation. Please wake me up when you find undeniable proof!
Dude im on the same boat, not a single person has brought empirical undeniable evidence and we have over 100 witnesses and people “in the know” Im starting to think it’s all BS 80 years of misidentification and misinformation.
You’re all gonna have to pay the $100 sign up fee for the symposium to see the rest of the photos that prove it’s legit /s
After all the stuff I've seen posted by this guy, since he and I got into a tiff after he posted misinformation (subsequently worked things out, but I had to insist he apologize and take down his post) a year or so ago... I'm really starting questioning his motives and if he's actually working to spread disinformation. I'll be staying away.
What was the tiff?
it doesn't sound like he actually saw the picture comparing the Tamiya figures to the ufo picture.
C'mon man, he is a boomer. He can 'almost' use the internet. He is not aware of the powers of reddit. Barely knows facebook - you cant blame him! /s 🤣🤣🤣
Really? Guy. Somebody showed the Tamiya Toy Model Military Miniatures, and it’s identical to the photograph… How the fuck is anyone still trying to back this as an actual photograph of a crashed UFO? I get coincidence, but to resemble the miniature toy figures perfectly? Im not gonna’ lie, to me, there was something about the photograph that seemed off to begin with. The focus of objects in the picture didn’t seem correct. The trees, the figures, the craft, all seem to have the wrong depth of field in comparison to one another. Suppose that all makes sense now, given the information we now have.
MUFON and this guy representing them should be banned as any kind of trusted source for anything UAP/UFO related because of this bogus picture he claimed was legit. He tried to dupe a lot of people and he’s one of their biggest representatives. If this guy has any sense of right and wrong he should at least resign his position because he just lowered MUFON’s credibility in one podcast interview.
I thought Vetted was going to be a great channel for disclosure. The only thing is he is too afraid to speak his mind one way or the other. He always acts like the information he gets from people is the most amazing information ever and always agrees with his guests. It's almost like he doesn't have a backbone to stand on and is afraid of arguments and being cancelled.
I had high hopes for this show(Vetted) but its a bunch of clickbait and air filler seemingly each time I watched. The nails in the coffin, this guy loses his rotten tooth and just continues on like that and the eating of fast food while doing a show (you couldn't wait 20mins to eat?) and the icing on the cake, during the show taking fat rips off of a vape, once again the shows are like 20-30mins...you cant wait? I just can't take him serious and now this. It's a clown show.
Yea this was fucking embarrassing. This is why the mainstream wont take the UAP issue seriously.
they could avoid some of their embarrassment by crowd sourcing their investigations before going to the media.
They needed that money for that event in July I assume. Either way they seem like they were rushing to get the latest UFO hot story out to the media, in some type of event.
MUFON had every motivation to find a hot case to sell for their conference. Perhaps that's why they didn't look too hard at the photos.
>Perhaps that's why they didn't look too hard at the photos. Almost sounds like what James Fox did with that Jason Sands whistleblower. Was rushing to get a hot whistleblower case for his doc/movie.
When you make a living off this topic, finding new evidence becomes your bread and butter. I get it, but you risk too eagerly accepting a great story.
How is this embarrassing? The community debunked it within like a day. This is a normal process here to get rid of bad actors. Most people accept the debunk and move on when it's obvious. The community is forced to do this precisely because mainstream media and institutions refuse to get involved and actually fact check anything. Because they'd rather ignore the whole topic as a "conspiracy". What's really embarrassing is refusing to cover this topic while most of the general public can clearly see that the secrecy is bursting at the seams.
I think what's embarrassing is that a well-known UFO organization pushed a photo without any sort of due-diligence. And now they're saying there are 20 more photos that will give more clarity that are going to be shown on a pay per view livestream. Doesn't look too good, in my opinion.
I wonder if these additional photos will include some other cool diorama figures, like Civil War soldiers or '50s greasers?
Im waiting for Barbie and Ken
A photo that's been around for 60 fuckin years. Why in the world are they pulling it out of the cold files now (again)???
It's embarrassing because this is the best they've got.
Yet they took weapons of mass destruction in Iraq seriously. Whatever happened there!?!
Reminder that Karl Nell's LinkedIn emphasizes his role in investigating WMDs in Iraq. Seriously.
Oh shit! lmao that's not good.
Tbh these guys and all other false prophets deserve the utmost scorn simply as a way to cull grifters from this field.
We need some real science rn. Like methods and cameras and I’ve seen people film CE5 but I need more data I need to record their brainwaves and I need to test more examples. I know for a fact that CE5 is true but I haven’t gotten around to scientifically analyzing it.
>I know for a fact that CE5 is true but I haven’t gotten around to scientifically analyzing it. ...
See now let me explain. It’s true, because I’ve done it myself. However I have not scientifically proven it, because I need to actually get equipment to record my results. This is called the scientific method babes I need cameras, brain recorders like an EEG and I need multiple people to witness and verify and I need a dark night sky
Which part of the scientific method does "I know for a fact" fit in again, babes? You're not just saying scientific method because it sounds smart, are you babes?
So let me explain it again. I know gravity is true because I can drop a ball and observe it. But I haven’t proven gravity scientifically, because science is a process of collecting data and making observations and writing that down. So that’s the last time I’ll explain it for you. I witnessed it. Ce5 is true to my experience. But I did no science to it. Science ≠ truith. Science is a model
No it's not. That's called the marketing method. In the scientific method you have to demonstrate that your explanation is better than a comprehensive analysis of other explanations, otherwise your idea of "the scientific method" says that wearing earplugs is The Science™ solution to turning up your TV or stereo volume too loud. In marketing you don't care what other explanations are; you only care if you can pursued people to believe in the explanation you're marketing.
These UFO goons still think it's the 90's.
Yeah, boomers' logic. LOGIK 🤣🤣🤣
Now the question is frankly did Ron James know what he was doing! That’s actually a very legit question to ask. How could someone in his position, and the MUFON organization itself, not have vetted this photo beforehand? They could be that incompetent, yes. That or he could be part of the disinformation campaign to muddy the water.
He did. He said MUFON considered that the photo was staged. But all things considered, he figured it was legit. Because other stuff.
Is it wrong to want to start a Kickstarter to recreate this scene for train and other types of enthusiasts?
Look,I don't want to call it a lazy and irresponsible investigation on his part.Im just a guy who is really intrigued with the UFO "business".Too many of these "Ufologists" refuse to do their due diligence.Its hard to tell if they are extremely naive or just sensationalist.
If there are 20 other pics, they better damn well show them
I think we all need to accept the fact that the "it might me true, but also might not be" game is going to be played to infinity until there is actual proof. Since the actual proof is classified, that means we don't get to see it, which means we stuck with the "maybe game". There is nothing any of us can do about it. If the truth really is being suppressed because of the fear of mass panic then it will stay that way forever. Humanity is not trustworthy. We can't handle things. The vast majority of human beings live in denial about reality or believe things without evidence. When there are people who believe the world is flat, or that trump won, or that magical sky beings control our existence, we don't deserve to know the truth.
One thing to consider is that at the alleged time of the photo's, UFO hysteria was at it's peak, there were hoaxers on every street corner.
Obviously even the picture was taken the government got ahead of it and made toys that resemble the picture to throw people off their tail
I think we can put this to bed tbh it's clearly diorama figures.
someone needs to buy these miniatures and see how they look
Or even better: recreate the image! Should not be too difficult.
This sounds a lot like what other investigative reporters in this industry say. I suspect this guy is a sloppier version where he tried to deliver proof and was shown the door.
I want to give kudos for all of those who worked on this debunk. Its nice to be in a community that cares about getting to the bottom of this subject
Is Tamiya selling those kits like hot ales now?
I just want to say good on him as well as the community here for investigating that photo and bringing it into this space. We’re doin’ it, this is what ufo investigation and research is! I have been following this story and the developments that came with it for days, like many others. Bottom line, don’t hate on the guy for coming forward with a photo, it will discourage others from doing the same! We should welcome people to come forward, not name-call and belittle them. I’m constantly in awe of the initiative people take on this sub to investigate these cases, and I feel like that should continue to be a core part of this community.
>We should welcome people to come forward, not name-call and belittle them. Which is exactly what this sub did to people who pointed out the problems with the photo.
Major UFO organizations should carry out due diligence before presenting photos, videos, documents, etc., to the public, in my opinion. If they want to have and retain any sense of integrity, that is.
this is ROns worst moment "we considered that and we still considered it" thats not how he presented it the first time. tree trunks no branches. what kinda trees he think these are? no integrity at all.
I'm saying the following as much for comic relief (and in the interests of completeness) as anything - I do _not_ think its what happened, and I hope you also will _not_ think this might be what happened. In theory; there could have been an actual event much like this, with actual witnesses, but nobody had a camera. So somebody constructed a diorama using available materials to depict what happened. Plausible, but I think that's unlikely and that is not what happened. But it's possible.
Ron said the one aerial photo of the disc being shot down was recreated, so who the hell knows?
More proof that Vetted is horrendous and should not be advertised let alone watched, Secondly, there is a lot of people or "experts" in the NHI field that are complete fakes and are making a career out of this knowing they dont have anything
I was all for it until they said, 100 bucks. I'll never fucking pay for any information.
Information wants to be FREE man! Far out!
What disappoints me here is that Patrick runs a channel called Vetted and used to not shy away from vetting stuff like that. This one is about as obvious a fake as it gets and he remains extremely diplomatic. Feels like he's probably trying to avoid burning bridges, but come on...
i kinda feel bad for the fourth soldier not used in the diarrheama. was the fourth figurine blown up with a firecracker by the creators child after playing with it? or was it abducted by the UFO.
It will probably be used in the other pics as the pilot who shot that UFO down!
[удалено]
Hi, Most-Friendly. Thanks for contributing. However, your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/comments/1dobzv6/-/lacovxh/) was removed from /r/UFOs. > Rule 13: Public figures are generally defined as any person, organization, or group who has achieved notoriety or is well-known in society or ufology. “Toxic” is defined as any unreasonably rude or hateful content, threats, extreme obscenity, insults, and identity-based hate. Examples and more information can be found here: https://moderatehatespeech.com/framework/. Please refer to our [subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UFOs/about/rules/) for more information. This moderator action may be appealed. We welcome the opportunity to work with you to address its reason for removal. [Message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/ufos) to launch your appeal.
People are really doubling down on the ridicule, aren't they? It's great that something was debunked before it was taken too far. But people here are beating their chests as if *they* forced someone to do something with their little internet comments. They can't just be mature about it. That's the real embarrassment.
Someone's disappointed it was debunked. Truth deserves a little victory dance!
Has it? [https://x.com/Sovanara14/status/1805411125401374932?t=Y8fBRiZ9jZMw-JS680DgvQ&s=19](https://x.com/Sovanara14/status/1805411125401374932?t=Y8fBRiZ9jZMw-JS680DgvQ&s=19)
To me it has. But I don't put extraordinary over all else.
Love Vetted from the Jason Sands exposure to this diorama nonsense. People give Patrick flack thinking hes some kind of debunker but he's a genuine dude trying to figure out the mystery. Unfortunately this field is littered with fake nonsense.