The Sad, Cynical Legacy of Stanton Friedman

A testament to the pursuit of profit over truth, fueled by intellectual dishonesty and cowardice

The email exchanges below will tell the story of what happens when a self-satisfied, profit-oriented member of the UFOCI pretends to want to know the truth about the Billy Meier UFO contacts, until he sees that the truth would crush him, his pretenses and…book sales. Unaware of what the listeners already determined about his credibility and competence, he further reveals his contempt for their intelligence in the second debate.

He deals a death blow to his own legacy, revealing what a complete sham the UFO field and its supposed “experts” really are, and why the topic is often deservedly marginalized by rational people.

The radio interviews can be found here.

…………………………………………………………….

Stan,

Let me be a bit more direct with you now, after I’ve spent four hours of my time trying to engage in intelligent debates with you, which included providing you with links to all of the documentation that would certainly suffice…had you truly been interested in the Meier case and it’s actual significance. In fact, every so-called “point” you raise in your terse response is answered in the Meier case, you simply never bothered to look. You did take a lot of time attacking a man who’s no longer living and who couldn’t speak in his own defense, of course.

Unfortunately, you were also too lazy, self-satisfied and contemptuous of the facts to bother. So you prefer to default to help continue the actual UFO cover-up – which is now solely about the Meier case – and this cover-up will become an indelible part of your legacy, to your own family and generations of people to come.

I’ll post the results of the listener’s poll for our first debate in case you didn’t see them either:

I don’t think it changed in your favor after the second one. You were simply received and evaluated as someone with…no credibility. I doubt that this response of yours will do much to enhance it, or show you were better prepared, sincere, or wanting to continue to anything more than promote your books, chuckle and try to cover up the painful facts that showed you to be completely out of your league.

We know that you tried to involve yourself in the original investigation but were told by Stevens and the team members that no one in the UFO community would be part of the actual investigation, but only qualified, independent experts such as those from NASA, JPL, USGS, etc., who indeed analyzed and authenticated Meier’s evidence.

You continue to promote your career and books based on an utterly unprovable case, with zero accessible evidence, yet you have the absolutely cynical arrogance to try to be dismissive of volumes of independently analyzed and authenticated physical and informational evidence from the only actual, still ongoing UFO contact case.

Frankly, this exhibits a level of contempt for the truth and for the intelligence of all interested parties which, as the listener’s poll demonstrates, was obvious to all.

Of course I didn’t ask you to be “convinced”, I asked that you would show the intellectual curiosity, honesty – and integrity – to pursue the truth. Instead you opted to try to protect your ego, to try to assuage the nagging realization that your years of attack and dismissiveness of the Meier case were ill spent. You didn’t have the courage and strength of character to actually investigate the case because you put profit over principles.

You’ve aligned yourself with the camp of the delusional “alien abduction” proponents, etc., etc. when you could have made a huge contribution to real human knowledge and even the safety of generations of people to come, which may include your own descendants.

When push comes to shove, many people choose mediocrity, compromise, etc., for the sake of personal profit, as you again demonstrate.

Despite the many emails and comments I received, after both shows, that you were transparently inept, posturing and insincere, I actually responded with optimism that you’d see – at this late point in your own life – that it wasn’t too late to champion an open investigation into the Meier case by the community in which you spend your time and make your money.

My optimism was misplaced of course. You performed like a jovial huckster who dodged and avoided any and every opportunity to behave like a credible scientist. You were absolutely no different than the kind of business-as-usual “scientists” that clog up the current educational system and who also have no interest in the truth, for all the obvious reasons.

You were given ample opportunity to create a real, lasting contribution to finding the truth…and you blew it off in favor of milking whatever profits remain from selling tales of limaginary “aliens”.

You fooled no one but yourself.

Michael Horn

Authorized American Media Representative

The Billy Meier Contacts

www.theyfly.com

Facebook

youtube.com/c/MichaelHorn812

…………………………………………………………….

On Nov 13, 2015, at 11:44 AM, Stan wrote:

Michael:

I must refuse the invitation as I am not convinced. You keep mentioning lights in the sky. I care not at all about lights in the sky.I am concerned with physical trace cases, multiple witness radar visual cases,advanced propulsion technology,large scale scientific studies, clear proof of government withholding information about UFOs. You seem not to be concerned about such matters.Has the Meier Defense community made available samples of ET materials for testing and published their results?. Many have sent comments about the absence of real proof about predictions.

Stan Friedman

…………………………………………………………….

—– Original Message —–

From: Michael Horn

To: Taro

Cc: Stan

Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 9:58 PM

Subject: Re: Meier Debate

Hi Taro & Stan,

I appreciate participating in this conversation, as a follow up to last night’s show, and I’d like to move this along effectively as well.

Stan, as I stated last night, it’s time that the Meier case was the focal point of open discussion and examination by the UFO community, MUFON – and more importantly any and all scientists who admit an interest in the UFO topic – anything less would only perpetuate the cover-up. (The real main culprits in the UFO cover-up are in the UFO community and…industry.)

To that end I’d like us to arrange an event wherein I present the Meier case and its evidence and any and all credible parties have the opportunity to question, challenge, etc. It’s that simple. No more runaround nonsense with the lights-in-the-sky-chasers and all of the unsubstantiated claims, etc., they churn out for fun and mainly profit.

As I also said last night, the confirmed discovery of intelligent extraterrestrial life would be the most important event in all of science and human history…exceeded only by contact between extraterrestrials and the people of Earth.

And it’s rather easy to demonstrate that the Meier case singularly fits that description.

I invite Taro to assist in this process so that this event is created and effected at the earliest possible time. What Taro accurately expresses below is indicative of the factual, impenetrably credible information, analyses, etc., that make the Meier case singularly authentic.

What we do – or don’t do – now will be an indelible part of our legacy and what we bequeath to future generations, familial and for the rest of humanity.

Let’s do it.

MH

…………………………………………………………….

On Nov 12, 2015, at 1:28 PM, Taro [email protected]> wrote:

Hello again, Stan. I managed to catch your debate with Michael Horn last night. During the show you mentioned that

“we have an interesting case here” and that “we need a higher level of discussion of people, the scientific community and especially the journalistic community to do their job, get at the facts, put it in front of the public”

I’m not quite clear on where the subject of the debate, the Meier evidence fits into your “Cosmic Watergate” analogy. Should it be dismissed or studied further? If I had to guess it would be that you were being deliberately vague. Is this accurate? Please understand, I am not attempting to solicit a stamp of approval from you. But I genuinely believe Meier’s physical evidence can hold up to the most critical and meticulous scrutiny. The evidence speaks for itself. And it would appear you may have suggested an interest in verifying this for yourself. Failing to seize this opportunity for a second time now could be the biggest mistake you leave behind. After becoming more familiar now with the sheer volume of material this one, disabled man has presented, what do you honestly think is the probability of hoax? And if it’s not, how will you be regarded by future generations for failing to take action when you had the chance?

We all agree, Roswell happened. The two primary distinctions between the Roswell and the Meier evidence are

A)

– The US government maintains a tight, heavy lid on the Roswell evidence.

– The Meier evidence, although suppressed and distorted is readily available for the rational mind to study.

B)

– Roswell was an accident. There was a crash, there were bodies, numerous accidental witnesses.

– The Meier case is intentional and controlled. The nature of the evidence will be as disparate as the case itself and expecting otherwise is not thinking clearly.

It is not very likely the USG will ever willingly release the Roswell evidence. So, unless we have another(even higher level) Snowden-type disclosure, it is very likely a dead-end. I can only imagine how much more careful those in charge are with the Roswell evidence.

The Meier evidence, although not nearly as cut and dry is out in the open. It may appear tedious to sift through the mountain of      material at first but as one spends time with already established analyses it becomes easier to separate the valid scientific work from the garbage. Critical observations become second nature for a guy like me and already should be for a guy like you. In any case, much of the work is already done. All that is left for someone like you is to review this scientific work and offer a scientific evaluation: Either there are flaws in these analyses or they are sound. You appear to have placed a disproportionate amount of focus on material that cannot by themselves be proved either way. This is not scientific. At the same time, you have quickly dismissed physical evidence based on a very limited frame of reference.

Take Bruce Maccabee’s analysis of the Pendulum Film, for example. Although he very thoroughly explained pendular motion he did nothing to address the possibility that ET’s thousands of years advanced could have mimicked this movement intentionally or the possibility that they had very good reason to do so. By ignoring these very plausible scenarios his analysis was quite simply incomplete. My video comparisons(https://youtu.be/SNlmFfb0ADs & https://youtu.be/gMFqSxX1b-g) clearly illustrate the practical difficulties with the suspended model theory. Rhal Zahi’s detailed analysis goes much further by measuring the periods, proving a model setup would necessarily require a constantly moving node in the vertical. The irregular vertical(yaw) axis of the disc prove a suspended model would also require node movement along the horizontal. How likely do you think it would be for such a suspended disc to remain laterally stable? It has never been duplicated as such. On top of this, there are numerous other unexplained events:

– smooth accelerations and decelerations with no obvious pulls

– a gradually INCREASING conical pendulum with no obvious pulls

– a smooth, 270º turn with zero disruption to lateral stability

– treetop movement AFTER disc passage with no disruption to disc movement or stability

– object fading out then back into visibility(x2), simultaneously appearing in two locations across multiple frames

– an unexplained burn-like anomaly during both of these “jumps”

– a noticeable difference in blur level from closest to farthest position from camera

To base your conclusions on the Pendulum Film entirely on Maccabee’s analysis is very much lacking in factual considerations. This is not scientific. I hope you choose to take a closer look.

I’m including Michael into this conversation since he would be the very best person to help arrange any further analysis of the Meier material should you choose to firmly commit to this higher level of discussion you mentioned last night. Remember, the Roswell evidence is safely locked away. But that which is out in the open is what the “powers that be” would have good reason to go to great lengths to hide by encouraging the muddying of the waters, so to speak.

So? Will you take a closer look at the science?

Taro Istok

The Sad, Cynical Legacy of Stanton Friedman originally appeared on They Fly Blog on November 13, 2015.