On Alfred Lehmberg's News to Chew, we find Richard Dolan's response to Michael R. Schuyler's criticisms of Dolan's research. Excellent response from Dolan. Hat tip to Lesley at The Debris Field for link.
On a related side note, Dolan responds to Schuyler's criticism of Linda Moultan Howe, a woman insulted and made fun of by many. All her years of research, her hard work, her contributions, are considered nil by some critics. At the risk of sounding boring and quaint I'll say it -- sometimes I don't wonder if those criticisms are nothing more than sexist comments. I think Howe has been naive at times, and I don't agree with her take on the paranormal perspective of UFO research, and a few other areas of disagreement, (including what I've heard and observed on a personal level) but the point is, this isn't a personality contest. And to dismiss someone with such disdain, who's given the field so damn much, is ignorant. I'll be open and say I don't like Peter Davenport; I don't like him personally (I've had two interactions with him that have just put me off, sister!) and I don't like his politics. In fact, the pompous stuffed shirt makes me laugh. But so what? No one cares, except me. I can attack him, or I can appreciate his decades of hard work -- work that very few else have attempted to do, especially those critics -- and that's what counts, not that he's a verbose bag of wind.
Research in this field is a chimera; it's hard to ever really get at "it" -- all we can do is do our best, and get as close to it as we can, with honesty and integrity.
Many who criticize -- who attack -- don't do much in ways of contributions to understanding the UFO phenomena. And if you believe their line that their contribution is the so-called calling out of others, or "exposing" people, for some imagined greater good of self-imposed UFO Policedom, you'd be mistaken, as they most surely are.