Saturday, March 27, 2010

Nukes, UFOs and James Carlson

I inducted uber-pathological debunker "Noisy Negativist" James Mcgaha into my 'Snarly Skepticism Owl Award.' Previous proud winners: Joe Nickell and Bill Nye.

James Carlson leaves me a comment:
Gentlemen; It occurs to me that you may not be entirely aware of the dishonest testimony published by Robert Salas and Robert Hastings, who have lied about these UFO incidents for years. Please take note of the discussions regarding the incidents they have proposed on the two URLs and . Problems inherent to their claims indicate that both men have invented a number of incidents. Very best regards, James Carlson Albuquerque, NM
So interesting when big time names drop by my no account anti-skeptoid blog; James Randi even left me a comment over there once! Wow.  After letting Carlson know "I'm a dame," and not a male member of some anti-skeptoid gentlemen's club, I added that I knew of allegations, duh. I assumed he meant the usual, and after reading, okay, more like skimming for now, his I dunno, 5,000 plus? work on events surrounding Robert Salas and Hastings, ... you just have to look at it yourself. Here's what Billy Cox at Devoid had to say about Carlson's work on his blog: 'Nukes debate gets personal.' (By the way, Cox says the work is 357 pages, it just seemed like 5,000 plus.)
The latest round of a blistering, two-year cyber-debate between UFO researcher Robert Hastings and the son of nuclear missile silo commander clanged into De Void’s e-mailbox last week. That’s when James Carlson, whose father Eric was ranking officer at a launch control facility in 1967 when 10 ICBMs mysteriously went offline, dropped a 357-page bomb.
And. . .
Anyhow, at the end of the day, amid the endless and enervating well of anger dominating the news cycles from Capitol Hill to Main Street, Carlson just gets lost in the crowd. That’s because he calls his online tome: “Americans, Credulous, or The Arrogance of Congenital Liars & Other Character Defects.” He dismisses those who disagree with him as “fools, idiots and liars,” among other things. Yawn. Click.
That's pretty much how I felt as I looked over the piece. Frank Warren, who is nobody's fool, and obviously among the serious UFO researchers, has a lot about this on his UFO Chronicles; be sure to scroll down to the responses to Carlson. I'm not an expert by any means in this area; not at all! But a couple of things scream at me "something's not right here girlie girl" and that's: Carlson's obsessive, kind of on the pathological side tone, and, the fact his father was an officer at a launch facility, as Cox points out. 


Lesley said...

According to Hastings, Carlson is a nut. Can't really disagree with him from what I have seen.

Regan Lee said...

I agree, from what I've read as well.

jtcarl said...

Ms. Lee,

I find it odd that you think my obsession regarding this matter is strange. Hastings and Salas have publically called my father a liar, insisting that he has repeatedly lied even to his own family for the past forty years. Hastings has stated in public that my father insists I have mental problems as well – another lie with no purpose except to discredit the arguments I've raised. He has also suggested my father has Alzheimer's disease. Should I not feel abused and defensive?

Robert Hastings has presented at least one witness who has claimed to be attached to a military command that has never existed. He paraded for years the testimony of Col.(Ret.) Walt Figel as "proof" of the interference by UFOs with the nuclear weapons in March 1967 when a single phone call by me to Col. Figel proved in a moment the foolishness of such a claim, with Figel asserting that UFOs were not involved at Echo Flight. All of the non-witness witnesses Hastings and Salas have presented are easily shown to be little more than the foolish affectations of men who have no ability to examine even the simplest of claims made. Both men have habitually attacked and attempted to destroy the reputations of men who are now dead and can no longer defend themselves or their families, and Hastings has attacked as well with personal insults and suggestions disparaging their abilities and sanity anybody who disputes what he claims, attacking as well their families and those they care about who have done nothing except disagree with him – and not just my own. He has published private emails in order to achieve these goals more than once with more one individual. Because of this combative behavior he has been locked out of numerous forums, including those run by the missileers he claims to speak for. He and Robert Salas are now soliciting funds to present their ridiculous fictions at a national press conference in Washington, D.C. during a period of high interest and national security fears brought about by terrorism and our controversial involvement in two wars – all of this in order to increase the money received from the sale of books and videos and for discussing nonsense theories in front of paying audiences.

How exactly should I react to men who publically assert that my father is a liar, and that I am, as responses to your commentary assert, "crazy" – all of which is entirely irrelevant to the documented facts I have presented, facts that both men refuse to comment on even to the extent of saying they are untrue, and facts that you admit you have not considered? Is there something wrong with my concern and defense of my family and my name? Is it strange that I care about the nation that I'm a citizen of, while both Hastings and Salas very clearly do not? Is a man’s defense of his own reputation and that of his father a bad thing? Had they simply left my father’s name out of their little exercise in stupidity from the very beginning as I requested, I would never have said anything regarding this incident. They decided that discrediting him and my family was easier.

I don't wish to offend you, Ms. Lee, and I'm sorry if my insistence seems overly "obsessive", but I've given up on politesse and courteous dispute in this case – it doesn't work with people like Hastings and Salas. I have already measured the breadth of their viciousness and I will not allow them to destroy the reputations of people I care about in the way they have already done with others. I have very good reasons for caring so much about this subject, primarily the fact that I am an honest man, as is my father, and those I have criticized are definitively not. Your conclusions might be more elevated if you would at least ask as well "why do Hastings and Salas care so much that they took the time to write their own books?", because they are making money from this exercise in American dishonesty, while I am not, and have no intentions of ever doing so.

James Carlson