I've defended Imbrogno in the past only in this sense: that his ideas about things paranormal and UFO were still interesting. Don't discount his ideas, which aren't new and have been proposed by many another through the decades, based on his dishonest behavior. Accepting his sources and research/data as valid is another issue, since it seems he has committed plagiarism.
Sunday, October 2, 2011
From The UFO Trail: Guiley Cancels Second Book with Imbrogno, Cites Fabrications and Plagiarism
Jack Brewer at UFO Trail posts the latest news on researcher Rosemary Ellen Guiley and her past collaboration with "fallen ufologist" Phil Imbrogno: The UFO Trail: Guiley Cancels Second Book with Imbrogno, Cites Fabrications and Plagiarism.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Hi, Regan,
I very much respect your willingness to continue to address and discuss the Imbrogno situation and implications. I realize there are some Internet war wounds in the mix from long-running feuds and disagreements.
That makes me all the more respect your willingness to look at the situation. Thank you for the link.
ah, Ms. Lee, how refreshing! yes, an idea is different from the person who puts forth (originally or not) that idea.
my mind continues boggled at the number of people who can't seem to grasp this elementary concept. additionally, while lying does cast a shadow on an author's work, it does not automatically follow that data were fabricated. in scientific circles, the ideal solution is to compare the data and results to other, independently produced data and results - that's the beauty of it, the scientific process doesn't depend on 'perfect people'.
but that process is tedious and subtle. though i do wonder why we don't toss out the ufo books by people who've cheated on spouses or significant others - it's hard to imagine a more untrustworthy act! ;) steph
Post a Comment