Saucer Smear
OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE SAUCER & UNEXPLAINED CELESTIAL EVENTS RESEARCH SOCIETY
EDITOR AND STILL
SUPREME COMMANDER:
James W. Moseley

CONTRIBUTING EDITOR:
Karl T. Pflock

NON-SCHEDULED
NEWSLETTER
Volume 46, No. 11
November 5th, 1999

MAILING ADDRESS:
P. 0. Box 1709
Key West, FL 33041


RE-HASH OF OUR GLORIOUS SAN ANTONIO CONVENTION:

The 36th annual National UFO Conference (NUFOC) was held in a quaint but adequate hotel in San Antonio, Texas, on the weekend of September 25th-26th. Due to great effort by local host Dennis Stacy (former editor of the MUFON Journal) and by Permanent Chairman Jim Moseley this was definately one of our most successful events. Actually, a modest profit was made, which is quite unusual! Additional help & guidance was given by Karl Pflock, Amy Hebert, Carlos Mentira, and many others, who aided us with publicity in various ways. And it didn't hurt that Whitley Strieber, our guest of honor, is now a "regular" on the Art Bell radio show!

In an Internet posting previous to the Convention, Stacy referred to your "Smear" editor as ufology's "reigning court jester". We hadn't really thought of ourselves that way, though we do use humor to get some hopefully serious points across. Anyhow, ace cartoonist Matt Graeber has come up with a wonderful rendition of this concept, as seen on the left. (See also Matt's letter to the editor, further along in this issue.)

The lead-off speaker at the Con. on Saturday morning was supposed to be retiring MUFON czar Walt Andrus, but Walt became lost in his efforts to drive to the hotel. That made Literary Agent Cherry Weiner the lead-off speaker, she being the lady handling our book "Shockingly Close to the Truth". Though not a ufologist, she is looking for interesting new clients.

Then came Walt, speaking on the subject of the truly mysterious disappearance of Australian pilot Frederich Valentich, some twenty years ago. Finally, the morning's program was rounded off by your "Smear" editor recounting (once again!) his "Weird Personal Experiences of a Skeptical Believer."

Saturday afternoon's program began with Patrick Huyghe speaking about various unearthly-looking creatures, drawings & descriptions of which also appear in his latest book. Then came Constance Clear, speaking about the abduction research she has done as a trained psychologist. We understand that Ms. Clear also does a stand-up comedy routine, but this was not it. Finally came Karl Pflock, with a detailed description of the story behind the rumored Aztec, New Mexico saucer crash, circa 1948. This is the yarn from Frank Scully's classic 1950 book, "Behind the Flying Saucers".

After the close of the Saturday afternoon session, Dennis Stacy invited all the speakers to dinner at a classy local fish house, where there was much merriment except for a brief but ugly scene between Whitley Strieber and Kevin Randle. As he walked into the room, Strieber immediately said to Randle, who was seated with his back to him: "You are either a military disinformation agent or a professional liar". (This may not be the precise quote, but it is extremely close.) Randle just sat there in shocked silence. The reference here was to Randle's latest book, co-authored with two others, in which a somewhat skeptical attitude toward abductions is expressed.

Whitley Strieber and Joe Firmage composed the Saturday evening program. Strieber accepted NUFOC's "Ufologist of the Year" Award, and then proceeded to show several startling videos, including two from NASA's 1986 space shuttle mission. Firmage gave his usual gung-ho, inspiring video presentation of his concepts regarding UFOs and the bright future awaiting Mankind if only we can get our Act together.

The final session of the Convention was Sunday morning. Again your "Smear" editor acted as Master of Ceremonies. First off, Tom Deuley gave the real story of the alleged 1950 saucer crash known as the El Indio - Guerrero case. Actually, as strange as this may seem, the real event behind the legend was an incident in 1944 in which a Civil Air Patrol plane was accidentally shot down by our own military personnel at an aerial gunnery range. The pilot and an observer with him were both killed, and there was indeed a cover-up of this embarrassing event, leading to the crashed saucer rumor.

Next on Sunday morning, Kevin Randle gave his usual entertaining but skeptical lecture regarding UFO abductions. Randle has recently obtained a Ph.D. from an institution called California Coast University (CCU). Cynics on the Net have characterized this as a "diploma mill" and questioned whether it is duly accredited. We do not have enough information to comment on this, but we do congratulate Randle on his achievement, whatever the gory details may be.

Our last speaker was a lady named Linda Corley, who many years ago made the last in-depth interview with Jesse Marcel Sr, of Roswell fame, and obtained certain details about the Roswell crash that no one else ever knew about until now.

Amazingly, the Fox Network covered our Convention, and it is said there will be a TV "Special" on this, shortly. In all respects we had a great deal of free publicity before the event, in the San Antonio newspapers and on the Art Bell Show, as already mentioned. Here's hoping we can do as well next year, wherever the 2000 NUFOC may be held. As of this writing, we are still looking for a site, and we would be very interested in any leads that "Smear" readers might care to send us.


TIDBITS OF TRASH:


BOOK REVIEWS:


RANDI UPDATE:

As mentioned in our Sept. 1st issue, magician/debunker James Randi makes the following assertion in his April 1999 Position Statement:
"When...Eldon Byrd sued me in Baltimore a few years ago, his lawyer brought up the famous tape recording as evidence against my character. My own lawyer, at my insistence, asked that the entire tape be played for the courtroom and jury, so that the true nature of the record would be understood, instead of being misrepresented as it usually was."

We now have a portion of the transcript of the Eldon Byrd vs. James Randi et al trial, dated May 26th, 1993. From a reading of this transcript it is abundantly clear that Randi's lawyer, named Diane Margaret Link, made every effort to persuade Judge Marvin J. Garbis not to let the jury hear the tape, which of course is the same so-called Blackmail Tape that we have referred to in "Smear" many times in the past.

Here, verbatim, is part of that excerpt from the official record of that trial:

MS. LANK: May I respectfully ask how the tape is relevant, your Honor? What defamatory statements alleged by Mr. Byrd are related to that tape?

THE COURT: Fortunately I don't have to persuade you that I'm right. I have to ultimately persuade the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit that I am properly exercising my discretion in this case, which I am doing.

I have listened to the tape.I have carefully and agonizingly reflected on this. It is possible, it is possible that your client told this Court, this jury, and the New York Skeptics a bald face lie. It is possible. The jury is going to have to evaluate that. I don't know how they can evaluate that if they don't hear this and determine which version is true.

If he has said a falsity about this tape and this is the tape he accused Mr. Byrd of manipulating, then I think it is relevant to this case, to his credibility and to the issues in this case with regard to whether or not he knew that other statements were false.

He had this tape. He knew what this tape was. He said things about Mr. Byrd relevant to this tape that the jury may find false, they may find are true.

What you have said and your position has been is that this tape is material. Mr. Randi is leading on some obscene callers. If your version is true, it is benign. I trust the jury. But if your version is not true, then the jury is entitled to know that. This issue is closed.

The Blackmail Tape was then played for the jury, obviously over the objections of Ms. Lank, who presumably was acting in behalf of her client, James Randi.

Randi apparently does not want the American public to hear this Tape, either. Why not???


PFLOCK PTALK - UFOOLOGICAL BELIEF SYSTEMS

by Karl Pflock, Our Contributing Editor & Fifth Columnist

In his October issue, "Magonia Monthly Supplement" editor John Harney writes,

"One of the problems caused by the preconceptions entertained by ufologists is that interesting cases are rarely investigated objectively. If the investigator favours the ETH as a possibility he will give up at a certain point and classify the case as possible evidence of it. He will also be tempted to suppress negative evidence, or alternative theories.

If the investigator is a sceptic, he will lose interest as soon as he has satisfied himself that some explanation other than alien spacecraft will fit."

Harney has it right, but goes too easy on the so-called skeptics. The truth is that gung-ho anti-ufologists like Klass, Shaeffer, and Posner, Klass' amanuensis, don't just lose interest, they sink their fangs into whatever explanation they've decided fits, and will fight down and dirty in its defense, tempted - and more - to suppress any evidence or theory to the contrary.

Ufology is beset by True Believers ("They must be, therefore they are!") and True Unbelievers ("They can't be, therefore they aren't!") Rare are those who pursue evidence wherever it may lead, no matter how the results may square with their cherished hopes and dreams. Ironically, both the TBists and the TUists see themselves as champions of objective analysis and critical thinking, when in fact they are defenders of their respective faiths and, not incidentally, their egos.

Harney cites this example of TUism in action: The dogged insistence that the Travis Walton abduction case is a hoax in which all the witnesses are co-conspirators despite the enormous practical problems with the "They are all in on it" theory. I can attest from personal experience that this is a particularly good example of the problem.

When I told Phil Klass, TUism's Walton-case inquisitor, I found it unlikely in the extreme that all the witnesses could have been in on a hoax, he would have none of it. Instead of giving my ideas reasoned consideration, Phil launched into a major - and unsuccessful - effort to demonstrate what he considered the error of my ways. (I am most grateful, though, for the extremely valuable material he provided along the way.)

I've focused on TUism here, but similar TBist examples abound - e.g. Roswell. The issue isn't which a priori beliefs blinker one's consideration of UFO data, but rather that any such beliefs are in play. When theories harden into articles of faith and egotism, critical thinking and truth are smothered in their cradles!


LETTERS TO YE OLDE EDITOR:


Saucer Smear Index
Saucer Smear Mailbox
Please note that letters for Smear editor James Moseley should be snail-mailed to PO Box 1709, Key West, FL 33041, insofar as Cdr. Moseley is proudly computer-illiterate and determined to stay that way.

Own a genuine artifact of ufological history!
Line your birdcage for pennies a sheet!
Back issues available for the last 43 years!


HTML version by S L M