"I saw two of his books (National Security State series) listed as recommended reading recently in a thread here, and I thought, before reading his book, that he was a reasonable and well-regarded researcher in the UFO field. I have read through some of his book, and it's fraught with delusional conspiracies about Freemasons and Trilateralists. He also cites dubious sources like Jim Marrs (who himself doesn't source any of his claims. I've read one of his books--absolute crock).
Am I right to think that Dolan is unreliable? I can't see how someone can plan out a historical overview of the phenomenon if a lot of what he supplies are unverifiable anecdotes and questionable inclusions of transnational banking conspiracies."
"Richard Dolan "sold his soul" to the UFO Industry. He is or tries to be a UFO-ET professional which means to sell the same stories again and again, and create new accessory myths. Dolan invented the separate secret civilization and the predictions "post disclosure". What else there is? The so called Ufology is a show, pathetic sometimes, based in selling fiction as fact. There is nothing else. Just people trying to make a living
with nonsense. UFO mythology is dead meat. 96 % of all sightings are natural phenomena or man made artifacts. The other 4 % is not enough for the market."
It’s not difficult to criticize some UFO book, simply because each one of these is basically the same book, sometimes with with touches of the author imagination.
However, what I say about the same book written again and again is perfectly explained in the following words of Michael Schuyler review of the second volume of Richard Dolan’s “UFOs and the NationalSecurity State.” The first, subtitled “Chronology of a Cover-up, 1941-1973”. Schuyler wrote:
“This volume, as before, is chronological, year by year. Dolan presents some cases from each year, followed usually by political events, then an analysis of the UFO story in light of those events. This is a very workable
system because it has the effect of placing UFOs, the cover-up, and the politics of the day in context with each other. This was also particularly exciting for me because the time frame covered mirrors my own entry intoadulthood and serious involvement in studying the issue. I remember many of the caseswhen they happened. I have or have read many of the books he discusses (My library of UFO titles numbers about 300.) It was like a de ja vu all over again experience to read this volume.”
“There’s nothing we haven’t actually seen before. As we shall see, Dolan’s accounts come from previously published sources, most of them popular treatments. The history is readily available, and he is certainly not the first to suggest a cover-up of things related to UFOs or any other aspect of American or any government. Indeed, it is our familiarity with these topics that serves to give the book a certain appeal and grounding. “
Michael gives us the classical modus operandi of Dolan and most of the self proclaimed experts in Ufology.
“Here you begin to see what Dolan’s modus operandi is with regards to his citations of hundreds of UFO events like the one cited above.
They come from the research of others. His is a tertiary role of compiling sightings from other authors on the subject. But when you look at the citations themselves, they often don’t have any references; they’re dead ends. So it looks like there is a documented, cited source for Dolan’s description when, in fact, there is no such thing.” READ MORE
The UFO-Conspiracy Industry sells fiction as fact and worst, sells the fiction others wrote.
Dear Richard, in my view, there is nothing new in your book, except the ugly cover. The idea of your head cut is sinister and bad tasted.
On the content, just the same old, but of course, there is never nothing new in UFO. I know it's not easy to make a living with things and factoids that perhaps had some meaning in the 50's and 60's. but these are different times.
Follow my advice Richard, and try something else. Go into Meditation, Tarot, ghost hunting, or even
It's up to you, Richard Dolan. The "UFO bug" illness is curable.
|Same old book written again and again.|
The most disturbing aspect of the book is the impression given by the author that he regards one source as
being as good as another. In support of his thesis that the US government is concealing the truth about incursions by aliens from space, he quotes from writers ranging from the reliable and scrupulously honest to the hucksters and pathological liars, and the majority to be found between these two extremes. One example is an account of a dramatic encounter of an American plane with foo fighters over the Pacific in August 1945. "The navigational needles went wild, the left engine faltered and spurted oil, the plane lost altitude, and the crew prepared to ditch. Then, in a close formation, the objects faded into a cloud bank. At that moment, the plane's engines restarted, and the crew safely flew on. One of the plane's passengers was future UFO researcher Leonard Stringfield."
"Their research seems to have consisted mainly of reading about some well-publicised UFO reports and ignoring the findings of investigators who have provided the true or possible explanations for them. For example, they mention the Phoenix Lights of 1997 and say that they "defied easy explanation". Anyone who
has bothered to read the literature on this case knows that the first formation of lights was identified as aircraft by amateur astronomer Mitch Stanley, who observed them through his telescope. There was a later sighting of flares dropped from aircraft. Of course, the believers ignore Mitch Stanley. Dolan and Zabel even consider Ed Walters and the Gulf Breeze nonsense worth mentioning." (this is FICTION-AS-FACT.)
"This book is fairly typical of other recent ones on UFOs, as it relies too much on cases which have been satisfactorily explained and uses obviously unreliable sources. If you are interested in this kind of speculation and would like to study the authors' thesis you will not find the index much help. It seems to have been compiled by simply picking out words or phrases almost at random and putting them in alphabetical order. -- John Harney