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 fromeach year, followed usually by political
events, then an analysis of the UFO story in lightof 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. What can they write about a
phenomenon who doesn’t exist? What can they tell us about sightings if 96 % of
these are perfectly explained by natural phenomena and /or manmade artifacts?.
Truth is that there is nothing new in “ufology”. Only dead
ends. Self proclaimed UFO experts know this but they have a compromise with the
market, not with the TRUTH.
