Tuesday, May 23, 2006

Paul Kimball on Coast to Coast AM tonight!!

Blog brother and all-around renaissance guy Paul Kimball will guest on C2C this very night...about an hour from now.

Outlining a few cases and hyping the upcoming filmwork no doubt.

This is a rare opportunity to hear a "new voice" in Ufological discourse, and a refreshingly independent and frequently unorthodox voice to boot.

This is "must-hear" radio!! LOL

And FYI...of the two rugged, pointy-topped icons in the photo above, the one on the LEFT is Paul...LOL

stream available here

Paul was an excellent guest. Some might think that his position makes him a poor "promoter" of the UFO field, but you'd be wrong. By appealing to the "center" of the debate, he was able to generate real excitement with his retellings of the RB-47 case, appealed to budding Ufologists with his reference to the online Blue Book Archive, and showed respect for the "wizened elders" (Hall, Friedman, Clark, Sparks) responsible for the body of reference and research extant, while still plugging a few "rising stars" of the field (Redfern, Bishop, Wise).

A bravura performance...KUDOS!

[hat tip to Coast to Coast AM]

Not quite in the same state of breathless anticipation, I'm content to wait for the MP3s. It will please me no end, sincerely, if our "pointy icon" comported himself as you say, really. I will expect same, Kyle, and that you haven't inadvertently snapped up the errant pellet with the beads, eh? [g].

AVG Blog -- http://alienviewgroup.blogspot.com/

Thanks. I should have mentioned you too, as one of the good guys out there! D'oh... my bad.

Gives me a reason to go back!!

Hey Alfred -

Breathless anticipation? Man, you should see the things I write to Jennifer Aniston...LOL But...

As I added in my update, I think Paul "comported himself" admirably.

Not a sycophant, and not a blanket debunker, either.

Dare I say...a "Centrist"? LOL

Thanks for the comments!

Paul -

I look forward to a repeat performance...beats the hell out of Glynnis "Numbers Lady" McCants and "Shyster" Sean David Morton...LOL

I will say I don't think I've heard the word "blog" so many times in one episode of C2C...way to drag 'em kicking and screaming into the 21st century!!!!


Oh, Kyle... glad I got my heartfelt sentiment in early... with all respect...
Paul Kimball gives good radio. Very calm, ostensibly focused, apparently knowledgeable, very reasoned and reasonable sounding, seemingly inclusive of different approaches and outlooks... I'm not so easily fooled.

...But a bravura performance even if it was a canted axe grinding. As one is advised to read between the lines with Mr. Kimball, it might be prudent to try to hear between them as well. My impressions as I listened:

Immanently facilitating and congratulatory throughout, Mr. Noory introduces Mr. Kimball to the world stage again:

On Hellyer -- ...Mischaracterized Hellyer's involvement with Corso and made not the remotest mention of the Peter Jennings special... ...which piqued Hellyer's interest to begin with, or reported the witnessed corroborations of an unnamed Senior Officer validating Corso (and more), securing that interest. Kimball further characterized any political contribution that Hellyer may have made by referring to it as "checkered"... inferring thinly to the uninformed listener that Hellyer's service was, at times, less than completely honorable... when it was entirely honorable at all times. This is ideological cant at it's very best.

Also during this segment Kimball communicated broad assumptions with regard to authorities who would be so gladly interested in studying UFOs if they were given "credible evidence" to do so... ...when they have had in their possession abundant evidence for same... ...and have done nothing with it in 60 freaking years! I smell Kool-aide.

Kimball complains that mainstream science, academia, and industry would have copious interest in UFOs given evidence of which Mr. Kimball approves... ...when all that Mr. Kimball has ever done so far is to produce work in investigation that is later self-debunked... ...as he debunks others ...perhaps encouraging the uninformed listener that there seems nothing at all to a highly strange phenomenon (he further dismisses as extraterrestrial)... ...that is otherwise well fleshed out by (a) dozens of named research scientists living and dead (b) thousands of years of documented history (c) in thousands of vetted photographs and movies (d) by thousands of quality anecdotal reports from commercial/military pilots, priests, and policemen et sig al (e) in thousands of physical trace cases ... ... scratched in old ink, colored pigments, and soot on cave walls for thousands of years?

Does Mr. Kimball take the listener for an idiot or is he crippled with a naiveté so pervasively portrayed and cluelessly deployed that it is scarcely to be believed? There seems no third choice.

On Friedman -- Majestic 12, Roswell, Wilbert Smith, the cosmic Watergate or "the conspiracy of needless silence"... ...all bunk, but Friedman himself is a good uncle and a "fun guy to be around..." ...Blithely and with senseless bias deconstructing much, about which, Stanton Friedman can be so conclusive, could Mr. Kimball have damned Mr. Friedman with fainter praise? I think not.

Additionally? I don't think more disrespect has ever been paid to coattails ridden in on. ...Good chums? I demand from and pay more respect to... ...my chums.

"Someone spewing bunk deserves to be debunked," Mr. Kimball righteously intones... I heartily agree. Moreover, proving something to Mr. Kimball's satisfaction is not the satisfying proof Mr. Kimball would have it be, I fear...

On Condign -- Characterized American ufologists as knee-jerk reactionaries when compelled by known debunkers to react to the re-imposition of such a revolting canard as plasma and ball lightening for an explanation of UFOs... ...when the concept has been abundantly discredited so well and often that even Philip Klass stopped banging his fecal drum in its regard.

Moreover, Mr. Kimball is not concerned that the second most powerful nation on the planet investigated UFOs and discounted, again, any attribution that it was a result of the activity of some kind of *other*... but that it is entirely a function of natural (not uncomfortable) processes we've yet to fully understand, as yet... Yes, thank you... you’ve been very helpful.

Please review (a) through (e) above. Plainly... there can be very little of this aforementioned evidence that can remotely be subscribed to *natural* phenomena, whatever that turns out to be.

Kimball's "big story" in Condign’s regard *is not* that UFOs are being investigated at all by major authority (his contention... forgetting they are dismissive in UFOs regard), he misses the point, again. The *big story* is that the major authorities continue to insist on shining on the public about the greatest story NEVER told, treating us like disrespected children in that story's regard, and pouring another bucket of duplicitous water on a valid ufological fire smoldering and almost breaking into flame, still.

There's the *story* on a fatuous, insipid, and un-brave Condign Report. And a pox on you, Andy Roberts, smirking and rubbing your clammy hands in senseless glee in the scurrilous activity of sticking it out there.

"Opportunities are missed," Mr. Kimball, not because they're NOT being taken advantage of... ...but because they WON'T be taken advantage of. The difference is not subtle.

On UFOs -- Mr. Kimball rests the provenance of his interest in UFOs entirely at the feet of Stanton Friedman. This seems a little odd given his testimony above and forgetting how we're frequently reminded how closely Friedman and Kimball are associated... ...given "close" family ties (Kimball is a distant nephew by marriage). Perhaps Mr. Kimball wishes to roll from the tree with a kick. Too bad Friedman loses a little bit of bark in the thrust away. Pity.

Still, Kimball is uncomfortable with the term "UFO" and prefers instead, UAP, or unidentified aerial phenomena. UFO, you see, infers something might actually BE there, whereas UAP refers to something that may not have to be there at all, could be attributed to something more comfortable _if_ there (swamp gasses or glowing plasmas), but likely something without an intelligence Mr. Kimball finds so threatening to his cloistered world view and sense of self... I surmise...

Mr. Kimball continues to scatter, and so, dilute the ufological impetus he maintains is worthy of at least distracted scientific/journalistic study... ...through temporal, dimensional, psychological, or other paranormal explanations (a plethora!). The extraterrestrial explanation is, again, singled out for mild ridicule and dismissal, made an unlikely, even if possible, last choice for consideration (...just to be balanced, you know?). What's Mr. Kimball so afraid of?

On Wilbert Smith -- Mr. Kimball believes that intellectual high rollers in key positions of government and industry who leave those positions honorably no longer have influence nor affect on those who had employed them... Dr.V. Bush could not have been tapped for use in a subsequent position, even one as dodgy as MJ12, for this reason... ...because he was... "...out of it."

Nonsense. I can see where someone as capable and as smart Dr. Bush was would be on the short list of persons to head up just such an operation. Kimball's take is ludicrous... Bush was a fine choice. Even if there were problems between Bush and Truman... better the devil you know, eh? "...Wouldn't have happened"? "...Couldn't have happened"? Mr. Kimball overstates his poor case? I suspect so.

Given the preceding rather fatuous buffoonery... Wilbert Smith is discredited because he names V. Bush as a member of the MJ12 panel, and by extension, MJ12 is discredited? This is beginning to resemble an Ouroborosian romp. Argumentative snakes feasting on their own dusty tails.

No, Mr. Kimball approaches his own concrescence, or how much of his own tail will he be able to get down before he gags. Moreover, folks who aren't seeing the wisdom in Kimball's glib rational aren't reading the right blogs... ...Kimball's for instance. That's what the man said. And there was very little humor in the expression, Folks. Mr. Kimball wasn't trying to be funny, you see. I think he was serious. What cheeky impudence.

Kimball's first UFO story? A stylized vignette of pre 1947 reports dismissed as aurora borealis, religious fervor, and dirigibles to the distracted listener. Does anyone else see a trend here?

Father Gill, a well known case with many witnesses as reported by an honorable man, is perhaps not a great case, if compelling, but as it was ...just a report by a rural preacher and his flock in a third world location... perhaps nothing to get excited about, all grist for the ufological mill as long as it's all grind and no bread-making? I paraphrase.

No worries here mate. UFOs are at more than an arm's length, all is right in the world, we still crown nature's glory. We are still the favorite of God. We are still alone in our little cosmic backwater. We are still in control.

So ends the first segment...

On the theme of "are we alone in the universe"? -- Mr. Kimball went on *humorously*, if in a protracted manner, about ice hockey and how important the Stanley Cup was to him personally... hmmm.

This is likely predictable, but I was appalled, and if we were at dinner and Mr. Kimball was to hold forth in a similar manner regarding the question? I'd be sitting with my hands in my lap staring at my plate.

Abduction? Impossibly *Rare* if it happens at all. Right...

Are we alone? No. Somewhere... just not here. Another intelligence is; however, unlikely. But life, of course... ...just not here, oh please god... not here. Mr. Kimball managed to sound self-assured and supremely confident while he intimated same. To answer Noorey’s very specific question, though? Yes! We are essentially alone! Remember. There's no UFOs, no Roswell, no MJ-12, no abductions, or so much as one really credible anecdotal report, which is all a happy result of being *alone*, don’t you know? Don't you see?

Ouroboros writhes as he swallows.

...But by all means follow George W. Bush on to Mars... there's our human spirit in action! Nothin' wrong with George! We can count on _him_ to be on the level!

Back on UFOs... information is withheld by benevolent, well meaning, and uncorrupted governments concerned about national security and embarrassed that they don't know more about UFOs... ...so that they could better serve the public they represent. Good god but Mr. Kimball's favorite drink must be Kool-aid!

No cover-ups folks, none but for their own general incompetence. You know. That lot that Mr. Kimball puts his faith in, and which he considers such a benign entity? No cover-ups, folks, but the occasional cover-up.

But wait! What about UFOs (I’m sorry, UAPs!) being neither here nor there... or even near to *there*? Seems Mr. Kimball himself has lost track of the bean beneath the shells he is sliding around... nes't ce pas?

...But that's all OK, proud science, the universal *arbiter* discipline before which all the rest of reality is laid for examination and assessment...?... This infallible intellectual edifice is bamboozled by flakes and charlatans from an accurate perception of UFOs and it is that which stands in the way of an investigation or disclosure. Damn those pesky *flakes* and *charlatans*, eh?

On J. Vallee -- ...Was bullied from ufology by the ee-vill ETH people... LOL! ...and tell me, Mr. Kimball... of what possible use or interest or even generation could an "Invisible College" be, given that mainstream science Vallee could "retreat to" and look at UFOs without professional trepidation anytime they'd read your blog so they knew where the real, *real* evidence was? LOL!

Ouroboros begins to gag. I think so.

Condon (Condon Report) is celebrated as a watershed event not entirely negative in characterization. An honest effort by officialdom even if they were predisposed to discount UFOs at the start... even if they did get it so suspiciously wrong? A landed report chilling all ufological study all over the planet... ...compared to a much more balanced Sturrock Report later on indicating UFOs needed to be aggressively studied for the possible benefits that could be derived... ...getting no play at all and barely seeing the light of day? What's the elected and non-elected leadership so scared of?

[I'm] lost already to Mr. Kimball only because I can no longer trust government, believe the church, have faith in my institutions, or confidence in the integrity of these things because I am many times bitten now and so must be, exponentially, shy? Mr. Kimball writes [me] off when it's him huffing the societal Kool-aide? His gall is equally appalling.

On Friedman as a Roswell promoter -- ... an accurate use of the term and "in-it-for-the-bucks is just one way to look at it." Extant? It doesn't have to be taken in the pejorative manner that it is...? Excuse me?

Maybe you didn't see Jennings' lip damn near curl when he ignorantly curried that thoughtless appellation on one of the finest men of our time... ...*fun guy* indeed! In dueling times I'd had to have my second get in touch with his second. ...Certainly leave my glove in his face.

That was entirely uncalled for! Where's Jennings' outrage for the lnown excesses of named others before he cluelessly curls his lip at Stanton Friedman!

Still pals with Stan? "Pals"? Humfph! I suspect Mr. Kimball does not perceive a difference between a pal and a shoulder (or a face?) on which to stand.

Klass and Condon? Top ten uflogists? These performed "valuable services" when the action of these two, by Kimball's own admission...!...held up the study of UFOs for over 40 years?

How could you be so deliberately obtuse, Mr. Kimball?

Oh... and there's likely nothing to cattle mutilations either folks... at best the impression with which the listener was left... and the premier researcher didn't meet with Kimball I'm betting because she would refuse to.

That's enough...

Sincerely, any semblance to a balanced approach and the very glib explication of Paul Kimball is a crafted illusion. Mr. Kimball is a canted apologist for debunker-ism, in the opinion or this writer, hostile to the merest suggestion of the wholly other (...whatever its provenance in a space, time, and surface area continuum grander than Kimball can ever know...) because he can't get past a worried if inordinately homocentric conceit of anthropomorphism. He's reluctant to consider that we don't captain every aspect of our lives on our own recognizance as an autonomous species. He's apprehensive that rather than being the measure of all things? He may only be a poor measurer of things... ...too filled with a science and philosophy only minutes old on the cosmic clock, and an uneasy pander to a duplicitous mainstream his only support.

...And a Kool-aide drinker. We can’t forget that.

That's fair... and from the *other side of the truth*, too, I'm betting. He left all the room in the world for religious fundamentalists who speak in canned memes of religious ignorance and practice hatred as a lifestyle, but called the ETHer "brown" and would run him out of town, along with Exopolitics and significant others if he had the power.

A little scary. No the uninformed listener who just tuned in as a result of some small distracted interest found between holding down a job with no health care, and talking care of a family fearful of the future (forgetting the nearing 1 in a hundred chance of being in jail?) was that there was no need to get excited regarding his UAPs.

Paul Kimball? A glibly canted *there*, there. Call him Darth.

AVG Blog -- http://alienviewgroup.blogspot.com/
Hey Alfred -

I was quite sure that you'd have a few choice comments for Paul...and by extension, me.

This tour de force is however, a very lucid and illustrative example of what separates yours and Paul's mindsets.

I do not disagree with all of your observations, and I don't agree with everything Paul said last night.

But for anyone who is curious about UFOs but has not yet formed a paradigm, I think Paul's "half full;half empty" approach is more likely to stoke the desire to know more.

Of course, I...unlike Paul :)...could be wrong!

I will add that I didn't find his comments about Stan derisive in the least. A little familiar perhaps, but he is after all family. It was obvious that he doesn't AGREE with Stan on everything, but I certainly didn't get the impression that he was condescending.

In the end, I think it's important to remember that Paul is not the level of researcher of a Dick Hall or Jerry Clark or Brad Sparks. On the contrary, he cites these researchers' works as accepted reference. No, Paul's stature in this milieu is as a filmmaker and historian. His comments on Hellyer were historically accurate vis a vis the Canadian culture. His views on Sturrock and Condon were cognizant IMO.

Perfect? Of course not. Fully in agreement with my views? Not hardly.

Articulate, respectful (in the main) and conducive to garnering more interest in the field by non-involved citizenry? I really think so.

At any rate, I sincerely appreciate your lengthy and thorough comments.

There is little ambiguity about the differences between your respective views!!

Thanks again!
Mr. Kimball seemed to say much about nothing. There was no indepth discussion of UFO sightings and he didn't seem to know what was referenced on his blog by Mr. Noory's webmaster.

I agree with what most of the posters on the coasttocoast official forum - the fantastic forum - opined. And it was negative.

Why can't Mr. Noory get a Vallee or Keel. Now that would be fascinating and informative.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Hey anonymous -

I think Paul made a good case for interested folks to peruse the Blue Book Archive, and made lots of old cases seem less like "crazy" hallucinations or ET claims, and more like things that should be investigated further.

Perhaps the opinions expressed at Fantastic Forums is one reason I don't post at Fantastic Forums. :)

And are you implying that the opinions there are more valid because it is the "official" forum of C2C?
If so, I think your comments may easily (and rightly) be ignored.


Mr. Lehmberg's "review" is amusing. Of course, it is singularly inaccurate and misrepresentative of what I actually said (check the show in the C2C archives if you have any doubt), but that's par for the course with A.L.

Agree or disagree with me, but one should listen to what I actually said before doing so, and endeavor to quote (or paraphrase) accurately. As just one (of oh-so-many) mistakes, I never said Condon was one of the top figures in ufology, as Mr. Lehmberg states. In fact, I said, explicitly, over and over again, that he was the WORST figure in the history of ufology.

But Mr. Lehmberg isn't interested in listening to what others have to say.

Which is precisely why he is indeed "lost" when it comes to the serious study of the UFO phenomenon.

That said, Ouroboros at last ralphs a fetid pile.

It remains Condon made Mr. Kimball's reductionist "*top* 10" list, that what sounds reasonable is not necessarily so, that reading between the lines is ofttimes more illuminating and informative than the straight text, especially given the dichotomies, inconsistencies, and outrages found therein, and that Mr. Kimball is laughingly rejected as the default arbiter of a discussion on whether I am lost... or not.

It won't really matter how many of the otherwise distracted Mr. Kimball entices into his minimalist and scientistic (sic) camp... I remain justifiably askance and akimbo.

Moreover, Mr. Kimball's oratory and literary production, stripped of its stealthy cant and faux reason-ability? Well, I suspect my paraphrasing is abundantly accurate, and stand by same without the slightest trepidation.
"But Mr. Lehmberg isn't interested in listening to what others have to say."

Mr. Kimball seems to have gotten it, conveniently, wrong again. He fails to point out that I have demonstrated an abundance of interest in what _he_ has to say, anyway.

AVG Blog -- http://alienviewgroup.blogspot.com/
Alfred -

Whatever might be said, you have definitely expressed a keen interest in what Paul said...or what you perceive him to have said.

In fact, your initial "post-C2C" comment on this post stands as the longest comment ever submitted to this blog.

And I think you (and Paul) have both provided more than adequate "grist" for the "mills" of your respective adherents.

My thanks to you both for the comments!

I know you've probably had enough of this here, but gross distoritions of the record should not be allowed to go unchallenged. So, for the record...

Mr. Lehmberg:

It "remains" that Condon made my BOTTOM ten list.

See: http://redstarfilms.blogspot.com/2005/07/ufologys-bottom-10.html

Wherein I wrote (for the accuracy impaired):

"1. Dr. Edward U. Condon – Condon was a distinguished scientist, a pioneer in quantum mechanics, the director of the National Bureau of Standards, the president of the American Physical Society, and a professor of physics at the University of Colorado. It is in this latter post where his claim to ufological infamy rests. The Condon Report, which was the result of a two-year “scientific” study of the UFO phenomenon commissioned by the United States Air Force (known formally as The University of Colorado UFO Project), was released in 1968. Condon was the director. Virtually from the beginning, critics (including some of the committee’s members) charged that Condon and coordinator Robert Low were biased. When the report came out, in concluded that there were prosaic explanations for all UFO cases, and that there was no evidence to support the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis. The Air Force, the American media (in general), and the scientific community (again, in general), accepted the report as the definitive word on the subject. Project Blue Book was terminated shortly after its release. Prominent critics such as Dr. Peter Sturrock, Dr. James E. McDonald, Stanton Friedman, and Dr. J. Allen Hynek, have all correctly noted that the report’s conclusions – which were authored by Condon himself – were sharply at variance with the evidence (Condon did not investigate any of the cases himself), which showed that 30% of the cases studied were classed as “unknowns,” higher even than earlier Air Force studies. As Sturrock wrote, “This report has clouded all attempts at legitimate UFO research since its release.” Little has changed in the almost four decades since the Report was released, as governments, the media, and many in the scientific community still cite it as proof that UFOs are not worth serious study. While it might seem unfair to include a real scientist like Condon on the same list as a fake one, like Bob Lazar (see #5), the Condon Report represents everything that science should not be, and irrevocably tarnished the reputation, for those aware of the facts, of a man who might otherwise have been viewed as one of the great American scientists of the 20th century. The damage it did to the serious study of the UFO phenomenon was incalculable."

Which is precisely what I said on C2C.

Do you ever read these things, or listen, before you leap?

And to think that you incessantly whine about how the mainstream media gets things wrongs, and twists the truth. Yeesh...

Mr. Kimball;

I must apologize on this point. Condon was _not_ on your top 10 list. I'm embarrassed to say, I misunderstood Noory, and I got it wrong. I'll, of course, repair that portion of the piece on my news page.

The rest of my criticism stands; however, as written, Darth. No apologies.

AVG Blog -- http://alienviewgroup.blogspot.com/
Correction made, Mr. Kimball, I'll be happy to entertain discussion on any other corrections you think might be made, too.

AVG Blog -- http://alienviewgroup.blogspot.com/
Wow fellas -

Thanks for the back and forth, and the acquiescence...little though there may be...was refreshing!

Onward, no?
Mr. Lehmberg:

Good show.

...Not so fast, Vader. Heave your emperor into the pit... ...then we can talk.

AVG Blog -- http://alienviewgroup.blogspot.com/
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?