the blue raven
Student
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2011
- Messages
- 25
Given the recent revelations by Lance Moody that ufologist and researcher, writer Phil Imbrogno lied about his MIT degree, and the resulting kerfluffle in ufological circles; I think it worth revisiting the claim that William Levengood, one of the 'leading' scientific investigators - among the believers that is - of crop circles, faked his own PhD credentials.
Levengood is part of the BLT research team (Burke, Levengood, Talbott) that is the most noted for undertaking scientific analyses of the plant and soil material in affected crop formations and claiming that there are physical and physiological effects that differ from the untouched and unaffected crops ie the crop circle phenomenon is a real mystery even if many of them are also hoaxed. Well that's the BLT line anyway, along with all the croppies who trek to south-west England every year for the season's displays (the summer harvesting months, right now is peak season). John Burke, also a scientist, passed away recently. Nancy Talbott is the group spokesperson, she has a background in psychology. I don't know if the team still exists thus in any meaningful sense or if other investigators do the research and pass on their results to Talbott who continues to publicize the findings under the BLT umbrella or what.. Their website is BLTResearch.
It is well-known among those seriously interested in the crop circle phenomenon that ufologist Kevin Randle claimed that William Levengood, who apparently taught plant science as a biophysicist at Michigan State, lied about his PhD qualification.
Firstly even though Randle is a well-known ufologist believer and writer (who unfortunately takes the Roswell nonsense seriously); to his credit, he has written some excellent stuff debunking the alien abduction phenomenon. Randle is a US military veteran who served in Vietnam and Iraq (can't be many who served in both wars, on the ground!). He also needs to be credited for uncovering Levengood's deceit (if he has done so), which I have noticed has been completely ignored by the croppie believers.
Now here's the thing though, when I wanted to check up on Randle's own remarks in this regard, I couldn't find them at his blog or in any of his writings elsewhere on the web. There is no mention of Levengood at all if you do a search at his blog. It's all second-hand in other words, the words of James Moseley, editor at Saucer Smear, (from the December 2002 issue of Saucer Smear) not Randle himself. Likewise skeptics have repeated the charges from Saucer Smear, yet I can't seem to find anything at all from the source of this exposé - ie Kevin Randle himself, at his blog 'A Different Perspective' or anywhere else.
Here is the relevant portion from the Saucer Smear issue, written by Moseley:
Finally, we have a hilarious story from the (cursed) Net, regarding "Doctor" William Levengood of BLT Research Team, Inc., a small group that has done a great deal of useful research on crop circles and cattle mutilations, with rather spectacular results.
When Levengood's doctorate was recently called into question by Dr. Kevin Randle, (of Roswell fame) and others, LeVengood said that in reality he has a "Ph.D. equivalent" from the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). This would be fine if it were true, but when that prestigious body was contacted, they made it known that the NAS is not a academic institution and does not issue "degree equivalents" of any kind. This sort of leaves "Dr." Levengood out on a limb!
Another problem is that BLT's spectacular results have not been duplicated elsewhere, either because of lack of funding, lack of interest, or possibly because these results are not valid! We don't know who the "B" in "BLT" is, but the "T" is a lady named Nancy Talbott. We have met her and seen her slide show, and she makes a very good presentation indeed, based mainly on the research of "Dr. Levegood. Stay tuned!
Well that's near nine years ago now and nothing else *new* has been heard about it since..
Maybe we need somebody of the calibre of Lance Moody to get to the bottom of this. Skeptics need to make a bigger deal of the William Levengood fakery (if indeed he faked his credentials) than arguably even Imbrogno, because Levengood has or had far more status and credibility than Imbrogno (whose stories were prima facie ridiculous and absurd). As Moody points out, even before the revelations of Imbrogno lying about his MIT background were uncovered by him, Imbrogno obviously could not be taken seriously given the outlandishness of his storytelling (just like Steve Greer and Bob Lazar and Colin Andrews in croppie circles for that matter). Levengood is actually a different kettle of fish, given he actually has carried out research and scientific analyses of the crops in the formations, from around the world. In fact he may well have done more analyses here than any other investigator and he does appear to have taught plant science at the University of Michigan. He is an expert on glass chemistry and has published in the professional literature in this regard. He has also done research on cattle mutilations.
I did locate his thesis:
Bioelectric currents and oxidant levels in plant systems : a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment for the degree of Master of Science-Forestry (1970).
Of course a thesis is not a PhD.
My point is - why have skeptics not made a bigger deal about Levengood? He is a big fish here, a big catch. All I could find on this forum, was a single reference by 'Stray Cat' to Levengood's fakery, but he didn't provide a source. This is from the twelve page thread 'Crop circle debuking help needed', the most extensive thread dedicated to crop circes at this forum, as far as I have ascertained.
There is very little about the Levengood fakery, from skeptics that is. In fact many noted skeptics haven't said anything about it publicly as far as I could find out. This is somewhat surprising and somewhat disappointing.
Is it because the guy who exposed Levengood, Kevin Randle is not a skeptic, but a UFO believer and a Roswell believer and promoter at that? So what, let's give credit where it's due, even if we roll our eyes at Randle's lack of skepticism with the Roswell myth. Any first-class skeptic knows though you need to get to the source, the original exposé, you need to hear from the horse's mouth so to speak. And I can't find this with Randle's exposé of Levengood, it's all second-hand. I can't find anything from Randle himself to repeat myself. Why does Randle have no mention of it at his blog, or anywhere else (unless I missed it)? Why haven't skeptics trumpeted this out far louder?
Also did Levengood really think that he could get away with this remark:
"Levengood said that in reality he has a "Ph.D. equivalent" from the National Academy of Sciences (NAS)"??
I mean anybody who knows anything basic about the US scientific community knows the NAS is a prestigious scientific association that you have to be elected to, it doesn't hand out degrees, PhDs or even a BSc for that matter. It's not a university or tertiary institute. It's like saying you got your medical degree 'equivalent' from a professional medical association rather than a university med school. Who would fall for that?
The thing is I can't find the 'smoking gun' evidence for Levengood's remarks here, that is not from Randle himself, it's all second-hand like I write above. Can anybody help here? Maybe contacting Kevin Randle himself? I think one may have to resort to that to get beyond the smoke here, and find the dead body so to speak. Also why has nobody put the feet to the fire of other noted croppie researchers and notable writers here, making them squirm, asking them to comment on Levengood's apparent fakery of his credentials - that would include more than anybody else Nancy Talbott, also Michael Glickman, Andy Thomas and others? Why have they been let off the hook?
Levengood has not appeared to respond to Randle's or Saucer Smear's accusations, so I assume that Randle is correct in his charges. Why else would Levengood stay silent? Surely he hasn't answered the charges because they are true - Levengood lied about his PhD and then compounded his lie by telling another one - he got his PhD equivalent from the NAS, what a howler. Still it would be nice if I could find the original claims/evidence from Randle himself, and I have not been able to do so.
People's thoughts here? I hope others concur with me that it is necessary to get to the bottom of this and that it hasn't been done properly (that is Randle's commentary here is not available for perusal. Well I can't find it). Also that skeptics need to be making a bigger deal of this than they have done so far (yes I know it has been near a decade since the revelations, so what?) and that this is frankly a failure of organized skepticism to have not done so. Ironically it's a UFO believer who did the exposé here, not a skeptic!
PS Randle is making a mention of the Imbrogno affair at his blog. More details of Imbrogno's confabulations have come to light.
Levengood is part of the BLT research team (Burke, Levengood, Talbott) that is the most noted for undertaking scientific analyses of the plant and soil material in affected crop formations and claiming that there are physical and physiological effects that differ from the untouched and unaffected crops ie the crop circle phenomenon is a real mystery even if many of them are also hoaxed. Well that's the BLT line anyway, along with all the croppies who trek to south-west England every year for the season's displays (the summer harvesting months, right now is peak season). John Burke, also a scientist, passed away recently. Nancy Talbott is the group spokesperson, she has a background in psychology. I don't know if the team still exists thus in any meaningful sense or if other investigators do the research and pass on their results to Talbott who continues to publicize the findings under the BLT umbrella or what.. Their website is BLTResearch.
It is well-known among those seriously interested in the crop circle phenomenon that ufologist Kevin Randle claimed that William Levengood, who apparently taught plant science as a biophysicist at Michigan State, lied about his PhD qualification.
Firstly even though Randle is a well-known ufologist believer and writer (who unfortunately takes the Roswell nonsense seriously); to his credit, he has written some excellent stuff debunking the alien abduction phenomenon. Randle is a US military veteran who served in Vietnam and Iraq (can't be many who served in both wars, on the ground!). He also needs to be credited for uncovering Levengood's deceit (if he has done so), which I have noticed has been completely ignored by the croppie believers.
Now here's the thing though, when I wanted to check up on Randle's own remarks in this regard, I couldn't find them at his blog or in any of his writings elsewhere on the web. There is no mention of Levengood at all if you do a search at his blog. It's all second-hand in other words, the words of James Moseley, editor at Saucer Smear, (from the December 2002 issue of Saucer Smear) not Randle himself. Likewise skeptics have repeated the charges from Saucer Smear, yet I can't seem to find anything at all from the source of this exposé - ie Kevin Randle himself, at his blog 'A Different Perspective' or anywhere else.
Here is the relevant portion from the Saucer Smear issue, written by Moseley:
Finally, we have a hilarious story from the (cursed) Net, regarding "Doctor" William Levengood of BLT Research Team, Inc., a small group that has done a great deal of useful research on crop circles and cattle mutilations, with rather spectacular results.
When Levengood's doctorate was recently called into question by Dr. Kevin Randle, (of Roswell fame) and others, LeVengood said that in reality he has a "Ph.D. equivalent" from the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). This would be fine if it were true, but when that prestigious body was contacted, they made it known that the NAS is not a academic institution and does not issue "degree equivalents" of any kind. This sort of leaves "Dr." Levengood out on a limb!
Another problem is that BLT's spectacular results have not been duplicated elsewhere, either because of lack of funding, lack of interest, or possibly because these results are not valid! We don't know who the "B" in "BLT" is, but the "T" is a lady named Nancy Talbott. We have met her and seen her slide show, and she makes a very good presentation indeed, based mainly on the research of "Dr. Levegood. Stay tuned!
Well that's near nine years ago now and nothing else *new* has been heard about it since..
Maybe we need somebody of the calibre of Lance Moody to get to the bottom of this. Skeptics need to make a bigger deal of the William Levengood fakery (if indeed he faked his credentials) than arguably even Imbrogno, because Levengood has or had far more status and credibility than Imbrogno (whose stories were prima facie ridiculous and absurd). As Moody points out, even before the revelations of Imbrogno lying about his MIT background were uncovered by him, Imbrogno obviously could not be taken seriously given the outlandishness of his storytelling (just like Steve Greer and Bob Lazar and Colin Andrews in croppie circles for that matter). Levengood is actually a different kettle of fish, given he actually has carried out research and scientific analyses of the crops in the formations, from around the world. In fact he may well have done more analyses here than any other investigator and he does appear to have taught plant science at the University of Michigan. He is an expert on glass chemistry and has published in the professional literature in this regard. He has also done research on cattle mutilations.
I did locate his thesis:
Bioelectric currents and oxidant levels in plant systems : a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment for the degree of Master of Science-Forestry (1970).
Of course a thesis is not a PhD.
My point is - why have skeptics not made a bigger deal about Levengood? He is a big fish here, a big catch. All I could find on this forum, was a single reference by 'Stray Cat' to Levengood's fakery, but he didn't provide a source. This is from the twelve page thread 'Crop circle debuking help needed', the most extensive thread dedicated to crop circes at this forum, as far as I have ascertained.
There is very little about the Levengood fakery, from skeptics that is. In fact many noted skeptics haven't said anything about it publicly as far as I could find out. This is somewhat surprising and somewhat disappointing.
Is it because the guy who exposed Levengood, Kevin Randle is not a skeptic, but a UFO believer and a Roswell believer and promoter at that? So what, let's give credit where it's due, even if we roll our eyes at Randle's lack of skepticism with the Roswell myth. Any first-class skeptic knows though you need to get to the source, the original exposé, you need to hear from the horse's mouth so to speak. And I can't find this with Randle's exposé of Levengood, it's all second-hand. I can't find anything from Randle himself to repeat myself. Why does Randle have no mention of it at his blog, or anywhere else (unless I missed it)? Why haven't skeptics trumpeted this out far louder?
Also did Levengood really think that he could get away with this remark:
"Levengood said that in reality he has a "Ph.D. equivalent" from the National Academy of Sciences (NAS)"??
I mean anybody who knows anything basic about the US scientific community knows the NAS is a prestigious scientific association that you have to be elected to, it doesn't hand out degrees, PhDs or even a BSc for that matter. It's not a university or tertiary institute. It's like saying you got your medical degree 'equivalent' from a professional medical association rather than a university med school. Who would fall for that?
The thing is I can't find the 'smoking gun' evidence for Levengood's remarks here, that is not from Randle himself, it's all second-hand like I write above. Can anybody help here? Maybe contacting Kevin Randle himself? I think one may have to resort to that to get beyond the smoke here, and find the dead body so to speak. Also why has nobody put the feet to the fire of other noted croppie researchers and notable writers here, making them squirm, asking them to comment on Levengood's apparent fakery of his credentials - that would include more than anybody else Nancy Talbott, also Michael Glickman, Andy Thomas and others? Why have they been let off the hook?
Levengood has not appeared to respond to Randle's or Saucer Smear's accusations, so I assume that Randle is correct in his charges. Why else would Levengood stay silent? Surely he hasn't answered the charges because they are true - Levengood lied about his PhD and then compounded his lie by telling another one - he got his PhD equivalent from the NAS, what a howler. Still it would be nice if I could find the original claims/evidence from Randle himself, and I have not been able to do so.
People's thoughts here? I hope others concur with me that it is necessary to get to the bottom of this and that it hasn't been done properly (that is Randle's commentary here is not available for perusal. Well I can't find it). Also that skeptics need to be making a bigger deal of this than they have done so far (yes I know it has been near a decade since the revelations, so what?) and that this is frankly a failure of organized skepticism to have not done so. Ironically it's a UFO believer who did the exposé here, not a skeptic!
PS Randle is making a mention of the Imbrogno affair at his blog. More details of Imbrogno's confabulations have come to light.
