UFO Hoaxing 101

[RoboTimbo]

If "ufologists" were actually scientists they would welcome hoaxes like this as a way of testing their methods and a reminder to be very, very suspicious of eyewitness testimony.

A hoax of this kind (one in which the hoaxers reveal their methods after perpetrating the hoax) is not a "false positive" because by revealing what they did the hoaxers have shown this to be a "negative." Everybody knows, now, that this wasn't a case of an alien space craft visiting earth. Any "ufologist" worth their salt should be keen to study the testimony arising from this case to learn about the ways in which stories of UFO sightings become distorted and embellished over time.

Unless, of course, what you're saying is that Ufologists don't actually care about the truth--they just want to rack up as many spurious "confirmed sightings" as possible.

This is what gets me too. Wouldn't these seriously scientific ufologists have used every tool in their scientific toolkit to rule out all mundane explanations? If they had looked at mundane explanations first, as any good seriously scientific ufologist should, they would have come up with many more explanations besides alien visitation and written this one off.

The fact that they didn't says more about their methods and motivation than anything. Good wake up call for them.

ETA: I also disagree with the method. Too dangerous.

 

[King of the Americas]

What scientific study? You keep going on about science when there is none involved here. The two hoaxers did not claim to be doing science. There is no genuine "scientific" study of UFOs going on anywhere. The whole premise of your argument is wrong and thus your conclusions are....wrong.

You take part in "Science" oftentimes without even knowing. Anytime, you 'observe' something, and then make an attempt to accurately record what you saw- THAT'S Science.

So, when you pick up a fly wing, and put it under a microscope in an attempt to identify structural techniques, you are doing something scientific...a 'study'.

It is the same when you use telescopes or binoculars to look skyward, and 'study' the things found there.

To make record of these things in an attempt to fully identify them.

It's Science...the 'study' of things yet undefined.

What these hoaxer did was anti-Science. They are stupid kids playing in a laboratory who don't appreciate the importance of the test tubes, as they mindless pour one into another, giggle like mad hatters in so much tea.

 

[King of the Americas]

Wait a sec...



Whew! You were saying? Oh, yeah...

Interfering with an ongoing criminal investigation is a criminal act, but interfering with the investigations of obessive-compulsive conspiracy nuts is just plain fun!

What other studies do you deem "...nuts..."?

---

How do you even begin to talk to someone like you?

You think that looking into the sky, in at attempt to record and identify the things you see is something it's okay to "fun or interfere with"...?

Well, your ignorance is on you, and you alone...although it would appear you have brethren.

I beg you to stop.

Stop hoaxing, and stop 'cheering' for those who do. It's beyond childish. It's wasteful, and detrimental to sincere discovery.

I am going to look in the direction, where I think I am most likely to make a find.

For you to point at a known forgery and proclaim, "Look here it is!"

...is...

Frustrating. WHY don't you go play video games, and leave me alone???

If you want to 'play', do it wit h yourself, or those who 'also' want to play. Because there are 'serious people', engaged in serious work. Your 'hoaxing' leads to the wasting our time and resources.

Please stop.

 

[King of the Americas]

Do you consider that the Moonies (insert least favourite dangerous cult) are a sincere religious group that deserves to have it's misconceived ideals remain free of outside interference?

So, that's a "No."?

If the 'experts' were doing their job as well as they claim to be able to do it, the false positive wouldn't be an issue. The hoax would have failed because the 'experts' would have identified the balloon flares or at least not immediately jumped to their premature conclusions.

So the only despicable hoaxes are those like Ray Santilli's Alien Autopsy hoax or the many other hoaxes actively promoted as genuine events by reseachers like Jamie Maussan, Sean David Morton, Billy Meier et al which which are done to really muddy the water and hoodwink people out of money...

I am looking for something... Pointing to something you KNOW isn't it, and saying come over here I found it...is "childish".

Hoaxing, should be breaking a civil code/law, and if you attempt to 'profit' from the hoax, then you should face criminal charges.

 

[King of the Americas]

KotA's....

C'mon comrades! Let's stake out the moral high ground.

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_1108546e95a2a33dbe.jpg[/qimg]

I mean... uh, I mean.....

Seriously, dude! Were you beaten as a child by a step-parent who was hoaxed into doing so, or something? As was pointed out our own James Randi perpetrated a hoax, himself. (You'll have to stretch to call it a practical joke - it was a hoax.)

Most of us applauded the hoax because it does just what these buffoons did - it shows how willing people are to believe in nonsense when presented with a story that suits their personal agenda.

You're just totally over-reacting. Where is all this moral outrage for the millions upon millions of dollars the US Government has spent tracking down decades worth of these ridiculous confabulations, quite a few of which are embroidered out of the whole cloth of imagination?

Meh - I'm for it. Anything that can be done to show people that they are using bias in their thinking is fine by me. Yeah, even if it fools me (once)....

Randi's hoax was NOTHING like what the above hoaxers did.

---

Over-reacting...?

Hoaxers are willfully wasting time, and laughing about it...

And you're pissed about government spending that also studies these things...?

...hum...

Why? Why are you SO opposed to these studies? What are 'you' so afraid we'll find...?

...you and your kind...are systematically trying to derail this entire field.

WHY???

This is the real frontier, this is where the next super scientific discovery could happen. What have 'you' to personally gain by "interfering" with these findings???

 

[King of the Americas]

Terribly sorry. Show me your degree in ufology and I'll step back.

Wait...IS there such a degree?

I'd bet money that there is likely a section or two in the cosmology or astronomy course lineups.

 

[Fnord]

Proverbs 26:1-11

What other studies do you deem "...nuts..."?

Ghosts, religion, reincarnation, parallel universes, retrograde time travel, perpetual motion, dowsing, metaphysics, fantasy football, pornography, channeling, spirituality, bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, Chupacabra, 911 conspiracy theories, who shot JFK and Lincoln, the face on Mars, and "Who's better, Batman or Spiderman?"

How do you even begin to talk to someone like you?

Cash up front is always a good option. Failing that, try offering valid evidence to support your claims, rather than relying solely on myth, legend, and subjective beliefs.

You think that looking into the sky, in at attempt to record and identify the things you see is something it's okay to "fun or interfere with"...?

Not at all. I think that seeing an object flying through the sky and being unable to identify it is insufficient reason to claim that an extra-terrestrail intelligence or a governmental conspiracy is behind it. I also think that it is fun to expose those who believe otherwise.

Well, your ignorance is on you, and you alone...although it would appear you have brethren.

Evidence, Please?

I beg you to stop.

I beg you to stop!

Stop hoaxing, and stop 'cheering' for those who do.

No, and no.

It's beyond childish. It's wasteful, and detrimental to sincere discovery.

It's detrimental only to those who make a claim based solely on speculation and without first gathering real, verifiable evidence to support it, and only because it exposes them for the gullible fools that they are.

I am going to look in the direction, where I think I am most likely to make a find.

Good for you! May I suggest the most remote of Peruvian mountain villages? They seem closest to your subject matter, and the people there will not be likely to contradict your "findings." That there is little or no Internet access at these locations should not hinder your studies in the least.

For you to point at a known forgery and proclaim, "Look here it is!"
...is... Frustrating.

See my sig line? Read that part about "Explaining the obvious to the oblivious..." one more time and meditate upon its meaning.

WHY don't you go play video games, and leave me alone???

Why don't you stop posting, and leave us all alone?

If you want to 'play', do it with yourself, or those who 'also' want to play.

Ooo ... you're trying to be funny, right?

Because there are 'serious people', engaged in serious work.

Yes, and they're called "Scientists" and "Degreed Professionals." Where do you fit in?

Your 'hoaxing' leads to the wasting our time and resources.

Well, gee ... I'm sorry you don't have time for websurfing and that you're all out of beer, but these are hard times. Why not try to find a job?

Please stop.

After you, my good man! After you...

 

[King of the Americas]

Any thread that causes a three-year member to make his third post has gotta be good for something.

Alright, I'll concede your point, partially...

Personally, I DON'T want my time 'wasted' investigating a known forgery, as 'training'.

All such a things would 'train' me to identify is a forgery...since I DON'T think they should exist to begin with...the whole thing seems to me a practice in the waste of time.

These things waste time.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

I just can't see how this can be constructive, ever. Ok, so the experts are being shown to be fools. That's great. But how many people saw these things, think they were UFO's, and never followed up any further than that? It just ends up being more proof for their own delusions. It's not like every single one of them will find out it was a hoax, and be fully educated about the whole thing. In the end, it will actually strengthen the beliefs of some.

My pragmatic side is kicking in here. Even though a greater good may be done, I think it does enough harm as well that it's not constructive.

This would be my primary argument against this hoax-not the fire hazard, not the "obstruction of scientific inquiry", not the legal issues, but the fact that it could do more harm than good.

I once wrote an extensive (to me, at least) article about a mudslide here in my hometown, and what struck me was how much CT material there was in the story. What further dawned on me was if a random mudslide can be blown up into a full-fledged conspiracy, that every disaster must have enough weird aspects for a CT brew. This, in turn, led me to seriously consider making a Loose Change-style movie cooking together the various strange aspects into a full-fledged delusional Conspiracy Theory with capital a C and T. Once I had gotten enough people suckered in, I'd step forward and explain to everyone that the whole thing had been a hoax.

Problem is, how many people would by then have turned into believers? How many would've taken the story further and found more "evidence"? How many would be too deep in the mud to admit they'd been fooled? Too many, that's who.

Lots of bizarre incidents out there have grown too big in peoples' minds to be explained as hoaxes. All that happens when these do turn out to be "fake", is that people think the hoaxers are out for attention or that the explanation of how they pulled off the hoax was somehow not sufficient.

So yes, it's a good point that there may be lots of people out there that, like our very own King of the Americas, were suckered in, and who, unlike KotA, didn't have the guts or rationality to admit their mistake.

You think that looking into the sky, in at attempt to record and identify the things you see is something it's okay to "fun or interfere with"...?

We don't. That's why astronomers and SETI do not get hoaxed.

 

[King of the Americas]

If "ufologists" were actually scientists they would welcome hoaxes like this as a way of testing their methods and a reminder to be very, very suspicious of eyewitness testimony.

A hoax of this kind (one in which the hoaxers reveal their methods after perpetrating the hoax) is not a "false positive" because by revealing what they did the hoaxers have shown this to be a "negative." Everybody knows, now, that this wasn't a case of an alien space craft visiting earth. Any "ufologist" worth their salt should be keen to study the testimony arising from this case to learn about the ways in which stories of UFO sightings become distorted and embellished over time.

Unless, of course, what you're saying is that Ufologists don't actually care about the truth--they just want to rack up as many spurious "confirmed sightings" as possible.

Investigative resources are finite.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Randi's hoax was NOTHING like what the above hoaxers did.

---

Oh, so there are hoaxes and then there are hoaxes? Is this some sort of hoax revisionism? You said all hoaxes were wrong and that you'd lose respect for Randi if he actually had perpetrated one, didn't you? Or was that someone else posting?

Over-reacting...?

Yes. If I walk down the street and someone I don't know points at me and says, "Funny green nose you've got there", I would probably think he's a little crazy. If twelve consecutive people, though, pointed and commented on my green nose, I'd look for a mirror toot sweet. Any number of people in this thread have mentioned your green nose. Are the perceptions of others so unimportant to you that you will continue to argue this from this ridiculous emotional and moral high ground you've staked out?

Hoaxers are willfully wasting time, and laughing about it...


And you're pissed about government spending that also studies these things...?

No, I'm pointing out MUCH LARGER HOAXES. Hoaxes you seem to think have validity of some sort and thus should take up the time and funds of serious research organizations.

...hum...

I can name that tune in four notes!

Why? Why are you SO opposed to these studies? What are 'you' so afraid we'll find...?

...you and your kind...are systematically trying to derail this entire field.

WHY???

Bolding mine. Tilt at windmills much? Must be a lonely crusade out there. Someone asks you a couple of questions and you've already pigeon-holed him into "them".

This is the real frontier, this is where the next super scientific discovery could happen. What have 'you' to personally gain by "interfering" with these findings???

Stop personalizing this. I couldn't care less if you spend all your hard-earned money scouring the Gobi for clues as to alien intervention in the development of the trade on the Silk Road. Have a ball!
I'm not interfering. I'm just telling you to stop taking yourself so seriously. The scammers in this were just tacky but the results are valid. Believers wanted to believe so they accepted the story as real without verifying anything - that's a perfectly valid scientific conclusion if you ask me.


Note to self: Self, stay out of Bigfoot and UFO threads.

 

[SezMe]

Foolmewunz, funny green nose you've got there.













Somebody had to say it and I'm just trying to be the responsible adult here.

 

[King of the Americas]

I just can't see how this can be constructive, ever. Ok, so the experts are being shown to be fools. That's great. But how many people saw these things, think they were UFO's, and never followed up any further than that? It just ends up being more proof for their own delusions. It's not like every single one of them will find out it was a hoax, and be fully educated about the whole thing. In the end, it will actually strengthen the beliefs of some.

My pragmatic side is kicking in here. Even though a greater good may be done, I think it does enough harm as well that it's not constructive.

Thank you for your input.

Consideration is appreciated.

 

[Laton]

Alright, I'll concede your point, partially...

Personally, I DON'T want my time 'wasted' investigating a known forgery, as 'training'.

All such a things would 'train' me to identify is a forgery...since I DON'T think they should exist to begin with...the while thing seems to me a practice in the waste of time.

These things waste time.

Just thinking that a hoax should'nt exist is not that useful as they obviously do. Surely knowing how to spot a forgery is valuable.

If you investigate something and conclude it's genuine only to find out later that it is indeed a fake, do you:

a) Ignore the evidence and still insist its real.
b) Concede the mistake and then go onto investigate the next item with no changes to your methods
c) learn from your error and apply that knowledge to your next investigation
d) learn from your error and apply that knowledge to your next investigation as well as re-evaluating prior investigations in the light of your new knowledge

BTW, I have an email from some chaps in Nigeria that may interest you, should forward it on?

 

[DogB]

Wait...IS there such a degree?

I'd bet money that there is likely a section or two in the cosmology or astronomy course lineups.

I'm pretty sure that isn't true in Australia but I'm not particularly well informed about other educational systems.

That said, any course that teaches careful adherence to the scientific method would be very useful to any 'researcher' of unusual phenomenon. I see precious little scientific rigor in ufology.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

The hilarious irony, which just dawned on me, is that the very UFO myth itself was started by people who misinterpreted an eyewitness account-a farmer stated he'd seen craft that moved as would a saucer skipping across the water. How anyone managed to so thoroughly misinterpret this, let alone take the idea of flying saucers seriously (what's next, teapot-shaped submarines?) is beyond me.

Randi's hoax was NOTHING like what the above hoaxers did.

How? It's all there-people who seriously want to find a real channeller, hoaxers producing a false positive, the media and believers "scientifically" studying the phenomenon wasting time and resources, and then finally the hoaxers coming forward. Where, exactly, lies the difference?

This is the real frontier, this is where the next super scientific discovery could happen.

Don't be ridiculous. Do you know that we possibly know less about the oceans than about space? Have you read The Swarm? Have you played Terror from the Deep or any other published work presenting UFOs that come out of the oceans? Have you heard about the legend of Atlantis? Who is to say there is nothing down there that, when found, could be "the next scientific discovery"?

What about time machines? What about portals? What about a medical revolution rendering us permanently immune to every kind of cancer? Who are you to state with such certainty that your field will be the next metaphorical messiah?

 

[Fnord]

All that's needed for a "Ufology Degree" is a video camera, an Internet connection, the ability to read and write, and the desire to be believed.

Other than that, not even a high-school diploma is needed.

 

[Stray Cat]

I am looking for something... Pointing to something you KNOW isn't it, and saying come over here I found it...is "childish".

I'm having a wedding celebration and me and my new wife decide it would be romantic to release a dozen Chinese flying lanterns.
Some IDIOT who doesn't know his UFO from his elbow thinks the aliens are invading. He phones the TV station who phone the experts who ALL AGREE it's aliens.
I wake up next morning and read in the paper that 12 UFO's were spotted floating away from the town I'd just had my wedding reception in. I phone the TV station and tell them "it was our chinese flying lanterns"

Exact same scenario but we've removed the 'intent' of hoaxing.
The dumb ass UFO investigators still look like fools to me.

Hoaxing, should be breaking a civil code/law, and if you attempt to 'profit' from the hoax, then you should face criminal charges.

OK, Here's a list of criminals based upon your criteria:
Ray Santilli
Sean David Morton
John Bradley Rutter (aka Dr. Jonathan Reed)
Richard Hoagland
Art Bell
Jim Delettoso
Billy Meier
Ed Dames
Steven Greer
Carlos Diaz
Bob Lazar
Jamie Maussan
Daniel Munoz
Linda Moulton Howe
Brian Bessent

All of these UFO 'experts' and many more are participating in a big money making HOAX.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

I'm having a wedding celebration and me and my new wife decide it would be romantic to release a dozen Chinese flying lanterns.
Some IDIOT who doesn't know his UFO from his elbow thinks the aliens are invading. He phones the TV station who phone the experts who ALL AGREE it's aliens.
I wake up next morning and read in the paper that 12 UFO's were spotted floating away from the town I'd just had my wedding reception in. I phone the TV station and tell them "it was our chinese flying lanterns"

Exact same scenario but we've removed the 'intent' of hoaxing.
The dumb ass UFO investigators still look like fools to me.

You just won the thread; this is exactly the point the rest of us have been trying to make from the King's first post:

If "UFOlogists" take every fire lantern, flare, zeppelin, unusually clear planet, satellite and other atmospheric phenomenon to be a visitor from outer space, then that is their problem.​

So I'm sorry, but I don't care how many fire lanterns over wedding receptions I distract the hoaxers distract them from "investigating": carrying out a hoax to drive this point out to them, surely, is not in any way immoral!

 

[I Ratant]

I

OK, Here's a list of criminals based upon your criteria:
Ray Santilli
...
All of these UFO 'experts' and many more are participating in a big money making HOAX.

.
After the "Alien Autopsy" movie was released, and I among others generally laughed it to scorn on the Compuserve Astronomy Forum, Santilli offered me the opportunity to peddle the thing here in the States.
I laughed.