Part 3 of 3: Science Was Wrong Interview with Stanton Friedman and Kathleen Marden by Michelle M. Pillow

Science Was Wrong Part 3 of 3

Interview with authors Stanton T. Friedman, MSC and Kathleen Marden

by Michelle M. Pillow, www.michellepillow.com

Part 3: In depth with Stanton T. Friedman, MSC

How is Science Was Wrong about UFO’s?

Stanton: I wrote a Chapter dealing with the positive evidence almost always neglected by the debunkers and refuting their false arguments. Kathleen wrote an excellent chapter on the Conundrum of Alien Abduction.

What do you think about Global Warming and Cold Fusion?

Stanton: I have reviewed a great deal of the literature and find enormous bias and selective choice of data on the part of those who claim that “man” is responsible for global warming because of his production of “evil” CO2, and who neglect such important factors as the fact that the most abundant greenhouse gas is water vapor NOT CO2 and that the sun varies considerably in its emission of magnetic fields, particulate radiation, plasmas, all having a substantial effect on climate. I have also found that there has been an active effort on the part of the IPCC to suppress opposing viewpoints and data, hardly a scientific process. Variation of weather and climate is much more complex than they have presented.

Cold Fusion has been viciously attacked often by people who haven’t studied the many experiments that reproduce the findings of Drs. Pons and Fleishmann. The evidence is very convincing that some new and exciting processes are occurring

Several of the chapters deal with medical issues such as the Hemophilia Holocaust. Why are they important?

Stanton: When false claims are put forth by smart prominent people they can easily have fatal consequences for the people involved. 10,000 American Hemophiliacs became HIV positive and some of them spread the disease unknowingly to others. Many needless and preventable deaths resulted. Many women and their off spring died needlessly from child bed fever as Semmelweis’s work was ignored. Many people died from smallpox because of resistance to vaccination.

Why is that so many smart people made what turns out to have been such stupid statements?

Stanton: There is often arrogance that goes with high status and a belief that, if the claim being put forth (alien visitation, government cover-ups, the ability to fly in vehicles in the air or in space, new treatment for a disease, etc) were true, that the smart person who believes he or she keeps up with what is important, would have known about it. Therefore, since he doesn’t, it couldn’t be true. The smart person seems to believe he is all knowing and must use his status to prevent thinking people from accepting “impossible” notions, There can’t possibly be evidence to support the “crazy” ideas. If they were true, he would have to admit having been wrong.

Have there really been serious consequences resulting from the Wrong Claims made by Scientists?

Stanton: The development of entire industries such as aviation and space travel were delayed because of foolish resistance. The US lost enormous prestige when the Russians launched the first satellite. Britain paid a high price during the battle of Britain because they didn’t develop jet engines prior to the Germans even though an English patent for one had been granted 6 years earlier than the German one. Big battleships were sunk at Pearl Harbor because the experts knew bombs dropped from an airplane could not sink a ship.

Some have wanted to heavily subsidize at public expense so called renewable energy schemes to avoid so called global warming. As noted above there were many needless deaths and serious illnesses because of resistance to new treatments.

Have you personally encountered many closed minds in the Academic world?

Stanton: I certainly have from professors who couldn’t believe there was evidence for alien visitations, alien abductions, or government cover-ups. I checked many audiences and found that almost none had read any of the large scale scientific UFO studies, or knew anything about how much acceleration people can withstand or that mother nature can provide much of the energy needed (cosmic freeloading) for space travel. Many seemed incredibly ignorant about the enormous amount of important research and development work that goes on outside academia. They think all research is published in the open scientific literature, which is absurd, and have no idea of the huge amounts of money spent in non academic facilities. Lockheed spent $10 Billion in secret to develop the stealth fighter. I have found that almost all know next to nothing about the development of nuclear systems for propulsion of submarines, for aircraft carriers that can operate for 18 years without refueling, fission rockets that produce much more velocity for a rocket than can chemical rockets and that nuclear fusion has been harnessed and could eject particles out the back end of a rocket and having 10 million times as much energy per particle as in a chemical rocket. They seem to be stuck at the level of the Pony Express for the transfer of information rather than at the level of the internet. Nuclear rockets have been tested. On Los Alamos system developed 4400 megawatts, twice the power of Grand Coullee Dam though only7’ in diameter. They seem oblivious to the fact that one H bomb can release as much energy as exploding 10 million tons of TNT.

You spent 14 years working in industry, but have lectured at over 600 colleges and universities. Did you find industry different from academia?

Stanton: Yes, I certainly did. People in industry and the national labs are motivated to make systems meeting a particular objective. They know that technological progress comes from doing things differently in an unpredictable way rather that by extrapolating from the old techniques. The academics are afraid that espousing new ideas might interfere with getting tenure and might lead to ridicule. They want to publish or perish. The industrials see goal achievement as more important and recognize that secrecy may indeed be necessary

Astronomers seem to be a favorite target in Science Was Wrong. Can you give some examples of their being wrong?

Stanton: Dr. Simon Newcombe top US astronomer in the 19th century said man would never fly in a machine. Two months before the Wright Brothers first flight, two British Royal astronomers indicated that space travel was impossible a year before the first satellite was launched. Others said the initial launch weight of a rocket able to get a man to the moon and back would have to have been a million-million tons. His computation was too high by a factor of 300 Million. Another proved it would be impossible to put anything in to orbit. Not enough energy available. Other claimed Mars had always been dry, that Venus was just a tropical paradise that the moon never had any water. That electromagnetic effects were of no significance in the solar system. They were wrong.

Stephen Hawking is one of the best known scientists on the planet. Were his comments in April about aliens another example of astronomers being Wrong?

Stanton: Very definitely. In the first place he knew nothing about alien visitations, behavior, or technology, despite the data that is available. Secondly he drew an analogy between Columbus’ impact on the natives and aliens’ impact on us. Bad analogy. Columbus didn’t have much more technology than the natives. We on the other hand have weapons of mass destruction, techniques for delivering them, many methods for reconnaissance to detect invaders. We have knowledge of nuclear fusion which is how the stars all produce their energy. He also claimed that if anybody came here they would have sent a message first. That is ridiculous. Columbus didn’t send a smoke signal. Our radio technology is less than 150 years old. Anybody coming here is much more advanced than we are and would have developed new techniques totally incompatible with our primitive receiving equipment. Why in the world would aliens send a message using old techniques? I don’t use a slide rule anymore. It is much more likely they are here to make sure we don’t go out there. We are a primitive society whose major activity is tribal warfare. We killed 50 million of our own in WW II.

Why are you better equipped to deal with topics such as space travel than the Professors who claim there is nothing to UFOs or to star travel?

Stanton: I have studied the relevant evidence about both topics. I also worked on many classified projects, so know about security. I have visited 20 archives. I worked on fission and fusion rockets, nuclear airplanes nuclear power plants for space. The professors haven’t studied the relevant data about any of these. I regularly read journals covering these matters. They don’t.

Tell us about space travel and other topics you discuss in Science Was Wrong?

Stanton: I tell the fascinating story of the development of aviation and space travel despite the claims of the noisy negativists that they were both impossible. Supposedly one could not fly faster than the speed of sound; here was no way to provide the energy needed or to withstand high acceleration. The data indicate otherwise

You and the late Carl Sagan were classmates in the physics department at the University of Chicago for 3 years. But you have noted in Science Was Wrong and elsewhere that he was wrong about UFOs, abductions, government cover ups. Why do you suppose that was?

Stanton: He was unwilling to waste his time checking the data; he was unwilling to risk ridicule from academia; he wanted to push SETI rather than evidence for visitations. If aliens are visiting, than listening for radio signals is silly. Maybe one should learn sign language. Of course, since he definitely had a security clearance, he may have been following orders to tamp down interest for national security reasons. Perhaps he replaced Donald Menzel as the chief debunker.

You seem to be an admirer of the late Dr. Immanuel Velikovsky and yet many scientists have heaped ridicule on him.

Stanton: True, Harvard astronomers attacked his books without even reading them. Hardly scientific.

Why do you support many of his views?

Stanton: Because he was far more often correct than wrong. He correctly predicted the surface of Venus would be very hot. He correctly predicted that radiation would be coming from Jupiter and that electromagnetic effects would be important in the solar system. He also had a medical degree which didn’t cut much weight with astronomers and he did find fascinating information in old stories from ancient civilizations. He was a thinker rather than a debunker.

Do you believe that the changes in the energy output of the sun are the real cause of climate change as opposed to the production of evil CO2?

Stanton: Yes, I do. The changes are influenced by the positions of the planets and the sun influences the atmosphere as well. Solar storms and sun spots turn out to be important

Dr. Robert O. Becker is somebody you obviously admire and consider to have been a pioneer in relating the effects of magnetic fields on people including not only treating certain medical conditions, but influencing people’s behavior. Can you give some examples of his work?

Stanton: He was able to demonstrate, after working on limb regeneration in salamanders, that appropriate magnetic fields could enhance healing in human fractures. He collected data showing that changes in the Earth’s electric and magnetic field environment influenced behavior of veterans being admitted to Veteran’s mental hospitals and also influenced behavior in mental wards as observed by neutral nurses. The brain is after all a sophisticated electrical system. He investigated, recorded and evaluated rather than scoffing. He was a real pioneer.

Can you tell us the general rules as you see them for the methods of approach of scientists who try to debunk such topics as UFOs, Cold Fusion, star travel?

Stanton: There are 4 basic rules for the nasty noisy negativists as I call the irrational debunkers:

1. Don’t bother me with the facts my mind is made up.

2. What the public doesn’t know I am not going to tell them

3. If one can’t attack the data, attack the people. It is much easier.

4. Do one’s research by proclamation. Investigation is too much trouble and nobody will know the difference

*****

If you would like to read more about Stanton T. Friedman, MSC and Kathleen Marden, or any of their mentioned titles, please visit them on the web at: www.stantonfriedman.com and www.kathleen-marden.com.

Interview by Michelle M. Pillow, www.michellepillow.com