Jump to content

Talk:Stanton T. Friedman

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bias?

[edit]

This is a fairly well written article, but IMHO it is strongly bias in favor of Mr. Friedman and his ideas. I think the addition of some criticisms or rebuttals of his work/theories would improve it. Alas, I am not knowledgeable enough in this field to undertake such an endeavour.
--Careax 08:39, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"I am not knowledgeable enough in this field" pretty much says it all for the poster —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.200.140.231 (talk) 02:07, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. If the poster was not "knowledgeable enough in this field", then how would he know if the article was biased or not? 79.66.39.117 (talk) 00:07, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By the same token, how would either of you know if the Poster is essentially right or wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.223.130.32 (talk) 19:35, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The primary reference seems to be an autobiography written by the subject himself. Whether you know the material or not, it's hard to imagine such a source *could* be unbiased. 04:12, 19 May 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.175.43.139 (talk)

ETH

[edit]
WTF is "ETH"???

--Larean01 13:40, 20 September 2006 (UTC) I agree. ETH seems to stand for "extra terrestrial hypothesis", which would be the idea that UFOs come from ET civilisations.[reply]

Comment added with signature and time stamp to facilitate archiving. - - MrBill3 (talk) 09:27, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Page clean-up

[edit]

There are several comments here which sure seem in my eyes to be "digs," like the gratuitous comments in regards to Friedman's background as a nuclear physicist. I'm going to do a bit of a clean-up here, so if there areCanada Jack 18:52, 1 June 2007 (UTC) any strong objections, let me know.[reply]

Citations & references

[edit]

See Wikipedia:Footnotes for an explanation of how to generate footnotes using the <ref(erences/)> tags Nhl4hamilton (talk) 07:34, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article says "He is unique[citation needed]amongst those who advocate such ideas in that he believes these machines are designed and operate according to physics and technologies that are entirely plausible within modern human understanding, albeit beyond present human engineering."

That's wrong. Jean-Pierre Petit says the same thing. And for this assertion:

"Friedman has reached the conclusion[citation needed]that a small fraction of documented UFO reports are observations of physical machines designed, built, and flown by an alien species from another planet to visit/study the earth."

Try this video (I find it by chance, I didn't really look for references. There should be better sources.) Kromsson (talk) 13:21, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've edited this article significantly. It was full of claims that reflected positively on Friedman and which were "substantiated" only his website; eg I can no evidence (and I have searched) for the lrole with Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as a science journalist that the article claimed. (I did find results showing that he helped make CBC programs on UFOs - this difference is not hair splitting: claiming that SF is recognized as a "straight" science journalist boosts the credibility of UFOlogy.) The website of a man who will sue people for saying that his claims regarding UFOs are untrue [1] should be used cautiously as a source, especially when making claims that promote his own activities. Umptious (talk) 00:07, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the claim that SF worked as a science journalist for the CBC, it would seem very strange indeed that a positive article about him published by the CBC wouldn't mention this, if was the case! [2] Umptious (talk) 00:32, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I work at the CBC and I thought he in fact had been a contributor, though not on the UFO side of things. Could be wrong. His daughter does work for us, I believe. I've looked at the article and cleaned up some glaring POV statements, reworded or omitted them, clarified the point about the Majestic 12 documents (they are not only doubted by skeptics of UFOs, but some of the leading Roswell researchers as well), and took out the rather odd note about him suing those who slandered him. (Not sure of the relevance of that.) Canada Jack (talk) 17:13, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

POV

[edit]

I removed the POV tag as there is no apparent reason for it being there now given talk here. Let me know if you disagree with this position, with explanation. Cheers Holon (talk) 23:46, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of MHD propulsion text from article.

[edit]

I removed the following from the article:

- a technology, referred to in the French COMETA report, that may be feasible in the near future. The COMETA report claims about magnetohydrodynamic propulsion are based on the scientific works of Jean-Pierre Petit.[1] It is also currently being investigated by aeronautical engineer Leik Myrabo[citation needed]. MHD propulsion can only explain the shock wave annihilation and the halo that is often seen in ufo sightings. MHD propulsion, while suitable for interplanetary (or intrasolar system) travel, cannot accommodate intersolar system (or intragalactic travel) due to the extreme distances separating stellar systems at Earth's distance from the center of the Milky Way galaxy. Distances between galaxies are far greater than those between stars and so intergalactic travel is far more unlikely.

This text, as fascinating as it may be, belongs (if not already there; I've not looked) in the article magnetohydrodynamic propulsion; in this article it is totally off-point. (We have wikilinks for exactly this purpose.) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 20:31, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.mhdprospects.com/

Removal of interviews

[edit]

I removed the following two sections from the article. Per WP:NOT, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, nor is a directory or guide. We don't include lists of interviews in biographies of notable people. Period.

-- John Broughton (♫♫) 21:36, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Radio interviews

[edit]
  • Binnall of America Holiday Episode 2005 - Part 1 and Part 2 - December 24, 2005
  • Binnall of America Holiday Episode 2006 - Part 1 and Part 2 - December 23, 2006
  • Binnall of America Holiday Episode 2007 - Part 1 and Part 2 - December 23, 2007
  • Binnall of America Holiday Episode 2008 - Part 1 and Part 2 - December 22, 2008
  • Binnall of America Holiday Episode 2009 - Part 1 and Part 2 - December 23, 2009
  • Binnall of America Holiday Episode 2010 - Part 1 and Part 2 - December 23, 2010
  • Breakthrough Clean Energy Technologies, BlackOp Suppression and the Extraterrestrial Presence Full Interview - May 11, 2009

Internet interviews

[edit]
  • Reddit IAmA interview. - [3] - 23 August 2011

Good source?

[edit]

I removed this, because it wasn't clearly connected to the article:

  • Moseley, James W.; Pflock, Karl T. (2002), Shockingly Close to the Truth!: Confessions of a Grave-Robbing Ufologist, Prometheus Books, ISBN 1-57392-991-3

My guess is that there is a lot of useful information in the book, but I doubt that the majority of it is about Friedman, so it doesn't belong in a "Further reading" section until/unless specific chapters actually do pertain to Friedman. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 21:46, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Stanton T. Friedman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:53, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wives?

[edit]

In Personal life, it says he's been married twice but has a daughter with this third wife. So is this his second wife or has he been married 3 times? Danpetitpas (talk) 06:08, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

He married three times. Someone reverted my edit. I am a direct descendant of Sue Porter, and I have been doing genealogy for my family including from Sue Porter's direct genealogy. My great grandmother Sue is his first wife; they adopted several children. He had a second wife, Stella Kimball, he married in 1974. "California Marriage Index, 1960-1985," database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:V62K-LFS : 27 November 2014), Stanton T Friedman and Stella M Kimball, 24 Nov 1974; from "California, Marriage Index, 1960-1985," database and images, Ancestry (http://www.ancestry.com : 2007); citing Los Angeles, California, Center of Health Statistics, California Department of Health Services, Sacramento. I am not sure when she was divorced, but his third partner is Marilyn; my great grandmother and Stanton had a major fallout in their relationship, and basically, he went around acting as if he had never been married to her. Generous assumption is the cited article, https://mag.uchicago.edu/science-medicine/science-fiction, made an editorial mistake. Either way. He has three wives. "his three children from his first marriage" are from Sue; they are my adopted relatives. KickAssClown (talk) 00:56, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Stanton T. Friedman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:19, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

On the Stanton Friedman page it says he was involved in a UFO investigation at Roswell. On the Roswell page it says it was a crashed air balloon. Obviously a disagreement in facts. I think there needs to be some resolution on this. JustinJ108 (talk) 03:05, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why is that a disagreement in facts? Is it because something that crashed cannot be a UFO because it is not flying? Or because air balloons and UFOs are different things?
Could you please, instead of telling it in your own words, quote what the articles say? I am not sure which parts you are talking about and what "links" have to do with it. --Hob Gadling (talk) 05:20, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Friedman's privacy

[edit]

One of the references overtly includes Friedman's private information. Though Friedman is deceased, the specific information I refer to could potentially be of use to the unscrupulous. If an authorized Wikipedia editor wishes to evaluate this, then contact me here and I'll elaborate.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Stanton_T._Friedman&oldid=1252188233"