Talk:Philip J. Klass

I added { { NPOV } } because these new critizisms of Klass are all one-sided. Bubba73 18:50, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

OK, the NPOV has improved some, but I would still like to get unbiased third-party opinions. Bubba73 03:21, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

This is very POV. Virtually everything that's been added is anti-Klass. -Anonymous

Then I'm putting the NPOV tag back. Bubba73 (talk), 19:32, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Even a superficial examination of the other contributions of authors of the criticism portions of this article reveals that they are devoted UFO believers. Totally POV.

disparaged?

The article says "The letter disparaged Friedman’s professional credentials as a nuclear physicist".

The actual letter says "He was trained as a nuclear physicist, worked in nuclear propulsion for five different companies in 14 years., before being laid off in the early 1070's and becoming a full-time UFO lecturer. He typically bills himself as the 'only nuclear physicists devoting full time to UFOs'. "

That doesn't seem very disparaging to me. The article Stanton Friedman says that he worked in nuclear physics 1956-1970, for five companies.

---

The "actual letter" immediately preceding the above quote is a little "introduction" that goes like this:

"...Canada will soon gain a "noted" UFOlogist, full-time UFO lecturer (of the "snake-oil salesman" variety) who will soon move to Canada to become its chief UFO Guru."

And followed immediately afterward by:

"Since the early 1970s, he has earned a comfortable living on the lecure circuit--mostly to junior colleges and the like. His lectures are very colorful, for he is quite a showman... His one-hour lecture is so filled with half-truths and falsehoods that it would take me several hours to offer a rebuttal. And like wrestling with an octopus, when you manage to pin down one leg, the other seven are still thrashing about. I am enclosing a White Paper which I prepared a few years back that illustrates the man's modus-operandi and his distortions of facts."

Now anyone with a little reading comprehension and who isn't disengenuous can see this is as obvious, slimy character assassination, full of all sorts of insinuations, that go something like this:

1. "Noted" is placed in quotes, insinuating this is imaginary, just part of Friedman's "mountainous ego" (a phrase Klass uses twice later in the letter). He's really a nobody speaking on the "junior college" circuit.

2. He is a "showman," a "snake-oil salesman," a "Guru," who distorts facts and spouts "half-truths and falsehoods." In other words, he's a disreputable liar.

3. Yeah, he's a nuclear engineer, but he had 5 jobs in 14 years, so he can't hold down a permanent job, but that's no surprise since he's such a liar. When his last employer cut him loose because of all his character faults, he became the carnival barker he is now, hustling money and speaking mostly to "junior colleges." He's just in it for the money ("earned a comfortable living on the lecture circuit"), probably because nobody will hire him.

And I bet Bubba buys every word of it.

---

The letter goes on to say: "Freidman and I are 'friends' of sorts ... he can be a quite likable chap with a good sense of humor."

---

Known as damning with faint praise. Note "friends" is in quotes, meaning "like hell we're friends." And of course it is immediately followed with:

"But since his livelihood now depends on UFOs, and he has a mountainous ego and knows how to make newspaper headlines, I would expect that he will be making waves for you and your associates. Within the UFO Movement in the U.S., Friedman is somewhat of an outcast, in part because of his style (or lack of it) and his mountainous ego. I understand... that his decision to move to Canada is prompted by the fact that his lecture business in the U.S. has fallen off, while that from Canada is growing...." blah, blah, blah

Followed by:

"The foregoing should provide you with a capsule summary of the man and, hopefully, alert you to deal cautiously with him knowing that he is inclined to distort the facts and exploit any ambiguity in your statements."

So the "mountainous ego" (twice), the man lacks style, he's an "outcast", and he is again the carnival barker just hustling money on the lecture circuit. Again he accuses Friedman of distorting the facts and asks the members of the National Research Council to treat him as the enemy who is going to be accusing them of all sorts of things.

Then at the end he says, "Please treat this letter in confidence, sharing it with appropriate associates as you see fit."

Or another words, please spread this dirt around with your associates, and for Godssakes don't let Friedman know that his "friend" is stabbing him in the back.

Anybody with any intelligence can see that Klass was smearing Friedman here and trying to destroy his reputation. This isn't an isolated incident either, as other examples of Klass' character assassination make clear. He even went after fellow skeptics who disagreed with him on occasion. (examples also given in article). There are numerous instances of this, the most infamous one being when he went after Dr. James McDonald for having the temerity to criticize his UFO theories as being unscientific. He tried to destroy the man professionally. Maybe Bubba and other skeptics don't like to have this rubbed in their face, but it's pretty obvious what sort of man Klass was. You can try to paint a pig with lipstick, but it's still a pig. The man wasn't a particularly nice guy and usually played dirty.

---

This article needs to be NPOV, not less. Bubba73 (talk) 20:53, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

---

It's a simple fact that there is a definite and very strong POV out there, based on the things Klass repeatedly wrote about UFO witnesses and UFO researchers, that Klass resorted to character assassination. NPOV doesn't mean you have to sugar coat this, though it should be documented with well-cited examples, as the article already is.Dr Fil 03:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, the UFO field is full of frauds, full of incompetent writers, and full of really disturbed persons. Why should Klass pretend that such people are serious researchers? --Hob Gadling 15:15, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

If you would bother (or dare) to read the article and the references, you would discover that Klass's character assassination wasn't directed at just questionable UFO witnesses and flaky UFO writers but at reputable scientists, ironic because Klass himself was no scientist. Their collective "sin" was daring to disagree with Klass. Among the scientists Klass tried to smear and ruin was Dr. James McDonald, Dr. J. Allen Hynek, Stanton Friedman, and even fellow CSICOPians Richard Kammann, Tom McIver, and Dennis Rawlins. And this is a short list. God help anyone who dared cross the great Philip J. Klass. The many, many instances when Klass resorted to such dirty tactics clearly indicates he was a textbook sociopathic personality. He was like Richard Nixon and his long "enemies list".

That you would fail to address the actual facts and instead resort to calling all these people "frauds", "incompetent writers", "disturbed persons", and not "serious researchers", sounds like you are taking a leaf out of Klass's book of dirty tricks and smear tactics. Dr Fil 22:49, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Now that's a dirty trick. I didn't "call all those people" "frauds" etc. You mentioned "the things Klass repeatedly wrote about UFO witnesses and UFO researchers", and I think that this is a very broad brush. In most cases, calling UFO researchers "incompetent" is absolutely correct, and Klass could back it up. That's all I'm saying here.

Being a "reputable scientist", in reality or in Dr Fil's personal opinion, is no guarantee for being smart, being competent, or making no mistakes. McDonald, Hynek, Friedman frequently used bad logic to justify their UFO beliefs, and Klass was often right to chastise them for it. I guess he was also often wrong, though I don't know any examples except maybe the McDonald misusing public funds affair.

Regarding Seckel, it seems that Klass was very gullible and made a big mistake. Someone who mostly discusses UFOlogists hardly ever needs to admit mistakes because they are such easy targets, and I guess he just wasn't used to it. He was used to discussing crackpots.

The Mars effect affair was botched by Kurtz, Abell, and Zelen, as well as the Gauquelins. Both groups split samples, which they shouldn't have done. But you need to read and understand a lot of statistics to find that out, and I guess that it went over Klass' head. So he should have kept silent. He didn't - another big mistake.

But maybe that what you are doing here is just what you are accusing Klass of? The "Criticism of Klass" section is longer than all the remaining text. --Hob Gadling 19:40, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Reference section is very bad and needs editing

The reference section is useless. There is no way of knowing which reference is being cited. This is going to need a clean up. If people here can not match the references properly then the whole article might have to come down.

The way to do this is as follows.

(1)Click edit page above and see what the text source for the next quote looks like.

"Dr. xxxxx and the editors of the Oxford & Harper Collins translations, contend that the number of Roman Emperor Nero is 92. , a view that is also supported by Elvis ."

This way the reference will automatically be given a number and entered into the notes section at the end of th'Italic text'e article also automatically. I have prepared that notes section already. Whatever gets into that notes section stays in the article and whatever doesn't needs to be cited in the above manner or will eventually go. (Simonapro 07:25, 6 June 2006 (UTC))

You might want to see how these changes look on Unidentified flying object (Simonapro 08:12, 6 June 2006 (UTC))