Lisa Romanek Offers Up Bob Bicksler With Claimed Sworn Testimony In Heated Debate With Mufon Head James Carrion
JAMES CARRION... WILL YOU WAVE THE WHITE FLAG REGARDING THE STAN ROMANEK EXPERIENCES WHEN COMMON SENSE DICTATES?By Lisa Romanekwww.stanromanek.com12-26-09[Unedited] Editor's Note--James Carrion has sent in his rejoinder to Lisa's OP-ED, which appears at the end the piece. Additionally, links to previous pertinent articles are there as well-FW Red flags are everywhere for MUFON's International Director James Carrion, as he investigates the Stan Romanek case via website posts, blogs, online post and response to articles posted about Stan Romanek's case of UFO sightings, alien abductions and much more. Oh yes and let's not forget the Schriever AFB document that he obtained mysteriously from an unnamable source. What will be sufficient evidence to allow him to raise a white flag? In many of James Carrions replies he requests that the individuals who wrote the online reports to NUFORC in support of Stan's sightingsprove that they are "real people." For some unfathomable reason he is now asking that any anonymous blog posters identify themselves as well? I am at a loss to see the relevance of blog posters to the evidence in this case. Any Tom, Dick or Harry can log onto a site and post a comment, it does not mean that they are not real; it does not show that they are connected to Stan Romanek in any way. The internet has become a device of disinformation as well as information. Many tactics are used to lend credibility to individuals as well as sneakily discredit with fictitious claims of knowledge that would support, in an effort to discredit. This is not a new strategy, it is just plain stupidity. And for individuals who are not able to discern the difference that make you gullible. No offense, I too wonder at many posts by individuals whom I do not know, who claim to know details that are incorrect. I ignore them as rubbish and move on, I understand some people want (or need) to have a connection to what is the big news for the day. I feel it is nothing more than that!Mr. Carrion wrote the following in his comment on October 10th, 2009 on the UFOnut.com site. The fact that the word fallow got mispelled in any single document or online posting is not the issue but that the mispelled word shows up in so many third party documents supporting Stan's claims -third parties that allegedly have no relationship or connection with Stan. What are the odds that all of these third parties mispelled this same word (in documents supportive of Stan), is due to chance? The Romanek's don't want you to mull this over using critical thinking but would rather try to refocus your attention on the word fallow being a commonly mispelled word. I don't buy their argument and I continue to consider it a red flag until one or more of these third parties come forward and prove themselves to be real people. Will the real John Mannon please step up? Not by posting again to the anonymous Internet but showing some ID in person so you can be verified to be a real physicist.Ok so let's break down Carrions reply a bit. He stated "The fact that the word fallow got misspelled in any single document or online posting is not the issue but that the misspelled word showed up in so many third party documents supporting Stan's claims -third partys that allegedly have no relationship or connection with Stan." First of all Mr. Carrion the correct spelling for misspelled is that there are two s's in it. It is my opinion if you are going to be so critical of other people's spelling errors, you should be damn sure your spelling is correct! You state in the opening sentence that the fact that the word follow (of which you chose to be like the online posters, and spelled it incorrectly as fallow...not so clever) was misspelled in any online or single doc. was not the issue. Sounds like you are making it part of your issue. Second, please be specific with what third party documents (many?) that you are talking about. Making broad general statements about many third party documents is not helping to rectify this debate. I see you wrote it as plural in that there is more than one document that you are referring to other than the Schriever AFB document. It is hard for people who may have knowledge of such "documents" to claim authorship of them if they do not know what you are referring to. Third, your comment, "What are the odd that all of these third parties misspelled this same word (in documents supportive to Stan), is due to chance?" Again what documents are you talking about? Without these alleged documents, this argument is moot to say the least. Fourth, you said, "The Romanek's don't want you to mull this over using critical thinking but would rather try to refocus your attention on the word fallow being a commonly mispelled word." It looks to me like you are the one who is focused on the word follow/fallow. How is this article showing that you (James Carrion) are not using critical thinking to prove anything-one way or another? It was not an attempt to refocus attention from the issue, it was an attempt to help you understand that "fallow" is a commonly misspelled word, and critical thinking WAS used to do so.Fifth, you state, "I don't buy their argument and I continue to consider it a red flag until one or more of these third parties come forward and prove themselves to be real people." As Stan's wife and using critical thinking I have taken it upon myself to contact the individuals who posted (some with Stan's assistance) reports on the NUFORC site, as well as Peter Davenport in regards to the September 21st 2001 sighting at Daniels Park near Castle Rock, Colorado. Please have your white flag ready, and let this be the end of this ridiculous argument once and for all. Feel free to contact any and all of the following witnesses for verification! I am glad that the NUFOC reporting site exists since reporting anything to MUFON seems to result in public criticism, attacks not only on the experiencers but also their families. I personally take offense at being attacked and called a liar! When an experiencers credibility is questioned and their integrity is questioned because of a misspelled word, and MUFON is connected to this behavior I am shocked and surprised that an organization of this magnitude would allow such an individual to continue in this very important position after such a blatant act of unprofessional and inappropriate conduct. Mr. Carrion,My name is Ann Romanek. I understand that there is confusion about my report in 2001 about a UFO sighting at Daniels Park which was one of the most astonishing and most startling experiences of my life. I requested at that time that my brother Stan Romanek type the report to NUFORC because I detest typing and I was intimidated by computers. I have been a MUFON volunteer for the past 4 to 5 years. I am appalled by your seemingly personal attack on those of us who wrote reports on what we witnessed and on my brother's credibility. I do understand that a number of MUFON investigators and members do not share your feelings on this matter nor do they share your opinions on the credibility of this case!Stan has recently asked that those who were there and reported anything on this experience that evening come forward and be heard, AGAIN! I and others who have witnessed these amazing UFOs are doing that now.I hope this isn't the way MUFON treats witnesses reporting these matters. It's a heck of a way to have the truth come forward.Ann RomanekP.S. Please notice in the NUFORC note at the bottom of my report that Mr. Davenport thanks Stan Romanek for submitting not only this report, but several other reports from other witnesses to this same event. See Here.- click on image(s) to enlarge -Mr. James CarrionMy name is Mark Stahl, I have been a volunteer for MICAP, MUFON and several other organizations for nearly 20 years and my contact information can be obtained through MUFON. I would like to address the issue that has recently come to my attention about a report that was submitted to NUFORC on my behalf in September 2001.I wrote a report of the UFO sighting that was witnessed by me and many other people at a night watch that I hosted in Sept. of 2001 at Daniels Park south of Denver, Colorado. I handwrote the report and asked Stan Romanek to help me post it on the reporting center website since I'm not that computer literate. I would like to state that I WAS at Daniels Park on September 21, 2001 and I DID file the report shortly afterwards. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me.Mark Stahl- click on image(s) to enlarge -I, Bob Bicksler, did submit a report to Peter Davenport at the UFO Reporting Center in Seattle, Washington about an incident that took place on September 21, 2001. It was about a happening at Daniels Park south of Denver and I interviewed two witnesses who were amazed at what they had seen. If you wish to know the details go to the UFO reporting Center September 22, 2001.That was my sworn testimony and I won't change a word of it. Signed, Bob Bicksler. - click on image(s) to enlarge -Lastly, I would like to address the John Mannon comment you made, "Will the real John Mannon please step up? Not by posting again to the anonymous Internet but showing some ID in person so you can be verified to be a real physicist." Where in this post does this person claim to be a physicist? If you have another post available with this claim please share that information as well.CommentFrom John Mannon 1-19-4:Hi Jeff -I have been enthralled with the Romanek case for some time now it is a great story. As I fallow his adventures on your site, I see something that others have missed. This is in response to Byron Guernsey's comment and star chart. I noticed that Stan Romanek's #6 equation is depicting Orion - but Orion is upside down Please see attached. (copied from www.rense.com See Here). I would also like to hear from John Mannon, but will not hold out hope for such a meeting. If this post was from 2004, I think it unlikely, but what an awesome challenge to an individual who wanted to make a simple comment. "The Truth Seeker" demands now that you prove that you are real or else... ? I would also like to meet the real "truth seeker" from the site, Follow The Magic Thread. Oh yes that is right James you are "the truth seeker." Let's see if you can accept the truth once it is presented to you or if you will continue to pursue this ridiculous issue instead of focusing on the real evidence in this case. You have a copy of the document from Schriever AFB, what have you learned of the authenticity of it? Tell us the "truth" of what your critical thinking had revealed! I would think that as MUFON's International Director you would have friends in high places that would pay to have it analyzed, again. Focus on the big picture, and stop making MUFON look bad by your actions. In conclusion I would like to share an email message from Peter Davenport, the Director of the NUFORC site. (National UFO Reporting Center www.UFOCenter.com or www.nuforc.org also, Hotline: 206-722-3000 (use only if the sighting has occurred within the last week)(An email communication between me and Peter Davenport)Hello Mr. Davenport,I know you are very busy and have a lot of messages to get through so I will keep this as short as possible. My name is Lisa Romanek, Stan's wife. I am writing to get your permission to post the full reports that Stan and other witnesses sent to you regarding the 9/21/2001 sighting at Daniels Park, and also if needed the 9/30/2001 reports as well. I am not sure if that is allowed or against your policy or not so I figured permission prior was easier than apologizing later.James Carrion MUFON International Director has taken issue with the fact that Stan posted reports for his sister and friend Mark on your site. He is very focused on the word follow misspelled fallow in some of the reports. We have asked that each person, who reported on your site for these sightings claim ownership of them (which they have) to prove to James Carrion that they are real people...he does not think they are regardless of our explaining that Stan did indeed file the reports for two of these witnesses - Ann Romanek and Mark Stahl on your site with them sitting next to him. (You even posted a note at the bottom that states that Stan helped them) Any further info you can recover for my quest would be greatly appreciated. Many Blessing for all your great work!Lisa RomanekHi, Lisa! "Thank you very much for your note,...and please convey my regards to Stan, if you would. Please feel free to use the reports, as you see fit. I would offer to return the original mailed copy of Stan's reports, but because of several computer failures, I suspect that they either are gone for good, or it would take a lot of time for me to find them. Hence, please feel free to copy them from the website.""I am very interested in having reports of all sightings, no matter when they occurred. My position is that if a serious-minded person sincerely believes that he/she has sighted a genuine UFO, that is information that should be 1) recorded, and 2) made available publicly. If you ever run into other folks, who have serious stories to tell, I would be most grateful if you would please direct them to our website, with encouragement to write down the details of the event. For your interest, Lisa, I estimate that out of 10,000 Americans who have been witness to a genuine UFO sighting, only perhaps one of those people has ever written it down! What's going on here?! Peter asks that if you have memory of, or if you have written down any sightings recent or not, please submit them to NUFORC National UFO Reporting Center's website, www.UFOCenter.com. More...CARRION'S REJOINDERI am getting wary of posting any more responses about the sinking ship that is the Stan Romanek saga. The Romanek marketing machine counter-attacks just highlight that they are in a serious credibility quandary from which they obviously have no intention of extracting themselves from, nor do they intend to release publicly their photo/video evidence for analysis. Their petty personal attacks and rallying of their faithful does not prove Stan's case and only reveals their very worn strategy of "thou does protest too much". Critical thinkers can see through Lisa and Stan's bolstering of their defenses as eluding the truth and my blog has already done enough damage to their credibility to sink a battleship. Unfortunately, they feel obliged to go down with the ship. Bon voyage. ThanksJamesSee Also:Lost in Space Stan Romanek:Point - Counterpoint With James Carrion Vs Rick Nelson SHARE YOUR UFO EXPERIENCEHELP SUPPORT THIS SITEABOUT DONATIONS Grab this Headline Animator

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Powered by Blogger.

Followers

Popular Posts

Blog Archive