Wednesday, January 21, 2015
About those Blue Book UFO files... UPDATED
Ryan Mullahy posted the following in the Facebook group UFO UpDates:
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE PROJECT BLUE BOOK FILES:
So the UFO researchers in this group are really going to sit silently while "UFO researchers" and "journalists" re-write UFO history for the sake of promoting a website? The Truth About The Project Blue Book Files:
- The Blue Book files have been available to the public since 1976 or earlier in physical archives.
- 50,000 Project Blue Book documents have been available on line at Archivist Rebecca Wise's Project Blue Book Archive since January 2005.
- fold.3 has had 129,658 Project Blue Book files online since 2008.
- I guess to Alejandro Rojas 6 years is "a few years."
Alejandro Rojas also inaccurately claims in his article that users have to pay a fee to download Project Blue Book Files from fold.3. This is untrue. A user only has to create a free account on fold.3 in order to download Project Blue Books documents. (Alejandro has since added a note to his article correcting himself about downloading from fold.3.) At least Kevin Randle had the guts to speak up.
Both Project Blue Book Archive and fold.3 have been amazing resources to me as a researcher for years, as they should be to any serious researcher, and I don't think Project Blue Book Archive or fold.3 deserve to be misrepresented and to have their contribution swept under the rug in a wave of misinformation like this.
It's great that there is another online source for the Project Blue Book documents, and I have no issue with the Black Vault, but this announcement shouldn't come at a cost of misleading and untrue news stories and a quasi re-writing of UFO history for the sake of a titillating news headline and the promotion of a website.
For the record, I have been answering many questions from media and UFO fans about this. Tempests and teapots come to mind.
Many people are pointing out: "But at least it gets everyone talking about UFOs, and in major media!"
Of course, that's the same argument about why Tweeting "disclosure" to politicians is a valid reason to do so.
And.... on February 6, 2015, John Greenewald posted:
It's a shame that this is the type of corporation Ancestry.com is. Their recent show of this is quite apparent in their statement about me personally -- especially since I peacefully complied with their demands -- and their attack and label on my is nothing short of saddening and pathetic.
In short, it's a mess.