Wednesday, July 25, 2007

Majestic-12 document proponent Ryan S. Wood's press release concerning the new forensic condemnation of the MJ-12 documents warrants a read, as he raises some worthwhile points.

As I mentioned in my previous MJ-12 post, I suspect the documents will ultimately be proven to be bogus -- but almost certainly not because of the new study gathering attention.

(To see some of the controversial papers yourself, click here.)


Anonymous said...

I tend to sway, opinion-wise, on the MJ-12 documents. At times I think they are genuine, and reflect an actual investigation and recovery of a downed ufo, at other times, and more often, I fell that they were produced in the time frame they are purpoted to be from, that various individuals known in the military did sign off on them, and produce some of the material itself, but the whole thing was a highly sophisticated hoax, for purposes imortant to the cold war. Particularly as there is little in the actual documents that isn't known science. Whether or not known then. Unless I am wrong, and there happens to be some formuula in one of the documents, precisely worked out, for, oh, say, an element or metal that even today, we are unable to produce.

mr. intense said...

Can you say ...Richard C. Doty?

I knew you could. (re: Mr. Rogers)

Based on some pertinent research on the MJ-12 papers by Barry Greenwood (co-author of the important book "Clear Intent", now titled "The UFO Cover-Up" in paperback), specifically in his now discontinued newsletter "UFO Historical Revue" or UHR #3 (go to, a lengthy analytical article entitled "The Majestic-12 Follies Returns" notes, towards the end under a section entitled "Exhibit Four: Annual Extract," a story contained within the MJ-12 documents about the alleged 1915 disappearance of the "One Fourth Norfolk [brigade] in Turkey" into a misty cloud during WW1.

Greenwood points out, after providing historical details, that:

"Now in light of these facts, how is it that a 1952 MJ-12 document recounts a flawed version of a story, which was unknown before 1965, in fact a story unique to 1965, 13 years after the document's claimed authorship?????

"The MJ-12 version is based more upon 1960s UFO pulp and newsletter accounts than it is on historical record.

"And we can probably eliminate the original publication of the affidavit in Spaceview as a source because it cites the 28th of August as the date of the disappearance.

"In fact, I do recall seeing versions of the other disappearances mentioned in the MJ-12 Annual's page 13 in UFO pulp literature that I had read during that era.

"One cannot avoid the conclusion that the Annual is a complete fake. How is it that the Woods did not notice this in their years-long investigation? What does it say of the Woods' investigation? For all of the impressive appearance and content of the Annual, one small mention of an alleged 1915 disappearance brings it crashing down in a heap, an anachronism to the power of 12, MJ that is! Claims by the Woods about type style, language, format, security makings, signatures, and "zingers" supporting the documents now have a hollow quality. It makes one think that the legitimate use of such investigative techniques under more normal circumstances, and in more skilled hands, is worthless if they didn't work very well here.

"But we should remember that, according to the Woods, errors tend to support authenticity. With that, this gaping error in the Annual must prove its reality beyond all shadow of doubt!

"The Woods state that the Annual's discussion on control and denial is "possibly the most egregious outrage yet perpetrated on the world public." I can think of one other that comes close: the new MJ-12 document investigation by its supporters. For now, MJ-12 is again being promoted as genuine in lectures, on radio, on the Internet, and in a forthcoming book, with document copies being sold to an unsuspecting public.

"An old adage applies here, 'He who does not learn from the mistakes of history is doomed to repeat them!'

"A fantasy world of revisionist history is being promoted by the Woods, fed by unknown sources with suspicious paperwork. None of this has been verified, despite 12 years of searching by advocates. It remains to be seen how many more years it will continue to distract consumers from reality."

Quoted from Barry Greenwood's UHR #3, Jan. 1999 (

'Nuff said, I would think, for most of a rational turn of mind. For others, well, the will to believe is so strong sometimes that their analytical abilities are deeply affected by other personal and financial factors.

I discussed and provided the details above to Ryan Wood at a MUFON meeting and via email, and was disappointed he could not accept the facts unearthed by Greenwood, and attempted to claim that perhaps the Norfolk brigade reference may have been intentionally included to provide a form of plausible deniability, and did not disprove the legit authenticity of the "other" MJ-12 documents, which is an esoteric, triple-helix twisting of reality to serve personal ends related to the over $100K financing originally provided to the Woods by Joe Firmage at that time. I also spoke briefly to Joe Firmage about this at the same MUFON meeting in San Francisco, and provided him a copy of the Greenwood analysis, and asked if it were established that MJ-12 was a psyop, fake, or hoax, if that would cause him to revise his opinion about the legitimacy of MJ-12 in general. He told me no, it would not, and I suggested he review the docs I provided him, which had my name, address, and phone number noted on them for contact or feedback. I never heard from Firmage. This all should tell you quite a bit about the whole MJ-12 scenario. Brad Sparks will have much more to say about all this at the upcoming annual MUFON conference in August.

Lesson: Caveat Emptor