Conversations With Ray Stanford (Part 1)by Ed Komarek 
It is and will be easy for the uninformed or marginally informed to dismiss these experiences as fraudulent or nuts but I find them fascinating in fleshing out the vastness of the contextual reality being experienced. This is not just about nuts and bolts craft and occupants but much more. I think Ray rightly feels his scientific work should stand independent of his personal experiences and on their own scientific merit regardless of his many fantastic personal lifetime experiences.
The separation of an individual’s scientific work from personal experience and belief is established scientific protocol. Advocating the mixing a scientist’s personal experience and beliefs with that person’s scientific work to discredit the scientific work is acting in a very unscientific, reckless and deceptive manner.)
It was obvious from the long conversation that Ray’s many-decades work in obtaining UFO hard data acceptable to mainstream science, and his preparation to present it to the scientific community, have not been liked by one or two individuals and groups that we agreed have past and/or present connections to the intelligence community. He was told in 1975 (at the Fort Smith UFO conference) by Phil Klass, that he, Ray, was the only person (in concert with Ray's organization) doing the kind of work (with instrumented UFO hard-data monitoring) that could potentially cause him to loose his (Klass's) bets that no scientifically acceptable evidence of alien technology visiting earth would ever be obtained.
Ray thinks he can succeed in bringing the instrument-recorded evidence collected over several decades to the scientific community and that it could usher the scientific approach to physical UFO studies into mainstream science. On the other hand Ray says some of his evidence (relevant to UFO intelligences and their possible significance to humanity) is very disturbing and that he has serious questions about its disclosure. He and I argued back and forth over the points pro and con for disclosure intensely at different times in the phone conversation.
Much of Ray’s personal experiences will, by his own intention, only be published after his death and I am sure that what he has to say is going to make for some very interesting and controversial reading. Meanwhile he hopes to present his propulsion-diagnostic, instrument-recorded evidence as soon as is practical in a credibly scientific manner to the scientific community. I for one hope he is able to do this and he should have the support of those of us who truly work for and understand the need for disclosure. I hope my friends and associates at OM will open a channel of communication with Ray and support him any way possible.
www.openmindsforum.com
| 
Today:
Printer
friendly version
