Monday, October 19, 2015

Stanton T. Friedman's letters from 1979 and 1980 on Billy Meier case in 'UFOs are Real' documentary


Nuclear Physicist Stanton T. Friedman requested (to no avail) that the segment in his 1979 documentary 'UFOs Are Real' dealing with the Meier case be removed. Here are two of the letters he sent to Group 1 Films (which produced the movie) and Wendelle Stevens, published by Korff on pgs. 105-107 in his 1981 book 'The Meier Incident: The Most Infamous Hoax in Ufology.'

Note: Portions of these letters not pertaining to the Meier case haven't been presented by Korff.

Letter 1:

Dear Brandon:                                                                                                                    Dec. 23, 1979

I wish to go officially on record as requesting that the Meier segment of the film be removed from the film. I have yet to see the movie but have also been completely unable to find any substantiation for the experience either from Wendelle Stevens, his associates, or anybody else in the world of UFOlogy. All four people who were at the screening on December 10 felt that the much better than expected, that it was probably the best UFO documentary ever made, and that the Meier segment leaves a very bad impression and should be removed. I should stress that all have many years of UFO interest, concern, and investigation behind them.

As I have stressed in numerous conversations with you, Ed, Mary Anne and others, I have been consistently distressed at Wendelle's unreliability as an investigator. Examples include the supposed but non-existent thousands of witnesses to the Ubatuba magnesium samples, the William Herrmann case documented in a previously supplied letter, the statement from Wendelle that that Marcel Vogel did not go to San Diego to announce the ET nature of the samples from Meier because of a conversation between Sagan and Vogel. No such conversation has taken place. Wendelle also misrepresented Jim Lorenzen's views about the Meier case. The book about the case is high on beauty but very low on documentation and also has errors of fact. Lorenzen's letter to the publisher's of Wendelle's book is enclosed. You have a German letter from Veit and also one from VonKeviczky both not accepting the Meier case even though both would very much like for it to be legitimate.

We knew the movie would bring attacks from the skeptics. I believe that the whole film will be tarnished by the implied acceptance of the Meier case. I think therefore that we will get attacks from friends. Do we really want them? I think sale of  the film to TV would be seriously jeopardized by the Meier segment. As you told me facts and documentation are what they for Meier other than from Wendelle and his heavily investing associates is totally lacking...

With the best wishes for the holiday season,
Stanton T. Friedman

Letter 2:

Dear Wendelle:                                                                                                             April 19, 1980

As I am sure you are unaware I have expressed very serious doubts about the validity of the Swiss pictures and have asked to no avail that that segment of UFOs Are Real be removed. It is not because I can at this time say that the pictures have been proven phony, but more that I am not satisfied that they have been established to be genuine. Unfortunately one of the main reasons is that your investigations seem to include as factual, many conjectures and extensions of reality. I find there to be an enormously important difference between what is and what might be. You seem to causually mix the two.

A good example is your investigation of the Herrmann case. Last June I wrote you asking for answers to a number of seemingly straight forward questions about your investigation. I have yet to receive a reply though you said you were working on it -- in San Diego in November...

Others have already raised a number of questions about the Swiss case and I suspect there will be even more raised in the future. I think the whole field of UFOlogy is done a great disservice by any publication embodying half truths, part truths, and untruths. They certainly lead to questions about profiteering, quick buck efforts, ethics, etc...

Stan Friedman