Stan Romanek’s Still Here. Why Don’t We Want Better?

You know who I can’t believe is still around in the UFO scene? Stan Romanek. He’s that alleged contactee who tried to sell some sort of ALF-puppet-in-a-window-combined-with-porn-bad-acting footage for $50,000 to a basic cable TV show. He once taped what to the untrained eye is a Chinese lantern floating over a park and said it was an alien spaceship. He bills himself as a nincompoop who can’t tie his own shoes and yet… and yet he has written two books and in the latest he talks about multiple timelines—physics—which the paper mache aliens from Planet Fucktard gave him, no doubt.

I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that he’s still around, but does he have to be on the main stage of UFO conferences? I mean, shouldn’t he be sitting at the kid’s table of New Age cons with the likes of Nancy Burson and whichever asshole is speaking to Buddhist dolphins about the energetic density of the human future? He belongs there, not on the same stage as intellectual heavyweights like Paola Harris, David Sereda, and Jaime Maussan.

Oh. Wait.

Well, I’m sitting here at my computer rummaging through old documents and I happen upon an article I wrote for UFO Magazine back when. It was going to be a review of Simple Stan’s first opus but I got bogged down by the fact that it was all nonsense and so instead I tried to do something more useful. More helpful. I used it as an example of how to look for bullshit when reading… um… bullshit. Here now I resurrect that article for your viewing pleasure. And if you want to overlay it atop Romanek’s latest or even his wife’s book—busy family of simpleton writers makin’ this look easy—feel free.

The article went something like this….


Stan Romanek’s Deceptive Messages

Paul:
You’ve got some pictures for me.
Billy Liar:
Yeah. This one is ‘Arlene.’ She is a Plajeren.
Paul:
That’s a mannequin.
Billy Liar:
No, that’s Arlene. She’s a Plajeren and–
Paul:
It looks like a mannequin.
Billy Liar:
Well, I mean, it’s a still photo, Paul. 

–Exchange from The Silent But Deadly Truthvolution of Truth

One of the perks of being a writer for UFO Magazine is that you are sometimes given free UFO-related books to review. One of the pitfalls, however, is that sometimes those books are Messages: The World’s Most Documented Extraterrestrial Contact Story, by Stan Romanek.

When you know a story is garbage before the story hits the printing press it’s hard to even crack the book open let alone review it. So I won’t review this and you can infer from that what you wish. I wish you’d infer that I knew the story was garbage before it hit print.

I did read the book, however, and so it behooves me to do something with it. I’ve decided to use it as an example of what to look for when judging whether a case of alleged alien contact is real or not. Well… potentially real is more like it. We can’t truly know unless we were there and even then it’s iffy. But we can stick our noses in the air and if we’ve learned how to sniff properly, discern that awkward smell of bologna.

The story revolves around Stan Romanek, a gosh, golly simple-folk kind of guy we are meant to believe is too stupid to pull off a hoax this multifaceted. After all, there’s video and photos and witnesses and answering machine messages from a computerized British female voice that might as well be the gal from your GPS system. In fact, right there on the book’s cover we’re told that this is, “The World’s Most Documented Extraterrestrial Contact Story.”

Move over, Billy Meier. Reawr…Cat fight!

Someone ought to alert Romanek’s webmaster that this is definitively the world’s most documented story, because his homepage reads: “The Stan Romanek case is possibly the most scientifically documented human/extraterrestrial encounters case in the world.”

Possibly?

Scientifically?

Case?

Oh, there’s so much wrong in one tiny sentence.

So how do we figure out what’s what with this case? We could ask the experts who have attached themselves to it. Luminaries in the field such as Jeff Peckman, who you may remember as the tall dude who went on Late Show with David Letterman to tell the world about Stan’s extraordinary video. Remember when Stan videotaped an alien peeping through his window? Yeah, whatever happened to that? Perhaps we’ll find out later in this article….

So Peckman must be legit, right? I mean he was on Letterman, and not as a Stupid Human Trick but as a genuine guest!

Let’s see what else Peckman is promoting. Perhaps that will shed some light on what he’s about.

On his website and at speaking engagements you can find him hocking a computer program that will cost you hundreds of dollars. It is called the Metatron Cosmic Peace Program ™.  According to his website, what this piece of shit does is:

“When downloaded onto your computer, the Metatron Cosmic Peace Program™ acts as a two-way mirror to support peace and harmony between human beings on Earth and intelligent beings not from Earth. Any negative intentions coming from any extraterrestrial intelligent beings will be transformed and reflected back to the extraterrestrial intelligent beings as love. Any negative intentions from human beings towards extraterrestrial intelligent beings will also be transformed and reflected back to the human beings as love.”

You can get it for your home, for your car—even take it on the go in a special card embedded with a computer chip.

That is the Romanek spokesman.

Now you might be thinking, Okay, fine, Mr. Vaeni. But that’s the spokesman. That’s not Romanek. That’s not the investigating team. What about those investigators?

Good call, reader. I happened to corner one of the former investigators at a conference. I sat down with Investigator X to hash out what’s what on this case. Here is what he told me:

Vaeni: So, Investigator X, you did some work on the Stan Romanek footage, right? What did you find?

Investigator X: I cannot talk about this.

Vaeni: Why not?

Investigator X: I signed a nondisclosure agreement barring me from talking about the case.

Vaeni: But other people talk about the case. Jeff Peckman talks about it all the time. Should we assume you found evidence of fraud?

Investigator X: I can’t talk about the case.

Vaeni: Well did you find anything that passed the smell test, or was extraterrestrial?

Investigator X: I can’t talk about it.

Vaeni: Do you find a conflict in Stan saying that he welcomes challenge because he really wants to know what’s going on and yet no investigator can challenge the case because they have to sign a nondisclosure agreement?

Investigator X: I can’t talk about it. Are you recording this?

Vaeni: No. Maybe. Why?

Investigator X: You’d better not use my name, if you print this. I’m serious, Vaeni. I cannot talk about it.

Vaeni: Crap!

Of course, reader, that conversation never took place but could you imagine if it had? I just did and it wasn’t pretty.

But now you’re probably like, Jer, I don’t have access to field investigators who cannot talk about the case. I don’t care that Jeff Peckman is a snake oil salesman. What about the footage itself? Stan’s got some photos in his book of aliens that traveled light years to practice intergalactic voyeurism on a man whose claim to fame is that he’s a simpleton who could not fake all of this. What about those photos?

Here my advice would be to use your eyes. That’s right, reader. Sometimes you have to use your own eyes. I know it’s fashionable to remain nonjudgmental because everything is allegedly a subjective experience and so who are we to say those aren’t real alien heads floating in the dark of night on a photocopy-quality black and white page, but… Donald Duck says your position on reality is not true. Donald Duck says he will never be real no matter how nonjudgmental you are. If it walks like a Donald Duck and quacks like a Donald Duck, it’s not aliens.

Okay, you’re right. Those photos do look a tad suspicious. But couldn’t someone be playing a trick on poor Stan? He does sound honest enough in interviews. You know… like the loveable simpleton who just wants to know what’s going on.

Well you got me there. Oh, except George Noory had him take a polygraph test for Coast To Coast AM, which he failed. Stan says he had a “blood sugar incident” (whatever that means), which interfered with the lie detector. He says he told the administrator this prior to the test and they went on with it anyway. The assumption being that the administrator had never heard of such a thing or was so unprofessional that he’d risk his reputation by going through with the test instead of rescheduling it.

But what if I just pick up the book and read it knowing nothing about any of this? How then does one tell if an alleged contactee or abductee is lying? 

Look for the little things, the mundane things, the things that don’t add up. For example, on page xxi (that’s page 1, paragraph 1 of the introduction) Stan explains how a Roper Poll shows that more than half of all Americans believe in aliens visiting earth. He then confesses that, “Until a few years ago, I was not only part of the 86 percent who had never seen a UFO, but would have counted myself among the half of those Americans who considered it all nonsense.”

On page 4, he really nails his message with:

“…. I can’t think of anyone less primed for my experiences than myself. It was as if God took the biggest skeptic—scratch that, the biggest cynic—on the subject of UFOs he could find and put him right in the center of the craziest experience anyone could have.”

Then on the next page, page 5, we learn that—wait a second—Romanek’s  family has been plagued by UFO incidents so otherworldly that his dad started buying bottled water for no discernible reason. Like maybe the end of the world is coming? We’ll never know; we can only imply. Dad won’t talk about it.

And, oh, after one UFO incident, a strange, alien-like lady interacts with young Simple Stanly until mom comes along and breaks it up. Not to fear. His ethereal guardian shows up again some years later. And a third time, at age 10, when she telepathically communicates to him, “’You know, you’re a special little boy’ …. ‘You’re part of us… and we’re a part of you. (Page 9)’”

That’s God’s biggest skeptic—nay, cynic. We’re not even up to page 10.

It’s on page 17, after we’ve forgotten what we’ve just read and been walked through Stan’s first UFO encounter as an adult, that he reminds us, “It was not an easy transition going from hard-nosed skeptic to unwilling but resigned believer in one step, but it can be done.”

It can be. But it wasn’t. Remember the first 9 pages, Stan?! Okay, never mind. If he doesn’t care about continuity, why should we? But the very next sentence on page 17 we cannot ignore, for here he is talking about what that initial adult UFO experience made him think. He, who has zero interest in ufology. He who until now, despite repeated alien incidents in childhood, has paid no attention to ufology—here is what his brain produced as a reaction:

“The experience also got me thinking about the whole UFO phenomenon in general. It made me wonder what is it about human society that makes so many people unwilling to even consider the possibility that UFOs might be real, especially in light of the reams of documentation and overwhelming evidence to support the phenomenon.”

Alright, reader. You pick it out. You pick out the problem there. Take a moment. I’ll wait….

…. Time’s up. Did you guess, It’s so highly unlikely as to be impossible that the most hardened skeptic/cynic/ignorer of all things UFO would ponder after his first UFO encounter how it is that society ignores the reams of documents and overwhelming evidence in support of UFOs? If so, pat yourself on the back. Someone with no knowledge or interest in a subject would not immediately realize there are reams of documents everyone’s ignoring. Sorry. The smell test has spoken.

I can go on and on but let me give you just one more. You may think this is Phil Klass-style nitpicking but really think about it here.

After numerous experiences involving aliens and organized human surveillance and now being “investigated” by one Clay Roberts, I think it’s fair to assume that Simple Stan may have read with his finger or had read to him a book or five on UFOs and alien abductions. So, when a mysterious British computerized voice shows up on his answering machine and refers to him as “Starseed,” you will be forgiven if you question Stan’s reaction on page 138:

“The message was also puzzling in what it said about me. She called me ‘Starseed’—whatever that means—and told me I am different and to ‘not be afraid of what I am.’ But how was I different? What did it all mean? The question continues to haunt me to this day.”

Well, Stan, I’m no Ingo Swann, but I think she might be referring to that conversation you had with the telepathic woman as a child where she told you, “’You know, you’re a special little boy’ …. ‘You’re part of us… and we’re a part of you.’”

Really? At this point you don’t know what starseed means? I mean even to this day? You didn’t Google search it? Clay didn’t tell you? Nothing? You couldn’t even just, in your own head, pick apart the component words “star” and “seed” to figure out what they might mean together in conjunction with you?

Still haven’t done that? Still?!

Wow, Stan. You’re right. You are a simpleton. Thankfully, this is America and even the simple can make big bucks, because for me personally, the BS detector goes off before the story even starts. For me, it’s right there in the acknowledgements where you thank your agent. Where you thank Clay Roberts for his tireless dedication and work on the documentary film that is forthcoming. It goes off when I read your Twitter notes informing your fans of your speaking engagements and cross-country book tour.

The simpleton is on tour and has a movie coming out.  The simpleton has not released the paradigm-shattering video footage of the alien in his window that Jeff Peckman raved about on Letterman. Some footage may have been leaked to Youtube. It’s unclear if that’s the real footage. If it is, you might want to rethink the documentary, Clay, because that looks no more realistic than a screensaver. But I’m sure you’ll weed out any investigators who might be inclined to say that with nondisclosure agreements.

That’s how this is done. Everyone goes home a financial winner. How they sleep at night we’ll never know but be certain the insomnia isn’t due to alien interference.

Advertisements

52 thoughts on “Stan Romanek’s Still Here. Why Don’t We Want Better?

  1. I think Romanek’s case appeals as it covers so many bases; UFO’s, Alien abductions, Hybrids, Shadow people, Orbs, strange equations written when asleep etc. that it makes such a good a good story we want it to be true.
    There’s so many pieces of ‘evidence’ in the form of photo’s and film clips that if you think one’s hokey, there’ll always be another one along in a minute.
    Personally I am open to hear about his latest experiences and see the latest photo or film clip partially because I’d like it all to be true.
    I wouldn’t ‘hang my hat’ on his case, as it were, because it does push the boundaries of belief, and seems to be following a linear narrative; UFO’s sighted, abduction, hybrids and now angelic beings etc.
    Funnily enough, the UFO I sighted that looked 2D and completely fake, was experienced by me whilst listening to a podcast interview with Stan on my mp3 player.
    What do I make of that? Was the phenomena showing a sense of humour?
    Was the phenomena telling me Romanek’s a faker by showing me a UFO that looked fake whilst I listened to an interview with him? Or was it telling me that this phenomena can show itself in ways that look unbelievable and fake to convince me to give Stan the benefit of the doubt?
    Or was it totally unconnected and I’m reading too much into it?
    As we know, this phenomena leads to more questions than answers and is more bizarre, fractured and non-linear than can be constructed into a nicely fitting story such as the one Romanek presents but it’s just so appealing and ticks so many boxes that it’s hard not to want to see what comes next.

    • What comes next is a large payday to people laughing at you while you give them your money. You don’t have to give him the benefit of the doubt. Use your eyes and your common sense. There’s no doubt. You’re an actor, Joe. SPOT THE BAD ACTING.

      • Granted his reaction in the video is pretty hokey but I wouldn’t judge his whole case on that one video. Like I say, I wouldn’t hang my hat on his case, but it does interest me.
        Is there a large payday from publishing 2 books?
        What about the other witnesses to the weird stuff going on in his house?
        Video wise: What do you make of the video of the orb light that comes over his house and then goes into the house?

      • 4 books including his wife’s and the transcript of his hypnosis sessions.

        Yes, there is a large payday when you get on national TV shows to promote them. He is an “international best-selling author.” That part I believe.

        Plus speaking engagements, documentaries, donations for further “research,” selling rights to the “alien” video for $50,000 a pop and the bet that it will become a Hollywood movie at some point. And whatever he sells the rights to footage for to 3rd party documentaries and TV shows around the world.

        Look at where Simple Stan used to live and look at his place now. He’s done pretty well for himself. What’s he do for a living? This.

        Witnesses to things? Who are they? Are they in on it? Are they being duped? Do they even exist?

        That video of an orb coming over the house and going inside… I don’t make anything of it other than I don’t assume they are the same light.

        There are so many things wrong with his story and that alien footage–How does one overlook that to say “Well, maybe that’s nonsense, but this other stuff…” I’m sorry, what?–It’s Billy Meier all over again. It’s embarrassing.

        Joke’s over. Step out of the flaming poo, people.

      • I really don’t think there’s that much money in what he’s been doing for the past few years. If you extrapolate what he may have earned over the years he’s been doing it would it be more than he could’ve worked doing a normal job?
        As far as I know, no-ones bought his footage for $50,000 unless you know different?
        I know what you’re saying in regards to his footage and my common sense alarm does go off with some of his ‘evidence’ and stories, especially his recent tales of ascended beings and the like and, as I’ve said, how it seems to fit a nice narrative. I haven’t read his latest book and only know about his recent experiences from what I’ve heard in interviews. I’ll have to see exactly what he is now presenting and then decide what I make of it. I’m open to see his latest footage. I guess it’s easy to paper over the cracks of doubt and disbelief with the desire for his tale to be true.

      • If you are just going to ignore everything then why are we having this discussion? Sounds like your mind is made up to believe him even whether YOU think he’s telling the truth or not. That’s the most ludicrous thing I’ve ever heard and yet… I like it! lol

        You’re being way short-sighted with the money thing. We know his first book was an international best seller. BANK. Then he did something really smart for a simpleton–having a huge cult following, he started self-publishing his books. JACKPOT. And he’s trying to turn his makeshift publication name into a real publisher for other authors. BANK. I don’t know if he sold the footage for $50,000 but each bit that he does sell the rights to is going to rake in hundreds or thousand of dollars depending on the clip, the length, or however he determines that. It’s not like documentary and TV producers can just take his videos from youtube. They have to purchase the rights. So, even if he’s on, say 20/20 for free (publicity) he’s making money from their use of his footage. BANK.

        The real test is–What does he do for a living? I’m guessing… nothing. He does this.

        I had the misfortune of being in James Carman’s documentary “The Hidden Hand.” I don’t remember how much I was paid–but I was paid. I think under a hundred bucks, but I don’t recall. It was long ago when we filmed. In any event, let’s say it was $65 because that sounds right. Now how many documentaries has Stan appeared in around the world? x65?

        How many lectures has he spoken at and been paid for and sold books on top of that? How many book store signings is he doing for each book?

        Check out his calendar. Pretty full. This IS his full time job. Doesn’t mean he’s a millionaire. But he doesn’t have to be. He just has to get by. For more on that, please see Bassett, Stephen. I would be absolutely shocked if the Romaneks weren’t far wealthier than he is and he doesn’t do anything for a living.

        UFO Lobbyist? Sweetest gig on the planet.

      • If I remember correctly I think he’s said in past interviews that he’s on disability welfare, so I guess he gets by ok if he’s on that as well as getting money from his appearances etc.
        It’s not that I believe him despite being unsure if he’s telling the truth or not, I have suspicions and doubts about him and his case (which are increasing the more I hear about his evolving experiences and the vibe I pick up off him when I see him interviewed in clips) but as with a lot of cases, I’m interested to see where they are headed and am open to see the evidence they present.
        The desire for it to be true is a powerful one.
        Maybe I do need to put that desire to one side and be more critical than I am with his case.
        I was thinking yesterday “Stan has so much evidence on film and photo’s etc.”
        But maybe that’s the problem. He has too much.
        The only evidence Whitley has presented apart from his and others testimonies, is his apparent implant and yet his experiences hold much more weight for me than Romanek’s with all his photo’s and film clips.
        The whole field of the paranormal is an odd one (in many ways!) there are so many fakers and hoaxers and even having a lifetime of personal experiences, I still question them and my interpretation of them and wonder at times if I’m deluding myself with my own interpretation of what I’ve experienced.
        I guess the things the cases I give credence to and even my own have in common are that they do not have a linear structure, they are fractured, disjointed and do not follow a nice narrative.
        Maybe that’s a good yardstick to judge others cases with; How fractured or linear they are?

      • Maybe it fits with any theory based on intangibility, though. Like Jeff’s notion that the material from another dimension would evaporate. All you’re left with are memories.

  2. I think believing in UFOs leaves a lot of questions open to begin with….so it doesn’t surprise me that you would question others, even though you believe in them (UFOs). I guess what is important here is the fact that you still believe they exist; with or without Stan’s story being around. But I don’t know why you are so exhaustingly negative; I would hate for you to be treated that way by non-believers of UFOs.

    • I’m not sure what you mean by “exhaustingly negative.” If you’re asking why I get pissed off at and do my best to expose nonsense like this, it’s because I’m not a believer in anything. I am an experiencer of this very thing and so to have charlatans make a mockery of this delicate, important, and truly deep subject for their own profit? Yeah, that bothers me. It affects my life and it’s a good portion of the reason many non-believers do treat us this way.

      • So you’re upset that people believe and are intrigued by his story and experiences and not yours? Sounds like you’re just a little bit jealous, which to me isn’t the same thing as pissed off. I watched the documentary and there’s a lot of backup to the story not only by people he has no relationship with he’s also got the audio and photos which have all been looked at by people who are credible and have no ties to him. Even if it is a hoax, Bravo Mr. Stan I’ll pay to see your story.

      • Gee, you really get it.

        Thank you for the last line. It saves me the trouble of having to explain anything further to you.

      • this is the BEST freeking article I’ve read in a long time man, Thanks for putting everything I’ve been thinking about this ass clown in one nice little package.

    • exhaustingly negative????!!!! if that’s the case, he has every right to be. stan romanek and his dodgy bullshit laden story continues to only further marginalize the subject of ufology. ufology on it’s best day faces steep uphill battles to make any ground. good, credible witnesses and researchers have sacraficed much if not all to give this subject even the slightest hint of legitimacy. stan romanek and his cohorts are bastardizing all of the legit ground work done by these good and honest investigators and witnesses, so it’s hard not to be negative when so many people cannot see what, to me, is such a blindingly obvious hoax of a story. it is disheartening to say the least to see people latch on to this garbage when there is a plethora of “solidly grounded” cases to research. shame on simple stan and his clowny clan.

  3. Jayvay,
    I have been following the Romanek story for a few years now, and have to disagree wholeheartedly with your view of this “case.” And yes it is considered a case, open and active. Denver MUFON were the first to investigate, and did so for many years. There is so much more to this case than Romanek’s brief association with Peckman, and he is not the spokesman for the Romanek’s. Peckman’s ambitions and behavior were for Peckman, as he was trying to create an Extraterrestrial Affairs Committee in Denver. And no matter what my personal views are on the matter, I can look past the strangeness of how Peckman went about it, but not the negative chaos he left in his wake. I feel a bit sorry for Stan Romanek for being used in such a manner by Mr. Peckman. His efforts to launch himself off of Stan’s evidence was shocking to say the least. But again, it happened, and nothing can be done to undo the damage that Peckamn created in his wake.

    You spout that this case is a hoax,what proof do you have to back up your verbal rampages? NONE! Have you ever attended a lecture, or are you among the Vicious TROLLS that simple believe what they read on the Internet? As far as the important people you mentioned, contact Paola Harris, or even Jaime Maussan and ask them their opinion of Stan Romanek, I dare you! They are Romanek supporters, and for good reason, they have taken the time to get to know these people, and to spend time doing the research independently, unlike TROLLS like you!

    Investigator X, really? Why can’t you call him by name? Is it that he reuses to allow you to do so? Did Investigator X tell you that he was an investigator on this case? When and for how long? What damning evidence did he tell you about that would even prompt you to USE him, in such a way as to cause damage not only to his reputation but to Stan’s as well??? You sir, are the lowest of the low, the poor lost soul who can’t get attention for good, so you are just plain nasty to people. I listened to you program, ONCE and that was enough for me, I also found you ranting on YouTube. By the way, what a pathetic attempt for attention, on your part. You are a vile individual, who attacks and denounces what scares you the most…TRUTH. Why do you continue to attack Mr. Romanek, without a shred of proof to back up your BS claims? Not to mention how you are throwing your friend, Investigator X your partner under the bus!

    • Alysan, thank you for the entertaining words. Just FYI, Paola Harris and Jaime Maussan are completely full of shit, too. So, that’s not really a dare in the way that you meant it.

      And when I say they, like the Romaneks, are full of shit, what I mean by that is DO YOUR OWN FUCKING HOMEWORK, DEAR. Google is your friend. Research the researchers. Or don’t. Just remember: There are no sacred cows in this field, only cows. (Insert fat joke about me here.) And a whole lotta bull.

      I gotta say, though, I clearly pointed out a slew of discrepancies in Stan’s book that you completely ignored. I’m not too optimistic that you’ll be able to figure any of this out here. Come on now. http://www.google.com – A whole world is waiting for you. Just use it. Witness the miracle for yourself.

  4. “Well you got me there. Oh, except George Noory had him take a polygraph test for Coast To Coast AM, which he failed.” Yes, George Noory did report that Stan failed the polygraph, but I have a question for you. Could you pass one? All or nothing? If the examiner asks you the same question repeatedly in this manner, “Was the alien in the window video faked?” And the reply is “no” 4 times over, with truthful readings, yet, the examiner REFUSED to EVER ask Romanek, did you fake the video! Regardless of that, he has said in interviews, that the more he was asked this question the more he questioned if someone had played a trick on him, finally after asking the same question another 4-5 times, Stan shared that he said, It was not faked by me, but I can’t be positive that it wasn’t someone didn’t do this to scare me, or trick me. The examiner, told him, to only answer yes or no. How can you do that, if you are questioning the question asked? One questioned and Noory deemed it failed, not inconclusive. As for the sugar thing, I have no idea. And it is my opinion that Mr. Noory is not who he seems.
    You are the simpleton Jeremy, How many books have you written? Are you getting rich off of them? I checked them out today, and see nothing but bad reviews. You talk in circle, and bully people into believing what ever you vomit out.
    Urgency. by Jeremy Vaeni (Mar 29, 2011) And your “partner” did you cover art, how sweet is that…ahhh. One review : This ‘book’ is only the constant whining of a fool who has had ‘an experience’ and then must, above all else, tells us over and over and over again how special he is. It’s an old old problem. Vaeni wants to be one of humanity’s ‘elder brothers’ – but he has neither the ability or the heart, warmth and real compassion that is required.
    I Know Why The Aliens Don’t Land! This one made me giggle a bit, his is not a book. It is a collection of words thrown on paper in an attempt to be clever. It is total trash. My copy is now swimming with the remnants of rain in the bottom of my garbage can. Who did he pay to write the above reviews????Has no business being listed with books on UFO’s.
    After taking a quick peek inside, I was slapped in the face by why you are suck a nasty bastard, well no, I know know your excuse for being a nasty bastard. Mommy and Daddy divorced, you were molested, and had to sleep with mom for forever. And the poor little boy, developed an inability to pee, because of the divorce and molestation…but he didn’t realize that until he was much older.
    Sound much like what Stan was talking about to me, that as a child you don’t dwell on the reason why you have fear, and eventually it fades away. Only;y to be brought back full force by an event later in life, but it still makes you question your memory of the events, as well as if you believed them at all.
    I do my research, and again disagree with you about Ms. Harris and Maussan, as do you apparently. Simpleton??? Yes, dear you are.
    “He belongs there, not on the same stage as intellectual heavyweights like Paola Harris, David Sereda, and Jaime Maussan.” You ramble so much JUNK, you can’t even remember what you said.

    Joe Gooch, please don’t let this MORON, think for you, we have enough of that going on . Most of what Jeremy ranted here is false, or embellished, I chose to remain skeptical of all things. Oh well. By the way, I am impressed by only one thing,Jeremy, you posted my comment!

    • Alysan, of course I posted your comment. I told you, I find you entertaining. I’m just glad you had an encore! That was TOTALLY worth it. Your eye for sarcasm in quoting my article is rivaled only by your eye for facts. I’m impressed that God’s elves still make humans like you in the factory. I’m gonna feel horrible when I find out I’m hurting the feelings of a teenager.

      Are you an adult? I’m asking that seriously. If not I 100% completely and totally apologize. I would never get nasty with a kid. But it’s hard to tell if you’re a kid or a moron, Alysan. This really could go either way.

      Either way, take my advice: Don’t suck down a packet of Spirulina and then chug water. Results may vary but none of them are good. I’m just trying to help.

  5. Alysan, I don’t let Jeremy or anyone else think for me. What I do is take on board good points that people make. That’s how we evolve our own thoughts. Jeremy makes good points and has insights that I value and appreciate.
    If we set out with our own agenda and rigid beliefs and turn a disagreement of points and views into an excuse for personal attacks (which seems to be a popular cowardly game on internet forums) then our thoughts become stagnant and we react with insecurity when our rigid belief or view is challenged because close mindedness has left us with nowhere except defensive overreaction and in turn, offensiveness.
    Question everything, be it the claims and evidence by someone such as Romanek, or the views of ‘experts’ researchers or organisations that set themselves up as an authority.
    You may disagree with Jeremy’s points and insights but resorting to the kind of personal attacks and comments you have posted only reveals your own shortcomings. Which may, as Jeremy points out, be due to your age.
    Jeremy doesn’t need me to defend him, he’s secure and witty enough to do that himself. But, seeing as you mentioned me by name I wanted to comment, even though I suspect it’s just a ploy to get a reaction from someone else as a means of attention. I hope I’m wrong but any subsequent comments you post will reveal your intention.

  6. To those of you p[osting here standing up for Stan, I know his best friend from high school and his sioster Ann and I can tell you that the so-called witnesses are indeed a small group; They have all known Stan there whole life, there are no independent witnesses.

    The voice on his recorder can be downloaded from the Internet. It is designed to be used on old fashioned answering machines or be used on new hi-tech cell phones for messaging. The people around Stan (and there are few) are all hard core believers going back to childhood, so that should tell you something.

    I asked several times if I could go to Stan’s house and see for myself.what was going on. He refused. He knows that I do video production for a living. So he knows I could spot a fake. But guess what? I can tell you the boo video was a cheap trick by him. If you saw the video that I was snuck into a forum to see, you can see why he does not want too many people to see all of his evidence.

    Stan was speaking back in 2010 at The Paranormal Forum here in Colorado and is hosted by Rick Nelsen (more on him in a minute). I was allowed because the regular person taking money at the door was sick. The replacement did not know who I was so she took my money and let me in. According to a person close to Stan, I was not to be allowed in whenever he was speaking due to my “negative vibes.” Well I sat in the back and watched as clearly computer animated video was shown of an alien going up to a house which was obviously was a 3-D model. The camera follows the alien up to the window and then the camera actually goes through the wall into the house! The video then changes to a real house, the same on you see in the boo video and you can see Stan react and all that. Then it cuts back to the 3-D scene from real life and the camera moves through the window and follows the alien as he walks away on a 3-D landscape!

    Abiout ten people said it was a fake and gort up and left, but the true believers were in awe. The lady sitting next to me was from Pyschology Today. She just laughed and said that this is why UFO believers were mentally ill.

    You can bet saner heads prevalied and stopped Stan from showing that video pubicly. In fact the guy who runs the forum (who was not there that night or I would not have gotten in) is former Naval Intelligence and started Stan down this road to fame and infamy!

    Another thing, that thing that Stan saw on the hogback (as they call in Jefferson County, Colorado) was a Lockheed project. If you look close you can see someone standing on that platform. Defense contractors have been working for years on low altitude manned personal platforms for military and law enforcement use. The reason I know this is when Stan was speaking a local UFO video show, two guys from Lockheed Martin’s security division showed up and try tot ell Stand and the others around him of what they saw, they did not want to listen.

    Stan makes a lot of claims that he says scientists back him up. Well, what scientists? Oh yes, those one’s that are true believers in UFO’s that have no unbias training to their credit. Using those scientists is like a persons saying, “Well, my mom says I’m the best piano player in town!” Well, you’re mom wills ay anything for you, and so will these biased scientists for Stan. Do you know that anybody who wants to look at Stan’s stuff has to sign a non-disclosure agreement?

    Oh, then there are those nice MUFOn guys who back up Stan’s claims. Once again these guys have known Stan and those around him for years. In fact Stan’s best friend from high school volunteers for these MUFON people at the yearly Colorado MUFOn symposium.

    Hmm.. How unbiased do you suppose they are?

    Stan is also good and incorporating other peoples experiences into his own, which makes him all the more a fraud. In fact I don’t think there is one original thing in his whole experience. I think he has pulled all of this from movies, books, tv shows, and of course, other peoples experiences. I should know since I had an experience in 2008 whil in Pennsylvania while driving a car back that I bought on Ebay. I saw several lights in the sky that moved closer and then farther away.

    I told Stan’s best friend this story, and guess who had come in and sat down behind us without me knowing? Of course Stan! Couple years later all of the sudden Stan has this very same experience and while driving back to Colorado, though he moved his experience to the Pennsylvania-Ohio border. i guess I can tell you the name of his best friend since if you’ve read the book you know his name is Mark. He is a nice guy, but I think that Stan can manipulate him. Hey, what best friend can’t?

    Anyway I remember the time frame very well and there is no way that Mark was with him if he went, because Mark has no money and was just about to become homeless and was volunteering at MUFON and Rick Nelsen’s Paranormal forum, which the week of this supposed incident, Mark was at the Paranormal Forum, which makes it highly unlikely that he was in Pennsylvania with Stan. I should know because the week that this happened I was in Pennsylvania and when I got back I asked Mark who spoke at Rick’s Paranormal Forum and he told me. SO if he was in Pennsylvania, don’t you think that he would say he wasn’t there are he was with Stan?

    So I think that it is safe to say that Stan pulls from others experiences. Mark to this day never claimed that he has been adbucted and if you ask him about the Pennsylvania trip, he will change the subject.

    The other nonsense that can be explained away is that stupid light going in and out of his house. If nayone botherd to check you would find that orange light can be found in Microsoft’s software development kit. Duh! I saw that one right away.

    The other problem I have is his continual talk of police reports. Well guess what? Not one of those reports is public including the one of him being assaulted before Christmas 2004.There is also the shooting that he claims happened to him and yet no police report. What gives? A police report amd witnesses would prove that something is happening to him. He claims that this happened where he worked, but nobody saw this until he; “Stumbled” into work? Come on!

    If you read his book all the way through like I have you will find out that it is some of the worst fiction out there. he probably should have asked Whitley Strieber or Stephen King to right it for him. As far as him being a best seller, we only have him to go on for that. Unless I see receipts for book deliveries to book stores I will continue to believe that he has sold very few books. Go to any book store and you will see one maybe two copies of his book. I asked my local Barnes and Nobles clerk how many they have sold at that store and she said maybe a dozen or so.

    Best seller my ass! Now how does he get by then? Well for one Mark (his best friend) told me that he went out on social security disability due to being hypoglycemic!

    I am willing that this point to believe and to suggest to all of you that he is some kind of mind controls ubject and that the military is involved.

    Remember that he grew up on military bases due to his father being in the Air Force. He supposedly had contact with an alien as a child but could not remember it (convienent) until he was hypnotically regressed (False satanic abuse, anyone?) and found to have been contacted.

    Then later in life he makes friends with two people who are both former military intelligence, one of whom I have not spoken about, but the other is Rick Nelsen who admits publicly that he is former Naval Intelligence and the other is a so-called “witness” at his home by the name of Bob Bixler, a strange character who flew special forces soldiers into North Vietnam. Do you know those piolts work for that did that? Military intelligence!

    These two military intelilgence agents have worked with Stan and “observed” his sightings and other happenings since that day at Daniels Park.

    Stan likes to hype things a bit. For one, Lisa came to one of the monthly video shows with the kids but without Stan and said that Lyons Gate enterntainment was looking at doing Stan’s documentary. Guess what? Lyon’s Gate has never heard of Stan except what they have heard on the Internet and on tv. I emailed them and asked them when the documentary was coming out because i wanted first dibs so I could dissect it, they replied that they have no contract with and have not been contacted or have contacted Stan or anyone associated with him about any documentary. The group he has doing the docunentary is a group called J3 I think. I went to their web site and they are a low budget if any budget indepedent film company with a couple of short dcouemntaries on UFO’s shown at UFo seminars.

    See how he hypes this crap and then it blows apart!

    Also, Stan used to work in the computer field repairing computers, or so he says. But if so, it makes everything more suspicious because he probalbly knows how to manipulate images, manipulate sound, and with the suspicious evidence, it makes his credibility all the more suspect.

    There are about a million things wrong with this case, but I think that I have presented enough for now. The best thing to do is look at his evidence in his books cloesly and ask yourself if you have read this stuff before, I’ll bet you have.

  7. I find it amusing that so called “serious” writers immediately call into question any witness or experiencer who makes money from their experiences. It’s okay for you to be a whore and make money from THEIR experiences, but God forbid they make some for themselves. Your sanctimonious mewlings compel me to diacard your opinion like an old piece of fish. Your complete disregard for the complete body of evidence, and your obvious unfamiliarity with the high strangeness that is found throughout the phenomena, make you a dullard. You’re worse than the hoaxers and the disinformation artists. Thank God no serious minded person would read your crap. I’m sorry I wasted 5 minutes of my time.
    Stan Romaneck’s story may or may not be true, but we’ll never know if all get from the so called “media” is armchair, ad hominen attacks written by third grade level essayists with an obvious “I’m poor and he’s not!” Agenda. Crawl back under the slimy rock you came from. Please.

  8. This is an awesome comment thread and I am so happy to have found this site! And I’m super high and drunk right now! Also, Stan is a goof and a kook. His two-hour presentation on The YouTube is absurd and entertaining. Quixotic and picaresque. If it was a meal, it wouldn’t be salubrious.

  9. Wow… as good as the article is… the comments are even better! Not to give anyone undue insight in to my boring life but this was the most fun I’ve had in days! Jayvay, well done; both the article and your replies.

  10. I detect a lot of hate from a debunker. Stan Romanek might be wrong. However, personal attacks are only going to help his cause. A lot of people suffer from alien abductions and they have to listen to some debunkers giggle and make fun of them. I repeat, no one is forcing you to read Stan’s books or watch his movies.

    • Maybe it’s time you stop detecting blindly and actually read, for instance, the post you are commenting on. This is a writer’s medium, after all. It’s not too much to ask. Or, if you simply don’t have time to read the things you’re commenting on, you could always learn who the author is before assuming he’s a debunker. Actually, that sounds like even more work than reading this thing. Never mind.

      How about this new rule: whenever you read a critical essay pointing out facts that are antithetical to what you want to believe about a man with a puppet in his window you don’t assume A.) the author is a debunker and B.) the puppet master merely “might be wrong.”

      If I were an abductee–and how could you possibly know if I considered myself one, right?–It’s not like you could plug my name into Google or read anything else on this site–but if I were, I’d be debunking this because it’s FUCKING OFFENSIVE TO ANYONE WITH A REAL FUCKING EXPERIENCE IN THIS.

      When are the ufological fanboys and girls going to wake up and realize that if we were talking about rape or cancer or slavery or any of the other topics of serious global and personal consequence we would never in a million years applaud fake victims or phony grandstanding before Congress by a cottage industry thumping their chests and shedding crocodile tears so they can stand on a stage for a living? We loath politicians but we love fake political organizations–is that it? We say “alien abduction is real! Take this seriously!” while pointing to and defending, by way of example, the most fraudulent characters in the field.

      Is that really what you want? Maybe it’s time to use your powers of discernment and actually care about the things you claim to care about.

  11. Jayvay – Here’s something interesting that proves Stan Romanek is a fake.

    Listen to this interview:
    http://www.blogtalkradio.com/ufo_radio/2010/01/23/stan-romanek-abduction-evidence

    21:11 – you hear Stan (thinking he’s off air) accidently play a recorded voice that says “…keep your mouth…”
    29:28 – you finally hear the recorded voice saying ”you need to learn to keep your mouth shut’; then he says “what was that?” and suddenly the line goes died.

    haha funny!!!! give it a listen please.

  12. I don’t know if you’ve heard this but here it is if you havnt….
    At 21.10 you hear stan setting up his recorded voice when he thinks he’s off air and then plays it at 29… I believe everybody who is working with him is in on the scam. He’s a fantastic actor tho ill give him that… But his story is scripted as you hear it’s word for word each time he tells it. Listen to it for yourself….
    http://www.blogtalkradio.com/ufo_radio/2010/01/23/stan-romanek-abduction-evidence

    • Wooooow, that’s terrible. and yet here he stands at podiums across the world. I must disagree with you, though, Jimmy. He’s a horrible actor. And here we see a horrible sound effects operator as well.

      WHY IS HE STILL ALLOWED TO SPEAK? Oh, because he draws a crowd, which makes money for conference promoters and garners ratings for radio shows/podcasts.

      Brought to you by the people who scream “This is a science!” And digested by an audience incapable of demanding better.

      Thanks for the link and the comments.

    • I don’t cuz I’m not a video analyst, but my initial reaction? It’s a balloon or a Chinese lantern. Maybe a remote-controlled one. “glowing” is the magic of night vision.

  13. Hi Gay jayvay,I only see here that you have failed to make a case against Mr Romaneks claims and what’s worse it comes across as a cheap dig and a flawed attempt to ridicule someone simply because the idea of an Alien presence and interaction with an Earthling (any) shatters your paradigm. I’m sure that anyone with any in-depth knowledge of Mr Romaneks experiences would undoubtedly win a debate in a face to face one on one setting.
    If poking fun and mocking people with astounding ‘stories’ to share is what you are about? then there are indeed plenty of easy targets out there; But however you get kicks? I would advise you to please study the object of your discrimination’s with a bit more rigorosity than shown here.
    p.s. I hope you don’t mind me adding the adjective ‘gay’ whilst addressing you/ It’s just that you seems such a Happy Chappie in your Photo insert.

    • Bobsy, if you’re going to be a homophobe, at least have the guts to own it.

      I’m curious–and by that, I mean ‘incurious’ but toying with you nonetheless–what would a debate between me and another person over a third person’s claimed experiences look like? When you picture that, how does it go?

      One (me) assumes that you know nothing about the author (me) and probably could not read facts as anything other than cheap digs when they are about your belief system. I get it; I’ll let it slide.

      But for you and all the defenders of, believers in, and especially experiencers of high strangeness, it’s time to use some discernment and stop defending every crook with a Chinese lantern tethered to an abduction story. Skeptics are not your enemy and neither am I. YOU are.

      • ‘Homophobic’ me? far from it Dear Author, I only resort to a trifle teasing, (name calling, if you prefer) as you were so rude as to call Mr Romanek a ‘Simpleton’ every time you refer to his name in your writings (see above), if that’s not being derogative and childish then I don’t know what is? – “what’s good for the goose….. “(well you get my meaning)
        I’ll respond to your paragraphs one at a time:
        i) My point being that a ‘one on one’ allows for direct communication or exchange between two people without the usual delay associated with written correspondence, thus facilitating the free- flow of information and facts between both Parties; This would give the observer a far better overview of the argument and a clearer grasp on who really is the charlatan? Or is that a little hard for you to understand?
        ii) All I know of you is your opinion on Mr Romanek, as derived from your ‘slights’ above. I see a difference between offering genuine ‘founded’ criticism and insult, and welcome any scepticism, as a healthy inquiring mind should always retain a certain degree of it.
        iii) Your calling a man a Crook and a Hoaxer without ever having met him and without doing any in-depth investigation into any of his claims. Yes that footage you refer to does indeed ‘look like’ a Chinese Lantern from those stills, but that does not make it so; And the ET in the window has a kind of ‘puppetry’ look to it, but is it? Have a little faith; Go read a book on Quantum Physics and then tell me you understand your surroundings and environment! You seem the pretty grounded type

        As for me, I’ve never met the guy and I’ve never seen ET or a UFO, but i won’t condemn a person whom appears ‘to me’ to be quite genuine and who is struggling to share an experience he believes is actually happening; If there is ever PROOF to the contrary I will readily jump-ship & join the Lynching Party – but there has to proof of Stan’s misdemeanors.
        Anyway, my glass is half full (and never half empty), its Xmas, so Seasons Greetings, Be Blessed

      • So, just ignore your own eyes and every FACT I pointed out and the audio clip someone else posted in this thread; keep referring to the slights so you can ignore the facts and keep claiming I’ve done no research into the topic, don’t read anything else on this blog or in any way acquaint yourself with the person with whom you’re dialoguing now… just do all of that and keep the faith.

        Ah, men.

  14. luv this site, will be back often, promise!! specially luv the comments. i am here cuz i just sat thru the romanek you tube vid in toto, usually i surf past it, but i had to see if others reactions were similar to mine. i have been interested in ufo’s and particularly abduction for some time. not sure why, as i am not an experiencer and have not even had a sighting, but i am very interested in the topic. my main problem is that i believe just about everyone, i think most of us expect others to do as we would and i can’t ever imagine perpetrating a hoax. all that being said, i can’t believe that everyone’s bs meter doesn’t go off full blast on mr. romanek. i literally don’t believe a word that comes out of his mouth. not sure why, but i just don’t believe him. just read from alienscientist.com that stan’s equations were plagiarized from hal puthoff’s work. i am not knowledgable enuf to know if that is accurate, but the accusation is quite serious.
    it seems that there mite be more that a little bit of deceptive practices at work in this field, which is greatly disappointing, as i really do believe that the phenomenon is genuine and that there are experiences that are not able to be explained by our current scientific method. unfortunately, that opens the door for charlatans and quacks.
    keep up the good work, jv, common sense and bit of skepticism is necessary in the field. this week, after seeing stan’s vid as well as the angry wife’s brief vid on a now deceased abduction investigator has me feeling somewhat negative about this field of inquiry.

    • If by “angry wife” you mean Carol Rainey, I don’t think she’s so much angry as she is telling the truth.

      This field is full of cow pies and it is sad. But, as you said, that doesn’t negate the fact that there is a real phenomenon (or phenomena) here. But since it is still an unknown and a mystery, beware the ones who have it all figured out.

      To that end, watch out for the Project Core study coming later this month. It might just be the shot in the arm ufological and paranormal research needs to get with the program and acknowledge that there are a lot of amazing questions beneath the crusty surface of our “answers.”

  15. while i don’t see myself as a fan i guess in some respects i really am one, and i have really liked mr. hopkins. as such, my initial reaction was to be upset with the attack and to wonder why ms rainey did not protest sooner or question the legitimacy of this event until after she and mr hopkins parted. like i said, that was my initial reaction, and after just a bit of self-reflection i realized that it really made no difference as to the legitimacy of the issue. i guess we all have our personal sacred cows and it has been instructive having one of my own taken down a few pegs.

  16. I smell another shitty Hollywood summer blockbuster with Michel Bay special effects. If Stan plays his cards rite, he can probably get an Xbox exclusive Lego game.

  17. Sorry for the double post, but after watching the YouTube thing all I can think about is Jason Mews’ line in Jay and Silent Bob. There goes homeboy. He once fucked a Martian.

  18. New movie comimg out, its called “simple stan goes to jail” he just couldn’t stop spilling that starseed of his while watching kiddie porn, I hope he is denied PC and thrown directly into general population.

  19. All i know is this ABDUCTION HAPPEN,and it is hard for people to get their head around it. People seem to think that everyone that says they have been abducted are out to make a buck well thats total bullshit,,maybe in usa,,but not other places around the world,we dont have hollywood or make films like that,I personally have had abductions,and i have physical evidence,(and its not still photos although i did take some of bruises i had after this but hey what do bruises prove but i have way more.) and i really couldnt care less who believes me because i know something out of this world happen,not to mention i have several witnesses to these events,

  20. i actually wrote to stans wife,their bizarre experiences sounded a lot like mine,but i didnt get the response i had hoped for,,to me i felt that they were lying,.if anyone really is abducted,and i have been,its so hard on that person,like who tries and get fame for it.i believe he really did have an alien and you do have to know what to look out for, but added to it,i couldn’t understand why when i made claims similar to theirs (ie paranormal things taking place in my home after these events took place ) she never responded the way i thought she would,i thought she would have wanted to see my evidence after all its more than they have. and i didnt get that,instead i was asked to buy books.and believe me. i’d seen all that bs before when i told ufo people about my experience when it first happened,i wanted answers i wanted help.i had no clue these people didnt know the answers,but i didnt find out they want to make book deals,little did i know at the meeting showing my evidence,i was talking to a well known australian book writer,but had no clue until years later when i had actually read one of his books,after all i waned to find out what i could to try and workout what happned to me,they knew i was adamant, i was there for help,not books.as i noticed even at the meeting books were for sale on the subject.they dont even know what happened to me after this,and i rang for help but they dont care because they know where i stand,i’m about the truth not having someone make a book to get half the proceeds thats all they are about.MONEY.not truth.and they will twist things and they will beef them up to be something bigger,they asked me if they could put my story in the ufo magazine,and i really didnt want to i just rang a hotline,,but i felt obligated after all they travelled to my home listened to my story,and so i said yes but anonymous,when i noticed what was written they had got things wrong,and that annoyed me,there was a part i mentioned about an incident my daughter told me about,and i wondered why they asked me why i didnt keep this object she found in her gum,and i said oh she just told me she threw it,they thought this event took place when i had my experiences but no,it had happened many years before,it was only after i had my experiences that my daughter told me a strange dream she had,and what she found in her mouth not 1 time but 2 times,same dream same object and that her sister was a witness both time to her pulling it out of her gum.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s