Due to recent links to Nick Pope in leading newspapers, i feel it is time to tackle the subject of whether Nick Pope is a trusted and informed ufologist…. The recent articles can be seen in the sun ” The truth is out there “, the daily mail “Keep an eye on the skies for saucers during the olympic games, warns former MOD UFO expert ” (just a PR stunt).
As far back as 2009, i wrote a blog article about Nick Pope, and have decided to reproduce it below….
March 31st 2009
Nick Pope seems to come out with amazing statements, but not back them up with anything substantial, or base them on any facts at all.
His latest statement to The sun’s article ” Google Unearthed“ (posted 30th March, 2009) was:
” Yesterday baffled ufologist Nick Pope said he was “very excited” by the image, which he labelled “truly fascinating”.
He added: “It appears to show nine objects flying in near perfect formation. About the only thing I know that can do this is the Red Arrows — and it’s not them” ” (extract from article). Ironically at Above top secret, there is a possibility that they are either jets, (including red arrows) or balloons : see Here and Here . Also they point out that google started mapping London out in 2008. One possibility could be that it was the Queen’s birthday fly past see here. Again i say possibilities, and as such should be presented as such.
You can see the google map in question here . I did notice that the next camera to the right, has (looking at the skyline) an aerial dissected half way up, and am unsure how this was caused (unless it was collected at two separate times, for instance).
Anyway, it soon finds its way into many newspapers and media outlets, but why? Again, i say why is this an amazing image….. to me one answer could be that it’s an image malfunction. I’m not saying that it should not be discussed, but the way it is being put ‘out there ‘ is getting sad, and there are better cases that should be discussed/ talked about in a rational way, but i guess it does not sell papers.
I will within the next week or so, put together an article, on why i have come to this conclusion about Nick Pope, and give my reasons with background information.
For example, i wrote about ” Is nick Pope being GULLable towards UFO sighting? ” in which the image was clearly a seagull (or Unidentified Feathered Object).
Although i’m not saying that you can get everything right, he does not seem to be learning from his mistakes, or even looking at the evidence with a clear head, and reasserting his answers to these questions.
Of course, sometimes all you can give are a series of alternatives (ie what they could be), and leave it at that.
Therefore we have to ask what are his motives in all this? Maybe i’m reacting to strongly to all this, possibly, but i do believe it is more sensationalism again.
The Sun newspaper is also proving to not be interested in the truth about UFOs whatsoever, and sooner the rest of the media realize this the better. For instance, the latest wind Turbine incident is a good example of hype by them.
I would be interested to find out what you think of Nick Pope? is he a reliable source of information on UFOs, and Ufology as a whole.
I only bring this whole subject up, because i wonder why some people are surprised, when they ask ” why is ufology not taken seriously”.
This asked some serious questions back in 2009, and they are still relevant now…..
Also similar questions were raised at forgetomori (in 2009) ” UFO fleet menaces east London?nah ” among other blogs.
So let’s backtrack a bit here, and examine Nick’s time at the MOD.
Nick Pope claims that he was the man “who used to run the British Government’s UFO Project” (from 1991-1994); and that he was responsible for these ufo reports. Please see Dr David Clarke for a detailed description in his blog article “Open Skies- closed Files” . This asks serious question of Nick’s involvement in the role he played with UFO’s and the MOD.
It is telling that the MOD have mentioned that there is no such thing as the UFO project.Many more questions arise from this as well? mainly what role did he play? why does he block details? has he something to hide..was he really only there in a part-time capacity? Also over at ufo-blog.co.uk the same analysis has taken place for this article please see here .
So basically what I’m saying is that there is very strong evidence to suggest, he was a low-level clerk at the MOD, that i believe was only part-time … he lives on the Mulder image, and he still claims he was the chief investigator without backing this up with any hard proof.
He also spends a lot of time contradicting himself, never really researching properly…but unfortunately the media love it, as it sells papers (and most of the tabloids are not interested in the truth).Nick Pope also loves it as it keeps him in the limelight.
Other links of interest :
*** this was dated from 1999 and is very telling about alot of things that Nick Pope said in the UFO magazine at the time, plus other comments.The link can be seen at sightings (rense.com) and confirms alot of the contradictions that are mentioned above *****.
“Although Nick Pope hasn’t to my knowledge responded to these questions and is of course absolutely under no obligation to, I have now received a reply from ‘Secretariat(Air Staff)2a’ concerning some of the aforementioned questions.
- The Ministry state:
- “Mr Pope was employed as an Executive Officer in Secretariat (Air Staff) 2. His post was designated Sec(AS)2a.
- The main duties of the post concern non-operational RAF activities overseas and diplomatic clearance for military flights abroad”.
- It would therefore appear that Nick Pope’s principal function was generally more mundane than “researching and investigating UFO sightings, alien abductions, crop circles, animal mutilations and any other weird and wonderful reports that came my way” [extract from article].
UFO Talk – No hope for pope
Colin Andrew’s concerns here
bad UFOs – Skepticism, UFOs and the Universe
Ok, I’ll lay it on the line and say that i have not been a fan of Nick Pope for quite a while. His brand of sensationalism is a joke and makes Ufology look pathetic.
I hear you say, that i should keep my prejudice out of this, and i usually do, however I actually despair with the whole Nick pope image. If nothing else it gives Ufology an even worse reputation than it already has.