Rouse and I shared the same brainwave when the subject turned to Courtney Brown: “I had this same question a few years back when Courtney Brown, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Political Science at Emory University published Cosmic Voyage: A Scientific Discovery of Extraterrestrial Visiting Earth. Why would Dr. Brown risk an academic career, in a field like political science, to publish what is, in my opinion, one of the more outlandish and wild hypotheses in a field that is replete with them? What could he possibly hope to gain in a few royalties that could offset damage to his career? Fortunately, Dr. Brown provides the answer on page 257 of his book: ‘I should remind the readers at the outset that I am a professor of political science. One of the specialties within the discipline is public opinion and mass behavior, which directly relates to governmental concerns regarding the subject of ETs and UFOs.’” We are well warned about this when he writes about how there are Martians living, surviving, on Earth, in a secret location – though he of course knows where. “There are Martians on Earth, but one must think clearly about the implications of this before ringing the alarm bell. These Martians are desperate. Apparently they have very crude living quarters on Mars. They cannot live on the surface. Their children have no future on their homeworld. Their home is destroyed; it is a planet of dust.” We can only wonder when the next TV marathon whereby the public will donate money for the poor conditions is going to occur. But, wait…
The subtitle of the book was “A scientific discovery of extraterrestrials visiting Earth.” The science used was “scientific remote viewing”. The opening words of the book were: “This is a book about two extraterrestrial civilizations that either already have or soon will have an important evolutionary impact on human life on Earth. This is not a book about scientific remote viewing. Nonetheless, since scientific remote viewing has been used to obtain the data […] it is necessary to briefly outline the history.” Even if it is totally coincidental, it is a standard debunking technique: link the subject to be discredited with outlandish claims, and the subject itself will become discredited. Mud sticks. Remember Geller and The Nine?
Rouse concluded: “He published a book, (mass communications) with an interest in ‘mass behavior’ (social psychology) and measures the effect ‘public opinion’ (survey research). When Dr. Brown published his book, he was employing the classical methods of Psychological Warfare. He didn’t write his book to persuade anyone of his outlandish assertions, he just wanted to gauge the reaction, possibly as a front for someone else, or some agency.” Remember: Rouse wrote that, not I…
