[trainedobserver]

Sounds like quite the elite group there, but other than selling books, attending conferences, doing interviews, and "scrutinizing" others in the same field, there is nothing that differentiates these people from the same argument you're making against the others like Wilcock, Greer, etc...

I'd have to question how familiar you actually are with those people's work, Richard Dolan in particular. Have you read his two books? If there were only two books on the UFO phenomena you ever read, they would be the ones to read. The guy does actual research.

Matter of fact, if anyone is a disinfo agent, it could easily be argued and counter pointed that those same set of characters you mentioned above are the actual agents. Most or all of them have worked for the government, Friedman openly gloats about the number of places he's worked on classified projects, Vallee was involved with DARPA, ...

You would undoubtedly suspect that I am a agent from my background. I certainly am not nor do I think those men are. They seldom make claims that they cannot back up with copious notes, references, and actual hands on research. However, this gets back to something I said earlier. It seems the truth about the phenomena is so bizarre, terrible, or strange that those who are let in on it may change their opinions on disclosure and may actually agree to contribute to its obfuscation for purely moral reasons. So it is possible a serious researcher could acquire information that changes his mode from one of exposure to protection. I don't think that is the case here however but I could be wrong. (I was once wrong in 1976 for several minutes so I know it is possible JOKE ... that was a JOKE) I fully recognize my ability to be completely mistaken.

Jacobs is a Uni-folk man pushing the 'alien threat' agenda with research only into any cases that involve a 'threatening' experience,

I think Jacob's just reports what is coming to him. His conclusions are logical based on the data he is getting.

and Dolan; while I think hes great and his book National Security State vol.1 is most certainly noteworthy, he himself has also been involved with Camelot and aligned with the same people you implicate are pushing disinformation.

I was a bit taken back by this also initially until I heard his explanation. Dolan has stated he will talk to anyone, anywhere, to promote the sales of his books. While some people will look down their nose at him for this he is just doing good business by getting his books out there in the demographic that would be interested in them. Promoting books is just another part of writing books unless you are a trust-fund baby or something. Dolan is a voice of reason.

My opinion is there has been evidence for multiple phenomena within the framework of 'ufos', the problem is every person wants his/her 'one explanation' for the entire phenomenon to be the right one. Vallee and Hynek explain it as interdimensional, Friedman is a classic Roswell proponent/greys-occupy-saucers from zeti reticuli, and then you have the Hopkins and similar mindsets focusing only on abductions.

I think if you'll examine what these guys actually say is they all confess to not being entirely sure about the origins of the phenomena themselves. The major line of demarcation appears to be between folks who think they are nuts and bolts machines and those who think they are living beings themselves. Certainly anyone studying the phenomena for any length of time will recognize and understand that it is not monolithic.

I'm no fan of Dan Burisch and never have been, but what makes his time-traveler explanation any less plausible than those with other theories.

I love to hate Dan Burisch like I love to hate a good movie villain. He is simultaneously comical and dastardly. For years now he has proposed the most ridiculous and amateurishly presented stories as his real experience. The story has evolved and changed so many times and each new chapter is more goofy than the previous one. His new wife posted some rather scary and particularly revealing videos as a message to his former wife on her youtube channel. I think if you listen to those you'll get a real good feeling for the mental atmosphere surrounding those two. I would love for someone to do some investigative work and film Dan and Marcie at their regular jobs and post them. It would be interesting to see what their real jobs are don't you think? My point being these are confidence operators. The man's most audacious lie has to be that he would be part of MJ-12. Just look at the list of accomplished individuals on the 'alleged' list and then carefully consider if Burisch is in their league. It is absolutely hilarious that this former parole officer would in any way qualify to be in that company of people.

Even the people who seem to possess the most honesty and credibility can hardly agree on anything, does that mean some or all of them are disinfo agents.

Well if they are lying about who they are and what they have done then they are simply liars. Burisch, IMHO, is just an opportunistic liar. He is running the 'paranormal' con-game. It could have been anything he just choose that scam.

But strictly in the context disinformation, Vallee or Friedman could easily be disinformation, and keep in mind that good people are often compromised, I happen to think this was the case with Greer after his disclosure project didn't quite make the headlines he was hoping for, and then he got older and started to think of just himself.

Just what would Vallee and Friedman be saying that is 'disinformation'? Just a couple of talking points would do. Have you read Vallee's books? I have. He is very non-committal about the whole thing. Yes, he has an opinion based on years of real research. But he would tell you it is just that, his opinion.

I think Greer was enchanted and enticed by the 'woo-woo' side of things much like Gilliand. He may have been bought, brainwashed, or just deceived I do not know but something happened to that guy. Time will tell.

When looking at any of these people you have to ask the basic questions. Who are they? (How many times have they changed their names?)
What is their background? Do they have the qualifications to make the statements they are making? What is their educational background? Are they lying about themselves or their experience?