Talk:Michael Hesemann

POV problem

Obviously there are two writers with the same name. There is also a third Michael Hesemann who is involved in microbiology and fossiles. Probably they were mixed up by this "ufoevidence" web site!

HSchnyder —Preceding undated comment added 02:19, 2 January 2011 (UTC).

It's well written, but very selective - clearly an ad.

"His 28 books were published in 14 languages" is followed by a litany of praises from high ranked church officials. There's no mention however that apparently at least half of those books are concerned with crop circles, green men and other UFO research:

http://www.ufoevidence.org/researchers/detail93.htm

The article doesn't seem to link to anythig either. It would be honest to at least use first person singular throughout the text.

Grzybozbur (talk) 14:00, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

RfC may have been a bit premature here; there doesn't seem to be any dispute that requires third-party intervention. If you think that there is a POV issue here, it would be best to just fix it yourself, and if other editors find your actions contentious they can discuss it here. RfC is for cases wherein the dispute is over an article is not getting anywhere, and outside input is needed. siafu (talk) 16:37, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

• Drive-by RFC commenter here. I share your sense that the article is less than neutral. Why not just dive straight in and edit/delete the stuff that seems overly promotional? You don't need anyone's permission to do this - if another editor disagrees they can revert you and you can have a polite chat about it. be bold!. Thparkth (talk) 03:54, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Footnote 12

Footnote 12 refers to a Telegraph article relying on Hesemann's own research!

nrglaw--Nrglaw (talk) 22:24, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

the UFO background of hesemann is missing

in the german wikipedia there's an ongoing discussion about the background of michael hesemann. he became well-known in germany in the late 1980ies and early 1990ies with publications about unidentified flying objects and aliens populating the earth. he organized "UFO-Kongresse" etc. in an interview in 2008 he reluctantly stated that he's not an "UFOloge" (UFOlogist), but a UFO scientist.

one of the main authors of this article is Hschnyder who in the german wiki notoriously tries to eliminate the UFO-history of hesemann. some assume, Hschneyder = Hesemann. this is not of importance as long as the article reports from a neutral POV.

also missing is a current court case in germany: in mid january 2013, a hamburg court stopped hesemann to publically discredit a homosexual german theologist.

Maximilian (talk) 18:17, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

The facts are: Hesemann quoted a (true) statement that a man using the same name as the controversial homosexual theologian wrote reader's letters in a homophobic German traditionalist Catholic website. Indeed the very same theologian stated in his book that he was active in traditionalist Catholic circles before his "outing". He requested a court orde ragainst Hesemann, claiming that it was not him using his name but someone else misusing his name as a nick.

Hesemann has no "Ufo history" at all. Some German Anti-catholic wiki authors try to identify him with an author of the same name from Munich, Germany, when Hesemann lives in Duesseldorf. There is a thirds person with the same name, living in Hamburg, actively involved in meteor research. Henri Schnyder lives in Luzern/Switzerland, working in the real estate-business - see: http://www.xing.com/profile/Henri_Schnyder and can't be identical with Hesemann, who is a German citizen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.181.239.222 (talk) 18:58, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

German National Library. There's only one Michael Hesemann who wrote books about ufology and Catholic topics. It's the same person. Agathenon (talk) 11:41, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

It is NOT the same person. Here the German amazon lists all his books - no U.F.O.'s are mentioned.http://www.amazon.de/Michael-Hesemann/e/B000APLA4U/ref=ntt_athr_dp_pel_pop_1 The German National Library go, probably, like all libraries, by name - and if there are two authors with the same name, a mix up is possible! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.226.24.3 (talk) 13:53, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Amazon isn't an official source, the National Library is. − Hschnyder's account was blocked in de:WP because of his edits in the article de:Michael Hesemann, just for information. The facts about Berger and Hesemann can be found here. If Hesemann repeatedly libels David Berger he will have to pay up to 250,000 euros as a fine. Maximilian Schönherr is right; whoever understands German can convince himself by following the given links. Agathenon (talk) 15:31, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Addition: even Amazon proves the ufologist Michael Hesemann and the Catholic writer Hesemann to be the same man. Agathenon (talk) 15:42, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

If two or three authors have the same name, of course the amazon search machine shows all entries unter this name. The amazon author's page includes a biography and does NOT include those Ufo books. The "Sueddeutsche" is a German socialist newspaper and not a serious source. Hesemann never libelled Berger but has quoted an articel stating that a man with the name "David Berger" wrote in the controversial right wing web site kreuz.net; the gay theologian David Berger claims that it was not him but someone else misusing his name. Being a defender of Pope Benedict, Hesemann became a victim of a shit storm on the German wikipedia, initiated by the very same users who try to discredit him here.

IP 77.43.69.58 (based in rome) has reverted the new entries i made about the facts which made hesemann well-known before he became a supporter of the current pope. he also brought back a couple of sentences which read like ads for hesemann and needed to be cut down.

we've had a long discussion about this in the german wiki which led to a life long blocking of one author who notoriously deleted all entries about hesemann's UFO past and fed tons of hesemann-promotion into the article. the anonymous author who in this discussion tries to discredit others (like a highly resprected and certainly not socialist newspaper) creates a conspiracy theory by splitting hesemann's into two persons, one who did the UFO thing, one who does the pope thing. the german article shows a long list of his works, including several books and videos on UFOs and other esotheric topics - all, of course by the same author. he even looks alike, today and back in 1985 on a stage in düsseldorf talking about the stupidity of universities by not installing institutes for "UFO science". maybe less hair today. ;-) plus, the pope-admirer hesemann in 2008 stated that he is a "UFO scientist" - as i said before.

to be as clear as possible: bringing hesemann's UFO-past into this article has nothing to do with putting him down. so it's totally un-encyclopedic to ignore this string of his expertise. if hesemann is not comfortable with his past, this does not matter here: it is his past.

Maximilian (talk) 00:30, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

And in fact, the German National Library knows only one Michael Hesemann, whose identification number is 115857737. It shows up if you follow the hyperlink Hesemann, Michael, no matter if you do it on a UFO book page or on a Catholic book page. If there were two Hesemanns there also were two identification numbers, but there's only one since it's about the same author. Whoever doubts is free to convince himself by this official source. Agathenon (talk) 16:32, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

on this (german) website we see hesemann and schnyder cooperating as book authors. the author of the website states that he's strongly influenced by hesemann's UFO- and religious apocalypse theories. Maximilian (talk) 23:43, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Sources

Source for Duessldorf and Rome

http://www.raggs-domspatz.de/profil/beirat.2/beirat.2.6/index.html

Hesemann is "Beirat" (board member) of a private German academy called "Ragg's Domspatz", obviously in connection with the Regensburger Domspatzen, the Cathedral Choir directed by Georg Ratzinger from 1964-1994. He is described as a "respected Church historian" ("renommierten Kirchenhistoriker" and lists his merits. Other board members are four Professors, two Catholic prelates, a count and a former German state gouvernor, indicating that this is a rather respected high level institution. I doubt they would welcome Hesemann as a board member (and I doubt the Pope's brother would chose him as his biographer) would he correspond to the image indicated here in wiki. Maybe the user who claims that there was a "shit storm" or campaign going on might be right and wiki becomes an instrument of a character assassination indeed... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.223.234.246 (talk) 02:37, 16 February 2013‎

How can we rule out that they are simply not aware that the subject was interested in UFO fringe before moving to Catholic miracle fringe; or don't mind, as they think of it as a conversion? Hans Adler 21:54, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

That's the bias I mean, Hans, calling Catholicism a fringe faith. He teaches Church history at a Catholic University and even was invited by the (not Catholic) Sorbonne University in Paris. He represents the Pave the way Foundation, working for the interreligious dialogue. His work in the Vatican Archives on Pius XII received international attention. He might be an eccentric, but certainly he's not a fringe scientist but a serious, respected historian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.223.234.246 (talk) 12:31, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I am not calling Catholicism a fringe faith. But the following books are clearly about Catholicism-related fringe rather than mainstream Catholicism:

• "Die Jesus-Tafel". Claims that the INRI table in Santa Croce in Gerusalemme#Passion relics is from the 1st century. Radiocarbon dating says it's medieval.
• "Die stummen Zeugen von Golgotha". Overview of Jesus relics. For some he makes more than dubious claims of authenticity, including a 'true cross'.
• "Das Fatima-Geheimnis". As is clear from the name, this is about Catholic miracles. Speculates that the apparitions were caused by holograms, presumably created by extraterrestrians. (The English edition appeared in a UFO series.)
• "Die Entdeckung des heiligen Grals". Some UFO freaks seem to be fascinated with the Holy Grail, somehow connecting it with extraterrestrians. Apparently, Hesemann didn't. Maybe his first serious work?
• "Auf den Spuren des Grabtuchs von Turin". Claims that the Turin Shroud is authentic. Discusses supposed traces of resurrection radiation.

Hans Adler 22:54, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Source for Duessldorf and Rome

http://www.raggs-domspatz.de/profil/beirat.2/beirat.2.6/index.html

Hesemann is "Beirat" (board member) of a private German academy called "Ragg's Domspatz", obviously in connection with the Regensburger Domspatzen, the Cathedral Choir directed by Georg Ratzinger from 1964-1994. He is described as a "respected Church historian" ("renommierten Kirchenhistoriker" and lists his merits. Other board members are four Professors, two Catholic prelates, a count and a former German state gouvernor, indicating that this is a rather respected high level institution. I doubt they would welcome Hesemann as a board member (and I doubt the Pope's brother would chose him as his biographer) would he correspond to the image indicated here in wiki. Maybe the user who claims that there was a "shit storm" or campaign going on might be right and wiki becomes an instrument of a character assassination indeed..

Other neutral sources on Hesemann:
http://www.kathpedia.com/index.php?title=Michael_Hesemann (German Catholic Church wiki)
The newspaper "The European" calls him "German historian, journalist and expert of Churcvh History" http://www.theeuropean.de/michael-hesemann

In English: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-hesemann

Also Hesemann's only website has nothing to do with Ufos nor does his facebook page
http://www.paulusjahr.info/
http://www.facebook.com/michael.hesemann — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.223.234.246 (talk) 02:48, 16 February 2013‎

The Regensburger Domspatzen seem to have had serious problems that would seem to indicate that the leadership wasn't as effective as one should have expected it to be.[1] So: not a good argument at all.

I don't think that Catholic sources are neutral in the sense that they have an interest in pointing out the UFO-related past of someone who is now writing on similar Catholic topics and has connections to top Vatican brass.

There is nothing inherently wrong about writing about UFOs or believing in them. (I am not claiming that the latter applies as I am not familiar with the subject's books or approach to writing at the time.) Maybe the subject now considers this a youthful sin, as a comment on the German Wikipedia by an editor whose name suggests closeness to the subject would seem to indicate. [2] But that does not mean that Wikipedia has to agree and has to purge the subject's past of noteworthy information. Hans Adler 22:08, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Is there indeed any evidence that the author of the books on UFOs are identical with the renowned Church historian?? And if yes, what is their content? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.223.234.246 (talk) 23:07, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't think there can be any reasonable doubt. If there are two authors of that name, then the German National Library has been extremely careless, and both of these authors have been extremely careless not to have the problem corrected. [3] According to the entry, Michael Hesemann of Düsseldorf and Rome, born 1964, is a futurologist, fringe science expert, documentary filmer, journalist specialised on church historical topics and freelancer for Vatican Magazine.

Also, user Hschnyder on the German Wikipedia, is very likely Henri Schnyder, a coauthor of Hesemann. As I explained above, he tried to deny the connection here, but admitted it on the German Wikipedia, giving additional details. Hans Adler 11:09, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Still what we find here on wikipedia is trash and in no way justifiable. We are dealing with the autor of 20+ serious books on Church history. Even if he wrote books on ufos in his youth, (he was 25/26 in 1990), we don't know their content nor the reason why he did it. I heard he stated that it had to do with his studies in modern myths, which would be legitimate. Today he gave up this subject completely, for 15 years or so, and seems to be highly respected - professors and Cardinals wrote the forewords of his books, according to the German Wikipedia and what I read he teaches Church history at a Catholic University (Gustav Siewerth Academy), lectured at the Sorbonne (not Catholic at all) and works in the Vatican Archives where only historians with an academic background are allowed to enter. This all indicates that he is a respected historian and far away from any lunatic or ufoologist! Even if he dealt with this controversial subject from an academic perspective. And let's not forget that he works for a good case, the interreligious dialogue, working for the Pave the Way Foundation (ppp.ptwf.org) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.223.234.246 (talk) 12:31, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

He was first notable as a UFO 'researcher'. Then he gradually moved from UFO fringe to Catholic relic fringe, initially even combining the two. (See my comments to some of his books in the section above.) Then he got rid of the allusions to extraterrestrials and moved more and more into the Catholic mainstream.

This gradual development may shed some light on his sincerity or lack thereof, and that fact seems to be the main reason for the attempts to cleanse his biography of references to his earlier claim to notability. But Wikipedia need not concern itself with that. We must tell the full story, regardless of interpretation.

To judge from your IP address in Karlsruhe, I guess you can read German. I suggest you read this. He wasn't just editor in chief of a UFO magazine. He actually toured through Germany giving lectures as "Germany's greatest UFO expert", talking about dubious proofs for UFOs and the conspiracy to cover them up. Hans Adler 23:09, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

thanks, Hans, for your good work here. we don't have to follow every single annoying argument in detail. the german article has had an endless discussion, and by now basic conspiracy theories like he was no ufologist or there's two blokes of the same name have been put to rest. may they rest in peace. let's ignore them from now on. Maximilian (talk) 23:33, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

ufo-hesemann is the same as pope-hesemann (a photo from his magazine 1995)

previous edits and postings by IP-users and Hschnyder here implied that there are two michael hesemanns, one being the UFO-man, one the pope-man. here's the dropbox-link to a photograph which appeared in hesemann's UFO-magazin Magazin 2000 on page 11 of issue 6/1995. hesemann, standing in the center, is of course the same hesemann as the one who appears in dozens of current catholic related sites and videos. i hope this puts an end to the odd 2 hesemanns claims. Maximilian (talk) 09:01, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Michael Hesemann. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120402211747/http://www.zenit.org/article-862?l=spanish to http://www.zenit.org/article-862?l=spanish

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:34, 27 January 2018 (UTC)