The UFO Iconoclast(s)

Thursday, March 08, 2007

The lost Trent/McMinnville photo?

On May 11th, 1950, the Trent family of McMinnville, Oregon took photos of a strange object flying above their farm.

This is one of the original photos:

t1.jpg

Is the picture below the “lost” Trent photo, obtained by SMC in Phoenix, Arizona, showing the object (or model?) nearer to the ground, and at an angle precluding a bona fide aerodynamic craft?

mcminn4.jpg

More to come…

Tuesday, March 06, 2007

Common Sense and UFOs

think.jpg

The problem that has always confronted UFO enthusiasts is that the field (ufology as it’s preposterously misnamed) is rife with those who look at (and have looked at) the enigma with belief-blinders on.

For example, night sightings of UFOs invariably indicate the observer has seen green, red, white or yellow, blinking lights, (sometimes blue): a clue that the UFO is something prosaic, like an airplane or dirigible.

Other worldly craft would, in all likelihood, not have the same authenticating beacons established by agencies to protect aircraft in the skies of Earth.

Moreover, what alien culture would have the identical color spectrum as that of Earth? The odds against a similar retinal response between extraterrestrials and Earthlings are phenomenally long.

If anything, a real alien visitation would be of such a strange magnitude that observers would not be able to readily explain it or, perhaps, even visualize it.

And what about so-called alien abductions?

Would an alien presence need to slink into bedrooms to take humans for a medical examination when persons walking, running, driving alone are readily available for the taking, without the fuss of teleportation through bedroom walls?

(The Betty/Barney Hill, Travis Walton, Pascagoula violations establish the template for alien kidnappings, but even those incidents are not without their problems of coherence.)

The sightings of daytime UFOs (flying saucers) are often misinterpretations of unusual aircraft (as we note elsewhere) or mundane phenomena (birds, clouds, wind-blown debris, balloons, meteorological quirks, et cetera).

But what about radar returns that indicate a faster-than-possible Earth aircraft or the immediate abrupt changes (180 degree turns ) that are often reported? Or pilot visualizations that have an air of accuracy about them?

Commons sense leaves in those instances, and a new study paradigm must be invoked.

Yet, the vast majority of UFO fanatics will not, cannot, undertake the intense scrutiny of such reported events as they (the fanatics) are often (usually) locked in debates about sighting minutiae which has little chance of explaining the thing that was picked up by radar or seen by observers (pilots, for instance) who have the acumen to decipher what they saw or measured.

Common sense is elusive in the UFO community; just take a dip into the ramblings at UFO UpDates or read the comments of bloggers, who prefer camaraderie to the pursuit of truth -- this side, or the other side.

Sunday, March 04, 2007

Swedenborg, Adamski, and the UFO experience

epiphany.jpg

Emanuel Swedenborg had visions that showed him beings on Saturn, Mars, Venus, and other planets of the solar system.

The descriptions of those beings [The Earths in the Universe] were appropriated by George Adamski for his various lectures and books, including “Flying Saucers Have Landed”(co-authored with Desmond Leslie) and “Inside the Space Ships.”

The planets, as NASA probes show, did not, could not, and cannot support life of the kind Swedenborg and Adamski described.

So what is one to make of the “insights” – especially since Swedenborg was not considered a charlatan as Adamski is?

Swedenborg’s visions have always been considered to be part of his epiphany; that is, he experienced Cosmic Consciousness [Richard Maurice Bucke, 1901].

But Adamski seems to have taken his “sightings” from Swedenborg’s accounts and others.

Yet what about other accounts of extraterrestrial life, such as that of Betty Andreasson-Luca or Billy Meier?

Are those accounts edifying in any way? Do they correspond to “sightings” and “visions” that may be precursors to a transcendental epiphany?

Alien abductions (the Andreasson scenario) or visitations (the Meier hoax) are missing the elements found in accounts by Socrates, Ezekiel, Constantine, and Malcolm X (to name only a few).

Alleged real visitations are not self-aggrandizing, or terrifying, as is the case with almost all UFO/occupant sightings and alien abductions.

Persons who have an actual UFO event do not capitalize (or try to) on their experience.

And those who have a real epiphany, such as that of Saint Thomas Aquinas, do not go forward with their mundane activities; they change, psychologically and fundamentally.

Having visions of other-worldly beings is either a harbinger of a transcendental awakening, a psychotic-induced episode, or a contrivance meant to fraudulently convince others of a special occurrence from which the perpetrator can derive money, notoriety, or some other self-serving accoutrement.

Swedenborg had visions, albeit visions that did not and does not coincide with reality as we know it.

Adamski had sightings (not visions) that were induced to commit fraud. Meier’s sightings follow the Adamski model. And Betty Andreasson? Where is the fundamental change in her life-style?

So what about all those who say they’ve seen a UFO (or a flying saucer)? Or say they’ve been abducted by occupants of them?

Are they Swedenborgian? Or Adamskian? Or somewhere in-between?

You make the call.