UFO Conjecture(s)

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

The Unscience of Ufology

UFO mavens and “researchers” have been so fixated in trying to convince the general public, media, and the government that UFOs are real, they’ve neglected the aspects of UFO accounts that could have, perhaps, determined what UFOs are.

Sensible persons know that “things” have been seen in the sky, on (or in) the oceans, and on the ground that are mysterious and unexplained by observation.

What those things are or have been has been sidelined by the defensive attitude of curious persons who have and continue to try and convince others that such things have actually been seen, that reports of the things are true observations – that witnesses to such things have seen what they say they have seen.

So much time and effort have been spent trying to prove that strange things have actually been seen, the “evidence” – hard and evanescent – has been set aside, to the point that those details have been muddied or lost by the vicissitudes of time and memory.

Roswell continues to resonate as the basics of that incident were resurrected by UFO researchers and enhanced by witnesses who’ve provided, what they say, are details that they recall and experienced.

Moreover, there are photographs, a press release, and a venue (or two) that remain intact and open to scrutiny, even after sixty-five years.

A Roswell Dream Team has been established by Kevin Randle, a team composed of sane (mostly), sensible men – but none of them scientists or skilled in aspects of science that are needed to address the Roswell issues.

Tyros and wannabes continue to muddy the Roswell waters with fraudulent expertise, as one can see by the latest salvo about the so-called Ramey memo, seen in a 1947 photograph and being discussed at Mr. Randle’s blog.

UFO hobbyists have inserted themselves into the Roswell story, in hopes of gaining some cachet with other Roswell “experts” – and there are Roswell “experts” but only insofar as they’ve accumulated detritus about Roswell over the years and present that detritus as if it is scientific data and evidence. It isn’t.

It’s merely dossiers of hear-say and conjecture.

But Roswell, unlike other UFO sightings and accounts, has a surfeit of materials that keeps the incident alive, which even if it comes, at this late moment, to a conclusion that an extraterrestrial thing crashed or landed near Roswell, still does not answer why such an ET visitation took place and what it means for humans today.

There is no science when it comes to Roswell, and even less so for other UFO sightings.

UFO aficionados are so anxious to “prove” that their interest in UFOs is worthwhile they have forsaken the elements of UFO sightings that might explain the phenomenon.

When one reviews the articles from UFO notables – Jerry Clark for one – one becomes fully aware that the notables (Clark et al.) have merely accumulated witness testimony. The notables haven’t presented insight or testimonial dogma of any kind.

They have only piled up story after story, witness account after witness account.

The hypotheticals have been open-ended and discursive.

Also, other UFO advocates will not call-out the slovenly approach to the “research” by UFO notables for fear of being shunned by the UFO community.

Alexis de Tocqueville noted in his masterwork, Democracy in America [1835], that Americans are loath to criticize fellow citizens, even when their fellows are reprobate, for fear of being ostracized by their community.

This is the case with the UFO community in spades.

UFO critics do not castigate the ineptitude of past and present UFO researchers, for fear of being “Amished” by the UFO community at large,

The failure of UFO notables and researchers to apply science methodology goes unanswered by almost all of the UFO curious, even those with credibility and sanity who write about or bring UFOs to the table with civility and applied deference.

I cite Anomalist here.

That my recent blurb about Michael Sword and his confab of UFO “geezers” caused an irrational defense of Professor Swords and the gaggle of UFO “notables” who met, one night, in his messy domicile, indicates the point I’m making here.

UFO “failures” are ignored, not talked about, and certainly not to be discussed openly.

It seems that the unscience of ufology is sacrosanct among the UFO underclass..

Only those who adopt the “King is not wearing clothes” approach to ufology – Bruce Duensing for one – have the temerity to point out that Ufologists and their lackeys are shorn of intellectual thought and research acumen.

Everyone else allows the dormant status quo to prevail.

And that’s why UFOs remain a mystery – a pathetic mystery, but still a mystery after all.

RR

8 Comments:

  • One wonders, of course, why that Professor Mike Swords you blogged about a couple posts ago, and who from reader comments seems to be a decent chap, wasn't put on The Dream Team by Kevin Randle, PhD.

    By Blogger Kurt Peters, at Tuesday, October 23, 2012  

  • The Roswell Dream Team is a clique, KP, sort of like that which one can find in High School settings.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, October 23, 2012  

  • Perhaps one of the areas of object "failure" in Ufology is the refusal of developing a more comprehensive psychological element.

    I see a tint at the reluctance of the psychological thrust as "painting" someone as potentially mentally disturbed, yet this need not be the case. After all, subtracting ET from the equation leaves, stripped bare, the human element which fraught with imperfection.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Tuesday, October 23, 2012  

  • I see that though it hasn't been updated since 2007, this website for the CUFOS is promoting a new (?) book by Professor Swords:

    http://www.cufos.org/UFOSGovt.html

    Rather funny that, since THE Roswell Dream Team seems to be researching a UFO-US government connection, yet they shun Professor Swords....

    By Blogger Tony Stark, at Wednesday, October 24, 2012  

  • Well said Rich, I just disagree with your closing line or rather the way you expressed it. Ufology will remain a mystery, it does remain a mystery even to those of us not enamored of the Roswell circus, and the ET hypothesis.

    In fact even if a team of a thousand world-class scientists from all the relevant disciplines (physics, neurology, astronomy, sociology etc) with a huge budget and massive government and university support re-investigated everything, they would simply be attempting to reinvent the wheel. They would be back to where we all are - stumped. It is the Roswell and ET true believers who explain away the mystery of ufology. It is when one removes the ET blinders, that the mystery shines through.

    The paradox with ufology is that the more you really know, the less you know - the more of an enigma it becomes. However that should not leave us disheartened. The same can be said for so many other scientific disciplines from astronomy, cosmology, physics and Quantum Mechanics to genetics, biophysics and ontogeny, from the study of consciousness to parapsychology.

    As Tim Herbert hints at above, unless we understand ourselves, we will not make headway with ufology.

    By Blogger Lawrence, at Wednesday, October 24, 2012  

  • Lawrence:

    I think we are a bigger msytery than UFOs are.

    Understanding human beings is a chore that remains unresolved.

    At least with UFOs there is a possibility that we might find a superficial explanation.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, October 24, 2012  

  • "Tony Stark"-

    We have in no way "shunned" Professor Swords! Don Schmitt met him just recently. But I have tried to contact him relative to his knowledge of a Battelle-Roswell connection that he wrote about some time ago on his blog- he never responded to emails or left messages.

    Anthony Bragalia

    By Blogger Anthony Bragalia, at Wednesday, October 24, 2012  

  • A very good example of your comment that we are an essential part of the mystery of anomalous perceptions and \or parallel realities. A well parsed
    examination of the issue that intrigues and confounds many as to the nature or nature(s) of the mind and it's relationship to the environment. I think it's directly relatable why it's more likely science will dig deeper and further
    beyond how we categorize the anomalous. How this can be ignored in a broader implication of the nature of this phenomenon has always amazed me as the majority seem to be under hypnosis by their own suggestions.

    http://www.realitysandwich.com/are_minds_confined_brains

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Wednesday, October 24, 2012  

Post a Comment

<< Home