UFO Conjecture(s)

Thursday, July 18, 2013

Going, going gone....

Bruce Duensing provided this as part of a comment. (I thought it worthy of better attention.)

"I was surprised to find UFO Mystic has vanished as NR seems to have consolidated his focus on his literary output. One of the saner compendiums and commentaries is no longer with us. With the passing of Tonnies, the fairly invisible Paul K and now UFO Mystic, an era seems to have folded back onto itself as having passed. Its interesting to consider how for some things, time moves on, and for others,like Roswell, the subjects never age, as if they were a petrified forest, inhabited by ghosts." 

Yes, some former UFO notables are leaving the topic (for now or forever).

The enigma has been swallowed up by nonsense and regurgitation that sickens the astute mind (Roswell, for instance).

UFOs as an internet topic is too entrenched and controlled by radicals or delusional persons -- or those who corrupt the discussion with snark and insane and inane retorts (The Ulofology Creep, for example).

Is there a way back to a UFO dialogue and input that is rational and intellectually bolstered? (Was it ever thus?)

We'll have to see...



  • This has actually been touched on before--on this site even--as certain people began to distance themselves from it all and focus on other aspects of their lives. It's the give up. People get frustrated because there is far more junk than answers and the joy has left them. It's happened in other fringe interests as well. As the new millennium trudges on, a degree on ennui has crept over us all. We're nearly 70 years removed from Roswell with basically nothing to show for it. There don't seem to be those flaps and waves that once got the world excited. For every Stephensville or Phoenix, there are tons of CGI hoaxes questioned by none. Even the likes of MUFON has become nothing more than a tabular clearing house for unverified reports. I can't say I blame anyone who steps aside and reconsiders it all.

    By Blogger Cullan Hudson, at Thursday, July 18, 2013  

  • Yes, Cullan, we are worn down.

    One can only hope that a spectacular new UFO event occurs or that Randle's Dream team lets loose with their recent discovery of an alleged Roswell artifact that will raise hob with skeptics and believers alike.

    (Meanwhile, I'm working on a Shakespeare thing that keeps me tethered to something intellectual but just as ornery as UFOs. I'm a sucker for mysteries or ongoing controversies....as are you I think.)


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, July 18, 2013  

  • When you say you are working on a "Shakespeare thing" do you mean you are trying to prove Bacon, or possibly Marlowe, wrote Shakespeare?

    By Blogger cda, at Thursday, July 18, 2013  

  • Something like that, CDA...

    I think Shakespeare was a consortium; a literary LLC as it were.

    A secret group of writers who used old Will as a rubric for their onslaughts on the Monarchy and English society.

    And that Marlowe, what an interesting gay guy.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, July 18, 2013  

  • I have to agree with Cullan's analysis. We're a "visual" society where the use of "Apps" on a cell phone (archaic?...smart phone?) rules the day.

    Lost is the art of looking over the written word and deciphering meaning and context.

    MUFON? Is, or has, this ever been a credible and unbiased organization with the hidden agenda that anything goes just for the sake of primping a database posing as credible information? I believe that James Carrion answered that question awhile back.

    The "unbiased" use in the above probably should be taken more in "tongue/cheek" fashion since we all have bias towards this phenomenon. Some are more open in disclosing their bias than others.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Thursday, July 18, 2013  

  • Can we get something straight here re when Bruce references me.

    UFOMystic is not my site. I don't own it, I never have, and the domain name is not mine. I have no control over it.

    Rather, I am someone who - just as with Greg Bishop, Regan Lee and many others - was invited to write for the site by the owner of the site.

    I only knew about the site being down when a couple of people asked me about its status. So, it's nothing to do with me.

    So, when Bruce says: "I was surprised to find UFO Mystic has vanished as NR seems to have consolidated his focus on his literary output..." I'm not sure what prompts that.

    Over the years I have seen people, time and again, mistakenly thinking I have ties to UFOMystic beyond being invited to write for it, which I don't and never have.

    My link to UFOMystic is no different to if Rich invited me to post articles to his site.

    By Blogger Nick Redfern, at Thursday, July 18, 2013  

  • IF UFOMystic was still up and running, I would still be writing for it. My enthusiasm for the subject is as high as it ever was, albeit in different directions than, say, 20 years ago. I was writing for UM as late as the end of last week. So, it's demise (or temporary demise) is totally unconnected to my writings outside of UM or my attitudes to the subject, or enthusiasm for it.

    By Blogger Nick Redfern, at Thursday, July 18, 2013  

  • Lesley Gunter (granted, not one of Ufology's "A-list stars") has essentially mothballed her blog, which was a daily posting of links with little original content from her. But even so she was a stalwart, and it's an indication even the second tier is retiring from the field.

    Ufology's "renaissance" (for lack of a better word) began in the early 90s, fueled by Bob Lazar's allegations about Area 51 and followed by the immense popularity of the X-Files and Larry King's regular UFO broadcasts.

    These have faded into the distant past now, along with any serious interest in UFOs among the wider general public. Now, UFOs and cat video stories are filler on slow news days.

    With the viciousness of the personal vendettas pursued by so many still interested in UFOs, as well as the continuing unproven and often insane claims ranging from alien abductions to anti-government conspiracy theories to underground bases to shape-shifting reptilians to crashed saucers, Ufology has painted itself as a "ship of fools" to rest of the world.

    No wonder neither the media nor professional scientists will take UFOs seriously and keep them at arm's length (something journalist Billy Cox continually whines about, seemingly unaware of how crazy Ufology looks to everyone but him).

    Ufology is its own worst enemy, and when it dies (which it may well be doing now) its death will be a suicide.

    By Blogger purrlgurrl, at Thursday, July 18, 2013  

  • Leslie Gunter and Regan Lee embarrassed women in the UFO field by aligning themselves with and promoting one of the most vulgar persons ever to enter the UFO arena; a man masturbating the English language to appear intelligent when he was anything but.

    They killed their own credibility thereby, which is what many UFO mavens do, by not paying attention to the nonsense and crap they extol.

    PG is right, and we've noted this in posts, long ago....Ufology has a death wish.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, July 18, 2013  

  • PG:

    Ufology, as a body, may indeed spiral down into self-destruction. And let's face it, all paranormal research has its day.

    Table-rapping was big in Victorian times. The Bemuda Triangle had its day, as did massive interest in astrology, fairies etc etc.

    One day, Ufology will indeed go the same way.

    I dare say there will be people who will continue to do research. I certainly will, as long as I have an enthusiasm for it. The day that goes, is the day I stop.

    But, I won't mourn Ufology if it goes. Those who will mourn it will likely be the ones who have no life outside of it.

    But, if the field does collapse, then those tragic characters who can't switch off, or who stare at the ceiling at midnight worrying about Roswell, will finally get laid, see a bit of the outside world, and live.

    So, the end of Ufology can serve a useful purpose, in terms of making certain people in the field into functional members of society again.

    By Blogger Nick Redfern, at Thursday, July 18, 2013  

  • The current sense of discouragement concerning UFO research is probably understandable but hey, guys, let's not lump serious and important UFO cases with table-rapping, astrology and dancing fairies. There is substantial (I would even say overwhelming) evidence that the major U.S. military and intelligence services have ALWAYS taken certain UFO reports seriously....and tried to cover them up. There are now enough official documents in the public domain to establish that beyound all doubt. Something strange is and has been going on for some time
    and the government's intelligence community has always been interested. I don't see the same level of concern over Bigfoot sightings or haunted house reports. So lumping solid UFO reports with spirit readings is comparing apples with oranges.

    Skeptics could claim that there are no solid UFO reports. Well here's one that gets almost no attention and critics are free to explain it in conventional terms: On May 3, 1957, Captain Gordon Cooper (later Mercury Astronaut)sent a two man crew out at Edwards Air force to film some precision jet landings. Later that day the crew reported to Cooper that a silent saucer had flown in, extended 3 landing gears, and set down 50 yeards away and that they had shot 35mm still photos and motion picture film of the saucer. Cooper was told to develop the film, make no prints, and send it to Washington...which he did. He also says that he looked at some of the negatives before sending them, and that they showed the saucer as described. Nothing was ever heard from Washington..."as if the incident never happened."

    There are really only two possibilites here. Either Gordon Cooper is a liar (and the two photographers are liars) OR the incident really happened and was covered up because it was (shall we say) unconvential.

    Overall conclusion: Despite the nonsense and the fruits and nuts that inhabit this subject, some UFO's are "serious business" and we can't just fold up our tents and go away.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Thursday, July 18, 2013  

  • Nick
    The reason the connection was made was due to your comment that you were closing all of your various blogs in order to consolidate monitoring them and subsequently I followed your posted link to your new website and this was done the day after I went to catch up with UFO Mystic and found it had vanished, and so I am surprised it was a form of synchronicity rather than intent although the result is the same.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Thursday, July 18, 2013  

  • BTW
    I suspect that the situation is very similar to other movements that were comparatively underground at some point and eventually became respectable through mass media.
    As a result, their focus became diluted as their original aim was lost to an entertainment factor.

    Just as seance parties became the thing during the Civil War, or the "hippy" culture being created by the mass media, it then follows that certain individuals (for various reasons) then become self proclaimed spokesmen for such popular movements that then eventually morph into stereotypes, or if you will dumbed down for the masses.

    Posturing and the steering of what becomes more of a belief system rather than a quest ensues.

    Once the inner core has been diluted by popularity, then when the popularity wanes, and this once underground becomes sort of a shell, a cultural artifact, everyone proclaims it to be dead.

    Yet the SPR ( for example ) is very alive and well, as far as spiritualism is concerned, although it resembles nothing as it was one hundred years ago. It went back underground. Ufology as it was, is dead and is at the end of it's tether as a cultural artifact, a belief system and will eventually go back underground. They never really go away, they either morph into new forms or retain a handful of adherents.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Thursday, July 18, 2013  

  • Using the term "ufology" was not helpful either.

    I did a paper in college, "Handwriting Analysis as a Diagnostic Tool" (Abnormal Psychology class.)

    The books I used, in part, were based upon something called "graphology" and another that tried to one-up "graphology" by calling itself "Graphoanalysis" (Bunker).

    Maybe if Ufology were called ufoanalysis it would have a more legitimate cachet.

    (I kid.)

    Trying to feign "science" by adopting a science extension -- ology -- didn't help, doesn't help.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, July 18, 2013  

  • Hey Bruce
    Yeah, I understand that re the statement re my blogs, but my point was that UFOMystic is not mine, nor has it ever been. I was invited to write for it by the owner.

    By Blogger Nick Redfern, at Thursday, July 18, 2013  

  • Hey Dominick,

    When you say: "...let's not lump serious and important UFO cases with table-rapping, astrology and dancing fairies..."

    my point was not to suggest that all these should be lumped together in terms of credibility levels (or lack of credibility).

    My words, as you'll see if you go back, were in relation to the fact that astrology, table-rapping etc were once extremely popular.

    But, history has shown that interest in unexplained phenomena changes over the years, to where something that was once very popular eventually becomes sidelined and obscure.

    I see no reason why that trend should not apply to UFOs.

    But my point was that it doesn't matter if, one day, there is no more UFO scene.

    If people are still doing solid work and looking for answers, it doesn't matter if there are no magazines or conferences, because if someone finds the answers, that will far outweigh the scene itself anyway.

    By Blogger Nick Redfern, at Thursday, July 18, 2013  

  • RRRGroup -

    "What's in a name? That which we call Roswell
    By any other name would smell...."

    "Tis not so deep as a well, nor wide as a Foster ranch gouge, but mind you tis enough...."

    "Alas, poor Kaufmann! I knew him, Randle: a fellow
    of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy: he hath
    borne me on his back a thousand times; and now, how
    abhorred in my imagination it is!"

    By Blogger Chuck Finley, at Thursday, July 18, 2013  

  • On further reflection, the study of the UFO phenomena will possibly shift to a broader scope of that of studying momentary shifts in cognitive functions or short delusional episodes that may/or may not have a pathological element.

    I know that the above is what landed me in this UFO "land of Oz" where there are numerous men lurking behind the curtain.

    I believe that the psychological element is paramount to individuals such as Gilles F. and myself, who are evaluating this phenomena.

    Cases such as Roswell only impart the evidence of obsessive compulsive components to the overall thinking of Ufology.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Thursday, July 18, 2013  

  • Tim
    I suspect you are right in terms of looking at the phenomenon through an evolution of theories that are broader in scope that encompass other aspects of the anomalous. I began as a kid with science fiction dreams that at one point in time seemed to become a near reality and a lot of water has passed under the bridge since then. Now I keep an eye on developments in physics and neurology, and so, I think "ufology" can transform itself with a open mind and stop characterizing itself as the study of literal extraterrestrials, and could gain some respect back from the scientific community. The problem as I see it, is that there is a self created safety zone of comfort of nuts and bolts , which strikes me as highly ironic, this unstated reluctance to explore new horizons. It is literally stuck in the 1950's and consequently, since it has not evolved, it has withered to the point of self parody, and those who are stuck somehow cannot step back and acknowledge that. Whats that saying? After failing, if you approach the same problem with the same methodology and expect different results, that's a hallmark of behavioral lunacy.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Friday, July 19, 2013  

  • Rich
    RE: Shakespeare..You might be onto something as a acquaintance of mine, a history professor, attained her doctorate by analyzing the political swipes carried by nursery rhymes within the historical and political context of the era which they were made popular. Richard the Third always appeared to be more of a diatribe of agitprop than a it is a study of the human condition.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Friday, July 19, 2013  

Post a Comment

<< Home