UFO Conjecture(s)

Friday, August 02, 2013

UFOs: What Were They?

UFO buffs have got to realize and/or admit that the UFO phenomenon has faded, from view, literally, and from the public consciousness.

Yes, UFOs are allegedly still be sighted; that is observations of odd things in the skies are being reported by people – but not being ubiquitously photographed, even though almost everyone has a camera or smart-phone camera ability at their disposal and in their hand(s).

Solving the nature of the phenomenon has become daunting, even improbable, more so than in the past, when the enigma was palpable but still eluded scrutiny, even by those (military, serious UFO researchers, covert scientist, et al.) who pursued the mysterious lights or objects earnestly.

Exerting energy today on trying to understand UFOs must be relegated to a retrospective, forensic examination of past UFO events/sightings, where data and information is a little more substantial than the ephemeral fly-bys offered as UFO sightings by the phenomenon’s die-hards.

Looking at past UFO sightings/events galls many former UFO aficionados; they see such examinations as futile, even silly.

But spectacular UFOs, by their current absence, in the skies or via encounters, leave UFO mavens no other choice, but that of re-studying the things as they were.

(This is what motivates Kevin Randle’s Roswell Dream Team; they have nothing like a Roswell incident or anything else that will spur a renewed interest in UFOs that they can capitalize upon or salvage their years of wasted time and efforts on the elusive phenomenon.)

UFOs are now a kind of archaeological topic or historical remnant, to be study likewise.

We’ll continue to nibble at the UFO conundrum, past and (niggardly) present incarnations, integrating the subject matter into a cultural context when possible.

Yet we are really only left with the question atop this piece: UFOs, what were they?



  • The obvious answer remains an unknown. The context of that era ( to my mind) cannot be separated from the very real threat of nuclear war as well as the largely unexpressed anxiety that came from shared, high levels of uncertainty. Another is the dawn of space travel. Combine these two and it's reasonable to suggest that if you add the two together, that context is a potent brew. I am not saying that it was all in the mind, but a great deal of it was in terms of anticipation. Saviors from space, communists from space. Then add civil unrest and I am not going Hegel on you.But below the surface something unknown was operative that was, if you will, parasitic to this, borrowing, hybridizing in waves. Not quite a dream not quite a material object. I think those of us who lived through this have a sort of crib blindness to how extraordinary that era was.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Friday, August 02, 2013  

  • This reminds me of my good friend Karl Pflock's belief that we were indeed visited by extraterrestrials in the 1940s through the 1960s, but after they had a prolonged look around they left, behaviour which mirrored the European explorers in the Pacific. It always seemed the most sensible take on the ET meme to me, for those who would be inclined to accept that some UFO reports from the early period were of alien spacecraft.


    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Friday, August 02, 2013  

  • A surveillance/espionage system that's been here as long as we have. They noticed we were getting clever, did whatever they did to make themselves known. The ruling class got the message and they went back into Watcher mode. We are property.

    By Blogger Christopher Loring Knowles, at Friday, August 02, 2013  

  • I agree Christopher...

    We are owned by someone or something, surely.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, August 02, 2013  

  • Alas for the true believers, if only there was some firm evidence to support their premature conclusions about alien control.

    As for owning, free will, Rich... free will. Or have you reverted to Calvinism in your old age. ;-)

    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Friday, August 02, 2013  

  • Oh I think we're in a kind of "matrix" Paul.

    Controlled by a malicious (Evil) God or a malevolent force.

    Free will? Yes, we have free will just as quantum particles seem to have, at a micro-level, but macro-cosmically, we are controlled.

    Jung might agree.

    Determinism isn't a bad call in my book.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, August 02, 2013  

  • Rich, a malicious or malevolent God or force?

    Perhaps more of a self-detached God claiming neutrality that's simply sitting on the side line eating a bag of popcorn as the parade of civilizations pass by.

    We may well be controlled but only through the mechanisms of our own cognizant doings.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Friday, August 02, 2013  

  • So, God, Tim, commits Sins of Omission rather than sins of Commission?


    Sitting on the sideline, while Jews were slaughtered en masse, and Sudanese are slaughtered even as I'm typing this?

    Children subject to cancer before having a chance to evolve/live?

    An Evil God.

    A psychotic God, as one can see in the passage in The Hewbrew Bible where He (or his demonic nature or demi-urge) attempts to kill Moses:
    Exodus 4:24, The Old Testament.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, August 02, 2013  

  • I don't argue your view point from the Old Testament writings. That God was totally hands on and generally pissed at mankind. Man could never get it right to please him or it.

    Something happened along the way, Christ or who/whatever, but from a theological perspective, God has been hands off as you have astutely referenced some of the world's atrocities and human sufferings with no hint of divine interventions.

    Maybe the agnostics were right, we were just a cosmic screw-up from a lesser bored juvenile demiurge until the grown ups attempted to right things.

    Or, there never were Gods and we're all at the mercy of human nature with most of us betting on our "better angels" to get us through our short life span of existence.

    Kinda sucks both ways to me Rich. Yet I still hold on to a flimsy of hope that there is a purpose for our existence other than to be specimens in a giant cosmic ant farm.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Friday, August 02, 2013  

  • As a seminarian (Catholic) and a once-rabid Christian taught many things (bad and good by my Jesuit brothers), I am now inclined to defend the new book, Zealot, about Jesus by a Muslim author.

    I have written, many times, that God is dead, not metaphorically (as Nietzsche had it) but actually dead, and His second nature (Jesus) with Him.

    The Evil continues via The (Un)Holy Spirit perhaps, or the Fourth nature of the Godhead, Satan (or Evil) as Jung had it.

    At any rate, I'm not about to give God or His memory a pass.

    As Aristotle intuited, God is responsible for Evil (as the Creator of all things). Even the great Aquinas couldn't defuse that opprobrium.

    Faith and Hope don't do it for me anymore.

    I (and you and Paul) have seen too many bad things that man alone couldn't be responsible for.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, August 02, 2013  

  • I don't give God any credit for any of the good things that happen, so I don't give him any blame for the bad. If he exists, he set the wheels in motion and gave us consciousness and free will, then left us to it. I wouldn't have it any other way.


    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Friday, August 02, 2013  

  • One last response, then I'll let it be.

    I grew up in a rigid "old-school" French Catholic culture in Louisiana. I escaped parochial schooling by moving to Texas...exposed now to fundamentalism and evangelical influences.

    I was always told that Jesus loves me until I asked, "If this is true, then did Jesus love Judas." Suffice to say I wasn't cut out to be in the evangelical crowd.

    Simply, my perspective on belief has changed dramatically.

    I don't count on or await divine intervention, the rules changed after Christ (throw in anyone else into the mix)for whatever reason.

    I know that my tentatively fragile hold on faith and hope is opposite to yours, but what are the alternatives?

    Should we just put a gun to our head and pull the trigger? I merely say this in friendly sarcasm.

    Anyways, as a way to transition back to UFOs, think of the irony. If we are all befuddled by God or the lack of God, then it is reasonable to expose the parallel conundrum towards the existence of UFO phenomena.:)

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Friday, August 02, 2013  

  • Pantheism is a safe bet unless you prefer Coca-Cola. Christianity is Ufology that comes with imagined nuts and bolts, a social political movement that begat clergy as well as
    various flavors of denominations. One of America's great national past times. I prefer sweet tea and BBQ.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Friday, August 02, 2013  

  • KPs idea, while appealing to me on a gut level in that it preserves the mystery of the phenomenon, is also somewhat lacking as explanatory for the same reason.
    He shall of course remain as a friend and talented author

    By Blogger Doc_B, at Saturday, August 03, 2013  

  • Mr. Kimball -

    Unaware was I that you were tutored in this subject by the late Karl Pflock; I had heard years ago that you have a family connection of some type to Stan Friedman, and I erroneously assumed that HE was your UFO mentor....

    But anyway, I first noticed Karl in this expanded field of the extramundane when he first made a real name for himself while investigating the so-called cattle mutilations of the late 1970s - early 1980s....

    ...Karl's later use of the CUFOS Roswell research files to great personal advantage is certainly a model of Carpe Diem... though I always wondered about his claim to me the few times we met that he was an established science fiction writer; I tried to find any short story or more written by him, but I must admit failure on this point.

    (...specifically he claimed to me to be a colleague of Bob Heinlein, which might have really been true, as Karl's diminutive size likely inspired this Heinlein gem:

    "Never frighten a little man. He'll kill you."

    http://www.anvari.org/fortune/Miscellaneous_Collections/183463_never-frighten-a-little-man-hell-kill-you-lazarus-long-from-robert-a.html )

    By Blogger Kurt Peters, at Sunday, August 04, 2013  

  • It is not a popular position because it provides no satisfying answers and leads to little more then the proverbial shrug of the shoulders, but I have a learned friend who likes to make the following point as to UFO's: perhaps our ability to understand the phenomenon is akin to a chimp's ability to understand the meaning of the Lincoln Memorial. Is it not possible that the human mind simply doesn't have the horsepower necessary to understand some aspects of our universe?

    I hate this theory as, like everyone, I have an innate belief in the power of my mind to eventually comprehend all significant aspects of the world in which I live. But such intellectual conceit may blind us to the possibility that some things may just be unknowable.

    By Blogger solarity, at Sunday, August 04, 2013  

  • Solarity,

    The philosophical idea(s) that God is unknowable, along with a few other unknowables -- the meaning of life, consciousness, the real nature of the Universe, et cetera, et cetera -- allows some of us the inability to get worked up about the unknowability of UFOs.

    The mind -- our ability to think -- is curbed by the gods perhaps.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, August 04, 2013  

Post a Comment

<< Home