UFO Conjecture(s)

Sunday, January 05, 2014

Ufology: A lack of dignity and class

One problem for the UFO phenomenon is that it is parented by a, generally, sleazy bunch of overseers.

In my objection to science, I didn’t note that its practitioners, scruffy as they may be, function with an academic decorum, generally, making their pronouncements, as crazy as they may be, acceptable to laymen and women, the media – the great unwashed even.

In UFO circles, we get such things as this: “Who Forted?” – A punny site, maybe full of great material (I’ve never sought it out because of its obtuse title) but one that sacrifices dignity and good taste for a catchy sobriquet.

Yet that’s the least of ufology’s problems. The core residents of the UFO community are crass and ill-educated, not just scummy-looking but scummy sounding and without logic or intellectual abilities.

The late Richard Hall, bless his soul, ranted about the lack of intelligence proffered by those who saturated the now-dead UFO UpDates. He was right, of course.

The mean-spirited and vulgar stance of some UpDate insiders drove off those with a touch of sophistication and reserve.

Why is the British/PBS show Downton Abbey so popular, even among the proletariat?

It smacks of a refined society that we in America, and especially among UFO aficionados, have long ago abandoned,

Add to that the psychotic ravings we get for comments here – not posted by the way – and we see examples of how society and civilization itself has sunk into a miasma of degraded and sometimes pathological behavior.

UFOs, as a phenomenon, has an uphill climb all by itself, to get acceptance by moderate and sensible persons who might have a chance at unraveling the obnoxious mystery.

Take into account that moderate and sensible persons have to skirt or overcome the dregs of humanity to get at UFO material and evidence, the chore becomes Sisyphean.

I try to maintain a modicum of sanity by associating with the likes of a Paul Kimball, or those Brits with their inherent reserve (Nick Redfern, Nick Pope, and David Clarke), or a Cullan Hudson.

And say what you will about Kevin Randle, he has never, to my knowledge, been vulgar or undignified at his blog or in person, a rarity for a man who’s been around the UFO block.

So, while I’m hanging in there with this blog, for a mite longer, I’ll be even less tolerant of goofy comments and attempted broadsides from a few psychopaths who still linger nearby.

But, as for ufology, I see it as a catch-all for all that is degraded in humanity – a place where the unaccepted members of society congregate to spew their vile, disgustingly stupid asides, and therefore will eschew the term as best as I can, because ufology as a word and a practice is demeaning to what man was meant to be.



  • Hi Rich,

    Speaking of Kevin Randle, not too long ago he wrote a glowing review on his blogspot of the book: "The Coyame Incident" by Noe Torres and Ruben Uriarte (with illustrator Neil Riebe). These two ufologist/writers are excellent examples of the dumbing-down of Ufology,imo. I posted a criticial comment to that blog entry and one of the writers became upset with me.

    Anyway, Torres and Uriarte are terrible writers who apparently don't use an editor or are unable to edit themselves (which should be a red flag for anyone taking their investigative skills seriously). I read their previous book "Aliens in the Forest: The Cisco Grove UFO Encounter"(the fascinatingly weird Donald Shrum CE seige from the 1960s)....Loaded with spelling errors, repeat sentences and the works of illustrator Neil Riebe who draws cartoons that seem geared for 6th graders or younger *and* did not represent Shrum's own descriptions which Torres & Uriarte had written.

    But, I don't think we can look at ufologists without looking at the flip side...the debunkers, who really are mean spirited. None of them have meaningful information to share and some are downright laughable and oddballs.

    The Amazing Randi....that peculiar santa beard he sports and his reputation for...ahem...grooming young men and the cultlike devotion he has from his online skeptoid fans.

    Then there's bow-tie sporting, makeup wearing Bill Nye The Science Guy who pings anorexic and appears to have had so many facelifts that he now looks more elvin than human. [Smarmy Michael Shermer is getting close to Nye in the facelift dept.]

    ~ Susan

    By Blogger brownie, at Sunday, January 05, 2014  

  • Susan..

    I noted that Kevin wasn't a vulgarian, not a good reviewer of UFO books.

    UFO skeptics are part of the UFO crowd, whether they admit or not.

    And, yes, they can be snotty or worse.

    And while I'm dealing with a heavy load of media "friends" on Facebook, I notice that they are a bit more civil than those in the UFO community but not any classier or smarter.

    The crassness and crudity of the UFO crowd is palpable and discouraging, often disgusting.

    There re exceptions, you being one, and Larry who visits here.

    However, my generality holds up I think.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, January 05, 2014  

  • Yes, point well taken Rich! Kevin Randle is a gentleman. No vulgar, crass nor mean outbursts that I've ever noticed in his blog.

    I definitely observed (and in a couple of instances been the recipient of) what you've noticed. There is a crassness, nastiness and downright visciousness from some of the established players in the field of ufology as well as many relative newbies. [W. Streiber, A. Streiber, A. Bell, N. Birnes, J. Vaeni, A. Lehmberg and some others come to mind] It all reminds me of John Keel warning off people (in "The Mothman Prophecies") who might be vulnerable to the instability that the subject itself yields.

    ~ Susan

    By Blogger brownie, at Sunday, January 05, 2014  

  • Susan,

    You've named some of the worst of the bunch.

    Fortunately, I've been able to marginalize or bury in the delete pile a few of them who've tried to insert themselves here.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, January 05, 2014  

  • Thank God! ;-)


    By Blogger brownie, at Sunday, January 05, 2014  

  • Who Forted? is a fortean blog. They do cover UFOs here and there but they don't write lengthy treatises on the topic. Theirs is primarily a humor site. While they love the material they post, they seem to love lampooning it just as much. I wouldn't hold them up as an example of your premise. They are not UFOlogists; they are more like the Colbert Report for the paranormal.

    By Blogger Cullan Hudson, at Monday, January 06, 2014  

  • They get a lot of attention from The Anomalist, and therefore show up at the fringe of media, which makes UFOs (and the paranormal) even kinkier than they are usually.

    Either UFOs are a joke, or they aren't.

    Even people in the midst of the topic aren't sure.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, January 06, 2014  

  • "...because ufology as a word and a practice is demeaning to what man was meant to be."

    Sorry, I do not follow you. What was man "meant to be"?

    Do you consider man has done what was intended for him, and that UFOs have played any part in it?

    I am a bit baffled here!

    I am even more baffled why you bring Downton Abbey into it. Is it shown in the US, by the way?

    By Blogger cda, at Monday, January 06, 2014  

  • I'm surprised CDA that you are baffled by a plea for civilized behavior.

    Yes, Downton Abbey is shown here and is a big deal, meaning, as I see it, a desire for the class and sophistication that now eludes society, here in America anyway.

    Ufology, and its practitioners, example how low society has sunk.

    You seem to give up your British reserve to muck around in it, here and at Kevin's blog, whereas persons like David Clarke, Redfern, and Pope -- your fellow Brits -- choose to remain out of such belabored venues.

    And I'm not talking about Kevin Randle -- a fine fellow -- but those he allows into his blog, people I'm sure he wouldn't want as house guests.

    Man was meant to be something lofty and superb, as the book Human Destiny, by Lecomte du Nouy makes clear.

    Ufology is not a path to or a practice that helps man achieve that state of existence.

    (Don't pretend to be thick; you know damn well what I'm talking about.)


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, January 06, 2014  

  • I think you generalise too much on ufology and its practitioners. Personally I do not find the UFO 'crowd' any worse in terms on manners and etiquette than debaters on other subjects. Some of them are less well educated than others, but what do you expect?

    Fringe science always brings out the extremists of all kinds (like religion and politics), and some will be, inevitably, of a lower order of intelligence, perception and education than others.

    And yes, some are rude and insulting. But this is, presumably, what "they were meant to be". We were not all created equal, whatever you might like to believe.

    OK maybe we were all created equal, but some are more equal than others. (Apologies to George Orwell).

    By Blogger cda, at Monday, January 06, 2014  

  • CDA:

    You seem to want to patty-cake with the slime who make up the UFO community.

    Let me assure you that the UFO crowd is a rowdy bunch of buffoons.

    That you do not see it goes to your desire to hobnob with the bunch and wish to overlook their shortcomings and boorish behavior.

    My generality holds up.

    And I suspect that a new book by Paul Kimball, that will appear this year, will bear me out.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, January 06, 2014  

Post a Comment

<< Home