posted by RRRGroup at
Tuesday, July 15, 2014
Too bad that believers and skeptics don't have any kind of peer review... then again, what kind of peer review could you expect from a field where being unscientific is seen as a plus rather than a shame?-- yes, I consider the "skeptics" as unscientific.
By Joel Crook, at Tuesday, July 15, 2014
RR-...WHO will peer review the 'Bragalia's????
By Kurt Peters, at Tuesday, July 15, 2014
Ufology needs to cultivate a formal retraction process. It's rare for findings to be corrected or withdrawn, perhaps for fear of giving aid and confort to "the enemy." But even when UFO investigators change their minds, this rarely makes any impact on proponents and the fandom, perhaps because there is no central repository for such retractions.In the Nov-Dec 1994 issue of the International UFO Reporter, Walter Webb, the original investigator of the Hill case, wrote this about the spots on Betty Hill's car:"I recall viewing similar spots on my own vehicle and realized that they had a natural cause due to some sort of weather-related or road precipitate. Those spots, too, gradually faded away. I believe Betty's description of the spots was somewhat exaggerated, and in her postencounter excitement she quite naturally was looking for something on the car that might explain the "beeps." (Italics are in the original.)Wow!But in the 20 years since, has anyone noted Webb's clear dismissal of this key piece of physical evidence? Not that I can find -- and I am looking. Certainly not Kathleen Marden in her book or lectures. Certainly not Stanton Friedman, who charges skeptics with failing to look at the Hill evidence.
By Terry the Censor, at Wednesday, July 16, 2014
None of this is scientific, it is theoretical and it defy's logic. It is as subjective as who happens to be looking and it challenges rationality as it is currently defined. The liminality of it is the point and it is bound to what we do not know about consciousness itself.Its lodged between dreams of waking realities as we experience them and other possibilities.The measuring stick is thrown out the window. Unless you have experienced this sort of twilight experiential anomaly you are comparing rocks toa slice of pizza.Most just don't get the point..things are much stranger than we can assume them to be. The trickster element is our thought processes in relation to how causality operates in ways of which we don't have a clue.
By Bruce Duensing, at Wednesday, July 16, 2014
Post a Comment
A group of media guys
View my complete profile