UFO Conjecture(s)

Friday, July 18, 2014

The Stupidity of UFO Mavens

My god....what's wrong with UFO-interested people?

Are they totally ignorant or insane?

My ideas about speculation have raised havoc with a few readers here, David Rudiak among them.

The consternation comes from persons who, apparently, think that UFO accounts and reports bespeak a reality, that flying saucers and UFOs contain extraterrestrial visitors from outer space.

They think the Aztec and Roswell tales contain actual, real accounts of dead alien bodies and an ET presence.

That I suggest those tales are speculation really irks these people. They have come to believe those two tales (and others) are true or real.

It's a matter of fanatic faith for them, like the existence of God.

No wonder that skeptics get berserk with these folks.

No UFO report or event has ever proved anything, except that something odd was seen in the air or on the ground.

Again, Roswell generated the Aztec story. Aztec is a fiction. Roswell was an odd event, far from settled as a flying disk crash.

One can only speculate about both: why Aztec was created and what really happened near Roswell.

To think there are facts or data proving either was a real ET event is insane, intellectually.

The thought processes expressed here, in comments, show delusional thinking at its worst.

I'm embarrased to have allowed such comments, and I'm chagrinned to think I've quartered here a raft of ravings that normal people can see are stupidity in the extreme.

RR

17 Comments:

  • In the enjoyment of reading your provocative blog, I have been struck by the inability of those mentioned to think in other categories.
    Another observation has been is the focus on wavering, so called facts that for over seventy years have failed to produce anything of value, yet they persist.
    They have even gone so far to become encyclopedic in the gathering of minutia.
    What has been lost in this narrow band of consideration is the wealth of other possibilities inherent in the subject.
    For example, it's resemblance to other parapsychological phenomenon something that I just completed a long exploration of in my own venue as well as the co-joining of physics and arcane and ancient metaphysical views which are interesting.
    This could have been a venue for exploring our own past quests for the truth in other categories but most are unschooled in this and are incapable ( apparently) to demonstrate other venues of thought. One trick ponies on a narrow band that broadcasts and yet cannot receive anything that challenges their mindsets.
    For many, having a dialog with them is an utter waste of time and is redundant to the Nth degree.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

  • Dialoguing with most of these people, Bruce, is like talking with a bunch of monkeys.

    I haven't seen such ignorance in other venues we host, media among them.

    It's frustrating.

    Simple elements of thought and thinking, taught in university, are absent.

    It's not only sad; it's pathetic.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

  • Rich, you tend to take an esoteric view on the subject. A view that I enjoy as I find it thought provoking. That tends to be a problem for some, but it's not your problem, it's their's.

    As I posted on my blog recently concerning one of my detractors, you can't argue with a mad man. From a psychiatric and psychological point of view, you and I are well aware that is true.

    Its the obsession that hinders any rational conversation.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

  • Why are you "embarrassed to have allowed such comments"? If you start a blog on contentious subjects you must expect extreme comments from both sides. You must also remember that many more people read these blogs than actually post comments.

    Thus you have no way of knowing how many agree or disagree with you, or the feelings of those who read it.

    I am guessing here, but I assume most readers of your blog(s), as with other blogs, say nothing at all. It is only the minority that make comments. By making comments they may or may not start a debate, which in turn may or may not become a heated debate.

    In the case of UFOs heated debates are common and can result in friction, name calling, insults and so on. That is because people have strong views.

    The comments are not your fault, but in some cases you can unwittingly draw undesirable people into the debate. It so happens that topics such as Roswell, Aztec, Rendlesham, Washington radar, Socorro, and others, almost always result in fierce debate. But most UFO cases do not provoke people anything like these cases do.

    There are many other topics, such as alternative medicine, astrology, psychic phenomena, etc that provoke the same debates, and these have a far greater history than ufology. Arguments about alternative medicine will certainly go on, literally forever. I do not think the same applies to ufology.

    But I could be wrong!

    By Blogger cda, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

  • Good post cda.

    I agree, strange and ambiguous topics like UFOs draw in extremes from both sides.
    I find it strange that so many people have already made up their minds without real hard evidence. Extreme skeptics and believers are nearly identical in their ideology and thinking. It is faith based. Both extreme views are narrow minded.

    Although, I think the UFO debate may go on for many years to come. The hardcore believers will always find evidence to support their views, and the skeptics will always find ways to poke holes in it.

    At the very least this blog will serve as a place where people can study those extreme views and the nature of faith based beliefs.

    I try to remain open to both sides. I don't necessarily think the believers are always incorrect, yet in some cases hard line skeptics make great points that I can agree with.

    I guess my point is that every argument or debate needs to be approached individually. Blanket statements or stances generally do not work when it comes to UFOs.

    By Blogger Daniel Hurd, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

  • RR: You state:

    "Again, Roswell generated the Aztec story".

    No it did not. I you insist it did, please provide some evidence that any of those involved with Aztec had ever heard of the Roswell affair.

    Roswell only became ET in 1978 when STF unfortunately got into it. Aztec was created (with the ET aspect) in 1948 or 49.

    There is simply NO CONNECTION and no way Aztec evolved from Roswell.

    There you are: I have stirred up further debate, possibly. You gotta watch out for guys like me.

    By Blogger cda, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

  • CDA:

    I know you think Roswell wasn't on anyone's radar until Friedman's intrusion in 1978, but that is a bias, not based in fact...as I assume David Rudiak might challenge, if he isn't offput by my remarks lately.

    I'll do you a solid, upcoming, and post the time-line and connections (again!) that make me "think" Aztec was created by Silas Newton, from an introduction of the Roswell event to him (by Bernerd Ray?)...

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

  • Here we go again...

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

  • Not really Bruce....

    I'm just placating CDA.

    I don't plan on really resurrecting the debate.

    He and others will eventually realize I've moved on, if they're paying attention.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

  • Hi Rich,

    It's not a debate - it's people yelling past each other. There is a difference.

    Paul

    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

  • Well yes, Frank Edwards mentions the Roswell case in his book "Flying saucers" serious business. I have my own copy of the book in spanish.

    a search on the net provice the following description another book

    "Also in 1966 in The Search for Life on Other Worlds by a Captain David C. Holmes, U.S. Navy states that since 1947 there have been 10,147 reported UFO sightings and alleges that somewhere in Wright Patterson Air Force Base hidden away are embalmed bodies of humanoid figures pulled from wreckage of space craft in the South West."

    http://roswell.greyfalcon.us/roswell2.html

    So CDA is wrong when blaming STF of inventing Roswell.

    By Blogger Don Maor, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

  • Thanks, Paul...

    I stand corrected.

    (I was trying to pretend that what I have going on here was something worthwhile.)

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

  • In a world where they are putting wine in beer cans, Rich, are you really surprised at the stupidity?

    http://www.thedrinksbusiness.com/2013/11/pinot-noir-in-a-can-launched/

    We are in the End Times, as this is one of the seven signs of the Apocalypse!

    PK

    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

  • Indeed, Paul...

    I'm headin' for the mountains.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, July 18, 2014  

  • If there were no obvious gaping holes in most UFO claims, I think skeptics would be relatively quiet on the issue. I started skepticism with research on pseudo-medicines, as CDA mentioned, but calling it alternative medicine.
    If it wasn't such a horrible bucket of wild claims and unsupported crap, then alternative medicine wouldn't stir skepticism in us as much as it does.
    RR, I appreciate how you can write posts critical of the seemingly major UFO skeptics, yet then write a bunch of more posts which highlight clearly and agree with our position.

    Thank you,
    Woody

    By Blogger Woody, at Saturday, July 19, 2014  

  • Rich,

    I stumbled over this article http://medicalxpress.com/news/2014-07-attitudes-dont-extremely.html

    It opens by saying, "What if the best way to change minds isn't to tell people why they're wrong, but to tell them why they're right? Scientists tried this recently and discovered that agreeing with people can be a surprisingly powerful way to shake up strongly held beliefs."

    The problem with our skeptical and believer friends isn't that they are wrong per se... it is that they are "logically challenged" to accept or understand ideas which are contrary to their current beliefs.

    By Blogger Joel Crook, at Saturday, July 19, 2014  

  • Thanks, Woody...

    I try to remain open-minded about things -- while admitting my own often stupidity.

    Life is complicated and odd.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, July 19, 2014  

Post a Comment

<< Home