UFO Conjecture(s)

Sunday, July 19, 2015

Goodbye Ufology?

I’ve written this so many times that it’s become a redux redundancy, but it now is clear that scientific endeavors, such as the Pluto fly-by and Mars probes, have captured the public’s imagination and interest, whereas UFOs and ufology are now relegated to the alley of disgraced subject matter or topics, one so debased that to bring it up in polite society will get you laughed out of the room.

Take a look at the comments at blogs and sites – I suggest Kevin Randle’s blog, where the postings by Mr. Randle are sensible (but passé to the point of irrelevancy) but the comments show a readership that is desperate to foist nonsense on everyone who tunes into the blog, and even evinces aspects of insanity.

The babbling is embarrassing, and examples how low ufology and UFOs have sunk into a miasma of effluvia.

The topic stinks, and is as dead as our recently deceased friend Bruce Duensing, a man hoping to elevate UFOs (or UAPs, as he liked to title them) to some degree of scholarly discussion.

Unfortunately, he wasn’t able to achieve that aim and died before he saw that the May 5th debacle and current scientific endeavors have killed UFOs and ufology that he hoped to redeem from the crazies who’ve captured the topic(s).

Even Anomalist is struggling to hold UFOs in its queue of paranormal topics of interest.

So, ufology and UFOs, friends, are over, all but the dying gasps of some psychotic die-hards. (Need I name them, my name on that list also?)

RR

15 Comments:

  • The return of the TV mini series,X FILES, will restart some ufo interest. But, generally,you are probably correct,Rich.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Sunday, July 19, 2015  

  • RR:

    You are being provocative. You and I both know that the 'death' of ufology has been predicted many times before, but it always rises from the dead. Neither is it any more dotty than, say, 50 years ago when plenty of crazies were in it (contactees, psychic channelers, airy fairy animals in space, etc).

    So I address ufology: arise and present yourself to us eager people again. We know you can do it. Ignore these negativists and death forecasters. You will NEVER DIE. You will be with us forever and a day. Never mind these crazy bloggers either. They have nothing else to talk about except climate change and the endless and tiresome middle-east situation. Arise ufology - the world, and the universe, await you!

    By Blogger cda, at Sunday, July 19, 2015  

  • Hahahaha CDA...

    You're whistling past the graveyard: Dominick and I see the handwriting on the wall.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, July 19, 2015  

  • Props to Dominick's mentioning of the new X-Files series. I'm a big fan, got started watching it in the early to mid 1990s...got my son hooked on it (it's an obsession for him, thanks to his father).

    BTW...the series was pure science fiction with a heavy emphasis on "fiction." And one could throw in fodder for the conspiracy buffs. But mainly the series was fun for us to suspend one's skepticism and enjoy being entertained.

    I have my doubts that the series revival will "revive" ufology. Nor should it. Ufology may have howled it's final shriek.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Sunday, July 19, 2015  

  • Tim:

    I never watched the X-Files but may give the show a peek when it airs again.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, July 19, 2015  

  • Rich, you can read synopsis of all the original episodes and download what strikes your fancy, but I'd stick to the stand-alone episodes that had nothing to do with UFOs. They were superior in every way to the muddled mess of the UFO arc. Unfortunately, it was that which made the show famous.

    By Blogger Ron, at Sunday, July 19, 2015  

  • Thanks, Ron...

    I'll give 'em a try.

    (I read in EW that the reboot may assuage the disappointment with the original UFO broadcasts).

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, July 19, 2015  

  • Actually, there's one UFO-related episode I'd recommend that's really very good. Season 3 Episode 20: "Jose Chung's From Outer Space." It runs outside their usual UFO arc of stories and while it has substance, it's also not as dark as the usual fare.

    By Blogger Ron, at Sunday, July 19, 2015  

  • Grazie, Ron

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, July 19, 2015  

  • Yes the fly-by is compelling and, as a wake up call it may bring about some correction in our subject. But much of the craziness will surely remain. And as has has been pointed out, the ancient astronauts folk have a lot of media money and spin a good tale for entertainment.

    Your previous thoughts on the images and writings of the ancients had me consider how few were literate in those times. Today we have more of us literate and yet we have still have a great mass of the semi-literate and uncritical of internet and media hype.

    The scientific speculation is an interesting area for conjecture. For example, I do find it curious that we went to the moon using slide rules and 1969 technology and we have not been back. Is there nothing to learn there?

    By Blogger Bryan Daum, at Sunday, July 19, 2015  

  • Bryan:

    I don't mind the AA speculations. They, as you note, entertain but are possible, just improbable to my way of thinking.

    However, I have a posting coming up that allows for the ancient astronaut theory, somewhat anyway.

    Surely something or someone(s), odd and out-of-the-ordinary, intervened in human affairs in the past.

    What that was or who it was remains a conjectural mystery.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, July 19, 2015  

  • My own opinion is as following:

    If we want to progress in the subject of UFOs, we need to start three independent fields of study:

    The first is to study the psychosocial aspects of the subject: the genesis of a modern folklore and mythology that originated
    from unverified reports, the mechanisms of the creation of a belief system, and so on. Gilles Fernandez, David Clarke and others already did considerable work on this.

    The second field is related to the perceptual and psychological aspects of reporting of UFO reports and some other "visionary" experiences such as abductions and contacts. Sleep paralysis, hypnopompic and hypnagogic hallucinations, altered states of consciousness, long term memory alteration and confabulation are subjects that should be studied in relation to UFO (and even other paranormal subjects) reports.

    The third field, which is the one I am currently working, is to discover if some UFO reports are not caused by rare or still unknown natural phenomena such as the controversial "earth lights". For that, a field observation project with
    instruments is required. I met several witnesses who claimed repeatedly observing weird things at the same location and I consider their reports truly intriguing. But as Zoamchomsky correctly pointed out (I found his opinions extreme, but I have to agree on most of them), anecdotal evidence is not scientific evidence, and quantitative measurements must be gathered to do true science. The project is to do instrumental observation at selected locations where recurrent sightings of a particular nature (luminous spheres or shapes seen close to the ground) are reported. This is research in progress. If the project is successful, the new phenomenon should be studied for itself, as we study now sprites and blue jets.

    Best regards,

    Jean

    By Blogger Rare phenomena lover, at Monday, July 20, 2015  

  • Thank you Jean...

    You have an eminently sensible approach.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, July 20, 2015  

  • A question that has bothered me for a while: Why did legitimate, diligent researchers such as John Keel, Jacques Vallee and others, who from what I have read had open minds and weren't following a prior agenda, had new thoughtful insights and make interesting discoveries, publish what they found, and then seem to give up on it? (Vallee yes kept it up somewhat, but even he seemed to have given up the search). If they had discovered something unprecedented, why stop at the point where they got to, why not keep going to try to get to the deep (dark) roots of the subject?

    By Blogger Muhammad Nawaz, at Tuesday, July 21, 2015  

  • Muhammad:

    I think the phenomenon finally just wears down those who pursue it.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, July 21, 2015  

Post a Comment

<< Home