UFO Conjectures

Wednesday, January 14, 2015

Researching UFO episodes – Old and New

Some comments in my post about Donald Menzel and radar tells me much about how UFO devotees (not researchers, just plain folks) are inept when it comes to scrutinizing UFO incidents.

Real doctors, those who want to cure their patients, look, myopically, at those patients to discern what they can from the little, imperceptible clues that might be missed but would actually tell them (the doctors) what ill or ills may be making the patient sick.

My posting on Cleckley’s The Mask of Sanity also insists that psychologists look at those almost hidden attributes that tell us whether a person is psychopathic or not.

(No one reading here has read the book I surmise, although it’s available as a free PDF online.)

Oliver Sacks' neurological-inspired tomes tell us the same thing: it’s the little things that often tell doctors (neurologists) what’s troubling a patient.

Now, here, I get superficial read-outs from my regulars whom I appreciate, truly, even though I think they are less than intellectual or perceptive about the topics I register, some in their field of expertise.

(Only Larry Lemke fulfills the honorarium of “intellectual” when he comments.)

In the matter of radar as problematic (possibly!) when it comes to UFOs I remind Bruce Duensing that Goliath was taken down by a slung rock.

That an extraterrestrial craft, as unknown a thing as we have (unreal or real, both) may be vulnerable to radar’s attributes, although even I think that’s iffy…isn’t impossible.

To conjecture about such a possibility [sic] is grist here – UFO Conjecture(s) – so long as it takes into account what radar is and can do or not do as we know from the data and physics of radar.

I ragged on the fellows at Randle’s blog for their conjectures – because those conjectures were juvenile and loony, the bulk of what Mr. Randle allows to pump up his hit-count.

My point here is that if one wants to disjoint the idea about radar being disruptive, within its physical parameters, they better have, at their disposal, all the info, online and in books, that present the whole radar panoply, and the experiments, over the years, attached to radar.

That Roswell was a radar event can’t be dismissed out of hand, as loopy as they may seem to be.

That’s my point.