UFO Conjectures

Tuesday, September 15, 2015

Nick Redfern on his latest MIB [Men in Black] book



The Marginalization of Ufology or Its Actual Demise.

In college I did a paper: Handwriting Analysis as a Diagnostic Tool.

Handwriting analysis was called “graphology.”

A guy named M. K. Bunker decided to one-up (à la Freud) graphology to “graphoanalysis.” (I have his book and many graphology tomes.)

With the demise of handwriting in the computer/internet era, graphology and/or graphoanalysis have become extinct, not virtually, but in actuality.

Ufology, the sobriquet of a pseudo-science, dealing ostensibly with flying saucers or UFOs, has become the catch-all for anything UFO related, no matter how tangential the connection is to the mysterious phenomenon designated as Unidentified Flying Objects, which is often altered by some who want to smarten up the designation as Unidentified Aerial Phenomena [UAP].

Like Bunker’s “Graphoanalysis” UAP can’t save “ufology.”

Ufology died, for all practical purposes, several years ago, with the final dagger to its heart coming with the May 5th, 2015 Roswell slides fiasco.

Although a few UFO enthusiast die-hards continue to flog the epithet, ufology (and UFO study) is moribund, on its final legs, as it were.

We (me and others) keep trying to resuscitate the excitement of UFO sightings that are marginalized by news media and the public and limited to classic cases with an occasional nod to relevance with an odd, current sighting now and again.

But the topic is dead, kaput, never more, like Monty Python’s parrot.

To persist in the bromide that UFOs are still being seen doesn’t give life to the phenomenon, which has become a paranormal ghost of an aerial kind.

So, when do sensible people – I like to think I may be one – give up the topic as a matter of daily blogging or debate?

(Yes, Kevin Randle can still rally the Roswellians, but that has become a sad commentary on intelligence and psychopathology.)

We’ll see…