UFO Conjecture(s)

Thursday, February 04, 2016

The Devolution of UFOs and Ufology

Yes, UFOs as a viable topic for broad discussion or concern is virtually dead, even among the most die-hard of UFO buffs.

UFOs became, in the late 40s and 50s, a hot matter for media, various militaries around the world, and a rabid coterie of people who were attracted to the evanescent phenomenon.

Interest peaked in the 50s, 60s, but started to wane in the 1970s, and now in 2016, UFOs are an insignificant matter for society, even though there remains a very small remnant of persons still interested in or attracted to the moribund phenomenon.

Alleged UFO/alien abductions no longer appear as ufological fodder.

Bizarre encounters with UFOs and creatures apparently connected to them have only become topics within the phenomenon’s lore.

Sightings and photographs of UFOs have diminished to the point of invisibility, even as fanatic UFO enthusiasts insist that UFOs still ply the skies and contrived photographs of the phenomenon continue to show up in internet venues as instigators of yawns by the public (and UFO aficionados also).

As the UFO fad has devolved (read diminished) to a less than trivial matter for society, some of us, who think we’re rational, have to move on – to consequential matters that impact us (humans).

UFOs, no matter what they were, are now, essentially, folklore.

One can ruminate about them accordingly, but to expend more than an academic interest in UFOs is tantamount to quartering time for séances, ghost-hunting, ESP, or ouija boards.

What lies at the heart of the UFO fad is grist for study perhaps but UFOs and ufology are as defunct as dinosaurs, and should be studied, if necessary, in the same way as those dead creatures are.

RR

9 Comments:

  • You mention UFO photos.

    Is it not remarkable that in the early days of ufology there were loads of photographs and even a few films of UFOs, or purported UFOs whereas now, when almost everyone carries around a photo-taking device of some kind and can send it by phone instantaneously to almost anywhere, we hardly ever hear of or see any new UFO photos?

    If UFOs were prolifreating on earth (or even in only one country) you would expect literally a deluge of UFO photographic evidence of all kinds.

    Yet we hardly get anything at all. Zilch. It is all so commonplace now that nobody cares or bothers. Or is there a much simpler reason?

    And yes, any abductee ought to be able to do a quick snap of his or her abductor as well. But alas, they never do. But I think we all know the reason, don't we?

    By Blogger cda, at Thursday, February 04, 2016  

  • One obvious reason for the lack of photos, CDA, is that the UFOs simply went away. That could be due to a lack of interest or a scarcity of resources. (After all, the USA has not been physically back to the Moon in decades, either.) Besides, there has not been a total lack of photos or film over the last 20 years. There is some excellent photo and film information from the Mexico sightings in the early 1990s and, of course, from Phoenix in 1997. If UFOS are real they are (must)also very scarce...a very rare phenomenon indeed. We are lucky to have any real photos.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Thursday, February 04, 2016  

  • Dominick,

    UFOs scarce? Perhaps the initial onslaught of UFO sightings going back to the 1940s (and even earlier) was purely a manifestation of mass hysteria? This is a reasonable assumption predicated on the general public's attempt to digest new technology. The world, from a technological standpoint has had to endure numerous paradigm shifts for quite some time.

    Carl Jung and other's had theorized the UFO phenomena as such.

    And here we are in 2016 with no further explanations...I should say reasonable explanations...to support ET-type visitations. I tend to cringe at Mexico having solid evidence particularly since those like Jamie Maussan tend to be involved...remember the infamous slides of last year? That egregious episode tantamount to "putting a stake through the UFO/ET heart."

    Perhaps, Rich's movement to A.I. is a reasonable approach...long shot...but possible.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Thursday, February 04, 2016  

  • Sure, there was an "onslaught of UFO sightings" but as we both know, 95% of so-called sightings are misidentifications of of airplanes, baloons, birds, planets, etc. I assume, then, that real UFOs (assuming that they exist)are rare, very rare, and that photos would be even rarer still. What's wrong with that logic? And as for the Mexico episodes, we cannot so easily dismiss the hundreds of photos and film strips simply because Jamie Maussan was involved AFTER the fact. That's nonsense logic.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Thursday, February 04, 2016  

  • Nonsense logic? Or being prudent due to the past "performance" factor. This approach being from my past participation in "risk" analysis when putting together numerous contract proposals for the government.

    Maussan has too much of his DNA on some of the Mexico purported sightings. But, I understand your logic at attempting to look at those fleeting "five percenters." The problem being is that the other 95 percent garbage tends to bury the leftovers.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Thursday, February 04, 2016  

  • Look, CDA and Tim, the fact remains that Jamie Maussan was involved in the Mexican photos and filmstrips AFTER they occured; indeed, well after they occured. In short, the photometric evidence stands on its own as a fairly impressive example of something out of the ordinary. That Maussan's reputation is spotty (to say the least) says absolutely nothing about objective evidence that happened well before he appeared on the scene to publicize those events. This is not rocket science.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Thursday, February 04, 2016  

  • Someone here, CDA, tim, even Rich, has searched any database of UFO reports or photo looking for recent UFO sighting. CDA instead of just speaking about "zilch" here and "zilch" there, should do some investigation before speaking... Why not searching in databases, or asking people who collect cases, or asking organizations who collect UFO reports. If laziness wins, well then go and check youtube at least. Type "UFOs 2015", etc. Do some little research.

    By Blogger Don Maor, at Thursday, February 04, 2016  

  • Don:

    If there really were any recent useful and interesting photos (i.e. ones that indicate we are being visited by extraterrestrials) you would NOT have to do any research or investigation of 'databases' to find them. They would be VERY obvious and given lots of space in the media.

    So stop your wishful thinking. I repeat: with all the modern technology, there ought to be many thousand such photos and films out and about. The reason we don't see any is that none exist. None acceptable to science anyway.

    But of course you are quite free to believe otherwise.

    By Blogger cda, at Friday, February 05, 2016  

  • The problem lies in how people have perceived the phenomenon since the late 40s. When fighter pilots saw the objects, they were "foo fighters" and the like. Before then, they were "airships", "fairy lights" and other items during the long history of anomalous flying object sightings.

    Investigators today generally make two basic errors. First, they believe that the objects are solid craft piloted by aliens. Second, they forget to go back to the original reports and read them with unbiased eyes.

    In both errors, bias overtakes objective science. As Dr. Vallee says over and over again in his books: all we have are the witness statements, radar tracks and photographic evidence to go by. Everything else is either fabricated or covered over with so many layers of suspicions, assumptions and in-fighting by investigators that the phenomenon no longer gets looked at objectively, if it ever truly has been.

    I know of only one long-term series of studies of UFOs which is based on sound science: the Hessdalen studies. What the scientists have been observing in that valley for around 30 years is most likely the very phenomenon which people have called UFOs in recent generations.

    But because of the biases mentioned above, UFO investigators have by and large ignored their findings. Also, the scientists do not call the phenomenon "UFO activity" for good reason. They do not want the UFO community to invade their valley and disrupt their on-going experiments.

    As for the lack of good photographic evidence, there is a perfectly good reason which explains why that is so. Like ball lightning, thundercloud sprites and other recently discovered meteorological phenomenon, UFOs may be rare enough that few people have the opportunity to photograph the real thing. But that is rapidly changing since the advent of cellphones.

    So investigators and "true believers" have to ditch their assumptions about what these things are, look squarely at the evidence and use Occam's Razor to make sound conclusions. They also have to ditch the in-fighting and other accretions that have plagued UFOlogy since the late 40s.

    By Blogger rroffel, at Monday, February 08, 2016  

Post a Comment

<< Home