UFO Conjecture(s)

Thursday, March 24, 2016

Ufology’s Indigent Class

Ufology is, by its very nature, laughable and dismissable.

But that laughable status is exacerbated by the poverty level of those who are immersed in the “study” of UFOs; I use the word “study” in a laughable way also.

It seems that, by the evidence of the clothes worn, the demeanor of ufological practitioners, and the plight of UFO web-sites and blogs, UFO proponents are in a desperate need for money.

(I won’t go into the embarrassing situation of The Paracast’s Gene Steinberg. That is too painful and base to further with commentary.)

Let’s look at such sites as The UFO Chronicles and Above Top Secret, to name a few, which throw everything but a kitchen sink into the UFO mix, to try and attract visitors and enhance the few pennies those sites receive from egregious, and sometimes sickening ads.

One can (almost) empathize with the economic slump that ufologists find themselves in, but they have, in most cases, brought their plight upon themselves by indulging in the UFO topic to the exclusion of maintaining a healthy capital existence.

There is a delusional belief that UFOs will bring a surfeit of monies if one plays the game correctly.

Stanton Friedman, Whitley Strieber, Jerry Clark, and even my friend Nick Redfern seem to have made some dollars from their writings or UFO enthusiasms.

But those dollars are paltry, as Nick has often attested.

The few cents that web-site/blog advertising brings in for those stuffing their sites with such detritus is pitiful and, again, embarrassing.

Seeing scruffy ufologists on pathetic TV shows about UFOs merely exacerbates the image of UFO buffs as a tramp-group.

UFO people look like bums, and act like bums.

That’s why some of us keep our interest in the hobby under wraps in our social lives.

The rest have sold their public image out by using Facebook to broadcast their feeble attempts at acceptance with UFO-inspired rants and commentary while showcasing how vulnerable they have become to the economic vicissitudes that the “study” of UFOs have subjected them too.

It’s one more example of the sad state of ufology: a poor man’s hobby and a blow to intelligence and intellectualism.

That it (ufology) is on its last legs is blatantly obvious, and one more example of a person going into bankruptcy will surely kill off the pursuit for those of the millennial class, who eschew UFOs for things more viable to personal existence.



  • Do you remember those far off days when Keyhoe pleaded for ever more funds from his NICAP members to bolster his aim to get congressional hearings on the subject, and hopefully to finally defeat the Air Force's secrecy? As I recall, he was literally always on the lookout for more and more money for this, and other, causes dear to his heart. I don't recall now, but did NICAP eventually go broke? If they did, presumably the USAF (plus the CIA etc) was to blame.

    Ufology has often relied on wealthy benefactors to make up any shortcomings. What became of Joe Firmage by the way? Also, was there a Rockefeller involved at one time?

    By Blogger cda, at Thursday, March 24, 2016  

  • I came across, the other day, CDA, Firmage e-mails about his attempt to conquer UFOs and the paranormal and wondered what happened to him and his interest(s).

    Keyhoe's desire for funds wasn't tacky like that which I mention in my post above. He really needed money to keep nagging government agencies to come clean about flying saucers/UFOs.

    NICAP went broke but was also fraught with internecine squabbles as Richard Hall often talked about.

    The Rockefeller's were superficially involved with the UFO topic, only because their buddy, CIA director Dulles led them to believe that UFOs were important to national security.

    (Dulles remains a UFO source that ufologists have been negligent in pursuing.)


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, March 24, 2016  

  • Bit harsh on people who, though I think have groundless beliefs (and how I wish they weren't [groundless]), are doubtless decent people mostly. However, perhaps that's why Jacques Vallee is a venture capitalist? (Also, John Lear must have a bob or two?)

    By Blogger scherben, at Thursday, March 24, 2016  

  • Oh the people, Scherben, are pretty decent, generally.....just poor (and often stupid).


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, March 24, 2016  

  • Indeed, aren't we all? (I know I am.) :)

    By Blogger scherben, at Thursday, March 24, 2016  

  • OpenMinds has a summary of Rockefeller's petition to the Clinton administration which also mentions Firmage.


    I recall Steven Greer also met with Rockefeller in the mid-1990's and was asked by him to lead the effort which became the Disclosure Project.

    By Blogger Brian Bell, at Thursday, March 24, 2016  

  • Scherben:

    I see you as an exception to my comments.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, March 24, 2016  

  • You're too kind. But, as I'm a sceptic, feel free to pile on the abuse :)

    By Blogger scherben, at Thursday, March 24, 2016  

  • Of course, S....

    It's in my nature to be abusive.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, March 24, 2016  

  • But why is it in your nature to be abusive (or so it seems) to the very people that visit your site and participate in your discussions? Why take it out on US? Reminds me of the priest who slams the congregation for poor attendance at church. Hey, man, we are ones who are concerned with the problem and we are the ones who are here! (Walked out of church 60 years ago when I head that nonsense and never walked back; you risk the same fate.)

    By Blogger Dominick, at Thursday, March 24, 2016  

  • Dominick:

    My postings apply to the overall UFO community and I always exempt my visitors.

    If you feel slighted by my tirades, I'm sorry and if you feel you have to leave, so be it.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, March 24, 2016  

  • Dominick, I've no doubt the abusive nature comment was a joke. My limited contact with this site has witnessed nothing but civility.

    I recommend that you stay and indulge in healthy debate in a subject, that, whilst explainable by the PSH and null hypotheses (as far as I'm concerned; though I'd love alien contact), is, nonetheless, never boring.

    By Blogger scherben, at Thursday, March 24, 2016  

  • "John Lear must have a bob or two?"

    One "Bob" too many maybe, as in Bob Lazar. It was John Lear who first spun the retread of Richard Shaver's Grand Cosmic Conspiramyth--complete with underground bases inside Area 51 and elsewhere, flying saucers and government cooperation with the extraterrestrial presence--to college dropout and Las Vegas pimp Bob Lazar.

    After which, Bob became the star of the show because he was bigger better liar.


    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Friday, March 25, 2016  

  • I first started in this sordid mess back in 2008, retooled an old political blog to a skeptics blog, mainly as a rebuttal to Robert(s) Hastings and Salas. Even then there was a high degree of activity regarding the UFO topic. I started on the Realityuncovered forum which sadly appears to be running on remote control with a sliver of the activity it once enjoyed.

    The point being that skeptics appear to be less inclined to get involved than previous times. Ufology's Gettysburg (Pickett's Charge) was May 5, 2015...not the high mark, but low mark. That appears to have sucked all of the air out of the subject matter.

    The death of Ufology and the economic plight of it's once vaunted spokesperson's may well be tied to the above date.

    I can't help but compare the symptoms of schizophrenia, both the negative and positive symptoms, to the current cast of players with few exceptions. Rich should be aware of these two classes of symptoms...delusional psychosis combined with the disheveled appearances, etc.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Friday, March 25, 2016  

  • Tim:

    There's a remarkable piece in the current New Yorker [3/28, Page 26 ff.] about new findings in the field of genetics (yes) about schizophrenia.

    I have trouble with the idea of a biological or neurological source for schizophrenia, adopting a bifurcated approach: some schizophrenic symptoms may occur with neurological glitches but many are caused by an aberrant mind (soul?) glitch; that is. mental activity is befouled and maybe exacerbated by brain-biological malfunction(s).

    Anyway, see if you can find the article online. It's title is "Runs in the Family" by Siddhartha Mukherjee.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, March 25, 2016  

  • Thanks for the New Yorker piece, I try an pull it up. I've never pointed this out, but I have a 27 y/o son who is a highly functioning autistic. Brilliant in some respects, yet nerve wracking in others.

    There is a high degree of similarities between autism and shizophrenia though both are distinct conditions.

    I'll read the New Yorker piece and get back to you...

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Friday, March 25, 2016  

Post a Comment

<< Home