UFO Conjecture(s)

Sunday, May 01, 2016

Ufology: Tabula Rasa or Smoking Gun

The dormancy of excitement in ufology, or the world of UFOs derives from, as Gene Steinberg of the Paracast noted in one of his Paracast announcements, a lack of anything new.

That is, the topic is mired in a constant rehash of old cases/sightings (which I’m guilty of myself) and the dearth of sensational aspects of current UFO sightings.

What is needed, as I see it, is a complete blank slate (tabula rasa) for old cases, a starting over from scratch, eliminating all the accretions that have accumulated from the outset of sightings, including Kevin Arnold’s iconic sighting, Roswell, Socorro, Rendlesham, to name a few.

Or, even better and easier, a search for that one clue (or smoking gun) in each sighting, old or new, that brings an epiphany.

This is what happened recently with UFO-Sweden and the Ghost Rocket episodes of the mid 1940s, as noted here a few days ago and is now being hyped by Chris Savia who sees the value of the UFO-Sweden effort.

(UFO-Sweden became privy to a recent sighting, by credible witnesses, that mimicked the 1946 Ghost Rocket sightings over Scandinavia. This encouraged the Swedish UFO group to re-examine the Ghost Rocket sightings, which turn out to be more mysterious or exotic than the “explanations,” among them that they were Soviet missile experiments.)

The cases where a smoking gun or “clue” may be present is Roswell (yes), where the so-called Ramey memo is ensconced, or Socorro where a symbol or insignia is prominent.

David Rudiak’s attempts at deciphering the memo have been extensive and could yield something worthwhile and decisive if only Rudiak and his pals would use or call upon those outside the UFO community for help, such as art curators who know who might be able to provide assistance with cleaning up the befogged photo image of Ramey’s memo which they do when it comes to determining the authenticity of an artist's signature hidden by years of over painting or chemical degradation, even forgery.

And there are highly efficient devices, which appeared in The New Yorker a while back (and noted here), that can discern obscure markings and traces in objects, admittedly at some cost, but a worthy consideration for those hoping to cement a final assessment of what happened near Roswell in 1947.

The Socorro symbol has been considerably treated here (and elsewhere) and continues to be so, as it might tell us who or what made the device Police Officer Lonnie Zamora saw in the desert and accurately reported.

Unfortunately, the Socorro symbol and the Ramey memo have been diluted by all the input from hacks and dopes who’ve intruded upon the discussions/debate with inane and banal observations.

Kevin Randle continues to scour the Roswell record and research materials he's accumulated over the years, hoping to spot that one clue or “smoking gun” that might lead to something concrete and final.

He is to be applauded for his effort(s) too, just as UFO-Sweden is or David Rudiak is.

A starting (tabula rasa style) over or re-examination (à la Sherlock Holmes or Columbo) with old, classic cases  (and new ones also) is needed, to re-invigorate the moribund study of UFOs.

What do you, often quiet buffs, think?

RR

9 Comments:

  • Not a case per se, but maybe an insight into some cases:
    http://www.astronautix.com/craft/pyeacket.htm

    By Blogger Ron, at Sunday, May 01, 2016  

  • Interesting Ron...

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, May 01, 2016  

  • Your Tabula Rasa suggestion is not without merit. However I don't believe most serious ufologists would consider such a thing in their best interest.

    Too many have devoted their entire lives investigating cases which they've since concluded already proves extraterrestrial civilizations are visiting this earth. They're simply waiting for the governments of the world to confirm their conclusions.

    However too many of the incidents they build their hypothesis on have been polluted with false testimony. And yet their claims remain firmly cemented none-the-less.

    It also seems like few ufologists spend time investigating modern incidents. They'd prefer to spend time at conferences, on blogs, writing books, and doing podcasts to propagate the claim they've already found the answer.

    In doing so they spend more time proselytizing to the world than investigating.

    So while I like the new approach, those rooted in the trade will in my opinion never support it. For them it's regressive; for a few it's even detrimental to their personal profit motive.

    By Blogger Brian Bell, at Sunday, May 01, 2016  

  • I totally agree Brian...

    The posting is optimistic, wishful-thinking on my part.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, May 01, 2016  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger hessdalen lights, at Monday, May 02, 2016  

  • Since many UFO sightings, Julien, have a prosaic explanation, one has to find that isolated clue or thing that bespeaks something truly "alien" or outstanding, that may provide an answer for the whole category of authentic sightings.

    If you want to know what gives a zebra its stripes, you don't need to capture a whole herd to study the stripe phenomenon.

    (If UFOs represent a gaggle of extraterrestrial visitors, unlikely in my view, then a broader picture, as you surmise, would make sense.. But it only takes one example to make a point: UFOs, or this one category or one UFO is.....)

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, May 02, 2016  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger hessdalen lights, at Monday, May 02, 2016  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger hessdalen lights, at Monday, May 02, 2016  

  • Julien:

    Of course such lights are interesting but hardly synonymous with UFOs that I'm attracted to: metallic-seeming, embarking creatures (seemingly), and employing maneuvers that appear to be intelligently controlled.

    Sure, such lights as seen the 2001 video intrigue, sort of, but they don't get me excited. They're just lights.

    They may be indicating a new or unknown phenomenon, but that's for others, not UFO buffs who think UFOs are something a bit more exotic, not necessarily ET-oriented, but oblique in ways more tangible than lights in the sky.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, May 02, 2016  

Post a Comment

<< Home