UFO Conjecture(s)

Monday, July 04, 2016

The Kinsey Reports and UFOs

In 1948 and 1953, Alfred Kinsey and Wardell Pomeroy of the Kinsey Institute at Indiana University provided two controversial studies on homosexuality in men and women.

Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953).


The studies concluded that about 10% [give of take] of the human population was homosexual (or gay, as society now tags the perversion).

But if you’re a news junkie or paying attention to sexual preferences in the human species as noted in 2016, you know that more – much more – of the population is homosexual (or gay) than anyone could have ever imagined and the Kinsey reports greatly underestimated the percentage of homosexuals in the human sphere.

[In Fort Wayne, where we have a watchdog for media operations, I can tell you that a much larger percentage of gays exist in the TV news rooms than Kinsey’s reports could have ever estimated or found by interviews and inquiries, in 1948/1953 or in 2016. Gays in our area of a conservative state remain mostly “closeted” or hidden, not for fear of reprisals by employers or the public but because it’s de rigueur to be discreet in a community that remains subliminally racist or prejudiced and was once a hotbed of activity for the KKK.]

Now how does this relate to UFOs?

Project Blue Book, at the end of its befuddled sojourn, “investigating” flying saucers or the UFO phenomenon, deduced that about 5.6% of UFO sightings were unexplainable: 701 of the 12,618 reports Blue Book gathered.

Like Kinsey, Blue Book underestimated (some say, “explained away”) its “research data.”

In 2016, there occurs many more UFO sightings, each day, that go unexplained than anyone cares to note; that is, UFOs show up regularly and no one knows what they are or even wishes to know what they are.

Just as homosexuals or gays) keep popping up in society and remain unknown, until something like the 2016 Orlando, Florida massacre happened, UFOs keep popping up, and remain unknown.

However, just as gays keep coming out of the woodwork, being "outed" by news reports and happenings, one would hope that UFOs would become “outed” by some enterprising news operation, because UFO buffs aren’t about to provide an explanation just as gays are not about to disclose their homosexuality until or unless they are forced to.

Kinsey obviously dealt with a semi-secretive group of people he interviewed, and news media (or interested scientists) are dealing with a muted crowd of UFO witnesses, who could provide meaningful information or data abut their sightings but choose not to.



  • Quite a stretch of comparison of sexuality reporting to UFO reporting.

    But, as has been discussed, the plethora of both reporting and camera phones -and quality zooming cameras- hasn't produced a single close up defining photo. That is disturbing and confusing as a personal witness. (Here comes Zoam with 'there's nothing to be revealed.')

    It takes me back to consideration of evasion/deception by a higher/advanced intelligence.

    On reluctant witnesses, I was one.


    By Blogger Bryan Daum, at Tuesday, July 05, 2016  

  • A little off-topic Bryan, but you make a point or two.

    The problem, for me, is that people doing studies, whether Kinsey or Blue Book, often miss the mark or don't see what is obvious even if subliminal or very subtle/nuanced.

    Kinsey didn't see latent homosexuality in many of his subjects when he and Pomeroy interviewed them. (They didn't have "gaydar" apparently.)

    Blue Book often missed the subtleties of some witnesses who saw a flying saucer of UFO and dismissed their sightings or explained them (away?) as Venus or something otherwise stupid.

    That's my point with the posting above.

    As for Zoam, he dismisses the terminology more than the phenomenon. Something odd is seen in the sky and people choose to call it a UFO, a nice, short sobriquet for what they saw.

    Zoam seems to want them to stop using that epithet, UFO.

    But they have to call their sighting something as they actually did see an extraordinary thing, or thought they did.

    UFO is a good term but Zoam hates it. (That has something to do with operant conditioning when he was younger I suspect. His mom or dad or grandpapa chewed him out for using the term, when he saw something or thought he did and ever since he's become a bit loony about the term.)


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, July 05, 2016  

  • Well scientists do often miss the obvious as Rich states. Not all of the time of course, but often on subjects that are controversial (UFOs, Bigfoot, etc.).

    The following video shows this rather clearly. Sorry that this is a bigfoot gait analysis from the P-G footage, but it demonstrates that sometimes the untrained eye can better see patterns or trends (in this case errors) that scientists miss because they have a built in mindset (paradigm) by which all things are filtered and analyzed.

    ThinkerTunker does a good job of demonstrating this dynamic in his video. And while this applies to bigfoot, it parlays nicely to what happens with UFO analysis as well.


    By Blogger Brian Bell, at Tuesday, July 05, 2016  

Post a Comment

<< Home