Debunking Jacques Vallee

[Constance]

Edit: Constance, you posted while I was typing. What pisses a lot of us off about the distorted claims of what Vallee says and believes is the idiotic claim that he says the phenomenon is not real. I have no idea where these geniuses get that idea. I think it comes from a deep seated inability in the nuts and bolts fundamentalists to deal with reality. Vallee and Hynek approached the whole thing with the idea that these honest and competent witnesses were not hallucinating or anything of the sort. How can we even begin to have an intelligent discussion about Vallee's work when basic facts are thrown out the window by the trolls?

That's easy -- just put those 'basic facts' back into your discussion about Vallee's work and tell us how he puts it all together? It seems he hasn't done so. It seems someone else needs to do so to attract more fans to your club.

As Heidi just posted,

"It's not Vallee that's the problem, it's what people do with his ideas, explorations, etc....that's the problem. Because he doesn't put a period at the end, people do it for him, hiding behind his work instead of searching for further explanation."

 

[Constance]

Who is it doing the rejecting? I'm not sure what you mean exactly.

Just repeating statements I've read here and elsewhere from time to time.

Back in the "good old days" the nuts and bolts fundamentalist pine for, there were only two options: Flying saucers were either spaceships welded together on another planet and flown here by strange looking creatures, or they were imaginary. Three possibilities I suppose, if you include the guy who makes that other kind of fundamentalism possible, the Devil. Yes, some intellectuals were intrigued by Jung's ideas but he wasn't writing very much UFO literature. "Imaginary" was winning when people like Vallee started getting attention in the popular literature, thanks to things like Hynek's swamp gas, the Condon farce, the Robertson Panel, and so on. Vallee's work represented an intelligent way forward for those of us who were very uncomfortable with the habit everyone seemed to have of ignoring large parts of the evidence pile just because it didn't fit with their favorite theory, which was usually the standard ETH. As far as I can determine, all Vallee is really saying is there is a hell of a lot more going on than sightings of metal spaceships made on some other planet. I think it's a bit of a stretch to hold him responsible for the nonsense others cook up after reading his work.

Vallee's work represented an intelligent way forward for those of us who were very uncomfortable with the habit everyone seemed to have of ignoring large parts of the evidence pile just because it didn't fit with their favorite theory, which was usually the standard ETH. As far as I can determine, all Vallee is really saying is there is a hell of a lot more going on than sightings of metal spaceships made on some other planet. I think it's a bit of a stretch to hold him responsible for the nonsense others cook up after reading his work.

Maybe you're the one meant to write that book I observed the need for and lack of earlier today. But if all Vallee is "really saying" is expressed in the sentence I highlighted above, you won't have much to work with.

 

[Double Nought Spy]

If you are not interested in what Vallee has to say, that's fine, but please don't misrepresent it. Also, I have never had any desire to join any club that would have me as a member.

My last post, the last one on page 4, speaks to some of what you said. Vallee doesn't spoon feed anyone any conclusions. He states his findings well, but as the whole thing is still a mystery I'm sure he would agree that it would be irresponsible to just make up some conclusions for the comfort of those needing them.

Actually, this thread baffles me. I don't see any problem with anything Vallee has said or done, but as Heidi pointed out, lots of people seem to need to make up shit so they can sleep at night.

I just saw your last post. If you don't find much to write about in "a hell of a lot more going on than sightings of metal spaceships made on some other planet," then I fucking give up.

Christ on a crutch.

 

[Constance]

If you are not interested in what Vallee has to say, that's fine, but please don't misrepresent it. Also, I have never had any desire to join any club that would have me as a member.

My last post, the last one on page 4, speaks to some of what you said. Vallee doesn't spoon feed anyone any conclusions. He states his findings well, but as the whole thing is still a mystery I'm sure he would agree that it would be irresponsible to just make up some conclusions for the comfort of those needing them.

Actually, this thread baffles me. I don't see any problem with anything Vallee has said or done, but as Heidi pointed out, lots of people seem to need to make up shit so they can sleep at night.

I just saw your last post. If you don't find much to write about in "a hell of a lot more going on than sightings of metal spaceships made on some other planet," then I fucking give up.

Christ on a crutch.

I'm not looking for 'conclusions' from Vallee but guidance in integrating the various kinds of data and information he refers to, including physical and psychological effects of ufos, mythical parallels in history, and real world issues such as governmental manipulation, disinformation, and suppression of ufo data. The ufo history, like all history, involves many players and many types of struggle. So write about all of that as expressed/identified in parts of Vallee's oeuvre, integrate and reason from the full complement of what he has written, correct the errors of popular ufo discussion wherever you see them. Instead of telling people that they have to stop what they're doing for a month or two to read all of Vallee's books, interviews, podcasts, etc., in order to see Vallee as you see him. I've had enough of this argument.

 

[BoyintheMachine]

I just looked, and as I thought, a lot of the fun stuff is in Dimensions and Confrontations. They are worth reading just for the excellent field work in them. Yes, Vallee actually goes out and talks to witnesses, measures things, talks to the local authorities, digs into meteorological records, you know, all the things a competent investigator does. Chapter 11 in Confrontations is called "Happy Camp" and has some of my favorite weirdness of all time in it, including my all time favorite Men in Black episode. It's funny as hell. Those two books are aimed at the mass market, and did quite well as I recall. The third in the trilogy, Revelations, is full of dark gummint stuff that is pretty unsettling. True to his ideals of going where the evidence leads him, Vallee examines all of it, no matter how weird or unpleasant it may be.

Edit: Constance, you posted while I was typing. What pisses a lot of us off about the distorted claims of what Vallee says and believes is the idiotic claim that he says the phenomenon is not real. I have no idea where these geniuses get that idea. I think it comes from a deep seated inability in the nuts and bolts fundamentalists to deal with reality. Vallee and Hynek approached the whole thing with the idea that these honest and competent witnesses were not hallucinating or anything of the sort. How can we even begin to have an intelligent discussion about Vallee's work when basic facts are thrown out the window by the trolls?

Read the goddamn books!

Vallee indeed claims the phenomenon is not "real", note that the word real has quotes to indicate something. That something I'm indicating is that Valle doesn't believe it's a part of normal reality but represents something else beyond normal reality.

 

[Polterwurst]

What baffles me is that a "nuts and bolts" guy, which BoyintheMachine probably sees himself as, can be such a hopeless fanatic. Materialists are the ones that you'd expect to be more down to earth, instead some of them totally throw all rationality overboard to push through their point of view.

So you didn't say they debunked the slides, you just implied it. But still, there was no team, that was a term you used to sound grandiose.

IMO, scientists didn't "leave the building" of Ufology because of Vallee. Most of them were too clever or too cautious to even enter it. With the hopelessly naive "space brothers movement" and "contactees" like George Adamski, it was kooky, charlatan-ridden and career-endangering right from the start. No serious scientist in their right mind would have publicly entered that building, unless they had seen something themselves or were beyond reproach (retired).

That Vallee makes some of the nuts&boltsers angry is a no-brainer, as proven by this very thread. And as for "singing the praises" of Vallee, as I said, I've never even read a book by him. I can't even say that I agree with him, because I don't see a direct connection between folkloristic descriptions of non-human entities and the modern era UFOs and "small greys" ones. All I can say is that from the interviews I've seen and listened to, Vallee strikes me as a thoughtful, highly intelligent researcher, who actually goes out to gather data all over the world, talks to witnesses etc. which has led him to doubt the "nuts and bolts" explanation. His statements are cautious and he seems to think long and hard before making them, which is obviously more than we can expect from "researchers" like BoyintheMachine.

 

[BoyintheMachine]

What baffles me is that a "nuts and bolts" guy, which BoyintheMachine probably sees himself as, can be such a hopeless fanatic. Materialists are the ones that you'd expect to be more down to earth, instead some of them totally throw all rationality overboard to push through their point of view.

IMO, scientists didn't "leave the building" of Ufology because of Vallee. Most of them were too clever or too cautious to even enter it. With the hopelessly naive "space brothers movement" and "contactees" like George Adamski, it was kooky, charlatan-ridden and career-endangering right from the start. No serious scientist in is right mind would have publicly entered that building, unless they had seen something themselves or were beyond reproach (retired).

That Vallee makes the nuts&boltsers angry is a no-brainer, as proven by this very thread. And as for "singing the praises" of Vallee, as I said, I've never even read a book by him. I can't even say that I agree with him, because I don't see a direct connection between folkloristic descriptions of non-human entities and the modern era UFOs and "small greys" ones. All I can say is that from the intervies I've seen and listened to, the strikes me as a thoughtful, highly intelligent researcher, who goes out to gather data, talk to witnesses etc. which has led him to doubt the "nuts and bolts" explanation. His statements are cautious and he seems to think long and hard before making them, which is obviously more than we can expect from you

Try to make sure to get in as many digs against me as possible.

 

[Polterwurst]

Will do. Thanks to you, there's no shortage.

 

[BoyintheMachine]

Will do. Thanks to you, there's no shortage.

Whatever you feel you need to pass the time and especially since you are incapable of posting anything of actual substance.

 

[Burnt State]

Constance, I posted the summation of a portion of Vallée's work in that video above. One phase of his thinking is there.

I also find the anti-Vallée thinking entirely inexplicable when in previous thread discussions, and in most circles, he is regarded as the best thing that's happened to Ufology in the modern era. Not much here is making sense at all. He doesn't need an index, and no one has published a summation of his or Dolan's or Redfern's thinking. He has published his original ideas and continues to evolve his thinking as opposed to standing still. This entire thread is really quite confusing.

 

[BoyintheMachine]

Constance, I posted the summation of a portion of Vallée's work in that video above. One phase of his thinking is there.

I also find the anti-Vallée thinking entirely inexplicable when in previous thread discussions, and in most circles, he is regarded as the best thing that's happened to Ufology in the modern era. Not much here is making sense at all. He doesn't need an index, and no one has published a summation of his or Dolan's or Redfern's thinking. He has published his original ideas and continues to evolve his thinking as opposed to standing still. This entire thread is really quite confusing.

People view him as the best thing in Ufology because they don't understand just what it is he is offering. Anything not nuts and bolts really doesn't stand a chance of ever being able to be proven and doesn't advance our understanding.

Its like the Skinwalker Ranch stuff. People are obsessed with it. Does it help us understand anything? Nope. Is there any proof of any of the claims? Nope. It's just entertainment. At the end of the day, that's what Vallee's work is. It's good reading but it's just entertainment.

 

[Heidi Lemmer]

People view him as the best thing in Ufology because they don't understand just what it is he is offering. Anything not nuts and bolts really doesn't stand a chance of ever being able to be proven and doesn't advance our understanding.

Its like the Skinwalker Ranch stuff. People are obsessed with it. Does it help us understand anything? Nope. Is there any proof of any of the claims? Nope. It's just entertainment. At the end of the day, that's what Vallee's work is. It's good reading but it's just entertainment.

It's more than that. We have to be honest here. He's spent an enormous amount of time on this subject. Years. He would be the first to admit he does not have the answer. It's what people do with his work that's damaging. They take his work verbatim and turn the whole subject into some mysty fairy airy crap, long ago leaving that last entry a pilot makes about a real object he clearly see's from his window to some hallucinatory mind masterbation and muddies the water to the point that even Vallee loses his points.

 

[Burnt State]

People view him as the best thing in Ufology because they don't understand just what it is he is offering. Anything not nuts and bolts really doesn't stand a chance of ever being able to be proven and doesn't advance our understanding.

Its like the Skinwalker Ranch stuff. People are obsessed with it. Does it help us understand anything? Nope. Is there any proof of any of the claims? Nope. It's just entertainment. At the end of the day, that's what Vallee's work is. It's good reading but it's just entertainment.

Okay, you still don't know who he is, his beliefs or his impact. Please read this and tell me where the anti-science parts are in all his physical studies of the core phenomenon.

Heretic Among Heretics: Jacques Vallee Interview - UFO Evidence

 

[Burnt State]

Who exactly are all these interdimensional disciples infected with the Vallée virus anyway?

 

[Burnt State]

Vallée's opposition to the ETH theory is summarised in his paper, "Five Arguments Against the Extraterrestrial Origin of Unidentified Flying Objects", Journal of Scientific Exploration, 1990:

"Scientific opinion has generally followed public opinion in the belief that unidentified flying objects either do not exist (the "natural phenomena hypothesis") or, if they do, must represent evidence of a visitation by some advanced race of space travellers (the extraterrestrial hypothesis or "ETH"). It is the view of the author that research on UFOs need not be restricted to these two alternatives. On the contrary, the accumulated data base exhibits several patterns tending to indicate that UFOs are real, represent a previously unrecognized phenomenon, and that the facts do not support the common concept of "space visitors." Five specific arguments articulated here contradict the ETH:

1. Unexplained close encounters are far more numerous than required for any physical survey of the earth;
2. the humanoid body structure of the alleged "aliens" is not likely to have originated on another planet and is not biologically adapted to space travel;
3. the reported behavior in thousands of abduction reports contradicts the hypothesis of genetic or scientific experimentation on humans by an advanced race;
4. the extension of the phenomenon throughout recorded human history demonstrates that UFOs are not a contemporary phenomenon; and
5. the apparent ability of UFOs to manipulate space and time suggests radically different and richer alternatives."

 

[BoyintheMachine]

Okay, you still don't know who he is, his beliefs or his impact. Please read this and tell me where the anti-science parts are in all his physical studies of the core phenomenon.

Heretic Among Heretics: Jacques Vallee Interview - UFO Evidence

The very second paragraph, THE SECOND PARAGRAPH, is full with all the problems of the anti-science crowd.

"In his recent autobiographical book, Forbidden Science, Vallee summed up his views about the provenance of UFOs, a viewpoint that he's developed through decades of research: "The UFO Phenomenon exists. It has been with us throughout history. It is physical in nature and it remains unexplained in terms of contemporary science. It represents a level of consciousness that we have not yet recognized, and which is able to manipulate dimensions beyond time and space as we understand them." So much for anti-gravity-powered starships ferrying Big Brothers from outer space. Vallee thinks UFOs are likely "windows" to other dimensions manipulated by intelligent, often mischievous, always enigmatic beings we have yet to understand. "

The very first sentence I boldened implies that our science can not explain it. This statement by it's very nature is anti-science as it is claiming that we need a new science to understand the UFO phenomenon.

The second sentence I boldened is an unsubstantiated claim having no proof.

The third sentence I boldened is an unsubstantiated claim having no proof.

 

[Burnt State]

You should try reading his books and read the rest of the article as thesis statements are often followed by proofs and explication. Don't get stumped by just the opening.

Here's the most recent thinking from him:

The age of impossible, anticipating discontinuous futures: Jacques Vallee at TEDxGeneva

 

[BoyintheMachine]

Vallée's opposition to the ETH theory is summarised in his paper, "Five Arguments Against the Extraterrestrial Origin of Unidentified Flying Objects", Journal of Scientific Exploration, 1990:

"Scientific opinion has generally followed public opinion in the belief that unidentified flying objects either do not exist (the "natural phenomena hypothesis") or, if they do, must represent evidence of a visitation by some advanced race of space travellers (the extraterrestrial hypothesis or "ETH"). It is the view of the author that research on UFOs need not be restricted to these two alternatives. On the contrary, the accumulated data base exhibits several patterns tending to indicate that UFOs are real, represent a previously unrecognized phenomenon, and that the facts do not support the common concept of "space visitors." Five specific arguments articulated here contradict the ETH:

1. Unexplained close encounters are far more numerous than required for any physical survey of the earth;
2. the humanoid body structure of the alleged "aliens" is not likely to have originated on another planet and is not biologically adapted to space travel;
3. the reported behavior in thousands of abduction reports contradicts the hypothesis of genetic or scientific experimentation on humans by an advanced race;
4. the extension of the phenomenon throughout recorded human history demonstrates that UFOs are not a contemporary phenomenon; and
5. the apparent ability of UFOs to manipulate space and time suggests radically different and richer alternatives."

Let me counter those 5 points.

1. Who says that aliens are here to perform a survey of the planet? Why does Vallee presume to know what an alien being thinks or what it is motivated by?

2. I would venture to say that the humanoid shape is one that is favored by evolution/natural selection. Several species on earth have evolved to be bipedal, upright walking or moving creatures. However, there are other explanations such as that the beings that we see are creations and not representatives of the intelligence behind the UFO phenomenon.

3. Says Vallee. However, abduction researchers would gladly reject Vallee's proclamation.

4. Whether or not the UFO phenomenon is new or old is of no concern. Being an old phenomenon doesn't rule out the ETH or nuts and bolts.

5. Says who? Vallee yet again makes a proclamation. He claims that UFOs manipulate time, space and other dimensions. How the hell does he know this and where is his proof?

 

[BoyintheMachine]

You should try reading his books and read the rest of the article as thesis statements are often followed by proofs and explication. Don't get stumped by just the opening.

Here's the most recent thinking from him:

The age of impossible, anticipating discontinuous futures: Jacques Vallee at TEDxGeneva

It's not necessary. I'm no stranger to Vallee as you seem to think. Vallee has never provided one piece of evidence for any of his claims.

 

[BoyintheMachine]

It's more than that. We have to be honest here. He's spent an enormous amount of time on this subject. Years. He would be the first to admit he does not have the answer. It's what people do with his work that's damaging. They take his work verbatim and turn the whole subject into some mysty fairy airy crap, long ago leaving that last entry a pilot makes about a real object he clearly see's from his window to some hallucinatory mind masterbation and muddies the water to the point that even Vallee loses his points.

I agree but what are Vallee's followers supposed to do when Vallee keeps leading people into really bad territory? They have no choice but to get lost and mired down in pseudoscientific nonsense.