• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Is Ufology a religion?

Free episodes:

swatcher

Skilled Investigator
In Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Buddhism prophets had visions. Believers in UFO have sightings.

There is no proof of God's existence. For decades ufologists have been trying to come up with definite proof, but there is none. I think there are other similarities between the two. Could it be that they are related phenomena?
 
For some, yes, it is a religion in the same way as certain religious sects view the world. No evidence, wishful thinking, "feelings" of other beings, supposed sightings, etc. This would seem to be the polarized, out-there, faith types that refute any type of useful investigation.

On the other hand believers and non-believers have had experiences. What these experiences are and what they mean remain elusive. Take the sightings of Phoenix and Hudson Valley. It certainly seems something was seen, by lots of people. What was it?? I don't know, I didn't see it.

It seems that we do have some types of evidence. I'm reminded of the Ted Phillips trace case in I believe Kansas. With the boy who saw this object and the family that saw it as well. We have pictures of the "ring" left behind. We have samples that were taken. Seems to have been a UFO, meaning something unusual and undetermined.

We also have documented evidence of things like Hessdalen and Marley Woods where "something" luminous and strange is not only seen, but documented.

Then, of course, we have David Bowie's Starman. The observant benevolent creatures watching over us. Absolutely no proof. Not entirely implausible, but quite a jump from something that you might think of when talking about ufo-logy. "Ology" usually meaning the study of something and not the wishfulness of it.

The spectrum of what we might call ufology is so vast that certainly some of it likens to religion no doubt. And some of it is rather interesting and perplexing. And even with the so-called evidence cases as descibed above and others it doesn't seem to indicate that we are experiencing some vast transcendant intelligence, but that we may be experiencing something that is misunderstood or more likely in many situations misidentified. Even so, I could be wrong, and we could be experiencing something of intelligence. I just haven't seen that myself.

It's an interesting question as there are certain parallels depending on the observer.

BTW thanks for changing the thread. I was trying to determine if people were in the closet on such subjects like I am. And it turned into this, which is fine. Thanks
 
Is Ufology a religion?

No. Religions have dogma, rights, sacred texts and a presumptive attitude about the one and only answer that they can provide. In ufology nothing remains sacred for long. One mans theory is another's delusion. The aliens of the 50s are not the aliens of today. Even the notion that aliens and UFOs are related has been questioned by some. In a religion that sort of thinking is called heresy. In Ufology it's par for the course.

Is Ufology a belief system?

Yes... and no. To be accurate, it is several competing belief systems with some areas of overlap. The notion that there's no proof is dubious at best. One thing that is for certain however is that in the grand scheme of things there is 10000x more proof favouring ufology over religious belief.

The problem here is that often, where religion is concerned, there's a tendancy to blend the concepts of religion, belief and god together as if they were they same thing. They are decidely not.
 
Back
Top