The Future of Ufology by Nick Redfern

[Frank Stalter]

Fair comments, but to fully understand the rationale, it's probably best to read the article here.

This is a really nice chart . . . .

One problem I have with UFO conversations is the way erroneous cliches have crept in . . . .

"95% of UFO cases can be explained" Complete nonsense and always has been, just an inaccurate meme as the chart above clearly demonstrates for many reasons that don't mean ET spacecraft.

"Science should embrace UFO research" Complete nonsense. Scientists do their thing their way and a lot of it, particularly as it relates to astronomy and theoretical physics, is pretty damn amazing. You don't need to be a scientist to read up on the latest, develop at least an armchair understanding and articulate that amazing truth in the context of UFOs instead of regurgitating the same tired old conspiracy theories and embrace every implausible UFO story that has ever come down the pike.

I may add to this later, feel free to do the same if you can think of any. That means you too Lance and Happy Thanksgiving to ya!

 

[Randall]

... really nice chart . . .
"95% of UFO cases can be explained" Complete nonsense and always has been, just an inaccurate meme as the chart above clearly demonstrates for many reasons that don't mean ET spacecraft.
"Science should embrace UFO research" Complete nonsense. Scientists do their thing their way and a lot of it, particularly as it relates to astronomy and theoretical physics, is pretty damn amazing. You don't need to be a scientist to read up on the latest, develop at least an armchair understanding and articulate that amazing truth in the context of UFOs instead of regurgitating the same tired old conspiracy theories and embrace every implausible UFO story that has ever come down the pike.
Thanksgiving to ya!

Thanks for the compliment on the chart, and if you are in the USA I hope your Thanksgiving was warm and wonderful. Also fair comments above regarding the ETH and the role of science in ufology. I would however caution that my agreement should not be construed as a license to mock and reject ufology either. Most importantly, those scientists with a genuine interest in the topic should not be subject to the stigmatization that we have seen in the past.

 

[Frank Stalter]

Thanks for the compliment on the chart, and if you are in the USA I hope your Thanksgiving was warm and wonderful. Also fair comments above regarding the ETH and the role of science in ufology. I would however caution that my agreement should not be construed as a license to mock and reject ufology either. Most importantly, those scientists with a genuine interest in the topic should not be subject to the stigmatization that we have seen in the past.

Just because you're in Canada doesn't mean you can't celebrate. I celebrate Boxing Day!

 

[Randall]

Lance ... I'd even be willing to bet a real silver dollar that I can find at least one or two positive conclusions someplace. So if you've got one ( a real silver dollar ) how about putting up. I'll be glad to take it off you.

Lance has become very quiet again suddenly.

 

[Frank Stalter]

Lance has become very quiet again suddenly.

He's like a ninja warrior. He comes and he goes . . . . where does he come from? Were does he go? Then when you least expect it . . . . he strikes!

 

[Randall]

He's like a ninja warrior. He comes and he goes . . . . where does he come from? Were does he go? Then when you least expect it . . . . he strikes!

Well ... I'm not so sure he's quite as subtle as a Ninja. The whole Ninja thing is about being silent and deadly. When Lance lands on you it's usually anything but subtle! ( Although he has pulled the silent treatment on me at least twice now. ). Still I think we need guys like Lance and I'm usually glad when he participates. I'd like to see him post more of his skeptical analysis for us to debate. His Point Mugu theory really made me examine that case closely. We don't normally get that kind of in-depth involvement. Plus, outing Imbrogno is something I doubt the ufology community would have attempted on its own. The Lance Moodys of this world definitely have value .

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

The Lance Moodys of this world definitely have value .

Absolutely! Lance is not only one of the Paracasts's most valuable contributors, he provides a valuable investigative context and higher-standard that the so-called fringe (proto-scientific fields of "ufology" and paranormal investigation) would be well advised to adhere to and learn from. I'm one of his biggest fans. I value his most important input here and elsewhere.

However, I am intrigued at the pureness and quality of his motivation—the true nature behind his objective agenda and the resulting focus of his time and resources. It's all well and good that someone skeptical claims they are openminded and objective, and another to use this claimed (or feigned) persona for what appears to be agenda driven damage-control propaganda.

As an aside, FWIW: I've always thought that Lance may have missed his true calling. Perhaps his greatest impact should be made in the realm of "Big-Picture" politics and the games surrounding political intrigue; the machinations surrounding the future of generations of Earthlings. Why his focus on low-status "paranormal" subjects and not more important high-status people, places, things and events? Lance is a fab researcher and a dogged investigator. With his talent, he could be a new groundbreaking Woodward or Bernstein, or Manning-inspired Assange casting the light of truth on the dark-side of control and power. We all have seen that Lance is a pit-bull when he grabs a hold of a target. Sure, he he comes across as ridgidly dogmatic and hints at some sort of higher imperative of "truth," but I suspect he is honestly seeking the truth of a particular matter.

But it bothers me that such talented motivation and time expenditure has been relegated to "paranormal" subjects, "UFOs" and their attendant personalities. Hmm Why doesn't he devote his efforts toward the soft-white belly of the mainstream maelstrom slouching as they appear to program us toward the Plain of Maggeddo? lol *smirk*

There are countless worthy subjects, events and players that deserve exposure and accountability—why waste time at the Paracast (and elsewhere) on Phil Imbrogno, et al? Why not dig into Obama, Bush/Cheney, Clinton, Lehman, BOA or the Fed? etc Or take the time to ascertain the (potentially-real) true genius of a Ray Stanford? What's truly your motivation, Lance? Why not give us something positive? Present your position paper on anything important that is original— something existential that we can learn from... whatever...

It's obvious to me: What motivates talented individuals to swim in a particular mud-puddle, pond, lake or ocean—questioning guppies, barracudas or whales—gives us insight into [the] particular agenda(s) and gives us insight into possible motivations, etc. Whatever

 

[Goggs Mackay]

I can't say I agree with all Lance's opinions and conclusions but I certainly see he does more research than 99% of pontificators (me included). And, people like Lance giving their view definitely raises the bar in terms of evidence.

BUT! We all know, it doesn't matter how good the sceptic/believer argument is, people will tend to continue to think the same way. I think it would be nigh impossible for Lance to accept there may be 'alien craft' flying about until he gets a guided tour/flight on a ship by the greys. And that's ok - that's just the standard Lance has for himself.

Contrast that with those who lap up Mr Meier or Greer or heaven fucking forbid 'Dr' Dan Burisch!! Now, where is that complete fraud hiding these days? Has he been silenced by shadowy agents in black? Has he taken a trip to Mars with Obama Andrew Basiago (rimes and chimes with Chicago don't you know?) Fruitcakes, that's a fantastic UK term for a very, very crazy person.

 

[Randall]

Absolutely! Lance is not only one of the Paracasts's most valuable contributors ... But it bothers me that such talented motivation and time expenditure has been relegated to "paranormal" subjects, "UFOs" and their attendant personalities. ...

Well ... Chris ... I could same the same about you or I. Why do we "relegate ourselves" to the pursuit of these phenomena? I'm going to go out on a limb here and venture a guess ( and Lance by all means please chime in if you catch this ). I think we're all not really so far apart in that we don't see it as being "relegated". On the contrary. Our common purpose is to reveal the truth and present it to the people for their benefit, and that is always an honorable pursuit, especially in a world that is so mired down in irrational behavior. There is also nothing lowly about exploring phenomena that could expand our understanding of our place in the universe, and part of that means making sure that in doing so we're not fooling ourselves. In this respect we're all on the same side, and I really wish sometimes that we could all more fully embrace that.

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

My motivation was fairly simple and straight forward: unexplained phenomenal events were allegedly occurring all around the San Luis Valley where I lived—sometimes right overhead... I was writing for my local paper and put together a couple of stories that ended up being circulated around the world like a wild-fire. I had inadvertently started the snowball racing down the hill and ended up having to spend more and more time fielding the interest that my articles (and later books and TV show appearances) generated. Plus, I was experiencing unexplained sightings and events myself, with my own eyes. Pretty straight forward. I never claimed I thought these events were due to "aliens from outer space," in fact, the more I dug into the reports and the more I researched, the less likely that explanation seemed to be a viable one and I've caught a lot of flack for saying so! Like you, I find the subject endlessly fascinating and intellectually challenging, but I have no agenda or hidden motivation that drives me other than ascertaining the truth, no matter what the truth may be. I can't say the same about the debunkers or the sneaky ones masquerading themselves as skeptics—they have already convinced themselves that it's all a bunch of BS and we are all delusional. IMO Preconceived conclusions and closed mindedness is disingenuous and intellectually dishonest both in true-believers and debunkers alike.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

I always wonder why people who convince themselves all Ufology is B.S bother to have anything to do with the field, even as a debunker.

If I thought there was nothing to UFOs I would not waste any time constantly trying to prove/demonstrate that to everyone else. There are plenty things I DO NOT believe are true but I don't see the point in me wasting lots of time and energy trying to convince the believers. There has to be something more in the psychological make-up of the debunking mind. I'm not for a second saying that there is anything weird in a psychiatric way, about debunking but in terms of personal motivating factors - I don't know what they could be?

To illustrate my point clearly, I am totally against all traditional, institutional religions. I have stacks and stacks of arguments which in my mind all but prove they are just man-made. But I don't see what me spending my free time on trying to convince all church-goers that they are making a big mistake. I probably would not convince anyone anyway so what would be my motivation to post on religious forums or research more and more wrongdoings of church members and contradictions in holy books etc. It's easy enough to debunk religion IMO but I don't see the point.

It seems to me the motivation might be to keep convincing oneself?

 

[Randall]

so what's this about? surely not just about whether someone is pro-ETH or not?

I'd Like to announce a very positive turn around. Recently I've posted some experiences I've had over on the Untitled Research Project. It was looking pretty grim but Ron had the fortitude and honor to seek some independent advice, and as a result he issued an apology to me and retracted the defamatory remarks made by a certain poster on his forum. These days such things are almost unheard of, the typical advice being that an apology can be construed as an admission of guilt, and few people have the strength of character to stuff the legalities and do what is right. Consequently I'd like to tip a glass to Ron and his trusted adviser. You have restored some of my faith in humanity and the ufology community. Also, in light of some of the recent publicity surrounding online character attacks, I'm sure that many more people besides me would commend you. Thank you both so much !

J. Randall Murphy
USI Calgary