• 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!

This week on DMR 7-01 - 07-03

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Decker

Decker

Administrator
Staff member
This week on DMR, July 01st I host Dr. Kevin Randle on a number of topics, not the least which will be Skeptics and UFOs.

Weds. July 03, David Biedny will make a return appearance with more on the Caracas UFO sighting he had with in family in the early 70's. DMR starts at 10:00 PM Pacific Daylight Time Monday thru Friday .. only on CyberstationUSA. Go to;

CyberStationUSA - An Innovation in Online Broadcasting | CyberStationUSA.com
 
What's with all the skeptic hate lately?

I just find it funny how both sides of the UFO debate accuse each other of the exact same thing.
 
Angel of Ioren said:
What's with all the skeptic hate lately?

I just find it funny how both sides of the UFO debate accuse each other of the exact same thing.
Click to expand...

Skeptic hate? I don't think so but I have been highlighting "debunkery" of late. I know you may not believe it Angle but I consider myself skeptical. I AM skeptical but what we have been looking at is/was debunking by the usual suspects. A fine line? Perhaps but there anyways.

Decker
 
I guess I find it pretty interesting how and what people choose to believe. The show's have been great - things do need to be debunked though.
Most skeptics don't really worry about UFOs anymore because "believing" in them doesn't really hurt anyone. The main issues in skepticism these days are debunking stuff like anti-vaccine proponents and climate change deniers which do have more tangible repercussions.
UFOs are super interesting to me, I just don't think that they have anything to do with aliens.
 
Lack of evidence, lying, personal attacks, not knowing what they are talking about, etc... Just the usual. A perfect example is when you posted somewhere on the forum a list of logical fallacies that skeptics use. The link was to a list created by The Skeptics Guide to the Galaxy, one of the best skeptical podcasts out there.
 
Angelo, you sack of crap! Your lying and obviously have no idea what your talking about. Just kiddin'. :)

It's all about baby steps. I firmly believe that we need to start by agreeing that there is a phenomenon worth study. That is the first step in bridging the chasm between skepticism and acceptance. This means that both sides have to bend a bit. But, in my opinion, it won't happen without some sort of triggering event that makes the topic impossible to ignore.
 
Angel of Ioren said:
Lack of evidence, lying, personal attacks, not knowing what they are talking about, etc... Just the usual. A perfect example is when you posted somewhere on the forum a list of logical fallacies that skeptics use. The link was to a list created by The Skeptics Guide to the Galaxy, one of the best skeptical podcasts out there.
Click to expand...

OK, I think I see where you might be going with that, and it's a fair point. It would be far better if we could all agree on some common standards and aims wouldn't it?
 
Skepticism is good, even skeptics are good, the ones who cite a lack of compelling evidence as their reasons for thinking UFOs are not anything special etc.

Debunking, well they way Angelo puts it, in terms of debunking scares over vaccines etc, well that is totally fine too. UFO debunking, in terms of exposing the Billy Meiers' out there is also good. I just have a problem when UFO debunkers knowingly use any old explanation to 'explain away' sightings. When Hynek used swamp gas, or the FAA used ultra-lights in formation for the Hudson Valley sightings, that is the debunking I hate, and only that type. Any skeptic who denies that even happens is deluding themselves.
 
Goggs Mackay said:
When Hynek used swamp gas, or the FAA used ultra-lights in formation for the Hudson Valley sightings, that is the debunking I hate, and only that type.
Click to expand...

At the time of the 1966 Michigan flap, Hynek was personally under the impression that there were more to the sightings than misidentifications, but was still under contract with the Air Force and was essentially told to come up with an explanation to quell the public. For Hynek this was the last straw in a series of obvious white washes by the Air Force. After this he started treating witnesses and the subject with more respect in public, and in 1973 founded the prestigious Center for UFO Studies ( CUFOS ), which although grossly underfunded, remains in operation to this day.
 
I know that Hynek felt under pressure to explain those sightings, but in my opinion almost anything would have been better than swamp gas!

On the other hand, it could be interpreted that he used such a ridiculous explanation to good effect in that the ridiculousness of the explanation could have been him secretly telling everyone that something truly unexplained happened. He couldn't just come out and say it, but by saying what he did, anyone with half a brain would have thought, 'Hold on, if the Air Force cannot come up with a better explanation than swamp gas, it must mean they are grasping at straws and so something strange must actually have happened.'
Now, I don't know if he was actually intending that consciously but perhaps his unconscious self could not stand being party to this debunk-at-all-costs ethos and it found a way for him to shout out without going against his employers, the Air Force.
 
Goggs Mackay said:
I know that Hynek felt under pressure to explain those sightings, but in my opinion almost anything would have been better than swamp gas!

On the other hand, it could be interpreted that he used such a ridiculous explanation to good effect in that the ridiculousness of the explanation could have been him secretly telling everyone that something truly unexplained happened. He couldn't just come out and say it, but by saying what he did, anyone with half a brain would have thought, 'Hold on, if the Air Force cannot come up with a better explanation than swamp gas, it must mean they are grasping at straws and so something strange must actually have happened.'
Now, I don't know if he was actually intending that consciously but perhaps his unconscious self could not stand being party to this debunk-at-all-costs ethos and it found a way for him to shout out without going against his employers, the Air Force.
Click to expand...

Watching the way Hynek explained it, he made it seem plausible, but the whole skeptic act was wearing thin and IMO this was the tipping point where the public began to see right through what the Air Force was saying.
 
ufology said:
Watching the way Hynek explained it, he made it seem plausible, but the whole skeptic act was wearing thin and IMO this was the tipping point where the public began to see right through what the Air Force was saying.
Click to expand...
Did the public ever truly see through the Blue Book deception? I would argue that they either did not. Or at least if they did, they just didn't care.
 
Ron Collins said:
Did the public ever truly see through the Blue Book deception? I would argue that they either did not. Or at least if they did, they just didn't care.
Click to expand...

In the context of the post, who we're talking about were the members of the public that the Air Force was addressing during the 1966 sightings in Dexter, Michigan who were told that what was being reported was swamp gas. The public saw right through that explanation and started contacting their representatives, which in turn led to the first public hearings ...

"I have taken special interest in these (UFO) accounts because many of the latest reported sightings have been made in my home state of Michigan...Because I think there may be substance to some of these reports and because I believe The American people are entitled to a more thorough explanation than has been given them by the Air force to date, I am proposing either the Science and Astronautics Committee or the Armed services Committee of the House, schedule hearings on the subject of UFOs and invite testimony from both the executive branch of the Government and some of the persons who claim to have seen UFOs...In the firm belief that the American public deserves a better explanation than that thus far given by the Air Force, I strongly recommend that there be a committee investigation of the UFO phenomena. I think we owe it to the people to establish credibility regarding UFOs and to produce the greatest possible enlightenment on this subject." - Gerald Ford​

So the evidence is that people did indeed see through the deception and cared enough to bother their representatives, who in-turn cared enough to launch hearings, and since then, there have been more and more people who have come to believe UFOs are real and that the government isn't disclosing everything they know about them. Today, according to the polls, we ( the believers ) number in the millions, and those who study ufology are aware of the continued efforts that went into undermining serious study of the phenomenon.

However, to address your comment in a more general sense, although the public's reaction to the 1966 Dexter Michigan sightings may have been the tipping point in terms of seeing through official deception, not everyone believes in UFOs or for that matter even cares. Even if UFOs were scientifically proven to be real, there would still be some people who wouldn't care about them. In another sense, there are those like myself who have gotten to the point where we don't need the government to tell us UFOs are real. We already know that and don't need big brother to validate it for us. Until the government comes clean with all the details, I personally think that caring about disclosure is a waste of my emotional energy.
 
Well, lets look at this f0r a moment. I once asked Phil Klass this question; "You say that you don't believe that any UFO sighting can't be explained. You say that they all can be explained with enough information or that they are hoax's, right? So why did you feel the need to go on an almost 40 year crusade against them? I mean Phil, I don't believe in fairies even though there are people that do believe they are real. But I don't feel the need to go on a crusade to convince everyone else that fairies are bullshit. And!, by the way, the United States Air Force never had Fairy Officers on each AF base but they did have UFO officers on each base. So, what is your deal?"

The bottom line boys and girls is Klass had NO ANSWER and attempted to change the subject.

Decker
 
Goggs Mackay said:
Many don't want it to be true IMO.
Click to expand...

A given, but why exactly is that ? Other then (not 'than', right ? (ffs, as a non-native english speaker I still have problems with that)) shady Government officials, there is hardly any noise, at least here in Europe. Either people don't give a crap and nothing is happening (why that would be so is a different matter), or it is supressed. Both scenarios are scary to me because I believe the second one to be true. One of the last Taboos out there.

Who knows, right....
 
Back
Top