I want people to realise that their implacable opposition (and their ridicule and abuse) toward the subject of UFOs and UFO proponents is misguided.
I don't ridicule cases and I only ridicule those proponents who make it really easy by making their lack of research and knowledge obvious.
I want people to realise that many people in the field are genuine, qualified researchers who seek to use the tools of science, logic, rational though AND sceptical thinking (for what is a scientist if not a sceptic) to explicate the mystery of UFOs.
And many, if not the vast majority in the field, are hoaxers and charlatans, as you yourself admit later on.
I want people to realise there is a genuine mystery at the heart of UFO sightings.
How do you know that the mystery is genuine?
There is a lot of “noise” but there is also a “signal” and we need to sort the signal from the noise.
How do you know that there's a signal? Are you saying that it's completely impossible that it's all noise? From where does this certainty come?
I want people to realise that while there are cases that DO indeed have mundane explanations,
The vast majority of cases in fact.
there also exist well documented, reliable cases that do not.
That you know of. Any scientist worthy of the name would know to add that caveat. Remember, if nobody had figured out that it was oil well fires, Campeche would be one of your prime cases.
I want them to realise that I too am frustrated and disappointed that the field of UFO research is full to the brim with hoaxers, and charlatans, but that should not prevent a true search for accurate knowledge.
I completely agree. On all points.
That also does not mean that an irrational, unsceptical generalisation of ridicule and abuse should be directed toward anyone who “dares” to propose an opinion opposite to those in this thread who think that they “know it all”.
Interesting that you claim to "know" that at least some of the cases are "genuine" and "signal", yet cannot convince anyone else of that. Either you are privy to knowledge that you haven't shared, or you're leaping to a conclusion before all of the evidence is in, which would hardly be scientific, would it?
Simply, I want people to realise that genuine UFOs exist
How do you know?
and that there are genuine people involved in trying to find out what they represent.
But by your own admission, they're swamped by hoaxers and charlatans.
The mantra of the UFO debunkers has been a blind assertion of a statement of belief that “It cannot be, therefore it isn’t”. I am here to challenge that belief.
No, the "mantra", for want of a better word, is "Show us some decent evidence". I have stated before, and will state again, any time I'm asked, "It can be, but it might not."
Examining “old” cases is not “fruitless” if they can show that genuine UFOs, for which there is NO plausible mundane explanation, exist
No plausible mundane explanation
that you know of. What part of that is so hard to understand.
I don't say that all UFOs
must have mundane explanations, but you seem to think that, just because you can't think of a plausible mundane explanation, no such explanation exists.
(if you notice there is a case from 2006 on my list –hardly an “old” case).
And yet, nobody has any idea what it was. It's a UFO. Unidentified.
