UFOs, Roswell, Friedman, &c.

[Rat]

I do some work for a chap who, while generally well-educated and of a skeptical bent in many ways, is an absolute believer in all things UFO. I don't think he'd put it that way - he'd say he just had an 'open mind' on such subjects - but the fact is that he buys books on the subject by the dozen, and he espouses many of the claims that they make.

I've searched, and there don't seem to be that many threads here on UFOlogy, as they perhaps ambitiously call it, so what's the score? Is there any kind of consensus on the issue here? I don't mean "there's a possibility that there is other life in the universe, and a (considerably smaller) possibility that they've visited this planet", as I think most would give - albeit reluctantly perhaps - some agreement to this. I mean that they have visited; that people have seen them; that there is real evidence of this; that governments (chiefly US) have covered up evidence.

The chap in question gives every appearance of firmly believing that the US government have got materials and technology from aliens (he's never mentioned Roswell, but I suspect that's the root of it), and that there is good and convincing evidence of this and the necessary cover-ups. He has books by or about Stanton Friedman, though I've never more than flicked through them.

The problem is that I frequently find myself in debates with him about this, and they tend to be short-lived, because I'm fairly ignorant of the subject, never having felt it worth looking into. I can request evidence and invoke Ockham's razor (and ad verecundiams &c.) for all I'm worth, but it's not particularly satisfying.

Anyway, thoughts?

Cheers,
Rat.

 

[shecky]

I don't follow the UFO scene either, but I've found Saucer Smear a rather entertaining newsletter run by possibly the most skeptical true believer (and Randi hater) James Moseley. Much of it reads like a continuing gossip sheet of UFOlogy's biggest personalities. But if you manage to search through the available archives, you'll get some leads on some of the whack jobs and their theroies involving the existence of UFOs and beyond.

 

[Jeff Corey]

Coming to your area soon!
There's either a pirate or Jesus in it.

 

[Aepervius]

For starter

* You could inquire with the passing and changing of *U.S.* culture, UFO form and shape, and alien morphology changed.
* Why there is so much UFO in the US which do not represent the majority of the % of mainland (and yes, EU is as technology advanced as the US. Heck as an alien I would rather search for highier tech , like nuclear power and land in those country, rather than a country which mainly use coal to generate power !).
* You could also inquire why with so much cover up, why people know so much and have a lot of web site.
* you could also point out there is no much inconsistency in UFOlogy.
* also point out how bad, WARRRRY WARRRRY BAD, are eye witness. How mind with time reconstruct memory which were not there at all, even in the most honest person, while it ignore things which were tehre (remmember the basket team video, 4 or 5 person playing basket ball, and suddenly a guorilla eprson appear in the focus and go away. Most people asked to witness the basket ball match do not see it because they concentrate on the ball !!!).
* sleep paralisys. Google for it. Search on the forum.
* also in our knowledge you can't go about light speed. Add the math and either the alien in small ship are FREAKINGLY long lived, or those are robot and not aliens,or they have to breed and need a way bigger ship.
* why would they come specifically to our planet ? Our light cone for radio wave is at most 150 years old (I won't bother google for a more specific timeline). At best they would come because they think a planet around our sun might have life. But certainly no way they would expect us or search for us.

I am standing on a leg, but I think for part of the skeptic (the orange or the green one ), the consensus is due to the above factor, there might be life *somewhere* in the universe, but the chance it comes to visit us among so many star to visit is vanishingly low, and there is not much in physic theory right now which allow it in a reasonable way for so many differents species of aliens. So I would say, it is the usual trick of the mind played on some people, but instead of seeing kobold or gods or virgin mary, they see UFO. *shrug*.

 

[Miss Whiplash]

SHOCKINGLY CLOSE TO THE TRUTH: Confessions of a Grave-Robbing Ufologist by James Moseley is a wonderful read. Even though he and Randi eventually fell out, they were friends and traveled in the same circles in the 1960's. Or so the book says.

 

[Patricio Elicer]

The most comprehensive and documented site I've found on the skeptical side of ufology is Tim Printy's UFO's: A Skeptical View

Well worth having it in mind when debating UFO nuts.

BTW, Tim Printy is aka "Astrophotographer" on the JREF Forums.

Keep up the good work, Tim.

Some of my favorite articles:

The Ability of Eyewitnesses

UFOLOGY's Desire for Scientific Recognition

Debunking and Ufology

Ufology: 50 Years of Futility, Frustration and Failure

Astronomers and UFOs


[edited to add the links]

 

[Astrophotographer]

The most comprehensive and documented site I've found on the skeptical side of ufology is Tim Printy's UFO's: A Skeptical View

QUOTE]


Thanks for the plug. Just my thoughts on the subject and a bit of research. I would not put much faith in most work by UFOlogists. They are often flawed and look at the facts from one point of view. In most cases, they find nitpicking reasons to reject likely explanations on small points in orderto keep the case "unexplained", which in their minds means evidence of extraterrestrial visitation.

I think an excellent example occurred here in the JREF forum a few years back when it came to the Mexican AF UFOs. The response to a likely explanation in some UFO forums was typical:

1. Trained pilots could NEVER mistake distant oil wells for UFOs
2. These UFOs moved around and surrounded the aircraft (The UFOs in the video never did this).
3. Oil wells can't fly (but the UFOs really did not fly either)
4. Oil wells don't register on radar (but neither did the UFOs on the video)
etc. etc. etc.

Those presenting this explanation were ridiculed by some of the same people, who are considered some of the leading minds of UFOlogy. So much for "open minds" they claim skeptics do not have.

The debate here on JREF was pretty good and everyone eventually agreed that the oil wells were the likely explanation for the video images. I bet you will never find that in any UFO book written by Friedmann.

 

[fuelair]

* You could inquire with the passing and changing of *U.S.* culture, UFO form and shape, and alien morphology changed.
* Why there is so much UFO in the US which do not represent the majority of the % of mainland (and yes, EU is as technology advanced as the US. Heck as an alien I would rather search for highier tech , like nuclear power and land in those country, rather than a country which mainly use coal to generate power !).
* You could also inquire why with so much cover up, why people know so much and have a lot of web site.
* you could also point out there is no much inconsistency in UFOlogy.
* also point out how bad, WARRRRY WARRRRY BAD, are eye witness. How mind with time reconstruct memory which were not there at all, even in the most honest person, while it ignore things which were tehre (remmember the basket team video, 4 or 5 person playing basket ball, and suddenly a guorilla eprson appear in the focus and go away. Most people asked to witness the basket ball match do not see it because they concentrate on the ball !!!).
* sleep paralisys. Google for it. Search on the forum.
* also in our knowledge you can't go about light speed. Add the math and either the alien in small ship are FREAKINGLY long lived, or those are robot and not aliens,or they have to breed and need a way bigger ship.
* why would they come specifically to our planet ? Our light cone for radio wave is at most 150 years old (I won't bother google for a more specific timeline). At best they would come because they think a planet around our sun might have life. But certainly no way they would expect us or search for us.

I am standing on a leg, but I think for part of the skeptic (the orange or the green one ), the consensus is due to the above factor, there might be life *somewhere* in the universe, but the chance it comes to visit us among so many star to visit is vanishingly low, and there is not much in physic theory right now which allow it in a reasonable way for so many differents species of aliens. So I would say, it is the usual trick of the mind played on some people, but instead of seeing kobold or gods or virgin mary, they see UFO. *shrug*.

I'm guessing you're not from around here, pardner.

 

[Patricio Elicer]

I would not put much faith in most work by UFOlogists. They are often flawed and look at the facts from one point of view. In most cases, they find nitpicking reasons to reject likely explanations on small points in orderto keep the case "unexplained", which in their minds means evidence of extraterrestrial visitation.

Yes, that seems to be a universal trait of ufology. I've been discussing ufology on a local forum extensively on the past months, and it's always the same old story. Prompt acceptance of anything supporting their beliefs/wishes, and prompt rejection/dismissal of anything going against them. If astronomer X says he/she saw a UFO, their testimony goes straight to their records and statistics. If astronomer Y says he/she has a mundane explanation, then they are promptly dismissed and called "debunkers".

Most ufologists seem more interested in perpetuating a mystery, rather than solving it (a thought stolen from you ).

I think an excellent example occurred here in the JREF forum a few years back when it came to the Mexican AF UFOs. The response to a likely explanation in some UFO forums was typical:

1. Trained pilots could NEVER mistake distant oil wells for UFOs
2. These UFOs moved around and surrounded the aircraft (The UFOs in the video never did this).
3. Oil wells can't fly (but the UFOs really did not fly either)
4. Oil wells don't register on radar (but neither did the UFOs on the video)
etc. etc. etc.

Those presenting this explanation were ridiculed by some of the same people, who are considered some of the leading minds of UFOlogy. So much for "open minds" they claim skeptics do not have.

I reviewed the Mexican Campeche case video just recently, and made me reflect further on the reliability of eyewitnesses testimonies. On their internal conversations, the pilots made 3 gross mistakes on their "sighting". They said that: 1) The objects were chasing them; 2) The objects were at the same altitude as the plane; 3) The objects were travelling at an enormous speed (that was an exclamation).

So I kept wondering, what if we had not had the video to do an independant research?. We'd have only the pilots' testimonies, and since trained pilots enjoy a high position and prestige as qualified observers, the case would be triunfally waved by ufologists as an undeniable proof of alien visitation, and would add up to the list of best unexplained cases. But the fact is that the pilots were dead wrong. That also made me wonder why the Kenneth Arnold case is still so important and emblematic on ufology.

I bet you will never find that in any UFO book written by Friedmann.

Friedman is usually mentioned in the UFO forum as the greatest figure in ufology, and his word is sacred to many. But digging up into his work, I've been losing respect for his person. I'm under the strong impression that his intellectual integrity is missing something, to say it in a gentle manner.