Friday, December 27, 2013


"The Trouble with your UFO hobby is that you have no evidence. "


"Yep. Pretty pathetic given all those years."

I think that there is pretty good evidence.

"Hah! If there was, we'd know about it."

I could show you....

"Don't bother."

There are unusual lights....

" What a joke!"

Well, there are a lot of them... and

That light Captain Hull and his co-pilot saw came in front of them and danced. ...

"Ah Shut-up! Who's Captain Hull? Some drunk?"

No, he's...

"I don't have time for this crap. So long."

Well, if you won't even look....

those non-inertials.... those displays which show 'it' knows exactly where the observers are... the military guys, even scientists/ astronomers...

"Lights in the sky. No more."


"Forget it, Waste of time... "

Well, he's gone... probably just as well...

Oh yes. No evidence. Technological objects by the dozens seen by aerotech engineers, pilots, people of every sort... Obviously physical, Obviously "built", Obviously "interested....

... no evidence.

Radar.... i guess those don't count.

We all know that radar is a useless technique. After all if it were useful our military would USE it, wouldn't we?

What we could really use would be some cases where the alleged things were close to the witnesses.

Too bad that we don't have any......

... or if the darned things would just leave some trace of their being here.

Too bad that never happens.

Or ANYTHING!! Anything at all! Electrical interference, mass displacement, "burns", paralysis --- ANYTHING!! Give me something!!

I guess we're just out of luck.

What about a picture? How about one by the military or one examined by them? But NOTHING! Nothing at all.

.... and if there WAS anything to this, you'd think that we'd get a glimpse of who's behind it once in a while.......

My friends, Doctor Hynek said that we have an "embarrassment" of riches in the case files. It is a difficult "embarrassment" however to employ. The good Doctor immersed himself in the pool of incidents; almost no one else will bother. People say that we've learned nothing. They mean that THEY've learned nothing.

... and to them I, an old fellow short of future years and tolerance, say: please just go away. That thing that you carry with you, which somewhat serves as a mind, wearies me.

JUST         GO         AWAY.........................................................................

I DO care a bit though about one thing: what should I do with these files, this pile of wasted paper and film in the eyes of the mind-dead?

... an embarrassment of riches....

which no one seems to care much about.

..... except we few.

Blessings, friends.


  1. i hope. all these files will be digitized .. and put into indexed database searchable by ufo researchers someday..

    maybe someone someday will help you as its not an easy job..

    1. One of my last UFOlogical hopes.

      I guesstimate that there are around 2000 cases resident here. Some aren't much [just a single page], but others, I believe, are as fine a case file as exists --- my lack of humility on that comment stems from requests that I get for material, and no one else has "come through" but me --- I REALLY wish that "my" file wasn't as comparatively good, as that would mean that many other better ones already existed in cooperative researchers' hands. We are getting there though I think. Us old guys should pop off the planet just about coincident to getting "our" stuff more effectively distributed.

  2. I anticipated your ending, as I started scrolling down I thought, "what's going to happen to all these files?". It would be nice if a university would accept them, maybe your alma mater? Unfortunately we all know how this data is viewed by mainstream academics...

  3. My dear Professor, fortunately unlike your witless "inquisitor" there are some people, who are seriously looking at "this embarrassment of riches" such as your good self. I count myself in as well. Anyone who seriously engages with this material, if they are at all intelligent, would at the very least conclude there is a serious problem worth looking into, that needs far better resources to make the kind of progress needed, that well funded sciences make. Meanwhile we have a litany of "lost opportunities" to do some good science with some extraordinary data. Love your filing system. Best wishes of the festive season and for a happy new year, from OZ

    1. Blessings to you Bill... you are a friend to not only me, but UFOlogy and Truth. Here's wishing the healthiest happiest 2014 for you.

  4. Classic post! Exposes all the shortcomings of "the nasty, noisy negativists". What a pleasure to read, and very satisfyingly devastating to the Debunker Camp.

  5. The right attitude as always towards the files of the anomalous - thanks.

  6. Provided any relevant permissions are obtained, it should be possible to arrange to have your files digitised and made available as searchable PDFs online on, say, a free file storage website in a relatively short span of time.

    Since we haven't had any direct contact (although I've been familiar with your work for quite a few years now and been tempted to bother you a few times), I should probably give a brief introduction of myself. I'd usually include a few relevant links, but don't want to suddenly pop up on your blog and appear to be spamming it.

    I am a barrister in England with an interest in various issues relating to UFOs/ufology. In a (possibly futile) attempt to reduce the amount of time wasted reinventing the wheel by those involved in UFO research, in the last year or two I have been focusing on making certain UFO material more easily available online in a searchable format (and posted information about ways of efficiently searching that material).

    I recently helped make Wendy Connors' ufological audio CDs available online (with Rod Dyke's permission), although my emphasis has been on making written material available as searchable PDFs documentary material. This material has included large collections of files from the official archives of Canada, Australia, New Zealand (after getting permission from their respective governments) in addition to the FBI's files (some of which are no longer on the FBI's website) and collection of various UFO magazines/journals (including a complete collection of the SUN newsletters written by Phil Klass, with the permission of CSICOP which in turn had permission from Phil Klass prior to his death and other publications, including a complete set of the 1980s British journal "The Probe Report" (with the permission of its editor) . I have also put a fair amount of effort into collating links to other digitised material online, including the MUFON Journals, NICAP newsletters and APRO Bulletins.

    Anyway, as I mentioned above, if you want your files digitised and made available online then I'm sure that (so far as the technical side of things is concerned) this could be arranged to be done for you in a fairly short span of time with searchable PDFs being uploaded to a free file storage website (so there is no need for any cost or bothering about technical infrastructure). I'd simply be concerned that any relevant permissions are obtained first.

    By the way, I recently had an exchange with a number of prominent skeptics and one of them expressed the view that skeptics have MORE interest in making underlying material freely available online than ufologists because skeptics think that the solution to apparent UFO cases lies in obtaining better data relating to those cases (and implied that many ufologists actually hold the same view). Just yesterday, another person commented that ufologists are only interested in sharing material when they can do so in a way that helps them make money. I disagree with that blanket view, but do think that several UFO groups have a pretty poor record of making material available without charge and then have a fair bit of cheek to complain that too few people show an interest in the material they sell. I could give a few examples that would (depending on your view of ufology) either make you laugh or cry.

    I may ask one or two of our mutual acquaintances to contact you, so that you know that I'm not just some random nut posting nonsense on your blog...

    1. Actually, Isaac, I do know who you are even though I haven't had the pleasure of directly corresponding. {and I've noticed your characteristic avatar on the list of my blog below, for some time}.

      Hopefully you have interacted with John Reid who "gave" me the SITU archive, and who is on his personal quest to get almost everything imaginable on line. For the books and most of the journals, that will happen. It's the unique files materials that are the real trouble. By definition, my files can only be dealt with in the one place they exist, which sort of sticks me with the job. And, as an old character with limited energy [especially for robot bending-over-style work], I just can't see myself with the time, energy, and fortitude to pull it off. Therefore I'll have to have "people" come to the house to do the scanning. As rabid UFO enthusiasts are not rampant in Kalamazoo, that means paying someone, or maybe risking shipping things out somewhere. Either way it will not be free. AFTER the scans, yes, then there is no economic issue involved in getting them on the internet.

      The UFO History Group is taking these dilemmas on though, and we'll crack them someday probably soon. The "permissions" thing is somewhat easier in that items are labeled as my own case file, and witness name redacted before "publication universally", and originals kept separate from general public unless certain permissions obtained. --- or some such schematic design.

      Anyway: delighted to "hear your voice", and may there be many more opportunities.

    2. It's good to make contact with you and at some point I'd like to bother you with a few issues (either here or by email). Sticking to the matter in hand of possibly digitising your files, it may well be possible for me to arrange for a "rabid UFO enthusiast" to come to your house in Kalamazoo, if that would be acceptable. Two possibilities that immediately occur to me are for one of us to make use of our respective contacts within MUFON and/or (which is probably more likely to be fruitful) for me to seek assistance on one or two of the more popular UFO discussion forums (e.g. Obviously, this would probably mean that the person coming to you house would not be someone that I could personally vouch for. This could well be a problem particularly if, for example, the relevant person would need to take the files away to their office etc to make use of a large scanner/printer. I've had quite a bit of luck inviting help on various projects.

      I have indeed had contact with John Reed (which I think is the right spelling of his name) of the "World Institute for Scientific Exploration"/"WISE". How could I resist contacting someone that has ambitious plans for scanning UFO periodicals and makes various points about duplication of effort in this field? :) He mentioned his contact with you. I've just tried to post below a version of a list of projects I know about to digitise UFO material. I prepared the relevant list for the purposes of a recent discussion with John Reed. However, the relevant list exceeded the length restrictions for blog posts.

    3. Hello again. I'll need to apologize to John. Ever since he came into my life, his name {Reed} and my old friend's {Frank Reid} have been colliding and morphing about in the old name memory box {a poor "facility" at best.}

      As to help scanning: I'm all for it. In my opinion the job, particularly the length of it, "sucks". But it would have to be done at some time when I had a significant period to straighten up my basement chaos in order to dedicate the main research table to it. The older I get the less trivial these "straightening" processes become.

    4. Just let me know when you would like me to being making attempts to secure help scanning your material. In relation to permissions, do you need/have permission from CUFOS? (I would not want to upset Mary or Mark). In the meantime, as a relatively small beginning of a potential larger project, I have been thinking about liaising with Tom Tulien and Jan about updating some sections of the Proceedings of the Sign Historical Group. The Proceedings could now either link to, or attach, copies of guides which are now available online to some of the collections mentioned (with a potential view to scanning some of that material, but at least helping with the "who has what" issue) and/or include updated details on relevant policies regarding copying/scanning/disseminating material from some of those collections. I don't think this would include a vast amount of work (particularly since I have collated some of the relevant links/guides already). I know that in the past you have written about compiling your own finders guides to some chollections and, in at least one case, I think you have mentioned leaving a copy of the relevant finders guide with the relevant archive. If those guides are things you would be prepared to share, I think they could be a relatively easy and valuable resource to make available online to help reduce the amount of reinvention of the wheel within this field and/or improve the quality of research. Again, I'm happy to discuss this (or some other small possibilities) here or by email (

    5. there would be a very small percentage of what I hold here in Kalamazoo which would need any permission from anyone. Plus, the main players in that [Mark, and John Reed] are such good friends [and onboard with electronic scanning] that permissions would be nearly automatic. I, and UFOlogy, are in a very good position as these issues are concerned. Almost everyone of any status or good sense out there views these things as my files or at the least files which wouldn't be available if I hadn't done the heavy lifting to make them so.

      There are at least two other things going on just as we speak which could dovetail into such a project, and I'm going to see how they play out before making a precise commitment --- as to desired time periods [my commitment to getting this scanned will never be retracted; it's just when and how].

      Thanks Isaac, you're a good fellow on the side of the light.

  7. Thanks for the kind words as well. I look forward to hearing from you in due course, or - ideally - seeing your files online as part of the work of the (intriguing) "at least two other things going on just as we speak". :)

    1. Surely, Isaac. As to the other things: I'm not being secretive [don't believe in that as a useful behavior generally]; I just mean that both my History Group and another couple of UFO friends are independently trying to help this process along, but, being just ordinary folks, we haven't the ability to ensure that stuff will happen and particularly when. When that clarity occurs, if ever, I'll let everybody know whatever I know that is useful.

      My vague [not much more than a dream at the moment] concept is to buy a wand scanner [probably], get some wise advice from my History Group buddies, get a little funding help somehow, and hire one or two of the guys who have been working on my sustainable house retrofit project [and are out-of-cashflow for the winter] [again with some money help] to come over "regularly" and put in some hours. But take none of this as more than gossamer, as I really haven't much of a clue just yet on any of it.

  8. Good news all around on these fronts!

  9. As Steve Purcell may have mentioned, I've emailed him with a few thoughts and some information in relation to scanning issues. In short, I think there may be cheaper, faster and (importantly!) far less tedious ways of getting at least some of the scanning done than using a wand scanner on all the material. I like to make life as easy as possible. :)

    1. Thanks again, Isaac. I am actually beginning to see some end-of-tunnel light here. I have two guys who need wintertime work who are willing to scan in-house for reasonable dollars. What I need to do now is get my computer "fixed" [I've been using my laptop and there are several linkage snafus], then buy the scanners, and clear the big basement table for them to get at it. When certain categories of cases are finished, I'll probably send them to Steve, and he, you, or whomever will figure out how to make this more accessible. Taking this route not only takes the time and irritation out of this for me, but also does a good spiritual service for two guys who could use some wintertime funds. Should be a Win-Win-Win.

  10. Whatever works for you and gets your material online is, of course, absolutely fine with me. I just want to make sure you know the difference in ease/speed of different types of scanners. For example, as I've mentioned at more length to Steve Purcell in my recent email, in my offices we use fairly large photocopiers that can take a large stack of loose-leaf documents and at the press of a button automatically scan (in a few minutes) the stack into a single PDF file which can be saved to a computer or even emailed to someone directly from the photocopier. No software required. No painfully dull messing around. Nice and simple. BUT, obviously, this does not work as well if the papers are largely stapled together or are very fragile or you simply cannot get access to such equipment (which, being realistic, is not the sort of thing you are likely to be buying). I'm sure that some, if not most, of your material could not be treated in this way - but there may be a significant fraction which could be dealt with in a few minutes/hours using such equipment, if I could arrange access to it for you. I therefore view getting access to office-grade scanners as very important in minimising the relevant time/effort/cost involved IF a good portion of the material is suitable for being fed automatically through such machines and IF those involved are prepared to either let a volunteer take the documents away to be scanned or (if this can be arranged with the volunteer) accompany the volunteer to ensure the safe keeping/return of their documents. Being realistic, the ability to get such assistance will depend in part on what will be done with the documents. If there were to be a rolling programme of uploading documents to, say, free file storage websites or an existing website then there would be fairly immediate visible results which could attract more assistance.