tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post7108000639693434837..comments2024-03-24T20:16:30.097-07:00Comments on The Big Study: UFOlogy : What Is It?The Professorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07811807639219365621noreply@blogger.comBlogger36125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-28883125127219926982010-01-17T07:05:37.943-08:002010-01-17T07:05:37.943-08:00Well, good luck [seriously] with all that. Speakin...Well, good luck [seriously] with all that. Speaking of super-high-tech systems to everyday Joes with small expendable incomes is not in the realm of our [the joes] reality. We can only do what we can, and that is keep the basic case data alive in hopes that some entity with those means will decide to take it seriously enough to apply them to the subject. And, it's my opinion that our currently operating surveillance systems can do all you describe already, and are doing so. On top of that, it is my opinion that the data gained from these systems are well known, yet get you no further towards "explanations" than where we poor amateurs are already. Someone "way over our head" [and I don't mean humans] is controlling this, and they have far more clever tech than we do to limit our surveillance to no more than they want to show. If that situation discourages anyone, then they will probably have to get out of the field from frustration. It does not, unduly, frustrate me, however, as I find that there is plenty of evidence that I am "allowed" to see to indicate the presence of non-human technology right here in our skies, and even to finding a small pattern once in a while. Preserving this data for the future seems to me to be a worthy cause, whether I find the final answer or not. i understand others who don't have that patience, and respect them. I'd also like them not to complain too much about what we laborers in the trenches ARE doing--we serve as we can, and it's not an easy hobby to have to spend so much time upon.The Professorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07811807639219365621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-50914208352596988612010-01-16T21:07:04.134-08:002010-01-16T21:07:04.134-08:00It seems to me that science advances in a given fi...It seems to me that science advances in a given field when a new tool comes along and makes it possible for those advances to happen.<br /><br />I think the invention of the telescope was astronomy's "killer application". Anybody could look through a telescope and see Jupiter's moons orbiting Jupiter (and not the sun) or see that Saturn was not a perfect crystalline sphere but instead had these big honking rings.<br /><br />The microscope is probably biology's killer app. People could finally see "animalcules" running around and pretty soon we had the "Germ theory of disease" and lots of other important breakthroughs.<br /><br />I'm sure the invention of radio led to lots of discoveries in cosmology by allowing people to hear the RF radiation from stars.<br /><br />Watson and Crick needed the data from X-ray crystallography to do their ground breaking work on DNA. No X-ray devices, no DNA related discoveries. <br /><br />PCR and particle accelerators seem like more of those foundational tools that a lot of scientific knowledge couldn't exist without.<br /><br />I think Ufology needs to find its own killer app to really progress anywhere. I'm not entirely sure what that would be though. Some people have suggested passive radar, some have suggested using a huge number of cameras pointed at sky and augmented with motion detection software.<br /><br />Anyhow, my feeling is that Ufology will keep stagnating and drifting around (with the "Theorists-of Everything" at the helm) until someone starts using the tool(s) that can finally find the crack in the enigma's armor. Maybe that tool hasn't been invented yet, or maybe it exists but just hasn't been properly applied to the problem up to this point (that we know of).MKEShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10845000549965580797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-12596744711254837932010-01-16T20:55:15.470-08:002010-01-16T20:55:15.470-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.MKEShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10845000549965580797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-21745648507370412522010-01-16T17:18:39.485-08:002010-01-16T17:18:39.485-08:00Tim: when Art Bell was just expanding into a truly...Tim: when Art Bell was just expanding into a truly national program, billionaire Bob Bigelow gave two kinds of support to that. One was a bit of funding [to my knowledge anyway] and the other was that he [BB] came to several of us [like Dick Hall, Mark Rodeghier, etc. and myself] and asked us if we would help get Bell's new initiative off to a good start by being on the show. Due to that I was on one of the first 10-to-20 programs---forget exactly which. It didn't do one bit of good. The reason is that this show was entertainment not scholarship. Some people might, originally, have been kidding themselves about that, but that is what it was. In the end, "reason" gets swamped with junk of all manner of types. It's just not the proper venue to get anything accomplished and not worth one's time.The Professorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07811807639219365621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-70639675490360725792010-01-16T14:14:44.481-08:002010-01-16T14:14:44.481-08:00It is interesting that you bring up talk radio, pr...It is interesting that you bring up talk radio, professor. I had meant to ask this earlier in our respective careers, but have you thought about reaching out to the Coast to Coast audience as a voice of reason in the UFOlogy business? Very occasionally there are good interviews with some serious researchers that make the show worth listening to.Conal_macLirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10043020152449261589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-41340949898285518562010-01-15T07:10:37.513-08:002010-01-15T07:10:37.513-08:00To whomever posted this last thing: please confine...To whomever posted this last thing: please confine your comments, CLEARLY, to the limited topic of the blog posting. This is not a place for stream-of-consciousness utterances. I have said before, this blog is like my home, which I allow others to come into and see parts of the "museum" that is there [for free]. It is not a let-it-all-air-out site with soap boxes. It is for questions of the home owner who has given a modest description of one of the "museum exhibits" and who is not looking for someone to begin saying whatever they feel like as if this were talk radio. I assume that I am not the only person who has no idea as to what you were talking about, even if it was very important. Please treat the blog as a guest,The Professorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07811807639219365621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-77431125630004623022010-01-14T20:15:45.287-08:002010-01-14T20:15:45.287-08:00In any case, treating other animal species on this...In any case, treating other animal species on this planet as "products" is a bad plan. If one were to object to being bred in ignorant servitude, shouldn't they likewise reject raising other people in ignorant servitude? Cow people, chicken people, fish people, what are we trying to build here anyway? Freedom means also the freedom to choose not to do bad things.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-69164566860052365182010-01-14T12:50:22.356-08:002010-01-14T12:50:22.356-08:00Hello Tim, maybe I remember you from sitting in on...Hello Tim, maybe I remember you from sitting in on ENVS classes [I vaguely think the values course], but I've had a lot of "Tims". Regarding MUFON, as stated MUFON is large and varied. I'd say join and see what the local is all about. At the least you'll probably find someone to whom you can regularly talk about the subject, even if you don't stick with the whole group. Regarding the materialization of a larger out-of-the-closet Invisible College of researchers and scholars who would insist on seriousness and be willing to debunk stuff within the field when it deserves it, I think that this would take some of us ancients getting together, somehow finding a webmaster and also a person who would be willing to do a face-to-face workshop/symposium each year, and then begin by conservative "invitation only" to people who were producers of quality work [or that we had good reason to believe were capable of it] and were in agreement that we were going to evaluate any and all ideas no matter how much a sacred cow they had become. And do it with smiles and kindness. There are actually some people in this business that fit that description [despite the external impression that the field has left. I know about twenty that I'd like to sit down with right now. Whether this happens will depend upon whether any of us ancients want to organize a first rump get-together and then whether we can get the web/meeting pragmatics worked out, with who's going to do it. If this doesn't happen and we all die [about a 50/50 bet] then it's up to you youngsters to "find each other" and do something similar.The Professorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07811807639219365621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-54088504849665164012010-01-14T12:23:05.080-08:002010-01-14T12:23:05.080-08:00Greetings Professor,
Just found the link to your ...Greetings Professor,<br /><br />Just found the link to your blog post. Believe it or not, you are linked at Coast to Coast AM. You may rememer me (Tim M.) from when I attended WMU grad school in anthro. back in the late 90's. It is indeed good to hear your balanced and most insightful voice again - specifically with regard to the current state of UFOlogy. (You see, I initially recognized you from your handwriting and diagrams before you outed yourself in the comments) ;)<br /><br />As for me, I have kept up my post-graduate study of the subject and have, I suppose, continued as a student at the "invisible college of UFOlogy." Would that such an institution existed in the real world, eh? So, on to my question.<br /><br />With regard to MUFON,there seems to be a shift of sorts towards a more scientific "feeling" towards these phenomena with the introduction of their new director. Have you noticed this as well? I have been feeling out the local group, mainly because they hold their meetings close to where I currently reside. I am still undecided about how to proceed with them, specifically, and where I might be able to help UFOlogy, generally. Perhaps an organized community of like-minded individuals can materialize, but could it ever go beyond the state of matter that other ufo "research groups" occupy? That is, who is to say who gets to "apply" for membership? Would there be a vetting process to determine legitimate scientific pedigrees? etc.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-86826948540274636822010-01-13T15:46:43.158-08:002010-01-13T15:46:43.158-08:00Bless you, Robert, my friend, if all of us were as...Bless you, Robert, my friend, if all of us were as open and honest and hard-working as you, we could let the whole world come to UFOlogy, "Hobbits" and all, and still get the truth out of it.The Professorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07811807639219365621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-11407441655687565652010-01-13T13:48:00.947-08:002010-01-13T13:48:00.947-08:00Hi Mike,
I have not been keeping up with your pos...Hi Mike,<br /><br />I have not been keeping up with your posts for the last couple of weeks, but am back at it. As usual, I really enjoy them. I never knew your exact thoughts on Hynek's, The UFO Experience, but I'm happy to report that it has always been my favorite of all UFOlogy books (purchased brand new for $1.50). My now yellow'd copy rests squarely in the middle of my bookcase and the book also contains my favorite newspaper clippings from the 70s. <br /><br />I am sad to say that I must agree with you on the lack of standards in the UFOlogy (I use the word loosely) magazines that are currently published. But in a way, it is to be expected. If the study of the recently unearthed "hobbits" were left to loosely organized public institutions, one can only stand aghast and imagine the "science" that would be accomplished. If only the scientific community could be convinced that the UFO Phenomenon is worthy of scientific investigation.Robert Powellhttp://rpowell.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-59210573539109728762010-01-12T19:40:15.250-08:002010-01-12T19:40:15.250-08:00Mr. Smith: when i began this blog i did it with a ...Mr. Smith: when i began this blog i did it with a rather transparent anonymity because i felt that i am not important but ideas and facts are, and sometimes people get lazy and dismiss or rapidly believe things just because they've labeled them with someone's name. The whole idea of this blog is that personality is not important in the pursuit of truth and often gets in the way. Also, i wanted to tell some personal and family member encounters, and didn't want to make it any easier for some nosy person to hassle them. However, since many people know exactly who I am and address me as such in the comments, it is a poorly kept secret indeed. I am former Western Michigan University science and environmental professor Michael Swords and a member of CUFOS, UFO Research Coalition, SSE, and the UFO History Group. Many other egocentric things could be said none of which are significant to our time together walking the un-beaten paths of adventure in the anomalies. I ask two things: please do not hassle my family with curiosity--ask me and I'll answer. And, do not use your knowledge of who I am to dissuade you from giving these ideas the personal research work that they need to become your own. As to the blog's future, I may have to drop down to twice a week to stay sane and healthy. I don't want to editorially edit comment if I don't have to. We'll see.The Professorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07811807639219365621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-46311987461609301002010-01-12T15:15:54.035-08:002010-01-12T15:15:54.035-08:00Hello, just a brief and I hope helpful suggestion....Hello, just a brief and I hope helpful suggestion. To help sort out some of the subjects not pertaining to a more NICAP style ufo investigation, the writings that are reproduced should be edited by the host or editor of the journal/blog. Thus the editor has some control.<br /><br />I came in a bit late on this site via the ufoupdates list and missed who 'the professor', our host is. May I ask? I always use my full name and give contact info on myself, for instance. Thanks, and very good work and elucidation here; my compliments. Randel Smith, Friendswood, Texas.Randel Smithhttp://www.timelessproductions.usnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-17244846985586874612010-01-12T14:49:07.320-08:002010-01-12T14:49:07.320-08:00To Stephan and the rest of the folks: I can not do...To Stephan and the rest of the folks: I can not do justice to a complicated comment like Stephan's, or many of the other notes which come in, without writing an academic paper [I'm serious; I'm not being glib]. The ETH hypothesis is not one hypothesis but has many variations; please read the earlier posts on this to begin seeing where I'm coming from. Keel can be seen as having a total view of the UFO phenomenon or merely a partial one. None of this is simply one idea to be ranged against another one. This blog is all part of an approach to these subjects that I hope has some coherence--it does so at least in my mind. Would it be possible for "new" commentators to read the rest of the blog first before oversimplifying my own alleged positions? If done one would see, I hope, that the blog author has very few absolutes in his head, and understands fairly well that it's a bad idea to dismiss things---almost the greatest violation of all this blog has been talking about that I can imagine. I think "gray" not black and white on everything. I reach for many sources and many dimensions of thought by colleagues alive and mentors dead before tossing out ideas to anyone---to me it is a sacred trust--no bull. The bottom line of this is: I am finding that I cannot answer all these questions [often not even questions but assertions] and you may have to forgive me if I occasionally have to ignore some. Please continue to ask and comment. Try to make it as simple as possible. Try to state things that have actually been said in the blog rather than assumptions based on reading one entry. I might be able to be of some use then and continue to survive all of this pressure [which as a caring teacher, I feel.The Professorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07811807639219365621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-61386921103015825952010-01-12T13:15:40.640-08:002010-01-12T13:15:40.640-08:00Second anonymous here, I didnt intentionally go fo...Second anonymous here, I didnt intentionally go for anonymous, but for some reason your comment box wouldnt allow me to post with my google sign in, strange glitch. Anyhow, I was referring to a whole long streak of writings by Vallee, from earlier on up to much more recent opinions. Granted it would only make sense that he would change some of his view points as more information comes in. This itself is indicative of a man who genuinly wants to know whats actually going on instead of validating a preconceived belief, also more then can be said of numerous other UFO researchers. <br /><br />I do suppose that an advanced ETH hypothesis could work, but if this were to be the case then the only way the whole phenomenon would be consistent with it is if the ET's are some sort of near god like beings, and the various phenomena, as bizarre as they are, represent some sort of purpose whose details are way out of current human grasp. But if one is still talking about "nuts and bolts" alien ships from a relatively nearby star system, then im sorry but I can't buy into the ETH hypothesis. Vallee himself explained how even our own current technology is capable of far more efficient means of collecting dna and conducting surveys of the earths characteristics, considering the sheer number of UFO sightings, it just don't make sense.<br /><br />On a side not, I would not at all dismiss Keel completely, for he certainly made a good deal of valid points. Much of the associated paranormal phenomena out there do indeed show strong evidence of being connected to UFO's. <br /><br />I agree that its a practical and valid idea to focus on UFO's specifically and only connect them to other things where there is clear evidence of valid correlation, but its also wise to be careful that one doesnt dismiss just for the sake of keeping things "neat". Reality is rarely neat, and it would be unscientific to force it into being so.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07011152873135314995noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-80513351816077972222010-01-12T12:12:18.787-08:002010-01-12T12:12:18.787-08:00To the first of the new "anonymous's"...To the first of the new "anonymous's": This not a chat room nor is it talk radio. If you believe in nothing, we don't need to hear about it unless you are adding something of specific interest relevant to the problem. The comment as presented indicates no familiarity with the scope of the UFO literature, nor any philosophical grounds for defining "evidence" as narrowly as it seems to. People looking for complete physical proof [a la lab bench science] before "believing", in fact by definition believe nothing, as with that sort of "proof" you don't have to believe. Proto-fields of study have to, by definition, begin to study without full proof. If we flushed all inquiry because we had no absolute proof, there would be no inquiry. --------------------------------------------------------To the second "anonymous": Vallee is not mentioned alongside Keel, because, as you say, they are not the same person. Vallee is a colleague and a complicated one. Some of what Jacques says I agree with wholeheartedly, and some of that I don't. To make an honest expression of my complicated views about Jacques' evolving ideas would take a great deal of time in order not to cause more trouble than clarity. Also, I wish not to personalize this stuff any more than is demanded, and don't want to dedicate a lengthy entire blog to the subject of one colleague's ideas. MAYBE some day I'll direct myself to some concise statement about one phase in the evolution of his thinking [but I don't know]. Jacques and I are getting along pretty well now, despite being generally on different sides of the ETH debate. I respect his take on things [including, obviously, his recent view that an advanced ETH is not as inadequate as the original ETH that he grew up with in his Hynek era.] If Jacques is 100% correct, that's fine by me--just know that if you're reading his writings from the 1970's period, Jacques is to creative a mind to have remained in exactly the same place as then. And if Jacques is 10% right, then he and I are the same. --------To GVT: OK, but I'd rather try to do something than give up and try nothing. You may not be recommending pessimism for everyone else, I realize, but we really need encouragement to keep at it, not cold water.The Professorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07811807639219365621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-16598380521251356342010-01-12T03:18:23.010-08:002010-01-12T03:18:23.010-08:00Wow. I can't believe it. An intelligent discus...Wow. I can't believe it. An intelligent discussion of the UFO phenomenon. Haven't seen anything like this for a very long time.<br /><br />I've been following the UFO phenomenon since sometime back in the late 50s. I really got into it in the early 90s with the expansion of the internet and easy access to so much information at my fingertips. But as of the past couple of years my interest has waned mostly because there seemed to be no advancement in the research. It seemed as if everything that could be said, conjectured or actually "known" about the phenomenon had already been said, conjectured or known for years.<br /><br />One of the problems (as I see it) is that we have no ET craft in our possession that we can get our hands on and study. Yes, I know. Bob Lazar, yada, yada, yada. His story may be true but since we can't go down to Area-51 on a field trip to examine the alleged craft for ourselves we pretty much have to assume there is no such craft. That leaves us with what? Nothing more than a bunch of eye-witness anecdotes (mine included), some questionable photos and some YouTube video clips of blurry lights in the night sky. All of these things have been analyzed to death by professionals and amateurs alike and we still don't really "know" very much from these analyses.<br /><br />Admittedly the reaseach over the decades has, for the most part, been rather spurious and undisciplined. Even so, I can't help but think that this tremendous bulk of accumulated information (undisciplined though the process may have been) has likely produced just about all we're ever going to find out about the phenomenon.<br /><br />I don't like saying that, especially since (like one of the other people in this thread) I've seen one of those gigantic "Black Triangle" ufos and it was at a relatively close range for a total duration of around 5 to 10 minutes. I REALLY want to know what the hell that thing was. But here I am, just another eye-witness with another anecdote to share. Proves nothing. Even though I can describe the event and the object in detail (see report and illustration of the craft: www.eons.com/groups/topic/1851994-Black-Triangle-UFO-Seattle-1993) – and even though my affidavit was entered into a legal suit filed by Peter Gersten against the Dept. of Defense in an attempt to gain some sort of information about these crafts – the whole thing amounts to zilch when it comes to advancing our understanding of the phenomenon.<br /><br />I guess what I'm saying is that as much as I would like to see ufology become a structured discipline with something resembling a "scientific" approach to the research, I'm not convinced that it would make much of a difference. Don't get me wrong. I'd love to be convinced! In fact I was a huge proponent of this sort of approach back in the 90s. I went so far as to lean on my academic background in the social sciences and presented a proposal for an introductory course on ufology to a local community college. I don't have to tell you how that was received. :-)<br /><br />Well, now that I've come off as a complete curmudgeon on the subject (LOL) I do want to say I am impressed with the discussion here and I think it may even have rekindled some of the old passion I used to have for the phenomenon.<br /><br />So when does the ribbon-cutting ceremony for the opening of the International College of Ufology take place? And can I get a T-shirt?Gary Val Tenutahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18081483524747772928noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-6491598120026555772010-01-12T02:12:14.066-08:002010-01-12T02:12:14.066-08:00One thing which concerns me is that you made no me...One thing which concerns me is that you made no mention of Jacques Vallee. I'll admit that John Keel was highly superficial at times, and would often make rather tenous leaps of logic, but Vallee is not like this. He tries to keep things as scientific as possible. I have to admit that his ideas on why we are not dealing with simple, classical ET's are very convincing.<br /><br />Aside from that, assuming that there is a single source to all the high strangeness, what if the phenomenon is deliberately designed (has designed itself) in such a way so that it endlessly confuses and muddies the waters. On the one hand it manifests a myriad of seemingly plausible ET and UFO encounters, and then on several different fronts spills forth occurances which seem utterly off the wall, and does so in such a way that there is indeed a strange sort of connection between them, albeit a really hard to prove one. <br /><br />If we are dealing with a conciously directed series of events, then a lot of the parameters by which we can judge plausibility sbould be changed. A concious entity could throw anything forward, no matter how bizarre, and it could be no less or more real then a standard flying saucer.<br /><br />However, I agree that all of this has to be approached in the most probing and scientific way possible; it is true that many people delve into the topic just for the sheer mysterious pleasure of it, and are not interested in concretely searching for answers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-57572947573652702872010-01-11T22:42:39.060-08:002010-01-11T22:42:39.060-08:00I want to believe, but there is simply no physical...I want to believe, but there is simply no physical evidence. You know, with all the alleged "visits" by E.T.s, you'd think one of them would drop a pen or forget their cellphone!(I can't go anywhere without losing something...)<br />Also, no bigfoot bones ever found, no Nessie carcasses, no Mothman droppings...The minute someone produces an "alien communicator" with unknown technology, or a "three toed space boot made of an unknown super-space leather," then I'll take this seriously. Till then, it's all just Star Trek to me. Sorry guys...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-67434973132274887252010-01-11T20:09:21.042-08:002010-01-11T20:09:21.042-08:00What impressed me the most about these postings is...What impressed me the most about these postings is the fact that everybody knows how to spell!!!! Very engaging posts...thanks to all.Dave K.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-87466909680129723072010-01-11T09:41:43.930-08:002010-01-11T09:41:43.930-08:00To the general readership: I just deleted the firs...To the general readership: I just deleted the first comment that I've done so. It contained no understandable content at all, and I don't believe that we should clog up these postings with stuff that adds nothing to our discussions. I will try to restrain myself from doing this too much, but I suspect, that since UFOlogy seems to attract more than its usual number of angry people, this won't be the last. What I'm really hoping for is zero abusive language, even rather strictly defined. Hopefully, it won't get to the point where I have to get my Godson to set this up so that I have to approve everything ahead of publishing it, and thankfully we are nowhere near that yet. Almost all you folks are very neighborly thank you.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------As to "anonymous": your sighting is interesting and thank you for sharing the experience. As far as the other ideas are concerned, I am either not qualified to comment upon them, or feel that it would take at least a whole blog entry to do some of it justice. I will say just one thing: I have two friends, Hal Puthoff and Bernie Haisch, who almost invented the interest in zero-point energy research with their work. I can tell you that neither of them are multi-millionaires, so it's my opinion that it's not a zero-point breakthrough that's holding any of the truth up, but rather entirely different issues.The Professorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07811807639219365621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-17346718973143383722010-01-11T09:08:05.915-08:002010-01-11T09:08:05.915-08:00I spent most of my 44 years poking fun of the subj...I spent most of my 44 years poking fun of the subject because that's what the media has been feeding me since I was a boy, until with my own eyes in 2001 I saw a triangle so big, so silent, so close, turned everything I thought I believed on it's ear.<br />The media does a pretty thorough job of branding those of us interested in the subject as crazy so it has swayed scientists that would love to go into the field to be tight lipped and dismissive about ufos in general, or face the wrath of the "normal" scientific community and get cast out as a lunatic.<br />It's the same reason they blacklist archeologists that find these so called anomalies, such as modern tools encased in coal 1000ft under the ground. well, that can't be, man hasn't been around that long... whatever.<br />There is a hidden history, a hidden physics that's privy only to an elite group of people that THEY feel can handle it. I say throw it at me... I can handle it. Unless of coarse the truth is just so horrible, so unbelievable, that they feel we would rip each other to pieces. My thought is that greed is evolved, zero point energy won't make them the kind of money they are making now. I hope to one day be let in on the little secret.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-34378592968108370422010-01-11T08:58:38.188-08:002010-01-11T08:58:38.188-08:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.the truthnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-9845552069402349652010-01-11T08:16:44.283-08:002010-01-11T08:16:44.283-08:00I wish that there was a way to get beyond the [sti...I wish that there was a way to get beyond the [still valuable] limits of merely firing e-mail-type thoughts around the globe, though, and establish some kind of organized "community" [having the guts to restrict itself to disciplined and collegial exchange among its members] with the regular ability to "e-publish" [at least mildly] "refereed" papers with the understood intent that these papers would be commented upon non-personality-wise with an aim to make them as accurate and thoughtful as possible. Something like that is a necessary function of a true "college" if it is ever going to do anything but produce ephemeral things, no matter how cogent, which then dissipate into dissociated electrons or other forgotten black holes in relatively short times. A real UFO studies field must find a way to ESTABLISH something once in a while. If we can't find the means for doing that, organizationally, then we're like footprints on the tidal sands forever.The Professorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07811807639219365621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2019724693487670016.post-76270297054108961732010-01-11T07:26:17.583-08:002010-01-11T07:26:17.583-08:00As a 40 year student of the UFO subject, how refre...As a 40 year student of the UFO subject, how refreshing to read an intelligent article and equally intelligent comments about the UFO <br />phenomena. There is truly an invisible college concerning this subject. It is just we do not communicate with each other because we don't who the members are.<br />Thank you all.<br />Wayne EasonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com