Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Followers
Blog Archive
-
▼
2010
(74)
-
▼
June
(9)
- Coral In The Desert: Searching for Socorro.
- Crawling Out Of The Desert, 1963-1964.
- Where do You draw the Line?
- From Bill to Gill to Hill: Part Three--Hill.
- Supplement to "GILL".
- From Bill to Gill to Hill: Part Two--Gill.
- Supplement to "BILL".
- From Bill to Gill to Hill: Part one--Bill.
- Flying Saucer Review Volume 9, Jan-Jun 1963: Nadir?
-
▼
June
(9)
Links
- A Different Perspective
- American Philosophical Library
- Caltech Archives
- Dr. J. Allen Hynek's Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS)
- Dr. Janet Quinn
- EXPLORE
- Frontiers Of Science
- Global Consciousness Project
- National Investigations Committee On Aerial Phenomena (NICAP)
- Robert G. Jahn, Ph.D.
- Smithsonian (SIRIS)
Hello, Prof.
ReplyDeleteLet me ask this general question. In the face of the events and their history that you chronicle so well, does it matter any more about UFO disclosure? Would the U.S. government admitting to it make it more real than it already is? I'm not being flippant, but it seems to me disclosure from the powers that be is not as important as your personal beliefs. Regards.
Disclosure of ordinary UFO information would, in my opinion, make very little difference to our understanding of the phenomenon. Disclosure of Roswell-like information would add at least something, and perhaps a great deal to it. But the real gain in disclosure would be the end to the debate about whether the phenomenon was even real, and probably the debate over the ETH as well. It would surely end the mockery and the sociological crap that UFO-interested persons have had to endure endlessly and chronically. That would put the field of study, and many other fields of study into new perspective. The subject has, precisely, lacked that "imprimatur" from some immediately recognized authority which would take it beyond cheap shots and academic disinterest.
ReplyDeleteOver the years, I've gotten the increasingly distinct impression that there are many competent and curious scientists who would love to study the various paranormal subjects in a mature and productive way, if only they didn't have to worry about being ostracized (or worse) in their professions. I think Carl Sagan is an excellent example, if an extreme one in a number of ways. I don't think we have any way to guess what all those bright, educated people might have learned by now. We surely would be living in a different world.
ReplyDeleteI have known many such persons. My feeling is that for most of the anomalistic subjects we would not be much further along---they are just too tough and intermittent to do real science upon, and they probably depend upon thinking entities who will not robotically behave according to simple physical laws. But I believe that in many areas of the parapsychological we would have made great progress, as well as the recognition of the work of Robert Jahn, Dean Radin, Roger Nelson and many others who have completed much already. The greatest value of a sea change in attitude is simply that we would be free--free to really think and imagine and create. We'd be ready, at last, for the Big Study that we should all be about.
ReplyDeleteSee this is why I love your reviving this stuff, Prof: it's from an era in some ways far less sophisticated than now, but in other ways far more sophisticated.
ReplyDeleteBack then there wasn't anything like the same number of cultural impositions to be wary of, but out of sheer necessity they also tended to spend most of their time using their eyes to navigate the real world as opposed to being hypnotically glued to the 2 dimensional world of their TV, PC, or satnav screens.
How many pilots, nowadays, gazing at their virtual reality representations of the world outside their craft, spend anything even remotely comparable to the amount of time ye olde air-pilotes were forced out of sheer necessity to expend on actually scanning the real sky?
But what I also like is most of the versions of these things out there're highly pruned down, often not so much even as accurate precises but more verging on mutations to the point of being misrepresentative.
So thanks to you I get to read how our two-fisted hero Bill Nash not only knows what he saw but won't stand for the TV guys steppin' out o' line with their illustrations.
But I'm also startled by his observation "Some persons have suggested they were entering a carrier".
So the concept of a mothership already existed in 1952?
Nash is writing to Menzel in the early 1960s. He has had 10 years for someone to suggest to him the idea that they might have flown into a carrier. As to when such an idea started, I can't say. Colonel McCoy suggested in July of 1947 that the Germans night employ "pickaback" [piggyback] aerial platforms from which to launch disks or whatever the saucers were. In the early 1950s, Adamski certainly pushed the idea of motherships.
ReplyDelete