Research, by a Real Researcher
Our friend, the late Lucius Farish, had a piece in the
magazine pictured here: The Techniques of Historical UFO Research [Page 18 ff.]
He, with Jerome Clark, provided the quintessential study of
the 1896 Airship wave, and Lucius touched on the sightings from that era in his article.
But he really was concentrating on how UFO research should
be conducted, noting that newspaper and other archives are rife with
information that could help ufologists to gather reliable (or rather reliable)
data if they are seriously going to investigate the UFO phenomenon. He didn’t
eschew past sightings that some UFO gadflies insist are irrelevant – probably
because they are too lazy to do the legwork Lucius and real researchers feel is
de rigueur when it comes to a phenomenon as odd as UFOs.
Lucius provides a number of incidents that, when followed up
thoroughly, offer insights that are substantial if one is truly intent on
getting at the nub of the UFO enigma.
He cites cavalier research in such books as Flying Saucers on
the Attack by Harold T. Wilkins.
Wilkins gave readers a hint of a 1742 sighting but didn’t
provide a sketch that accompanied the reported sighting, which ended up being
brought forward by an Oregon researcher, Charles F. Flood in 1968: a
significant historical document that serious researchers should have at their
disposal. Here’s that document:
Isaac Koi is the only current ufologist I know who has the
fortitude to gather UFO documents, past and present, providing them to his
fellow UFO aficionados, all without recompense or remuneration.
As for the 1896/1897 Airship sightings, Lucius gives a
cursory account that puts to shame some of the nonsense that skeptic Gilles
Fernandez tried to pass off recently as a scientific rebuttal of Airship
sightings, writing that they were misidentified Venus sightings.
Unfortunately, Lucius Farish’s procedures and writings are
not generally known today by UFO newbies, and magazine articles, as the one
cited here, are lost to the present UFO milieu as UFO mavens today see 1976
(the magazine’s publishing date) as ancient literature, out of date and out of
reach.
There is no real UFO research going on in UFO circles
nowadays, just blather and posturing with insipid skeletal UFO accounts from the
internet being the fodder of UFO discourse.
And some think my ongoing, repetitive screeds about the
death of ufology and UFOs as a topic of interest is sensationalizing when, in
fact, my redundant discourse may be likened to John the Baptist’s voice crying
in the desert.
RR


