UFO Conjectures

Tuesday, May 08, 2018

From Nick Redfern: Demonic UFOs

Back in 2010, I wrote a book called "Final Events."

It was focused on a group within the government which had a very strange and controversial belief.

They believed that the UFO phenomenon is not extraterrestrial but literally demonic. Some people said at the time it was nonsense to say that such a group/think-tank could exist.

 Now, 8 years after "Final Events" was published, there's this from today:

http://metro.co.uk/2018/05/08/religious-pentagon-mod-officials-thought-ufos-demonic-divine-former-government-investigators-reveal-7529174/

NR

posted by RRRGroup at Tuesday, May 08, 2018

52 Comments:

  • Wow! thanks for sharing this, Nick, as I've been compiling some notes on not unrelated matters.

    Do you remember reading how the American Defense establishment was caught off guard by the collapse of the Soviet Union because certain of its key members believed the USSR was Gog/Magog of Revelation? I've been trying to confirm my memory of this situation not dissimilar to the one you share here....

    By Blogger Bryan Sentes, at Tuesday, May 08, 2018  

  • Hey Bryan, Yeah, the government has been involved in a lot of programs that border upon the occult, such as "Operation Often." See:

    http://mysteriousuniverse.org/2018/03/paranormal-phenomena-and-government-agencies/

    By Blogger Nick Redfern, at Tuesday, May 08, 2018  

  • Bryan,

    I remember being briefed during a "Global Shield" exercise that the USSR was indeed "religious" by showing photos of stained glass windows (old Russian churches) depicting Lenin in a divine setting. This being the old saw that religion being the opium of the masses.

    Not surprised by Nick's post. DoD personnel is a cross section of our population which carries religious beliefs. This also includes the halls of Congress and the Executive Branch.

    Anyone remember Garner Ted Armstrong's weekend TV program back in the 1970s? Rife with elements of the Book of Revelations and the USSR playing the part of the forces of the Anti Christ in the final standoff at Armageddon.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Tuesday, May 08, 2018  

  • Coincidents?:

    https://i.ytimg.com/vi/EOfvBEBSpd0/maxresdefault.jpg


    https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1368071812l/1310069.jpg

    By Blogger Zak MacKracken, at Tuesday, May 08, 2018  

  • Thanks for the link, Nick.

    Tim: Garner Ted Armstrong, and The Late, Great Planet Earth--I remember them both well. And former's TV series goes on!

    By Blogger Bryan Sentes, at Tuesday, May 08, 2018  

  • There we go; Why not consider Demonic?

    When one considers the depiction of "some" UFO occupants, I would not be surprised, but if Rich is correct about AI craft, then we are all back where we started, with the question of; What are they & where did they came from? I don't accept that all, are from elsewhere,that "some" UFOs; are manufactured here on Earth covertly! as the story in Ufology suggests. But would a UFO. manufactured here on Earth, actually buzz our own aircraft?...Well They might, if they were AIs, for the reasons Rich has explained!! And IF UFOs are Demonic, then what would the reasons be for being anywhere near our aircraft....Abduction?....When, where?....Not heard of it!

    Aircraft go missing....aircraft crash, so what are we to think? There are more crashes on the free-way than in the air. By the way, having said this, be careful, I'd loath to think you'd become another statistic on your roads, that would be Demonic..........

    By Blogger Daniel, at Tuesday, May 08, 2018  

  • The information is strange. Retarded behavior, optical in the physical expression.

    How small and intelligent does something need to be to hack human perception and yet exist as something else?

    Stray ionized neutronic memetic plasma with FTL neurosis?

    Could be a work in progress. Hard to know if that is natural or something else.

    Probably staged.

    By Blogger neal, at Wednesday, May 09, 2018  

  • Well, having stated the phenomenion is based largely on 'deception' - here's the statement released Friday evening by Bigelow Aerospace Advance Space Studies spokesperson Caroline Bleakley confirming their investigations involved - “a lot more than nuts and bolts machines that interacted with military aircraft. The phenomenon also involved a whole panoply of diverse activity that included bizarre creatures, poltergeist activity, invisible entities, orbs of light, animal and human injuries and much more.”

    Again - this can't fail to bring to mind the recent cover of Jacques Vallee's 'Passport to Magonia' once more.

    https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51IxQrWJd2L._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

    By Blogger DrDee, at Thursday, May 10, 2018  

  • As if this was anything new, and it's a "UFO" believer, Elizondo, saying it. Duh!

    Battling cosmic forces of good and evil, the demonic Dero and the beneficent Tero, were the heart of the Shaver mystery--the immediate precursor of flying-saucer hysteria beginning in 1947. Their "flying saucers" being depicted on the covers of Amazing Stories many times, even the very month of Ken Arnold's line of "saucers."

    And as if belief in "UFOs" wasn't loaded with otherworldly meta-religious elements. How many new-age "flying saucer" religions are there? Or cults that incorporate belief in "UFOs" (good and/or evil) into their lunatic belief systems? Dozens!

    "the Shaver Mystery was the 'UFO phenomenon' before the actual UFO phenomenon."

    (As much as I detest the p-word used to describe what does not exist as fact.)

    https://amazingstoriesmag.com/2013/02/the-art-of-the-shaver-mystery/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_UFO_religions

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Thursday, May 10, 2018  

  • "the American Defense establishment was caught off guard by the collapse of the Soviet Union"

    Funny, I've heard it was the CIA. And it's the Pentagon too? What a Load! A Myth!

    I was a college senior in 1980 and told my professors that the Soviet Union was near to collapse, doomed. I knew just by my reading of the New York Times. The United States had three-pronged policy of destroying the Soviet Union. It was no secret.

    Destroy their economy; outspend them in global defense; and foment religious unrest in their Islamic states. That began by luring them into a miserable unwinnable war in Afghanistan that lasted nearly a decade, brought to you by the US and the Saudis.

    Remember the video of bin Laden in Afghanistan? And we all know the rest of the story. Blowback!

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Thursday, May 10, 2018  

  • A real reason NOT to take anything Luis Elizondo says seriously:

    Luis Elizondo Says UFO Anti-Gravity Technology Almost Understood

    From watching what are most likely just other jets in a few IR videos? Baloney!

    If this claim weren't so pathetically ludicrous I would laugh but this is crazy talk. This is 1950's comic-book territory, just make up crap and say "antigravity" a lot. That's how long we've been hearing about "antigravity" flying saucers.

    "Gravity control propulsion research had been the subject of widely published UFO and conspiracy theory literature. The documented testimonies of whistleblowers edited by Dr. Steven Greer, Director of the Disclosure Project; anecdotes and schematics by Mark McCandlish and Milton William Cooper; and the reports by Philip J. Corso, David Darlington, and Donald Keyhoe, famous UFO researcher, have suggested incorporation of reverse engineering of recovered extraterrestrial vehicles with the anti-gravity propulsion projects had enabled them to continue beyond 1973 to successfully manufacture antigravity vehicles. Branches of the military and defense agencies have denied and refuted such claims."

    "Antigravity propulsion" is about as real as "broadcast electricity." A Fantasy!

    See also: "UFO and [antigracvity] conspiracy theories" at bottom of page

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_gravity_control_propulsion_research

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Friday, May 11, 2018  

  • Hey Zoam - since you 'know' the UFO phemomenon is a load of bull - why waste your time (and ours) commenting?

    By Blogger DrDee, at Friday, May 11, 2018  

  • Dr Dee: every such forum needs its Menzel/Klass sckeptic--Though, just what ZC's _interest_ in a "phenomenon" he so energetically dismisses _is_ a question even my hermeneutically-attuned imagination has difficulty divining....

    Zoam: whatever you do, DON'T visit this site or interact with its author re EM propulsion!

    https://quantumantigravity.wordpress.com/

    By Blogger Bryan Sentes, at Friday, May 11, 2018  

  • I smile:) because Zoam is very good at what he does, "as a skeptic!" and hopes we will fade away, & disappear:.. But!..

    -> The documented testimonies of whistleblowers edited by Dr. Steven Greer, Director of the Disclosure Project; anecdotes and schematics by Mark McCandlish and Milton William Cooper; and the reports by Philip J. Corso, David Darlington, and Donald Keyhoe, famous UFO researcher, have suggested incorporation of reverse engineering of recovered extraterrestrial vehicles with the anti-gravity propulsion projects had enabled them to continue beyond 1973 to successfully manufacture antigravity vehicles. Branches of the military and defense agencies have denied and refuted such claims." <-

    These testimonies, of the said whistleblowers, are far more convincing than Zoams scepticism, yeah?...And as for the; Branches of the military and defense agencies having denied and refuted such claims, [Well, they would, wouldn't they!?]

    It's top-secret, "Officially!!" until Disclosure, if at ALL!?...........

    By Blogger Daniel, at Friday, May 11, 2018  

  • Dr Dee; Most Internet skeptics have heard that question many times. And a rather obvious response is:

    If you think YOU are wasting YOUR time then stop reading my posts.

    (Funny, some old-time skeptics refer to believers as "time wasters" because they're seemingly immune to good sense!)

    I'm not wasting my time; the "UFO" subject is exactly what one makes of it.

    Most of us think of this as a hobby combining sciences and literature that mainly concerns the idea of life on other worlds, however remote that might be. But there are other hypotheses--including the Null hypothesis: There aren't any real "UFOs" of any kind and there never were. It's all nothing but an aerospace-age delusion.

    Some of the people this subject attracts will uncritically believe just about anything that confirms their predisposition to a "UFO" reality of any kind--ET or not. Some others are more objective and have higher standards of logic and evidence; and some, like our gracious host, have hope that something will come of all of this. And even the most hard core who think it's all nothing but noise can still be interested and be on hand to help moderate the discussions.

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Saturday, May 12, 2018  

  • https://quantumantigravity.wordpress.com/

    Is that intended to be a comedy site? The home page has an image from a Coen Bros movie, "A Serious Man," other pages appear serious but then there's a "Boyd Bushman" page. Funny stuff. Reminds me of:

    http://www.crank.net/quantum.html

    They're endless.

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Saturday, May 12, 2018  

  • Zoam--the site in question is quite serious, from its own point of view. It's originator ("owner"? "operator"? What DOES one call someone who runs a website? My linguistic cortex is buggy today) engaged me re the Electro-Magnetic Hypothesis on my own site. He surely seems to take himself seriously...

    By Blogger Bryan Sentes, at Saturday, May 12, 2018  

  • Talking of good sense, Zoam; How can anyone with "good sense" DENY!

    -> The documented testimonies of whistleblowers edited by Dr. Steven Greer, Director of the Disclosure Project; anecdotes and schematics by Mark McCandlish and Milton William Cooper; and the reports by Philip J. Corso, David Darlington, and Donald Keyhoe, famous UFO researcher, have suggested incorporation of reverse engineering of recovered extraterrestrial vehicles with the anti-gravity propulsion projects had enabled them to continue beyond 1973 to successfully manufacture antigravity vehicles.<-

    These documented testimonies of whistleblowers, are "serious minds" Zoam, with good
    sense! You know this, because they are in positions of TRUST, with good sense, or they would not have these positions of trust. This is what makes their testimonies so trust worthy, they are "Reputable" citizens in trust, there of; and know what they have seen, and testify to...In the [Citizens Hearings] these "Reputable Citizens" were under Oath, to tell the truth & nothing but the truth. It's not a bedtime story for children, its serious stuff, of some concern. For example;

    Pilots report, near misses! THAT, in its self, must be of some concern to all of us, including yourself Zoam!? So why do you; deny, deny, deny!!!

    By Blogger Daniel, at Saturday, May 12, 2018  

  • ZoamChomsky - You're funny! :)

    Firstly I do indeed cease reading once I realise it's another of your blanket dismissals - what's the point? How does this categorically dismissive stance towards the entire field in any way add to the discussion or indeed 'moderate' it as you claim, when your extreme & distinctly immoderate position is 'it's all complete rubbish'?

    You're a typical 'skeptic' with a 'k' which in British Forteana is used to distinguish hardline, rigid deniers from more open-minded 'sceptical' enquirers. You're not interested in any of the evidence, you just make the same ludicrous, unqualified assertion:

    'There aren't any real "UFOs" of any kind and there never were. It's all nothing but an aerospace-age delusion.'

    To quote Bill Hicks 'Wow - how f***ing scientific!'

    Voltaire of course famously reprimanded the uneducated peasantry who, despite his vast and superior intellect, could not stop the simpletons from repeatedly insisting that 'rocks' had fallen from the sky into their fields. This was of course all palpable nonsense, since Voltaire KNEW rocks don't fall from the sky...

    How does anyone 'KNOW' there are no 'REAL' UFOs? (quite apart from from the age-old philosophical chestnut of delineating what 'REAL' is.)

    You DON'T & can't possibly 'KNOW' this of course - you BELIEVE it to be 'true' but like Fundamentalist Christians & Flat Earthers maintaining such a viewpoint requires the denial of much inconvenient evidence to the contrary. Even sceptical researcher Dr. David Clarke concedes there are cases that defy 'rational' explanation where the testimony of trained, credible witnesses (pilots etc.) coupled with radar returns would indicate something unidentified and unexplained was encountered and recorded.

    Einstein couldn't accept that 'spooky action at a distance' (or 'quantum entanglement' as we now refer to it) could possibly work in the 'irrational' way it appeared to. Unfortunately for old Al, it's been further verified & confirmed this week (via random control data harvested from a mass online game) the impossibility of ever accurately predicting which state any entangled particle is in prior to observation. Einstein arguably wasted the latter part of his career trying to explain away such 'irrational' & highly inconvenient facts which were 'immune to good sense' (to use your phrase).

    Why should 'reality' conform to 'good sense'? To quote Richard Feynman 'If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you DON'T understand quantum mechanics.' If we'd insisted on explaining everything in terms of 'what we already know' we'd still be in the Dark Ages. Similarly - why would the US Govt. fund & legitimise Bigelow Aerospace's 'Advanced Aviation Threat' program if there's literally NOTHING to it (beyond a 'delusion') Presumably they could've saved themselves a bundle by just asking you - since you KNOW the answer!

    As I'm sure you're aware, Vallee, Hynek, Keel and Nick Redfern amongst many others, note this is far from an 'aerospace-age' phenomenon. The 'phantom airship' encounters alone pre-date the aerospace age let alone the centuries of encounters documented by Vallee.

    For the record neither I, nor anyone I know for that matter, regards their interest in the subject as a 'hobby combining sciences and literature that mainly concerns the idea of life on other worlds'. Sounds like a Sci-Fi Creative Writing course the way you describe it and I find your assertion that 'most of us think that' completely bizarre.

    By Blogger DrDee, at Sunday, May 13, 2018  

  • (cont'd) I'm with Vallee, Keel & others in believing such encounters & phenomena emanate from a non-human but terrestrial intelligence which has been present in some form throughout human history and assumes (for its own, unknown motives) various cultural guises. The phenomenon is primarily, as Vallee has asserted (and which intriguingly a recent Bigelow Aerospace statement appears to confirm) largely based on DECEPTION. The Bigelow Aerospace statement also notes:

    'The phenomenon also involved a whole panoply of diverse activity that included bizarre creatures, poltergeist activity, invisible entities, orbs of light, animal and human injuries and much more.”

    This is clearly NOT a topic that in anyway fits your 'hobbyist' concern with 'life on other planets'. As Robert Bigelow recently responded to a '60 Minutes' question about whether we'll 'meet aliens as we travel further into space':

    'There's no need to go anywhere. They're already here.' (i.e. they're NOT 'space aliens')

    Aside from this disjunct between what an active, government funded investigation found and your somewhat cosy 'definition' - two illustrative examples of how the phenomenon is NOT simply 'delusion'.

    Firstly the well documented JAL 1628 flight over Alaska which had 3 trained cabin crew witness an unidentified massive object that threatened the safety of the aircraft by obstructing its flight path, before 'intelligently' following it along its amended course.

    'In a SECRET meeting attended by representatives of the three letter agencies - as well as the President's Scientific Study Team - the data presented by John Callahan, FAA Chief of Accidents and Investigations, was reviewed and TAKEN AWAY as SECRET'.

    Skeptics maintain nothing was seen on radar & the pilots had merely seen 'planets' ('What they were probably seeing is light bouncing off a strut' as Chris Morris satirised such simplistic skeptical 'explanations' in his current affairs mockumentary series 'Brass Eye')

    Callahan maintains however that air traffic control DID report seeing something unusual on radar but this was deliberately hushed up.

    If indeed the incident was a case of 'errors' in the radar image and the pilots had seen 'planets' (a somewhat worrying failing in the skill set of professional aviators one would think), then why would there need to be a cover up and why would the CIA & FBI call for a secret meeting with the FAA to discuss the evidence?

    Similarly if intelligence agencies routinely confiscate such data proofs, actively concealing & covering up such incidents (also allegedly threatening FAA staff with the old 'you didn't see this, this never happened' routine according to Callahan) how would we ever know the 'truth'. (Other than by consulting you of course!)

    Secondly, and recently revisited on here (notably to NO comment from yourself) is the intriguing and baffling Kera UFO. It was unquestionably a solid object, it was filmed & photographed, the physicist father of one of the boys examined it & could neither determine its origin, mode of manufacture or indeed from what metal it was constructed. Presumably this too is all delusion?

    Again if you 'KNOW' the entire UFO phenomenon is nothing more than a delusion, why waste your time interacting with us clearly deluded, mental deficients?

    Do you need to constantly re-assert some kind of spurious intellectual 'superiority' over us sad simpletons and our 'fantasies' - the erroneous nature of which your all-seeing omnipotence has thankfully revealed to our lowly intellects.

    By Blogger DrDee, at Sunday, May 13, 2018  

  • (cont'd) Anyway - busy schedule permitting - on your next descent from on high, do enlighten us as to how you came by such indisputable, priveleged & transcendent 'meta-knowledge' far beyond the wit of us mere mortals.

    One could quite easily argue your dismissive & unshakeable 'certainty' UFOs are 'merely a delusion' (not withstanding the decades of investigation and academic research by Drs Hynek & Vallee as well as the initially sceptical Harvard Professor John Mack amongst others) is itself a baseless (and some would say) arrogant delusion.

    Do keep taking the tablets! ;)

    By Blogger DrDee, at Sunday, May 13, 2018  

  • Same old baloney we've heard for years, Dr Dee, and not one bit of it is true or even relevant or applies to me. But as the old Internet saw goes, "Skeptics address the "UFO" subject; Believers address skeptics." Meaning, always failing to make their case for real "UFOs" of any kind, Believers must default to ad hominem.

    Anyone who's been her for more than five minutes knows I'm just as much an advocate of the Psychosocial hypothesis as I am the Null hypothesis for "UFO" reports, much like most other Pelicanists, whose slogan for two decades has been: "Make Ufology History." Any difference between UK sceptics and US skeptics is very much semantic.

    Magonian and sceptic John Rimmer has been saying for decades that there are no real "UFOs" of any kind--there is no core stimulus. And folklorist and sceptic, David Clarke announced last year as his first principle: "There is no "UFO" phenomenon," echoing what US advocates of the Null hypothesis have been saying for half a century.

    Next it's the typical worthless appeal to the history of science, science as an institution, as promoters of pseudoscience imagine it anyway. When one appeals to the history of science to make a case for some pseudoscience, you know his case is hopeless. ;-D

    Terauchi was a "flying saucer" believer of the worst kind who manufactured his very own "small group scare" over Alaska--just one of his several "saucer" sightings which he later regretted. And so on....

    Dr Dee, until the Null hypothesis is falsified, the PSH will remain the best explanation for why people make "UFO" reports. The onus is completely on the advocate, that's how science works. So show the Null hypothesis is false, show us veracious evidence of real "UFOs!"

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Monday, May 14, 2018  

  • Makes a damned good living studying this phenomenon that 'doesn't exist' doesn't he, this David Clarke? Gets almost as much mileage out of it as you do!

    This is the ludicrous & nonsensical paradox of the supposed 'rational' mindset. How can you study and/or have an ongoing dialogue with something that doesn't exist? Of course it exists, irrespective of what it is or isn't - otherwise what the hell are we discussing?

    Similarly how can there be NO core stimulus of any sort? There must be a 'cause' if you're sticking to your classical scientific paradigm (or are we into Jungian acausality now?) :)

    The hypotheses (null or otherwise) of scientific rationalism are NEVER going to prove or disprove something that doesn't appear to conveniently operate within its currently accepted boundaries. THIS is the 'Einstein Problem' - 'THIS can't be happening - it 'doesn't make sense' or fit the current theories, neither is it (at the time)testable or verifiable.

    Einstein was no doubt employing the 'null hypothesis' when he (wrongly and repeatedly) decided the outcomes of the TEST DATA were UNLIKELY. A peculiarly unscientific & subjective value judgement one would think.

    Where's the TEST DATA for Dark Matter? There is NONE.
    Where's the TEST DATA for String Theory? There is NONE.
    Where's the TEST DATA for 'Life on other planets'- There is NONE.

    Are these 'pseudoscience' then? (since there isn't a single shred of evidence to prove either.) I invoked the Einstein anecdote simply because it is illustrative of how even the greatest scientific theorists can't & won't accept repeatedly observed phenomena that don't appear 'scientific' since they seem 'unlikely' - as many of the 'High Strangeness' encounters were/are dismissed as 'unlikely'.

    As I said previously why should 'reality' conform to rational expectations of what is deemed 'likely'. What a laughable and ludicrous notion.

    That said (and what you fail to address) is why do Bigelow Aerospace (with US Govt. support & funding) spend millions on researching a phenomenon that apparently DOES NOT EXIST?

    Why do they want 'inquisitive outside of the circle thinker(s), who (are) detail oriented and looking for a challenge - to be a part of cutting edge research.'

    Here's a blog with the ads: http://ufos-scientificresearch.blogspot.co.uk/2018/05/bigelow-aerospace-advert-for-aawsa-jobs_10.html

    A major NASA contractor full of delusional lunatics no doubt.

    Their recent statement states the phenomenon 'involved a whole panoply of diverse activity that included bizarre creatures, poltergeist activity, invisible entities, orbs of light, animal and human injuries and much more.'

    This data all sounds highly 'unlikely' so I'd dismiss it out of hand - and thus we expand & advance our knowledge.

    You again fail to address the EVIDENCE of specific cases (other than dismissing them offhand)

    In the JAL case - why, according to FAA Chief John Callahan, did the 'three letter agencies' convene a SECRET meeting with them as well as the President's Scientific Study Team - officially declare it a UFO, warn them to keep quiet and seize & remove corroborative data? Why bother if it's just a delusion & why on Earth are both agencies interested?

    Also, as Jacques Vallee (a statistician & computer scientist besides a Ufologist) notes if the data WAS accessible - as opposed to being routinely seized & 'hushed up' (as the JAL & Rendlesham Forest cases amongst others suggest, let alone the wholesale destruction of ALL the data & evidence from the Condign Report) then perhaps a 'null hypothesis' could perhaps be applied. This is definitively NOT the case in the US or UK.

    Also - the Kera UFO (discuss)

    By Blogger DrDee, at Tuesday, May 15, 2018  

  • @Zoam Chomsky

    Oh and by the way - here is the said Dr. David Clarke on UK Channel 5 documentary 'Britain's Closest Encounters' - explaining that the UFO phenomenon comprises many different things including 'natural phenomena & INEXPLICABLE phenomena'. Indeed, there is as he points out "No ONE UFO 'phenomenon' - there are MANY UFO 'phenomena'."

    Here's the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PH-fpHi7-9Y

    Doesn't SOUND like he's claiming there's NO UFO phenomenon does it?
    Not 'creatively' part-paraphrasing for our own purposes are we? :D

    By Blogger DrDee, at Wednesday, May 16, 2018  

  • >> Dr Dee,<< Illustrates again that he really doesn't understand the history and philosophy of science, the scientific method and falsification, the Null hypothesis, or the PSH and the modern "UFO" myth and delusion.

    >> what the hell are we discussing?<< The "UFO" myth and collective delusion--the popular but demonstrably false belief that unknowns of some kind are haunting the atmosphere and nearspace.

    >> how can there be NO core stimulus of any sort?<< No extraordinary stimulus is the core of "UFO" reports, only various mundane stimuli, if there is a stimulus at all. People have told all manner of "UFO" stories for over a century that were complete fantasies or hoaxes, no stimuli.

    >> The hypotheses (null or otherwise) of scientific rationalism are NEVER going to prove or disprove something that doesn't appear to conveniently operate within its currently accepted boundaries.<< Hypotheses don't prove or disprove things, Dee. Several competing hypotheses exist simultaneously over time and we rank them tentively from most probable to least probable.

    Related to falsification, the Null hypothesis and probability is the positive "as if" philosophy, we consider our most probable hypotheses about the world outside our immediate sensibilities "as if" they are true representations of ultramicroscopic or ultramacroscopic events. Well aware that all imagined, however hypothetical, however distant, exists in the real-world here and now.

    >> THIS is the 'Einstein Problem' - 'THIS can't be happening - it 'doesn't make sense' or fit the current theories, neither is it (at the time)testable or verifiable.<<

    You know, Dee, it really is irrational to keep trying to justify belief in "UFOs" with analogies to the history of science. But it's nothing new, it's a well-known folk-logic ruse. Link to follow.

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Wednesday, May 16, 2018  

  • >> Einstein was no doubt employing the 'null hypothesis' when he (wrongly and repeatedly) decided the outcomes of the TEST DATA were UNLIKELY. A peculiarly unscientific & subjective value judgement one would think.<<

    Even great geniuses can make mistakes--especially when they are already venturing far beyond not just the limits of knowledge but beyond the limits of accepted theory. But again, such analogies hardly make a case at all for some atmospheric unknowns of any kind, "UFOs."

    >> Where's the TEST DATA for Dark Matter? There is NONE.
    Where's the TEST DATA for String Theory? There is NONE.
    Where's the TEST DATA for 'Life on other planets'- There is NONE.<<

    Again, that's not the way the validation of scientific theories works. Me thinks that there is more artistry, invention and judgment in the creation of scientific theories than "Dr Dee" has dreamt of.

    >> Are these 'pseudoscience' then? (since there isn't a single shred of evidence to prove either.)<< Pseudoscience is generally failed meta-science--junk science--hypotheses that have been considered and dismissed, falsified already. And the term is also applied to hypotheses that cannot be falsified, one cannot conceive of how the assertion could NOT be true. That's what is required to be "scientific," to be able to conceive of a "NOT true" test--not an actual test, Dee.

    So no, those are not pseudoscientific theories.

    >> I invoked the Einstein anecdote simply because it is illustrative of how even the greatest scientific theorists can't & won't accept repeatedly observed phenomena that don't appear 'scientific' since they seem 'unlikely' - as many of the 'High Strangeness' encounters were/are dismissed as 'unlikely'.<<

    Same again, see above. Science by analogy exists in the mind of the believer, and one has nothing to do with the other. The long dead and fossilized pseudoscience of ufxlogy can never be revived, and the fading popular "UFO" myth and collective delusion can hardly be justified, by analogies to the history and philosophy of science. It's a worthless rheorical device.

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Wednesday, May 16, 2018  

  • >> As I said previously why should 'reality' conform to rational expectations of what is deemed 'likely'. What a laughable and ludicrous notion.<<

    Another rhetorical diversion. I don't know anyone who's ever claimed that "reality" should conform to reason. It's much more the case that reason (innate good sense and scientific hypotheses) has unfolded according to the dictates of the natural world, physical reality.

    "Scientific realism" is the belief that the world, the Universe, is that known directly by the senses and described by prevailing scientific theories--however ambiguous and incomplete. Dwell on that, Dee, because that's all we have. The world as it is, however ambiguous and incomplete our knowledge and theories. Talking about unknowns and ultimate realities is confused metaphysical mumbo jumbo. We can only know the world as it is.

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Wednesday, May 16, 2018  

  • This comment has been removed by the author.

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Wednesday, May 16, 2018  

  • >> Doesn't SOUND like he's claiming there's NO UFO phenomenon does it?<< Dee

    Why do I suddenly feel like I'm talking to a twelve-year-old? Have you read Clarke's book?

    Get this:

    "There is no such thing as the UFO phenomenon, but there are lots of phenomena that cause UFO reports.

    "There is no such thing as “True UFO”.

    "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. ..."

    http://pelicanist.blogspot.com/2015/05/conquered.html

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Wednesday, May 16, 2018  

  • Here we go again - blahblahblah yadayadayada.

    You're an indulger 'par execellence' in worthless rhetoric.

    You neither have access to all the information - since much of it remains redacted (one has to ask why if it's all 'nonsense' as you claim) or, in the case of Condon's Project Blue Book evidence (notably different from the version for 'public consumption' - again, WHY?) deliberately destroyed so HOW can you possibly make a truly informed, evidence based assessment that there's 'nothing to it'.

    You can't - so it's as ludicrous as it is arrogant to make such assertions. If you were a high ranking military or intelligence officer with access to information we aren't privy to I'd be inclined to believe you.

    Since you're OBVIOUSLY NOT yet MANY such people have testified for the Disclosure Project that there IS INDEED something to it and much of it remains classified & undisclosed, I'm much more inclined to take their word for it rather than yours. It's just a question of who, logically, is the more credible source really.

    Anyway - address/explain some SPECIFICS rather than swerving them & waffling on endlessly.

    1) Dr. David Clarke who you claim said 'there is NO UFO phenomenon' (link?) states there are 'many UFO phenomena' some of which ARE INEXPLICABLE on the YouTube link here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PH-fpHi7-9Y - comments?
    2) (YET AGAIN) - The KERA UFO. Bit too much evidence for ya?
    3) WHY do the CIA & FBI (as attested to by FAA Chief John Callahan & Colonel Charles Halt of USAF/RAF Bentwaters whose video evidence disappeared after he was told to send it to Intelligence Chiefs) seize data & warn people to keep quiet if it's all nonsense? What's the purpose or motivation for this? None of this squares with your assertion.
    4) Why have many ex-military, NASA & intelligence personnel testified for the Disclosure Project that there is indeed SOMETHING to the UFO phenomenon and that much of it remains classified & undisclosed. They're ALL deluded &/or liars presumably?
    5) Why would Dr J. Allen Hynek & Professor John Mack for example (both previously sceptics) change their opinion on the subject after years of hands on research & investigation and why should I disbelieve the opinions of such eminent people in favour of yours?

    I don't unquestioningly 'believe' anything, I just tend to agree, along with some much greater scientific minds than either yours or mine - Drs Hynek & Vallee being foremost of course, that there are compelling cases where without the shadow of a doubt, evidence exists that something inexplicable has happened and very few of these involve 'atmospheric unknowns' as you put it.

    'Even great geniuses can make mistakes--especially when they are already venturing far beyond not just the limits of knowledge but beyond the limits of accepted theory.' But again, such analogies hardly make a case at all for some atmospheric unknowns of any kind, "UFOs."'

    The point I made was that some scientists repeatedly discount observed phenomena that doesn't fit the accepted paradigm. Vallee's interest in UFOs was sparked while working on the staff of the French Space Committee, when tape evidence of a satellite orbiting the earth in opposition to its rotation was destroyed. At the time, no one had the capability to launch such a satellite.

    Also I think you'll find, Bigelow Aerospace are 'venturing far beyond not just the limits of knowledge but beyond the limits of accepted theory' to use your own words and putting their money where their mouth is.

    How or why is this approach invalid with reference to UFO research simply because you are of the 'belief' they don't exist? People much higher up the Chain of Command than you or I and with access to govt. info & resources we don't would seem to strongly disagree with you.

    By Blogger DrDee, at Wednesday, May 16, 2018  

  • 'Me thinks that there is more artistry, invention and judgment in the creation of scientific theories than "Dr Dee" has dreamt of.'

    And there we hit the nail on the head. 'Dark Matter' & 'String Theory' are entirely the products of 'artistry, invention & creation' and are not evidence based theories. Even some Theoretical Physicists have branded these theories 'BELIEFS' since there is NO EVIDENCE for Dark Matter's proposed WIMPs & MaCHOs (I mean gimme a break ffs!) & String Theory, concerned as it is with 'extra dimensions' we can neither detect nor interact with is thus literally 'UNTESTABLE' & 'UNVERIFIABLE' other than on a blackboard. Some have argued this therefore isn't even 'science'.

    Thankfully we do still have brilliant, open minds willing to 'venture far beyond not just the limits of knowledge but beyond the limits of accepted theory'.

    You quite clearly are not. Like Edward Condon who 'decided' there was nothing to the UFO phenomenon before he'd even recieved or looked at the evidence, then deliberately destroyed it before Hynek & Vallee could study it properly.

    Again - 'How f***ing scientific'

    Anyway if you could just address the specific points above and why I should discount such sources in favour of your assertions - thanks.

    By Blogger DrDee, at Wednesday, May 16, 2018  

  • @ "zoamchomsky"

    In the video clip Dr. David Clarke quite clearly states 'The UFO Phenomenon' (you know - the one that DOESN'T EXIST) is actually comprised of many different elements including 'INEXPLICABLE phenomena'.

    If it's INEXPLICABLE how on Earth can he then 'explain' it, before using this spurious piece of self-contradictory nonsense to 'prove' there is 'NO Ufo Phenomenon'?

    In the same episode he also notes two separate cases remain 'unexplained', the latter being the 'Jersey/Channel Islands Encounter' where a small passenger plane pilot, together with most of his passengers witnessed what they described as a 'vast, illuminated object' (also confirmed by at least one other pilot in a separate aircraft)

    Since no radar return could be definitively ascribed to the object Clarke speculates it could well be some form of currently unknown atmospheric phenomena which is a perfectly reasonable suggestion but he doesn't KNOW this and verifiable incidents such as this from reliable, trained witnesses are at the heart of the Ufo MYSTERY.

    Such cases are clearly NOT delusions, have multiple corroborating witnesses (including other pilots), the pilot insists it WAS some sort of unknown object (irrespective of whether it could be ascribed a radar return or not) David Clarke has a different unprovable theory but none of them 'KNOW' and while we don't have a definitive answer as to what such 'UFOs' are it's clearly both

    a) an untenable & illogical assertion 'there is NO Ufo phenomenon' &
    b) 'explain' away something that both sceptics & witnesses alike agree is currently inexplicable.

    I returned the pejorative 'name in inverted commas' favour - since it's clearly not your name either and no, I'm not a '12 year old' but hey, thanks for the compliment Troll Boy! ;)

    Just wondering - do you tell the Mormons & Scientolgists what a bunch of deluded idiots they are too on a regular basis? I REALLY think you should :D

    By Blogger DrDee, at Thursday, May 17, 2018  

  • Again, just as a LAST adjunct to this (and as an illustration of the hypocrisy & double standards where 'skeptics' are concerned) Dr. David Clarke & his team's report on the Channel Islands UFO is officially deemed 'INCONCLUSIVE' - i.e. there is, based on the available evidence, NO satisfactory explanation of the encounter.

    Having stated this, he then goes on to say 'I THINK (i.e. he's now giving his unverifiable & untestable OPINION) that it's MUCH MORE ACCURATE (how pray tell David is your journalistic 'opinion' more ACCURATE than a pilot's eye-witness testimony when you've already stated there is NO explanation of the case?) to describe what he saw as a UAP...some kind of natural phenomena that's yet to be identified and categorised by scientists.'

    While this is a perfectly valid OPINION to express it is certainly no more or less ACCURATE than the pilot's or anyone else's opinion as to what it was that was seen.

    You CANNOT logically state there is NO accurate conclusion to be drawn from a case - then state your particular (journalistic) OPINION is MORE ACCURATE than anyone else's, including that of an experienced, profesional aviator.

    The supposedly 'unbiased' skeptic's personal OPINION is prefaced with the phrase it's 'MORE ACCURATE' to say what HE thinks, thus your response to his completely subjective (and unsubstantiated) version of events is being subtly & subliminally influenced (as Derren Brown often demonstrates) whilst he apparently remains dispassionately 'neutral'.

    The link (for anyone who cares to view it) is here:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjKJ6IY4muU

    By Blogger DrDee, at Friday, May 18, 2018  

  • Robert Bigelow; Harry Reid; Kenju Terauchi; John Callahan; Jacques Vallee and "Dr Dee"

    Dee, just about any human being is susceptible and can be a victim of the "UFO" delusion. Whether they're a Nevada businessman or former Senator; Japanese airline pilot or FAA investigator; former astronomer and computer scientist turned "UFO" author and private businessman; the Duke of Edinburgh or President of the United States. It doesn't matter.

    Being an authority in one area doesn't transfer to another; and when the "other" is the subject of mass media-manufactured and prepetuated myth and delusion, like "UFOs," their "authority" is absolutely worthless.

    Terauchi was a multitime "flying saucer" repeater; and the JAL 1628 event was a textbook "UFO" small group scare." His own copilot, Tamafuji, said it was "just some light" far in the distance, the color of "landing lights," which also are the very same colors of scintillating stars or bright planets when seen across an arc of atmosphere. Then Terauchi imagined a "giant mothership" on his tail, but nearby planes vectored to intercept JAL 1628 reported that there was nothing there! Terauchi was later under a doctor's care and expressed regret at his "illusion."

    Whatever else, Jacques Vallee has been a lifelong "UFO" conspiracy theorist since he first recalled he witnessed French observatory tapes of anomalous objects in orbit being erased. Wow! How's that for nonfalsifiable? Just like rest of everything Vallee has ever said about "UFOs." There's no way to ever show that anything he says is false. It's non falsifiable, so not scientific. Rational people informed on the "UFO" subject just call it what it is: Conspiracy Baloney!

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Sunday, May 20, 2018  

  • Much like Jerry Clark mocking the PSH as "literary criticism," "Dr Dee" refers to it
    as "Sci-Fi Creative Writing." Which is hilarious considering in the very next paragraph he writes:

    >> I'm with Vallee, Keel & others in believing such encounters & phenomena emanate from a non-human but terrestrial intelligence which has been present in some form throughout human history and assumes (for its own, unknown motives) various cultural guises.<<

    Isn't that very much the plot of an episode of "The Outer Limits" from 1964? Yes! I wonder if Jacques saw that episode? Just as Betty and Barney saw another.... ;-D

    But the fantasy-prone "Dr Dee" is professing to actually believe in such insanity! And all because some people make "UFO" reports inside of a modern mass delusion.

    "Dr Dee;" John Keel was a writer, period. He didn't believe a word of this crap. I know that as fact because he said so. And I doubt Vallee believes a word of it either. He's a guy who wrote "UFO" books to make money! After years of reading pulp-fiction.

    Grow up!

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Sunday, May 20, 2018  

  • Keel, like Strieber, was a candidate for psychoanalysis; Keel, long before his descent into madness.

    Vallee, as is the case with other UFO "enthusiasts, has gotten so far into the UFO mania that he can only try to make the topic edifying, a difficult task considering the mental temper of UFO buffs.

    We UFO followers, skeptics too, are trying to find a way out of the madness that is ufology, but will only be able to do so with analysis or going "cold turkey."

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, May 20, 2018  

  • @zoamchomsky

    I agree - it doesn't matter who these 'so called experts' are who claim to know what's going on (sound familiar?) Your 'logic' NEVER seems to apply to you, does it?

    I DON'T know what's going on (and neither do you) but if it's a toss up between believing trained professional pilots or a ground based 'investigative journalist' as to what's in front of them, I know whose testimony I (and every court in the land) would go with every time.

    On the Channel Islands UFO (link): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjKJ6IY4muU

    Clarke at the end asserts (contrary to his own report) that he THINKS his take on the incident is 'MORE ACCURATE' - why when there is officially NO explanation? It's just his unprovable & unverifiable OPINION - he's not even a scientist let alone an aviator.

    Your take on the incident would no doubt be 'it's all a delusion' despite your pal Clarke accepting there WAS an incident (seen by multiple witnesses onboard and another pilot) which he investigated (as part of the 'non-existent' UFO phenomenon again) and could come to no satisfactory explanation (despite his assertion that his unqualified OPINION as to what it was, is 'MORE ACCURATE') Classic linguistic 'framing'. Laughable.

    When trained pilots report such incidents, corroborated by both passengers and other pilots - how can YOU say it's all a delusion when Clarke et al don't think that's the case but can offer no satisfactory explanation as to what was witnessed either.

    Why should I disbelieve the accounts of trained, experienced aviators as witnesses in favour of an unqualified 'investigative journalist' from Sheffield (who like you claim of Vallee - is OBVIOUSLY only IN IT FOR THE MONEY)

    To discount ALL such pilot testimony as 'delusion' is a DELUSIONAL BELIEF in itself - even Clarke isn't THAT cavalier.

    The Channel Islands UFO is yet another example of the sighting of an apparent object that remains unidentified.

    THAT'S what the enduring core of the UFO phenomenon IS - credible, corroborative witness reports of UNEXPLAINED phenomena & objects. Dr. David Clarke & team are presumably just as delusional accepting such incidents have occurred & investigating them - again why? if they're ALL delusions (as you KNOW of course) before stating there is NO EXPLANATION as to what was seen.

    Until these incidents are comprehensively & scientifically explained there is still an enduring & unexplained MYSTERY of what such UFOs actually ARE.

    YOU DON'T KNOW & neither do I or anyone on here, nor indeed do skeptics like David Clarke for that matter. He can speculate & proffer HIS preferred take on it but he DOESN'T KNOW & CAN'T PROVE IT one way or the other - hence the continuing interest for the majority of us.

    By Blogger DrDee, at Tuesday, May 22, 2018  

  • I don't BELIEVE they're definitively one thing or another but the phenomenon EXISTS, or pilots wouldn't continue to report such objects & Dr. David Clarke & co. would have nothing to investigate - despite your assertion he claims there is NO UFO phenomenon.

    What on Earth is he investigating then when a pilot (& others) claim to have seen a static, aerial 'object' & Clarke concludes there is no satisfactory explanation? It is by any DEFINITION a FLYING (airborne) OBJECT that remains UNIDENTIFIED. The 'UAP' acronym not withsatnding - it's still something in the air that defies current explanation i.e. a UFO.

    If there's definitively NOTHING to it - why does he continue to bother investigating such obvious 'nonsense'? (oh - the money...)

    To continually stamp your feet & arrogantly assert that YOU alone KNOW, above & beyond all expert eye-witness testimony & the officially 'inconclusive' reports of skeptical researchers who themselves accept that SOMETHING has been encountered & observed, that it's ALL DELUSION is the most childish, solipsistic and blinkered piece of nonsense I've ever read in my life.

    "God grant me the company of those who seek the truth, and God deliver me from those who have 'found' it."
    Sir Isaac Newton

    By Blogger DrDee, at Tuesday, May 22, 2018  

  • @Rich

    I think that's an unfairly dismissive attitude to Vallee's work. He does indeed make the material an edifiying read while, as I've previously said, arguably turning the field on its head by categorically dismissing the ETH as an explanation for the phenomenon.

    Vallee would also no doubt argue that in some instances a possibly external/objective effect of the phenomenon interacts with the psyche of experiencers, initiating mental crises &/or transformative psychological effects.

    I merely concur with Keel that some of the reported behaviours & capabilities of UFOs would appear to be 'paranormal' & thus perhaps linked to other currently inexplicable phenomena which the Bigelow Aerospace press release seems to confirm. (I'm not a particular fan of Keel's work - the 'Long Island Files' being notably bonkers. I just think now & again, he may have unintentionally stumbled upon 'revelatory epiphanies'.)

    Since we don't definitively have an answer as to what the phenomenon is or what UFOs are - how do we KNOW (apart from Zoam of course) that there isn't behind it something apparently mind-meltingly illogical &/or 'madness' inducing to our rational paradigm - much as Einstein chose to view 'entanglement'.

    (apologies to Zoam for employing another 'irrelevant', 'invalid' & 'non-illustrative' scientific metaphor there.) ;)

    By Blogger DrDee, at Tuesday, May 22, 2018  

  • DD:

    You've seen Jose Caravaca's theory,all over the place here, yes?

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, May 22, 2018  

  • "I DON'T know what's going on (and neither do you)" says Dr Dee.

    Actually I do, Dee. Me and millions of other skeptics and scientists worldwide know the substance of this subject, "UFO" reports, is complete and utter baloney. What is of interest is cultural history, literature, logic and philosophy, aerospace, myth and social psychology expressed in Scientific realism and skepticism.

    Most have never given the "UFO" subject a second thought. But some of us, social psychologists, have made the "UFO" myth and collective delusion their first work, others have made it a second interest, a hobby that evokes vestiges of our youth.

    "but if it's a toss up between believing trained professional pilots or a ground based 'investigative journalist' as to what's in front of them, I know whose testimony I (and every court in the land) would go with every time."

    No, you're wrong again, Dee, it's been known for decades that pilots are the worst of witnesses!

    "[Hynek] found that the best class of witnesses had a 50% misperception rate, but that pilots had a much higher rate: 88% for military pilots, 89% for commercial pilots. the worst of all categories listed."

    Dr Dee, I'm going to tell you sgain: Arguing "UFO" cases, and arguing by analogies to the history and philosophy of science will never produce one real "UFO."

    What is required is for the "UFO" advocate to falsify the Null hypothesis for "UFO" reports. Show a real "UFO!"

    Eternal thanks to my friends James Oberg, Robert Sheaffer and Royston Paynter.

    http://www.zipworld.com.au/~psmith/pilot-ufos.html

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Wednesday, May 23, 2018  

  • Yep - nice theory but doesn't square with incidents such as the Channel Islands UFO link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjKJ6IY4muU

    - which even skeptic Dr. David Clarke accepts 'took place' and was simultaneously witnessed and corroborated by his onboard passengers as well as another pilot reporting a similar object in the same vicinity.

    'we cannot find similar details that researchers have accumulated in UFO reports/tales' - not true.

    Many cases (like the above incident) have multiple witnesses who give corroborative details. Many different witnesses, including a group of 3 police officers investigating stolen motorbikes as well as a number of farm workers in different locations, all witnessed strange light phenomena hours prior to PC Alan Godfrey's report of encountering a UFO in Todmorden.

    The 3 police officers, (2 men & one woman) high up on the Pennine Moors all confirmed they saw erratically moving 'blue lights' around them, which they could neither identify or explain and which caused great distress to the female officer who was forced to retreat to one of the patrol cars.

    'It seems likely that we have been confronted with experiences that have a high psychic component, that are non-transferable, unique to the individual, and where witnesses, themselves, provide most of the material that is “observed.”

    Again, the above cases, with corroborative details provided by multiple witnesses (some in different locations) do NOT bear out the assertion the 'experiences are non-transferrable' or 'unique to the individual'.

    Even the 'Hopkinsville Goblins' case (officially deemed a 'hoax' by Project Blue Book though an appended note confirms Dr. Carl Sagan no less requested to see the 'evidence') produced drawings by radio engineer and artist Andrew Ledwith who interviewed the multiple witnesses individually & who was individually given corroborative details of the features of the 'entities'.

    So, no I don't buy it.

    By Blogger DrDee, at Wednesday, May 23, 2018  

  • You can quote statistics at me all you want. Let's take a SPECIFIC case - the Channel Islands UFO - seen by pilot Ray Bowyer ('one of the most convincing witnesses I've ever interviewed' according to Dr. David Clarke) and his passengers, as well as a pilot in a separate aircraft. These people DIDN'T see an UNIDENTIFIED object then? (An encounter which Clarke & team accepted took place & was investigated but no satisfactory explanation as to what it was could be reached).

    It was therefore (and remains) a 'real' verified & investigated encounter with an UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT, irrespective of Dr. David Clarke's 'opinion' as to what it may or may not have been.

    How is this a MYTH pray tell?


    By Blogger DrDee, at Wednesday, May 23, 2018  

  • @Zoam - More 'deluded' idiots no doubt.

    Former Senator Harry Reid obtained copies of unclassified documents related to UFO encounters, (that) confirms the Nimitz group had several interactions with Anomalous Aerial Vehicles.

    http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/21000/highly-detailed-report-on-harrowing-encounter-between-f-a-18s-and-ufo-off-baja-surfaces

    Politicians Support Congressional Hearing on UFOs as former head of AATIP states there have been 'many accounts from the Navy and other services of unusual aerial systems interfering with military weapon platforms and displaying beyond-next-generation capabilities.'

    http://www.denofgeek.com/us/culture/ufo/273512/politicians-support-congressional-hearing-on-ufos

    By Blogger DrDee, at Thursday, May 24, 2018  

  • Dr Dee;

    To say that you are "all over the place" would be an understatement. In the manner of "UFO" books (and FATE magazine) beginning in the late 1940s, you seem have the mistaken idea that if you just uncritically shout out enough old "UFO" stories that it will somehow create a "truth." It will not.

    Innumerable, utterly inconsequential... Why is that, Dee? Why has absolutely nothing become of the "UFO" myth and delusion in over a century since the Great Airship mania of 1896-97?

    Innumerable, utterly inconsequential "UFO" reports but not one real "UFO" of any kind. Falsify the Null hypothesis for "UFO" reports, Dee, produce a real "UFO."

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Thursday, May 24, 2018  

  • "God grant me the company of those who seek the truth, and God deliver me from those who have 'found' it." Sir Isaac Newton

    Isaac Newton never said that.

    What a surprise.

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Thursday, May 24, 2018  

  • "You can quote statistics at me all you want." says Dee

    You claimed hysterically that pilots were the ultimately reliable witnesses. I showed you that wasn't true and that they're actually the least reliable. So this Channel Islands "UFO" story is no better than any other "saw something in the sky I couldn't identify" story. The pilot later claimed they were ET spacecraft. ;-D

    Read the story, watched an interview, and I'm not impressed. He and few others saw a distant bright yellowish line in the sky. Then they saw another, both with a dark band towards one end. The pilot was using binoculars and couldn't determine what he was seeing. He estimated it to be a mile long and at a distance of ten miles, but the only unidentified radar return was FIFTY miles away. So probably not what he was seeing.

    Dee, these people saw something atmospheric, totally ambiguous, "object" is too strong a word to describe it accurately though we call them "UFO" reports. You're simply playing on word.

    And like any other report, their story is part of the "UFO" myth and delusion because they believe their mere failure to identify some wholly ambiguous bright light in the sky is somehow significant. It's not. It's completely inconsequential.

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Thursday, May 24, 2018  

  • "PC Alan Godfrey's report of encountering a UFO in Todmorden."

    Otherwise known as "The Case of the Lost Cows." He also saw a prefab Futuro house on the back of a flatbed truck and imagined it to be a "flying saucer."

    Then there was the fifteen minutes of "missing time." Probably at the pub for a quick half!

    He couldn't recall being abducted and medically examined by little greys and a tall bearded man but could recall it all under hypnosis.

    Dee, that's one of the funniest "UFO" stories I've ever heard. What a Nut!

    "Hopkinsville Goblins"

    A Classic Small Group Scare

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Thursday, May 24, 2018  

  • "More 'deluded' idiots no doubt." You said it!

    Covered this nonsense on that post.

    "confirms the Nimitz group had several interactions with Anomalous Aerial Vehicles."

    That's the claim being made in anonymous, undated papers probably written by Luis Elizondo, a hardcore Believer.

    "Politicians Support Congressional Hearing on UFOs" Will never go anywhere.

    "as former head of AATIP states there have been 'many accounts from the Navy and other services of unusual aerial systems interfering with military weapon platforms and displaying beyond-next-generation capabilities.'"

    That's Luis Elizondo making wildly incautious pronouncements again. Dee, anybody can claim anything. Just because Reid and Bigelow have and/or had their fellow ETH crackpot on their payroll doesn't mean anything. He doesn't speak for the US government and the fact that he was ever a conduit for $22 million of taxpayer money to Bigelow for "UFO" materials storage is absurd if not criminal.

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Thursday, May 24, 2018  

  • @zoam

    Firstly - "God grant me the company of those who seek the truth, and God deliver me from those who have 'found' it." Isaac Newton never said that. What a surprise.

    Er - I'm afraid HE DID.

    Channel Islands UFO: 'Read the story, watched an interview, and I'm not impressed' - 'what a surprise' to quote yourself - you never are. What is it exactly you're 'not impressed' by?

    I'm not trying to 'impress' you I'm merely using a case where even Clarke accepts something strange & inexplicable was witnessed which the pilot claimed was 'an object'. Like Clarke you can proffer your own preferred take on it but in the absence of any conclusive explanation it reamins UNIDENTIFIED and Bowyer maintains it was an 'object'.

    I DID NOT claim anywhere that pilots were 'ultimately reliable witnesses' (again that skeptical agenda adding the preferred 'slant') but that I would logically give more credence to an experienced aviator's take on a flight incident than a third-hand, ground-based journalist's take on something which he neither witnessed nor for which he could give any explanation. (Made sure he gave us his 'MORE ACCURATE' skeptical opinion though, didn't he?)

    The pilot insisted what he saw was a 'self-illuminating object' & so I employed his decriptive terms myself.

    I am NOT 'playing on a word' I am accurately quoting the terms employed by the main witness so don't twist my words & LIE for your own agenda.

    He also DIDN'T state, ANYWHERE 'it was an ET spacecraft'. He said 'if it WAS a piece of technology' he would like to 'shake the engineer by the hand' and that he believed it 'wasn't from round here', but hey let's ignore the FACTS and try & portray him as a gullible NUT again.

    By Blogger DrDee, at Friday, May 25, 2018  

  • @zoam cont'd

    Whether you like it or not, Elizondo:

    'is a 22-year veteran of the Department of Defense with TOP SECURITY CLEARANCE, The Washington Post reported. He’s a SENIOR CAREER INTELLIGENCE OFFICER who has worked for the Army, The National Counterintelligence Executive, and the Director of National Intelligence. He was Director for the National Programs Special Management Staff in the Office of the Secretary of Defense.'

    You would have us believe a high level Career Intelligence Officer with top security clearance and 22 years experience is little more than a gullible imbecile and CERTAINLY no match for your superior intellect & insight.

    In the credibility & credentials stakes 'Zoam' I think he's got you licked don't you? He's quite obviously been, for over two decades, privy to Defence Intelligence information you clearly haven't so how do you KNOW what is or isn't contained within internal Navy & other service reports and that Elizondo is making 'wild' claims about these?

    You DON'T of course - again you're just making unsupported wild claims of your own based on your OPINION & pre-disposed 'skeptic' agenda which you maintain is a dispassionate viewpoint.

    You're doing what 'skeptics' the world over (including Dr. David Clarke) criticise others for doing - i.e. ignoring or glossing over the many 'inconvenient truths' that would undermine your claims before overstepping the boundaries of ESTABLISHED FACT to give us your skeptical OPINION - as Clarke does when he states 'I THINK it would be MORE ACCURATE to say' of a case where his own investigation failed to find a conclusive explanation. How can ANY 'explanation' then be deemed 'MORE ACCURATE' when he's just conceded THERE ISN'T ONE? Ludicrous hypocrisy.

    PC Alan Godfrey - Yeah, he saw a plastic orange day-glo house on the back of a lorry. That's the recent bit of complete & utter bollocks that's been tagged on to this as an 'explanation'.

    I expect 'Venus/Jupiter/The Moon (delete as applicable) was very bright that night', or more likely it was 'Just some blue light, bouncing off a strut' eh?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsapOr4KXig

    Still, as you rightly state 'ANYBODY can claim ANYTHING'. You said it, kid.

    There were a cluster of reports of strange light phenomena on the night in question (ok, perhaps unrelated but still curious) all preceeded by the strange disappearance and death of Zigmund Adamski, found dead on top of a coal heap with unexplained burns smeared with a substance forensics could not identify, looking 'as if he'd been dropped there from above'.

    Adamski had previously been reported as a missing person and his body was found, wearing a stainless white shirt (despite him having apparently scrambled up a coal heap) in plain view of hundreds of mine workers who failed to notice his dead body lying there when the shift changed over half an hour earlier.

    The Coroner stated 'This was one of the most puzzling cases I've come across in 25 years' and that if a UFO could be linked to this case 'I'd only raise half an eyebrow'. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0cbXB1MEkA

    What I'm interested in are the UNEXPLAINED FACTS of such cases that form the context of the event and CONTEXT is everything isn't it Mr. 'Chomsky'.

    Like ALL skeptics with an agenda, you either gloss over or conveniently ignore facts that don't fit before offering the usual preposterous potted skeptic 'explanations' that test the very boundaries of credulity rather than accepting that something strange/anomalous was witnessed.

    By Blogger DrDee, at Friday, May 25, 2018  

  • Dee; That quotation you attributed to Isaac Newton was first uttered in the early 1950s, so I doubt very much that Newton ever said it. I'd ask you for a source but you couldn't produce it. Do you really think Newton wrote or spoke modern English?

    "You would have us believe a high level Career Intelligence Officer with top security clearance and 22 years experience is little more than a gullible imbecile and CERTAINLY no match for your superior intellect & insight."

    I'm not the one making extraordinary claims for which there is no evidence. Luis Elizondo, former intelligence officer or not, is making wildly outrageous claims for which there is ZERO evidence. You don't seem to get it: It's not who is saying it, it's what's being said. It could be the POTUS or the Queen, if they claimed that Earth was being visited by ET in "flying saucers" from another world, as Luis Elizondo, Robert Bigelow, and Tom DeLonge do frequently, it would still be NOT believable.

    Appealing to authority will never score points because it's fundamentally fallacious. And when it turns out that Luis Elizondo is not really who or what he claims to be, and none of his claims are true; and years in the future you know no more about "UFOs" than you know right now, you're going to feel pretty stupid and silly.

    I guarantee this will be the case.

    By Blogger zoamchomsky, at Saturday, May 26, 2018  

Post a Comment

<< Home