Copyright 2019, InterAmerica, Inc.
In all the UFO cases or sightings on record, including the
Tic-Tac event and current hints that Navy pilots have seen or encountered a
number of UFOs, none – not one – has provided proof of anything, no “smoking
gun.”
That, in itself, is a clue as to what UFOs are: an
everlasting, true enigma.
Pushing odd aerial phenomena into categories, based on
evidentiary whiz is not only not science but is ignorance of a basic kind.
UFOs as some kind of meteorological phenomenon or thinking
UFOs are secret aircraft (or something) of a major world power or hoping UFOs
are extraterrestrial craft visiting Earth from another spot in the cosmos are
speculative conclusions of a very wispy kind.
UFO enthusiasts (me among them) bring forth old UFO
cases/sightings, regurgitating them, over and over again, hoping against
hope that something might pop up from the rehashed material that makes some
kind of case for what UFOs are or have been.
The current blend of ruminations about the phenomenon and
its intertwining with social environments is a kind of slurry that doesn’t come
anywhere near helping to solve what UFOs may be.
Such tentative posturings merely muddy the UFO waters. What
does the political or economic or cultural milieux have to do with “things”
thought to be seen in the sky?
The argument is that certain milieux make people see things,
or that the milieux creates things sometimes.
A case can be made that environments, such as the Cold War
or the intensity of pilots flying about in practice missions, invite “objects”
to be seen.
But that is pure guesswork, even when it is supported by
studies that show people do conjure up things when in an excitable state.
Yet, nothing in the way of solid proof is forthcoming, only
the possibility that persons will see something (create something mentally)
that ends up not really being there.
I know of no case(s) where a person or persons seeing a
movie about space invaders and UFOs leaving the theater and seeing a UFO. (Robbie
Graham might enlighten.)
And those professional military men, flying in jets, who’ve
recently been outed for seeing or pursuing a UFO, as in the 2004 Tic-Tac event
(and others), they are not above reproach for seeing odd maneuvers by the thing
they’ve seen as “intelligent” in nature.
Something seeming to evade an approaching aircraft or
following alongside an aircraft or appearing” to mimic an aircraft would allow
for one conclude they had come in contact with a thinking operation.
But that is imposing upon a non-sequitur batch of movements as something rational or intelligent when it is merely maneuverings of an evasive
or repellant kind, something getting out of the way of an imposing aircraft.
My point, if there is one on this, is that seeing a UFO or
confronting something weird in the sky (or on the ground) tells us nothing of
the nature of that which is seen.
We only have a reported visual of something queer.
A thing making a 180° turn can be an optical
illusion or an actual 180° turn but so what?
Something speeding off can actually be speeding off or seem to
be speeding off when it is in fact disappearing from mental sight or actually
disappearing.
Until someone comes up with something more than a moldy
recounting of an old UFO sighting or the military provides something more than
vivid pilot encounters supported by nothing more than a blurry video and
excitable retellings, I think I’ll wait for that alleged “smoking gun” that is
supposed to provide the proof we are all seeking, so lamely.
RR
