The too long “history” of UFOs for some of us
Copyright 2022, InterAmerica, Inc.
For those still wondering at my pique (and that of others) with the regurgitation of UFO accounts and hypotheses that keep confront- ing us long-timers – the materials pushed forward by newbies, quidnuncs, and some fellow-long-timers who keep harking back to the nostalgic good-old days when they thought they had a UFO voice, which now is quieted by those newbies and punks who push into UFO circles without a nub of knowledge worth a damn -- there is this:
Here is a pre-von Däniken ancient alien story published in Palmer's October 1965 Flying Saucers magazine:
For those still wondering at my pique (and that of others) with the regurgitation of UFO accounts and hypotheses that keep confront- ing us long-timers – the materials pushed forward by newbies, quidnuncs, and some fellow-long-timers who keep harking back to the nostalgic good-old days when they thought they had a UFO voice, which now is quieted by those newbies and punks who push into UFO circles without a nub of knowledge worth a damn -- there is this:
Here is a pre-von Däniken ancient alien story published in Palmer's October 1965 Flying Saucers magazine:
And the E-M effects around UFO sightings is covered
extensively in the December 1972 issue of Palmer's Flying Saucers magazine,
Pages 2-7….extensive!
The archivists can keep gathering UFO magazines and mimeo
sheets all they want to, but we long-time UFO enthusiasts are familiar with the
stories, in detail and the lop-sided explanations of them.
I could dig out Ron’s UFO Magazines – I have almost the whole lot of the published issues, good in their day, but mildewed by the UAP replacement thrust upon the phenomenon by those hoping to water down the ET aspect or physiognomy of the things seen in the skies and seas.
The plea that old UFO data – the word “data” used to update the proclivity toward mildewed reports – is valuable as a sop to ignorance and those harboring its use can be ignored.
The misuse of an “s” after UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) goes to show the blatant stupidity of those adding the pluralized letter.
Yes, I’m short-tempered with Roswell and all the following arcade of past UFO or flying saucer events, unless – unless there is a new, undecrepit spin of such past UFO stories.
In the 1972 issue noted above is “Some Questions About Flying Saucers” by Gordon Lindsay that puts to bed the idea of ET flying saucers. [Page 14 ff.]
That the extraterrestrial explanation still resonates with some UFOers is a mental madness that is hard to overcome, it’s so embedded in the UFO zeitgeist.
So, pardon my ill-feelings about some of the UFO palaver. It’s sickening to a Neanderthalian degree.
RR
I could dig out Ron’s UFO Magazines – I have almost the whole lot of the published issues, good in their day, but mildewed by the UAP replacement thrust upon the phenomenon by those hoping to water down the ET aspect or physiognomy of the things seen in the skies and seas.
The plea that old UFO data – the word “data” used to update the proclivity toward mildewed reports – is valuable as a sop to ignorance and those harboring its use can be ignored.
The misuse of an “s” after UAP (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) goes to show the blatant stupidity of those adding the pluralized letter.
Yes, I’m short-tempered with Roswell and all the following arcade of past UFO or flying saucer events, unless – unless there is a new, undecrepit spin of such past UFO stories.
In the 1972 issue noted above is “Some Questions About Flying Saucers” by Gordon Lindsay that puts to bed the idea of ET flying saucers. [Page 14 ff.]
That the extraterrestrial explanation still resonates with some UFOers is a mental madness that is hard to overcome, it’s so embedded in the UFO zeitgeist.
So, pardon my ill-feelings about some of the UFO palaver. It’s sickening to a Neanderthalian degree.
RR
posted by RRRGroup at
Sunday, October 23, 2022
|
1 comments
