The constant rehash of iconic UFO accounts should cease
Copyright 2023, InterAmerica, Inc.
Today [3/2] I came across Curt Collins besmirching his
resurgent UFO Update spot on Facebook with a plop about the 1947 William Rhodes
photo:
And Rick Hilberg dumped me on FB because I asked him to move
on from his incessant recounting of old UFO cases he slurped in his younger
years.
And Kevin Randle provided a lengthy account of the 1951 Lubbock Lights recently.
These fellows, not part of the new UFO/UAP crowd that gets the attention nowadays when the phenomenon is newsworthy, seem anxious to be part of the discussion but showcasing or regurgitating the old, iconic flying saucer tales is not going to do it for them.
These guys are the past. UFOs are now in the province of a new batch of UFO enthusiasts and researchers, “youngsters” with vim and vigor who are atop what’s going on among UFO enthusiasts today – 2023, not 1947 or accounts of the Phoenix Lights and that ilk.
It’s sad to grow old and no longer be pertinent…tell me about it.
But that’s the way it is, and to keep trying to recapture the nos- talgic past is not only sad but pathetic.
Move on…..please!
RR
And Kevin Randle provided a lengthy account of the 1951 Lubbock Lights recently.
These fellows, not part of the new UFO/UAP crowd that gets the attention nowadays when the phenomenon is newsworthy, seem anxious to be part of the discussion but showcasing or regurgitating the old, iconic flying saucer tales is not going to do it for them.
These guys are the past. UFOs are now in the province of a new batch of UFO enthusiasts and researchers, “youngsters” with vim and vigor who are atop what’s going on among UFO enthusiasts today – 2023, not 1947 or accounts of the Phoenix Lights and that ilk.
It’s sad to grow old and no longer be pertinent…tell me about it.
But that’s the way it is, and to keep trying to recapture the nos- talgic past is not only sad but pathetic.
Move on…..please!
RR
posted by RRRGroup at
Thursday, March 02, 2023
10 Comments:
The younger ones in the science fields should be encouraged to dig into the three big mysteries you describe. The "historians" have done their part, but it comes with baggage. More is needed.
By
Ron, at Thursday, March 02, 2023
I'd agree Ron but newbies are not inclined to dig into anything.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Thursday, March 02, 2023
That leaves middle-age scientists like your guy, Loeb.
By
Ron, at Thursday, March 02, 2023
I made a like comment at Curt Collins UFO Update site on Facebook and he wrote:
I consider you [Rich] an old account so you should cease.
Something like that.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Friday, March 03, 2023
Rich -
I grow tired of the constant criticism (and that's not directed at you but so many others) that I am moving back to the old science fiction and action adventure writing. It's more fun and not as much work... and I can describe areas in Vietnam from having observed them in person.
I will note, however, that I was asked by those at Coast to Coast to provide a "retro" case once a month. Since I only have three minutes, I posted the longer piece for those who wished a longer look at the case. Just thought I would mention it.
By
KRandle, at Sunday, March 05, 2023
I have to write something to clarify my point about old cases....
There are a number of interesting old cases that are little known or unknown, and offer material that is fascinating or pertinent.
It's those "classic" cases that keep getting pummeled by repetition and are now cliched or so full of errant accretions that they have become useless, as research fodder -- Rendlesham comes to mind.
You Kevin, provide thorough, wordy postings (as you noted in your current effort) that help newbies or those who haven't been paying attention understand the problem that confronts those hoping to unmask the mysterious phenomenon.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Sunday, March 05, 2023
First, I like to share my definition of the term "rehash." Rehash to me, means the endless recounting of UFO reports by general writers who do not check the facts surrounding the cases they choose. I view this type of UFO literature as the Time and Life writing approach.
Big books that have a lot of topical information on a particular topic, but contribute very little in advancing the topic in the book. Wallpaper?
The same rings true for new UFO books written by mainly “young Fortean writers.”
They “discover” the phenomenon, get excited, read a few books on UFOs, not check the sources and rehash the same-old-same-old. This is why we have all those"exciting tell-all" Roswell books. Gee-wiz MJ-12! Today, if I don’t recognize the author’s name, I tread lightly.
It is important, in this day and age, as Ufology relentlessly marches to the mainstream that seasoned research continually reexamines and investigates past cases. You never know what may be discovered either to bolster the belief in a case to be authentic, or prove it to be a hoax or misidentification with new evidence coming to light.
By chastising seasoned pro investigators with long histories and in depth knowledge in the UFO field is like telling a research scientist to; “Forget that old E = Mc2 thing, we’ve explored that universe before.” Or advising a seasoned detective to forget that cold case file. “You’ll just be looking at old crime scene photos.” Or an Archaeologist; “The Pyramids? Been there, done that!”
So dig we must into the past. It’s in truth, the only lead we got.
By
Bernie O'Connor, at Wednesday, March 08, 2023
Sorry Bernie...
You're advocating the "old ufology" -- one filled by "rehashing" under the guise of "new research."
The UFO geezers have had their day, and they blew it.
Now, let's give the intellectual Newbies a crack at it.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Wednesday, March 08, 2023
How can you tell who a UFO geezer is? They refuse to use the term "UAP."
LOL
By
Bernie O'Connor, at Wednesday, March 08, 2023
Yep, that's a plus, Bernie. I'll give you that.
But a few tend to slip up, going so far as to be errant by referring to UAPs.... That "s" so wrong.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Wednesday, March 08, 2023
Post a Comment
<< Home