Support for some of my non-UFO views here

Copyright 2023, InterAmerica, Inc.

The TLS [Times Literary Supplement] for March 31, 2023 has several reviews of books about subject matter presented here, during my occasional tirades:

 
Life is Short by Dean Rickles [Princeton University Press]

Life is Hard by Kieran Setiya [Heinemann]
 
The review Slow Thinking of How to Think Like a Philosopher by Julian Baggini [Granta]
 
And commentary about Shakespeare’s mysterious London lodger (one of the consortium?) on Page 10.
 
Life is Short by Rickles premises Seneca’s “On the Shortness of Life” argues that today “Zoomer’s’ lifespan are spent idling on [social media] platforms, concerned more with how they appear than how they are, never giving themselves space to properly think – true even of a good deal of my academic colleagues, I might add.” [Page 3]
 
Life is Hard contends with the hardships of life over which we have little control: illness, suffering, poverty, grief, et cetera. [Pages 3-4]

 
Slow Thinking observes the author’s predilection for certain Philosophers, some of my favorites also – Plato. Aristotle. Aquinas, Hannah Arendt – but we know, from Hawking that “Philosophy is dead.”
 
My point here is that, while some of you disdain my side-bars about non-UFO issues, or my dropping off into indirect (seemingly not pertinent) issues about UFOs, they do pertain.
 
The ignorance of most UFO enthusiasts has complicated the solution to the flying saucer/UFO mystery – it’s muddied the waters, sometimes egregiously.
 
The social media slurping has been a killer of thought, really deep thought, and has encouraged the radicalization of instant pleasures – travel, food, a moment in a conference sun, a back-slap from some pretend UFO expert, and so on.
 
That’s it. Get the TLS issue and read it for yourselves…weeping as you do that you and I are as much a problem as the dolts hogging the UFO stage at the moment.
 
RR

Living UFO people who matter, objectively (and personally to me)

Copyright 2023, InterAmerica, Inc.

(If I miss a name you think is important, leave a comment. If I agree, I’ll let the comment stand.)
 
In no particular order…by recall (which is obtuse lately):
 
Jesse Michels, Patrick Huyghe and his Anomalist crew, Jacques Vallee (!), Avi Loeb, Luis Elizondo, Tony Bragalia, Jan Aldrich, José Antonio Caravaca, Kevin Randle, Beau Patrick Carrington, Clas Svahn, Mrherr Zaar (aka Martin Kottmeyer), Nick Redfern, Micah Hanks, Ron Press, The Observer gang, Billy Cox, Robert Sheaffer, Joe Rogan, Albert Rosales, Steve Mera, John Greenewald Jr., Malcolm Robin- son, Vincent-Juan Ballester Olmos, (Paul Kimball), and ?

 
There may be a few persons you like or think relevant to the phenomenon, and I don’t.
 
These are just some persons who impact, for me, the phenomenon in a thoughtful and/or imaginative way.
 
Have at it…
 
RR

Let me give you an example of ufological stupidity

Copyright 2023, InterAmerica, Inc.
 
Kevin Ranlde offered a defense for studying old UFO cases. And I have explained that old cases may tell us what UFO aren’t, but they can’t and haven’t told us what UFOs are, in over 70 years of recap- itulating the UFO accounts.
 
Along comes my ex-pal Bryan Sentes offering his usual kiss-ass slavishness for Kevin, a pal of mine too.
 
Bryan provided a link to a David Clarke piece which showed that a 30 year-old UFO report was proof that the UFO was explained – the thing reported was not a UFO.
 
Exactly what I’ve been writing all along – Old UFO accounts may tell us what UFOs are not – but can’t and haven’t told us what UFOs are.
 
(UFOs seem to lie outside human detection.)
 
The matter for me is simple: Old UFO reports, no matter how interesting or queer, do not provide any clues – and haven’t – as to what UFOs may be.
 
They can tell us what UFOs are not, but not what UFOs are.
 
It’s that simple.
 
But my former buddy, Bryan, in his quest to be a UFO biggie, laps up chances to schmooze real UFO biggies – in this case Kevin Randle – with sloppy ass-kissing that doesn’t register with what is being said in UFO circles.
 
This goes to Bryan’s errant understanding of philosophy. He misunderstands Kant, Derrida, and Adorno, some of his favorite philosophical biggies.
 
And to bolster Heidegger – an anti-semitic thinker is beyond the pale.
 
And he totally misunderstood the 1500’s accounts of Reformation strife which caused some broadsheets to provide illustrations about that strife: the Basel and Hamburg editorial “cartoons” thought by some UFO dolts to be illustrations of a UFO war in the air over the two cities.

I like Bryan. He’s a smart guy, usually. But he so wants to be included in the UFO pantheon – and I can’t imagine why – that he supports, slavishly, every name and person who has a valid UFO credential.

 
He, and others, misread my complaint about old UFO accounts or reports.
 
They do not and cannot tell us what UFOs are. They may tell us what UFOs are not, but that’s it.
 
Don’t be aggrieved, UFO geezers and non-thinkers. It’s just my solid opinion.

RR