Wednesday, 30 January 2008

The Vanities

While I have argued here in the past that I think the giggle factor relating to “UFOs” has greatly diminished in recent years, we have not got away from it completely. I remember someone recently complaining that as many questions about UFOs were asked in the presidential debates in the States as there had been about the Green issue. This was said with utter disbelief as if there could be nothing more important than ecology, and UFOs were simply trash talk.

There are others that have opined that all the recent activity in Texas has made Stephenville a laughing stock.

And so on.

The reason I mention this is to get some perspective. To many people, those with an interest in UFOlogy, regardless of how belief driven or reason driven they may be, are all nutters. There is no differential made between those that embrace it as a religion and those that want it taken seriously by science. All are loonies fit for the bin.

With that in mind, quite recently, Rod Brock reactivated his Aliens Ate My Buick blog. It can be found here:

From the perspective of an ETH’er, Rod is a sceptic and has attracted bucket loads of abuse and criticism over the years. While he has his fans, his views are not the sort that many in UFOlogy want to read or listen to, understandably.

I think he talks a lot of sense and writes in a truly objective manner. But objectivism and UFOlogy do not necessarily make good bedfellows.

Labelling is always a dangerous game and one that within UFOlogy, is never really accurate, but for the sake of argument, I would call myself a fringe sceptic in relation to UFOs these days. Nevertheless, I do notice a trait among some of the more died in the wool lot that I call battle weariness. It is a state of mind that comes about from having been in too many philosophical fights, arguments, and exchanging of insults. This in turn induces a siege mentality and a degree of obstinacy on the part of the sceptic, an anticipation of reaction and an aggressive posture pre-assumed. Debates can only go in one direction.

I notice this attitude in Rod Brock. The root cause of it I believe is frustration. Rod knows he talks common sense and his despair comes about from the failure of others to see his point of view. There’s no getting away from it but an attitude such as this is arrogant. There’s also no getting away from the fact that when you call someone arrogant, it is impossible to do so without causing offence, and I don’t intend to cause that offence. It’s an observation. I don’t know Rod Brock and can only make an assessment based on his writings.

What Rod wants to do is to change the world. He wants people who follow a fanciful, unsustainable path of thinking to snap out of it and see sense and reason.

He is obviously far from being a stupid man and his years of experience should tell him that he will never change people if they don’t want to change. He is pissing in the wind.

And he’s a long way from being alone. It is endemic.

It has always been so that those who consider they take an intelligent and considered approach to the subject of UFOs want to change the thinking of others. They despise the low life of UFOlogy and want to purge them so that the subject can be taken seriously. Cleansed of people who think ET is already here and there is a government conspiracy, more prestigious institutions will begin to take notice.

What this really is about is them getting to feel better about themselves, separating themselves from the madness and mayhem, and engaging their aspirations to a greater intellectual authority.

No matter how you circumvent this, you always come back to the same word; arrogance.

My argument is, forget it. Leave people be. Let them think what they want and believe what they want. Why shouldn’t they?

Either quit the game or accept the status quo and recognise that you are in a field where some of your fellow travellers disturb you.

But trying to change the world, either surreptitiously by showing good practice or by haranguing folk constantly is simply pointless.

Remember; whoever you are, someone, somewhere thinks you’re an idiot.

Sunday, 20 January 2008

The Garden Path Beckons

There are discomforting similarities between the events in Stephenville Texas last week and the Phoenix Lights incident. The one major difference is that Phoenix happened over a large metropolis and Stephenville is out in the sticks.

So why am I disturbed by these similarities? It is because of the way, 11 years later, that I now perceive the Phoenix Lights events. I don’t believe that what floated around over the capital of Arizona on that evening of March 13th in 1997 was an extraterrestrial craft. I think the event was deliberately staged to reinvigorate the UFO story for intelligence purposes. I think it was a brilliantly acted out performance that involved a deliberate confusion of sightings and a conflict involving flares. The actual object seen was some sort of dirigible, possibly some sort of lifter, or maybe even something especially rigged up for the occasion.

Dirigibles, flares, and a very large object as big as the proverbial football field, as in Phoenix, have all been mentioned in relation to Stephenville.

I think we have to ask ourselves what exactly it is that we expect from sightings like Phoenix and Stephenville. It’s a rhetorical question because the answer is clear. What we hope is that these are genuinely anomalous objects that carry within them intelligent life from another planet. Although some people might earnestly argue differently, they might mitigate or qualify, if truth be told, we want aliens.

Just how likely is that? Just how likely is it that life from another planet would choose to get so close to our planetary surface and then just parade itself around in this fashion and fly off again?

Now it is true, and I’ve said this before, that I don’t know what might go on inside an alien’s mind, so of course I cannot categorically insist that Phoenix and Stephenville did not involve extraterrestrials. Furthermore, I could be totally wrong on another front; the heat generated from Stephenville has attracted genuine astronomical interest and there are suspicions that some of the sightings have a natural origin to them. This is still up in the air, as are a lot of facts, but for the purposes of this thread, let us assume that this particular direction proves fruitless.

So what are we left with? Another town becomes a tourist hot spot and its local industry becomes invigorated. The subject of UFOs is thrown once more into the public limelight, having barely recovered from its previous brush with the Presidential race. There is some ridicule but in the main, it gets serious coverage. Well, if anyone within the Disclosure movement had half an ounce of brain matter, then they should be getting hysterical just at this moment and screaming that all these UFO events coming along so closely, one after the other, is surely an indication that we’re being “prepared” and that full disclosure has to be imminent. Be funny if they were right.

In my estimation, we’re just being dragged over the coals again, played and poked with by the theatrical department of AFOSI in their “genuine” pursuit of the psychological examination of the propagation of myth and rumour, and their ability to manipulate it and us via modern media outlets i.e. the Internet and the Press.

One question that comes to my mind about this is; does it matter to them that as time has progressed, the subject of UFOs gradually gets taken more seriously as the historical ridicule progressively evaporates? Is it relevant and does it even matter?

I am very curious about what might happen next. If there is another major’ish UFO related event within the next few months, depending on what it is, then I think it could be argued with a degree more respectability that we might be moving towards something. Could it be Disclosure? I’d like to give a highly qualified “possibly” but the difficulty I have is that the movement is so bedecked with utter nutters that I am too ashamed to even countenance the likelihood, for fear of being associated with them by implication.

The best answer I can give for now is this: if something else happens relatively soon, then the chances are that someone somewhere is up to something. What that might be, for the moment, is beyond me.