UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1997 > Nov > Nov 27

Re: ETH [Extra Terrestrial Hypothesis] &c

From: clark@mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark]
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 17:43:47 PST
Fwd Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 21:08:02 -0500
Subject: Re: ETH [Extra Terrestrial Hypothesis] &c


> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 20:39:56 -0800
> From: John Koopmans <john.koopmans@sympatico.ca>
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: ETH [Extra Terrestrial Hypothesis] &c

> > Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 05:27:42 -0600
> > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> > From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com>
> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: ETH [Extra Terrestrial Hypothesis] &c

> > >From: clark@mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark]
> > >Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 16:59:46 PST
> > >To: updates@globalserve.net
> > >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: ETH [Extra Terrestrial Hypothesis] &c

> > >Bob,

> > >If you're not endorsing John Keel's half-baked ideas,
> > >you ought not to be using his vocabulary.  Keel explicitly
> > >endorses occult and demonological notions which no
> > >post-Enlightenment thinker would find of any utility
> > >whatever in trying to make sense of what the UFO
> > >phenomenon is about.  As I said, nobody endorses
> > >the use of theory-driven words (whether ET or ultra-
> > >terrestrial) in anything other than hypothesis-driven
> > >discourse.  In any case, I would not equate scientific
> > >speculation about the possible nature of ET life with
> > >medieval speculation about demons, unless one
> > >believes late 20th century science is in no significant
> > >manner different from 12th century theology.

> > >Jerry Clark

> > Jerry...

> > Unfortunately John Kep's ideas are not thought of as "half-baked"
> > by the average "religious" person in this country.  I can't speak
> > for the rest of the world, but in this country, the primary
> > explaination for "UFOs" and their "alien" occupants is indeed
> > "demonic." Remember, a couple of months ago when "Pat Robertson"
> > came out on his 700 Club and announced that UFOS were Demonic in
> > nature and anyone who professed to Investigate them or believe in
> > them were guilty of blasphamy and should be stoned to death?
> > Well, unfortunately, this man speaks with the same tongue as the
> > orthodox religionist.

> > Now, I am not by any means saying ALL religions and their
> > followers profess this doctrine, but many do. Having a background
> > in the Baptist religion, I know how many of the people I work and
> > associate with feel about UFOs.

> > Just thought I would add to the conversation, Jerry.
> > Remember, not everyone believes the scientific doctrine.

> > REgards, Mike


> I might also add that those who have experienced some of the
> things John Keel talks about and have seen such things as
> "phantom" UFOs have a lot more respect for Keel's theories than
> some of the "half-baked" theories some of the so-called UFO
> scientists put out.

> There's more to life than science can presently explain.

> John K.


John,

I'm sure few on this list would dispute that.  Certainly
not I.  It's John Keel's theories that are half-baked,
not the extraordinary phenomena that happen to
human beings and that science has yet to explain or
even address in any meaningful way.  There surely
is a middle course between the materialist's dogmatic
rejection and the supernaturalist's naive desire to
"explain" phenomena via forces and mechanisms
that the theorist (in this case Keel) can't even prove
exist.

Jerry Clark



Search for other documents from or mentioning: clark | john.koopmans | mchristo

[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com