UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1998 > Jul > Jul 1

Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4

From: bruce maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 07:53:52 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 16:55:14 -0400
Subject: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4


>Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 22:58:02 -0500 (CDT)
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4


>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: MAGONIA ETH Bulletin #4
>>Date: Mon, 29 Jun 98 12:17:09 PDT


>For what it's worth, however, I don't think that such exercises
>are as totally irrelevant as you apparently do. For instance,
>Ronald D. Story compiled a UFO encyclopedia and then went on to
>author another book based on just such a "best case" list, UFOs
>and the Limits of Science -- presumably because he gave some
t>hought to the question. I hope I'm not giving away any trade
>secrets here, when I say that someone else who occasionally
>posts on this List is also presently at work on a UFO book based
.on the "ten best cases" approach, and has been actively querying
>various ufologists for same as a starting point.

(SNIP)

>Again, the reason why I brought this whole issue up in the first
>place was because I had just finished working on a book which
>required 50 reliable cases -- and it wasn't quite the "snap" I
>had anticipated. As a sidelight, I might add that the closer one
>approaches the present, the harder good case histories are to
>come by (a feeling, I believe, expressed by Clark himself on
>occasion, although I won't put words in his mouth). Indeed, the
>latter is in danger of extinction, being rapidly superceded by
>abduction accounts, conspiracy theories, and more and more
>Roswell ephemera.>

(SNIP)_
>But since it's unfair to ask another to do what one wouldn't do
>oneself, I will shortly post a personal list of 20 UFO cases
>drawn (culled?) from the 50 mentioned earlier. I won't
>necessarily defend each and everyone of them to the death if
>called upon to do so, naturally, but I will throw them out there
>for discussion. Or dissection. Whatever>

Dennis

I agree that having "ten best cases" or 5 or 1 or 100 would be
valuable. We should attempt to find at least one case that the
majority of contributers can agree remains UNEXPLAINED AFTER
EVALUATION and, furthermore, APPEARS THAT IT WILL REMAIN
UNEXPLAINABLE IN THE FUTURE, where explanation is in terms of
known phenomena (e,g.,explaining a UFO as ball lightning is
explaining one unknown with another).

Several weeks ago when this list was tied up in arguing the
merits and application of Ockham's Double Edge Sword I pointed
out in a post that was resoundingly ignored that, rather than
endlessly argue finde points of philosophy we would actually
accomplish something if we essentially investigated and vetted a
case on line. (Something like this happened last summer/fall in
the discussion over the Arnold sighting and whether or not it
could be explained as fast geese or even faster pelicans.... but
then that discussion faded out since, I guess it appeared that
these explanations were for the birds).

One nice thing about using historical sightings is that there
has been time to collect all available information and there is
already a background of discussion from which to start and
amplify various aspects of the sighting.  Furthermore, as I
have pointed out in THE UFO/FBI CONNECTION, a number of
"ancient" cases are well enough reported so that the Air Force
could legitimately conclude (from FBI document, July, 1952) that
3% of the sightings could not be explained and that top AF
officialks were seriously considering interplanetary ships.