UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1998 > Jul > Jul 15

Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 98 13:54:36 PDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 15 Jul 1998 06:21:04 -0400
Subject: Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'

> From: RobIrving@aol.com
> Date: Tue, 14 Jul 1998 13:06:36 EDT
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'

> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: 'She Blinded Me with Science'
> >Date: Mon, 13 Jul 98 08:27:55 PDT

> Jerry,

> >After all, you
> >have said Prophecy is about "ufology" on more than one occasion.

> I have said there are parallels, which is not the same thing as
> being 'about'. These parallels would apply to any area in which
> belief flies in the face of evidence.

Including unsupported claims by UFO debunkers?  Or, as I
suspect, do you exclude those?

> >Festinger and his co-authors use it as a case study to argue for
> >a larger social theory which, alas, proves to be based in part on a
> >major misreading of a particular historical episode.

> By your own admission you are largely ignorant of this larger
> social theory, which was published in detail after WPF. My
> complaint here, Jerry, is that you are suggesting that this has
> been dismissed when it hasn't. In fact it is alive and well and
> the parallels are there for any who care to study it.

What strikes me, Rob, is your apparent unawareness -- the less
polite phrase is ignorance of the fact -- that Festinger's
theories have been challenged.  I don't recall ever saying
"dismissed," and I wouldn't have said it because it is not true.
If you need to beat down strawmen, do it elsewhere. The
hypothesis proposed in When Prophecy Fails, however, has failed
replication. These problems have been reported in the
social-science literature.  It seems odd, that being the case,
that you are accusing ME of ignorance.  One thinks here of the
pot and the kettle.

And you still haven't found that whopping historical error,
have you?

I note, too, that you continue to maintain a telling
silence when asked about your apparent belief that
anybody who thinks UFOs may represent something
extraordinary is in some sense comparably irrational,
whether Dorothy Martin or Isabel Davis, Truman
Bethurum or Richard Haines, Billy Meier or Mark
Rodeghier.  Once again: is this indeed your view?

Jerry Clark