UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1998 > Jul > Jul 26

Re: The Sturrock Panel: The Next Step

From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac@compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1998 15:40:53 -0400
Fwd Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1998 00:15:46 -0400
Subject: Re: The Sturrock Panel: The Next Step


>Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 16:24:48 -0700
>From: Jan Aldrich <jan@cyberzone.net>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: P-1947: The Sturrock Panel: The Next Step

>Greetings List Members,

>RE: THE STURROCK PANEL'S RECOMMENDATIONS

>There are not as yet any answers to the request concerning the
>Sturrock Panel, and what the next step should be. There always
>seems to be complaints and criticisms after someone in ufology
>does or proposes something. There always seems to be few
>recommended courses of actions before the fact, but great
>amounts of criticism and complaints after the fact.>

<snip>

>I. Tasking:

> What actions should now be taken to implement the Sturrock
>Panel's main recommendation that UFO deserve serious scientific
>consideration?

One task could be a formal respose to the panel's report...or a
formal commentary on same addressing certain issues which are
"opinions of the panel" rather than accepted facts.

>II. Assumptions.

> A. There is no definitive critical information currently
>available that will settle the UFO problem once and for all. (Or
>restated for the conspiracy minded: Those "in the know" will not
>be revealing critical information. So you will not be able to
>inspect any crashed saucers soon.)

The claim that there is no "definitive information that will
settle the UFO problem once and for all" may be correct.
However, more basic claim that they panel had...no evidence of
anything truly unusual or "physics breaking"....is not accepted
as a fact by the UFO community (otherwise there probably would
be no such "community") and an important response to the panel
would be to lean why the panel members essentially claimed that
everything could be explained (no unconventional physics) while
admitting that some sightings were"difficult to explain." What
new but not ET/Other Intelligences (OI) related phenomena might
be invoked to explain the unexplainable? Or did the panel catch
itself in a "paradox" (all cases are basically a result of known
natural or manmade phenomena and we think we know about all
natural phenomena that could be related to sightings such as
there, but there are some cases which we can't explain and
therefore must involve unknown natural phenomena.)

A response tto the panel would be for th investigators in the
UFO community to find at least one case which is (a) rich in
detail, (b) contains information that clearly conflicts with all
known manmade and natural (unintelligent) phenomena and (c)
which all investigators can agree is unexplained, yet highly
credible. (I nominate the May 24, 1949 Rogue River sighting.)


> B. Most of the official, scientific, and media establishments
>will remain dubious or skeptical of UFOs.

Probably true. Doesn't stop us from moving ahead of the rest of
the scientific world.


> C. There will be a slim possibility of limited cooperation
>with official and scientific organizations (FAA, weather bureau,
>access to unofficial tracking networks and records).

Great... grab the possibility

> D. Political action is not within the scope of this
>recommendation.

Obviously political action has already been taken (e.g., the
Congressional Initiative of the Fund for UFO Research begun 15
or more years ago; ORTK, CSETI)

> E. Funding will be extremely limited with $500,000 being at
>the upper limit.

Over what period? The Fund fr UFO Research has already spent
over $500K in the last 20 years. III. Intelligence.