UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1998 > Jun > Jun 9

Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

From: "Stanton T. Friedman" <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 20:28:06 -0300
Fwd Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1998 22:32:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs


> From: "Greg Sandow" <gsandow@prodigy.net>
> To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs
> Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 09:48:34 -0400

> > From: RobIrving@aol.com
> > Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 23:40:29 EDT
> > To: updates@globalserve.net
> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Occam's Razor and UFOs

<snip>

> > In any case, if Hynek and McDonald couldn't pull
> > the scientific community into the debate, what luck are
> > scientific ufologists now likely to have?)

> With sufficient and clearly presented evidence I can't see much
> of a problem.  What exactly is the problem, in your opinion? I
> personally don't accept the line that scientists are too worried
> about reputation to involve themselves in ufology - that argument
> doesn't hold water.

> What Rob or I personally care to accept is beside the point. What
> matters is what scientists think. David Pritchard said recently that
> peer pressure was pushing him away from UFOs, and John Mack was
> publicly questioned by an official Harvard invesitgation. There we
> have two gentlemen with professional scientific credentials who
> organized a scientific conference on abductions, and paid for it. I
> know of two other scientists who take part in abduction research, but
> prefer to be anonymous, fearing what their colleagues would think.
> Would Rob care to quote some UFO-involved scientists with contrary
> views?

I think Rob's comments are so much horse manure.

I have lectured to over 100 professional groups in many
locations.. Los Alamos National Lab, Engineering Societies in
Baltimore, Cincinnati, Detroit, Management clubs at Houston Space
Center, McDonnel Douglas, Lockheed, and a host more. The title is
Flying Saucers ARE Real. I certainly claim that SOME UFOs are ET
Spacecraft, that the subject is a Cosmic Watergate, that no
anti-UFO arguments stand up to careful scrutiny and that this is
the biggest story of the millenium.

In over 700 lectures (mostly colleges)over 31 years I have had 11
hecklers.. 2 of whom were drunk. I use facts, data, raise the
tough questions and always have an open question and aswer
session.. It is interesting that in several of my UK lectures in
l995, NOBODY in the audience had read any of the 5 large scale
scientific studies I discuss.No tomatoes or eggs. I, of course,
do NOT use comments from Tabloids or contactees as Mr.
Brookesmith tried to at Oxford. It is no wonder 60% of the
listeners agreed with the affirmative side despite an obvious
lack of audience knowledge at the start.

It is of course not a surprising that the first dozen or so
debunking boks don't even mention Blue Book Special Report 14 and
its quality evaluations, cross comparisons between UNKNOWNS and
knowns, physical trace cases and other facts.

A serious ufologist has to be almost  as patient as the gold
miners at Homestake Mine where they find 1 ounce of gold per 5
tons of ore.

The essence of science involves asking the right questions,
maintaining a large gray basket and going after the relevant
data, not in raising theoretical arguments which obscure reality
but waste loads of time.

Stan Friedman

[ 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