UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1999 > Jan > Jan 19

Re: The State of Ufology Today

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 99 14:14:33 PST
Fwd Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1999 07:58:13 -0500
Subject: Re: The State of Ufology Today

>Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 11:56:32 -0500
>From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
>To: UFO UpDate <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: Re: The State of Ufology Today

>>Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 01:37:06 -0800
>>From: Josh Goldstein <clearlt@pacbell.net>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: The State of Ufology Today

>>>Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 20:15:06 -0500
>>>From: Gary Alevy <galevy@pipeline.com>
>>>To: UFO UpDate <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: The State of Ufology Today

Gary and patient and gentle listfolk:

>You object to the style of message that I used; however, isn't
>it true that if I tried to make these points in the "academic"
>style so fashionable today no one would have paid it any
>attention. I have been observing this list for more than two
>years and I see "researchers" you favor insult, degrade and
>debase posters to this list, you are silent. Jerry Clark posts
>no original research or work to this list. He posts to attack
>and debunk other's postings using the method of character
>assasination that so upsets you. Does the archives document your
>criticism of him for being out of bounds?

Of course I don't employ "character assassination," nor do you
list any "original research or work to this list."  (Creative
imagination, Gary, is neither research nor work.)  I oppose
character assassination in principle. (I have been on the
receiving end of it on occasion.)   In any case it isn't
necessary when one is responding to arguments as thinly based in
reason, evidence, and documentation as Mr. Alevy's.

On the subject of character assassination, however, I find it --
to put it mildly -- odd that Gary is objecting to it only when
it allegedly is employed by others. On the other hand, his
character assassination of honorable men such as Allen Hynek and
Sherman Larsen is okay by Gary.  Here's a psychic test for the
rest of you:  I am thinking of a word to characterize Gary's
approach here.  A hint: it starts with "h."

>Generally speaking on this list those clamoring the loudest for
>proof use this as a smokescreen for ignoring discussion of
>evidence and hypotheses. An example of this is your response to
>my post clamoring for "proof" while you fail to engage in any
>discussion, civil or otherwise, of any and all points I raised.

Let me offer this one bit of advice, Gary:  If you are going to
assassinate the characters of your betters -- by leveling the
most serious charges one ufologist can make against other
ufologists -- you had better produce evidence, damned good
evidence, and you had better have a more relevant, compelling
response to your critics than the self-righteous posturing and
subject-changing we've seen so far.  Otherwise, an approach like
yours represents ufology at its worst.

Never having met you personally and knowing nothing about you
beyond what I see on this list, I have no personal quarrel with
you.  For all I know, when you're not bloviating on subjects you
know little or nothing about (a hardly unique human failing),
you're a nice guy.  But the sorts of baseless slanders* you have
directed against some of ufology's true pioneers do no one --
least of all you -- any good.

Jerry Clark

*Last time I used this word, you objected to it.  Look it up in
the dictionary.

[ 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