UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1999 > Oct > Oct 4

Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 99 18:15:28 PDT
Fwd Date: Mon, 04 Oct 1999 16:20:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Sun, 03 Oct 1999 15:24:19 -0400
 >From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos
 >>Date: Fri, 01 Oct 99 18:44:18 PDT


Mr. Young, with apologies to patient and gentle listfolk:

 >>You conveniently failed to mention, as I pointed out to
 >>you last time around (and as Brian Straight has also pointed out
 >>to you), that I was responding to vile accusations against my
 >>character -- accusations, moreover, that were hurled without a
 >>shred of supporting evidence.

 >I am most curious to learn what specific and exacting comments
 >that were hurled against you which you might consider 'vile
 >accusations against your character.' Might it be possible for
 >you to please clarify your statement with an issue-related
 >example?

Do you know what the adjective "disingenuous" means?  If not,
suffice it to say that you have just provided a living example.
And if you aren't being disingenuous -- which I find hard to
believe -- and genuinely did not know what the discussion is
about, why did you join it at all?

 >By all means, I would speak out against any character digs
 >against you if you could demonstrate that which you claim.

 >From my recall of the Gulf Breeze discussions, Jerry Black has
 >afforded you inclusion in his "Old Boy's Network." Could this be
 >what has caused you to think yourself the victim of a 'vile
 >accusation against your character?'

Self-appointed judge, juror, and executioner Jerry Black began
this whole sorry business with an attack on Bruce Maccabee.  Its
focus, as you should know (did you even read it?), was less on
Maccabee's Gulf Breeze analysis -- which Black had every right
to take issue with -- than on Maccabee's character -- which is
another matter altogether.

Black conjured up what struck me as a paranoid, even laughable,
vision of an "Old Boys' Network" of intellectually corrupt
"leaders" (this field has leaders?) who covered for each other
and who, according to Judge Black, are nothing but lying, craven
opportunists driven by unsavory, self-serving interests.
Maccabee was one, I was another, Walt Andrus  a third. I don't
recall the others, but you can look them up in the archives if
you wanted to.  I recall that for the most part they were people
not well acquainted or even actively antagonistic to each other.

I am not corrupt.  I don't belong to an Old Boys' Network, and I
don't cover for others.  I have always been forthright in
stating my views, even when they disagreed with those of good
friends.  As I've said before, I don't know Bruce all that well,
though I like and respect him.  Walt Andrus and I aren't even on
speaking terms and haven't been for years.

Yeah, I don't like being at the receiving end of nasty slurs,
and anybody who is going to throw them my way is not going to
like my response.  Nor do I like to see the good names of
hard-working, honest, conscientious investigators like Bruce
Maccabee trashed, either.

You inserted yourself into the middle of this discussion by
making it appear as if the victims of the slurs were the
slurers.

 >While lamenting others for being judge, jury and executioner in
 >ufology, you seem to have no problem tackling such a position
 >yourself.

Nah, I don't think so.  Not my style, personality, temperament,
or intellect.  I guess that's why I get riled when I have the
misfortune of running into those who act that way.

 >Perhaps, Mr. Clark, your hot-dog hostility through this bizarre
 >episode has left you as first among the wounded resulting from
 >Black's exposure of this "Old Boy's Club."

In so doing, I'm afraid, Black exposed himself not only as
self-appointed judge, juror, and executioner but also as a man
with a wild imagination not much constrained by mundane reality.
And you have exposed yourself as his apologist.

Let me put it this way:

If I were going to make unprovoked charges which cast serious
doubt on the integrity of a colleague, I would make damned sure
I had my facts right. I would not level the charges casually.
And when challenged, I could defend myself by citing chapter and
verse.  I would think any decent human being would operate by
the same set of principles.

What we've gotten from your pal Mr. Black, and from your attempt
to change the subject from his baseless charges to my response
to them, is a depressing recklessness, a supreme indifference to
the reality of well-meaning, honest colleagues whose only sin is
to hold views different from Black's.

Is this any way to run ufology?  Is it any way that an honest
man would want to conduct himself?  I certainly hope not.

Jerry Clark






[ 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