UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1999 > Oct > Oct 7

Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

From: Pat McCartney <ElPatricio@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 13:31:19 EDT
Fwd Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:43:01 -0400
Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos


 >Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 15:02:37 -0400
 >From: Kenny Young <ufo@fuse.net>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Bruce Maccabee and Gulf Breeze Photos

 >Mr. Jerome Clark,
 >You have been given the opportunity to support some of the wild
 >charges that you have made in the past few days concerning
 >'character assassination' attempts that you claimed to have
 >dealt with, and from your message to UFO UpDates (dated October
 >3, 1999), you have failed to clarify your comments or uphold
 >those wild allegations.

 >For the record, Jerome Clark, let's take note of this failure
 >and of your apparent 'ducking' of this fair issue, for as I have
 >authenticated, your rabid approach to those you disagree with
 >and your issuance of insupportable charges renders you in the
 >same light that you seek to cast onto your opponents. Your
 >demonstrable chest-beating, trashing of opponents and hurling
 >specious comments through argumentation has caused me to think
 >of you in a new and unfortunate manner.

  <merciful snip>

 >As Dennis Stacey keenly pointed out, your personal (and publicly
 >professed) suspicion of Ed Walters and Gulf Breeze has not
 >inhibited you from heartily endorsing colleague Bruce Maccabee,
 >the same one who has actively worked to promote Ed Walters and
 >Gulf Breeze.

 >This flaming double-standard serves as a top-notch example of
 >everything that is wrong with ufology, for it incisively
 >highlights your lack of ideological strength and your inability
 >to stand behind the research of the one you promote.

 >Although there is nothing wrong with being a personal friend of
 >a fellow researcher (who may be 'in the wrong'), I see it as a
 >mistake to promote that researcher on a professional or
 >conjectural level while in fundamental disagreement.

Oh, puh-leeze! This dissection of whether or not one UFO
researcher should denounce another researcher with whom he
disagrees has become incredibly tiresome. Thanks to Jerry
Black's intemperate assaults on the integrity of practically
everyone who has ever contributed to the field (or who hasn't
agreed to submit to a lie detector test from him) has spawned a
base, pointless exchange.

Kenny Young's principle of "no agreement/no respect" appears
closer in spirit to Torquemada or the Stalinist purges than a
realistic expectation of professionals or serious amateurs in a
field of study.

Would one physicist, say, who believes that quarks are the
fundamental particle of matter knock the ethics and
professionalism of a mathematician espousing the string theory?

Or more pointedly, should a left-leaning ideologue denounce the
principles of a colleague who mysteriously adopts a reactionary
position on a particular subject?

Choose your field, whether hard science or fuzzy social science,
progress is not made by tearing down the methods of others but
by explaining why something's right or explaining why something
is wrong.

The real goal in any field is to contribute original ideas that
stand the test of time. That is something which is sorely
lacking in this regrettable thread.


Regards,

Pat McCartney
Auburn, California



[ 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