UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Aug > Aug 1

Re: Why The Cover-Up?

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 09:41:55 -0500
Archived: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 09:45:41 -0400
Subject: Re: Why The Cover-Up?

>From: Paul Scott Anderson <paulscottanderson.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 12:31:51 -0700
>Subject: Re: Why The Cover-Up?

>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 11:56:58 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Why The Cover-Up?

>>Did you even read what I wrote? You're simply repeating to me
>>what I already outlined, namely that _while skeptical of cosmic
>>origin_ - a point I made very clear, and related the basis of
>>such doubt - scientists did investigate meteorite reports.

>Yes, there were various theories at the time of course. But the
>theory that these stones came from outer space was dismissed at
>first; read the quotes again I posted before:

Why do you keep repeating what I wrote originally, all the while
asserting that I never said what you're repeating?

One last try:

Scientists of the 18th Century investigated the evidence for
meteorite reports. They investigated because the evidence for
falling stones existed in abundance; they did not ignore it on
the grounds, as you initially claimed, that because stones don't
exist in the sky, stones cannot fall from the sky, case closed.
Where scientists initially erred - not unusually in the history
of any kind of inquiry, especially when the discipline is in its
formative years - was in the interpretation, which was limited
by the very modest scientific understanding (let me repeat: very
modest scientific understanding) that prevailed more than two
centuries ago.  Between today's science and the science of 200+
years ago, an enormous knowledge gulf stretches. In due course,
meteorites became explainable. Just like all kinds of other
phenomena of nature.

Let me repeat the lesson: Abundant evidence vs. massive
ignorance of early science leads to confusion about
interpretation. Not to mention the generation of a dead horse
that forever after, advocates of esoteric speculations of all
kinds will beat as they wail about scientists' refusal to take
their fantastic beliefs seriously.

Except by proclamation - yours - the meteorite episode has
nothing to do with the reception of Gehrmanism.  No evidence
that would impress any modestly critical-minded, knowledgeable
authority supports Gehrmanism's propositions; therefore,
scientists aren't investigating it. Gehrmanism's extraordinary
claims are not even a remote controversy among them, unlike,
say, the fierce dispute that rages - though nearer now to being
settled - among archaeologists and physical anthropologists
about the identity of the first human beings in the Americas and
the date of their arrival. Unlike Gehrmanism, this is actually
an interesting subject (a small library of books has been
written on it), showing scientists at both their best and their
worst, with much fascinating material to chew over. Nothing in
the relevant archaeological and related data, however, can be
interpreted as supporting Gehrmanist beliefs.

Unlike some ufological mystery-mongers, who argue for an open-
mindedness so expansive that it allows the brains to drop out
(or, as here, actively demands that they do so), scientists,
historians, and other scholarly professionals do not hold that
one idea, however far-fetched, is as good as another. Nor do
they think that all ideas deserve respect simply because the
non-scientist/non-professional who proposes them furiously
pronounces himself "scientific" and whines that, as with
Galileo, only inquisitors oppose his noble efforts. Scientific
professionals devote their efforts to, you know, actual stuff,
studied via well-established, demonstrably successful
methodology, built upon many decades, even centuries, of
accumulated established knowledge. They don't confuse free
expression, the right to which everybody has, with intellectual
seriousness, which some manifestly do not possess.

But if you indeed believe that Ed Gehrman may have discovered a
truth so staggeringly important it rivals the discoveries of
Galileo and Darwin, why in the world are you wasting time on
UpDates? Why aren't you urging Gehrman to take his revolutionary
insights to the scientific community for assessments by actual
scientists in the relevant fields of paleontology, archaeology,
history, anthropology, physics, aeronautics, engineering, and
God knows what else that Gehrmanism, once it has triumphed, will

Or is the answer to that obvious - that this is just a game to
you guys and, beneath it all, you know perfectly well that this
is second-grade science fiction?

Jerry Clark

Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast