UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Oct > Oct 19

Re: Is Ufology 'Anti-Science'?

From: Katharina Wilson <K_Wilson.nul>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 17:23:38 -0500
Archived: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:26:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Is Ufology 'Anti-Science'?

>From: Eleanor White <eleanor.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 17:17:22 -0400
>Subject: Re: Is Ufology 'Anti-Science'?

>>From: Gerald O'Connell <gac.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 20:04:43 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Is Ufology 'Anti-Science'?


>>>It's really rather simple. How many legitimate sciences are
>>>conducted 95% or better by part-time, weekend hobbyists and
>>>enthusiasts who simply appoint themselves as 'experts', as
>>>opposed to people professionally trained and educated?

>>>There is not a single real physical or social science out there
>>>which has no budget, and no cadre of professionals to carry out
>>>the research and provide peer review.

>>Absolutely spot on, Dick. Furthermore, it is really quite
>>delusional to try to pretend otherwise.

>>All of which raises the question as to why this state of affairs
>>pertains. Obviously, any halfway sensible answer will call on a
>>wide range of contributory factors, ranging from sociological,
>>through institutional to scientific. The issue is a complex one,
>>and will not be resolved by approaches that fail to acknowledge
>>this fact.

>I suggest the number one factor is that since Roswell or
>thereabouts, there has been a very slick but powerful campaign
>to make ufology look like a synonym for mental illness.

Several of the posts relating to Eleanor's comments below were
written as if she were coming across as being conspiratorial or
worse. This is just not the case. Here's a few examples off the
top of my head of why Eleanor is absolutely correct with her
list. There are many more I could cite, but here are some quick

>Some clues:

>The mandatory reference to "little green men" in all
>mainstream articles about UFOs (virtually all.)

Anyone who has listened to the news over the past 40 years has
heard this exact line with the "laugh" from news broadcasters. I
heard it on my local news just a couple of months ago. Someone
was reporting that someone saw a UFO and there went the news
anchors, "Oh (snicker, snicker) do _you_ believe in 'little
green men'? [snicker, laugh... cut to commercial...]

As recently as last night on the Keith Olberman Show, MSNBC:

He ridiculed the subject of UFOs and repeatedly showed a group
of people sitting in an audience laughing in a strained, over-
rehearsed sort of way. He began making fun of Spielberg's movie
ET and the entire time he was talking about the movie ET (a
friendly alien) MSNBC was showing highly destructive scenes from
the movie Independence Day. They then repeated the footage at
the end of the piece while making fun of Guliani's statement
that he would be able to protect us from an invasion by
extraterrestrials (if he were to become President).

This all centered around the fact that a little boy asked
Guliani if he could protect us against an ET invasion. Can you
imagine how the little boy feels about his question relating to
whether or not his government can protect him (us) against an ET
invasion? Not only is this young boy being made fun of, he, and
other young people who were watching this pathetic display, will
probably not want to ever ask anyone about this subject again.
And, that's the point, isn't it? See how it works?

Yes, the media has and continues to ridicule, laugh at and
mislead the American public about UFOs.

Have we forgotten this?

"Through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to
believe that unidentified flying objects are nonsense. To hide
the facts, the Air Force has silenced its personnel."

              -- Admiral Roscoe H. Hillenkoetter, Former Director
                 of the CIA, February 28, 1960.

>The substantial avoidance of physcial trace cases in
>media presentations on the subject

One example that quickly comes to mind is when NOVA refused to
show physical evidence that Budd Hopkins wanted to present
during a program about abductions. The director at the time said
to do so, "...would open a can of worms."

>The consistent use of "skeptics" in media presentations
>who have not researched UFOs and whose backgrounds
>don't qualify them to offer an informed opinion

Wasn't this the subject (and a long discussion on this List) of
the Larry King interview with Stanton Friedman, and CNN's
invited debunker, etc....?

Here's a look at something from Ufology's own "backyard"
regarding "expert" opinions about abductions and abductees.

"...'Abduction Enigma' is a half-baked affair so far as its
assessment of psychological issues. Books such as Randle's serve
as distractions from the all-too-real effort of people like my
clients who hold trauma and its transformation - in their very
real physical bodies.
                                           -- Janet Colli, Ph.D.

Please read other people's opinions regarding this:


>The mandatory use of "limbo lighting", weird music and
>other ridicule gimmicks when UFO experiencers or
>researchers appear in documentaries, while the skeptic
>is usually presented in a credible setting.

I've seen this just recently on the Mystery Channel,
oh, I'm sorry, that would be the History Channel. The
music was so utterly strange and loud that I could barely
hear the narrator. They totally blurred the message
because the topic was controversial.

>The mandatory denial of the UFO researchers in
>documentaries the chance to rebut the skeptics' claims
>on camera.

Again, I refer to the latest such event, the Larry King
interview with Stan Friedman. Stan did a great job, but look at
how he had to fight to get a word in edgewise and we're still
talking about who's a credible observer? To some on this list,
pilots are no longer credible observers? Give me a break.

>The mandatory last word in documentaries and other
>media presentations being given to the skeptic.

Absolutely, with the exception of the "news anchors."
Usually they are given the last laugh. One day they
will realize, those who laugh last don't laugh the longest,
they are just the last to "get it."

>It amazes me that some seniour ufologists seem to discount
>this very well coordinated campaign of discreditation by both
>government and the media.  Those things above are not
>coincidence, folks. --  Eleanor White

Does anybody remember these guys?

"The debunking aim would result in reduction of public interest
in flying saucers, which today evokes a strong psychological
reaction. This education could be accomplished by mass media
such as television, motion picture, and popular articles...."

 From The (1953) Robertson Panel
(IMHO, a CIA-sponsored debunking initiative.)

The following are excerpts from a letter to Major Keyhoe's
publishers from the Air Force. The letter is printed on the back
cover of "Flying Saucers From Outer Space:"

[Second paragraph]
"We in the Air Force recognize Major Keyhoe as a responsible,
accurate reporter. His long association and cooperation with the
Air Force, in our study of unidentified flying objects,
qualifies him as a leading civilian authority on this

[Fourth Paragraph]
"The Air Force, and its investigating agency, 'Project
Bluebook,' are aware of Major Keyhoe's conclusion that the
'Flying Saucers' are from another planet. The Air Force has
never denied that this possibility exists....if the apparently
controlled maneuvers reported by many competent observers are
correct, then the only remaining explanation is the
interplanetary answer." - The letter was signed 'Very Truly
Yours, Albert M. Chop, Air Force Press Desk.' "

Yes, I too am amazed that some ufologists seem to discount this
very well co-ordinated campaign of discreditation by both
government and the media.

K. Wilson

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



[ 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