From: Jerome Clark <jkclark.nul> Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 11:01:01 -0500 Archived: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 12:26:43 -0400 Subject: Re: Mirage Men The Trailer >From: David Rudiak <drudiak.nul> >To: post.nul >Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 10:45:11 -0700 >Subject: Re: Mirage Men The Trailer >>From: John Lundberg <john.nul> >>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <post.nul> >>Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 15:44:39 +0100 >>Subject: Mirage Men The Trailer >>I thought you and the folks on the UFO Updates list might be >>interested to know that we have just released the first teaser >>trailer for our forthcoming feature documentary 'Mirage Men': >>You can view it here on vimeo: >>http://vimeo.com/39095965 >>And here on YouTube: >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4H7gQ4Tp50 >>Director - Mirage Men >>http://miragemen.com >I'm afraid all we have is another version of what I call the >skeptics' "Drooling Idiot" (DI) theory of history. The military, >the airlines, the FAA, various intelligence services, etc., >etc., are populated with numerous DI's, incapable of the most >basic of judgments. Thus pilots and radar operators, civilian >and military, are incapable of distinguishing something >anomalous from the ordinary. At Roswell, senior officers >couldn't distinguish fragile, common balloon debris from highly >anomalous debris and thought it was from a flying saucer. And on >and on and on. >Of course, only the skeptics, with their superior intellects and >infallible superpowers of "scientific" analysis, are capable of >correctly perceiving the "real" story. In this case, it's all a >big counterintelligence scam that's been going on for over 60 >years to conceal our most secret military projects. An excellent point, David, in a post full of them. I have long thought that skeptical ideologues ought to establish a phone or e-mail hotline. Deluded souls who think they've had a UFO encounter can quickly contact the experts, who will inform them on the spot what they really saw, which was not, of course, what they thought they saw, they being dimwits with defective perceptual apparatuses of the sort that make it difficult for them to cross the street safely. We really need to show more respect for the wisdom of our skeptical lords and masters who alone know the true nature of our experiences. >Under this theory, the DI theory needs to be extended to our >enemies as well, otherwise, what's the purpose of all this >deception-just to fool the American public? What purpose does >that serve? Isn't it the Russians or Chinese or the enemy flavor >the of the week you are trying to deceive? E.g., our spy planes >are really enemy flying saucers, so don't try to shoot them >down. >Yes, the Russians, the Chinese, etc., with their own >sophisticated military machines, radar networks, interceptor >aircraft, intelligence services, etc., have been as easily >fooled as the stereotypical drunken hillbilly reporting a flying >saucer. >Not only that, but a common extension of this theory, as >advocated by such debunkers as James Oberg, is that the Russians >et. al. are playing the same game on us to conceal their own >secret projects. >This has got to be one of the longest cons in history, where >everybody is being fooled and nobody can figure out that they >are being had (except for the debunkers , of course). The only >way the theory could conceivably make sense is if the major >powers already know that true UFOs are quite real and not made >by any nation on planet earth. Then, and only then could one >conceivably disguise one's own craft as a UFO. It is entirely predictable, of course, that debunkers would eventually become conspiracy theorists. Conspiracy theory is where you go when all else has failed. <snip> >I have pointed out the absurdity of the usual DI theory many >times in the past whenever some debunker puts it forward, and I >have yet to here a single plausible refutation of my points. >Usually the debunkers don't respond at all, but just slink away, >maybe too embarrassed to even try any sort of counter. They too >must know the theory is utter foolishness. In the last print issue of the anti-anomaly British journal Magonia, I contributed a short essay on the view from June 25, 1947, laying out a series of logical developments that would have followed if the then-novel flying saucers turned out to be solely the product of error and deceit. Along with other issues, I outline what investigators would find out about the character of witnesses. It would be found, for example, that those who reported close-range, high-strangeness encounters - in other words, experiences difficult to explain via honest misperception - would overwhelmingly be fringe individuals, that is, liars, hysterics, or mentally ill persons. The "best" sightings with the most credible observers would be undramatic and easily or fairly easily traced to prosaic causes. Carl Sagan's notorious dictum would actually be true: the most interesting sightings would be the least credible, and the least interesting would be the most credible. The contention that anything anomalous was going on would be conclusively falsified within weeks or months (I suspect by the end of 1947), and the fad, like all baseless fads (e.g., ancient astronauts, the Bermuda Triangle), would end for all practical purposes, to survive only among hard-core cranks of the sort who think that the earth is flat or hollow and that Richard Shaver was right. No serious investigation, by scientists or conscientious lay researchers, would ever conclude with cases, especially those representative of an apparent unknown technology, puzzling, unsolved, and suggestive. Scientists of any reputation would rarely if ever report unexplained UFO sightings. Airline pilots so deluded as to do so would be terminated as menaces to the safety of aviation passengers. Nobody attempted a refutation of my argument. Instead, skeptical ideologues just talk louder and amp up the ridicule, clearly in the hope, mostly forlorn by now but also successful in some ways, that they can intimidate all contrary voices into silence. The talking points get endlessly recycled, and the intolerance for dissent (as we saw in the recent exchange among debunkers about Leslie Kean's book) goes ever farther off the charts, preceded long before by any link, however tenuous, to logical thought, intellectual proportion, and rhetorical moderation. The Drooling Idiots, I'm afraid, are not the UFO witnesses. Jerry Clark Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp