It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Anyone else find ufology incredibly boring nowadays?

page: 4
8
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 03:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Guyfriday
a reply to: kayleighkitty
I can't agree with you. While I was a Field Investigator for MUFON the one thing that really turned me off to working with other investigators was how quickly many of them would say its a UFO, or worse lead the eye witness with questions.

I still free lance every now and then investigating sightings, but it can be very boring at time. On the other hand when you get involved with a current hot case, things can be very exciting very quickly.

If you really think its a boring field try asking a local MUFON investigator if you can go on an investigation. While the investigator may or may not be very good, MUFON does get the good cases to check out and they have a standards of conduct to follow too. Make your own decision about the evidence you might happen upon, and have fun.

If you are going to make the point of it being boring based on the activity of UFO web sights filled with people too lazy to go conduct a real investigation. Then yes it's a dead field.



Could you clear up a few things for me about MUFON? Has MUFON ever conducted a scientific study and published it? If so, what and where can I find it? Does MUFON include reports of paranormal experiences or exclude them as a matter of policy? How does MUFON decide which reports are legit and get included in their data base and which are not legit and don't get included or listed as not credible?




posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 03:48 PM
link   
a reply to: kayleighkitty

That is because the topic of UFOs IS BORING once you see Deathbed confessions with mall dolls used for pictures that are presented as a 'picture of an alien body'.

But to hit both sides, what is also boring, is narrow science that thinks they would have ruined reputation if they decided to think outside the box.

The scientific approach should be - have we been visited/ have gods been some advanced civlizations? - The answer should be - It is a possibility because of unexplained things around monuments and artefacts but we don't have enough evidence to say if so.

Rather than 'No! Because I didn't see it happening. Oh wait I wasn't born but not my fault - no see, no happen' - is this scientific? No it isn't.

Yes, if there are any beings at all, perhaps in the distant past. I am leaning to call every single case today a Military Drone, Aircraft or just a toy/prank or hoax.



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 03:51 PM
link   
It's just that for many years now people have been trying to shoehorn UFOs into an "aliens in space ships" explanation, and we've finally gotten to the point where we have to face the fact that there has never been an iota of good evidence linking real UFOs with aliens of any sort.

That leaves us in a kind of quandary. Where do we go from here? People are a little hesitant to look more seriously into the "paranormal," and who can blame them? But we're kind of stuck.

I have my own theories, but they aren't useful for scientific study. *shrug*



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 03:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blue Shift
It's just that for many years now people have been trying to shoehorn UFOs into an "aliens in space ships" explanation, and we've finally gotten to the point where we have to face the fact that there has never been an iota of good evidence linking real UFOs with aliens of any sort.

That leaves us in a kind of quandary. Where do we go from here? People are a little hesitant to look more seriously into the "paranormal," and who can blame them? But we're kind of stuck.

I have my own theories, but they aren't useful for scientific study. *shrug*


You're right. The ET hypothesis has hit a brick wall. The True Believers are blind to this but there are people who want to explore other hypotheses. Why not share yours?



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 04:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesearchfortruth
Here's a new development you might be interested in: Roswell Slides
Could of course be a hoax but we'll just have to wait and find out.

This case has me nostalgic for all the old Alien Autopsy hoopla from the 90s. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out, but I already feel that it, too, will hit a dead-end, just like everything else. I'm already getting the impression that they're going to try to show images of stereotypical grey aliens, when all the "witnesses" pretty much agree that the Roswell aliens were just small humanoids, not greys.

But I can wait to find out. Besides, all the big cases end up being time travel cases, anyway.



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 04:06 PM
link   
Found this listed on Yahoo today. Kind of interesting, some look like possibly they could have been UFOs in the past.

www.odometer.com.../28/0



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 04:07 PM
link   
If there's anything I've learned on ATS it's that posted videos are never worth watching.



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 04:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine
You're right. The ET hypothesis has hit a brick wall. The True Believers are blind to this but there are people who want to explore other hypotheses. Why not share yours?


I've mentioned it before, but in a nutshell, after half a century of interest in UFOs I've come to believe that real, honest-to-goodness UFOs (not hoaxes, or military, etc.) represent a piece of a larger reality we're just not smart enough to comprehend.

Reality varies according to intelligence. Are income taxes real? Of course. But try explaining them to your cat. We like to think that we're smart enough to have a handle on all of reality, but we are likely in the same position as the cat. We're smart, but how much smarter could we be? Maybe a lot, we don't know. So we see a UFO, and we interpret it as best we can using our limited intelligence, and we see a flying machine. We are familiar with machines, so that's how we see it. But that might not be what it is at all.

And this applies to other mysterious things, too. Like Bigfoot, or demons, or whatever.

Now, someday soon we'll create artificial intelligences that might be smarter than us, or might think differently than us, and they'll be able to look at these things and see them for what they really are. But for now, we're kind of stuck with our dumb animal brains, trying to make sense out of things as they pass through our limited range of perception.

I don't know how to turn this into a functional way to study UFOs, though. I'm not that smart.

edit on 5-3-2015 by Blue Shift because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue Shift

Very insightful. There's a Non-extraterrestrial UFO hypotheses thread going right now that might interest you.



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 04:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

Could you clear up a few things for me about MUFON?


Has MUFON ever conducted a scientific study and published it?

There has been a few research studies that were conducted in the past. Most of what they posted about it was published in their "MUFON Journal". Mostly what I did, and what was done is conduct data gathering. When "evidence" is collected out in the field it's suppose to be sent to a lab for analysis. These labs were suppose to be accredited colleges and professional labs for conducting research. Some of the information was collected was sent to these places, but some of it never made it there.

If so, what and where can I find it?

As I stated above MUFONs "MUFON Journal" was where most of the research was published, but (or rather BUT) MUFON also had people that would conduct scientific evaluations on collected evidence. This information is somewhere, but I don't know how to gain access to it.

Does MUFON include reports of paranormal experiences or exclude them as a matter of policy?

No it doesn't. By definition MUFON stands for Mutual Unconventional Flying Object Network. So something like Big Foot, or Shadow People wouldn't be included in their investigations unless there is a direct link to a sighting.

They have a mission statement on their website: (sorry I can't do the linky thingy)
From The MUFON home page:

I. Investigate UFO sightings and collect the data in the MUFON Database for use by researchers worldwide.
II. Promote research on UFOs to discover the true nature of the phenomenon, with an eye towards scientific breakthroughs, and improving life on our planet.
III. Educate the public on the UFO phenomenon and its potential impact on society.

How does MUFON decide which reports are legit and get included in their data base and which are not legit and don't get included or listed as not credible?

Well that's the fun part. As a Field Investigator my job was to go out to a sighting event, collect data (this includes first hand eye witness reports, pictures of the area, measurements if possible, soil samples if a landing was claimed), and make an assessment of the validity of the claim being made then file a report on my findings. If I found or believed it to be a HOAX them I would just report why I felt this, but on the other hand if I felt there may have been something experienced I would also include why I felt that too.

What I found as an investigator in my state were fellow investigators that were quick to judge something as an alien encounter, mishandle collected evidence if it provided proof of a HOAX, and a lack of impartial bias when conducting an interview of sighting witnesses. More then once I had my investigations tossed out because the State Director at the time didn't like the conclusion of my findings.

I hope that helps.



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

I used to have a lot of faith in MUFON and even went to a national convention in the nineties.

The last I paid attention was a few years ago when someone from MUFON investigated the Lake Erie lights and concluded they were simply aircraft approaching Cleveland Hopkins International airport. That had also been the previously determined consensus here on ATS.

The main proponent of the Lake Erie lights as alien craft is/was Michael Lee Hill who loudly denounced MUFON and the investigator as disinformation agents working with the alphabet agencies, blah, blah blah the usual...

However, shortly thereafter I saw he was one of the scheduled speakers at a MUFON regional convention in Pennsylvania so go figure. IMO Hill's story lines are as flakey as anything in Ufology (assuming he's still on the scene): Secret connections with the intelligence agencies; special emissary for the Anunnaki; claims he's the Maitreya and the illegitimate son of Eric Clapton; failed 2012 planet X predictions, drug use. I don't understand why anyone in MUFON would sign off on him as a featured speaker at any convention unless they're just about generating interest and attendance rather than rational investigation.
edit on 5-3-2015 by DelMarvel because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2015 @ 07:31 PM
link   
It's become boring, but maybe I've become disconnected. I'll eye up interesting story/report threads but leave the sensationalist ones alone - it's pretty obvious where 99% of them lead. It doesn't feel like there's been much of a UK UFO flap since 07-08. Around that time and thru to 2010 it felt for me it was leading somewhere, but sort of after that up to now it just feels like it's irrelevant. But perhaps that was what "they" intended. There were apparently messages that the time is up, I guess we just didn't accept them in time so they buggered off
The UFO "industry" keeps turning, look at that contact in the desert thing - I'd love to go, but as OP says the UFOlogy spectrum has been pretty freaking lame in the last few years, the actual real phenomena that is. There's been some good docus and occasional interesting topics. But IT itself... Yeah "what happened?" feels appropriate, and strangely so considering the decades of absolutely everything UFOlogy. All that said, I guess I can still well and truly be considered a "lurker". I mean, I want a UFO to jump out and scare the crap out of me still, no doubt about it. The real phenomena is definitely around just not lately for some reason.
edit on 5-3-2015 by markymint because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 07:57 AM
link   
Simply because it is encountered a serious bottle neck. For any serious research, the first thing is to set up assumptions and build concepts, in other words, to define WHAT. However, in the field so-called UFOLOGY, WHAT has not been established due to the lack of solid proof or detailed physical description, which makes it difficult to make further study such as WHO, WHY, HOW, WHERE, WHEN...or even deeper study such as social relations, biological relations, ...



posted on Mar, 6 2015 @ 09:19 AM
link   
Ufology has become boring if you still want exciting stories of aliens talking to the President of the USA, landing in remote areas and telling completely random people of how bad humanity is to the planet and each other, and crash landing their flimsy saucers to earth.

Now maybe Obama only speaks via sub-space radio to aliens these days. The alien 'missionaries' have given up convincing ordinary nobodies we are bad people and they finally trained better pilots and sorted out their craft so they crash less often. Although I doubt it!

I think we now live in times where we have the internet as a wonderful resource for sharing information rapidly. This means we no longer have to take a single point of view or news source on stories. There a multitude of websites and online radio shows now dedicated to the UFO topic and all offering varying points of view from outright de-bunkers to strong believers. Add to that a number of documents from the Cold War era have been de-classified and some countries have released their "UFO" files in their entirety.

Of course the new technologies we have available in wider society have also probably 'killed' stories like the Canadian crashed UFO tale recently or even the meteorite in Russia. 40 years ago these may have grown into crashed alien spacecraft stories but no longer. Imagine if a Roswell type crash happened today. You'd have news choppers swarming over the debris field and we'd probably see for ourselves if it was a Mogul balloon. A Lonnie Zamora type sighting of a strange craft would have been caught on his onboard camera with today's technology and the guys stomping round Rendlesham forest in 1980 would also have their own cameras these days capturing live video of their excursion off base.

So we have a mass of resources available but what it is tending to show is that a number of the classic cases many hold close to their heart as being proof of alien contact can be de-constructed. The results tending to show that many of these cases are not quite as robust as it once seemed and perhaps most UFOs are not alien spacecraft.

For people who invested so much in alien visitation, crashes and cosmic cover-ups then maybe the present state of Ufology is more disturbing than boring. But it seems we are also on the cusp of detecting life out in the galaxy and science now leads the way not Ufology.
edit on 6/3/15 by mirageman because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2015 @ 02:46 AM
link   
It is indisputable that the UFO (or UAP) phenomenon exists, and probably consists of several phenomena we do not yet understand. One of these phenomena is studied in Hessdalen – the ‘Hessdalen lights’.

The big question of course is: Among the thousands of UFO cases, is there at least one that unequivocally points to extraterrestrial visitation? The boring part is discussing the thousands of other cases and hoaxes.

The solution against this boredom: Get off the Internet, and start reading high quality literature on the subject. You cannot learn everything by surfing the web, sometimes you're better off investing your precious time in serious study of serious books.

You’ll find out that:
- The topic has been and still is being studied by a handful of scientists.
- Science actually predicts we should be visited (the Fermi Paradox).
- According to several scientists, cases exist for which the extraterrestrial hypothesis is the most logical one.
- For these kinds of unpredictable and transient events, collecting ‘extraordinary evidence’ is impossible.
- These events are very rare.
- There are no signs that ‘they’ want serious contact. So don’t expect any serious impact on society.

A good place to start is the Cometa report Cometa part 1 Cometa part 2
Another great source is the ‘free online books’ section on the NICAP site: Free online books The Symposium on UFO's, Ruppelt's book, the UFO evidence, books by McCambell and Haines - it's all there. Other good reads are the Condon report, Paul R. Hill's 'unconventional flying objects', and a recent book by Leslie Kean.

Here is a summary of the Cometa report by a French astronomer (with German subtitles):



posted on Mar, 7 2015 @ 08:42 AM
link   
The most exciting thing about Ufology for me is talking about hallucinations and then being called disinfo agent. That being pretty much a low point already, it all goes down hill from there. anti-ufology is much more exciting.



posted on Mar, 7 2015 @ 08:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Guest101
It is indisputable that the UFO (or UAP) phenomenon exists, and probably consists of several phenomena we do not yet understand....

The big question of course is: Among the thousands of UFO cases, is there at least one that unequivocally points to extraterrestrial visitation? The boring part is discussing the thousands of other cases and hoaxes.




Answer to first paragraph: Yes. Of course there is unidentified arial phenomena.

Answer to second paragraph: No. There's not an iota of testable evidence proving that extraterrestrials exist, visit earth and abduct people. The fact that, statistically, there is a high likelihood of life elsewhere in no way proves the latter.



posted on Mar, 7 2015 @ 11:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Guyfriday
a reply to: Tangerine

Could you clear up a few things for me about MUFON?


Has MUFON ever conducted a scientific study and published it?

There has been a few research studies that were conducted in the past. Most of what they posted about it was published in their "MUFON Journal". Mostly what I did, and what was done is conduct data gathering.


Why is 90% of MUFON's budget spent on their yearly MUFON Symposia and not actual investigations? According to their tax filings that's the case.



posted on Mar, 7 2015 @ 11:53 PM
link   
a reply to: JadeStar
I don't have an answer for that since I'm no longer with MUFON, nor was I ever in a position to know the financial dealing with them. Sorry.



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 04:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: Guyfriday
a reply to: Tangerine

Could you clear up a few things for me about MUFON?


Has MUFON ever conducted a scientific study and published it?

There has been a few research studies that were conducted in the past. Most of what they posted about it was published in their "MUFON Journal". Mostly what I did, and what was done is conduct data gathering.


Why is 90% of MUFON's budget spent on their yearly MUFON Symposia and not actual investigations? According to their tax filings that's the case.


I'm not affiliated with them, as you know, but if 90% of their budget is spent on their yearly symposia, it's probably because, despite their claims, they're clearly not conducting scientific research. They have an agenda and that agenda is to promote the extra-terrestrial hypothesis. There is no testable evidence they can use to back that agenda with hard science so they simply skip that step. They don't even gather reliable data that could be used by someone interested in using it in a meaningful way. I've talked to one of their field investigators who told me that, in her state, the state director decides (second-hand, no less) what is a credible report and what isn't. He's supposed to have this magical ability to tell whether someone is hoaxing or not. That, of course, completely skews the data making it useless for actual scientific study.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join