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.

 

The Decline of Ufology: Decades of Fraud, Frustration and Failure?

page: 10
55
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 12:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: fleabit
What exactly is “concrete proof” of alien visitation? A spacecraft landing on the lawn of a prominent world leader? An alien body on a slab? A fully functional spaceship that crashed and was recovered and then revealed to the public? A full 3 hour video in HD of a sighting?

I suppose if you are expecting that, and only that, as proof, then sure, there has been no “concrete proof” in your world. But personally I feel there has been plenty of proof. It’s a pity that so much eyewitness testimony is disregarded out of hand.

If there really are/were aliens, saucers and visitations, their technology must be incredible, to have left no physical traces or clearly recorded passage.
It belies rational belief to think that material craft are visiting our world with any regularity without being observed / recorded by the huge and growing number of cameras, satellites, radar nets, etc.
I am more and more inclined to agree with what John Keel suggested in 'Mothman Prophecies'; that some force or group is interfering with us. In the old days we had dragons and fairies and magic. Mid 20th-century saw saucers and martians. Presumably we will soon see some new e-phenomena.
Keel referred to 'The crew that never rest', someone or something seeming to take delight in tormenting the human race. Maybe the ancients had it right after all. Demons?




posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: FireMoon




Mirage you see there you use a term which is wholly incorrect and yet it is used by others time and time again as if it's true. There never was or is now a "Stealth Fighter",


Well err maybe in a purely technical sense. But even the USAF use the terms Stealth Fighter. So misnomer that it maybe I think everyone knows what we mean by Stealth Fighter.

As for the rest of it you are indeed correct about a downed Stealth "Bomber" in Serbia.





The Americans special forces even failed to clean up the mess there before the locals got to it.




....I would go so far as to suggest that, there's a credible case to be made that whatever crashed at Roswell in 1947 was taken back and the USA could do nothing about it at all


Now you're talking! Please let us know more on this theory.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 03:14 PM
link   
a reply to: JimOberg

Thanks for dropping by, Jim.

Have your opinions on Ufology changed at all since writing the article linked in the opening post from 1977?

“The Failure of the Science of Ufology” - James Oberg, New Scientist Magazine Oct 1979”



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 03:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jonjonj
a reply to: mirageman

Look, we can run around all our lives arguing but the fact is that the UFO phenomena is worthy of detailed study by unbiased researchers and there is a concerted effort on the part of governments and the media, through disregard and ridicule, so that this doesn't happen.
The rest is just semantics and agenda push.


Well I think we both agree on the point highlighted but doesn't that illustrate where Ufology falls down? Organisations like MUFON are surely there to provide this analysis (although having seen Hangar One I am not sure they are unbiased). What have they really achieved in all their years of existence?

In defence of Ufology the main problem is that trying to study a UFO event is a very low probability/high cost ratio in terms of capturing meaningful data with any degree of sophistication.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 03:57 PM
link   
a reply to: works4dhs



I am more and more inclined to agree with what John Keel suggested in 'Mothman Prophecies'; that some force or group is interfering with us. In the old days we had dragons and fairies and magic. Mid 20th-century saw saucers and martians. Presumably we will soon see some new e-phenomena.


Maybe you are right? The thing is...where does that leave anyone? How can anyone pursue a hypothesis that there's 'some force or group' interfering with us? For the record, Keel discarded those ideas and said he'd made them up to stir controversy. Jacques Vallee, on the other hand, has published very similar speculations with his 'control system.' Hynek also went down that path in the late 70s with the 'metaterrestrials.'




Demons?


To paraphrase Vallee, 'If it's as simple as 'demons,' I'll be very disappointed.'



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 06:11 PM
link   
The UFO field is too watered down and saturated now. That is a problem in itself and in my opinion, its the biggest reason for the overall decline. There are simply too many voices in the field now and there are dozens upon dozens of different types of hypothesis. Also, the field has become full of hoaxers and tricksters now more than ever before. Has anyone noticed a decline in UFO books? I have. You can only rehash thing so many times before enough is enough.

The entire field is played out now. There is nothing interesting coming out of it anymore and when something does, its a hoax. Hoaxes and people forcing the issue tend to happen when something gets toward the end of its rope. People are trying to manufacture interest in the subject again, but they are going about it with hoaxes and lies. All that does, is drive more nails into the proverbial coffin.
edit on 29-10-2015 by Bloodydagger because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 09:26 PM
link   
a reply to: FireMoon


Plus, people simply do not report what they see as often as they did in the past. In the last decade I have had several cases reported me by people that, in the last 3-4 decades of the 20th century would have been "classic cases" the sort referred to time and time again in various books about the subject. When I asked why they didn't report these sightings the answer was either, "Who to and what for? or; "Well, I just assumed it was some secret tech of ours".


I think it has always been a problem(why put up with the ridicule unless you know you have iron clad proof), but more so now. Even when reported to orgs like MUFON, most encounters are over fairly quick and hard to substantiate.

But even so, what if everyone on this forum was convinced of the ET option(as they should be !), what then? If someone like Podesta cant secure what the govt knows(and maybe they dont know much more than we do), I just dont see finding out whats really going on anytime soon.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 10:35 PM
link   
UFOlogy is not dead. Saying so makes you seem above it all.

There are scores of us who look forward to the discovery one day of what lies beyond our little blue world.

I think there has been enough evidence (although not scientific) for us to believe there is life beyond our planet. 50 years is a blink of an eye---not long enough to have the sort of evidence you're looking for. The evidence available reflects the infancy of the topic.

It will evolve in its own time, in its own right.

Don't forget its likely the information is being suppressed, which certainly dosen't bode well for the evolution of the subject.

But ufology is not dead.

It's barely a second old in universal time.



posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 12:30 AM
link   
I know lots of people including FAA officials, former Army intelligence officers and one Air force office of special investigations officer, who have seen non human technology land on air port runways, fly next to aircraft in a dangerous manner, shoot objects at a police helicopter, leave radiation traces on said runways, and plenty of other eye popping shenanigans.

They just claimed it was "non human" which is just a guess, but then the question of what human would put aircraft in danger like they have, or in the famous lake Michigan case (which debunkers claim simply didn't happen), caused the death of a fighter pilot. (Actually they never found a single trace of the pilot, or the aircraft to this day). He was scrambled and vectored to the odd radar trace, and when he got close to it, the radar image showed two blips becoming one, and then just one, and that one sheered off fast from the scope never to be seen again.

Some officials say it isn't humans doing it, nor is it technology anyone on Earth can manufacture.
Next is the problem of proof. But proof for whom? The dead pilot, or those mentioned above who were witnesses of these craft and the damages and traces left behind? Or the friends of those who swear on their life these things happened?

No, the proof is needed for those who are too ignorant to fathom these realities, or too afraid to face a reality where they live on a planet where nobody is 100% safe from a totally unknown foe. A foe that has claimed thousands of lives, and in one case a commercial airplane that was hit midair and crashed killing all people aboard.

The media demands proof, and the ignorant demand proof because they have never witnessed anything like these cases happening before. Why is it important that the ignorant be made to know reality? Are they so special that until they are made to know what is happening, will mankind's progress be halted?

I say let the world continue, and just ignore the fools who can't even do a day's research themselves, just to find out that the world of UFOlogy passed them by years ago and they are still left asking to see one case where there is solid evidence. This even though solid evidence has been documented a hundred times over and is available in the public domain, and has been for many years.
There is no need to provide anyone with proof of anything, because if you have to ask for proof, then your just not savvy enough to see it when it crosses right under your nose.

The OP has a good point, but is only a point that those who aren't capable of understanding the very world around them, see as a valid point.
Those who have seen for themselves, and trust those individuals who tell their stories and personal encounters, and have the aptitude to understand and synthesize the information into a proper prospective, can see what it means. Those who can't, are here today full of arrogance and dishonesty, and a continuing unwillingness to research anything themselves, and are standing ready to ridicule those who have done their own homework, and while doing this, are compiling this with the pretense that nothing of any evidential nature even exists.

And while they spit and holler the opposite, we who already know that other people are here, and have been coming here for varying purposes, some good and some bad, for many thousands of years, will just know what we know, and no longer have any need to inform those who don't observe the normal rules of self education.

Why bother?

It would be much easier to say "I just don't know, and I don't want to"
And those who do know, can just sit back and watch the ones who are never going to know, fight amongst themselves.

Many of those who have never seen a big fat nutty flying saucer zipping too and fro will mistake their own lack of personal experience, for non existence, and we certainly see a ton of that here on ATS. Usually its the ones who think highly of themselves claiming a high degree of scientific pedigree and participation. I suppose that at least offers some degree of comfort in exchange for being completely ignorant of the reality of Alien visitation.



posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 01:43 AM
link   
a reply to: mirageman

"Ufology has morphed into an entertainment industry."


So has the mainstream news media, and with far less an excuse. 'Ufology' is a too-big word for what has largely been the widespread efforts of unfunded citizen researchers around the planet attempting to fill the hole left open by government secrecy and suppression of information about ufos. Sixty-five years' worth of serious, dedicated investigations by these citizen researchers has not disappeared nor has such effort ceased. There would be no record of modern ufo history were it not for the work of those individuals. It is popular culture, the internet, and the increasing dumbing-down of the American public that has trivialized the ufo subject in our time [and most everything else], leaving a younger generation that has not read 2 percent of ufo history and research with a feeling of frustration and resentment that they can only resolve by doing their homework in this and other fields of learning.



posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 02:29 AM
link   
a reply to: anton74

"Your post is what the OP is talking about. Ufology is no longer about objectivity. Science left the building years ago."

Science was never *in* the building -- not public science, research intended for public consumption. Plenty of government and military-industrial science, though, hidden away in black projects and not reporting out to the public. Academic scientists cannot obtain government research grants to pursue ufo research, cannot get their papers published, cannot achieve tenure and remain employed by universities. This has not happened by accident.

Nevertheless some scientists have pursued the ufo subject and relied on the decades of ufo research accomplished by competent and serious citizen researchers. Look up Peter Sturrock and James McDonald for example.

It's absurd to say that ufo research is 'dying'. Only people who have not read it (and it takes years) can confuse the history of serious ufo research with forums and chat sites on the internet.


edit on 30-10-2015 by Constance because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-10-2015 by Constance because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-10-2015 by Constance because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 02:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Constance



...the hole left open by government secrecy and suppression of information about ufos.


,..is there because "there is no there, there".

There are no aliens.

What's being suppressed is a natural phenomenon that drives human creativity and production.

It creates a strange loop that provides this feeling of getting closer to the "otherworldly", while only really bringing the "researcher" closer to the world and nature.

Simple as that.

Ta da.




posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 02:55 AM
link   
a reply to: mirageman

"I made those ludicrous suggestions because I needed to highlight that expecting others to prove something that is unproven in itself is not how Scientific burden of proof works."

The scientific burden of proof is on scientists, don'tcha think? Take your complaints to the universities that won't support ufo research in their science departments, to the federal agencies that fund the majority of academic science projects, and to the government that hides its own ufo research where ordinary people can't get to it. That's as true in the UK as it is in the US, btw.



posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 04:01 AM
link   
It's true that Ufology is a frustrating subject. Whilst I accept that no single piece of solid evidence exists of alien visitation, I remain puzzled that there are so many reports of what appear to be solid flying objects that are difficult to dismiss in their entirety as man made secret technology or hoaxes. There just seem to be too many of these for this to be true. I do think that probably 95% of observations of "lights in the sky" can probably be explained as misidentifications of stars/planets/aircraft/satellites, particularly if they do not make any obvious and unusual movements. It's just those "nuts and bolts" ones that keep me wondering....



posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 04:09 AM
link   
Reply to Bybyots

" "there is no there, there".

There are no aliens.

What's being suppressed is a natural phenomenon that drives human creativity and production.

It creates a strange loop that provides this feeling of getting closer to the "otherworldly", while only really bringing the "researcher" closer to the world and nature."

If it makes you happy to think so, I won't try to change your mind.




posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 04:37 AM
link   
The "burden of proof" argument has been used a few times in this discussion.



In science, the burden of proof falls upon the claimant; and the more extraordinary a claim, the heavier is the burden of proof demanded. The true skeptic takes an agnostic position, one that says the claim is not proved rather than disproved.


The ‘burden of proof’ applies to any claim, which is something that sceptics who present ‘explanations’ for UFO sightings often seem to forget.



Critics who assert negative claims, but who mistakenly call themselves "skeptics," often act as though they have no burden of proof placed on them at all, though such a stance would be appropriate only for the agnostic or true skeptic.



in far too many instances, the critic who makes a merely plausible argument for an artifact closes the door on future research when proper science demands that his hypothesis of an artifact should also be tested. Alas, most critics seem happy to sit in their armchairs producing post hoc counter-explanations.



Both critics and proponents need to learn to think of adjudication in science as more like that found in the law courts, imperfect and with varying degrees of proof and evidence. Absolute truth, like absolute justice, is seldom obtainable. We can only do our best to approximate them.


These quotes are from Professor Marcello Truzzi, (1935-2003) founding co-chairman of CSICOP, the skeptical Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal.

Source: www.ufoskeptic.org...



posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: works4dhs

originally posted by: fleabit
What exactly is “concrete proof” of alien visitation? A spacecraft landing on the lawn of a prominent world leader? An alien body on a slab? A fully functional spaceship that crashed and was recovered and then revealed to the public? A full 3 hour video in HD of a sighting?

I suppose if you are expecting that, and only that, as proof, then sure, there has been no “concrete proof” in your world. But personally I feel there has been plenty of proof. It’s a pity that so much eyewitness testimony is disregarded out of hand.

If there really are/were aliens, saucers and visitations, their technology must be incredible, to have left no physical traces or clearly recorded passage.
It belies rational belief to think that material craft are visiting our world with any regularity without being observed / recorded by the huge and growing number of cameras, satellites, radar nets, etc.
I am more and more inclined to agree with what John Keel suggested in 'Mothman Prophecies'; that some force or group is interfering with us. In the old days we had dragons and fairies and magic. Mid 20th-century saw saucers and martians. Presumably we will soon see some new e-phenomena.
Keel referred to 'The crew that never rest', someone or something seeming to take delight in tormenting the human race. Maybe the ancients had it right after all. Demons?
If, big if, if aliens got here they're pretty smart, they have some kind of technology that allows faster than light travel, or connecting wormholes, or basically some kind of tech we haven't thought of. I can believe then they also mastered stealth tech which even us humans have begun using. Some sort of cloaking device. In fact I doubt they'd have any lights on their UFOs that would be seen at night, that'd be something newb aliens might do at first but they'd figure out we use light to see things quick I bet.



posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 12:57 PM
link   
There is so much rubbish out there when it comes to this subject, which is a shame because there are enough cases out there that are completely unexplained and need further investigation.

Footage and photos you see now, I am not interested because anything can be faked now.

But don't be mistaken. Get rid of all the crap, and there is a real mystery here that can't be explained.



posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 04:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Guest101

"These quotes are from Professor Marcello Truzzi, (1935-2003) founding co-chairman of CSICOP, the skeptical Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal.

Source: www.ufoskeptic.org..."


An excellent and timely citation, Guest. Anyone coming into the discussion of ufos and ufo research here and elsewhere online needs to read Truzzi's and others' contributions to Bernard Haisch's ufoskeptic site.



posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: HorusChrist

"If, big if, if aliens got here they're pretty smart, they have some kind of technology that allows faster than light travel, or connecting wormholes, or basically some kind of tech we haven't thought of. I can believe then they also mastered stealth tech which even us humans have begun using. Some sort of cloaking device. In fact I doubt they'd have any lights on their UFOs that would be seen at night, that'd be something newb aliens might do at first but they'd figure out we use light to see things quick I bet."

Yes. From what witnesses in the air and on the ground and at sea have seen, it's apparent that whatever species are behind ufo phenomena have a profoundly deeper understanding of the physics of nature than we do and have developed technologies far beyond our own to work with and against forces and fields in nature.

Re the intensity of light phenomena produced by ufos, it might be that all of it can be masked by some form of advanced 'stealth' technology, but it's clear in the ufo history that often the light has not been masked or blocked. Its frequently blinding intensity suggests that it might not be possible for any highly evolved species to consistently block it. It's also possible that it is the intention of some species approaching earth closely to make it impossible for us to ignore their proximity to us and our planet, thus forcing us to contemplate and investigate its meaning. The hypothesis that makes the most sense for me is that the sudden manifestations of waves of visible ufos during and after WWII is connected to our development of and use of atomic and nuclear weapons having the potential to destroy life on this planet.




top topics



 
55
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join