It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Paddyofurniture
PS. Not to pry but, is there any correlation of Project Phoenix and the To The Stars program. Both being released within a few days of each other ( TTS info dump ) and I see that Hal Puthoff endorsed your project statement.
Jim Oberg wrote this article about the problems with UFOlogy and a lot of it is as valid today as it was 38 years ago. He acknowledges there are some "serious UFOlogists" and even though he is part time I'd say Isaac Koi's interest in the subject seems serious:
originally posted by: shawmanfromny
A quick question....where are all the sceptics and debunkers, who like to imply that all people interested in the UFO phenomenon are "gullible" and "stupid?"
The suspicion with which modern "establishment science" regards the UFO movement appears to be more closely connected with some disturbing characteristics of "ufology" itself. Although many negative feelings have, no doubt, been aroused by the crackpot aura with which the flying saucer movement has long been associated -- despite the best efforts of a few serious ufologists -- other criticism has been leveled at the very philosophical foundations of ufology. The inability of ufological theorists to come to grips with these objections represents the most serious roadblock to the acceptance of ufology as a legitimate branch of modern science.
The criticisms are essentially these: ufology allegedly refuses to play by the rules of scientific thought, demanding instead special exemptions from time-tested procedures of data verification, theory testing, and the burden of proof.
So, with access to all this documentation, maybe we can finally find evidence which will stand up to scientific scrutiny. We have evidence some cases are unexplained, but unexplained means unexplained. I think the insinuations of naïveté result from the inference by some, maybe even many UFOlogists that "unexplained" means more than unexplained, but that doesn't apply to all UFOlogists, and not to Isaac Koi.
Where is the "ufology" movement likely to be after another 30 years? Perhaps new evidence will finally appear which can stand up to scientific scrutiny. Perhaps self-styled ufologists will establish truly scientific standards of evidence, will accept the burden of proof, will produce "falsifiable" theories, and will seek to formulate their science on positive rather than negative logic. Perhaps something significant will come out of this after all.