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.

 

Question about UFO Community Experts

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 09:05 AM
link   
While I have been interested in the UFO phenomenon for several years, and have read several books and articles; one thing that I am not very well versed in is the relationships among the various 'experts' that have more or less risen to the top of this 'food chain'.

To me, it sometimes seems that many of the UFO experts have lately become experts in the art of the 'circular firing squad' technique. I can't help but wonder if they (and us, too) spend more time shooting at each other than in trying to work together.

Anyway, just curious what the thoughts of the ATS community were about this. Has it always been like this, or is it getting worse?


Thank you in advance.




posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 09:49 AM
link   
My first rule - if they try to sell the truth, they're fraudulent. Knowledge, especially in the field we're talking about, should be free.
Why they're shooting at each other ? Because there's a limited amount of money and everyone wants the biggest piece of the cake. Why we here shoot at each other ? Little more difficult, i would guess, that the "truth" is a rather monotheistic thing and there can't be two different truths, but mostly it borders on the believer vs sceptic vs "there's nothing out there"
I bet, if we all would pull on the same rope, the community would be far more powerful (jeez... imagine 500000 people openly demanding to know, what the government knows, imagine a "truth march"), but unfortunately, we're just human



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 09:56 AM
link   
Judge yourself.
UFO hall of fame
Vs
UFO hall of shame

You know what to do when someone is selling you a winner lottery ticket for few cents.



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Anyway, just curious what the thoughts of the ATS community were about this. Has it always been like this, or is it getting worse?


It's always been like this. Many UFOlogists see each other as "competition" instead of colleagues... It's unfortunate, but it is what it is.

It only gets "worse" when ETs are really in the spotlight in the press for any given reason...which only then further adds to the disrespect of the field.



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Txhunter67
Has it always been like this, or is it getting worse?


Hi Txhunter67,

It has always been like this.

If you read UFO newsletters from the 1950s and 1960s, you'll find exactly the same sort of sniping, conflicts and competition between UFO researchers/groups.

For example, NICAP and APRO had very poor relations for much of their history - partly due to differences in their views as to what UFO groups should be doing (i.e. concentrating on lobbying government versus concentrating on doing research/investigations) and the evidence that is worth looking into (e.g. whether reports involving UFO occupants should be ignored).

MUFON and APRO similarly had, um, difficulties (which the uncharitable might suggest was mainly due to MUFON taking researchers and members away from APRO).

If anything, I think co-operation (or at least dialogue) between leading researchers if probably BETTER now than in previous decades. Of course, the conflicts tend to generate quite a bit of discussion...

All the best,

Isaac Koi

[edit on 2-8-2007 by IsaacKoi]



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phil J. Fry
My first rule - if they try to sell the truth, they're fraudulent. Knowledge, especially in the field we're talking about, should be free.


Sorry, Phil, I have to disagree. Under your theory, all text books, science books, history, and alot of other books would be fraudulent. You may think knowledge should be free, but the people who write these books need to eat, too. As a publisher of a magazine and a writer, I can tell you that I do charge a yearly subscription rate. It's not a very high fee, but I do charge a fee. Under your theory, I shouldn't be charging anything. But then, how do I pay my writers, artists, other contributors, the web designer/maintainer, and I also have to have money to do research, i.e. travel, phone interviews, some books and after it's all done, even with charging a small fee, I'm still in the hole financially and have to kick in some of my own money from time to time. It's a labor of love for me, but my staff has to eat and pay rent, what are they supposed to do if they aren't paid?
I have spent my entire life reading and researching, should I just give my experience away for free? Should Stephen Gould or Stephen Hawking give away the knowledge that they have worked so hard to acquire?
UFO research and publishing costs money. Whatever career you've spent your life working on, would you be willing to give away for free?
Just some thoughts.
There are many wonderful and brilliant researchers out there. Jacque Vallee is one, he's a friend of mine and he charges for the books he writes. He's a very fine person and a true gentleman; definitely not a fraud. Just an example.



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 12:10 PM
link   
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind, the information should be free. In a perfect world, money should not be a factor.

I should be given a personal transportation device of my chosing. My home should be new and clean all of the time. Where can I move to have this type of luxury?

Lets face reality, it costs money to live on this rock in a manner that suits you. Who will give it to you for free? Who wants to work for free? OK, go live in Africa then, with those people who have nothing. Is that what you want?

Yes, people should do things for other people out of kindness, and share the wealth. If you consider where it came from, and how much you can take with you when you die, it should be a no-brainer.



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 12:17 PM
link   
I hate to say it, but there is also 360 degrees of 'circular firing squad' tactics in some mainstream research fields. When it is a field with a limited set of a data and a lot of people trying to own turf, it gets ugly. Human nature, I'm afraid. It would be better if we could reduce that aspect of culture, but it won't be going anywhere anytime soon.



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 01:26 PM
link   
Txhunter67

Those who know something true are watched carefully and discredited personally and professionally to the masses of people who believe "something" about the alien races visiting Earth but do not know what that something should be. The leading governments know very little about the alien races, and what they are really hiding so desperately is their own corrupt operations, and they do not want any civilians learning and publicly sharing anything from the alien races. If a person tells great big interesting lies, he's not only left free to speak, he is assisted to rise in controversy and popularity to lead public opinion.

It may seem to some that all the figures leading the UFO field are firing at one another, but really some are attacking in order to control mass information and opinion, and some are just defending their own truth and experience, their right to pursue the truth and their right to share it openly with others. If all the various conflicting information looks like the same animal to you, then the goal of all the fighting is working on you, and that is why you can't tell who is attacking and who is defending.

The alien races are real, but the UFO field is all made up about them. The goal of the massive governmental disinformation campaign is to create the UFO field to be your diversion from the truth. So it's imperative to the education and very survival of humanity that individuals who learn the truth about universal life for themselves will publish their material for wide availability.

The truth has to be heard and considered by you first, before it can ever be believed or proven to you.



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 01:51 PM
link   
Thanks to every one of you above for taking the time to post some very interesting thoughts and theories.

I especially found the discussion about the UFO groups with different agendas (research -vs- lobbying) to be enlightening. I was not aware that there was a lot of disagreement here. I would hope that some day people who are experts at research, as well as those who are experts at lobbying the byzantine alleyways of world governments, could form their own groups and let everyone do what they do best.

Again....Thank you! I learn so much here at ATS because of the time that members take to post intelligent theories, thoughts...as well as informant links.



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 02:47 AM
link   
Yes, it essentially has been like this. But in the UFO: Hall of Fame some people do not belong. It is not Art Bell's job to judge whether one person is better than the other person. That is up to the audience, afterall some of us here late at night, need some comedy, and have to laugh sometimes about all the debate that has been going on for years, and years, and years.

Yes, Dr. Hynek belongs in the UFO: Hall of Fame because he tried to make it a viable subject, then came along Vallee and all the skeptics to bring up weather phenomenum and all the other theories.

Why is all of this needed in the first place? Because there are the questions one has to ask about any such UFO case unless an UFO hits someone in the head and there is direct evidence.

Just the fact that mainly there is some good photos and good UFO cases does not negate the subject. Yes, some people like to tie up another person's time making the subject what it is and in those cases less credible, but how much is concerned that it is some sort of conspiracy then, and all the related subjects bound to come up about any of the UFO field.

You even have scientists that will not agree on anything, so why should anyone in the UFO field agree on anything or be better than one or the other.

It still probably would be a debate even if a person had any real proof and any real subtance that could be used. Simply put, those people who have fears would fight it and not be too keen to accept it. UFO study is a state of mind and of heart and of brain.



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by AmoebaSized
Yes, Dr. Hynek belongs in the UFO: Hall of Fame because he tried to make it a viable subject, then came along Vallee and all the skeptics to bring up weather phenomenum and all the other theories.


Don't know where you got your info on Jacques Vallee, but he is anything but a skeptic. Jacques is considered a first-rate UFOlogist. He's written alot of books on the subject. Do some research before you make false claims and mislead people.



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 02:18 PM
link   
The least skeptical people of the fact that the alien races are real are those who have their own experiences with alien life.

The most skeptical people of the information coming out of the UFO field are also those who have their own experiences with alien life.

I think that any intelligent person who has a rational grasp of evidence, science, space, evolution, and the prejudice of leadership and human gossip, even if he doesn't experience alien life himself, should still be able to see the vast difference between the visiting races and the nature of the human's UFO field.

Maybe Vallee knows for himself that there is nothing ridiculous about alien visitation, and everything ridiculous about how the silly humans are handling it.



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 02:51 PM
link   
I'd definitely rank Dr. Vallee' up there with Dr. Hynek...


Not sure if you know, but one thing Vallee' can claim, is that unlike Al Gore, Dr. Vallee' CAN take some credit for inventing the internet, hehe...(his PhD is also in Computer Science I believe, he was a former ARPANET guy)...so like Hynek, he's been on the other side of the fence....



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 03:35 PM
link   
Okay, it was years ago. I meant Phillip Klass. Vallee I did not read all that much anyway if any. So what if a character like him is used for a movie like "Close Encounters of the Third Kind", it still makes the subject of UFO's a human emotion also, plus all the rest of the discussion going on about it. But somewhere maybe I read or heard that Vallee was more critical about what was going on, but like I stated, that was years ago.

Afterall I did amateur astronomy for at least 10 years and still never see anything here in this location in the Middle of the Country.



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by AmoebaSized
Okay, it was years ago. I meant Phillip Klass. Vallee I did not read all that much anyway if any. So what if a character like him is used for a movie like "Close Encounters of the Third Kind", it still makes the subject of UFO's a human emotion also, plus all the rest of the discussion going on about it. But somewhere maybe I read or heard that Vallee was more critical about what was going on, but like I stated, that was years ago.

Afterall I did amateur astronomy for at least 10 years and still never see anything here in this location in the Middle of the Country.


AS, please, don't try to impune Jacque's work. He's an astronomer, computer scientist and UFOlogist. I've known him for a number of years, and he's the most brilliant, gentlemanly scholar anyone would be fortunate to meet.
He has worked very hard to maintain an objective, open-minded view as is possible.
You obviously know nothing of his work and he doesn't deserve your harsh and ignorant criticism. He has some of the highest integrity of anyone I've ever met.

Please, stop and think before you begin to spout uninformed opinions and possibly ruin people's good reputations.
THank you,
FL



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join