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.

 

Has MUFON Investigators switched to the Debunker List?

page: 2
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 2 2009 @ 12:38 PM
link   
having looked at bigelows NIDS " investigation " of the alleged ` skin walker ranch `, i have very low expectayions of this new development




posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 


You said in nicer terms than I would have for I see organizations such as MUFON to be dinosaurs soon to be extinct. What does MUFON achieve with its existence? When you really think about it and not let emotions rule your thought, nothing is achieved. When MUFON and all of the other organizations that are no longer in existence came into being, UFOs were dominating the thoughts of earthlings because we had gone from the age of Adamski with his unbelievable tales to more humans coming forth with better tales, tales that did not rely on inventing occupants. People were looking up more and seeing what was being missed.

So everytime that someone claimed they had a sighting, bam! there go the field researchers. It was new. It was exciting especially as fame started to overtake what was a boring situation: you travel to a location, you interview witnesses, you file a report and you move on to the next witness. That's all that happened!

And what did it result in? Nothing but lots of file cabinets being stuffed with paper along with some photos and films. Has anything changed? Yes, less paper and films and more hard drives being stuffed with reports! Along with digital photos and videos.

Has any of this activity resulted in knowing more about UFOs? Not a shred.

Why should organizations such as MUFON continue to exist? It's more of camaraderie than anything else. You either belong to an organization that has annual "parties" or you stay an individual and you come to forums such as this one without getting personally involved with the other members but at the same time sharing thoughts.


[edit on 3-10-2009 by Skeptical Ed]



posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by jkrog08It seems that people, while many believe in ETs, just do not feel it worth while chasing a 'ghost', which is exactly what it seems we all are chasing at the moment--


Hmmmm you know your right
All we do here is chase ghosts and argue about the existence of ghosts... endlessly like a broken record. Each new video posted we descend like spiders to the bait... either to tear it to shreds or hope that this one is it.

It's gotten so bad I have memorized most of the first responses


Maybe its time to shut off the computer and go outside and see if the real world is still out there
I have that wood stove to install, some unattended chores put on the shelf chasing ghosts...


So there are on such thing as ghosts, or aliens or fill in the blank "___________" Now you can all go back to living a real life rather than wasting away in a small dark den hunting ghosts



posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 02:44 AM
link   
This is great news. Any time someone decides to apply more science and critical thinking to their field, it helps. Well, unless the critical thinking and logic is what finally debunks their field... *cough*

Also, I've noticed this all over these boards, but when did 'debunk' become a bad word?



posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 04:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skeptical Ed
You said in nicer terms than I would have for I see organizations such as MUFON to be dinosaurs soon to be extinct..

Has any of this activity resulted in knowing more about UFOs? Not a shred.


Ed have you ever actualy read some of the evidence collated by organisations such as NICAP?

www.nicap.org...
www.nicap.org...
www.nicap.org...
www.nicap.org...
www.nicap.org...
www.nicap.org...
www.nicap.org...
www.nicap.org...
www.nicap.org...



posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 04:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by EsSeeEye
Also, I've noticed this all over these boards, but when did 'debunk' become a bad word?


I'm all for impartial,objective analysis of unexplained incidents but it seems this is becoming a rarer commodity by the day - instead of which we usualy just have close minded cynics noisly shoehorning their own preconceived ideas onto events -irrespective of any facts that might get in their way (either that or they just wilfully ignore it).


Handy defintion:


Open minded sceptics

*Has honest doubt and questions all beliefs, including their own

*Seeks the truth, considers it the highest aim

*Seeks open inquiry and investigation of both sides

*Is nonjudgmental, doesn't jump to rash conclusions

*Weighs evidence on all sides

*Asks exploratory questions about new things to try to understand them

*Acknowledges valid convincing evidence

*Possesses solid sharp common sense

*Is able to adapt and update their paradigms to new evidence



Close minded cynics

*Automatically dismisses and denies all claims that contradict materialism and orthodoxy

*Is not interested in truth, evidence or facts, only in defending orthodoxy and the status quo

*Ignores anything that doesn't fit their a priori beliefs and assumptions

*Scoffs and ridicules their targets instead of providing solid arguments and giving honest consideration

*Has a know-it-all-attitude, never asks questions about things they don't understand, never admits that they don't know something

*Insists that everything unknown and unexplained must have a conventional materialistic explanation

*Is judgmental and quick to draw conclusions about things they know little or nothing about

*Uses semantics and word games with their own rules of logic to try to win arguments

*Is unable to adapt and update their paradigms to new evidence



posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 08:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by free_spirit
Now Carrion continues to turn himself and MUFON against certain websites who are questioning his methods based in those reasons you correctly wrote in this thread, this is a fact.


And what "certain websites" are those?

I'm curious.



posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mark Easter MUFON PR
I would like to start by introducing myself.

My name is Mark Easter and I am the International Director of Public Relations for The Mutual UFO Network. (MUFON)



Hi Mark - can you shed any light onto this incident?


MUFON Report Censored:

We were invited to participate as lecturer in the MUFON UFO Symposium held on the days 2, 3 and 4 of July of 1993, in Richmond, Virginia, USA In our lecture we informed on the UFO situation in Puerto Rico, but we also lectured, on certain facts pertaining to the UFO situation in El Yunque, a series of encounters with alien beings and our suspicion, due to certain facts, of the possibility that the U.S. Government kept flying saucer type crafts there, we also expressed ourselves on the possibility of there being official U.S. / alien contact in a site close to the rain forest: Roosevelt Roads U.S. Naval Station.
Right after we sent our paper on all this to Mr. Walt Andrus, general director of MUFON, for it to be published in the Symposium's Proceedings Book ,a strange set of events started happening. Apparently, the content of the paper touched a sensitive nerve somewhere and "someone" seemed to be very alarmed by it.
But more interestingly, that same "someone" seemed to connected MUFON's higher levels.

www.iraap.org...

From thread:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Cheers.



posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by karl 12

Originally posted by Skeptical Ed
You said in nicer terms than I would have for I see organizations such as MUFON to be dinosaurs soon to be extinct..

Has any of this activity resulted in knowing more about UFOs? Not a shred.


Ed have you ever actualy read some of the evidence collated by organisations such as NICAP?

www.nicap.org...
www.nicap.org...
www.nicap.org...
www.nicap.org...
www.nicap.org...
www.nicap.org...
www.nicap.org...
www.nicap.org...
www.nicap.org...


I've been questioning everything about Eddie here for a few days now.

He makes himself out to be this serious researcher who has been doing this for years. Since the 1960's I think he's said, but last night he wouldn't even watch some videos that someone else had shown him. Now if he was the serious researcher like he makes himself out to be, he would have watched some of the videos and not use the excuse that they were too long or had some questionable people in them. The content or length wouldn't matter. A serious researcher would have at least made a serious effort to watch them. I think he said (and I could be wrong) that he stopped after 10 minutes. I know there were 55 videos, but nobody said he had to sit and watch all of them in one sitting. He couldn't even make it through the first one.


There's also his "compelling evidence" he apparently has. Says he has great, convincing evidence in both images and video. Would love to put it up on ATS if he only knew how. Says he e-mailed ATS last year for help and never got a response. I'm calling BS on that one. He's been sent a U2U by another member here explaining how to upload images and videos and I also posted a link to the ATS tutorial video last night in a thread. He's been ignoring anyone who has tried to help him with that.

About claims of evidence. He tells people who say they've had sightings to post evidence to prove it, but when it comes to his sightings he talks about it as if his word alone is enough proof, then starts talking about how he doesn't know how to upload stuff or he'd show it.

I've also noticed that most of the stuff he's tried debunking, is older stuff that's already been debunked.

Contradicts himself all the time. Demands evidence of sightings and stuff from other members, but when it comes to his he doesn't need to show evidence, words alone are proof enough. The guy isn't a serious researcher at all.

I apologize for the small rant, but had to get it off my chest. If it were me or anyone else acting the way he has on here, claiming he's debunked stuff that he hasn't and demanding proof when he won't even show his, people would be coming after us and for some reason people are taking this guy seriously.

[edit on 3-10-2009 by nightmare_david]



posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 03:21 PM
link   
I agree that MUFON should er on the skeptical side. Not only hoaxes, but those who are too believe-y (gullible) put ufo research in a bad light.



posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by karl 12

Originally posted by Skeptical Ed
You said in nicer terms than I would have for I see organizations such as MUFON to be dinosaurs soon to be extinct..

Has any of this activity resulted in knowing more about UFOs? Not a shred.


Ed have you ever actualy read some of the evidence collated by organisations such as NICAP?


Since 1957 I've probably read and heard more about UFOs than most members of ATS (Aliens and UFOs, of course). I've attended MUFON meetings. I've communicated with Walt Andrus and have somewhere a letter from him. Right now I'm holding a copy of the "MUFON 1988 INTERNATIONAL UFO SYMPOSIUM PROCEEDINGS - ABDUCTIONS AND THE E.T. HYPOTHESIS."

Yeah, you could say I've read "some" of the evidence collated by past UFO organizations. Tons of "evidence" which consists of filed reports filled with hearsay. But that's the way it was. I was a field researcher myself until I came to the realization that, again, all I was doing was interviewing people who made claims and my reports, while studied, simply were filed.

I have a nice UFO activity resume.



posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Decoy
 


decoy this is an absolutely incredible thread. thank you for posting it.



posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 06:22 PM
link   
reply to post by free_spirit
 


can we truly rely or count on mufon any longer?



posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 


is there anywhere i can read up on this cone shaped anamoly?



posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 06:38 PM
link   
its very possible mufon is controlled by government agencies.



posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by AboveTopSecretX
its very possible mufon is controlled by government agencies.


You just joined ATS and you're accusing someone, a well known and respected UFO organization in this case, of being "controlled by government agencies".

What are the basis for your accusation? Please elaborate. You're making serious accusations, the least you could do is share with the rest of us what are your reasons to make such a claim.


[edit on 3-10-2009 by converge]



posted on Oct, 3 2009 @ 07:19 PM
link   
I think Ufology and exopolitics at this rate will be all but dead in about two years time.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 01:46 AM
link   
Wow guys, if anything is going to kill UFOlogy I think it'll be all the infighting. BTW, AboveTopsSecretX, the 3 single line short sentence posts are kind of annoying, think you could just type it all at once? I think theres a rule against one-line posts
If you need to, just go back and edit your post and add to it.
Anyhow, I'll still pretty young-at 25- and am really just starting to get really interested in this field. Thanks for the interesting posts.
I think what UFOlogy needs is people willing to look at both sides, unbiased. Is it a UFO? Yeah, we don't know what it is... OK, is it "swamp gas" possiable. Is it a ET craft..also possiable. Weigh both sides you know? I just hope that if I really get into this that there will still be a field to investigate...



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by JJRichey
Wow guys, if anything is going to kill UFOlogy I think it'll be all the infighting.


No, the problem with the UFO field is one respectability and seriousness.

You think there's no infighting in well-established scientific fields? The difference is that those fields are respected and the public views them as a serious fields of study.

To me it's obvious the only way the UFO field can gain any respect and eventually be seen as a legitimate field, is to be strictly scientific in its research and presentation.



I think what UFOlogy needs is people willing to look at both sides, unbiased.


That sounds good and fine, but to me that's one of the problems with the mentality of some people involved: there are no sides per se - there is only what the evidence shows and where it leads you.

There are sides when it comes to beliefs and conjectures about the phenomena, but not realizing the different beliefs of people involved in the field and what the existent available evidence actually shows are completely different things, is a mistake that has plagued the UFO field since its inception.

And that, I believe, should be made very clear by anyone who claims to be, or want to be, a so called UFO researcher.



posted on Oct, 4 2009 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by converge
There are sides when it comes to beliefs and conjectures about the phenomena, but not realizing the different beliefs of people involved in the field and what the existent available evidence actually shows are completely different things, is a mistake that has plagued the UFO field since its inception.


Converge - would you tend to agree with these comments made by Richard Dolan (or not) ?


As a result, the easiest thing to do with UFO evidence is to ignore it, which is what most people do. Much harder is to confront it honestly, whether this means accepting or debunking it. That is, accepting into one's worldview something as "far out" as extraterrestrials is not easy for many people, especially when one's official culture finds little more than ridicule in the subject.
But honest debunking is very, very difficult, considering the compelling nature of so many UFO cases. Personally, I am close to the position that it is impossible to do this honestly, but will leave the benefit of the doubt to some exceptional, as yet unfound, individual.

The problem with nearly all skeptical arguments against alien visitation is that, quite simply, they fail to look at the UFO evidence. They all sound great in theory, but fall apart when presented with a few good reports. In the end, skeptics are forced to fall back upon their most often-used weapon: claiming a UFO event was a hoax.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Cheers.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join