Some photos of "aliens" and "ufos" are like zombies.
They can be the subject of detailed and devasting revelations - up to and including an admission of a hoax, with details of how the hoax was
And yet they live on.
The photos stagger from website to website, accompanied by a wailing noise and the gnashing of teeth (from some researchers that would like to see
ufology become a more respectable hobby).
Such photos are rarely accompanied by any explanation of their source, or indeed any text at all, making it difficult to identify key-words which can
be used to search for relevant information. So, the viewing public remains ignorant of the fact that any hope that the the image showed anything real
died long ago.
So, it is possible to kill such an alien zombie?
Is there a silver bullet which can finally finish off some of the more infamous photos (and videos) of "aliens" and "ufos" for once and for
Some partial solutions have been adopted on ATS, for example:
(a) discussion of known hoaxes are already moved into a separate area of ATS
Browsing through that forum helps identify some of the known hoaxes. But the sheer number of relevant threads makes it difficult for someone new to
ATS/ufology to try to find the background to the more infamous and commonly recurring discredited videos/images/cases.
(b) Probably more usefully as a reference guide, some threads on ATS (and elsewhere) try to list known hoaxes, but those threads have generally died
off fairly quickly and (more importantly) rarely include any analysis of the relevant images or references which provided the best evidence of a hoax.
See, for example:
CGI UFOs | Some of the best ones
Compilation list of CGI, known hoaxes and disproved(videos and photos)
What more can be done?
I'm not sure, but surely it is worth a bit of effort to try and achieve this objective?
Perhaps a few leading researchers or UFO groups could agree a list of discredited images/cases. Would this have any real effect?, Would some people
will view it merely as an "appeal to authority" (a well-known logical fallacy) and ignore any such initiative?
Perhaps such a panel could be more proactive and seek out websites displaying relevant images/cases and give the relevant webmaster a reference to
discussions highlighting why that image/case is generally viewed as discredited with a request that they post some of that information or a link on
their website? Or would this be viewed as spam and/or a potentially suspicious "debunking" initiative?
Any other ideas?
All the best,
[edit on 9-7-2010 by IsaacKoi]