The Inconsistencies of UFOlogy.

reply to post by TeaAndStrumpets


I take it then you're still adamant about dismissing the findings and indications of an entire branch of science because they don't fit with your favorite hypothetical?

Further, your continued detraction in following an argument based from personal criticism doesn't even rank with Freshman Debate Club.
You may wish to alter your tactic to a more effective platform addressing the points of debate as opposed to the personalities making those points.

In regard to "FRINGE"; that term applies to the entirety of UFO study, not specific cases as you've implied. "Fringe" is a blanket over the entire phenomenon, regardless the merit, or lack of in individual cases.

Now, as to Psychology and UFO witnesses.
Here's something old you may enjoy
and
Anomalistic Psychology -article
and
Fantasy Proneness and other Psychological correlates of UFO experience

I leave that for you to read over.

Originally posted by Brighter
reply to post by Druscilla

 

I think the reason why we're not seeing eye-to-eye is due to a gross disparity in our respective research (or absence of) regarding the UFO phenomenon. If anything is going to lend any credence to peoples' abduction accounts, it would be the fact that (1) UFOs indeed exist, and furthermore (2) that they are most likely not 'ours'. In order to feel comfortable with (1), it is necessary that you have actually done some serious research into the UFO phenomenon and its attendant literature. Yet you have explicitly stated that you don't even own a single book on the UFO phenomenon.

In fact, you have stated elsewhere that you are expressly against even reading any of this literature. This is a blatant revelation of an entirely subjective and un-scientific methodology regarding the entire issue. And I have the distinct suspicion that many of the people writing articles such as the one that you posted have a very one-sided, myopic understanding of the issue as well. They are relying on precisely the kinds of one-sided arguments that you are so critical of. It's the age-old case of someone who has been trained as an expert in one field (e.g., psychology), and then an irrational sense of entitlement sets in, wherein they believe that their highly specified field in and of itself has the answers to problems in every other field. They don't even have to touch any other kind of literature, as their field alone and its methodologies supposedly already has the tools to understand it.

Now of course, not everyone who claims to have seen a UFO, and not everyone who claims to have been abducted is necessarily telling the truth or is perceiving a real object or having a real experience. I think this kind of goes without saying, and is basically to state the obvious. But to continually focus on these cases, while intentionally tying on a blind-fold and intentionally avoiding any possible good cases is really the height of intellectual irresponsibility and dishonesty.

So until you do the research and take a good look at the actual data regarding the UFO phenomenon, it is very difficult to take anything you say seriously, as we have no common ground of background research as a launching point from which to have a meaningful conversation. This lack of actual research on your part is the same exact reason underlying your debates with the other more informed members on this forum.

And let me say that I wholeheartedly agree with your position that, in order to truly understand something, one must utilize the tools of diverse disciplines in order to see it from different perspectives. Unfortunately, you've yet to take your own advice, and have expressly stated as much.

... and we have some ad hominem argument on your front regarding myself. Nice.

It would seem we all have some issues to work on.

I am, however, content on remaining within the venue of the psycho-social examination of this topic. Such is what really interests me about this phenomenon, more so than the phenomenon itself.

You may notice, in some threads, however, where I have no psycho-social explanation as mistaken identity on a you-tube video is quite evident where balloons, lanterns, Venus, clouds, CGI, conventional aircraft, and other culprits are the measure.

Attempting to box me in on one singular position is also logically irresponsible. I'm fairly adept at identifying cases of mistaken identity.

Others, however, who wish to study the entirety of the phenomenon, would do well not to discount and ignore this psycho-social position as is often done, as well as outright opposing the psycho-social explanation with seeming biased zeal.

I don't claim all cases attached to this phenomenon have a psycho-social explanation, but, from a case by case standpoint, in examining cases, it's entirely relevant to question as to how such might apply.
Take, for instance, this case:

www.abovetopsecret.com...
Multiple Witnesses. Mother Ship. What could it have been?

reply to post by Vandelay Industries


Hey Vandelay, hope the latex business is still going strong

Interesting observations, nice discussion arising, thanks everyone, good read.

I don't know how it's exactly called, but as I understand it the human brain is constantly trying to make sense of what we are seeing. It's somewhat faulty at that.
Connecting three dots of light and seeing a solid triangle for example.

When it is confronted offguard with some highly unusual structure, that just won't make any sense, maybe expressing colors or flight patterns that are way out of the ordinary, the descriptions maybe honest but likely not accurate. And how could they?

I would however expect that given descriptions of the same object would show cultural differencies.
Because the brain fills in the gaps with familiar things.

Originally posted by Druscilla
I take it then you're still adamant about dismissing the findings and indications of an entire branch of science because they don't fit with your favorite hypothetical?

Further, your continued detraction in following an argument based from personal criticism doesn't even rank with Freshman Debate Club.
You may wish to alter your tactic to a more effective platform addressing the points of debate as opposed to the personalities making those points....

Now, as to Psychology and UFO witnesses.
Here's something old you may enjoy
and
Anomalistic Psychology -article
and
Fantasy Proneness and other Psychological correlates of UFO experience

Beautifully done, Druscilla. I read it over....

You quote:
1) the Condon Report, the very source you dismissed only an hour or two ago as a "45 year old document that arbitrarily dismisses the psycho-social factors." (This is just rich! Really. This is where your lack of actual research and reading into the core of the UFO topic, not merely the fringe, really becomes apparent.)
2) a newspaper article from the Guardian which makes a point that every reasonable person around here concedes: that "perception and memory are prone to errors." Yep.
3) a study regarding primarily those who claim to be contactees and abductees... which you admit is a little different than a mere witness to a UFO, do you not?

Again, do you have any real, actual science that refutes what I cited above from the Condon Report, which said: "only a very small proportion of sighters can be categorized as exhibiting psychopathology"?

Read the words carefully. Which of us is avoiding the topic?

You keep pushing towards the fringe topics, hoping no one will notice. Well consider it noticed. If you're as interested in UFOs as your post count seems to indicate, then know that there's a whole wide world of serious writing out there to explore. Of course, it'll require some reading....

Originally posted by TeaAndStrumpets

Beautifully done, Druscilla. I read it over....

You quote:
1) the Condon Report, the very source you dismissed only an hour or two ago as a "45 year old document that arbitrarily dismisses the psycho-social factors." (This is just rich! Really. This is where your lack of actual research and reading into the core of the UFO topic, not merely the fringe, really becomes apparent.)
2) a newspaper article from the Guardian which makes a point that every reasonable person around here concedes: that "perception and memory are prone to errors." Yep.
3) a study regarding primarily those who claim to be contactees and abductees... which you admit is a little different than a mere witness to a UFO, do you not?

Again, do you have any real, actual science that refutes what I cited above from the Condon Report, which said: "only a very small proportion of sighters can be categorized as exhibiting psychopathology"?

Read the words carefully. Which of us is avoiding the topic?

You keep pushing towards the fringe topics, hoping no one will notice. Well consider it noticed. If you're as interested in UFOs as your post count seems to indicate, then know that there's a whole wide world of serious writing out there to explore. Of course, it'll require some reading....

1. Look up "Irony". Considering your failure to acknowledge the importance of the psycho-social argument, I thought you might enjoy reading from your own book.
2. Yep. Yet you continue to challenge it.
3. You discount again anything that doesn't fit your favorite hypothetical, failing to see the applicable relations.

You use "fringe" as if the UFO topic isn't a fringe topic itself?

I suggest you revisit your perceptual assertions as well as your reading comprehension. UFO = Fringe Topic.
I'm not attempting to push anything toward a fringe heading. It is already a fringe topic.

I haven't avoided the topic at all. I've listed several links to papers. articles, and threads relevant to my position across several posts.
I've yet to see anything similar in reply. Just a lot of protesting noise, braided with personal criticisms and debate-craft semantics.

The point is, the psycho-social explanation is important to the examination of the UFO phenomenon.
Anyone protesting, or discounting that may as well join the ranks of those believing in Alien Jedi Priests from Orion for Jesus

To each his/her own though. May the Fork be with you.

Originally posted by Blue Shift
My general problem with the notion that it's part of some kind of covert, subtle educational attempt by the unseen intelligence is that if this intelligence understands us enough to present the phenomenon to us that way, then it should also understand that it doesn't need to do it that way...As it is, if they're giving us lessons, we're not understanding them. But if they're dealing with multiple dimensions or quirks of time and time travel, then it's possible that it's simply beyond our comprehension. In that regard, we might never, ever understand what the UFOs or "aliens" are up to.

I've been pondering the electromagnetic angle latey. Vallee and others note that it seems to be a feature of many cases. Persinger and the God Helmet along with Albert Budden's books suggest that electromagnetism can do some freaky stuff to the brain.

While I reject Buddens thesis that we live in a world of EM saturation and the phenomenon is not anomalous, I am leaning toward our visitors either having an inherent EM or using it as part of their technology and as such we get some high strangeness features and inconsistency in the reports.

As far as the "lessons," if they are, say, interdimensional in nature, it might behoove them to convince us that they are from outer space so as to keep us from getting too close. That's one reason that crosses my mind and, if so, they've done a bang up job of rearranging and solidifying that belief system.

If they are tied to this world, it would also fit with the alleged messages that warn us of dangers to the environment and against nuclear weapons.

Always fascinating input from you, Blue Shift.

I see your point, in that the UFO's observed by a culture runs in correlation to the intensity of the media coverage, the nature of the coverage and the general beliefs of that society. An example of a changed public perception due to media coverage over a period of time is going from the 'little green man' to the 'little grey man' in terms of how western society views an alien, or scandinavian looking nordics being seen in Europe. The reports by children are the ones that intrest me the most, because that media indoctrination has not taken place on a concious level, although they may of picked up triggers subconciously from news reports/movies etc.

But the reality is the over-whelming majority of UFO experiences can be attributed to a known phenomonon. The ones that humanity as a whole should concentrate on are the ones with tangible evidence, such as unexplained radar reports in line with sightings of lights made by the public or unexplained concentrations of radiation,. multiple witnesses all reporting the same thing etc. Not schizos/attention seekers

www.youtube.com... Heres an intresting case with children

Originally posted by therovers
I see your point, in that the UFO's observed by a culture runs in correlation to the intensity of the media coverage, the nature of the coverage and the general beliefs of that society. An example of a changed public perception due to media coverage over a period of time is going from the 'little green man' to the 'little grey man' in terms of how western society views an alien, or scandinavian looking nordics being seen in Europe. The reports by children are the ones that intrest me the most, because that media indoctrination has not taken place on a concious level, although they may of picked up triggers subconciously from news reports/movies etc.

But the reality is the over-whelming majority of UFO experiences can be attributed to a known phenomonon. The ones that humanity as a whole should concentrate on are the ones with tangible evidence, such as unexplained radar reports in line with sightings of lights made by the public or unexplained concentrations of radiation,. multiple witnesses all reporting the same thing etc. Not schizos/attention seekers

www.youtube.com... Heres an intresting case with children

edit on 20-8-2012 by therovers because: (no reason given)

I agree, the Ruwa case has always been fascinating to me.

reply to post by therovers

I hope you can see how this Topics discussion as well as the classification of the people debating it is exactly the same thing as the example that you and others are posting now...that being that there is a disparity or difference in what people report about UFO's as to their Social Status as well as their Geographic Location which in of itself is also another form of disparity of wealth as what is reported in a Third World Country as it varies to what is reported in the U.S. or Europe or even certain areas of either.

UFO is defined as an Unidentified Flying Object. It does not determine whether what is seen is Alien in Nature or of a generated process of the Natural World.

Unfortunately...I KNOW the reality of the issue. Many UFO sightings are various forms of Ultra-High Tech. U.S. Craft. Some are just Natural Phenomena. Yet there are other sightings that are of Real E.T. Craft. I cannot provide proof of this and it is not because proof is not available...but I can point out to several incidents in the 50's and 60's as well as U.S. Astronaut's testimony. Believe me...the Reality is more than a person wants to know...even if they say they want or even DEMAND to know. For those of you who are in the Dark...buy a Flashlight and be grateful! Split Infinity