Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

2014 New year : New start for ufology? Or a continuing fall in standards?

page: 1
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 01:14 PM
link   
I'd like to wish fellow members of ATS a very happy New Year.

Was it just me or did the quality of UFO research in 2012 and 2013 actually fall from the previous (already fairly low) standard?

The first day of a new year seems to be a good time to ask some basic questions about the future direction(s) of UFO research.

The current state of UFO research is so frustratingly poor that its amusement value continues to decrease.

2014 is likely to be the year when I either launch a new project within ufology (which has the working name "the UFO Collective") or quit the subject altogether. I'm rather torn between these apparent options.

The Internet has given us all access to more information and resources than previous researchers - however, this does not yet appear to have been translated into better quality investigations/research.

Is else anyone working on (or have ideas for) any projects that may improve the quality of research?
edit on 1-1-2014 by IsaacKoi because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 01:26 PM
link   
I look at it this way, that the dis-information programme to considerably reduce the UFO phenomenon as fake has worked in their favor the past few years, especially leading up to 2012 and beyond.
We've now seen the rise of CGI and photo trickery, which has been used as an advantage to discredit the phenomenon, the topic just got harder, but it doesn't mean we can close the case, because after all, the case is too big to close.



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by IsaacKoi
 





The current state of UFO research is so frustratingly poor that its amusement value continues to decrease.


Could that be because of the use of CGI and youtube where every light in the distance is considered a UFO?

I am not saying that youtube is the problem, but it does seem to hinder the problem more than help it in my opinion.

I hope you keep up the good work in 2014 as I do enjoy your threads and attention to detail.



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by IsaacKoi
 




2014 is likely to be the year when I either launch a new project within ufology (which has the working name "the UFO Collective") or quit the subject altogether. I'm rather torn between these apparent options.


Sorry to hear that mate, it'll be a big loss if you quit the subject, however I understand the unwanted frustration that so often accompanies Ufology.

Sad to say, but I think the quality will only ever get worse. More few and far between genuine cases getting thrown around with the CGI videos, UFO cash schemers and other people who spot incentives in fabricating sightings and such.

In saying that though, something serious needs to happen within this subject, 2014 may be the year. If the idea of apparently advanced aerodynamic and unidentifiable craft with no apparent affiliation with any country is true, then something has to happen sometime involving them.



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 02:06 PM
link   
In my non sceptical view it is practical to assume that if we dont have confirmed unacquivical proof that UFO's/USO's are EBE's/ID's and are here/visiting by 2020 then they havent been here yet!

That gives 6 years for something to occur that supplies the proof. Bookmark this post!!!!!!!!!! 1-Jan-2014

That is ample time in my view.
edit on 1-1-2014 by RP2SticksOfDynamite because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 02:28 PM
link   
I have been following ATS since it's inception due to the UFO
phenomenon. I didn't join until 2010. I have been heavily into
UFOs since I was ~ 4 to 5 yrs old. I have lost interest over the
past few years due to so many fakes with CGI, youtube &
whatever else.
It's sad & very disappointing because I miss the real stuff.
I have witnessed & have seen things since I was 5 - 6 yrs old & am
over 50 now. I stopped officially sky watching a few years ago to
due to missing my sky watch partners after I moved. It's always
good to have a witness.

OP I hope you don't leave as we need good people like yourself
to help promote the well balanced issue of the truth.

Cheers
Ektar



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 02:28 PM
link   
reply to post by IsaacKoi
 


Any photo will be looked upon with scrutiny now because of cgi. Heck, skeptics were still scrutinizing photos before cgi. There will still be hoaxes as with any phenomenon.

It's easy for skeptics and those connected with government disinformation to ridicule any photo placed on the internet. Just like the other poster who stated that the government's disinformation campaign has really accomplished what it was intended to do. I have to totally agree.

I personally feel that multiple witness sightings, military witnesses, police officers, astronauts, commercial airline pilots, military pilots, death bed confessions, physical residue, and government insiders offer the best evidence to prove the existence of UFO's. Today, photographs need to be accompanied by multiple or credible witnesses.

I believe that one day, ufologists and those who have claimed to have seen or made contact will be redeemed. Skeptics on the other hand, will be crawling under rocks facing ridicule, and government leaders will be put on trial for keeping it secret from the world population. Scientist who were afraid to touch the subject for fear of ridicule, will be chastised for not taking the amount of research and evidence seriously. Those who can't come to grips because it doesn't fit in their normal sense of reality, it will turn they beliefs upside down.

Just wait, time will justify those who have given their life for the research and exposure of the most important secret kept from mankind.
edit on 1-1-2014 by WeRpeons because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by IsaacKoi
 


If such a worthy contributor as yourself departs the field, yes, standards will continue to fall.

UFOlogy desperately needs those who can and will separate what has potential from the dross. Those who will continue to call out the hoaxers, eliminate what is mistaken and/or misidentified, and allow those few and far between cases without explanation to continue to be examined. Even if no 'truth' is ever discovered (and when is it unless discovering a hoax?), at least the mystery may stand without obfuscation.

The work done here on ATS by members such as yourself and Karl12 is nothing short of miraculous. Yes, there are others working in more speculative areas (equally important, but perhaps harder to quantify) like the GUT, but the works you and Karl12 (and others I can't name right now) is of extraordinary value to both ATS, and UFOlogy.



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 02:32 PM
link   
Don't rely on Ufology. Just find a hot-spot and camp there till you've seen enough to know.



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 02:40 PM
link   
It really doesn't help that YouTube monetises everything now. All the CGI hoaxers want is exposure for ad revenue.
I don't think that it is ethical to try and fool people and to make money inventing falsities and presenting them as truth.
Oh boy, I could make so much money if I was dishonest!
But I am poor, and honest.

I click on UFO videos mostly to entertain myself with hoaxing attempts, whilst looking for that gem that 'may' have merit in the belief department.

I still believe they are here.



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by IsaacKoi
 


I'm of the opinion that interest in fringe materials and phenomenon is undergoing a die-off from what I think off as post-2012-apocalypse booty hurt.

Many folks got pulled into the fringe forum through the addictive allure of apocalypticism, and as with anything new and shiney, grabbed handsfull of whatever brightly colored candy was on offer.

The showmen and mythologers, as well as any and every other opportunist, however, are always on the wait for new converts, and with the rise in fringe interest market share, we saw also a rise in fraudulent activities, and circus barkers.

With the 2012 apocalypse done and over, with 2013 passed with nothing of significant moment occurring (just in case there was a mistake somewhere), the fringe market share begins to drop and will, if it follows the decennial interest pattern observed so far, will continue to drop at least until the 2020s when interest in the topic will begin to rise again if the pattern is followed.

Lack of interest from the general popular public market share of faith and attention, is, however, a good thing, as without fodder to feed them, the opportunists driving the invention of fantasies and mythmaking in this forum will dry up like winter leaves and blow away.
With less myth making noise, the subject should then allow for better examination and distribution of resources toward the interrogation of the subject.




posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 03:06 PM
link   
As a former MUFON Field Investigator I can honestly say that the biggest downfall in the field has nothing to do with "dis-informationists", but rather to many people trying to make a buck on selling hope.

I really wouldn't call them "New Age" people either (but that group does inflect it's fair share of damage). The biggest issue is people claiming that the "Alien of the Week" is trying to warn us, help us, or hunt us. Try conducting a site investigation when the person your trying to interview about the sighting is trying to get paid for interview, or worse yet sits and tells you, "They were telling me this and that for our future on this planet."

Trying to determine if a UFO event has happened is hard enough as it is (gathering evidence from a reported landing, talking to multiple witnesses, asking if anyone has pictures/video) without learning that the person who reported the event goes to those UFO "conventions" (more like a flea market for the gullible) and tries to contaminate all of the evidence by following you around and telling people what to say (usually ending their conversation with, "you'll read more about it at my blog-site".

As anyone who's done any serious work in this field knows, it's not about money, fame, but rather truth based in facts. Well that's my take on it.

Old saying I heard when I first started in the field:
It's like dropping a wedding ring in the outhouse. You'll have to dig through all the crap to find what you're looking for.



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 03:17 PM
link   
We need an event to happen, ala the phoenix lights.
Something to re-invigorate believers and skeptics alike.
Clear evidence is needed. If a project is to be started i think we need to get people who are really in the know. Ex area 51 employee's, defence ministers, ex military. i know the disclosure project went down that route, and some interesting testimony came out. We need the moon photo's pre-airbrushing. Film of ufo's landing at air force bases. Photo's of area 51 ufo's. Real stuff.
Tell people they would go down is history as the person who showed the world true evidence of extraterrestrials.
Whats out there now, photo's and film, is'nt enough. A well respected researcher like yourself Isaac, might get somewhere with people in the know. How to go about it, i dont know.
But i think something needs to happen this year or the subject will continue to slide.
All the above you well know Isaac, im just thinking out loud.



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueMule
 

That is a great point! I have had contact on many occasions & I don't
talk about it due to being ridiculed & dragged across the hot coals.
It's not worth the aggravation any more & I am sure many others
feel the same way.
So you have a great message, however if they are closed minded they
may not see a bloody thing.

Cheers
Ektar



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Guyfriday
 

Spot on! I was working with researchers & MUFON-LA on West Coast.
So my interest slowly diminished after moving to East Coast, not knowing
anyone who was as interested as I was & no one to sky watch with.

Out West I did a serious sky watch twice a month after my initial
MUFON sky watch & yes we had contact with witnesses. I don't
know if it was ever reported. I really miss those days as things were
real & in the now & not like today.
No one tried to make a buck off of that siting.

Cheers
Ektar



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 04:05 PM
link   

WeRpeons

I believe that one day, ufologists and those who have claimed to have seen or made contact will be redeemed. Skeptics on the other hand, will be crawling under rocks facing ridicule



Just because that will happen in the future and as a scepitc on here I think it will happen as there are bound to be other lifeforms out there DOESN'T mean that any claims made in the past were factual or can you not understand that?

Also as we have lots of evidence were even your credible witness list can be FOOLED because they have no knowledge of photography or video, which we can also see with youtubers and members on here.

Many members on here are long time amatuer photographers,semi pro or even professional photographers we like to look at any image of a so called ufo and long may they continue, if I see something I think is the real deal I will back it 100% up till now I cant do that.



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 05:00 PM
link   
Science Fiction author Theodore Sturgeon responded to the charge that 90% of Science Fiction is crap with the reply, "90% of everything is crap."

The UFO percentage may run higher. The sad thing is, the big chunk of poo gets almost all the attention. There are some things worthy of study, but the genuine ones are probably as rarer than comets. they just don't appear wight he frequency to support UFO magazines and conferences. Proponents are forced to look to other material to present, and some of these are staking their financial well-being on it. There is also a history of frauds, hoaxers and charlatans. By no means are the fakes unique to the UFO field, but they are allowed to remain in a stunningly high proportion.

I'm interested in the good 10%, but don't know how to support it. Organizations have tried and failed. The UFO clubs seem to be a doomed model, collapsing under ego battles and bureaucracy. The most valuable effort I've run across has been Isaac's effort to preserve UFO records and make them accessible. That's great, but a similar effort needs to be made to towards current efforts. I'd like to see a network of researchers able the share in collecting and evaluating current data.

edit on 1-1-2014 by CardDown because: Happy New Year!



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 




Many members on here are long time amatuer photographers,semi pro or even professional photographers we like to look at any image of a so called ufo and long may they continue, if I see something I think is the real deal I will back it 100% up till now I cant do that.


For your information, I was deep into photography since the age of 16, and had my own black and white dark room. I won a scholarship for photography and was a photo major the first 2 years of college before I made the change to Advertising Management. I don't know how old you are, but I was involved in photography before digital photography made the scene.

You can claim all you want about so called "professional photographers" tearing apart digital photographs because with today's technology, someone can easily use Photoshop and embed an object and claim it's a UFO. Sure there are hoaxes out there, but the photos you "CAN'T" easily dismiss are those that are done on film. I manipulated many photos in my dark room using dodging techniques, using double exposures, sandwiching negatives, and even using special effect lenses, but those can easily be identified under close examination of the negative and photo itself. Which leaves those photos that were taken before "digital" photography that cannot be explained away.

I've seen many photos being explained away as hoaxes on this site. Some are, and some I would definitely question. The problem I have with many skeptics is the lack of research they have done in the area of UFO's, and abduction cases. Most of them will jump at anything to explain it away.

I have to laugh at the show that tries to duplicate various sightings using photography and other techniques. That means nothing. I can duplicate a dent in a car, it doesn't mean it was made with the same object or in the same manner. Just because I can duplicate a glow in the night sky with a Chinese lantern doesn't mean the glow was a Chinese lantern unless it's light signature is different. (Case in point, skeptics tried to explain away The Phoenix Lights as being flares, yet the light signature was analyzed and was shown to be nothing close to flares). Photos of the lights can easily be explained away as just flares. It's why analyzing a photograph doesn't always tell the whole story.

Skeptics can continue to think inside the box and try to rationalize anything that doesn't fit with today's physical properties, as being a hoax. You need to realize that their have been many physicists, scientists and doctors who have been scoffed at because of their theories that later turned out to be factual.

What I am saying, is that this subject has not been taken seriously by the scientific community. Most of them are afraid of even mentioning it's a possibility for fear of losing their reputation or losing their job. We still haven't learned from the example of Galileo who was condemned for his scientific beliefs. Or Barry Marshall who was ridiculed and laughed at when he claimed that peptic ulcers were cause by the bacteria Helicobacter pylori.

I prescribe to this belief...


While it's true that at least 99% of revolutionary announcements from the fringes of science are just as bogus as they seem, we cannot dismiss every one of them without investigation. If we do, then we'll certainly take our place among the ranks of scoffers who accidentally helped delay numbers of major scientific discoveries throughout history. Beware, for many discoveries such as powered flight and drifting continents today only appear sane and acceptable because we have such powerful hindsight. These same advancements were seen as obviously a bunch of disgusting lunatic garbage during the years they were first discovered.


Here's is a just a few of the out of reality theories that were dismissed that were later to be found to exist.

Arrhenius (ion chemistry)
Alfven, Hans (galaxy-scale plasma dynamics)
Bardeen & Brattain (transistor)
Chandrasekhar, Subrahmanyan (black holes in 1930)
Folk, Robert L. (existence and importance of nanobacteria)
Goddard, Robert (rocket-powered space ships)
Lovelock, James (Gaia theory)
Ovshinsky, Stanford R. (amorphous semiconductor devices)
Rous, Peyton (viruses cause cancer)
Tesla, Nikola (Earth electrical resonance, "Schumann" resonance)
J H van't Hoff (molecules are 3D)
Wright, Wilbur & Orville (flying machines)
Zwicky, Fritz (existence of dark matter, 1933)
Zweig, George (quark theory)

You can find out more here...


amasci.com...



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 06:57 PM
link   

CardDown
Science Fiction author Theodore Sturgeon responded to the charge that 90% of Science Fiction is crap with the reply, "90% of everything is crap."

The UFO percentage may run higher. The sad thing is, the big chunk of poo gets almost all the attention. There are some things worthy of study, but the genuine ones are probably as rarer than comets. they just don't appear wight he frequency to support UFO magazines and conferences. Proponents are forced to look to other material to present, and some of these are staking their financial well-being on it. There is also a history of frauds, hoaxers and charlatans. By no means are the fakes unique to the UFO field, but they are allowed to remain in a stunningly high proportion.

I'm interested in the good 10%, but don't know how to support it. Organizations have tried and failed. The UFO clubs seem to be a doomed model, collapsing under ego battles and bureaucracy. The most valuable effort I've run across has been Isaac's effort to preserve UFO records and make them accessible. That's great, but a similar effort needs to be made to towards current efforts. I'd like to see a network of researchers able the share in collecting and evaluating current data.

edit on 1-1-2014 by CardDown because: Happy New Year!


Same conclusions here. I think we need to emulate Vallee and friends and go down the 'invisible college' route. Or something. I dunno. I'd just like to keep corresponding with interested folks, and to go through interesting data.



posted on Jan, 1 2014 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by WeRpeons
 


FIRST SLR in 1979 fully manual is that enough info for you!





new topics

top topics



 
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join