Misleading Headlines!

A new Reuters News Story by Sven Nordenstam is absolutely misleading.

Reuters story

The title say's " Conspiracy theorists unmoved by British UFO denial".

That is very misleading and I have to even wonder if Sven Nordenstam even read any of the report he's commenting about , the Condign Report. Admittedly I have not read ALL of the report yet myself , but I've read quite a bit of it and I can say it certainly is not a UFO denial!

Here is the link to the MOD Condign Report.

MOD Condign Report - Executive Summary

MOD Defense News "UFOs exist - it's official!"

The Executive Summary begins by defining UAP as "popularly known as UFOs" and then goes on to state " That UAP exist is indisputable".

Of course this report goes on to explain that UAP have all the classic characteristics of Flight , Speed , and hovering ability of UFOs even explaining that UAP can damage Aircraft and speculating that UAP produce magnetic and electronic phenomena that can cause people to see "Crafts" and basically hallucinate about "Alien" encounters!

At any rate this report is an affirmation of UFOs and goes to great lengths IMO to explain UFOs as UAP that would ofcourse be natural phenomena as opposed to E.T.

That is the only point that the News story got correct or even attempted to make, but I'd think that the reports statement that "UAP exist" and might "affect" people and Air Craft even Car Motors would be even bigger News than the fact that the Conspiracy Theorists haven't thrown in the towel.

Where is the Reuters Headline that say's " Seeing a UFO with Aliens , your just being affected by UAP!"

Or how about " Plane about to crash? Aliens didn't do it , it was UAP!"

We haven't seen those Stories. Apparently all that really matters is that the readers understand that there is not evidence of "Aliens" according to the mysterious Author of this MOD report.







[edit on 29-6-2006 by lost_shaman]

I would argue that the article author's central argument-- that UFO enthusiasts will not be moved by the denial of their belief system--is accurate.

However, as I am sure the article author is fully aware, the folklorist's argument is tangential to the fundamental question of UFO explanations. His point is merely that regardless of how many government reports state otherwise, the community will reject them for anthropological reasons. This assertion is correct. Yet it is equally applicable to all sides of this issue.

My question to him is, did he believe the government when they said that Iraq had missles that it could launch and hit England with in 40 some-odd minutes? Did he believe the WMD hype?

Clearly, governments lie to the masses in order to manipulate them. This is a given. The question, then, is why the author chooses to poo-poo the skeptic, and side with the official mouthpiece of faith-based belief in government. Could it be an intrinsic belief in the intangible?

As a professional scientist, I do not have the tendancy towards implicit trust of 'the official scientist'--the character applied in this story. Instead, I tend to look at the implicit trust invectives applied by the author in his story.

What is his believed folklore?

• A truthful government
  
• Scientists as implicitly overriding authority figures
  

Neither of these archetypes stands up to the scrutiny of reality. You are more likely to meet a leprachaun than a government that does not lie to its people. And you are more likely to meet a Zeta Reticulan than a scientific community that doesn't perpetuate the myth of overriding authority.

The point of the folklorist remains true. Regardless of on which side of this debate you fall, true believers will believe, skeptics will mock, and the naturally curious will not let anyone on either side get in their way.

[edit on 29-6-2006 by Ectoterrestrial]

[Double post by mistake. DELETE ME]

[edit on 29-6-2006 by Ectoterrestrial]