It's titled Alien Abductions: A Dangerous Game, and he didn't know it, but he was on to something with the title. It is a "dangerous game" at times.
Monday, March 31, 2008
A Classic: Abduction book by Klass
It's titled Alien Abductions: A Dangerous Game, and he didn't know it, but he was on to something with the title. It is a "dangerous game" at times.
Nightline - the Alien Abduction Episode part 1
From 1987. Klass at his best of course! (Actually, he had a point; challenging reporters to really do their job and investigate, but we know how that goes . . .)
Saturday, March 29, 2008
15 Bigfoot Threads on JREF, and Counting!
Updated 4/15/08
This list can also be found over my Frame 352 Bigfoot blog.
Every time I think I have all the Bigfoot threads down from the JREF, I find that I've missed one or two. So here they are. Be sure to check for updates, because no doubt there will some!
Bigfoot in West Virginia
3 Toed SC Bigfoot
Bigfoot on video? Memorial Day 1996
Man accuses Bigfoot of sexual assualt
Another Bigfoot Video
Bigfoot - The Patterson Gimlin Film
Creekfreak’s Bigfoot hair samples and other non-photo related claims
Bigfoot is real I have the proof
Bigfoot: The Invisible Variety
Government Bigfoot cover-up
Native American myths/traditions support Bigfoot? A critical look
(actually, in spite of the context of this thread being on a chronic skeptic forum, it's an interesting thread at times.)
Bigfoot - the Skookum Cast
Juvenile bigfoot captured on game cam?
I Saw Bigfoot Kissing Santa Claus
Suppose Bigfoot was real and I had the proof?
As I've commented before, for a subject that invites ridicule from the skeptic crowd, they sure spend a lot of time discussing it.
This list can also be found over my Frame 352 Bigfoot blog.
Every time I think I have all the Bigfoot threads down from the JREF, I find that I've missed one or two. So here they are. Be sure to check for updates, because no doubt there will some!
Bigfoot in West Virginia
3 Toed SC Bigfoot
Bigfoot on video? Memorial Day 1996
Man accuses Bigfoot of sexual assualt
Another Bigfoot Video
Bigfoot - The Patterson Gimlin Film
Creekfreak’s Bigfoot hair samples and other non-photo related claims
Bigfoot is real I have the proof
Bigfoot: The Invisible Variety
Government Bigfoot cover-up
Native American myths/traditions support Bigfoot? A critical look
(actually, in spite of the context of this thread being on a chronic skeptic forum, it's an interesting thread at times.)
Bigfoot - the Skookum Cast
Juvenile bigfoot captured on game cam?
I Saw Bigfoot Kissing Santa Claus
Suppose Bigfoot was real and I had the proof?
As I've commented before, for a subject that invites ridicule from the skeptic crowd, they sure spend a lot of time discussing it.
Larry King-UFOs:ARE THEY REAL? 6 of 6
Featured Snarly Skeptic of the Month James Mcgaha, on the Larry King Live program.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
On Cryptomundo: Pelicanism 1897
Cryptomundo blog has a nice piece on Pelicanism. It's not what you might think. (Well, maybe a bit . . .)
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Extraordinary Investigations To Find Out
What we need is not the will to believe but the will to find out.~ Bertrand Russell
I like this quote.
The so-called "true believers," who, let's be honest now, exist, believe in things beyond mere faith; they insist it's The Truth. Not just their truth, but THE truth, yours, mine, ours, everyone's. They're everywhere, and that includes the world of the esoteric, UFOs, Forteana.
The chronic skeptics, persisting in their dismissals even while completely ignoring the data, the facts, the history,the context -- not to mention fear of the box's exterior - are no different. They don't want to find out; they're content to mock, insult, bully, intimidate, even lie, when it comes to these subjects. Anything but to avoid what UFO researcher Budd Hopkins has said:
An extraordinary phenomenon demands an extraordinary investigations.
But as we know, there are so many content to mock and ignore, or waste time writing away on blogs how others who think about these things are wasting time (and the irony escapes them) take the easy way out.
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Desire To Debunk
Desire To Debunk
November 23, 2007
What is it about those who pathologically debunk just for the hell of it? . . .
We were watching Monster Quest: Birdzilla! last night, when my husband “George” said to me, “Why do some people have this obsessive need to debunk, just for the hell of debunking?”
In particular, George was referring to the segment on the giant bird kite. Disputing the idea there are giant birds (Thunderbirds, dinosaurs, cryptids, condors or wayward monkey eating crowned eagles) a “master kite builder” built a giant black bird kite to show the rest of us we can be fooled.
The kite was very cool. Very cool. As someone who loves kite flying myself, I was enchanted by the kite. It would be great to fly a kite like that! It’d take twenty people, but it looked like great fun.
Before the master kite builder segment, there were the usual witnesses to giant birds, including some interesting footage of a very large bird indeed taken in the 1970s.
Aside from the obvious anti-anomalous perspective -- no such thing as giant birds, especially those grabbing up little children -- was that tired chronic skeptic refrain about size. We can’t judge things correctly in the sky because ... well, we just can’t. Without a reference point, we don’t know how big it is and all the usual excuses.
Except, in the case of the 1970s footage, there were reference points.
Back to Mr. Kite Builder. They go out, fly the kite, and it’s huge. Big black very cool looking bird kite. No reference points, as in trees or buildings; just the black bird agasint the blue sky. Then they asked passersby to estimate how big the bird kite was. The word here is estimate.
And they did, and since they were estimating, responses varied. This, to the pathological debunkers, “proved” that we can’t possibly know what we’re seeing as far as size goes.
Two points seemed to fly right over their heads. (heh) One, all who estimated were in the same ballpark. (Except for one guy, who George laughed at and said “He probably exaggerates about everything.” ) The other point, that was glaringly obvious, was that the bird kite was big. Really, really big. How exactly big? Who knows; unless one can fly and manage to whip out a tape measure while the thing’s flying around, impossible to say. But the obvious fact is that, looking up, that is one big bird up there, and a perfectly reasonable thing to say it was, say, "bigger than a crow." Or an eagle. Or really, anything most of us in the U.S. has ever seen.
Which should be enough for anyone.
But it's not enough for those with the pathological need to debunk, who debunk even when there’s no need.
It’s an interesting study in human nature and response to the unusual; observing and musing on why these chronic minded types do what they do. It woudln’t matter much except that it’s often presented disingenuously and so distracts from the real stuff.
By doing mildly interesting things like flying giant bird kites around, no matter how cool they are, the fact of witnesses accounts, of stories, lore, myth and legend, petroglyphs, film footage, and the obvious thing right in front of you (it’s big, damn it) are questioned. In fact, one could say that the reality of the seeming unreality is questioned. Our experiences are questioned. Not only are these things questioned (which isn’t neccesarly a bad thing in itself) but diluted, and reguritated back to us as “nonsense” or “misinterpretations.”
The magicians pulling one over on us aren’t those with tales of the weird, they’re the Pelicanists, the chronic skeptics, the pathological debunkers who pull all kinds of stunts to distract us from what some of us can't acknowledge.
November 23, 2007
What is it about those who pathologically debunk just for the hell of it? . . .
We were watching Monster Quest: Birdzilla! last night, when my husband “George” said to me, “Why do some people have this obsessive need to debunk, just for the hell of debunking?”
In particular, George was referring to the segment on the giant bird kite. Disputing the idea there are giant birds (Thunderbirds, dinosaurs, cryptids, condors or wayward monkey eating crowned eagles) a “master kite builder” built a giant black bird kite to show the rest of us we can be fooled.
The kite was very cool. Very cool. As someone who loves kite flying myself, I was enchanted by the kite. It would be great to fly a kite like that! It’d take twenty people, but it looked like great fun.
Before the master kite builder segment, there were the usual witnesses to giant birds, including some interesting footage of a very large bird indeed taken in the 1970s.
Aside from the obvious anti-anomalous perspective -- no such thing as giant birds, especially those grabbing up little children -- was that tired chronic skeptic refrain about size. We can’t judge things correctly in the sky because ... well, we just can’t. Without a reference point, we don’t know how big it is and all the usual excuses.
Except, in the case of the 1970s footage, there were reference points.
Back to Mr. Kite Builder. They go out, fly the kite, and it’s huge. Big black very cool looking bird kite. No reference points, as in trees or buildings; just the black bird agasint the blue sky. Then they asked passersby to estimate how big the bird kite was. The word here is estimate.
And they did, and since they were estimating, responses varied. This, to the pathological debunkers, “proved” that we can’t possibly know what we’re seeing as far as size goes.
Two points seemed to fly right over their heads. (heh) One, all who estimated were in the same ballpark. (Except for one guy, who George laughed at and said “He probably exaggerates about everything.” ) The other point, that was glaringly obvious, was that the bird kite was big. Really, really big. How exactly big? Who knows; unless one can fly and manage to whip out a tape measure while the thing’s flying around, impossible to say. But the obvious fact is that, looking up, that is one big bird up there, and a perfectly reasonable thing to say it was, say, "bigger than a crow." Or an eagle. Or really, anything most of us in the U.S. has ever seen.
Which should be enough for anyone.
But it's not enough for those with the pathological need to debunk, who debunk even when there’s no need.
It’s an interesting study in human nature and response to the unusual; observing and musing on why these chronic minded types do what they do. It woudln’t matter much except that it’s often presented disingenuously and so distracts from the real stuff.
By doing mildly interesting things like flying giant bird kites around, no matter how cool they are, the fact of witnesses accounts, of stories, lore, myth and legend, petroglyphs, film footage, and the obvious thing right in front of you (it’s big, damn it) are questioned. In fact, one could say that the reality of the seeming unreality is questioned. Our experiences are questioned. Not only are these things questioned (which isn’t neccesarly a bad thing in itself) but diluted, and reguritated back to us as “nonsense” or “misinterpretations.”
The magicians pulling one over on us aren’t those with tales of the weird, they’re the Pelicanists, the chronic skeptics, the pathological debunkers who pull all kinds of stunts to distract us from what some of us can't acknowledge.
The Usual Purple Tinged Hyperbole About UFOs
This is the article I referred to in my earlier post on Scientology and the Anonomyous Movement. For some reason, the link doesn’t transfer properly, so I’m just reposting it here in full. Probably not a bad idea to do that with all of them anyway. . .
The Usual Purple Tinged Hyperbole About UFOs
September 10, 2006
Wandering through the kingdom of anti-UFOism on the internet, I recently came across a few sites with the same message; so-called ‘name calling’ is just as bad as using racial slurs. Labeling the anti-UFOists, skeptics and or debunkers as any of the following: skeptoid, skepti-bunkie, Skepti-bunkie, New Thug, etc. is on the same level as being called any of the heinous names for an ethnic, cultural or racial group. (Also, using such labels as say, New Thugs or skeptibunkies, supports their opinion that the “name caller” is emotionally and psychologically deficient in some way.) The obvious -- that these offended complainers use terms like woo, kook, lunatics, true believers, ‘bleevers, etc. -- well, no need to point that out, so I won’t.
What does need to be pointed out is that this belief that being labeled just what one is, based on observation of their behavior (er, if you’re bashing ufos and ufo experiencers/witnesses/researchers, doesn’t that make you a debunker/skeptic/thug? Answer: yes, yes it does) is hardly “name calling.” A note to the thin skinned: ‘Skepti-bunkie’ is nowhere near the level of being called a f****** moronic idiot or other foul names. Neither is it anywhere close to being called a racist name. What those who are complaining about such silliness need to get is that it is completely disingenuous to pretend one is affronted by these labels, that they are on a par with victims of racial and ethnic slurs. That pompous opinion doesn’t set well with me; being pc has nothing to do with it. It’s insulting and it’s a lie to suggest that being called a ‘skeptibunkie’ is the same as being called an ugly name for someone’s race or ethnicity.
This pretense of being offended by, say, being This pretense of being offended by, say, being referred to as a “skeptibunkie” or some other label is just another tactic used by anti-UFOists. Meanwhile, those of us who’ve experienced UFOs in various ways are called mentally ill, intellectually challenged, spiritually needy, liars, drunks, drug users, attention getters, drama queens, and more. Those all are worse than being called a thug, skeptibunkie, or Pelicanist. (Pelicanist is a term coined by UFO researcher Jerome Clark.) Let’s see: mentally ill drug user who’s a liar, or skeptical thug? Hmm, I’ll take ‘skeptical thug’ for eight hundred Alex.
The anti-UFO activists can be offended all he or she likes, sniff and sneer at being mocked, take offense at being called a New Thug, even though that is the behavior so often being exhibited these days (golly gee, what else do you call demands for the cultural cleansing of UFOlogy by non-UFOists?) But they do not get to be so damn arrogant and full of their own importance regarding their Crusade to Rid the World of Woo. (And UFOs -- anything outside of the most hard core nuts and bolts theories -- are considered woo to the skeptibunkie.) It is not honest or accurate for them to align themselves with those that are victims of bigotry, prejudice and hateful epithets. They’re not that important, and neither is their cause.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Hyperbole, Anonymous and Scientology
Some time ago I wrote a piece about the chronic skeptic's sense of self imposed effrontery at Things That Offend. One of the many things that offend is name calling. Well, sure, who doesn’t it offend; no one likes to be called names. The problem lies, not with their feelings hurt at being called names, but two things in particular: one, they call people names and see nothing wrong in doing so: woo, woo-woo, mentally ill, and so much more. So much more. Two, they equate the so-called “name calling” from woos to racial slurs. As I wrote in The Usual Purple Tinged Hyperbole About UFOs this attitude is the height of arrogance. It may be (and I say may be) immature, it may be unkind, but it isn’t anywhere near the same thing as someone who uses words to wound those of an ethnic or racial group.
Here we find another example of this bloated sense of self importance; that strange yet prevalent view held by many a chronic skeptic that their actions and words concerning the harassment and infiltration of Things That Offend are righteous. Worse, not only are they righteous, they are doing the world a wondrous favor steeped in altruism.
In one example I came across, the victims of 9/11 are equated with those of the so-called anonymous movement who are pushing to rid the world of Scientology.
That, my friend, is despicable.
While I have issues with those who criticize us for writing about the paranormal and UFOs because we’re not dealing with ‘real” issues (instead of “wasting” time writing about UFOs, why not spend that time and energy on animal abuse, or child abuse, or efforts towards peace, or . . . ?) I will say the same about these “anonymous” activists and their defenders. I am no fan of Scientology, believe me; but at the same time I shudder any time I see a strong mass movement of self righteous people crying for blood. Something just reeks of fascism and a mob mentality that I don’t like. And so, instead of crying for the blood of Scientologists, why not cry for the blood of those that willingly spill the blood -- literally -- of others? Or any number of positive actions towards resolution: peace, the end to abuse whether it be child, animal, elder, etc. or the end to poverty, to ignorance.
Ah, that last one: ignorance. Some may insist that Scientology itself is ignorant, or rather, ensures that ignorance continue through its actions. I don’t argue that. But it’s not the same kind of ignorance as the type that leads to abuses, hunger, war, poverty, illness.
The Catholic church is no different. They might even be worse. Where’s the Anonymous movement when it comes to the Catholics? Or, in my view, Christianity or any organized religion? Where’s the Anonymous movement when it comes to Corporate Globalization? Far worse than Scientology.
Even with the vast problems going back centuries that organized religions, dogmas and doctrines have perpetuated, there is some good to be gleaned from them. Do not misunderstand me; I do not believe in any God in a Big Daddy God in the Sky construct, and am not a Christian. But it is as equally disturbing, as well as ignornant, to put all Christians and people of faith in the same boat as the fanatics. If given their way, the chronic skeptics, so-called "brights," and supporters of the Anonymous Movement would have the same power and influence as the very institutions they want replaced. Then they decide which system gets to be in power. They can't see that, and that's what makes them equally scary.
Here we find another example of this bloated sense of self importance; that strange yet prevalent view held by many a chronic skeptic that their actions and words concerning the harassment and infiltration of Things That Offend are righteous. Worse, not only are they righteous, they are doing the world a wondrous favor steeped in altruism.
In one example I came across, the victims of 9/11 are equated with those of the so-called anonymous movement who are pushing to rid the world of Scientology.
That, my friend, is despicable.
While I have issues with those who criticize us for writing about the paranormal and UFOs because we’re not dealing with ‘real” issues (instead of “wasting” time writing about UFOs, why not spend that time and energy on animal abuse, or child abuse, or efforts towards peace, or . . . ?) I will say the same about these “anonymous” activists and their defenders. I am no fan of Scientology, believe me; but at the same time I shudder any time I see a strong mass movement of self righteous people crying for blood. Something just reeks of fascism and a mob mentality that I don’t like. And so, instead of crying for the blood of Scientologists, why not cry for the blood of those that willingly spill the blood -- literally -- of others? Or any number of positive actions towards resolution: peace, the end to abuse whether it be child, animal, elder, etc. or the end to poverty, to ignorance.
Ah, that last one: ignorance. Some may insist that Scientology itself is ignorant, or rather, ensures that ignorance continue through its actions. I don’t argue that. But it’s not the same kind of ignorance as the type that leads to abuses, hunger, war, poverty, illness.
The Catholic church is no different. They might even be worse. Where’s the Anonymous movement when it comes to the Catholics? Or, in my view, Christianity or any organized religion? Where’s the Anonymous movement when it comes to Corporate Globalization? Far worse than Scientology.
Even with the vast problems going back centuries that organized religions, dogmas and doctrines have perpetuated, there is some good to be gleaned from them. Do not misunderstand me; I do not believe in any God in a Big Daddy God in the Sky construct, and am not a Christian. But it is as equally disturbing, as well as ignornant, to put all Christians and people of faith in the same boat as the fanatics. If given their way, the chronic skeptics, so-called "brights," and supporters of the Anonymous Movement would have the same power and influence as the very institutions they want replaced. Then they decide which system gets to be in power. They can't see that, and that's what makes them equally scary.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)