Skeptics vs. Believers: Not of the same source

New post at my Orange Orb blog on the oft repeated idea that "skeptics" and "believers", at the farthest ends of the continuum, are really the same. Not so fast there little misters and missys:

Kevin Randle's recent piece about the wildly out out of proportion responses of Phillip Klass to UFOs (Phillip Klass and the FBI) got my mind going on a tangent about the often stated and accepted "fact" concerning skeptics/debunkers and "believers." We've all said it; that "believers/bleevers/woos" vs. "skeptics/debunkers/'bunkies" have, at their core, the same reason for their fanatical beliefs. For their stubborn, pathological clinging to their position. At some point, both sides are really doing the same thing for the same reasons. Just a part of human nature. (While I'm mainly discussing UFOs here the same applies to Bigfoot witnesses and Bigfoot "skeptics.") Not so fast. The usual disclaimers aside about the truly unbalanced, the reason for the "believers" insistence is not for the same reasons of the debunker, or even the so-called skeptic. For many a witness their encounter was goddamn intense and life changing. If the witness chooses to be open about their experience, and is repeatedly accused of being a liar (at best) or insane (at worst) and everything in between, the witness, depending on his or her personality, is not going to give up. But the relentless harassment (often verging on the illegal) coming from the faux skeptics is enough to drive anyone into varying states of anger, frustration and confusion. You can only bang your head against a wall so much before you get to the point of either shutting down --going away, never to discuss your experiences again, at least not openly-- or becoming a loud squeaky wheel that will persist. The so-called "believer" has something solid to stand behind: their experience. What that experience was, why it was, and all of the rest surrounding paranormal, Fortean phenomena, is something else. But the fact of the experience is true. It happened. The skeptics (term used loosely) have nothing. Just their pathological and nasty knee jerk responses. The vulnerabilities of witnesses are not respected, but considered toys for their sneering amusement. They, like religious fanatics, often arrogantly present themselves as warriors in the great crusade against a perceived irrationally. But that's not based on anything. Least of all the witness of the UFO, or a Sasquatch, or even the more unbelievable things seen between our worlds.

Dancing 'round the teapot --- again

Naturally enough, the skeptic-debunkoid world has been attempting to debunk the 1950 Paul Trent UFO photos. That's to be expected. And sometimes those who pretend to be inside the gates of UFO Land like to stir things up, which is confusing. Until we remember that the Trickster element is firmly at home with this kind of thing. With the James Randi/Oberg/Nye/Mcgaha types, it's no surprise. We know exactly where those bunkies stand. Not quite so clear with some others. No matter though, as long as a few things are kept in mind:

• The afore mentioned overall Trickster element
• Some people love to stir things up simply because they can
• Oh, a bunch of other stuff I don't care about; the usual about egos and cruelty and meanness and downright illegal behaviors that thrives in the muckier side of UFO research.

This is all leading up to the recent flurry of little pieces once again teasing us with disingenuous items presenting as really-deep-research exposing the Trent photos as hoaxed images. Maybe. Could be. Maybe they're weren't. Were they? We'll see. Possibly.

Yes, it's like that. Oy.

Here some links, you can Google the rest and so on.

Personally, from all that I've read -- and observing on the periphery the Trent family at the McMinnville UFO fests -- I think the photos are genuine. And if they're not, well, then they're not. Such is life in UFO Land. But so far, no one has proven them to be fakes. Speculations about "city folk vs. poor farm folk" and such, while amusing in its dated classist way, isn't earth shattering news.

Most recent:
The Orange Orb: Revisiting the Tempest in a Teapot: McMinnville UFO Photos Faked. Again.
Simple Farm Folk vs. The City Slickers
And so...

They were at it years ago:
The Trent Trickster Three
A "Lost" Trent Farm Photo Surfaces?
The Trent Tempest

Frame 352: Why is (almost) Everyone Giving Dr. Melba Ketchum a Hard Time?

Dr. Melba Ketchum is trying to do something about the evidence she has. She's getting it tested all over the place, it's quite a collection of evidence, and the results are interesting. Yet science isn't having much of it. Nor, it turns out, are some in Bigfoot world. Excerpt from my post at my bigfoot blog:

Frame 352: Why is (almost) Everyone Giving Dr. Melba Ketchum a Hard Time?: According to Ketchum, one scientist threatened to sue her and her team if they used his findings; that's how angry he was over the subject of her research -- and how afraid he remains of being associated in any way with Bigfoot research.

Then there's the infamous "peer reviewed" journal citation that gives any researcher the cred they need to be accepted in mainstream science and academia. It's a crazy loop: you have to be accepted by the very types of individuals who think you're nuts to be doing this kind of research in the first place, so you're not going to be accepted. Not having been accepted, your research is nothing. If her research isn't accepted into an accepted scientific journal, she's out. So is the star of this thing: Bigfoot.

Virginia woman sues over 'fortune-teller' label

This is from 2010, but the case is on-going, and of course they're going at it over on the JREF. Virginia woman sues over 'fortune-teller' label | HamptonRoads.com | PilotOnline.com

What's interesting is the assumption Patricia Moore-King, the psychic, is full of crap. Not by the skeptoids; that's a given they'd think that. But the judge cites other fake psychics:

"Fortune-tellers have fleeced people in the past," the judge said. "... For all we know she's been involved in chicanery elsewhere in the United States and doesn't want her background checked."

Here's where things are now: Court to hear arguments in case of Va. psychic:

Moore-King, who operates as “Psychic Sophie,” claims county zoning and licensing regulations for fortune tellers violate her constitutional rights to free exercise of religion, speech and equal protection. The zoning law relegates Moore-King’s business to areas populated by trailer parks, towing lots, lumber yards and utility service buildings.

The judge called her website "deceptive" but I couldn't find anything deceptive about it. This is the opening paragraphs from Sophie's page:

People have asked me, what kind of psychic are you? I have to laugh when I hear this question, as part of the answer lay in over-coming commonly held misconceptions. Psychics do not know all things at all times. We know some things, sometimes, other things at other times, and often, we have no idea why certain things come at certain times, they just do. We probably don’t know what someone had for breakfast, unless they’re wearing some of it, and we often forget where we parked our car. Most of us dress in jeans, not loud caftans, some wear a baseball cap or beret, not a sparkly turban, and if we wear make-up at all, it isn’t usually applied with a spatula or spray-gun. Sometimes, we aren’t all here, figuratively speaking; so no surprise if we appear a bit eccentric. If I get a glazed look to my eyes, it won’t be from staring into a crystal ball. Usually, I look away from my clients and focus on a corner. This is because I am getting information and don’t want distraction, and not because I have suddenly gone mad or decided to study the intricacies of carpeting or crown molding. Would you laugh if I said I KNOW what brought you here? All joking aside, it doesn’t take a psychic to figure out that many people, who seek the services of a psychic, are motivated by a desire to find one who is legitimate and accurate. I possess these traits, but I confess I have a different motivation where it concerns my clients. My level of psychic accuracy is important, to be sure, but accuracy in and of itself is really a small part of a much bigger whole. It is what one does with the information presented that really counts, and this is what motivates me.

I don't find anything "deceptive" there.