The Cycle of No There There: 'UFO enthusiasts admit the truth may not be out there after all'

Once again, we see an item on how there's nothing to UFOs. Not from the overt and pathological skeptic crowd, but from the meh realm. UFO enthusiasts admit the truth may not be out there after all - Telegraph

This is not news. Oh, I don't doubt the debunkers and "skeptics" will jump all over this to support their ludicrous opinions on the UFO phenomena. It'll be juicy news for their disingenuous little black hearts.

We've seen this meme many times over the past few years. A few items here and there on how: UFO sightings are down, reports are down, UFO "enthusiasts" have given up, UFO organizations have closed their doors, and so on.

These fluffy little pieces circle around like black helicopters.

Feh.

The 'Goalpost' Paradigm

 “Which way you ought to go depends on where you want to get to...” ~ Alice in Wonderland, Lewis Carroll

Skeptics, debunkers, and believers alike accuse each other of "moving the goalposts." In the context of how the term is used -- pieces in a game -- it's true. (Skeptibunkies do "move the goal posts" all the time when it comes to anomalous subjects. They assume much: why and how Bigfoot, psychics, UFOs, and so on should behave, without doing any of the research. And if they've done the research, they'd realize one can't assume a thing.)

But let's forget that. Why use a sports or game analogy at all? By using a verbal marker like "goalpost" we're keeping alive the idea that there are rules. Rules that must be followed - goalposts -- and, along with that the idea that, since a game is being played, there are winners and losers. It's a battle, a contest. A competition. It's a preconceived framework, with rules, boundaries, winners, losers. Anything outside of the game is rejected because, of course, it doesn't fit in with this particular game. You don't insert the rules of chess into Monopoly.

As long as we accept this idea of a game, with posts to be moved, or not, we stay stuck. It's not a game! Or, maybe, like Alice, it is a game in the very loosest of meanings.

The rule is, jam tomorrow and jam yesterday-but never jam today

It must come sometime to jam today, Alice objected

No it can't said the Queen It's jam every other day. Today isn't any other day, you know”  ~ Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland

Why do we continue to force the unexplained into an established framework (the "game") when clearly, "it" meaning, the paranormal/Fortean/supernatural,  is playing by its own rules? If "it" is playing a game, it's one we don't know how to play. Insisting "it" play by our rules obviously isn't working.

Forget the "goalposts." Forget the game. At least, our game. I think if we stand back and watch for awhile as well as experiment, that would be both refreshing and revealing.

Just in Case, Rule Forty-Two

“Forty-two,” said Deep Thought, with infinite majesty and calm. ~ Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

I'll end with this little synchronicity. Earlier this afternoon I finished Minette Walter's The Scold's Bridle. One of the characters, a policeman, references Douglas Adams, author of The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. Specifically, the idea of the question, the answer and of course, how 42 plays into that. While working on this post, I looked up quotes from Alice in Wonderland, and came across this:

“Rule Forty-two. All persons more than a mile high to leave the court.” ~ Alice in Wonderland, Lewis Carroll

Grass Roots Welcome Committee

The latest scandal in UFO Land -- Phil Imbrogno's lies about his academic and service background -- is still being discussed. I'm not supporting Imbrogno's lies, nor defending him for doing so. His ideas about things UFO -ish are still interesting, and, while not new, still worth exploring. I had respect for Imbrogno and am sorry this happened. But, it does seem clear it did happen. Which made me wonder: why would someone feel the need to lie about his or her background, when it comes to UFOlogy? Phil Imbrogno isn't the first person to have been exposed for lying about his credentials, and realistically speaking, he probably won't be the last. Yet, why do some people feel they need to lie, in the context of UFOs?

UFO culture is a grass roots culture. Anyone --- despite the UFO Police and snarky researchers who dismiss whatever, or whoever, they don't agree with -- can live in UFO Land. (Well, except scofftics.) Anyone. It doesnt' matter if you have degrees or not, or what those degrees are in. Degrees do not denote intelligence; oh, they point to a specific type and tell us the degreed person has focus and perseverance in order to receive that degree. Don't misunderstand me, I am not "anti degree" and I have one myself. [Sidebar: full disclosure in case anyone tries to out little ol' me: I have an Associate Degree in Early Childhood Ed, a Bachelor's in English lit with an emphasis on Folklore, a Certificate in Ethnic Studies and Folklore, and two years of grad school. ] Does this make any more or less qualified than anyone else? Nope. Not a damn bit. I'm intelligent if discussing Beat poetry or folkloric applications but a goddamn dummy when it comes to math, business or 12th century military history.

So why do some feel the need to lie or exaggerate in context of UFO research? I have a theory. Ahem.

It's the damn debunker skeptoids. As well as those within UFOlogy, many of whom are in the UFO Police camp, who drone on about being "scientific" and academic and all kinds of -ics. No, I'm not implying science is useless, of course it isn't. We need it all in UFOlogy. But because someone holds a degree in the sciences, or at the least, in academia, does not make them any more qualified in any way to research UFOs. Not one damn bit.

In this culture we place a lot of esteem onto those who have college degrees. We automatically think they're smarter and better than the rest of us. Studying UFOs is a fringe thing to do, a kooky, silly thing to do. You're not serious or smart if you consider UFOs to be anything more than a curiosity. (I know, some co-workers and acquaintances think I'm not as smart as they thought I was, once they find I'm "into" UFOs. Surely someone intelligent wouldn't waste their time...) Some think that having a degree gives a little bit of legitimacy to an illegitimate field.

But there's no need. No need to lie about your background, whatever it is. As long as you're using your head, are truthful and honest and following your own voice, you can't go wrong. Despite what some others might say to you about that, the research and the work will stand on its own. And that's all you need.

Career Advice From Uber Skeptoids

Oh for crying out loud: Requirements to be a UFO investigator by way of the JREF.

Not at all unexpected but head bashingly annoying all the same. Here's what the OP wrote:

My 12 year old nephew wants to be a UFO investigator, he asked me what qualifications he needs

I told him

1, you need the ability to believe in something with no supporting evidence

2, you need the ability to ignore facts and evidence to the contrary while inventing a reason for doing so

3, you need the ability to not be a critical thinker

4, you need a tin foil hat

5. you need to have zero credibility from your peers

There are many comments, well, all comments, that follow which are the usual batch of pathological debunking/jokey crap, but this one really got me for its typical and cheap fall back onto classism:

All you need to be a UFO Investigator are:


- A single-wide trailer.
- Electrical service.
- A fridge full of beer.
- An internet connection.
- A five-year old computer.
- A ten-year old CRT monitor.


It's that third one that eliminates him from the profession -- you need to be 21 in most (all?) states. 6th-grade grammar and spelling skills are useful as well, but not necessary.

Shermer's Gorilla Suit Man

Michael Shermer, uber-skeptoid and professional debunker, did an experiment at the recent 2009 Science, Technology and Research Symposium in Charleston to show that Mothman (which he admits to knowing nothing about), Bigfoot (to which he says he does) and other paranormal/Fortean/esoteric/anomalous phenomena are figments of over-active imaginations, but more than that,illustrations of why we lie:

We already know that people lie; that happens all the time. ... The more interesting question is why do people fall for it," he said.

In other words, people who speak of witnessing UFOs or other strange events, are lying.

Sure, people lie about their experiences. They elaborate, embroider, exaggerate and outright lie. They hoax and they pull pranks. They're delusional and mentally ill, they're alcoholics and drug abusers. Some people. And for some people in that category, they present to the world tales of UFOs, strange creatures, aliens and visits to Venus.

Those aside, thousands upon thousands more people without that baggage -- and even with some of that baggage, does not automatically exclude the experience of such phenomena or cause it -- have encounters with the weird that cannot be explained by tired exercises into so-called rationality. Such as Shermer's. (Warning: ad hom ahead. "Smirking Shermer" as I like to call him. Come on, the man smirks for crying out loud. He's so taken with himself.)

Shermer instructs an audience to watch a video of basket ball players, watching for:

the number of times six young people passing basketballs, three of them in white shirts and three in black shirts. He asked the crowd to count how many times the three in white shirts passed the basketball to each other.

Afterward, Shermer had the crowd call out answers. Then he played the video again, telling everyone just to relax and not worry about counting passes this time. And to the amazement of many, about halfway through a person in a monkey suit walked from out-of-frame into the middle of the scene, paused, gave a friendly wave and then promptly walked off screen.

This proves, says Shermer, that people see what they want to see. Er, that means we don't want to see a man in a gorilla suit at the Lakers game?

What it says to me is this: when something weird and unexpected happens, especially in the midst of a mundane event, like a basketball game, we don't notice it. Which then means , that the weird, the unexpected, like say, a Mothman or a Bigfoot, even a UFO, goes right by us. It literally can be in front of our noses and we won't deal with the strangeness. In fact, when something highly unusual is going on, and the one or two people who do happen to be aware of it point it out to others, most people refuse to even look to see for themselves.

Shermer had his own out of body experience. Under laboratory conditions, don't you know. Which proves that no such thing as astral projection and OOBEs occur, since it can be recreated in the laboratory:

Shermer said he once had an out-of-body experience successfully recreated under laboratory conditions. It had nothing to do with his consciousness actually leaving his body.

This is another standard, and very tired meme of the uber-skeptic: that because something paranormal/anomalous can be recreated in the lab, it doesn't exist. Rather, it doesn't exist paranormally; of course it exists, they just recreated it! (The same is said of hoaxes, as the recent hoaxed UFO lights showed: to the skeptoid, UFO hoaxes "proves" that UFOs don't exist.)

Why do we insist upon "believing weird things" as Shermer so often phrases this conundrum of human existence? It has to do with evolution:

As for the reason people believe strange things, Shermer said it is rooted in humanity's evolutionary history and its psychological drive to connect invisible causes to the events around them. That movement in the grass may be the wind or it could be a predator.

Or fairies! It's fairies!

If we think of the movement in the grass as a predator, we're good ... Shermer concludes that if we think the worst: "better safe than sorry" then we believe that forces control the things we can't explain. Like a lion in the grass? Huh?

Shermer's presentation didn't prove a thing, but of course, the choir he preaches to think otherwise.

Soure: Science vs. ESP: Skeptic Ponders UFOs, Mothman

BVM, e-books, the dangers of Bigfootry, esoteric women,

On UFO-Mary I have several new posts, including one on the Mexican edition of Playboy magazine, with it's Virgin Mary like model on the cover. Just in time for the pilgrimage to the shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe.

I've been experiencing a few synchroniciites related to the image of Mary, as well as Goddess energy in general. It's not surprising to find that when ones attention is really directed at something; UFOs, what have you, the synchronicities appear!

Chris Holly is a new contributor to Women Of Esoterica. Her first post is a ghost story; visit Women Of Esoterica and read Holly's, as well as entries by Kithra, Richelle Hawks, Lesley Gunter, Karyn Dolan, Farah Yurdozu, and myself.

Snarly Skepticism; also the unofficial JREF Watch, I just decided, has an entry on the dangers of Bigfoot research. Yes, dangers. The harm Bigfoot research, and just a "belief" in Bigfoot, must be told! Beware!

Usually my Trickster's Realm column for Binnall of America goes up on Monday, but recently things have been changed around a bit. So my column won't be up until Thursday. I write about the Darklore, Volume II that just came out. Speaking of, it'll make a great gift! You can find out about ordering information at Amazon.com or the Daily Grail site.

It's been snowy here, which I don't like. It's wet, it's cold, what's the point? Fortunately I don't have to go anywhere these days; I"m off for winter break for three weeks. So I'm cozy in my house, trying to work on various writing projects.

And speaking of writing projects, visit my Lulu.com storefront. I plan to have a few more things available -- some for free -- in a few days.

I was going to be on the X-Zone radio show but still sick with some cold/throat thing. I'm much better but my throat still hurts and I sound like a frog. I'm sure in a few days I'll be fine, and will post the date when I know more.

---

Read about juicy McMinnville UFO-gossip here!

UFO Mania!

Trickster's Realm
I got my dates mixed up and didn't realize my Trickster's Realm column wasn't due 'til next week, so no new TR today.

UFO Magazine's The Green Room: Stephenville Lights and the Creepy Beam
I do have something up at UFO Magazine's blog The Green Room: Stephenville's Creepy Beam: The Return of the Stephenville Lights and a Creepy Beam of Light

UFO News: They're Here!

"You sure don't look like an iguana." ~ V, 1983

Some amazing UFO news from a variety of places that seems to be just . . . there, here, on the Internet and in small places. UFO Magazine's blog has some interesting items on UFO news. We're in a UFO flap and have been for at least a year now. MOD and others are releasing their UFO files and basically are saying "Well, UFOs are real, and we don't know much what to do about it." It's exciting to those of us who are immersed in this world, but outside it's business as usual, and yet, "they're here!" and it all seems so . . . casual. And I think if the Big D (disclosure) would ever to take place, it would be in this way: just a plethora of quiet little items, casually dropped about but without any mainstream big time fanfare, until . . . "oh, yeah. the alien dudes. kinda freaky, huh?' and then back to work on Monday. We'll be going fucking nuts over this of course, including "told yas!" but the uber-skeptics would still be fighting with each other, with us, with anything that they even think gives off the faintest whiff of woo. Now and then there'll be something about "alien rights" akin to animal rights, or like something out of the television series V.

UFO Hunters New Season This Wednesday
UFO Hunters new season starts this Wednesday on The History Channel. 10:00 pm Eastern time.

Things

Snarly Skepticism
Lots going on at Snarly Skepticism. I had to change the comment settings after getting a few nasty comments (ah yes, the ad homs and the skeptic!) so sorry about that, but there's three, four at least new items up there.

Vintage U.F.O.
I have something about creepy clowns on Vintage U.F.O., which fits in a bit with my Trickster's Realm column on Binnall, which will be up sometime on Monday. That column is about "MIBs, Clowns and Helicopters," inspired mostly by Tim Beckley's The UFO Silencers, but also Chris O'Brien's Mysterious Valley books.

James Rich, Artist
I've been shamelessly promoting my husband's work everywhere. He's finally finished taking images of his paintings and finding a good art hosting site at Yessy.com. He has literally hundreds of paintings, so be sure to check it out regularly; he's putting up images daily.

Lulu.com: E-Books
So are, I only have one little thing up there; a collection of articles on the Trent UFO case and the McMinnville, UFO Festival. I'll more things up there in the weeks to come. You can see what's available on my Lulu Storefront.

Randi's "Hot News"

Oy. Must have been a slow news day for Randi,who, in his recent JREF newsletter, has an item captioned Hot News" on Uri Geller's name, as if this is some deep dark earth shattering revelation.

Sunday Round Up of Self Promotion

A few new things at my Bigfoot blog Frame 352.

And at Mating Hedgehogs.

Not much elsewhere, the new UFO Magazine isn't yet out, but should be soon. Look for my article on Daniel Fry, as well as all the other great articles that will be available.

I'll be in Los Angeles beginning Thursday; family wedding. I'll have my laptop but don't know how much writing I'll get done.

However, I am working a lot of various things, as always, including something on chemtrails, referencing Colin Bennett's article on the subject,(Chemtrails and UFOs) for example. My trip to Los Angeles should prove interesting regarding chemtrails. Also: UFO Semantics, or the Semantics of UFOs, something like that. It's a lost cause but I get annoyed and rant about it anyway. You can't "believe in" UFOs, UFOs are not aliens, UFOs do indeed exist, etc. The most convulted "reasoning" about this was a thread on the JREF (James Randi forum) -- something about why are UFOs considered "paranormal?" Nothing of the Trickster like events within many UFO events, or any of that, but a surreal post about extraterrestrials could be out there, but UFOs aren't, no one's proven UFOs exist, ... I dunno. Is it just me?

More Skepti-ness: Randi’s “Challenge”

From the PsiPog.net blog, an entry on the author’s experiences with members of the JREF forum, (James Randi Educational Foundation) Randi himself, and an assistant.
Beware Pseudo-Skepticism I’m not at all surprised by what the author (who calls himself Peebrain) has to relate; it mirrors much of what I’ve personally experienced and observed through the years. And, as so many of us ask: why can’t people just be nice? Sheesh, such a prickly bunch. Far more important of course, and the real issue, is the lack of forthrightness on their part.

SKEPTO REVAMPO: SKEPTICISM GOES HOLLYWOOD

source:http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2002/Dec-31-Tue-2002/photos/chicago.jpg

Recently
CSICOP changed its name. From the ponderous CSICOP (Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal ) to the sleek and bright CSI. Yes, “CSI.” Not the TV CSI, but CSI for Committee for Skeptical Inquiry. CSICOP, er, CSI, has gone Hollywood. Slicker, shorter, brighter, juxtaposed with the hipness and scientifically aligned TV program of the same name, skepticism has gone Tinsel Town.

Will this name change garner a lawsuit from CSI, the TV franchise? That would be delicious; after all, we all know CSI, er, the skeptic CSI, not CSI the TV show, would sue in a heartbeat if they were pissed off enough at someone. Speaking of
sue happy skeptics, The Amazing Randihas had his fun going after participants of the strange; (if they’re not going after him.)

“Name change reflects growth, focus on science and reason” assures the blurb from their website. (Did any of us have any doubt as to the purpose of CSICOP?) Of course, given the scurrilous history of CSCICP in that regard, it’s no wonder they want a name change. There was never anything of a ‘scientific” inquiry towards UFOs, the paranormal or Forteana, (the

sTARBABY scandal proves that.) In fact, many of CSICOP’s/CSI’s media skeptics do not have a science background.

The new CSCIOP is no longer solely concerned with debunking UFOs or ghosts. There’s a higher moral imperative:

“Today there are new challenges to science,” Kurtz writes in Skeptical Inquirer. “Yet powerful moral, theological, and political forces have opposed scientific research on a whole number of issues.”

While that may sound rational and reasonable (no sane person believes creationism mythologies should be taught in a science class) that’s a hell of a scary statement. The danger here is the potential of cultural cleansing by the chronic skeptics of all they deign to be “unscientific.” (See: Colin Bennett: Skepticism as Mystique: A Fortean Essay in Rationalist Panics and Skeptical Dementia, UFO Magazine vol 21, No.10 December 2006 ,George P. Hansen:CSICOP and the Skeptics: An Overview, Robert Anton Wilson:The New Inquisition)

This journey has been a long one for CSCIOP/CSI. In 1997, CSCICOP held its first

”Council” in Hollywood. Hollywood was chided for airing “pseudoscientific” programs “almost every month.”

"Recently there have been programs on prophecies, astrology, psychic powers, creationism, Noah's Ark, angels, and alien abductions," said the Council. All of them posed, in some way, as being based on scientific fact."

The Council also criticized the many talk shows devoted to the paranormal in which claims in favor of the paranormal are given a platform but the scientific viewpoint is rarely allowed.“

Back in 1997, CSICOP/CSI
bought media stock in its efforts to quash hokey documentaries on UFOs and Bigfoot:

"In its latest effort in the battle against fringe-science TV, the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP) and it's "media watch-dog" arm, the Council for Media Integrity (CMI), established the "Media Stock Fund." Aimed at providing leverage for CSICOP's response to the television industries lucrative commercial marketing of fringe science and psuedoscience, CMI is asking friends and supporters to help it aquire common stock in media conglomerate companies. The Media Stock Fund will allow CSICOP and the CMI to take part in shareholder meetings, where it can question the increasing infatuation with the paranormal in television programming."

"We are deliberately targeting each of the major television networks and well-known media conglomerates - Viacom (CBS), General Electric (NBC), NewsCorp (Fox), AOL/Time Warner (WB, Turner Broadcasting, CNN), and Disney (ABC)," says Paul Kurtz, chairman of CSICOP”

CSICOP/CSI has been working on joining the hoi poli and entertainment media for awhile now. Note the CMI:Council for Media Integrity, and the lack of the words "science" or "skeptic" within.

Other skeptic organizations have been been busily remaking themselves. The JREF (James Randi Educational Forum) forum has recently changed its look on its website and forum. I’m not sure how long ago it took place, but I noticed it a month or so ago. New look, new colors. Still serious though of course. Somber maroonish brown and bold black; veering on hip but still too classic to be considered at all edgy, it conveys what it's meant to convey: serious inquiry of non-serious things.

And now
Randi’s revised the infamous “Challenge.” (The challenge is an award of one million dollars to any claimant who demonstrates paranormal powers. No winners so far.)

The reason for the changes has to do in part with people flapping about the JREF offices, or laboratories, or wherever it is they test these hapless, optimistic entrants:

"We can't waste the hundreds of hours that we spend every year on the nutcases out there -- people who say they can fly by flapping their arms," says Randi. "We have three file drawers jam-packed with those collections.... There are over 300 claims that we have handled in detail."

This new Challenge will only take those with head shots. Meaning, JREF is going Hollywood as well, just like CSI. Applicants now have to have been on the news or have some other media oomph behind them before they’ll be allowed in to the Challenge. They’ll have to have press clippings and those press clippings have to be “backed up by academia.” Someone from a University (does the Community College count?) has to support the applicant’s claims.
Ah, but it can’t be just any moldy old academic.

"They have to get some academic to endorse their claims," says Randi. "And that academic is not the local chiropractor or some such thing."

Quite a Catch 22 there: really, what academic that “the Challenge” people would accept, would back a paranormal claim? As soon as one does such backing of such claims, such academic is kicked rudely to the curb by inhabitants of Randi Land. You can’t take those academics seriously! After all, they back claimants to “the Challenge!’

Randi and the JREF are nothing if not good citizens, altruistically protecting the rest of us from the evils of fake psychics. Which, in Randi World, includes all
psychics;

“Randi says he'll start actively investigating professional mind-readers and mediums for proof of criminal fraud, or opportunities for civil lawsuits. “

I see potential here for some sort of reality based SKEPTO program, in partnership with the sleek bright CSI (sceptic CSI, not TV CSI), where a strange hierarchy of skeptics, seers and paranormal claimants ar pitted against each other. Guest hosts Penn and Teller are sure to enjoy themselves when it comes to be their turn at mocking the weird. Maybe Donald Trump will add some cash to the Challenge’s coffers. (cue Billy Flynn singing ‘Razzle Dazzle”) Lights and music come one while the rainbow colored confetti swirls down among the skeptics, the audience, and the somewhat dazed cons tenants.

"We're going to pick people every year and hammer on them," says Wagg. "We're going to send certified mail, we're going to do advertising. We're going to pick a few people and say, we are actively challenging you. We may advertise in The New York Times.

Boy, sounds like fun.

Yes, they’re going for the glamour, the gold, the gusto for sure. Spending years sneering at those UFO book writers and TV psychics for making money off their stuff, the JREF and CSICOP (damn, I mean CSI) is now working towards doing the same thing.

It’s all just ‘Flim Flam.’

Razzle Dazzle
Artist: Richard Gere Lyrics
Song: Razzle Dazzle Lyrics
BAILIFF(Spoken)
Mr. Flynn, his honor is here

BILLY(Spoken)
Thank you. Just a moment.
You ready?

ROXIE(Spoken)
Oh Billy, I'm scared.

BILLY(Spoken)
Roxie, you got nothing to worry about.
It's all a circus, kid. A three ring circus.
These trials- the wholeworld- all show business.
But kid, you're working with a star, the biggest!

(Singing)
Give 'em the old razzle dazzle
Razzle Dazzle 'em
Give 'em an act with lots of flash in it
And the reaction will be passionate
Give 'em the old hocus pocus
Bead and feather 'em
How can they see with sequins in their eyes?

What if your hinges all are rusting?
What if, in fact, you're just disgusting?

Razzle dazzle 'em
And they;ll never catch wise!

Give 'em the old Razzle Dazzle

BILLY AND COMPANY
Razzle dazzle 'em
Give 'em a show that's so splendiferous

BILLY
Row after row will crow vociferous

BILLY AND COMPANY
Give 'em the old flim flam flummox
Fool and fracture 'em

BILLY
How can they hear the truth above the roar?

BILLY AND COMPANY
Throw 'em a fake and a finagle
They'll never know you're just a bagel,

BILLY
Razzle dazzle 'em
And they'll beg you for more!

BILLY AND COMPANY
Give 'em the old double whammy
Daze and dizzy 'em
Back since the days of old Methuselah
Everyone loves the big bambooz-a-ler

Give 'em the old three ring circus
Stun and stagger 'em
When you're in trouble, go into your dance

Though you are stiffer than a girder
They'll let you get away with murder
Razzle dazzle 'em
And you've got a romance

COMPANY(The same time as BILLY's)
Give 'em the old
Razzle Dazzle

BILLY
Give 'em the old Razzle Dazzle
Razzle dazzle 'em
Show 'em the first rate sorceror you are
Long as you keep 'em way off balance
How can they spot you've got no talent
Razzle Dazzle 'em

BILLY AND COMPANY
Razzle Dazzle 'em
Razzle Dazzle 'em

And they'll make you a star!