Gatekeepers: On Whose Authority?

UFO Gatekeepers. They come from all sides; uber-skeptics, debunkers, as well as those who believe, but insist on scientific approaches to exploring all that is UFO. The Gatekeepers wrangle one tentacle of the UFO Kraken, ignoring the rest -- even while it strangles them -- rejecting the elements that annoy them.

They decide who gets to, what methods, which cases.

On what authority?!

There is none.

James Mcgaha, uber-debunker, asks UFO witness if "she's qualified to look at the sky"

There is no UFO Authority, no matter how desperately some want there to be. There is no Official Method, case, researcher, witness, spokesperson.

No one is more, or less, qualified than anyone one else in this realm.

As soon as someone starts spouting off a need for standards: academic, scientific, "legitimate" cases, etc. I do not take them seriously.

Honesty is expected, at all times. That's about all we should expect. Sincere desire to explore, to share, to research, while holding the ball of integrity.

Other than that, the rest is a form of bullying. Self-righteous and arrogant demands to join, if you don't, then you're not honest, sincere and legitimate.

Rejecting Witness, Assassinating Character...

Self elected UFO Police, whether it's someone who runs a podcast or forums, or researchers who get up organizations with manifestos and rules about what speculations will and will not be entertained, are annoying, sure. They're liars. They're manipulators. All that is certainly a drag, but, while on the surface it may seem like petty bullshit, it's actually very dangerous.

It's dangerous because pundits decide, for whatever personal whims and biases of their own, that a witness is full of crap. Whatever witness comes forward with her or his story, these would be gurus of UFO Land are no better than the psycho-skeptoids who debunk fringe topics, including UFOs. Demands are made by these Flying Saucer Fascists that the witness reveal their true name. Sometimes it is their real name, but try convincing these thugs of that. Other times anonymity is absolutely understandable, to protect family or jobs, but that's not good enough for those who make these demands. The goal posts are moved -- again something the uber-skeptic does constantly -- but it's baffling when UFO folk do it. The witness is expected to suddenly be of the highest caliber of UFO researcher, familiar with all of UFO history and theories. The witness is supposed to stop "whining" if they tell their story, or portray themselves as a "victim." And yet these same little fascists tell us they want to solve the Big UFO Mystery; collect data, and do diligent research. How can any of that happen if the witness is rejected? If the witness is consistently treated with insults, suspicions and even threats? 

And great goddess help the witness if they question theory or, worse, reveal their personal interactions with a researcher that conflict with ones' personal views.

The witness doesn't owe anyone anything. As a given, in all human interactions of every kind, honesty and integrity are expected. I assume those are present when talking with a witness. If it turns out they're not -- the witness is a lunatic or a liar, then, oh well, that's life. I'll  survive. UFOlogy will survive. Back to the star map. If a witness trusts me to share their story, I owe that witness, actually. I owe them respect and I owe them the honoring of their experience by retelling it faithfully and being honest in my responses to that experience. I may not understand their experience, or share the same cultural world views (ie, religious experiences) but that doesn't mean the witness is a liar.

Distractions and Paranoia
Meanwhile, all the insults and lies and attacks continue. The accusations of what someone said, without support, are made. Either the ones telling these made up stories about witnesses or writers they don't like are genuinely mistaken, or they're liars. Hard to believe adults can be so stupid as well as petty but UFO World and its cousins, like Bigfoot World, certainly have their share of stupidity. Egos are huge in the Flying Saucer Universe. No proof is provided to back up accusations, yet accusations are made. I know, amazing!

It's a distraction.  Those who smugly attack others for sometimes ridiculous reasons (like their use of the English language-- they don't get it, so the writer is the buffoon, not them), accusations without support when called on it, or, more profoundly, attacks, slanders, slurs and literally libelous statements about crimes that were never committed, actual research and data reporting are being ignored.

It's incredible to me many of these characters are held in some kind of high UFO regard as credible contributors to UFO research.

The Debris Field: The Wake Up Now Conference - why was it important and what does it mean for Albuquerque now and in the future?

Lesley Gunter was a part of the team that brought The Wake Up Now Conference to Albuquerque-- how I wish I could have been there! It would have been wonderful to meet Lesley in person after all these years, and to meet and hear all the speakers. I'm glad it was a success, and you can read more about it here:
The Debris Field: The Wake Up Now Conference - why was it important and what does it mean for Albuquerque now and in the future?

Brazen Hussies Invade Earth! Serious UFO Research Attacked!

 Cigarette Smoking Woman Single-handedly brings down UFO research! In her slip, no less!

Disclosure:  I write for both the on-line 'zine, UFO Digest, as well as the print publication UFO Magazine. 

When Deirdre O'Lavery of Interstellar Housewife and JAR announced she was UFO Magazine's newest columnist, I was thrilled. She shared some of her ideas for her column's title with myself and a few others, including fellow UFO Magazine columnists Lesley Gunter at The Debris Field  and Alfred Lehmberg of Alien View.  The one column title that really said "Deirdre" to me was Saucers, Slips and Cigarettes, which is the one she chose.

A member of the Stuffed Shirt faction of the UFO Police doesn't appreciate Deirdre's cheeky 'tude, the brazen hussy, she.  David P. Kuhlman, FFSc, in his article for UFO Digest (UFO Mag Columnist is an Insult To Readers,) tells us why O'Lavery's column is offensive. Clues to Kuhlman's personal philosophy can be found in comments like the following: 

Do people give in to secular pressures, which can change the outlook and product for everyone? [bold and italics mine]

Indeed, in another article he wrote for UFO Digest; An Alien Reasoning, Kuhlman wrote:

I am a Christian. I was brought up through the years in church and I have strong roots with all Christian beliefs. I believe in God.

The use of the word "secular" in this context is clear: Deirdre O'Lavery has been seduced by the devil and away from the light, and is bringing the rest of us down with her into the roiling pits of hell.

John Collier, Lilith, 1892

Kuhlman goes on for quite awhile discussing what we all know far too well: UFOlogy has a difficult time being taken seriously, hoaxes hurt us all, there are good researchers who are "respectable," but some are not, and they're talking the rest of us down.  One of those who are not respectable, writes Kuhlman, is Deirdre O'Lavery, who should cause us all not only "concern" but "out-rage." Something about slips and cigarettes causes Kuhlman great distress:

Paging through to the seventh one [column] I noticed an unfamiliar face, a columnist. It initially caught my glance simply because I am familiar with the magazines layout since I read it often, and I knew this was a new addition immediately. I was curious and thumbed back to the index page and sure enough, the magazine had added a new columnist to its list, Ms. Deirdre O’ Lavery, Hmmm… never heard of her. Instantly I knew this was the place to start my reading journey through this months issue and quickly paged back to the column titled “Saucers, Slips, and Cigarettes”. That is where my blood began to boil!

I understand not liking a column, but really, his "blood began to boil?"  Sex, -- especially the "wrong" kind of sex, as in, anything you don't approve of between consenting adults -- is clearly the issue here, not UFO research. Women should be demure; we should speak softly and refrain from being sassy. Especially if we're wearing underwear. (Note to Kulhlman: some people prefer that kind of thing.)

The title of the column was strange I thought after reading it, it really didn’t seem to “fit” a serious publication on UFO research, but sometimes the title is to get the attention of the reader and it certainly did its job there and at least one word did correlate with the cigarette hanging out of the side of Ms. O’ Lavery’s clown painted, rose red lips. [italics mine]

Deirdre O'Lavery, get thee to a nunnery! And lest you think I am being overly flip here, Kuhlman himself is serious; of all the things in UFO land to get upset about, he finds O'Lavery's "rose red lips," cigarette smoking, and use of the word "slips" to be the targets of his repressed and misogynistic outrage:

"I have never been more agitated at any other piece of writing on UFOs than I am on this one . . . As I read I was disgusted and nauseated at her attempt to break the ice with the reader. Foul language and an utter sense of ignorance and disrespect to serious readers was her route. She goes on to write her column like a heathen speaks. [italics mine]   

He was nauseated? And "heathen?" "Heathen?" Did he really write that? Yes, yes he did. 

All that mishegas aside, he completely misunderstands O'Lavery's column, focusing instead not only on her lips but her "drunkenness":

Can people really take the UFO phenomenon seriously when it is painted that only sorry drunk people with no life dabble into this subject? Folks, this article is a disgrace to everyone that considers UFOlogy worth of investigation!

Kuhlman borders on the libelous; if it weren't so damn funny, it might be of concern. He not only finds Ms. O'Lavery "drunken," and what not but also believes she should be shunted off to the nut house:

She is certifiable for this piece of worthless paper with all of her slang and ignorant insight.

Her "slang?" Hey Daddyo, you sound like a real square!

Of all the columnists that write for UFO Magazine, this is the one that has caused Kuhlman --- after just one column! -- to stop reading the magazine altogether. If O'Lavery's one column can upset a supposed UFO researcher so much that he writes a rant about it and demands a "formal apology" from the publishers, then Ms. O'Lavery is one hell of a writer!

Painting by James Rich

One last point about Kuhlman's apoplectic response to Deirdre O'Lavery: he includes all of "us" (well, except for O'lavery) in his rant, beginning with his title: UFO Mag Columnist is an Insult to Readers. No, Kuhlman, it's not an insult to all readers; not to me, obviously. Speak for yourself. Clearly it's an insult to you, and possibly, to some others, so be it. But don't include me in your campaign to rid UFO land of Ms. O'Lavery. This is the problem with the UFO Police; they expect everyone to join them in their outrages and edicts about what they perceive to be right.

Congratulations, Ms. Deirdre O'Lavery, for bringing UFOlogy down to such a shameless level with just one column!

Vol. 2: UFOs and the National Security State

Richard Dolan's second volume of UFOs and the National Security State will be available about the second week of August. I just ordered mine! You can pre-order at Dolan's site here.

Open Up

I commented in my earlier post about something Stanton Friedman said in the interview with Tim Binnall: that UFOlogists shouldn't be embarrassed, and should stop being apologists for the UFO phenomena, even while studying it. I embrace this idea, even though I've been an apologist myself, and embarrassed, as to my telepathic New Agey side. Oh well, but there it is. It's true, it's me, there you go. I'd be a liar to pretend otherwise, and what do I care about smarmy self-appointed UFO authoritarian stuffed shirts who might make fun? Nothing I can do about the reactions of others. So I'll crunch my crystals all I like, thank you very much.

Meanwhile, all that aside, I understand some of the need to disassociate oneself from some aspects of the UFO phenomena. Under an often well meaning but misguided sense of credibility, many believe they need to slough off the gaudy, the loud, the silly, the weird, the uncomfortable. The logical thinking goes like this: "UFOlogy has enough problems being taken seriously, we can't afford such nonsense." Sounds quite sensible.

Just below the surface we find it isn't sensible at all. The UFO question isn't taken seriously at all by the infrastructure; never has, never will. At least, that's how it appears. It's because it's actually taken extremely seriously that they work very hard at giving the impression the opposite is the case. If that sounds like frustraintg gibberish, I'll agree it's frustrating, but it isn't gibberish. It's to be expected. That Trickster element is the swirling crazy making thing that it is, and yet, there are so many UFO researchers, pundits, investigators, etc. that don't get this. And as long as they continue to ignore the fact this Trickster trait is an innate part of the UFO phenomena, we'll remain stuck.

Not that we'll ever become completely unstuck. But is that the point anyway? To get the Big Question Finally Answered? Narrowly focused on a few minute details, some UFOlogists don't have patience or time to look around. They're missing a lot. Others say "Well, I did look, and it was fun/interesting/weird, but so what. It entertained, but didn't give The Golden Answer to the UFO Problem." Maybe that's part of the problem; seeing it as a "problem." Whether it's seen as a problem or a mystery, it's still full of contradictions, manipulations, high strangeness, and so much more. Expecting to get at the truth by excising the parts not understood or liked is pathological.

Others see themselves as doing some sort of service to "UFOlogy" -- attacking others, insulting, trotting out various witnesses or researchers and ripping them a new one. And these are the ones who accept that UFOs are a reality. With friends like that who needs a Shermer, Mcgaha or Nye? "But we need to be critical!" is the logical response. Yes, but unless one has proof, and I mean solid, real, actual, and legal proof that someone is a fraud, or a liar, it's a dangerous game to play. Libel and slander aren't far off. The rest is just bullying; being a big fat poopy-head simply because you can. Wow, good for you.

Along with all this: the Trickster element, the gaudy, weird, even embarrassing, the uncomfortable, is that "the UFO phenomena" includes us. "UFOlogy" isn't just the thing seen in the sky. We're also a part of the thing we call UFOlogy, or The UFO Phenomena . . . we are not separate from it. We are not objective, we are not immune, we do not stand outside while commenting on what goes on, we're in it. The very moment we decided to get involved, for whatever reason, we became a part of "ufology" just as much as all the rest of it. Some like to parse these things, labeling the various elements and rating them; dividing the players into inside or outside, liars or weirdos. . . doesn't matter. We're still all in it.

Instead of being combative and defensive while at the same time obsequious by whimpering at the infrastructure (government disclosure movement, academia, skeptoids, big science, religious institutions. . .) we need to relax. I don't mean relax standards or critical thinking, but relax so we can think. Think bigger, deeper, more openly. Consider. Open ourselves to more. To other.

We can't do that if we have our dukes up all the time.

Jesus Fucking Holy Christ; That’s Some “Mistake!”

Local (Eugene) UFO researcher Gordon Kaswell passed this news item on to me this evening:

Air Force investigates mistaken transport of nuclear warheads

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Six nuclear warheads on cruise missiles were mistakenly carried on a flight from North Dakota to Louisiana last week, prompting a major investigation, military officials have confirmed.
art.barksdale.b52.usaf.jpg

A B-52 is seen on the ground at Barksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana, in this file photo.

The plane took the cruise missiles from Minot Air Force Base to Barksdale Air Force Base for decommissioning Thursday, the Air Force said.

"This is a major gaffe, and it's going to cause some heads to roll down the line," said Don Shepperd, a retired Air Force major general and military analyst for CNN.

Shepperd said the United States had agreed in a Cold War-era treaty not to fly nuclear weapons. "It appears that what happened was this treaty agreement was violated," he said.

Which prompted this decision:

The Air Force announced that all flights of fighters and bombers in the United States will be halted on September 14 to allow for a review of procedures.

It's Stanton Friedman Day!

Today it's Stanton Friedman Day. Who says? Some people, like this person: Fredericton honours world-renowned flying saucer expert, and why not? Stanton Friedman deserves it!

Kimball on Redfern

I started to respond to this item by Paul Kimball on his blog The Other Side of Truth about Nick Redfern, Nick Redfern on UFOlogy but it quickly became very long so I’m putting it here.

Kimball has a response to Nick Redfern’s contention that:

I predict that ufology will never be anymore than a subject that attracts a few thousand people on a regular basis (and maybe less now).

Many ufologists confidently think that the world is waiting for them to finally deliver the ET goods and go down in history.

They’re not. Most people outside could not care less about the petty arguments in ufology (and don’t know about it anyway) and unless someone really makes a major breakthrough (along the lines of proving that Roswell was ET, for example), we will not be remembered by science, the media or the public.

I've been saying this for ever: the one, final Answer, The big Answer, about ufos will never come. Never. It just can't, (in my opinion, partly due to the Trickster like aspects of the phenomena.)
Redfern goes on to say that if that answer comes, if it’s shown that ET does exist, science and the general population will forget about UFO researchers, pundits, etc:

In other words, we’ll be viewed as a group of people who looked into some unusual areas in search of the truth about aliens, but never really found any hard evidence that proved ET was visiting.

Ironically, if ET really does land, I personally think that ufology will be swept away in an instant as the public demands answers from the media, who in turn demand answers [sic] from the government and the mainstream scientific community.

(I agree with this, and I think the same would be true in the case of Bigfoot, Nessie, etc. If a dead BF body were found, if it were announced by science BF does indeed, exist, the same attitude towards BF researchers would be present.)

Kimball writes:

So, in the meantime, everyone should focus on the intriguing mystery, and have some fun, because that's what mysteries should be - fun.

This means that there should be room for some of the more "out there" theories (FYI - as far as the mainstream is concerned, that includes the ETH), even to the point of speculation. Where would I draw the line? When people are clearly lying, or when the theories and speculation goes so far as to be preposterous, at which point let 'em have it.

Exactly. some sort of inner journey-process thing going on for some us. And, I agree, if they do land and it's somehow proven UFOs exist (more to the point, that ET exists) UFO researchers will be ignored. They might be trotted out now and then for some entertainment value, but no one's going to really take them seriously; they'll be co-opted and appropriated. Used by the media and institiutions such as science for their own purposes. (The same would happen in the case of Bigfoot or Nessie.)
The public would be interested, as Alfred Lehmberg wrote in his comment to this item on Paul’s blog, and in that sense, the "folk" will jump in, but, being just the folk, no one's going to care. The institutions of science, academia, etc. aren’t going to bother with what will still be considered the fringe element. Even as it’s discovered that ET exists, there will still be areas of ufology that will fascinate, while ignored by the mainstream.

Years ago a professor of folklore told me that if ET were to land tomorrow, “it wouldn’t matter.” I didn’t understand what she meant at the time; what do mean, “It wouldn’t matter??!!” Of course it’d matter! What she meant was, in the context of folklore, it wouldn’t matter. People would still have their stories, the “folk” would continue to be marginalized by the mainstream and the approved institutions, individuals would still have their experiences. Various rituals, beliefs, and processes would evolve surrounding the discovery of ET, and take on their own flavor due to cultures and religious/spiritual beliefs. Even though ET has now been proven as a reality, various and new “realities” would quickly spring up surrouding ET, and it would start all over.

This doesn’t mean, as Kimball writes, we still can’t “have fun,” and for some of us, it’s more than “fun” (though it certainly is that too) it’s very personal on many levels. But that depends on how each of us is wired; we’re all of different temperaments.

It doesn’t matter to me that it will be highly unlikely we’ll ever find “the answer” because that’s not the purpose of this journey. (And, as I said, by definition it can’t happen anyway due to the Trickster aspect.)

So where does all this leave the “nuts and bolts” researchers? Those who work so tirelessly and do their best (most of them) to produce documents, evidence, facts of a case, to show the world? Nothing short of a dead body (be it ET or Bigfoot) that’s been independently verified by a whole slew of scientists will prove anything to the world. And then what? We’ll go on as before, except those of us who, as I mentioned, do this for other reasons other than “proving” something to others. Those diligent researchers will be trotted out as well as entertainment value, footnotes to the big reveal of ET.

That’s okay though, as cynical as it sounds. There’s the outsider element when the truth is concerned in “fringe” topics, and UFOlogy is no different. These same kinds of responses to Ufologists and Ufology apply to the Kennedy assassination and 9/11. If it were somehow proven to the world that the so-called “conspiracy nuts” were right about those things, they’d be briefly mentioned before once again sent back to the fringe while the approved pundits of society argue over minutae on CNN.

That’s just the way things are. It’s okay. After all, I’m having fun.

UFOs in Eugene?

UFOs in Eugene

Just a passing thought: doesn’t seem to be the same level of interest in UFOs here in the Eugene area as there is ghosts. Even though Eugene is considered a “mini UFO hot spot” (I read that somewhere) there isn’t any local UFO group. There’s a MUFON chapter in Portland, two hundred miles away. There’s a state wide paranormal society; TEPS (Trial’s End Paranormal Society.) Last time I heard from them, they were interested in starting up a UFO department, but don’t know what came of that. A new group is forming in Eugene; if I have their permission I’ll post more about it. Their focus seems to be on ghosts, although, again, they are interested in UFOs. Their first meeting is in a couple of weeks; maybe I’ll know more at that time.

There was also Oregon UFO Review, run by Eric Byler in Salem, Oregon. Oregon UFO Review had investigators all over the state, but last few times I’ve checked, they seem to have disappeared. If anyone knows anything about them, I’d appreciate an e-mail or comment.

There is a loose group of individuals here who are interested, and they meet informally a few times a year. I hesitate to name them; I don’t think they want the publicity. There isn’t any investigation going on, per se, but sharing of information and ideas.

The local media seems to have ignored UFOs in the past few years as well. Ten years or so ago, they were far more active.

I know there are plenty of sightings in the area; I hear about them all the time. I’m sure MUFON in Portland, NUFORC, etc. do as well. What purpose would a group serve? Not sure. First problem is, as soon as you have a ‘group” you’re in trouble. Too many meetings, rules, etc. I'm not wired that way. But a loose resource center for local, interested parties might be nice.

Tina Sena on "Skepticus Humanus"

Tina Sena, owner of the blog Yufology, also writes a column titled Esotericana for Tim Binnall's website, BOA.

Check out her latest: The Origins of the Species : Skepticus Humanus

List Those Blogs!

List your UFO blog here!

Skepticism vs. All The Other Kinds of Skeptoism

Hey, that’s it! Maybe. ‘Skepto’ to denote the rabid, pathological, fundie,mondo, irrational skepticism, and to separate it from normal, everyday, “real” skepticism.

While we do have skepti-bunkies, skeptoid, etc. that seems to offend those that wear those shoes (tough) and confuse some others.

I like Colin Bennett’s chronic and cultural skepticism terms, but that may be too esoteric.

Whatever term you use, and I’ll probably keep on using various forms of rabid-pathological-fundie myself, the point is: there is skepticism, and then there’s something else entirely hiding behind the goodly term of skepticism.

When it comes to UFOs, it’s not that I’m skeptical. As I’ve asked in the past, skeptical of what, exactly? That UFOs exist? Of course I’m not skeptical. That’d be stupid.

It’s illogical, and, well, pathological to hold yourself up proudly as a “skeptic’” and state that you “don’t believe UFOs exist.”

UFOs exist. People see them all the time. Whatever in the world is there to dispute, dahlings?

Personal interpretations of what those UFOs are, now, that’s a different matter. And stating, as fact, that they’re aliens from Mars, is not one bit skeptical. To be skeptical that UFOs are from other planets is a good and true thing.

This doesn't mean, however, that they couldn’t be from Mars. It’s possible. And in my opinion, it’s very likely they are. Or from somewhere. I suspect they are, and that’s my opinion. It’s not a fact, for no one knows. (Well, possibly “they” know, you know, “them” -- but they’re not telling.)

I’m very skeptical alien abductions are: A) carried out by aliens, and B) literal abduction events. I’m also equally skeptical alien abductions are merely road weariness or product of a sleep disorder.

As much as I respect and admire Stanton Friedman, and I do, I am skeptical of the veracity of MJ-12. I think he has been the ongoing target of a disinformation campaign, but I could be wrong. I hope I am. But the history of the source, or his leads, and of UFO disinfo itself, causes me to be skeptical.

Surprising as it may be to the anti-UFO “skeptic” there are skeptics within genuine UFOlogy as well. I remember many years ago, when I was involved in a local UFO study group. I voiced my opinion on abductions; how I think much of that is staged “MILAB’ stuff. I was almost run out of town on a rail. One person told me he didn’t want to be around me; he couldn’t bring himself to associate with someone like me who was “that paranoid.”

At a local UFO conference once, I was disinvited to speak, because I was too “negative.” My message? Beware the messenger. Too “negative” and they wanted to keep things upbeat. Christ, you would have thought I was talking about the Reptilian Overlords and vats of human body parts in Dulce from the way the conference facilitator carried on.

Anyway, I could go on and on, and I will at some point. Meantime, just know that there are those out there who are no mere skeptics, but a completely different breed altogether, wit no only a bias, but an agenda. There are levels and varieties to these types of course, from the hapless dupes who gladly grab onto the latest meme of anti-UFOism, to the intentional disinformation agents who put the latest anti-UFO meme out there for the dupes to pick up, gossip over, and pass along. There are the debunkers, and the pathological, the rabid, the irrational rationalists. There are the ones with the big egos who pride themselves on being educated and intelligent -- as they never fail to tell the rest of us , implying that many of us are not -- and carve out a niche for themselves as skeptics. Finally -- and this is based on my personal experience and observation -- those who are given to sarcasm and sneering ‘tudes, just for its own sake , seem to gravitate to the rabid skeptic side.

There are also those who I find particularly intriguing, though at the same time unctuous and nauseating, and that’s the mega-rabid anti-UFOist. So obsessed they are! They despise UFos, UFOlogy, UFO experiencers, UFO witnesses, UFO researchers, UFO “enthusiasts” so much, they write virtually daily on UFOlogy, and why it’s bad, evil, silly, stupid, dangerous, sad, pathetic, a waste of time. Why, they even lie at times! I know, it’s positively astonishing, isn’t it?

Well, I kind of went off there on a tangent, but nothing new there. Aside from my own brilliant insights into skepticism, there have been some very good entries on the topic by other bloggers as well lately. Greg Bishop, on UFO Mystic, and
Dustin of Odd Things. Dustin mentions Mac Tonnies; with a link to Wikipedia on Tonnies’ essay on Skepticism. Nick Redfern has also written something recently on UFO whistle blowers, and the need for skepticism.

One thing I’ve noticed about “skeptics” and UFO people -- and of course this is a generalization, based on nothing but observation - but it seems that the anti type of skeptic isn’t questioning. Unless, of course, they’re calling into question one’s sanity, character, and innate state of truthfulness. Compare that to the questioning of the UFO witness, or researcher. Most of us are doing nothing but questioning. The “true ‘bleevers” aside, most of us question quite a lot, while the fundie/rabid/pathological etc. “skeptic” does not. They believe there is nothing to question. They’re far from any honest, open “inquiry” they’re about denial, derision, and even a sort of cultural cleansing. Rid the world of “woo” -- in this case, flying saucer woo -- and let the questioning end, seems to be the goal.

Confessions of a UFO Dilettante (D. Brenton's blog)

Daniel Brenton, author of The Meaning of Existence and all that blog, has written another insightful, and reflective, piece on UFOlogy. Not only UFOlogy as UFOlogy, but all of us in here.

Like Daniel, and so many other bloggers out there who write on UFOs and Fortean things, I’ve had a fascination -- and personal experiences -- with UFOs and related things since childhood.

Brenton brings up the idea of ‘value’ in the context of a personal involvement with UFOs; all this blogging, writing, more writing, discussion, exchanges. A search indeed.

He also brings up the complicated matter of abductees and experience as well as UFOlogists, among other things.

It’s the “truth” and, as my favorite philosophy professor said to us years ago, the truth is different for each of us. Many call that a contradiction, others a paradox. Either way, it’s the truth. (hee.)

Whether one brings the personal to all this in terms of experiences of UFO sightings and all manner of paranormal/Fortean stuff, or the personal in the sense of . . . just themselves, somehow, their willingness to share some of themselves in their research, studies, documentation, it’s all good, it’s all needed, it’s all valid.

Most of all, it contributes in a real (or “truthful”) way towards this journey.