Around The Orb

New template, and new name, on my skeptic’s blog. It’s now Snarly Skepticism, and has some neat things, like the Bigfoot Threads on JREF and Still Counting on the menu on your right. (At last count I think it was thirteen.)

I’ve been having too much fun at Vintage U.F.O. -- lots of clips and things up right now. Nothing terribly insightful but fun. You might have noticed I made a slight change to that blog too; from Vintage UFO to Vintage U.F.O.

As always, I’ll plug Women Of Esoterica and Frame 352: The Stranger Side of Sasquatch.

---

Still reading Andrew Colvin’s Mothman Photographer’s II, which I’m enjoying very much. This isn’t to say I always agree with Colvin on some things; he has some very firm opinions. I won’t mention names but he doesn’t like a couple of people in the field I do find interesting, and likes someone I had a very nasty private exchange with, who frequents a well known UFO list. But his experiences and take on things is worth looking at; and the book has a lot of stuff by John Keel, which is great. I still think, after all this time, much of what Keel has to say about things makes sense. (So there’s an example of an “old” researcher whose contributions may be “old” but they’re hardly without value.) If nothing else, the book is fascinating for its mind boggling world of synchronicities and complicated connections from one seemingly mundane thing to a paranormal, UFO, global Illuminati thing. You can see how this stuff could drive someone mad . . .

---

The Contactees continue to fascinate me, and I’m just beginning to explore the idea of the time of their contacts. We think of the Contactee era has happening mainly in the 1950s and 1960s. But eras don’t exist in vacuums; any period in history overlaps with what went before, and what follows. Some of the Contactees experienced visitations earlier than what we typically think of as the ‘Contactee era.” What that could mean, I don’t know.

---

I’m so busy with my own blogging and writing, and “real” life, that I don’t acknowledge all the others who do great work -- and for free, which shows I’m not the only one obsessed. All the individual bloggers, listed on my links list, but also forums and places like Book of Thoth, or Binnall of America, or UFO Digest, or Stuart Miller's Alien Worlds. And Greenwald’s Blackvault. The Anomalist as well, even though they’re a publisher, and do make some money; but it’s not as if they’re all buying villas in Italy. All those places give the rest of us daily news and links to the realm of the weird, which is pretty neat.

And of course all those individual bloggers; that’s why it annoys me so much when people start writing about how others are wasting time, or should shut up because they’re not saying the “right things” about UFOs. Or worse, when they get downright insulting. No, you shut up. Neener neener. So there. Feh!

---

Have a good week!

The Snarly . . .

Sometimes I just have to laugh. Usually I ignore silly blowhards, but sometimes the mood overcomes me and I have to play.

Today's example: the UFO Provocateur(s) blog (now there’s an unassuming name) have decided that when all those in the UFO field die off, it will be a good thing. Oh Happy Day. The “UFO palate” (oh, pleeeeeze!) shall be cleansed, they tell us. Oy.

After the elders die off, the young will swoop in with new bright ideas and new bright energy and save UFOLogy from itself.

What a load of crap. Young, old, in between, people with diverse backgrounds and experiences, skills and perspectives are contributing their thoughts to UFOlogy and related fields. It’s mostly and usually a good thing.

If UFOlogy stinks, it isn’t because it’s “old people” or middle aged people, or baby boomers. It’s not because there is a lack of some holy UFO Organization, or union, or guild, or whatever the hell some people want to get up and running. (However,UFOlogy will surely start to reek of its own self importance if the latter ever happens. Which, happily, it won’t. It’s a glad thing that UFOlogy is full of all kinds of people, of all ages and types. What kind of rational being thinks you can get all these types of people together in one cohesive thing? How long will such a thing last before a group of ticked off individuals leave to start their own UFO Guild of UFO High and Mightiness? Then what? We’re back where we started, having lost a lot of time in the process.)

In fact, UFOlogy doesn’t stink at all. People who think that are mostly debunkers; anti-UFOists, snarly little skeptics. Some are actually inside UFOlogy themselves, but for some twisted reasons of their own, don’t like that fact much, so have to qualify their presence. That includes saying things like “UFOlogy is a circus,”
and bemoaning the sad, sorry state of things while sneering at others. They’ve come to the party and eat all the appetizers and drink all the booze but keep checking their watches. And they won’t stay to help clean up.

Meanwhile, the world outside of UFOlogy goes on, whether those of us inside are young, old, baby boomers, middle aged, or whatever. The mainstream media continues to ridicule and ignore, the authorities continue to cover-up, the relatives think you’re crazy.

Nothing is going to change that either. It’s the way of things.

So you either be brave and true within yourself, and do what you do, and tell your story. You learn about others and think upon them. You express yourself, you discover. You do your best to ignore the bozos. And here’s a clue little mister, the bozos aren’t the My Reptilian Lizard Lover victims, the bozos are the ones who think they’re above it all, who believe their views gives them the right to insult, as if being insulting is a sign of intellectual superiority. We expect that from the aforementioned snarly skeptics, the debunkers and those types. But when it comes from within, it's a different story.

They’re not only ill mannered little buggers, but naive little buggers. They don’t get that nothing much will change on the outside, no matter how many Approved UFO Think Tanks are created, or how dismissive they are about UFO experiences.

Now here’s fair warning: the part where I get all Shirley MacLaine-ish. Things on the outside are beginning to change, and humans have the potential to help that change, regardless of a “belief” in UFOs or things Fortean. Our thoughts and energy affect the ways things go. Calm down, I’m not ridiculous enough to think that’s all you have to do; wave a crystal around and you’re done. But focusing your intent and holding that intent on a daily basis can only help.

You can choose your intent, your battles, where to put your focus. You can grumble and poke things with sticks, or you can snap out of it and be a bit more compassionate.

The Scientology Meme: Mob Mentality

I’m no fan of Scientology, (had a personal negative experience with them involving a family member when I was young) but I’m no fan of organized religions or organized anythings. Like Groucho Marx once said:

I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.

On many esoteric blogs, as well as the anti-esoteric blogs and forums (otherwise known as “skeptics”) there’s been a lot of self righteous anti-Scientology posts. Well, yeah, okay. Let’s go after the Vatican, various Christian sects, Islamic extremists, the Raelians, Buddhists (just because they’re not American and are suspect you know), Yoga, and Jews. Oh, and Wicca. Let’s go after all religions, spiritual and philosophical systems. Get rid of them!

The reasons why so many all over the world are now going after Scientology have to do with its existence on the fringe. Everyone’s gone after all the above mentioned systems; and many of those systems (Catholics, Jews, Muslims) are accepted by mainstream culture. As soon as you step over that line of what’s accepted, you’re fair game. Scientologists, like Mormons and Wiccans for example. are suspect. Their rights to freedoms, in this country anyway, are swept off the table, because, well, they’re weird. And if we think it’s weird, really weird, then we get to vilify. We’ll leave the Methodists alone but don’t be going around saying you’re a Scientologist or practice Wicca. Then we’ll get you. Get you good.

Another reason for the smug sense of being Very Reasonable, is the fear of criticizing religious Muslim extremists for what they are: fanatics. We don't dare go near there for fear of staring up something, or being “anti Muslim” and vilifying an entire group of people.

The same with Judaism, though less so. Everyone from the Left to the Right and in between gets to insist they’re “not anti-Semitic, just anti-Israel,” before they launch into a long winded, often erroneous, mini history of why Israel is so evil. But that aside, most people leave that alone as well. (Wait, no they don’t, look at Rense.com.)

The point is, no, I don’t like Scientology. (Although, as with all of these systems, don’t be so quick to throw the baby out with the bath water.) But there are issues far bigger than Scientology to focus your wrath on. The occupation (er, “war”) in Iraq. Global warming/climate changes/whatever the hell you want to call it, we’re all gonna die save the earth damnit, alternative energies, child abuse, elder abuse, domestic abuse, animal abuse (Christ, we’re an abusive species!) poverty, education . . .

I’ve noticed that for those who proudly state they’re “skeptics” -- those very same who remain stubbornly ignorant of the facts when it comes to UFOs, who assume all kinds of wild things regarding the paranormal -- are quick to believe the most paranoid, outlandish things about things they want to annihilate.

I suppose one thing that bothers me in particular about this is the idea that those working so hard towards eliminating or “exposing” Scientology feel so damn proud of themselves, as if they’ve brought us a rare gift from another realm. This rare gift is presented as enlightenment from ignorance and superstition. It's an intellectual coup.

Kind of like what they do with UFO and paranormal topics. There are those within and on the fringe (the chronic skeptics looking in) of UFO studies who insist UFOlogy needs some sort of guild, organization, committee -- some kind of official body --- that will once and for all get rid of all that embarrasses and angers, and keep only what is approved. (Who gets to do the approving, and why, well, you see why it's a problem. . .)

Exercising our right to voice our opinions about these things is one thing, and exposing illegal or unethical methods is a good thing. Other than that, ranting on an almost daily basis, hacking into web sites and calling for blood seems over the top.

What disturbs me is the momentum. Worldwide, people have been unquestioningly and happily joining in protests against Scientology. And it’s this crowd gathering/one-mind vibe that has me worried. At some point, the lines blur: who are the ones acting as a mob, as a single unit, as a controlling mass? That’s scary.

Joseph Capp on The Breaking Point

A fresh perspective into UFOs and the people who see them is UFO Breaking Point, at UFO Media Matters, Joseph Capp’s blog.

Capp discusses the psychological effect on UFO witnesses, including witnesses with multiple sightings. He says, of disclosure:

I really have had strong problems with the idea that wide or complete public knowledge of ET presence would not be a profound shock to many, many people, that it must be assumed that the masses of regular people will simply go about their daily lives as though nothing happened.

On the contrary: I believe a kind of ET Shock would take hold. I suspect ET Shock would marginalize rational thinking in many people who need the safety blanket of Business As Usual in our busy, spin saturated world.

(I often say that, after a small period of adjustment, we’d all go back to normal, but I’ve been rethinking this recently. And here I find Capp’s comments on this topic; another bit of synchronicity. I think many subcultures and already marginalized groups wouldn’t be in shock -- they’ve been expecting it. But the infrastructures and mainstream, which after all are the ones that count as far as control goes, would be turned upside down. That’s why full disclosure won’t happen, and exopolitics, while well meaning, is a bit pointless. On the other hand, it’s presumptive of us to assume anything when it comes to this subject. But we can speculate, which is what we’re all trying to do; just deal with what we know so far and have experienced.)

Capp writes of his own UFO sighting, and the affect it’s had on him -- all these years later. As with my own “obsession” and so many others, those of us who’ve had sightings oftentimes spend years searching for clues and answers -- even knowing no one size fits all answer will ever come -- we still take part in the process of discovery. Why?

And this last paragraph was another bit of Synchronicty between my recent musings on the phenomena and Capp’s closing paragraph:

So in our own community we need to understand that UFO people are not “off” because they actually believe in UFOs; some of them have become “Off” by dealing personally with this profound, and often psychologically shattering experience as best as they knew how.

I’ve been thinking a lot the past few weeks about our isolation from each other, even within the field of UFOlogy and Fortean studies. Not only is our culture decompartmentalized, the subcultures of UFOlogy, etc. are as well. The often hostile divisions between nuts and bolts and more holistic theories, between paranormal Bigfoot and flesh and blood Bigfoot, and so on, further divide, and by doing so, reinforce the loneliness, uncertainties, and confusion within individuals. Throw in the skeptics -- who, like it or not are a part of this since they insist on being vocal on the fringes of the fringe -- and the experience is far from cohesive or supportive.

Our technological culture doesn’t allow for these kinds of experiences,including religious ones. We tolerate some mainstream religions and misuse the more fundamental varieties to strengthen the fascism and theocracy leanings of government,(the control aspect) but there is not a culture of acceptability when it comes to the spiritual, supernatural, paranormal esoteric world that has lived alongside us for millennia.

It’s not at all surprising UFO and other phenomena are kept at arm’s length by society. Unless the topic is to be dismantled (debunkers, pathological skeptics,) or exploited (entertainment, television programs on the topic) it’s still held out as highly questionable. You can voice your beliefs on Christianity at work, and come right out and say that “Halloween is a holy day and so shouldn’t be celebrated” and you’ll be treated with respect, no matter how grudgingly. Sure enough, no Halloween party will happen, and you’ll even have a few coworkers chide you if you use the word Halloween. (I know, I experience this every year.) Talk about your church and you’re tolerated, if not downright accepted as being “normal.” For the most part, say you're a religious person of an accepted religion, and you're "normal." The activist atheist excepted, those will be tolerated in society. Venture out just a bit though, and you're suspect; even Mormonism is off the edge. The message is: don't stray too far from the relgious paradigm. Mention UFOs or Bigfoot, and people literally snort in your face. This isn’t news to anyone of course.

The point is, in our society we’ve moved far away from the acknowledgment of “the other” to the point of outright denial it exists. And within the UFO arena, this same attitude exists among its own. It isn’t any wonder, as Joseph Capp points out, that those who experience these things often go through psychological trauma, and may appear to be lost, off, confused, shaken, or gullible. And at a certain point, those labels become just that; labels. If we aren’t willing to give some kind of support -- which doesn’t mean agreement or total acceptance -- I really think we should shut up. Those that come on heavy and thuggish aren’t contributing to the field in any way, despite whatever praise they receive. There’s no pride in coming off as a bully, or being snide. Rejecting various aspects of the phenomena as not worth the time for its perceived silly factor is not a sign of intellectual superiority; it’s a sign of intentional ignorance.

The obsessive path many a UFO experiencer or writer takes sometimes ends badly; even death. Suicides, mysterious deaths, mental illness, paranoia; UFO history has its share of people who've gone this way. Many of us accept this as a risk we take, and go on. It's a fact many were victims of government mind games; psy ops, mind control, intentional games played with the UFO witness or researcher to ensure his or her isolation, not only from society, but from their own sub-culture of UFOlogists. Their own families. And we're partly repsonbile, for allowing these divisions to exist, for allowing the petty grudge matches to go on, and all the rest of the ugly side of UFOlogy to continue.

Joseph Capp suggests there may be a Part II to the article; I hope so!

UFO Digest: "Are You Qualified?"

My rant on skeptibunker James McGaha on UFO Digest: "Are You Qualified?" (Ignore the text about Dana Howard, it looks like when they put the article up they inadvertantly added some text from my previous article on Contactee Dana Howard.)

Gleaning From “Numb3rs”

Is it ironic that a “scientific” TV show, appreciated by skeptics, is also one of my favorite shows -- and that I’ve gotten so much esoteric-Fortean use out of the show?

Numb3rs is a favorite show of mine. I like the combination of mystery, crime solving, science and mysticism. It’s also set in L.A., where I was born and raised, and I like the three lead mensch-like characters.

Besides entertaining me, Numb3rs has given me a bit of inspiration three times now for my esoteric writing. Awhile ago, I wrote an article about semantics and perceptions of UFOs, and used an example from a Numb3rs episode. In that example, the main character Don Epps, FBI agent, said, of UFOs: (paraphrasing)

“We don’t know what a UFO looks like, so how do we know one when we see one?”

That line inspired me to write several articles on the topics of UFO semantics and definitions, as well as denial and debunkery. (See my American Chronicle articles for more.)

In another episodes, the character Charlie Epps (Don’s younger, math genius brother) told his crime solving colleagues to “throw on more data.” The team was not making any progress in trying to solve a case; “throw in more data” was the solution. By including more data, the character explained, more patterns, more information, will be revealed, and the agents would get closer to solving the crime. That was the inspiration for a column I wrote recently for UFO Magazine: Throw On More Data:

What got me thinking about the UFO phenomena in light of Numb3rs was what the character Charlie (young math professor genius) said to an FBI agent when the agent asked for help in solving a mystery. No matter how many times the agent went over the data he had, he just couldn’t figure it out, yet he knew he could, knew there was an answer. If only he had the right formula, or was shown some way to get at it. The math genius told him to “throw in more data.”

Throw in more data. And by doing so, said the character, we can begin to see a “connectivity” between the clues that will lead the agent to his solution.

Throw in more data. And yet that what much of UFOlogy doesn’t do. We don’t see a “connectivity” because we’re divided, we argue, -- we downright fight and attack at times (forget the skeptoids,sometimes we’re our own worst enemies) -- we pick a theory or two and stick with it. More data, especially data that throws us off, is rejected. After all this time, we’re still arguing over nuts and bolts versus an ETH, or an ultra terrestrial theory. ~ (UFO Magazine, 2007)

This past Friday’s episode, about a serial rapist, served as another inspiration. It turned out the rapist had a MRSA (antibiotic resistant staph infection) STD. One of the agents, in explaining MRSA to her co-workers, said (again paraphrasing)

“There’s only one type of antibiotic that can kill it, but doctor’s don’t want to give it out.”

That line had me thinking about my own MRSA infection, the disconnects and jangled messages from various sources -- including doctors -- and so I wrote an article about MRSA and Morgellons and this oppositional juxtaposition in MRSA and Morgellons: Jangled Messages.(Hopefully it will be up at Book of Thoth in a day or two.)

So, thanks Numb3rs for your contributions to my continued inspiration!


Notes:
Image credits:
http://www.daemonstv.com/images/cbs/numb3rs1.jpg
amazing-tv-shows.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default

American Chronicle

UFO Magazine
Book of Thoth

Silly UFO Dream:Knocking Penn Gillette Right on His Keister

I know, reading about other people’s dreams is usually boring. But this one was funny, silly, and I’m sure pointless. So of course I’ll share it with you.

Starts off I’m going to go on the Phil Donahue program to be interviewed about UFOs. Keeping with dream logic, it didn’t matter that Phil hasn’t his own show for a hundred years. Anyway.

I’m pretty excited about that of course. No pay, but they were going to give me a free make-over and I could keep the high end fashion dress and accessories they were going to put me in. Naturally I went for it.

The dresser/make-up artist, young, blonde, very skinny, very ultra cosmo hip, and snooty as hell, comes with me. She’s insisting I try on these god awful dresses. I keep telling her what I don’t like, and that’s what she brings me every time! I’m being nice but come on. Then she tells me I’m “being difficult.” I pull rank on her: "I’m the guest, dahling, and I’m old enough to be your mother, so stop being so defensive and believe that I’m not out to get you, I just don’t look good in yellow and really dahling, I abhor puce.”

I end up in a pretty little number, a bit young and girly for me but it’s all right.

Time for the show. Which takes place in a shoddy basement turned rec room kind of space. The audience is up above, surrounding us; like in an operating theater. Phil’s nice; both he and the audience seem geniunely interested in UFOs. But, I’m astounded, and pretty pissed, to see Penn and Teller there. WTF???!!!! I call the producers on their lying ways, but too late. Anyway, my ego takes over; I want to discuss UFOs, and here I am.

So I wax poetic on the topic, amazing everyone. Penn is sitting back in his swivel chair, feet up on a table, making rude noises at me the whole time. Finally he makes some stupid ass comment about the whole thing; typical pathological skeptic stuff. I just look at him. I mean, one hell of a great look full of dripping disdain that says it all. It clearly says “I’m not even bothering responding to that crap!”

The Look is so intense and all powerful it knocks him out of his chair. He mumbles something about never in his career has anyone shot him down like that, and he leaves.

The End

The Clowns in the "Sorry" State

A recent piece by Frank Warren inspired me to go off on one of my own favorite rants; that of the so-called “sorry state” of UFOlogy. As Warren says, underscoring Richard Dolan's point, the idea that there's a "state" of UFOlogy is inaccurate and misses the point. You can read Warren's piece here: What is The State of Ufology? Wrong Question!


I often rant against those who call for a “new UFOlogy.” What’s wrong with the old one? More to the point, what in the world makes those who want a “new” UFOlogy, a better or a different or a cleaner or a neater or a “more scientific” (oy) UFOlogy that anyone outside of UFOlogy cares?

Who says it’s “sorry?” Because we have the expected jokers around? The Raelians make the mainstream news, not the serious, interesting UFO cases that may also contain some evidence. (Other than anecdotal.) So?

What else do you expect from the mainstream media? They’ve always been cheesy, sleazy and exploitive, that’s what they do. I promise you, if we all got up some kind of serious, somber, clinical “New UFOlogical” whatever, no one would give a damn. We would, (some of us) but no one listens to us. And then there’s this: after a short time, it isn’t too long before this “new” UFOlogy will be perceived -- and possibly turn into -- a stodgy, rigid, snooty mini-infrastructure of scientism in its own right. Before that point thought, this "new" UFOlogy will be scrambling to be accepted by those they've decided long ago they need: mainstream science, academia, the media, politics. Wow, talk about idealism! But those institutions have turned their noses up at UFOlogy; a "new" UFOlogy will have to dance real fast and real well in order to be accepted. Which means, much of what makes UFOflogy the thing that it is will have to be discarded before this "new" state gets in the door. And at that point, of course, you don't have a real (authentic) UFOlogy, but you still have a very "sorry" state indeed. Irony!

Don't you find it ironic that a diverse,individual, subjective, elusive and contradictory phenomenon such as UFOs is persistenlty being forced into some kind of stable state where everyone agrees (pretty much) and the personal is silenced, or at least told to shush?

One thing wrong about screaming for a new UFOlogy or repairing its “state” is the belief we would do better without the clowns. First, we have to acknowledge that there is a clown like atmosphere to much of UFO and Fortean events, and it’s a natural part of the anomalous. There are many ways to deal with this, depending on the situation and where the clown antics fall on the UFOlogical clown scale. (New Age clowns, Contactee clowns, Bigfoot-UFO clowns, Abduction clowns, My Lizard Lover clowns, etc.)

We can ignore them. Call them on their stuff. Expose them for the lying clowns they are. But what if they’re not lying clowns? They could be clowns for a number of reasons, but not liars. At some point, it’s subjective. Trust comes in. Intuition. Meanwhile, we’re all distracted by trying to shove out these clowns, argue over who’s a clown and who isn’t, and the actual work isn’t getting done. We’ve been too busy chasing after those we’ve decided are clowns. Talk about a circus.

Then we get back to work, feeling smug and justified that we cleaned up the mess, only to realize more clowns have sneaked in. That’s the nature of the anomalous clown beast. You just can’t get rid of them. In fact, the harder you try, the more return. Like Sisyphus, once you roll that rock uphill, it just comes back.

The mainstream media and the pathological skeptics will never avert their attention from the clown side of things, for that would mean they have to admit there is something of value and truth to all this.

(Actually, the mainstream media at times slowly turns to the light; little bits of UFO reality get by and we experience a respite from little green men jokes by talking heads.)

We can learn from the clowns. Instead of chasing after them with brooms we can stop and just watch them for awhile. What are they up to, and why? Might turn out it was a waste of time, so what? Might turn out you learned something. Maybe that clown wasn’t just a lampshade on its head bore, but a true Fool leading you down a much neglected and magickical path. You could return from that journey with something of value to share with the “sorry state” of UFOlogy.


cut and paste if link doesn't work: http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=46054

Meanwhile, . . .

Another illustration of the skeptic phenomenon of dissecting an anomalous event -- in this case, alien abduction -- whilst knowing not of what they speak. Or, speaketh. Whatever. Brought to you by the JREF. (James Randi Educational Forum.)

Joseph Capp: UFO Caste System

Joseph Capp, of Media Matters blog, has a very good piece on classim and the RRR Group's Trent photo stunt: UFO Caste System. I commented over there, and left links to my responses about the Trent Photo antics. Joseph had also commented on that back then.

From Trickster and Paranormal Blog

Excellent post by George P. Hansen's blog Trickster and the Paranormal, on the name change of CSICOP to CSI. (I've written on this myself, but Hansen does a much better job explaining the anthro/sociological reasons of the whys . . . )

Non-extraordinary Reactions to Extraordinary Things

Regardless of the cause behind the UFOs, the fact is the UFOs exist, and we have every right to talk about our observations and experiences.

That's a quote from me. Yes, I'm quoting myself. My recent piece on UFO Digest, on the orb/UFO sighting of the Lafuers in Albany, Oregon and chronic skeptics.

A Scofftoid Looks at Rendlesham: The Persistence of Skepticism vs. The Persistence of High Strangeness

Aaron Sakulich, resident collegiate scofftoid of the Iron Triangle college paper at Drexel University, writes on/against UFOs and related topics. A favorite phrase of his is “UFO enthusiast.” (Use of such a term attempts to ensure that any study of UFOs and related phenomena remain trivialized.) He mocks, he pontificates, he rants. Free country, we’re all entitled.

But in his recent piece: Story of 'British Roswell' lacks verifiable evidence” he misses the point. Well, he’s missed the point about a lot of things, but that’s to be expected with chronic skeptics.

It’s a given there isn’t any “verifiable evidence” with any of all this stuff; so let’s move on. Of course, it does beg the question of just what is “verifiable evidence?” Students of the esoteric know that chronic skepticism does not allow for anecdotal evidence to be considered evidence. Not even data. Well, sheesh, dahlings, if you’re going to go that far, whatever is there to talk about?

Anyway. Rendlesham.

Sakulich shares with all persistent, irrational rationalists the premise that there’s no "there" in UFO Land, and so, open mockery and silliness is not only acceptable, but expected. He opens with:

England is an exotic land of mystery. The English eat parts of animals I'd never consider putting in my mouth. Some of their groceries are named specifically after genitalia and their secret agents are continually impregnating the women of the world. Americans prefer broken beer bottles at the bar; they prefer top hats and pistols at dawn. Yet, our two countries have something in common: UFO enthusiasts seize on the flimsiest evidence and hold it up as proof that space monsters from beyond the moon are visiting the earth.

I have nothing against the English (so much) and I hope to visit there someday, but I don’t think of England as being “exotic.” And I for one, being a “UFO enthusiast” don’t think aliens come from “beyond the moon” but actually from the moon.

Of Rendlesham, or the so-called “British Roswell,” Sakulich says there are “enormous holes” in the story. That’s a fascinating statement, given that we don’t know what happened. If we don’t know what happened, how can we say there are ‘holes?” We're dealing with the anomalous, the weird, the highly unusual; "holes" are to be expected, if by "holes" one means Things That Don't Fit.

He goes on to describe what happened; the flashing lights, the weird sounds, the triangle shape observed by one of the soldiers, the burn marks and impressions in the ground from something heavy, and so on.

Sakulich's first error -- either from an honest glitch in thinking, or disingenuousness - is in assuming what “UFO enthusiasts” think. He does this all the time, sharing with all persistent skeptics the need to make sweeping assumptions on what "UFO enthusiasts" think:

The next day, returning to the site of the supposed landing, men found triangular impressions in the earth and "burn marks" on the trees. Therefore, the UFO community came to one conclusion: a mechanical spaceship had been out and about in the forest that night wreaking all sorts of havoc.

I for one never thought the UFO that landed that night was from outer space, piloted by aliens. No, this “UFO enthusiast,” dahlings, thinks it was a military (or industrial/technological-- or combination of ) object, intentionally sent, staged, to gauge the reactions of the humans on duty that night. Possibly it was a mistake; the thing wasn’t meant to be seen, but seen it was. Either way, whatever the thing was, I don’t think it was from outer space, and there are a lot of UFO researchers who agree.

Besides which, the “UFO community” is far from being a cohesive group that comes to consensus. Der.

Of the lights seen, Sakulich writes that witness Penniston was “petulant” in his disagreement that the light (s) he saw weren’t beacons:

When asked if this could be the source of the lights, Penniston petulantly replied that no, he could tell the difference between this beacon and the mystery lights.

I’d be “petulant” too, if someone insisted I saw something different from what I saw, especially if they weren’t there, and I was. What, suddenly we’re to believe Penniston can’t distinguish types of lights?

It’s old news; this lighthouse beacon stuff, and enough already. But here Sakulich almost surpasses the infamous “mating hedgehogs” explanation for crop circles, in explaining away the marks left in the ground from an object:

The third problem is the supposed physical evidence found at the scene: the triangular landing gear marks and the burn marks on the trees in the areas. For this one, investigators didn't have to go much further than the locals. The marks made by alien landing gears were actually rabbit holes, perfectly normal and plentiful in the forest.

(And I just can’t let go the cheap easy “laugh” when Sakulich stoops to classism and culturalism when he comments:

I like to imagine that these locals laugh a little to themselves at the city-slicker UFO enthusiasts mistaking rabbit holes for landing pad impressions as they wait in line for their monthly allowance of eel pies and plaid wool trousers.)

He drones on, but the point is this: something weird enough happened at Rendlesham to mess with witnesses heads, which seemed to be the point of the whole thing. The incident isn’t any different from countless others in UFOlogy; and this glaring fact utterly escapes people like Sakulich.

It’s easy to be glib, and easy to be lazy. Call everyone who doesn’t openly mock and ridicule UFOlogy a “UFO enthusiast,” make wild assumptions, such as they/we all believe the same thing, and that same thing is a warm and fuzzy ET space brother. Call the people who’ve experienced the weird and shared their stories nuts and lunatics, and there it is: a name for yourself, a reputation as a “critical thinker” when no such thing has taken place. Meanwhile, the anomalous continues to manifest, despite what we say about such things.

New Book: Parapsychology and the Skeptics

The Daily Grail has an item on a new book: Parapsychology and the Skeptics, by Chris Carter. Good comments by TDG; take a look. Now you all know I can’t wait to get his book!

An Eastern Oregon Tale

I'm not sure what the motive was for the writer here; other than obvious mocking of the UFO phenomena in general. Other than that . . .

I'm posting it here because it has to do with Oregon.

And I suppose it's the still all too typical crap like this that gets written on the topic needs to be pointed out, shaken, and scolded. For whatever it's worth.

UFOs, clerks and domestic discord

By Karen Spears Zacharias

Tim Binnall, Brad Steiger, and Trickster

Tim Binnall’s season two finale interview with Brad Steiger was inspiring, reminding me of what I consider to be the crucial points of esoteric research and phenomena. (Including UFOs.)

Steiger stressed that at the core of all these anomalous events (always keeping in mind this includes UFOs) is the Trickster element. (Steiger isn’t the only researcher that believes this; see George P. Hansen’s The Trickster and the Paranormal.)

Another point Steiger made was that no one has the answer, (which should seem obvious) and yet so many come out and insist that that is exactly what they have.

There was also the point made that younger researchers sometimes are ignorant of the older, previous researchers that have gone before and set the way for others; Steiger himself, Keel, Sanderson, Fodor, etc. Young ghost busters tromping through haunted houses with high tech equipment, or UFO “researchers” who read one or two books and think they know it all. I’d add to this that it isn’t just young people, nor all young people, but that this attitude is found among all age groups. There are calls to ignore the history and focus on the now, which is a disservice to all research. (At the same time, you don’t want to get stuck in the past.)

The chronic skeptics, in all their varieties, point to the fact that after so many years -- whether it’s sixty years or a thousand -- we haven't found any answers. That’s true, if one means, by “answer,” the final one size fits all solution to the UFO question. We haven't found “the answer.” The point is, we very likely won’t. That’s unacceptable for some. For others, it’s a non-issue, since we heavily suspect we’ll never find the “answer” and anyway, that’s beside the point.

(Painting: section of Boticelli's Adoration of the Magi 1475)


The persistently skeptical also tell us us that much of UFO and anomalous phenomena seems silly and downright pointless. Conflicting information given by “aliens,” their general behavior, the elusive nature; it’s too uselessly complex and nonsensical.

But that’s what makes it fun; and it’s what the Trickster does; confuse and play cruel jokes. Maybe it makes sense to itself; tough if we can’t get it. Or maybe it knows we can’t get it, and that’s why it delights in doing what it does. Maybe it’s nothing personal at all and we’re personifying; it just is what it is, and we are what we are. No matter, for the Trickster is still at it, regardless of what we think about it.

None of this means there really aren’t Martians living beneath the surface of Mars, or that there are bases on the back side of the Moon. (Maybe.) If any of that is so, that’s only a fraction of the Big Paranormal Picture. A lot more is still to come.

And actually, I suspect that it is really very “simple” in a way: as Steiger called it, we live parallel to a “shadow” world/reality. They do their thing, we do ours. Sometimes, more often than some of us would acknowledge, we meet each other, We find ourselves plunked into their world, or we meet up with “visitors” from theirs. The boundaries between the two aren’t all that firm, as much as some of us like to pretend it is. Indeed, one of the main functions of the Trickster is crossing boundaries.

So thanks to Tim Binnall for all his great work in bringing us (and for free) solid interviews with all kinds of UFO and esoteric researchers, including Brad Steiger.


Resources:
Binnall of America
Brad and Sherry Steiger
The Trickster and the Paranormal

Two columns by Greg Bishop of UFO Mystic

Why is it we’re all supposed to sit around and nod politelyu and not say anything “rude” at all when someone tells us they’re a Christian, how they just went to their church picnic, etc. but everyone titters and rolls their eyes if you mention UFOs? Which at least exist, in the literal sense. But don’t get me started.

Back to Greg; from May:
Christians Want UFOs Taught in Schools, and from today: Fundame ntalist
Skeptics Dumber.

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

I Know, It’s A Waste Of Time . . .

But I do wish the following would forever disappear from the culture:

“Do you believe in UFOs?”

"Are UFOs real?"

“Do you believe you’ve seen what you thought was a UFO?”

“Aunt Millie said she’s seen a UFO; do you believe her?”

“Do you believe UFOs exist?”

You get the picture.

I know, I know, it’s “only” semantics (a phrase that drives me wild) and it’s a ridiculous battle. No chance at all of ever winning, or even coming close.

Still, every now and then I just have to rant about the use of UFO as an: idol, an idea, a concept, a entity, an alien -- make that an outer space alien -- a mirage, a hallucination, a fantasy, a lie, a drug or alcohol induced event, a mental aberration, a religious figure, a God/

Instead of what it is: a weird object/craft/machine/light of unknown origin and purpose. Nothing to “believe” in at all. Do you “believe” in your microwave? The point some make that “we know what a microwave is; we don’t know what a UFO is” is a nonsensical response. Yes, yes, we know about microwaves, and we don’t know the whats, wheres, and whys of UFOs, but that’s what UFOs are. In that sense, we do know what UFOs are: we don’t know what they are. (heh.)

Putting all this other stuff onto an unexplainable light/thing/machine in the sky only reveals the issues of the individual doing the interpreting. Including the thuggish (or disingenuous, depending) response of the pathological skeptic who insists that “everyone knows when we say UFO we really mean aliens from space.” Speak for yourself there Mr. or Ms. Pelican Head.

I have ideas, theories even, as to what some UFOs are, but that doesn’t mean they are that.

I’ve seen several UFOs in my life. (Some with some high strangeness thrown in.) And while I won’t deny or try to explain away, nor rationalize in any way, that I’ve seen UFOs, -- because I have -- neither will I say I “believe” in them.

Around

On Tim Binnall’s site, BOA (Binnall of America) for my Trickster’s Realm column: Why Did I Lie? about my defensive response to alien abductions.

Be sure to read the other columns: Lesley's Grey Matters, Wrath of Joe, etc. and listen to the great, free, podcasts of Tim's interviews!

On UFO Digest: The Fortean Pinball Machine, about my theories on no theories, or, no theory about all those theories. Or maybe my theory is that it’s all very weird. Which isn’t a theory, it’s a given.

Sign up for the UFO Digest newsletter while you're there; it's free, and it's good.