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.

New Age Clown Fish Dream

Wonderful dream last night in a kind of goofy way. There is much more to this dream that goes along with what I posted about awhile ago on Snarly Skepticism, and maybe I'll post about that but for now, I'll just share this one part:

I'm some kind of psychic/healer/medium and am hired by a family to heal their fish; a clown fish. The clown fish is beautiful, but much larger than clown fish in waking life. This dream clown fish is about two feet long, almost eel like, but very friendly and beautiful. The orange color, all the colors, just lovely. But the clown fish is sick, so I'm hired to come and help.

The family is a blended family and a large one. Mostly Caucasian American and Indians, Hindu and Buddhist. 


I go into the room where the fish is. There are two tanks. One on a shelf, the other tank on a shelf higher and off to the left a bit. A tube connects the two. After looking at the fish I know the fish will most likely be all right, though it's sick now, but the rest is up to the family, I tell them. They really love this fish. I tell them the fish has a "Forty seventy" chance of living (I realize when I woke up you can't have a "forty seventy" but that's what was said in the dream) and that, instead of being sad that there's a seventy percent chance it might die, be grateful and concentrate on the forty percent that he'll live.


I show them how to sit with the fish every day, for at least ten minutes a day, and just concentrate on the fish being well. Send it love, literally, white light from your heart to the fish, and back again. Everyone in the family has to do this, and even when away from the fish, think about the fish and send it love and light.

I tell them it's important to keep the tanks clean, make sure the water is fresh and running and let the fish go back and forth between tanks. The fish follows the tube between tanks.  And indeed, as we're there in the room and I'm talking, the fish is happier and brighter and swimming back and forth between tanks.

I think this dream has something to do with the subconscious and the whole circus discussion surrounding UFO experiences. The clown fish, aside from the name, is orange (orange orb.) The clown fish was not just a happy go lucky rather silly fish; it was actually very beautiful and intelligent, as well as happy.

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.

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.

Lesley for Grey Matters: Money in the Sky (Part 2) : The Pointless Point

Lesley (Debris Field blog, and Beyond the Dial in UFO magazine) has a good piece for her Grey Matters column for BoA: Money in the Sky (Part 2) : The Pointless Point. Lesley writes about the “they’re only in it for the money” line many scofftoids (and some UFO people, sadly) use to dismiss people who write about UFOs and happen to make money.

“Make money;” it doesn't matter how much money, if that “making money” is a few dollars here and there or enough to make ones living from. The latter is rare, I suspect. I write like the hepped up caffeine junkie I am about UFOs and related phenomena, but so far, I haven’t made a cent. So what? When the day comes that I do make “some money” I’ll be happy of course, but I’m happy now too. The point is, as Lesley writes, is that there is nothing wrong with “making money” from writing about these topics. However, there are plenty of the “UFOlogy Police” (as Lesley calls them) who spend their time attacking those who “make money’ or who they suspect “make money” from their UFO books, videos, and lectures.

Another comment Lesley makes is about humor. Lesley discusses UFO experiencer, writer and filmmaker Jeremy Vaeni -- one of the accused “money makers” -- and how some have added the sin of having a sense of humor to his crime of money making. I’ve been attacked for my sense of humor as well; in fact, I believe that those who’ve gone after me with such psychotic vengeance is the fact that UFO pundits aren't supposed to crack wise. And women especially aren’t supposed to be so damn cheeky.

I don’t know Jeremy personally, never having met him, but we’ve corresponded quite a bit, including an interview he did of me for UFO Magazine (Grilling Regan Lee) and I’ve always been impressed with his humor. He comes across as quirky, sure, but quirky is good, and there isn’t enough of it. More importantly (for we all can’t be quirky; you either are or you’re not) he is his own damn self. He’s not afraid to be who he is, doesn't pretend to be anything other than himself. That’s all anyone can expect in this arena: honesty.

As to “making money,” I doubt Vaeni is going to be moving to that villa in Tuscany any time soon.

This whole idea that “making money” from one’s UFO passion - and that it somehow proves the individual is lying -- is ridiculous.

I loved Lesley’s comment regarding this faux moral concern:

”What is Ufology? The Priesthood? You must give up all your worldly good and take a vow of poverty? Maybe you also need to promise to only bath once a year and crawl around your house through broken glass? Ridiculous!”

There are those -- way too many -- who have blogs and websites that write incessantly about how people who write about UFOs are wasting time. Apparently we;re wasting their time, our time, everyone's time. The irony escapes them: that they’re wasting time telling everyone else how much time we’re wasting. But they also can’t resist reading the material they judge to be crap. Rather than ignoring such “crap” and doing something productive, they attack, often going so far as to lie about the people they’re attacking. They harp on the “truth” and decide that they’re the ones able to judge. They insist material such as abduction accounts be classified as fiction, instead of nonfiction. True, there’s no ultimate “proof” of these encounters, which is a whole other topic, but here’s something Lesley said about this that I think is very important:

"I hate to sound all anarchist, but why should we be so concerned about whether something is true? If we find the story thought provoking, does it really matter if it is true? There are certain fiction books that have influenced my entire life, not because they were true, but because the values I learned from them are true and because they caused me to think about things that are beyond my ordinary daily life. I am not really terribly concerned about what Jeremy or anyone else says being completely true or accurate, I am more concerned about whether it is interesting and whether I can learn anything from it. Since I look at almost all Ufology as being subjective, none of it is really true. If dozens of people had the same esoteric experience, the chances that most would interpret it differently is highly likely. Even if they all agree that they saw the same thing, many will take different meanings from what they saw. This is not only true of esoteric events, ask any policeman about robbery witnesses. One person will swear it was a blue shirt the guy was wearing, while another insists that is was green. Both of these people will be completely sure they are right and the other is wrong. Human minds interpret things differently, that is just how it is.”

And it all gets down to this: for those that find some sort of twisted joy in attacking UFO and Fortean writers, Lesley suggests the following:

"Besides which, if they are so sure that they know the truth, then they should spread it, instead of spending their time sitting at their keyboard constantly griping about what others are doing.”

Excellent advice.

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?

Squeaking 'Alien' Creature: Guitarfish Fish

On the very excellent blog BioFort, Scott Maruna's blog, is an item on the "alien" Russian fish. Er, alien. No, really, it's a fish. A guitarfish.

Weird looking creatures. I know I'd seen them somewhere, as I mentioned in the article on UFO Digest. I thought it might have been a skate; others think sturgeon. Sturgeon or pike always seem to be the explanation for weird things in the water; for Ogo Pogo, Champ, Nessie. That, or giant rotting salmon corpses, as in the case of Nessie. Yes, there really was a mega-skeptic that offered that theory to explain Nessie of Loch Ness.

More Skepticism Pieces

Seems that a lot of bloggers are writing about skepticism past few days; here’s something from the Doubtful blog: Poor Professional Manners. A lot of us have been blogging about skepticism and I’ve noticed we’ve been saying the same things, in one way or another:

Be nice

Skepticism is good and fine and of course, neccessary, however:

There are many who say they are skeptics, and they’re nothing of the kind. (And to make the distinction between true skeptics and the fundies, we use various descriptive labels to make those distincitons)It is those types we have an issue with

Update to Skepticism vs. All The Other Kinds of Skepticism

'Crazyhoarse,' author of his (or her) blog over on The Daily Grail, wrote a piece on skepticism/pathological skepticism. SKEPTOPATHS, SKEPTOPATHOLOGY and O'HARE. In particular, Crazyhoarse addresses vehement skepticism in relation to the O'Hare sighting.

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.

An Open Letter to the UFO Community

From Daniel Brenton's 'Meaning of Existence blog.' As I said to him the other day, he says it well and clearly. And the more UFO bloggers that say this the better. (I also told him I say similar things all the time here; I'm just usually crankier.)

An Open Letter to the UFO Community.

FURTHUR ORTHON

image source:
http://searchwarp.com/swa2005.htm

FURTHER ORTHON

A bit of More From Orthon; this time it’s synchronicity.

Ken Kesey, (author of Sometimes a Great Notion, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, etc.) lived around here. There’s a statue of him on the mall; lots of people who knew him, or say they knew him, all that stuff. Yesterday's item in the local paper, the Eugene Register-Guard, had
this little entry on Ken Kesey’s estate their efforts regarding “the bus:” I don’t know if this opening sentence is intentional:

Dreams of getting author Ken Kesey's original psychedelic bus, Furthur, back on the road again have hit a pothole.

But it is appreciated.

Then I pick up my copy of Colin Bennett’s Looking for Orthon (his book on Adamski) and am amused to read this:

“ . . . prototype hippies arrived to empty the larder and spend their time contemplating the infinite than work. This was the time of Ken Kesey of course; and if Adamski had not been of a different generation to him and his followers, perhaps lights and amplifier would have strewn the sides of Mt. Palomar.

But not even Ken Kesey had spaceman dropping in uninvited for dinner. - (Looking for Othon p 50)

Related item: the news that Carl Sagan smoked pot. I like what

Greg Bishop, on his UFO Mystic blog has to say about that, and asks the very good question: “why did Sagan remain such a “dick” about the UFO question?”

I’M BORED WITH THE BORED; BUT HAPPY NEW YEAR ANYWAY

One observation I’ve made while journeying through UFO Land is that there are a handful of active, yet bored, anti-UFOists. Yes, they’re skeptics, but it’s more than that. Some are ex-UFO investigators/researchers themselves. Years ago, they started UFO newsletters, magazines, journals, groups, meetings, presentations. They investigated local UFO sightings. They researched UFO history and became familiar with the UFO cases and participants. Others never were so involved; that was, and is, beneath them. This never stopped them from commenting on UFOs, even writing books about them. While there are differences between these two; the skeptic who sneers at it all, and the ex-wonderer/wanderer who now sneers at it all, they have some things in common. And that’s boredom, with a capitol B. Bored, bored bored. They are so damn bored.

They’re so bored, they have to write about how bored they are, and tell others about how bored they are. They have the need to express their ennui with UFOlogy to others; but that’s not enough, they have to try and get others to come over ot their side. They have no qualms about being insulting to pro-UFOers. They think it’s okay for some reason; probably because, aside from being bored, they’re arrogant. They’re arrogant, because in their mind, they’re right. Their rightness gives them the right (heh) to be obnoxious towards others they deem unworthy. Those that haven’t yet turned toward the UFO side are ripe for picking; aiming their pleas at the neutral, the undecided, the newbie, the Bored ask them to come on over and join them in their anti-UFO, fanatical rationalism.

These bored types respond to anything UFO-ish with a big yawn. They often qualify their bored responses with the typical refrain of many a skeptic: “oh, I wish it would be true. I wish we’d all get the answer that a new study, a new case, a new witness, will tell us what UFOs are, and why, and from where they’ve come.”

Even if they truly did wish that, one wonders why they’re wasting so much time with telling us how bored they are.

A few of the bored blogs: (by no means an inclusive list. They differ slightly in other ways, and, as noted, there are plenty of others that incorporate even more bored bashing, but I’m not here to review them, analyze them, or get into anything. Simply point out the blatant and obvious: they’re bored, and I’m bored with their boredom.)

Aliens Ate My Buick
UFO Reality
UFO Iconoclast
Updates UFO Updates
Magonia


I’m bored with these boring bored bores. Let’s hope the New Year brings us world peace and freedom from poverty. And freedom from boring bored anti-UFO pundits.

Sadly, the chances of the first two becoming a reality are close to none, as is the latter wish.

But as I always point out my dahlings, within my somewhat cynical and pessimist nature (though I prefer to use the word ‘practical’) (and at least I’m not bored) there’s always hope, a glimmering desire stronger than the current reality. And so, I, along with so many others, continue to do the things needed to bring about these changes.

And with that, Happy New Year everyone!

MORE FROM ORTHON: CLASSISM

I’ve just decided to up and post little gems from Colin Bennett’s Looking for Orthon,his book on George Adamski, as I come upon them. Which is a book everyone who considers themselves serious about UFOlogy should read. (I know, we all have our “must read UFO books list” right?)

One of the common folklore items about Adamski was that he was an immigrant hot dog vendor. This is often said in the same context as dismissing Adamski. Sure, he’s a lunatic, goes the thinking, but if you have any doubt about that, geez, he was just an immigrant hot dog/hamburger vendor.

The fact is, Adamski often worked with his wife in a restaurant operated and owned by his close friend Alice K. Wells. This restaurant (not simple ‘hot dog’ stand) was the stopping place for people going, or coming back from, the observatory up the road to Mt. Palomar.

Regarding the common and all too frequent meme that Adamski “sold hot dogs” (or the variant; “hamburger” vendor) Bennett cites Lou Zinnsstag, who couldn’t understand the need to dismiss Adamski, based on his alleged occupation. She wondered:

”why, in a democracy, this fact did so much to damage his image.”

It’s the American way, isn’t it? Work hard, the idea that manual labor is good, honest labor, that working at all is better than free loading. We're told that, or were, (I know I was, probably reality's beginning to set in now in these times, the further away we are from Post WWII era fantasties.) The opposite is true of course: you aren't any better off, and there is nothing dignified about living in poverty or working your bones bare til you drop.

Bennett writes, of the slams against Adamski’s occupation to “prove” that he was full of crap:

Perhaps the world still thinks as Shakespeare thought, that only those at the top of the social scale are capable of having intensely significant experiences. “

Maybe it irked the privileged classes on some level, those who prided themselves on being ‘educated’ and in a higher economic bracket, that these experiences didn’t happen to them. And that if they did, they don’t dare tell about it, for fear of being ostracized from their peer groups and their social class.

This notion that Adamski was a no account working stiff at a dead end hamburger/hot dog stand still exists. I’ve come across this snide dismissal from many an anti-UFO individual. As Bennett tells us, this kind of thinking was alive as recently as 1999:

Naturally enough, Adamski was always very sensitive about the “hamburger vendor” title some popular newspapers had given him. Even as late as 1999, the British X-Factor magazine condescendingly refers to his “hot dog stand.” From this remark, we assume that for sound philosophy, first-class restaurants are absolutely essential.”

(And that last line is one of the many reasons why I love Bennett.)

It doesn’t need saying (but of course I’ll say it anyway) that it’s become a cliché in our culture to make fun of the hick, the hillbilly, the trailer park occupant, -- the working class, the poor, the working poor, those without a higher education (or those who are assumed to not have a higher education,) the blue and pink collar workers of our country, and point to them and deride them when they tell us they’ve seen a UFO, or experienced some other anomalous event.

And yet, it is to this group of people that most often the anomalous occurs, it seems. If they do occur to the upper classes -- or those who would like to see themselves that way -- the elite, the ones with college degrees, the scientists and white collar professionals, they are keeping quiet for the most part.

There are exceptions of course; like commercial pilots, a lot of military people who’ve come forward, etc.

But the idea that it’s low life hicks and/or mere “hamburger” slingers that see UFOs or encounter the weird, is still around. Their stories are too fantastic to be believed, but we know that somewhere, it’s possible, it’s even likely, and so we tell ourselves that it’s only the unimportant in society that see these things to make us feel better. By negating the experiences of one class, we suppress the possibility of having those experiences ourselves.

__________

For more on UFOs and class, see:

Dr. Kinsey, UFOs and the Lower Class

Eugene, Oregon: A Fortean Home

Or so it seems. Autumn Williams, Bigfoot researcher, lives in Eugene. Her mother lives in Oregon as well, she's the author of a recent (or soon to be ) book on Bigfoot. Also Ron Olsen, Bigfoot researcher. And director Ed Ragozzino, director of the 1977 movie Sasquatch, the Legend of Bigfoot.

Nahu lives about two miles from me, as it turns out. He's written a book about UFOs, angels, aliens and God/Jesus. I've never met the man, but I'm sure it'll be interesting. Oh you bet I'm going to call him!

I wonder who else is lurking around this town? (Oh, Dr. Ray Hyman, skeptic; he's over at the University of Oregon. But he doesn't count.)

And that's just here in Eugene. Oregon, it seems, has quite a number of Bigfoot, UFO and Fortean/paranormal people around.

Stop Wasting Time Whining About Wasting Time

(Thankfully, some of my blog entries from the original blog are still cached. How long they’ll be available, no one can say. This was posted on Nov. 16, almost a month ago today.)

Anti-UFOists complain about those of us who write, study, investigate, research and explore the UFO phenomena. They debate the validity of UFOs. They debate the character of those who study UFOs. They debate the legitimacy of UFOs as a worthy subject, and the work of UFOlogists as meaningful in any way.

There are many who think the subject is a joke and the people involved in exploring UFOs are also a joke. They tell us this on a daily basis. There are several of these anti-UFOists who, for various reasons, have arrived at the conclusion that it’s all a big waste of time.

Blogging away about how anyone who studies UFOs is wasting time, writing about this time waster in forums and websites, they rail against those of us invovled in UFO studies, whether it’s the researcher, the well known UFO author/pundit, or the individual UFO witness, like myself. Isn’t it a waste of time to waste a lot of time telling the rest of us we’re wasting time? Really, dahlings, what do they care how the rest of us spend our time?

It is this last opinion that I find intriguing: this belief that studying UFOs is a waste of time, for I spend a lot of time thinking about the UFO phenomena and it’s not something I do frivolously. I often have a lot of fun with it, but it’s hardly trivial, and it’s not a waste of time.

I find the UFO topic fascinating for all kinds of reasons. Some argue that one will most likely never find “the answer” to the UFO question. I agree with that completely. The difference between the anti-UFOist and myself is this: I don’t mind at all that there will probably never be A Final UFO Answer, and it’s very unlikely we will find that answer. I’ve been saying this for a long time.

But unlike those anti-UFOists who see UFO research as a big waste of time, I see it as, at the very least, a highly interesting journey. It’s the process of my journey that I find as interesting as any clues I find along the way. As you go along you find dozens of other fascinating threads to the phenomena that take you in many directions. This is a good thing. Studying the UFO and related phenomena can be compared to a giant glittering quilt with thousands of sparkling threads and shimmering shapes. One leads to another and sometimes you can detect a pattern, other times there doesn’t seem to be any pattern at all, just a cacophony of color and designs jumbled among a lot of pieces. That’s perfectly okay.

Because of my interest in UFOs, I’ve studied mythology, world religions, art history, cultures, philosophies, technology, history, and much more. I’ve had fascinating discussions with people, have met some intriguing individuals, and have had fascinating personal experiences that transcend the mundane.

I think some of this anti-UFO attitude is steeped in a literal idea about UFOs. There’s nothing going on except the cold hard machinery of the things which are either man made craft, or natural phenomena mistaken for cold hard machinery. Anything outside of that prosaic opinion smacks of the worst of everything else: New Age stuff, pop culture, mysticism, spiritualism, fanaticism -- all kinds of -isms.

To the anti-UFOist, people like us who blog, study and research UFOs and continue on our journey need to be arrogantly reminded, chided, and insulted into “getting a life.” Which involves anything, anything at all, as long as it doesn’t have to do with UFOs. (If we follow this line of thinking we arrive at the assumption that “getting a life” would include talking about UFOs, as long as you bash all things UFO, preferably several times a week. The more articulate cite sources and write well; the more pathetic insult, harass and make things up about the pro-UFO individuals.)

Well, no one’s denying that we all have our opinions. There is one fact though, and that is this: no one knows what is going on. Not the anti-UFOists, not you, not me.

It is because of this fact -- that I don’t know what’s going on or what went on in my own personal UFO encounter -- that started me on this process of discovery. When you have unusual UFO experiences it seems natural to want to know what the hell happened. Certainly no help is coming from the anti-UFO section (can any of them tell me what happened? Not so far) unless it’s incessant droning about not wasting time trying to figure it out.

When one puts themselves out there and starts publicly talking about UFOs and other weirdness, Bigfoot, psychic experiences and other strange things, you’re a fool if you’re surprised people fling insults your way. It’s too bad, and shouldn’t be, but that’s the way it is. At some point you have to wonder what is it that they’re so bothered by that they feel the need to not only be at times hideously insulting, but stoop to lying? All because someone writes about UFOs. Clearly they are insulted on a deep level by the personal journeys of others. The explorations of the UFO phenomena is taken as a personal assault.