From the PsiPog.net blog, an entry on the author’s experiences with members of the JREF forum, (James Randi Educational Foundation) Randi himself, and an assistant.
Beware Pseudo-Skepticism I’m not at all surprised by what the author (who calls himself Peebrain) has to relate; it mirrors much of what I’ve personally experienced and observed through the years. And, as so many of us ask: why can’t people just be nice? Sheesh, such a prickly bunch. Far more important of course, and the real issue, is the lack of forthrightness on their part.
Friday, February 9, 2007
Thursday, February 8, 2007
Gordon Kaswell on Skepticism
It's skepti synchronicity! About a week ago I received the following email from Oregon UFO researcher Gordon Kaswell. With his permission, I've posted his thoughts on skepticism below:
This email is about something that keeps popping up in controversial science issues: Carl Sagan's famous dictum, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Just this evening, I heard a psychologist on the Discovery Channel use this phrase regarding the question of whether or not "Bigfoot" exists. (Hardcore skeptics of the "paranormal" love to atack those who maintain that the creature might actually be real. It's really not a paranormal question at all, by the way-- only a crypto-zoological one.)
But back to Sagan. His comment about "extraordinary claims" sounds reasonable. It seems to be saying that we must have very high standards in scientific inquiry.
And indeed we should have high standards. But not a double standard. There is really no way to objectively and quantitatively determine the "extraordinariness" of a scientific claim. Therefore, there is no way to objectively say how "extraordinary" the evidence must be before we accept the claim. "Extraordinariness" is essentially an emotional consideration, not a scientific one. If you've done good, careful, science, your results should be taken seriously. If those results overturn previously held beliefs, that's just fine. Indeed, that's how science is supposed to work. Thomas Kuhn's book, "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" is an excellent discussion of how science advances in fits and starts, as new data and viewpoints are ignored, resisted, and ultimately embraced.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Another way to put this might be:
"Adjust your scientific standards to fit you emotional needs."
--Doesn't sound so reasonable now, does it?
Raelians and Their New/Old Symbol
Once upon a time, the Raelians of UFO Land (by the way, their term and name for proposed park/city/compound; I just picked up and used the phrase) had the swastika as their official symbol. Oh, it wasn't just a swastika, for it was artfully entwined with the Star of David. Naturally, this upset a lot of people, both inside and outside of UFO Land. And so, the Raelians did away with their symbol, and redesigned it. The new design was more of a Lotus flower type design. Throughout the Land, and elsewhere, people sighed a sigh of relief, and all was well.
But now, the Raelians have gone back to their offensive ways, and brought back the swastika-Star of David emblem.
Many of us realise that the "original" swatiska was a sign of peace, harmony, and had nothing to do with Nazis, anti-Semities, or Jew haters. But we all know what happened next.
And so, given this context, one would think that the Raelians would get a clue. But alas, they cannot.
The Raelians like to clone things, and say they have a cloned human baby or two around the place. And this is a reason why, combined with their new/old symbol harkening back to Nazism, the whole thing makes a lot of us here in UFO Land nervous.
But now, the Raelians have gone back to their offensive ways, and brought back the swastika-Star of David emblem.
Many of us realise that the "original" swatiska was a sign of peace, harmony, and had nothing to do with Nazis, anti-Semities, or Jew haters. But we all know what happened next.
And so, given this context, one would think that the Raelians would get a clue. But alas, they cannot.
The Raelians like to clone things, and say they have a cloned human baby or two around the place. And this is a reason why, combined with their new/old symbol harkening back to Nazism, the whole thing makes a lot of us here in UFO Land nervous.
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
Look, It's Crash Test Dummies! No, er, Balloons! I Mean, Flares! Yeah, Flares!
Lights over Phoenix, again. Nothing new, it's been going on for ten years, and more. Previous to what we call "The Phoenix Lights," UFOs, strange lights, have been seen in the area for a very long time.
But with the classic UFO Phoenix Lights event of ten years ago, as we know, the official explanation -- when they finally got around to releasing one, as silly as it was -- was "flares."
And so, once again, the official explantion is: yes, flares.
But with the classic UFO Phoenix Lights event of ten years ago, as we know, the official explanation -- when they finally got around to releasing one, as silly as it was -- was "flares."
And so, once again, the official explantion is: yes, flares.
Dean Radin Debunks Debunkers
The attacks on Dean Radin and parapsychology continue. Radin answers back on his blog Entangled Minds. This isn't Radin's only entry on this topic; exploring Radin's blog you'll discover that he doesn't let these things go, and, he shouldn't.
Tuesday, February 6, 2007
"The Extraterrestrial Bigfoot"
I'm not quesy about Bigfoot-UFO stories; and having personal contact with some who've had these kinds of experiences, what can one say? These stories exist, and, like "alien" abductions, they're here. What to make of them; hmmm. But I am fascinated, and there seems to be a decidedly firm relationship between some sort of Sasquatch like being, and UFOs. Or, what we interpret as Sasquatch like beings, and UFOs.
The CryptoZoology.com site has an article on Bigfoot-UFOs; interesting, but I don't think we see things the same way.
The CryptoZoology.com site has an article on Bigfoot-UFOs; interesting, but I don't think we see things the same way.
'An Orange Ball Shaped Object'
Here's another sighting of an orange ball from HBCC. No size reported, (or at least, an estimate of a size) and not much else on details, still, as someone who saw an orange orb myself, I'm always interested in similar reports.
Oregon MUFON
MUFON is still the best UFO organization; join your local MUFON chapter! Here's the link to the Oregon chapter, with meetings in a few places, including Portland. The MUFON Jouranl is worth subscribing to.
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
Sunday, February 4, 2007
Speaking of Global Warming
No, this doesn't have anything to do with UFOs. Or, does it? It could. Make your own connections. I suppose we could say there's a connection in the sense of Pelicanist behavior; the leaders that be continue to ignore, cover-up and disseminate disinfo about both UFOs and global warming.
Alfred Lehmberg, on his blog Alien Views, has a recent piece about this: Slow Death.
Dustin, on his Odd Things blog, has a recent piece on global warming.
If you haven't seen An Inconvenient Truth yet, why not, and, see it.
The war, er, occupation, is horrific, and so are dozens of other issues; poverty, child abuse, animal abuse, etc. And while global warming may seem boring, daunting, overwhelming, and not sexy enough, the reality is this: if we don't focus on this and fix it (and being as how we're the biggest contributor to the problem, with the least amount of responsibility) we won't be around to worry about the other issues.
Alfred Lehmberg, on his blog Alien Views, has a recent piece about this: Slow Death.
Dustin, on his Odd Things blog, has a recent piece on global warming.
If you haven't seen An Inconvenient Truth yet, why not, and, see it.
The war, er, occupation, is horrific, and so are dozens of other issues; poverty, child abuse, animal abuse, etc. And while global warming may seem boring, daunting, overwhelming, and not sexy enough, the reality is this: if we don't focus on this and fix it (and being as how we're the biggest contributor to the problem, with the least amount of responsibility) we won't be around to worry about the other issues.
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.
The Wizard of Oz trailer
No UFOs, unless you want to consider the Good Witch in a bubble as some sort of metaphor. Oh, and the flying monkeys. (Which scared me to death when I was a kid; I thought they were real. Hmm, maybe that explains it. . .)
Saturday, February 3, 2007
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.
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.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Military Watches Crop Circle Watchers
Colin Andrews, Crop Circle researcher, on military surveilance of circles and investigators. Who's watching whom, and why? Oh, and don't forget the little ball of light.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)