Advancements in UFOlogy

I often see skeptics and researchers defend the good (or bad) name of UFOlogy claiming that outlandish experiences and speculation sullies the field. So I have some questions if anyone will care to indulge...

I'm curious to know what the advancements in the field are or at least... is the progress quantifiable?

Has there been any progress and what do you think is the progress that has been made?

22 views and nobody has replied yet?

Perhaps their silence speaks volumes?...

Originally posted by sonicology
Perhaps their silence speaks volumes?...

Yes, probably but I'll give it more time. I had hoped I would get some genuine responses that may cover areas I hadn't thought of yet.

Alternatively, there is no real answer to the question, in which case, yes it speaks volumes but hopefully, someone can provide a well thought out response or even give their opinion on the answers to the question so I can understand an alternative mindset.

I think the advancements are proceeding at the pace of a snail. I took us thousands of years to figure out electricity or that the earth is not the center of the universe, and it may take another 100 years to figure out that we are not alone. In fact, for some its frustrating how slow all of this is going. The atser would prefer new revelations on a daily basis.

You will get more responses if you research the advancements yourself and post them here for our lazy asses.

there aren't any advancements, just a lot of hoaxes and proffessional hoaxers
profiting from people thirst for the truth, a sad state of affairs

Originally posted by Skyfloating
You will get more responses if you research the advancements yourself and post them here for our lazy asses.

That's kind of my point. I don't think there are any. I want to know what they are.

What is most damning is the advancement in technology, yet still lack of any real advancement in evidence.

Unfortunately the advancement in technology has also allowed the clowns to advance in the quality of hoaxes and led more people into wild speculations.

Originally posted by Chorlton
Unfortunately the advancement in technology has also allowed the clowns to advance in the quality of hoaxes and led more people into wild speculations.

The problem is that you cannot prove something as "alien" in this field but you can prove something a hoax. Therefore all evidence that is scrutinized either leads you to one of two conclusions, either it's fake or it's inconclusive because to conclude otherwise requires that leap.

Perhaps there are no advancements because those leaps are easy to dismiss, or simply the scientific community isn't prepared to make any leap in order to further the mainstream study of the phenomena, forever condemning the field to circular arguments and matters of faith or kookery.

Well, I am officially disapoointed that not one person can give one example of where UFOlogy has made progress. It then puzzles me when some seem so angry when defending the field.

It would appear that anyone that wishes to take the path of denier or debunker over that of collaborator has an agenda that wishes to keep the phenomena in the realms of fantasy.

Interesting.

I see your point, and understand your post. I have never claimed that Ufology has made advancements. Other than advancements in technology (such as recording devices, and photo editing) tried and true investigatory techniques still must prevail. But, you must remember, investigations work so much easier when the public is behind them, or at least when the subject matter is not laughed at.

Here is always my problem with how half the nutjob stuff on this board hurts Ufology; I feel that, due to the nature of the investigation, that it will require a large amount of public support to uncover anything noteworthy. Public support coming from all places, which will lead to this topic becoming mainstream AND taken seriously. It is not until then that investigators will be able to hake significant headway, their investigations will carry more weight.

However, every time someone posts some of the most ridiculous stuff, it gives fodder to those who wish to make light of the subject, which spreads like wildfire until most people chuckle when you bring the subject up.

I have a lot more to say on this, but I need to gather my thoughts. If you follow what I mean now, there is no need for me to go into it anymore.

If you care one iota about the truth, you would find a way to get to it. Saying someones fantastic claim is bunk without reasonable explanation of the refutation is not collaboration or invesigation, it is a simple denial of the possibility.

The average joe is not an investigator, they are often just people who have seen or experienced something that is indistinguishable from magic or the supernatural and in response to their story they get calls for proof and swiftly labelled a kook or a nutjob when the smoking gun isn't duly provided. It is so easy to knock these people down like this and for decades, this is what happens, not one is taken seriously.

All evidence throughout history is dismissed out of hand, basically because there is no single, individual smoking gun. Those who wish to deny the subject progression can always find a handy get out clause to deny the possibilities that are presented before them. It's actually the easiest thing in the world to deny and dismiss this subject and the paranormal.

The debunkers and deniers are taking up this easy position for a reason that is unknown to me and especially here on ATS, I find it a double edged sword as they play the deny ignorance card on subjects we, as a species, are ignorant. Seems like a double negative to me.

The only progression that can be made is that the subject is widely accepted and mainstream as you say. Most serious investigators believe whole heartedly that there is a major cover up and aliens and UFO's is a very large and elusive subject that warrants as much waking up and investigation as possible. Then you get not so serious "investigators" that simply blow off entire subjects with a wave of the hand and ridicule the subject while they are at it.

This is the behaviour I speak of for if those persons truly cared for the subject, they would collaborate rather than pour scorn. But they don't, they ridicule, deny and dismiss ensuring that the circular arguments prevail in a subjective environment for a reason that seems to me to be the perpetuation of keeping the subject AWAY from mainstream acceptance, the very thing that it seems is the only path to progression in a field they claim to care for but spend time and effort doing the exact opposite.

They’re will be no “advancements” in UFOlogy until the “true believers” learn how to separate the wheat from the chafe for themselves.

UFOlogy is dead until the same old crap (Roswell, MJ-12, Area 51, Dulce, astronaut encounters, abductions, Moon bases, etc.) that has already been debunked (to the satisfaction of the mainstream which is who need to convince if you want this subject to be taken seriously) stops being recycled over and over again and shoved down the throats of the “uninitiated” by the “true believers”. Of course that will never happen because the "true believers" think the "skeptics" have an agenda (as opposed to being the voice of common sense and reason) and can't be trusted. It's a viscous cycle.

As it stands right now it’s impossible for the average person (let alone scientists) to separate the signal (assuming there is one after all is said and done) from the noise.

I had posted a longer answer, but here's the short version.

1. The gubmint admitted that they use the UFO cover story to explain inadvertant sightings of secret projects. They probably still do.

2. More people are carrying cameras and video devices 24/7, improving the chances of capturing anomalous aerial events (AAE).

3. Advancements in Science and Technology continue to improve data gathering, however it also aids in debunking the ET-hypothesis as an explanation for AAE.

Will we ever be able to prove that ET visits Earth? As I've said in the past, if they come here it will likely be in robotic form and it's unlikely they will bother to use any form of stealth. If they come here in full-force, believe me, we'll know it immediately.

Since I believe this to be extremely unlikely almost to the point that we can discount it, imo, the best way to study the UFO pheonomenon is as a study of known and unknown terrestrial objects.

reply to post by Access Denied


Does that mean that those issues have been debunked to your satisfaction?

You're right though, it is a vicious cycle but not because believers think skeptics have an agenda but because it seems clear to those believers who DO have common sense, logic and reason that honest investigations uncover the dishonesty from the source and it isn't because we don't get the answers we want, it's because a rat is smelled from half a mile away when official versions and channels obfuscate and block attempts to uncover the truth. How many times did they change the Roswell story? Always questions go unanswered and it's fishy BECAUSE believers are using common sense and logic.

With regard to believers thinking skeptics have an agenda, it isn't that we think skeptics have an agenda, there is a good place for skepticism, but it is those that simply come up with an equally outlandish claim of something it clearly isn't. It's one thing to be skeptical, it is quite another for someone to come along and say "Hey, it's not happening, you are deluded" and in order for them to make that claim, I presume they must have their own proof of the opposite. In the same vein that believers are accused of no proof, skeptics are guilty of same.

I don't have a problem with either, what I DO have a problem with is why these skeptics are so cock sure that the claim they are refuting DOESN'T exist, it just baffles me how they know this. For example, I saw someone claim for a fact that there was no secret space station. I wondered how they knew this and why this was considered a reasonable refutation of the speculative harmless discussion that was taking place.

The second psychological element that baffles me is that some posters will bash at a thread again and again, and I wonder, if this is not to your taste or you don't believe it could possibly be true, why are you spending so much time and effort arguing? I don't hang around in religious forums for the same reason, I don't believe it so it doesn't interest me.

That brings me to a third point. For those that do waste this time and effort to debunk, I don't understand why there isn't that inner thought saying to them "What if!". If that's not there, why? If it is there, why not join in the discussion and work together i.e. collaborate, because if it is bunk, it will be shown as such.

At present, there are the two factions and they don't seem to like each other very much and it shows in the posts and I think that's a shame and not in the true spirit of Denying Ignorance which really means collaboration and education. After all we are talking about paranormal and secret stuff, are we not?

Originally posted by Badge01
1. The gubmint admitted that they use the UFO cover story to explain inadvertant sightings of secret projects. They probably still do.

I don't know what you mean here, are you saying that someone see's a black ops craft and the gubmint say, hey no worries it's a UFO in order to cover it up... I must not be understanding this.

Originally posted by Badge01
2. More people are carrying cameras and video devices 24/7, improving the chances of capturing anomalous aerial events (AAE).

3. Advancements in Science and Technology continue to improve data gathering, however it also aids in debunking the ET-hypothesis as an explanation for AAE.

I agree, I think Chorlton mentioned that. Also it would add to the high noise to signal ratio AD mentioned, the technology is a two way street and doesn't help anything.

I don't feel photo and video are submissable as evidence these days. I wrote a thread on it a while back.

UFO Photos are a complete waste of time



[edit on 14/10/07 by Prote]

Originally posted by Prote


Does that mean that those issues have been debunked to your satisfaction?

With regard to believers thinking skeptics have an agenda, it isn't that we think skeptics have an agenda, there is a good place for skepticism, but it is those that simply come up with an equally outlandish claim of something it clearly isn't.

I would have to say that most debunker's claims, although they might not be dead on , are far from being as outlandish as most of the believers claims concerning the same evidence. Such as the typical youtube superstar blurry lights against a black background. That's all we see, but within the same thread you have die hard believers telling us what propulsion system the craft is displaying and what species the co-pilot is.

I presume they must have their own proof of the opposite. In the same vein that believers are accused of no proof, skeptics are guilty of same.

Sometimes, common sense, reason and logic are are that is needed, rather than spending a huge amount of time anaylsing pictures or video using complicated software and hours of vaulable spare time. If something does not pass my common sense, logic and reason test then I am inclined to look into it further.

.....and I wonder, if this is not to your taste or you don't believe it could possibly be true, why are you spending so much time and effort arguing?

Good question. I hang out here and "bash", as you put it, repetitive threads because I want to believe, like most skeptics. My only fear is that the community of nuts and whackos will get to those sitting on the fence and convince them to loose their common sense. This hurts us all. I don't spend time in religious forums, although I do not believe in religion, posting my views, trying to persuade people I am right because it is too late for that. Religion has already run away from common sense, reason and logic long ago. But ufology on the other hand is still in it's infancy, and how it gets handled now will forever affect it's future. I hope by getting a few words of reason in edgewise that a few people will stop to think before they take the flying leap of absurdity that that thing in the video is in fact an alien spacecraft.

reply to post by Prote


I don't think it's changed much since 47. The pro roswell and the con roswell still argue and they both have good points so they beat each other out. The skeptics still feel it's impossible that a flying saucer could travel here from across the universe. And the question still lies, why don't aliens intervene in our affairs and help our troubled planet. But some pro believers do put out good arguments to the contrary, but it always doesn't help. You know what prote, great job on this thread I really like it. It's quite intelligent imo.


[edit on 14-10-2007 by malakiem]

Maybe take a look at nearly all of GridKeeper's topics... I dont know if they are true at all, but some people apparently (using some special technique and telescope) can see alien space ships in space.

Its hard for me to describe... just take a look at most of GridKeeper's topics.

Originally posted by malakiem
The skeptics still feel it's impossible that a flying saucer could travel here from across the universe.

Not impossible... extremely unlikely... especially manned... and most likely wouldn't look anything like a "flying saucer".

Ufology is going backwards. There have been no advancements apart from some of the space footage. Conventional Ufology is dead due to the advance of technology. Maybe things will get interesting when space tourism becomes a reality.