Ufology v 9/11 Truth Movement - Differences?

As part of the work I've been doing in relation to 9/11 conspiracy theories (including compiling a "Free 9/11 Researcher Starter Pack" along similar lines to my popular "Free UFO Researcher Starter Pack", I'm interested in performing a serious and critical comparison of ufology and the 9/11 truth movement


I'd be interested in hearing from members of this Forum whether they consider there are similarities and (more particularly) differences between the methodology and personalities of UFO researchers/believers on the one hand and non-OCT 9/11 conspiracy researchers/believers on the other?


Here are some possible differences for consideration. (I'd be interested in hearing whether my perceptions are shared or not by others on this Forum.)

(1) There is some polling data to suggest that there is a positive correlation between affirmative answers to the questions "do you believe UFOs are real?" and intelligence/education, while my research so far into similar polling data on 9/11 (which I'm still looking into) suggests that people with only a high school education are especially likely to suspect federal involvement in 9/11.

(2) I think ufologists are remarkably poor advocates for their subject (e.g. referring to their opposition as "skeptics" and "debunkers" - when many outside ufology consider "skepticism" to be a good thing), whereas "Truthers" are generally better at presenting themselves (e.g. the frequently repeated comment that the mainstream view is actually a conspiracy theory itself, involving a conspiracy between Islamic fundamentalists).

(3) The material considered - Ufologists have a mass of official documentation to locate and consider. "Truthers" have, relatively speaking, far less such material. Ufology generally involves issues relating to the accuracy of the perceptions of eye-witnesses. 9/11 conspiracy research generally involves issues relating to the accuracy of media reports and the statements of “experts”.

(4) Several UFO researchers have written about several ufologists that hold right-wing views etc, but the prevalence of such views amongst 9/11 "Truthers" seems to be more widespread. I've seen several websites by leading figures in the 9/11 "Truth Movement" which discuss Jews and/or Zionism in terms I find extremely disturbing.

(5) I have come across evidence of serious concern among intelligence/law enforcement agencies in the USA and UK that those that promote, or subscribe to, 9/11 conspiracy theories may be ripe for recruitment by terrorists. Also, some of the relevant conspiracy theories actually originated with terrorist groups or their backers. I'm not aware of anything similar occurring in relation to ufology...

(6) Duration of discussion: Theories about UFOs have been discussed in the media since (at least) 1947, i.e. for over 60 years, with new material for discussion emerging on a daily basis - including new eye-witness reports and new government documents. 9/11 happened relatively recently, with conspiracy theories emerging shortly after that event. I find it doubtful that 9/11 conspiracy theories will be discussed with as much vigor in 50 or 60 years time (although it must be said that many thought in the 1940s-1960s that ufology was a fad that would soon die out or be resolved by government disclosure or the emergence of conclusive evidence...).

(7) Significance of video documentaries : Perhaps it is simply a matter of the time-frame during which both debates have occurred, but video documentaries have had little impact on ufology relative to their significance in the 9/11 debate. From my reading of material relating to 9/11 conspiracy theories in the media and online, it appears to me that certain video documentaries (particularly Loose Change) have greatly increased interest in the relevant theories. There have been numerous books and numerous video documentaries about both ufology and 9/11 conspiracy theories, but the video documentaries seem to be far more significant in the history of the debate regarding 9/11 conspiracy theories. The 9/11 debate has seen video documentaries produced in direct response to other documentaries (most significantly, Screw Loose Change in response to Loose Change and Farenhype 9/11 in response to Farenheit 9/11) - I'm not aware of anything similar within ufology.


During the last day or so, I've posted the above list of potential differences on two "Truther" forums. The comments I received on those forums contend, in summary, that:

(a) My questions indicate I am a "government person doing a study" and/or "doing active work for one of those 'think tanks' ";

(b) The 9/11 community has little, if anything, in common with the ufological community. (If that assertion is true, why do so many books and websites (including this one) cover BOTH topics?)

(c) The 9/11 Truth movement, unlike ufology, "hasn't got a Rockefeller pumping money into it from its outset, deciding its direction".


I'm still actively searching for additional polling data relating to, amongst other things, the intelligence/education levels of supporters of 9/11 conspiracy theories (to compare with a mass of data I've collated during recent years relating to polls which asked questions about UFOs).


Any comments or suggestions would be most welcome.

Kind Regards,

Isaac Koi

Great post, as usual.

Have you listened to the last few Exopolitics radio episodes?
There are some good interviews with Grant Cameron and Stephen Basset.
You might find those interesting.
I think they bring 9/11/Politics/UFO together on a good way.

Personally i think that 9/11 and the UFO subject are covered up by they same groups/interests/corporations.
The big difference still is that mainstream media/news is picking up on the UFO subject seriously. Not on the 9/11 issue.
Let's hope they will in the future in their controlled world of censorship.

An interesting analysis. I'm no expert in either area. MY apologies for this lengthy reply. My comments relate only to my observations in the last two years. (I had no exposure to UFOlogy prior to 2004):

Originally posted by IsaacKoi
I'd be interested in hearing from members of this Forum whether they consider there are similarities and (more particularly) differences between the methodology and personalities of UFO researchers/believers on the one hand and non-OCT 9/11 conspiracy researchers/believers on the other?

Both communities are paranoid. Both communities, when faced with human positions they find untenable, will be prone to claim 'government insider'. I've made that mistake. Its a sad state of undirected fear and overflowing angst.

(1) There is some polling data to suggest that there is a positive correlation between affirmative answers to the questions "do you believe UFOs are real?" and intelligence/education, while my research so far into similar polling data on 9/11 (which I'm still looking into) suggests that people with only a high school education are especially likely to suspect federal involvement in 9/11.

I hold a PhD in a science. I don't have much interest in 9/11 truth movements because a one time event has little likelihood of providing future discriminant evidence. In contrast, I believe people will continue to report unexplained aerial phenomena, and that as such, it is an interesting subject to explore.

From a personal perspective, I like to evaluate empiricism versus extrapolation, explore, and more importantly, try to understand what the sincere nuclear engineers, accountants, computer programmers, relatives, and other experiencers I have directly met are talking about.

From a purely scientific perspective, I believe that with recurrence of phenomena one might eventually resolve UFOlogy. It may not be an explanation anyone wants to hear or has thought of yet, but the potential for resolution, no matter how distant or muddy is none-the-less alluring.

I see no potential resolution of 9/11. I believe it will end up like the explosion of the Maine in our historical dialogs. I worry more about how future scumbags use this incident as a political motivator for unbalanced thinking (on all sides of the debate) as compared with which scumbags did the murdering in the past.

(2) I think ufologists are remarkably poor advocates for their subject (e.g. referring to their opposition as "skeptics" and "debunkers" - when many outside ufology consider "skepticism" to be a good thing), whereas "Truthers" are generally better at presenting themselves (e.g. the frequently repeated comment that the mainstream view is actually a conspiracy theory itself, involving a conspiracy between Islamic fundamentalists).

I disagree slightly here. I agree that dismissal of skepticism is a bad idea. I like skepticism. I have started using the terms Orthodox Skepticism and Mythical Science to try to help bridge the gap. Skeptics and UFOLogists should both recognize Mythical Science as an enemy. Mythical Science is the use of common scientific objects as mythological explanations. Instead of saying "Zeus did it", mythological science says "a superior mirage did it" without any attempt to test, fit hypothesis to data, or otherwise correlate reality with a pleasing and convenient argument.

I use the term "Orthodox Skepticism" to refer to a doctrine-derived skepticism. The doctrine is that UFOs are not flying objects of an unusual kind. Skepticism is used as an excuse to support the doctrine, not to discriminate myth from evidential conclusion. An orthodox skeptic believes the conclusion that the common case of phenomena represents all possible phenomena, and applies skepticism as a barrier to concluding anything else, NOT as a tool as it should be used, to obtain the best possible hypothesis. As a scientist, I can never back that philosophy of debunking.

I should repeat, accurately applied skepticism is a boon to science and ufology, not a curse. There are many skeptics around here

(3) The material considered -

My only comment here is I am currently very concerned about the genesis of much UFO evidence. Collection of people's accounts is often too late, and heavy weight is given to sensational reports from individuals over mass reports. Not enough civilian data is collected from events as they happen.

(4) Several UFO researchers have written about several ufologists that hold right-wing views etc, but the prevalence of such views amongst 9/11 "Truthers" seems to be more widespread. I've seen several websites by leading figures in the 9/11 "Truth Movement" which discuss Jews and/or Zionism in terms I find extremely disturbing.

I have seen hate speech in many forms everywhere. For example, long ago, I was asked to join an anti-black group. That group had absurd theories about how black people 'ruined jazz and baseball.' I would have laughed had they not had a straight razor under my neck at the time. In UFOLOGY, fear is often directed at military personnel, NASA, and other government agencies that are perceived by the community to be opaque and unresponsive to the UFO communities needs. Meanwhile, those who have seen UFOs are perceived as largely unstable by scientists.

The disconnect between a UFO believer's reality and that of the average NASA scientists creates dismay and confusion for the average UFO believer, leading to conspiracy theory. Likewise, the average NASA scientist has never seen something they could not explain (or explain away and therefore sees fits to label the observers of outlier phenomena as outlier
thinkers. Having met plenty of great UFO believers here, and worked for NASA people in the past, I can see past these theories of one another.

(5) I have come across evidence of serious concern among intelligence/law enforcement agencies in the USA and UK that those that promote, or subscribe to, 9/11 conspiracy theories may be ripe for recruitment by terrorists. Also, some of the relevant conspiracy theories actually originated with terrorist groups or their backers. I'm not aware of anything similar occurring in relation to ufology...

I have seen evidence of recruitment and propaganda here in the UFO community. We see political, religious, nationality, anti-state and pro-state propaganda here on a daily basis. It often pops up late at night (U.S. time) on these forums.

(6) Duration of discussion: Theories about UFOs have been discussed in the media since (at least) 1947, i.e. for over 60 years

I can't comment on this. I have no perspective, This annoys my elders greatly and makes me a fool ;P

(7) Significance of video documentaries

I would argue that "Out of the Blue" had a significant impact on the pro-UFO community.

[edit on 12-2-2008 by Ectoterrestrial]

[edit on 12-2-2008 by Ectoterrestrial]

Originally posted by abovetech
Have you listened to the last few Exopolitics radio episodes?
There are some good interviews with Grant Cameron and Stephen Basset.
You might find those interesting.
I think they bring 9/11/Politics/UFO together on a good way.

Thanks for the suggestion. I'll listen to those radio episodes shortly.

For anyone else interested, they can be found online at the link below:
www.exopoliticsradio.com...

Kind Regards,

Isaac

Originally posted by Ectoterrestrial
MY apologies for this lengthy reply.

No need to apologise as far as I'm concerned. Thanks for taking the time to comment on the issues I'd raised. I've read all your comments, but I'll just respond to a few below.

I see no potential resolution of 9/11. I believe it will end up like the explosion of the Maine in our historical dialogs. I worry more about how future scumbags use this incident as a political motivator for unbalanced thinking (on all sides of the debate) as compared with which scumbags did the murdering in the past.

I'm aware of concern about this within the US and UK security services. I'm still looking into issues relating to this.

I should repeat, accurately applied skepticism is a boon to science and ufology, not a curse. There are many skeptics around here

No argument to the contrary from me. My point was simply that by labelling their opponents as "skeptics", ufologists shoot themselves in the foot as they suggest to those outside ufology that they are NOT skeptical.

I have seen evidence of recruitment and propaganda here in the UFO community. We see political, religious, nationality, anti-state and pro-state propaganda here on a daily basis. It often pops up late at night (U.S. time) on these forums.

I'm not sure what sort of "evidence of recruitment" you have in mind. We certainly see a wide variety of opinions expressed...

Kind Regards,

Isaac