Believer turned skeptic. Help a bored dude out.

reply to post by The GUT


You sound like a soundly intelligent, objective thinker.

How long have you studied ufo reports, and have you ever wavered in your belief? If so, what brought you back?

(cause honestly, some of the # I read on here just makes me believe it less. People are CRAZY!)

Originally posted by ubeenhad
You sound like a soundly intelligent, objective thinker.

How long have you studied ufo reports, and have you ever wavered in your belief? If so, what brought you back?

(cause honestly, some of the # I read on here just makes me believe it less. People are CRAZY!)

I feel your pain, and some of the very, imo, brightest thinkers here at ATS feel much as you do. I've had a lifelong interest in the subject although I took a break from reading the pop-culture bullcrap ufological literature that really started proliferating the market in the 80's.

Learning how selective and deceitful some "researchers" are is conducive to "wavering." However, if we look at the phenomenon as psycho-socially interesting at the very least, while keeping an open mind, it becomes easier to write the b.s. artists off and still retain a rewarding fascination with the phenomenon.

In the last few years, I dug in again and have found a few sources I believe are worth considering.

My own viewpoint, at this juncture, rests mainly on two hypotheses:

1.) The phenomenology could be some type of Jungian-esque product of our psyches, or

2.) They represent a non-human intelligence that can't be defined by the E.T. theory.

Good luck and continue to be ballsy and call b.s. when you think you see it, but also keep an open mind and dig through ALL of history, not just modern ufology, and I think some of the "fun" will come back into the picture for you.

Originally posted by ubeenhad
reply to post by bluestreak53

 

does anyone know of any good, objective literature on the phoenix lights?

It's not spectacular -



But it's decent, and it's based on actual interviews with actual witnesses. Reasonably thorough.

Amazon link

Originally posted by The GUT

Originally posted by ubeenhad
You sound like a soundly intelligent, objective thinker.

How long have you studied ufo reports, and have you ever wavered in your belief? If so, what brought you back?

(cause honestly, some of the # I read on here just makes me believe it less. People are CRAZY!)

I feel your pain, and some of the very, imo, brightest thinkers here at ATS feel much as you do. I've had a lifelong interest in the subject although I took a break from reading the pop-culture bullcrap ufological literature that really started proliferating the market in the 80's.

Learning how selective and deceitful some "researchers" are is conducive to "wavering." However, if we look at the phenomenon as psycho-socially interesting at the very least, while keeping an open mind, it becomes easier to write the b.s. artists off and still retain a rewarding fascination with the phenomenon.

In the last few years, I dug in again and have found a few sources I believe are worth considering.

My own viewpoint, at this juncture, rests mainly on two hypotheses:

1.) The phenomenology could be some type of Jungian-esque product of our psyches, or

2.) They represent a non-human intelligence that can't be defined by the E.T. theory.

Good luck and continue to be ballsy and call b.s. when you think you see it, but also keep an open mind and dig through ALL of history, not just modern ufology, and I think some of the "fun" will come back into the picture for you.

Whats your personal take on the more "out there" reports of people like David Icke or billy meirs(tho hes been debunked thoroughly?) Just curious.

reply to post by ubeenhad


Regarding the Phoenix Lights, it's good to note that there were apparently hundreds of people who were shocked and befuddled enough by what they saw that they went out of their way to contact the city government and express their concern.



There were also a number of witnesses who reported seeing an actual object in enough detail to describe it's color and surface texture. In some cases, the lights on the bottom were not even on if I remember correctly. Also, the angular size of the object was described variously as larger than an unfolded newspaper held at arms length, or as flying over with the center lights directly overhead and the "wingtip" lights several blocks away (paraphrasing here). The lights were also described as being very large - enough so that people had the impression they were looking up inside of them.

This certainly could be the result of airplanes flying over the state in formation, apparently flying high enough to appear silent and carrying unusually large lights. It is interesting to note the witnesses' descriptions. It makes one wonder why there aren't more such incidents if such a stir is caused by airplanes in formation.

Originally posted by Orkojoker

Originally posted by ubeenhad
reply to post by bluestreak53

 

does anyone know of any good, objective literature on the phoenix lights?

It's not spectacular -

But it's decent, and it's based on actual interviews with actual witnesses. Reasonably thorough.

Amazon link

Im very adapt to write off witness reports because of some studies done with human memory. Not saying they don't have merit, I just don't think witness testimony is gunna get us any closer to the truth than it has. So im looking for something that has a good, honest analysis of the videos, light luminosity, and the other proposed "proof"

Originally posted by ubeenhad
reply to post by bluestreak53

 

Is that really the case?
Isn't there a few out there that were done directly by famous Ufologists? (im thinking of friedman specifically)

edit on 28-9-2012 by ubeenhad because: (no reason given)

I know of only one documentary that focused on Stanton Friedman. It was done by Paul Kimball. He interviewed Stanton, but I'm pretty certain that Stanton had no control over how the documentary was put together.



This is actually the case for most documentaries. And UFO documentaries are almost never produced by Ufologists.

EDIT: Browsing through You-Tube it looks like there are several that focus on Stanton, some on the UFOTV label. But I'm sure the same applies. Stanton is the subject and he doesn't make the video.

reply to post by Orkojoker


How much of the specifics of the details were molded after everyone in town heard about a UFO over town. It was gossip, and many of the stories could have collaborated in the hours/days after the incident.

How many recordings of original witness reports still exist of the V shaped craft that went up and down the whole state?

reply to post by bluestreak53


I thought he did atleast one about remote viewing an abduction? or was that Marrs?

Originally posted by ubeenhad
Im very adapt to write off witness reports because of some studies done with human memory. Not saying they don't have merit, I just don't think witness testimony is gunna get us any closer to the truth than it has. So im looking for something that has a good, honest analysis of the videos, light luminosity, and the other proposed "proof"

Who believes in the videos? I think there are very, very few videos of any quality and most videos can be quite easily explained.

I can't see how videos are "useful evidence" as they can be faked. Plus I think that sighting which basically amounts to "lights in the sky" does not provide us anything useful in terms of advancing our knowledge of UFO phenomena. (not saying there aren't potential anomalous phenomena that are purely "luminous plasma")

I should add that I think that there are very, very few UFO sightings that represent any real "unknown" anomaly. And I think that very few "authentic anomalies" are ever recorded in video or photos. So that means there is a "lot of crap" to sift through with very little chance of finding anything anomalous. And even if it seems to be an anomalous phenomena, what does that prove?

OP, i tip my hat to you...believer turned skeptic? How is that even possible?

Originally posted by ubeenhad
reply to post by bluestreak53

 

I thought he did atleast one about remote viewing an abduction? or was that Marrs?

edit on 28-9-2012 by ubeenhad because: (no reason given)

Are you referring to Stanton Friedman? I don't think he has any interest in "remote viewing" at all. That would seem entirely out of character.

reply to post by bluestreak53


Ya. its besides the point tho. Hes influential enough, he could demand oversight of editing of a documentary couldn't he? Scientists do it all the time.

reply to post by rabzdguy


I was gulable. I was looking for a replacement for religion. So i found UFO's. I bought it for awhile but then my objective personality kicked in. Its not as black and white as any mainstream Ufologist would have you believe. Atleast imo.

Originally posted by ubeenhad
reply to post by rabzdguy

 

I was looking for a replacement for religion. So i found UFO's. I bought it for awhile but then my objective personality kicked in. Its not as black and white as any mainstream Ufologist would have you believe. Atleast imo.

Well that would be a mistake (in my opinion). UFOlogy is not a religion (or it certainly shouldn't be a religion). But I do encounter lots of people who are over eager to believe in anything They take a photo that has a blurry bug and they figure they caught an image of an "invisible spaceship". Or they wake up with a spider bite and they figure it must be done by aliens.

Plus you find people who really fall for hoax videos (and other hoaxes) and refuse to believe that they are hoaxes even when lots of evidence is provided of the hoax.

In that sense, I agree that you do find a lot of similarity in the beliefs around many "believers" and people who are religious believers.

reply to post by bluestreak53


Bad wording. Not a direct replacement for religion.
I was an athiest for awhile, and was kinda sad I think, about my view of the universe, and the meaning of life. And some alien theories provide something to fill that "hole" with.

Many do it with pure science and are content with the beauty of nature(Were I am at now), but i think almost anyone who believes in Aliens whole heartedly, and 50% of ats members are using it to fill ideological holes.

Originally posted by ubeenhad
Whats your personal take on the more "out there" reports of people like David Icke or billy meirs(tho hes been debunked thoroughly?) Just curious.

I'll address Icke by addressing my take on Meier. I think there is some pretty good evidence that Meier falls into two categories:

A.) The Trickster Archetype - Both as Perpetrator & Victim

B.) Intelligence Agency UFO Cult-Building

I do believe there was some high-strangeness in his case, but what that means is hard to decipher in the context of the hoax factor.

One of the most rewarding books I've read in a long time in regards to "phenomenology" is, The Trickster and the Paranormal by George P. Hansen.

It's not for short-attention spans but, imo, is highly-rewarding and thought-provoking for anyone with a serious interest in these subjects. The author has been around, is highly intelligent, and has academic credentials in phenomenology.

The paranormal encompasses everything from levitating monks to ESP, from spirits to cattle mutilations—an incredible and unsavory hodgepodge. The mix seems incoherent. But the trickster makes sense of it.

Among other things, this book explains:

Why parapsychology and UFOs are shunned by establishment science.

How anthropology and literary criticism apply to the paranormal.

Why psychic phenomena are associated with mystical practices.

Why tabloids often put paranormal features on their front pages.

Trickster theories are not well known. They are scattered across disciplines and hidden in obscure academic tomes. The Trickster and the Paranormal brings them together.

www.tricksterbook.com...

On UFOs:

European psycho-social theorists tend to discount the physical reality of UFOs. I do not. UFOs are real, but they are extremely problematic for science. I address “high strangeness” cases. Ufologists often are reluctant to take them seriously, because they embarrass ufology. But they are a key to understanding the UFO mystery.

Ufologists often bemoan the hoaxes that plague the field. This is understandable, but an error. Hoaxes have significant benefits, and investigators need to understand them.

Establishment science ignores the UFO problem. Very little funding is available for research, and there is a “giggle factor” surrounding the topic. These are not accidents but rather important clues to the nature of UFOs.

www.tricksterbook.com...

Any so-called "Ufologist" that fails to address "High-Strangeness" is an author/researcher that either can't be trusted or needs, at the very least, to be taken with a grain of salt.

The author doesn't claim to have all the answers, but he does offer some "meat" in a field that's been long-starved for anything new on the subject.

The Kindle version is cost effective and actually formatted better than most of the books I've purchased on Kindle.

reply to post by The GUT


scribd has an unofficial copy! Im gunna start reading that asap. Looks stupid interesting. You should post up an official review on ATS

Originally posted by ubeenhad
reply to post by Orkojoker

 

How much of the specifics of the details were molded after everyone in town heard about a UFO over town. It was gossip, and many of the stories could have collaborated in the hours/days after the incident.

Impossible to know.

How many recordings of original witness reports still exist of the V shaped craft that went up and down the whole state?

edit on 28-9-2012 by ubeenhad because: (no reason given)

Videos of the "craft"? Zero that I'm aware of.

Originally posted by Orkojoker

Originally posted by ubeenhad
reply to post by Orkojoker

 

How much of the specifics of the details were molded after everyone in town heard about a UFO over town. It was gossip, and many of the stories could have collaborated in the hours/days after the incident.

Impossible to know.

How many recordings of original witness reports still exist of the V shaped craft that went up and down the whole state?

edit on 28-9-2012 by ubeenhad because: (no reason given)

Videos of the "craft"? Zero that I'm aware of.

No, the original phone calls of witness reporting it as its happening.