Summary: Ufology is in a state of self denial. For most intents and purposes it appears to be a dead issue. Why is this? Because it is practiced by few and infiltrated by the many, who fail to realize the importance of the phenomena as a scientific endeavor worthy of respect and appreciation for its unique nomenclature of a mystery needing clear explanation.
Ufology is in a state of self denial. For most intents and purposes it appears to be a dead issue. Why is this? Because it is practiced by few and infiltrated by the many, who fail to realize the importance of the phenomena as a scientific endeavor worthy of respect and appreciation for its unique nomenclature of a mystery needing clear explanation. Saddling the study of the phenomenon through various avenues, such as applying close-ended skepticism, debunking through ignorance or hidden agenda and expounding upon it with non- factual data and hypotheses and enlarging the scope of Ufology to include all areas of Fortean variety, cheapens the scientific quest for understanding and explanation.
Ufology, as a scientific area of study and research, fails on other levels as well. It fails to evolve by the normal processes as other sciences have accomplished. In almost sixty years the failure to formulate and put into place a specific language for understanding, such as found in other sciences, so that it can be properly discussed and taught. All formal sciences have formulated a specific language for a particular area of study and research. As an example is the medical profession. All practioners of the profession speak in a common language that is universally accepted. It has its own working vocabulary.
Another level upon which Ufology as a science fails, is not preparing its history as the foundation to prepare the birth of the science for teaching it to those who would desire contributing in a meaningful way, now and in the future. All recognized sciences today initially began from a perceived paranormal perspective, but evolved through education to the level of legitimacy.
There are many fallacies adhered to in the field of Ufology by the majority. Some are innocent, but the majority are entrenched to the point of strangling a new science to death before it has had an opportunity to birth. What are some of these fallacies?
First would be the belief by the majority that Ufology encompasses all areas of the paranormal. It does not. Rods, crop circles, most alien abductions, spook lights, bigfoot, gnomes, fairies, channeling, crystal gazing, HAARP, Chemtrails, etc. are not parts of the science commonly referred to as Ufology. Any attempt to associate these with Ufology is an egregous intellectual error.
Secondly, science and academics have taken a hard look at the data concerning the UFO issue and found it lacking scientific merit. This is totally false. There has never been an applied, unbiased, long-term, funded research effort regarding the hard data and documentation by any area of legitimate sciences in regards to the issue. The phenomenon has been declared null and void erroneously. Any scientist that argues from this position is literally incompetent to speak to the issue and does their own science an injustice.
Third. Earth is being visited and manipulated by aliens. There is absolutely no hard evidence or data to prove this and it remains only a hypothesis. However, enough hard data has been accumulated to prove that the existence of unknown aerial objects, of apparent manufacture, do exist and appear under intelligent control within the atmospheres of the earth and within near space and have been observed by competent observers. To say that these objects and the intelligence behind them are from inner or outer space has not been confirmed. The basic fact is that nobody knows yet where these objects derive, who or what is behind their manufacture and operation, nor the purpose for their appearance.
Fourth, that there is a deliberate cover-up by the U.S. military and government regarding UFOs, including silencing and intimidation, has not been proven nor documented by hard data. Documentation clearly shows that the USAF and the U.S. government has a considerable track record of ineptness in handling the UFO question and has failed to approach the issue with proper analysis.
Fifth. The Roswell incident was the result of a Mogul balloon mishap is not conclusive and the overall evidence of it being such is based upon faulty reasoning and manipulation of the data. Further, there is absolutely no hard documentation at this time to support the recovery of either crashed UFOs or aliens. However, circumstantial evidence exists in enough abundance to assume that the recovery of a crashed UFO and occupant(s) remains in the realm of possiblity than probability.
Sixth is that the news media deliberately attempts to avoid reporting solid observations of UFOs and UFO cases. In actuality the organized news media is no longer a local and national public watchdog of the people. It has become a conglomerate of corporations that answers to advertisers and shareholders and is therefore no longer capable of unbiased reporting.
Seventh. Ufology has deteriorated to the level of impotence and there is nothing to be learned from the study and research of the field in general and earlier investigated cases. This concept is ludicrous. More documentation, data and solid research has been accomplished in the last decade than in the prior five decades. Old case investigations are not carved in stone. As new documentation and research is brought to light, additions or subtractions to such cases are made and the data for these cases are clarified.
These are just a few of the glaring fallacies within the field of Ufology. The quagmire current Ufology finds itself is based upon many issues, most of which cannot be rectified on an individual basis. Rectifcation comes over a long period of time through the efforts of those dedicated to the science of Ufology by their research and eventual edification of the general public by the method of teaching the history and research methodologies and being honest with the documentation, data and hypotheses presented.