Search

The Orange Orb on WordPress

"The part we ignore…may contain the clue to the whole subject." ~ J. Allen Hynek

Tag

ethics

Rectangle UFO in Oregon

MUFON has a report on a 2018 sighting. Sounds like a weird blimp to me, but who can say? Speaking of MUFON, feh. Except for straight up reports, otherwise . . . we take what we can get in this field.

An Oregon witness at Dallas reported watching a large, gray, rectangular-shaped object reminiscent of an aircraft carrier moving overhead, according to testimony in Case 92560 from the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON) witness reporting database. – MUFON

My (Past) War With Skeptics

Oy. Skeptics.

When I first discovered the internet; many years ago, I went after skeptics. I had many a name for these debunkers. “Skeptoids,” “skeptic-bunkies,” and more. I had Yahoo groups (remember them?) devoted to bashing skeptics. Blogs that went after them with a vengeance. Argued with them, and, was the victim of their pathological insanity. I was called many names, insulted, lied about, and threatened. (With violence, with rape.)

I would count up the astounding number of links on the JREF forum relating to Bigfoot — so many dozens of links attacking the existence of Bigfoot! For a creature that skeptics insist isn’t real, there were sure (and no doubt still are; haven’t checked in a long time) a lot of threads devoted to Sasquatch.

Finally, I quite. Started using my own, real, legal name on-line. Partly because, in using my own name, that would hold me accountable to myself. Also, letting others know: this is me. Who I am. Really, truly me.

As it is now. Still me.

After awhile, things died down, and they’re still fairly quiet in that realm. But overall, lately, there has been an uptick in the skeptical world. Lots of links (see Anomalist, and Coast to Coast, etc. for links) to skeptics and anti-skeptics.

Things don’t change. They rest, they retreat for a moment, but after a while, they return. Skeptics are always with us. Still showing their ignorance, their smugness, their refusal to consider — seriously, and more importantly, honestly, — the subject they’re refuting.

Finally, I’d like to say, to para-phrase, “nobody believes in ghosts, until they’ve seen one.” Except, even in those cases, I know that’s not true. I’ve met a few who have seen ghosts, heard them, felt them, along with members of their family, and still refuse to acknowledge their existence. I’ve had people walk out of the room, rather than talk about the things they’ve seen, be it UFOs or strange creatures or ghosts. I’ve had people refuse to talk about the very things the rest of their loved ones have seen, as they themselves had. Their love for their family — siblings, spouses, etc. — isn’t enough to cancel out their fear, or refusal, to accept the anomaly.  (And by the way, I have seen and heard ghosts, many a time.)

Why?

A question that intrigues me, but at the same time, I don’t pay much attention to anymore. I don’t argue. I don’t explain. Not now. Not anymore.

I will happily discuss my experiences. But explain? Justify? Apologize? Nope.

It is not my job to convince you. I don’t want to convince anyone. I simply  tell my story. My truth. It is up to you — your choice — if you believe me, or care to honestly engage with me.

Otherwise, buzz off.

Labeling the Experience

 

typewriterpixabayimage.jpg

 

Labels. We all use them, in every situation and context. Labels help us. They also manipulate us. We need something to hang onto, something to help us make sense of things. A handy quick label keeps us moving. We assume we all know, all agree, what we’re talking about when we use labels. Of course, most of the time that’s not true. We don’t agree, we aren’t sure, and we just want to get to it. Not get bogged down with defining our labels or explaining ourselves.

Anyway.

When it comes to UFOs, well, the word itself is a label abused. Both debunkers and believers (more labels!) assume UFO means aliens from outer space. (My theory is “they started it” meaning the skepti-bunkers, who insist that UFO of course  “really” means ET, and therefore, let the scoffing and mocking begin.)

What labels to use when talking about people who’ve interacted with UFOs and or entities? Experiencer is a big one. Abductee, contactee, … the edges blur with those two, though of course those words help us identify witnesses who have been contacted, or taken, by entities. (And I do recognize that I use entity more than alien, certainly more than ET, because, well, we don’t know they’re literal ETs.)  I will not ever tell someone who’s gone through encounters what to do; never suggest they take a specific approach or use only certain terminology. That’s up to them. For myself, I think simply using the word witness is enough. Yes, I’ve experienced things as well, but for me, that word in this context seems clinical. The use of the word experience removes a complicated mass of emotions and responses, it sets the self apart from the crazy mysterious scary weird exhilarating thing that happened.

It is up to each one of us who have witnessed these things to use whatever terms makes sense to us at the time. And the researchers who work with witnesses need to respect that, using their own language as they see fit, but allowing the witness her or his voice as well.

 

A Comment on my recent Stint on Jeremy Vaeni’s ‘Experience’ Podcast

It’s very difficult to mine any information from this interview. Regan was good at expressing her own bafflement and confusion with her experiences, but not at describing them with enough detail that we could either sincerely share her bafflement or perhaps provide some clarity. She says she’s trying to understand them better, and I believe her, but I also sense an unwillingness to open her experiences up fully to outside commentary. One thing that was obvious is that she’s concluded far more about her experiences than she expresses outright, and perhaps she fears that opening up her experiences to outside comment will challenge those conclusions and throw her back into a worse confusion, or confirm the worst of them which she is not ready to hear, but that looks to me to be rooted in a lack of self-confidence and a disbelief that anyone could really offer her anything truly beneficial.

I apologize to Regan for being so critical, and perhaps I’ve got it all wrong, I share my thoughts freely and whether she considers them or throws them into the bin I’ll take no offense.

A comment left  on Jeremy Vaeni’s Unknown Country/Experience podcast site in response to my podcast appearance on Vaeni’s program several weeks ago, (Which I greatly enjoyed, and once again, thank Jeremy for the opportunity to talk with him. Always truly wonderful, and funny, and “real” to speak with Vaeni.)
No offense taken dear commentator, I agree with many of your thoughts.
I am only trying to figure it out. Being human, and having all kinds of experiences involving  trauma — extant of any paranormal/supernatural experiences, I have my blind spots. Some I’m aware of, some I’m not.
We’re all in this together, trying to figure it out, find our way. Find those to trust, who will listen. Find others who’ve had similar experiences, who will share, and, listen to us without a knee jerk reaction of rejection.
Search, research, study.
But yeah, I’m human, and like everyone else, have moments of clarity, then, those muddled moments of what-ifs and it-couldn’t- possibly- be. Even fear. Okay, FEAR.  At times.
I don’t doubt at all that there’s a part of me that is afraid. Fuck yeah. Missing time? Not once, but at least twice. It’d be bad enough if it were only me present at those times, but, no. Others were present who confirmed the experiences.  Same with the invisible but no less real presences, (alien? not human, anyway) again, confirmed by others. And, so on  . . .
And I will acknowledge that yes, there are still some private, intimate episodes that I’m not willing to share now, or, I might find, will never be willing to share. Fear, shame, confusion, self-protection, … who knows. But it’s my right  to decide when and  where I will share these episodes. Will they be useful to the meta-data? To women in this field? To me?! Probably.  Yet in the meantime, we have to allow ourselves the time and space to process all this stuff.
We have to respect witnesses and let them speak, encourage but not harass or persecute those who share their stories. There will be a time when they’re (and when I’m) ready  to be even more open.
Being so-called closed shouldn’t imply a dishonesty, but foster a sense of compassion and patience.
True, there are those are coy for whatever reason (er, um, well,  David Paulides . . .) but the majority of people sharing their stories are being truthful. Sadly, but reallistically, there are always those who are hoaxers, liars, or sloppy and sleezy creeps (David Jacobs, in my opinion) but it’s a given that in any field — you name it, any field — that there are the liars, creeps, psychos, and huskters.

Just Be Honest and Do The Work

My latest rant on Facebook, related to… oh I don’t know. Just the usual I suppose. The arguments, the in-fighting, the eating our own, the UFO Police.

UFOlogy needs to stop being so needy. And at the same time, stop being so authoritarian. There will be no UFO Police. Stop being so damn obsequious; trying to get the approval of Science, and to a lesser degree, academia. Just be honest. Just listen. Stop being competitive and accept that we are individuals, with individual talents and experiences, backgrounds and knowledge, to contribute. And stop being afraid to call out those creeps who get away with stuff because he (or she) is “one of us.” David Jacobs being at the top of the list. You don’t personally think there are reptilians? Fine. Don’t. But move on. But be honest if an account shows up in your data. Don’t mock or reject based on your own bias. This is what UFOlogy needs, not the surreal loop of non-productive whining about science, and the “crazies.” You do realize that to the outside world, also known as the “real” world, we’re All crazy, here in the fringe? So you can forget that. Just do the work, be honest, listen, and get over yourself.

Old Debate, New Article: To Kill BF, or , Not

Well, of course the answer is NO.

Cross posted at my Frame 352: The Stranger Side of Sasquatch blog.

New article (To Kill or to Capture Bigfoot: The Great Cryptozoological Debate) on the old debate that rages on. Sad that it rages on, sad that some people think one has to kill themselves a Bigfoot just to prove to science it exists. Not enough for one’s own experience to be the proof; Big Science has to know as well in order for those with the bloodlust to feel vindicated.

“You would need a heavy-duty rifle,” according Jim Lansdale, co-founder of the Gulf Coast Bigfoot Research Organization (GCBRO). “I would suggest a 30-aught-six or better; .458 or something like that. Maybe a seven-mag’. But it’s all shot placement and you’d have to shoot him in the head. You can’t body-shoot him. They’re too big.” [Jim Lansdale; Gizmodo]

Disgusting Lansdale has spent a lot of brain energy figuring out just what weapon will do the job.

Skeptic and debunker Benjamin Radford gives his reason why those, like myself, are against killing a Sasquatch:

“To them it’s not just like killing an armadillo or an elk—it is a symbol of purity.” [Benjamin Radford; Gizmodo]

I’d like Mr. Radford to know that I wouldn’t kill an armadillo (who does that?) or an elk. While some do — hunters who kill elk in order to provide food for their family — I choose not to do so. It’s not because I believe Sasquatch is “pure”, I have no idea. It simply is not right to do so. In this I am very adamant.

I have not seen a Sasquatch, though I have had a couple of odd experiences related to Sasquatch. I know a lot of individuals who have seen Bigfoot. I believe it exists. To me it doesn’t matter if it’s “pure” or almost human, or human like, or even human, or, ‘simply’ an animal. No reason to kill it. None.

None.

Nope.

Not one good reason.

At. All.

Having said that, I will make a qualifier here. While I doubt Bigfoot are psycho-beings killing humans willy-nilly, as Lansdale believes, (because, after all, those of us who are NO KILL are “bleeding hearts”, which tells you a lot about Lansdale’s mindset and political values) if an animal — human or non — is coming at me to eat me for lunch, then yes, I’d defend myself.

But I’m not going out to look for a being with the single minded purpose of killing one.

Oh, the Big Reveal: Government Studied UFOs After Project Blue Book

vintageufo2.jpg

“Since the termination of Project Blue Book, no evidence has been presented to indicate that further investigation of UFOs by the Air Force is warranted. In view of the considerable Air Force commitment of resources in the past and the extreme pressure on Air Force funds at this time, there is no likelihood of renewed Air Force involvement in this area.” [USAF]

No one can be surprised at this. I’ve said this many times, as others have as well: that the government has continued to study UFOs, despite their official pronouncement that they had no interest in doing so. No believed that. Did they?

Paul Dean has a detailed  post about this latest UFO government news at his blog UFOs – Documenting the Evidence.

Various government agencies passing off UFO research to other agencies, lying about it, telling the public one thing, doing another . . . not surprising.

MUFON’S Inner Circle

Kevin Randle has a piece at his blog on MUFON’s Inner Circle: A Different Perspective: MUFON, Racism and Dodging the Questions.

Another huge WTF moment in the continuing sleazy saga that is MUFON these days.

For some time, MUFON, as an institution, been very suspect. MUFON began (one assumes) with good intentions on bringing a respectable and acceptable, light regarding UFOs to the masses. Excluding the more embarrassing witness narratives of course.

Then the strange relationship with cagey and coy millionaire Bigelow, John Ventre’s racism, and now, the Inner Circle, where, for five thousand dollars, you can join. Members include JZ Knight. Yes, that JZ Knight, keeper of the entity known as Ramtha.

Oy.

Kevin Randle has written a good piece and thanks to him for putting this out there.

 

MUFON’s John Ventre and Acceptance of the Repugnant

MUFON member — not just a member but “multi state director” John Ventre  posted fearful racist posts on his Facebook page. Sad to see anyone post such paranoid and ignorant rantings, and it brings up questions concerning UFO research when it comes to a public figure involved in this area.

Why would this concern anyone?  After all, he has a right to his opinion, his personal views are his and not reflective of MUFON. In fact, MUFON has issued an apology covering -one’s- collective -asse response.

To be fair, in the comments section, MUFON has posted that Ventre’s books have been removed from MUFON, and he has been disinvited from the 2018 MUFON Symposium, but, he has been “replaced as a Journal columnist” [MUFON.comSo it’s questionable how much MUFON cares. In fact, the following statement from MUFON smacks of an apologist stance on MUFON’s part, as author Robbie Graham pointed out on their site in the comments section:

Jan Harzan’s official statement here is an absolute disgrace. “Who is worse,” he asks, “the posters posting or the haters hating?” In the context of this issue, he’s actually implying that those who stand up to racism are as bad as (or worse than) the racists themselves, with the racist being merely a “poster” and the anti-racists being “haters.” He should be thoroughly ashamed of himself. Utter disgrace. If Harzan represents MUFON, then MUFON is a joke, and a sick one at that. (Robbie Graham, comments section, MUFON.com)

Ventre’s opions  affects research and MUFON as well as the rest of us living in the fringe, and we should care about this. (Many of us do care, for example, Lon Strickler, of Phantoms and Monsters, has spoken out about this, among others. ) This goes beyond someone’s hateful views on race. If Ventre feels this way, how do his feelings affect his research? When investigating a case involving people of a class, race, religion or gender one has bias towards, these prejudices affects the quality of research. 

David Jacobs, whose bizarre, off the rails misogynistic treatment of Emma Woods has been a wildly surreal contribution to UFO Land’s history, yet he is still accepted — including by MUFON — and support for Jacobs continues.

If these researchers want UFO research to be taken “seriously” by the mainstream and the infrastructure and institutions, these behaviors cannot continue. If certain professions demand that individuals within those professions be held up to a higher standard (and I do have issues with that assumption) , and, if some UFO researchers and pundits push for acceptability, then they should demonstrate those higher standards.

Of course, UFO research, like all aspects of paranormal/supernatural/Fortean things/conspiracy and other fringe dwelling topics will never be taken seriously by anyone in the mainstream.  That fact, however, does not give those who blithely show off their racist and sexist beliefs the excuse they’re looking for to continue to do so.

One last thought: it does not matter how long ago this took place; the discussion needs to keep going, (as with Jacobs and all the aftermath) — it is not a forgotten, “get over it” type of thing.

 

 

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: