Search results

Thomas Kuhn, Jungian Psychology and Ufology. At the risk of sounding unnecessarily persnickety, I'm going to point out that Thomas Kuhn did not coin the term "paradigm." He was, however, the first to use it to refer to a disciplinary matrix of common foundational assumptions that guides...

The "by whom" is all on page 30 of Kean's UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go On the Record, available on Google books. As for the question of how it was analyzed, that's trickier. De Brouwer refers on page 30 of the Kean book to Professor Andre Marion of the University of...

I, too, am beginning to suffer from flagging interest in this "field." I think perhaps we've reached what Thomas Kuhn might call a crisis phase: the dominant paradigms have ceased to be convincing, and with no compelling replacement paradigm waiting in the wings, we're all left floating...

The televised report seems to contradict Le Soir. The bottom photo (the 4 April 1990 Petit Rechain photo which receives extended treatment by de Brouwer in Kean's book) appears to be the one "Patrick" is claiming credit for having produced, while the top photo, usually attributed to J.S...

I'm not qualified to evaluate his methodology, but I won't argue with your assessment of his shifting stance on witness testimony, either. I do think the van Utrecht photo reproduced in the article (which I think Paquay acknowledges was originally from a Jenny Randles book) could be useful for...

Until and unless we get a recreation from "Patrick," we can look to the independent recreation on page 21 of "The Petit-Rechain photograph" by Roger Paquay: http://home.comcast.net/~tprinty/UFO/SUNlite3_2.pdf I wonder if the re-creator, Wim van Utrecht, would be willing to submit his...

Yeah, it was so iconic and looked so monolithic that for better or for worse it has come to represent the Belgian flap as a whole. And when an image comes to stand for something, debunking the image can seem to debunk that which it stands for, even if there's more to the story than that single...

Yes, you were right from the beginning. Apologies if I muddied the waters unnecessarily. Now, it will be very interesting to see if there are calls for the hoaxer to recreate the hoax, and, if so, to see if he agrees to try. If he can do it successfully, there will be a lot to learn for UFO...

The photo that de Brouwer's discussing was taken on 4 April 1990, at 10 PM in Petit-Rechain, on a still camera loaded with color slides with "only two shots" left (Kean 29). No mention of video footage at all.

If the information in the first photo is accurate, they are different photos taken by different people at different times. The top photo was supposedly taken in June 1990, and the bottom in April of the same year. I don't claim to know if either photo is authentic, or if one is CG, or what...

But which picture? Is this the alleged hoax or is it this one ? I don't think it's the first picture (the dates and names don't match), but I'm not sure how trustworthy that date and attribution are. I initially assumed we were talking about the second picture. If we are, that's the...

It would be interesting to set up an experiment: have the hoaxer recreate the hoax, then take the recreation, have the same expert conduct the same photo analysis, and see if the "halo" still turns up. If it does, you've learned something valuable about how apparently (but not authentically)...

The latest data from the European Space Agency’s Integral gamma-ray detector found none of the graininess or pixelation that would support the holographic model, even after checking all the way down to 10^-48 meters: We May Not Live in a Hologram After All : Discovery News See also The...

A bearded and bespectacled Harvey Keitel as J. Allen Hynek:

You've caught Rainey lying multiple times. Very well done. Whether or not that means all of her accusations are falsehoods is not a call I'm qualified to make, but this certainly seems to severely compromise her credibility. I still think that, ultimately, any challenge to established and...

I was just being mischievous, Angelo. I understand and concede the point that gravity's existence is not contingent upon human beings. But I also understand that we have no access to the whole, unmediated truth of what gravity is and that we have to settle for a tentative theory of gravity...

What causes gravity? Isaac Newton first figured out the fundamental nature of gravity in the late 1600s. By unraveling the mysteries of planetary movement and Earth’s pull on its inhabitants, he described modern physics. But more than three centuries later, that’s still all we have: an...

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>...

Quite right. There is a very significant difference, and I'm in no way suggesting that scientists don't work with tangible evidence. But scientists do have a kind of faith: faith in the validity of whatever interpretive paradigm dominates their field. They have faith that their way of...

If there is any convincing case to be made for science as a religion, it's this: like medieval clergy, who interpreted scripture to a population that either couldn't read Greek and Latin or couldn't read at all, scientists read the text of reality and dictate their interpretations to the...