App State Professor says "Ufology Waste of Time"

[exo_doc]

I happen to know this Professor because I took astronomy and physics classes under him years ago. And I'm linking his recent news article about UFO's because the Greensboro symposium apparently sparked this half-ass stereotypical skeptic/debunking rebuttal of why Ufology is such a waste of time. Check it out, but hold your nose........

There are cool things to see in the sky – but don’t waste your time on UFOs | CharlotteObserver.com

Especially check out the point where he says "pilots and generals are brought in as experts, as if they somehow have superior observational skills"
THEN, he goes on to say "Many people are grossly ignorant of natural phenomena"..........and I have to ask ....Even these pilots that fly at all hours, day or night, for years on end? THEY are somehow ignorant of natural phenomena?

Professor Caton is the worst of the worst, and in line for the Phillip J Klass lifetime acheivement award.

 

[Jimi H.]

I happen to agree with him on most points but imo. the weakness to his argument is that he doesn't exemplify by taking a well-known and documented case and showing how it could be explained naturally. This in turn tells me he probably hasn't allowed himself to be caught up by particular cases, and thus hasn't felt sufficiently intellectually/scientifically challenged by it!

I forgive him because if noone showed him sufficiently awesome cases, and his introduction to the phenomenon was by some 3rdphase-site, he is totally reasonable to reason as he does. That's just my opinion, anyway. I can empathize with why he says what he does. So, unlike the guy who commented at the bottom of the article, I don't think it's a conspiracy. I think it's just a matter of how you view the world and what caught your fancy at some point in life (unless you saw something yourself of course!).

Personally, my own interest is tied in with just a few cases, because, it is also my impression that "Many people are grossly ignorant of natural phenomena these days, having grown up indoors and disconnected from nature. The nightscape is totally foreign turf .. On top of all this it is well-known that eyewitness testimony is very unreliable."

I mean, if there was just one photo or video where there was no dispute as to its weirdness and non-human/natural origin.. But that would be 'proof' wouldn't it?

I guess perhaps someone should give him Leslie Keane's book? Sufficiently neutral language (I imagine) and perhaps sufficiently inexplicable cases? Does it have enough documentation, besides witness testimony, to make a fella like him interested? I don't know, it's possible.

 

[exo_doc]

I mean, if there was just one photo or video where there was no dispute as to its weirdness and non-human/natural origin.. But that would be 'proof' wouldn't it?

I honestly think there can be no evidence strong enough for some people to even give a half-hearted look into ufology, much less study it with a scientific unbiased attitude.
As far as photos go, I (personally) don't think it gets any better than ....
1. The Trent photos


2. Or the Heflin photos

 

[Randall]

I happen to know this Professor because I took astronomy and physics classes under him years ago. And I'm linking his recent news article about UFO's because the Greensboro symposium apparently sparked this half-ass stereotypical skeptic/debunking rebuttal of why Ufology is such a waste of time.

A waste of time? He should talk. For example it would have been nice if he'd told us something we don't already know. Instead we get this lazy man's approach to commenting on the subject. Virtually anyone can crap out a lousy editorial piece. Caton is an astronomy professor. He could have spent some time telling us some cool astronomy, but instead he goes out of his way just to trash a field of interest for so many people, and for what? Is he trying for a Skeptic of the Month award from his local CSICOP chapter ( now just CSI ) ... or what?

 

[Michelle]

As an educator you would think he would be familiar with the Drake equation... I can completely understand someone not partaking in sky watching but there is no mention in the article what so ever whether or not Caton agrees or disagrees with the possibility that Extraterrestrial Life exists!

Also as an educator and having young minds to mold, I believe that you should keep an open mind yourself! If a professor of mine told me this I would switch out of his class immediately. I've switched out of many classes for lesser offenses!

 

[exo_doc]

Dr. Caton would not discuss, nor let the topic be discussed, in his class. As I remember it, whenever someone would bring it up, he would stop them cold. Now the man was not an idiot, he knew his physics and astronomy, but his mind was closed to anything out of the ordinary.

 

[Ron Collins]

Consulting an Astronomer about what it would take to achieve interstellar travel is like asking a auto mechanic to design and build a space shuttle. It's absurd. Utterly absurd. Astronomers do not have the theoretical basis for adapting physical principles and cutting edge theory to the problem. All they can do is repeat that same old "it too far" nonsense.

They don't look at the data because the already know they are right. I think it's a matter of ego. They are the reigning experts of the universe in the public eye. That's the only reason I can come up with for explaining the abject hatred they spew at this subject.

 

[Jimi H.]

I honestly think there can be no evidence strong enough for some people to even give a half-hearted look into ufology, much less study it with a scientific unbiased attitude.

But why would a guy like him study anything where he can't get proper and reliable data?

Also, those Rex Hefflin photos always looked like a hub-cap to me, and a smoke ring needn't be anything out of the ordinary.

My point is not wether those Hefflin pics are anything out of the ordinary, my point is that to someone who hasn't been 'bitten' they necessarily must draw a laugh.

It's reasonable to laugh at the Hefflin photos.

 

[boomerang]

2. Or the Heflin photos

An aging Rex Heflin calmly sticks to his story:

 

[Jimi H.]

.., but instead he goes out of his way just to trash a field of interest for so many people, and for what?..

Very good question! But I'm not sure the reply is welcome if you don't know it already: 'The field' is so full of crazy and anti-science that many feel called upon, by their own volition, by their conscious, to counter the crazy and educate.

In the other corner we have the believers. They are far more depressing adversaries imo, than a staunch science professor who hasn't seen a UFO and hasn't been exposed to serious cases.

For instance, the forum in general didn't back me up when I exposed that flying orb/ghost video that was done with a paintbrush. But the believers came down on me with genuine anger and tried to twist my words. The OP didn't feel obliged to acknowledge that 'yes', I had indeed debunked the video. Nuff said..

Such experiences will quickly eat away at any goodwill one has to topics like those presented among ufologist etc. I'm sure the proff has been there and done that with eager students, and I don't blame him for simply saying, also to his students: Don't waste my time with crap, focus on the science.

 

[Jimi H.]

An aging Rex Heflin calmly sticks to his story: ..

That's cool, but it's not going to daunt a proff. who is used to working with hard data that can be independently verified.

 

[Jeff Davis]

Ufology with the understanding or practice that we are automatically dealing with "ET" *IS* useless. It has proved itself to be such over that last 75 years. Useless. Stick to consciousness or quantum physics as that which may provide an introductory scientific angle. These are the only sciences where in effect behaviors similar to those demonstrated by reported UFO activity are observed and theorized about readily. Theoretical time travel, teleportation, non-locality, etc. Of course scientific theory also postulates the possibility of IT, but IT is in NO WAY supported by UFO observations. Only a complete IDIOT would dismiss as much in lieu of something like the "greater likelihood of IT". Bullshit. The ONLY time that IT becomes more so likely is when attempting to prevent a deviation from typical popular science fiction stories.

 

[Jeff Davis]

That's cool, but it's not going to daunt a proff. who is used to working with hard data that can be independently verified.

It's also true that the Helfin photos were declared hoaxes a couple years ago. I forget who it was precisely, but comparative photos were made using a model train wheel and it was identical. Helfin was also a model railroader.

 

[Jimi H.]

As an educator you would think he would be familiar with the Drake equation... !

As someone who posts on a paranormal site, I imagine you're aware of the Fermi paradox?:
Fermi paradox - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's also true that the Helfin photos were declared hoaxes a couple years ago. I forget who it was precisely, but comparative photos were made using a model train wheel and it was identical. Helfin was also a model railroader.

Well, there you go, that's the problem in a nutshell isn't it? If Exo_doc ever showed the proff the Heflin-photos, the proff was correct to not bother..

 

[Jimi H.]

.. I've switched out of many classes for lesser offenses!

I had to weigh my words before I replied to this. To be frank: As an ex-high school teacher, if you were my student and you had that attitude, I'd be more than happy to let you go, and you'd only have yourself to thank for the trouble.

You can be pretty sure your proff knows way more about scholarly matters than you do as a fresh student, and (s)he will continue to do so if you turn tail when something goes against your beliefs.

If you decide that the best thing for you is to stick around and aquire all the knowledge you can, you can return later, with all your academic skills, and the very best cases. Cases that you haven't been able to solve for yourself after years of trying, and then challenge the proff to explain them, or even explain how they could be mondane. You'd be much better off that way, trust me..

 

[Jeff Davis]

As someone who posts on a paranormal site, I imagine you're aware of the Fermi paradox?:
Fermi paradox - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Well, there you go, that's the problem in a nutshell isn't it? If Exo_doc ever showed the proff the Heflin-photos, the proff was correct to not bother..

The problem is much greater than a few old school hoaxes, or the insane amount of computer generated crap on Youtube. Mankind, instead of making a decision to truly study the phenomena based solely on the notions of observation based phenomenology, whereby we would wait for our own sciences to reveal UFO associated discoveries, it feels the need to project itself upon the phenomena in an effort to understand it. More like in a fear based effort to pretend it can control as much via an understanding of it. Major mistake. Mankind has a SERIOUS problem understanding that it is not the center of the universe when making speculations regarding UFOs. In other words, we do not have a clue what UFOs are in all reality. We don't. But we sure as heck want to convince everyone around us that we know precisely what they are via assumptions akin to, well, if that was us in them there UFOs a thousand years from now, we would have developed IT and be touring the Universe too. It must be aliens from outer space.

Why is this such a problem? Because it leaves us with no other choice but to construct a personification to "fit" the legend. Mankind has never stretched it's sentience to witness a member of it's own environmental community that is far and away superior to itself, so we automatically assume they must be from another planet. Holy Keyhoe ego fests!

If UFOs are guided by an independent intelligence, which I absolutely believe them to be (a human weakness, I'm sorry), they OBVIOUSLY understand our own environment much better than we do. Is it really such a stretch to think that such intelligences may in fact be native to Earth, or possibly share a mutual environment with us, of which we have only accessed a portion of, up to the present?

 

[Jimi H.]

I've read and written within the critical genre of eco-criticism. A major issue in eco-crit is human exceptionalism in relation to the arguably magnificent total variety of life and nature. Typically, the blame is put upon:

- Religious tradition: Dualist religions like Jewdom, Cristianity and Islam all seperate the human from nature, we are by definition exceptional. While e.g. some native American religions see humanity as part of a web of life where all life has spiritual value. (Related topic: Pastoral versus hunter/gatherer-societies.)

- the philosopher Descartes: While more transcendental (natural romantic) philosophies would later emerge even among scientists, it was Descarted who said that humans were of divine origins, but that all the animals were just like machines (he had to please the church, and they were pleased with the seperation)! This was terribly unfortunate, because it allowed a complete disregard to all the animals that surely 'think' and feel vastly more than most meat-eating and enterprising humans would like to admit. Many animals are very aware beings. 'I think therefor I am', Descartes said, and he didn't include the animals among the thinkers. Therefor they were just machines. Kinda wacky, isn't it?

I just saw a documentary about a man raising wild turkeys. His insights were profound, especially towards the end when he spoke about communication, including active inter-species communication. I wish everyone would see it.

Yikes, the dailymotion audio-compression sounds terrible, US'ers try this link: Watch My Life as a Turkey Online | Full Episode | Nature | PBS

PS: Check out Biosemiotics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

PPS: When people (especially artificial intelligence prophets) think that humans are 'just a machine' they are thinking like Descartes. It's a conceptual mistake, of course. The reality is that we make machines that look like us, in our own image, as it were. We have an arm, so we make a mechanical arm. That certainly doesn't turn the human into a machine. Neither does it make the machine a human. It's just advanced mechanics and complex software algorithms.

 

[Stagger Lee]

"may in fact be native to Earth"
I often toss this idea around myself. Atomic testing, drawing them out of their "place" to examine our environment, and the effects of such testing. The time line, and reported interest in our nuke sites add up. Not to say it wouldn't be possible for an advanced ET intelligence to have, perhaps located us after the first A-bomb tests. Also explains the focus on America through the last half of the 20th century.

 

[exo_doc]

It's also true that the Helfin photos were declared hoaxes a couple years ago. I forget who it was precisely, but comparative photos were made using a model train wheel and it was identical. Helfin was also a model railroader.

This is the first I've heard of this Jeff. More info please.

 

[DaveM]

Probably the reason why this professor won't allow discussions of the UFO topic is that he has been muzzled by his university. The university authorities don't want anything to upset the apple cart at their school. I am not sure why anyone would take a UFO 'expert's' word as gospel truth anyway. These people are a dime a dozen. I still can't understand why people hang on Nick Pope's every sentence. The man was the mouthpiece for the Ministry of Defence. Do you really think that they would allow him to shoot off his mouth about the topic of UFOs? Use your own mind and draw your own conclusions.