Tony2007 said:
Maybe, but it doesn't look like the FAA is interested in finding out if this object was a UFO or weather pattern, or anything! Seems like all we got was, "Oh, weather phenomenon, no one cares." Since we haven't heard of any intent to investige on the FAA's part, you have to admit is has the flavor of conspiracy, especially since not a single FAA official came forward and said, "I saw this thing, and I can tell you it was not a ship or craft or anything other than a weather phenomenon." This is why I called it ridiculous, because it was like they wanted to simply brush this aside.
Actually, it isn't in their mandate to look at UFO claims (whether it should be or not is a different question). See:
The Other Side of Truth: O'Hare: The FAA "Cover-Up"
As for the "weather" explanation, just because the FAA might offer it, and then move on, doesn't mean that UFO investigators should dismiss it out of hand. Even if the FAA had never mentioned it, it should have been one of the first things that UFO investigators looked at in depth, instead of what we usually get, which is, "oh, a pilot would never mistake weather for a UFO."
In any good investigation, you start in neutral, and eliminate the more mundane possibilities, before you jump to the fantastic ones. Or at least you should.
Tony2007 said:
Besides, wouldn't the FAA want to investigate claims from pilots who state that an unauthorized craft (man-made or not) was inside restricted airspace? The FAA has been very complacent about this incident, and it doesn't look good.
See above about it not being their job.
Tony2007 said:
I can see your point, and indeed it does seem like Davenport wasn't interested in any other explanation other than "UFO driven by ET." This is not the right impression to give to the media, and in this sense he may have cocked up (love that phrase).
I have heard privately from some leading ufologists that Davenport has a good project (NUFORC), and does some good, useful work, but is too quick to label everything and anything as ET.
Tony2007 said:
Did you see the follow-up video Hilkevitch did for chicagotribune.com? I have it posted on my blog
here if you are interested. Apparently there are some photos Hilkevitch is trying to track down. I'd love to know what your thoughts are if you look at this video.
Yes, I saw it - as a TV guy, I found the anchor's pre-interview behaviour hilarious, assuming the clip was legit, which it seemed to be.
Rumours abound about photos or videos. I hope some surface, because without them this is just another witness case, and I know where that will end up - the same place as all the rest, depending on one's preconceived point of view.
Tony2007 said:
And no one's credibility will suffer more than Davenport's. His whole career as a Ufologist might hinge on this one, simply because it will be so easy to brush him off if the O'Hare thing turns out to be nothing.
Well, you would think so, but... I've found that ufologists can survive just about anything, because their core audience will accept just about anything. Besides, all Davenport will have to do is yell, "cover-up" and all will be forgiven. Come to think of it, he's already done that.
Tony2007 said:
I get the sense that you're more infuriated by current methodology than anything else, and I think justifiably so.
Methodology? What methodology? ;-)
Seriously, with very few exceptions, there is none.
Tony2007 said:
In my opinion the whole thing is quite the paradox. In my opinion, what we need is a well-funded, well-staffed, global UFO investigation agency that has free access to all the information, but we'll never have that unless global society has a radical change in attitude towards UFO phenomenon and research. However, in order for this attitude shift, you would need something like a centralized Ufological organization that brought together keen investigators from all over the world. We're very far from a global perspective on these things, and in this sense Ufology is still in it's infancy, by virtue of the fact that it's so disorganized.
What ufology needs, first and foremost, is to establish standards, and to clean out its Augean stables, which, given the proliferation of the likes of Steven Greer, will be a Herculean task indeed.
Don't hold your breath.
In the meantime, the real investigations go on under the radar, by people who want nothing to do with the circus that is ufology. You won't see them at conferences (unless it's one I organize), and you won't hear them on C2C, although you never know - maybe they will appear on the Paracast... maybe they already have.
Paul