SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY A PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, five years young! For a low subscription fee, you will be able to download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive After The Paracast podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! FLASH! For a limited time, you can save up to 40% on your subscription. You can sign up right here!
Well I feel somewhat relieved because if I recall correctly, I don't think I had much to say for at least 30 mins and therefore can only be guilty of not interrupting Don more often than I did .I'm going to have to agree with those that this show was a real bummer however, to be truthful, Ian, I didn't make it to 30 minutes. @Don - you have had a great run, don't ruin it with your ever increasing anger about everything that you believe pertains to you. @Gene - way to hang in there.
I can't tell you why this was on my mind this morning. Honestly I didn't make it through the whole thing either and had moved on but having read this post it's one of those case where a voice suddenly became a real person and it gave me cause to stop and think about stuff and things a bit more. A phrase I use all the time is "you either doing it or you're just talking about it" and yup, I'm sitting here in my jammies fiddling around. Similarly I don't necessarily agree with things Chris O'Brien has said or the way he's said it but respect the fact that he got his ass off his couch and did something about his interest. Perspective hit home.Well all, sorry if you found this to be a bit rambling. The fact of the matter is .. this was UFO history and history that I lived. Not to be too much of a curmudgeon but, nobody was forcing you to listen. What most of you don't know, nor probably give a damn about, was the amount of damage Cooper did to the overall UFO field. Oh, he was certainly not the first nor will he be the last ... but when we were publishing UFO Magazine we cared about the field. Something else concerning most of you ... to you this is a hobby, something to wile away with your free time, something you do when you aren't doing something else. This is what I did, this was my job and I cared about it. I doubt if many of you will understand ... and if you don't ... too bad.
According to an article (below) I saw this week, it’s only two years away!Well, more and more people are getting voluntary RFID implants, so who knows? Maybe someday the defense that "Siri made me do it!" might actually be admissible in court.
An excellent observation, which makes it even more important for those of us who consider themselves to be part of the field of ufology to build and preserve whatever credibility we can for it. That's why it really irks me when people who could make a very positive difference consciously make decisions that reinforce negative perceptions.... This leads me to the second part, which is the other 99.999999999% of Ufology, it's US. More a topic for sociologists than physicists or aeronautical engineers. A new member GlitteringBadger made a similar observation. I do care about the field and if I didn't have any interest I wouldn't be here. Unfortunately I don't see much having changed over the years (until very recently).
Which is a different thing, of course, than caring about solving the UFO mystery. Personally, I think "the field" is much more interesting than the phenomenon itself, but there is a distinction between the two. UFO Magazine had to pull double duty really, examining the phenomenon but keeping tabs on the personalities as well.when we were publishing UFO Magazine we cared about the field.
this was UFO history and history that I lived
I wasn't attempting to make an argument but rather an observation, I don't fault Ecker's objectivity and clearly explained that I value the contributions he's made.One's personal experiences are obviously going to be subjective. So that's not the basis for an argument.
Nothing to argue about there and would prefer appeal to the better angels of our nature. Human nature being what it is makes that an uphill fight. It would probably take the discovery of something truly unequivocal to lend credibility to 'this field' and wouldn't be long before the head cases worked to undermine it.An excellent observation, which makes it even more important for those of us who consider themselves to be part of the field of ufology to build and preserve whatever credibility we can for it. That's why it really irks me when people who could make a very positive difference consciously make decisions that reinforce negative perceptions.
Within a sociological context, there is lots of room for differing opinions and theories. So it's not that any one of them must win out in order for the field to gain respect. It's how those in the field deal with the subject that effects credibility more than anything else. That's why I endorse an academic approach. This doesn't mean ufology should be reserved exclusively for educational institutions, but it does mean that we should be using a more objective approach to study the various facets of the field. In other words we don't have to believe in Pleiadian contactees like Eduard Meier, but we should be able to discuss the various facets of the story in an objective and cooperative manner, preferably in an effort to reveal as many facts about it as possible.
A reasonable approachAgreed, except I am 180 degrees opposite. More interested in the weird stuff than the weirdos
And very often some of the most compelling cases fail to hold up under scrutiny - but it may take some time. I am think of Coyne -Mansfield incident. Credit to Creepy Green Light for that one.A reasonable approach
So often there is compelling weird stuff but filtered through the perceptions of weirdos (or, very often, filtered through the perceptions of people who seemed "normal" at the time their encounter was documented who turn out to be weirdos down the road. This field (or the weirdness itself) has a way of turning people into weirdos sometimes
A reasonable approach
So often there is compelling weird stuff but filtered through the perceptions of weirdos (or, very often, filtered through the perceptions of people who seemed "normal" at the time their encounter was documented who turn out to be weirdos down the road. This field (or the weirdness itself) has a way of turning people into weirdos sometimes)
edit: stupid unclosed parenthesis...
The above statement resurfaced in my brain the other day when I was watching a TV show called Daredevil about a fictional vigilante crime fighter, who despite the evils of guys far worse than Cooper, believes that criminals should be taken alive and face justice in a court of law. This was in sharp contrast to that of The Punisher, another fictional character who had no qualms about killing any bad guy in his path. In the series the two face off and the drama of the two opposing views plays out.... Trying to rehabilitate Bill Cooper is like trying to put lipstick on a pig. When its over all you have is a pig wearing lipstick ...
Boy this one must have been simmering in there a while.The above statement resurfaced in my brain the other day when I was watching a TV show called Daredevil about a fictional vigilante crime fighter, who despite the evils of guys far worse than Cooper, believes that criminals should be taken alive and face justice in a court of law. This was in sharp contrast to that of The Punisher, another fictional character who had no qualms about killing any bad guy in his path. In the series the two face off and the drama of the two opposing views plays out.
I find the above moral dilemma very relevant to real life. I don't doubt that Cooper had problems and made enemies, but completely dehumanizing him to the level of a pig in order to justify shooting him is way beyond my comfort level. Maybe I'm just too much of an idealist, but Cooper was a human being and I don't think it's too much to suggest that there should have been a better plan to capture him than the one they came up with. IMO police have traditionally been given too much benefit of the doubt when it comes to shooting citizens, and their self-regulating tribunals seem a bit too self-serving ( to me ).
Then again I've never been a policeman, so I don't know what sort of mitigating circumstances or reasoning besides dehumanizing their victims might apply. I just think there's something wrong with this picture: List of killings by law enforcement officers in Canada - Wikipedia
Which dare I assume it is in the USA ( worse or better ) ?
I think Don was deadly serious, and in the context of the post it was clearly dehumanizing so as to diminish the idea of rehabilitation as an alternative to shooting Cooper. To dismiss it as humor isn't appropriate ( IMO as part of the discussion. For discussion purposes, it's fine if you're of an opposing view )Boy this one must have been simmering in there a while.
Lipstick on a pig. Just an old expression taken not to be taken that seriously.
The old "I was just following orders" routine has always been a poor excuse. The plan was a bad one ( obviously ). I think it could have been done differently so nobody was injured or killed. NOTE: That still doesn't excuse Cooper. He should have turned himself in peacefully.There are no atheists in foxholes. At any point if I were forced to confront an armed lunatic either as a private citizen or as a law enforcement officer (which I am not) I’d have to deal with the problem first and then we can all have a group hug and talk about how the guy laying over there next to the rifle was misunderstood.
I imagine so. But I'm missing the point.My niece is engaged to a very nice young man who served several tours overseas, worked his way through the corrections system, worked the highways as a deputy sheriff and is now a newly minted detective. A very mild unassuming man of which there is a lot to be proud of. He knows more abut the sh***y side of life than most of us combined.
True. Maybe we should start a "Good News For a Change" thread. I'd be happy to contribute.Spectacular failures are what we see in the news, and rightly so. What we rarely if ever see are the millions of small successes that take place every day.
I don't think on-the-job experience is applicable to the principles here. There are simply those who favor shooting first and asking questions later and those who don't, and "lipstick on a pig" type comments aren't a defense for the former. Don seems to think Cooper got exactly what he deserved. I think it's fair to look at the questions I raised, and ask if the system could have done better. And in the bigger picture I look at the list of people shot by police in the link above and can't help but feel there's something wrong with that.On an intellectual level dehumanizing an opponent is a point of discussion. On a practical level I’d suggest a few ride-alongs with guys like my soon to be nephew before making too many lofty determinations.
Your counterpoint is weak, consisting of personal jibes, repetition and further dehumanizing a criminal to justify his death. A reasonable and intelligent response would be to admit that a better plan could very well have resulted in Cooper being taken into custody without an officer down and a man dead. Calling that viewpoint clueless while endorsing the attitude that Cooper was a pig and deserved what he got is shallow and irresponsible. It doesn't contribute anything positive or encourage thought about how to better handle such situations. Don please tell me you're better than that. If not, I at least hope most of our other law enforcement officers out there are better than that. If they're not, then there's a serious problem with the way we're being policed.So, now RJ Murphy knows just what was in my mind?
I think Don was deadly serious, and in the context of the post it was clearly dehumanizing so as to diminish the idea of rehabilitation as an alternative to shooting Cooper. To dismiss it as humor isn't appropriate ( IMO as part of the discussion. For discussion purposes, it's fine if you're of an opposing view )
You sound totally clueless RJ. I asked you some time back what was the color of the sky on your planet, you never answered. You simply don't get it, do you? Cooper was a time bomb, clock ticking, simply waiting to go off. He had a website in which he said he would meet anyone coming on his property with lethal force. In other words, he would use a firearm to shoot them. The police were there because Cooper threatened a man, a doctor, with a firearm for driving on his property. He had felony warrants filed on him by federal officers. He shot a police officer in the head. I laughed at the naive remark you made ... Don seems to think Cooper got exactly what he deserved. Yes, I guess I do. Shoot a a cop, reap the harvest. Sounds right to me.
So RJ, no matter how many times YOU put lipstick on that pig, in the end you only have a pig with lipstick. Try working the job (law enforcement) for a year or so ... then come back and talk to me. In the meantime ...