Modern Ufology provides:
. . . expert kaleidoscopic observation of wispy smoke in a hall of mirrors . . .
A repackaged, loose paraphrase of Christopher O'Brien's color commentary.
Well, Robert, your essay stood out to me in several ways, but mostly in terms of how often the needs of traumatized experiencers of the "what-ever-it-is" are more-or-less disregarded, while the prized, sanitized "report" is added to a mountainous pile of UFO statistics.
In contrast, Chris Rutkowski's piece seemed to hammer relentlessly on UFO believers, not that I don't recognize the potential danger of a whacked-out, uncritical, easy believism in UFO salvation.
I appreciate Mike Clelland's highly impressive experiences, but I am perturbed by what comes across to me as something of an invitation to join him in his emotional whirlpool. In that respect, Clueless Wonder's conservative approach was a good choice to follow Mike, IMHO, though his essay was a little on the dry side for my taste.
Joshua Cutchin, I think, makes an interesting point about so-called telepathic phenomenon that quite often accompanies UFO experience. The point he makes is persuasive, even if I don't like the terminology of materialist vs. non-materialist. But Cutchin did not invent the jargon, he only made use of it. The only other tiny quibble I have is about Cutchin's use of geocentricism vs heliocentrism as an example of sweeping paradigm shift. The fact is, geocentricism still remains valid to this very day. But only when properly nuanced. For observers on earth, the sun and moon are the two largest objects in the sky. The moon's orbit is well-described as geocentric. So, instead of speaking of sweeping change, the geocentricism vs heliocentrism debate ought to remind everyone of the desperate need for nuance and careful definition of terms.
I liked Micah Hanks' proposal of updating reporting terminology, though his $50 phrasing in $5 sentences gets a little tedious. I enjoyed Lorin Cutts' essay, simply for the forms of expression: "Disclosure is like attempting a prison break by asking the prison guards for the keys." I also enjoyed Curt Collins' replay of the "Not Roswell Slides." SMiles Lewis' essay was interesting, including his comment that "Ronnie Raygun" (of ancient history) was not the first to suggest the unifying effect of an external UFO invasion of earth.
I'd never heard of M. J. Banias prior to reading the book, and I found his ideas on capitalism as it would affect study of UFOs to be quite interesting, and persuasive I guess. RPJ's anarchy was pure anarchy, and worth a read, as was Susan Demeter-St. Clair's article. I haven't yet read Ryan Sprague's article, but I will get to it. I haven't read Greg Bishop's article yet either, but I've read his "It Defies Language" so I presume I have some understanding of where he will go.
Again, overall, I have been enlightened in various ways, and I appreciate the work that went into the individual articles and the editing. Hope this helps Burnt.
