Who cares if UFOology is respected?

[Mr. Fibuli]

The field is full of cranks. So is every field..I think the angst I hear over the ocean of poopoo is misguided. It's impossible to flush the tank. There should be a rating site for all cases like Politifact.
I'm saying keep calm and carry on, because the scammers and nuts are EVERYWHERE.

I mean, it'd be nice if it could be less of a circus, but who knows what tomorrow has coming.

 

[Wade]

As a unattached, self-effacing, fairly good-natured impartial armchair observer I'm fully on board with your post and even if I was immersed in it i would feel the same way, needless to say there are people that have a lot more self interest in the field (and other fields) who rankle at this idea. I guess it all depends how you came out of the womb. But from my pov do you think the editors of papers such as the Washington Post, Wall Street Journal and New York Times get their panties in knots about newsstand tabloids? As you say every field is littered with unwanted baggage. If i was in the field...or any field... I would just keep my head down and focus on my own work let it speak for itself and present it on its own merit and let others get caught up in the circus.

 

[AlienEsq]

The circus will always be there, regardless of the field. I would say, however, that respect is a natural desire in all professions as well. While I'm not calling myself an expert or even a researcher into ufology, I'm still waiting for the day when those who have dedicated themselves to this field are nationally recognized. That's my own, personal desire to advocate for the success of this field, and I agree that we should try to keep a civilized and educational dialogue going while also trying to weed out those who aren't genuinely interested in perpetuating the growth and recognition of our field.

Anyone else?

 

[DaveM]

As a unattached, self-effacing, fairly good-natured impartial armchair observer I'm fully on board with your post and even if I was immersed in it i would feel the same way, needless to say there are people that have a lot more self interest in the field (and other fields) who rankle at this idea. I guess it all depends how you came out of the womb. But from my pov do you think the editors of papers such as the Washington Post, Wall Street Journal and New York Times get their panties in knots about newsstand tabloids? As you say every field is littered with unwanted baggage. If i was in the field...or any field... I would just keep my head down and focus on my own work let it speak for itself and present it on its own merit and let others get caught up in the circus.

You will probably never see a positive story concerning ufos from the major newspapers. The editors take their orders from the owners. It is well known that the CIA and the FBI have desks at these newspapers and any major media for that matter. They screen anything that the government doesn't want you seeing. See Operation Mockingbird for the beginnings of that fiasco. Anyway, I wouldn't expect much out of the major outlets for news.

 

[Randall]

The field is full of cranks. So is every field..I think the angst I hear over the ocean of poopoo is misguided. It's impossible to flush the tank. There should be a rating site for all cases like Politifact.
I'm saying keep calm and carry on, because the scammers and nuts are EVERYWHERE.

I mean, it'd be nice if it could be less of a circus, but who knows what tomorrow has coming.

Who cares if ufology is respected? I do, and so should anyone else with a genuine and constructive interest in the UFO phenomenon.

If we in ufology want to improve our image, then the first thing to do is stop being our own worst enemy. Let's take a lesson from the field of medicine. You don't see people in medicine constantly ranting about how lousy a job they're doing, yet there are literally thousands of cases of fraud and/or misinformation in medical papers along with countless lawsuits involving huge amounts of money. The problems in ufology pale in comparison, yet doctors still get respect. So let's seriously try to get it through to the ufology community that publicly ranting about all the problems in ufology doesn't help.

Instead, when addressing the public, it's very important to stay on the positive side and radiate enthusiasm and interest, while at the same time, working behind the scenes to solve the problems. That's what I've been attempting to do with USI. Our perspective is that the study of ufology spans a wide range of science, culture, and art, and that the process of "separating the signal from the noise" can be highly informative, acting as a gateway to the study of related academic fields. It's also why I like to support The Paracast. @Gene Steinberg and @Christopher O'Brien are both very knowledgeable and aren't out to promote or perpetuate misinformation.

So ufology is not only fascinating because of the genuine mystery that it represents, it can also be entertaining and educational, even fun. It doesn't have to be taken seriously all the time. The "Seriously Funny Stuff" thread is a testament to that . There are so many really positive things about ufology, but the naysayers are always doing their best to ruin it. So why should we help them by adding our voice to theirs? We shouldn't. Anyone who trashes ufology, especially to make themselves seem more credible is IMO exploiting ufology for their own gain, and eroding the progress that the rest of us are trying so hard to make.

All that being said. I don't have a problem with exposing the problems. It's how it's done that is the issue. On the USI site I try to do it in a very objective way by simply stating the facts and keeping the editorializing to a minimum, and anyone can make a difference by volunteering articles for the site. Just get in touch and we'll figure something out.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Agreed. I would have thought it only natural that those with an interest in the field of ufos would err on the side of promoting the positive aspects over any negative.

Occasionally I tell people of my interest in the field, this show and forum etc but I don't make a habit of it. When I do though, I will point toward the cases/reasons as to why I think it is all worth bothering about.

I often wonder what it takes for someone to actually 'get into' the subject of Ufology. You can tell some very intelligent and curious people loads about it but they'd still rather watch football or whatever. I'm not at all sure it is possible to push someone into a fascination for UFOs when they haven't made that journey themselves. Not one single person I know had anything to do with my own interest. I am pretty sure that apart from TV and movies, my interest in UFOs came from myself 100%

Does anyone here think they know of anyone who was persuaded to become interested in this topic?

I do care about how Ufology comes across to the general public but I know I have little control over those in the field who have a religious view of it all. All each person can really do I suppose is to promote the positive and scientific side over the woo-woo side, whenever they are given the opportunity.

 

[Randall]

... Does anyone here think they know of anyone who was persuaded to become interested in this topic?

Interesting observation. Most of the people I've connected with already had some interest in UFOs before I mention the topic. One exception however was a fellow I worked with, who had gotten into a discussion with someone else the day before about conspiracy theories and the paranormal. Unaware that I was interested in UFOs he started out the discussion by saying how some people believe the stupidest things, and used angels as an example. Being non-denominational myself, I had to agree, but then he mentioned UFOs.

I responded with what I've found to be an excellent segue, which depending on the situation goes something like this: "UFOs are a different story because there's nothing unscientific about the possibility of interstellar travel or life on other worlds." Setting aside the issue that it's an introduction to the ETH, the truth of the statement was enough to make him rethink his position and open up to the possibility. After some further discussion about radar/visual cases and official Air Force investigations, he decided to do some looking into it on his own, and over the summer we had several really good discussions about UFOs .

So it is possible to introduce people to the field and even change their minds if they have a negative opinion. What's harder I've found, is changing people's minds who are already in the field. Once people get certain ideas in their heads and tell the same stories over and over again enough times, they seem to become entrenched in their own belief systems, where even logic and evidence to the contrary are insufficient to get them turned around.

 

[Vimana]

...Does anyone here think they know of anyone who was persuaded to become interested in this topic?

My dad was a fighter pilot who was extremely skeptical throughout his career, but after reading a few of the better books of the last couple decades he has developed an interest. He wasn't persuaded by any one thing in particular. He leans more to a Nuts n Bolts theory where I'm a bit farther out.

 

[Randall]

My dad was a fighter pilot who was extremely skeptical throughout his career, but after reading a few of the better books of the last couple decades he has developed an interest. He wasn't persuaded by any one thing in particular. He leans more to a Nuts n Bolts theory where I'm a bit farther out.

You might try to find a couple of the classics for your dad by Keyhoe and Ruppelt, both of whom were in and/or had close connections with the Air Force during the Golden Age of ufology ( 1947-1957 ). And of course we have Kean's book where pilots and military people "go on record" about their encounters.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Ruppelt's "close connection" was that he was an Air Force officer and a head of Project Blue Book. Close as you get.

 

[Mr. Fibuli]

The Paracast is the most straight paranormal broadcast I have heard. I appreciate the open mindedness and reasonability.
As an agnostic and a punk rocker, I have learned that respect is only worthwhile when received from a critically thinking person. Anyone else is an ignorant sleepwalker so their opinion doesn't matter. I don't give respect based on title or rank (not that I'm implying anyone else is!)
On the other hand..the yearning for acceptance; yeah, I get that too

 

[Mr. Fibuli]

Giordano Bruno wasn't respected.

 

[Randall]

... I don't give respect based on title or rank ( not that I'm implying anyone else is! ) ...

Bravo! I'm not against someone having credentials when it's obvious that they're needed. Like I wouldn't want someone doing neurosurgery on me who had learned it over the weekend on YouTube, but generally speaking, the "education industry" has become a tool for stifling prosperity. It also hinders gainful employment for those who are well qualified from experience, but lack some "little piece of paper" from some school or another. Check out the article College Conspiracy and the related videos posted below:

College Conspiracy 2011 ( SO IT'S EVEN WORSE NOW ! )

Hey: BTW: Are you a punk rock player?

 

[SheaOlmsford]

The Paracast is the most straight paranormal broadcast I have heard. I appreciate the open mindedness and reasonability.
As an agnostic and a punk rocker, I have learned that respect is only worthwhile when received from a critically thinking person. Anyone else is an ignorant sleepwalker so their opinion doesn't matter. I don't give respect based on title or rank (not that I'm implying anyone else is!)
On the other hand..the yearning for acceptance; yeah, I get that too

It's not all that straight. I am here and I am gay. (I could not resist).