• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus 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! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Your Paracast Newsletter — November 19, 2017


Gene Steinberg

Forum Super Hero
Staff member
THE PARACAST NEWSLETTER
November 19, 2017
www.theparacast.com


Veteran UFO Researcher Philip Mantle Discusses the State of Research on The Paracast

The Paracast is heard Sundays from 3:00 AM until 6:00 AM Central Time on the GCN Radio Network and affiliates around the USA, the Boost Radio Network, the IRN Internet Radio Network, and online across the globe via download and on-demand streaming.

SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY A PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! We have another radio show and we’d love for you listen to it. So for a low subscription fee, you will receive access to an exclusive podcast, After The Paracast, plus a higher-quality version of The Paracast free of network ads, when you sign up for The Paracast+. We also offer a special RSS feed for easy updates of the latest episodes, the Paracast+ Video Channel, episode transcripts, Special Features, Classic Episodes and there’s more to come! We also feature selected podcasts and videos from Paul Kimball’s “Other Side of Truth,” and we are now offering special access to the first two episodes of the ghost haunting show he cohosts, "Haunted." Check out our new lower rates, starting at just $1.49 per week, plus our “Lifetime” membership and special free print and eBook book offers! For more information about our premium package, please visit: Introducing The Paracast+ | The Paracast — The Gold Standard of Paranormal Radio.

This Week's Episode: Gene and special guest cohost Curtis Collins present veteran UFO researcher, writer and publisher Philip Mantle with a UFO field update. Subjects include MUFON’s emphasis on entertainment over research, whether large UFO research organizations have any value, and Philip’s various UFO book projects. Mantle is a long standing UFO researcher and author from the UK. He was formerly the Director of Investigations for the British UFO Research Association and the MUFON Representative for England. He is the founder of FLYING DISK PRESS and can be contacted at: Flying Disk Press. Note: We encountered slight reception problems with our guest’s Skype connection.

Chris O’Brien’s Blog: Our Strange Planet

Curtis Collins' Blog: Blue Blurry Lines

Philip Mantle's Site: Flying Disk Press

After The Paracast -- Available exclusively to Paracast+ subscribers on November 19: Gene chats with guest cohost Curtis Collins on a variety of topics including the touchy topic of whether large UFO organizations, such as MUFON, have a future anymore beyond just becoming entertainment mediums. Gene and Curt discuss ways to monetize such organizations, perhaps by trying to line up sponsorships from corporations that sell consumer projects. The discussion moves on to casting news and the reported selection of an actor to portray Dr. J. Allen Hynek in the upcoming sci-fi series, “Blue Book,” based on his work with Project Blue Book. The show is also compared to a TV drama from the 1970s, “Project U.F.O.,” which was produced by the late Jack Webb of “Dragnet” fame. That show was also said to be based on Blue Book’s investigations.

Reminder: Please don't forget to visit our famous Paracast Community Forums for the latest news/views/debates on all things paranormal: The Paracast Community Forums. Check out our new YouTube channel at: The Official Paracast Channel

About the Need for UFO Research Clubs
By Gene Steinberg

The last time Chris and I interviewed Stanton T. Friedman, it was about his 2016 book, “Fact, Fiction and Flying Saucers,” coauthored with Kathleen Marden. The episode was broadcast on September 26, 2017.

The long and short is that the book was mostly a rehash of well-worn flying saucer lore. But when it came to mentioning a place to get regular information on the subject, or to report a sighting, you’d get the impression that there was one and only one source, the Mutual UFO Network (MUFON).

Although that group has been active for 48 years — it was founded in 1969 as the Midwest UFO Network — it is obviously not the only active UFO organization on the planet. Even though MUFON’s membership, estimated at several thousand people, is larger than any other group in the U.S., you can’t assume they are alone.

That said, finding a roughly equivalent organization of its size is not easy. In the UK, the major UFO group over the decades, according to veteran researcher Philip Mantle, was the British UFO Research Association (BUFORA), which got its start in 1962, seven years before MUFON came on the scene.

While membership reportedly hit 1,000 at one time, Mantle says it’s mostly inactive nowadays, but at least its large store of publications is evidently available free online. Indeed, when I checked their site (http://www.bufora.org.uk), I found a collection of magazines dating from the 1960s through a final issue from 2005.

I strongly suspect that, if MUFON ever decided to close shop or at least give up on its monthly “Journal,” you’d still have to pay for a copy, even a digital one.

Now I have no doubt that many of the people who have worked with such organizations over the years were fully dedicated to the task. Many of these people want to get to the bottom of the UFO enigma, though I suspect a fair number are also interested in evangelizing the flying saucer legend, that they are visitors from other planets.

When I interviewed MUFON Executive Director Jan Harzan on The Paracast for our November 12, 2017 episode, I asked him pointblank what, if anything, the organization had accomplished in 48 years. He had an answer, or sorts, but as a practical matter, we are no closer to a solution. Harzan still roots for the ET answer, and evidently believes some of the governments of Earth have guilty knowledge of what’s really going on.

Thus he wants disclosure, but it’s not as if anything’s been accomplished in making that happen. But that also assumes any government knows more about UFOs than the most knowledgeable private researcher. During our interview with Mantle, he said he doesn’t think there’s much significant data to disclose. I have no doubt that there are military sightings involving various types of top secret hardware, such as weapons and test aircraft. But it’s not as if those reports, with security-related information redacted, would actually help lead us to a solution.

I strongly suspect that, if the UFO mystery were ever solved, it would not be through the efforts of any private UFO group, or, for that matter, the result of achieving disclosure. If UFOs are truly spaceships, they are functioning on their own agenda, whatever that is, and will only reveal their presence if it suited their needs. It wouldn’t happen because we are clamoring for it.

Indeed, it may well be that UFOs are destined to remain a mystery. Even if we developed technology for advanced space travel, maybe even something related to antigravity or warp drive, we’d still confront a UFO mystery. But maybe it would manifest itself in a different way, forever elusive.

That said, do UFO organizations ever advance the cause? Have they made any progress at all in solving anything?

From the earliest days of the modern UFO era, there were research groups that rose to the level of thousands of members. Two of the largest in the U.S. in the 1950s and 1960s, APRO and NICAP, had different motivations.

NICAP was intended to be a lobbying organization. When he was Director, Major Donald E. Keyhoe said it was their goal to put it out of business, after convincing the U.S. Congress to hold hearings on the subject. Those hearings happened all right, but they resulted in the Condon Committee, and its report was labeled in the UFO research community as a whitewash.

But it gave the Air Force the excuse it needed to get out of the UFO investigation business, at least publicly, by shuttering Project Blue Book. NICAP suffered from plummeting memberships and income. In 1969, its governing board fired Keyhoe over alleged financial irregularities involving the reported failure to send Social Security taxes, collected from employees, to the government.

What an ignominious ending for Keyhoe’s career at NICAP. While he continued to make public appearances as a UFO researcher, he was very much a relic of the past. NICAP stumbled along for a while, but its influence was severely diminished.

APRO was heavily involved in investigating UFO cases, including the 1964 Socorro, NM landing. But there was no game plan for the future. It lived and died under the leadership of Jim and Coral Lorenzen. The voluminous files assembled during their lifetimes are evidently still being stored in filing cabinets, but the people who took control of them continue to refuse to let anyone see them.

While the data would no doubt be useful to researchers, if they were granted access, it’s not as if APRO solved the UFO mystery. NICAP clearly wasn’t interested in solving anything.

MUFON claims to be a scientific research organization, but in recent years it has focused more on growing membership and income. That explains its tie-up with a semi-fictional TV reality show, “Hangar 1,” and the decision to focus its 2017 convention on unproven theories about an alleged secret space program. It was all about attracting new members and selling stuff.

So has any UFO group accomplished anything to advance the cause of research to any significant degree? Sure, many thousands of sightings have been collected, magazines have been published and conventions have been held.

But as to progress? Do we even need a large UFO research body catering to the mass market? Did we ever need one? Wouldn’t research better be served by small dedicated groups devoted to exploring specific aspects of the phenomenon? Funded or not, the results can easily be posted online for little or no cost.

Would such an approach lead us any closer to some sorely-needed answers? What about some other research methods? Maybe not, but the existing approach hasn’t worked either.

Copyright 1999-2017 The Paracast LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Privacy Policy: Your personal information is safe with us. We will positively never give out your name and/or e-mail address to anybody else, and that's a promise!
 
Many of these people want to get to the bottom of the UFO enigma, though I suspect a fair number are also interested in evangelizing the flying saucer legend, that they are visitors from other planets.
This is an excellent example of the kind of purely rhetorical ad hominem attack that I was just railing about in this post. Instead of mounting a rational argument against the ETH (which appears to be impossible, as far as I’ve seen yet), these kinds of rhetorical arguments simply seek to create a prejudice in the mind through a derogatory choice of wording – in this case, by characterizing the ETH as “legend” (in direct contradiction to the well-established fact that every line of applicable scientific inquiry favors the ETH, and has increasingly grown in favor of the ETH over the past seven decades).

I’ve provided a list of the lines of relevant scientific rationales, and cited three of the successful scientific predictions of the ETH, in this other post.

I’ve posed this challenge before, and I’ll do it again: cite one rational and defensible objection to the viability of the ETH. If I can’t completely demolish the objection that you raise with peer-reviewed scientific papers and simple logic, then I will concede that the ETH is an unsatisfactory hypothesis for explaining the sightings of devices in our skies that vastly outperform our most advanced hardware.

And if I can do so, then I only ask that you heretofore refrain from characterizing advocates of the ETH as “evangelists” or “religious fanatics” or “people who believe in space aliens” and “nuts and bolts” craft.

That’s a fair and equitable offer, right?

Even if we developed technology for advanced space travel, maybe even something related to antigravity or warp drive, we’d still confront a UFO mystery. But maybe it would manifest itself in a different way, forever elusive.
Are you saying that even after we’ve designed and created a superluminal spacecraft that reduces transit times to other stars to trivial intervals, and which replicates the performance characteristics that are widely reported in ufology, you still won’t be satisfied that we’ve been experiencing visits from other similarly advanced civilizations for decades, if not millennia?

I mean, that would be really stubborn. We may never be sufficiently interesting and/or charming to entice our alien neighbors to join us for a nice clam bake or a walk around the lake with interlaced fingers/tentacles/whatnot – but once we’re manufacturing our own ufos and conducting science surveys on other living planets in our general galactic vicinity and beyond, it would be irrational to still question the likelihood that even more advanced civilizations have been doing the same with our world for quite awhile, based on the many thousands of seemingly quite credible cases that we’ve accrued along the way. And of course, sooner or later we’ll find worlds inhabited by those civilizations, and pay them a visit.

But as to progress? Do we even need a large UFO research body catering to the mass market? Did we ever need one? Wouldn’t research better be served by small dedicated groups devoted to exploring specific aspects of the phenomenon? Funded or not, the results can easily be posted online for little or no cost.

Would such an approach lead us any closer to some sorely-needed answers? What about some other research methods? Maybe not, but the existing approach hasn’t worked either.
Honestly I don’t think that "the existing approach" has ever made the efforts that they were intended for in the first place. MUFON appears to be a 48-year experiment that never actually got started. We’ve never seen a bona fide scientific investigation of the ufo phenomenon.

To conduct a true scientific investigation into the subject of ufos, we’d need a lot of good hardware, for starters – or at least access to the existing hardware, which has never happened either. Radar tower data, jets loaded with photographic equipment and a wealth of scientific instrumentation, a network of simple but powerfully useful passive radar antennas all around the country feeding telemetry and profile data to a central analytical server (which could display a real-time map of all air traffic in the country on a public website and tag anomalous signals which could be sent out to app users in active regions), satellite cameras and sensors, and several portable scientific pods like Chris has been working on to deploy to hotspots etc., and on-going development of theoretical physics models to explain the key features of the ufo phenomenon and ultimately replicate them in the lab – this is what a scientific investigation of ufos would look like.

But so far, ufo organizations have been content to collect stories and to invite hucksters to spout a bunch of BS at public conferences. That’s why we haven’t made any progress.

A large organization could, in theory, fund genuine scientific investigation into ufos. So they could, in theory, be very useful. Small groups and individuals can rarely fund scientific projects of the type required. So it’s been a 70-year stalemate.
 
Your comments are highly exaggerated. My column, for example, never presented all people who believe in the ETH as evangelists. I don’t have the time to go through the rest.
 
Your comments are highly exaggerated. My column, for example, never presented all people who believe in the ETH as evangelists. I don’t have the time to go through the rest.
I don't think that's a frank response, frankly. Here's exactly what you said - note that you defined two categories of people (specifically those in the large ufo organizations, so I'll give you that);"the truth seekers," and "those who evangelize the legend of extraterrestrial visitors":

Now I have no doubt that many of the people who have worked with such organizations over the years were fully dedicated to the task. Many of these people want to get to the bottom of the UFO enigma, though I suspect a fair number are also interested in evangelizing the flying saucer legend, that they are visitors from other planets.

As a member who's spent some time defending the ETH this past week, it's hard not to take that a bit personally. And if you were an advocate of the ETH, I'm sure you'd feel the same way.

I just asked for an opportunity to defend the very many of us who find the ETH compelling on purely scientific and logical grounds, because on a disturbingly high number of occasions lately, those of us who favor the ETH have been falsely characterized as cock-eyed cultists and knuckle-dragging mouth-breathers, and I'd like to help put a stop to that kind of rhetorical slight. That's all.
 
Oh please. It was a MUFON-related reference about some members evangelizing the ETH. You disagree?

You are making mountains from ant hills.

I’m not against the ETH, but very little has been proven yet.
 
Well, I have no idea what MUFON members you're talking about, or what they have to say, so I don't know what "evangelizing the flying saucer legend" entails, but it sure as heck sounds like you think that the ETH is a legend, and you don't seem to have much patience for people who defend it.

I think that if somebody had written "Many of these people want to get to the bottom of the UFO enigma, though I suspect a fair number are also interested in evangelizing the paranormal legend, that they are inexplicable pranks by supernatural beings," that you wouldn't find that to be a fair or balanced statement.

Perhaps you only intended to castigate the likes of Andrew Basiago and Jaime Maussan, but it sure reads as an indictment against anyone who favors the ETH.
 
Same answer. Many of the people who have worked with such organizations as MUFON are more interested in evangelizing about UFOs as alien visitors than in investigating. You don't think so? Fine. End of story.
 
Let’s leave MUFON out of it for a moment, because to the casual observer it appears that their recent and lamentable lurch into commercialism, sensationalism, and a persistent disregard for factual accuracy, has not only alienated and offended The Paracast community and pretty much every serious researcher in the field – but it has also somehow resulted in this kind of open hostility toward the ETH as well, which is unwarranted.

It’s perfectly possible, as I and many other bright and reasonable members here have clearly illustrated in this thread, to defend the ETH on purely scientific and logical grounds. One can certainly do so without “evangelizing about UFOs as alien visitors” – many if not most of your own guests do so on a regular basis.

In fact the only intelligible hypothesis offered to date that rationally explains sightings of anomalous objects in our skies that vastly and routinely outperform our most advanced aircraft and appear on radar and occasionally leave trace evidence behind, is the ETH.

It by no means explains all of the highly anomalous reports, however – nor does it claim to. This seems to be a sticking point with many people. Rather than a single “one size fits all” explanation, the situation appears to entail an “ETH+” explanation, i.e. “devices of extraterrestrial origin plus one or more additional and as-yet-unknown phenomena.”

So I think it’s a mistake to throw the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak. MUFON and a host of unscrupulous hucksters have chosen to exploit the ETH for unsavory purposes. But that’s not an indictment of the ETH; it’s simply an indictment of unscrupulous opportunists like David Wilcock et al.

And I have yet to hear a single rational, scientific, or logical objection to the hypothesis that many if not most of the sightings reports that we commonly hear about are devices of extraterrestrial origin. Or even an intelligible alternative hypothesis.

It seems quite likely that the ETH isn’t the whole story, but I have yet to hear a rational argument for why it can’t explain a large portion, if not the vast majority, of the story. And I’d like to, because I enjoy a lively and compelling, informed and mostly civil debate. That's why we're here, isn't it?
 
Back
Top