Now, there, I agree with you to a degree. There is an awful lot of subjective chasing of the tail in ufology, despite a decent objective data pool. My disagreement with you rests on the idea that mainstream scientists confuse that high-visibility subjective screaming with an apparent lack of objective potential.
I also wouldn't say that there aren't procedures - MUFON in particular has a pretty rigorous set of standard tools for investigation and research. There are folks out there putting forth a best effort at consistency, but there as yet no analog to the NAS for ufology. We do what we can as best as possible, including trying to keep the data and its analysis as clean as possible. But that isn't everyone's approach.
My appeal to you is that there is no logical reason for UFO's to not exist. There are potential explanations for that which people see in the skies that is repeatable over the many years. I expect that an organized approach will only aid in characterizing that, especially if it exposes and freezes out the hucksters.
posted on 06/27/2006 7:50:52 AM PDT
(May the wings of Liberty never lose a feather!)
Since I do not accept that the Theory of Relativity means that FTL travel is impossible, I might accept that ships of some kind could scoot across the galaxy at any speed. That does not mean that any such ships exist as yet, and the ones reported do not have to originate anywhere but this planet.
Maybe we are not looking at the right things the right way, but it does not appear there is any sign of intelligent life anywhere but earth. I wouldn't look far for the origins of UFOs.
posted on 06/27/2006 7:58:46 AM PDT
(Off touch and out of base)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson