'Do Your Homework Before Entering UFO Fray', page 4
Great post as usual Karl12
I been spending these last few weeks reading the whole FSR (flying saucer review) magazine pdf files from the 1950s up to 1980s now.. its amazing how the phenomena works all these years. in my opinion its not a nuts n bolt alien but something more sinister. Those with religion know what im talking about, those who dont believe in God or anything spiritual will have some difficulty explaining the massive amount of case materials all freely available on the net.
THere are some that may be added to your list
- To be a serious UFO researcher you have to learn Occultism and its history (i think john keel said this)
- you have to do a field work for UFO cases (interview, site visit etc) instead of sitting in your home reading books/internet stuff (i think jaques vallee said this)
- Be prepared to encounter 'high strangeness' when you are deep into UFO research. Better be protected spiritually. (i forgot who said this)
- if the UFO investigator a sensitive (have a kind of 6th sense) then you must be prepared spiritually before entering UFO research as historically a 'sensitive' person are usually the entitiy's target/victim for deception
- The entity behind the UFO phenomena is similar to what the old 'spirit medium' encounter in their session. Liars and Tricksters
While all the scientific research is important for cataloging physical traces of the phenomena, i also suggest all research dont limit itself to just 'science'. there are lot of things thats beyond current understanding , and there are things that cannot be explained by material science.
a little example, while we are driving on a jungle road at night , wilderness all around us , driving from plantation to plantation with no population in between, what can explain a lady wearing white standing alone beside the road ?
a real scientist dont work and judge from a desk , a real scientist will do field work to prove/disprove..</B>
reply posted on 8-12-2012 @ 02:22 AM by Ectoplasm8
Originally posted by Brighter
No. The "Cheshire Cat Effect" properties of UFOs that Hynek was referring to are the exact properties that would lead one to abandon the ETH in favor of something like IDH/EDH.
In fact, all of the points against the ETH that he brought up in "The Case Against E.T." are what lead people to favor things like IDH/EDH.
So you're saying people favor the IDH/EDH over the ETH? If you are, I don't think that's completely true. Using this forum as an example of what people believe, more people on this forum still share the ETH. Which makes sense since a majority of UFO reports claim that an object with 3-dimensional properties moves across the sky, performs strange movements and speeds off. You don't find many reports claiming an object materializes and de-materializes in front of their eyes. If you disagree, lead me to those equally numbered cases. But, going with this IDH/EDH, that would
be the optimum way for these "UFOs" go unnoticed, as they apparently attempt to do, wouldn't it? Zap into the 3rd-dimension, zap out. No need to fly off. But, the funny thing is, most of the claims have them jet off in one direction or another. No vanishing into thin air. It's ridiculous. All of these hypothesis have far too many holes in them to be taken seriously.... How does one prove the IDH/EDH? It would be practically impossible... What about Roswell? You would think if there was an objective to not be seen, they would have been pulled back to their other dimension. The supposed alive alien? He just zaps back over and is gone. IDH/EDH is just as ridiculous of a suggestion as the ETH. The entire alien belief is complete fantasy with the given hypotheses not even able to hold up to anything realistic. It's just graping at straws for those intent on this superior alien race answer. Hynek quote of "Putting the cart before the horse" works perfectly.
I know that you want to think that Hynek abandoned the idea that aliens were controlling these craft, but you can't conclude this from the quotes that you are referencing that he made in his later years. All that you can conclude is that:
1) His focus shifted to an interest in the study of UFOs as opposed to questions regarding their origin.
2) He brought up some counterarguments to the ETH.
In neither 1) nor 2) do you see Hynek saying that he no longer believes that aliens could be controlling these craft. What you do see is someone who is more interested in raising the social perception of Ufology by turning the focus to the scientific study of what these craft are, as opposed to what might be controlling them.
I don't think he did, it's exactly
what he said. He didn't just state to focus your attention away from the ETH only to the objects themselves. That would
be up for interpretation as to exactly what he meant. But, he gave point by point reasons why the ETH didn't make sense. He went further stating his last point can't be argued in favor of the ETH
. How can you not understand that as Hynek abandoning the hypothesis? For the sake of your own argument, I can see why you continue to hold on to this assumption, but, in reality he clearly had changed his views.</B>
<A class=postbtn href="http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/cc.php?tid=903446&pid=15484738&page=4" rel=nofollow target=_new>