Saturday, January 26, 2008

Scientists Frantically Trying to Disprove TX UFO

A new, and quite in-depth, article from Newsweek details how scientists are trying to disprove the existence of UFOs by, once again, explaining them away "logically."

While the article is actually very detailed and paints a sympathetic portrait of scientists to UFO witnesses, we here to The OddBlog know that this is not an accurate portrayal of the scientific community as a whole. While some may truly be sympathetic - even empathetic (having had their own "experiences") - to witnesses, most are condescending know-it-alls who fall back on the age-old "scientific explanations" saw.

Most of these simple "explanations" are intellectually insulting and thoroughly belittling, not only to witnesses, but to everyone. The idea that highly-trained Air Force pilots would mistake a flock of geese at several-thousand feet, or that "swamp gas" can rise a mile into the air and fool entire towns, are just some of the "plausible" explanations forwarded by scientists and researchers in the past. But with the advancement of science comes too the advancement of their "plausible" explanations, with today's belittlements relying on far more advanced descriptions of magnetic fields, brain activity, pop-culture iconography (Jung) and so forth.

Now I would be remiss if I did not admit that such things definitely are factors in some percentage of reported UFO events, but such reports are remiss when they do not admit that not all UFO-related events can be so easily dismissed. In fact, governments around the world have documented cases that "cannot be explained."

This is a case of "a part masquerading as the whole," which we have discussed many times before: just because some cases can be explained by such means does not mean they all can. My favorite analogy (which I cannot take credit for but do not know who first forwarded it) is the one that states, just because you can counterfeit money does not mean that all money is worthless.

And while advancements in this type of research are important to ufology, they can also be dangerous. Minor advancements and limited successes in these fields and with these theories have a tendency to encourage even well-meaning scientists to start "explaining-away" accounts before they collect the evidence; e.g., dismissing actual evidence in favor of theoretical explanations of unexplained phenomena.

© C Harris Lynn, 2008

No comments:

Post a Comment