UFO Conjecture(s)

Friday, March 03, 2017

What are UFO Skeptics Afraid Of?

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.

UFO believers – buffs – think UFOs are any number of things, many opting for the extraterrestrial explanation.

(I’m agnostic about UFOs, as most of you know, eschewing the ETH for reasons amply noted here, but not anathema.)

UFO beliefs, even the ETH, are proffered across the UFO milieu, now (and has been in the past), in muted tones and terms pretty much.

But UFO skeptics attack (and have attacked) UFO beliefs with a fervor that bespeaks a latent, repressed, or unconscious fear; that is, UFO skeptics are afraid of UFOs, what they are and what they mean.

The desire to suppress various UFO explanations, especially the extraterrestrial explanation, as improbable as it seems (as I see it), is pathological.

It could be tagged “ufobia.”

Psychiatry has softened the epithet “fear” with the term “anxiety.” But in ufology it’s more than that; it’s outright fear of a UFO reality, no matter what that UFO reality is.

There are a plethora of anxieties that I could trot out to make a few points, but I’d rather subsume them under the outright term “fear” which makes clear that UFO skeptics are a little nuts when it comes to UFOs, hoping to explain them in less anxiety (less fearful) ways: hoaxes, the planet Venus, misidentified meteorology, or an innocuous, unknown phenomenon, plus a few other less anxiety-spurring explanations.

Skeptical explanations are often rancid, or defensive, even when bolstered by the appearance of rationality or a scintilla of obtuse evidence.

I love skeptical views. They are often (mostly) clownish and silly, providing comic relief in the serious but usually calm communal UFO outtakes from the UFO community as a whole.

So, I ask, what are UFO skeptics afraid of? Huh?

RR

3 Comments:

  • Why do you suggest skeptics are "afraid" of anything pointing to UFO reality? I would counter this by saying ETH believers are "afraid" whenever one of their favorite sightings gets satisfactorily explained. Of course such believers will not accept the explanation offered.

    We recently discussed the Gill case in Papua. We disagree. OK, since you often say you do not accept ETH as an explanation, what is your conclusion on the Gill affair? I once thought this case was fantastic and among the best ever. Not anymore.

    And I am not the least "afraid" it might have been a genuine ET craft. It all occurred nearly 60 years ago and I am not inclined to get over-concerned about it now. At one point Rev Gill actually went in to dinner when the thing was still shining brightly, and apparently near at hand, above the mission church! Those were his exact words. It seems even he was not afraid, when it stood (apparently) some 300 feet above him.

    Yes, it still MIGHT have been an ET craft (as pro-ETHers insisted at the time), but if not, what was it? Can you offer a credible answer? Of course, this depends on whether you believe all those native mission boys actually saw what Rev Gill described. Has a single one of them ever commented on the case since, and if not, why not?

    As astronomers have been searching for signs of ET life for at least 150 years and we now have this latest idea that there exist 50 planets in other star systems that probably support life, maybe even ET life, what have skeptics to be afraid of?

    In order for the skeptics to be proved wrong, some actual hardware or bodies will have to be produced, and accepted as such by science. This has not happened yet, but probably most skeptics, contrary to being 'afraid', would be only too happy if such were produced. Yet they are very confident, perhaps over-confident, that this will never happen. (Perhaps 'never' is too strong a word!).

    By Blogger cda, at Saturday, March 04, 2017  

  • CDA,

    You know my position on the ETH: it's an improbability (my reason cited here often), not an impossibility but farfetched .

    And the fervent attacked on the ETH or just UFOs themselves bespeak an inner-anxiety (fear) by skeptics. UFO skeptics are just a little too animated in their dismissal of UFOs, especially the ETH explanation. They can't wait to jump on anyone who mentions UFOs, the ETHers getting the worse of it.

    The Reverend Gill case didn't example an extraterrestrial visitation but a "folie a many" episode as I've pointed out here many times, as regular, non-absent visitors know. Gill and his people were suffused in a group hallucination, maybe even stemming from an inordinate observation of the planet Venus, although I think that it was something else.

    UFO skeptics are delightful and I like most of then. But they are too quick to demean UFO believers indicating a psychiatric anxiety of a pronounced kind -- a fear that they try to make cathartic by blasting UFOers with rampant, seeming offsetting details and irrelevant detritus.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, March 04, 2017  

  • Isn't it all about personality types responding to a blank canvas? Rorschachs?

    Some skeptics and some believers are equally prone to explaining things according to their world-views. Altogether I think the skeptic side has way more 'wins' than the believer side.

    By Blogger Kandinsky, at Saturday, March 04, 2017  

Post a Comment

<< Home