March 5, 2005 This is a rather strange document from someone who claims to be a researcher in Oregon. Actually this person claims to be a number of things. I wanted to make a couple of comments. The original can be found at Oregon Fortena.<\/p>\n
RUBY’S U.F.O. MANIFESTO<\/p>\n
1.The question, \\\u201cDo you believe in UFOs” will never again be asked. For the question is moot. The question is the wrong question. Indeed, the question is, \\\u201cWhat are they” not \u201cDo you believe”<\/em><\/p>\n Perhaps; This is assuming that everyone believes the same thing. As a personal testimony and individual creed it’s laudable but creating creeds for something like UFOS is a little strange and probably useless. UFOs seem to be a very subjective phenomena in that no two people perceive them in exactly the same way.<\/p>\n 1a. Furthermore, the question of \u201cbelief” in a UFO shall cease to exist. One cannot, or does not, \u201cbelieve” in airplanes, clouds, cars, toasters, or hamster cages. One does not \u201cbelieve” in UFOs, one witnesses a UFO. Interpretation is another matter, The idea of an inherent belief in UFOs is no longer valid and shall forever be vanquished.<\/em><\/p>\n Well, one can submit that people see unknown objects in the sky, defining what those objects are is quite another thing.<\/p>\n 2. The unstated assumption that UFOs equals extra terrestrials shall forever hence be vanquished from the lexicon. UFO does not mean aliens from outer space, inner space, or your basement (It could be, but that’s a different issue.) This assumption is made frequently by UFO debunkers and often by so-called believers. Both groups shall cease to make this assumption. <\/em><\/p>\n Both groups? This ‘\u201cRuby” person is making a declaration of responsibility and an order into \u201cthe lexicon” (whatever that might be.) I suspect that this person cannot speak for either believers or debunkers.<\/p>\n 3. U.F.O. will replace UFO. UFO is not a word. U.F.O. is an acronym, with stands for Unidentified Flying Object. UFO is murky, a would be word that only causes confusion, such as the case above: UFO being , in the minds of many with alien piloted spacecraft. Such assumptions set the stage for the debate, which is an unfair advantage or disadvantage, depending on one’s mind set. (debunker, pseudo skeptic, or Fortean.) Therefore, to prepare for a clean area of debate and discussion, the acronym U.F.O. will replace UFO.<\/em><\/p>\n Probably be a good time to start doing this? I notice that there is a huge double standard in many of these statements. Red Queen uses the term UFO freely, I’ve found the best way to lead is by example. In other words, *you*( the writer of this manifesto) start using the acronym U.F.O. in all your various correspondence. If you do and you get even a modicum of respect you’ll see others emulating you. I call this the “trim-tab effect.” Tiny changes rippling out into the world and causing profound and far reaching changes.<\/p>\n 4. Dismissing documentaries out of hand because they: A) are about UFOs, er, U.F.O.s and B) because they appeared on TLC, Discovery, Sci Fi channel shall no longer be allowed. Judge the program on its content, not the station.<\/em><\/p>\n Accreditation is extremely important in any pursuit. A documentary on the Sci Fi channel is no less a documentary but documentaries on UFOs as a whole are not very credible by their very nature. What most people forget is that documentaries on television are less for information than entertainment, UFO documentaries are almost pure entertainment from the get-go. In other words, I’e never seen a UFO documentary that had any information I had not already seen before, sometimes many years previously. News in this day and age is \u201cnot-news.” It’s all a circus and that goes double for UFOs.<\/p>\n 5. Forteans, U.F.O. researchers, experiences, etc. will give debunkers, skeptoids and pseudo skeptics only an hour\u00c3\u00a2\u00e2\u201a\u00ac\u00e2\u201e\u00a2s worth of discussion time. After that, you will move on. It is a worthless energy drain, time waster, and supreme distraction to engage the enemy to any greater degree. Henceforth, U.F.O. debunkers will be allowed what will amount to 1 hour of debate time per so-called \u201cbeliever.” After that, another believer will replace the previous believer.<\/em><\/p>\n Uh, yes sir-sir! I’m assuming all researchers will fall into lockstep? Basically \u201cIf you don’t like what they are saying, shut them the f*** up.”<\/p>\n Interesting way to get people to listen to you. Usually it’s a good idea to listen to both sides of an issue instead of just one. Not looking at both sides of an issue is extremely prejudicial.<\/p>\n 6. Groups, organizations, individuals who call for \u201clegalizing” the U.F.O. field, and other such authoritarian measures, will immediately cease. <\/em><\/p>\n One wonder’s at the incredible arrogance of this statement. The ‘manifesto’<\/strong> is itself an attempt to regulate UFO research.<\/p>\n How ironic is it that?<\/p>\n 7. All anomalous data within U.F.O. narratives will be included in retelling.<\/em><\/p>\n I agree!. All information should be included. Good call!<\/p>\n 8. When citing the research done by those with degrees, those degrees and titles will be stated and included. Stan Friedman is Dr. Stan Friedman, nuclear physicist. Jacques Vallee is Dr. Jacques Vallee, astrophysicist. John Mack is Dr. John Mack, psychiatrist and Pulitzer Prize winner. The consistent use of titles and degrees imbeds itself into the consciousness of U.F.O. debunkers. U.F.O. debunkers and skeptoids will attempt to dismiss any UFO researcher that does not fit within their agenda including those with degrees and aligned with academia or the scientific community. Nonetheless, the message must be hammered into them: \u201cserious” people research U.F.O.s.<\/em><\/p>\n The same can be done with people who tend to debunk UFO material. Accrediting someone based on whether or not their opinion agrees with yours invites prejudice. In conclusion? This manifesto is almost all useless. Writing elaborate wish-lists for a field of research is just fine but no one is going to take you seriously with this! The way to be taken seriously is to actually get out and do the scrub work, not just interview someone for a UFO web page but really do the research. Your local university or community college can help you out there.<\/p>\n The only way to get to the bottom of the UFOs conundrum is to systematically apply scientific principles. Wishful thinking, and writing elaborate manifestos doesn’t amount to a hill of beans. Real research takes a detailed oriented, painstaking approach. It means giving up preconceived notions and beliefs. It means allowing the evidence to propel the research, not starting with a strong belief system and attempting to find proofs.<\/p>\n The writer of this manifesto doesn’t seem to understand this.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" March 5, 2005 This is a rather strange document from someone who claims to be a researcher in Oregon. Actually this person claims to be a number of things. I wanted to make a couple of comments. The original can … Continue reading
\nBTW, it’s probably a good idea to actually state their real degrees and qualifications, not what you think<\/strong> they are. For example; Dr. Vallee has his PhD in Computer Science, he has some training in astrophysics but he is not an Astrophysicist.<\/p>\n