- As of the morning of this writing (Nov 12), former Arizona
Governor Fife Symington is scheduled to appear at the National Press Club
to discuss his UFO sighting in Phoenix in 1997. He says he will be joined
by 14 former high-ranking military and government officials from various
countries who have witnessed and/or investigated the UFO phenomenon.
-
- Symington claims to have had a UFO encounter so startling
as to realign his perception. He writes, "In 1997, during my second
term as governor of Arizona, I saw something that defied logic and challenged
my reality....I witnessed a massive delta-shaped craft silently navigate
over Squaw Peak, a mountain range in Phoenix, Arizona. It was truly breathtaking.
I was absolutely stunned because I was turning to the west looking for
the distant Phoenix Lights."
-
- Symington called upon his knowledge as a pilot and former
Air Force Officer to exclude the possibility that the craft was either
manmade, or "high-altitude flares" (the preferred "explanation"
expounded for years by the Air Force and parroted by many AZ officials).
He is now offering an apology of sorts to the public, saying he "never
meant to ridicule anyone," and that his inquiries were never properly
answered. He also describes the Air Force's "explanation" as
"silly," and warns that "incidents like these are not going
away." (His full statement may be read here: http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/11/09/
- simington.ufocommentary/index.html)
-
- The former Arizona Governor is not the only American
political figure to publicly acknowledge a personal UFO sighting in recent
weeks. Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich confirmed his
own rumored sighting, leading Fox News' John Gibson to write an editorial
column entitled, "Dennis Kucinich's UFO Comments Prove He's Nuts."
-
- According to Gibson, Kucinich is in need of institutionalization,
electroconvulsive therapy, drug treatment, and possibly a frontal lobotomy
because he openly admits to have once seen something that he simply CAN'T
EXPLAIN (hence the term UNIDENTIFIED flying object). Gibson writes, "If
you admit to seeing a UFO, martians, space creatures, big foot and all
the rest, you are by definition on the defensive against a charge of craziness."
(Story: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,307117,00.html)
-
- This is a true statement. Thanks to pusillanimous, pseudo-skeptical
media personalities like John Gibson, any public figure who confesses an
encounter with the inexplicable should anticipate an all-out ad hominem
media assailment, replete with unimaginative name-calling and accusations
of insanity. Never mind that Kucinich has never publicly declared a belief
in aliens or anything "paranormal," but rather acknowledges that
he once looked up to the sky and saw something that didn't seem to belong
there (hence the term UNIDENTIFIED Flying Object). To this, Fox News' Gibson
responds: He's nuts! Because...well...he saw a UFO and has chosen not to
lie about! The nerve of that nutball! Let's all throw nuts at him! The
raving nutter!
-
- Ironically, Gibson spends fully half of his diatribe
defending the sanity of George W. Bush, a man who claims to speak directly
to Jesus Christ and whose war plans were purportedly drafted by God Himself.
-
- Gibson's comments are so lacking in any defensible logic,
they can only be called LIES, and potentially libelous ones at that. It
is not logically, morally, or (perhaps) legally defensible to call people
"insane" (with a clear intent of damaging their reputations,
no less) with no evidentiary basis. Does Gibson REALLY believe that every
person who has seen something apparently unidentifiable is INSANE?
-
- This is the way incorrigible pseudo-skeptical haters
of the "paranormal" operate. They lie and call names as a matter
of course and undoubtedly feel justified, because they "know"
the "paranormal" is bullshit, and (they imagine) their lies and
ad hominem serve a greater good. But I'm tired of being lied to and insulted.
This mindless, knee-jerk denial of the "paranormal" is injurious
to our culture and a major impedance to scientific progress. As confident
as John Gibson is that all paranormal believers are "nuts," I
know that the "paranormal" is real, and unlike Gibson, I can
back up my statement with logic and evidence.
-
- Psychic phenomena are real. This is an obviously true,
common sense observation based on mountains of evidence both anecdotal
and empirical. Over several decades, many controlled, double-blind studies
have confirmed the psychic abilities of both humans and animals. Self-styled
"skeptics," guided by the a priori assumption that such studies
MUST be flawed, respond by lying and/or attacking the researchers' reputations.
Consider the "skeptic" community's response to Dr. Rupert Sheldrake's
experimental investigation of psychic phenomena in pets. Sheldrake, PhD,
is a biologist and author of the book Dogs that Know When Their Owners
are Coming Home, and Other Unexplained Powers of Animals. It is Sheldrake's
finding that animals can "anticipate" the arrival of their owners
at irregular hours at a rate considerably higher than chance.
-
- One self-styled "skeptic" to immediately weigh-in
on Sheldrake was James "The Amazing" Randi, who claimed to have
tested Sheldrake's thesis and found that it failed. But Dr. Sheldrake took
issue with Randi's assertion and demanded by email that Randi clarify it.
Sheldrake describes their exchange on his website:
-
- (From http://www.sheldrake.org/controversies/randi.html
)
-
- "The January 2000 issue of Dog World magazine included
an article on a possible sixth sense in dogs, which discussed some of my
research. In this article Randi was quoted as saying that in relation to
canine ESP, 'We at the JREF [James Randi Educational Foundation] have tested
these claims. They fail.' No details were given of these tests.
-
- "I emailed James Randi to ask for details of this
JREF research. He did not reply. He ignored a second request for information
too.
-
- "I then asked members of the JREF Scientific Advisory
Board to help me find out more about this claim. They did indeed help by
advising Randi to reply. In an email sent on Februaury 6, 2000 he told
me that the tests he referred to were not done at the JREF, but took place
'years ago' and were 'informal'. They involved two dogs belonging to a
friend of his that he observed over a two-week period. All records had
been lost. He wrote: 'I overstated my case for doubting the reality of
dog ESP based on the small amount of data I obtained. It was rash and improper
of me to do so.'
-
- "Randi also claimed to have debunked one of my experiments
with the dog Jaytee, a part of which was shown on television. Jaytee went
to the window to wait for his owner when she set off to come home, but
did not do so before she set off. In Dog World, Randi stated: 'Viewing
the entire tape, we see that the dog responded to every car that drove
by, and to every person who walked by.' This is simply not true, and Randi
now admits that he has never seen the tape."
-
- All Sheldrake has done is confirm what was already obvious
to millions of pet owners through simple observation. No narrow, materialistic
view of reality can explain the countless reports of lost animals that
traversed hundreds or even thousands of miles to return home, guided only
by intuition. Consider this 1971 report of a cat whose 1,600 mile journey
finally led her -- bruised paws and all -- to her owners' doorstep:
-
- News Journal, Sunday July 25, 1971, Mansfield, Ohio
- From The Family Weekly
-
- The Love Cats Feel For People...The Journeys Their Love
Inspires
- By Felica Ames
-
- What built-in cat radar led Clementine through endless
miles of unknown country to the one house and one family in the world she
was looking for?
-
- How long would it take to walk from Dunkirk, N. Y., to
Denver, Col.? A cat named Clementine could tell you. It took her four paw-bruising
months to make that 1,600-mile trek. But then, Clementine didn't know the
way.
-
- When Mr. and Mrs. Robert Lundmark moved from Dunkirk
to Denver, they left their pet black cat with neighbors because Clementine
was in the family way. Once the litter was weaned, however, Clementine
abandoned her brood and hit the road. Four months later an exhausted female
cat appeared on the Lundmark's doorstep. There was no doubt it was Clementine,
for this amazing animal was unique in another way. She had seven toes on
each front paw, two white spots on her stomach and a scar on her left shoulder.
-
- ------------------------------
-
- (Full story: http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?noframes;read=107214)
-
- Such stories are indeed "anecdotal," but contrary
to what pseudo-skeptical paranormal haters like Randi and John Gibson would
have you believe, anecdotal evidence is not the same thing as NO EVIDENCE.
In many cases, anecdotal evidence gives us the BEST reasons for undertaking
a scientific investigation. And by hearing out the witnesses' testimony,
investigators can gain an invaluable guide to help steer them in the right
direction.
-
- How is that astronomers know that meteor fireballs are
frequently accompanied by radiophonic noises? Because the noises were reported
by WITNESSES, and the consistent, corroborated testimony prompted scientists
to investigate further. Likewise, scientists for years doubted the existence
of cloud-to-ionosphere lightning -- so much so that the pilots who witnessed
it remained silent for fear of ridicule -- until finally, in the early
90's a research team confirmed that the lightning is real. (See Giant Lightning
TO Space, http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060322sprite.htm,
and The Peekskill Meteor, http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050613meteor.htm)
-
- It is irrational, illogical, and anti-science to ignore
or dismiss human testimony. We see this irrationality in full display in
the SETI Institute's dogmatic stance on the ET issue. For years, Seth Shostak,
Senior Astronomer at SETI, has been involved in a self-styled "search
for extraterrestrial intelligence" throughout the cosmos, but in Seth's
view, eyewitness testimony and similar "anecdotal" evidence is
not to be taken seriously. In fact, Shostak doesn't just ignore UFO accounts,
he actively seeks to discredit them. He hosts a monthly radio show called
"Skeptical Sunday," devoted to debunking "pseudo-science,"
including the study of UFOs. Seth probably views his purportedly "skeptical"
approach as scientific, because scientists are supposed to work with data
that can be measured, detected, and verified through experiment. He insists
that life may be "out there" ...somewhere...but it can ONLY be
found by the location of a focused radio signal from another cosmic realm.
-
- To maintain this noble "search," Seth must
keep the cash-flow coming from private donors like billionaire Paul Allen
(SETI is no longer taxpayer funded, since Congress had a hard time justifying
its funding of an institute that has never produced a single result). If
Paul were to suddenly realize that the best place to look for ET was not
in the vast reaches of space but rather OUR OWN SKIES, well, that could
be very bad for Seth and his fellow signal-hunters. So Seth continues to
insist that eyewitness UFO accounts -- including those from eminently credible,
trained observes like former Governor Symington -- don't count as evidence
and should be thrown in the trash heap right along with debunked Billy
Meier photographs and every copy of Communion.
-
- SETI's dogmatic approach is built on spurious assumptions
and bad logic. They insist that aliens can ONLY communicate via an unbelievably
primitive technology, because theoretical aliens would not possess the
required power for interstellar travel. One researcher to respond to this
fallacy is Stanton T. Friedman, nuclear physicist and longtime UFO investigator.
Friedman writes: "Why is it that SS (SETI specialists) make proclamations
about how much energy it would take for interstellar travel when they have
no professional competence, training, or awareness of the relevant engineering
literature in this area? As it happens, the required amount of energy is
entirely dependent on the details of the trip and CANNOT be determined
from basic physics. If one makes enough totally inappropriate assumptions,
as academic astronomers have repeatedly done down through history in their
supposedly scientific calculations about flight, one reaches ridiculous
conclusions." (Source: http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfufovsseti.html)
-
- The sentiment of Friedman's statement is 100% correct,
and in fact, the mainstream cosmological picture is in a state of crisis
bordering on meltdown. For far too long, astronomers have ignored the real-world
disciplines of electrodynamics and experimental plasma science, in favor
of "elegant" mathematical models and bizarre esoterica. And increasingly,
mainstreamers -- most with little or no interest in an electrical view
of the universe -- are coming to recognize this. An emeritus professor
named Michael J. Disney recently wrote an article entitled, "Modern
Cosmology: Science or Folk Tale?", published in the September-October
2007 issue of American Scientist magazine. Disney compares modern, purely
mathematical astronomical theory to "witchcraft," and warns of
the "unexpected surprises" inherent in the theoretical models.
He writes:
-
- "The currently fashionable concordance model of
cosmology (also known to the cognoscenti as 'Lambda-Cold Dark Matter,'
or 'LambdaCDM') has 18 parameters, 17 of which are independent. Thirteen
of these parameters are well fitted to the observational data; the other
four remain floating. This situation is very far from healthy. Any theory
with more free parameters (hypotheses) than relevant (astronomical) observations
has little to recommend it. Cosmology has always had such a negative significance,
in the sense that it has always had fewer (astronomical) observations than
free parameters (hypotheses) (as is illustrated on page TK), though cosmologists
are strangely reluctant to admit it. While it is true that we presently
have no alternative to the Big Bang in sight, that is no reason to accept
it. Thus it was that witchcraft took hold."
-
- "The three successful predictions of the concordance
model (the apparent flatness of space, the abundances of the light elements
and the maximum ages of the oldest star clusters) are overwhelmed by at
least half a dozen unpredicted surprises, including dark matter and dark
energy. Worse still, there is no sign of a systematic improvement in the
net significance of cosmological theories over time."
-
- (A review of Disney's article may be read here:
- http://news.aol.com/story/_a/british-professor-elegantly-questions/n20071023110909990029)
-
- The amazing irony here is that mainstream astronomy has
for a long time been guilty of the very logical fallacies of which they
accuse paranormal proponents. The scientific process must be a combination
of observation and experiment. With little or no regard for this principle,
astronomers tell us that "black holes" (and now SUPERMASSIVE
black holes) exist at the heart of every galaxy. Yet no one has ever seen
a black hole, no analog for the black hole exists in nature, and the physics
of the black hole -- a nearly INFINITE compression of matter -- has no
experimental support whatever. And the theory's predictive record is embarrassing
to non-existent. First, we were told that NOTHING could escape a black
hole -- not even light -- but now astronomers insist that black holes "eject"
stupendous, filamentary jets stretching over THOUSANDS OF LIGHT YEARS!
A belief in black holes is far more illogical, baseless, and unscientific
than a belief in UFOs, because at least we know that some people have SEEN
UFOs! (For background, see When Astronomers Fall Into a Black Hole, http://www.rense.com/general78/rdod.htm)
-
- In a sense, when pseudo-skeptical fanatics like John
Gibson and Randi declare the "paranormal" is bullshit, they are
correct. By definition, nothing can exist outside the realm of REALITY.
But UFOs, psychic abilities, crop circles, etc., are only labeled "paranormal"
because official science has until now lacked the courage and integrity
to investigate the phenomena properly. Officialdom's pathological, institutionalized
denial of the "paranormal" hurts us. How could it not? We are
being misled and lied to about the most important questions a human being
can face: Who am I? Are we alone in the Universe? Am I more than a body?
Will my consciousness survive physical death? Is each of us separate and
disconnected, or is all life joined by forces invisible yet more real than
that which we can see and touch?
-
- I'll leave you with the words of a highly accredited
individual who devoted a portion of his professional life to solving these
puzzles. His name was Air Force Colonel Dolan M. McKelvy, author of a rather
mysterious USAF report entitled, "Psychic Warfare: Exploring the Mind
Frontier." McKelvy warns of the tragic human consequences of officialdom's
cynical, pseudo-skeptical attitude toward the paranormal:
-
- "Man's greatest potential remains a prisoner of
man. Vast untapped mental capabilities create an entirely new battlefield
dimension which, if ignored, pose a threat to self and country more serious
than nuclear weapons. This threat starts from within. Our fears and cynical
attitudes towards psychic capabilities make us our own worst enemies....Exploring
the mind frontier is essential and the key to successful exploration is
a greater psychic awareness. The mind is rich in unfathomed resources ripe
for exploration, a limitless source of treasures for advancing all mankind,
and a serious threat to those who ignore its potential. We must overcome
our psychic inhibitions, stop denying the existence of paranormal events,
and start trying instead to understand the nature of these phenomena...."
(Full story: http://www.rense.com/general77/more.htm)
-
- ADDENDUM
-
- One comment that I made regarding meteor noises requires
correction. The correct term for these "anomalous" sounds is
electrophonic, not radiophonic, and it's not accurate to describe them
as occurring "frequently." And like most every space and/or atmospheric
phenomena that is electrical in nature, they are still a source of great
controversy. Again, for background on electrophonic radio noises accompanying
the flaring up of meteor fireballs, see the Thunderbolts article, The Peekskill
Meteor: http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050613meteor.htm
|
