Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Fw: UFO UpDate: Re: Is Ufology Dead Or Just Dozing? - Lemire

Expand Messages
  • Joe McGonagle
    Crossposted from UFO updates ... which ... suggestions ... changed, ... said ... UFOlogists ... research, ... so ... the ... needs ... to ... for ... both? ...
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 6, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Crossposted from UFO updates
      ----- Original Message -----
      > From: Todd Lemire <tlemire@...>
      > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@...>
      > Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 12:45:40 -0500
      > Subject: Re: Is Ufology Dead Or Just Dozing?
      >
      >
      > >From: Joe McGonagle <joe@...>
      > >To: <ufoupdates@...>
      > >Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 16:40:21 -0000
      > >Subject: Is Ufology Dead Or Just Dozing?
      >
      >
      > >Jenny Randles wrote an excellent article for EYE magazine,
      which
      > >is now up at their website at:
      >
      > >http://www.hufos1.karoo.net
      >
      > >It is quite critical of ufology, but does make some
      suggestions
      > >as to the way forward. Just to give you a taste, read the
      > >following quote:
      >
      >
      > >"So UFOlogy will never go back to the way it was. It has
      changed,
      > >forever, and the UFO community that once controlled what was
      said
      > >and done has lost the say in its own subject. Indeed,
      UFOlogists
      > >have almost become an irrelevance - at best lumbering behind a
      > >litany of advertisers,hype merchants, web site designers, and
      > >sci-fi entrepreneurs."
      >
      >
      > >So, is ufology dead, or just dozing?
      >
      >
      > >Joe
      >
      >
      > Joe and others,
      >
      > I find it interesting that this thread deals with: 'web' based
      > research in all it's forms, 'web' based access to this
      research,
      > the threat the 'web' poses to 'standard ufology' as some
      > 'oldtimers' see it, the networking that the 'web' provides
      > between researchers - both good and bad, the pros and cons of
      > the lecture circuit, the quality of this 'web' based content,
      > the possibility of creating an 'International Authority', and
      so
      > on.... and so on.... and so on... and scooby dooby do!, yet
      > there seems to be no discussion of what I perceived to be the
      > main points of Jenny's article that, "UFOlogy must go back to
      > basics and treat this as a phenomenon in need of explanation,
      > rather than an explanation in search of any evidence to support
      > it."
      >
      > As some here agree, the 'web' is already here and will be here
      > for many more years. As Jenny states in her article, "All
      > UFOlogists are BECOMING part of an interacting community via
      the
      > net and this is what needs to be exploited."... "It simply
      needs
      > coordination and mobilization." The key discussion in this
      > thread, in my opinion, should've been, exploitation,
      > coordination, and mobilization, rather than what I perceived to
      > be how much of a 'threat' the web poses to 'paper and lecture'
      > ufology.
      >
      > None on the 'lecture circuit', and very few on this list can do
      > as Jenny says and ..."prove rational objectivity and a desire
      to
      > stay out of the public limelight."
      >
      > The 'web' should be, among other things, a "diagnostic tool"
      for
      > the ufologist, as Jenny suggests, which has the ability of...
      > "suggesting options to be investigated during a sighting." I
      > would've liked to have seen some website suggestions in this
      > thread that supported this, but are there any? I can't, off the
      > top of my head, think of a UFO website that _focuses_ on both
      > 'investigative resources' and 'sighting reports'. Where are
      > these comprehensive ufo sites that provide ready access to
      both?
      > I didn't see any discussion regarding the necessary steps and
      > requirements to develop such a site.
      >
      > I also didn't see any discussion of what I perceive to be an
      > important part of Jenny's article, "active research... of a
      > window area". Jenny states that, "We are far too passive as a
      > movement - waiting for Joe Bloggs..." If not used correctly and
      > in the right amounts the 'web' can be a serious detriment to
      the
      > 'proactive research' she speaks of. How many of you actually
      > step away from the pc long enough to go out in the field to
      > investigate a _current_ case, much less do a 'window' project?
      > Not very many of us.
      >
      > There are a few good beginnings to what she speaks of as far as
      > sighting databases are concerned and most here are already
      aware
      > of these, but we are still lacking the "interactive community",
      > the "coordination and mobilization", as well as the "diagnostic
      > tools" and resources that Jenny speaks of.
      >
      > She hit the nail on the head not only as it concerns British
      > ufologists but American ones as well. Some may require a
      > 'spoonful of sugar' to help the medicine go down.
      >
      >
      > Todd Lemire
      >
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.