Sunday, July 24, 2016

Julius CSICOP (Part II)



Julius  CSICOP
(Part II)
 by Alfred Lehmberg

...You need more substantiation for CSICOPian intellectual constipation?  ...You need another justification for their demise?  ...Further evidence is required validating their orbit's nuke? OK... one only has to observe how our errant denizens of CSICOPia endeavor to fall on the wrong side of the already errant and fatuous but still asked question:

UFOs—Are they "real"... or are they "fake"?

Rise up in outrage!  Perceive this obviously contrived mechanism of unwarranted dismissal!  Avoid this unbrave intellectual circumvention of the obvious!  Be not fooled, reader!  The question itself is bogus!  It presumes an answer that is itself, not forthcoming.

Verily, it is just this typified cant solemnly expressed at every conference, all television appearances, and each radio interview... where angry CSICOPians are trotted in for alleged balance, but end up looking more like a suicide-bomber invited to a respectful discussion of confounding political issues. CSIcopian Minds are made up, and shall not be changed!  They are that bomber alluded to!

Consider: New conservative re-estimations of the Drake Equation (that attempted a scientific stab at calculating the number of intelligent species in the universe?) puts the measurement probability for a plethora of off-world intelligences, I understand, so close to 100% that the difference is immeasurable!  Immeasurable, reader!

This is to say that one has a much better chance of winning the Publisher's Clearing House lottery (approaching zero) than one does betting against extraterrestrial intelligence elsewhere in the universe (in actuality, zero)... ...Yes.


Consider, briefly, that an immutable law of the universe is that what can happen... happens.  There is that much space, time, and surface area, reader!  Humanity "happened"... proving the certainty of that particular potentiality with equal assurance...

What happens once... happens again.  Stuff happens, that is to say.  What can happen, happens.  What has happened... ...happens once more... then once more... then one more...

Frankly, that fires of self-aware intelligence have kindled right here on this planet, reader, many times!  This is to include three or four species of humankind, forgetting its occurrence in a smear of Animalia from mollusks (Octopi), through cetaceans (Whales), to pachyderms (Elephants)!

Frankly, pretending we are alone in all this awesomely boundless magnificence of this space, time, and surface area, forgetting the very concept is flatly ludicrous... is naive and ignorant arrogance, I expect, at best.  At worst, it may be a sophisticated and informed arrogance... a knowing arrogance... a conscious arrogance... a baseless arrogance...!  A contrived arrogance born of unqualified hubris, to be sure, and one with no justification!

"UFOs... Real or Fake"?  Why, this debate has been going on since 1947 in a seemingly apparent attempt to preclude any substantive progress on the question, at all!

"UFOs... Real or Fake"?  ...Are there not seven (7) categories of compelling evidence very specifically indicative that UFOs are a stone cold reality?  Almost (99.999999999>>>...%) certainly, according to Bentley College professor Doctor A.D. Aczel in his book "Probability One"!

The huge volume of extant evidence is of a quality that cannot be forever ignored even as card carrying CSICOPians Kurtz, Mcgaha, Shermer, Shostak, Nickell, and the still in print if late Philip Klass furiously try.  The evidence remains.

Yes, reader, the quality anecdotal evidence, compounded with the vetted photographic evidence, and then added to the documented historical evidence... gives every indication that a ufological contention regarding that phenomena must be more real than not...

Moreover! When the preceding is shown in pre-digital photographic evidence, framed by the serious artistic evidence, qualified by the available physical evidence, verified by a mathematical evidence, and then conclusively buttressed by the emboldening personal evidence (...if the reader has some... as I do...), I can only be annoyingly astonished by the continued reluctance of some to face the highly strange music that just cannot be forever marginalized... I submit the reader should be outraged, too?

Does the information available justify attention by the mainstream to perform a more *in depth* investigation of UFOs?  Absolutely"!  ...CSICOPiate and angry SETIan Seth Shostak, hilariously, agrees!

But...

When, Dr. Shostak?  Where, Dr. Shostak?  How, Dr. Shostak?  With regard to what, Dr. Shostak?

Outside of his own parochial boondoggle at the Specious Exercise To Investigate (SETI)... when has Dr. Shostak ever championed an increase in the aggregate ufological consciousness even world class physicist Michio Kaku has countenanced?  No, Dr. Shostak has only ever been a steadily smirking bulwark against same!

Instead, don't these errant *avians* (Pelicanists!) ooze forth, periodically... to re-prosecute the skeptibunky case of yesteryear, every year!  Don't they furiously spin the ufological reality extant in their cowardly attempt to reduce the level of ufological debate tediously, once again, to its tiresome starting point!

Is it not their goal, reader, to re-achieve an old, outdated, and mind-numbingly outrageous level of pre-discussion... re-discussing the (...now thoroughly discredited!) possibility... that UFOs are likely something safely prosaic and certainly other than evidence of some significant alternative (off-planet?) intelligence?

Yes.  I think the reader must agree that these do.

"UFOs... Real or Fake"?  Does the reader see how that suggestive statement brings the level of debate back to the decades old, and very dreary, level of "conceivable deniability"?  In other words... That it is somehow still very, very possible, boys and girls... that UFOs... may not... exist... at all?  ...Everybody draws a deeper, if fallaciously inaccurate, breath!  Then... the prize truck from Publisher's Clearinghouse pulls into your driveway blaring its triple-toned horn... for you!  ...not!

"UFOs... Real or Fake"?  "There is no 'proof', you know, even as there may be some evidence for a ufological reality..." I paraphrase.

"UFOs... Real or Fake"?  "Mind you, UFOs and aliens might exist, but no proof has been uncovered in over 50 years that this is so..." I paraphrase.

"UFOs... Real or Fake"?  "We are the only *proof* of intelligence in the whole of the universe..." I paraphrase.

...Oh... so comforting, eh?

The preceding, frankly, is what we must move beyond.  Yes... first we must get passed the level of the remotest denial in a discussion of UFOs, as the denial of UFOs can not have the remotest validity given the work, research, and tight explication of a host of quality ufologists and researchers... and NOT forgetting the obvious inability of a well-financed CSICOPian opposition to discredit same... after many well-funded years of furiously trying to do just THAT!   

I remind the reader of the aforementioned CSICOPian imperatives, via:

Friedman's Rules of CSIcopia

1. What the public doesn't know,we're not going to tell them!

2. Don't bother us with the facts, our minds are made up!

3. If we can't attack the data, we attack the people!

4. We Avoid investigation! We do research by proclamation. It is much easier.

We must admit (and otherwise cop to) the aforementioned and ponderous volume (Seven categories, reader!) of evidence that exists regarding the ufological reality extant, evidence handily destroying or compromising every CSICOPian effort to make UFOs 'disappear', again and again, over many, many years...!

None dare calls the preceding proof!  I shall!

We must demand a government forthcoming-ness with regard to funded and open investigations, investigations both international and cross-cultural in scope (...and generations of corporate tax scofflaws can pay for it!)!  We'd be served is my feeling!

We must face our well cultivated and crippling fear facilitated by those unwilling to cop to UFOs... (Shostak and Shermer et sig al) ...step forward to embrace this conjectured future!  We must not step back to a pie-in-the-sky past that only existed in a skeptibunker's spotty imagination, cowardly intellectualism, and suspect politics, anyway!

Summation? CSICOP only offers their six duplicitous, discredited, and un-repudiated points of shame wrapped in time-loop... re-discussing what does not remain to be discussed, reader!  Simply re-asking already answered questions not even in a new way... like they were questions asked for the very first time.  Simply re-plodding worn paths, re-examining every already exhausted pebble and slight inconsistency anew like they were smoking guns... ...so cowardly...

Humanity is better than that.  Humanity demands more than that.  You reader, are worth more than that!

Death to CSIcopia!

Read on...

ÆL

Wednesday, July 20, 2016

Julius CSICOP (Part I)



Julius  CSICOP
(Part I)

I write, reader, not to praise CSIcop*, certainly, but to nuke it from orbit!  Such should be its woeful, yet well-earned, wage!  Verily, friends and neighbors, it doesn't deserve a fair fight or the waste of the energy expended on it to obliterate it.  For so egregiously betraying the spirit and letter of its own tenants, it should effortlessly get what it gave... easily reap what was sown... then be bulldozed into the ground and summarily urinated upon.  I understate.

...Remains, CSICOP must be stamped out, ultimately... relegated to its own denunciation, finally, even as it would stamp out others, itself, ironically enough... Even as it would condemn, denounce, and invalidate  as from "on high" those more innovative and courageous than itself, and perform that condemnation, denunciation, and invalidation with all the authorization, encouragement, and support required from a conflicted and contrived lapdog mainstream...  Even as the mainstream fails ultimately!

...From orbit, my brothers and sisters!  I say unto ye!

...Any good they do shall be interred with their treacherous bones, if it please you.  Their *evil* shall live on and on.  Hence their obliteration and anticipated demise and my earnest funerary calls...

Hyperbole and histrionics?  No.  Only my disgusted so theatrical admonition provoked by CSIcopian arrogance and sneering hubris, other ritual mouth noises from mal-religionists, scientistic (sic) and otherwise!  It chaps the buns.

...And I must caution the reader at this point that it is not Skeptics with whom I have a problem... or that I am one of those credulous mooks merely bored with the *rationality* ardent CSIcopians pretend to unctuously dispense... No!

True skeptics are never the issue, reader! They are in comparison persons to be revered above all others, actually!  They are welcome company ... They are honored team members... They are boon companions...!

Skeptics... are the most interesting of us.  Skeptics are the most knowledgeable of us! Skeptics are the ones to instruct us the most! 

Consider.  "Doubting Thomas" was the most honored of the disciples because he doubted, reader!  Only he was allowed to touch the corporeal body of the risen Christ! Doubt is rewarded as reflex denial must ultimately incur a loss, I suspect.

No.  Skeptics are not to be confused with scurrilous skepti-bunkies, ponderous "pelicanists," or insipid "CSICOPians..." (scurvy klasskurtxians?)... the antagonists regarded in the rest of this piece!

...This collection of fringe flogging front-men and intellectually constipated imps of niggard anti-science just iterated are the new ignorance actually!  Consequently?  A righteous pox on CSIcop, that Committee for the Serially Insentient Commitment of Obdurate Persons!  Could I be plainer?   

See, lately fed by a popularized neo-conservatist (sic) 'right' of your garden variety fascist, CSIcopian ranks swell with the even more deceitful and cross-purposed!  Their smug smirk of corn-fed intellectual contempt works its unctuous way through our cyberspace like an unhealthy toxic mass worried uncomfortably through an internet's electronic bowels. 

The preceding simile is not inapt.  A pox upon them, again, for measure.

Why?  To wit: they are not what they vociferously if duplicitously portray themselves to be!  ...Always enough for explanation as it turns out!  By omission, commission, or planned imprecision?  They lie!  ...For our own good of course.  ...It's always for "our own good..."

Yes.  Gleefully and with malice aforethought, they provide for and nurture the informational void your betrayed and hapless "rank and file" can only attempt to miserably fill (...even as these are marginalized for same!).  Dutifully, speciously vacuous CSIcopians then complacently demonize these hapless further for their, many times, sincere (if credulous!) attempts to "address", "tackle", "attend to"... ...fill that unnecessary void worrying them... ...A void CSIcop has founded, actually cultivates, and busily facilitates... one comes to see!

Yes, functioning as a mechanism for social niggards and a sociopathic corporate elite they've fraudulently set themselves up as a clearing house, reader, a miserly and over-employed reductionism masquerading as hard-nosed rationality and impartial science!  Stow that

Science fraudulently employed as the default arbiter of that which it blithely refuses to investigate in the first placeThere is the real lunacy, forgetting the affront to science invoked in name only!

To wit, CSIcopia populates its ranks with intellectual motes of insufficient and counterfeit sentience, lettered ringers of dubious veracity (irrelevant doctorates and "B" grade entertainers) to tout a party line! Moreover, they cloak themselves in an unjustified and too proud mantel of a convenient lap-dog science only engineered to grind the corporate axes they patently contrive to grind!

On the subject of UFOs, as my focus regarding my problem with them, my once adored Penn and Teller can just piss off, consume fecal matter and expire.  Hang on... let me reset my hyperbole circuit breaker... 

...But sincerely, reader, Axes of denial, Axes of denunciation, and Axes of unbrave refutation... ...Mendacious Axes well ground, I add, and then fatuously brandished like virtuous swords in an astonishing display of arrogant hubris... disguised as outraged and righteous scientific piety!  A Pox, I say!

Enough recrimination and cast aspersion!  Details!

Astoundingly, tepid reductionists  proclaim a six-point covenant with the "unwashed" and "ignorant" masses supporting them (and actually despise I suspect), establish this thin veneer of trustworthy credibility and *credulity assuagement*... and then publish their *balanced rational worldview* in that six-point plan of stated intent: each point a subject of this essay!

Even if presently non-current, that six-point plan has not earned the slightest repudiation from CSIcopia, reader, or been amended in any form, when it is abundantly appropriate to provide said repudiation... and so remains a cheesy fraud, along with a very subsequent brand change, revealed! What else?

To wade right in... like most frauds that aforementioned six-point plan is anything but balanced, actually.  It is a canted mess of reflex denials, character assassinations, and bald duplicities I'm provoked to contend.  

Let's look at that six point covenant, then, and examine each of its *points* in turn...

CSICOP's first point is especially stalwart sounding, reader... fairly ringing with lofty ideals... nearly oozing "good intentions, high standards, and best practice..."    

"1. Maintain a network of people interested in critically examining paranormal, fringe science, and other claims, and in contributing to consumer education..."


One almost hears little horns of the arriving cavalry but this writer is immediately compelled to examine any *demonstrated* integrity of this aforementioned *network* of implied efficaciousness... to come up with patent bupkis!  Founded by Dr. Paul Kurtz, a man on record as being constitutionally unable to perceive "any difference between a UFO and a traditional leprechaun," this *network* seems, at first blush, to be a paragon of refined education, advanced experiential acumen, and incisive brainpower

No, no, and no.  Predictably, as with everything else regarding CSICOP, appearances can be deceiving.  Consider the unrelated and immaterial "Doctor's" degrees of many of the CSICOPian principals, as in the case of Dr. Joe Nickell. Consider the ridiculously canted, assumptive and NON-networking remarks he's made (among significant others, Dr. McGaha springs to mind) as if it were Nickell (an English major!) who would proscribe what was and what was not acceptable to think about, for the rest of us. 

Dr. Nickell, sadly, is typical of the kind of person closely associated with CSICOP.  His bias, worn on a damp sleeve, is obvious in word and deed!  What *service* is provided with his anti-network of canted explications, intellectual cowardice, and same from fellow immaterial persons?

The (overwhelmingly male and so affected) persons involved with CSICOP are, demonstrably, a puddle deep lot decidedly incapable of any balanced examination, presumably... if for no other reason than that there is so little investigation actually going on, and right under their noses, too!  Indeed, the word investigation is a component of the very acronym they use to identify themselves (forgetting that it is publicly touted that "investigation is the middle name" of your garden variety CSICOPian...), when there is so very little of same! 

Verily, it certainly refrains from same!  There IS no investigation!  CSICOP, instead, prefers to portentously pronounce on what is acceptable thinking in the form of scientific sounding dictates of dubious veracity, disingenuous assumptive-ness, and biased incompleteness.  They don't even LOOK, remember, their minds are made up going in!

At its head... and as typified by adherents near that head, CSICOP is instead really, only a conflicted *aggregate entity* furiously driven only by the denial of its hostile and mal-educated ideologues!  Indeed, repressive regressives, they are themselves what they warn against!

It is not a network of credible and balanced persons interested in critical examinations of anything... anything but its own obtuse agenda, that is.  Moreover, their reputation among true skeptics absolves the need for citation, reader!  The only person defending CSICOPia is a fellow-traveling CSICOPian.

Paul Kurtz knew Philip Klass was a nut!  He said so.  That was perfectly acceptable; however, because Klass was Kurtz's nut!  Klass was Kurtz's "lap nut."

No.  On reflection?  CSICOPia is a network only of obstinate denial, conflicted cant, and obvious bias! Consider, with MUCH of the highly strange it is entirely possible to credit... UFO cases like:

1. Kirtland AFB [11\4\57] 2. Hynek Blue Book Case [5\5\65]  3. Malmstrom AFB [3/20/67]  4. Incident at Redlands, Ca. [Hynek, BB, 2\4\68]  5. Exeter, New Hampshire [9\3\65]  6. Malmstrom AFB [11\7\75] 7. Iran F-4 Incident [9\76]  8. Belgium [1989\90]  9. Illinois, USA [1\5\2000] just to start...

...CSICOPians have not remotely credited a fraction of that which they have mendaciously (if unsuccessfully) discredited, have they!  No!  Have they ever credited anything save their own inordinately sullen and desultory intransigence?  On inspection, no!

This demonstrates their pestilent cant, good reader.  Verily, and at the last?  The hapless consumer is ill served by this parody of science!  This spoof of reductionism!  This caricature of Descartes!  This lampoon of number and measure!

It's not science, reader, CSICOP typifies, see?  It is the insentient, cowardly, and non-progressive worst of a niggard's scientistic  (sic) reductionism, only.

The CSICOPian second point is a continuing insult to our aggregate intelligence...



"2. Prepare bibliographies of published materials that carefully examine such claims..."


...And then print them in your own ringer publishing activity at "Prometheus Press," eh?  Sincerely, "Careful examination" of paranormal claims is airily abandoned in the production of bibliographies heavily (even admittedly!) stacked with researchers who toe the fundamentalist CSICOPian's party-line.  An example?

Since the very beginning (and as typified by the Dennis Rawlins imbroglio over the "StarBaby" paper) any research critical *of* or in opposition *to* that CSICOPian party-liners remains remarkably non-included in these not so efficacious *bibliographies...* or why was "StarBaby" published in "Fate" and not in the "Skeptical Inquirer"?  Why can't Dr. David Rudiak get a peer review for his Mogul Work in the same canted CSICOPian rag?  Frank Feschino for "Shoot Them Down"?  Stanton Friedman for "MAJIC"?  Robert Hastings "UFOs and Nuclear Missiles"?  Richard Dolan "UFOs and the National Security State"?

Why indeed!


...On to the third point:


The third point would be a lot more funny were it not for the dire implications it makes regarding a complete and balanced research outside the cloistered CSIcop paradigm CSIcopia promotes and stridently insists upon as the default arbiter of the one true "science..." 

...Flesh crawls...

3. Encourage research by objective  and impartial inquiry in areas where it is needed. 

This is rolling-on-the-floor-and-clenching-near-incontinent-cheeks-together laughable!  Where can your garden variety CSICOPian not be shown to be anything but tediously subjective regarding every aspect of their conduct... and the corrosive performance of that conduct?  Ask anyone credible in their crosshairs. Friedman, Hastings, Feschino, Dolan et sig al.

Where is their *encouragement* possible given their ready character assassinations and reflex research discriminations?  Their "blue hare hoaxes" and duplicitous ringer placements?  Their campaigns of rigid ideological suppression and bullying sponsor intimidation?  Their individual browbeatings, their individual harassments, and their tyrannous individual persecutions?  Are these not going on?

How is a person with an alternative thought *encouraged* in such an atmosphere, or in the scurrilous actions of infamous stage-clowns like Penn and Teller who lied to their guests, otherwise misrepresented their own scurrilous intentions, and made all the program participants look like buffoons, nut-bags and public whack-o-doodles?  What manner of "Bull-Shit" (Their choice of title!) is that

CSICOP is far from 'objective', miles away from 'impartial', and, (this writer contends) decidedly not the best choice to decide where 'inquiry is needed.'  They perform a treacherous disservice, at best, to suggest that they are otherwise!  Laugh in their pompous faces, and then let us move on.


The fourth point is key to the infrastructure of their institutional infidelity practiced in the unctuously earnest transmission of an ignoble and non-progressive CSICOPian meme!

"4. Convene conferences and meetings..."

Oh, the horror... but they do enough of that!  Rest assured, reader.  They encourage all sorts of little splinter groups to grow up, clone-like, in their image... additional busy little imps to caper around the book-burning fire (...Not that one pilgrim!  That's a "Prometheus Press" book!) ... harsh infernos where good reputations get burned at the stake with the bad and where the catechisms of the jealous status quo are solemnly rehearsed in the flickering light and stinking smoke...

No, any resemblance to balanced "conferences and meetings" is dissolved in the Ad Hominem attacks, derisive ridicule, and easy dismissal of the opposition thinker at these *meetings*.  Audiences are encouraged to laugh out loud and the laughter provoking ring-master is visibly pleased with the expression of that laughter, it's been reported.  Sounds more like a college frat party than a meeting of serious... hardnosed intellectuals.

Clearly—these meetings are *coven conferences* described by some as Scientistic (sic) "Inquisition" assemblies!  Their purpose is to dictate thought, proscribe their canted eschatologies, and rehearse their *approved* scriptures, just like the old Catholic enterprise of old, it's been written.  All hail Doctors Kurtz and Shermer, our teachers, leaders, and holders of the guiding light!  Feh!


The fifth point proves that their intimated *balance* is a self-admitted fraud!


"5. Publish articles that examine claims of the paranormal..."

...Articles galore... And books!  Lots of books!  Books that shall remain unburned.  Clueless books.  Books without imagination.  Books without courage!  Books without vision or scope!  Books to coddle and mollify the flat-earth reader with the prosaic and predicable.  The reassuring and comforting.  The staid and mundane!

Books without depth.  Books without novelty!  Books without character!  Books that celebrate an invalidated and irrelevant status quo!

Moreover, asked previously and answered, reader!  "Examination" presupposes investigation, remember... so "Examine" how, given that there is so little (if any) investigation, going on, to support the examination to which they allude! 

...Besides, what further needs to be said than that their publishing accomplishments include the intellectually back-sliding screeds of one Kal K. Korff?  'Nuff said?


No.  The sixth and final point provokes in me a keen astonishment that a card carrying CSICOPian can ever behold his own reflection in a mirror!


"6. Do not reject claims on 'a priori' grounds, antecedent to inquiry, but examine them objectively and carefully..."

Don't these smirking authoritarians read their own stuff?  Are they that credulous themselves to be so disrespectful of the public's attention?  What bizarro world must they inhabit?  They clearly do what they proclaim they do not.

Reader!  "A priori" means:

1. Proceeding from a known or assumed cause to a necessarily related effect; deductive.

A priori, flatly, suggests the exact opposite of a process indeed going where the data might lead—the aspiration of any true skeptical scientist!  The history of CSICOP is, again flatly, rich with the direct antithesis of "following the data." 

No. CSICOPians are "data pushers," patent cherry-pickers for evidence supporting their contentions and, by admission, dismissive of evidence that doesn't support their contentions!  This is widely and competently reported.  So, in this sense they are very "a priori" when they very unctuously proclaim... that they are not!  None dare call that a lie.  I shall.

A priori further means:

2a. Derived by or designating the process of reasoning without reference to particular facts or experience, or...

2b. Knowable without appeal to particular experience.

" *DING*...Another winner, Johnny"!  2a and b are precisely their activity!

The particular experience (or bias) of your friendly neighborhood CSICOPian is very much a factor in their, so-called, inquiry!  Claims are measured first with a rubric of: can that claim first be *true* or not!  That which is determined to be incapable of *truth*, to begin with (...by dictate of "fishy fiat," presumably!) is removed from serious consideration... and ridiculed!  "UFOs cannot exist," first, so any inquiry regarding whether they exist or not, is moot!

"UFOs can't happen... period" (to quote the lovely Dr. McGaha), without regard to conflicting evidence of any type.  They make up their minds about a question, and prosecute that, without once validating the question, which, facilitating them, must remain unasked!  Outrageous!

CSICOPians are very much a priori in this sense, too.  ...yet they say that they are not...  See how this works, reader?

Finally. A priori means:


3. [The Determination of something] made before or without examination; which is to say, not supported by factual study! 

Excuse me!  The preceding is the obvious method of the garden variety CSICOPian, who has made up his mind, "thank-you-very-much," and would prefer not to be confounded with the facts, if you'd please and thank you very much! 

=Forget= that this behavior is proclaimed by the concerned card-carrier to be "not so." It remains... a priori describes them perfectly, reader!  "A priori," and not "investigation" ...would appear to be their middle name! 

Additionally "careful and objective" are only duplicitous malapropisms they employ... words carefully chosen to mask a very real agenda of *think-cloaking*, acrimonious axe-grinding, and rank intellectual fascism, finally! 

...My hyperbole circuit breaker didn't even get warm!

Clearly, a reasonable assessment of these preceding six points, then, shows them to be more CSICOPian artful dodge...reader, than stated aims to which one might bravely aspire!  They are red herrings scripted to deceive and mislead, not to edify and enlighten! 

Clearly, CSICOP's six points of shame are carnival hucksterisms, empty platitudes which contrive to get you into their big CSICOPian tent for the scientistic (sic) revival meeting!  Once there, smooth faced scienti-evangelists like (the hugely disappointing!) Penn and Teller, the not-so-amazing Randi, or the bellicose and whiney Dr. McGaha (don't forget the fatuous Dr. Nickell!)... can perform their unbalanced slights of hand! 

Yes, reader, it seems these guys, among others, are just slick scientistic-scripture pounding frauds with ulterior motives, in one considered opinion! They front an organization of similar myopic intellectualists, little men who steadfastly assert to the contrived credulous that there is a place for *everything*, and everything (read 'everybody'!) should be in its place! 

I see them as spiritless men (fewer women) for a soulless organization as bereft of imagination as it is bereft of creativity, frankly!  It's no stretch that they are the nineteenth-century proponents for the new dark ages threatened us in our... 21st century. 

Now I'm not a scientist, but a soldier and a poet ...forgetting I was raised by a scientist, been around them all my life, and hold a bachelor of science degree.  I have a deep respect, admiration, and appreciation for the rules of science.  I can, therefore, call these CSICOPians as I see them, smug proponents of unbrave institutional evil, a scourge of canted intellect, and a hurdle to the rising and advancing of the human spirit—a torpedo for our human potential! 

...Still ice cold, that aforementioned breaker!

As with other dark-age producing tyrants of the past, I patiently await the eventual demise of planet CSICOPia and I further anticipate the strident repudiation of their unctuous six point covenant as a bald misdirection and oily obfuscation of their true aims. 

Their covenant, finally, is a farce.  Verily!  The late Steve Allen, a founding CSIcopian, wretches from beyond the grave, I suspect (even as Philip Klass gloats gleefully).

In Part II we wonder that a conjectured speculation on the "true or false" reality of the UFO in an ETH sense might be as specious as it is ludicrous and as mendacious as it is cowardly, and then reflect on the comparative scientific infallibility of Stanton Friedman.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
*...still csicop.com

Saturday, July 16, 2016

Odd Observation #18


Odd Observation #18
Though Heaven Falls...
by Alfred Lehmberg



I'd had some exciting observations since a previous report. Some real puzzlers in the Southeast United States (converging and then diverging multiples, rate and direction changers, and super-slow movers creeping furtively along about one degree every ten seconds...), but nothing at was my location close to the west coast (I'd traveled out to CA to get my mom; she would go back to Alabama to live with me until she passed) save one wispy 'indistinct' a few days ago. It's been nearly a week of clear moonless mornings, so far, virtually bereft of even the prosaic non-prosaic... 

I'd previously wondered where they go... Where DO they go?

There WERE the usual good skies found in northern California to marvel at, despite some fires in the area, but the distinct absence of wandering stars was noted and they are auspiciously obvious with their absence. I've ALWAYS seen copious amounts of them out in Nor Cal. Where did they go? Another question, of many questions, with no answers readily forthcoming, at all.

This iteration of my observation series, fortuitously then [g], can concern itself with observations on another matter entirely: my tumultuous dismissal and change of venue as it pertained to an "ongoing theme" and a "continuing saga" of the hard but honorable road of elusive truth, harsh consequences for actions taken, and righteous good faith whistleblowing. Though my eyes were drawn to the sky, still (every morning), for a glimpse of the presumed larger reality I would convey back to an appreciated reader, I must confide that I found myself remarkably affected by the aforementioned *change*, disappointingly inexplicable at the time, as it was.

I felt a little like I'd been cast from heaven, eh? Reality can be uncomfortably mercurial.


Briefly (?): valued individuals I'd thought respected peers (if not rare friends) made what I had to take as a pointed indication from seeming ambush, that the perceived fellowship just described... Was.  Not.  So.

I was ejected from their offended presence in what I took for unqualified irritation with extreme prejudice. It was harsh.

The charges as leveled included getting "in too deep" where it was desired that I not go.  That I was "rewriting history," ...and a tersely undefined "indecency" was accused. These came to be not so laughable charges as it turned out. I didn't  know it at the time.They'd be true enough.


I, through my own filters, would have more properly described my unflaggingly consistent behavior as the continued support of a once valued friend and comrade, telling it like (I perceived) it WAS, and turning over restless rocks in PUBLIC that were being perceived as busily undermined in PRIVATE.  We'll forget for a moment that that "undermining" was abundantly deserved.

...But that's the theme; it's what I do, I've discovered to my horror and chagrin over the decades. When I put two and two together sometimes I get five... hey, it's served me well in a literary sense.  Sometimes, where only half the truth is being told, you have to tell the truth and a half!

That, and coming clean when I can see my arrears myself and not hang on to them beyond their expiration date... That's the key.


I am and have always been, pretty much, a whistle-blower. I've tried to keep it real, and I know what the value of loyalty is (the first whistle blown is to the individual concerned, always, no ambushing), but I can't help bumping my gums if I feel something untoward is going down, be it individual or institutional. I'm at the end of a long line of scientists, teachers, and Protestant ministers and when stuff ain't right, somebody ought'a SAY something about it! I regret it when, my little *character flaw* gets me knocked away from YOUR attention, reader, even if that WAS a good thing. [g].

I bring it on myself, undeniably, and perhaps I sometimes (too many times) elect myself to sound an alarm, but I require an occasional glimpse of myself in a mirror (Gotta trim those nose hairs!), so keeping silent about perceived non-equity I can at least say something about is not a comfortable option for me... Moreover, on those occasions when I failed to blow the whistle, folks around me got needlessly hurt (on one level or another) or a substantive chunk would come out of my own rear... The wage of inaction is oftentimes more arduous than the painful wage of the whistle blown or the flag thrown down.


My whistle-blowing outlook served me well in military aviation (though it kept me at company level as I've pointed out before), where what one does pretty much has to *work*.  Lives are in the balance.

Nothing has to *work* in civilian life... I've come to find; it just has to FIT, and that *fit* is trending back to one of rigid inflexibility, more and more, over time, for horrendous times ahead if we let it... ...Some irony there.


My alien view of the entire tedious situation forecasted only an aggregate appreciation for my efficacious behavioral consistency, as a matter of definition. In other words, one might think that behavior that had achieved some celebration mere days before... becoming, suddenly, almost overnight, "indecent and disappointing", would strain garden variety credulity a little bit. It strained mine. I was wounded and pissed off.  I dug in.


Moreover, I was stunned personally. There was no appeal, no discussion, and no debate. After six years of smooth sailing, there was no explanation, no expression, and no introspection. My WEB site, previously hosted by the dismissing venue, was also ejected into null space for ten days of needless inactivity, and I, with no warning of any kind (in fact counter to other more seemingly reliable indications!) suddenly had the deadest of dead microphones. My idiosyncratic stock had bottomed.  Ouch!


Well—Ok. I'm not Martha Stewart, I don't have to be "on," but I kind of got the immediate impression that it wasn't so much ME that was getting bumped from a ufological round table as you, good reader. All of a sudden, for the most seemingly arbitrary of seemingly arbitrary reasons... I wasn't getting "out" to a readership the way I was before... The way that had seemed to me to be as natural as breathing. It didn't feel like a good thing. It didn't feel like the right thing.


I don't know why I felt that way, really (though I have my suspicions), but I did. I felt I had a valid connection with a listening readership all too easily severed as if by the petty and arbitrary pique of a wounded teenager. I was wrong, even if I didn't know it.

There are a few of you out there, reading, for all the admonitions accusing my alleged pretentiousness, insults about unusual words I may use, or the pointed questioning and potential shredding of your untested faith! It's all paint from the paint box, good reader. True enough, you've read this far... There will be more to read, lord willin' and the creek don't rise...

Had the reader noticed, for instance, that for all the strident acknowledgment of the UFO phenomenon (multiple daily reminders in all media from a suspect mainstream), ZERO progression has been made regarding that key concern in over seventy years! I have!


That's part of the problem. The ufological principals (from opponent CSIcopian to proponent "Two Percenter") don't like to discuss their part in the general cover-up and mainstream obfuscation as it pertains to that nondisclosure.


Well, I DO like to discuss it. I suspect that most do. Was that a good reason to lose our connection? I didn't think so at the time.


Additionally, treat UFOs as anything more than an entertainment or a moment's fanciful digression and one risks (as a result of the 'Mothman Futility Syndrome'?) one's livelihood, social control, even family and sanity—plus the concern, consideration, and respect of those who proclaimed that they were your fellow travelers in the struggle. Is that rational? Look at the all but forgotten John Ford. Be a "truth seeker" only at your peril.


The reader can only imagine the quandary that put THIS writer in at the end of that aforementioned line of truth seeking scientists, teachers, and ministers. What ABOUT those nose hairs?  I'm sixty-eight!  They grow like weeds! I can't trim the "edge" if the "lawn" revolts me...


Step away from an "accepted party-line" and incur the wrath of the hard-liners. Suggest the existence of a hidden agenda they entertain and be summarily banished and whisper campaigned. Become the hated enemy as a result of rational disagreement and endure the irrational. Think outside the accepted box to be perhaps shoved outside that box. Think on your own and mayhap be socially disowned.  All that's risked right or wrong.  I was wrong.  Still, no one tried to "show" me.  All just tried to "tell" me.

That I would do it all again with a blind second chance? Of course.  Remember that consistency I talked about back at the start.


See, somethin' didn't seem right? The stress of NOT banging my literary gums about it was too much to bear. I had to report on it! Like any person aspiring to journalist/artist, I'm driven. ...Sounds a little pretentious? ...Not a whole lot I can do, or want to do, about that.  At my age, little pretentiousness can remain.


The personal satisfactions found in producing this critical prose and poetic commentary are huge, with the reader or without the reader, forgetting for a moment that any joy that is shared is always increased. That's the nature of a conscientious expression. It also may be an indication that I might be on the level...


The much appreciated constant reader understands that my behavior is constant and has remained constant over the past twenty years (anyway!) and would gleefully remain so, despite the discomfort of a few that find me cutting a little too close to their rational bone (?), but prosecuting rational convictions, generally "soaring" and "cleaving" to the maximum extent possible, and reporting it all back in as optimistic and respectful manner as I can... Would the reader have me do anything less?


All this, AND I would admit error when it's presented to me and I can recognize it. Why? It's a step up.

Every opportunity to have more information should always be busily explored. ...Ever moving forward to where the data appears to lead... ...Though heaven falls.

Still—I haven't had to back off a single major position I've taken, save the one, in that same twenty years. Show me new evidence.  I'd been right on Frank Feschino, "Emma Woods," and John Ford.  I LIVE to change. The future, as it has always been. Anything else is death. Death, reader!


What do I observe as a result of my (my/your) expulsion from a conflicted corner of Internet ufology?


1. That a new idea is not easily tolerated anywhere, even in a bastion of the newest of new ideas (that idea being that we are not alone in even this little sector of backwater space), and we ought to stamp out a reflexive, untenable, and unreasoning intolerance wherever it raises its pointy little head.  I'd thought such was so... heavy sigh...


2. That officious authoritarianism is everywhere in a serious ufology and it is used as it always is anywhere else: to avoid rethinking positions, redoing work thought done, and upsetting a status quo comfortable only for its too comfortable facilitator and administrator.


3. That no good deed shall go unpunished, and that the good a man may do is usually interred with his bones where his evil is almost guaranteed to live on and on? Plenty of evidence exists in our community for both of those.


4. That as important as being correct must be that it's more important to admit error, immediately, as it occurs and as it is recognized.


5. ...That I'm not dead, so I must be stronger?


6. Finally—that I am on to something important and consciousness changing (with some significant like-minded others), that I'd be able to bring back *alive* somewhat, perhaps, contribute some "beginning explanation" for same, or even materialize it in the so-called real world? The will is there and it's affordable to watch.  Aspiration inspires even as it fails!


Closing frankly? The only persons I have left in this world to impress are myself, family, anyone with an Alien View, or any general entity visiting from off planet, so... check in with the AlienView once in a while and see what's been explored, see observations made, or see stuff "impressive." My aspiration's there and it's sure to curl the short hair, gratify a few, and astonish the rest! The AlienView aspires to be real even if derivative.  That shouldn't be a concern or a surprise where we live in a fractal reality.  It is, and we do.


That's enough, read on.

ÆL

Sunday, July 10, 2016

My Forbidden Books Stack


.
Look... ...floating gently ... that washboard of cloud? This signifies singing, a tone, a low sound. It’s music to whales; a song of the earth... will it reconcile, somehow, my fate and my birth?
.
Where is that land in a world held dear? A land with abundant potential, sans fear? A land that is fecund, untrammeled, and graceful. A land where we find what rebukes the distasteful....
.
I swim a mean sea with a contrary feeling. This sea's self-absorbed and is petulance squealing. The water is cold, has but few warming currents, and whirlpools rule with elitist's endurance.
.
Awash in this sea of an old party line, I notice some things with a conscience refined. It’s salty this sea, with the tears of stressed billions. ...Many cook with cow dung ...so the few can have trillions.
.
I’m not calling the capitalist, or the one who has better... a skunk, or a thief, or invalidly lettered! It’s good to be rich–we’re honed to drive to it! ...But make folks pay dear, mind ... we find that you blew it!
.
Now, look at the persons who do the right works. These reinvest in people... are not psychopaths and jerks! ...These are folk knowing they don’t have a thing but what workers below them... have with them to bring!
.
So what might we gain if we left this "salt water"? If we crawled out on land, and loosed the "old halters"? With Moslem on one side, and Jew on the other? Perhaps, neighbors and friends, co-protectors... ...new brothers!
.
And what of the sisters who preceded the men-folk? Well, we honor their courage ... the past was a sick joke. They are half of the team, and likely, the best half. ...And I’m blowing no smoke... just wheat from the chaff.
.
Now, CNN smirks with talking head bimbos... that hundreds of thousands see "balloons" from their windows! They are so tongue and cheek , suggesting the ludicrous, *uncaring*, ... afraid, self-serving ... injurious!
.
Well ... I’ve seen the film they don’t show on TV! It was running (unwatched?) at a conference for free! It ducked into clouds, below roofs, behind buildings! This hard motion picture was consistently thrilling!
.
Why don’t they show all the good stuff on television? Because next comes accounting and pissed inquisition! Yes, what a fine inquest it would make – it could be! To drain the "pus pockets" of Roswell, or Kennedy!
.
There’s someone who knows what the past has been hiding... buried in landfills they shall not confide in. It matters, or not, that your kid's getting cancer? They’ve found their true happiness; they’ve found all their answers!
.
They write it off, puling, that effects on the people would freak all the good folk to question their steeples! See, they’re the ones freaked when mere *people* survive! They lose their advantage and all they contrive!
.
...But I’m safe, for the moment, in a spot that I’ve found. It’s the place where I study, and write, or make sound. It’s found in the textbook, never read and sold back; The facts of real history: my forbidden books stack!

.
alienview@adelphia.net
http://www.alienview.net/



.


Oh yeah! There are forbidden books, and papers – books and papers you’ve seen bandied about here, some of them. ...Books that talk about the...

. . : : -- ~ gobsmackingly outre and unrelentingly twitchy~ --: : . .

.
... stuff... ...and you can SEE Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, even UFOs I suspect (as no thing is immune from provenance), for what they are: tiny twigs sprouting from what came before.
.
Should the twig nurture hatred for the branch of that twig's very issue? Is it written in stone that son must hate father and father, son? You'd think so.
.
The books from the forbidden index to which I allude are forbidden because they make for inconvenient reading. Not uncomfortable for the reader so much, but the persons advantaging themselves of a person's ignorance of the stunning contents of that conjectured reading. The status quo loves your ignorance.
.
...Just when you thought you had stuff figured out, eh?  Thing is?  Who does?
.
You're best provoked to find yourself checking the roots of your own obsessions. Some of these obsessions (many of them?), perhaps not so surprisingly, come up with little “tilt” signs, flashing their electronic graphemes of “Game Over,” “Divide by Zero error,” or a “Blue-Screen of Death.” Credibilities of God, religion, country, institution, government, and agency are quick to come into question. The status quo hates questions.
.
Ever listen to fundamentalist Christians talk about UFO’s? They’re not a good thing with the bible-brandishing crowd. No sir, they don’t like ‘em ... not one bit. Ever wonder why that is!
.
...Sedition by any other name would smell as sweet, reader. The Status Quo hates alternatives.
.
What is the true sin of the Giants who walked the earth? ... That they saw the “daughters of men and found them fair” after all? Or, maybe these "giants" thought men themselves were getting a raw (...hearty giggle at the understatement...) deal from the 'establishment', and threw in with them, incurring the awful rage of them they had, perhaps righteously, betrayed? The status-quo hates dissent... even if it's righteous. ...Especially if it's righteous.  God was the Devil and the Devil, God?! This appears to be the way the Sumerians had it.  How'd that get turned 180 degrees?
.
Additionally, I read Dominion is misinterpreted "stewardship," frankly, not "slumlord," as we currently have it. Lot’s wife was turned into a pillar of mist, not salt. What else did King James, a bad son, a horrible man, a cheating husband, a horrific father, and an egregious King—forgetting his deleterious psychopathic tradition subsequently continued—get wrong when he approved the *translated* bible as his device for a new political control? Is this when the Bible became a list of FOX talking points? I digress.
.
What do you have wrong, reader? And what have I?
.
...Finding out is a step up.
.
Read on.