Channeling & Other UFO Silliness

[frogmarch]

is the title of an article by John Shirley that I found on his blog http://www.darkecho.com/skepticalbeliever/ ">The Skeptical Believer. He eventually became so fed up with all the ufology crackpots and the resulting loss of credibility in the field that he stopped writing UFO blog articles. You can read about this decision in his article "Listen. I DONT CARE ABOUT SHIRLEY's LAST WORD On UFOs! It's His POMPOUS OPINION and SCREW HIM (and Besides, I'm Not Even Reading This Column)"


Excerpt from “Channeling & Other UFO Silliness”:

You want to talk about UFOs? We can talk about UFOs. But you want to talk about CHANNELING UFOs? For a minute or two, sure.

I can't make a whole lot of time for horseshit.

Here's what I want to know: why can't ufology eliminate, at least, the obviously silly? The stuff that makes rational people turn away from ufology muttering, "Get a clue!" Stuff like channeling, and people who tell stories about visits aboard UFOs in which the aliens act just like the ones the experiencer saw in movies when they were little; abduction experiences that are silly in their resemblance to bad science fiction movies. Billy Meier videos of "dinosaurs" and his photos of the pretty alien lady "Asket". Or videos of airplanes and helicopter lights, of really, really obvious stunt kites. I mean, stuff that doesn't even fool my kids -- who laughed at an Ed Walters' "UFO" video I was screening; howled at its silliness without any prompting from me. Why can't we, at least, turn away from sheer silliness?

I appreciate what John Shirley had to say on the subject of UFOs. It’s pretty much where I stand on it too.

[zappaman]

1. Congratulations!

That's just what our alien overloads WANT you to think!

[frogmarch]

2. That's what they

want me to think they want me to think.

:tinfoilhat: