It appears to me that "when the method is applied vigiorously and thoroughly to the UFO question," it often reduces the probability of ETI.[/quote[
In many cases it does. Even UFO researchers acknowledge that 80-90% of UFO sightings turn out to have a generic explanation when investigated thoroughly. However, there are a core group of cases very similar in nature that upon close study truly defy a conventional explanation.
SkinWalker said:
While not necessarily a result of an established or traditional religion, the UFO/ETI movement does have many religious characteristics.
Agreed, but once again the "ETI movement" as you refer to it represents a few weirdoes who will believe anything anyone tells them about aliens. It is not very large and most definitely not held to by serious researchers in ufology.
SkinWalker said:
I think I successfully demonstrate that there is some religiosity to the UFO belief system.
Same response as above.
SkinWalker said:
It has been successfully demonstrated many times that one's status and position within society doesn't necessarily create the perfect witness.
No it doesn't. Which is why if there were only a few witnesses, they could still easily be dismissed as mistaken/deluded. That is not the case however. When you have
thousands of people reporting almost the
exact same thing you can't simply ignore that.
SkinWalker said:
They are subject to the very belief system fallacies as the rest of us. Indeed, President Reagan (arguably one of the greatest world leaders of the 20th century) often consulted the advice of astrologers. That doesn't give additional credibility to astrology -it still suffers from the same problems from the standpoint of science.
Once again you are making the mistake of thinking everyone who reports UFOs is a part of this "belief system" you associate with them. That is completely untrue. If you look at firsthand reports and witness statements you find that many were quite skeptical about UFOs before they saw one. Many of them were completely uninterested in the topic and many even remained so after the fact.
SkinWalker said:
This is where I appear snide but I assure you I'm asking out of genuine interest when I say, "point me to the citations of the journal articles written on the analyses."
You might check out the Journal of UFO Studies. This is a peer review journal that well represents mainstream ufology and researchers advocating a scientific approach to the issue.
SkinWalker said:
Largely demonstrated to be false, hoaxed, or out-of-context.
This is where you show your true knowledge of this topic. None of the documents I refer to are hoaxed. They are all acknowledged to be completely real even by debunkers. You seem to be referring to MJ-12 of other such unofficial documents that could be hoaxes. I am referring to competely valid documents released under FOIA or found in the various archives. These documents represent thousands of pages. The FBI released over 1600 pages relating to UFOs. The CIA released over 1000. The Air Force analyses and Blue Book investigation documents represent tens of thousands of pages.
SkinWalker said:
Even those that did refer directly to UFOs don't in themselves provide evidence of existance, but rather evidence of discussion. The UFO craze isn't new. It was in full swing prior to 1970 and the Cold War mentality created all sorts of cultural norms for government that would seem extraordinary today.
Much of the discussion in these documents is very mindful of that. You often see military officers saying things like "make sure these witnesses aren't just reporting crazy rumors." Other times they do cite direct evidence and state that it is very compelling, in spite of the hoaxers and loonies.
I plan eventually to write up a detailed summary of the documents and post them as well so everyone can make up their own minds, but that would take much more time than I currently have available.
SkinWalker said:
But you might be surprised to know that I once bought into the UFO/ETI movement.
This is where we differ. I never did. The "movement" as I have already stated is run by individuals who wildly interpret things to fit their desire to believe ETI exists. Serious UFO research is not part of that.
SkinWalker said:
So much so that I even started a website in 1996 to list some of the very same "evidence" that you are pouring over. It took some development of my critical thinking and a fresh look at the UFO question from a different perspective to see the pattern of evidence: anecdote of observation, anecdote of physical objects, anecdote of physical trace, anecdote of anecdote (rumour), hoaxes, bias presentation of evidence, etc. All the traits and characteristics of a belief system.
Well if you truly have looked at the evidence firsthand and reached a different conclusion, then I can respect you for that. I can't respect people who dismiss it offhand as something not even worth their time.
SkinWalker said:
The presence of a mystery doesn't necessarily imply the paranormal or supernormal.
No, but if something remains unexplained over a long period of time it usually gets classified in a paranormal context with other unexplainable phenomena.
SkinWalker said:
It simply means that the ability to infer or deduce is obstructed by lack of evidence.
Not necessarily. There is a great deal of evidence dealing with UFOs. The problem comes from the inability to take it seriously and get serious investigation and analyses performed. If science had been as diligent in this very important area over the last half century as other fields of study, perhaps we would have an answer today. But because science refused to take it seriously after the Condon Report, UFO research is generally relegated to unfunded hobbyists and few qualified scientists.
Even when mainsteam science (The Sturrock Panel) decrees the topic worthy of investigation, it is very difficult to get to that. If a broad spectrum, multidisciplinary approach were taken and a well funded study conducted, we might get some good results.
SkinWalker said:
The Mexico Ufo event of recent months is a good example. Not just to drag this out again, but believers and skeptics were largely polarized over is/isn't ETI. In all actuality, however, there were perhaps 10 decent hypotheses, one of which included UFO/ETI.
There were far less than 10 that even remotely supported the evidence. This also illustrates the difference between serious UFO research and believers/debunkers. The believers immediately proclaimed ETI. The debunkers issued numerous armchair explanations without examining the evidence first. On the other hand, we haven't heard anything from the serious UFO research community. That is because the investigation is still ongoing. What a novel idea! Conduct a thorough analysis before issuing a conclusion. This is still very much an active case. It stalled a bit because one of the military officials researchers were conferring with went on vacation.
SkinWalker said:
Being "unexplained" does not mean something is "inexplicable."
Well many cases are inexplicable with the investigation conducted so far. But as I said above, if we could get some more serious study to happen perhaps we would have more explanations.