A Challenge To Scientist, Not Skeptics
The Bigger the Skeptic (debunker) the Bigger the Fool
I hardly ever hear of a skeptic doing any debunking after interviewing a witness to a UFO, especially in person.. For that matter you almost never hear of any scientist or skeptic interviewing any witness to the UFO phenomenon. Strange way to prove this phenomenon isn’t intelligent. If people were reporting the same symptoms of a new disease around the world there would be a massive field investigation.
The skeptics impinge on the clarity of all memories of a credible UFO witness (except those memories that agree with their latest pet explanations.)
I remember reading about a witness, who now is considered very credible by both the skeptics and UFO researchers alike: Police Officer Lonnie Zamora. His credibility, however, was attacked when the Officer first reported his sightings. Officer Zamora witness a landed craft and little people beside it. The evidence was overwhelming. Was he believed or given the benefit of the doubt. Skeptics never dwell on the fact that this man’s career was destroyed. Phil Klass, a famous skeptic at the time, claimed that policeman, Lonnie Zamora, who witnessed a landing of a craft with occupants, must be a liar. The only answer could be that he must be in cahoots with the Mayor of his district to raise the price of land this mayor wanted to sell. In other words, this good policeman was called a liar and a thief. He supposedly staged the burn marks, impressions and lied when he made the dispatch calls- all for a few bucks.
History has shown Klass’s vicious attack to be without any basis in truth. Officer Zamora retired two years after the sighting report, suffering the label of "the man who sees Martians," You will never hear a skeptic apologize, never. I know that people who don’t apologize when they are wrong can become president+(Bush), but should an investegator (Klass Oberg etc.) who is never wrong fight the fight for honest scientific inquiry on UFOs? It would nice if the skeptics used 10% of their time debunking UFO reports would for policing there own sloppy work.
Most skeptics continually use character assignations. They imply that all credible, highly qualified witnesses lose their intelligence when they report UFO sighting details: i.e.: “pilot mistook bad weather for a solid craft.”
I wonder how many skeptics would make blanket statements about the character of a UFO witness if that witness were testifying on their behalf in a criminal case.
MUFON and many UFO researchers do their work out in the field. One field investigator has amassed 5000 UFO landing trace cases. Some investigators are retired police officers, engineers, scientists, etc. The UFO cases which are discredited by MUFON are done by the evidence, not by character attacks.
The UFO phenomenon has challenged science for at least 50 years.
What has been done to “mainstream scientists” who have studied aspects of the UFO phenomenon is tantamount to what was done to early scientists by way of the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages. Today the skeptics try to destroy careers, revoke tenure, cause diversion of research monies, and influence non- support by the of peers.
I believe some mainstreamed scientists today have the courage of their ancient counter parts:
“Between 1992 and 1997 Bruce Cornet scientifically studied and documented Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) near Pine Bush, NY. He documented the phenomenon using time exposures at night in order to record the movements of UAP in relationship to trees, fields, and landmark features on the ground. His data confirm the existence of a phenomenon that most mainstream scientists are afraid to investigate for fear of peer ridicule and censorship.”
Bruce Cornet reports on the behavior of his fellow scientist upon showing them the data:
“I have actually had competent scientists and aerospace engineers lose it after viewing my data. They desperately tried to preserve their beliefs and concepts of reality by denying that I had photographed and videotaped anything other than conventional aircraft. Objectivity lost, they fished for explanations that were more ridiculous than the obvious, ignoring definitive evidence to the contrary. Their response is a psychological problem, not an indication of any weakness in the evidence or its implications.”
As Robert G Jahn past dean of Princeton’s school of Engineer who headed the Anomalies Research laboratory which closed recently.
“For 28 years, we’ve done what we wanted to do, and there’s no reason to stay and generate more of the same data,” said the laboratory’s founder, Robert G. Jahn, 76, former dean of Princeton’s engineering school and an emeritus professor. “If people don’t believe us after all the results we’ve produced, then they never will.”
Look through the eyepiece and tell me what you see, the clergy present, would not look through the eyepiece.”
I ask though, what does Bruce Cornet’s data accomplish in today’s climate of fear, the same fear that fellow scientists felt during the middle ages?
Do you realize that the only UFO paper published in a scientific peer-review journal in the last 20 years about UFOs was only allowed to use certain reports (3) and none of them new?
I don’t know if anyone reading this has watched the movie “One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest”. Jack Nicolson’s(a patient among many in a mental asylum) character is trying to lift this heavy sink and rip it out of the floor. He did this while an enormous Native American(another patient) watched, commenting how ridiculous it was for Nicholson to try to attempt the impossible. Nicolson tries with all his might to lift the sink and fails. The Native American shakes his head and seems to think Nicolson is a fool. But Nicolson replies with a statement that sticks in the mind of this enormous powerful man:
“At Least I Tried.”
At the end of the movie Nicolson character is all but dead. The Native American with a powerful lift finally pulls the sink out and smashes it through the window to escape to freedom, the real freedom: the freedom to decide for yourself.
What ever the debunker or skeptics want to say about Bruce Cornet, at least he tried. He could have stayed in his office but instead he wanted to see for the evidence firsthand. What a novel idea.
My challenge here is not to the skeptic but to the real scientists; those who can feel instinctively there is something more to be revealed about the UFO enigma
Here is a chance to find out what is really going on for yourself. Right now there seems to be a UFO flap. UFO flaps are concentrations of UFO activates usually for a limited period of time. These “UFO flaps” are uncommon and an opportunity for the pure scientists. We now know that many witnesses have recounted repeated sightings during these flaps. A good example of this, today, is in Tippen, North Dakota where craft and occupant have been reported observed and interacted with. MUFON has been to the site where the people have tangled with these “visitors”. MUFON reports the family involved seemed sincere. What has happened since then seems to duplicate how most flaps evolve: multiple sightings and group sightings, photos and sometimes videos. Perhaps, if a couple of scientists with test equipment and open minds went to these sites to investigate in a timely manner, who knows what they might find?
See Tippen North Dakota
Most discoveries are made by observing anomalies by scientists who think differently. The world at large may have one of the greatest discoveries of all time waiting for the right scientist with tireless tenacity and courage to discover it. After all is said and done, even if you do not get the answer to this enigma, you can honestly say, “At Least I Tried.”
UFO Media Matters