In a Snarky Mood: Books

A UFO blog that shall not be named nor linked to recently posted "Three Books You Haven't Read" with cover images of the three books, and the comment that most readers of their blog had not read any of the books. Well, smart asses, I read one out of the three, it's on my bookshelf right now, I can see it from here: In Search of Schrodinger's Cat.

Feh. Pompous snark-masters.

Reminds me of the smug full of himself puritan professor I had who taught a James Joyce seminar each year. Me, in my enthusiastic naivety (older "returning student" as anyone over 40 was euphemistically called) and pure joy at being in college, said to him something like "I was happy to hear you teach a Joyce course; he's among my favorite writers." "Yes?" sniffed (literally, he sniffed!) Professor Important. "I love Joyce, I've read all of his work, ..." "You? You've read all of James Joyce?" he said. He seemed downright offended as well as shocked. And a bit suspicious. "Well, yes..." I said. "How interesting..." and he walked away.

The Orange Orb: Leah Haley on the Abduction Mythology

if she's telling her truth, she is not to blame for anything.

I comment on Leah Haley's recent opinions on abductions, thanks to Jack Brewer's post at his blog The UFO Trial: The Orange Orb: Leah Haley on the Abduction Mythology

"Absurd Bits" in Fortean Phenomena

 My current Trickster's Realm column for Tim Binnall's site. My new column will be up Monday. 





"Absurd Bits" in Fortean Phenomena

Reading one of my favorite esoteric Fortean authors Colin Bennett right now: Flying Saucers Over the White House; The Inside Story of Captain Edward J. Ruppelt and His Official U.S. Airforce Investigation of UFOs. I'm only just into it, but, as usual when I read Bennett, there is so much rich, juicy and insightful right on stuff it's exhilarating. It's almost too much, one quick brilliant statement after another. One of the numerous gems is the "psychosocial filter" as Bennett calls it concerning UFO (and, I'll add, paranormal events in general) witness experiences: It is an amusing feature of the Western mind that those people who have had a UFO experience of any kind are judged to be people least worthy of analyzing that experience." The witness is often treated as an afterthought, or even an embarrassment. And all is lost if the witness has things that clogs up that "psychosocial filter": The courts of "proper" debate rule out any odd, highly individualized, comic, or ludicrous or absurd elements. Here we see the most tragic-comic emblem of mankind's philosophy: get rid of the nutcases and there will be revealed the shining truth. [Bennett: 39] It seems obvious that without UFO witnesses we wouldn't have UFOs to investigate in the first place. The UFO investigator wasn't there, nor the Sasquatch explorer or the ghost hunter. The witness was there, and she knows of her experience. The problem is with interpretation and assumption. But that's different than what happened, no matter how crazy it may sound. The researcher brings her or his own bias as well. The whole thing is -- I don't want to use words like contaminated or polluted because those words frame UFO and paranormal events as a negative -- but it's all messed up, turned inside out and upside down, from the moment it started. That's okay. That in itself is part of the phenomena. Instead, there are a lot of people out there chasing UFOs and ghosts and Bigfoot who believe they'll get to the truth of things if they reject anything that hints of those "absurd elements" Bennett refers to. That, and bringing along a lot of clanking high tech equipment that lights up and does other cool stuff. I don't remember where it was that I read a suggestion from Jacques Vallee, who commented that many UFO researchers were going about things all wrong. Instead of asking the witness about measurements, size, yards, feet, longitudes and latitudes and behaving in somber UFO Investigator mode, just give the witness a pad of paper and a pencil and have them draw what they saw. In their own words, in their own way. Stand back, don't talk much, and just let them relate their experience. Then go from there. It's a symbiotic relationship between witness and chroniicler of the event. Despite the insistence of some, Fortean phenomena isn't scientific (not to be confused with complete rejection of using scientific methodologies when desired), it's not objective, and it's nothing to be embarrassed about. You're either in it or you're not. You're in it and that means you take in the "absurd elements" along with the rest. The moment you start rejecting bits from a report because it's too weird or subjectively stupid, you've "contaminated" the research. The UFO Police (and the Bigfoot Police) pop up with regularity, with new mission statements and rules about what will, and what will not, be accepted into their (always) scientific minded organization. Embarrassed by most all of UFOlogy UFO Police want to be treated with respect by the residents of Debunkerville and the MSM (mainstream media.) Those invites will never happen, because the phenomena won't let it. Which the UFO Police would realize, if they stopped rejecting the "absurd elements." Meanwhile, witnesses continue to have UFO sightings that often contain high strangeness. I can only speak for myself, but I take it very personally when a stuffed shirt UFO investigator condescends to me that they only consider "hard evidence" and my experience is "only anecdotal." Well kid, it's all I got. But really, in my case, as with many other witnesses, that's a lot. It's actually huge. Lately I've been chronicling all of the strange UFO events in my life, going back to my childhood, (including those pesky "absurd" bits) and it's startling how connected and big this all seems to be. The "problem with UFOlogy" as some like to say, isn't with the "absurd bits." It's with the idea there's a "problem" that needs to be fixed.

Autumn Williams' Enoch: Witness Researcher Dynamic

Bigfoot researcher Autumn Williams wrote a book last year about a Bigfoot witness named "Mike," and his on-going interactions with a Bigfoot he called Enoch. Enoch is the title of that book.

The book has absolutely nothing to do with UFOs, but I'm mentioning her book here because of the points Williams makes concerning the witness-researcher dynamic. Aside from the fascinating story of Mike's encounters with a Sasquatch is the concurrent story of the researcher and witness paradigm and how it must be, at the very least, evaluated, if not changed altogether. So many times while reading Enoch I thought "just replace Bigfoot with UFO and the message is the same" in terms of how witnesses are often considered and treated, and the power dynamic between witness and researcher.

Even if you're not interested in Bigfoot, I recommend Enoch for those reasons.