THE REVEALING SCIENCE OF UFOLOGY; Pt 1
Date : 02-Aug-91 22:17
From : David Knapp
To : All
Subject : THE REVEALING SCIENCE OF UFOLOGY; Pt 1
Replies : -> #7607
The following lecture was given at the 1991 MUFON International
Symposium at the Hyatt Regency O'Hare in Chicago Illinois by Forest
Crawford. It is a topic that has been gaining alot of ground as 'we'
continue to search for answers to the UFO phenomenon. The data presented
is an assemblage of data research that is continuing to be collected.
It is offered on a take it or leave it basis to be compared with your own
research or other research for purposes of looking for correlations.
It is not the scope of this project to argue about small details or attack
witnesses who are providing small pieces of the data. In order for UFOlogy
to continue to grow, we must concern ourselves with researching what the
data is telling us, not with what should be rejected because it is not what
sounds plausible or what everybody else is reporting.
Those that have constructive comments or suggestions and any
correlating data are urged to submit it for research use.
Dave
THE REVEALING SCIENCE OF UFOLOGY
An Anatomy of Abduction Correlations
By: Forest Crawford
"To stretch your paradigm, first you must understand how to walk," said
the seminar instructor.
"I need a volunteer. Who thinks they know how to walk?"
I automatically raised my hand and thought, "Everyone in this room
knows how to walk; what does this have to do with being a better
businessman?" One person was quickly chosen and brought to the front center
row.
"Now, would everyone sitting in an aisle seat down the center here, lay
something down on the floor. Paper, pencil, anything."
The floor down the center aisle began to get cluttered with
contributions at the instructor's request.
"OK, I would like you to walk down the center aisle as fast as you can
safely go without stepping on anything."
The volunteer carefully started to the back of the room. His eyes
darted about surveying the path as his arms bobbed up and down to maintain
balance. He looked like a sea-bird stepping from rock to rock as everyone
laughed.
"I need another volunteer." As the instructor positioned a young woman
with her back to the center aisle, he produced a blindfold and tied it
securely over her eyes. Turning her around to face down the aisle he said,
"The rules are the same; walk to the back of the room without stepping on
anything and take as much time as you need."
"I can't! I can't see!" she said.
"Have you seen blind people walking down the sidewalk?" he asked.
"Yes," she said.
"Then use your feet to feel your way like a blind person uses their
cane," he said.
The woman reluctantly started her way down the aisle. She stumbled a
few times, stepped on a few things along the way and took ten times as long
as the first volunteer to reach the back.
The instructor pointed out that even a person who can only perceive
what is directly under their feet can get to the end of their journey.
However, it will most certainly take him longer and they will miss details
along the way. On the other hand, the person with the insight and
foresight to look all around will ultimately finish the journey faster and
with more awareness of the things they encountered.
The walk of a scientist is often a strange and wonderful trip. As one
learns to walk in science, he/she is required to always keep one foot
planted firmly on solid ground while reaching out to test new ground with
the other. Only after the new ground is thoroughly and convincingly
tested, may the scientist shift his/her weight forward, much like the
blinded volunteer probing her way down the aisle.
It's funny how scientists are expected to discover and understand the
universe around them, yet they are generally not allowed the creativity to
develop their own insight. The real inventors, researchers and discoverers
are those that can see the path ahead with all of its gifts and pitfalls.
The Einsteins, Salks, Faradays, Teslas, Pasteurs, Edisons, Galaleos and
Divenchys are the world changers.
Ufology, a science in its infancy, is affected by lack of insight and
foresight possibly worst of all. If asked to compare it to other sciences,
it would be considered more like archaeology that a purer science such as
physics and chemistry. This is due largely to the fact that we are always
investigating events that have already happened. At best a UFO
investigator will arrive on the scene within hours. Very rarely will the
investigator be present for the UFO event. If they are, they will rarely
admit to it for fear of losing their reputation.
Why has Ufology ended up this way? Is it because we spend too much
time arguing amongst ourselves over trivial things?
Mr. X - "There were five dead aliens at the Roswell crash!"
Mr. Y - "No, you are wrong there were four dead and one alive."
Mr. X - "You are wrong and I'm right."
Mr. Y - "Well oh ya!"
Has a want or need for money and attention hindered our growth? These
things have certainly contributed some to Ufology's state of affairs, but
there are several other major problems faced by our science:
1) The evidence seems to tell us that we are dealing with a phenomenon
that is controlled by something more intelligent than we are.
Imagine a chimpanzee lumbering out onto a runway with a club in hand
trying to figure out a fighter jet. Could that chimp even carry on a
simple conversation with the pilot and would the pilot care?
2) A more serious problem is the lack of conclusive, or even substantial,
evidence. The only conclusive evidence would be a whole or crashed
craft or an alien live, dead or in part. All other forms of evidence,
landing traces, photographs, scars, testimony and even most artifacts
are only circumstantial. Our evidence must prove beyond a shadow of a
doubt strangeness exceeding all known human technology. This is an
extremely tall order.
There is another less scientific form of evidence that I feel warrants
including; I call it "Personal Evidence." Personal evidence is
synchronicities or coincidences that may not make sense or have
significance to anyone but the experiencee. Personal evidence is usually
hard to prove, a hunch or premonition perhaps. It seems to be a part of
our creative intuitive selves that we are generally unaware of.
I would like to share a few examples. One late night after a long
interview with an abductee, I was driving home in a thick fog. The witness
and I had just been discussing that she thought the aliens were around and
paying attention to more people than we realized. I had the radio on and
the disk jockey was playing a series of clips of famous quotes from movies.
I craned my neck to look up and out the front window into the fog.
Thinking out loud I said to the mist, "It is to easy for you to hide in the
fog. If you are really up there paying attention it would be nice if you
let us know once in a while."
At the very instant I finished saying that a quote from a "Three
Stooges" movie played and it said, "Look Moe, there is a flying saucer up
there!"
Another incident happened after an interview with a contactee. He had
just been telling me that more UFO activity was going to happen and that
more and more races of beings would be paying attention to Earth. On the
way home I stopped at a quick shop to call home and tell my wife I was
running late. I pulled my van up next to the pay phone and turned to get
out. There on the wall outside the quick shop was a Camel cigarette
poster. The poster was a picture of a well dressed camel standing against
a night sky. A beam of blue and red light from a silver saucer shined on
him from above. The words, "THEY'RE COMING," in big letters was all it
said.
It is nice to know that they have a sense of humor. Of course there is
no proof that this means anything, but I got kick out of it. You just had
to be there.
There is another very important aspect that has held UFOlogy back;
ignoring evidence. If a pharmaceutical company wanted to sell a new drug
to the public, they would have to thoroughly analyze it to determine its
contents. If upon analysis they found a compound that they could not
identify, would they be able to sell the product? Of course not. They
could not take the risk of people becoming ill or dying from something the
company could not explain. The truth is, no scientist worth his weight in
salt could ignore data and be considered a real scientist. If other
scientists can not ignore data then how can we get away with it? In fact
we have not gotten away with it, but we keep trying. Remember there was a
time when we ignored crash retrievals because it was too controversial.
Now there is a crash reported on "Unsolved Mysteries" several times a year.
UFOlogists have done the same thing with the abduction phenomenon and it
has become our main focus of attention lately. We are still doing it with
mental transmission and contactee cases. This may be a mistake we will
regret later.
If small gray aliens wake you in the middle of the night, paralyze you
with their stare, beam you through the wall on board their ship, examine
you in a rather unfriendly way, maybe even reproduce hybrid children with
you, blank or mask your memory and return you to bed, that is acceptable.
But, if they just want to teach you things, answer questions or help you
develop personally, then that is too hard to believe and God forbid if they
look human. If this comparison sounds ludicrous, it is. We must keep an
open mind unless we really like eating crow.
Comments
Post a Comment