THE REVEALING SCIENCE OF UFOLOGY; Pt 1
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