Alien Theory Aids And Abets Debunkers

ETH. Three little letters that have been the backbone of ufology since its inception. It stands for “Extraterrestrial Hypothesis,” but the way it is commonly used today you’d think it’s more forgone conclusion than hypothetical. To any reasonable person this is jumping too far ahead. No one ever accused ufology of welcoming reasonable people to its fold.

Still, there are some astute researchers who hold a personal hypothesis of what is behind ufo sightings and accompanying phenomena, but they never make it public. This is because the question is the important thing, not their conclusion. No cart before the horse for them, no sir. And I’ve been thinking lately why that’s important. I mean besides the obvious reasons contained in these two paragraphs and others we’ve covered on Paratopia and elsewhere.  Let us add this to the mix–nay, let us make this the main ingredient from here on out:

It is important not to promote the ETH anymore because it allows the Secular Humanist debunkers masquerading as skeptics to avoid the real issue. The real issue is, Are UFO sightings and accompanying phenomena worth examining or not?

The question isn’t, Is it aliens? It’s not, What does the government know? It’s, Is this worth our time?

In order for it to be worth our time, there has to be an unknown or unidentified in the data. Skeptical groups, as I’ve been hammering lately, are not really comprised of skeptics. They are organizations under the umbrella of a religion called Secular Humanism. Humanists are, as you may guess from the name, real big on what humans think and do and not so much concerned with anything else. Science. Philosophy. The end. Every good thing is a healthy mental construct from the human brain; everything else is a delusional mental construct.

They are more afraid of the dark than abductees and haunted people. They light that dark with themselves–with what they know “for sure” and with what they assume they will know once the scientific method has proved it. If a phenomenon hasn’t run that course then it isn’t real.  Needless to say, once it has run its course–and if it has been proven to be real–what was formerly scoffed at is now taken as conventional wisdom.

All of that is to say that “skeptics” (Humanists) must debunk the unknown and the unknowable because these are antithetical to their belief in the human capacity to know all. Some unknowns get the scientific treatment, with judgement put on hold until a verdict is in; other unknowns get laughed out of the room. It is far easier to laugh and be done with it than to investigate. Upholding their belief in themselves takes precedence over science and discovery. If you take unidentified objects or manifestations in the sky and call them “alien,” man alive are you ever making the Humanist’s job easier, because that they can know the answer to and laugh you out of the room.

Jeff Ritzmann and I have often complained that “skeptical” organizations always pick the low-hanging fruit to debunk. I never saw this before, but it’s actually ufology’s fault that they do. If you say “UFOs are alien spacecraft” then all the debunker need do is concentrate on those photos and videos that look like props from a sci fi movie to debunk it. “Nope. Sorry. That mothership is a spray-painted cup glued to a plastic tree.”

There goes your proof of aliens.

Well… duh. But, see, that’s the wrong conversation to have. The real one, the one ufology and Humanism despise for the same reason (lack of a concrete answer) is, “Okay, if we put aside aliens and every definition for these things, is it worth studying? If we examine it, we’ve got to go all in. We’ve got to be honest with what happens to experiencers–ALL the weird surrounding phenomena. What happens, how it happens, when it happens. We’ve got to throw away the hypnotically-retrieved junk and the CGI footage. No more Greer talking about alien fetuses when we know it’s human. No more Jim Sparks sweating into the camera as he assures you that he already knows everything about the aliens. No more Steve Bassett fake news conferences or any promotion where the promoter takes center stage over the science. That on our part–so skeptics, we’re abandoning aliens, which means you have to  put down the 15-page dissection of Billy Meier’s obvious hoax and the frame-by-frame examination of Stan Romanek’s puppet in the window and actually look at the data from legit case studies, not the sensationalized cottage industry junk.”

What can we glean from examining the still-unknown cases, the top 10%? We can glean whether or not this is worth investigating further. Humanists don’t ever have to address that question so long as we refuse to ask it. They LOVE having the alien fight. They will win that every time until an alien actually lands and gets out and says, “Lead me to your taker.”

That’s their whole thing, right? How many times have you heard a Humanist say, “Where’s the proof? Where’s the piece of the ship? Where’s the alien?”

And they are right to say that. More than that. In fact, they have all the proof in the world that it’s not aliens thanks to the likes of Meier, Romanek, Bassett, Greer, and every fledgling special effects house trying to go viral on youtube with “real” UFO footage. That’s the answer they NEED–it’s just humans behind all of this. Humanists require that it be just humans and ufology keeps feeding their belief system.

I say, no more. Stop playing into their hand and ask the question they’re glad to ignore: Is this worth looking at?

You ask that and they have to look at it to know what you’re talking about to give an answer. And if they say no, they have to give a reason. And that reason can no longer be, “Because it’s not aliens. It’s hoaxes, delusions, and misidentifications of planets.”

“Yes,” you can agree, “it IS all of those thing. That’s the other 90% and the cultural filter we wrongly tried to force onto it. But what’s this 10% over here about if it’s not aliens, Mars, a hoax, and the witness is sane? It’s an unknown, right? So, is it worth examining?”

The last thing a Humanist will ever reply with is, “I don’t know.”

Advertisements

One thought on “Alien Theory Aids And Abets Debunkers

  1. I have to think that some of the sentiment in this post is a result of constant internet warring.

    “Skeptical groups, as I’ve been hammering lately, are not really comprised of skeptics. They are organizations under the umbrella of a religion called Secular Humanism.”

    It’s more of a worldview than a religion, but okay.

    “Humanists are, as you may guess from the name, real big on what humans think and do and not so much concerned with anything else. Science. Philosophy. The end.”

    All knowledge that we humans have has been attained in some way though science (empirical evidence) or philosophy (logical reasoning). Everything else is opinion or personal belief, which is totally fine! Even humanists have those! Thing is that opinions and beliefs are far more open to being challenged/rejected, especially if you’re trying to push your belief as true without sufficient support.

    “Every good thing is a healthy mental construct from the human brain; everything else is a delusional mental construct.”

    You’re describing philosophical idealism here, not secular humanism. Secular humanism is closer to philosophical materialism.

    “They are more afraid of the dark than abductees and haunted people. They light that dark with themselves–with what they know “for sure” and with what they assume they will know once the scientific method has proved it. If a phenomenon hasn’t run that course then it isn’t real. Needless to say, once it has run its course–and if it has been proven to be real–what was formerly scoffed at is now taken as conventional wisdom.”

    You’re not witnessing “fear”. You’re witnessing science. We can’t accept something as true before we know “for sure” as you dismissively put it. If a phenomenon hasn’t run the course of being tested and proven to a fairly rigorous degree of certainty, with some kind of compelling evidence (stronger than eyewitness testimony, for example), then it is unconfirmed. It isn’t necessarily false, but as the saying goes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. You can go ahead believing in it, but you haven’t convinced the rest of us.

    “All of that is to say that “skeptics” (Humanists) must debunk the unknown and the unknowable because these are antithetical to their belief in the human capacity to know all.”

    No humanist worth their salt will tell you that they believe it is within human capacity to know everything. Hell, Godel proved that as a logical impossibility 100 years ago. No, the real motivation driving humanist debunkers is fear…of other gullible people. If we all just nodded our heads without expecting a reasonable standard of proof for dramatic claims, why, we might fall victim to one or more of the following:

    Cults
    Witch-hunts
    Phony psychics (also known as psychics for short)
    Ethnic cleansing (“God spoke to me in a dream. It’s all insert-group-here’s fault!”)
    Healing crystals
    One Weird Trick to a larger penis/more sex/immense wealth

    Oh, damn…maybe we need more secular humanists. Maybe if there were less gullible people giving caution to the wind and embracing any idea that “sounds right” I wouldn’t have to try convincing my mother that her astrology book is as useless as her book of Nostradamus’ year 2000 predictions. (That last one was a big seller in 1999 for some reason.)

    “Some unknowns get the scientific treatment, with judgement put on hold until a verdict is in; other unknowns get laughed out of the room.”

    Not all “unknowns” (what I interpret to be claims of fact from your usage) are created equal. Some “unknowns” deserve to get laughed out of the room because laughter is the most productive thing that can come from them. To quote Isaac Asimov: When people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together.

    “It is far easier to laugh and be done with it than to investigate. Upholding their belief in themselves takes precedence over science and discovery.”

    It’s more an issue of not wasting time with wild goose chases. You describe in this post the multitude of attention seekers and hoaxers who try to convince the world of their poppycock abduction stories. There is only so much time – there are more pressing matters to investigate than whether someone truly was visited, especially given that in most cases there is no further avenue of investigation than basically asking the person what happened and speculating. And we’re just talking abductees here, this is to say nothing of perpetual motion, psychics, ghosts, etc.

    Even so you still have organizations like SETI who use scientific methods to try to acquire evidence of extraterrestrial life that can be studied and verified by independent, third-party peers. That’s because anything less doesn’t cut it.

    “What can we glean from examining the still-unknown cases, the top 10%? We can glean whether or not this is worth investigating further.”

    Agreed!

    “Humanists don’t ever have to address that question so long as we refuse to ask it. They LOVE having the alien fight.”

    EVERYONE loves having the alien fight, because aliens are scandalous and sexy. Well, maybe not sexy…ah, you know what I mean.

    “That’s the answer they NEED–it’s just humans behind all of this. Humanists require that it be just humans and ufology keeps feeding their belief system.”

    That’s not secular humanism. I’ll grant you that there are certainly lots of people who feel more comfortable thinking that way, but it’s not because they’re humanists. Secular humanists (those people who adhere to the “religion” of secular humanism, as you call it…I assume they must follow the dogma?) don’t REQUIRE that the answer be anything, except that it is either supported by reason, rigorous testing, and/or solid evidence.

    I would wager that the vast majority of secular humanists would be THRILLED to discover evidence that we have been contacted by alien life. The only downside would be the masses of loons coming out of the woodwork claiming that they were right all along, thus validating all of the other nuts who make fantastical claims with little evidence to back them up.

    “The last thing a Humanist will ever reply with is, “I don’t know.””

    WRONG sir! Stating “I don’t know” is the foundation of science. It is the acknowledgement of ignorance, and a recognition that our lack of knowledge is NOT a sketch board on which to draw our dreams, hopes, fears, and fantasies, but as a gap in our understanding of the actual world.

    What you are taking issue with, in fact, isn’t a humanist’s refusal to say “I don’t know”, it’s their insistence that YOU don’t know, either. I understand that this is incredibly frustrating, especially if you DID have (or believe you had) a paranormal experience, and you are not insane. But without needing evidence to back up my claims, I could claim that God visited me and in a heavenly embrace told me that you are insane and not to believe you. Or that I, with my advanced telepathic powers which I can only utilize at random intervals, made you have those experiences to trick you. Or that I found these divine gold plates and they say to give me money or the world ends.

    For whatever it’s worth, I keep telling people it’s not butter and they NEVER believe me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s