My advice to UFOlogy is to stop wasting time chasing UFO reports both old and new. They haven't solved anything in the past 60+ years and there is no reason to believe they will solve anything in the future.
The reports by themselves provide very little useful data for analysis. Most of these reports do not even contain real observational data that can be analyzed.
This subject is so elusive that it's nearly impossible to formalize it like other sciences. You can't force the UFO peg into a hole of your own design. I am not a scientist, I'm ever the creative type, and I'm content ignoring anything that resembles a formalized process.Michael Naisbitt writes UFO-Blog, dedicated to "fighting truth decay." He also maintains the site, Drone Hoax, a page that should be saved in the favorites of anyone researching the drones fiasco. Expressing concerns related to a prevailing lack of qualified peer review, Michael commented:
There are aspects of this phenomenon that challenge everything, including my definition of reality. There are little strings all tangled up that seem to go everywhere. Life and death, expanded consciousness, mind-control, emerging mythology, channeling, mysticism, synchronicity, psychic weirdness and outright magic are all connected. Everything is on the table.
You start out questioning, "What is happening?" and you very quickly need to ask, "What is God?"
Too many researchers have locked themselves into confined little boxes. I've heard too many people say, "Well that's just ridiculous!" when asked about some of the outlying strangeness. When I dig into that preconceived ridiculous stuff, I find that there really is something going on there. It's complicated and slippery - but something is going on.
We are all human, and we are trying to peer into something from beyond our realm. True understanding might be impossible. We need to pull off our blinders, and this ain't easy. Or, at least we need to admit that we have these blinders - all of us.
If you've read my past writing then you probably know how frustrated I am with Ufology, and how the infighting and corrosive personalities drove me away from dealing with most of the stories and discussions that surface inside of that community.Filmmaker, writer and multi-talented Carol Rainey has addressed problems within ufology and, more specifically, within abduction research. She thoroughly explored such issues in her article, The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the "Alien Abduction Phenomenon," which should be on your reading list if you have not yet read it. Concerning constructive directions, Carol provided the following practical considerations:
However, the idea of formulating a new, future direction is a refreshing one. It's also extremely difficult, because there are so many pet theories that people who are well-entrenched in the UFO community have written about and feel the need to defend. How many times have you watched a UFO documentary and all they can come up with is the tired, old Roswell theories of Stanton Friedman - bringing him in as an "expert" as though the field of Ufology has not and cannot progress beyond the singular event of Roswell and the core theory of little green men crashing an alien disk into the sand?
For Ufology to enter into mainstream consciousness as a respectable form of scientific inquiry - it needs to become more like other scientific fields of study like paleontology or epidemiology. Even though those are fields that explore either new or old "unknowns" - the researchers involved understand the process of scientific inquiry. That is: never holding firm to one rigid theory, but instead always questioning, testing, and retesting. That is the answer - everything we think we know about sightings, abductions, and other related phenomena needs to be questioned, re-examined, retested and re-validated under real scientific study.
So long as Ufology continues to exist as a "hobby" for so many untrained and unscientific so-called "researchers," it will never have a chance of being accepted as a legitimate scientific inquiry by the mainstream. I honestly hold very little hope for this ever happening, unless someone finally makes a ground-breaking discovery that unsettles the very foundation of everything vanguard Ufologists have always accepted as their "truth" when it comes to UFOs.
In brief, these would be my suggestions to potential investigators for studying a phenomenon that is still a baffling, though very real, human experience:
- Learn how to use raw data, allowing in all of the reported material, not rigging the narrative by selecting out only the data that fits that investigator’s preferred narrative.
- Have a researcher’s work peer reviewed prior to his/her publication. It’s a tried and true method of helping to spot a fallacy or other logical weakness in a case.
- Don't work alone: work with cross-disciplinary teams, all focused together on a case that all agree is worthy of their time.
- Try some other way of recall, not hypnosis. It's simply potentially damaging to the subject and doesn't help the field get anywhere near those much needed National Institutes of Health dollars for grants.
- Keep current with the rapidly advancing field of neurobiology. Scientists have made great strides over the past decade in understanding memory and the validity of recovered memory. The field has changed greatly, while alien abduction researchers are still working on the basis of very old information.
As for me, I think a constructive direction for ufology would be cultivating an environment that prioritizes personal responsibility, particularly in discriminating between established facts and chosen beliefs. Taking such responsibility and expecting it of others applies across the board and is possible regardless of personal areas of interest, levels of experience and extents of involvement.
I recognize fact as defined by Merriam-Webster. From my vantage point, life is mysterious enough, more than adequately wondrous and plenty full of intriguing challenges without jumping to premature conclusions. The creative process and exploration of the unknown need not be stifled by respecting accuracy.
Compassion and civility are important when applicable but are not synonymous with enabling unaccountability. Reasonable debate protocol and fair fighting rules should be practiced when confronting others about misrepresenting facts or irresponsible behavior, but it should be clearly understood that an environment of personal responsibility is not only conducive to addressing fraud and ill conceived research methodology, but demands it.
People are entitled to believe anything they want to believe. They are not entitled to do harm to others in the process. They are also not entitled to uncontested claims and they are not entitled to demand you support their belief systems.
As long as there is a market for presenting unsubstantiated claims as facts, there will be suppliers. Stop buying and they will stop selling. The whole is the sum of its parts, as each and every one of us and our actions collectively contribute to a prevailing paradigm. We are individually responsible for the finished product.
If we want change and improvement, then we must change and improve. If we want truth, we must consistently provide it while refusing to accept its substitutes. If conclusions are claimed, we are entitled to require presentation of supporting data and analysis. If others do not share our standards, we are justified in choosing not to support them and their activities. We are not only entitled to such conditions, we have personal responsibilities to provide, support and request them.
You deserve more quality. Refuse to accept less.
Now you know what some people and I have to say about constructive directions for ufology. What say you?