The Need To Be Honest About The Future of Ufology

We need to be very honest about Ufology. It is dead. Since 1947 the mindset has been that of a social club where people meet, hear the latest news and listen to occasional guest speakers while those in charge try to raise more funds. Yes, there were some really dedicated people but they either gave up for various reasons or succumbed to self-deception.

 

Carol Rainey, who was married to Budd Hopkins and assisted him in his work reported ("The Co-Creation of the Abduction Phenomenon", Spectrum Radio Network 11th February, 2011) how, if she "challenged" Hopkins on an aspect of a case he was far from happy. Rainey, obviously, also knew David Jacobs and it was at a dinner in Jacobs' home one day that he leant across the table to Hopkins and told him "We are the only two people in the world who know the truth of what is going on." Rainey's draw dropped and she did question that stance and the response was not good.

 

Hopkins and Jacobs, as far as they were both concerned, could not be challenged on their work and this begins to explain what went wrong with Hopkins work as well as Jacobs; neither man would accept criticism of their work or even allow peer review or analysis of alleged materials from alien abductions (powders, stained clothes or 'implants') there was always a reason why they would not cooperate on this aspect.

We also know that Hopkins left out some aspects of accounts (as with the book Unseen) and then cherry-picked data and even went so far as to redraw symbols allegedly seen during abductions. He believed that he was on the right track so to heck with everyone else.

 

Jacobs, as I have noted before, went so completely off the deep end that if he were a medical professional he could well be struck off for his actions –telephone hypnosis sessions alone are high risk but, you know, what the hell: he “knows” what he is doing and now that Hopkins is dead Jacobs is the ONLY man who knows the truth (the “David Vincent” syndrome –named after the character from the 1960s TV show The Invaders).

 

Researchers in psychology distinguish “belief superiority” from “belief confidence” (thinking your opinion is correct). Belief superiority is relative; it is when you think your opinion is more correct than other people’s.  The top end of their belief superiority scale is to indicate that your belief is “Totally correct (mine is the only correct view)”. Hopkins and Jacobs fall into this last category.

 

So why did no Ufologists challenge them and their techniques and lack of any oversight or peer review? Well, Ufology is a kind of hive mentality club: you agree with everyone else or you are out. In the 1980s, t5hrough the efforts of two long standing MUFON members (who left MUFON when things started going wrong) I was persuaded to (all expenses paid) attend a MUFO)N symposium and give two talks on UK CE3K/AE research and how to proceed when such reports were received.  No problem even though I do not like public speaking or stepping into even the shadow created by the lime light!

 

When I heard no more I asked what was happening because I needed to prepare material. “You upset a few people. Deal’s off” I was told. Before “orbs” and all the other “current raves” you have to remember MUFON was drawing in money, TV and a lot of publicity based on the Grey Abduction hysteria. Apparently “someone” (a well known UK Ufologist and author I am told) sent MUFON copies of some of my articles which question methodology and certain cases. No. MUFON was NOT going to allow that.

 

You see, if you are not “part of the hive” you do not get any time at a conference or speak anywhere. We have seen that corruption of ethics and any pretence at scientific research vanish as (without the permission of investigators or witnesses) MUFON sold all of its UFO reports to Robert Bigelow –just as John Carpenter had sold his confidential files. Then MUFON was hit by claims that it was rigging data to go with the lat4est trend, racist rants from some higher ups, not to mention sexism…oh, and child sexual abuse claims.

 

If all you see is the TV shows then you think MUFON is a slick hard core scientific organisation. MUFON died a long time ago.

 

Back-biting, in-fighting, Ufologists hoaxing other Ufologists or adding faked reports into the system making any serious study highly flawed and pointless. Ufology was never a science just as “Bigfootology” and “Cryptozoology” and around 96% of current paranormal research is and was not a science.

 

When I started working on my first book, Some Things Strange and Sinister” it contained almost 40 years of research into some cases. The UFO related cases outlined showed just how much lying had been going on. Noted American Ufologists admitting openly that reports used since the 1960s were well known hoaxes or fantasy stories from well known “personalities” but were these exposed widely to prevent any serious researcher using them? No. They continued to be used –including by the people who knew they were fake.

 

With the second book, Some More Things Strange and Sinister I delved into other cases –there were interesting cases to note in all fields including Ufology- and these were not debunking books. If you find an explanation for a report then you have to make that known to prevent serious researchers using it and every one of my books is fully referenced so everything can be double-checked which is the best peer review can be with these subjects.

 

When it came to the first book entirely dedicated to SETI, CETI and CE3K/AE –UFO Contact?- I decide4d to go straight for the proverbial jugular and hit certain “classic” cases hard. After 40-60 years of debunking there should have been enough pro-con material to reassess these cases. Fake then I’d show why by using facts rather than “Oh, well so-and-so said it was true.” I double and triple checked the cases put forward by debunkers (not sceptics who assess evidence but people just out to disprove everything by fair or foul means) and…most of it turned out to be fake evidence, twisted truths and worse. I had to then double and triple check that these were not Ufologists!

 

I could dismiss a lot Ufologists claimed –I am sick to my back-teeth of hearing about the Betty Hill “star map” which is pointless. I as sick of hearing “He passed dud cheques” (debunkers, even most Ufologists failing to point out that these payments were honoured by the person in question) or had a record for “parking violations” and when you consider the dirty and not-quite-legal things the debunkers got up to there were some pretty bad double standards going on.

 

I waded through all of this and concluded –based on testimony and secondary witness reports as well as other factors- that certain reports seemed genuine. “No, I’m not having that –I’ve missed something!” I said to myself. I checked, checked and checked again. Same conclusion each time.  I had to stick with the results.

Let me make it clear that we do NOT have any physical artefact from a UFO. As you might expect because it is hard to steal something in most of the situations described. Unconnected people observing a UFO over the area where a claimed encounter took place, physiological and psychological effects and even trace evidence has to have a cause. Someone walking down a quiet country lane or through a jungle is not going to come into casual contact with high doses of radiation. Something has to have been seen or encountered to cause psychological shock in a person or even post traumatic stress disorder.

I prefer cases where there are secondary witnesses if not to entities then to the UFO involved –something that says yes, something did happen. I prefer cases involving two or more people and, preferably, a report not messed up by some idiot using hypnosis and forcing their own beliefs onto a percipient. Not some person who keeps details to themselves and only releases little snippets as and when they like. The percipient must be protected at all costs but initial and final FULL reports must be published for perusal by any serious scientists to look at.  Any and all hypnotic sessions MUST be recorded and made available. If we can see that no one is misleading us or stacking the decks somehow then we have something we can look at and build on.

When I realised that there were seemingly genuine incidents I began to look at others. I checked as I normally do and came up wi8th various trends and findings that –it seems- no one else has in Ufology. I was working alone and not connected to any group (most of who would not cooperate anyway) and just ignoring the Grey (or which ever alien Jacobs currently claims is the real power behind things…until the next one is discovered) abduction phenomenon –I did assess the various aspects involved in UFO Contact?- and looking at the reports.

Everything I came across and added to is fully referenced so anyone can come along and say “Let’s see if this is accurate” and can do their own work.

Ufology cannot just sit on its collective backsides and say “Jacobs is handling this” because he is NOT.  A pinpoint of light in the sky is a pinpoint of light in the sky and not proof of extraterrestrial space craft or even “back up evidence” to someone’s claim of being abducted by aliens.

Although, if these objects and those on board them are not from Earth, it leaves only one real conclusion outside of wild and sometimes fantastical speculation; they are from another planet. However, on that subject I have to remain neutral because there is nothing to show us which planetary system or planet. In fact, I do not even thing extra terrestrial when I study these reports because that would mean the research would get tainted. If I believe Betty and Barney Hill or Travis Walton, Zanfretta or any other percipient it is because there is a strong case not because I believe in extra terrestrial visitors.

If a percipient is told a planet of origin, the planetary system and how far from Earth it is then that can be checked to a degree –is it an exo-planet in a system we know of for instance. Earth is currently (and very likely will not be for hundreds of years) not a threat to any superior extra terrestrial civilization so one might hope that one day someone asks one of these entities; “Where you from, pal?”

Ufology is currently in its death throws but is in denial because admitting that affects certain power bases and definitely the money coming in. Will it ever change or just fade out to become an obscure fringe subject –no one can answer that. It is up to the individual Ufologist.

Me? Well, I’m doing the work and the results are there to read by anyone and with no seriously established publisher being involved the reach is not as wide as I might hope. Would I accept funding to continue the work? Like a shot.