• State of the UFO community by Brad Langton : 1 December 1988

    From Ty Holder@RICKSBBS to ALL on Wed Jan 8 07:04:44 2025
    The following is a point of reflection on the current state of the UFO community as it is being portrayed by some of the material that has been circulating through Paranet.
    Brad Langton : 1 December 1988 ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Over the course of the last few months I have been watching the drama
    unfold over the UFO enigma. In this time I have seen many examples of thoughtful, deliberate dialog on a subject that is at the very least, highly controvertial. Unfortunately, I have also seen examples of the very worst in behavior exhibited by what I will call zealots within the UFO community.
    Most recently this charge would have to be awarded to Bill Cooper who has
    just uploaded one of the most animated and paradoxical documents I've yet
    seen.
    While stating his allegience to the Republic, he has gone to extreme
    lengths to discredit 90% of all the FOIA documents that have been tossed
    around over the past few years. Additionally, Mr. Cooper states that he has known that Majestic 12 was not a legitimate document. Mr. Cooper draws a
    vieled inference regarding his association with John Lear who along with himself "...know the real truth." I have to wonder why Mr. Cooper has become
    so nervous as to run about proclaiming his allegience to the government
    over and over again. I am also concerned about Mr. Cooper's claims that the Aquarius and MJ-12 materials were "obviously a hoax" when those are the very documents of "proof" that John Lear sent to me earlier in the year in
    support of his hypothesis.
    Does Mr. Cooper want us to believe that he is being pressured from above
    to defuse documents that are being widely referenced both in this network,
    the UFO books, and the recent plethora of television specials? In a similar vein, is he trying to set himself and John Lear as the GURUs of UFOlogy?
    This is all very confusing to me, especially in light of the materials John Lear sent me.
    Looking back over the Paranet message base dumps of the last few months,
    I'm equally confused by the online behavior of Mr. Lear, Mr. Cooper, and
    some others that were cooresponding with him at the time. I am in no way surprised that Jim Speiser finally had to act to prevent total anarchy in
    the message base!
    Here at Paranet Lambda, one of our users has attempted to cast a viel of mystery around the removal of the B-49s (Flying Wings) from the Airforce
    back in the '50s. I went on to cast a fictitious viel around the possible "hidden agenda" of my BBS! Tongue in cheek, I think I have demonstrated how being too anxious to find mystery where in fact, none exists, can easily be constructed around ANYTHING.
    Jim referenced my perspective of "open-minded skepticism" in a mid
    November post regarding the mission of Paranet. I would like to examine that perspective at this time. Basically, I feel that there are clearly
    mysterious circumstances surrounding many aspects of the UFO phenomenon.
    Each incident must be examined critically with an open, rather than an adle mind. This is to say that we do not procede from ANY premise except that
    there is a strange event... only after examining the facts, and this can be expert testimony, can we ascribe an S/P rating to the event. We should
    NEVER eliminate traditional explanations or assume that every blinking light
    is an extraterestrial craft. Likewise we should NEVER assume that ONLY traditional explanations can possibly account for all UFO sightings or that UFOs can NOT be extraterrestrial or even interdimensional in nature. The key
    is to make NO assumptions that we can't place a probability on based on testimony or physical evidence. Lear's initial approach of placing his conclusions in the form of a hypothesis was faithful to this end. Unfortunately, subsequent coorespondence produced other, less professional responses and claims. We should never discourage hypotheses but we must
    clarify them as such and not get carried away without reason.
    So where does this leave Paranet? In my understanding, we are to be a clearing house for UFO and paranormal information. All material is worthy
    of an initial investigation and subsequent debate. We should NOT be a
    mirror of CSICOP. As I see it, CSICOP begins with the assumption that everything is explainable in terms of commonly known phenomenon or basic fakery. We don't want to assume that everything is automatically strange
    and outside of our sphere of experience... we must be the middle ground. Jim
    is doing a great job of mediating this fine line and is to be commended
    for all of the tremendous effort that this takes. In my small way, I try
    to do likewise here at Paranet Lambda, although I don't have the supurb resources and contacts that Paranet Alpha has developed.
    Another possibility, and well within the scope of this network, is the possibility that the EBEs are not necessarily from another planet, but
    from another dimension or perhaps, even our own future. A recent article presented within the physics community (who I am sure are revered by
    CSICOP) states that it may in fact be theoretically possible to travel not
    only forward, but BACKWARD in time! The philosophical implications here
    are incredible and threaten to force us to completely alter our
    perceptions of causality, religion, everything! This would also explain
    why EBEs do NOT want to become visible to us, their past. See how easy it
    is to present hypotheses? For the record, I am NOT proposing the above as anything more than an intellectual exercise but I hope it makes my point without ruffling too many feathers.
    Well, I've probably already said enough to become a controversy all my
    own so I'll leave now and encourage you to give Paranet Lambda a call at 716-377-3985 and let me hear from you... I'm sure that some of you have
    plenty to say regarding my ruminations. Lambda does support 2400 baud so
    if money is a problem, as it is so often with me, compose a response
    offline as I have here and upload it to Alpha or preferably to Alpha
    AND Lambda. I look forward to hearing from you all!

    Brad Langton --<< Paranet Lambda >>--











    
    Ty Holder
    telnet://ricksbbs.synchro.net:23
    http://ricksbbs.synchro.net:8080
    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Rick's BBS - telnet://ricksbbs.synchro.net:23