• NEIL HITS THE MARK - - RPD

    From Ty Holder@RICKSBBS to All on Tue Jun 23 07:59:21 2026
    ---------------------------------------
    Date: Tue Apr 12 11:42:08 1988
    From: RICHARD P. DELL'AQUILA (ab114)
    Subj: Neil Hits the Mark--RPD
    COPY OF LETTER TO DR. LAMBE
    Since Dr. Lambe, moderator of the SF Reviewers' SIG has seen fit
    to delete all reference to UFOs from his board, I am uploading
    this copy of the beginning portion of a rather lengthy upload to
    the SF OPEN Forum Board. (Apparently Dr. Lambe has concluded
    that his OPEN Forum was to be closed to matters pertaining to
    Ufolog. Thankfully, Page has not come to a similar conclusion.
    Dear Dr. Lambe:
    Thank you for your letter concerning your opinions on
    UFOs, but I believe you are operating under a misperception.
    I do not presume to know what UFOs ARE, because I really don't
    know; but the evidence does establish beyond a reasonable doubt
    that they are not ALL misperceptions or hoaxes. Indeed, the
    reports that stem from IDENTIFIABLE sources do not, obviously,
    fit the definition of an UNIDENTIFIED Flying Object.
    UFOs have been reported by entirely competent witnesses
    whose sightings have been corroborated by other independent
    witnesses and instrumentation, such as radar. To make the a
    priori assumption that all UFOs are the result of misperceptions
    of known objects or phenomena simply misses the mark. I can
    therefore only conclude that you have not adequately informed
    yourself on the subject. With all due respect to your opinion,
    I am uploading this reply to the Science Fiction SIG, as you
    suggested, and I hope it will generate additional discusssion of
    the subject. In the end, it is only by thorough review,
    discussion and a legitimate scientific inquiry into UFOs that
    any answers will be found.
    In 1895, the philosoper William James berated his
    scientific colleagues at Harvard University, saying "They show
    such a lack of scientific imagination that it is hard to see how
    one who is actively advancing any part of Science can [say that]
    all the fundamental conceptions of truth have already been found
    by Science. Think how many absolutely new scientific
    conceptions have arisen in our generation...Is this credible
    that such a ushroom of knowledge, such a growth overnight as
    this, CAN represent more than the minutest glimpse of what the
    universe will really prove to be when adequately understood? NO!
    Our Science is but a drop, our ignorance a sea..."
    Almost a century later, James has been fully vindicated by
    discoverys such as relativity, quantum mechanics, and associated
    new concepts that overturned the previous scintific "truths."
    Our scientific knowledge continues to grow exponentially.
    The focus of your reply seems to be that UFOs do not exist
    as such, but your opinion is based on a false assumption. The
    issue of UFO existence cannot be dismissed on the basis of any
    such a priori assumption, but must be premised upon
    investigation. The evidence to date indicates that UFOs are
    phenomena not completely understood by our present Science, but
    which fall into one or several of the followi categories:
    that conform to the laws of physics, but require
    extraordinary explanations;
    that conform to undiscovered laws of physics;
    action, conforming to known and unknown psychological
    principles, or
    ( ETC. )
    In reviewing the recent upload by Neil, I believ his
    approach most accurately "hits the mark." We don't KNOW what
    UFOs are or will prove to be. We can make some educated guesses
    to explain all the many credible reports, and the
    extraterrestrial hypothesis is only one among many of the
    possible alternatives.
    ---------------------------------------

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