The UFOEYES approach to UFOs: A clarification
6 comments
I received an email from an upset reader today. The anonymous sender says I’m too skeptical and that I have no respect for people with real UFO experiences. I’m also doing the UFO community a disservice with my disinformation campaign here at UFOEYES.
I’m not surprised really. I actually thought I would start receiving these kind of emails sooner.
Am I a skeptic? Why yes.
Do I believe in UFOs? Nope.
Do I find the subject extremely interesting and the prospect that intelligent life exists in other parts of the universe completely rational?
Absolutely.
But that doesn’t mean I’m going to be ignorant about this stuff.
Blurry dots of light in the sky aren’t evidence of extraterrestrials visiting Earth. Reports of silent triangular craft in the sky over Arizona might be nothing more than airplanes or helicopters, or why not Chinese lanterns. Dozens of military eyewitnesses telling us UFOs have tampered with nuclear warheads do not constitute hard evidence.
They might however be interpreted as indications that something worthy of investigation is going on around us. Something that might shed a bit of light on our place in the universe and maybe give us a clue about whether we are sharing the galaxy with other intelligent beings.
Of course, there are many sightings and personal experiences that are extremely intriguing, and I will continue to report on those.
But until we see some real, hard evidence, that’s all there is to it.
That’s my take on the UFO phenomenon and I will continue to approach it with a healthy dose of skepticism here at UFOEYES.
Thanks for reading and hope you all have a great weekend!
CHECK OUT THESE RELATED POSTS OR LEAVE A COMMENT BELOW
UFOs exist, of course they do. Unidentified Flying Object. Something that is flying, and not identified. Yup, definitely they exist.
And of course most of them fairly quickly become /identified/ flying objects. And this is much more the case now than it was in the 50s when radar tech was not so good and paranoia and secrecy were much worse too.
If only people would drop the credulous nonsense and focus on the interesting phenomena, as you suggest, then real scientists might be less repelled.
UFOEYES, I agree with you on most points.
Sometimes I try to ‘solve’ a video on youtube by suggesting that it shows lense flare, balloon(s), asian lantern, star or planet.
Often I get the reply “So you’re so stupid that you don’t believe in live outside out planet? Or are you waiting till the little green man land?” and such. As if by saying that 1 video can be solved, all can be solved. As if a “ufo-believer” must believe that every video is real an unexplainable.
Actually I am convinced that there are many civilisations on other planets that are much older then our own planet. I even think it would be possible that they found a way to visit other planets, including ours.
But fuzzy shaky video’s don’t prove anything. If we don’t know what it is on the video, those video’s aren’t proof of intelligent life outside, only possible proof of unintelligent life on our own planet.
I believe we have to be very sceptic, ruthless even, to investigate every ufo-sighting, in order to end up with a small hard core of totally unexplainable cases that will point us in the direction of a solution.
Keep up the good work!
@Elzo
I try to separate the wheat from the chaff here at UFOEYES, and sometimes it turns into a debunking spree, but I guess I’m just trying to keep some perspective.
Thanks for your comment and insightful words!
@Guy
Amen to that.
Just found this site. Very refreshing – I am extremely intrigued in this subject as well, but prefer to stick to the agnostic approach to all this. I think the approach Leslie Kean takes in her book is the absolute right one.
And my, there are some crazies on youtube – “fake planes”, LED planes, chinese lanterns, it’s so depressing.
Hi Gil,
Yep, I agree that the agnostic approach makes a lot of sense when dealing with UFOs. I haven’t read Kean’s book yet, but plan on doing it real soon!