Hucksters selling DVD sets and Joshua Tree? Hoagland is going to be crushed after you made a point of saying you don’t hate him. Every time he thinks he has won you over, you crush his heart again.

No worries about your comments, I just wanted to clarify why I made the points that I did.

The gist of my point is that if Ufology could raise it’s public perception, then it could defeat the almighty “giggle factor”, draw in more “real” scientists, and, possibly, get better funding from serious sources (like how SETI bilked millions out of that dude from Microsoft).

And while I’m sure there are lots of hucksters who would love for better PR for Ufology, so that they could go raise the prices on their DVD sets and Joshua Tree conferences, my points more apply to using that PR to get over the big stumbling blocks that are, and have been, holding the field back.

And, with some exceptions like Kimball, very few people are even discussing this huge elephant in the room re: Ufology and PR. But, it addresses the problems facing Ufology and offers some solutions to fixing them, which is different from the “nuts and bolts” UFO researchers are doing (and have been doing for decades to no avail).

Again, though, my point of view is shaped by my place as a person in the media and as an outsider to Ufology.

Paul ::

Thanks ! I thought it went well.

“I suspect UFOs are a reality of _some_ type. This has to be true. Consider, Paul Kimball and I can agree upon it… it must be fact.”

Sort of. I am convinced that UAPs are an objective reality, i.e. there are some cases (far fewer than most ufologists would have you believe, but more than the true naysayers would admit) which are unexplained, i.e. unidentified. That makes UAP an objective reality worthy of scientific investigation.

“Ufology’s mechanism further compels _me_, upon a humble and respectful study, because UFOs imply an occupant *other* of some type. I suspect Mr. Kimball and I might continue to agree.”

Here is where you lose me, or I lose you. I don’t rule this out as a possibility, but it’s far from proven. That’s why UAP is a more precise term than UFOs (and not just a “dodge” term as some people have stated) - “UFO” does indeed imply an “object”, which further implies an “occupant other” as you correctly note. But that’s a conclusion-oriented term that jumps far ahead of the available evidence. “UAP” leaves the door open, as it should, that all of these things can be explained in relatively mundane terrestrial terms, while at the same time leaving the door open for the “gee whiz” explanations.

As for Tim’s point re: PR and ufology, I couldn’t agree more, and have written about this same theme more than once in the past. Nice interview, Tim.

Best regards,
Paul Kimball

Then again, I’m terrible at capitalism, so take that as you will.

For starters, allow me to break the 4th wall momentarily, because I have a mild confession to make. You see, I haven’t even listened to my interview on Red Ice yet ! I don’t know what it is. I can listen to countless hours of my own show while editing it and putting it together, but I can’t seem to bring myself to listen to myself as guest. I suppose I will have to eventually.

So anyway, I’m going on memory here of my conversation w. Henrik.

Thanks for listening, those that did, I appreciate that it spawned some sort of discussion somewhere.

spookyparadigm ::

My response was framed that way based on a number of things. For starters, I am sooo tired of UFO doom and gloomers. Yes, the world would be in upheaval (let’s not all go off on tangents quibbling over said upheaval). Personally, having heard countless hours of radio, I’ve heard this point of view speculated upon and dissected ad nauseum.

So, I tried (remember now I am recollecting) to answer the question from a different point of view, that of the “marketing and PR for ufology”

Ufology has a massive public relations problem. The sooner it realizes this and looks to fixing it, the sooner it could evolve past where it is today. (Stop laughing).

My thoughts were more regarding the science & “social movement” and less so towards the “media and publishing business” but perhaps I am biased because, in this zany world of Ufology, I am part of the media (by default some might say, lol).

I do agree, wholeheartedly, that Ufology should be trying to make itself extinct. I think that was addressed in my lament that Ufology has no goal outside of the nebulous “truth about UFOs”.

I think you and Greg did a fine job of extrapolating just “why” there is no common goal, so there is no point retreading that.

If the “truth” came out, Ufologists would scatter in a variety of directions. The ramifications of which are facinating to think about. I’ll spare you the details, because I’d probably write an ultra long post here.

Also, and to no surprise to me, Adam Gorightly speaks the truth once again. “It is the journey that should important, not the getting there.” May El Santo smile upon you, good sir.

If you have any other queries or responses (in regards to my interview), remind me of what I said (or the question) and perhaps I can come up with a more succint or thoughtful answer now that I am not being interviewed by a Swede (it’s surprisingly stressful, but fun nonetheless).

For a response to your comment, see my posts on “What Does The Government Know?” Parts 1, 2, and 3.

Thanks for setting me straight on Thomas Merton. When I was researching my book on Thornley, I came across a hand written note by Greg Hill that had that quotation, and assumed it was written by him.

I stand corrected!

I agree with myself almost completely, too!

The reference to implants was just an example. My attention wavers. Tomorrow I might come across an implant story that will intrigue me, and get me interested in the possibility again.

What I get tired of is the parroting puppets who latch on to a concept and beat it deeply in submission, and then keep on beating it into irrelevance. Alien bases, implants, secret pacts, etc., after awhile just become tired clichés if its just the same old stuff being rehashed and repeated.

Not to say that I discount or dismiss any of those theories outright. But after a while a fella will tune out something if its just the same old same old.