My brief interjections. Ed.
Well, the believers have spoken, and what they have to say isn't very surprising. In classic blind believer style the entire point was ignored and the experiment blithely dismissed using the "One bad apple doesn't ruin the whole barrel" approach. Well, in truth mainly by our friendly neighborhood Mufon member
whom we leaked the fact that it was a hoax to and dutifully reported it for us but this is no surprise.
Then in further attempts to shoot the messengers, sweeping statements were made that all skeptics are biased and out to debunk every claim they come across. We are close minded , inflexible, incapable of comprehending the truth of alien and ufo existence, yadda yadda yadaa.
Given the fact that "skeptics" practice similar methodology from person to person it becomes very easy to make inaccurate assumptions and assertions regarding them as a whole. The assertion that all skeptics are the same is based wholly on the fact that they arrive at the same conclusions on a regular basis.
This is not due to some character flaw as its been insinuated but to the fact that the more fastidious skeptics stay true to accepted methods which produce reliable and repeatable results when dealing with the same information. Applied correctly, critical thought and the scientific method work the
nearly the same from person to person. It is not the fault of skeptics if these results do not sit well with those who refuse to accept these conclusions, and the obvious inference therefore that the methods they employ to gain their pleasing results are in all truth flawed.
Skepticism and science do not deal in unfounded assumption if applied correctly. They operate within an accepted and credible framework that produces reliable results. I will not go into yet another explanation of the scientific method as its been shown to be a futile
endeavor when dealing with those who have shown an adamant refusal to even consider applying it. I'm more interested in the denial of this latest blow to the credibility of the pro ufo community.
Here we go again folks. I have witnessed one after another, blatant attempts at dismantling a well constructed example which brings to light another of the many flaws inherent in the believer argument. Through overgeneralization and arrogant dismissal its been insinuated Grendels hoax test is nothing more than a minor and ineffectual exercise. Nothing could be further from the truth.
What has been done speaks volumes regarding the validity of the mountains of "recorded credible witness" reports and data. A favorite standby in the pro ufo camp has been "You can't ignore the thousands and thousands of eyewitness sightings"! Yes, yes you can.
It well demonstrates a few facts regarding the voluminous data compiled by Mufon and other large investigative organizations.
Fact, quantity is not quality. It cannot stand in for empirical data in its absence. It's erroneous to assert that all the data points to one conclusion when the data itself has been shown through glaring example to be flawed.
Fact, while true that Mufon did not state decisively that the hoaxed report was verified it has nonetheless been added and remains embedded in their compiled report logs , even though no attempt has been made to investigate. Rather than discard that which cannot be verified they opt to taint their data with unreliable information. This, despite the assertion that it has been brought to their attention by one of their members! It's still listed in the files with no one apparently concerned enough to remove it. (Update, they found it after Grendel made the hoax known and noted it but have not removed the original,
finally. )Ed.
Fact, if indeed these organizations were dedicated to the pursuit of truth regarding the ufo enigma as they claim, they should not, in good conscience, be able to accept any of these reports without a thorough investigation performed beforehand. Given the fact that this would be a time consuming and exhaustive process, and that it would also result in the rejection of many claims, I believe this would reduce the volume of filed reports considerably. Are they more concerned with bulk rather than content?
Conversely though, and ironically, methodical and diligent investigation of every claim would have the beneficial effect of considerably raising the credibilty of the reports that did survive close and unbiased scrutiny. This is where where quality would far outshine quantity.
These organizations make it known through various disclaimers that not all the reports they file are verified. If the true intentions of these groups was the diligent pursuit of truth these organizations would not have these unverified reports lumped in with those that have been validated, albeit in their own biased ways, at all. Faulty or unreliable data must be noted and discarded in order to avoid invalidating the end results.
Maybe they should have a disclaimer similar to the one shown at the beginning of popular wrestling programs. "The events depicted here are entertainment only". P.N nib68
Update... The report has finally been noted by Mr. Filer and a new disclaimer added. Another organization (CAUS) however has the report still listed although I personally weeks ago emailed them informing them of this reports intent and status. P.N nib68