From: Peregrine Mendoza <firstname.lastname@example.org> [Peter Brookesmith] Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 21:53:10 -0400 Fwd Date: Wed, 01 Oct 1997 11:07:20 -0400 Subject: Re: Witness Anonymity The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments. >From: email@example.com [Jerome Clark] >Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 15:52:33 PDT >To: firstname.lastname@example.org >Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: A New Question about Witness Anonymity I have been staring at this message every so often over the last eight days trying to figure out what it is supposed to convey. >Sorry, Duke, but anybody who would accuse a skeptic of being >"witty" need only read Phil (Ufology Is Tantamount to Communism) >Klass, when the just-named thinks he's being so, to be disabused >of this strange notion. Unca Phil has all the wit of a particularly >unfunny 11-year-old. Very odd. Phil Klass is not funny (although I find him riotous, but there again I do enjoy irony; most of us who went to English boarding schools had a well-developed sense thereof by the age of 11), ergo all skeptics are, so to speak, witless? Is that what it means? Or does it mean that blood sports in ufology are okay as long as the hounds are baying only at skeptics over 70 years old? Very odd indeed. Phil Klass thinks - or once said - ufology is tantamount to communism. Interesting comparison if you're intrigued by secular alternatives to religion. Maybe Phil didn't mean that. Maybe quoting people out of context is not always illuminating. Maybe John Mack meant something very profound when he said (to Jerry Clark, indeed - I think) that "Anti-communism is a form of racism". Maybe we can all agree, on the data presented by these two luminaries, that ufology is a form of anti-racism? That would be the first positive statement the field has made since Allen Hynek suggested that some UFOs that some people saw somewhere once were "swamp gas", and meant it. On the other hand, where are all the black ufologists? Odder and odder, really. Why does Phil Klass get a bashing when I am merely wondering aloud why Mrs Linda Cortibaloni thinks being witty is tantamount to being wicked? Why does Phil Klass get dumped with ad hominem contumely when not only is his name not mentioned in my post but my post did mention that Mr B. Hopkins persistently mentioned Mrs Linda Corsairbanana's real name - or one of them - in a public forum, albeit one slightly more distant from Manhattan than Albuquerque (or wherever) where Linda Cuddlytarantula first tasted the sweet wine of public adulation? > >If we can no longer promise a witness anonymity because > >down the line somebody may decree that he or she doesn't deserve > >it, then let me be the first to urge that no UFO witnesses desiring > >privacy step forward ever again. >Of course the sentence ought to have opened "If we can no longer >promise to honor...." Satisfied? Absolutely. Everyone's mind, like John Renbourne's, when they "lay down at night, just tryin' to take some rest" may get "to wanderin' like those wild geese in the West". I don't entirely agree with the sentiment, but if the news from San Marino is correct (and I know some who say it surely is, and there are weirder rumors yet now afoot from elsewhere), then Mr B. Hopkins is the last man you should trust with your real name. Did Crazy George have a point after all? I look forward to the customary deafening silence on this, of course. Yours &c Palindrome D. Monotone Monkey Catcher PS: Jerry, what *is* the story on Terry O'Leary of Larson fame?
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp