UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2001 > Apr > Apr 21

Re: High Silliness on UFO UpDates - Ledger

From: Dona Ledger <dledger@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 12:27:31 -0300
Fwd Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 13:27:11 -0400
Subject: Re: High Silliness on UFO UpDates - Ledger

 >From: Bob Young <YoungBob2@aol.com>
 >Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:15:28 EDT
 >Subject: Re: High Silliness on UFO UpDates
 >To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>From: Wendy Connors <projectsign@worldnet.att.net>
 >>Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 10:01:10 -0600
 >>Subject: Re: High Silliness on UFO UpDates
 >>To: updates@sympatico.ca

 >>They do have a more honest right to an opinion on ufology in all
 >>its forms based solely on having done the research, rather than
 >>those who have not or failed to unbiasly read their contributions.
 >>My bookshelf contains many examples of their acumen and
 >>research...I don't see anything by you on the shelf. Therefore,
 >>your opinion comes from the List rather than from your
 >>contributions to research.

 >Wendy, Anyone who read that:

 >Thanks for giving us this wonderful example of "the UFO Elite".
 >I thought that we were on a discussion List, but maybe I was
 >mistaken. Does this mean that if one is losing an argument,
 >here, that an appeal to "authority" can be the only acceptable
 >way to proceed?

 >My, my. That is what ufology always seems to be accusing
 >"science" of doing. Why, with this rule old Doc Menzel and Uncle
 >Phil would have to retain advanced positions on your library

 >Based upon this, I can propose,

 >Wendy Connors' Default Law of Honest UFOlogy

 >In determining whether someone has The Honest Right to determine
 >The Truth, the weight of their argument shall be directly
 >proportional to the weight of their published output; with
 >double weight being assigned to self-published books, monographs
 >and articles in little flying saucer magazines; with an
 >adjustment of a triple weight being added to those works which
 >have only been read by participants with a "biased attitude". In
 >case of a dispute, the default setting shall be that of the
 >author with the more heavily footnoted pro-ETH position.

 >All kidding aside, this seems to be the 50 year methodology
 >of the science of ufology.

Still Bob, you must admit that a thorough grounding in this
field would help before tossing out uninformed opinions based
only on a personal bias. You've demonstarted this naivete
yourself on several occassions, most recently on the Arnold

I think it bugs many researchers when someone who has done no
apparent research of their own chimes in with uninformed
opinion, basing their credulity on their attachment to some
scientific persuasion. That's not good enough.

Keep 'em flyin'.


[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com