DATE OF UPLOAD: June 15, 1989 ORIGIN OF UPLOAD: ParaNet Omega, Australian Bureau CONTRIBUT

---
Master Index Current Directory Index Go to SkepticTank Go to Human Rights activist Keith Henson Go to Scientology cult

Skeptic Tank!

DATE OF UPLOAD: June 15, 1989 ORIGIN OF UPLOAD: ParaNet Omega, Australian Bureau CONTRIBUTED BY: Bob Fletcher ======================================================== (C) Copyright 1989 ParaNet Information Service All Rights Reserved. THIS FILE WAS PREPARED BY PARANET ALPHA -- PARANET INFORMATION SERVICE PARANET INFORMATION SERVICE BBS PARANET ALPHA 1-303-431-1343 9600 BAUD DENVER, COLORADO NOTE: THESE FILES ARE NOT FOR REDISTRIBUTION OUTSIDE OF THE PARANET INFORMATION SERVICE NETWORK ======================================================== MISIDENTIFICATION OF UFO'S When considering the possibility of misidentification, it should be remembered that if no normal explanation can be found it may be because none is apparent and act because none exists. However, I believe that the higher the strangeness of a report the less likely it is that a normal explanation exists (i.e. if there is no suspicion of a hoax or hallucination). On the other hand, if the UFO phenomenon exists as it appears to, then it must be normal to certain conditions but rarely (compared to other phenomena), though repeatedly, witnessed. On the possibility of a hoax I take the line of 'innocent until proven guilty', bearing in mind that any degree of suspicion of a hoax will correspondingly reduce the weight of the report. If at the end of it all the object remains unidentified, the credibility of the report has to be decided upon; whether the witness s accurate not only in estimation of size etc., but also in the content of account. Does it ring true? (whether or not the witness believes, it since he/she may find it too much to accept). Before we can decide upon this perhaps we should draw a line of credibility, beyond which anything will be too incredible to consider seriously as a real event. But how can we decide where this line of credibility should be drawn when we should know by now that the 'absurdities' of yesterday are often accepted as, and interwoven with, the 'facts' of today? For this reason I prefer not to draw such a line, but to consider each case on it's own, and then within the context of the UFO phenomenon as I understand it to be. In any case, UFO reports of high strangeness will obviously contain more information than, say, a light in the sky, and so to get to this information it is necessary to consider the case worthy of investigation. This means that even before investigation any line of credibility must be drawn high, or not at all. These are some of my own views on the investigation of UFO's, but if these UFO's are really craft with occupants from...wherever, then it is my belief that no matter how much investigation is carried out we can only learn as much as we are allowed to learn, or less. Some people believe that the UFO's will show themselves fully - eventually. If this is the case perhaps the rising number of UFO reports indicates that this may occur in the not too distant future.

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank