home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Msg: #4675 Sec: 1 - UFOlogy 28-MAR-87 05:28 PMSubj: Isaac Asimov (R)From: Sysop To: AllDr. Isaac Asimov, the world's most prolific
- writer, made a comment on lastnight's Larry King Show that points up the haughty attitude of science towardsUFOs. He said that he doesn't b
- elieve ETs are coming here in spaceships. Hebelieves people are merely seeing lights in the sky that they can't identify.He said he's seen t
- hem himself. Now, here's one of the most brilliantscientific thinkers of the century, admitting not the slightest curiousityabout a phenomen
- on he has visually confirmed for himself.I have been interested in UFOs for over 20 years. I have no special scientifictraining. Yet I have
- never, not once, seen an object, day or night, that Icould not positively identify. If I can acknowledge a genuine scientificcuriousity abou
- t the phenomenon, why can't the so-called Balzak of Science,Isaac Asimov?What is Science afraid of?From: Dean Mccarron To: Sysop (X)It's af
- raid of nothing. It's just that it takes resources to investigatelights in the sky, and as UFOs are very unpredictable, it's far easier to
- workwith something else. (In other words, it is a matter of economics, andworking conditions.)DeanFrom: Sysop To: Dean Mccarron (X)Dean, I
- couldn't disagree more. Right now, Carl Sagan is campaigning to raise$80 million for SETI, a project which has been in operation in one for
- m oranother for 25 years now and has turned up absolutely 0 results. There is notthe slightest shred of evidence, scientific or anecdotal, t
- hat ETs are usingradio waves to communicate with this planet. He will probably get the money,or something close to it.Meantime, an attorney
- named Robert Bletchman is struggling to raise $27,000for UFO research, a field which, over forty years, has produced vast amountsof evidence
- - mostly anecdotal but the hard stuff IS there - for itsexistence. Yet its questionable whether he will get it.The question of economics co
- mes back to the question of attitudes.(I know what you're going to ask...What will we do with the money? Go ahead,ask.)JimFrom: Dean Mccarro
- n To: Sysop (X)It's still a question of economics, and the lab-type situation. Let's face it-- when somebody spends $80 million, they want
- to see a nice laboratory,sophisticated equipment, etc. If the UFO researchers are really interested inmoney, it would be wise to make thems
- elves look more like mainstream science;in fact, they could probably get much better funding if they representedthemselves as "anti" UFO typ
- es, or debunkers. (After all, it didn't hurtRandi, did it?)DeanFrom: Sysop To: Dean Mccarron (X)If someone were to spend just 1% of that $8
- 0 million on ufology, believe me,they'd see plenty of nice lab equipment, mainly photo-analysis computers,medical labs, radiation detection
- equipment, etc. They would also see ufologyget a whole lot more scientific. Let's put the cart before the horse.Ufology is filled with mains
- tream scientists: Nuclear physicist StantonFriedman, Dr. Richard Haines of NASA, Dr. James Harder of UC Berkeley, MichaelSwords, Ph.D., Prof
- essor David M. Jacobs, Professor Ronald Story, US Navyoptical physicist Dr. Bruce Maccabee, (the late) astronomer Dr. J. AllenHynek, compute
- r scientist Dr. Jacques Vallee, Professor Ray Stanford, (thelate) meteorologist Dr. James McDonald, Boston Planetarium astronomer WalterWebb
- ....need I go on?Why should we have to misrepresent ourselves in order to get money? Do youthink the phenomenon merits the influx of funds o
- r don't you? Its as simple asthat.JimFrom: Tom Betz To: Sysop (X)BTW, it's "Balzac", Jim. I don't begrudge Dr. A. his lack of curiousity..
- . as long as he keeps turning out all that stimulating reading, and opposing themilitarization of space, I'll be happy to forgive him his la
- ck of curiousity. Hell, he just doesn't have the time! Besides, his admitted fear of flyingwould handicap him seriously as a UFO researcher.
- Let others better suited tothe task do it... and chain Dr. A. to his word processor, where he can makehis unique contribution to our socie
- ty.From: Sysop To: Tom Betz (X)I agree, I'm one of Dr. A's biggest fans. That's why I'm doubly disappointedin him. But I'm pointing him out
- as an example of the attitudes somescientists take, in the name of Science. Another example is his statements onthe Shroud of Turin. Asimov
- is an avowed Atheist, head of American Humanists,member of CSICOP's religious counterpart, member of American's for ReligiousLiberty, etc.
- Yet he has not bothered to study the Shroud, which could be theonly evidence extant that would completely nullify his point of view (whichal
- so happens to be mine). I HAVE bothered to study it, and I tell you I'mimpressed. But the point is, why should I exhibit more scientific cur
- iousitythan Asimov? And how can he maintain, indeed, flaunt his point of view withoutexamining the evidence?From: Tom Betz To: Sysop (X)Loo
- k, all he did was answer questions. I heard that program, and I didn'thear him pushing an opinion, I heard him say, in response to question
- s fromfolks calling in, what his opinion was, and that he hadn't checked out theevidence. _You_ haven't written and published 357 books and
- a thousand of twoshort stories since 1938... can you imagine how much TIME that takes? 14hours a day, seven days a week... the guy is just
- always writing orresearching what he's writing... and he's an acrophobe, which makes it hardfor him to travel to the sources of some of the
- se things (UFO sightings,Turin, etc.) I can't fault him... but YOU, Jim, why haven't you written atleast a hundred books? Huh??Answer me TH
- AT!!tbFrom: Sysop To: Tom Betz (X)Tom: Asimov did not seem to be pushing an opinion on Larry King, its true. Hedoes, however, push his o
- pinions by dint of his association with suchorganizations as CSICOP, American Humanists, etc. Don't get me wrong, I'm asubscriber to both Sk
- eptical Inquirer and Free Inquiry, and basically classmyself as a skeptic and a secular humanist. But I, at least, will break withboth those
- organizations on certain issues where I have taken the time toexamine the evidence. I think that someone as pre-eminent as Asimov has a dut
- yto his readers to either push an opinion based on his own examinations, orelse not state an opinion.As to my writing at least a hundred boo
- ks, I'm working on it! And I don't knowthat Asimov has written that many books. The fact that there are 357 bookswith his name on it is circ
- umstantial. _I_ didn't see him write them. JimFrom: Tom Betz To: Sysop (X)heheheFrom: Shon White To: Sysop (X)i'v seen a ufo or somethi
- ng i couldn't identify. But i think that somewhereout in the universe there are other life forms. SHON WHITE ****************
- *************From: Sysop To: Shon WhiteShon: As I've said before, not many people deny that there are other life forms.Even Carl Sagan b
- elieves this, or he wouldn't be chasing after all this moneyto fund SETI. Where the argument breaks down is that mainstreamers do notbelieve
- they would come here. They cite a variety of reasons, mainlytechnological, such as the speed of light being the ultimate speed limit, butal
- so sociological, such as "what would they have to gain from us?" I thinkthat's a bunch of hogwash myself. What do we have to gain from primi
- tivetribes in Borneo? Some insights into our past, perhaps? Jim, head of American Humanists,member of CSICOP's religious counterpart, mem
- ber of American's for ReligiousLiberty, etc. Yet he