Oh sure, I know that isn't the real purpose of this blog, but I wanted to wish everyone a great weekend!

BTW, Larry King will be doing a UFO show tonight -- Are UFO's Real?  The guest list is not posted yet, but it probably will be later today. 

Frank Feschino lives my friend! Remember him as you pretend you took no sides when he disclosed... his tale to us on Errol's show. Invited, he just tells the story. There is no reward or glory, just a smear by those effused with ignorance which Frank's refused.

Click to read more ...

Now that’s a slightly pretentious and wordy title. Nothing gonzo about that. Every so often, I see posts about a gonzo approach to UFO research, as well as the idea that witnesses/experiencers can’t possibly be objective about UFO research. What do these two things have in common? Well, Forteana is, by its very being, kind of gonzo-ish. And those that revel in that approach are often the very kind others sneer at: the grass roots aspect of UFO studies and experience. There’s an often unspoken but very real aspect of the UFO experience that some are guilty of promoting, and that’s classism. Throw in there some racism, sexism, ageism and other isms. . .we have a group of “researchers” who dismiss the witness based on personal agendas. Nothing new there. But really, it has to stop.

I guess “research” should be defined. When it comes to UFOs and the paranormal and Fortean stuff in general, just what is considered research? Is what I do research? Kind of sort of but certainly not in any great way. If anything, I research myself. It’s a self-reflexive thing.

Which brings us to the idea of objectivity/subjectivity. The first thing to get clear about is where one is, philosophically, about being objective. Me, I say no one is objective about anything. It’s all a matter of degrees; of being closer in, or further out, from the center, but never a complete objectivity. So that’s done.

As to me, why does the fact I’ve seen UFOs -- and experienced many high strangeness things with many of them -- make me nonobjective? Nonobjective to what?

Click to read more ...

Some things you just aren't supposed to say. We all know what political correctness means. You say something that goes against the prevalent attitudes in the media (yes, the media—not the populace). For example the following sentence, which I wholeheartedly endorse, violates political correctness:

Global warming is poppycock!

Whoops, sorry. I meant climate change. Or is that the climate crisis? I can't keep up! Anyway, you get my point. In ufology, political correctness centers around the nature of the phenomenon. Purely nuts and bolts, or supernatural? UFOs can be both and in fact are supernatural, i.e. paranormal, by their very existence. [See my Backyard Phenomena blog later this week for an explanation of that statement.]

A lot of UFO researchers deny this fact with the same wrath my global warming statement arouses in climate crisis fans. Thus anything that suggests UFOs represent anything other than nuts & bolts creations (don't ask whose creations!) becomes verboten. What three taboo topics incite the most rancor? Everyone will have their own list of personal favorites. Here are mine:

Lisa's Top 3 Forbidden Connections with UFOs

1. Bigfoot—He's big, he's hairy, and he hangs out with ET.

2. Ancient history—Cave paintings and mythology seem rife with UFOs and alien visitors.

3. Evolution—Have ufonauts messed with our DNA?

Each connection has evidence to support it. Notice that I said evidence, not proof. Nobody has proof of anything about UFOs and other paranormal phenomena. Each of the topics above also inspires debate, polite and otherwise.

Most often otherwise. So I'll end with one final request. Can we all act like grown-ups please?

Of course, that request may be about as far-fetched as global warming.

As regards our so-called "mainstream," thought reflective and sincere; our "limit" on bad thinking — a buffer from "the fear":

Supposed "a mediation," or "distillation" of the facts, it's portrayed as very "logical" — the "cure" for "fakes and hacks." Too, it shills as sense's medicine, protection from the fringe, the unwashed and the ignorant… the deceptively unhinged.

It's the view that most will hold... because it is "official." Other views are ridiculed and implode upon dismissal. See, it's opposed to other views, which fade in sad distraction as the mainstream is a jealous foe and a master of detraction!

It will leave no stone unturned to keep its upper hand, and many that must challenge it are cursed, betrayed, or damned.

Click to read more ...