And today I've decided to procrastinate by sharing my thoughts on the second of the four (so far) responses by ufologists to my UFO piece.
Curiously, this piece was linked to by a variety of blogs and websites around the country, meaning, oddly enough, that I am on the "poopie-list" of such groups as the Southeast Sasquatch Watchers Association (or something like that, I forget the exact name. My hope is that by not putting their name exactly right, they will be more likely to ignore me and keep watching those sasquatches instead of me.)
See: http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2008/jul/20/op-ed-column-story-ufo-watcher-raised-some-disturb/ for the actual piece.
And now for response #2 of 4:
"griffi12 ( no real name given ) says...
I feel we are still a long way off before scientists are willing to propose any kind of answer to the UFO questions. For example look at the global warming/ climate change debate. For decades these scientists would only say things like “we currently to not have enough data to answer the global warming debate conclusively, and speculating on things that can’t be proven is useless”. The slowly over the decades as the data began to build more and more timid scientists began to step forward and say things like “It now seem certain that the temperature changes we have seen in the last 50 years are the results of human activities”. One day when salt water is rushing into our homes scientists will stand up and say “It’s proven, we humans have changed the climate on our planet.”
The subject of UFOs is just now entering the “can’t be proven and it’s useless to speculate” phase and like global warming debate, a lot of people can already see the hand writing on the wall."
Well, thank you "griffi12."
Curiously enough, aside from the complete pointlessness of this thing, as well as the total lack of evidence offered to argue the writer's position, the part that irks me the most is the phrase "hand writing on the wall." The usual phrase is simply "writing on the wall" and it's a reference to the Biblical story of Daniel.
See here: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=34&chapter=5&version=31
If I recall correctly, based on what I was taught in Old Testament class in high school (there was one year, due to my parents' employment, I attended a church run school for Navajo people where this was a required class for people in my year) the book of Daniel was written as a piece of allegorical fiction and was not intended to be taken literally by the people of the time it was produced.
Oh well. I am, of course, showing off, in part because it's my view that few skeptics have much knowledge of religion. Time to get to work. Actual substantive work, and stop with silly blogging. Adios!
Latest Nelson Report
9 hours ago