You Don't Have To 'Believe' In UFOs Any Longer By James Neff
<webmaster@sightings.com>

Whenever I hear the question "do you believe in UFOs?" there often
arises an instant feeling of frustration which quickly rolls over into
fatigue and a sense of pity. To most of those who have devoted even a
reasonable portion of time to acquiring an understanding of the
phenomenon, the term "belief" simply doesn't, and should never, apply.
To use this expression shoves the UFO over into the category of
religion or even fantasy, and nothing could be more inaccurate or
counter-productive. It takes absolutely no leap of faith, no mustering
of imagination or whimsy for any rational mind to realize what is
already a proven reality: UFOs exist and are as real and the
Pacific Ocean or the Rocky Mountains (and may have been here just as
long). The simple fact of the matter is, UFOs (and whatever may be
INSIDE them) are a real, verified and massively documented phenomena
... but much of our culture and language perpetuate and cling to the
erroneous notion that we're dealing with some kind of specter or myth.

One might 'believe' in fire-breathing dragons or fairies ... yet, there
is no evidence whatever that either of these exist. However, one need
only look at the facts now in evidence to see that 'flying saucers'
(not merely "unidentified flying objects") do, indeed, exist. Those who
know UFOs are 'real' need to make a serious effort to cease using and
condoning that negative terminology of doubt inspired by our
disinformation-driven culture. "Are you aware of UFOs?" (i.e., "have
you been educated on the existence of flying saucers?") should have
replaced "Do you believe in UFOs?" in both text and conversation long
ago. We no longer are soliciting people to 'believe'. Instead, we are
(or should be) asking the uninformed to become educated to the facts.
The issue of visitors to this planet, wherever (or whenever) they
originate, is as vital an issue as any world geopolitical, religious,
or economic affair or policy. In fact, it is probably far more
important.

It is simply a matter of education. The evidence we have for the
existence of unidentified flying machines, even if we toss out all
photographic evidence and all abduction accounts or close encounter
experience testimonies from the most reliable, credible civilian
experiencers, is...massive. Even if we dismiss the most credible
testimony and eyewitness accounts, the evidence is...enormous. What
remains is a nearly a century of 'expert' interaction with flying
saucers (and other shaped craft) under extremely scientific,
verifiable, and examinable circumstances. I am speaking of the
countless military and commercial pilot interactions with these
remarkable, unknown machines, in situations where often entirely
empirical testing of data has been recorded. One could not ask for a
much better 'test lab' for the UFO phenomenon than in the cockpit of a
military fighter or commercial airliner.

In both situations there are one, or more, specialists in the field of
atmospherics and aerodynamics in a 'flying laboratory,' well-equipped
with scientifically-approved and understood instrumentation which can
record and note verifiable time frames, locations, altitudes,
longitudes, latitudes of the UFO phenomena. Additionally, and
obviously, there is also (in countless cases) verification by radar --
which constitutes a second 'laboratory' of qualified, educated and
capable specialists interpreting data. Apart from pilots in their
'flying laboratories' and their ground-based radar counterparts, there
is now also the testimony of astronauts who are increasingly detailing
UFO evidence and information outside of the stratosphere.

>From these three sources alone, there exists undeniable proof of the
'flying saucer.'

UFOs have entered practically every 'sensitive' international airspace,
been tracked on uncountable
civilian and military radars, been pursued by the finest and most
advanced flying machines on the
planet, eye-witnessed by our best trained pilots, even fired upon (or
so attempted) by pilots dating
all the way back to reports from WWI aviators over England. Our
visitors have been tracked at speeds exceeding all known propulsion or
contemporary technology and fully-defying the laws of *our* physics.
Flying Saucers have on scores of occasions brought military units,
including our nuclear forces, to full alert and then engaged those
forces in what appear to be tests of our technological capacity. Flying
Saucers of gargantuan size have been seen at close range by both
civilian and military professionals and verified by radar...both ground
and airborne. Some would even say our visitors have taunted and played
with our military...the reports of incursions into our SAC bases being
particularly extraordinary.

Millions of dollars are spent every year by air force units around the
world from every advanced
nation to intercept these aerial interlopers. Countries do not spend
that kind of money chasing
Venus, 'heat inversions' or entertaining myths. To suggest so is simply
preposterous. The information and data, mountains of it, from these
civilian and military aviation and defense specialists regarding the
UFO match or exceed the information we have from "less than expert"
civilian eyewitnesses of UFOs, and only serves to validate and support
public accounts of UFOs and/or interactions with them. We accept
without reservation the existence of atomic and subatomic
particles which only a privileged handful of experts in that field of
study have ever 'seen' with the most advanced special instrumentation.

Granted, there is far more 'scientific' data and knowledge of atomic
and subatomic particles than
exists for flying saucers -- but data is data, and evidence is evidence
-- and we have no trouble in trusting and being dependent upon the
experiences and veracity of the physicists and scientists
involved. We accept the reality of these all but invisible atomic and
sub-atomic structures with no
hesitation. And yet with the flying saucer, we are not dealing with
'invisibles' at all. At best, one must define the flying saucer as
transitory, difficult and evasive -- but nonetheless, a real part of
our physical universe. Unlike the atomic particle which is governed by
laws already understood, or well on the way to being understood within
the sheer mechanics of the universe itself and its conditions and
measures, the UFO has behind it an intelligence of its own. We can no
more easily reach out and snatch a flying saucer for examination than
we can ball lightning... yet, both exist. (There is strong indication
our military has had examples of UFO technology ...and its flight
crews...for more than a half century, but that is another subject
altogether).

Our public sector scientific evaluation of the flying saucer is
therefore more akin to hunting a
rare and highly-advanced species of animal formerly classified as
'cryptozooligical' but now definitely reclassified as 'authentic' due
to the sheer weight of verifiable and coherent data from experts. Like
the Tasmanian Tiger, we now know they "are"... but to capture one for
more advanced study proves to be essentially impossible.

 Ours or 'theirs'?

It does appear that the U.S. military has developed craft with similar
appearance and capabilities as
some 'flying saucers' (as reported by many reasonable and credible
individuals). However,
history shows us that the flying saucer has been coming and going on
planet earth for generations,
and centuries, which rules out the idea that all flying saucers are
manmade craft of a clandestine
technology.  Considering these realities, our language regarding UFOs
should cease, immediately, to reflect the elements of myth, legend or
fantasy, and fully embrace its definitive reality, helping to bring in
a new cultural era regarding the UFO. We must each arm ourselves with
these most primary facts when dealing with those uneducated, prepared
to give a rational defense of the subject. There is absolutely no
reason to ever feel awkward about the issue simply because others are
poorly-educated about the facts. And educating them at every
opportunity is paramount. The reality of
UFOs is such that its implications require every human being to become
as aware of it as their
individual mental and emotional limits will allow. Our place in the
universe is likely to be defined
by this very subject, be it a truth we are ready to receive or a lie we
are miserably destined to
suffer.

Either way, we don't "believe" in UFOs. No faith is required. It is not
a religion or occult pseudo
science. It is a reality. What we do with that reality is now squarely
on the table.


A Rebuttal by Jim Foreman; Editor, The Skeptic Report
His rebuttal is published as follows...

OK, we'll grant that UFOs (in this, we mean Unidentified Flying
Objects) do exist. There are strange things in the sky that people see
and then report to their local branch of MUFON. Maybe these objects are
vehicles, or are at least unnatural phenomena built by intelligent
species. Some of
them. Maybe. Does this mean that those few that are actually physical,
manufactured objects made by humans? Probably. Does this mean that
they're created by aliens? Absolutely not. Other than grainy
photographs, radar ghosts and eyewitness testimony (which is always
highly questionable...ask any lawyer) I am not aware of anything
empirical or scientific. Simply noting that something is there, flying
around, or might be flying around, in no way proves (or even logically
suggests) that it is an alien spacecraft.

There's no evidence for any of that at all. There are also some pretty
cool accounts of vampires, but close examination by scientists familiar
with body decay and pathology have shown that vampires probably weren't
supernatural. Thus, historical accounts can't be trusted without modern
analysis.
What really saddens us about the flavor of this whole article is the
tendency for the people responsible for the dissemination of UFO
information to wholly embrace the scanty evidence
for Unidentified Flying Objects and then similarly assume, without any
corroboration, that the objects are alien in origin. That's
inexcusable, unscientific, and just plain unfair.

Reply

I love a skeptic, and consider myself one. A big one. It takes a lot to
convince me of anything. I'm
not even sure you are real, Jim :) You write:

"This article basically extols the virtues of UFO worship, though he
devotes the article to
damning that anyone could "believe" in UFOs at all.

God forbid ANYONE "worships" UFOs as you claim I have encouraged! My
entire point is that the UFO is undeserving of such mentality...
because of the weight of evidence.

Now, allow me to defend myself only on two points, the rest of which
I'll leave to the readers to
evaluate using that wonderful gray matter between their ears. My
admonition: BE SKEPTICAL. That's the entire point. EDUCATE yourself on
the facts. Once the facts are in evidence, you will come to the same
conclusion. Either that, or, turn in denial and ignore the truth.

(1) I make it very clear that we have in no way defined the ORIGINS of
the UFO; this has NOT been verified or proven -- admittedly it is
entirely speculative that they are "alien" craft from other
planets or 'outer space'. But what I DO say is that since these craft
have been recorded historically
dating far beyond our own industrial revolution, much less the
invention of manned flight, we can
surmise that these are not all "ours" (ie, man made craft). You
immediately debunk this idea. Well,
history is on my side here. Anyone can crack a Bible and read about
Ezekiel's UFO experience...
anyone can read the Upanishads of the Hindu's and read about 'air cars'
powered by an energy source called 'sidis'... and if one really wants
to educate oneself on the true history of UFOs, you
can read quite a lot in this excellent NIGHTWATCH article entitled
"UFOs Through The Ages...A
Timeline." Because human beings have been describing this same
phenomena for so many centuries persuades me that the phenomena is at
the very least not a production of modern technology. It remains to
determine what they are, where they come from, etc. So we are in
agreement -- your
first statement is:

"OK, we'll grant that UFOs (in this, we mean Unidentified Flying
Objects) do exist. There are strange things in the sky that people see
and then report to their local branch of MUFON. Maybe these objects are
vehicles, or are at least unnatural phenomena built by intelligent
species."

 (2) My second point is to rise to your challenge of proof that the
military/air forces around the world spend millions of dollars dealing
with the UFO phenomena. These events are on record. Stanton Friedman
and many other researchers have amassed such data, and this is nothing
new or earthshaking (to the UFO educated). Iraqi & Israeli Air Force,
as well as the French government, have been entirely open about their
UFO encounters. Several of our own astronauts have openly told about
their encounters with UFOs when in the Air Force. Major Donald E. Kehoe
spent the latter part of his life documenting such cases provoked by
personal experience. Filer's Files frequently and archivally have
records of such events. These aren't buried someplace! They've been
known to anyone wanting to learn about it for years. Do you have any
idea how much it costs to send your best fighters after a radar
detected interloper traveling at 3000 mph over sensitive airspace (only
to close in on it and discover it's not a missile, but a silver disc
with brilliant lights playing cat and mouse)? Any person in the air
force will confirm this fact: it costs millions, even if it only
happens a few times a year. This website is overflowing with these
cases and accounts, as are many others. The documentation is openly
available. The witnesses, expert. The accounts, verified.

I will not defend the idea that UFOs are proven to be alien spacecraft.
I don't know what they are. I simply know they 'ARE' and that
historically the evidence for their existence reveals that, whatever
their origin, it is entirely unrelated to our own technological status
here on earth. Hence, it is not a "belief" system. It is a rational
assembly of facts with a reasonable conclusion. Flying Saucers
(and other shapes and forms of this same aerial phenomena) EXIST. They
being of extraterrestrial origin is, indeed, a speculation; as is, a
metaphysical conclusion; as is a phenomenon of nature. My personal
speculation, based on the evidence, is that these are craft with
intelligent occupants and/or guided by intelligent means which is not
human; there is ample evidence of intelligent control behind these
devices.

As I said, what we do with this reality is squarely on the table. I
appreciate your skeptical prodding's. Keeps me on my toes :)
-----------
Geekatron <spamfree@geekatron.com> wrote on 9/5/0

At least he said something that will help this newsgroup and its
readers.
Unlike your.. erm.. I don't even want to call post.
-----------
Andreas Klokkaris <andre@spidernet.com.cy> responded on 9/5/00

Excellent post man!
 -----------
Sir Arthur Wholeflaffer A.S.A. replied:
Thank you for your very insightful compliment.
This will put every debunker to shame,
 -----------
Andreas Klokkaris <andre@spidernet.com.cy> added:

Hm...I wouldn't bet on it. Believe me I've tried it in the past with
posts similar to the one you posted. Debunkers don't seem to have the
word shame (or defeat) in their vocabulary. They are weird beings,
really. My advice: Ignore them until they rot! Ha-ha
 -----------
Sir Arthur Wholeflaffer A.S.A. again:

Now we know the five stages of the UFO debunker:
anger, denial, bargaining, depression and acceptance.
   -----------
Andreas Klokkaris <andre@spidernet.com.cy> wrote:

Well said, but you can sum it all up with the following cutie that's
been around the net lately:
"All truth passes through 3 stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it
is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being  -- Arthur
Schopenhauer

n