"Sir Arthur C.B.E. Wholeflaffers A.S.A." <garymatalucci@gmail.com> wrote in 
message 
news:c9275010-7b5d-448b-a46e-5451ee808f62@42g2000prb.googlegroups.com...

Being a Debunker means never having to say you're sorry

Request to become a debunker:  Denied.





-- 
Harlow Victor Allen Campbell
Moderator
alt.alien.research  alt.alien.visitors
sci.skeptic  alt.conspiracy  alt.astronomy

responsibility as an investigator to respond to their demands. Don't
fall for that ploy. Only you and the organization you represent can
define your responsibilities.

A formula for avoiding stress caused by the actions of the debunkers
is to follow industry's lead in looking for "value added" in any
interchange or effort. If there is nothing to be gained from
responding to them, then don't do it. Apply your energies where they
will make a difference. Don't play their game. It takes two to make a
game and if you do not respond to their provocation, then they do not
have a game. They lose and you are not stressed.
+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++===+++++===+++===+
"Science of Not Knowing" by John E. Mack, M.D.

Despite official skepticism and even cynicism in media, government,
and scientific circles, it must be evident to many Americans that
something extraordinary-at least from the standpoint of the Western
worldview-is going on. No conventional explanation for the thousands
of reported cases of encounters with alien beings has been sufficient,
and this remains true in spite of the fact that the experiencers
themselves would, with rare exceptions, welcome any explanation other
than that they are being visited without their permission by humanoid
creatures from another place.

Yet the debate that is devoted to the UFO abduction phenomenon remains
focused largely on the question of whether or not it is real in the
strictly physical sense. Some skeptics even claim or imply that,
insofar as the physical evidence for the reality of the phenomenon
does not meet standards of scientific proof, we can presume for
practical purposes that it does not exist at all.

But what if the phenomenon were subtle in the sense that it may
manifest in the physical world, but derive from a source which by its
very nature could not provide the kind of hard evidence that would
satisfy skeptics for whom reality is limited to the material? If so,
might we not be losing an opportunity to learn and grow as a species
by remaining so wedded to an epistemology of physical proof?

What if, instead, we were to acknowledge that the abduction phenomenon
is intrinsically mysterious and, ultimately, beyond our present
framework of knowledge? What if we were to admit our puzzlement before
this mystery?

Might not such an attitude of humility become, paradoxically, a way to
enlarge upon what could then be learned? Is it possible that adopting
an open attitude could result in greater knowledge not only about the
physical aspects of the phenomenon, but about numinous dimensions as
well?

And might not this opening of consciousness enable us to learn of
unseen realities now obscured by our too limited epistemology,
allowing us to rediscover the sacred and the divinity in nature and in
ourselves?