Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here Our Bookstore is OPEN Over 5000 new & used titles, competitively priced! Topics: UFOs - Paranormal - Area 51 - Ghosts - Forteana - Conspiracy - History - Biography - Psychology - Religion - Crime - Health - Geography - Maps - Science - Money - Language - Recreation - Technology - Fiction - Other - New Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Location: Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1998 -> Apr -> Re: UFOs An "End-Times Deception"

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Sun, 05 Apr 98 12:05:57 PDT
Fwd Date: Sun, 05 Apr 1998 15:01:03 -0400
Subject: Re: UFOs An "End-Times Deception"


> Date: Sat, 4 Apr 1998 23:34:27 -0500
> From: The Duke of Mendoza <101653.2205@compuserve.com> [Peter Brookesmith]
> Subject: UFOs An "End-Times Deception"
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>


> The Duke of Mendoza presents his compliments to the List.

> >To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> >From: "Jerome Clark" <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
> >Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFOs An "End-Times Deception"
> >Date: Sat, 04 Apr 98 11:40:08 PST


> > Date: Fri, 3 Apr 1998 21:27:33 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time)
> > From: Nick Balaskas <nikolaos@YorkU.CA>
> > To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: UFOs An "End-Times Deception"

> So much for that. Whereas, Jerome also (post cited above) wrote:

> >All I ask
> >is that you don't bring your beliefs into a secular arena where
> >logic and  evidence, not belief matters, are at issue. There is a
> >place to take up the latter, and it's not here.

> But with that I have to disagree. So much of "ufology" is
> entangled with "belief" - from extreme debunker to extreme true
> believer - that, I submit, it's impossible to draw a line between
> what is secular and what is not in this field (not excluding
> debunkers - in the Truzzian sense of the word - from this rough
> delineation).

Well, true, more or less, I guess, but also not entirely so.
"Belief" used in contexts such as the above is sometimes abused
in ufological polemic, where the real subtext is: "What I know I
know, and what you think you know you only believe." Yes, people
do hold foolish points of view (e.g., everybody who disagrees
with me), but ideally, theoretically, and sometimes even
demonstrably, ideas in ufology can be argued, and eventually
resolved, using reason and evidence. Religious matters are
another question, as any good theologian would agree. That's why
such folk talk about faith and why some regard as blasphemous the
effort to bring scientific validation to Bible or other religious
claims.

> I would say: don't exclude, or refuse admittance, anyone from the
> debate. If you have faith [sic] in rational argument then you
> have landed yourself with the duty of demonstrating its superior
> powers - *and* abiding by its inevitable limitations.

> Besides, it ain't your List already, that you should set the rules!

I wasn't setting the rules. I thought Errol does those things,
and as far as I have been led to believe, this is not a list
dealing with Bible prophecy.  If it is, let me off.

Except for these cavils, I loved your posting, Duke.

Cheers,

Jerry Clark