From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 08:29:23 -0400 Fwd Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 23:52:35 -0500 Subject: Re: SETI Scientists Petitioning The White House >From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com> >Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1998 17:55:26 +0000 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net> >Subject: SETI Scientists Petitioning The White House >>From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net> >>Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1998 15:10:54 -0400 >>Fwd Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1998 15:14:38 -0500 >>Subject: Re: SETI Scientists Petitioning The White House >Previously, Serge Salvaille wrote: >>>>In my opinion SETI is a $100-million adventure based on a 1950 >>>>cheap b-zone sci-fi hypothesis. SETI got 30 years of research >>>>and came out empty-handed. The funny part is that its promoters >>>>still have credibility. Most scientists and researchers in the >>>>FOIA adventure on UFOs came out with their hands full but with >>>>_no_ credibility. >> >Doc Barry chimed in with: >>>I agree with Serge. SETI is a joke, a waste of time, money, and >>>talent, period. == Doc Barr >Stan's response: >>Right on. SETI really stands for Silly Effort To Investigate. >>The SETI cultists assume radio is the ultimate in communication, >>even though any study of technological progress indicates that >>progress comes from doing things differently in an unpredictable >>way. The future is NOT an extrapolation of the past. >Stan, I respect your research efforts and feel that you've >brought alot to the ufology scene. But I have to disagree with >you on this. >I believe that SETI has great potential and should receive >funding to continue its efforts; it does no harm to listen or >try to communicate with whatever is "out there". I also agree >that terrestrial based UFO research should get funding as well, >if not more. The fact that it doesn't isn't the fault of SETI or >its member or supporters. And let's face it, SETI isn't getting >THAT much funding for its 30 year effort and you know it; though >compared to the squat resources allocated for terrestrial UFO >visitation research, it is a fortune. >As for your claim that SETI advocates "assume radio is the >ultimate in communcation"; sorry, but you are just plain wrong. >RF is simply the tool at hand. We either use it or we remain >mute. Personally, I see no harm in trying to say hello to our >neighbors, whether they be far away on another planet or close >by in a space craft. If they are advanced enough, they will >recognize our primative attempts using RF and will reciprocate >if they are interested. Perhaps they will use RF at first, then >teach us something more sophisticated. It's simple, it's logical >and it's the path of least resistance for both humans and ETs. >>For those who are upset by my use of the word cult, consider the >>attributes of a cult: Charismatic leadership (Sagan, Tartar, >>Drake etc); Strong dogma ( life out there using radio to try to >>connect with us; no colonization, no migration, no other means >>of communication, NO VISITS to Earth), and certainly a strong >>resistance to contrary views. >Right, Stan, and every portly gentleman with a white beard is >Santa. >Please, in this day and age, if it walks like a duck and quacks >like a duck it only means that it has the basic characteristics >of a duck and nothing more. SETI has had some high profiled >advocates with questionable agendas but that means nothing; so >has Ufology. If it meant anything at all, then the peole of the >Soviet Union must be as stupid as their high profile leaders and >we Americans must all think like the President, since he >represents us publicly. >Get my point? >>Almost all SETI Cultists strongly attack ufology though they >>never reference the scientific work, but rather focus on tabloid >>nonsense. >>Sagan's most cited source about UFOs, in 'Demon Haunted World', >>is the tabloid 'Weekly World News'. He doesn't mention the >>Congressional Hearings of l968, nor the AAAS Sessions of l969, >>though he participated in both and Edited the Conference >>Proceedings for the latter. >"Almost all SETI Cultists..."? >Based on what research, Stan? What cross section of SETI >advocates did you poll to come up with that statement? More to >the point, though I support SETI, I'd hardly consider myself a >"cultist" as I, and all other SETI supporters I know, ALSO >believe in the existence of UFO visitations and feel such events >should be studied. >In fact, I find your use of the word "cultists" somewhat >disturbing since it promotes an atmosphere of "us against them". >Isn't that what we are all trying to avoid? Look back in your >own culture and examine the effect that categorizing has on a >given society scrambling for limited resources. Such name >calling and stereotyping accomplishes nothing but division and >competition for status within a group. >In fact, if SETI is such a monumental waste of time, then why >bitch about it so much; it should be no threat to Ufology. On >the contrary, SETI steals nothing from UFOlogy and, if >successful, could be the catalyst for the release of tons of UFO >information now considered classified. Isn't that what you, I, >and every other Ufologist wants? >Or is there fear that SETI might be successful in making contact >first or, at least, getting the credit? >If this is what everything comes down to, "getting the credit", >then we should all hang our heads in shame. In the study of UFOs >and extraterrestrial intelligence, egos and pettiness should be >checked at the door, guys. >How about it, Stan? Isn't there room for everyone, regardless of >their methods? Shouldn't the term "cultists" be avoided since >you really can't back up the claim that every SETI supporter >feels as you say they do? >I understand the frustration regarding the imbalance of funding >for SETI and Ufology, but name calling or cancellation of SETI >won't change a damn thing and certainly won't provide Ufology >with the respect it so desperately wants and deserves. >Tolerance is a fundable requirement for any communication with >other beings. >And I ain't talking 'bout ETs.... >Roger Evans, >Houston, Texas Roger, I am convinced that one of the reasons that ufology is so poorly treated by mainstream media and some of the scientific community is the constant refrain of disdain from Drake, Tartar, Sagan etc. Last I heard we were dealing here with SETI not CETI (C for Communication). We have astronomers not only trashing the possibility of interstellar travel (about which they know nothing) but telling us how aliens would behave, about which they know even less. My 1973 paper "Ufology and Search for ET Intelligent Life" delves in detail into the SETI Community not just the big names. Carl Sagan in his October, l994,Scientific American article about SETI even defines it as ".. an attempt to use large radio telescopes, sophisticated receivers, and modern data analysis to detect hypothetical signals sent our way by advanced civilizations on planets around other stars". No room for visitors here. It is not the money I object to, since it is indeed peanuts. It is the attitude from on high. The Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion program I worked on in the late 1950s for GE was spending 100,000,000 per year and employed 3500 people of whom 1100 were engineers and scientists. I know many people with a strong interest in UFOs who follow the SETI Literature. I know very few SETI Specialists (cultists is indeed derogatory, even if deserved) who follow either the UFO literature or the interstellar travel literature, or the national security issues.Of course I am equally derogatory about UFO cultists. One problem that comes up all the time in my travels is that people automatically assume that the 2 questions "Is anybody out there?" and "Is anybody coming here?" are the same. They are not SETI Specialists answer "Yes" to the first and "NO!" to the second. Serious ufologists say "Yes." to both. Somebody has to stand up and say The Emperor isn't wearing any clothes. Stan Friedman
UFO UpDates - Toronto -
updates@globalserve.net
Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp - ++ 416-696-0304
A Hand-Operated E-Mail Subscription Service for the Study of UFO Related
Phenomena.
To subscribe please send your first and last name to
updates@globalserve.net
Message submissions should be sent to the same address.
|
Link it to the appropriate Ufologist or UFO Topic page. |
Archived as a public service by Area 51 Research Center which is not
responsible for content.
Financial support for this web server is provided by the
Research Center Catalog.
Software by Glenn Campbell.
Technical contact:
webmaster@ufomind.com