Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here UFOs | Paranormal | Area 51 People | Places | Random Top 100 | What's New Catalog | New Books 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 Our Bookstore is OPEN Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1999 -> Jul -> Here

From: Stan Friedman <fsphys@brunnet.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 20:12:53 -0300
Fwd Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 08:57:52 -0400
Subject: Re: Sheffield UFO Incident 2?


 >From: Martin Phillips <mphillips@btinternet.com>
 >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
 >Subject: Re: Sheffield UFO Incident 2?
 >Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 02:46:44 +0100

 >>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
 >>To: <updates@globalserve.net>
 >>Subject: Re: Sheffield UFO Incident 2?
 >>Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 18:27:57 +0100

 >>>Date: Sat, 24 Jul 1999 11:27:15 -0500 (CDT)
 >>>From: Brian Cuthbertson <brianc@fc.net>
 >>>To: updates@globalserve.net
 >>>Subject: Re: Sheffield UFO Incident 2?

 >>>PS.  I guess you might call me a "ufologist" instead of a
 >>>"Ufologist".  It strikes me we really do need a professional
 >>>exam for this field.  Perhaps Klass could suggest some of the
 >>>questions to go on it?

 >>In the UK right now a gang of rebels (alright, Dr Dave Clarke,
 >>Gloria Dixon - who holds the record score in the test by the way
 >>- Tim Matthews, Robert Moore, Andy Roberts and myself for now)
 >>(but we're growing!) have been discussing such issues as
 >>professionalism in UFOlogy. It is a good idea to have something
 >>to add to the self policing that we do. But finding the right
 >>balance is not easy.

 >I agree that the field needs to be more professional, and have
 >higher standards, but I don't think it will happen. I've been
 >watching this list from the sidelines for a year, and I've seen
 >slanging matches worthy of 5 year-olds in the playground.
 >usually it's the ETH people and the 'they're all American'
 >people calling each other silly names and arguing over spurious
 >'facts'. Just look at the recent debate on statistics for
 >sightings, with people quoting percentages. They're guesses, but
 >people defend them as facts. The arguments for and against ETH
 >remind me of the debates in the Reformation about what happens
 >in the Communion.

 >For the field to become more professional, there will need to be
 >some big names who will have to change their approach, and stop
 >defending positions that they hold as certainties when there is
 >no conclusive proof.


In civil matters it is a preponderance of the evidence that
matters. Why even bring up such terms as "conclusive Proof" or
"Confirmed alien contact"??.. Evidence there is aplenty.

Stanton Friedman