# Do you think linking UFOs with the paranormal is healthy for either discussion? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 14, 2013, 8:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976 "2013-06-14T08:16:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/81 "2013-06-14T17:16:40Z")
> [@RadioActiveRich](#): > > Somebody who LOSES credibility, is scorned, and who risks not only their security clearance, but their reputation is not gaining anything. Again, you’re excluding the attention they can get from these claims, to say nothing of potentially making money. That’s a very significant motivation for many people. But even if we leave out those factors, that would only speak to whether or not these people believe what they’re saying - not whether what they’re saying is actually true. There is a huge difference. > [@](#): > > But four witnesses make it less likely that it was a hallucination, imagined, or made up. History says otherwise. Mass hysteria and delusions are not all that rare. And that doesn’t address plain old _being wrong_. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/82 "2013-06-14T17:18:45Z")
> [@RadioActiveRich](#): > > You are incorrect. Again. Why is it okay for you to leap to conclusions and assume, but I cannot state a simple fact and have it taken at face value? > > Can you prove these people are lying, mistaken, or imagining things? > > What’s wrong with having the discussion in an intelligent and scientific format? > > And as I said before nobody that I’ve talked to asked for money or man power. They simply investigate as any scientist would in search of the truth. Sure there are profiteers in any field, including mainstream science, but that’s not really the point now is it? The only fact you’ve got is that some people saw something they couldn’t identify. Congratulations! That is something that happens to almost everybody on Earth almost every day of their lives. I have no intention of attempting to prove that people lie, imagine or make mistakes because we all know that people lie, imagine and make mistakes already and it would take forever to do so when you could keep throwing examples at us until the cows come home. BTW, any proper study would _have_ to take much money and manpower(it’s been done many times in the past…with no positive result), so I don’t know how your “scientists” plan on studying this supposed phenomena. ---
**Author:** ![RadioActiveRich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/df788c/32.png) [@RadioActiveRich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RadioActiveRich)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/83 "2013-06-14T17:24:17Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > The only fact you’ve got is that some people saw something they couldn’t identify. Congratulations! That is something that happens to almost everybody on Earth almost every day of their lives. I have no intention of attempting to prove that people lie, imagine or make mistakes because we all know that people lie, imagine and make mistakes already and it would take forever to do so when you could keep throwing examples at us until the cows come home. BTW, any proper study would _have_ to take much money and manpower(it’s been done many times in the past…with no positive result), so I don’t know how your “scientists” plan on studying this supposed phenomena. Okay, so now you cite a fact for once. What study used mass amounts of money and manpower to study even one case? Where is this mass expenditure? And what is the name of the UFOlogist that linked UFOs to the paranormal? You don’t have to believe. Hell I don’t believe most of what’s out there. And the rest is mostly questions, but you keep demanding facts yet you don’t offer any to back up your statements. Except for the University of Colorado study (which did validate at least one piece of photographic evidence) what study has anyone actually paid for? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/84 "2013-06-14T17:25:19Z")
> [@RadioActiveRich](#): > > Read the rest of their testimony. Three of the guards approached a landed craft. One touched it while the other drew pictures of the symbols on it. Not one of them agrees that the lighthouse claim is true. > > Once again - I am not saying I believe everything. I am skeptical by nature, but I can’t just call these men liars because I don’t want to believe. Read the _whole_ testimony, not just the parts you think support your thinking…then read [what the author of that article says about UFOs in general.](http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/ufoindex.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/85 "2013-06-14T17:26:52Z")
> [@radioactiverich](#): > > okay, so now you cite a fact for once. What study used mass amounts of money and manpower to study even one case? Where is this mass expenditure? > > And what is the name of the ufologist that linked ufos to the paranormal? > > You don’t have to believe. Hell i don’t believe most of what’s out there. And the rest is mostly questions, but you keep demanding facts yet you don’t offer any to back up your statements. Except for the university of colorado study (which did validate at least one piece of photographic evidence) what study as anyone actually paid for? _ **Define ufolgist, please** _. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/86 "2013-06-14T17:27:04Z")
> [@RadioActiveRich](#): > > Can you prove these people are lying, mistaken, or imagining things? I don’t have to prove it, they are the ones suggesting they’ve seen alien visitations. If they’re not suggesting that, they’ve done exactly what Czarcasm said, they saw something they couldn’t recognize, which is so irrelevant an event it barely warrants telling the wife when you get home. OTOH, I already know the REAL answer anyway, a wizard did it. Go ahead and prove me wrong. ---
**Author:** ![RadioActiveRich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/df788c/32.png) [@RadioActiveRich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RadioActiveRich)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/87 "2013-06-14T17:31:13Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Again, you’re excluding the attention they can get from these claims, to say nothing of potentially making money. That’s a very significant motivation for many people. I am not excluding that, but you are assuming that attention is wanted or positive and in many of these cases it’s the opposite. It’s difficult if you haven’t read these people’s accounts or watched their interviews. You are making generalizations, which as with most generalizations are generally true, but I am not talking about the 99 out of 100. I am talking about the 1 out of 100. > [@Marley23](#): > > History says otherwise. Mass hysteria and delusions are not all that rare. And that doesn’t address plain old _being wrong_. And you don’t think that mass hysteria among dozens, to hundreds, to thousands of people at a time is worth a serious look? I never discounted hysteria, drugs, hallucinations, or anything that is more plausible than aliens. I consider those things more likely, but why dismiss those cases? Why not prove them? That stuff could still be proven a hell of a lot easier than aliens landing. I am not arguing for any conclusion. Just that the facts be considered more seriously that ghosts and goblins. ---
**Author:** ![RadioActiveRich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/df788c/32.png) [@RadioActiveRich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RadioActiveRich)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/88 "2013-06-14T17:33:06Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > I don’t have to prove it, they are the ones suggesting they’ve seen alien visitations. If they’re not suggesting that, they’ve done exactly what Czarcasm said, they saw something they couldn’t recognize, which is so irrelevant an event it barely warrants telling the wife when you get home. > > OTOH, I already know the REAL answer anyway, a wizard did it. > > Go ahead and prove me wrong. Actually almost none of these people claim to have seen aliens. Almost none of them draw a conclusion at all unless pressed to. They simply report facts that are, on their face, worth investigation. And that’s all I am advocating. ---
**Author:** ![eburacum45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eburacum45/32/8690_2.png) [@eburacum45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eburacum45)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/89 "2013-06-14T17:34:01Z")
Radioactive Rich is right (to an extent) about the age of the universe, and the likelihood that any other alien civilisation will be much older than us. There are three possibilities; 1/ an alien civilisation is much older than humanity 2/an alien civilisation is within a few thousand years of the same age as humanity and 3/ there are no alien civilisations yet. If there are any alien civilisations at all, 1/ is much more likely than 2/; this should be mathematically obvious. There have been Sun-like stars with planets for many, many billions of years, and many of these are older than the Earth. Why would civilisations be limited to emerging within the last 10,000 years, less than a millonth of the age of the Universe? If we are the first civilisation in our section of the observable universe, then 3 applies. It is not possible to assign reliable probabilities to either 1/ or 3/, given the current state of knowledge, but the probablity of option 2/ is vanishingly small. This is all part of the Fermi Paradox, which should be familiar to many of you. Admittedly the possibility that UFOs are alien spacecraft is one possible solution to the Paradox (the Zoo Hypothesis) - there are many, many others. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/90 "2013-06-14T17:35:56Z")
Are UFOs in any way interesting if they are _not_ alien? If they’re experimental Air Force planes I don’t see the big deal. I would just assume the government and defense companies are testing new aircraft and I wouldn’t assume they would tell me about all of that - and I don’t really care if they do. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/91 "2013-06-14T17:38:31Z")
> [@RadioActiveRich](#): > > Actually almost none of these people claim to have seen aliens. Almost none of them draw a conclusion at all unless pressed to. They simply report facts that are, on their face, worth investigation. And that’s all I am advocating. Does every single incident need to be investigated, or can we stop after a certain number and say “You know-we’re not really getting anything new here. Why don’t we spend our time doing the things that need to be done until a piece of real evidence pops up for us to study?” ---
**Author:** ![RadioActiveRich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/df788c/32.png) [@RadioActiveRich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RadioActiveRich)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/92 "2013-06-14T17:39:11Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > _ **Define ufolgist, please** _. An individual with a degree in a scientific discipline dedicated to the study of UFOs and the UFO phenomena and who has been published on the subject including scholarly work that has been subjected to peer review. You want a list of UFOlogists in North America? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/93 "2013-06-14T17:40:01Z")
> [@RadioActiveRich](#): > > I am not excluding that, but you are assuming that attention is wanted or positive and in many of these cases it’s the opposite. That doesn’t really matter. Attention is attention, and I think plenty of people are willing to risk a lot of negative attention for a little positive attention. > [@](#): > > I am talking about the 1 out of 100. I’m not seeing the difference between the 1 and the 99. > [@](#): > > And you don’t think that mass hysteria among dozens, to hundreds, to thousands of people at a time is worth a serious look? Not especially. Do you realize people still occasionally get killed for being witches? > [@](#): > > why dismiss those cases? Why not prove them? The proof should come from the people making the claim, especially if the claim runs contrary to what we see everyday. If you think UFOs are significant somehow - alien visitations or whatever it is - prove it. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/94 "2013-06-14T17:41:12Z")
> [@RadioActiveRich](#): > > They simply report facts that are, on their face, worth investigation. And that’s all I am advocating. Why should anybody put any effort into uncovering the perfectly mundane items misidentified by these people? ---
**Author:** ![RadioActiveRich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/df788c/32.png) [@RadioActiveRich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RadioActiveRich)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/95 "2013-06-14T17:41:58Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Does every single incident need to be investigated, or can we stop after a certain number and say “You know-we’re not really getting anything new here. Why don’t we spend our time doing the things that need to be done until a piece of real evidence pops up for us to study?” Yes, if a dozen people with their fingers on the trigger of nuclear weapons are claiming to see UFOs, it needs to be investigated. If two security teams responsible for guarding aircraft armed with nuclear weapons are running around chasing a lighthouse, it needs to be investigated. If a Presidential candidate says in private that his first two directives upon reaching the White House are to find out who killed JFK and where the aliens are being kept, I think he should be looked at a little (true story btw - wanna guess which President?) I think there is a standard, but when security is clearly an issue we should investigate. Yes. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/96 "2013-06-14T17:43:22Z")
> [@RadioActiveRich](#): > > An individual with a degree in a scientific discipline dedicated to the study of UFOs and the UFO phenomena and who has been published on the subject including scholarly work that has been subjected to peer review. > > You want a list of UFOlogists in North America? 1. Where does one get an accredited degree in Ufology? 2. What peer-reviewed scientific journal covers Ufology? ---
**Author:** ![eburacum45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eburacum45/32/8690_2.png) [@eburacum45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eburacum45)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/97 "2013-06-14T17:43:33Z")
> [@RadioActiveRich](#): > > Read the rest of their testimony. Three of the guards approached a landed craft. One touched it while the other drew pictures of the symbols on it. . Nope; that didn’t happen. The one who claims to have touched it is also the one who drew the pictures. Penniston however did not get any closer than 50 metres (160 feet) from whatever was causing the phenomenon, according to his statement made a few days later. Here is his statement; [![](http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/Penniston1.PNG) ](http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/Penniston1.PNG) > [@](#): > > When we got with in (sic) a 50 metre distance. The object was producing red and bl ue light. … This is the closes (sic) point that I was near the objet (sic) it (sic) at any point. If Penniston touched it from 164 feet away, he must have very long arms. ---
**Author:** ![RadioActiveRich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/df788c/32.png) [@RadioActiveRich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RadioActiveRich)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/98 "2013-06-14T17:46:14Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I’m not seeing the difference between the 1 and the 99. How could you? You never looked. > [@Marley23](#): > > Not especially. Do you realize people still occasionally get killed for being witches? No I didn’t know that, but if they’re being murdered for any reason they deserve an investigation. > [@Marley23](#): > > The proof should come from the people making the claim, especially if the claim runs contrary to what we see everyday. If you think UFOs are significant somehow - alien visitations or whatever it is - prove it. You’re not getting it. Investigations shouldn’t begin with a claim as to what the investigation will conclude. That’s not at all credible. And most of these sightings (the ones I listed) these people didn’t offer conclusions except to say that they believed there was a security issue along with details of their encounters. That IS their job. But the conversation by the willing should be able to take place without being cluttered by nonsense. What about that do you find unreasonable? ---
**Author:** ![RadioActiveRich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/df788c/32.png) [@RadioActiveRich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RadioActiveRich)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/99 "2013-06-14T17:49:56Z")
> [@eburacum45](#): > > Nope; that didn’t happen. The one who claims to have touched it is also the one who drew the pictures. Penniston however did not get any closer than 50 metres (160 feet) from whatever was causing the phenomenon, according to his statement made a few days later. > Here is his statement; > [http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/Penniston1.PNG](http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/Penniston1.PNG) > If Penniston touched it from 164 feet away, he must have very long arms. There were three guards at the craft itself. Yes others kept their distance. And you are correct the guard that touched it was the one who took notes and drew pictures. Also, there were radar reports of the object (actually two objects) at the time of the sighting. The one contravening piece of evidence was a guard tower not too far away that didn’t report anything. That has never been explained. Still you have more than a dozen guards responsible for the security of nuclear weapons who claimed to have seen something pretty bizarre. You don’t find it curious that none of those guards were ever reassigned or pulled from active duty? Forget the space ship thing - just answer why nothing on the base changed given how bizarre their stories are up to this day. ---
**Author:** ![eburacum45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eburacum45/32/8690_2.png) [@eburacum45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eburacum45)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2013, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976/100 "2013-06-14T17:52:47Z")
As far as Penniston’s red and blue light is concerned, there is a (semi-humorous) explanation, that may well be correct; _tractor beams_. see [http://www.forteantimes.com/features/articles/257/rendlesham\_revelations.html](http://www.forteantimes.com/features/articles/257/rendlesham_revelations.html) > [@](#): > > “I was living off base at the time in a small town called Darsham, near Saxmundham, Suffolk. My room mate and I were on a small country road and as we came round a curve there was a small triangular object, about eight feet (2.4m) in height, stopped in middle of the road. This object had a small flashing orange beacon on top and bright white lights emanating from it at various points." > > “Our immediate thought was that it was a UFO, but it turned out to be a very small farm tractor. The top width was shorter than the bottom width and the two sides slightly angled up toward the top. This shape was actually the operator’s compartment. However, viewing this at night when the white lights were on created an initial impression of a ‘triangle’. It wasn’t until the operator extinguished some of the lights and moved off the road that we realized it was a tractor.” The thing about a UFO is that it is unidentified until you identify it; if you never make that identification, the strangeness of the sighting multiplies in your mind over time until you remember things that never happened. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-you-think-linking-ufos-with-the-paranormal-is-healthy-for-either-discussion/660976.md?page=6)