Released Videos From The Pentagon's First Batch Of UFO Files

[John Corbett]

There were two themes that I hammered on at the Ed Forum to howls of protest: (1) the large body of psychological and sociological studies and literature that has accumulated over the past 20 years concerning the distinct conspiracy-prone mindset, and (2) the near-exact parallels between the UFO phenomenon and the JFKA and their respective communities of researchers, hobbyists and cultists.

No less a legend in his own mind than Jim DiEugenio said that my UFO analogy was the single most irritating thing about me for him. UFO believers are all wackos, you see, while he is a serious historian (albeit one who exemplifies the conspiracy-prone mindset to the nth degree).

I happen to think the UFO phenomenon is far, far more significant than the JFKA. It has the potential to alter our understanding of our place in the universe and even of the very nature of reality. If the LN narrative is correct, the JFKA is no more significant than the McKinley assassination. If certain conspiracy theories are correct, the JFKA might tell us something about the subsequent history and current state of the country – but not much, and pretty much nothing we couldn’t have figured out without worrying about the JFKA.

Like it or not, a truly vast body evidence, scientific studies and serious theorizing concerning the UFO phenomenon has accumulated over the past 75 or so years. Much of it has little or nothing to do with “space aliens,” and serious theories are all over the map. Even versions of the ET hypothesis are far more sophisticated and plausible than "space aliens" in nuts-and-bolts craft.

As with the JFKA, most people have no awareness whatsoever of this vast body of material. They glean their minimal understanding from the mainstream media and perhaps the occasional program on the Discovery Channel or video on YouTube. They either think the UFO phenomenon, like JFKA conspiracy theorizing, is all nonsense or they have some vague notion that “there must be something to it” but they don’t really know or care what this might be.

This near-complete lack of awareness is evident on this thread. For many, the term UFO conjures up nothing but images of wacky folks who think “space aliens” are visiting the planet in motherships and saucers from Zeta Reticuli and the Pleiades.

When the vast body of UFO material is viewed in the context of the latest thinking in the areas of physics, cosmology and consciousness, it becomes fascinating. Some of the more sophisticated UFO theories no longer seem nearly as far “out there” as they once did. As we see on this thread, however, most people have no clue. It’s all just “space aliens.”

As with the JFKA and every other area of weirdness and religion, the UFO community is absolutely plagued with hoaxsters, fraudsters, fast-buck artists, nutcase cultists, and folks deep in the grip of the conspiracy-prone mindset or even genuine mental illness. Indeed, in my opinion based on long experience and observation both the UFO and JFKA communities are dominated by these characters. (Don't come unglued, CTers. I'm talking about the LN side as well.) One has to work to find the serious and worthy-of-consideration aspect of either subject and separate the wheat from the chaff.

With the CTs, its all chaff and no wheat. None of them can provide any evidence to support the proposition that anyone other than Oswald were complicit in the crime.

Since I have studied the UFO phenomenon far less than the JFK assassination, I'm willing to be a bit more open minded but I remain unconvinced that there isn't a very mundane explanation for them. For the UFO buffs, I remain unconvinced there is any wheat and that it too isn't all chaff.

[John Corbett]

Deleted

[Jack Nessan]

To me these accounts are in the same category as crop circles which for a while confounded people including some in the scientific community until somebody showed how easy it was to create these circles with boards tether to a rope attached to a center point. I don't hear much about crop circles any more. Once the trick was revealed, the explanation was far more mundane than what had been speculated.

But yet you can embrace the idea that there was shot at Z152 with zero evidence there ever was one. An early missed shot is nothing but a fantasy. If that is how you feel about UFO sightings then I understand.

[Lance Payette]

I'll make the same challenge to you that I have made numerous times to the CT community over the past several decades. I have challenged them to provide an alternative explanation of the assassination and their supporting evidence. Few even tried and the few who did were easily shot down. If you think these UFO sightings have a "non-mundane" explanation, tell us what you think that explanation is and what your supporting evidence is. Until somebody can do that, I will continue to believe these sightings have a mundane explanation even if we don't yet know what that explanation is.

I thought I had made clear that I do not have "an explanation" for the UFO phenomenon. I am well-informed about essentially all of the evidence and all of the theories. The phenomenon as a whole does not mesh with our present undersgtanding of reality; hence my characterization of it as "non-mundane" and "extraordinary." There are hypotheses that, to me, fit the phenomenon as a whole better than do others such as the "space aliens" hypothesis. Those hypotheses generally involve interactions with other dimensions or levels of reality, and my views are informed by my pretty considerable studies of physics, cosmology and consciousness. I could entertain the possibility that the entire phenomenon is generated by a single unimaginably advanced alien culture for some purpose known only to it and that it is essentially a staged phenomenon that gives the appearance to us (in Arthur C. Clarke's phrase) of "magic."

I don't believe that either I or a JFKA CTer is obligated to respond to your challenges. You don't have sufficient interest in the subject to have even minimally informed yourself, so why should I attempt to summarize my 60+ years of involvement in the field? What do I care what you think about UFOs or my understanding of them?

I have L-O-N-G experience engaging with the curious species of atheist who haunts religion forums. Your posts are very similar. The atheists have no clue what they are talking about when it comes to theology and do not haunt the forums for the purpose of genuine discussion, Their tactic, which becomes quite tedious, is to issue endless "challenges" and then announce that believers' "evidence" is neither "extraordinary" nor even credible and they remain wholly unconvinced even though (they claim) they are open-minded and would be receptive if only the silly, delusional believers had anything at all resembling real evidence.

When it comes to the JFKA, some conspiracy theories are "easily shot down" by the standards of any reasonable person. Others, not so easily. And there are aspects of the LN narrative that are problematical and troubling. Those for whom the LN narrative seems to have achieved the status of some sort of religion are in many ways more puzzling to me than any CTer. Conspiracies are, at least, kind of intriguing and fun to kick around. If I were 100% convinced the LN narrative were true and there was nothing to talk about, I'm not sure why I would care anything about defending it on a forum such as this. This again is reminiscent of the internet atheists - they purport to regard religion as utter silliness and practically a mental illness, yet they spend vast amounts of time attacking and discussing it and railing against a deity they supposedly think is a complete fiction. Weird.

[John Corbett]

But yet you can embrace the idea that there was shot at Z152 with zero evidence there ever was one. An early missed shot is nothing but a fantasy. If that is how you feel about UFO sightings then I understand.

There is evidence of an early shot although I admit it is not conclusive evidence, which is Zapruder's camera shake at Z155 which would be indicative of a shot fired at Z147-148. The reason that it is not conclusive evidence is that there are other things that could have caused that shake. Coupled with the reactions of JBC and Rosemary Willis less than a full second later, it is probative if not conclusive. We see similar camera shakes following shots we know were fired at Z227 and Z318.

[Lance Payette]

But yet you can embrace the idea that there was shot at Z152 with zero evidence there ever was one. An early missed shot is nothing but a fantasy. If that is how you feel about UFO sightings then I understand.

As Jack knows, I found Phantom Shot be pretty compelling and persuasive. It eliminates a number of problems. It's curious that most LNers cling so tenaciously to the three-shot scenario while having such incredibly diverse notions as to when the first shot was fired and why it missed. Just intuitively, two shots that nailed JFK squarely in the back and head and one that missed all of downtown Dallas seems problematical.

[John Corbett]

As Jack knows, I found Phantom Shot be pretty compelling and persuasive. It eliminates a number of problems. It's curious that most LNers cling so tenaciously to the three-shot scenario while having such incredibly diverse notions as to when the first shot was fired and why it missed. Just intuitively, two shots that nailed JFK squarely in the back and head and one that missed all of downtown Dallas seems problematical.

It's hardly surprising that LNs have diverse opinions on when the first shot was fired since the Z-film gives us no definitive clues. A case can be made for shots at various points prior to JBC turning in reaction to hearing the first shot. It comes down to how one chooses to weigh those clues.