“A doubt that doubted everything would not be a doubt”; “A
doubt without an end is not even a doubt.” [Wittgenstein, On Certainty, 1969,
from The Classical Tradition, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press,
Cambridge, MA and London, 2010, Page 892]
I’ve been at this long enough to have some thoughts on the
inner workings of the skeptical mind that intrudes on my pages and also a few
other pages [Kevin Randle’s, Above Top Secret, et al.].
CDA [U.K. resident Christopher Allan, who has been at this
as long as I have and maybe more].
CDA, down deep, believes something odd happened at Roswell
and proceeds to press the matter with skeptical asides, hoping that someone,
sometime will provide proof of an extraterrestrial connection to the Roswell
CDA is open to an ET explanation, even while seeming to
eschew the idea of an ET explanation.
There are sympathetic musings all over his commentary, but
he hasn’t seen anything that confirms for him what he believed in his youth and
still believes, hesitatingly, today: a flying disk crashed near Roswell, but
the fact of it has been submerged for a myriad of reasons, none of those
reasons clear to CDA or anyone else.
This is where his skepticism resides: in the idea that no
one could cover up such a monumental event, for such a long period s sixty years
Yet, he thinks that something uncanny and flying saucer
related happened near Roswell in 1947, yet he will protest this thought process
I’m thrusting upon him.
But read his energetic comments about Roswell and many other
early flying saucer accounts and you can only conclude that he, at one time,
believed the phenomenon to be ET-related, only to be flummoxed by the seemingly
fraudulent activities and accoutrements to the topic by George Adamski and
especially Cedric Allingham, CDA’s fellow countryman whom he unmasked as
astronomer Patrick Moore creating a hoax:
“[The] unravelling the mystery came in 1986 as a result of
research by Christopher Allan and Steuart Campbell which they revealed in the
skeptical Fortean journal Magonia.
In Flying Saucer from Moore's?, they argued that the prose
of Allingham's book showed significant similarities to the writing of the
famous astronomer Patrick Moore.” [Wikipedia]
Today CDA presses the issue that Stanton Friedman
unconsciously (or purposefully) coached Roswell citizens in the late 1970s in
the ET proposition for the Roswell incident (with which I am in agreement).
So, CDA’s skepticism is rooted in the prevarications about
flying saucers, not that they don’t exist or that nothing odd happened at
He thinks something happened at Roswell, and I get the
impression that the happening he thinks occurred was more ET oriented than
anything else but no one can prove it, not even the prolific ET-biased David
And thus CDA is skeptical in facile terms.
The other skeptic that sometimes visits here is Lance Moody.
Lance is not a UFO doubter by a long shot, he just thinks
that the hooey presented for an ET presence to explain such episodes as
Roswell, the Trent/McMinnville saucer photo, et cetera are too skimpy to
provide proof of anything.
Lance dislikes chicanery and is noted for exposing Philip
Imbrogno’s education credentials plus the embarrassing Kodachrome slides mummy
Lance isn’t a radical skeptic, but he is a forceful opponent
of nonsense and attempted trickery when UFO event explanations are fulsome,
often taking to task David Rudiak’s excessive circumlocutions to explain
Roswell and other noted UFO cases.
(Then there are Robert Sheaffer and Tim Printy, about whom I
will not say much, except to note that they both take on classic UFO reports or
sightings in an exact way, Sheaffer the more thorough of the two.)
Zoam Chomsky [The Iron Skeptic] is from the atheist school
of skepticism, proselytizing against UFOs as if they do not exist at all, but,
seeming, to me, to believe, in his heart of hearts, they do.
(Only the fool says, in his heart “there is no God.” Psalms)
Zoam is too energetic in his UFO denial. He wants to crush
out a deep-rooted belief that caused him grief in his younger days, it seems to
(The psychoanalytic pursuit of his qualms must be for
The only real, objective skeptic I’m familiar with is French
psychologist Gilles Fernandez.
Gilles is fervent in his skepticism, resorting to massive
“evidence” that refutes classic UFO sightings of the past and today, such as
the 1896 Airship sightings or those damnable mummy slides that caused havoc and
strife for many of us.
My only problem with Gilles’ skeptical approach, if I have
any problem at all, is how he musters all counter arguments against a UFO
event, everything, including a kitchen sink.
He sometimes piles upon legitimate refutations accreted
nonsense, like his Venus explanation for some of those late 1800 airship
reports, overlooking the obvious journalistic tomfoolery that generated many of
the reported sightings.
In his zeal to condemn anti-scientific thinking, he gathers
debunking material that is extraneous to his arguments, and unnecessary.
But that said, he doesn’t seem to have a deep-rooted,
hidden, unconscious belief that UFOs or airships or flying saucers might be
extraterrestrial, as CDA does or maybe Lance (or even me).
Gilles is a bona fide skeptic.
Well, that's how I see it. Now let the denials spring forth.