As a researcher who has poured over original documents, digitized copies, and explored many an archive and newspaper morgue, I have a broad understanding of the role of skepticism as it applies to the field of the unexplained.
J. Allen Hynek wrote in the early 1970's that the official stance to odd things reported was "such and such cannot happen" and therefore "it did not happen." The process of scientific exploration was sidelined.
Reviewing some past rebuttals in the historic record reveals some common behaviors.
1. Reject the Idea of anything out of the normal. This is clear when reports and news accounts are rejected and rebutted without anyone actually investigating.
2. Offer up A Substitute Explanation. It does not need to fit just throw it against the wall and see if it sticks.
3. Repeat as Needed.
In recent years, this routine has reappeared. This time the hecklers have expanded to social media, pod casts, etc.
Scenario #1- Person X shares a strange object they saw in the skies to an online social platform. Immediate responses showing the people had not read the entry in total (with mentions of directional changes, etc.). The posts - "it's a satellite"; "rolling eyes" graphic; "I knew the conspiracy nuts would show up!"
Scenario #2 - Person on Y shares a strange object and they KNOW what it was. The galactic overlords have arrived! They post an image that is clearly Starlinks, Falcon 9, etc. Yet, despite the informative posts they refuse to listen and accuse those voices of trying to silence the truth.
In many ways these are similar situations. In ech case is a lack of an open mind, willing to learn, test new ideas, and find facts.
Too much at either end of this spectrum is unhealthy to expanding human knowledge. The extremes are where the concept of "faith" or "science" takes over in oddly similar religious-like devotion. The skeptics worship a never changing science and the other extreme believes anything.
Target somewhere in the middle....
No comments:
Post a Comment