tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1485997200234349788.post6020166909365050312..comments2024-03-07T12:48:21.070+00:00Comments on MAGONIA REVIEW: JIM MOSELEY 1931 -2012Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1485997200234349788.post-79320120683777685252013-08-03T00:43:50.202+01:002013-08-03T00:43:50.202+01:00@Ross
> I'm sure T the C would reject and r...@Ross<br />> I'm sure T the C would reject and ridicule nearly every one of the many views that Moseley held<br /><br />I don't have to agree with someone to respect them. Can you say the same?Terry the Censorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13361088223337740598noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1485997200234349788.post-37748892040671639132013-03-02T05:29:16.366+00:002013-03-02T05:29:16.366+00:00sad to hear the passage of Jim Moseley...I enjoyed...sad to hear the passage of Jim Moseley...I enjoyed catching the saucer smears out there...I named a character and a space ship the saucer smear with his blessings for my film, misadventures in space, I think he liked it, and that humor is best thing about saucer smear...and probably the big reason he sometimes rankled 'serious' UFO hunters...RIP commander!Purple mage 7https://www.blogger.com/profile/02124548440515106859noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1485997200234349788.post-39258732388626457542012-11-27T06:56:17.951+00:002012-11-27T06:56:17.951+00:00Could we put "the Trickster" to bed? It&...Could we put "the Trickster" to bed? It's become such a tired cliche.<br /><br />There's a roundtable discussion of Moseley, the man and the ufologist, over at The Paracast (www.theparacast.com). The show is dated November 25, 2012. Warning: Jerome Clark is one of the participants. DANGER! DANGER! Rossnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1485997200234349788.post-45652165599192286052012-11-27T04:42:18.391+00:002012-11-27T04:42:18.391+00:00Thank you John for such a good article on Jim. He...Thank you John for such a good article on Jim. He was a good friend and I liked his attitude. He was indeed very interested in UFOs, and simply admitted to not knowing what they really were. I discussed several phenomena explanations with him and he was open minded as ever. He just didn't get bent out of shape over things, which seemed to annoy people. He seemed to like everybody, and that annoyed many as well. <br /><br />He really will be missed and was the last of the first saucer enthusiasts. Too bad he didn't like the internet though. There were always materials I wanted to send him but had to print it up and mail it, so I didn't do as much of it as I should have. His decision to not be online did keep him out of the comments that are made by so many and may have contributed to his being a friendly spirit. <br /><br />Thanks again John. <br /><br />Randel in TexasRandel Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10649871674605641915noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1485997200234349788.post-90604999124356128072012-11-26T21:45:34.002+00:002012-11-26T21:45:34.002+00:00How amusing and fitting that the comments to a tri...How amusing and fitting that the comments to a tribute to the one and only Jim Moseley go off-track and veer into the bitter Keel-Clark feud. <br /><br />If anything Moseley did get closer to the truth than anybody because of his and his rag Saucer Smear's irreverance, humour and gossip. Moseley knew the subject of ufology was far too important to take seriously. Perhaps not always consciously, yet most definitely Moseley's own participation, contributions and commentary on ufology put the Trickster at the centre of the phenomenon, and dare I say that it is. Of course this begs more questions than it answers, yet that is just the way it is...<br /><br />ahtzib, I myself agree with you and think Clark's rude and condescending dismissals of Keel on the paracast recently do not reflect well on Clark at all. Simply shameful ad hominems from Clark who still holds old grudges, he can't put it all behind him. A pity. Well who needs reminding of his outrageous commentary directed George Hansen's way? And as some of you know, I have defended Clark at Rich Reynold's blog not too long ago. I won't be doing that again. <br /><br />Anyhow this respectful obituary on Moseley from Rimmer is one of the best I have read. It is truly the passing of an era. I miss Moseley already.<br /><br />Funny story that only those of us seriously interested in ufology can appreciate: I was on the phone the other day to my cousin, who like all regular folk doesn't know anything much about ufology at all, and he remarked, 'did you see who just died?'. And I was about to blurt out in response, without thinking, 'yes Jim Moseley' when my cousin simply remarked, 'Larry Hagman/JR'. A reminder that us ufology freaks don't have the same mundane concerns or interests as the rest of the population, even if we often can't stand one another!Lawrencehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04531198239870181089noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1485997200234349788.post-87865548023284042512012-11-25T04:45:55.415+00:002012-11-25T04:45:55.415+00:00Clark's critical comments about Moseley's ...Clark's critical comments about Moseley's supposed intellectual inactivity with respect to UFOs were not made after Moseley's death. Also, Moseley (in a Paracast interview) agreed with some of Clark's comments about him.<br /><br />Clark made no "vicious" comments about Keel after his death. He simply said, in agreement with some of the the others in the roundtable, that Keel could be a very unpleasant and even "paranoid" individual. No one who has read Keel's books should be surprised at Keel being described as paranoid by those who personally knew him. I didn't detect any vitriol in Clark's voice when he spoke of Keel. <br /><br />By the way, what's all the Clark-bashing about at this website? Is acceptance of the ETH a mortal sin in Magonia? (Well, rejection of the ETH does set one apart from the unwashed masses.) Is Keel's UTH (ultra-terrestrial hypothesis) somehow preferable? Rossnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1485997200234349788.post-72607400133255764382012-11-24T22:45:18.985+00:002012-11-24T22:45:18.985+00:00I'd say Clark's words would be a surprise,...I'd say Clark's words would be a surprise, but after his vicious comments about John Keel in the Paracast roundtable held in Keel's honor, I can't say I'm shocked. It seems particularly ironic considering that Clark has written a fair amount about contactees himself. <br /><br />I'd suggest, though that this is not the most ufology-damning part of Moseley's record (be it Saucer Smear or Shockingly). It's instead the window it opens on how the sausage of ufology has been made, how the myths were made by the likes of Barker, how any number of grifters have bummed around the edges of the field, and how the careers of esteemed UFO elders today can be traced not back to groundbreaking research into the topic, but to their being available to give entertaining lectures at corporate events. <br /><br />That's the kind of history Smear is all about, and it's not the one anyone involved in UFOs except social scientists wants to hear. IIRC, Moseley's partial successor is in fact an anthropologist, which is entirely fitting.ahtzibhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03577845276318742985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1485997200234349788.post-26246960957065685792012-11-24T04:40:40.552+00:002012-11-24T04:40:40.552+00:00I find it surprising that Terry the Censor would a...I find it surprising that Terry the Censor would applaud Moseley for having an open mind, since I'm sure T the C would reject and ridicule nearly every one of the many views that Moseley held about UFOs through the years.Rosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07359114718992723491noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1485997200234349788.post-38701887607547014452012-11-23T09:18:11.955+00:002012-11-23T09:18:11.955+00:00I would like to make an addition comment:
When I ...I would like to make an addition comment:<br /><br />When I wrote my previous comment, I had a BB King CD on repeat in my headphones. This is fitting. There are many blues artists and numerous ufologists...but some of them are one-of-a-kind: imitated, sure, but not to be known again.<br /><br />James Moseley is unique. He will be missed by believers and skeptics alike.<br /><br />Is there a higher honour?<br /><br />T. Brown<br />Toronto, Canada<br />Terry the Censorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13361088223337740598noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1485997200234349788.post-20754110276588585902012-11-23T09:09:27.494+00:002012-11-23T09:09:27.494+00:00I read Moseley's memoir this summer and I now ...I read Moseley's memoir this summer and I now regret that I never became a non-subscriber.<br /><br />Based on my readings of the classics, I offer that Mr. Moseley was an ironist of the highest order -- a Socrates of ufology.<br /><br />Please bless this field with another!<br /><br />> A Serious Ufologist pronounced “Moseley has spent the last five decades engaged in thinking as little about UFOs as his brain can be lulled into..."<br /><br />You can name names. Even a newbie such as myself knows this is the Estimable Jerome Clark the First (let us hope that after JC's untimely passing, the next pope takes on JC II as a moniker. I can't imagine any serious person objecting).<br /><br />> Over the years he has entertained about every view it is possible to hold about UFOs<br /><br />A rare thing in ufology: an open mind!<br /><br />> He certainly seemed comfortable with the European brand of sceptical ufology.<br /><br />A virtue indeed.<br /><br />If one keeps only to the US brand, one will be deceived.Terry the Censorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13361088223337740598noreply@blogger.com