tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1485997200234349788.post8690116348451494082..comments2024-03-07T12:48:21.070+00:00Comments on MAGONIA REVIEW: FIRST READ: WAVENEY GIRVANUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1485997200234349788.post-52237895499353541412013-12-12T20:06:46.956+00:002013-12-12T20:06:46.956+00:00"nothing much has changed since the 1950s.&qu..."nothing much has changed since the 1950s."<br /><br />Because ufoolery is pseudoscience.<br /><br />ufoolery is characterized by partial or total pseudoscience. Pseudoscience is behavior that claims to exemplify the methods and principles of science, but does not adhere to an appropriate scientific methodology, lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, or otherwise lacks scientific status.<br /><br />ufoolery can be categorized as a pseudoscience because its adherents claim it to be a science while being rejected as being one by the scientific community and because the field lacks cumulative scientific progress; ufoolery has not advanced since the 1950s.<br /><br />Not only is the minor "crashed 'UFO' and detritus" theme based in numerous hoaxes and is a century-old mass-media-manufactured pop-culture fiction, the elemental cosmic-conspiramythic narrative of the whole "UFO" delusion is a mashup of century-old science-fiction and antiscientific spiritualist transcendental nonsense.<br /><br />Other hallmarks of pseudoscience, most of which are fundamental to ufoolery:<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience#Pseudoscientific_concepts <br /><br />ufoology is history; let's make the popular "UFO" myth and delusion history as well.zoamchomskyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16519698426338891542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1485997200234349788.post-75730532161330297542013-12-10T17:59:55.710+00:002013-12-10T17:59:55.710+00:00"...ufology remains as elusive as ever."..."...ufology remains as elusive as ever." UFOs may be elusive, but ufology isn't. It's a readily available street drug.:) Rosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04726872916865592134noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1485997200234349788.post-7567492265380558202013-12-03T14:06:18.956+00:002013-12-03T14:06:18.956+00:00As a youngster I also was impressed with Girvan...As a youngster I also was impressed with Girvan's book, his analysis of the Adamski controversy, the Darbishire photos, the Allingham story, the hints at government cover-up and his general attack on skeptics like Menzel and the Astronomer Royal of the time (Sir Harold Spencer Jones).<br /><br />I did detect, however (from correspondence with him during his editorship of FSR) that doubts about Adamski began to emerge after INSIDE THE SPACE SHIPS came out. In other words, although Girvan wanted to accept, and was of course the publisher of, the first Adamski/Leslie book he had serious doubts about the second, although he avoided saying so publicly in FSR. <br /><br />Girvan did also rely on his informants, one of whom was in a high NATO position (most likely General L.M.Chassin), for hints at the coming of the 'great truth', which never came, and is no more likely to now than it was then. <br /><br />Alas Adamski, Darbishire, Allingham and the mystery informants have all bitten the dust and ufology remains as elusive as ever.<br /><br /><br /><br />cdahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01005702597775594084noreply@blogger.com