James Neff, the webmaster
of rense.com, is a gentleman with whom
we've clashed before. He's always been courteous and friendly in
our dealings with him (except for that time he got really pissed off at
us), and he is one of the more intelligent, articulate paranormalites out
there in the Internet's electronic soup. He also does some nifty
The reason we bring him up is for this
nice little article he wrote for Jeff Rense's website (you can read it
here) entitled "You Don't Have to 'Believe' Anymore." This article
basically extols the virtues of UFO worship, though he devotes the article
to damning that anyone could "believe" in UFOs at all. According
to him, the existence of UFOs is a proven fact, not open to belief at all.
Here, Mr. Neff is just plain wrong.
OK, we'll grant that UFOs (in this, we
mean Unidentified Flying Objects) do exist. There are strange things
in the sky that people see and then report to their local branch of MUFON.
Maybe these objects are vehicles, or are at least unnatural phenomena built
by intelligent species. Some of them. Maybe. Does
this mean that those few that are actually physical, manufactured objects
are made by humans? Probably. Does this mean that they're created
by aliens? Absolutely not.
But rather than condemn Mr. Neff without
any corroboration, let's let his own words convict him:
It takes absolutely no leap of faith,
no mustering of imagination or whimsy for any rational mind to realize what is already a proven reality: UFOs
exist and are as real and the Pacific Ocean or the Rocky
OK, maybe you're on to something there.
Like we said, we'll admit that people are seeing stuff.
...(and may have been here just as long).
What? Where's the corroboration for that?
Does my rational mind accept that? Hell, no! Sneaking in undocumented
"whimsy" into a somewhat corroborated statement of fact is just not very
The issue of visitors to this planet, wherever
(or whenever) they originate, is as vital an issue as any world geopolitical, religious, or economic affair or policy.
In fact, it is probably far more important.
Ah, yes, an undocumented, unreliably recorded
and outright unproven event is definitely more important than, say, nuclear
war or something. Realize this, Mr. Neff, UFOs aren't alien creations
until you (or someone else) proves it. It ain't been proven yet.
What remains is a nearly a century of 'expert' interaction
with flying saucers (and other shaped craft) under
extremely scientific, verifiable, and examinable
circumstances. I am speaking of the countless military
and commercial pilot interactions with these remarkable,
unknown machines, in situations where often entirely empirical testing of data has been recorded. One could
not ask for a much better 'test lab' for the UFO phenomenon than in the cockpit of a military fighter or
In both situations there are one, or more, specialists in
the field of atmospherics and aerodynamics in a 'flying
laboratory,' well-equipped with scientifically-approved
and understood instrumentation which can record and
note verifiable time frames, locations, altitudes,
longitudes, latitudes of the UFO phenomena.
Additionally, and obviously, there is also (in countless
cases) verification by radar -- which consitututes a
second 'laboratory' of qualified, educated and capable
specialists interpreting data.
Apart from pilots in their 'flying laboratories' and their
ground-based radar counterparts, there is now also the
testimony of astronauts who are increasingly detailing
UFO evidence and information outside of the
From these three sources alone, there exists undeniable
proof of the 'flying saucer.'
No, that's not true at all. Other
than grainy photographs, radar ghosts and eyewitness testimony (which is
always highly questionable...ask any lawyer) I am not aware of anything
empirical or scientific. Simply noting that something is there, flying
around, or might be flying around, in no way proves (or even logically
suggests) that it is an alien spacecraft.
Millions of dollars are spent every year by air force units
around the world from every advanced nation to
intercept these aerial interlopers. Countries do not spend
that kind of money chasing Venus, 'heat inversions' or entertaining myths. To suggest so is simply preposterous.
Prove it. Can't? I didn't think
so. It's not like a paranormalite to cite national governments as
reliable about anything. I guess they do when it serves their purposes.
We accept without reservation the existence of atomic and subatomic particles which only a privileged handful of
experts in that field of study have ever 'seen' with the
most advanced special instrumentation.
Uh huh. This doesn't explain why
UFO supporters assume that because these flying things are unidentified,
that they also have little gray men flying them around. That's "simply
Granted, there is far more 'scientific'
data and knowledge of atomic and subatomic particles than exists for flying saucers -- but data is data, and evidence is evidence --
and we have no trouble in trusting and being dependent upon the experiences and veracity of the physicists and
I love it when paranormalites put the word
scientific in quotations. Like it's just some buzz word that scientists
attach to things to make them seem valid.
Like the Tasmanian Tiger, we now know they "are"... but to capture one for more
advanced study proves to be essentially impossible.
Uh, the Tasmanian Tiger "isn't," anymore,
since it's extinct, and we know for a fact that it was wiped out by Europeans,
since we still have their pelts. I met a guy who said he had an alien
pelt once, but it looked more like a bolt of suede leather left out in
However, history shows us that the flying
saucer has been coming and going on planet earth for
generations, and centuries, which rules out the idea that
all flying saucers are manmade craft of a clandestine
Pure speculation. There's no evidence
for any of that at all. There are also some pretty cool accounts
of vampires, but close examination by scientists familiar with body decay
and pathology have shown that vampires probably weren't supernatural.
Thus, historical accounts can't be trusted without modern analysis.
What really saddens us about the flavor
of this whole article is the tendency for the people responsible for the
dissemination of UFO information to wholly embrace the scanty evidence
for Unidentified Flying Objects and then similarly assume, without any
corroboration, that the objects are alien in origin. That's inexcusable,
unscientific, and just plain unfair.