THE GREAT UFO DEBATE: INTRODUCTION In April of 1986, I attended the 10th Anniversary Convention and Banquet of the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP). There I sat next to a charming gentleman named Lucien Kemble, who told me to my surprise that he was a Fran- ciscan monk. Fr. Kemble and I talked and dined together often at the convention, and we have maintained a correspondence ever since. His skeptical attitude towards the paranormal stems from his desire not to see the true works of God and Christ get lost in a flurry of meta- magical fluff and nonsense. As an accomplished amateur star-gazer, he views the beautifully integrated mechanics of the universe itself as the one true "paranormal" occurrence. In our correspondence, I raised with him my disagreement with CSICOP's attitude on UFOs. "SOMETHING is going on up there," I told him, "and Science is missing the boat." Rather than sneering at me condescendingly, as others have, he very politely and with genuine curiosity asked me my reasons for believing thus. It was then that the idea of a public electronic debate on the subject occurred to me. The fortieth anniversary of the traditional beginning of the UFO era presents an appropriate time frame for a reasoned, objective dis- cussion of the UFO issue, specifically, whether UFOs represent a gen- uine opportunity to add significantly to our knowledge of the uni- verse, or are simply a figment of the collective imagination. As Para- Net is philosophically neutral territory, a sort of electronic "Hyde Park" of the paranormal, what better venue for such a discussion to take place. Here, therefore, begins the second ParaNet Debate: UFOs, 1987 - After 40 Years, Have We Got ANYTHING? I will begin the debate with a brief article, which will be posted here and submitted to Fr. Kemble for his reply. Copies of the submissions will be sent to various others in the field, skeptics and believers alike, for their perusal and possible response. In addition, all ParaNet users are invited to participate. You can submit a response by typing it on an ASCII word processor and uploading it to Section 1 - Ufology, or if it is less than 2000 characters, simply post it to the message base. Non-users can simply send a typewritten submission of up to 3000 words to: ParaNet, PO Box 17675, Fountain Hills, AZ, 85268. (If you happen to have access to IBM-formatted disks, you can submit in that manner as well.) As ParaNet is an eleemosynary entity, we regret that we cannot compensate anyone for a submission; we ask that you do this in the interest of public education. However, all copyrights will be honored and posted as requested. The fruits of the debate will be stored in the ParaNet Library for reference by future generations of Truth-seekers. And now, let the debate begin! --Jim Speiser  UFOLOGY: AFTER 40 YEARS, STILL NO RESPECT by Jim Speiser ___________________________ On June 24th of this year, we will mark the 40th anniversary of the start of the present "flying saucer" era. No subject has captured the imagination or sparked so much controversy as the UFO phenomenon. It's been characterized as the "silly season that wouldn't go away." And why hasn't it gone away? The debunkers tell us that such things run in cycles, and UFO flaps, or waves, are merely the effects of the domino theory at work. A particularly well-publicized story in one section of the country, the theory goes, will cause starry-eyed true believers in other areas to suddenly delude themselves into believing that, "yeah, I seen it too!" That, they tell us, is what happened in 1973 when over 1200 cases were reported in the country, after a few sightings in the southeast were bally- hooed. Yet, here we are in the Year of the UFO, with three major books on the market, Shirley MacLaine preaching the Gospel of Our Lady of the Pleiades, and a Japanese airliner serving French wine to gigantic flying walnuts. Where's the flap? In the first five months of 1987, the UFO Information Ser- vice has recorded only 27 sightings. Isn't it possible that the cyclical nature of UFOs is a characteristic of the phenomenon itself, and not of our collective "attunement"? Such questions as this need to be addressed more honestly by those who tell us there's nothing new in our atmosphere. And there are other questions. Why are we constantly fed bromides like, "Astronomers do not see UFOs"? When you adjust for the explainable sightings, they see them in approximately the same proportionate numbers as the general populace. Explaining UFO sightings is one thing. Excessive, obsessive debunking is quite another. The rise of organized skepticism has raised negativism to a new art form. I call it "The Discount Muffler Theory of Ufology," because I am reminded of the TV commercial where two chimpanzees are banging on a muff- ler to get it to fit a car it was obviously not designed for. The debunkers constantly try to hammer the facts into place, in order to get them to fit a given situation. The message of this New Negativism is clear: those of us interested in UFO research are nothing but childish, uneducated, anti-intellectual twits, who should probably go home and watch reruns of Star Trek. To be truly in- tellectually chic, these days, one must NOT let one's mind entertain such silly notions. While a few skeptics grudgingly acknowledge the scientific competence of some ufologists, the majority are characterized as unworthy of their letters. And those of us below the doctorate level are made to feel sympathy with the witches of Salem. I envision in the near future bumper stickers that say, "Kill a Believer for CSICOP." Given that Ufology and "Mainstream Science" share a common ancestor, namely Curiosity, the question must be asked, Is all this abject negativism truly in the best interest of science? Perhaps the debunkers are right, and there really is nothing new under the sun. How has it harmed anyone to wonder, to look further, to investigate? One gets the impression that the skeptics would prefer us all to pack up our geiger counters, our VCRs, and our autographed copies of "Communion" and go home, never again to whisper the phrase, "UFOs are real". OK, what if we complied? And what if we were right in the first place, BUT NEVER FOUND OUT? How great the loss to science? As I said, questions remain. Questions like: If the Cash/Landrum case is a hoax, as Mr. Klass has said, how were Betty Cash and Vicki and Colby Landrum able to fake the symptoms of radiation poisoning? Can a bolide really remain in the Earth's atmosphere for 45 seconds...and then skip off into space? Can a group of ultralight pilots really perform a turn about a point in absolutely flawless formation, at night, without navigation lights? Are airline pilots with 20 years experience really capable of mistaking a planet 800 million miles distant for a gigantic spaceship only 8 miles distant? I firmly believe that UFOs are worthy of responsible investigation; that some responsible investigation has occurred already, and has turned up evi- dence worth a closer look. I also firmly believe that as long as a substan- tial number of questions such as these remain unanswered, and a substantial number of ends remain loose, that the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis, no matter how scientifically unlikely, remains too important to dismiss out of hand. There, I've said it. Get the stake ready for another witch.  No longer a Time to Debate! by Ralph Toscano There exists the possibility that the UFO phenomenon is far stranger than we are led to believe. The UFO-Buff considers each case as authentic, and that the "space-brothers" are here for our redemption. Then on the other hand you have the hard-core skeptic. His major focus is to see that all the people who have a UFO experience are discredited at whatever cost. Last, and perhaps most important, you have the concerned investigators, who unfortunately are stuck between these warring factions, and sometimes being pushed into one of these camps without any consideration for his true expertise. The thought has crossed my mind that perhaps the best way to cover for any activity would be to get the people of the particular race so involved with arguing amongst each other that they actually "miss the boat" as far as what is really going on around them. I feel that the strangeness of this phenomena is not entirely centered around the "Extra- terrestrial Hypothesis". I think that for the most part, it has been the government of each country that has made this phenomena so mysterious. If you go on the premise that the documents recovered through the FOIA are legitimate, then these materials speak for themselves. The U.S. government is obviously up to some clandestine operation designed to suppress or dis- credit any individual victim to a UFO experience. And the documents go MUCH deeper, there are hints that the government actually has in its pos- session assorted space debris TOTALLY alien to planet Earth!! Even if these documents prove to be bogus, and we have no reason to think they are, then we must turn to the many incidents in which irrefutable physical side-effects are our best evidence. The whole phenomena is not going to go away, its been around a lot longer than the 40 years we acknowledge. There are many passages in the Bible which describe strange lights or even veh- icles that parallel the incidents that occur today. These occurrences con- tinue throughout history. It is no longer a question of is there something happening here, but more a question of WHAT is happening here! Since we cannot rely on our military or even our government for that matter, any information must come from other sources inside these communities. It is time for an operation such as "BluePeace" to swing into action! Let's get the congressional hearings started now! All the skeptics will be needing a change of shorts when this happens.  >> Mr. Howard is the former Western States Associate Director of the venerable Ground Saucer Watch (GSW). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Forty years! Forty years since the Kenneth Arnold sighting near Mt. Rainier in Washington state. Forty years since the popular press coined the term "flying saucer." An incredible span of time for so little accomplishment in dis- covering the secrets of the enigmatic UFO. An incredible span of time for such little scientific headway in explaining the UFO phenomena. Or has there been little progress? During this period the Air Force concluded Project Twinkle with the assertion that the UFO phenomena was not of earthly origin. Some time later the Air Force repudiated that conclusion and instituted Project Blue Book to explain away the phenomena. In the same period the Robertson panel, in essence, concluded that the American people were not psychologically capable of accepting the truth of the existence of extraterrestrials. That such informa- tion could cause mass hysteria and economic collapse. We've had Adamski and Van Tassel. We've also had hoaxers, grifters, and scam workers galore, those that sought notoriety, glamor, fame and money through exploitation of the UFO phenomena. We, as a nation, have in the same time created a space program and landed men on the moon. We have created an international telecom- munications network with man made orbiting satellites. We have creat- ed electricity through the use of controlled nuclear fission. We have launched ships and submarines propelled, and spacecraft powered by that selfsame energy. For a short time shadowy "men in black" seemed to haunt those that reported a UFO. And the scientists of our nation took flight with a great monotonous cry denouncing reported UFO sightings as misapprehension, reflections from birds, sunlight glinting from high flying aircraft, swamp gas, hoax, any and everything but an honest evaluation of the phenomena. In light of our national accomplishments and great strides in technology, and despite incredible, even superhuman, efforts by the debunkers, the UFO phenomena persists. There is a core of inex- plicable sightings reported by reputable citizens. Inexplicable, in the sense that they are too well documented by people with nothing to gain from their reports except, invariably, a big hassle and a desire for the truth. Inexplicable in the sense that these few reports are not explained by any known phenomena. The FOIA has given the serious researchers and investigators a tool with which, hopefully, to free the UFO phenomena from the clutches of governmental secrecy. We, additionally, need to continue the pursuit of "good" sightings. We need to analyze and correlate the data that we have. We need to establish a working hypothesis or hypotheses that can and will account for all the cases of reported UFO sightings. What is my axe?, you might ask. I remember my interest as I read the newspaper account of the Arnold sighting, and my immature specula- tion regarding the account. Man and boy, for forty years, I have fol- lowed the continuing UFO reports. I have been air crew and pilot, back yard astronomer and photographer, professionally involved in electronics and computers, yet the interest remains. I have been in- volved with organizations whose goal was the scientific investigation of the UFO phenomena and I participated in a number of field investi- gations of purported UFO sightings with no slackening of interest. Truly it has waxed and waned, with the seasons of my life, occupying differing degrees of priority as those seasons have passed; yet, the interest still remains. What is the explanation of this enigmatic UFO phenomena? For the unknowns there is, as yet, no satisfactory scientific explanation. Do I believe in a phenomena, global in nature, respecter of no person or intellect, seemingly oblivious to national boundaries, cares nothing for season or belief, and repeats in tantalizing ways? Sure! I believe that something, as yet unexplained, is happening in the skies over the planet earth, or in the minds of earth people every- where, and I would like to live long enough to see this mystery solved.  May 27, 1987 - The Great UFO Debate . After forty years, Have We Got Anything? By God, if we don't then somebody is blind! The works of Hopkins and Strieber alone should be enough evidence to convince any normal unprejudiced group of people. Non-human entities have been and still are taking US citizen's by force, disfiguring the bodies and inflecting psychological changes upon them. Had a Black, Mexican, Puerto Rican (or any minority for that matter) perpetrated what these aliens regularly get away with there would be lynch mobs searching the hills with shotguns and blood hounds looking for them. I have seen people convicted and put in prison by our legal system with less proof. Consider the following scenario. A typical abduction case but the situation has been changed to reflect humans instead of aliens. . Joe is walking down a dark country road. Suddenly bright headlights from a car (UFO) startle Joe. As the headlights creep nearer, Joe is paralyzed with fear. Then a strange seedy bald little midget (ALIEN) grabs Joe and ties him up (PUTS HIM IN A TRANCE) so that he can't move any part of his body but his eyes. He's hauled (LEVITATED) in the a silver customized van (SAUCER SHAPED OBJECT) where he's terrorized (TERRORIZED) and cut up with a knife (CUT UP WITH A SHARP OBJECT). Joe is than carry (FLOATED) back to where he was pick up and told to keep his mouth shut! (MADE TO FORGET THROUGH SOME UNKNOWN PSYCHOLOGICAL PROCESS). Folks, that is called kidnapping and armed assault. . The truly amazing part of the story surfaces when this pattern is repeated not once or twice or even three times but HUNDREDS. . It is amusing and thought provoking to speculate about their purpose. Makes good cocktail talk. But, the facts remain. 1) They come in the dark. 2) They incapacitated people in a way we don't understand. 3) People are taken against their will. 4) There bodies are often disfigured. 5) They cause people to lose their memory for which our science can't yet explain. 6) They conceal there presence. Not a very pretty picture. . What is called for is an aggressive, proactive program to determine their purpose, communicate our dissatisfaction with their methods (IF there purpose is innocent) and lastly establish a method to stop, by force if necessary, their culturally unsatisfactory actions (call me ethnocentric but when they're here they live by our rules.) Ted Markley  >> Dale Ledoux is a member of ParaNet Gamma in Lousiana.-------------------------------------------------------- While I have not read th e material released under FOIA on this subject, and am therefore not fully informed on it, I am still skeptical. I offer the hypothesis that, assuming there is another civilization advanced enough to visit earth from extra-terrrestrial origin, these beings would also have within their means the ability to determine the fate of their previous probes, and would also have the means to propogate the news of their arrival(s) better than has been done. To date, I have seen no evidence that this has been done. As a past walker among battlefields, I have found many things that are of questionable origin, and many unexplained phenomena. Within the realm of my limited knowledge, I often find 'predictable' systems acting in unpredictable fashion, but all this means is that I don't have all the information. Too much of the UFObia smacks of efforts to ascribe near-godhood to extraterrestrials and to ascribe to government the time-worn idea that THEY (it's always the mysterious THEY) are trying to keep something good from us. I already feel that our country's security is too lax, and if these boys can't keep a secret about a recently developed piece of hardware like the F-19, I really don't think they can keep a secret about assorted and sundry chunks of extraterrestrial hardware stored in some desert warehouse. Of course, these same aliens could also be trying to remain incognito, in which case they wouldn't want the publicity. If that were the case, though, I doubt that they'd be really happy about this evidence in the hands of terrestrial authorities. I still contend that they'd be able to do something about it. Then, too, is the question, what sort of technology do you think the government is hiding if indeed they are hiding something? Unless I miss some bets, I think we can detail a fairly consistent research path to all of today's technology from earlier levels. I wish somebody would point to one of the quantum jumps that would possibly arise as a result of exposure to the detritus of some advanced civilization's space probe. It'd certainly be nice, though, if I could comfort myself with the knowledge that Reagan's SDI is based on some other technology from Alpha Centauri than the stuff I know about. Maybe this IS true. Aw, shoot, there I go again... >> Fr. Lucien Kemble is a Franciscan friar living in Alberta, Canada. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am grateful to Jim Speiser for introducing me, via some lengthy and stimulating exchanges at the last two CSICOP conferences (Boulder and Pasa- dena), to this UFO debate. As an advanced and avid amateur astronomer and one who is keenly interested in and fairly well-read in many areas of sci- ence, I have followed the UFO controversies since their inception. I have also been interested in all phenomena of the natural world, as a Francis- can Friar and priest, follower of St. Francis of Assisi, sharing his great love for the physical universe. Drawing on scientific methods of critique and on the necessity of rational bases for what is called "faith", both scientific and religious, I have discovered a complementarity, not a con- tradiction, between science and faith. But that is another story. As regards the UFO debate: I think it absolutely necessary to make some important distinctions and to clarify usage of terms. I have been asked very frequently, "With your telescope and viewing of the heavens, have you ever seen any UFOs?" Without being facetious, I usually reply, "Yeah, lots of them. Why, just the other day I saw an unidentified bird flying down the valley. And once I saw a tiny, strange, periodic flashing in the sky for which I had no explanation." I know what is behind such questions - the universal confusion between UFO's and flying saucers or Extra-terrestrial Phenomena (ETP's). It needs repeating ad nauseum that UFO's are, by definition, precisely unidentified and therefore, even though they demand full examination, they ought not be, but usually are, identified via wishful thinking with an ETP, spaceship, alien visitations, etc. But, in spite of this persistent confusion, there ought to be always as full an investigation as possible, without an a priori acceptance or re- jection. Most people are usually let down when their supposed ETP is ex- plainable or explained simply in terms of a very natural, but to them un- familiar, down-to-earth phenomenon. To such people, rational, critical ex- planations are so much "taking the fun out of life." There is always room for "fun", but not at the expense of clear thinking. A second necessary distinction in this, as in other areas of inquiry, has to do with an ambiguous use of words such as "skeptic," "criticism," "judgement," etc. Too often these and like words seem to carry, quite wrongfully, the idea of condemnation of a person. When the statement is made, "you are so critical!", it is usually meant as a reproach. In reali- ty it should be considered a compliment. True criticism, critique, is a quality whereby the critic uses his full powers of intelligent inquiry, taking nothing for granted or by gut reaction, feelings, etc., but who evaluates, weighs, judges. He takes into account all pertinent facts, ex- cludes all contradictory evidence, and at least tries to avoid personal feelings and interest, preconceived opinions, etc. One may have a so- called right to one's opinion, but that opinion becomes objectively valid only when it conforms to critically evaluated data. A third distinction has to do with weighing possibilities against probabilities against certitude. There are few of the latter, but one really gets into hot water, especially in the UFO/ETP debate, when one begins with a mere possibility and expands it, e.g. "Inhabited worlds are POSSIBLE. Therefore there are PROBABLY hundreds of more advanced civili- zations. Surely, then, ET's and spaceships HAVE to exist (CERTITUDE). A capital principle in logic is never to cross the border from one assertion to the next. A "possible" remains only that, and neither it nor a probable becomes a fact. To date, as regards UFOs being anything but naturally ex- plicable phenomena, there are no hard certainties or facts or, for that matter, even probabilities. A fourth clarification, and an important one, deals with things that can be known but not proven. Generally, knowledge is gained via three path- ways: evidence; rational proof from assured data or principles; faith, of any kind. Physical hands-on evidence is, of course, fundamental, provided illusion, sense-defective collecting of data, etc., are excluded. ET ori- gins of UFOs are out of the question so far, as regards hard evidence. Rational proof or intellectually critical evaluation, is of the utmost importance as a human pathway to truth. The third mode knowledge is the one that gives us trouble because of our western bias concerning an imag- ined faith/reason exclusivity and contradiction. But, looked at object- ively, most of our ordinary knowledge indeed comes to us via some kind of faith. St. Paul gives a good definition of faith by calling it the "sub- stance of things unseen, but hoped for or trusted in." As an example, I personally did not see Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon - all I did see was TV coverage of an event which now KNOW to be true. I take it on faith or trust in the reliability of TV networks (which can be verified). Such coverage can be reliable in this respect (in spite of so many other unreli- abilities of TV as truth purveyors. In short, the value of any knowledge gleaned through faith is going to be as strong as the reliability of my source. I may not fully comprehend all that I do believe, nor even be able to prove it for that matter, but I must always be ready with good reasons to prove WHY I believe. Anything less is gullibility. And the same applies to the opposite, i.e. one must back up one's rejection of any reported phenomenon with as solid reasons as one would want for acceptance. In the UFO/ETP debate, then, it would seem that there are two extreme camps: the fervent "believers" with nothing to really back up their asser- tions; the "scoffers" who dismiss without any real reasons for doing so. In this, as in so many other areas of supposedly extraordinary phenomena, one has to be open to full, unbiased research, sifting of facts, ridding oneself of bias one way or the other and, in general, trying to be as ob- jective as possible. In specific areas, the arguments against UFOs being ETP's and the option, for the time being, for their explanation as purely earthly, mater- ial phenomena, are many and convincing. But that's for another time. Respectfully submitted, LJK >>Mr. Klass is former Avionics Editor of Aviation Week & Space Technology Magazine, and widely recognized as the world's foremost UFO debunker. ---------------------- Although I am really much too busy working on my new book on "UFO abductions," and my assignments for Aviation Week & Space Technology magazine, I chanced to note your pernicious comment that you "envision in the near future bumper stickers that say, `Kill a Believer for CSICOP.'" What a dreadfully inaccurate comment from one who has attended a CSICOP conference, where the "believers" are invited to present their views -- in striking contrast to MUFON conferences. (At the recent first general meeting of the National Capital Area Skeptics, Dr. Bruce Maccabee was invited to present the pro-UFO side of `UFO-abductions' and given equal time to my own. Did he invite me to speak at his FUFOR sponsored MUFON conference later this month??) As for your lament, "Ufology: After 40 Years, Still No Respect," the same lament has been voiced by The Flat Earth Society, by those who believe in "ancient astronauts," in ghosts and poltergeist -- and was earlier voiced by the late Sir Arthur Conan Doyle when organized science showed no interest in his photos and tales of fairies (the tiny variety). The explanation is simple: The world's leading scientists are dum- dums, which explains why our scientific knowledge has not advanced one iota in the past 100 years!!!!! If world-reknown [sic] scientists fail to be impressed by the evid- ence that you and other UFOlogists find so impressive, then clearly it is "they" and not you who are at fault. And "they" would be more open-minded if it were not for the tiny handful of skeptics, such as Klass, Sheaffer, and Oberg. Why is it that Hynek, McDonald, Maccabee, Sturrock, Westrum, Truzzi, etc., all with Ph.D.'s, were/are not able to overcome the negativ- ism of a tiny handful of skeptics without such academic pedigrees? It never once occurs to UFO-proponents like yourself that perhaps-- perhaps--there is no UFO evidence that the world's great scientific minds find impressive. That it is only impressive to those who have an overwhelm- ing desire to believe, to the credulous and gullible. But be of good cheer, at age 67 I do not have many more years ahead, and Sheaffer and Oberg in time will pass. Then, with the three of us gone-- at long last the world's great scientists will "see the light" about UFOs. And, for the first time, the cultists will have been proven right, and the world's great scientific minds will admit they were wrong. THE UFO: FORTY YEARS ON by John D. Aultman Kenneth Arnold's UFO sighting in 1947 began the modern era of the UFO phenomenon. Since Arnold's sighting the UFO has been the subject of num- erous books, articles, debates, and controversy. We have seen stories of trips to Mars and beyond, claims of messages from the aliens, and claims that the UFO is nonexistent. Yet, the UFO has survived for four decades, and we still see the whole gamut of claims associated with it. As a layman who has observed the UFO phenomenon for over fourteen years, and who has studied its history, a number of thoughts have come to mind. Many of them may meet with mixed response from the UFO community, and some have been stated before. However, as the UFO and civilian UFO investigation enter their fifth decade, it is time that some serious attention is given to where both stand and what direction the future holds. Just where does the UFO phenomenon and the UFO community stand? Over forty years a large number of unexplained cases have been collected. That the cases defy explanation can be seen in two lights. First, some probably have some known cause which is unforeseen because of lack of sufficient data due to insufficient observation or investigation. Second, some defy explanation because they either exceed our level of scientific development to explain, or they have an explanation within our comprehension, but which science is reluctant to accept. In a sizable portion of the unex- plained cases which have a sufficient amount of data the logical conclu- sion is the latter: either they defy explanation or science is unwilling to accept the possible explanations that can be offered. The majority of witnesses to UFOs are Joe Average, having given no attention to the sub- ject, or having scoffed at it at best. They have seen or experienced some- thing which they can not explain or comprehend, and which science either cannot explain or is unwilling to. Most witnesses seek no personal gain from their experience, although some have chosen to do so. From the unexplained cases with sufficient data, one can extract a fair amount of theoretical data about the UFO and its possible characteristics. We know that it can outperform any man-made aircraft, and perform maneu- vers which are beyond our level of technology. They can be detected by radar, and some cases indicate an ability to elude radar. We know this is possible by recent developments in our own technology, although whether ours is the same as the theoretical UFO cannot be said. We also know that they may have left physical traces, such as burned circles, radiation, and landing gear imprints, as well as possible physical effects on witnesses. Additional, but less reliable, speculation can be made in such areas as human abductions, cattle mutilations, and appearance of occupants. All such speculation is interesting, and some of it may, in time, prove to be on the right track, or one that is close to being correct. However, it is still only speculation, none can be proven conclusively. The UFO has left, in forty years, a sizable number of eyewitnesses, and some interesting, but unconfirmed, circumstantial evidence. All of it adds up to a case which can be very convincing of the reality of the UFO phenom- enon, if not the UFO itself. The analogy has been used, with some validi- ty, that if an attorney were preparing a case from comparable evidence, that they would be assured of winning their case. The evidence collected so far is convincing, and is enough so that the case for the reality of the UFO phenomenon would be likely to be won. However, a number of things must be held in mind. First, even though the evidence for the validity of the phenomenon is convincing, none of it, to date, is convincing enough to support any theory that would explain the phenomenon. Second, although sci- ence and law work on similar rules, science differs in how it approaches problems, especially those which would challenge accepted concepts of the universe and how it works. And the reality of the UFO phenomenon, and the implications of that reality. Offer too much that would defy a number of aspects of the current scientific model of the universe. While civilian UFO research has produced much in the way of eyewitness and circumstantial evidence, it has failed to produce the one thing needed to force scientif- ic acceptance of the UFO phenomenon: hard evidence. The burden of proof of the UFO phenomenon today rests totally in the hands of civilian research. As the UFO phenomenon has changed, so has civilian investigation. Groups and individuals have come and gone, with purposes as diverse as their claims. Some told of fabulous trips to Mars and beyond, while others spoke of all important messages from the aliens. Others sought personal gain and/or attention. Many just wanted to find out what was going on. Although most major groups in existence today are of a more serious nature, the crackpot and those out for personal gain still exist. But even serious minded research has faced many of the same problems through the years. Although many in the field present themselves as reputable investigators, they are anything but. Many show total disregard for even common sense investigative procedure; one has to go no further than to scan the number of blatant oversights readily evident in many public reports, articles, and books put out by these investigators. Oftimes, known facts are ig- nored, leads aren't followed up, and viable explanations ignored so that a 'valid' case can be built. Often, personal theories, reputations, and pride override the stated purpose of the investigator. Add to this the fact that infighting, feuds, and personal attacks are too often present. It is sad but true that the biggest stumbling block to civilian UFO re- search has been itself. More important than where are we, is where are we going? Where will UFO research be ten years from now? Will it have provided a valid case for the UFO phenomenon. and be working with science toward a solution? Or will it still be fighting an uphill battle? If civilian UFO research is to make any progress, then it is going to have to take several strong steps toward solidifying itself. It is going to have to get its act together totally. I can not make absolute statements as what has to be done, but I can provide what I consider to be valid recommendations. First, civilian research has to take steps toward unity. I don't mean one organization, but rather, to- tal cooperation among existing organizations and individuals; the sharing of information being not the least of considerations. Second, a standard- ized procedure for investigators, which would include a standard ratings system, perhaps similar to the Hynek system used by ParaNet. Third, an ac- creditation procedure for investigators to certify their competency, and a standard of ethics. Fourth, disassociation of any investigator who fails to live up to the code of ethics, fails to achieve accreditation, or fails to adhere to standard investigative procedure (beyond a preset limit). Fifth, the establishment of an information sharing network. A series of computer based bulletin boards would be ideal for this purpose, since they would allow access by all but would limit access according to security clearance on the BBS. Above all, even if none of the above is done, UFO investigation has to be- come more reliable. Infighting must come to an end, and those seeking only to feather their own nest must be ousted from the ranks of reputable in- vestigators. The carelessness of the past and present only plays into the hands of debunkers who wish to portray the civilian UFO effort as an at- tempt to mislead the American public. Civilian UFO investigation has gained the level of respect it has due to the efforts of APRO, NICAP, MUFON, CAUS, and many reputable individuals who gave, and are giving, many hours of work to the purpose of proving the case for the phenomenon. If those in UFO investigation today would devote some of their time and ef- fort toward rectifying the weaknesses which exist, and making certain that the mistakes of the past don't reoccur, then the day of proving the valid- ity of the phenomenon will be that much closer. ------------------------------------------John Aultman is ParaNet's Mississippi correspondent and a member of MUFON. Thisarticle was origin ally submitted to the MUFON UFO Journal.