The unsettling reality that “for the vast majority of what we say we encounter in daily life–all we have is our own personal testimony, possibly corroborated by someone else (or a few others). And even a very straightforward, “just the facts” report “is already interpreted.” Mike Cifone explains why, and why there’s not so much difference between UFO witness reports and tales of mundane, well-accepted experiences as skeptics would like us to believe. Cifone goes further, heralding his own plunge towards a “theory of the UFO phenomenon.” This piece builds upon a previous Note on the Perils of Skepticism. There Cifone critiques the blog by and a particular example from Luis Cayetano, bringing out perceived “weaknesses” emblematic of the skeptical approach that all anomalous data can ultimately be explained within the confines of or very slight adjustments to already-established scientific “givens.” Such an a priori approach stifles true scientific progress, much as did arguments against meteorite origins or the sun-centered solar system. In A Response to Michael Cifone of the Entaus Blog Cayetano clarifies his positions that Cifone criticizes. These pieces constitute an interesting discussion of basic principles to be observed in “scientific” ufology. (WM)
— Delivered by Feed43 service