CHANGE FOR THE FUTURE OF UFOLOGY
Steve Bass
August 01, 2009
Originally printed in Journal of Frontier Science at www.frontierscience.us/article170.html
When I founded Journal of Frontier Science, I knew I had a lot to learn. Every day I find that I have that much more.
I have always been the type that, once a subject has my interest, I go to extremes to learn all I can. As the years went by and I got more and more involved in Ufology, I soon learned that there are a million internet and research sources available to learn the subject, and you never knew which source was quality and which was to be avoided at all costs. Sometimes a theory would sound so out there, and sometimes you find out that it makes sense after some research. But how do you know to research one strange hypothesis from another?
I knew that there would be others like me that needed a dependable source to learn from, to be educated on the history of the phenomenon, investigative techniques, and new ideas.
I believe this could be the single issue that holds Ufology at bay in achieving a respectable status in the eyes of mainstream science.
All disciplines require its students undergo educational and training processes, except Ufology.
All disciplines offer a certification process, except Ufology.
All disciplines have a core focus on its theme, except Ufology.
That is where change must come about.
This is a good part of the reasoning and criteria used in selecting writers and contributors to JFS. From Nick Redfern to Stanton Friedman to Nick Pope to Dr. Edgar Mitchell ScD, all are a solid cross between maverick and levelheaded researcher. I personally may or may not agree with their theories or positions, but I do know that the secret to finding elusive answers is to allow unconventional but genuine methods to lead you to the answer, instead of you leading yourself to what you think the answer should be, as so many so-called "ufologists" have done. This sort of thinking outside-the-box is the only hope true Ufologists have in reaching the unreachable.
Now, as I learn, so can you.
When I founded Journal of Frontier Science, I knew I had a lot to learn. Every day I find that I have that much more.
I have always been the type that, once a subject has my interest, I go to extremes to learn all I can. As the years went by and I got more and more involved in Ufology, I soon learned that there are a million internet and research sources available to learn the subject, and you never knew which source was quality and which was to be avoided at all costs. Sometimes a theory would sound so out there, and sometimes you find out that it makes sense after some research. But how do you know to research one strange hypothesis from another?
I knew that there would be others like me that needed a dependable source to learn from, to be educated on the history of the phenomenon, investigative techniques, and new ideas.
I believe this could be the single issue that holds Ufology at bay in achieving a respectable status in the eyes of mainstream science.
All disciplines require its students undergo educational and training processes, except Ufology.
All disciplines offer a certification process, except Ufology.
All disciplines have a core focus on its theme, except Ufology.
That is where change must come about.
This is a good part of the reasoning and criteria used in selecting writers and contributors to JFS. From Nick Redfern to Stanton Friedman to Nick Pope to Dr. Edgar Mitchell ScD, all are a solid cross between maverick and levelheaded researcher. I personally may or may not agree with their theories or positions, but I do know that the secret to finding elusive answers is to allow unconventional but genuine methods to lead you to the answer, instead of you leading yourself to what you think the answer should be, as so many so-called "ufologists" have done. This sort of thinking outside-the-box is the only hope true Ufologists have in reaching the unreachable.
Now, as I learn, so can you.
Print
Email
