The Persistence of Chronic Skepticism
R. Lee
July 15, 2007
The recent (July 13) Larry King program Are UFOs Real? on Roswell and UFOs had quite a panel: Roswell witnesses Jesse Marcel, Julie Shuster of the International UFO Museum and research Center in Roswell and daughter of Walter Haut. (Haut was public information officer at Roswell and was responsible for the press release announcing a “crashed disk” had been recovered,) ex-Arizona Governor Fyfe Symington, who openly mocked the Phoenix Lights sightings but recently came out to say he himself saw the UFO, UFO, astronaut Buzz Aldrin, (who seemed to have a debunking agenda of his own, but that’s deserving of an article all its own,) talk radio Coast to Coast’s host George Noory, UFO researcher Stanton Friedman, UFO documentary producer James Fox (Out of the Blue,) and arch skeptic Michael Shermer, among others.
(By the way, the title is misleading, of course UFOs are “real,” the question is, what are they? But like the Buzz Aldrin agenda, that’s a topic for another article.)
Stanton Friedman, for those who don’t know, is the UFO researcher and nuclear physicist who’s been researching UFOs for decades. Roswell is his “specialty,” you could say.
I asked myself, as I always do when watching programs like this, why do producers believe it’s necessary to bring on these “storage skeptics?” (By “storage skeptic” I mean the usual ones you see on Bigfoot, ghost, and UFO documentaries; the same ones are trotted out to debunk, deny, and mock a variety of fringe topics.) Would you have an atheist on when doing a panel on religion? If interviewing the Pope. would one bring on a MIchael Shermer? While occasionally “alternative” religions (nonwestern systems, Wicca, neo-pagan, etc.) are represented, programs usually stick to the acceptable. And rarely is a debunker brought on, though on occasion an atheist will pop up.
More frequently than not though, people are allowed to discuss their religious views and experience without a debunker present. (One might have an opposing or different religious perspective represented, but that’s not the same as having someone on to dismiss religion in itself.)
But with UFOs, or any “paranormal,” Fortean, anomalous, supernatural topic, the skeptics come out to do their best. Why?
Why is one’s religious beliefs and experience off limits (pretty much) while encounters of the unusual are held up as some sort of scapegoat for the smug and the dense? Many will say that it’s “good to have a balance,” and that “critical thinking is necessary,” and other intellectually altruistic platitudes. Okay, why not do the same with religion?
Chronic skeptics and its supporters may fool themselves into believing they’re providing a service to the unenlightened masses, but they’re wimps as long as they stay out of the religious arena.
The response is that “religion is a matter of faith, and we accept that.” Seeing a UFO is not a “matter of faith,” seeing a Bigfoot is not a “matter of faith.” Murkier areas, such as ghosts, etc. may or may not be matters of faith, but still, a highly unusual experience occurred, and that isn’t a “matter of faith.” A deep belief in ET is a “matter of faith,” but that lies within the individual. I saw a UFO, that doesn’t mean I “believe’ extraterrestrials exist. More importantly, even if I did believe extraterrestrials exist, (which I do) I don’t believe in them, any more I “believe” in my cat.
Producers don’t care about critical thinking or “balance.” They care about ratings. They know it’’ll make for a rollicking good time; tempers flare, people get exasperated, ratings go up. A shouting, roiling debate is good TV. Who cares if the facts of something are presented, or steps towards resolution are made, or people’s stories and experiences are listened to and heard on their own merits? Fights make for good ratings.
Producers don’t put atheists and debunkers on when it comes to religion, because the religious majority will eat them alive and there go the ratings. Oh, you can have “kooks” on like the local witch, because she or he is outside the acceptable norm. Anything outside what the majority deems “normal” is fair game. But no one wants to offend the groups that matter, and UFO witnesses don’t matter. We’re all just average folk who’ve experienced something pretty weird, and are, for whatever reason, stupid enough to go out there and tell people about it. Then the Michael Shermer’s of the world come out and tell us we’ve seen too many flying saucer movies.
The chronic skeptics believe they’re providing a service of enlightenment to the world, where in fact, they’re just fodder producers of UFO and paranormal programming.
(By the way, the title is misleading, of course UFOs are “real,” the question is, what are they? But like the Buzz Aldrin agenda, that’s a topic for another article.)
Stanton Friedman, for those who don’t know, is the UFO researcher and nuclear physicist who’s been researching UFOs for decades. Roswell is his “specialty,” you could say.
I asked myself, as I always do when watching programs like this, why do producers believe it’s necessary to bring on these “storage skeptics?” (By “storage skeptic” I mean the usual ones you see on Bigfoot, ghost, and UFO documentaries; the same ones are trotted out to debunk, deny, and mock a variety of fringe topics.) Would you have an atheist on when doing a panel on religion? If interviewing the Pope. would one bring on a MIchael Shermer? While occasionally “alternative” religions (nonwestern systems, Wicca, neo-pagan, etc.) are represented, programs usually stick to the acceptable. And rarely is a debunker brought on, though on occasion an atheist will pop up.
More frequently than not though, people are allowed to discuss their religious views and experience without a debunker present. (One might have an opposing or different religious perspective represented, but that’s not the same as having someone on to dismiss religion in itself.)
But with UFOs, or any “paranormal,” Fortean, anomalous, supernatural topic, the skeptics come out to do their best. Why?
Why is one’s religious beliefs and experience off limits (pretty much) while encounters of the unusual are held up as some sort of scapegoat for the smug and the dense? Many will say that it’s “good to have a balance,” and that “critical thinking is necessary,” and other intellectually altruistic platitudes. Okay, why not do the same with religion?
Chronic skeptics and its supporters may fool themselves into believing they’re providing a service to the unenlightened masses, but they’re wimps as long as they stay out of the religious arena.
The response is that “religion is a matter of faith, and we accept that.” Seeing a UFO is not a “matter of faith,” seeing a Bigfoot is not a “matter of faith.” Murkier areas, such as ghosts, etc. may or may not be matters of faith, but still, a highly unusual experience occurred, and that isn’t a “matter of faith.” A deep belief in ET is a “matter of faith,” but that lies within the individual. I saw a UFO, that doesn’t mean I “believe’ extraterrestrials exist. More importantly, even if I did believe extraterrestrials exist, (which I do) I don’t believe in them, any more I “believe” in my cat.
Producers don’t care about critical thinking or “balance.” They care about ratings. They know it’’ll make for a rollicking good time; tempers flare, people get exasperated, ratings go up. A shouting, roiling debate is good TV. Who cares if the facts of something are presented, or steps towards resolution are made, or people’s stories and experiences are listened to and heard on their own merits? Fights make for good ratings.
Producers don’t put atheists and debunkers on when it comes to religion, because the religious majority will eat them alive and there go the ratings. Oh, you can have “kooks” on like the local witch, because she or he is outside the acceptable norm. Anything outside what the majority deems “normal” is fair game. But no one wants to offend the groups that matter, and UFO witnesses don’t matter. We’re all just average folk who’ve experienced something pretty weird, and are, for whatever reason, stupid enough to go out there and tell people about it. Then the Michael Shermer’s of the world come out and tell us we’ve seen too many flying saucer movies.
The chronic skeptics believe they’re providing a service of enlightenment to the world, where in fact, they’re just fodder producers of UFO and paranormal programming.
Print
Email
