63 lines
3.5 KiB
Plaintext
63 lines
3.5 KiB
Plaintext
|
The following editorial is reprinted from JUST CAUSE #17, the quarterly
|
|||
|
|
newsletter of Citizens Against UFO Secrecy.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
At a time when public awareness of the UFO phenomenon is at a
|
|||
|
|
very high level, we note a disturbing situation. Serious
|
|||
|
|
controversy has developed in connection with the Gulf Breeze,
|
|||
|
|
Florida UFO photo case, a controversy which threatens the
|
|||
|
|
integrity of our subject (see recent issues of the MUFON UFO
|
|||
|
|
Journal and CUFOS Bulletin for details.)
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
One may debate the merits or demerits of a sighting, this is
|
|||
|
|
what investigation and discussion of casework is all about. What
|
|||
|
|
has clearly developed here however is an exercise in character
|
|||
|
|
assassination, with MUFON and Gulf Breeze supporters on one side
|
|||
|
|
and CUFOS and Gulf Breeze critics on the other side.
|
|||
|
|
Unfortunately the verbal muggings going on and their aftermath
|
|||
|
|
will hurt us all. UFO study will continue to be perceived as a
|
|||
|
|
fragmented, disorganized political boxing ring where those of
|
|||
|
|
differing opinions slug it out to see who can blacken the
|
|||
|
|
other's eyes.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Our position is that the burden of proof is on the Gulf Breeze
|
|||
|
|
supporters to prove their case, something we feel has not been
|
|||
|
|
done yet at this writing (8/23). It is entirely reasonable and
|
|||
|
|
necessary to raise critical questions and put a case through a
|
|||
|
|
ringer of tough scrutiny before it deserves the label "UFO." The
|
|||
|
|
questions posed by the Center for UFO Studies are serious,
|
|||
|
|
legitimate, and have not been adequately answered by the MUFON
|
|||
|
|
side of the fence. We are most dismayed at the removal of Robert
|
|||
|
|
Boyd, MUFON's State Director for Alabama and a former
|
|||
|
|
investigator and current critic of Gulf Breeze, from his
|
|||
|
|
directorship by MUFON's International Director, Walt Andrus. The
|
|||
|
|
reason given, alleged violations of MUFON's Field Manual, will
|
|||
|
|
undoubtedly be interpreted instead as retaliation for being
|
|||
|
|
vocally against what MUFON has now endorsed as authentic (see
|
|||
|
|
MUFON UFO Journal, August 1988). At the same time we've noted
|
|||
|
|
statements earlier in the year by Gulf Breeze proponents which
|
|||
|
|
were outrageously biased, yet no punishment seems to have been
|
|||
|
|
meted out at all.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
The consequences of the current debate are clear. If an
|
|||
|
|
organization makes a policy decision to support a bizarre
|
|||
|
|
incident, or series of incidents, as authentic and then proceeds
|
|||
|
|
to attack all criticism, every question MUST be answered, not
|
|||
|
|
ignored; otherwise, the organization's support must be
|
|||
|
|
considered "lightweight" and without firm scientific foundation.
|
|||
|
|
The organization then becomes vulnerable to credibility
|
|||
|
|
questions and its hard-earned influence fades quickly into
|
|||
|
|
obscurity.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
We would like to see total and amiable cooperation between all
|
|||
|
|
organizations researching UFOs. It is obvious though that with
|
|||
|
|
four decades of experience behind us this will be nearly
|
|||
|
|
impossible. We can only hope that UFOs will be explained
|
|||
|
|
ultimately, despite the petty bickerings of those who embrace
|
|||
|
|
the subject the most.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
We support a recent statement by CUFOS, The CUFOS Position on
|
|||
|
|
the Gulf Breeze Case [CUFOS.GB] and look for a quick
|
|||
|
|
resolution to this very serious problem.
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|