Jim Moseley is one of my favourite folks in ufology. I'm not exactly sure how many people are "non-subscribers" to Saucer Smear, his less-than-regular but always timely UFO newsletter, but for those who aren't (which would be most readers here, I suspect), I'll be running, as "non-scheduled" columns, some of my favourite observations that Moseley has made over the past few years, as well as some excerpts from his book, Shockingly Close to the Truth (co-authored with Karl Pflock), which is a must-read for anyone interested in either ufology or ufoology. If someone ever starts up a sociology or history course dealing with "ufology" (as opposed to UFOs), I predict Shockingly Close to the Truth will become one of the standard texts (at least it should be).Here is one of Moseley's recent observations, found in the January 25, 2006 edition of Saucer Smear, which was written after Bob Pratt's death:
"Well, it seems, doesn't it, that the old-time ufologists are dying off like flies! If only there was "new blood" in the field, of the caliber of J. Allen Hynek or even Stanton Friedman! Instead we have mostly people who make outrageous, unsubstantiated claims about government secrecy and/or their own ufological adventures. Somewhere out there lies The Truth, but it really doesn't seem we are going to find it any time soon."
Exactly so. Where are the younger, serious researchers? A young Brad Sparks, for example, or a young Jim McDonald?
Go to a UFO convention. There's more grey hair there than at an AARP conference.
Heck, even the "big news" on the fringe is old (Paul Hellyer, Phil Corso).
A sports team, if it wants to keep on winning, develops younger talent. The veterans are eventually traded, or retire, to be replaced by the next generation. The alternative is a complete collapse. Politics work the same way (ask the Canadian Liberal Party these days). So does business. Even Star Trek eventually discovered a "Next Generation".
The "kids" don't step in right at the top, but they need to be encouraged to get involved, and the veterans slowly need to cede a larger role to them.
Is ufology actively developing that "next generation"? Nope. As a result, there are few, if any, new ideas in ufology these days, and a lack of real investigations of newer cases.
If you disagree, cite examples. Name someone under 40 who has the drive, interest, and talent to be the future of ufology. Nick Redfern and Greg Bishop are two of the best candidates, because, even when wrong, they fit the "challenger of the unkown" mold, but they're not exactly well-received by many in ufology these days, and Nick just passed 40 a couple of years ago. The only other person that I can think of is John Greenwald. But (and it's a big "but"), while he's good at getting documents out of the government, he doesn't have the training to interpret what they mean. He's the medium, not the message, and while the medium is important, in this case the two are not the same thing.
This is a dilemna that Jim Moseley, as one of the most senior figures in ufology, understands. It's an example of what makes him well worth reading.
Keep 'em comin', Jim. May The Space People continue to watch over you!
Paul Kimball
6 comments:
All Hail Supreme Commander Moseley!
As you probably know, Jim suffered a setback with Hurricane Wilma. Personal papers and other historical items were damaged by salt water (as he mentions in Saucer Smear, Dec. 1, 2005). While that would have daunted a lesser man (i.e., me) he still keeps plugging away with Smear. Considering that Smear is "irregularly published," Jim gets out more issues that other zines that try to be monthly or even bi-monthly. I know I can't keep up with him.
What I like about Saucer Smear is its retro-look: Jim still uses a typewriter and while not as polished as using a computer, he still creates neat-looking editions. I've needled him in jest about shunning the great Roswell technology given to us through the efforts of that legendary public servant, Colonel Philip J. Corso. But Jim still eschews computers and also the Net -- the Dreaded Internet, as he calls it. While someone else publishes Smear on the Web for him, Jim still prefers corresponding via snail mail, particularly with the format of "confidential postcards." (If I worked for the Post Office, I would never read a postcard marked CONFIDENTIAL. How about you?)
It's ironical that a man who has spent most of his life fascinated with the possibility of technologically advanced craft from other worlds sticks with paper. Then again, hardcopies of Saucer Smear will never crash. I don't know how well a hard drive would hold up against salt water.
Baa! There are none to my knowledge. Very few who get it in the way Moseley did.
Why would anyone under the age of 40 want to get into UFOlogy anyway? Outside of selling books there really is little incentive. I mean, look at the fringe benefits! Spend bunches of time poring over old accounts--trying to make sense out of them. Interview witnesses who will range from sincere, down to Earth types to downright loonies. Get ridiculed by your peers and perfect strangers (;)) Make a marginal living on your last self- published book if you are really, really lucky.
This is of you approach the thing with a more or less objective bent. If you get sucked into the believer-bracket you can have all of the above plus, be a speaker at UFO conventions. Sell UFO related merchandise (and your self-published book.) Maybe if you are an adroit business person you can roll this into a very lucrative income. Some people do.
Who wouldn’t want that? What’s a career, friends and family when you can become a modern-day version of a patent medicine show?
All the time we get no closer to the core mystery. Marketing is not research and research is often times too boring to market. Or if one is a cynic like myself, there really is no solution so, why not sit back and enjoy the show?
Moseley had one advantage in that he had a little family money to start out with. If he’d been a working stiff I doubt we would have ever heard of him. But he did contribute and many have heard of him. Most “saucer fiends” won’t realize what that contribution is. I think it’s in the “sit back and enjoy” category. He’s a fellow who is not too insecure to laugh, at himself and at (with) others. And that is an important contribution indeed
Ray:
The irony is that some ufologists criticize Moseley for not being "Internet savvy", while they spend all of their time and energy looking into cases from decades ago, as opposed to going out and doing what Moseley himself once did - investigate new cases.
I think Moselely is still ahead of the curve vis-a-vis many in ufology, disdain for the Internet notwithstanding.
After all, it's not the medium - it's the message that counts.
Paul
Odd:
Here's a question that people should ask themselves - who would you rather have a drink with, and a chat? Jim Moseley, or his critics within ufology?
Easy answer for me. Moseley.
Paul
Moseley's book would be good for such a course, but it would have to be joined with at least one other book with more structure, as well as articles.
I lay this out in my review of Peebles' book and Moseley's book, which are the two most comprehensive single volume histories of ufology that I am aware of.
http://studentweb.tulane.edu/~jcard/review/peebles.htm
Heh!
I’d happily buy the drinks!
Not that I wouldn’t sit down with any of Moseley’s critics, or my critics even. I like a good debate; in person or over email, it makes little difference to me.
But a good debate is one which shares both sides of an issue, not having one person’s opinions crammed down you throat. Looking over Moseley’s history I’d say he’s quite capable of holding his own with the worst criticism, being assertive without becoming insulting and still coming out of the discussion with a handshake and a smile. Those are rare qualities indeed!
Post a Comment