Visitors Now:
Total Visits:
Total Stories:
Profile image
Story Views

Now:
Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:
Total:

Long-Form Thinking…where is it in ufology?

Sunday, October 16, 2016 10:18
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

(Before It's News)

B4INREMOTE-aHR0cHM6Ly8xLmJwLmJsb2dzcG90LmNvbS8tdFlLMnFsNm95Rm8vV0FPeUdMX2w4cEkvQUFBQUFBQUFTSmsvc1d6dDZvLVJTOUFtRkRYUkduUHdwN2tucTNXbjkxRzdBQ0xjQi9zMTYwMC9Mb25nLWZvcm0ucG5n
TIME magazine (for October 24th 2016) has an “op ed” piece by author James Patterson wherein he writes about the current state of reading:
“People age 75 and older read about an hour a day. The habit drops off through each 10-year bracket below that until you get to people ages 35 to 44 years old. They’re reading 12 minutes on Saturdays and Sundays and less than 10 [minutes] during the week. Younger than that, it only gets worse.”
My experience here, at this blog, is that odd, semi-serious infusions, like the “old coin from Egypt with an alien face on it” gets a serious response from our friend, Terry the Censor and others, but a serious, scientific insertion, like “what preceded The Big Bang” gets nothing, no rejoinder at all.
This is true of other cogitative input here.
My Facebook UFO page had a note from Philip Mantle about a podcast from a nascent “new ufology” starter that seems to be geared to an inclusive clientele, membership.
He (Philip) was maligned and desired an apology, which he won’t get, as ufologists today are not about truth but, rather, as he notes, about belief.
This belief comes from cursory readings of scientific materials and thoughtful UFO renderings.
No one has time to ruminate on UFO tales, past and present. Everyone is enamored of the Facebook approach to thinking: simple is the way to go.
Terry, for instance has, he tells us, 1000 non-fiction books in his personal library, but he, then, only provides correctives to postings here and at other blogs, like Kevin Randle’s.
Have his readings, which have to be greater than a few minutes per day, not formed a desire in him to elaborate on ideas (goofy and otherwise) that he comes across in the UFO community output?
There is another guy (unnamed by me because he’s a total ass) who scours the internet for grammatical mistakes in UFO postings. What a waste.
Arch-skeptic Zoam Chomsky is beloved by me because he inundates blogs, like mine, with erudite scoffing.
Where is Lance Moody, another brilliant skeptic? He’s on Facebook, enlivening that venue with bon mots and gratuitous pleas for Facebook “likes” as does his pal, and mine, Paul Kimball.
They seem to have given up on long-form reading and excoriation of nutty UFO postings, mine among them.
We, all of us, are on a downhill slide to banality and irrelevance when it comes to UFOs and intellectual topics of a societal nature too.
Facebook and lazy reading habits are the cause of an increase in ignorance and superficiality.
Zuckerberg and his minions have become the bane of humanity.
RR

http://ufocon.blogspot.com – The UFO Iconoclast(s)

Report abuse

Comments

Your Comments
Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

Top Stories
Recent Stories

Register

Newsletter

Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.