Wednesday, June 15, 2005
Here's a typical UFO news story; it just so happens it's recent as well.
Man sees UFO two nights running
The main witness (there were at least two) has the following to say about his sighting:
"It became bright, then moved up and down and made weird shapes in the sky."
Interesting. Later we're treated to more details suggestive of something genuinely strange:
"Peacock said the object continued its apparently random movement across the sky almost until dawn, when it disappeared.
"He dismissed it as a strange phenomenon until he saw it reappear yesterday morning."
But finally reality becomes manageable again thanks to some rote debunkery:
"Experts were unable to identify the object but said it could have been a satellite burning up as it re-entered Earth's atmosphere."
Ignoring for the moment that there's no damned way this was satellite debris, who are these "experts"? "Journalism" does us a grave injustice when it's content to give the last word to people who, for all I can tell, may not even exist.
Man sees UFO two nights running
The main witness (there were at least two) has the following to say about his sighting:
"It became bright, then moved up and down and made weird shapes in the sky."
Interesting. Later we're treated to more details suggestive of something genuinely strange:
"Peacock said the object continued its apparently random movement across the sky almost until dawn, when it disappeared.
"He dismissed it as a strange phenomenon until he saw it reappear yesterday morning."
But finally reality becomes manageable again thanks to some rote debunkery:
"Experts were unable to identify the object but said it could have been a satellite burning up as it re-entered Earth's atmosphere."
Ignoring for the moment that there's no damned way this was satellite debris, who are these "experts"? "Journalism" does us a grave injustice when it's content to give the last word to people who, for all I can tell, may not even exist.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment