THE GREAT PARADOX OF THE FLYING SAUCERS (1980) 19 mai, 2012
Posté par skystars dans : Exo-contacts , trackbackBy Philip SCHNEYDER
President of the C.N.R.O.V.N.I. (FRANCE) 1973-1995
Amongst the innumerable paradoxes which characterise the immense problem of the flying-saucer phenomenon, by no means the least resides in the following statement.
Indeed, whereas in all probability there is reason for considering that, on a planetary level, the question of UFO(s) clearly constitutes the first and foremost problem of our time – with due respect to all the chauvinists, rationalists and troubled spirits who think we could economise on this as on the struggle for the conquest and control of space – Humanity does not particulary give the impression of according to it the no doubt capital importance it deserves, beginning by those who should precisely be concerned by vocation.
There are several reasons for this amazing situation which, on the whole, have escaped till now the notice of the majority of the public and for good reason but, prompted by personnal reflection over a number of years, we shall attempt to resume them by setting out the following four principal points.
POINT ONE :
The first point involves is commonly known today as the mass-medias. Now the respect we owe to the simple truth obliges us here to state plainly that ever since Anglo-saxon journalists started to use the unfortunate expression « flying saucer » after Kenneth ARNOLD’s famous observation at Mount Rainer in 1947, there has always been an ever widening separation between journalists and the respect due to current-event problems of all sorts and, naturally, the respect equally due to the public.
Briefly, we claim to affirm that – save several exceptions which precisely confirm the rule – new reports, wether written, spoken or televised, and journalists have never really made the effort to deal seriously and honestly with the problem which so rightly preoccupies us.
It is true that the attitude of jeering mockery which rapidly established itself or, in contrast, the farcical and grotesque « space opera » style which also became so popular are not the fault of journalists and newspapers alone….. This inevitably and logically leads us to points TWO and THREE where we shall see that the journalistic tribe thus fortunately finds itself exonerated of part of the sins of which we accuse it.
Point TWO concerns intellectuals and point THREE the secret services of the two great nations
POINT TWO
It is well known and obvious that, when analysing the mysterious « Flying Saucer » phenomenon somewhat in the manner of the thesis defended by Dr David Michael JACOBS at the university of Indiana, intellectual spheres and, first and foremost, the scientific community refused for a long time to tackle what they considered to be a myth or phantasm unworthy of enlightened minds.
Only very gradually did American or European intelligentsia consent to take a good look at this formidable puzzle which they strongly suspected of being a diabolical trap, set for all those whose profession of faith or thought was in sympathy with established dogmas. Our friend, Jean-François Gille (John F. Gille), physicist and eminent ufologist, showed this clearly in his recent article » The intellectuals great fear of flying-saucers » (in LE MONDE, Aug, 17th 1979), meanig the fear of an intelligence exterior to our World, visiting or supervising the Earth and, without doubt, master of a transcendantal, non human technology or at any rate one very much superior to our own. This is also the point of view of the french astrophysicist Pierre GUERIN.
We shall not revert to this beyond pointing out that, in view of the immovable, sceptical and anthropocentric spirit of our Masters of thought (or Master-thinkers ?), it was evidently more comfortable to relegate flying-saucers to the cloakroom by preferring the arguments of the american Carl Sagan or scotsman Duncan Lunan, or even of the frenchman Albert Ducrocq, on interstellar communications by radiotelescopes which themselves relegate the hypothetical « little green men » to thousands if not millions of light-years away from us. (Likewise, when Pierre Benoît, champion adventure-novelist between the two wars, situates his mysterious « Atlantide » in the heart of the Sahara, no one is upset) One most, howewer, observe in passing the obvious seriousness of this conjunction between, on the one hand, the clumsiness and incomptence of the mass-media and, on the other, the refusal a priori by prominent intellectuals to examine the documents.
POINT THREE
The third point offers another explanation of the scandalous discredit suffered for so long by the « F.S. » phenomenon within a large part of public opinion. Indeed, very rapidly and intimately believing in the physical or psycho-physical reality of the UFO(s) phenomenon, the american and soviet secret services (C.I.A. and K.G.B.), especially the former and near proof ot this exists today, brought pressure to bear on military authorities and even on parliamentary and governmental quarters so that nothing, or at least the minimum, filtered through to the public or, more precisely, to the principal channels of opinion concerning the reality of the UFO(s) « nuts and bolts », as the american Stringfield would say, and of their occasional occupants.
It is not necessary to seek elsewhere the explanation of the intentional and premeditated failure of the majority of american baords of enquiry, from the « Project Sign » to the most recent CONDOM Committee.
We shall not revert to this either, for all those more or less involved with the problem know today what gigantic practical jokes were unhesitatingly resorted to in order to disguise the truth, a truth which became more and more embarrassing. Scientists themselves, including James Mc Donald and J. Allen Hynek, were hoodwinked at the beginning. Did they not publicy admit so later ?
Faced with such an accumulation of negative and unfavourable factors, we must admit that a black-out of this type and importance deserved to hold good as it has done, wether we like it or not, for 25 years, and this in the face of numerous and virulent attaks directed by ufologists, scientists, members of Parliament and journalists.
POINT FOUR
The fourth and last point completes our demonstration in so far as the majority of responsible ufologists, in spite of inevitable divergences over details, agreeon one thing at least : that Agent X (meaning the behaviour of the flying-saucers phenomenon) leads us astray intentionnaly. Indeed, wether ostentations or elusive, the phenomenon has on typical particularity : its quality which is both evanescent, fleeting and remanent. We know personnaly of cases of alleged « landings » where traces coincide with « fairy rings », easily identified and very much of this earth. This in order to say that everithing happens consequently as though we were dealing with a magic phenomenon, even though in other respects we all pertinently know that this same perennial, obstinate and even repetitive phenomenon can be picked up by radar and photographed….. and also that it leaves traces which are often indelible, especially on vegetation, animals and even on certain human beings.
None the less, we know that henceforward we are confronted with a phenomenon really, as the frenchman Bertrand Meheust would say, « unyielding to the human psychism » which is playing with us by trying to be accepted for what it is not, in other words : an ILLUSION.
Here then is the great word, the master-word : CAMOUFLAGE. Well, when we can find out what exactly is behind the curtain of smoke, we shall then most certainly be approaching the truth.
At present we are still groping…. There is no reason to do so blindly or masochistically, veiling our eyes knowingly before a possible danger. Who knows ? There are other methods of approaching a phenomenon, attested by nearly 90 million observations during 30 years (provisionnal figure), which will be of capital importance to future generations.
This, we believe, is what should be recalled when the sinister black-out on the M.I.B. (men in black), previously referred to, begins to crack before disintegration which will not now be long we hope.
Philippe SCHNEYDER
1980
source: Archives de la commission nationale de recherches sur les Ovnis (CNROVNI)
Laisser un commentaire
Vous devez être connecté pour rédiger un commentaire.
Commentaires»
pas encore de commentaires