http://subversivethinking.blogspot.com/2010/12/interview-with-daniel-drasin-author-of.html

 

THURSDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2010

Interview with Daniel Drasin, the author of Zen... and the Art of Debunkery

 

 

1- Dan, tell us something about your background. 

 

I was born, raised and received my professional training in filmmaking and media production in the New York CIty area. Since 1973 I've been based primarily in the San Francisco Bay Area. In addition to my professional focus I'm broadly conversant with the arts, sciences and technology.

 

As a child I had many precognitive dreams. These experiences taught me that our normal perception of reality wasn't the whole picture, and that things went on "behind the scenes" to which our normal senses, and our scientific instruments, seem to be blind. This instilled in me a healthy skepticism toward the limited picture of reality we've been fed by our culture.

 

In the mid-1940s, Frank Edwards, one of that era's legendary New York radio broadcasters, often reported UFO sightings. This was a perfectly respectable subject at the time -- the ridicule-and-disinformation campaign wasn't launched until the infamous Robertson Panel initiated it in 1952. Fascinated by Edwards' UFO reports, I started reading everything I could find on the subject. I also became addicted to Long John Nebel's midnight radio show out of New York, which often featured purported UFO contactees and researchers of the paranormal.

 

In the mid-1960s I was invited by John Keel to accompany him on his research trips to Point Pleasant, West Virginia, where the mysterious Mothman was scaring the wits out of local residents, cops, and no-nonsense private pilots who had seen the enigmatic creature in full flight. This was my first exposure to "high strangeness," and it also taught me a lot about irrational and politicized skepticism. John wrote about some of my adventures in his book, *The Mothman Prophecies*, from which the Richard Gere movie was loosely adapted. It still freaks me out when I recall that I walked across the Silver Bridge less than a week before it collapsed into the Ohio River!

 

During the 1980s I became involved in the research into the apparent anomalies on Mars, initially working with Richard Hoagland and later with the Society for Planetary Seti Research. I'm still on the fence about some of these Mars features, but to me the most interesting part of that experience was my encounter with the bizarre irrationality and bullying tactics of the debunker community, many of whom fancied themselves scientists but were happy to behave perfectly unscientifically when it came to controversial subject matter.

 

Since about 2001 I've been producing some documentaries about scientific research into the afterlife. If you think the notion of ET brings out the bottom-feeding debunkers, just try getting into any inquiry that questions, on science's own terms, the materialist belief that the mind is the brain and that death is the end of awareness. That really drives them crazy!

 

 

2- You're the author of the excellent online article "Zen... and the Art of Debunkery". What motivated you to write it?

 

"Zen..." started out as a paper I delivered at a conference of the International Association for New Science in 1991. I wrote it pretty much off the top of my head, based on my run-ins with the debunking community over the years. My initial motive was simply to lay bare the strategies of the pathological skeptic, but I ended up having a lot of fun holding up the mirror to those who claim the scientific high ground without paying their dues, and who have made the lives of so many honest researchers so miserable for so long.

 

Of course, like any field of inquiry that's been marginalized, ufology, and anomalistics in general, have attracted their share of disgruntled eccentrics, carnival barkers and disinformers as well as bona-fide researchers. But I must say that the vast majority of people I've personally met in this field are simply trying to do their homework... often against formidable odds on a cruelly inclined playing field.

 

 

3- Have you received any feedback from "skeptics" and debunkers, regarding your article?

 

Some years ago I did receive an astonishingly unhinged rant from a fire-breathing debunker who claimed to be a scientist, but so far that's the only one. I certainly welcome reasoned feedback from anyone, but frankly I can't see most debunker types reading past the first paragraph of "Zen..." without rejecting the rest of the piece sight-unseen.

 

 

4- In your opinion, which are the main causes of the debunkers' almost obsessive hostility against unorthodox scientific theories? 

 

The main cause, as far a I can see, is the overwhelming force of peer pressure, which can be especially nasty in the supposedly free-thinking provinces of science and academia. Step one degree out of line, and your reputation and funding can suddenly evaporate, your papers may be rejected for publication, and the church fathers will refuse to look through your telescope -- it's been going on for centuries. You may also be disinvited from professional conferences, as recently happened to the Nobel-laureate physicist Brian Josephson, whose unpardonable sin was following scientific studies of the "paranormal." (Ironically, "paranormal" is a social definition, not a scientific one. After all, how can one even determine the degree of normalcy of anything that can't be discussed openly?)

 

Another root cause of that hostility seems to be that some people need structure in their lives. Many of them join the armed services, religious cults, right-wing groups or whatever, because they can't bear to take responsibility for their own words and actions. The cult of turbo-skepticism is tailor-made for those of a scientific or intellectual bent who fall into this category.

 

Beyond that there are the usual political and commercial forces that seek to suppress inconvenient truths of all kinds by any means possible. The attitude of the SETI community toward the ufological community is a perfect example. I mean, what would happen to SETI's funding if the scientific community suddenly started examining the robust evidence and testimony underlying the UFO issue?

 

 

5- In your view, which is the field of research most negatively affected by the debunkers' attacks and propaganda? 

 

That's a hard one because kneejerk negativists pervade just about every scientific and cultural field. In terms of immediate global consequences, I suppose the Big-Oil-fueled propaganda of the peak-oil deniers and climate-change debunkers is doing the most damage. Next in line would probably be the "free-energy" and cold-fusion "skeptics" who have cost us over two decades of delay and stagnation in the research and development of desperately needed new energy sources. Beyond that, of course, we have massive forces of denial pushing back against consciousness studies, post-materialist science, ufology, health and economic alternatives, and whatever threatens to render entrenched interests obsolete.

 

 

6- Your article addreses the common debunking tactics regarding evidence for extraterrestrial intelligence. Which is your current opinion about ufology? 

 

Well, "ufology" has always been poorly defined as a discipline, and is a mixed bag in terms of integrity, scientific rigor and so forth. It has also been heavily contaminated by those who, for whatever reasons, seek to muddy the waters by concocting hoaxes and other distractions. Once you force any field of inquiry underground, these kinds of dynamics are pretty much inevitable. In fact, those who suppress the truth rely on them and sometimes jump-start them behind the scenes. Those two old geezers, "Doug and Dave," who claimed to have hoaxed hundreds of crop circles, are a perfect example. You can find some provocative information about these and other crop-circle disinfo tactics at http://www.consciousape.com/news/mi5-crop-circle-makers/

 

Probably the greatest breath of fresh air to come along in many years is Leslie Kean's new book, *UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go on the Record*. With this book, Kean has set a new benchmark for journalism and scientific clarity in this field. So far, all the debunkers can do about it is to crawl out from under their rocks, take Leslie's words out of context, manufacture distractions and straw-man arguments, and toss a few outright lies into the mix. James Fox's documentary films, *Out of the Blue*, and its sequel *I Know What I Saw*, are also very well worth a look. In the related field of crop-circle research, Nancy Talbott's website, http://bltresearch.com, and Suzanne Taylor's documentary "What on Earth?" are quite good.

 

 

6A- Do you think we have reasonably good evidence for the possible extraterrestrial origin of some ufos? 

 

Yes, but I think the evidence suggests that the bigger picture may be more interesting than that. My guess is that it also involves several aspects of reality for which our current physics and psychology haven't yet developed appropriate language or conceptual frameworks.

 

 

7- One common objection to the hypothesis that alien beings are visiting us is that, given the extremely large distances between stars, it's monumentally improbable that such beings could arrive here. What do you think of this objection? 

 

It's pretty shortsighted, and also way out of line with the speculations of modern physics. As recently as 1900, the idea of flying from Los Angeles to London overnight would have seemed just as monumentally improbable and would surely have been shot down by any number of debunkers, foaming at the mouth about such nonsense and providing plenty of reasons why it would forever remain impossible.

 

Fortunately, what's possible isn't dictated by our theories. What matters is the evidence, and how honestly and carefully we study and interpret it.

 

 

8- Another objection is that, even if we accept the non-conventional nature of ufos, it doesn't imply that such objects are from an extraterrestrial origin. Some speculate that they could be human beings coming from the future, or even "angels" of other dimensions. Do you think it is a good objection against the alien hypothesis? 

 

The "UFO phenomenon" actually appears to be a range of different phenomena that we've lumped together into one big, fuzzy category. The political, scientific and social taboos against research in this area have kept our discernment stuck pretty much at the kindergarten level for at least a half a century.

 

 

9- What do you think of the phenomenon of "contactees" (i.e. people who claim to be in communication with ET)? Is there good evidence for these cases?

 

I don't think a broad-brush answer is possible -- one has to study these cases individually and carefully. Some seem to be transparent frauds and hoaxes. Some may be wholly or partly true. Unfortunately, many people's minds tend to snap completely open or shut too easily, so the possibility of a partial truth is almost never considered. We need to remember that sometimes witnesses and experiencers have to massage the facts a bit for their own protection. Others may embellish it for reasons of ego or opportunism.

 

 

10- Do you think the abduction phenomenon is real? 

 

There seems to be quite a lot of evidence for it, and no evidence against it that I know of. There may be abstract arguments against it, but reality doesn't give a hoot about our abstract arguments.

 

 

11- Do you think the ufo phenomenon has any connection with the history of humankind and religion?

 

As with the abduction phenomenon, there seems to be compelling evidence for it. I'm not aware of any evidence against it.

 

 

12- Are there some books you would like to recommend about ufology or any other topic?

 

For ufology I'd start with Leslie Kean's book, then go back a few years to Timothy Good's "Above Top Secret" and his subsequent books.

 

For a peek beyond the boundaries of the materialist paradigm I'd start with Charles T. Tart's "The End of Materialism," Michael Newton's "Journey of Souls," and The Solomons' "The Scole Experiment."

 

 

13- Something else you would like to add to end the interview?

 

I'd just like to thank you for publishing your blog and for shining so much light on these abuses and distortions of skepticism and critical thinking.

http://subversivethinking.blogspot.com/2010/12/interview-with-daniel-drasin-author-of.html

 

THURSDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2010

Interview with Daniel Drasin, the author of Zen... and the Art of Debunkery

 

This is an interview with Daniel Drasin, the author of the excellent online article (recently updated) entitled "Zen... and the Art of Debunkery". Enjoy.

 

 

1- Dan, tell us something about your background. 

 

I was born, raised and received my professional training in filmmaking and media production in the New York CIty area. Since 1973 I've been based primarily in the San Francisco Bay Area. In addition to my professional focus I'm broadly conversant with the arts, sciences and technology.

 

As a child I had many precognitive dreams. These experiences taught me that our normal perception of reality wasn't the whole picture, and that things went on "behind the scenes" to which our normal senses, and our scientific instruments, seem to be blind. This instilled in me a healthy skepticism toward the limited picture of reality we've been fed by our culture.

 

In the mid-1940s, Frank Edwards, one of that era's legendary New York radio broadcasters, often reported UFO sightings. This was a perfectly respectable subject at the time -- the ridicule-and-disinformation campaign wasn't launched until the infamous Robertson Panel initiated it in 1952. Fascinated by Edwards' UFO reports, I started reading everything I could find on the subject. I also became addicted to Long John Nebel's midnight radio show out of New York, which often featured purported UFO contactees and researchers of the paranormal.

 

In the mid-1960s I was invited by John Keel to accompany him on his research trips to Point Pleasant, West Virginia, where the mysterious Mothman was scaring the wits out of local residents, cops, and no-nonsense private pilots who had seen the enigmatic creature in full flight. This was my first exposure to "high strangeness," and it also taught me a lot about irrational and politicized skepticism. John wrote about some of my adventures in his book, *The Mothman Prophecies*, from which the Richard Gere movie was loosely adapted. It still freaks me out when I recall that I walked across the Silver Bridge less than a week before it collapsed into the Ohio River!

 

During the 1980s I became involved in the research into the apparent anomalies on Mars, initially working with Richard Hoagland and later with the Society for Planetary Seti Research. I'm still on the fence about some of these Mars features, but to me the most interesting part of that experience was my encounter with the bizarre irrationality and bullying tactics of the debunker community, many of whom fancied themselves scientists but were happy to behave perfectly unscientifically when it came to controversial subject matter.

 

Since about 2001 I've been producing some documentaries about scientific research into the afterlife. If you think the notion of ET brings out the bottom-feeding debunkers, just try getting into any inquiry that questions, on science's own terms, the materialist belief that the mind is the brain and that death is the end of awareness. That really drives them crazy!

 

 

2- You're the author of the excellent online article "Zen... and the Art of Debunkery". What motivated you to write it?

 

"Zen..." started out as a paper I delivered at a conference of the International Association for New Science in 1991. I wrote it pretty much off the top of my head, based on my run-ins with the debunking community over the years. My initial motive was simply to lay bare the strategies of the pathological skeptic, but I ended up having a lot of fun holding up the mirror to those who claim the scientific high ground without paying their dues, and who have made the lives of so many honest researchers so miserable for so long.

 

Of course, like any field of inquiry that's been marginalized, ufology, and anomalistics in general, have attracted their share of disgruntled eccentrics, carnival barkers and disinformers as well as bona-fide researchers. But I must say that the vast majority of people I've personally met in this field are simply trying to do their homework... often against formidable odds on a cruelly inclined playing field.

 

 

3- Have you received any feedback from "skeptics" and debunkers, regarding your article?

 

Some years ago I did receive an astonishingly unhinged rant from a fire-breathing debunker who claimed to be a scientist, but so far that's the only one. I certainly welcome reasoned feedback from anyone, but frankly I can't see most debunker types reading past the first paragraph of "Zen..." without rejecting the rest of the piece sight-unseen.

 

 

4- In your opinion, which are the main causes of the debunkers' almost obsessive hostility against unorthodox scientific theories? 

 

The main cause, as far a I can see, is the overwhelming force of peer pressure, which can be especially nasty in the supposedly free-thinking provinces of science and academia. Step one degree out of line, and your reputation and funding can suddenly evaporate, your papers may be rejected for publication, and the church fathers will refuse to look through your telescope -- it's been going on for centuries. You may also be disinvited from professional conferences, as recently happened to the Nobel-laureate physicist Brian Josephson, whose unpardonable sin was following scientific studies of the "paranormal." (Ironically, "paranormal" is a social definition, not a scientific one. After all, how can one even determine the degree of normalcy of anything that can't be discussed openly?)

 

Another root cause of that hostility seems to be that some people need structure in their lives. Many of them join the armed services, religious cults, right-wing groups or whatever, because they can't bear to take responsibility for their own words and actions. The cult of turbo-skepticism is tailor-made for those of a scientific or intellectual bent who fall into this category.

 

Beyond that there are the usual political and commercial forces that seek to suppress inconvenient truths of all kinds by any means possible. The attitude of the SETI community toward the ufological community is a perfect example. I mean, what would happen to SETI's funding if the scientific community suddenly started examining the robust evidence and testimony underlying the UFO issue?

 

 

5- In your view, which is the field of research most negatively affected by the debunkers' attacks and propaganda? 

 

That's a hard one because kneejerk negativists pervade just about every scientific and cultural field. In terms of immediate global consequences, I suppose the Big-Oil-fueled propaganda of the peak-oil deniers and climate-change debunkers is doing the most damage. Next in line would probably be the "free-energy" and cold-fusion "skeptics" who have cost us over two decades of delay and stagnation in the research and development of desperately needed new energy sources. Beyond that, of course, we have massive forces of denial pushing back against consciousness studies, post-materialist science, ufology, health and economic alternatives, and whatever threatens to render entrenched interests obsolete.

 

 

6- Your article addreses the common debunking tactics regarding evidence for extraterrestrial intelligence. Which is your current opinion about ufology? 

 

Well, "ufology" has always been poorly defined as a discipline, and is a mixed bag in terms of integrity, scientific rigor and so forth. It has also been heavily contaminated by those who, for whatever reasons, seek to muddy the waters by concocting hoaxes and other distractions. Once you force any field of inquiry underground, these kinds of dynamics are pretty much inevitable. In fact, those who suppress the truth rely on them and sometimes jump-start them behind the scenes. Those two old geezers, "Doug and Dave," who claimed to have hoaxed hundreds of crop circles, are a perfect example. You can find some provocative information about these and other crop-circle disinfo tactics at http://www.consciousape.com/news/mi5-crop-circle-makers/

 

Probably the greatest breath of fresh air to come along in many years is Leslie Kean's new book, *UFOs: Generals, Pilots and Government Officials Go on the Record*. With this book, Kean has set a new benchmark for journalism and scientific clarity in this field. So far, all the debunkers can do about it is to crawl out from under their rocks, take Leslie's words out of context, manufacture distractions and straw-man arguments, and toss a few outright lies into the mix. James Fox's documentary films, *Out of the Blue*, and its sequel *I Know What I Saw*, are also very well worth a look. In the related field of crop-circle research, Nancy Talbott's website, http://bltresearch.com, and Suzanne Taylor's documentary "What on Earth?" are quite good.

 

 

6A- Do you think we have reasonably good evidence for the possible extraterrestrial origin of some ufos? 

 

Yes, but I think the evidence suggests that the bigger picture may be more interesting than that. My guess is that it also involves several aspects of reality for which our current physics and psychology haven't yet developed appropriate language or conceptual frameworks.

 

 

7- One common objection to the hypothesis that alien beings are visiting us is that, given the extremely large distances between stars, it's monumentally improbable that such beings could arrive here. What do you think of this objection? 

 

It's pretty shortsighted, and also way out of line with the speculations of modern physics. As recently as 1900, the idea of flying from Los Angeles to London overnight would have seemed just as monumentally improbable and would surely have been shot down by any number of debunkers, foaming at the mouth about such nonsense and providing plenty of reasons why it would forever remain impossible.

 

Fortunately, what's possible isn't dictated by our theories. What matters is the evidence, and how honestly and carefully we study and interpret it.

 

 

8- Another objection is that, even if we accept the non-conventional nature of ufos, it doesn't imply that such objects are from an extraterrestrial origin. Some speculate that they could be human beings coming from the future, or even "angels" of other dimensions. Do you think it is a good objection against the alien hypothesis? 

 

The "UFO phenomenon" actually appears to be a range of different phenomena that we've lumped together into one big, fuzzy category. The political, scientific and social taboos against research in this area have kept our discernment stuck pretty much at the kindergarten level for at least a half a century.

 

 

9- What do you think of the phenomenon of "contactees" (i.e. people who claim to be in communication with ET)? Is there good evidence for these cases?

 

I don't think a broad-brush answer is possible -- one has to study these cases individually and carefully. Some seem to be transparent frauds and hoaxes. Some may be wholly or partly true. Unfortunately, many people's minds tend to snap completely open or shut too easily, so the possibility of a partial truth is almost never considered. We need to remember that sometimes witnesses and experiencers have to massage the facts a bit for their own protection. Others may embellish it for reasons of ego or opportunism.

 

 

10- Do you think the abduction phenomenon is real? 

 

There seems to be quite a lot of evidence for it, and no evidence against it that I know of. There may be abstract arguments against it, but reality doesn't give a hoot about our abstract arguments.

 

 

11- Do you think the ufo phenomenon has any connection with the history of humankind and religion?

 

As with the abduction phenomenon, there seems to be compelling evidence for it. I'm not aware of any evidence against it.

 

 

12- Are there some books you would like to recommend about ufology or any other topic?

 

For ufology I'd start with Leslie Kean's book, then go back a few years to Timothy Good's "Above Top Secret" and his subsequent books.

 

For a peek beyond the boundaries of the materialist paradigm I'd start with Charles T. Tart's "The End of Materialism," Michael Newton's "Journey of Souls," and The Solomons' "The Scole Experiment."

 

 

13- Something else you would like to add to end the interview?

 

I'd just like to thank you for publishing your blog and for shining so much light on these abuses and distortions of skepticism and critical thinking.