Debunkery 101: Dan Aykroyd Hawks Plastic Skull Vodka and Claims to Have Seen UFOs

True believers are delighted that a celebrity has come out of the closet, and declared that he has seen UFO's. But a has-been actor who is reduced to hawking vodka packaged in a plastic skull doesn't exactly have a lot of credibility.

Only a UFO true believer would point to a UFO hoax as proof that there are real UFO's out there. The Ghostbusters star must be drinking from that cheap plastic skull of vodka, how else can we account for his twisted logic?

I'll buy Akroyd as a big screen ghostbuster, but I seriously doubt that he has seen any UFO's when he wasn't drunk or high.

Most of the UFO sightings are like the hoax that Akroyd alluded to: Two dudes attached flares to helium balloons and presto, instant UFO's.

Friends and neighbors the giant Pillsbury Dough Boy from Ghostbusters will come to your house selling Avon, before you see a real UFO.

Robert Paul Reyes is a NewsBlaze writer on Politics, Pop Culture and Pointless Pontificating. Contact him by writing to NewsBlaze.

Dan Aykroyd Hawks Plastic Skull Vodka and Claims to Have Seen UFOs

I have read a lot of really insulting articles, but this one has to make the top ten.

First, a comedic genius is called a has been actor. Yes, as though the only reason he isn't in dozens of movies anymore is because he is no longer A-list, not that he prefers to do other things or possibly has made enough money that he doesn't care to work his ass off doing movies.

Of course, next is the oldest debunkery rule in the book -- if someone claims to have seen something strange just accuse them of being drunk or high. Does he accuse Ronald Regan and Jimmy Carter of the same? No doubt he would if he thought it would stick.

Yes, another debunkery rule -- make sure to accuse someone of only caring about making money. He does plenty of that just in the title of the article, hawking plastic skull vodka. In the mind of the Debunklicans anyone who actually may be making some money is obviously lying about everything. Even if that money isn't being made from Ufology. Never mentioned is the fact that skeptics/debunkies make money spewing their De Bunk.

As someone who has seen strange things flying about while not being drunk or high -- I find this insulting. It is insulting mostly in it's common, dull and dumb assumptions made by someone who has obviously not investigated the subject. Someone who doesn't realize there are thousands of videos, photos and even military documented sightings of UFOs. Someone who really is so uninformed that he shouldn't be worth my time to comment on, but it is a dull rainy day.

KNOWING, …or NOT?

So hurray! Along comes “Knowing” and gives the non-skeptical world a whole new reason to believe in precognition, clairvoyance and the supernatural. Not to mention another number conspiracy theory to freshen up any ancient Pythagorean, sacred geometric, alchemical or numerological hoodoo that may have been on the wane since “The Di Vinci Code” or “The Number 23.” In this movie it’s all neatly rolled into one little bundle. As a mentalist I can now use effects that utilize numbers and predictions and be assured of a whole new audience! All I can say is, “…Woooooooooooooooo!” Thank you mass media for another validation! We may grit their teeth at this fairytale, but falling for this yarn for anybody but us skeptics is not so preposterous when you see the way the writers and director pulled this all off. The acting is compelling, the story tight and the special effects utterly smashing - in more ways than one.

I wrote about this a couple weeks back in Grey Matters after seeing the film, but why is it that skeptics/debunkers and fundamentalist Christians both think the non-skeptical world or non-believers are going to take this seriously? I found it to be an entertaining fictional film that had me thinking about what ifs for about 10 minutes or so and then I went on with my life.

It is something that skeptics and fundamentalists Christians have in common -- anyone who doesn't think exactly like them will take such things seriously. Everyone other than them is mislead and dumb. Hogwash!

No wonder the aliens would rather save the rabbits. :-)

Continue reading --
Skepticblog » KNOWING, …or NOT?

FAQ ATTAQ!! Hate and Crap vs. Light and Love

• UFO Magazine: News For the Fews •

Randi Backs Out of Challenge with Homeopath George Vithoulkas

As for homeopathic remedies, how would you judge that? If there was no physical evidence that they worked and yet the person feels better -- how could it be said that they didn't work? Even if they only work mentally, they still work.

Using myself as an example -- I know that acupuncture does not heal my back and neck problems. However, whenever I have it done it relaxes me so much that they feel better and I feel better overall.

Health and wellness is not just physical and almost any doctor will agree with that.

Randi Backs Out of Challenge with Homeopath George Vithoulkas

Rupert Sheldrake and Scientific Fundamentalism

Such a great article, you can find it here.

Some quotes:

The same is true of controversies about telepathy. Sceptics like Rutherford, who accused me of "crimes against reason", rely on the claims of other skeptics, like Michael Shermer, who rely on yet other skeptics such as David Marks, who ignore any evidence that goes against their beliefs.

Their beliefs. That is true and it totally excludes them from being considered skeptics and tags them as debunkers.

Science is our best method for exploring what we do not understand. But for some people science has become a religion. They need authority and certainty, and want to believe that the fundamental answers are already known.

Scientific fundamentalism serves deep emotional needs, but it is counter-productive for the progress of science itself. It inhibits scientific exploration, gives science a bad name and puts young people off. Science advances through questioning dogmas, by considering new possibilities, and through open-minded enquiry.

That is also completely true.

Certain people need certainty because they are afraid of the unknown. If there is an unknown that means that they really have no control. They are afraid of having no control.

In fact, it does inhibit science as well. I know several people who have come up with great inventions and patents simply by not following "scientific laws." Yes, by trying something new. By trying something that others told them would never work.

The BSCSI

Journalist Terry Hansen wrote:

"[The Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal] is an organization of people who oppose what they contend is pseudo-science...CSICOP, contrary to its impressive-sounding title, does not sponsor scientific research. On the contrary, it's main function has been to oppose scientific research, especially in areas such as psychic phenomena and UFOs, two topics that, coincidentally or not, have been of demonstrated interest to the intelligence community over the decades. Instead, CSICOP devotes nearly all of its resources to influencing the American public via the mass media. As author Jerome Clark, editor of the International UFO Reporter, once pointed out, 'CSICOP's ability to influence media is legendary. It's Manual for Local, Regional and National Groups devotes 17 pages to 'Handling the Media' and 'Public Relations' and, tellingly, a mere three to 'Scientific Investigations'...' "

Yes! Exactly! These people try to appear as though they are scientists and that they are conducting actual scientific investigations when they are NOT! The only people that actually investigate UFO Sighting are Ufologists. Perhaps some of their investigation are not as scientific as some would like, but at least they are out there interviewing witnesses and investigating -- unlike CSI.

I have always suspected that CSI members have a hat and in that hat are all their silly theories, swamp gas, weather balloons, hedgehogs, Venus, owls and so on. When a case comes along that gets any attention they reach into that hat and pull out a theory rather than doing any actual investigation. Then they get on the phone to various media outlets and push that theory even though there was no real investigation. There are many times that I have noticed that CSI members are not even aware of the most basic facts of a case they may be commenting on and putting forth their theories on.

Robert Hastings writes:

The long-time and still-current Executive Editor of Skeptical Inquirer, Kendrick Frazier, worked for more than two decades as a PR Specialist at Sandia National Laboratories-although one will have to look high and low to find references to that employment in his magazine and even in his self-published online biography. Sandia Labs is one of the U.S. government's most important nuclear weapons labs.

Some snipping

So, who is routinely trying to debunk the reality of UFOs and the notion of a UFO cover-up in CSI's Skeptical Inquirer magazine? Why, a PR guy working for the U.S. government's nuclear weapons program! (Although he is strangely shy about publicly acknowledging where he picked up his paycheck for over 20 years, during the same period he was feverishly debunking UFOs, supposedly because of his "skepticism" about them!)

Why is a PR guy of any sort involved in debunking UFOs, but especially one working for the US Government? These people are NOT skeptics, they are debunkers and the entire situation reeks of a government sponsered disinformation program.

Another good question would be -- why does the media give these people the amount of attention that they do? I will guess there is less conspiracy there and mainly just pure lazyness of not taking the time to find out if these people actually deserve to be called scientific or skeptical.

Perhaps Ufology needs some PR people too? People that could point out the small amount of investigation CSI actually does and that they normally have no actual evidence for their claims. That is aside from them being a bit too cozy with the US government.

"More BS from CSI on Big Sur"

An excellent article by Robert Hastings. I hope to get around to commenting on it later.
THE UFO CHRONICLES