Debunking

The debunking (of English to debunk : to contradict, to discredit) indicates in the beginning the action to prove the inaccuracy of theories or assertions by using the various tools of logic and science. The debunkeurs apply these tools so that they regard as forgery, nonscientific, odd or abnormal and particularly employ them in the fields of the Paranormal, the UFO or the theories of the plot. In its original direction to contradict , the debunking merges with the scientific Scepticisme in the Anglo-Saxon world and with the Zététique in France.

Within the framework of the debate on the nature of the phenomenon UFO, the critics of the extraterrestrial assumption who consider the ufology as a Pseudo-science rather develop the Modèle sociopsychologic of the phenomenon UFO. It is noted however that in certain mediums ufologic, especially not english-speaking, the term of debunking takes a negative connotation. They use the term in a different direction, debunking then indicating what they perceive as processes of misinformation of which the goal is to disparage, to ridicule the witnesses or enquiring ufologists, of désinformer and to handle.

In the same way, some skeptics, such as Joe Nickel of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry for example, reject the use of the term debunking because of pejorative interpretation of this term, and prefer to say that the skeptics apply the scientific Méthode and the critical Pensée of the paranormaux phenomena. In this context, the debunking would indicate a bad form of skepticism, where the person would remain behind her office and would not inquire into the ground. However, the majority of the authors of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry insist on the importance of the investigation of ground when it is a question of explaining the paranormal.

It is clear that in this direction, the border between the honest skeptic and the debunker dishonest person and insincerely can be very thin since it can depend only on the lawsuit of intention which one wishes to make with his adversary . The use of the word debunking and debunker in the ufologic community is sometimes ironic since the skeptics always use the term in its original direction and are defended to want désinformer.

The debunking in the world ufologic

Two techniques of débunking can be identified:

External Debunking

The external debunking is most traditional: it is a question of seeking to discredit the defenders of a theory in their opponent of the commonplace explanations aiming at calling into question their good sense. One can quote the following examples:

In March 1966, the doctor Josef Allen Hynek, then scientific consultant near the Project Blue Book, revealed that officers of the American army had intimated the order to him to explain the business of Ann Arbor, in the Michigan, by a gas emission of the marshes . At the time of this observation, 40 people, including 12 police officers, had seen a UFO who seemed to be escorted by four smaller flying objects to be posed in marshes, the night.
the NICAP (American ufologic association mainly made up of military career) ceased any true activity as from 1969, after John Acuff replaced Donald Keyhoe with the head of this association. John Acuff recognized being member of the CIA several years after the end of the activities of this group of ufologic research.
In 1947, when at the time of the business Roswell, the US Air Force affirmed that the remains found on the place of crash landing were those of a banal weather sounding-balloon. But one also suspects the army of being at the origin of the thesis of the crash landing of UFO in order to camouflage the fact that it was about balloon-spy Mogul (material of secret ultra information at the time of the facts).
the thesis of the attack of owls for the Incidental of Kelly-Hopkinsville in 1955.

Interior Debunking

The interior debunking is more subtle. One could also call it debunking infiltration , since it would be about a technique of misinformation consisting in ridiculing a group and the theories which he preaches by infiltrating it and by décrédibilisant it " intérieur" near the general public. In so far as the existence of this type of debunker is proven, it cannot then merge with a skeptic, since it will claim to share the theories of the infiltrated group and will ridicule it by proposing voluntarily ridiculous theses or arguments or forgeries which could then be debunkés , exposing to the great day ridiculous group.

Like example of this type of debunking, one will be able to quote:

the fact that the theory of an alleged recovery of corpses the extraterrestrial ones by the American army with Roswell appeared for the first time in 1994 in a book written by an ex-agent of the CIA; that is interpreted by certain ufologists like an attempt by the US government to discredit the extraterrestrial thesis while making it ridiculous.
the fact that some of the Théories of the plot in connection with the oddest attacks of September 11th, 2001 could have been the work of the US government him even in order to discredit any contradictor of the official thesis.

In this direction, the interior debunking can thus be comparable with a Théorie of the plot.

Examples of debunkings

Here an not-exhaustive list of case where the skeptics propose explanations for cases a priori unexplained. The cases are classified chronologically.

1947 : The observation of Kenneth Arnold, at the origin of the phenomenon UFO, is explained for certain skeptics by a complex Méprise with a herd of Pélican S American white. Another important point is that Arnold observed objects in form of Boomerang S, and not in the shape of saucer. On the other hand, it described with the journalists the movement of the objects as similar to those of saucer which one would launch on water (a displacement by rebounds). The journalist was mistaken in his article and said that the objects had the shapes of saucer, which gave the term of flying saucers. However, in the weeks which followed, of tens of witnesses appeared, to say that they had seen flying saucers. They not described the form really observed by Arnold (boomerangs), but that conveyed by the press. It is a perfect example of the importance of the Suggestion of the media, and influence which they have when they work testimonys fortéens in general, or of UFO in particular…

1947 : The Incident of Roswell is explained by the crash landing of a balloon Mogul. It is first of all about the official explanation concerning this business, but various investigators skeptics arrived at the same conclusion as the experts of the government after their own independent surveys: Philip J. Klass and Kal K. Korff not to quote that two more famous of enter them. The project Mogul was a signal-secrecy project which at the beginning of the Cold war consisted in sending sounding-balloons in the upper atmosphere in order to espionner the Soviet Union and to see whether it carried out nuclear tests . A launching of balloon Mogul was carried out little before the pled crash landing of Roswell. The remains on the photograph of press where the soldiers show the remainders of the “saucer” correspond to the remains of a sounding-balloon Mogul.

1955 : The Rencontre of Kelly-Hopkinsville is an good example of meeting brought closer to the 3rd type which is explained for certain skeptics by a complex mistakes with night Rapace S (explanation suggested by Renaut Leclet, of CNEGU).

1961 : The removal pled by the extraterrestrial ones of Betty and Barney Hill. The skeptics consider that Betty Hill had a inclined Personnalité with imagination. Following a traditional vision of Ovni and with readings in the field of the Ufologie, Betty Hill started to make long-lived dreams, which is one of the characteristics of such a personality. The analysis of the skeptics is the suivante : via the Hypnosis, Betty and Barney Hill have both developed a Syndrome of the false memories ; before the couple does not consult a hypnothérapeute, Betty told its long-lived dreams with her Barney husband, which explains the elements common to testimonys of the wife and the husband, this one having done nothing but repeat under hypnosis what his wife had said to him. With regard to the sincerity of the couple, it should be stressed that if the couple indeed built a Faux memory via the allegedly regressive Hypnose, as it think the skeptics, it is completely logical that they have the air sincere in what they témoignent ; the sincerity of a person does not imply absolutely that it describes the events such as they really occurred. The skeptics regard this case as essential for the comprehension of the phenomenon of the removals pled by the extraterrestrial ones, since the later witnesses will base themselves on this account, very largely mediatized, to build theirs unconsciously. The account of Hill became the narrative type for all later pled removals. The “Gris” became since extremely popular, and this extraterrestrial “species” at present is represented in ufologic mythology.

1969: The observation of the president of the USA Jimmy Carter was unbolted by the skeptic Robert Sheaffer. It is very interesting to note that a president is an human being like the others, and that it can also try out a Méprise complex with Venus.

1981 : Case of Trans-in-Provence. Nothing proves that the examined traces were indeed caused by an extraterrestrial landing of spaceship. The skeptics lean rather for a shifting of tire, perhaps due to a Bétonnière used in work of masonries which took place at that time or to another vehicle. Moreover, it is not because a witness affirms that he says the truth proves that he says the truth, just as it is not because a witness affirms anything to know with the phenomenon UFO which he knows indeed nothing with the phenomenon UFO…

2004 : The Observation of Campeche, with the Mexico, took place when an infra-red camera of a plane of the Mexican Air force filmed 11 Ovni S in the Mexican airspace. The explanation brought by the skeptics for this case is that the infra-red camera filmed Torchère S of the wells of Pétrole (detectable at very long distance by an infra-red camera because of heat which releases the flares). In this case, a revealing index was that if the camera had indeed filmed something, the pilots of the plane had not seen anything with the naked eye…

See too

Movement contemporary skeptic
Zététique
UFO
Model sociopsychologic of the phenomenon UFO