3 commentaires
Don't care for this crap. Personally, if I ever witnessed ufo activity, I would NEVER call mufon. They treat people like crap! I understand research and analysis completely, but lets not forget you are dealing with humans. Humans react to unknown things with panic and confusion. And often with wonderment. Quit watching in the 2nd episode because of their negative oriented analysis. Just made me hate mufon. So back off mufon!
Most UFO-minded documentaries seem either uncritically gullible or skeptical beyond point of rationality. This 3-episode series walks the line between, with superb balance, and refreshing results. But beware: it doesn't pander to prejudicially "pro" or "con" bias. As such, it won't please ... quite a few viewers, who prefer one or the other type presentation.
This series raises as many good questions, as it answers - earning high marks on both counts. I'm surprised at the relatively low (5.4 / 10) IMDb series rating, and assume that perhaps reflect viewer tastes - i.e., preferring either a more typically "con-skeptical" (e.g. NOVA: CASE OF THE UFOS) - or "pro-excited" presentation and slant. But this series deserves acclaim for its essentially non-dismissive approach sympathetic-to- possibilities, while yielding no ground to gullibility or anything even remotely uncritical. It excels thus in both its aims, and results the investigation team gets.
These investigators aren't trying to 'explain away' anything, nor build it up into some big mystery. They're interested in solving cases they investigate. And the do so with impressive methods and skill - not least of which, witness interview and evaluation - getting answers, and leaving questions that remain, standing.
The episode about a Fayetteville NC incident made me wonder - how are polygraph examiners selected sometimes, when it comes to saucers. Is question posed to them, of whether they 'believe' in UFOs or not? Either way - could answer to such a question have any bearing on their handling of a UFO witness? While the examiner concluded the witness was fabrication - all other factors, as presented, suggested otherwise. The show's investigative team held his conclusion in reserve, sensibly amid conflicting indications.
The episode on Mexican reports perhaps best showcases the versatility, command, and critically balanced rigor of the investigative team. They got to the bottom of cases they looked at - and the Jaime Maussan factor too. Without personalizing, they brought an entirely new light on his role. We've seen him on TV ever since early 1990's, when the Mexican ufo bonanza kicked up. But, never like this - admirably eye-opening work, scientific and forensic.
The Bucks County PA episode, likewise excellent.
This series raises as many good questions, as it answers - earning high marks on both counts. I'm surprised at the relatively low (5.4 / 10) IMDb series rating, and assume that perhaps reflect viewer tastes - i.e., preferring either a more typically "con-skeptical" (e.g. NOVA: CASE OF THE UFOS) - or "pro-excited" presentation and slant. But this series deserves acclaim for its essentially non-dismissive approach sympathetic-to- possibilities, while yielding no ground to gullibility or anything even remotely uncritical. It excels thus in both its aims, and results the investigation team gets.
These investigators aren't trying to 'explain away' anything, nor build it up into some big mystery. They're interested in solving cases they investigate. And the do so with impressive methods and skill - not least of which, witness interview and evaluation - getting answers, and leaving questions that remain, standing.
The episode about a Fayetteville NC incident made me wonder - how are polygraph examiners selected sometimes, when it comes to saucers. Is question posed to them, of whether they 'believe' in UFOs or not? Either way - could answer to such a question have any bearing on their handling of a UFO witness? While the examiner concluded the witness was fabrication - all other factors, as presented, suggested otherwise. The show's investigative team held his conclusion in reserve, sensibly amid conflicting indications.
The episode on Mexican reports perhaps best showcases the versatility, command, and critically balanced rigor of the investigative team. They got to the bottom of cases they looked at - and the Jaime Maussan factor too. Without personalizing, they brought an entirely new light on his role. We've seen him on TV ever since early 1990's, when the Mexican ufo bonanza kicked up. But, never like this - admirably eye-opening work, scientific and forensic.
The Bucks County PA episode, likewise excellent.
This is frankly the series which helped tank MUFON's (Mutual UFO Network) reputation. I think the series concept is great, which is probably not as it appears in ads. Exemplified by the third episode where they travel to Mexico, and debunk two UFO cases from the files of the famed UFO investigator Jaime Maussan. Essentially they are UFO debunkers, which ends like an episode of the old series "Cheaters", where they confront the alleged witnesses to a UFO incident.
In the Mexico episode, James Carrion's ability to speak fluent Spanish is a breath of fresh air (one needs look at James Fox's South American jaunt's to see the effect of a language barrier on the production), and they really skewer some of the alleged witnesses.
Unfortunately for MUFON, they debunked the wrong person in their first episode, Chris Bledsoe, who has since been investigated ad nausea by NASA, CIA etc. Etc.
In the Mexico episode, James Carrion's ability to speak fluent Spanish is a breath of fresh air (one needs look at James Fox's South American jaunt's to see the effect of a language barrier on the production), and they really skewer some of the alleged witnesses.
Unfortunately for MUFON, they debunked the wrong person in their first episode, Chris Bledsoe, who has since been investigated ad nausea by NASA, CIA etc. Etc.
- gregorybquinn
- 28 nov. 2024
- Permalien