5 thoughts on “32. Marc Sima, Texas Lights

  • Pingback: Show Notes, Marc Sima, 32. | Podcast UFO

  • January 6, 2013 at 2:34 am
    Permalink

    Great interview! He said a number of things that resonated with me. The issue of being more “free” in other countries when it comes to UFO research than The United States because of a different mindset was similar to what I was recently blogging about. Another issue that he brought up, though he did not say it quite like this, was the problem that our society has with scientism, or the belief that “scientific” reasoning is the one form of philosophy that should trump all others. This is another subject that I want to blog about, in the future. Just because most “scientists” believe that the kind of evidence that is presented in favor of the UFO phenomenon is weak does not necessarily mean that they are right. “Scientists” and their vision of “science” should not necessarily be the final word on whether or not we have good reason to believe that the subject of UFOlogy should be seen as serious. Sima was right to point out that circumstantial evidence can, many times, make a very strong argument as to the reality of a phenomenon, even if it is not “scientific.” We should have a high level of respect for the opinion of the “scientists,” but we should not give them the level of respect that scientism calls for. There are times when the “scientists” should be overruled.

    • January 6, 2013 at 12:39 pm
      Permalink

      Hi Mark,

      I agree science has been enormously helpful to get us where we are today. At the same time it has brought with it, as you said, the short comings of the materialist outlook. Rationalism, cause and effect, are the only tools we are supposed to use to gain scientific knowledge, to understand our world and all phenomena in it. But in the cases of, let say, meaningful coincidences, our feeling that destiny is at work sometimes, irregular paranormal events, Yi Ching, Astrology (more popular in our time than never before so that every publisher provides us with our daily horoscope) and UFOs, all are denied scientific scrutiny. Because they seem to resist statistics, regular cause-effect patterns, lab experiments and so on.

      Another problem I can see with science today is that it has become extremely specialized because of the increasing complexity of each subject studied. Scientists are unfortunately investigating along the long and narrow corridors they inhabit, unaware even of what other scientists are doing next to them. Very few individuals today have a specialist view together with a broad view that could help produce the kind of “Copernican revolution” we probably need to understand UFOs fully. If “flying saucers” are just visitors from distant planets, one day we may stumble upon the definite confirmation that we are looking for. But if the phenomenon is a more complex one, we may need to broaden our view to have a chance to gain real knowledge of what it is. In Texas Lights, for the fun of it, I give my own interpretation of what they possibly could be. Maybe they are more than one phenomenon.

      In any case what is clear for me is that we have past the point, a long time ago, to waste time discussing if UFOs exist of not. Yes, the circumstantial evidence is overwhelming. Now it is time to start building a serious knowledge about what they are.

      Cheers – Marc Sima

  • January 6, 2013 at 1:00 pm
    Permalink

    Many thanks to Martin Willis for being such a wonderful and generous host. I really enjoyed our conversation.

    I wanted to correct something I said on the podcast. I mentioned that one core belief of Buddhists is that there is more than one world. They are the human world plus a number of others. They are 6 Realms, not 8 as I said. All have their set of beings and they interact with one another. They are also 8 paths towards enlightenment.

    This is why when Dr. John Mack asked Tibetan Lamas about UFOs and aliens, the answer was that obviously the Universe was full of intelligent creatures…

    Marc Sima

  • January 6, 2013 at 4:21 pm
    Permalink

    Thank you for that correction Marc.

    I also believe a lot of science is still being suppressed if it is unconventional, or strays too far from what we think we already know. For instance; human ancient cultures, we seem to be afraid to think they may have existed 10s maybe 100s of thousands of years ago.

    New discoveries are often discounted, sometimes based on fear, egos or something is just too outside of the box to consider. Galileo Galilei was condemned to house arrest in 1633 for his accurate book;”Dialogues concerning the Two Great World Systems”. We now have more knowledge and technology, but we have the same way of thinking with the same type of primitive fears. Martin

Comments are closed.