Avoiding Dogmatic Skepticism: Identification vs Usefulness

Humans enjoy psychological boxes and will fight for their ideas. Whether religion, philosophy, or politics, our territorial natures are not limited to the physical. People will fight for their ideas no matter how novel and democratic they are. Even different versions of spiritual love cause war and conflict, as in the case of the Osho cult in Oregon, which poisoned local citizens who got in the way of their world peace agenda.

One of the weaknesses of human beings is the need to be certain to avoid the feeling of being wrong. This is an evolutionary trait. Our ancestors needed to be assured of their survival. Their assessment of the environment was crucial in protecting them from predators. Was the rustling bush a predator, or was it the wind? Being wrong about a threat could result in being eaten alive, thus, increasing our epigenetic motivations for rightness. Being wrong about our convictions is counterintuitive and more so for the person with a philosophical identity.

For the sake of this article, I'm going to focus on skepticism.

Recently, in a Facebook skeptic community, I came across a post on the movie "The Sound of Freedom," which is an expose' on the horrifying child sex trafficking industry. The post read as an invitation to see the movie and raise awareness of this scourge of modern slavery.

In response, several replies suggested a conspiracy theory was afoot, and others dismissed the movie as hype. I found these comments profoundly ignorant especially coming from a community rooted in common sense and critical thinking.

For one, anyone can verify the legitimacy of the organization behind the movie through law enforcement affiliation. Two, child sex trafficking stats are available on Google proving a 150 billion dollar global slave trade. Three, writing off a movie that is trending at the top of the box office exposing criminal organizations is counterproductive. A cursory understanding of how child abuse affects our culture should motivate anyone with common sense.

But skeptics are skeptics. Not all are the dogmatic kind, but many position themselves to attack ideas that don't fit neatly into their pessimism box. Furthermore, their skeptical assessment depends on being "right" about, well, everything (you know what they say about opinions). So, they must abandon critical thinking and double down with dismissal techniques, sarcasm, and frivolous accusations. In other words, skeptics can project their own conspiracy theories onto subjects they refuse to properly investigate.

Being skeptical is being cautious about agreeing with the status quo. It is a form of thinking through something, to trust one's doubts and reservations. It is a safeguard. It protects us from delusion and falsehoods. It is a healthy survival mechanism. A lack of independent thinking can be detrimental and, in some cases, deadly. But there's a difference between being skeptical and 'identifying' as a skeptic. The former is a skill, and the latter is a psychological identity one must validate, prove, and defend at all costs because the skill has become the self.

An excellent example of skeptical bias is Michael Shermer, an acclaimed author, scientist, and director of the Skeptics Society. He is highly respected for his rational approach to scrutinizing religion and metaphysics. However, his unwavering skepticism toward the UFO phenomenon is revealing.

Despite the increasing number of government and military reports, including the renowned UFOs captured by US Navy fighter jets on the USS Nimitz and USS Theodore Roosevelt in 2004, 2014, and 2015, Shermer dismissively attributes such sightings to "fuzzy" and "blurry" objects, like balloons, drones, and distorted photos of flying insects. The pilots' recordings, describing these UFOs' maneuvers defying known laws of physics, raise intriguing questions in contrast to Shermer's rigid stance.

Pentagon now reports about 400 UFO encounters: 'We want to know what's out there.'

Pentagon announces new group to investigate reports of UFOs near certain military sites.

Another topic that is conveniently overlooked by skeptics is the long history of government coverup. There are countless reports of government and military personnel stating on record they were told to keep silent or distract the public. One example is the famous Phoenix Lights sightings on March 13, 1997. 

This extraordinary case involving former Arizona Governor Fife Symington stands out due to the events that unfolded. On that evening, numerous citizens in Phoenix reported witnessing massive, noiseless crafts maneuvering in the skies, disappearing at incredible speeds. The witnesses included police officers, pilots, military personnel, and, surprisingly, Fife Symington himself, as it was later revealed a decade later.

Upon hearing reports of UFO sightings in the area while he was at home watching television, Symington, with his security detail gone for the day, decided to investigate alone. To his amazement, he saw a colossal boomerang-shaped craft gliding silently overhead, aligning with the descriptions provided by many other witnesses that night.

The sightings received extensive local media coverage for three months before gaining national attention. As public curiosity and demand for an explanation grew, Symington called a national press conference but remained tight-lipped about his own experience. Instead, he presented his chief of staff dressed as an alien, intending to mock the situation and lighten the atmosphere. However, this prank haunted him for years.

A decade after the incident, Symington eventually confessed to his own sighting and the deception during the press conference. He cited pressure from upset citizens and a guilty conscience as his reasons for finally coming clean. He acknowledged that talking about UFOs and extraterrestrial phenomena is considered taboo for elected officials, fearing the media's ridicule and potential damage to their credibility.

Symington lamented the culture of ridicule prevalent in the media, believing that serious discussions about UFOs are dismissed without proper consideration. He emphasized the caution required when addressing such matters as an elected official, acknowledging the potential consequences of being discredited by the media. This is a mild example of a UFO coverup. I could write an entire article on documented cases.

Despite all of the evidence (and there's plenty of it), skeptics wrote it off as flares floating around in the sky. Skeptoid was "so sure" the Pheonix Lights were not alien spacecraft (as if they had proof) Brian Dunning subtitled his article 'The Alien Invasion of Phoenix, Arizona' with:

"Despite what many UFOlogists want, the famous Phoenix Lights were not alien spacecraft."

And capped the article with an unscientific quip:

The Phoenix Lights were flares. Deal with it.

One can only wonder if there's a "CONSPIRACY" when critical-thinking skeptics dismiss a worldwide phenomenon that has been going on for over a century, witnessed by millions of people, as flares and balloons. Wait, I'm feeling an incoming transmission from another dimension:

“Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence”

— Carl Sagan

Then you have lawmakers calling this "A National Security Threat." Consider for a moment how serious a situation we have; you don't see this as BREAKING NEWS on the nightly media machine. Unknown advanced vehicles are flying in our atmosphere, breaking the known laws of physics, and humans are acting like business as usual.

UFOs pose ‘potential national security threat,’ lawmakers warn. Rep. André Carson (D-Ind.) on Tuesday warned that UFOs pose a “potential national security threat” to the U.S. and “need to be treated that way” during a highly anticipated hearing with the Pentagon’s top intelligence officials on mysterious aerial sightings.

Reports of UFO sightings have increased around the world in the past few years (2020-2023), with footage from multiple sources on the ground. In most cases, the crafts appear as large orbs, black triangles, and your typical Area 51 disc. In early 2023 military pilots reported that they had seen a dramatic uptick in sightings.

Allow me to clarify my point here. The connection I am making between the Sound of Freedom movie and the UFO phenomenon is the dogmatic approach bordering on denial by skeptics. I don't find a sincere, non-biased attempt at investigation because if they find out that UFOs are alien craft, or worse, our geopolitical enemies, they will have to confront the uncomfortable feeling of being WRONG about their history of 'dismissal skepticism.'

From Visits to and From Extraterrestrials: Why They Never Occurred, and Probably Never Will: "Despite much ballyhoo in the media, all efforts thus far have failed to provide substantive evidence that might link the appearance of UFOs, now called UAPs (unidentified aerial phenomena), with aliens from other planets. This failure results from limitations imposed by both biology and distance. As Morton Tavel explains, when these factors are combined, they render any such contacts virtually impossible."

And yet you have highly respected scientists like Michio Kaku demonstrating a rational response to the issue:

"We have multiple sightings by multiple modes. That is the gold standard for looking for these objects. Not just one person, but several people who are reputable. Not just radar, but visual sighting, infrared sensors, telescoping evidence…"

"These objects travel between mach 5 and mach 20. That’s 20 times the speed of sound… The G forces are several hundred times the force of gravity. Any living person’s bones would be crushed by these objects, so they’re probably drones of some sort. These objects can drop 70,000 feet in a few seconds… And they can go underwater… And they also move without making exhaust or breaking the sound barrier. And these are things we can now document frame by frame by looking at these video tapes."

Despite his impeccable reputation, the experts in UFOlogy, "the press" (imaginary scientists) made a hilarious dispute in the article "Michio Kaku's Embarrassing Stance on UFOs":

But now, Kaku is seriously jeopardizing his reputation and misleading the public through his unscientific new stance on UFOs. He articulated it when speaking with podcaster Joe Rogan early last month.

"The burden of proof has shifted," he said. "It used to be the burden of proof was on the people who believe in UFOs. Now the burden of proof has shifted to the Pentagon, to the military. Now they have to prove that these aren’t extraterrestrial."

The article goes on to say that UFO enthusiast Mick West, who analyzes UFO claims with an evidence-based mindset, debunked the videos fairly easily as radar artifacts, planes, or merely balloons (eye-roll).

So, let me get this right:

- The entire Military Industrial Complex is clueless about what these things are.

- Lawmakers think these UFOs are a national security threat due to a phobia of hot air balloons.

- Norad pilots (who know better than anyone else the difference between a plane, balloon, and radar artifacts from extraordinary craft breaking the laws of physics) are delusional and incompetent.

- Millions of people with cell phone footage from around the world are secretly texting each other to keep the conspiracy under wraps.

- And military personal dating back 60 years who have publically disclosed under oath UFO and alien government involvement are suffering from weird bouts of false memory syndrome.

Who is right? You guessed it—the skeptics. Why? Because being skeptical is a sign of intelligence. These are the people who filter the nonsense of society. It is they who protect us. Their mental agility is unmatched, even in the face of physicists like Michio Kaku (my appeal to authority).

So why wouldn't they take 30 seconds to do a Google search on the 150 billion dollar child sex industry before dismissing 'The Sound of Freedom' on social media? Because they are the gatekeepers of normalcy bias — maybe it is they who can't handle the truth.

Remain skeptical of the skeptics.

— Zzenn