We usually have a little over a 1000 visitors each day, most leaving no indication that they've been here.
That spike on November 25th comes from the Roswell slides imbroglio.
But that's not my plaint...
What irritates is that UFO devotees are facile, glib when it comes to commenting or investigating a UFO sighting, old or new.
For instance, the brilliant Eric Wargo was linked here, his take on worm holes, the Hill episode, et cetera.
Only erudite Bruce Duensing commented, probably because he's one of the few readers here who understood what Mr. Wargo was telling us.
I've also added a few controversial topics which have either received no comments or passing asides.
The topics, whether the link to a "report" that a scientist thought nuclear war took place on Mars in the past or my view that the gods were human projections not alien visitors from other parts of the cosmos, have been shrugged off.
At our private UFO web-site where non-UFO students and academics hover, we get interesting and often bizarre views that provoke thought and creative thinking about UFOs and related issues.
And everyone uses their real names.
I like it that readers cruise by. I hope they take away something unique, from the past or from my ramblings.
But is you've got guts and thoughts that are intellectually oriented, please leave a note.
Kevin Randle accepts slovenly comments at his valuable blog; he's more compassionate about dullards and their flippant remarks. (I'm not, as Frank Stalter notes at Kevin's blog.)
So I'll continue here, for a while, as getting views is not as bad as being ignored altogether.
But I'd sure like to hear from those who have something to say -- something notable of course -- but something, nonetheless.
The UFO topic is conversationally moribund. I know that, but it still has enough interest by mavens to create a stir, as the slides brouhaha showed.
So don't just look here. Leave a note. (I won't make fun of it.)
RR
0 comments:
Post a Comment