In previous episodes of adventures in Gonzo Theory, the introduction is about the foundation of the current discourse. Once again, there is the necessity of reiterating the viability of pseudoscience. No disrespect, condescension and demeaning intent are suggested here. Instead, the word is used to describe the notion that some things cannot be proved as yet by the evidence at hand. There is no honor lost, nor impotency implied. On the contrary, pseudoscience is viewed as an ongoing search to prove the science. And by evidence, the conjecture is that of scientific validation, confirmed by rigorous measurement, testing, and eventual provability. As to that, the kind of evidence is relative to that which might be presented and tested in a court of law. In addition, Gonzo Theory is based on the tenets of the classical school of criminology. Where one might be curious about that, go look it up. Regarding pseudoscience in academia, the primary four quests in metaphysics are criminology, psychology, sociology, and theology.

     In other sphere of investigative journeys, the “social studies arena” (i.e. criminology, psychology, sociology, theology) shares a close kinship with other pseudoscientific adventures. Of these, explorations include the paranormal, the parapsychological, and the interplanetary. Of both the “social studies arena” and the otherworldly, these are contrasted with the real sciences. In this spectrum, the inquirer encounters the scientific fields of biology, chemistry, quantum mechanics, and physics to name a few. From them, the so called scientific methodology is frequently heisted. All to frequently in the pseudosciences, the justification for claiming “scientific” relevance boasts the use of the “scientific method”. For the classical school of criminology, free will is a central aspects. Everyone makes choices by way of calculated premeditation, cost-benefit analysis, and targeted selectivity. For some classicists, no excuses, no mitigations, and no externalities of deterministic control justifies maladaptive behaviors.

     Everyone is responsible for what they think, say and do. With this particular slant of classical criminology, the underlying potency reflects the depth of individual sexual impetus. Such is the carnality of the behavioral characteristics. So powerful is the ideation, especially from the streams of dreams to conscious states, that personal reality becomes uniquely interpreted. Such is exciting, a turn on, and potentially dangerously creative. Additionally, by way of purposeful efforts for self-serving needs, the advocacy and promotion of various phenomena is for the salaciousness of personal gain. Libido is credo and serves the amative necessity of existence.

      Regarding the impetus, the ideation from fantasy to fruition, and the purposeful insistence for thoughtful anxiety, the power is in the primordial energies of willful salaciousness. As to the carnality of the self, individuality is all about the passions of personal prurience. For the sake of creative exclusivity, the intentions influence the quest. And for each, the necessity of the adventure is essential to self-evolution. Inquiries are built upon the scope and extent of the very essence of personal complexity. An aspect of the investigative process considers the amative primordial basis of motivational factors. Others will disagree and counter with alternate viewpoints based optional philosophies. Regardless, what does the claimant want from their particular perspective? Is it the various degrees of self-satisfaction in the perpetration of hoax, fraud, scam or scheme? Who stands to gain from the subsequent gambit? Is about the next podcast, blog, or self-flagellating vlog? Or is it more primal in order to satiate the weakness of sedentary gluttony?

     The questions continue. Many expound upon their limited points of view, erroneous assumptions and debilitating inexperience. By latent levels of immaturity, the satiation lingers in the vacuum of a profound scarcity of evidence. While UFOs have captured the public’s imagination, it is important to remember that this fascination is largely speculative. Mainstream media (the vast corporate monopolies) enjoys opportunities to capitalize on the mythology.  As the game is afoot, the money is on the hook. Schemes unfold in quickly marketing the alleged sightings of mysterious objects in the sky. Fantasies unfold with limited imaginative assertion as conspiracies abound based upon mere speculation.  Fueled by the latest publicity stunts, congressional fascinations, and military reports, the majority of the public races to reinforce a diversity of believability. At the same instant, science fiction genre becomes reinvigorated as the entertainment value escalates for the time being. In 2021, a major international news source underscored the resurrection of public interest.

     The author in this source again cites the lack of definitive evidentiary validation. Of particular notation in the forgoing article, was how easy “experts” are fooled by natural causality. That is, in spite of high-tech equipment, interpretations default to human observation and assessment of alleged data. As bias enters every potential conclusion, and the observer significantly influences the observation, error is a high probability. In the end, regarding selected case studies, the result is generally the same. That is, no conclusive evidence comes to light. Assertions spring eternal. Along these lines, the critical task is accepting opinion in lieu of physical evidence. An admonition from the skeptical community is to be wary of any conjecture that fails to produce proof.

     For the investigative process by any configuration, the hunt for evidence is of primary importance. Despite the endless reports of sightings, opinions, rumors, gossip, and alleged “whistleblowers”, no definitive evidence surfaces. Added to that is the abundance of excuses that raise the specter of one conspiracy theory after another. Scientific validation requires vitality in the efficacy of evidence. Clear, convincing, and unequivocal courtroom viable evidence of a compelling nature is required. Outside that, conjecture defaults to opinion. From the world of scientific investigations, one publication asserts very quickly in its commentary that there is no evidence of life on other planets. Nonetheless, the author leaves open the door with the typical caveat: the “universe is a very large place”. Of course, that seems standard procedure and may serve to soothe the feelings of those who anticipate an imminent alien invasion.

     For those adherents to beliefs in alien visitations, abductions, and so forth, perhaps they are hoping to get probed. Wishful thinking fosters all manner of ideations. All of which, as considered here, correlate to the innate intentional sexuality of each person. That is a central tenet in Gonzo's Theory related to the classical school of criminology. Behavior is an expression of human sexuality. While some scream and holler, rant, and rave about such salacious conjecture, they will eventually get over it. In the meantime, at the beginning of the last century, the historical figures of medical-psycho-social analysis were on the right track. Libido is credo. On the issue of extraterrestrials (ET), a definition of terms is essential. What does that mean to say that one claims there are ETs out there? Does alien encompass the wide variety of possibilities attendant to a diversity of life forms? Would that include microbial entities or something out of CGI designed for a sci-fi movie? Or is it more likely that an ET looks humanoid?

     More often than not, the science fiction genre since the early 1990s has given the public a variety of alien forms. In some movies, it is a wonder that the “alien body types” could actually pilot a spacecraft.  For the sleight of hand fraud of “reality TV shows”, there is no reality; it is all clever stage management. Another science oriented publication published a physicist’s viewpoints about the lack of activity throughout the cosmos. While the universe is extraordinarily massive neighborhood, one researcher’s efforts ponders the absence of lots of lifeforms busily traversing the galaxy. With billions of stars in the Milky Way galaxy alone, plus billions of years of evolutionary processes, the researcher wonders where is everyone? Speculation might ponder more importantly, why another “advanced life form” has not made an appearance in our solar system. As a sense of conspiratorial space silence ensues, any form of contact seems elusive.

     Following up on that, a recent conversation on aerial balloons and alien visitations occurred between an alleged news reporter and a renowned physicist. From the scientific perspective, the viewpoint urged by the scientist asks basically, why would aliens travel across the galaxy to float balloons across the U.S.? Further, the evidentiary aspects become murkier when analysis considers the vast number of photographic techniques available. With millions of cameras, cell phones, and satellites operating every day, not much is clearly observed and documented relative to alien activity. In every 24/7 daily cycle, the planet is watched by an extraordinary array of technologically advanced surveillance systems. All too often, when a suspicious object is observed, aside from personal biases, the default option is to claim it is a UFO. Generally, until such an object is identified, it is “unidentified and flying”. However, to immediately conclude the suspect anomaly is piloted by alien beings is more science fiction than fact.

     More convincingly now more than ever, with all the techno-detection capacities of the planet, there remains no proof of aliens visiting planet Earth. Meanwhile, whistleblowers come forward in the aftermath of congressional UFO hearings. Claims are made. Yet, not a single piece of hard evidence is presented. This is very similar to so-called reality TV shows chasing UFOs. To counter the sweeping testimonial generalizations of alleged “government insiders”, a skeptical investigator challenges the assertions for a serious lack of evidentiary artifacts. Once again, opinion coupled with fascinating anecdotal conjecture does not measure up against scientific validation. Additionally, if aliens were discovered and somehow brought in for questioning, that would result in quite a worldwide televised event. In fact, any piece of evidence discovered not of this world would be heralded for immediate acquisition by renowned museums. As to this, aliens have much in common with Bigfoot. Alleged sightings end up either debunked as fakes, inconclusive or more likely lacking any significant natural physicality.

     According to a scientific analysis offered by a government space agency, a scientist offered a fundamental conclusion regarding aliens. The stark observation flatly asserts there are no aliens out there. Furthermore, there is a high probability that we are alone here on planet Earth. Regarding that observation, the viewpoint suggests that the likelihood of alien life forms is very remote. For a long time now, the conclusion submits the notion that there have been no visitations. Without confirmed real identifiable sightings and subsequent interactions, no interstellar communication has occurred. As such, to pose the question, do aliens exist, remains highly speculative at best. Regardless of the emotional reactivity involved, fact is often supplanted by fiction.

     In Gonzo Theory, the suggestion of the “ET Effect” is similar to the “CSI Effect”. As seen on television, in the movies, and in other fictional story telling, if it sounds good and entertains well then it must be true . The “CSI Effect” is notorious in the various fields of criminal justice, as well as philosophical assertion in subsets of criminology. With nearly 80% of the population sharing beliefs in other worldly phenomena, allowing fiction to override reality is commonplace. For the vast “infotainment” industry, much is filled with illusions. A frequent example of the fantasy of the “CSI Effect” is the aspiring recruit who seeks entry into a police academy. Such is similar to the prospective student applying for acceptance to a college criminology degree program. An interviewer often hears the aspiration to become a “detective”, or a “crime scene investigator”. Or not untypical in the same mysticism is the student who wants to be a “criminal profiler”.

     For roles such as “detective, “crime scene investigator”, or so-called “criminal profiler”, represent long-term education, training, and laborious effort in the real world to achieve. Perceptively, the common-sense notion is that twenty or thirty years of devotion, discipline, and duty to the field of study necessitate a very mature and ascended personal evolution. A very compelling element relates to the individual maturation process. However, many relish in their fantasy world of make-believe. This is generally okay, so long as one understands the difference between the fun of fantasy and the corresponding delineation of reality. Fantasy is a healthy component of the human thinking processes. Sometimes, the lines blur, and people become dangerous. That aside, attaining such an assignment as a “crime scene investigator” may never happen. Once again, back to the notion of credentials, an individual has to build their expertise over time. Yet, television story tales offer mythical notions in a surreal and superficial context.

     For one skeptical investigator who devoted 40 years of research into paranormal activity, there is a connection between Bigfoot and aliens. In terms of human motivations, as a result of thinking processes, mysterious creatures and unearthly beings have a long history in human folklore. People like to tell stories. Some are very good, while others are incompetent. An experienced aficionado of the horror genre, for instance, will quickly recognize this in contemporary filmmaking. A few filmmakers with sufficient resources, quality performances, compelling scripts, etc., can produce a reasonably entertaining movie. By contrast, a vast number of wannabe filmmakers produce exceptionally awful productions. Regardless of that, much fictional artistry, or lack thereof, becomes compelling in the realms of magical thinking when people want it to be true . As to the aforementioned investigator, there is a similarity between Bigfoot and aliens.

     The comparison draws analogy in the notion that humans like to create things in “their own image”. Playing a god is potent and salaciously expresses inner dimensions of personal proclivities. Around each setting every day, little divinities make their play. Bigger ones control the playground. And, even more powerful ones dominate many playing fields. History is a saga of one story after another attempting to explain the mysteries of life. As to that, expound upon what one medical theorist postulated, along with the talking cure, monsters from Id dwell deep in psychic dimensions. With either the “ET Effect” or the “CSI Effect” the perpetration stems from primordial impetus to create “monsters”, and let them play. While a renowned author created Frankenstein, another psychically summons a vampire from the depths of mindful realms. Likewise, a lycanthrope or man-beast, the shape shifting reflection of the human horrors waiting to be unleashed. By bite, scratch, curse or profane willfulness, the alter ego, or many alter egos, fragmented personalities, are allowed to escape confinement.

     In a scientific journal, a researcher investigates the connection between illusions of legends and the reality of bringing them to life. With that comes the notion that the human imagination is very inventive. That’s where monsters come from. People make them up, as hope that springs eternal reinforces subjective validation. Cryptids of such personification. Where there is limited comprehension of scientific rationality, any manifestation can come to life. This especially applies to the belief the universe is populated with all manner of life forms. Without evidence to substantiate any particular paradox, equation, or theorem, opinion often overrides the reality of evidence. Regardless of whatever the U.S. government is up to, the cover stories, etc. the strength of well-substantiated physical evidence is woefully deficient. In the passage of time, some three-quarters of a century since an alleged crash in Roswell, New Mexico, every possible ramification has been sensationalized. From a British publication with a focus on science, the author notes that stories about aliens always seem to capture the public’s attention.

     Beliefs, expectations, wants, desires, and so on are an expression of amative creativeness within the complexity of human thinking. Some people for instance, those not self-evolving in an exceptional way, choose to remain and the lowest levels of inventiveness. Their need for clinging to child-like narcissistic behaviors is self-serving. Others willfully ascend to higher psychodynamic heights.  For this issue, creativity is viewed as a hierarchy of psychic potency or impotency. Many examples can be observed in low-quality storytelling. Human capacity for life-long competency is expressed through the individuality of creative endeavors.

     As to that propensity for inventiveness, the is always room for scams and hoaxes. Humans are pretty good at deception. From a law enforcement standpoint, and especially in classical criminology, what is the truth, and who do you trust? A rough guideline is that you trust nothing and no one until all the evidence is thoroughly examined. This means the rigorous application of testing and re-testing and applying “falsification theory”. You ignore alleged “peer review”, assume everyone has a hidden agenda, particularly if they have tenure, and follow the “money”. The latter, of course, refers to those who stand to gain in a utilitarian sense of cost-benefit analysis. Reality TV is just such a genre. Such is a mechanism by which the public can be entertained with various sleight-of-hand tactics. One long-time investigator of the adventures in cryptozoology, etc., in writing about fake science, invokes the necessity of strenuous scientific methodology. Calling out the “social studies arena”, and in particular the notion of “cryptids”, the investigator points to the problem within American culture that does not understand the nature of science. 

     As earlier alluded, the mention of “peer review” in the context of the “social studies arena” is questionable. In the real sciences, the process is different. By contrast, in the adventures of metaphysics, philosophies, ideologies, and so forth, the inquisitor is often dealing with other peoples’ opinions. Within those spheres of exploration and exploitation and the varying levels of self-evolving status, all manner of bias is of high probability. Wannabe “scientists” masquerading as “neuroscientific” researchers easily fool themselves as well as others. Regarding commentary by the aforesaid scientist analyzing cryptids, as both a biologist and paleontologist, the problem of “bad science” is that opinion is not evidence, and neither is an endless series of anecdotes. As such, Hollywood typically leads the way in stereotypic portrayals of science and scientists. White lab coats, bubbling beakers, eerie sounds, scatted lab notes, and noisy and sparking devices add to the choreographed special effects.  Alleged reality TV follows a similar formula.

     A never-ending production of ghost stories promoted as real continues to promote one scam after another in the television genre. Additionally, the fabricated format includes standard elements to promulgate the visual trickery. Depending on the acting talent, intense facial expressions and displays of concern or fear are effective. Considering the actors, their credentials are generally very exaggerated as to their pretended experience or expertise. From ghost hunting in old asylums to interviews with abductees or exorcising demonic possession, the format is copied repeatedly. The pretense of serious investigation is perpetrated by deploying fancy, supposedly sophisticated equipment, particularly night vision devices. Meanwhile, the ETs are cleverly elusive.