like some have said, taking one obviously mentally disturbed individual and the rantings of others equally ‘empathetically challenged’ in the RRR writings and applying that brush to an entire generation is not unlike saying all Baby Boomers wanted to bankrupt America’s future because of W’s failed leadership and the failure of the largely Boomer-aged Congress to prevent it.

or blaming the ‘Greatest Generation’ for the only bombing of a civilian city not once but twice to end the Japanese portion of WW2.

in essence, it’s a reductionist point of view. it fails to also take into account the sufferings of each generation at the hands of the generations preceeding it.

i’m guilty of this a lot. i tend to blame the various preceedings generations at times; at other times, i realize there is humanity in all age groups, and that some elderly and middle-aged people deserve enormous respect if not for wisdom than simply enduring human reality for so many years without giving up.

it’s a thankless task to survive, see so much horror committed by so few for the unfortunate misery of so many, again and again, i think.

but you know, there ARE always latent sociopaths in every generation.

for every Einstein, there is a Stalin. for every John Lennon, a Charlie Manson. for every hope, there is a failure. it’s the balance and unbalance of life, as far as i can determine.

sadly, our latent problems know no bounds, either religious, cultural, metaphysical, or generational.

we are wounded and we are strong; we are monsters (at times) and we are (at times) saints.

a good thought to keep in mind when we discuss cryptids; for who is to say, for example, that supposing its existence, a ‘bigfoot is all good’ or ‘bigfoot is all bad’ when we are honest?

could not some be ‘good’ and others be ‘bad’ without either invalidating the tribe as a whole?

if not, we have a lot of explaining to do if we ever DO make ‘contact’ with alien life forces or Fortean ‘beyond our knowledge’ forces.

after all, we cannot even agree amongst ourselves all too often on a course of action, and yet all of us who are alive and reading these thoughts are responsible at some level, for example, for greenhouse emissions, continued warfare, etc.

IF of course you agree with my statements.

Get well soon, Sir!!!

I second what ARTIST, RED_PILL_JUNKIE, and CAMPERGUY said.

The “new guard” seems to think the “old guard” has totally bad ideas and only they, the “young turks,” so to speak, have all the answers. NOT TRUE.

Reminds me of Newton’s remarks about “standing on the shoulders of giants.”

I’d just like to say that the “RRR” group is not representative of our generation as a whole. They are the exception, not the rule. I personally feel deeply honored to be able to “stand on the shoulders of giants”, as it were.

Making such statements just shows a lack of maturity and intelligence. Again and again, hey if you don’t believe something fine, don’t believe, but it’s the fanatics who try to tell others what they should and should not believe (or can and can’t believe) that are the people we need to keep in check.

And in this particular case, yes, I think the red flags were in place on that individual. Of course, it’s hard to recognize the red flags a lot of times until after the fact.

For the rest of us, I think we can count on the next generations keeping up the hunt for cryptids, ufos, etc. despite a few bloggers who try to talk for the bulk of us.

It is not about ufology, and thus comments that wish to begin discourses on ufological thoughts and criticisms will not be supported and published here. (You will not see those here, for very long.)

For those that understand the underlying metaphorical themes regarding how some in cryptozoology wish to “overthrow” the elders in our field, you get it.

Thank you for staying on the topic at hand.

It is going to be unfortunate if the attacker read the blog.

The blog seems to say that new ideas cannot flourish in the face of old ideas being supported by the old guard. Aren’t all new ideas forced to cross this hurdle? The world is flat vs. the world is round new idea comes to mind. The article is not logical to me.