Amazing! UFOs in Marion, Ohio - December 16, 2021

NoParty

Senior Member.
Article:
Jive is a more common variant of jibe than gibe is. This word (which may mean “glib, deceptive, or foolish talk” or several other things) began appearing in print in the late 1920s and waited little more than a decade before it started being used in the sense “in accord with; agrees with.


jive is more fun anyway.. like "we go together like rama lama lama ka dinga da dinga dong"
Source: https://youtu.be/73KjGH7jcMI?t=10
Not to go too far down this road...but "Jive" (dance) is kind of a British misunderstanding of American Swing.

It's like if you bled the soul out of Swing, and then just hopped about too much. Jive exists as a category of
"International" dance competitions: In a nutshell, to allow for easier grading of contestants from different
countries, a generic, lowest-common-denominator version of each dance was created: Drain the
Argentina out of the Tango, take the Brazil out of the Samba, the American Blacks out of Swing, and so on.
On the plus side, it does make international competitions easier to grade. On the bigger, bad side, you're left
with these empty, soulless bastardizations of dances that people really cared about.
And of all the garbage, inorganic pieces of crap "International" Ballroom left us with, Jive is the worst.
(In a former lifetime, I was a proud teacher, choreographer & competitor in American Swing...East Coast and West Coast).

p.s. Just to put an exclamation point on how artificial Jive/International is, they consider it a "Latin" dance.
 
Last edited:

FatPhil

Senior Member.
Not to go too far down this road...but "Jive" (dance) is kind of a British misunderstanding of American Swing.

It's like if you bled the soul out of Swing, and then just hopped about too much. Jive exists as a category of
"International" dance competitions: In a nutshell, to allow for easier grading of contestants from different
countries, a generic, lowest-common-denominator version of each dance was created: Drain the
Argentina out of the Tango, take the Brazil out of the Samba, the American Blacks out of Swing, and so on.
On the plus side, it does make international competitions easier to grade. On the bigger, bad side, you're left
with these empty, soulless bastardizations of dances that people really cared about.
And of all the garbage, inorganic pieces of crap "International" Ballroom left us with, Jive is the worst.
(In a former lifetime, I was a proud teacher, choreographer & competitor in American Swing...East Coast and West Coast).

p.s. Just to put an exclamation point on how artificial Jive/International is, they consider it a "Latin" dance.

Some would say the Argentinians are the ones doing the "bastardisation" of tango. If you want a more authentic tango, you could do a lot worse than looking at Finland, where the style has remained practically unchanged since introduction.

But on the other hand, what's this got to do with UFOs in Marion, Ohio?
 

Daves!

Active Member
Unknown. There is no name or email in the original MUFON report.
Isnt that strange at all or is it because out of shame or afraid to be laughed at?
I personaly dont mind people to report something anonymously but also cloud indicate a red flag.
 

flarkey

Senior Member.
Staff member
on a different note, how do we feel about people (not Mick of course) taking our debunking work packaging it into a YT video and maybe trying to monetise the channel? It seems UFO videos are a bit of a revenue generator.

I see 2 issues here -

1 re people "taking our work", I don't think we hold any rights over the debunking of any case, but I'd say other sites should be curteous and give credit to the original debunker or site when they quote their findings. In fairness, the poster of that video refereed to my posts on Reddit /r/UFOs and gave me the due credit - he didnt refer to Metabunk specifically, but my original post on here was taken from Reddit so I'm fine with that.

2 re monetising findings - again I don't think there's much we can do. Its great that Metabunk does not have ads nor tries to profit from any investigations. If it did then the conspiracy theorists would criticise our motives saying we are only debunking for cash. But we cant stop individuals from monetising from something they've read on the net. If someone else tries to profit form our findings then I suppose it potentially taints the findings slightly, just as TTSAs involvement with the US Navy videos tainted them. And I think there's much more opportunity for profit in promoting conspiracy theories & the paranormal than in debunking them.
 

jarlrmai

Senior Member
I see 2 issues here -

1 re people "taking our work", I don't think we hold any rights over the debunking of any case, but I'd say other sites should be curteous and give credit to the original debunker or site when they quote their findings. In fairness, the poster of that video refereed to my posts on Reddit /r/UFOs and gave me the due credit - he didnt refer to Metabunk specifically, but my original post on here was taken from Reddit so I'm fine with that.

2 re monetising findings - again I don't think there's much we can do. Its great that Metabunk does not have ads nor tries to profit from any investigations. If it did then the conspiracy theorists would criticise our motives saying we are only debunking for cash. But we cant stop individuals from monetising from something they've read on the net. If someone else tries to profit form our findings then I suppose it potentially taints the findings slightly, just as TTSAs involvement with the US Navy videos tainted them. And I think there's much more opportunity for profit in promoting conspiracy theories & the paranormal than in debunking them.
Yeah that's my main issue a monetised video using a debunk from here becomes the popular source and then is tainted by being on a monetised channel, not much we can do about it though I agree and spreading the debunking word is probably for the best.
 

JMartJr

Senior Member
On the other hand, getting the work done here in front if a larger audience is probably a good thing. Might save a few folks from falling for the nonsense being shoveled at them on YouTube.
 

Ravi

Senior Member.
On the other hand, getting the work done here in front if a larger audience is probably a good thing. Might save a few folks from falling for the nonsense being shoveled at them on YouTube.
A few. You say it correctly. I am convinced the mass of the people will just swallow anything and have no idea what critical thinking means. Sorry to be negative nancy here, but true.
 

JMartJr

Senior Member
A few. You say it correctly. I am convinced the mass of the people will just swallow anything and have no idea what critical thinking means. Sorry to be negative nancy here, but true.
I can't argue with that, but it sort of reduces the value of what happens here to just "we enjoy doing it," doesn't it?
 
on a different note, how do we feel about people (not Mick of course) taking our debunking work packaging it into a YT video and maybe trying to monetise the channel? It seems UFO videos are a bit of a revenue generator.
If the dude makes a buck or two spreading the good word, as opposed to propagating UFO BS...Then good on him.
 
Top