u/Stratguy666

It’s good to have a space like this subreddit dedicated to science on this topic. But having followed this subreddit on and off for a while, I’m surprised by the parochialism
of nearly all discussions, which undercuts the quality of debate. Two observations:

1. First of all, there is practically no serious engagement with the substantial rigorous scientific literature on “experiencers”, beyond the tired references to the work to John E Mack. It’s notable that when advocates appeal to scientific authority or studies, they pretty much stick to Mack, rather defensively. Why is there a paucity of real engagement with all of the important work done critiquing him and the experiencer phenomenon, or the alternative explanations grounded in actual research?
2. Second, The focus of many UFO/UAP discussions is either a) on earth-based events (is that a plane or an orb, etc) , which is such a narrow and frankly banal horizon of interest, or b) highly conjectural and fanciful claims about the nature of dimensions, space, time, time travel, etc.
   But There is such a fantastic amount of scientific research being done currently that is ignored by this subreddit. For instance, the Vera C Rubin observatory is assembling an amazing catalogue of deep space artifacts to better understand dark matter and energy, with perhaps remarkable consequences for our understanding of the fabric of the universe. Efforts like this, grounded in actual science, get short shrift here.
3. This is all perplexing. My sense is that the reason there is so little engagement with actual Science on a purported science subreddit is because most people on here are not qualified - do not have the training and understanding - to actually understand much of the research being conducted today, which makes it harder to comprehend what’s relevant and what isn’t. This is probably exacerbated by the general tendency to reject research that is mainstream, often on the broad strokes of conspiracy thinking (don’t trust Mainstream scientists etc) and a misunderstanding of how research communities actually work (I’m a social scientist with a PhD and can tell you that these communities are far from monolithic).
   Thoughts about 1&2 above? I ask these questions in a spirit of real inquiry, and I apologize if anyone is offended.

Hello, I’m interested in learning to play classical guitar and would appreciate any books or websites (currently unable to get a tutor). My background: I have been playing guitar for over 35 years and have a strong grounding in theory and know the neck well. Most of my playing is in jazz, and metal. I normally play using a pick and fingers, so not in conventional classical style (more traditionally jazz), and technically otherwise very competent. My sight reading is mediocre - I mostly read jazz “lead sheets”, so would need to improve my sight reading for classical.
All recs welcome! (I particularly like books, as I’m old, but online videos are welcome!).

Hi all, are there any audio books (not podcasts or printed books) with a good delta green vibe you’d recommend? Thanks!

Hello, can you recommend a more contemporary book like Ceram’s Gods, Graves, and Scholars? I’m looking for a fast-paced beach read like this about early discoveries, but more up to date. I’m not a professional archaeologist and I’m less interested in extensive internal scholarly debates (I’m a scholar in a different field, and sometimes I just want to read a good narrative history for fun).
I haven’t read Ceram’s book, but my understanding is that it’s problematic and of course outdated. Of course, if it’s still worth reading for a lay person, please let me know as well.

Hi,

I am interested in any recommendations you may have on histories of music theory and composition prior to the Baroque. I'd like to learn more about the theory of renaissance music and earlier music, in other words, before the rise of functional harmony of the common practice period.

As an example, I enjoyed Richard Crocker's "A History of Musical Styles," so books along those lines would be great. I am less interested in histories of music organized around composer biographies. Extensive theoretical analyses of different musical periods, however, are welcome! Thanks!

Hello. I am interested in any recommendations you may have on histories of music theory and composition prior to the Baroque. I'd like to learn more about the theory of renaissance music and earlier music, in other words, before the rise of functional harmony of the common practice period.

As an example, I enjoyed Richard Crocker's "A History of Musical Styles," so books along those lines would be great. I am less interested in histories of music organized around composer biographies. Extensive theoretical analyses of different musical periods, however, are welcome! Thank you.

Any new updates on Maj Gen William McCasland? Please give sources of you’ve got anything.