Dream Transference or Alien Abduction?

 

Kathleen Marden, Author / Researcher/ Lecturer

     The scientific investigation of the 9/19-20/1961 Betty and Barney Hill UFO encounter has been supported by the abundance of evidence that something anomalous occurred, bolstered by the professional competence of early investigators, such as Walter Webb, Robert Hohmann, C.D. Jackson, Dr. James McDonald and Dr. James Harder. However, skeptical literature is teeming with allegations that the alleged alien abduction was nothing more than a fantasy dreamed by Betty over a five night period in early October 1961, and absorbed by Barney when he overheard her retell the tale to Walter Webb and others.  Barney, who admitted that he had overheard snippets of Betty’s dreams, informed Dr. Simon, “I just told her it was a dream and nothing to get alarmed about…I can’t believe whatever these dreams are that she is having…I never believed her dreams.”(3/21/64) Even Dr. Benjamin Simon hypothesized that Betty so strongly believed her dreams that she repeated them as fantasies during her hypnosis sessions. He also expressed concern that Barney had unintentionally absorbed the bits of information from Betty’s dream account.  Although he was willing to accept the possibility that the Hills observed an unidentified flying object in the night sky on September 19-20, 1961, (though not necessarily an extraterrestrial craft), he stated that their abduction accounts were so nearly identical that one had to have obtained the information from the other, particularly since in 1964, alien abduction had never been reported. He added that although anything is possible, the likelihood of alien abduction seemed improbable to him. (He knew almost nothing about UFOs.)


     Most of you have read about the Hills’ close encounter with an 80’ silent, hovering craft south of Indian Head in Lincoln, NH.  Barney’s conscious description of the figures on board, copied from NICAP investigator Walter Webb’s October 1961 confidential report, can be found on page 52 in my book Captured! The Betty and Barney Hill UFO Experience co-written with nuclear physicist/scientific ufologist Stanton Friedman. It has been well established through investigation reports and the Hills’ recorded statements that they consciously recalled a series of buzzing/beeping sounds that caused their vehicle to vibrate and a tingling sensation to pass through their bodies.  When they arrived home later than expected, they consciously recalled observing a fiery orb and a roadblock on an unfamiliar stretch of road, followed by another series of buzzing/beeping sounds.  Additionally, they observed and reported perplexing physical and circumstantial evidence for which they could not account, including 12-18 shiny, magnetized circles on their car’s trunk, broken watches, broken binocular strap and Barney’s ruined shoes. (Later, Betty reported to investigators that her dress was coated with a pink powdery substance and torn in several places.) It was the period of missing time and the subsequent decline in Barney’s health that finally brought him, accompanied by Betty, to Dr. Simon’s office in December 1963. The events that unfolded under six months of separate hypnotherapy with amnesia imposed at the end of each session are well documented in The Interrupted Journey and Captured! 


     Although I was a primary witness to the evidence and the aftermath, my own investigation and research was delayed until the late 1980s.  Finally, after several years of intensive study I convinced Betty (1996) to afford me the opportunity to test the hypothesis that Barney had merely absorbed her dream account and that she had reiterated her dreams nearly verbatim in Dr. Simon’s office. This research approach is clearly amenable within the framework of social science, and also gave me the opportunity to answer the question that had been nagging at me for thirty-two years—were my aunt and uncle really abducted by alien beings? 


First I studied the oral content of the hypnosis tapes dated February-April 1964. The Hills’ first visit with Dr. Simon took place on December 14, 1963, followed by several hypnotic inductions and conditioning sessions.  Barney’s first hypnotic regression transpired on February 22, 1964 in a soundproof room at Dr. Simon’s Back Bay office in Boston, MA.  To insure privacy Dr. Simon played bombastic classical music in the room where Betty waited for Barney.  At the end of each session he reinstated amnesia in both Betty and Barney to ensure that no cross-contamination of information would occur and to protect his patients’ psychological well-being.  He reasoned that if the traumatic event, for which they had amnesia, entered consciousness too early it could produce added trauma. When I felt that I had a full understanding of what had occurred, I transcribed the hypnosis tapes and embarked upon a detailed dissection of the Hills individual statements and descriptions during a lengthy comparative analysis.  It was then that I realized how much I (and probably Dr. Simon) had missed.


     With a couple of exceptions that were easily worked out in later sessions, the Hills’ separate accounts, for which they retained conscious memory, were amazingly consistent.  I was anxious to compare Betty’s dreams with the hypnosis accounts in sequential order. In “Dreams or Recall?”, a five page account of her dreams written in November 1961,  Betty wrote, “…I saw 8-11 men standing in the middle of the road.  Barney slowed down to wait for them to move, but the motor died.  As he was trying to start the motor, the men surrounded the car.”(11/61)  Now let us compare this account to Barney’s hypnotic recall.  He stated, “I think I have driven a lot of miles and the road is not Route 3.  It is a heavily wooded area but it is a road and this is when I am flagged down…I thought I saw a cluster of six men, because three came to me and three did not.” (2/29/64) The discrepancy is obvious.  In Betty’s dream account 8-11 men surrounded the Hills’ vehicle, whereas Barney recalled six men who divided into two groups.  Betty’s hypnotic recall of this event is inconsistent with her dream account but consistent with Barney’s statement.  She reported, “There were these men standing in the highway…There were several…And Barney, of course, had to stop…and these men started to come up to the car.  They separated.  They came up in two groups…and there are one, two, three next to me.”(3/7/64)

 

                             Dreams            Betty’s Hypnosis      Barney’s Hypnosis

 

Capture:             Surround car           2 groups                  2 groups

# Men:                   8-11                       6                               6



      “Dreams or Recall?” continues, “We sat there motionless and speechless, and I was terrified.  At the same time, they opened the car doors on each side, reached in and took us by the arm.” (11/61) In Betty’s and Barney’s hypnotic regression sessions, a new scenario emerged that contradicted Betty’s dream account.  Barney recalled, “I saw two eyes coming close to mine and I felt like the eyes had pushed into my eyes….I got out of the car and put my left leg on the ground, and the two men helped me out.”(2/29/64) Now let us examine Betty’s statement made under hypnosis: “The men are coming toward us and I think I can get away from them.  If I can get the car door open I can run into the woods and hide.  And I just put my hand on the car door to open it and the men come up and they open it for me.”  Betty reported that although there were three men next to her, one took her out of the vehicle.  Next, Dr. Simon stated that he didn’t hear her last statement and in a very confusing sentence, Betty started to count the men over and over again. Then she added, “I don’t know what happened.”(3/7/64) She later informed me that she had lost consciousness when a handheld device was pointed at her. Again the Hills’ hypnotic regression statements are consistent, but they are inconsistent with Betty’s dream account.  They did not sit motionless.  Barney opened the car door and put his foot on the ground and Betty attempted to open her door to escape into the woods. They also discussed the possibility that they had encountered an accident ahead and Barney stated that he thought it was “them” again. 

     The comparative analysis becomes tricky when Betty and Barney approach the ramp leading to the craft’s interior.  Betty’s dream account states, “We stepped up a step or two to go onto a ramp, leading to a door.”  On 3/7/64 Betty omitted the steps when she told Dr. Simon, “I go up the ramp, and I go inside and in the corridor to the left.”  


On 2/29/64, Barney stated, “I am only thinking of mental pictures because my eyes are closed, and I think I am going up a slight incline, and my feet are not bumping on the rocks.  That's funny, I thought of my feet bumping on the rocks.  And they are going up smoothly, but I'm afraid to open my eyes because I am being told strongly, by myself, to keep my eyes closed.  Don't open them.” Barney’s omission of steps is consistent with Betty’s statement to Dr. Simon, but both contradict Betty’s dream account. 

                       Dreams                  Betty’s Hypnosis      Barney’s Hypnosis

Entrance       2 steps to ramp       ramp/no steps             ramp/no steps  

 
 

                            

 

 




The Hills are then escorted to separate examining rooms and recall similarly detailed, but separate experiences with their captors.  Although there is correlating data in their statements regarding procedures, attitudes and room descriptions, I chose not to include it in this comparative analysis. Additionally, the sequential order of Betty’s onboard experience differs from that in her dream account. My research protocol dictated that my data should be restricted to shared descriptive details, including positional data and numbers of aliens; not physical descriptions. 

     This takes us to the point where the Hills and their captors share a common area in the corridor at the time of departure.   Betty’s dream account states, “We left the ship and walked through the woods…All the men accompanied us.  We came to the car and the leader suggested that we wait and see them leave.  We agreed.  Barney seemed to wake up as we approached the car, and he showed no emotion.  We stood on the right-hand side of the car, Barney was leaning against the front fender, and I was by the door.  As we were waiting, I thought of Delsey. I opened the car door and Delsey was under the seat.  She was trembling badly, and I patted her for a moment.  She came out and I picked her up, and held her, again leaning against the car door.”

     Betty contradicts her dream account when she states to Dr. Simon, “I've been standing there on the side of the ramp talking to him (the leader), and I'm at the ramp now, and they're taking Barney ahead while we were talking. “ (3/14/64) 


Barney’s statement is consistent with Betty’s hypnotic recall but inconsistent with Betty’s dream account.  He informed Dr. Simon, “I am walking and I am walking, and I am being guided and my eyes are closed. And I open my eyes and there is the car, and the lights are off and it is not running, and Delsey is under the seat, and I reach under and touch her, and she is in a tight ball. And I sit back and I see Betty is coming down the road.” (2/29/64) 


It is unambiguous that Betty and Barney did not leave the craft at the same time and were not escorted to their vehicle by all of the men. Barney was returned by the crew, while Betty remained on the craft arguing with the leader.  Finally, the leader escorted Betty to the car where Barney was already seated on the driver’s side, contrary to Betty’s dream account. On 3/14/64, Barney added, “I saw my car and the lights were out and it was sitting down the road…very dark.  And I couldn't understand…I had not cut out the lights, and I opened the door, and felt for Delsey.  And got in and I sat on my gun, and I took it--removed it from the seat, and put it down on the floor.  And Betty was coming down the road and she came around and opened the door.”

     Betty added, “I got out to the car and Barney's inside and I opened the car door and I said, "Come on out and watch them leave…Delsey's sitting on the seat where I sit and I felt of Delsey and she is trembling all over.  And she's scared, so I said, Well Barney, come on out and I'll get Delsey."  And I picked Delsey up off the seat and I'm holding Delsey and I'm patting her and I'm saying, "Don't be afraid, Delsey.  There's nothing to be afraid of.  Look Delsey, look."  And I'm leaning against the fender of the car and I shut the car door and I'm leaning against the fender and I'm looking up and I say, "Barney, look."  And Barney comes out and stands aside of me and I'm patting Delsey."


It is clear that Betty and Barney’s statements to Dr. Simon independently confirm that they did not return to the car at the same time.  This is in direct contradiction to Betty’s dream recall.  Additionally, both stated that Barney was seated in the driver’s seat when Betty arrived at the car.  This statement is inconsistent with Betty’s dream sequence.  In Betty’s dream, she opens the car door to remove Delsey from under the seat, but under hypnosis she states that Delsey was already on the car seat.  Barney confirmed Betty’s statement that he then exited the car and stood beside her to observe the craft’s departure. 

 

                                                Dreams                    Betty’s Hypnosis                Barney’s Hypnosis

Departure from Craft              together                  separate/Barney 1st          separate/Barney 1st

At vehicle                                no entry                   Barney seated                    Barney seated

Delsey’s position                     under seat               on seat                                under seat, then on seat
 
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 




 

 The above statements provide confirmatory scientific evidence (social science) that Betty and Barney Hill recalled correlating detailed positional and numerical information regarding their abduction experience.  Further, this information is inconsistent with Betty’s dream recollection, and therefore could not have been transferred to Barney by Betty. Nor could Betty have been restating the fantasy material in her dreams.  Because the Hills amnesia remained intact during their hypnosis sessions, they could not have contaminated each other’s recall.  These findings clearly support the abduction hypothesis and refute the dream transference hypothesis. 

References:

 

Dunning, Brian. “Betty and Barney Hill: The Original UFO Abduction”. Skeptoid Podcast  

     Transcript # 124. 10/21/08. Http://skeptoid.com/episode.php?id=4124&comments=all 

     Accessed 12/14/2008.

_________”Stanton Friedman Doesn’t Like Me”. Skeptic Blog 12/04/2008. 

     http://skepticblog.org.2008/12/04stanton-friedman-doesn’t-like-me Accessed 

     12/14/2008.

Friedman, Stanton F. and Kathleen Marden.  Captured! The Betty and Barney Hill UFO   

     Experience. New Jersey: New Page Books, 2007. 

Fuller, John G.. The Interrupted Journey. New York: Dial Press, 1966.

Hill, Betty. “Dreams or Recall?”. Original unpublished version. November 1961.

Hill, Betty and Barney.  “Hypnosis Transcripts”. Transcribed by Kathleen Marden, 1996.

Klass, Philip J.. UFO Abductions a Dangerous Game.  New York: Prometheus Books, 1989.

Kottmeyer, Martin S. “Betty Hill’s Medical Nightmare”. Magonia Monthly Supplement. No. 12,

     February 1999. www.users.waitrose.com/~magonia/ms12.htm Accessed 2/25/09.

Randle, Kevin D., Russ Estes and William P. Cone, Ph.D. The Abduction Enigma. New York: 

     Forge, 1999.

Sheaffer, Robert.  “Ufology 2009: A Six-Decade Perspective”. Jan/Feb 2009.

     www.csicop.org/si/2009-01/sheaffer.html Accessed 3/12/09.








  




      Pseudoskeptics’  Deception about the Betty and Barney Hill UFO Encounter


Kathleen Marden


I have nothing against healthy skepticism.  The fact is that I consider myself a skeptic.  I do, however, find the intentional dissemination of false and misleading information abhorrent.  There is a growing movement of pseudo-skepticism afoot that threatens scientific progress. The pseudoskeptics often adhere to a theistic belief in science, although many are self professed atheists, marked by cynicism and the manipulation of data to fit their beliefs.  They target frontier sciences such as psi phenomena and UFOs and work to suppress scientific exploration in these fields.

 

Historically, when new paradigms have threatened existing dogma, those who clung to archaic ideology have worked to suppress emerging scientific ideas.  For example, British Ornithologist Francis O. Morris wrote the following about Darwinism (1877): “If the whole of the English language could be condensed into one word, it would not suffice to express the utter contempt those invite who are so deluded as to the disciples of such an imposture as Darwinism.” Pierre Pochet, a professor of physiology at Toulouse wrote of Louis Pasteur (1872): “…theory of germs is ridiculous fiction.”  An editorial in the Boston Post wrote of Joshua Copperfield, who was arrested for fraud for attempting to raise funds for the development of a telephone (1865): “Well informed people know it is impossible to transmit the voice over wires and that were it possible to do so, the thing would be of no practical use.” Britain’s leading scientist, Lord Kelvin wrote (1897): “Radio has no future.” and (1900) “X-rays are a hoax.”  American engineer Floyd Parsons wrote of the atomic bomb (1931): “Nothing is gained by exaggerating the possibilities of tomorrow.  We need not worry over the consequences of breaking up the atom.” Adolf Hitler called physics “Jewish pseudoscience.” Ernst Mach, professor of physics at the University of Vienna wrote (1913) “I can accept the theory of relativity as little as I can accept the existence of atoms and other such dogmas.”    

 

     Today it is apparent that similar forces are engaging in ad hominem attacks against frontier scientists, disseminating lies and misrepresenting factual information.  Examples of this type of cynicism are abundant on the Internet.  Below you will find a list of false information disseminated by pseudoskeptics about the September 19-20, 1961 Betty and Barney Hill UFO experience, along with the truth.

 

False: The Hills spotted a star-like object in the sky that seemed to be following them.  Although it remained star-like, the Hills thought that it must have been a flying saucer.  Betty thought it was a spacecraft but Barney always thought it was an airplane.

 

True: The Hills initially spotted a brightly lighted object in the sky. However, they soon observed its unconventional appearance and flight pattern.  Two miles south of Indian Head, the large, silent craft descended to within hundreds of feet of the vehicle, and finally stopped 80-100 feet above the Hills.  As Barney observed it through binoculars, he saw a brilliantly lit double row of windows along the curved exterior of the disk shaped craft. With military precision all but one of the figures moved to a rear panel along a corridor, while one remained at the window.  His intense stare frightened Barney who thought that he was about to be captured like a “bug in a net”.  Fear of ridicule prevented him from reporting the figures to Pease Air Force Base when he reported the UFO. (Reported to Pease Air Force Base 9/21/61, NICAP  9/26/61 and 10/21/61.

 

False: Betty phoned their close friend, Major Paul Henderson at Pease Air Force Base.

 

True:  The Hills had never met Major Paul Henderson.

 

False: The Hills became nervous when a star-like object appeared to be following them and they turned onto narrow mountain roads becoming lost.

 

True:  They reported that, while the object was above their vehicle after it had 'swooped down, they heard a series of short loud' buzzes' which they described as sounding like someone had dropped a tuning fork. They reported that they could feel these buzzing sounds vibrate in their auto. The Hills thought that the object had departed, (Pease AFB 9/21/61), yet without warning, Barney made a sharp left turn approximately twelve miles south of the close encounter site. He told Dr. Simon, “I was driving and driving and driving, and I made a turn and I never knew this.  I don’t know why I had to make that turn. And I was lost. I was on a strange area of the highway and I had never been there before.  And I was being stopped.”(1964 Hypnosis session)  Barney had turned off U.S. Highway Route 3 onto NH State Highway Route 175.  It is not a narrow mountain road.  It runs parallel to Route 3 through the rural villages of Thornton and Campton.  It increased the Hills travel distance by approximately five miles. 

 

False:  When the Hills returned home they had vague memories of observing a star-like object in the sky that seemed to be following them. It wasn’t until after Betty had a series of dreams about a UFO encounter and alien abduction that they became convinced they had experienced a close encounter with a UFO.  Nearly the entire experience was recalled through hypnotic regression. 

 

True:  When the Hills arrived home on the morning of 9/20/61 they had full conscious recall of a close encounter with an 80’-100’ silent hovering craft.  (See the Project Blue Book report.) Barney reported his observation of figures aboard the craft to my father within two days of the event.  On 10/21/61 he told Walter Webb the following: “The figures, according to Barney Hill, were of human form dressed in shiny black uniforms and black caps with peaks or bills on them (which could be seen when the figures turned their heads).  The uniforms were like glossy leather.  When they were standing at the windows he could see down to their waists.  When they moved backward to the wall, their legs were partially visible.  The figures reminded the observer of the cold precision of German officers; they moved smoothly and efficiently and showed no emotion except for one fellow operating a lever who, Mr. Hill claims, looked over his shoulder and smiled. The approaching UFO finally filled up the entire field of the binoculars.  The ‘leader’ at the window held a special attraction for the witness and frightened him terribly.  The witness said he could almost feel this figure’s intense concentration to do something, to carry out a plan.  Mr. Hill believed he was going to be captured like ‘a bug in a net’.”       Letters written by the original investigators indicate that from the outset Betty’s amnesia was of shorter duration than Barney’s. She recalled a turn off from Route 3, whereas Barney’s conscious recall ended near North Woodstock.  Both remembered a second series of beeping/buzzing sounds that seemed to shake them out of an amnesic state and restore their verbal communication. They were perplexed by memories of a fiery orb and a roadblock, but they couldn’t recall the location. (NICAP Report 10/26/61) 

 

False: Betty said the compass needle seemed to move erratically over six, strange, shiny spots the size of a dollar on the car’s trunk.  However, when Barney tried the same test the needle acted normally. 

 

 True: There were 12 to 18 shiny spots on the car’s trunk.  Barney stated, “The spots were shiny and perfect circles. (They were) about the size of half dollars….silver dollars. I put the compass close to it and the compass would spin and spin, and I could move the compass as few inches to a spot on trunk that did not have a spot and the compass would drop down, and I could not understand this.”  (1964 conversation with Dr. Benjamin Simon)

 

False:  Betty Hill wrote to Donald Keyhoe who, despite the fact that he received over a hundred letters a day, homed in on this initially unremarkable case.  Within 24 hours, Keyhoe had arranged for the Hills to be visited by top-level scientists, including C.D. Jackson, who had previously (definitely not coincidentally) worked on psychological warfare techniques for President Eisenhower.  

 

True:  Richard Hall (NICAP secretary), read the letter and replied on 10/17/1961, almost a month later.  NICAP investigator Walter Webb, an astronomy lecturer (not military), interviewed the Hills separately for 6 hours on 10/21/61, over a month after the encounter. Not Hohmann and Jackson and not fast.  The C.D. Jackson, who visited the Hills on 11/25/61, was not the one who worked for Eisenhower.

 

False:  It was Jackson who drew the Hills' attention to their missing time period.  Until he did so, the couple had not realized that their memories of that fateful night were incomplete. It was Jackson who suggested hypnotic regression as a means of unlocking it.

 

True:  The Hills were already aware of the fact that they arrived home later than anticipated. It wasn't until they drove along their close encounter route with Hohmann and Jackson that they realized they were missing a full two hours, even accounting for their stops and period of slow driving.  Air Force Major Jim McDonald suggested hypnosis, although Betty had mentioned it in her first letter to NICAP dated 9/26/61. Hohmann and Jackson agreed that hypnosis might be a good option.   

 

False: It was Jackson who then arranged for one of the Army's top psychiatric experts to undertake the regression, under which the full story of the joint abduction “emerged”. 

 

True:   Dr. Duncan Stevens, the civilian psychiatrist Barney was seeing because of his bleeding ulcer and high blood pressure thought that Barney was making a good adjustment in his marriage to Betty and life in NH.  However, following an exploratory trip to the White Mountains, he mentioned his UFO encounter and apparent amnesia to Dr. Stevens.  Dr. Stevens thought this was significant and referred Barney to Dr. Benjamin Simon, a civilian psychiatrist for many years, who had specialized in hypnotic regression to treat traumatic amnesia during WW II.  He set up the psychiatric unit at the Mason General Hospital on Long Island  After the war, he taught at Harvard, owned a private psychiatric hospital, and later, went into private practice in Boston's Back Bay.  The Hills saw him in his Back Bay office.

 

False: Many researchers have since demonstrated that a careful review of the timings actually shows that there was no missing time at all.

 

True:  Skeptics have made this claim but it can't be supported.  I and others have driven along the Hills' route at their reported rate of speed, lingered at the reported stops, and followed their route precisely.  We could not account for the time differential. I also attempted to become lost for two hours and couldn't. 

 

False:  The anxiety caused by Barney’s increasing racial sensitivity during his trip caused him to misinterpret a conventional aircraft for an unconventional flying object.  He did not encounter a UFO. 

 

True:  Although Barney engaged in introspective thought about racial prejudice on three brief occasions over a three day period, no overt discrimination was exhibited toward him. When Dr. Simon inquired about his mood, Barney stated, “I felt in good spirits.  I felt in high spirits.”

 

False:  Barney was so tired that he must have been hallucinating.

 

True:  In a conscious interview with Dr. Simon Barney stated the following:  “I was well rested from the night before.  We had spent a delightful day and I knew I could drive on from the White Mountains down to Portsmouth.  So, I didn't stop.  I didn't feel too tired.”

 

False:  Betty wrote and rewrote accounts of her dreams during a two year period prior to hypnosis.  She probably told the story over and over again until Barney’s “ears fell off”.

 

True:  Barney told Dr. Simon that he overheard Betty tell her dreams to NICAP investigator Walter Webb while he waited in an adjacent room.  He also heard her dream account on 11/3/1963.  She did not write and rewrite them.  She initially wrote them on note paper.  She wrote one and only one account titled “Dreams or Recall?”.

 

False: Betty had vivid nightmares in which she was taken from her bed onto an alien ship, and had medical procedures performed on her. The information revealed during the Hills’ separate hypnosis sessions is essentially identical to Betty’s dream account.

 

True:  Betty did not dream that she was taken from her bed onto an alien ship. There are significant differences between Betty’s dreams and information recalled separately by Betty and Barney during hypnotic regression. My next paper will reveal the correlating data not present in Betty’s dreams.  In the interim, refer to Captured! The Betty and Barney Hill UFO Experience.

 

False:  The Hills were stripped naked and underwent intrusive medical examinations focusing on their genital organs. 

 

True:  No, they weren’t stripped naked. Betty remained dressed in her underwear, including a slip.  Barney’s clothing was pushed up or lowered.  The exam did not focus upon their genital organs.  Betty’s genital organs were not examined but a needle was inserted into her navel. The exams focused on the differences between them and us--skin, skeletal structure, mouths, eyes, etc.. 

 

False: There are reasonable mundane explanations for the damage to Betty’s “purple” dress, examined by a group of crop circle investigators, such as dust mites, moths and mold.

 

True: There was a 2” tear in the stitching along the top right side of the fabric next to her zipper on Betty’s blue dress.  There was a 1” tear in the thick zipper fabric along the top left side. The lining was torn from waist to hemline and the hem was hanging down. All of this during a drive through NH? Later, when Betty retrieved it from her closet it was coated with a pink powdery substance and badly stained, especially along the hem, around the sleeves, and along the top of the bodice. Betty reported that her captors had touched the dress in the stained areas. Although it initially underwent testing in 1978, BP-Amoco analytical chemist Phyllis Budinger, M.S. did the most thorough analysis from 11/2001-10/2003. (She is not a crop circle investigator) She compared Betty’s dress to a 40 year old control that had hung in a closet for the same duration.  She found dust, cat hair, etc. on both dresses. Otherwise, there were no similarities.

 

False: You almost never hear a critical treatment of their story.

 

True:  This is patently false. The pseudoskeptics have invented largely bogus accounts of the Hills’ UFO experience and have widely disseminated them in books, magazine articles, radio and television programs and on the Internet. 

 

False: The Betty & Barney Hill abduction story has every indication of being merely an inventive tale from the mind of a lifelong UFO fanatic.

 

True:  The Hills had little or no interest in UFOs prior to their close encounter.  They had a wide range of interests, including civil rights, human rights, politics, church activities, gardening, and their jobs. The statement that Betty was a lifelong UFO fanatic is an outright lie.  She was 42 when the UFO encounter occurred. 

 

False: In her original written stories, she described the aliens' star map as three dimensional. Under hypnosis, she redrew it on paper, in two dimensions. It's seven or eight random dots were connected by lines.

 

True:  In “Dreams or Reality?” Betty described a two dimensional star map that rolled up like a window shade.  Later, during hypnotic regression, she remembered a three dimensional hologram.  She drew it on paper as the result of a post hypnotic suggestion by Dr. Simon.  There were not 7 or 8 random dots; there were 16 precisely drawn dots of varying size, connected by solid, dotted or dashed lines.  Marjorie Fish built 26 three dimensional models of our local galactic neighborhood before she was able to find a match. She found that all the pattern stars are the right kind for planets and life, even though less than 5% of the stars in the local neighborhood qualify, and all the sun-like stars in the volume of space taken up by the 3D model are part of the pattern. There have been many estimates made of the probability that it was just a coincidence from one in a thousand to one in a million.  Her work was vetted and found to be very accurate by Dr. Walter Mitchell XE "George Mitchell"  of the astronomy department at Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio.

 

     There is ample reason to be skeptical about some aspects of the Betty and Barney Hill UFO abduction, especially regarding Betty’s statements that are identical to her dream account.  Although the Hills’ UFO encounter provided an abundance of forensic evidence, only Betty’s dress underwent scientific laboratory analysis.  My comparative analysis of the hypnosis tapes vis-à-vis Betty’s infamous “Dreams of Recall?” account provides correlating data that is clearly amenable within the framework of social science.   It is apparent that “something” anomalous happened to Betty and Barney Hill on September 19-20, 1961.  I welcome healthy skepticism by respectful rationalists.  However, denigrating remarks, lies and personal attacks are not acceptable in intelligent discourse. 


 

References Brummett, Major William E. and USAF Captain Ernest R. Zuick, Jr.. Air Command and Staff College Research Study, Air University Report No. 045-74, “Should the USAF Reopen Project Bluebook?’, Alabama: Maxwell AFB, May 17, 1974, p. 5.  Also found at Http://www.cufon.org/afrstdy1.htm Budinger, Phyllis XE "Phyllis Budinger" . “Analysis of the Dress Worn by Betty Hill XE "Betty Hill"  During the September 19, 1961 Abduction in New Hampshire.” October 19, 2003. Cerf, Christopher and Victor Navasky. The Experts Speak. New York, NY: Pantheon Books, 1984. Clancy, Susan  XE "Clancy" , Abducted: How People Come to Believe They Were Kidnapped by Aliens. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2005 Coppens, Philip. “The Pied Pipers of the CIA”. http://www.philipcoppens.com/ufo_ciapipers.html

 

Http://brentenergywork.com/OBJECTIVE_SCIENCE_ARTICLE.htm Donderi, Don. “”The Scientific Context of the UFO/ Abduction Phenomenon”, International UFO Reporter, Spring 1996, Vo. 21, no. 1.  http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents.doc12.htm Dunning, Brian. “Betty and Barney Hill: The Original Abduction”. October 21, 2008. http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4124 Fish XE "Marjorie Fish" , Marjorie , “Journey into the Hill Star Map XE "Star Map" .” MUFON UFO Symposium, 1974.  http://www.nicap.dabsol.co.uk/hillmap.htm Friedman, Stanton and Kathleen Marden, Captured! The Betty and Barney Hill UFO Experience. (New Page: Franklin Lakes, NJ, 2007. Fuller, John G.,, The Interrupted Journey XE "The Interrupted Journey" , New York: Dial Press, 1966 Henderson, Major Paul W., “Air Intelligence Information Report No. 100-1-61”, Project Blue Book, September 21, 1961. Hill, Betty, “Dreams or Reality?”, November 1961. Johnson, Laurance. “Objective Science: An Inherent Oxymoron” Http://brentenergywork.com/OBJECTIVE_SCIENCE_ARTICLE.htm Klass, Philip J.. UFO Abductions: A Dangerous Game, (Prometheus: Buffalo, New York, 1989) Lakatos, “Science and Pseudoscience”. www.info.fu-berlin.de//ehre/pmo/eng/Lakatos_Science.pdf Sheaffer, Robert.  “Over the Hill on UFO Abductions”, Skeptical Inquirer, Nov-Dec 2007. http://www.csicop.org/si/2007-06/sheaffer.html  XE "James Randi" Simon, Benjamin, “Hypnosis in the Treatment of Military Neuroses,” Psychiatric Opinion, (Vol. 4: No. 5) October, 1967 Swett XE "Swett" , Ben, “Testimony regarding Betty and Barney Hill XE "Barney Hill" .” November 29, 2006.   XE "Ben Swett" Also see: “Betty and Barney Hill, Http://bswett.com/1963-09BettyAndBarney.html Unknown Author.  “The Abduction of Reason”. November 20, 2008. http://calgaryskeptics.com/blog/tag/sleep-paralysis/ Webb, Walter, “A Dramatic UFO Encounter in the White Mountains of New Hampshire—September 19-20, 1961”, Confidential NICAP Report. October 26, 1961.  Wu, Winston.  “Mistaking Cynicism for True Skepticism”. http://www.happierabroad.com/Debunking_Skeptical_Arguments/Introduction.htm


*** Permission granted to publish these articles to this website by Kathleen Marden. Any other use or reproductions are prohibited.





                      SETI Surprise         Column Oct. 5, 2008    Stan Friedman 


Author / Physicist / Ufologist : Stanton Friedman


As regular readers of this column and of my book "Flying Saucers and Science" (Ref. 1) are aware, I am definitely not a fan of the SETI movement. I honestly believe a more accurate meaning for SETI than Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence is Silly Effort To Investigate. I spell out the reasons in detail in the book chapter "The Cult of SETI". But I must admit I was shocked to read in a blog "Estimate of the Situation" by Wisconsin attorney Adam Korbitz, that the subject of UFOs was presented in a sensible way as part of some lectures at the First International Academy of Astronautics Symposium on "Searching For Life Signatures" at the UNESCO Building in Paris during the week of September 22-26, 2008.A total of 60 papers were presented. I will not have copies of the Power Point Presentations for a while.

                                                                There were several indications of ufological respectability.

Adam dealt especially about the paper  by Alain Labeque of France. Alain talked about the Fermi Paradox,  which I discuss in the book and has been discussed in many other books. Enrico Fermi was one of the top nuclear physicists of the 20th century He was, amazingly, equally at home with theoretical and experimental work. He won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1938, directed the first operation of a chain reacting nuclear pile in 1942 at the University of Chicago, and did much much more to help in the development of the first nuclear weapons among other things. Frankly, he was one of the reasons I had switched to the University in 1953, though sadly he died in 1954. The well known paradox story is that after a 1950 luncheon discussion at Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory in New Mexico about the probability that a truly advanced society could colonize the entire Milky Way Galaxy in a few million years, Fermi suddenly asked "So where is everybody?" He did not say nobody was visiting, and was well known for using questions as a teaching tool. There have been loads of answers to the question. Normally all the usual SETI suspects agree there are no aliens here, though none review the overwhelming evidence that indeed earth is being visited by aliens. One group of answers comes under the general heading of the Zoo hypothesis. In other words : They are out there but are not openly visiting because they don't want to interfere, or they want to observe us untainted by their presence,  or they think we are too savage, or...

 

For example, Stephen Webb, author of the book  "Where Is Everybody: 50 Solutions to the Fermi Paradox" (Ref. 2)  does barely mention UFOs, but only notes the negative statements of debunker Robert Schaeffer. There is no mention of the large scale scientific studies, the multiple witness radar visual cases. He talks about lights in the sky as if that was all there was. There is no mention of Ted Phillips 3000 + physical trace cases. He dismisses abductions out of hand (for example ignoring the Betty and Barney Hill case) and is apparently equally ignorant of the Roswell Incident. He lists a total of 218 References. But none are to the scientific publications such as "Blue Book Special Report 14"(Ref. 3) or Dr. J. Allen Hynek's  "The UFO Experience" (Ref.4) or the Congressional Hearings of 1968.(Ref.5).

 

My general impression is that those saying nobody is coming here naively assume aliens would be making themselves known, might have found us accidentally, would hold a press conference, go out for a beer, etc. These guys are serious! I take an entirely different view namely that advanced civilizations in the neighborhood would list earth as a planet currently inhabited by a primitive society whose major activity is tribal warfare. I assume, of course, that every advanced civilization would be concerned about its own security and survival and would certainly have to keep track of other blossoming younger societies that within a hundred years or so would be capable of interstellar travel. Of special, concern would be those (like Earthlings) which have clearly not developed their sociological skills to match their technological ones. So we would be checked out infrequently until new advanced technologies came into view. Visits in 1900 would show little evidence of advanced technology.. no flying, almost no radio, no radar, no space travel, etc.

 

 By 1917 there was some flight and major warfare in the trenches of Europe. By 1944 there were major air battles in the Pacific and in Europe. Millions were being killed; radar was being used. Massive bombing raids involving literally hundreds of bombers per raid were raining destruction on civilian and military targets in Germany and Japan. There were loads of airplanes by 1940. By the end of August, 1945, 3 incredibly destructive atom bombs had been exploded including 2 on Hiroshima and Nagasaki destroying huge numbers of civilians and military people. By the end of 1946, 2 more A bombs had been exploded in the Pacific. The point of tapping the energy of the nucleus is that it should lead to interstellar travel. And the noisy negativists think aliens would just drop by for chats? The cold war was in earnest; it was obvious that there were many different languages being spoken, many different and rapidly improving military flight systems being developed, and, very clearly. no one individual who speaks for the planet. High speed jets were being developed.. and earthling governments were surely not sharing information determined by examination of crashed alien vehicles. By 1949 the Russians had tested their first nuclear weapon and a few more within the next 3 years.

 

 In October, 1952, the USA had detonated the first nuclear fusion weapon (H-Bomb) finally tapping the same source of energy as produces the energy of the stars (and which could get us out in the local neighborhood).  MIKE was quite  a show releasing the energy of 10 million tons of TNT.. with a fireball 3 miles wide. Many more nuclear weapons were detonated not only by the Soviet Union and the USA, but by France and England and China. One Soviet fusion device had the energy release of 50 million tons of TNT. Surely thse bomb blasts told a lot about what kind of beings Earthlings are.

 

By 1960 the first space systems had been launched. By 1970 Man had gone to the moon several times. Surely it would not be unreasonable to expect that soon interstellar missions would be planned, but by a primitive society whose major activity, as noted,  is tribal warfare. Major wars had also taken place such as the "Police action"  in Korea and the Vietnamese war. The US alone lost 54,000 killed in action in Korea and 58,000 in Vietnam. Casualties from Korea and Vietnam were much greater.

 

The naysayers about alien visits essentially ignore the fact that governments would all have a great interest in the technology of the visitors for its possible use in military systems. Also they ignore the fact that governments have been very successful at keeping secrets including the existence of multibillion dollar research and development programs. Obviously the military in various countries control the best sky-visitor monitoring systems from the ground and from space.

 

Dr. Labeque in his paper "Active SETI and the Zoo Hypothesis" talks of the Zoo Hypothesis, but strongly suggests that the UFO evidence should also be reviewed. He also noted the catalog of more than 1400 pilot sightings compiled by Dominque Weinstein (Ref. 6). Active SETI involves our sending signals out and seeing if there is a response. In particular he focuses on one of the most important cases(ignored by debunkers, of course) namely the RB-47 case of July 1957.This lasted for over one hour, and involved two different ground based radar systems plus the sophisticated electronic detection systems on board the reconnaissance airplane with its highly trained crew of 6. The RB-47 flew from Mississippi, through Louisiana and Texas, and on in to Oklahoma. Of great significance is the fact that the crew noted that not only had they watched the nearby UFO with its sometimes strange maneuvers, but they had monitored a 3 Magahertz electromagnetic signal from it. Was it the equivalent of alien radar? Were they communicating with another alien space craft or a mother ship? Labeque recommended that we send out a 3MH signal in all directions for a finite period of time and then stop transmitting and see if we get an answer on the same frequency. Others talked about Active SETI at the conference especially Alexander Zaitsev of the Soviet Union, and some believe there should be a prohibition of such signals because it would inform aliens that we are here. (This assumes, of course, that they don't already know we are). Most of these same people would argue that nobody is coming here because one can't get here from there. Seth Shostak, of the SETI Institute, to his credit, did not wish there to be any such prohibition.

 

Another French scientist Jean-Pierre Rospars in his paper "SETI in the Light of Terrestrial Biological Evolution" stated that "ET presence in our neighborhood should not be neglected. It may be partly accessible to our limited means of investigation". That, too, is a big step forward.

 

There was also another paper listed on the program "When SETI meets an Alien Form of Intelligence: understanding the troubled relationships between SETI and ufology" by Pierre Lagrange. As of yet I do not have any information about the contents of this provocatively sounding presentation. Finally, and quite extraordinarily, there was  the paper by Bjorn Gitle Hauge of Norway "Investigation and Analysis of Transient Luminous Phenomena in the low atmosphere of Hessdalen Valley, Norway". A great many scientific measurements have been made by a Hesdalen study group. These were presented (not really in a UFO context) with a request for evaluation by the attending scientists.

 

I am hoping to see Korbitz at a conference in Burlington, Wisconsin, to get as much more information as possible. He did note that the US SETI contingent didn't react to these  UFO provocations. I am certain from my contacts with them and their negative ignorant approaches to ufology on such programs as the Peter Jennings mockumentaries (Volumes 1 and 2) that they were not happy about UFOs being brought up at a SETI conference. Obviously if aliens are visiting, who needs to listen for signals?? Stanton Friedman fsphys@rogers.com  www.stantonfriedman.com  

 

REFERENCES 1.Friedman, Stanton T. Flying Saucers and Science, 2008, New Page Books, NJ, 320 pages $19. from UFORI, POB 958, Houlton, ME 04730-0958 Autographed covers S& H 2.Webb, Stephen Where is Everybody:Fifty Solutions to the Fermi Paradox and the Problem of Extraterrestrial Life Copernicus Books, 2002, 288 pages. 3. Project Blue Book Special Report 14. 250 pages October 1955, Data on 3201 UFO Sightings 240 charts, tables etc. Includes Priority Mail $25.00 from UFORI 4. Hynek, Joseph Allen The UFO Experience:A Scientific Enquiry  Henry Regnery, Chicago, 1972 5. House of Representatives Committee on Science and Astronautics Symposium on UFOs, July 29, 1968 6. Weinstein, Dominque F. Unidentified Aerial Phenomena: EightyYears of Pilot Sightings. Catalog of Military, Airliner, Private Pilots Sightings from 1916-2000. 6th Edition, 2001








   Perceptions       Defamation Physics (Cottle) 12/05/08      Stan Friedman 


Author/ Physicist / Ufologist : Stanton Friedman 


Every so often people have suggested to me that I must get a hard time from the press or the attendees at my lectures, usually "Flying Saucers ARE Real" because of expressing such strong positive views about flying saucer reality, the Cosmic Watergate, Roswell, etc. They all seem surprised when I point out that I have had only 11 hecklers, two of whom were drunk, despite having given more than 700 lectures and done loads of radio and TV programs and campus classroom sessions, and coming on very strong indeed.  I guess I spoke too soon. In early.November, 2008, I was strongly and publicly castigated separately by two Professors of Physics at Florida State University (FSU) in Tallahassee, Florida. A local museum, the Mary Brogan Museum of Arts and Sciences, had earlier decided to bring in an extensive exhibit about the Roswell Incident. This same exhibit had been shown at the Southwest Florida Museum of History in Fort Myers, Florida a few years ago.. They had brought me in as the original civilian investigator of the Incident to give two lectures and were very pleased with the response to the exhibit and my programs. The Brogan had decided to bring me in as well on November 7 and 8. One talk would be the "The Real Roswell Story". The second would be "Star Travel? Yes!".

 

The museum had asked if I would be interested in doing something in classes or seminars over at nearby FSU to help promote the lectures and the exhibit, and, of course, I agreed. I did tell them that usually it is the student activities people on campus that bring me in not the academic departments. I noted I have done a number of seminars, colloquia, etc.. sometimes set up to try unsuccessfully to embarrass me by physics departments.

 

I was told that nobody had wanted me over at FSU, so I thought that is fine, less work to do.. I was quite shocked, therefore, when on Nov. 4 the Tallahassee Democrat Newspaper (circulation of 50,000) had carried a defamatory letter from Dr. Paul Cottle, an FSU Physics Department Professor, whose field of research was nuclear physics. This was rather ironic since I had been interviewed the previous week by the TD which ran a generally favorable article on Nov. 6. Cottle, with whom I had had no previous contact, called me a "well known charlatan" and a "pseudoscientist" and apparently disbelieved, for reasons unknown, that I was a nuclear physicist. I have no reason to believe he knew anything about me or had read any of my books or seen the exhibit or gone to my website which has a bio. I am not hard to track down. A google search on "Stanton Friedman" obtained 52,000 hits.

 

Chucha Barber, executive director of the museum, responded quickly with a letter highlighting my background, my degrees from the U. of Chicago, my work for GE, GM, Westinghouse, etc. etc. This was responded to by Dr. Gregory Boebinger, director of the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory at FSU, one of the top facilities of its kind in the world. He at least didn't mention my name, but again linked pseudoscience with Roswell, UFOs. and wondered if "the museum was planning to host future exhibits on palm reading or, astrology?" What an incredible stretch of irrationality! I had responded via email to Cottle, providing background information, demanding an apology, offering to debate him, referring to my website and my 4 books and the 10 PhD Theses on UFO related thesis topics, and  stressing that he had defamed me. No response. I also emailed Boebinger. No response. Others sent me copies of letters sent praising the Brogan for bringing me in. Surely being a Professor of Physics at a major university does not place one above the law or even rules of fair criticism and good taste, or the use of the scientific method. A keystone of that method is to have facts in hand before putting computer in gear.

 

To the best of my knowledge, neither physicist attended either the exhibit or my lectures. I asked at both. The Roswell lecture was to an overflow crowd.. Attendees paid $10@.  I don't know if any were students at FSU. The museum sold all the copies of my books that I had provided. Apparently Cottle was particularly incensed by being asked by the museum to give extra credit to students for attending my lectures and also by my being called nuclear physicist. That was my job title for major corporations even though I don't have a PhD and don't work in academia. I have been a member of the American Physical Society, the major professional organization for physicists, for 50 years and the American Nuclear Society and the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics for more than 40 years.

 

I sent copies of the various letters to several reporters including Billy Cox of Sarasota, Florida, who has attended my lectures and is very very knowledgeable about UFOs. He had also taken the trouble to talk to retired General Thomas J. DuBose one of the key Roswell witnesses. He writes incisive blogs for the Sarasota Harold Tribune. His blog got much attention on the internet under the title "Scientists Refuse to Defend Themselves". He had contacted both of the offenders. Boebinger didn't respond. Cottle sent a brief note "I'm not going to comment further. My letter to the editor was a message to my local community, and I'm going to leave it at that." A professor of physics could say this in a world in which the internet flashes articles all over in a short time? Does he really believe that it is OK to libel if the paper "only" goes to 50,000 people? As a nuclear physicist I always worked on the basis that claims should be based on facts and evidence, not made up of whole cloth as these were. None of us has license to defame or slander someone. Slander is oral defamation. Libel is in print. Neither is fair comment.

 

I was "fortunately" already familiar with the Libel laws, having successfully brought an action years ago against a newspaper in the UK and a researcher who had libeled me, both as quoted in the paper and in a much nastier letter to the paper. I would have settled for a full and public apology by both, but the researcher refused. The newspaper had early on realized that they hadn't checked the facts and were ready to apologize right away. I eventually reached a settlement and received both a payment and a full published apology from the researcher and the newspaper.

 

I have had advice from two persons familiar with libel laws. One made it explicit that I had a strong cause of action for Libel per se. That means "on its face" because of the "Well Known Charlatan" remark. The best defense against a charge of Libel is Truth. Obviously there is none here to be applied. I don't relish spending my time on legalities, but certainly cannot let such false charges go unanswered. If no apology is provided, I may well proceed with the legal action. I have two years to decide. I should stress that in the USA a legal decision known as "Sullivan vs. New York Times" indicates that almost anything can be said about a public figure. I suppose that with all my lectures and radio and TV programs I can be considered a public figure. However, Libel per se describes a situation in which the charge is so bad that a reasonable person would lose his reputation if the charge were true. For example, calling somebody a convicted murderer or convicted rapist or charlatan, would be libel per se, if the charge was untrue. One reason for wanting a public apology, is that hopefully it would send two messages . I am not a charlatan and it is not OK to make such defamatory charges without paying the price..

 

In trying to get a handle on the reason for Cottle's charges, I did determine that he had been heavily involved in a statewide committee about educational standards with a primary focus on whether it is OK to teach creationism as well as evolution. Perhaps he and Boebinger linked me (for no good reason at all) with the Florida fundamentalists who espoused creationism.

 

Strangely, one of the 11 hecklers I mentioned above was a Professor of Physics at a State College in Cortland, New York. He started the Q. and A. session after my lecture with this statement:  "I have never in one night heard so much nonsense as I did  tonight". I asked if he could be more specific. He then made a number of "You said that." statements. I had to point out after each one that it wasn't what I had said. For example, he said "You said that Betty and Barney Hill were taken to Zeta Reticuli and back within 2 hours". I said  "Sorry, but what I said was 'They were taken on board a UFO for 2 hours. It didn't go anywhere'." After several more of these off the wall claims, somebody shouted "How about taking some sensible questions". The heckler left. I asked "Who was that?" He was a professor of physics. Sometimes a PhD means piled higher and deeper, I guess. Obviously he hadn't heard what I said any more than Dr. Cottle knew anything about me or UFOs or Roswell.

 

Perhaps Samuel Johnson (1709-1784) had it right when he said: "The greatest part of mankind has no other reasons for their opinion than that they are in fashion". Debunkers foolishly believe everybody agrees with them, so no investigation is needed.

 

Stan Friedman fsphys@rogers.com    www.stantonfriedman.com
<http://www.stantonfriedman.com/>  
 






 Misrepresentations about the Hills    Nov. 5, 2008    Stanton T. Friedman


Author / Physicist / Ufologist : Stanton Friedman 




I am sure that everybody who has been following the US election campaign is well aware that much of what has shown up on the internet simply wasn't true. Clearly some was intentionally posted  to deceive. It has also been true that much that has been written about UFOs has been false. A fine example of ignorance or intentional deception appeared in a "skeptical" piece by Brian Dunning which appeared as Skeptoid No. 124 on October 21, 2008. It was sent to me by a guy who occasionally sends nasty comments after I appear on Coast to Coast.. the title is "Betty and Barney Hill: The Original UFO Abduction". It can be found on Skeptoid.com .

 

It is truly a splendid textbook example of propaganda and misrepresentation. BD does get the date right, Sept. 19, 1961, but very little else. "Near the resort of Indian Head they stopped their car in the middle of Rte. 3 to observe a strange light moving through in the night sky. The next thing they knew, they were about 35 miles further along on their trip and several hours had elapsed". Talk about omissions. There was more than one stop. The large object (hardly a light) was within a few hundred feet. Barney observed it through binoculars from outside the car. He observed a double row of windows through which he could see about 10 individuals, red lights on fins on the outside, etc This was conscious recall and was described to NICAP Investigator Walter Webb during a six hour interview on October 21 1961. No hypnosis was involved.

 

"Then Betty began having nightmares two weeks later; in her nightmares she described being taken aboard an alien spacecraft and having medical experiments performed. As a result of these nightmares, Betty and Barney decided to undergo hypnosis." This is absurd. Barney had developed hypertension, bleeding ulcers, was unable to sleep. He was in therapy . The original thought, that these symptoms were related to his having moved to NH leaving his sons, was dispelled by the therapist. At one session he noted that he and Betty had been searching for the location where they had seen the UFO. Then he was referred to  Psychiatrist Dr. Benjamin Simon, an early expert in treatment of  Post Traumatic Stress Disorder using medical hypnotic regression with amnesia induced after each session.

 

BD States "Innumerable books and movies were made about the Betty and Barney Hill abduction. you almost never hear a critical treatment of their story". He mentions none of the books . I know of three (Ref. 1, 2, 3) and one movie, NBC's 1975 "The UFO Incident" starring James Earl Jones and Estelle Parsons. There have been loads of very critical treatments, for example, by Carl Sagan in the bestselling "Cosmos"(Ref.4) and in an article in Parade magazine (Ref.5). BD goes on "Much of the Hill story is said to be based on these separate hypnosis sessions.. In fact that turns out not to be case at all..It is important to note that that it was more than two years after the incident that the Hills underwent hypnosis. During those two years Betty was writing and rewriting her accounts of her dreams. All of the significant details you may have heard about the Hills medical experiments came from her two years of  writing ". This is a total lie. There was no writing and rewriting as can be seen by reading what she wrote, for example, in "Captured!" and the comparative analysis between the dreams and the hypnosis material.

 

She did dream of a star-map, but it was on a roller like maps at school and was not 3D. BD has the gall to claim "Betty probably told the story to Barney over and over again until his ears fell off over a period of two years before they ever had any hypnosis". I have no idea what the source is for this nonsense. Nor for this ridiculous comment "When they first saw the light, Betty said she thought it was a spacecraft. Barney always said he thought it was an airplane". Without hypnosis they described seeing it close-up near their car with a double row of windows and barely moving and without any noise. This is an airplane?

 

Dunning then notes that Betty's written description of the beings in her nightmare was different from Barney's under hypnosis But when reliving the moments together their descriptions of events matched.. "After Betty Hill heard these sessions suddenly her hypnosis accounts began to describe the same kind of character". The simple fact of the matter is that Betty and Barney were each hypnotized separately and amnesia was induced after each separate session so they could not talk with each other about what came out under hypnosis .Betty could not have heard any of these sessions until Dr. Simon  finally played the tapes for them.

 

Dunning then tries to relate the characters described in the hypnosis session to aliens who appeared 12 days prior to Barney's first hypnosis session in February 1964 to an experience on the Outer Limits TV program called The  Bellero Shield. As a matter of fact, they do not match. Dunning admits "The Hills stated they did not watch it". As with most of Dunning's claims, no basis is given for claiming they did. It should be noted that nowhere does Dunning bother to note that Betty was a social worker and a supervisor in the Welfare Department of the State of  New Hampshire. Of course he doesn't mention that Barney was on the governor's Civil Rights Commission. Nor does he give Dr. Simon's name or background such as that he ran a 3000 bed hospital for shell shock war veterans and that he was featured in an army film "Let There be Light" about his successful treatment of these veterans, using hypnosis in the same fashion  he used with Betty and Barney to  recover missing memories..

 

Dunning claims "Betty had commonly spoken of UFOs even before 1961, including one story she often told of her sister's own close encounter in 1957." Again no source is given. The fact is that her sister's daughter, Kathleen Marden, co-author of "Captured!"  has stated this is false. Betty mentioned it once to Barney and he didn't believe in UFOs and that was the end of that.

 

Dunning then gives this strange summary "So here's what we have so far: A woman  who clearly had an obsession with UFOs [no evidence whatsoever] saw a light in the sky that her husband described as an airplane [when it was farther away].She then spent  two years writing an elaborate story [totally false] and no doubt  telling it and retelling it to her husband [totally false]. Later under hypnosis Barney  was asked about the events described in Betty's story, and surprise, surprise he retold the story she already told him a hundred times [totally false] and added a dash from the Outer Limits"

 

Dunning mentions radar sightings included in the Blue Book file and dismisses them naturally excluding some important data such as the supposed weather balloons having a very low radar profile. He tries to throw out measurements made on Betty's dress by unnamed "crop circle enthusiasts" but ignores the important work done by analytical chemist Phyllis Budinger, employed by a major company for  35 years. He claims that anything found on the dress was the result of its being in the closet for 40 years. Phyllis actually had a very similar dress (her wedding dress) kept for that long and not having any of the same stuff. on it.

 

Dunning is equally cavalier in trying to toss out the star map work done by Marjorie Fish. Surprisingly he mentions her by name, then totally misrepresents what she did . He says she  read a book [Of course he doesn't mention that it was John Fuller's "Interrupted Journey" and that she visited Betty to get more data] "It's seven or 8 random dots connected by lines". More nonsense, there are 15 dots. The lines make sense: nearest star to nearest star.  "She then took beads and string and converted her living room into a 3 dimensional version of the galaxy based on the 1969 Gliese star catalog". The fact of the matter is she built 26 different 3D models of the local galactic neighborhood,  out 55 light years, at most, from the sun. The biggest model was a 3foot cube.. hardly living room size, and was used as  a teaching tool by Dr. Walter Mitchell, Chairman of the Astronomy Department at the Ohio State University. He and Marjorie and Betty are all in the movie"UFOs Are Real" (Ref. 6) The galaxy is about 100,000 light years across. Most of the work was done before the Gliese catalog was published. Nobody doing what she did before  the Gliese was published could have identified the stars because the correct distance data had not been available.. Of course he says Zeta Reticuli when there are 2 stars, Zeta 1 and Zeta 2 Reticuli.(The constellation is Reticulum). He makes no note of the facts that they are the closest to each other pair of sun-like stars in the neighborhood (1/8th of a ly apart), and a billion years older than the sun and 39.3 light years from Earth and that all the pattern stars are sun-like though only 5% of those in the neighborhood are, and that all the sun-like stars in the 3D volume represented by her models are part of the pattern and that they are all in a plane. He claims that anybody could have made a crude drawing using the Gliese data.. not published until 8 years after the event!! He makes claims about Carl Sagan and other astronomers' comments, but neglecting to say they don't stand up to careful review such as provided by Astronomy writer Terence Dickinson (Ref. 7 and 8)

 

He concludes this mockery of journalism and science: "The Betty and Barney Hill abduction story has every indication of being merely an inventive tale from the mind of a lifelong UFO Fanatic. It is unsupported by any useful evidence and is perfectly consistent with the purely natural  explanation.".

 

I have been unable to find any biographical data about Dunning though there is a well known flautist with the same name.  His piece (There are many other false claims besides those noted above) stands as a monument to laziness, misrepresentation, bias and ignorance. It is almost pure baloney, an inventive tale from the mind of an anti-UFO fanatic. No, I have no idea why he and other debunkers are so determined to ignore the UFO evidence. Stan Friedman fsphys@rogers.com www.stantonfriedman.com

 

References 1. Fuller, John The Interrupted Journey Dial Press, New York. 1966 2. Pflock, Karl and Brookesmith, Peter(Editors) Encounters at Indian Head: The Betty and Barney Hill UFO Abduction Revisited 2007 Anomalist Books 3. Friedman, Stanton T. , Marden, Kathleen. Captured! The Betty and Barney Hill UFO Experience. 320 pages, New Page Books, Franklin Lakes, New Jersey, 2007, Autographed by both authors, UFORI, POB 958, Houlton, ME 04730-0958 $18.99 includes P & H 4. Sagan, Carl Cosmos TV Series and Book, 1980 5.Sagan, Carl UFO Abductions PARADE, March 7,1993 6.UFOs Are Real DVD 1979 93 minutesUFORI, $20.00 7.Dickinson ,Terence The Zeta Reticuli Incident  Astromedia  1974 8. Dickinson, Terence Update on the Zeta Reticuli Incident, UFORI 1980 $1.00


*** Permission to use these articles by Stanton Friedman. Any unauthorized use prohibited.






 Government Underground Secrecy

 

 MUFON Certified UFO Investigator / Writer / Researcher : Dennis Balthaser

Secrecy by our government is not anything new, and in the case of developing new technology for our military, I agree with the need for secrecy, since we don’t want our advisories knowing what is being developed. It’s my personal feeling that UFO information is well known by our government and military, however for more than 60 years they have both been emphatic that they either know nothing about it, or it doesn’t exist. Those of us that have done this research of course believe differently. To put it simply, we’re being lied to. Such secrecy is not only limited to information the government has or knows about UFOs, but on many other fronts as well.

 

While doing research, I always regress to two questions I have. Who has given a few the authority to keep certain secrets from the public? And secondly, what has happened to the first three words in the preamble to our Constitution---“We the people”? Secrecy, lies and cover-ups have perpetuated themselves to the point that the general public no longer has any confidence in our elected officials, as shown recently in the public’s low approval ratings of those officials.

Again in my opinion, young people in this country need to start asking questions and demanding answers of our leaders. Accepting secrecy and cover-ups is no longer acceptable, but will continue, and probably increase if no one questions them. Secrecy can be good and even justified in some cases, but it can get out of hand and become extremely dangerous if abused. 

 

Much of this secrecy is cloaked from the public and most of our elected officials with catch phrases such as; “National Security”, “Research and Development”, “Special Projects”, and others, some of which are probably “Black Projects”. The financial budgets for some of these programs are staggering figures, and in the case of the Central Intelligence Agency, by law, the National Security Act of 1947 made it illegal to ever disclose how much money is spent by the CIA. Guess who is paying for all of this? You and I are. 

“Activities at Area 51 (also known as Groom Lake), have properly been determined to be classified” 


Several of the secret military bases, such as Area 51 have highly visible signs posted stating, “the use of deadly force is authorized”, which is a good indication that something very secretive is taking place there either above or below ground. Since the 1990’s each President has issued a yearly Presidential Determination, “exempting the base from complying with environmental laws.” The reason given is the fact that, “activities at Area 51 (also known as Groom Lake), have properly been determined to be classified, and its disclosure would be harmful to National Security.”

While doing research for my “Underground Bases and Tunnels” lecture, I discovered another federal agency that is heavily involved in secrecy, which very few Americans, including very few Congressmen are probably aware of.

“FEMA’s underground locations are referred to as “Continuity of Government” facilities.”

FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, is not only available to help in times of disaster, but has a much more complex role in protecting our leaders in case of a national emergency, and in obtaining information on you and I. Many of FEMA’s underground locations are referred to as “Continuity of Government” facilities. One of those underground locations is Mount Weather, 46 miles from Washington, D.C. near Bluemont, Virginia. This is the operational hub of approximately 100 other Federal Relocation Centers. In the event of a nuclear war, declaration of martial law, or other national emergency, the President, his cabinet and the rest of the Executive branch would be relocated here. Officially Mount Weather and its budget do not exist, and FEMA refuses to answer questions about the facility. As far back as 1975, a Senate subcommittee learned that the facility has information on at least 100,000 Americans, and their computers can access millions of pieces of additional information on the personal lives of other American citizens. Mount Weather was prepared for use at the time of the 1961 Cuban missile crisis, the assassination of President Kennedy in 1963, and was on standby during the 1967 and 1968 urban riots.

Just across the Pennsylvania-Maryland state line is the Raven Rock Underground Command Center, sometimes referred to as Site-R. This site has 700,000 square feet of interior space, underneath the surface. Underground the facility contains six levels of underground offices, massive steel doors, a subterranean water reservoir, and up on the surface banks of antennas and satellite dishes. It went on line in 1954, and in the event it is needed, representatives of all military departments and the Joint Chiefs of Staff would be located here.

“There was a television studio with a backdrop of the United States capital on the wall where lawmakers could have addressed their constituents, had any of those constituents survived”

A third site in the “Continuity of Government” facilities known as the Greenbrier Resort, 250 miles southwest of Washington, had to be deactivated in 1992, when the Washington Post published an article about this underground bunker, exposing it to the public. Again in the event of a nuclear war, about 1000 people including all 535 members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, along with their top aides would have been evacuated to this facility. It contained 18 dormitories with bunk beds, a 12 bed medical clinic, self-contained power plant, water purification plant, and a “crematorium.” There was a television studio with a backdrop of the United States capital on the wall where lawmakers could have addressed their constituents, had any of those constituents survived above ground to watch television. In 1995 the Greenbrier facility was opened to public tours, and I have not yet located a new facility for our lawmakers, but I’m sure there is one.

Many of the facilities constructed in the 1950’s were primarily for the protection of our leaders in the event of a nuclear war. Today many of the secret military facilities not only in the United States, but in other countries as well have been required to go underground because of the many foreign satellites circling the earth that are so technically advanced that they can read a newspaper from 200 miles above the earth. Very little can remain secretive on the surface anymore. Military facilities are no longer limited exclusively to underground locations either, as the Navy has been evolving underwater locations with huge manned bases offshore for several years, of which not as much information has been forthcoming.
 

                  Musko Naval Base

During WWII, Sweden had an elaborate Naval facility build into the side of a mountain, with water access, known as the Musko Naval Base, consisting not only of dry docks for ships and submarines, but the whole base was built into the side and under the mountain. It contained repair factories, a hospital with a thousand beds, dining rooms and barracks.

My civil engineering background was aroused when I started researching underground facilities, and I quickly learned that the equipment and personnel required to build some of these elaborate underground complexes is readily available. Several types of tunnel boring equipment, sometimes referred to as TBM’s have been manufactured by companies like Bechtel, the Robbins Company, and Dawn Engineering, as well as several foreign equipment manufacturers. They vary greatly in size and can be of the “gouging” type, flame cutters and nuclear, the latter being developed at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico with a United States Patent Office date of September 26, 1972.

Many other facilities are known to exist, and you have the assurance of our government that with the use of our tax dollars, our government and military leaders are at least protected even if we are not, and in most cases their purpose, cost and location will be denied, or attempted to remain in secrecy. 

All photo credits: Dennis Balthaser 

*** Article used on this site with permission from Dennis Balthaser unauthorized use prohibited.






                                                               My 10 Favorite UFO Cases


 Dennis Balthaser

My 10 Favorite UFO Cases

I suppose most researchers have their favorite UFO cases which they are interested in, so when I was recently asked to list my 10 favorite UFO cases, I thought this will certainly create some discussion, as there will be those that disagree for one reason or another with my favorites. I preferred to not call them “My top 10 UFO cases” for that very reason. Over the years my research has been primarily devoted to the 1947 Roswell Incident, Underground Bases, Area 51 and most recently the Great Pyramids of Giza. In reality there are probably hundreds of cases that could be listed, and I discovered early on in my research that it’s impossible for me to investigate or research all phases of this subject, but I still can have an interest in them, even though I might not personally be researching them.

 

The list of my 10 favorite UFO cases is not in any order as far as importance to me, but rather ten of the cases that I personally feel are worth further investigation or research, based on the information already known. I cannot tell you that all cases are factual either, and until validated information is brought forward to prove or disprove them satisfactorily, I will continue to have an interest in these and others.
 

My 10 Favorite UFO Related Cases:

1947 Roswell Incident: Reports of a crashed extraterrestrial craft with bodies on a ranch northwest of Roswell New Mexico in July 1947. The United States Air Force has unsuccessfully given 4 excuses over the past 55 years to explain what actually happened. Most major afternoon newspapers west of Chicago reported the crash on July 8, 1947 stating, “RAAF Captures Flying Saucer On Ranch in Roswell Region”. The next day July 9, 1947, General Ramey’s weather balloon cover story was in major newspapers east of Chicago. Hundreds of first hand witnesses have been interviewed since 1978 when the investigation again started. New Mexico Congressman Steven Schiff had the GAO (General Accounting Office) investigate the Roswell Incident, only to have the United States Air Force issue a 1995 report stating it was a Mogul balloon. In 1997 the Air Force issued their 4th excuse stating the bodies found were anthropomorphic crash test dummies. The dummies however were not used until1953, 6 years after the Roswell Incident happened. The debunkers, skeptics and non-believers have failed miserably in satisfactorily explaining what actually happened near Roswell New Mexico in 1947.
 

1964 Socorro New Mexico: Known as the Lonnie Zamora case (a policeman for the city of Socorro) who on April 24, 1964 during a high-speed vehicle chase, was deviated from the chase by the sight of a blue flame under an object in the distance. His first thought when approaching was that it was an overturned vehicle with two people near by. Within several hundred feet of where Zamora stopped his police car, he saw a white, egg-shaped object standing on 4 legs with a bright polished metal surface. Within moments of being spotted by one of the beings outside the craft, he heard the slamming of a thick metallic door and a low frequency roar eventually rising to a higher pitch. The craft began rising with a bright blue and orange flame visible underneath the craft. Project Blue Book classified the case as an “unknown”. Later inspection of the site revealed impressions in the ground where the craft had landed. Debunkers have theorized that it was a hot air balloon, however the flame on hot air balloons must go upwards, not downward to heat the balloon envelope for lift.
 

Area 51: Known by many other names such as Dreamland, the box, the dark side of the moon and the ranch, Area 51 is a secret military base located 85 miles northwest of Las Vegas Nevada. It has been in existence since the 1950s, however only recently has the government and military admitted that the base exists at all. What transpires there is some of the highest security work in the United States, some of which includes testing of new type aircraft, radioactive research, etc.

It has been reported that extraterrestrial craft and possibly alien bodies are housed at this installation in an area known as S-4. Reports of 22 levels below ground have also been noted. Security is some of the highest in the country with signs at the perimeter of the base that warn trespassers that, “the use of deadly force is authorized”. I don’t want our military development secrets revealed to our adversaries, however if alien craft or bodies are kept there, I am interested in that for the future of our children and grandchildren.

Fire in the Sky: Travis Walton’s November 5, 1975 abduction experience has been recorded both in book form and big screen movie. Working with loggers in the mountains of northeastern Arizona, an unusually bright light was observed in the sky. Walton got out of the truck to view it closer and as he walked toward the light, he was blasted with a bolt of unknown energy. The other logger’s fled the scene in fear. Returning to the site, Walton was not to be found. A massive manhunt was mounted for five days to find Walton (or his body), since his co-workers were suspected of murder after his disappearance. Walton finally reappeared, disoriented to a world of disbelievers and interrogations that would change his life forever.

Great Pyramids of Giza: I was recently asked to join the Advisory Board of the Great Pyramid of Giza Research Association. Many of us believe that the pyramids of Giza are much older than we’ve been told, primarily due to the fact that the deterioration of the Sphinx was probably done by water rather than wind and sand erosion. Since there hasn’t been a large quantity of water in that region for over 15,000 years, it would mean that the pyramids of Giza are pre-Egyptian. If that’s the case, and the Pyramids were not built by Egyptians, who build them? Some theorize that perhaps there was “ET” involvement due to the technology required to construct the only remaining structures of the Seven Wonders of the World.

Barney and Betty Hill Abduction: One of the best-documented abduction cases on record. While traveling from Canada to their home in Portsmouth, New Hampshire at about 10:15 pm on September 19, 1961 the couple noticed a light in the sky below the moon that kept getting closer to them. As it got closer Barney was able to see occupants standing inside the craft. Because of the time required to make the trip (two hours longer than normal), both Barney and Betty believed that they had been abducted and given medical examinations. Betty claimed to have been shown a star map with information that mainstream science didn’t know about until years later.

1952 Washington, D.C. Invasion: Over a 10 day period Washington, D.C. was invaded by UFOs witnessed by radar controllers, pilots and crews of both commercial and military aircraft, and ground observers. The craft detected on radar screens would hover in one position at times and also dart up and down. Radar equipment was checked and found to be working correctly.

F-94 interceptors were called in but by that time the targets were gone. Major General John A. Samford, Air Force Director of Intelligence, announced at the Pentagon on July 29, 1952, that the radar and visual sightings over the Washington, D.C. area, “were due to mirage effects created by a double temperature inversion”.
 

Phoenix Lights: Seen by thousands of witnesses on the ground, many with cameras and video equipment on March 13, 1997. Described as very large (the size of a Boeing 747), reported to have had the sound of rushing wind, V-shaped with large lights on the leading edge. The lights were seen in the states of Nevada and Arizona over a 3-hour period as it crossed those states. Luke AFB, Public Affairs office announced 2 months later that their investigation had revealed that the lights were flares dropped from A-10 aircraft over the Gila Bend Firing Range. The national news media didn’t report anything until June 18, 1997 when USA Today had an article 10 weeks after the event.

Kenneth Arnold Sighting: On June 24, 1947, two weeks before the Roswell Incident, pilot Kenneth Arnold reported seeing nine shiny objects traveling at an estimated speed of 1,300-1,600 mph while flying his aircraft between Mt. Rainer and Mt. Adams in the state of Washington. The term “flying saucer” is credited to reporter William C. Bequette, who at the time worked in the newsroom of the Pendleton East Oregonian. Arnold had described the movement of the craft as similar to a saucer being skipped across water.
 

Aztec, NM Crash, March 1948: A 99foot diameter craft containing “16 little men” crashed outside of Aztec, NM in Hart Canyon. A high security recovery operation took place over the next two weeks. Some researchers believe the date should be changed to later (March 1950), when the Farmington, New Mexico Daily Times newspaper had a front page headline describing an armada of flying saucers that were witnessed by Farmington residents over a 3 day period describing estimated speeds at 1000mph.
 

Many other cases such as the Dulce underground Base, the Maury Island Incident, Shag Harbor, the White Sands Landing in the 50’s and of course my own 1997 Interception experience would also qualify as favorites for a larger list.

Dennis G. Balthaser

*  UFOIHR site granted permission to use by Dennis Balthaser. No other uses permitted.





 

                                         

                     Critics and Debunkers are Still At It

  Dennis Balthaser 


Over the years the 1947 Roswell Incident has had it’s share of critics, skeptics and debunkers, and I’ve welcomed them in most cases, hopeful that they could offer information that might be beneficial to finally understanding what actually happened near Roswell in 1947. Too many times however the information they present is not factual, and for several years I tried to discuss their points of view with them privately, hoping we could come to an agreement on the information being discussed. I have since then changed my approach and now expose them publicly, as I’ve done in past editorials about remarks made by Nancy Red Star, Phil Klass, Karl Pflock, James Bond Johnson, and others. The Roswell Incident is hard enough to research without these type individuals continually spreading their beliefs without any verifiable information to support their claims.

Several years ago Dave Thomas did a presentation at the Aztec, NM symposium and during the Q&A time after his presentation, Stanton Friedman and I questioned many of the comments he had made, pretty well destroying his claims. Dave is a physics and mathematics graduate of New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, and a senior scientist at Quatro Corporation in Albuquerque. He is vice president and communications officer of New Mexico for Science and Reason.

 

Based on his article entitled, Roswell Crash of 1947 “A Realistic View”, posted in the January, 2009 edition of Rob McConnell’s ‘X’ Chronicle Newspaper, it is neither scientific, reasonable or realistic. The article does not state a date when Thomas wrote it, however if it’s his current view of the Roswell Incident, nothing has changed since he did his presentation at Aztec several years ago. This of course is typical, since their agenda is to ridicule and deny the facts presented over the years.

I will quote statements by Dave Thomas in the above ‘X’ Chronicle article using his initials (DT) to distinguish his remarks from my rebuttal and comments.

(DT) “Roswell, a small town doing a big business feeding the insatiable appetite of UFO enthusiasts, now houses two UFO museums.”

Roswell has not had two UFO Museum’s since 1998, when the one located near the base closed after the 50th anniversary of the Incident.

(DT) “Why the aliens were not taken to a superior medical facility remains a mystery.”

Is Thomas admitting there were aliens? What knowledge does he have that they were not taken to a superior medical facility such as the Lovelace Clinic in Albuquerque, which had a contract with the Army Air Force, or to White Sands, Los Alamos, Bethesda, Walter Reed, Wright Field, or any other location?

(DT) “William “Mac” Brazel, foreman of the Foster ranch, along with a 7-year old girl, Dee Proctor, found the most famous debris in modern history.”

I’m proposing a technicality here, because I found Brazel’s gravesite 10 years ago and his nickname on the tombstone is spelled “Mack”, not “Mac”.

 

I could stop right here because of the next comment, but I believe it over emphasizes the lack of doing good research by Dave Thomas and others, that continue to distribute information without doing the required research. Dee Proctor was not a 7-year old girl, but was the “7-year old SON” of Loretta and Floyd Proctor, ranch neighbors to “Mack” Brazel on the Foster ranch.

(DT) “Actually, it was pretty mundane stuff, including a piece of reinforcing tape whose flower-like design was taken to be alien hieroglyphics”

The symbols on the tape were never “taken” as hieroglyphics. Major Jesse Marcel and his son Jesse Jr., both commented that “the markings on the I-beams---not on the tape” looked like some “form of hieroglyphics”, that being the best description they could come up with as a comparison with anything we knew at the time. I submitted the drawing Maj. Marcel gave to Linda Corley, PhD, in an interview she did with Major Marcel, May 5, 1981, prior to his death, to the Great Pyramid of Giza Research Association I belong to, and those board members knowledgeable in hieroglyphics informed me there is no resemblance to any form of hieroglyphics. Jesse Marcel Jr. went over this with C.B.Moore, and talks about it in his book, “The Roswell Legacy”, which Thomas has probably not read.

(DT) “The National Enquirer also brought Roswell to the forefront in 1980, with a story featuring Jesse Marcel, the Army Major who, in 1947 may have been responsible for a press release.”

Again obviously, Thomas did no research. The fact is that Lt. Walter Haut, the Public Relations Officer for the 509th Bomb Wing at Roswell Army Airfield, under orders from Base Commander, Col Blanchard, wrote the press release, and distributed it to both radio stations and both newspapers in Roswell, about noon New Mexico time, July 8, 1947. The article went out to most newspapers west of Chicago, as a front-page headline, in those afternoon or evening papers July 8th. It was not Major Marcel who was responsible for the press release. Walter Haut wrote and distributed it locally to the media.

(DT) “Current conventional wisdom among skeptics is that what was found on the Brazel ranch was part of Project Mogul, a top secret project testing giant, high-flying balloons to detect Soviet nuclear explosions.”

“Conventional wisdom?”  It wasn’t the Brazel ranch---it was the Foster ranch where Brazel was ranch foreman. The Soviets didn’t do any nuclear testing until 1949, (two years after the Roswell Incident)?

(DT) On several occasions in Dave Thomas’ article he mentions Charles Moore, one of the Project Mogul scientists, who worked with NYU on Mogul projects, who refers to the equipment used for the balloon launches such as; radar reflectors, aluminum rings, sonobuoys, batteries for the acoustic equipment, radiosondes, and others.

Why did none of that equipment show up in the photos taken in General Ramey’s office, and what is in the unopened packages by the radiator behind General Ramey and Col. DuBose in those photographs?

(DT) “Moore makes a strong case for the hypothesis that NYU Flight # 4, which he helped launch on June 4, 1947, was the source of the debris Brazel found on the Foster ranch.”

Flight 4 was cancelled due to weather conditions, and Moore admits no altitude data was obtained for it and it was not included in the NYU reports.

(DT) “Brazel reported that he found the debris on the ranch on June 14, 1947.”

Brazel would have come into Roswell on Sunday, July 6th bringing some debris to Sheriff Wilcox’s office, and the military would have gotten involved with Marcel and Cavitt going out to the ranch that evening. The military would have had time to talk to Brazel and have him prepare a statement, prior to taking him to the base for an in-depth interrogation. Brazel is quoted on the June 14th date only in the Roswell Daily Record newspaper for July 9, when General Ramey’s weather balloon story was the headline.

(DT) “Moore’s calculated balloon path is quite consistent with a landing at the Foster ranch, approximately 85 miles northeast of the Alamogordo launch site and 60 miles northwest of Roswell.”

Researcher David Rudiak  www.roswellproof.com has volumes of information pertaining trajectory path errors proposed by Charles Moore as well as documentation about the various flight numbers and paths of balloons launched from Alamogordo, New Mexico, confirming that the debris on the Foster ranch could not have come from Flight #4.

If Dave Thomas and others insist on discussing the Roswell Incident, they should at least do the research required, or cease referring to themselves as scientific, reasonable or realistic.

Thanks to Stanton Friedman www.stantonfriedman.com  for reviewing my comments.

Dennis G. Balthaser

** Article used on UFOIHR with permission from Dennis Balthaser. No other uses permitted.


UFO Research and Christian Faith


Dennis Balthaser

This editorial will touch on a topic that not everyone will agree with and that’s OK, but I felt it was a subject that I could personally talk about based on my own experience as both a UFO researcher and a Christian. Over the years at symposiums and in conversations, I’ve been questioned several times about whether I was a Christian or not, and my answer is always, “Yes I am.” Many people seem to have a problem or “hang up” about that, whereas I never have. One’s Christian belief to me is a personal decision, and I normally don’t emphasize it in my research unless asked about it. I was a Christian long before I became a UFO researcher, so I saw no need to change anything because I chose to do this type research. 

I have also for many years been interested in reading comments made by the Catholic church (particularly the Vatican), about their views on the subject of extraterrestrials and the possibility of life in the universe, other than just on our little glob of mud and water known as earth, and their views appear to be leaning more and more toward the possibility that other life probably does exist out there somewhere. The Vatican has a tremendous interest in “what is out there,” from meteorites and asteroids to extraterrestrials, as I’ll briefly review later.
 

In recent years, a few scientists have also finally admitted that the universe probably has life other than just us, so it appears to me that we are all slowly coming together with the same conclusion, from totally different points of view.

One profound exception that I know of was made by Evangelist Pat Robertson several years ago, when he was quoted as saying, “Anyone who believes in UFOs or Extraterrestrials, should be stoned.” That certainly wasn’t very comforting to those of us that have chosen to research this subject.

Several researchers have studied the Bible and many scriptures have been found that seem to indicate a relationship with UFOs, the best example for me being the book of Ezekiel, Chapter 1, (King James Version), which discusses living creatures coming out of the north in a cloud and wheels within wheels. Perhaps I shouldn’t make that comparison, but it does appear similar to many UFO reports, which also refer to creatures, wheel shaped craft such as discs or saucer’s coming from the sky, etc.

I was raised in the Lutheran faith for the first 30 years of my life and have been associated with the Southern Baptists since then. Today I am active at First Baptist church here in Roswell, in the choir, playing drums in the Praise band, Sunday school, Men’s Bible study and other activities at church. Recently at a symposium while talking to some attendees I was asked, “You mean they let you in First Baptist church,” as if I had some disease that would prevent me from being active in church because I research UFO’s. My method of doing this research has always been to do the research and share that information with the public, allowing them to decide what they want to believe or not believe.

A few weeks ago I took that one step further. I was asked to do a lecture at our church for the monthly senior’s luncheon. Instead of the normal 20-25 people showing up, there were between 70 and 80 at my presentation. They were extremely attentive and interested, with excellent questions after the presentation. Other than a few humorous comments from time to time by fellow church members, I’ve never been ridiculed for what I do, which indicates an open-mindedness we could all learn from.

I was brought up believing that God created everything, and my interpretation of everything means everything, so why couldn’t there be life elsewhere? Just because we don’t yet know if life exists somewhere else in the universe, certainly doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist

Earlier I mentioned the Vatican in Rome, and from time to time articles are released by them on the subject of life elsewhere in the universe and what they are doing in space exploration. I have heard that the Vatican has one of the largest UFO related libraries in the world. 

According to Vatican astronomer Dr. Guy Consolmagno, since 1981 the Vatican has operated a 1.8-meter telescope on Mt. Graham in Arizona. Including the Mt Graham telescope, the Vatican has two observatories and five telescopes. Castel Gandolfo, Italy is home of the Vatican meteorites. The library at Castel Gandolfo contains more than 22,000 volumes and rare antique books including the works of Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Kepler and others. It’s believed that the “church” wants to show the world that it is not afraid of science. It’s my belief that one does not have to choose between science and religion, but rather that it’s entirely possible that they can work together. Science should not be done for money, our own prestige or glory, but because we want to find out what’s the truth. 

On October 8, 1995 Vatican Priest Monsignor Corrada Balducci went on Italian National Television and said “Extraterrestrials do exist.” He stated that of the entire phenomenon that exists, if 99 out of 100 were false and that one was true, it’s that one that says some phenomenon exist.

To me Christian religion and the study of UFOs are based on human testimony, and we as individuals have the choice of what we believe or do not believe. My personal choice is to believe in both, one of which I pursue by faith, and the other not by faith, but by trying to determine which human testimony is accurate and truthful pertaining to Ufology. 

French scientist Charles Richet (1850-1935), wrote in his “Traite de Metapsychique”, in 1922, “Do we have any right to claim, just because of our limited senses and our mistaken intelligence, that man is the only intelligent being in this immense cosmos?…That other intellectual forces, different from us, exist is not only possible but extremely probable. It is even certain…It is absurd to claim that we are the only intelligence in nature. The existence of these beings has not yet been proven, but the probability of their existence is evident.” And to quote nuclear physicist and UFO researcher Stanton Friedman, “We humans, intelligence-wise, are trying to get into the pre-school of the universe.”
 

Cardinal Nicolo Cusano (1401-1464), philosopher and scientist said, “We are not authorized to exclude that on another star beings do exist, even if they are completely different from us.”

Jesuit George Coyne, director of the Vatican Observatory, said, “The more we study the stars, the more aware we become of our own ignorance, and it is madness to think we humans are alone in the universe.”

So after I discontinue my UFO research, I will still be a Christian, and during the interim period I will comfortably be both. 

Dennis G. Balthaser

** Permission to use on UFOIHR by Dennis Balthaser. No other uses permitted.






       A Hard Look at UFOs

  Proposes an explanation for why hard physical evidence of UFOs with an extraterrestrial origin is so hard to find.


Author / Researcher / Artist : Robert L. Mason


 The modern era of UFOs is now over sixty years old. If we step back as far as we can and view the entire subject with the best possible perspective, one disconcerting fact is rather apparent. We have no hard physical evidence for an extraterrestrial origin. We have some physical trace evidence, but nothing so extraordinary that no other explanation can be offered. We have a vast amount of anecdotal evidence, and some of it is impressive. Jessie Marcel Jr. M.D. springs to mind. He is, by all accounts, a credible person, and he claims to have handled alien-looking materials that his father brought home from the Roswell crash site (2). Then there is Jim Penniston, an Air Force Sergeant with top-secret clearance, who says he touched what appeared to be an alien UFO in the Rendlesham Forest incident (4). But despite being credible, these reports are still anecdotal in nature.

 If the materials that are rumored to have been collected by the military from various crash retrievals actually do exist, and if they were made available for free an open scientific investigation, and if that investigation concluded that there was no possible explanation for them other than they were the product of an extraterrestrial civilization, then we would have hard physical evidence. Just one piece of such evidence would be worth more than all the anecdotal evidence in existence. But that has not happened, and the result is tantamount to the same thing—no hard physical evidence.

 So, does that mean we are not being monitored in some manner by an alien civilization? Not necessarily. What it could mean is the monitoring process is beyond our technical comprehension. Given current estimates of 13.7 billion years for the age of the Universe and 4.6 billion years for the age of the solar system it is obvious that there has been plenty of time for other civilizations to precede us and, consequently, be greatly advanced technically when compared to us. Can we make any guesses at all about how such an advanced civilization might operate? We can try.

One trap we may be falling into is thinking of alien spacecraft as highly advanced versions of what we are capable of building; whereas they may be something entirely different altogether. What can we imagine that could, among other things:

• make right angle turns at extremely high velocities;
• appear luminous or lighted in low light and solid in daylight;
• have a radar signature;
• be usually described as completely silent;
• kill the engine of an automobile; and
• leave physical traces such as burns on vegetation, etc.?

In my recent book The UFO Experience Reconsidered: Science and Speculation (3), I argue that a charged particle beam aimed into our atmosphere from somewhere off the planet could, in fact, have all of these characteristics. In addition, if used in conjunction with an advanced capability in the quantum mechanical phenomenon known as “entanglement”, it might enable remote sensing from considerable distances. Exactly how this would work is anybody’s guess. My best guess is illustrated in Figure No.s 1 & 2 below, and is based on a superficial knowledge of particle accelerators.

Figure 1

Figure 2

I have extrapolated on today’s knowledge to a high degree and it may be beyond our current ability to judge the efficacy of such a system or something akin to it, but I can think of “no logical or scientific reason” (1) why it would be impossible. A device like this could generate an apparent object in our atmosphere—a virtual spaceship, if you will. There would be very little substance to a craft of this nature. It would mainly consist of a stream of high-energy particles. Its low mass would allow extreme maneuvers. It could leave physical trace evidence and kill the engine of automobiles by inducing a current opposite to that of normal operation. Interaction with atmospheric gasses could cause a visible plasma display that could also appear on radar. It would be completely silent, and it would leave no hard physical evidence.

References:

(1) Burleson, Donald, R. PhD. MUFON Journal No. 485 p. 10
(2) Marcel, Jesse A. Jr. M.D. et. al. The Rosewll Legacy. Helena, Montana: Big Sky Press
(3) Mason, Robert L. The UFO Experience Reconsidered. Mendocino, CA: Schooner Moon Books, 2008
(4) Stewart, Eric. Rendlesham File. Best UFO Resources: 2002 http://www.hyper.net/ufo/vs/m18-020.html

 

© Robert L. Mason
November 30, 2008

*** Article used on this site with permission of Robert L. Mason. Unauthorized use prohibited.






   Alien Spacecraft: Real, Physical or Virtual ?


    Robert L. Mason

                                            Speculations on how an alien remote sensing probe might
                                            work and why such a probe, based on a charged particle
                                            beam, might be mistaken for an actual physical spacecraft.

The clearest and most succinct summary of reported UFO characteristics I have yet to find was written by the late Dr. J. Allen Hynek in a foreword to the book The UFO Controversy in America (4).

“The reported ability to execute trajectories, often but not always silently, that no
known man-made craft could generate or follow; the ability to hover, and then to
accelerate to high speeds in the order of seconds (and generally without a sonic
boom); on occasion to change shape, and to produce durable physical effects on
both animate and inanimate matter. To be, on occasion, unmistakably detected on
radar, yet to be peculiarly localized and preferential in their manifestation (that is,
their appearance at times and places when and where they would be least likely to
be detected, and their avoidance of level flight which would of necessity open them
to observation by people along the way). The pattern in the ‘close encounter’ cases
is almost universal: a rapid descent to a landing or near landing, a stay of the order
of only minutes, and the ascent, at usually a high angle, and disappearance either
through distance or by some other means (it is often reported that at a height of a
few hundred feet the bright luminosity vanishes). The choice of locale is statistically
significant. The close encounter cases simply do not occur on the White House lawn or
between halves at the Rose Bowl game, but in desolate spots, generally some distance
from habitation and where detection would be least expected. In a small percent
of the close encounter cases, robot-like or human-like “creatures” are reported.”

Dr. Hynek should not need an introduction to anybody who has made even the slightest foray into the field of UFO literature. His own book, The UFO Experience: A Scientific Inquiry (3) is considered a classic in this field and many people, myself included, think it is probably the most important book ever written on this subject. The book includes an appendix listing some eighty cases that were carefully selected by Hynek for maximum credibility. Reading these cases it is easy to conclude that the phenomena in question does not move in a way that is dependent on aerodynamics or on any kind of standard propulsion system. Can we create a set of familiar circumstances that would serve an an analog to what has been so consistently reported and ably summarized by Dr. Hynek?

Thought Experiment
If, in a darkened room, a stream of motor oil was poured through the plane of a laser level (used in construction for casting a level line), what one would see is a red dot with a disc shape to it. The dot could be moved laterally by moving the stream and vertically along the stream by raising and lowering the plane of the laser level. It seems to me that this may be analogous to something that actually happens and may explain, if only through the various geometric relationships involved, some of the characteristics summarized by Dr. Hynek above. What kind of a device can we imagine that would produce similar movement characteristics, but on the scale of those actually observed?

Particle Accelerators
Particle accelerators can produce a stream of charged particles. These accelerators come in two basic configurations: circular (cyclotrons and synchrotrons) and straight (linear or linacs) and are used for research at various laboratories and educational institutions to investigate the nature of subatomic particles or at clinics to produce x-rays for medical purposes such as zapping cancer tumors. My personal experience is with linacs of the traveling wave variety. This type of device consists of a segmented tube of individual cavities with a gun at one end and a target at the other. Once in the tube the particles “surf” on a traveling radio frequency wave whose phase velocity is increased as it travels down the tube, thus accelerating the particles. The longer the tube, the higher the velocities and energies achieved. What would happen if a beam of accelerated charged particles were to be aimed up into the atmosphere instead of at a material target? Physicist Tom Mahood in his on-line essay, “Particle Beams and Saucer Dreams” (5) speculates that a particle beam aimed up into the atmosphere would, depending upon the initial energy and velocity, produce a ball of plasma at some altitude, and he provides some impressive mathematics to back this up. Coming out of the accelerator at high velocity the beam would initially shoulder aside molecules of air, but would gradually attenuate to the point where it would collide with these molecules and dump its remaining energy creating a ball of plasma. Much of the resulting electromagnetic radiation would be in the visual portion of the spectrum, but it would also show up as a false bogie on radar screens, and he suggests therein lies the military interest.

The Implications of Quantum Physics
The field of quantum physics (mechanics), is a difficult subject to wrap your mind around. Much of what happens on the level of the very small is counterintuitive to us. Things wink into and out of existence at subatomic dimensions, and the very nature of a particle seems to depend on whether or not it is being observed. Quantum entanglement is one of the strangest aspects of quantum mechanics. It holds that when two or more particles are put into the same state they become “entangled” and afterward mirror each other no matter how far apart they are separated. Moreover, this communication is instantaneous. The mathematics governing such action was first pointed out by Einstein et al. in 1935 (2) but he refused to believe it was possible, calling it “spooky action at a distance.” He proposed that the theory must be incomplete. However, subsequent developments have supported the validity of entanglement, and it has recently been verified experimentally on numerous occasions. As we currently understand it, entanglement is a fairly fragile connection. Magnetic fields, stray radiation, and the presence of other particles or atoms can cause what is known as decoherence. Even so, it would seem to open up the possibility of a number of practical applications. Those mentioned so far include unbreakable encryption, parallel processing by quantum computers, and teleportation. The last of these would seem to border on science fiction but, in fact, teleportation has already been achieved on a very small scale (subatomic particles) over short distances.

Remote Sensing?
Remote sensing would also seem to be a possibility. Especially intriguing is the thought that an alien culture might use such technology to monitor events here on Earth. How would that work? It is next to impossible to know or even guess how a technology that may be centuries, millennia, or even much larger time periods, in advance of our own, would work. Nevertheless, I believe we must, at least, try. Extrapolating on current human technology, I imagine a device like a particle accelerator in which entangled particles such as electrons or protons are inserted and accelerated to velocities approaching the speed of light. Then some portion of them is separated off and pointed at a distant target. This would constitute a beam of charged particles. The remaining particles are maintained at velocity in a storage ring something like those in use today at various high- energy labs. When the targeted particles reach their destination they interact with whatever is there and that interaction is mirrored by their entangled “brethren” in the storage ring at home. Maybe the entangled particles could be put through a particle accelerator, then divided by a beam splitter of some kind sending half to a storage ring and putting the other half in orbit around a carrier beam of opposite charge that has wave characteristics. Care would be taken to achieve an exact match in the conditions the two halves experience, and then the traveling half is sent on its way in an annular configuration, by manipulating the phase velocity of the carrier beam. Figure No.1 is a schematic diagram of how such a device might work. A sufficiently advanced technology would have some way of monitoring what happens to the particles in the storage ring and thus could sense the nature of the distant target. Such a monitor might make use of information carried by synchrotron emissions (electromagnetic energy that radiates from such a ring as a result of the particle’s angular acceleration). Perhaps the storage ring is housed in a special chamber that allows a holographic image of the targeted environment to be produced. This synchotron radiation might also be used at the target end for sensing the environment there. Maybe an advanced alien culture could remain at home while monitoring developments in our world. A charged particle beam could be accelerated close to the speed of light fairly easily and sent on its way while the aliens stay in the comfort of their base of operations. They might still have to wait considerable periods of time for the beam to reach its intended destination, because even at velocities close to the speed light the trip could take many years, but once the destination was reached they would get instant results back home.

Active and Passive Sensing Systems
The human eye is an example of a passive sensing system. It gathers ambient light and transmits it as data to the brain. Hearing is also a passive sensing system. Radar and sonar are examples of active sensing systems. A signal is sent out and that portion that bounces back to the receiver is sensed. Almost all astronomy conducted by humans has been passive. What I am suggesting is that alien beings on distant worlds, with sufficiently advanced technology, might use an active sensing system to do astronomy. We know how to do this on a small scale. An electron microscope

Remote Sensing Probe at Target End

Remote Sensing Probe at Source

Remote Sensing Probe at Target End

Remote Sensing Probe at Target End

is an example of an active sensing system using a beam of electrons to obtain resolutions much finer than can be achieved with light. The disadvantage of an active sensing system for great distances, as in astronomy, is the signal must make a round trip. However, by utilizing the instantaneous communication of entangled particles the aliens could get around this problem. Even if an alien civilization had established a physical presence somewhere in our solar system they still might prefer the use of such a remote sensing device to actual physical exploration. Would this alien monitoring process be apparent to us here on Earth? Under most conditions a cohesive high-energy beam striking Earth might not be visible to the naked eye. If, however, it were to pass through a gas such as methane upon its arrival it could cause the gas to fluoresce. Such fluorescence might act as a natural monitor revealing the organized nature of the beam. Maybe, instead of fluorescence we would see a plasma display as described by Tom Mahood. This would be especially true in low ambient light conditions. Under these conditions one might see a kind of hologram of the storage ring back at the alien base of operations (see Figure No. 2). The hologram might be the interior of the chamber housing the storage ring but seen as it would look when viewed from the outside. It may have its own albedo appearing luminous against a night sky or darker in bright daylight. Thus, the storage ring and its chamber at the source of the beam become a virtual spaceship. It may even be possible to “steer” or control the traveling half of the entangled particles by manipulating those in the storage ring at the source. In other words, they could “fly” their virtual spaceship to various locations of interest while staying physically at their base. On those rare occasions when conditions are just right to reveal their virtual spaceship to the human eye, it seems quite likely that most of the commonly mentioned characteristics of UFOs cited by Dr. Hynek would be met. There is an interesting corollary to this scenario. One of the criticisms that is commonly leveled against alien UFO advocates is the lack of any hard physical evidence. So far there really isn’t any. However, this may be one of those rare instances in which the lack of evidence is evidence. It may be that no hard physical evidence exists because the alien craft are only virtual.

 

The Explanatory Power of this Scenario
I need to emphasize that this speculation is only my best guess. Extrapolating on current science, of which I am but an interested layman, I have produced a scenario that I think is compatible with the description authored by Dr. Hynek and quoted at the beginning of this article. For instance:

• The probe would be silent and would not create a sonic boom
• Inertial problems are almost nonexistent because of extremely low mass.
• Shape could be flexible.
• A radar signature is probable.
• Descent and ascent at steep angle is to be expected (along the carrier beam).
• It could leave behind evidence of its presence such as burn marks or wilted vegetation.
It might even kill the engine of a car by inducing a current in the circuitry with polarity
opposite that of normal operation.
• The short duration of presence may result from difficulties maintaining entangled
coherence near Earth’s surface. This may also explain the preference for desolate
locations as the avoidance of excessive electromagnetic radiation in more urban
settings. Or . . . they may just wish to remain covert as much
as possible.
• Changes in intensity could be the result of variations in beam energy all the way down
to zero (disappearance).
• Finally, there is the question of human-like creatures. Already described is what the
earthbound observer might see from a close encounter distance, but should the probe
actually envelope the observer then both ends of the probe would be seen simultaneously.
The observer would see the target environment because that is his/her locale, and
superimposed on this would be the source end, observed via a holograph, of the inside of
the storage ring chamber. Should there be autonomous creatures present in the chamber
at that time then they might be apparent to the earthbound observer. This would explain
events like the classic Kelly-Hopkinsville case (1,3) where glowing creatures appeared to
float and suggests that the beam in that case originated from somewhere with a very low
gravity.

Major Question Marks
I feel this scenario is conceptually plausible, but I admit that technological unknowns abound:
• How do you make the huge numbers of entangled particles required?
• Can the coherence of entangled particles be made to last for long periods of time
instead of the microseconds we now experience?
• Can particles (electrons?) be put into a stable orbit around a carrier beam with wave
characteristics and moved along the beam by adjusting the phase velocity?
• Does synchrotron emission carry information about the state of particles in a storage
ring and can that information be used to produce a holographic image?

These are a few of the questions that need answers, and I assume that a highly advanced technical civilization would have ironed out these wrinkles long ago. The part I am most confident about is the involvement of some kind of particle beam that could enable remote sensing via entanglement and moves as described by Dr. Hynek.

Notes and References:
1) Calamia, J.R. “August 21, 1955 – Shots Were Fired” MUFON UFO Journal 483 July 2008
2) Einstein, Podolsky & Rosen “Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be
Considered Complete?” Physical Review 41,777, May 15, 1935
3) Hynek, J. Allen 1972, The UFO Experience: A Scientific Inquiry. Henry Regnery Co. p. 150,
plate 6
4) Jacobs, David M. 1975 The UFO Controversy in America. Indiana University Press, p. xiii
5) Mahood, Tom 1998 “Particle Beams and Saucer Dreams”
http://www.serve.com/mahood/probeams.htm
6) Mason, R.L. 2008. The UFO Experience Reconsidered*. Schooner Moon Books

* Used with permission by Robert L. Mason for this site. No other use permitted.





                                       X-ray Tsunami

 


   Robert L. Mason


                      Findings of the Chandra X-ray Observatory and how they might relate to the beginning of the modern UFO era.

Scientists had long suspected a massive black hole existed at the center of the Milky Way galaxy, but it was not easy to confirm. First, one simply can’t see a black hole because nothing—not even light—escapes it. A black hole’s existence could only be deduced by its gravitational effects. Next, clouds of dust and gas obscured our view of the center of the galaxy. However, with the launching of the Chandra X-ray Observatory in 1999, the latter problem was considerably reduced. The orbiting observatory, although it couldn’t actually see a black hole, could see a strong localized source of x-rays coming from the suspected location. Scientists explained that these didn’t actually come from the black hole itself, but instead emanated from the steady stream of dust, gas, and debris about to cross the event horizon of the black hole and thus disappear forever. It was like their last scream before being devoured. This was deemed sufficient confirmation and the black hole was given a name. It is officially called Sagittarius A* (pronounced Sagittarius A-star). It is “Sagittarius” because it appears within the constellation Sagittarius when viewed from Earth and “A” because it is the first ascribed to that region. It is currently estimated that Sagittarius A* gobbles up a whole star about once every 10,000 years.

Having established the existence of Sagittarius A*, astronomers began looking around at the rest of our galaxy. In 2007 they noticed x-ray “echoes” being reflected back at us from molecular clouds that are outside our orbit of the galaxy’s center, or at distances greater than our distance from the center. From this they deduced that Sagittarius A* must have devoured something fairly large in the recent past, and they calculated that whatever it was must have been at least as big as the planet Mercury. The resulting burst of x-rays that is just now (2007) reaching us by reflection, would have rushed past Earth about sixty years ago (5). Here on Earth we would not have noticed this because our atmosphere is opaque to x-rays and we didn’t have a telescope with x-ray vision like the Chandra X-ray Observatory in 1947.

 

The year 1947 is bound to ring a bell with those who have delved into UFO literature to any extent. It is widely considered the beginning of the modern UFO era. A string of events beginning that year and extending into the early fifties triggered a government involvement lasting two decades, and it may continue to this day on a classified level. Most famous was the reported UFO crash at Roswell, New Mexico in 1947. Some accounts claim two crashes actually happened at the same time, but separated by a few hundred miles (3). October of that same year also produced rumors of a crash at Paradise Valley, Arizona (1). Then there was a purported crash at Aztec, New Mexico in March of 1948 (7), and another account of a crash near Laredo, Texas in December of 1950 (2). If you accept these events as true, and of extraterrestrial origin, then you have to ask yourself what would cause such necessarily sophisticated craft to crash? In addition to crashes, a rash of sightings also occurred during this same general period (6). Why such a precipitous start to the modern UFO era? Is the x-ray tsunami rushing past Earth in 1947 and the start of the modern UFO era a coincidence, or does a cause and effect relationship exist between the two?

Suppose it is true that we here on Earth have been under observation for some period of time by an alien civilization, and that civilization arrived here from somewhere else in the galaxy. And suppose this alien civilization has established a local outpost in our neighborhood where they can operate unseen by us — the backside of the Moon perhaps. From there they are able to send out scout craft that normally operate in distant Earth orbits and use a remote sensing device to monitor events on Earth. Such a devise is described in my recent book The UFO Experience Reconsidered (6). Then imagine that in 1947 a fleet of these craft, on station at various points around the planet, suddenly measures a steep rise in the x-ray intensity coming from the direction of the galaxy’s center. Being a highly sophisticated civilization they guess what has happened, but they had no way of predicting it because x-rays travel at the speed of light. Perhaps they know that intense x-rays have a serious negative effect on their craft or it’s operators and emergency action is immediately required. Probably the quickest way to safety would be to get down deep into Earth’s atmosphere where the x-rays would be blocked — “any port in a storm.” There ensues a mad dash for safety; some of them make it in time and some do not. Because of it’s sparse population — obvious from space at night — the desert Southwest of the United States would be one likely emergency destination for the incoming spacecraft in order to remain as covert as possible under the circumstances.

How long would such an x-ray tsunami last? Remember we are talking about things on a galactic scale, so a wave period of years does not seem unreasonable. The mental image of a rock tossed into the middle of a pond is helpful. Using this analogy we can even imagine a series of spreading concentric rings of varying amplitude thus triggering more than one emergency situation.

Of course the scenario I have created uses the words “suppose,” “perhaps,” and “imagine.” In fact, it borders on science fiction. The concurrency of events may just be a chance happening, but then again . . . maybe not.

References:

Beckley, Timothy Green MJ-12 and the Riddle of Hanger 18. New Brunswick: Inner Light 

      Publications, 1989 p.32

Dolan, Richard M. UFOs and the National Security State Charlottesville,VA: Hampton 

      Roads publishing Co. Inc. 2002

Good, Timothy Alien Contact. New York: William Morrow & Co. Inc. 1995 pp. 98 & 99

Mason, Robert L. The UFO Experience Reconsidered. Mendocino, CA:  Schooner Moon Books, 2007

Ornes, Stephen “Black Hole Feasts at Milky Way Center” Discover Magazine, January

     2008 p. 46

Ruppelt, Edward J. The Report on Unidentified Flying Objects. Nashville: Source Books Inc. 2002 pp. 111-           121

Steinman, William S. UFO Crash at Aztec. Boulder, CO: American West Publishers, 1986

 

© Robert L. Mason

December 31, 2008

*  Used with permission from Robert L. Mason. No unauthorized use permitted.

Make a Free Website with Yola.