UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1997 > Oct > Oct 28

Re: Questions for Abductees

From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark}
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 11:35:07 PST
Fwd Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 16:42:02 -0500
Subject: Re: Questions for Abductees

> From: "Clarke Hathaway" <earthwrk@doitnow.com>
> To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees
> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 18:19:24 -0700

> > From: clark@canby.mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark]
> > Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 18:11:53 PST
> > To: updates@globalserve.net
> > Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Questions for Abductees

> > I will say, however, that from just about any point of view,
> > Keel and Vallee have shed far more darkness than light on
> > ufology's many vexing questions. Demonologist Keel has a
> > great 13th-century mind, and Vallee is incoherent when he
> > isn't being paranoia-addled, and vice versa.  I urge you to
> > read my essay on "Paranormal and Occult Theories about
> > UFOs" in my just-published (and available at your local
> > bookstore) trade paperback The UFO Book, or the much-
> > extended discussions to appear in the second edition of my
> > UFO Encyclopedia (due out in January 1998).

> I have a great amount of difficulty with the E.T. hypothesis. I
> find that there is little if anything to support it. Appreciate
> Vallee or not, he is correct when he infers that the UFO question
> is not one which science is equipped to solve. Having a limited
> military intelligence background, I can appreciate it when he
> states that it is an Intelligence problem.


In fact, there is a great deal to support the ETH.  So far it is
the most reasonable -- or, as Michael Swords has it, "natural" --
provisional hypothesis which seeks to explain the hard-core
evidence: i.e., the stuff that emerges from CE2s, independently
and multiply witnessed cases, and so on.  I urge you to read
Swords' "Extraterrestrial Hypothesis and Science" which is
included in my new book (pages 188-99). If you read the SETI
literature, you'll be surprised at how much state-of-the-art
thinking and speculation is consistent with what UFO witnesses
report -- though nearly all SETI people want nothing to do with
UFOs.  (At least one -- John L. Casti -- has, however, sheepishly
conceded the similarities.)

Vallee is simply wrong when he suggests that the UFO question
is beyond science.  Here he betrays his occult -- even anti-
rationalist -- sympathies.  In any event, how would he know?
For one thing, science has barely addressed the question.  The
best cases, however, are eminently investigatable by traditional
scientific method; on those relatively rare instances where that
has happened, the results have been productive, and suggestive
not of paranormal phenomena but of hardware and technology.
Next year, for example, will see the publication of an in-depth
investigation of a seminal case where the operation of an
extraordinary technology can be demonstrated in a way that's
going to shock everybody who's paying attention.

We are wrong, in my opinion, in making an automatic link between
daylight discs and (say) men in black.  We may be carelessly
lumping a lot of things that really have nothing to do with the
core UFO phenomenon under the general rubric of "UFO activity."
As I have put it (see the intro to my 1993 book Unexplained!), we
could usefully look at events as opposed to experiences.  A
radar/visual of a daylight disc is an event; an encounter with
MIB, however anomalous, is only an experience which exists solely
in memory and testimony (albeit highly anomalously in some

All best,

Jerry Clark

Search for other documents from or mentioning: clark | earthwrk

[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com