From: Tim Shell <tshell.nul> Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 16:45:23 -0600 Fwd Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 08:52:49 -0500 Subject: Re: Review Of 'Sight Unseen' By Hopkins & Rainey - >From: Gildas Bourdais <gbourdais.nul> >To: <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2004 15:42:28 +0100 >Subject: Re: Review Of 'Sight Unseen' By Hopkins & Rainey >It is going to be easy to demolish the book, if you want to. >But I feel that it goes in the right direction. To be sure, >there is still a long way to go! It is interesting that the old "alternate dimensions" argument was finally brought into the picture in an effort to explain the obvious inconsistencies and odd events that seem to go along with many abduction scenarios. And this is particularly noteworthy since Hopkins, from my perspective anyway, has always been much more of a nuts-and-bolts (or perhaps "blood-and-guts") proponent. He hasn't quite made the jump yet from the Mars Needs Women viewpoint to a more paraphysical stance, which might included ghosts and demons and all the other entities that go bump in the night, by it is an interesting shift. But this sort of "explaining something unexplained with something perhaps even more unexplained" is not going to win very many debates. Unless there's some way to anticipate an event and get some decent data - synchronized, sealed clocks that end up with time differences, maybe - then it's all just fluffy conjecture. Hell, even I can do that! What would be a good experiment to test this invisibility/pulled out of normal spacetime experience? Again, when it comes to the idea of measuring or manipulating time within spacetime, I'm no Einstein. I admit I'm just not smart enough to come up with even a decent paradigm within which a test can be structured.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp