UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2004 > Feb > Feb 4

Re: Review Of Sight Unseen - Velez

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic.nul>
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 12:28:28 -0500
Fwd Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 16:33:57 -0500
Subject: Re: Review Of Sight Unseen - Velez

>From: Stuart Miller <Stuart.Miller4.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 17:27:53 -0000
>Subject: Re: Review Of Sight Unseen

>>From: Luis R. Gonzalez <lrgm.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 00:08:05 +0100
>>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

>Gildas, Luis and List,

>With respect gentlemen, I think you are missing the point here.

>I am not suggesting that the book should not be subjected to
>analytical review, but by the very nature of the subject matter,
>it will inevitably fall down on that score. I am sure there are
>countless holes in it that can be picked till they bleed.

>I regard the book, which I enjoyed enormously, as a very brave
>attempt by the authors to take the subject of abduction one
>stage further. And in doing so I think Hopkins and Rainey have
>taken a massive and admirable gamble with their professional

>If Hopkins is convinced of the veracity of a witnesses testimony
>(and as he revealed, he has various means of checking) and yet
>the story falls outside even the parameters of the extremely
>broad boundaries that this subject already imposes, then what is
>he to do? Given his intellect and experience, he will attempt to
>offer some "reasonable" explanation, and that is exactly what he
>and Carol have done. All that Carol, on the science side of
>things has done is to pull together a number of both existing
>and original ideas, as well as solid facts, put them together in
>a reasoned and thought out manner, and then say, "This is what
>might have happened". She's not saying, "This is definitely what
>happened".  It's placed before you gentlemen for your reasoned
>and considered opinion. As I read it, they don't want you to
>take what they say as fact. These are ideas, intelligently
>posited and thoughtfully constructed and laid before the reader
>to think about. Of course, it is your choice to reject or

>Hopkins admits that it took him, as I remember, close to two
>decades to get his thoughts in order on this. He's aware of the
>risk he's taking, and it appears, not without some discomfort. I
>for one applaud his and Carol's bravery. I think it is a
>landmark book and, as I mentioned in my own review, I think
>their ideas will gradually, over time, gain acceptance and
>filter through into mainstream thinking. Rip it apart,
>gentlemen, by all means, but I will not be looking at the detail
>too closely.

Hello Stuart, All,

You wrote:

>My preference is to stand back and take a broader view.

After having spent almost 6 years working closely with Budd, I
would venture to say that you have taken the material, related
to it, in the way it was intended you should by Budd. People who
dismiss Budd too quickly are invariably people who do not know
him at all. Who have no idea about the expansive and deep
intellect they are 'blowing off.'

Budd used to broach this subject of 'invisibility' with me from
time to time. I have to admit that even though I am an abductee,
I was intellectually 'uncomfortable' discussing the mere
possibility of something like that. Budd wasn't. He always goes
where the data leads him. And that in spite of any personal or
intellectual difficulties he may have with the concept himself.

I'm actually not surprised at some of the 'conclusions' (if they
can properly be called that) that Budd has arrived at. At his
core he is first and foremost a creative artist of some note and
reputation. As a creative person he has a proven ability to be
able to think in 'quantum leaps.' Budd Hopkins has
_historically_ been at least twenty-five years ahead of everyone
else in his work and his thinking. I suspect it's going to take
about that long for the rest of us to catch up with where Budd
is with the research right now.

Excellent review Stuart. You're a bright, perceptive fellow!


John Velez

[ 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