UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2004 > Feb > Feb 11

Re: Review Of Sight Unseen - Gonzalez

From: Luis R. Gonzalez <lrgm.nul>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 20:12:56 +0100
Fwd Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 05:24:14 -0500
Subject: Re: Review Of Sight Unseen - Gonzalez


>From: Greg Sandow <greg.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 16:39:43 -0500
>Subject: Re: Review Of Sight Unseen

>>From: Nick Pope <nick.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2004 20:10:52 -0000
>>Subject: Re: Review Of Sight Unseen

>>>Has he ever found at least 3 independent abductees (ideally, from 3
>>>different investigators) who describe at least 4 identical complex
>>>symbols?

<snip>

>All of them have these same elements; none
>of them had anything that wasn't built from these elements.

>Later Budd told me that, in fact, he had 35 samples. He showed
>them to me. Same story again - the additional 21 samples were
>equally as consistent, both with the original 14 and with each
>other. I believe he should publish them, exactly as he says he's
>received them. At one point, JUFOS was interested in publishing
>a study of the symbols, but it then ceased publication for a
>while. I don't know if the project has ever gotten back on
>track.

>That's what I know about this subject. Anyone who's seen Budd's
>notebooks, with the 35 samples of these allegedly remembered
>symbols, each in a different handwriting, would have to be
>impressed. Even die-hard debunkers (the kind who think
>abductees, generally speaking, need psychiatric help, despite
>numerous studies to the contrary) would have to grant that if
>this is a hoax, it's a fairly monumental one. Unless, of course,
>somebody thinks that Budd is hoaxing it.

Hi, Greg, nice to hear from you again!

Let me see if I have understand it properly. Are you saying that
Mr. Hopkins has collected (among the dozens of different alleged
alien symbols he has got in 25 years of investigations) not only
4 but 35 samples of substantially the same symbols? Are you
saying that Mr. Hopkins has collected from allegedly 35
different abductees, texts (in other words, long collection of
symbols) that seems to be written in the same language (Hebrew,
in your analogy)? Something as if you have collected
newsclippings from all over the world, and could group at least
35 of them as belonging to the same alphabet, say cyrillic,
because they esentially use the same "letters"?

That would really be a "smoking gun"!!

The ufological community should make Mr. Hopkins an offer he
could not refuse, document in depth each of these samples, and
ask (challenge) the scientific community for an explanation.

>Just
>look at Luis R. Gonzalez, and all his assumptions about
>Katharina Wilson, which Katharina - a class act, if ever I've
>seen one here - so patiently demolished.

Well, my perception is that she was neither patient nor
demolished my assumptions, but as she refuse to continue (and I
perfectly understand it, she has not any obligation), it stops
there.

For instance, does anybody agree with me that, if Katharina's
watch marked the same time when she began her phone talk with
her husband, and later (2, 3 or 5 minutes, it doesn't matter) at
the luggage reclaim area, it cannot have been just a
teleportation but also a travel back in time? It is not easier
and perfectly acceptable for the ufological minded person to
consider a temporary EM effect which stopped her watch after
returning from the alleged abduction (a sequel from her
abduction, like her alleged invisibility, and the yellowish tan
that enveloped everything) and made it click again after meeting
with her hostess?

>And now Luis jumps - hope once more triumphing over experience
>(though he doesn't seem to have processed his experience) - all
>over the idea that poor Budd Hopkins may have been fooled by
>someone claiming to be an abductee. Ha! says Luis. Didn't those
>same people, the same ones saying Budd was fooled, also say that
>Budd has reasonable checks on whether abductees are credible.
>They're contradicting themselves!!!!!

>Except... haven't we known, in other walks of life, reputable,
>competent people who sometimes make mistakes? Budd, otherwise
>careful, could have made a mistake here. Poor UFO investigators.
>I guess they, alone of all humans, have to be completely,
>utterly infallible.

Did you read what I wrote? I said that I do not trust any
ufologist who do not get at least 50% IFOs. In other words, UFO
testimonies which fooled him for a while, until he explained
them. So, I am the very first to concede that UFO investigators
are fallible, and get fooled (probably, much more than they even
dare to acknowledge). That is one of the reason why I repeatedly
ask Hopkins for some example about his own failures, they will
make him more human. Calibration.


Yours,

Luis R. Gonzalez Manso


[ 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