Recently, on UFO UpDates, there has been some discussion about the Barney and Betty Hill abduction and a few of the claims made by researchers about what Betty Hill might have seen at the movies or on television. The problem arose when one of the list members wrote about that Science Fiction classic, Killers from Space.
This is a really awful 1954 movie in which Peter Graves plays a scientist working around nuclear weapons. He experiences an episode of missing time, has an unexplained scar on his chest, is haunted by aliens with large eyes who come from a dying planet and who are hiding in an underground base. Nearly all the elements of the modern abduction phenomenon are covered in this film and there are those who believe that it was a government plot to ridicule the abduction phenomenon to keep it hidden from the public. This about a decade before anyone heard of an abduction.
I suppose it’s time to stir the controversy pot again and point out that in The Abduction Engima, published about ten years ago, we, meaning Russ Estes, Bill Cone, and I, discuss all the pop cultural references to alien abduction starting with a 1908 silent movie, the pulp era of science fiction meaning the 1930s and 40s, and the movies that mirror the abduction phenomenon long before anyone in the UFO field was talking about it. Does this mean that all the abductees were exposed to this material? Well, the opportunity was certainly there.
Now there is the suggestion that the Pentagon might have engineered this, meaning producing the movies so that the general population wouldn’t take abduction reports seriously. But, much of this came long before there was a Pentagon (though there certainly was an Army)... and we really don’t need to postulate about disinformers in the military or in the government because we have enough home grown ones that no program needs to exist to make the topic ridiculous.
Yes, we can say today that neither Barney nor Betty enjoyed science fiction and that they were uninterested in it. But we must also remember that in the 1960s there were three television networks, Public Television and few independent stations. You were stuck with what they broadcast and in the era before the remote control, you even tended to watch the commercials. So, who can say that late one sleepless night that Betty didn’t see one of these movies (Killers from Space, This Island Earth, Invaders from Mars, etc.)... or an trailer for it...?
And let’s not forget that on page 144 of Fuller’s hardback, The Interrupted Journey, the book about the Hill aabduction published in 1966, Betty said, "And I laughed at him[Barney when he suggested they might be captured] and asked him if he had watched the Twilight Zone recently on TV..."
Now, to be fair, Dr. Simon asks if there had been anything like this on the Twilight Zone and Betty said, "I don’t know. I never see the Twilight Zone. But I had heard people talk about this program, and I always was under the impression that it was a way-out type thing."
But, to answer Simon’s question, "Yes, there had been." Broadcast on April 4, 1962, was an episode called "Hocus-Pocus and Frisby" in which Andy Devine is abducted by aliens, taken onto their ship where they are finally revealed as gray-faced creatures with no nose and small, tear-drop shaped eyes without pupils.
(For those interested, Devine is a well-known liar, claiming all sorts of extraordinary things, which is why the aliens have searched him out. They believe he is a brilliant scientist and want to tap into his brain... which means, I suppose, interrogate him. When he pulls out his harmonic, the vibrations of the music cause the alien human appearance to shatter and we see the aliens for what they are. Devine escapes, tells his friends what happened, but, of course, they don’t believe him.)
Take a look at the picture (seen below) and see if it doesn’t bear a striking resemblance to the pictures we see of the "grays.
" Yes, the eyes are smaller and there are those folds in the face, but this is a interesting match. Of course there are those who will say that the designer working on the show had been abducted at some point and used his or her own subconscious memories to create the alien face. Just as there are those who claim that the writers and producers of Killers from Space had some sort of abduction experience... or that those in the Pentagon influenced the production to make claims of abduction seem ridiculous and causing the rest of us to reject such stories.
" Yes, the eyes are smaller and there are those folds in the face, but this is a interesting match. Of course there are those who will say that the designer working on the show had been abducted at some point and used his or her own subconscious memories to create the alien face. Just as there are those who claim that the writers and producers of Killers from Space had some sort of abduction experience... or that those in the Pentagon influenced the production to make claims of abduction seem ridiculous and causing the rest of us to reject such stories.There is no amount of twisting and turning that the true believers will reject to keep their beliefs intact... which explains why even with the admission of the participants that the Alien Autopsy film is a fake and here’s who we created it, there are those who reject the proof... Or those who believe in the Allende Letters even with the confession by Allende (aka Carl Allen) that he faked the whole thing... Or those who think Maury Island was anything but a hoax... but I digress once again.
So, did Barney or Betty see this Twilight Zone episode? Did they see a preview for it? Or did they never see it and had no knowledge that it even existed? If I had to guess, I’d pick door number three, but I can’t know and neither can anyone else. To reject this possible contamination out of hand is typical of those true believers. Don’t bother me with evidence because I know the truth... I am enlightened and you are not.
What we can see here, and which I’m sure will now result in a loud chorus of "Betty Hill never watched these sci-fi programs," and "Kevin Randle is an anti-abduction propagandist," is the fact that these sorts of stories were in the public arena long before any of them reached into the UFO field. What we don’t have is an answer about the possible cultural influence of them on Barney and Betty Hill. I’m not saying that Betty Hill was affected by any of this, only that we cannot eliminate the possibility that she was...
And for a simple personal anecdote, let me say this. I don’t watch King of the Hill, but on Who Wants to be a Millionaire they asked what Hank Hill did for a living. I knew it had to do with propane. Had they not given four choices, I might not have been able to come up with the answer, but the point is, I did and I don’t watch the show. I picked it up because it was out there in the pop cultural world and we are foolish if we dismiss the possibility that someone uninterested in science fiction might not have stumbled across one of these references as she made her way around.
28 comments:
Propane and propane accessories!
I had always heard it was an Outer Limits episode, "The Bellero Shield".
Great article, Kevin.
Yes, the skeptics and the debunkers have long talked about "The Bellero Shield" on the old Outer Limits and that program aired in the days prior to Barney drawing the aliens, but I think this Twilight Zone episode more closely describes the event.
And hey, does anyone remember that on page 298 (hardback edition of The Interrupted Journey) Betty gave us an early description of the aliens saying, "...I have seen people with noses like theirs - like Jimmy Durante's."
Of course, later they were talking about the aliens having no nose... let's cherry pick the facts.
And glad you liked the article...
On the subject of how sci-fi may have influenced aspects of the UFO controversy: in one episode of "UFO" - the old British TV show of the early 70s - an autopsy is undertaken on an alien body by the secret government group that is tasked with defeating them. At one point during the autopsy, the medical team removes a "contact lens" from one of the alien’s eyes that eerily parallels the similar scene in the infamous Alien Autopsy film that Ray Santilli thrust upon an unsuspecting world in the mid-1990s.
I don't understand what you are saying Kevin are you saying Betty and Barney faked the abduction that they put those marks on their cars and the scuffing of his shoes. Are you saying a person having extremely traumatic experience like that shouldn't include some confabulation. Because you know part confabulations is mostly the case in anything like this and yet still should not discount most of what they saw.
Because if you are going to call them liars then do it out right so they can sue you in court.. stop being one of these gutless debunkers using innuendo please. I was a Science Fiction reader but my friend was not yet we both witness flying disks in the daytime, maybe I controlled his mind with my imagination.
Joe Capp
UFO Media Matters
Joe -
I thought I was quite clear in what I was saying... That there are all sorts of cultural elements that feed into everything. I'm saying that it is possible, please note, possible, that Betty or Barney Hill saw one or more of these science fiction movies. I'm suggesting that when Budd Hopkins claims there are no science fiction elements or demons for an abductee to draw upon, he is incorrect. The elements are all there.
I'm not saying that Betty Hill's experience wasn't traumatic, nor am I suggesting that she is (or was lying)about it. Clearly both she and Barney suffered from the experience.
I'm also suggesting that people can confabulate under hypnosis, and that confabulation is not the same as lying.
I'm suggesting that we need something more than hypnotically recovered testimony, that case study research is no longer going to advance our knowledge of abduction, and that we must be aware that the sources of contamination are out there, whether we like it or not.
Finally, I don't believe that Betty Hill (or the majority of those who say they were abducted) are lying. I believe they are telling the truth as they believe it. But I'm also suggesting that we need to move research to the next level so that we can better understand what is happening.
And, if I believe someone is lying, then I say it right out loud. All you need to do is look at some of the postings here.
As always Kevin, good stuff.
People who overlook the cultural elements are missing a large part of the picture (or rather, are seeing what they want to see).
I have always believed that the likes of Hopkins and Jacobs have done far more harm to these people than good (actually, I haven't seen any good). No need to worry, Joe - I've said so publicly, and in one case to his face.
Paul
I think you have hit on a key feature
of this phenomenon, that the observers state of reference fills in
the frame which is not the same thing as saying it did not happen but rather it strikes me as an interaction akin to two points of reference "talking" over one another in a quantum interaction. This also accounts for the huge variance in experiences...a great post and food for thought.
Did not Martin Kottmeyer say much the same back in 1990? How about the starmap that Betty drew? Stan Friedman swears by it.
To change the subject a bit, has anything recently surfaced about the Linda abduction? Budd Hopkins swore by it but after a lot of discussion & dispute about it for maybe two years it seems to have fizzled out. Is anyone any the wiser?
We should be careful and critical, but the Hill case has some physical evidence. Also, why would both of those people give similar descriptions?--there are a multitude of sci fi alien types.
Physical evidence? You mean the spots on the car? How does that lead us to the extraterrestrial? You mean the dress that Betty Hill threw in the closet? What analysis was done that showed something that could be considered extraterrestrial? The Star Map? There are four interpetations of it including one that suggests it was the alignment of the planets in the Solar System on or near the date of the sighting.
Similar descriptions? Did you miss the part where Betty Hill claimed, originally that the aliens had huge noses like those of Jimmy Durante? Barney later suggested that they didn't.
To answer the question, all we have to remember is that Barney and Betty talked about the sighting on several occasions and Barney listened in as Betty talked about her dreams. By the time they got to Dr. Simon, they had years of contamination. If you wonder how the descriptions came to match, that's all you really need to know.
It was Budd Hopkins who said that there were no "sci-fi gods or demons" that matched the creatures he had learned about in his research. I'm merely saying, and you obviously agree, that there are many. Some of the descriptions match those we have seen in science fiction long before we talked of flying saucers and alien abduction.
We must no select the data which match our notions, but look at all of it and remember it. To select it ruins our objective and skews our views.
Kevin -
Just discovered your blog...good to have you back.
What's always bothered me about the Hill case and those abduction reports that came after it is the disconnect between the technology displayed by the aliens in the "examination" and the craft on which the examination allegedly took place.
You have an interplanetary craft, yet the aliens seem incapable of effectively rendering their subjects completely unconscious. Given that Earth surgeons have the ability to render a patient unconscious or even comatose so that no memory of a medical procedure exists at all, why can't the aliens do the same if they're advanced enough to build an interplanetary ship? Granted the pro-abduction camp may reply that the aliens intentionaly want the subject to have memories of the event, but if this were the case, why not just leave the person awake?
And why all the manual prodding and probing??? If you're advanced enough to have a spacecraft, shouldn't you have something that's at least similar to a modern MRI machine to check out the life forms that you're picking up for study??
And if the aliens wanted human DNA, why go through the effort of plucking someone off the roadside and risk detection when you could more discreetly take a straw from a trash can with saliva on it or break into an unoccupied house and take strands of hair off of a pillow case?
I dunno....it seems like abduction stories are very "1960's" and our medical technology in 2008 seems as good as or better than what the aliens have. This makes no sense.
Jim
None of this happened without a run-up.
It isn't believable, or not, based on its own merit either, rather it came after years of extremely strange sightings, from many varied people, over a span of years, of which already seemed to be evoking the equivalent of someone saying, "hey, look here".
As the contactee thing began to wear off, this started to creep in.
And before them both, existed moments where Army, Navy, and Air Force individuals, including pilots and radar operators, had to deal with the unbelievable possibility that they were seeing craft from "somewhere else".
And what of their motives? Would we even think we could begin to understand it, if they were that old?
I'm not saying I'm an all-out believer that people have been "abducted", or otherwise borrowed, by Non-Terrestrial beings. But I admit right now that I believe some people may have had some type of interactions with some.
I think it would be presumptuous on our part to throw away all of the previous data, that says "yes, some of these objects may be of extra-terrestrial origin", to support saying that people are nuts or lying, because if they are not nuts, or lying, and something did happen to them (after all, you yourself said that you thought that something may have happened to them, just that you don't think they were abducted by aliens), then the question: who is responsible?!? -is still just as valid, or even more so!
The Hills saw a UFO before their traumatic missing time. Barney even saw ETs aboard it through binocs. Later, under hypnosis, they described alien abductors. What's the problem? What else could've caused the missing time and the trauma? If you believe in UFOs and aliens, there should be no problem with them causing abductions. There may be different interpretations of the star map but interestingly, one concerns a rather close, Population II system, which on the basis of later work, only matched the map some years after it was drawn. Of course, I don't believe ETs are really studying us, or they need our DNA; that's just a facade. The phenomenon has a different agenda and is quite deceptive. But abductions are still real.
We can say that the Hills saw normal astronomical objects, according to some of the work done on the case. We can say that their stopping, driving slowly to view the objects, and other factors delayed their return home giving them the impression of missing time. And we can say that confabulation caused the memories of Barney's seeing the occupants through his binoculars.
Far-fetched? Review the blog entry for the Mount Vernon sighting published in April 2007. Here was a case in which the initial sighting was of star-like points of light in the distance. That evolved into a domed disk and later into a domed disk with human-like shapes in the light. It shows what the human mind can do.
No, I'm not saying that this explains the Hill case. I'm saying that there is precedent for it and in studying UFOs, we need to understand how these things work and that sometimes the skepical answer has a basis in science.
What "normal astronomical objects"? I think Venus was then in the morning sky, and Mars was inconspicuous at best. You'd think that if normal astronomical objects caused the sighting, such events would be much more frequent. The Hills should have been able to explain their late arrival home, without claiming missing time, had stopping and slow driving been the sole cause. They were not retarded. It seems to me that if you're going to throw out the Hill case, you might as well throw out the whole of UFOlogy.
"Barney even saw ETs aboard it through binocs. Later, under hypnosis, they described alien abductors"
Yes, and they were -different-
"What else could've caused the missing time and the trauma?"
All sorts of crap, to be honest, including personal delusion.
"Of course, I don't believe ETs are really studying us, or they need our DNA; that's just a facade. The phenomenon has a different agenda and is quite deceptive. But abductions are still real."
Right. So you're operating here on knee-jerk anger because someone's applying rigorous analysis to something you would rather believe in whole cloth while claiming other aspects of the phenomena are a facade. RIIIGHT.
It's not impossible that it really happened, somewhat, if not exactly as they say, but also most honest folk are going to entertain the whole imagery into the subconcious mind facet for some of this UFO/Alien data. It's a logical question to ask, but there was a progression of events, where several UFO witnesses had a close encounter, yet couldn't remember a certain time-period very well. This type of thing was seen time, and time again. It wasn't until later it began to take on a more sinister look. The hole was already there waiting to be filled in, with something.
I think you are already aware that betty did not "change" her story, or "cherry-pick" information, when she later mentioned their large noses. The original book included the transcript from her dreams, which came first, before treatment, and this is how she first remembered "them". It was never snuck by the reader, but was included so that a "Fuller" story might be better utilized for evaluation. So then one might argue that it is possible that the original dreams were more accurate, and it was the therapy itself that tainted it. I admittedly don't recall anything within the released data that showed the hypno-therapist was purposely attempting to force away the large nose information, as the first time it is mentioned is with the dreams, which she had first.
Kevin - I'm not privy to what's posted on the now-private UFO Updates but I made the same references to Killers From Space more than a year ago on a couple of discussion forums. The point I made at the time was that it is irrelevant whether Betty Hill actually saw that movie (or Invaders from Mars, with its examination tables, needles and implants). The simple fact of the matter is that all of the elements of the modern abduction episode were well established in popular culture years before Betty and Barney's alleged 1961 encounter. While I'm not saying Betty's hypnotic recollections were influences by her exposure to pop culture, it is altogether possible that they could have been.
S
BTW, you might also mention that the aliens in Killers From Space showed Peter Graves a star map...
S
The AF suggested the Hills misindentified Jupiter, which I had surmised was then a little past opposition. But in addition to the object's erratic movements, muliticolered lights, windows and occupants, Betty saw it pass in front of the moon, which no planet can do.
What evidence is there that the Hills were prone to delusion? Did they have a history of schizophrenia prior to 9/19/61? It is highly unlikely that the Hills ever saw "the bellero shield." Barney worked in the evenings when the OL was on and Betty said she never heard of it.
As I wrote before, if you're going to throw out the Hill case, you might as well throw out all of UFOlogy. Why not invoke "confabulation" to explain away the testimony of Marcel, and Rowe and everyone else?
On what grounds does 'Starman' say that if you reject the Hill case you should throw out the whole of ufology? Does he really suppose the Hill case is the best, or nearly best, in UFO history?
It is like saying that Roswell is unsurpassable as a UFO case and that if this ever falls the whole of ufology will fall with it. Of course it won't.
Neither case will ever, repeat ever, prove UFOs are real until and unless genuine physical evidence is produced. In Roswell's case it requires one of: UFO wreckage, alien bodies, or some authentic official documentation on the case. None has turned up in 60 years, and I am tempted to say with certainty that none ever will.
But ufology itself can still gradually become acceptable to science, though it will take a long time yet.
In the Hill case, the star map might have been the answer (but it is difficult to see how at this late stage) or, failing that, some piece of alien hardware or artefact given by the supposed aliens to the Hills. Even a large definitive book (with illustrations) showing how their spacecraft was built, or some new technological invention by the Zeta Reticulans would be far better than their existing narrative. It would all need very careful scientific scrutiny, of course, before being acceptable.
Think of all the stuff of ours in orbit. Think of all the hardware we left on the moon, (and certainly will do on Mars) as a result of our own space journeys so far.
Why are our supposed 'visitors' so reluctant to leave anything behind as a permanent reminder, to us, of their visits to earth?
Adamski tried to overcome this problem in the 1950s (!)
cda: There IS SOME physical evidence, such as landing traces and so forth. But essentially UFOlogy is based on witness testimony. The Hills were intelligent, respectable people; AFAIK they didn't have a history of schizophrenia. They reported seeing a UFO approach their vehicle. Through his binocs, Barney even saw occupants through its windows. I doubt very much that there is any prosaic explanation, such as Jupiter (or insanity--no evidence of it). In short, the Hill case is about as credible as most other cases based on testimony (and a little physical evidence). If the Hill testimony is to be rejected as the result of "confabulation" and "contamination", by the same token, you might as well reject virtually all other testimony on the same grounds. After all, there was sci fi involving aliens well before Roswell. :) And, despite all the crash material the witnesses claimed to have handled, nongovernment researchers today have zero of it, AFAIK, to study and evaluate. Essentially all we have is testimony, just like in the Hill case. Inasmuch as the witnesses in both cases appear credible, and there's no good alternative to ETs in either case, I accept both cases.
You say Barney Hill, through his binocs, saw occupants of the UFO. Rev Gill (in Papua) also saw occupants of his UFO, on two successive evenings. What is more, he didn't need binoculars! Neither did his numerous supporting witnesses.
Yet Americans rarely talk about the Gill case, as if it was of minor quality compared with, say, the Hills.
What I am saying is this: if you really think the Hill case so outstanding that ufology rises or falls on it, I would retort that we still have the Gill case to contend with. No abduction, but better and certainly more numerous witnesses to something unearthly. Yet neither case is really a clincher.
Which do you prefer, Gill or Hill?
IIRC there was a differene: in the Gill case, the occupants stood atop their craft whereas in the Hill case, they were inside, prior to the abduction. So maybe binocs were needed in the Hill case; in any event he just wanted a closer or better look. It's only natural that people here remember the Hill case more because it happened in the US and an abduction is more dramatic. I think they're both OK as cases. But I wouldn't say Gill was a BETTER witness; I don't place much stock in holy joes lol.
My point was not to paint the Hill case as particularly outstanding, much less a clincher; it isn't. I just wanted to point out that it's no "worse" than the vast majority of cases, which tend to be based on little if anything more than witness testimony. That includes Roswell. Our esteemed colleague KDR has fought tooth and nail for 20 years to establish/maintain the validity of Roswell as a genuine ET event. What strikes me as a bit surprising, and inconsistent, is his apparent rejection of the Hill case due to supposed "confabulation" and "contamination." You could invoke that for virtually ANY case. Basically all we lay people have to work with is witness testimony. If a UFO report by intelligent, respectable people like the Hills is to be rejected, then, by the same token, virtually NO UFO report, by Marcel, Rowe or anybody else,is reliable. Of course I don't mean we should accept ALL stories; Meier is a phony, Maury Island was a hoax etc. But when the witnesses are credible, and there is no good prosaic explanation, based on it, we shouldn't reject it just because it may indicate "frightening" ET behavior such as abductions.
I have let this discussion run because it has been interesting, but I tire of having my position misidentified. I have suggested here that the Hill case didn't evolve in a vacuum as others would have us believe. Contrary to opinion, there is a cultural basis for these stories, not to mention the description of the aliens as I have pointed out.
I will note that the Hill case, as reported, is the result of Betty Hill's dreams, recorded in her journals after the event. I will note that the descriptions offered have evolved since the first report was made. And I will note that confabulation can account for the growing detail.
My point is that the Hill case, while interesting, and the star map is interesting, doesn't move us from speculation into reality. That is why I noted there were, at least, four interpretations of the star map, though those in UFO study have grabbed on the Zeta I and Zeta II Reticuli as the proper solution. I have heard a very prominent researcher say that we KNOW some of the aliens come from the Zeta Reticuli systems. Well, we don't KNOW that.
The difference between Roswell, which really has no bearing on this discussion, and the Hill case is that we have many, many witnesses while in the Hill case we have two who were in constant communication with one another. With Roswell we were able to interview many BEFORE Roswell reached the status it has. Every member of Colonel Blanchard's staff who voiced an opinion, with one expection, told us this event was extraterrestrial. And I will say that there is no evidence that Jesse Marcel, Sr. ever engaged in confabulation... please read that carefully.
If I was to postulate an abduction scenario, the Hill case would more closely match it than the idea of aliens tracking humans and abducting them time and again. In that vein, I find the Walton Abduction more plausible than many of the abductions recounted by David Jacobs, Budd Hopkins or any of the others.
So, once again, the point is this. There were all the cultural elements in play prior to the Hill abduction and to suggest otherwise is to ignore the truth. Were the Hills abducted? I don't know. The evidence, to my mind is thin, but we can point to many UFO cases in which the evidence is thin... but there are some cases in which it is very thick.
The Hill case wasn't based solely on Betty's dreams. They saw a UFO and reported it to Pease AFB, which appeared to confirm the affair. Aspects of Roswell have also "evolved" over time. The batwing craft reported in the heyday of Kaufmann has given way to the egg shaped device mentioned more recently. Certainly Roswell has many more witnesses but quite a few have "collapsed." Others, like Haut, appear befuddled. There have been many varying claims concerning exactly what came down, when and where. If we can forgive all that, and still believe in Roswell, I think the Hill case should survive changes in the reported configuration of an alien nose, lol. And you could say "cultural influences" were in place prior to Roswell, like the '38 "war of the worlds" broadcast or Flash Gordon. Basically, I believe Marcel sr. But I note Korff produced documentation about his propensity to "exaggerate difficulties" while he may also have claimed degrees he didn't have. Nobody is perfect, but I think testimony in both cases was credible.
Once again, Roswell has nothing to do with this.
The reason for mentioning the cultural influences was that abduction researchers have said, repeatedly, that there are no cultural components that mirror the abduction phenomenon. No one has said that the cultural elements, including science fiction that dealt with aliens, space flight, and invasion didn't exist prior to the Roswell case.
Yes, the Hills reported a sighting of something that could just as easily have been astronomical phenomena than something of an extraterrestrial nature. Making such a report means they believed this important enough to report but doesn't mean what they saw was alien in nature.
You have forgotten to mention that radar at Pease AFB had a taget in the approximate position that the Hills reported the UFO... a bit of electronic corroboration for their sighting.
The whole of the Hill case was outlined in the dreams Betty recorded in her journal.
None of this is saying that the Hills weren't abducted by alien creatures, only that the case isn't as black and white as you wish it to be. All I have been attempting to say is that there were cultural precedents.
I'm not sure that I would quote Kal Korff who managed, in a single paragraph, to confuse the testimony of three witnesses, blamed one for the lies told by Sheridan Cavitt about his arrival in Roswell, and then maligned Edwin Easley for no reason other that Easley suggested the object was from another planet.
Finally, no one is suggesting that either Barney or Betty Hill were lying about anything. Confused, maybe, but certainly not lying.
Of course I was aware of the claim that Pease radar detected the UFO but I think Vallee mentioned only an AF report of something unusual at the time. In either event, this certainly argues that what the Hills saw was no astronomical phenomenon. Only Jupiter was in the approximate right place at the time. Betty saw the object pass in front of the moon; Barney saw it fairly close through his binocs. They'd have to be retarded, or highly delusional, if it was just Jupiter, and there's no evidence for such issues. Considering the highly unastronomical observations, and AF confirmation, an astronomical explanation is hardly as likely as an ET one. If it is, that would throw maybe 90% of all UFO sightings, or the whole phenomenon, into serious doubt. OK, certain cultural elements might conceivably have influenced this case--not that there's actual evidence that they did AFAIK. But it's probably more likely IMO, that those cultural elements (Outer Limit aliens)themselves stemmed from descriptions of actual ETs reported in the literature; there had been a number of sightings of humanoids prior to the early '60s. So it may make no difference even if some OL show influenced their descriptions.
Post a Comment