A Collection of Strange Beliefs, Amusing Deceptions, and Dangerous Delusions

From Abracadabra to Zombies

reader comments: alien abductions, UFOs and ETs

17 Aug 1999 
I read the check list of symptoms that determine whether one had been kidnapped by aliens or not. My husband fit four out of five on the list. However, he has a seizure disorder which displays the same symptoms -- 'floating off to the ceiling', disorientation, and missing time. If my husband had not been diagnosed with his seizure disorder, he could rival Mr. Strieber in alien abduction accounts. I am curious if any of the abductees were checked for neurological disorders. Do any of the practitioners have any of this type of medical training?

Virginia Carper

reply: Budd Hopkins is a draftsman by training and John Mack is a psychiatrist, though I don't know if he has had any of his patients tested for neurological problems.

24 Jun 1999
While perusing the amusing section on ETs and abductions I came across one letter which stated (in somewhat vague terms) that it might be possible to "cheat" the light speed limitation our universe seems to impose on matter and energy. Without going into too much detail on a subject which is a bit of a pet hobby of mine on the theoretical end, (I'm not too proud to admit that much of the higher mathematics involved still eludes me) there is a potential way to cheat light speed by using the phenomenon commonly referred to as "wormholes".

It is postulated that said wormholes (actually closer to spheres since we are talking a hole in 3 dimensional space) might connect two areas of space "outside" the universe we inhabit. Again, skipping a lengthy lecture on higher spatial dimensions, it is potentially possible to hold open a wormhole long enough to push matter through it...but there are a few snags. The type of particles necessary to hold the 'hole open are only theoretical insofar as we know; there is no guarantee that you'll end up anywhere near where you want to go (in time as well as space), and physicists aren't sure that the matter going in would even survive the trip as matter if it even manages to get in before the wormhole collapses. All this effort for the honour of crashing your ship into Earth.

I wonder how many "crashes of alien spacecraft" have been reported since 1920 or so, if you take each cluster of reports around one geographic area as "one crash". I wonder if anyone has ever tallied up the number of so-called crashes or sightings and given us a grand total? It might prove interesting to learn that every time we or especially astronomers look to the skies, we should probably be seeing spacecraft.

Finally, if you wish to read a far more in-depth account of how gravity works and how the light speed barrier may potentially be cheated (if it doesn't displace or kill you), then I suggest Black Holes and Time Warps: Einstein's Outrageous Legacy by Kip Thorne, PhD. It takes a subject most people view as hopelessly esoteric and presents it in a fun, easy to digest format.
Edward Tyndall

27 Jan 1997
One thing I don't see mentioned on the alien abduction section is the fact that these aliens (the "greys?") look like neotenous humans -- that is, humans with infant-like features. I.e. large eyes, head too large for the body, a scrawny undersized sexless body, no hair.

I am reminded of a study a friend of mine saw (unfortunately, I don't know where) in which researchers put stuffed animals with neotenous features and stuffed animals that were more "animal-like" out for children to play with. The children played with them all equally. When the researchers offered the option to the parents, though, the results were different - the adults overwhelmingly went for the stuffed animals with neotenous features. After he told me that, I took a look at my modest stuffed animal collection, and, by gum, that's what I've been picking, too!

In other words, there's something hard-wired into the human psyche which operates when we are adults that attracts us to such features. Not hard to see why, since one would HOPE that we would find our own infants appealing! Stretch this only slightly to say that we're 'programmed' to respond to things with such features, whether it's a human baby, a puppy, or a stuffed animal.

How this translates into neotenous creatures populating our nightmares, whether they're fairies or demons or "greys," I have no idea. Although this same friend of mine says that's only because I don't have children. He says if I DID have children, I'd realize how scary they really were - partly because they're your "replacements." Maybe so.

Anyway, it seems to me that by imagining aliens in this form, we are only holding a distorted mirror up in which we see ourselves. And considering what monstrous things some humans have done in the past, is it no wonder we terrify ourselves with our own image?
Marella Sands 

2 Dec 1996
First of all, let me say that I agree with your skepticism concerning alien abductions. However, in your article, you make the following inaccurate statement, upon which you base an argument for a need for extraordinarily reliable equipment.

"...the closest star (besides our Sun) is so far away from Earth that travel between the two would take more than a human lifetime. "

It is true that at our current technology level it would take longer than a human lifetime. However, the possibility exists that other life forms may have developed better technology. Proxima Centauri is approximately 5 light-years from our solar system (I'm writing from memory; excuse me if I'm not too precise). If we accept current physics theory, the maximum theoretical speed is the speed of light. Obviously, then, the theoretical minimum time to travel from here to the nearest star is 5 to 6 years. In fact, extraterrestrials need only travel at approximately 1/15th the speed of light to travel from the nearest sun to the earth within a human lifetime. Consequently, the equipment need be no more reliable than our technology.

So the possibility exists, and is more likely than you posit. However, I still agree that it is very unlikely.

Steven Knox  

1 Oct 1996
Your comments on alien abductions are entirely convincing, and they remind me of an amusing incident. Some years ago I helped a friend of mine who worked as a comedy writer and performer develop a comedy sketch based on this theme. In this sketch a man recalls having been driving home late one night and being stopped by a space ship with flashing red and blue lights and an unearthly wailing sound which lands in front of him. He is taken inside the space ship, which is occupied by humanoids in blue space suits, and forced to undergo various medical experiments, including giving blood and air samples through a mouth-tube. He is then flown back to the aliens' home planet, where he is questioned by one of their government officials and is then locked in a cell with some other abductees from earth. He next remembers being flown back to his home and wakes up feeling terribly sick as a result of the rapid space travel and drugs administered by the aliens.

Thank you for a very interesting web site.
Robert Darby 
Canberra, Australia 

2 Apr 1996
I have read your position on alien abductions. Your skepticism is healthy, but you ignore much of the information.

I find it hard not to.

Strieber, whom I will admit is a little disturbed, has not had experiences solo. His wife, child, and friends have been exposed.

You know what they say: the family that is abducted together stays together!

(I'd be disturbed too if I had his contacts.)

I think that is a safe bet.

If you have read Bud Hopkins Intruders, then you will see that landing traces also exist. Hopkins and the physicians working with him have MRI documentation of implants.

Hopkins does not appear to me to be much of a reliable source. I think he would trust you if you told him you travel to Mars every night and that's where you learned the value of brushing your teeth.

Current thought suggests the beings are interdimentional rather than ET.

I'm sure this makes a big difference even though I have no clue as to what an "interdimentional" being is. (Do you mean "innerdementional"?) 

After reviewing the UFO section, I have to say, those who don't believe in UFO's, don't know reality. I work for the Air Force as a civilian and have seen tapes of a foreign F-16, locking and tracking an object and observing the object's speed, heading and altitude changes that was defying the known laws of physics, and verified by eyewitness and ground-based radar at the time.

reply: I don't doubt that pilots have tried to track down meteors, disintegrating satellites, lights from various sources, reflections on their windows, and other phantoms, and that they have claimed that what they saw "defied the known laws of physics." These testimonials hardly count as scientific evidence that anything really "defied the known laws of physics." They count only as pilots seeing things they could not identify and which baffled the hell out them.

The Air Force has lost men and equipment chasing after these unknown objects because they were over-stressing their aircraft trying to keep up with what they were tracking.

reply: I don't doubt that. But my conclusion would be more along the lines of wasting taxpayer dollars on phantom chases than on evidence we've been contacted by aliens.

I know that most sightings are honest misidentifications. In fact, one of our KC-10 tanker aircraft was doing touch and go landings at a local airport in Northern California--Redding-- last January and was mistaken for a UFO. At night, with all of its specialized lights on, it looks like a "Flying Christmas Tree." It was very easy to view it as a UFO, however, you can't dismissed the lockups and tracking on APG-63 and APG-70 radars of military aircraft on objects that are being observed by others in a different location. I am sure that many of the sightings in Southern California, was the result of military aircraft and to what many believe is, "Aurora." I can't comment on Aurora, but I want to let you know that there are objects out there and they don't belong to us.

reply: That's true. Some of it belongs to Nature. Some of the junk that's been sent to space and which occasionally falls back to earth, ricocheting off the atmosphere and being illuminated as it burns up, has been put there by the Russians, the French, the Indians, etc. Just because the junk doesn't belong to us doesn't mean it belongs to aliens from another galaxy.

The Government already knows that but feels that its citizens are not ready. It is probably due to the fact of what happened when "War of the Worlds" was broadcasted over the airwaves. Remember the widespread panic? Anyway, I thought you would like to know that about UFO's.

reply: How can you trust your government to be so caring? Your government would as soon send you to hell as protect you from aliens. You would know this if you were not a civilian working for the Air Force, but were a member of the military.

I can't comment on what is flying over the skies of the world for security reasons, but I can say this, there are objects flying that would boogle your mind. Some of these operate on a propulsion systems unknown to you but I will give you a hint about one of them that is not classified by nickname only. Nicknamed: 'Pulser.' That's all I can say about it.
--Aubrey Matthews

reply: That there are objects flying that would "boogle" my mind does not surprise me; nor does the fact there are propulsion systems unknown to me. But if anyone ever asks me about Pulser, I'll refer them to you. 

I have often wondered what travel pamphlets alien's use when deciding to "visit" the Earth. After all if we are to assume that the speed of light (real light that is, not a spacecraft capable of warp 8) is the propagation rate of electromagnetic energy, then organized radiometric energy emanating from the earth has yet to reach even the closest stars. Any visual light waves containing perhaps images of prehistoric creatures are still meandering their way through our own galaxy. What inspiration then exists for others to pack up the kids and head for the garden spot of the galaxy. I might understand when others begin receiving Tesla's first sparks or perhaps it will be episodes of "I Love Lucy" that will inspire intergalactic explorers to venture into the "final frontier". If the travelers continue to monitor the broadcasts en route however, they may think that we posses awesome defenses in the form of the star ship "Enterprise" and turn back. In fact they might have already done so if their monitoring equipment picks up Oprah or Sally ! What will they think of Tanya Harding for God's sake. Where is Zeno when you need him.

As an aside, I wonder if residents of other planets tell stories of being abducted by earthlings? Keep up the good work,
Best regards,
--Steve Marsh 

I visited this 'Skeptics Dictionary' site so I could receive a little more insight into how the 'other side' views the ideas of extraterrestrials and UFO's, as I believe that they are not one in the same or from the same. I myself am a personal believer after reading hundreds of accounts and such. What is interesting is that you don't attempt to discredit or disprove so many of the PROVEN UFO's (not in the sense of ET's mind you). Even if you were to take into account that at least 2% of all UFO sightings are real than you have thousands of sightings that you can not disprove or discredit the witnesses.

What is a "real" UFO sighting? One for which there is no ready naturalistic explanation? If so, then what you have is 2% of these sightings are unexplained. That does not imply that they are best explained by assuming they are space ships from alien civilizations. A more reasonable explanation is that they are natural phenomena.

From what I've read in this skeptics dictionary in relation to ETs and UFOs it is clear to me that you have not done any research WHATSOEVER into believing them. You tend to discredit no matter what. I personally don't believe everything I've read about UFOs, some things just seem TOO farfetched to be believed.

If by research, you mean spending years trying to prove Roswell is a government conspiracy, or personally interviewing every person who has claimed to have been abducted by aliens, then you are right. I do not take such people seriously. I consider them to be in error or to be frauds. Until one of them brings back a souvenir, I'll let others spend their time investigating these sightings.

In conclusion here I would just like to say you better update your 'dictionary' to include many things in relation to UFOs such as MIBs.

If I don't, what happens to me? Am I abducted and surgically altered?
--Fred Peterson
'Absence of Proof is not Proof of Absence' -- Ian Malcolm, "The Lost World" by Michael Crichton

No. And absence of proof is not proof, either. 

To whom it may concern, I skimmed through "alien abductions". This subject or rather the proponents of alien abduction never cease to amaze me. To think that we humans, citizens of a single planet called Earth are so fascinating to any advanced race from where ever is preposterous.

It may be preposterous to you and me, but not to Fred and his comrades.

If one considers the remote possibilities of "advanced" life in our galaxy, coupled with the odds of any such race visiting our planet more than once in a million years, it is clear that these abductions are bunk. I feel sorry for the people who feel compelled to make up this nonsense. I despise the jackals and con artists labeling themselves as "experts" wasting time and resources that could better be spent in a thousand endeavors much more rewarding to all of us. But I guess chasing government conspiracy theories, publishing pseudo-science rags and bilking lonely people out of their money is more exiting than feeding the hungry, helping the homeless or visiting an elderly shut-in. If the subject of our vast universe fascinates one, write Congress and request that more funds be spent on NASA studying real mysteries of the cosmos. Just my two cents. Excuse me now, there are two large headed beings at my window who wish to take me out for a beer and study my old football injury.
--John McGarry 

What a great resource.
I have a comment about aliens. In May of 1992 I was in San Jose, Costa Rica. there had just been a rash of UFO sightings in the previous months. There was an article in the Sunday paper, recounting sightings, history of UFOs etc., the usual stuff. There were two pictures, artists renderings of aliens as described by people who claimed to have seen them. The composite of an alien as described by North Americans looked remarkably like E.T. The composite as described by witnesses in Latin America looked amazingly like the traditional image of an angel. Most North Americans know from the media what aliens are supposed to look like. In Latin America, where the Catholic church is still very strong people have a different expectation.
--Bill Sawyers  

Of course accounts of UFOs and abductions are "unreasonable". The very notion is unreasonable. But this does not negate the possibility, no matter how great or small, that these events actually occur. Certainly, at the least, we can agree that a documented "phenomena" of reports from seemingly "normal" people continues to occur. Whether these reports are based upon reality, or the human frailty of the psyche remains to be seen. I maintain an open mind.
Steve Murillo

So do I. 

21 Jun 1996
hello! I must admit I've been a fan of the skeptic's dictionary for quite some time, and until the present i haven't written to express my gratitude for such a resource! I have considered myself of a very skeptical nature for many years now, and enjoy looking over the entries in the skeptic's dictionary often. You have amassed a huge amount of information and brilliant opinions about a variety of pseudoscience, delusion and general crap that tends to pervade the teeming masses of 'believers' these days. Thanks for all the information and entertainment along the way!

reply: thanks. flattery will get you anywhere you want to go. btw are you related to e.e.cummings?

But I've rambled enough. How about comments on a specific area? aliens, alien abductions, etc.

this area fascinates me immensely! I love to watch programs about or read about supposed alien visitations, Roswell, et cetera. as a scientist, the prospect of other life than that which we know here on earth is an intriguing one. however, the thing that amuses/annoys me the most about 'alien encounters' are some of the more popular skeptical issues brought against them: why do all these aliens look identical? is there only one or two buzzing around scaring the pants off of people? (see 'the hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy' for further info on this!) of course there must be some explanation for this

... my personal favorite that i cling to is the likelihood of alien life to be a humanoid biped are astronomically low. if you give any credence to a field like xenobiology, you realize people have postulated the probability of alien life being of certain types (this is covered in 'the andromeda strain' too, I believe). given the immense amount of disadvantages to our humanoid architecture (inability to move very quickly, precarious head positioning - injury is just too easy, our extreme upright posture makes attack much easier, the issue of balance, etc.) the odds of an alien species resembling us at all is fairly poor. thus, i and most people of a scientific education seem to feel, it is much more likely that we would encounter a smaller, maybe even single cell-type organism, or maybe an aggregate of such things. when one considers the evolution of our own species, the contributions and role that bacteria play is impossible to ignore. of course, if you believe in panspermia, and the seeding of the universe with the same genetic material, I guess aliens would resemble us in some ways, though different in others due to divergent evolution, different evolutionary/environmental pressures, etc. - but i certainly do not accept this theory.

I'll stop here, i don't want to start with all my other theories/reasonings, this has become quite a tome already!
--jason affourtit 

29 Oct 1996
I love that Randi quote about Hynek! Hynek did appear and debate with Menzel, Oberg, and Sheaffer, all of them considered leading UFO skeptics. Not, apparently, by Randi.

Furthermore, does Randi really think that scientific questions are solved by debates? If so, why haven't high-school debating clubs figured everything out yet? Clearly, Randi favors a format where you can't check references, and where whoever acts like the top-dog best wins. Science sure doesn't work that way.

Dan Clore

reply: Actually, science often works that way. High school debaters haven't resolved major scientific issues because they are not knowledgeable scientists, not because they debate instead of doing experiments. Debating various alternative hypotheses for the explanation of observable phenomena is truly in tune with scientific methodologies.

7 Jun 1997
Very insightful stuff indeed.

A couple of years ago, we had an April fool which was set up by the SABC (South Africa's Government's TV station's news program). They said a Mirage (our army's aircraft) with experimental laser cannons, shot down a UFO in the Karoo Desert, and took the aliens hostage.

On several occasions I've seen USA programs like "UFO Update, " which had an insert concerning this cover-up in South Africa, and they show the original army documents which were made as part of the April fool's joke, as evidence of a famous cover-up.

It is 10 years later and people all over the world are still being caught by this April fool's joke.
South Africa 

17 Jul 1997
I wonder how long it will be before the (lack of a) correlation between the number of hand-held video cameras in circulation and the number of even halfway convincing video clips of ufos sheds some statistical light on the existence of these things ? I would have thought that given the number of claimed "sightings", sooner or later there should be something convincing on film, right ? A good comparison would probably be with the number of natural (or otherwise) disasters caught on video as more and more people carry cameras around.

Andy Adamson
Centre for Astrophysics, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, U.K. 

6 Jul 1997
I see that some of your correspondents think that it is 'just' technological inadequacy that prevents us from reaching the nearest inhabited stars in time scales well within a human lifetime. I wonder if it has occurred to them that at near light speed a blue shifted cosmic background radiation, leave alone all the other stuff (X-rays, gamma rays) may well fry anything. This idea was suggested to me by a friend doing a Ph.D. in X-ray astronomy. Neither he nor I can think of any way round it apart, perhaps, from MASSIVE shielding - and how do you get all that to near light speed.
David Bleines

reply: What I want to know is what happens to a pint of Sierra Nevada Pale Ale when one is drinking at the speed of light? 

08 Aug 1997
G'day Bob,

May I congratulate you on a most interesting and informative Web Site. Your 'Skeptic's Dictionary' is a constant source of education/interest/and amusement for me after I accidentally stumbled across it recently. For some years I thought I may have been the only 'skeptic'!

I am a professional Flight Instructor with many hours of both Day and Night Flying and Training in my Log Book and have read, with interest, you explanations for many 'UFO' type sightings, Alien Visitations etc.

Here in Australia there is a well documented case of a young Pilot, a member of a 'civilian Air Force' Cadet program, who took off from an airport somewhere in the Melbourne area (the State of Victoria, Southern Australia) - this event took place some time ago, perhaps in the 1960's, and the place names have now 'slipped' from my memory of the 'incident.'

Apparently the Pilot, who was not particularly experienced in Night VFR Ops,(Night Visual Flight Rules Operations - where constant reference to a 'natural horizon' is essential - he was not Instrument Rated) took off, I believe for a flight to Tasmania, to the south, over a notoriously rough stretch of water. He was in constant radio communications with Melbourne (probably Flight Service or Air Traffic Control) and shortly after departure reported seeing 'strange, coloured lights, moving both in an erratic and constantly changing speed and distance from his aircraft.' Unfortunately he crashed his aircraft and neither he nor his craft have been found. (No little surprise here, taking into account his 'over-water' flight path.)

Over the years this 'unsolved mystery' has surfaced on many occasions and is always accompanied with the usual 'theories' of UFO's, Alien Abduction and the like.

What really 'amuses' me (perhaps that is an inappropriate term) is that each time this 'mystery' is re-opened, the logical explanation of simple disorientation has been pushed to one side; the 'unexplained UFO' type explanation seems to be at the forefront!

Of course, as an active and current Instructor, the dangers of disorientation, bought about by even short term loss of a visible horizon or reference, are far too real to disregard. A Pilot, under such circumstances, will 'swear' that he is maintaining heading and 'controlled flight' (i.e., straight and level), but in actual fact will find that he is simply not where 'he thinks he is', both in 'flight attitude' and even in 'geographical orientation' - usually the aircraft will enter a spiral dive, with the inner ear mechanisms giving the Pilot completely erroneous, but totally believable 'misinformation' - he is likely to input further control movements, based upon his 'inner ear misinformation' which will only increase this spiral dive. (I have been with Pilots (as a Check Pilot), who have become disoriented and have even resisted my attempts to regain normal flight attitude and orientation - such disorientation is a very 'real and dangerous' problem for not only inexperienced Pilots, but also for the experienced Instrument Rated Pilot.

In this particular case, the Pilot reported seeing 'flashing lights', moving erratically about his aircraft and completely 'unexplainable' to him. (it was later established that he was flying in the general vicinity of one of southern Victoria's Light-houses). ATC (or Flight Service) then lost radio communications from him and the 'emergency' was then instigated for a full 'Search and Rescue' operation - as mentioned, neither he or his aircraft were ever found (of course, this only added to the theory of 'Alien Abduction')

The only reason I am retelling this particular 'story' is that in my own experience I have found it extremely difficult to explain to Pilots (both Students and so called 'experienced' Pilots) the very real dangers of 'loosing' the natural horizon - of how one's body will give erroneous information that is 'completely believable' and the difficulty in putting one's total trust in Instruments - especially where, as we develop, we tend to have a tendency to 'mistrust' this type of information - i.e., putting our 'total trust' - and, in fact, putting our life in the belief in such instruments)

Perhaps I am lucky - I have never experienced this type of disorientation, having, I suppose, been 'raised in the Flying Training Industry' where this type of 'phenomena' occurs on an unfortunately regular basis. To a 'non aviator', the 'workings' of the inner ear is a complete 'mystery' - people I speak to find it totally unbelievable that a Pilot can experience total disorientation by the simple fact of not having a 'reference' upon which to base a 'belief' of what is 'up' and what is 'down'.

I believe similar experiences are often encountered by 'cave divers' - that 'breed' of men and women who 'scuba' dive into extremely clear water, only to encounter total disorientation when they stir the bottom silt into such a 'cloudy state' so as to loose their own reference to what is 'up and down' - unfortunately, so many seem to run out of their precious bottled air, dying before realising their mistake.

Perhaps I have 'prattled' on too long, but again, well done on a most interesting and informative Web Site!

Peter Whellum 

11 Aug 1997
Let me say first that I agree with your conclusions on this matter, and, in general, find your arguments to be solid and logical. But I feel that there is one area where you are closing your mind, and, as such, weakening your stance as a skeptic.

This is in regards to your argument that any alien life would have to take thousands of years to travel between stars, due to being unable to exceed the speed of light. By taking this stance, you seem to be assuming that the laws of physics as we know them are the sum total of knowledge in this area, yet there is really little more reason to assume that now than there was a hundred years ago. Most of what we know is probably true, yes. But, even at the cutting edge of modern physics now, there are acknowledgments of possible methods of 'cheating' the speed of light, so as to effectively exceed it. Most of these ideas - wormholes and reality warping as an example - are only now moving from the area of science fiction, and are far beyond our present abilities. But the possibilities still exist, and, given the time scales involved, it is entirely possible that there is intelligent life out there which has been around for millions of years longer then we. The possibility of them having methods of travel which we are only now beginning to understand is not a possibility that should be discarded, certainly not if one wishes to keep an open mind.
Matt Wilson.

reply: I agree that it is likely that there are other life forms in the universe and that some of them have existed for millions of years longer than humans. I also agree that it is likely that some of these life forms are highly intelligent. That may be why they are not here. They came, they saw, they left. Who in their right mind with such intelligence would stick around this planet?

On a more serious note, these superior beings could aim their spacecraft in any direction and the odds of them hitting a habitable planet with intelligent life-forms, much less earth, would be negligible. They could travel around for millions of years at ten times the speed of light with a map of the universe, using "wormholes" or "reality warping," and it would still be unlikely that they'd ever find another planet with intelligent life-forms. This does not make it impossible for alien intelligence to reach earth or for earthlings to reach some other planet with intelligent life, but it makes it improbable.  

09 Sep 1997
Come on guys! The scientific method isn't suspended just because you cloak yourselves in science. Yes, much of today's literature is replete with unscientific information, some of which can actually be harmful to us. And we should feel an obligation to reveal these falsehoods when we run across them. However, let's remember that the true skeptic accepts neither side of a story until confronted with the truth.

reply: And I suppose you are now about to confront me with "the truth." OK.

Case in point. Have you taken a look at some of the better UFO pictures? Do you really expect me to believe that all of these pictures are fakes? I have looked at some of them and some are definitely not fakes. I often see these photos dismissed with a "simple explanation" that is more often than not desired ["designed"?] to ridicule, rather than inform.

Don't call yourself a scientist until you can lay ridicule aside and make judgements based upon the merits of the situation.

reply: Thank you for confronting me with the truth. If you have seen them and you swear they are pictures of real alien craft, then who are we to disagree? I won't call myself a scientist when confronted with such overwhelming support for the notion that some of these photos are of a real alien spacecraft. I will lay ridicule aside, and walk unto the valley of death. For greater love hath no man than that he lay down his Polaroid for that of another.

P.S. I've been a practicing scientist/engineer virtually all my adult life. I am a retired Air Force Major and have worked in many technical fields during my career inside the Air Force. I have been retired for eight years, have worked for prestigious research organizations since then, and have led several successful research projects. I think I know the scientific method when I see it.
Dr. Ken Dreyer

reply: I feel safer already, knowing you are retired from our Air Force. I wonder what the bosses at your prestigious research organization would think if you told them you can spot a real from a fake UFO photo just by looking at it. Thank you for your vivid insights into the scientific method, viz., namely, whatever you clearly and distinctly see to be true, is true. Are you Descartes' reincarnation?

24 Feb 1998
I find it very good to view the opposite side of things.  Your views on these subjects could be described as polar opposite.

reply: I suppose they could. They could even be described as bipolar posite or antipolar cellulite, but what good would it do?

 I was reading about alien abductions and I recognize from your site the use of such phrases as "junk science" and "fraud."  in your abduction article, you stated, "There is a widespread, though erroneous, belief that alien beings have traveled to earth..."  for one who claims such studies affirming paranormal activities, this was certainly an ill-chosen sentence.

reply: You must have me confused with my evil twin. I do not claim to affirm paranormal activities.

I would consider your beliefs to be erroneous, it's just a matter of sufficient evidence.  if you wish to be objective, you should choose your words more wisely.

reply: I see. And if I were objective, I would no doubt see that I am in error and you are correct. I would see that there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that aliens have landed and I would choose my words more wisely. You have a way with words, I must admit.

that done with, I would recommend reading "Fire in the Sky."  I'm sure you've heard of it.  if you've seen the movie and not read the book, you've simply confirmed the view of those that believe the media is fooling the public.  the book is written very objectively.  he describes the incident from his coworkers' experience, then from his own, attempting to make as little speculation as possible, then he moves on to use accepted (and I assert the use of this word) documented evidence to refute all theories of the "real story."  I have written down many of the differences between the movie and the book (enough to fill two or three type-written pages), the majority of which shed more doubt on the situation.  one in particular I like to point out is the angry refusal to take a polygraph test, whereas in reality the group volunteered to take the lie detector tests.  six passed, one was questionable.  later all seven retook the test and all passed (there is about a million to one chance that seven people can conspire a story and pass a lie detector, especially since it was the top polygraph expert in the country).  if that book isn't evidence enough (at least to change your overzealous view of "true  believers"), then i don't know what will, other than seeing an alien yourself.  I would gladly receive a response when you have time.
   -a true believer

reply: I'll tell you what: if I ever see an alien I will agree to take a lie detector test.

larrow.gif (1051 bytes) alien abductions

larrow.gif (1051 bytes) UFOs & ETs

All Reader Comments

This page was designed by Cristian Popa.