Date: Fri Feb 05 1993 18:29:00 To: David Bloomberg Hi David! At last, I took the time to r

Master Index Current Directory Index Go to SkepticTank Go to Human Rights activist Keith Henson Go to Scientology cult

Skeptic Tank!

Date: Fri Feb 05 1993 18:29:00 From: Jacques Poulet To: David Bloomberg Hi David! At last, I took the time to read the file (UNPREDIS.ZIP) you suggested I read. I hope that you had formulated some criticisms about some aspects of Martin S. Kottmeyer's paper. Because I do have a few, as you may have guess. I won't be quoting too much, so please refer to the actual file to see the context of the quotes. Let's start by saying that the entire "exercise" is based, if I understand correctly, on the belief that no such thing has "flying saucer from outer space" realy exist and much less the "alien abducting earthling" scenario. QUOTE Culture is an admixture of repetition and variation, convention and creativity, signals and noise. It is ever new and forever old as humanity relives old dreams and nightmares or forgets and forges new ones. Part of the delight of history is the recognition that however new a given event appears, traces of the past can generally be discerned. ENDQUOTE From this affirmation, we can surmise that there might be a trace of the past in all of these science-fiction movies. Some common root that could have affected them all. As you see, it works both ways. QUOTE Extraterrestrials, however, should be independent of culture and if they are newly arrived their characteristics should represent a discontinuity with the past. ENDQUOTE If they are newly arrived, I'd agree. But if they've been here longer than we realize, then they could very well have been portrayed, culturaly, _before_ we recognized them for what they realy are. QUOTE Thomas E. Bullard makes the rather more modest claim that the keystone of the abduction mystery, the interrupted journey of Betty and Barney Hill, had no cultural sources from which to derive the experience they reported. They were, to quote him, "entirely unpredisposed" since they were the first. ENDQUOTE It's not because this case is the first one documented, that such event didn't occur repeatedly for years, or decades, before that Betty and Barney Hill's case, without us knowing anything about it. QUOTE The shape of the objects Arnold saw is hard to describe in a word or two. It wasn't like a plane or rocket, or even a disc. When the newsman Bill Bequette wrote the story up for the news services he recalled Arnold's describing the motion of the objects as like a saucer if you skip it across the water. Jumbling the metaphorical intent of the description, Bequette labeled the objects "flying* saucers", Arnold said the term arose from "a great deal of misunderstanding". The public, however, did not know that. No drawing accompanied the story. People started looking for flying saucers and that is exactly what they found. They reported flat, circular objects that look like flying saucers sound like they should look like. Equally important: no one reported objects like the drawing in Arnold's report to the Air Force.[6] The implications of this journalistic error are staggering in the extreme. ENDQUOTE Kottmeyer forget to mention that many reports describes object as an OBOL (Orange Ball Of Light), as a boomerang (or triangular), as a cigare (or rocket), as a bell (or acorn) or as a disk (or saucer). Also, he forget to verify if that "flying saucer" shape ever appeared before Arnold's report: On March 22, 1870, an observation was made aboard the "Lady of the Lake" in the Atlantic Ocean at 5°47' N and 27°52" W. The object seen was a disk of light gray color. (from "Anatomy of a phenomwnon" by Jacques Vallée, page 27-28) QUOTE The flying saucer mythos perfectly predisposes us to include flying saucers in our fantasies and nightmares about extraterrestrials. ENDQUOTE That's entirely hypothetical and unsubstantiated, as I just explained. QUOTE This takes care of the craft, but what of the entities? ENDQUOTE The problem of the craft is still present, and has only been brushed superficialy. QUOTE Hopkins professes it is instructive that his abductees are not devoured like in War of the Worlds, but how would a myth devour a person? ENDQUOTE This is his personal opinion. He hasn't satisfactorily demonstrated that it is only a myth. Not a very objective approach to the subject. QUOTE I ask, is there anything about UFO aliens that does not resemble science fiction? ENDQUOTE Or is it the other way around? Does science-fiction, all cultural activities finally, depict a certain aspect of our society? Could the "style" of science-fiction Kottmeyer is refering to, be a mirror of our own situation? These questions are as valid as his. QUOTE Years from now we may have an epidemic of implanted parasites, potential chest-bursters, due to the influence of the movie "Alien" starting such an association. Presently such a report would be too suspect, but eventually some puzzling medical oddity might be associated with such a delusion and the UFO lore would evolve in new directions. It could just as easily never happen because of the vagaries of social factors. UNQUOTE He's already making excuses in case his prediction, based on his hypothesis, doesn't become reality. QUOTE It is more likely they share an intuitive ordering principle subconsciously acquired from exposure to drama. A relabeling of Bullard's elements should make the logic clearer: (i) character introduced, (ii) peril and conflict, (iii) explanation and insight, (iv) good will and attempt to impress, (v) excitement, (vi) climax, (vii) closure, (viii) sequel. UNQUOTE Or is it just a natural order for these type of events to occur? There are a great number of alternate order that are simply not likely to occur. They may be doing what's important first. Then, if time permits, the other "elements" may fits in. Too simple an explanation is it? QUOTE No doubt this would have impressed Betty as similar to Barney's experience of seeing the saucer's occupants. ENDQUOTE Why so? Why would _this_ particular encounter impressed Betty and Barney? That is called assuming things. Kottmeyer is obviously trying to "connect" unrelated facts (or events) while discarding those other avenues that don't fit his belief. Why aren't the abductors, in the Betty and Barney case, 10 feet tall? QUOTE In the original nightmare Betty compares the noses of the aliens to Jimmy Durante. This is a very apt description of the noses of the mutants in "Invaders From Mars". Barney, oddly, didn't see the Durante noses of the aliens. Perhaps it was in deference to Barney's on-the-scene memories that this detail was edited out by Betty in her hypnosis sessions. ENDQUOTE This is a very important point. I'm not familiar with the details of that case. But if what he's saying is true, that Betty has changed her story, it could be significant. To evaluate how serious it might be, we'd have to examine what exactly was changed, and in what circumstances. QUOTE Wraparound eyes are an extreme rarity in science fiction films. I know of only one instance. They appeared on the alien of an episode of an old TV series "The Outer Limits" entitled "The Bellero Shield". A person familiar with Barney's sketch in "The Interrupted Journey" and the sketch done in collaboration with the artist David Baker will find a "frisson" of "deja vu" creeping up his spine when seeing this episode. The resemblance is much abetted by an absence of ears, hair, and nose on both aliens. Could it be by chance? Consider this: Barney first described and drew the wraparound eyes during the hypnosis session dated 22 February 1964. "The Bellero Shield" was first broadcast on "10 February 1964. Only twelve days separate the two instances. If the identification is admitted, the commonness of wraparound eyes in the abduction literature falls to cultural forces. ENDQUOTE That is another significant piece of information which is worth investigating further. QUOTE It is my opinion that culture predisposes people to have the sorts of UFO experiences they do to a degree we have yet to fully appreciate. If I'm wrong, my pontifications still won't be in vain. UNQUOTE I would tend to agree on his conclusion. And he defenitely helped me understand the intricate connection between culture and our interprtation of experiences. But he hasn't convince me that no such events are occuring. Jacques


E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank