🔻
To cover 'all about UFOs, the universe and everything' in about 140 pages is a fairly tall order and it is to the author's credit that he has made a good stab at it. Most aspects of the subject are give fair treatment, and the presentation of many of the new ideas coming from France to a British readership is welcomed. The sociological, psychological and physical facets of the UFO experience are all dealt with, and something of the bewildering complexity of. the subject comes through.
However, I do not think that the book puts across the often extreme ambiguity of individual cases. Hilary clearly sees that collectively the cases are ambiguous, yet individually he would like to slot them into neat categories - this one a craft, that an intelligent light, this a misidentification, and so forth. Perhaps this is caused by the lack of space to discuss individual cases at length. The author may be rather too sanguine about the possibility of truly exotic origins f or 'UFOs'; and it must be said that his occasional rash talk of "many thousands of [alleged] UFO sightings have been investigated sufficiently thoroughly to establish that no easy solution is forthcoming" (p.36); "there are tens of thousands of alleged photographs in existence" (p.65) leaves one with serious doubts. The most comprehensive catalogues of UFO photographs tend towards the 1000 mark, and much the same must surely be said about "sufficiently thoroughly" (whatever that might mean) investigated UFO reports.
The use of the term "sufficiently thoroughly" illustrates a particular difficulty of the subject. How, unless one knows every single UFO investigator, and .their foibles, biases and special interests, can one gauge whether or not they have investigated a case "sufficiently thoroughly"? What possible reason could, say, a Norwegian ufologist with a reasonable command of English have for doubting that Randall Jones-Pugh had "sufficiently investigated" the Ripperston affair? But we all know what Hilary found.
At one point Hilary comes to a tentative pro-ETH solution, which did not seem to be indicated by the main text, or his earlier writings, and which came as something of a surprise. Naturally, I was interested to see which cases had impressed him so I looked back on the ones he offered as possible evidence of ET intervention. It is my contention that these cases do not provide such unequivocal testimony, and I outline a few briefly.
The sighting of a huge, illuminated object over Partington, Greater Manchester in 1977 was made by a handful of people in a single group, despite it passing over a densely populated area. Jenny Randles, one of the investigators, has cited it as an example of a 'subjective UFO'. The evidence seems consistent with extreme distortion of a view of an aircraft from Manchester Airport.
The Exeter, New Hampshire, incidents of 1965 seem just the sort of case which is destined to remain ambiguous. Things seen at night by frightened people do not seem the best of evidence.
A classic cloud cigar case from Vernon, France, 1954. I had thought these cases had been retired some years ago with the recognition that they may well be peculiar cloud effects; furthermore, it is not at all clear just what investigation, if any, took place on this case. Can anything be salvaged from the wreckage of the French wave of 1954?
I am not suggesting that these cases, and the others that Hilary cites, and which I submit are subject to similar criticisms, are not interesting, or indeed that they are not illustrative of the type of case which can incline people towards the ETH, but saying "I can see no other way to account for such cases" is pitching it far too high.
Having made these criticisms, I would not wish them to be taken as indicating that I regard this as a poor book. I commend its treatment of t he social background to the phenomenon. The general treatment is calm and considered, and the author's openly stated commitments never prevent him presenting evidence which may seem to contradict them. The style is pleasant and easy to read. I just feel that if some of the hyperbole had been cut out it would have been even better.
- Peter Rogerson, from Magonia 15, April 1985
No comments:
Post a Comment