Betty Hill artfully debunked by Dr Simon & skeptics Phil Klass & Robert Sheaffer

This is my first thread and I hope it's received without negativity, and that I contributed to clear thinking.

I've been into UFOs since 1958, have had 6 sightings with one videotaped, attended a ton of local lectures in NYC in the 1960s and LA in the 1980s, was at the UN on UFO day in 1978, etc. I know a thing or two about UFOs and read almost every UFO book published starting in 1958 with George Adamski's "Flying Saucers Have Landed" (co-written with Desmond Leslie in 1953).

I tell you this 'cause I read "The Interrupted Journey" by John G. Fuller in 1966 and read almost everything that was written about the experience and I'm still reading about it. I never accepted the story as having happened and I relied on Dr Simon's similar opinion and he was in the best position to know. I learned a lot of things about the Hills but, primarily, about Betty and how she wasn't the innocent she gave the impression of being and still is presented today. Before the alleged event she was an active veteran UFO enthusiast. She knew her stuff.

I just became aware of a tell-all PDF titled "between Dr. Benjamin Simon, Philip J. Klass" and here is the url for the PDF: www.debunker.com...

It is 48 pages long and is comprised of correspondence between Phil Klass, Dr Benjamin Simon, Betty Hill and Robert Sheaffer. It deals with facts that blow the Hill's account out of the water as far as the Hill's being abducted and "processed" by alleged extraterrestrials or aliens. This is the horse's mouth.

Regardless of what you know or how you feel about the veracity of the published accounts, do yourself a favor and clean out your biases by reading what really happened to the Hills. Dr Simon is unimpeachable and the UFO field could have used a dozen of him instead of all those gullible, in it for the buck, "popular" UFO authors.

Looking forward to comments that generate a lively discussion.

a reply to: klassless

you take a good approach...I will definitely read the pdf and post later...sounds like a really interesting read for sure...I remember seeing the movie a long time ago....

He's a debunker, not a skeptic. Big difference. I read his letter in the first few pages of the PDF. Even offers suggestions to an author writing a book to 'help' explain what they really saw. Hella perspective since he wasn't their, either.

originally posted by: intrptr

He's a debunker, not a skeptic. Big difference. I read his letter in the first few pages of the PDF. Even offers suggestions to an author writing a book to 'help' explain what they really saw. Hella perspective since he wasn't their, either.

I am sure he was speaking about celestial events that Betty misxategorized. If you would have read the whole thing you would have emerged more informed. Instead you chose to read partially and ended up with your old biases.

I am a skeptic and a debunker. But an open-minded one.

You know , I have been undecided about this since the day. However , in the pdf , statements there are like :I have evidence to disprove" Just dont tell us that you do (not you OP) , tell us the evidence. Too easy to cut this down w/o knowing what evidence he had to disprove it.

And he actually states that no such occurrence with a 2 star general ever happened. Then on the next line a disclaimer that he didnt even try to contact anyone about it.

Just sayin

a reply to: klassless

Most interesting! Excellent source materials there, though I have only, so far, gone through about a fourth of it. I had never read that the psychiatrist didn't believe them. Not surprised. Interesting story, but it never quite rang true for me. Will have to read through the rest later on. S&F.

originally posted by: klassless

originally posted by: intrptr

He's a debunker, not a skeptic. Big difference. I read his letter in the first few pages of the PDF. Even offers suggestions to an author writing a book to 'help' explain what they really saw. Hella perspective since he wasn't their, either.

I am sure he was speaking about celestial events that Betty misxategorized. If you would have read the whole thing you would have emerged more informed. Instead you chose to read partially and ended up with your old biases.

My bias is clear to any that read my content, too. I've seen a thingy, I know they exist.

Klassless, is that a play on Phillips name?

He quite cleary dismisses "with quotations" their tale and others as fame and fortune hunting. Dude is not open minded and it shows in that letter he writes in the first few pages.

a reply to: klassless

The UFO was a t'sighting", The abduction did not take place but was a repnoduction of Bettyts dream which occurred right after. the sight- ing. This was her expression of anxiety as contrasted to Banneys more psychosomatlc one. Again best wishes and good luck.

So...UFO sighting was real...it just didnt happen the way they said it did.

Got it.

Great debunking.

a reply to: klassless

Welcome new member

There's an audio version of Interrupted Journey right here that includes the actual hypnosis sessions at 1:05 onwards. There's also a great 45m show from 1966 with Betty, Barney, Carl Sagan, James E McDonald and Leo Sprinkle available here. The book is all over the web as a pdf and here's one of them.

It's good for people to hear their voices and stories in their words rather than the layers of obfuscation and additions trowelled on since. Some ufologists have slotted 'greys' into the report when it really wasn't an original feature. 'In their own words' is an improvement on modern synopses.

a reply to: klassless

I read an account of this event in Readers Digest in the early 1970's and if, as is claimed, she was "into UFOs" then that may have been why she and Barney were selected. Who are we to say these aliens do not have the capacity, either technological or otherwise, to know who to select when they abduct someone?

What evidence does the debunker have that aliens only ever select people on nothing more than just a hit-n-hope basis?

She did ask them if they would come back and that she would have earth experts with her who could understand the answers the aliens gave to her questions. Their answer was that they may return one day so she asked how, where and when would they meet. They replied "we dont have any problem finding those they wish to find."

By the way, did the debunker have access to and go through all the records of their regressions?

originally posted by: klassless
This is my first thread and I hope it's received without negativity, and that I contributed to clear thinking.

...

Welcome!

I would like to say that this case has been covered on ATS, try the search feature. I am not sure that any thread has been created regarding Dr Simon and skeptics Phil Klass and Robert Sheaffer. I would like to ask you if they were there when the alleged incident happened.

a reply to: klassless

Welcome, and great first thread.

I was always under the impression that something indeed did happen to the Hills that night but that their account of extra terrestrial abduction seemed sketchy at best and willfully manipulating at worst.

If they did encounter a UFO and they were manipulated into believing it was the work of ET, I suspect that Psychotronic technology had been used on them. Psychotronics would account for the pulsed microwave radiation that was detected faintly from their vehicle.

a reply to: klassless

A good, well thought out post. Nice job.

Question to the masses.

Doesn't the starmap segment confirm their account of what occurred?

Hi I read part of debunker.com

S&F + Good first post , Carry on

a reply to: klassless


I will not bother reading the skeptical explanation of the Hill's experience. I'm an abductee myself, from back in 1964 which was before Fuller's book was published in 1966. If you know so much about UFOs, then you should know that far from simply being a "close encounter" that an abduction experience is a situation where the abductee is under the complete mental control of the ETs. That is the scary part that most people shy away from wanting to accept because it is a direct affront to human dignity as we know it, especially in the US. No one should have that ability, especially an alien...but they do....

What the abductee takes away from the incident is what the ETs want to be taken and how the abductee perceives what their heads were filled with. Brutal but true, fact and fiction is the hallmark of an abduction, exactly designed to mask the true nature of what they want from and do to us. The best example is the ETs showing/telling the abductees how we humans were/are destroying the earth. --These incidents started well before any of the "save the Earth" type of dialogue.

My own, repeated attempts to enlighten some folks on ATS are testament to how an abductee gets "educated" to a totally new philosophy than what they held formerly. A genuine, typical and uneducated redneck from a rural area, I gained and grew a new perspective on the whole situation of what is and isn't in the cosmos. In the field of abductees, I am not alone in that change, if more vocal in my later years as I understand the sheer stupidity of my fellow humans in their views on about everything.

Understand that a fake CGI video of a UFO proves nothing about UFOs. Efforts on ATS to debunk older UFO accounts seems to be growing recently. Betty and Barney Hill may have elaborated their stories both while under hypnosis and while awake. Perhaps Fuller help expand their story? I don't know whether their account is all true or just partially. I don't care much either way. As I said, I know the can of worms that an abduction opens. It is an aspect of the UFO myth the ETs generate and which we may facilitate with our fallible minds. As I've said before, they know us better than we know ourselves.

(I will not be back to further respond to this thread.)

a reply to: Xcathdra

doesn't the star map segment confirm their account of what occurred?

The star map proves nothing.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Doesn't the starmap segment confirm their account of what occurred?

Not at all. Betty distinctly refers to "stars and planets," yet the infamous attempt to match the map to nearby stars ignores this. Also, the pattern can be applied to nearly any random collection of dots:

a reply to: klassless

The Hills sort of debunk themselves.

-The "incident" wasn't reported straight away.
-The hypnosis was done using some pretty strong drugs.
-The hypnosis was also done quite a long time after the perpetrated incident.
-They each had a different rendition of what they "saw".
-The "map" is nothing more than dots, circles and lines, as pointed out by DJW001. One of my images is also there to prove the point (The UK towns and villages one).

There's too many inconsistencies to take anything they say, seriously.

a reply to: BIGPoJo

No offense intended here, just a statement. This is why I do not create threads on ATS. "This has been posted, search feature", etc etc. Sure, they could go search, find, and post in some two year old thread, but how many on here are going to go find that same old thread and read the new post within it. Just about every conspiracy under the sun has been posted on this site, so lets just stop making new threads.

originally posted by: intrptr

He's a debunker, not a skeptic. Big difference. I read his letter in the first few pages of the PDF.

originally posted by: Aliensun

I will not bother reading the skeptical explanation of the Hill's experience.

And these are the typical responses by those that believe or claim experience alien abductions. Apparently once you believe or experience, every other claim is most likely true by default. There's no need to research. The old Stanton Friedman quote comes to mind which is used towards those that debunk or are skeptical: "Don't bother me with the facts, my mind is made up." It's the perfect example of how this quote backfires many times onto his side of the camp.

If you look through the PDF, you'll see correspondence with the direct source of this case, Betty Hill. Part of researching a case is searching for quotes back to the source of the story. Betty makes claims in her letters of over 350 landings, near-landings, and close encounters in the area around Peace Air Force base in a five year period of the letter. She also says you could turn on the radio and pick up activity when the UFOs fly over the base and the F111(?) chase them. I'm not aware of any facts to back up these claims though. With all of this, you can get a better understanding of Betty's mindset through her own words.

I've done a lot of armchair research with this incident and I'm familiar with many of the letters and the ATC report in the PDF, but some of them I've never seen before. Star and flag for posting this and adding it to the facts of the case.