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

originally posted by: notquiteright
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.

Well put. I will agree that it is OK to make new threads but at least make an effort to link to old threads with relevant and or corresponding research.

One can always learn something new from a new thread on old topics.

For example, I just learned that Dr. Simon had two experiences with UFOs himself - first letter, second page, third paragraph, the highlighted text. Quote: Having had two experiences with UFOs myself I felt little need to go to someone else who probably had none."

Therefore, it's too much to say Dr. Simon was skeptical, even less a debunker, from the beginning. Maybe because of his personal experiences he was inclined to accept that there was an actual sighting that night. Dr. Simon was a truly professional hypnotist and wouldn't allow his own experiences to influence the subject, but it's still possible. And I also ask the question: Did he actually go to someone with his sightings and to who. Is this how he got recommended to do this job?

I'm also very surprised by the handwriting of Betty Hill. For a mentally unstable person it's extremely organized and well crafted. Did she write these letters herself or she dictated to someone? If dictated - who wrote?

a reply to: BIGPoJo

I can live with that.

Personally I don't really care about individual accounts.. Looking at individual cases is pointless, you have to look at it from a holistic perspective. I don't doubt that out of the hundreds of thousands of contactees and abductees a fair number of them have had real experiences. When you take both the phenomenon of UFO's, abductions, various types of evidence including trace evidence and radar signals, whistleblowers in intelligence and defence as well as very detailed historical accounts by the ancients I think it paints a pretty clear picture. Rather undeniable I would say.

The problem is people don't care about evidence(not proof mind you) even if there is mountains of it, they mostly believe what they want to believe, and especially if this knowledge has a tendency to shatter long held worldviews or if it is especially unsavoury. Their belief systems are skewed and biased towards the default conventional view of history and reality. The skepticism towards various different theories is rather telling and incredibly one-sided, marked by whether the belief is considered fringe or not. In lieu of absolute proof the leading hypothesis should rightly be the one with the most evidence even if only circumstantial. And if not outright accepted should be given due consideration and be publically debated instead of being institutionally ridiculed by government and media as well as being virtually anathema in academia - this is telling! And the most ridiculous of these explanations they come up with can't really be empirically proven either. Sometimes they aren't even remotely plausible after only a cursory glance at the situation.. but they are slavishly believed, the cover stories of militaries that would have an undeniable interest in the phenomena. It's laughable really.

Some might subscribe to the unscientific axiom that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - a goalpost that can always be moved if needed - but this is a rather arbitrary designation as many scientific realities have been incredibly extraordinary to pre-modern societal mores. Like bacteria or numerous other scientific realities wouldn't be considered extraordinary to a society that have never heard of such far out concepts. This is very often the case with new scientific discoveries. The idea of extraordinary evidence is a weak pseudo-argument that only flaccid minds given to intellectual laziness would accept.

So called skeptics aren't really skeptics because they only reserve their skepticism towards beliefs that challenge orthodoxy. An orthodoxy that is being propped up by powers that are largely corrupt and deceitful in the extreme. But they're willing to give these untrustworthy institutions the benefit of the doubt, all they need is their word and they'll buy the most ridiculous of explanations.

Pseudoskeptics are narrow-minded conformist clowns ruled by an orthodoxy they aren't willing to challenge in the least. To call them biased would be the understatement of the century. Their cowardly denial is tantamount to religion, not true science. The same goes for paranormal phenomena.

I do not doubt they are here at all, in fact I know they are here. Take from that what you will.

originally posted by: research100
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....

Thanks for the kind words. You just gotta enjoy reading the 48 pages. Better than any book out there.

It's too bad that another source that may have contributed to the alleged Hill's experiece was not mentioned. But here it is to add to the Hill's delusions.

From Wikipedia:
"Legacy[edit]
Skeptics pointed to this episode to explain the grey aliens in the 1961 Betty and Barney Hill abduction. In his 1990 article Entirely Unpredisposed, Martin Kottmeyer suggested that Barney's memories revealed under hypnosis might have been influenced by the episode, which was broadcast twelve days before Barney's first hypnotic session. Between the alleged 1961 abduction and the airing of the episode in 1964, Betty Hill's writings had described the aliens as short black-haired men with large "Jimmy Durante" noses.[3] The episode featured an extraterrestrial with large eyes who says, "In all the universes, in all the unities beyond the universes, all who have eyes have eyes that speak." The report from the regression featured a scenario that was in some respects similar to the television show. In part, Kottmeyer wrote:[4]

"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 "déjà 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."

When a different researcher asked Betty about The Outer Limits, she insisted she had "never heard of it".[5]"

Good answer!

originally posted by: Gothmog
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

Good points but they do supply all of the evidence to convince that the alleged events didn't happen. The evidence is the radar report, weather reports, astronomical evidence, etc.

I'll have to read again that part about the general and I may add a comment.

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
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.

Your kind of reply is what I was hoping for. Glad you're gonna read through.

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
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.

The way I read it is that the "ufo" was real in Betty's and maybe Barney's heads but the "ufo" was a planet that did not register in their minds. The astronomical data supports a misidentification on Betty's part. The planet, to her, was a ufo.

originally posted by: Kandinsky
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.

Thanks for those links, I'll have to make time to visit them. It's easy to find sources that are fueled by believers but I prefer those that stray from support to reveal worthy criticisms. Here is one such source and I include one paragraph that describes the author John G. Fuller's feelings after writing the book that started iit all.

[Wednesday, July 31, 2013
John G. Fuller Warns Betty Hill Not to "Jump to Conclusions"
However, one visitor to the "UFO landing spot" was not so easily impressed: John G. Fuller, the author of the book The Interrupted Journey that made the Hills famous, who regularly wrote for major magazines such as the Saturday Review and Look. (Remember when people used to read magazines for news and current events?) Fuller was a firm believer in UFOs, ghosts, and other paranormal claims, but he could not stomach the UFO claims being made by Betty Hill after her supposed "abduction."]

badufos.blogspot.com...
Bad UFOs: Skepticism, UFOs, and The Universe

originally posted by: Azureblue
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?

Disabuse yourself from this type of thinking. There was no ufo or aliens. The Hills were not abducted. You are giving alleged aliens a reality that hasn't been proven to exist.

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

What evidence do you have to accept aliens as real? If you believe aliens are real keep in mind that reality creates beliefs, not the other way 'round.

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."

Never happened. It was created.

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

The person that can answer your question is the "debunker".

originally posted by: BIGPoJo

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.

Thanks for the welcome. I'm sure that many threads exist covering this non-event but I didn't find anything similar to this thread and it may attract new members who may not want old comments. The Mods are always on the job and if they agree to close this thread there's nothing I can do.

Of course no one was there with the Hills.

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
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.

Thanks. They only thing that happened to the Hills is that they got carried away with their interpretation of what must have been a beautiful celestial, even through the clouds. I've driven through the area they were in when I was stationed at Pease AFB in 1958-1959. You can wander of the main roads and get lost while under an umbrella of beautiful sky.

There wasn't any pulsed microwave radiation anywhere near them or their car.

www.theironskeptic.com...
"Later, Betty discovered some shiny spots each about the size of a coin on the trunk, which most investigators assumed were the natural products of wear and tear. Not so Betty"

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

I don't really care about individual accounts.. Looking at individual cases is pointless,

In my opinion the 'UFO this and that + Debunked' threads are quite useless. But if you look at it in a holistic scale things become very clear. During the cold war there must have been U.F.O's on either side (in the sense of unidentified airplanes). But the official reports of for instance Germany were that there were never any unidentified objects sighted. Well that is hard to believe isn't it (ufo could also be american spyplane)? Ergo , official sources lie and lied about the phenomenon even today... Making information classified and stonewalling research. Look hollistic and it all becomes very very clear.

They exist , and they control the airspace.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
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?

Thanks. The starmap was debunked by a lot of clear-headed investigators such as Carl Sagan.

originally posted by: frenchfries
Hi I read part of debunker.com

S&F + Good first post , Carry on

Thanks. I'll definitely carry on. There's a million topics waiting to be given the same debunking treatment, but always in good taste.

a reply to: klassless

There's a million topics waiting to be given the same debunking treatment, but always in good taste.

lol automated mass boXsized debunking comes in mind

(sounded funny in my head)

Although I firmly believe in ET and some other CT's on ATS. I love it when people search for the Truth and debunk stories that discredit the UFO phenomenon.

cheerio!

originally posted by: klassless

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
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.

The way I read it is that the "ufo" was real in Betty's and maybe Barney's heads but the "ufo" was a planet that did not register in their minds. The astronomical data supports a misidentification on Betty's part. The planet, to her, was a ufo.

That's not what the author said. On at least 2 occasions...he states...the UFO sighting was real...but that their story of abductions and experiments werent.

a reply to: DJW001

is the implication we are to take from this that because any pattern of co-ordinates can be overlaid in many different ways and places, no map can be true and all direction is unknowable?

like yeah maybe it's a stretch that the starmap is real but you can't "prove" that by showing the points correlating to other maps, that's such reductionism

Let's not mince words. Klass' own friends stated openly his hatred of UFOs was almost pathological and the FBI, grew so wary of his torrent of abusive letters they even questioned his mental state. In truth, Klass belongs in exactly the same category as Greer as "busted flush". Paying people to lie about being the relative of Travis Walton, accusing Valentich of being a "drug runner" without a shred of actual evidence, trying to force a photo expert to publish and back an analysis he did not agree with. His analysis of the !Wow" incident being utter pseudo science and factually inaccurate to the point of embarrassment. As for Sheaffer, a mere dilettante who loves seeing his smug smile on TV while he prates on about cases that are never too challenging. Sheaffer is also way too prone to trotting out "misinformation" about sightings as well, the actual depth of his research wouldn't trouble a legless fly.

As for Betty and Barney Hill, all one can really say is that, they seemed to truly believe what happened to them was genuine and that is about it. Neither Klass or Sheaffer had or have the "intellectual chops" to deal with the case as neither really have or had the slightest clue when it comes to pronouncing on complicated sociological issues and the chemistry of the brain, no matter what they might like or liked to have claim(ed).

a reply to: continuousThunder

is the implication we are to take from this that because any pattern of co-ordinates can be overlaid in many different ways and places, no map can be true and all direction is unknowable?

No, it simply means that any attempt to "identify" the stars and planets on the drawing is an exercise in futility.