An analysis of the Betty Hill "star map"

a reply to: james1947

Nice!!!

Well more power to you then.
I still feel it's like finding a needle in a needlestack.

Where do you think my logic is breaking down?

a reply to: james1947

What an outstanding post James1947. I found all of your supporting evidence infallible up to 99.1%! The ensuing side arguments of those who clearly do not understand the fundamental basis of your position originates from a data set that has never changed since its inception. The star map.

It reminded me of the Dogon tribe and their long standing documentation of Sirius B which is not visible via the naked eye. The only possible way for them to have known about Sirius B and it's orbital path was via ET knowledge passed to them.

Outstanding work.

Now, go draw Betty's map again from your own memory. Then, see how well it matches up. My guess it's not even close, but still matches "someplace" in space.

originally posted by: FlyingFox
Now, go draw Betty's map again from your own memory. Then, see how well it matches up. My guess it's not even close, but still matches "someplace" in space.

He'll be able to draw it because of his obsession with the map. As I said in my post, he needs to show the map to someone that doesn't know it has to be remembered and re-drawn 3 years later just as Betty Hill didn't know. Hypnosis is a weak and poor argument for remembering all 25 dots, their relative positions, and connecting lines. Recalled memories through hypnotism is scientifically questioned and not accepted by the American Medical Association or American Psychological Association. Beyond all the logical questions, that kinda kills the theory of this "alien" map.

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8

originally posted by: FlyingFox
Now, go draw Betty's map again from your own memory. Then, see how well it matches up. My guess it's not even close, but still matches "someplace" in space.

He'll be able to draw it because of his obsession with the map. As I said in my post, he needs to show the map to someone that doesn't know it has to be remembered and re-drawn 3 years later just as Betty Hill didn't know. Hypnosis is a weak and poor argument for remembering all 25 dots, their relative positions, and connecting lines. Recalled memories through hypnotism is scientifically questioned and not accepted by the American Medical Association or American Psychological Association. Beyond all the logical questions, that kinda kills the theory of this "alien" map.

So...then, just "how" did Betty beat the odds on drawing her map? I've proven that it is an excellent match to real stars, and that it can't be coincidence. I've shown where there are 4 stars predicted, and how later science confirmed them.

So, just how do you explain these inconvenient facts?
(just to enumerate)
1. 99.1% match to stars when viewed from HIP-26737
2. 1 chance in 7.978176e+93 of coincidence
3. 4 predicted stars confirmed in 1991
4. Implied prediction of planets. 16 confirmed so far.

Oh, and, yes, absolutely I could draw the map.

originally posted by: james1947
So...then, just "how" did Betty beat the odds on drawing her map? I've proven that it is an excellent match to real stars, and that it can't be coincidence.

Although highly unlikely, it can be a coincidence.

Also, if she didn't say what stars were supposed to be shown on the map how can we really say "it's a match"? It's a (not very good) match to the stars you chose, but that doesn't mean those were the stars she was trying to show on the map.

2. 1 chance in 7.978176e+93 of coincidence

One chance is not no chance.

originally posted by: ArMaP
It's a (not very good) match to the stars you chose, but that doesn't mean those were the stars she was trying to show on the map.

Depending on how these ships were supposed to move between star systems, I can imagine that a lot of the "dots" would show what are essentially stargates or managed wormholes, and not planets, and because of the tremendous forces involved in creating those, they might not be anywhere near an inhabited system.

Besides, I've been watching a lot of YouTube videos lately that suggest a spacefaring civilization might not even bother living on planets anymore, since they just create a gravity well you have to climb out of, wasting energy. Their homes will be their ships. Maybe close enough to a star to take advantage of that energy, but not necessarily. My original thought about the map (other than it likely just being a fantasy), is that it shows the two main, heavily traveled access points -- the Earth and the Moon -- and a series of gateways that are not necessarily associated with stars and planets. And if that's the case, then a star finding program is not going to help identify anything.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: james1947
So...then, just "how" did Betty beat the odds on drawing her map? I've proven that it is an excellent match to real stars, and that it can't be coincidence.

Although highly unlikely, it can be a coincidence.

Also, if she didn't say what stars were supposed to be shown on the map how can we really say "it's a match"? It's a (not very good) match to the stars you chose, but that doesn't mean those were the stars she was trying to show on the map.

2. 1 chance in 7.978176e+93 of coincidence

One chance is not no chance.

Absolutely true, that's kind of the "nature" of probability. But, One wonders IF you really have any appreciation for the magnitude?

For instance; in Las Vegas, those kind of odds are typically referred to as a "sure thing". Except they (the odds) are usually "for" a given event, rather than opposed to it.

And, no, Betty didn't name any stars; though she didn't have to. The probability of a match is so remote that there will be only one match, especially since the field of stars is limited to those within 33 parsec; so only 2826 (Hipparcos) stars. When Ms. Fish built her interpretation she was mostly correct, as a result the map was relatively easy to verify, as the stars she selected were the only viable candidates in the "view".

Ya know, this kind of quibbling is more what I would expect from someone who is not prepared for the realities of the map and it's probabilities...If that was the probability that the asteroid currently on its was to Earth would hit us; we'd all breathe a sigh of relief. (and, the actual probability that the asteroid will hit is much, much greater, yet I'll bet you're not the least bit worried!)

originally posted by: Blue Shift

Besides, I've been watching a lot of YouTube videos lately that suggest a spacefaring civilization might not even bother living on planets anymore, since they just create a gravity well you have to climb out of, wasting energy. Their homes will be their ships.

I watched a Martial Arts movie a long time ago; in this movie a young fighter was showing off his martial prowess. He took his blade and made several "standard" cuts through, made a lot of noise, then as his end move; threw his blade at a target, striking it in the center of the "bulls-eye", and sinking half its length. The Master he was trying to impress simply said; "Very good, you have thrown away your only weapon."

Kind of like those Extraterrestrials in the YouTube videos, who have abandoned their planet in favor of a ship that cannot replace natural resources...they traded a renewable resource for one that is not! How advanced are those aliens?!?

I have shown that the map is not fantasy, you haven't really shown anything of substance yet. So, how about you show us just "how" the map is fantasy!...if possible.

Can I apply the breaks for one second?

a reply to: james1947

James - can I ask which other UFO cases you have a particular interest in, if any? The Hill map argument could spiral on forever, of course, but I'd be very interested in how you might apply your formidable analytical skills elsewhere.

Or is the nature of evidence outside the Hill case generally too flimsy or TOO ethereal?

originally posted by: james1947
Kind of like those Extraterrestrials in the YouTube videos, who have abandoned their planet in favor of a ship that cannot replace natural resources...they traded a renewable resource for one that is not! How advanced are those aliens?!?

You think space is empty? I mean, it's pretty empty, but there is also a lot of junk floating around out there, and by "junk" I mean whole planetoids made of raw materials for the taking. All you need is power, and if you can move between star systems, you already have it.

Gravity wells are for suckers.

originally posted by: ConfusedBrit
Can I apply the breaks for one second?

a reply to: james1947

James - can I ask which other UFO cases you have a particular interest in, if any? The Hill map argument could spiral on forever, of course, but I'd be very interested in how you might apply your formidable analytical skills elsewhere.

Or is the nature of evidence outside the Hill case generally too flimsy or TOO ethereal?

Here's part of the problem with virtually all UFO events; no reliable, viable evidence. Typically all we get is eye-witness reports, and as compelling as they may be, there is typically nothing to support the original report.

In the case of the Hill event there is that "map", something cast in concrete that can be compared to reality.

It was once said; "If an abductee can provide some bit of evidence from Extraterrestrials, that science can later prove, it would go a very long way to proving extraterrestrial involvement." That is what has happened with the Hill map, and, unfortunately I know of no other event like it. If there was one, then perhaps we could apply my kind of analysis, but, we gonna need that "scrap of evidence".

One part of the Hill abduction that always amused me was how the leader pulls down the map on a roller, like in a 1950s classroom instead of a highly advanced spaceship from another planet / the future. "Old school," indeed.

originally posted by: james1947
The probability of a match is so remote that there will be only one match, especially since the field of stars is limited to those within 33 parsec; so only 2826 (Hipparcos) stars.

You cannot really say that there will be only one match unless you have tried them all.

Ya know, this kind of quibbling is more what I would expect from someone who is not prepared for the realities of the map and it's probabilities...

That's the problem, there's really no evidence that the map is connected to reality. You can spend the rest of your life finding matches to a map that was badly drawn.

originally posted by: james1947
Here's part of the problem with virtually all UFO events; no reliable, viable evidence. Typically all we get is eye-witness reports, and as compelling as they may be, there is typically nothing to support the original report.

In the case of the Hill event there is that "map", something cast in concrete that can be compared to reality.

Isn't the map also an eyewitness report? We are not looking at the original map.

originally posted by: james1947

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: bally001
a reply to: turbonium1

I think the whole discussion comes from the fact(?) that the map did not represent a view from Earth but from an unknown point in space.

Yes that is correct! Betty's map is being viewed from somewhere near HIP-26737.

26737 is a class G2V star 122 light years from here, and is where ALL my work is viewed from.

I read another poster's response indicating that the alien asked Betty Hill 'where is Earth' on the map? So, if we are to believe Betty's regressed memories, then Earth should be somewhere on her drawn map. Did you consider that aspect?

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: james1947
The probability of a match is so remote that there will be only one match, especially since the field of stars is limited to those within 33 parsec; so only 2826 (Hipparcos) stars.

You cannot really say that there will be only one match unless you have tried them all.

Ya know, this kind of quibbling is more what I would expect from someone who is not prepared for the realities of the map and it's probabilities...

That's the problem, there's really no evidence that the map is connected to reality. You can spend the rest of your life finding matches to a map that was badly drawn.

Yes, ArMap, we actually CAN say just that. However, it requires that One actually believe what they were taught in school. And, that would be that the field of Mathematics isn't based on fantasy!

The probability of one match is 1.024e-94. the probability of a second is that number squared; or on the order of 1.0e-188.

These kinds of probabilities should be telling you that it is not practical to search for additional matches since the probability of finding one is so outrageously against it...ya know, there isn't even any practical way to explain how far off base you are...

Anyway, in response to your highlighted statement above...Yes, there IS a way to "see" IF the map is connected to reality. Marjorie Fish showed you way back in the late 1960's, and I've shown you just now. That is exactly "HOW" the map is "connected" with reality.

However, as with most things; you are free to form any opinion you like...personally, I prefer knowledge based on science.

We are not looking at the original map.

This too is true, however the original map is now 40 light years distant, and 58 years in the past.

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: james1947

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: bally001
a reply to: turbonium1

I think the whole discussion comes from the fact(?) that the map did not represent a view from Earth but from an unknown point in space.

Yes that is correct! Betty's map is being viewed from somewhere near HIP-26737.

26737 is a class G2V star 122 light years from here, and is where ALL my work is viewed from.

I read another poster's response indicating that the alien asked Betty Hill 'where is Earth' on the map? So, if we are to believe Betty's regressed memories, then Earth should be somewhere on her drawn map. Did you consider that aspect?

Yes, I have considered that aspect. And, if you hve read all of my posts regarding that you should have read that all of the known planets associated, or attributed with the map are in fact shown.

You see,Earth wouldn't appear explicitly on Betty's version of the map, the reason; Betty's map doesn't show Sol (our Sun) as an expanded object, but rather Zeta(s) Reticuli.

I've been sort of trying to communicate that Betty's map is a crude drawing of a Graphical User Interface (GUI) she was exposed to on the ET craft. As such, it wouldn't necessarily show any planets until and unless they were requested.

So, yes, Earth is there, One only needs to "drill down"...

originally posted by: james1947

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: james1947

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: bally001
a reply to: turbonium1

I think the whole discussion comes from the fact(?) that the map did not represent a view from Earth but from an unknown point in space.

Yes that is correct! Betty's map is being viewed from somewhere near HIP-26737.

26737 is a class G2V star 122 light years from here, and is where ALL my work is viewed from.

I read another poster's response indicating that the alien asked Betty Hill 'where is Earth' on the map? So, if we are to believe Betty's regressed memories, then Earth should be somewhere on her drawn map. Did you consider that aspect?

Yes, I have considered that aspect. And, if you hve read all of my posts regarding that you should have read that all of the known planets associated, or attributed with the map are in fact shown.

You see,Earth wouldn't appear explicitly on Betty's version of the map, the reason; Betty's map doesn't show Sol (our Sun) as an expanded object, but rather Zeta(s) Reticuli.

I've been sort of trying to communicate that Betty's map is a crude drawing of a Graphical User Interface (GUI) she was exposed to on the ET craft. As such, it wouldn't necessarily show any planets until and unless they were requested.

So, yes, Earth is there, One only needs to "drill down"...

It does not make sense to me, if we are to believe Betty's regression about the alien implying that Earth can be found on the map by Betty, that it would be that difficult to locate.

She was able to do it correctly and confidently the first time she was asked. If she was asked again, confirmation bias would have been playing in her favor with every attempt. This is a coincidence that happens to be part of a story about the unexplored. I don't see it as anything more