OK, guys, are you familiar with the concept of 'Fair Witness
', as outlined by Heinlein in
'Stranger, in a Strange Land
When you investigate a case, especially a very compelling case that has been thoroughly documented, I think it's best to do at least -one- analytical
thread where you take as a default position that there are no aliens; period; can't happen. IOW a non-paranormal tack.
This position may be just for the sake of argument; it's good to be able to debate both sides passionately.
I've found that doing this, however distasteful, can reveal things about the case even to the ardent believer in you.
What I'd suggest doing, if only for your own edification, is to make a chart and label one column 'Paranormal' and the other 'Prosaic'. On the
X-axis, list all the important 'facts' of the case.
In a well-established case, if you're trying to really get a good look at it, tear down -all- your assumptions. Try to go back to the original
In the Hill case there are lots and lots of 'factoids' that involve 'interpretation', and we're taking the interpretation of the people that went
before. So we're often seeing things through a lens, darkly.
Then do another outline where you list the top items of proof. In UFO cases, simultaneous radar traces are quite high (one of my favorite
investigators only investigates those kinds of cases - with actual radar confirmations). But it's important to look into these radar cases, also. If
possible talk to the actual radar technician. Sometimes, in the attempt to counter the idea that UFOs are nonsense, well-meaning investigators let
things 'slide' into evidence which may be equivocal.
Though I'd agree that the 'Star Map' is important (as are several elements in the Hill case), it's not unassailable.
What you learn is deeper than 'was that a UFO'. You learn how to think carefully and critically.
After all isn't that the main purpose of ATS?
Proving it to someone else is kinda silly if you haven't leaned to see through the details, yourself. Learn to look at something completely
clinically, and don't take someone else's interpretation without dissecting it as thoroughly as possible. Otherwise, you're helping to create a
myth within the case.
The methods I mentioned above are only two of many.
In the end, it doesn't really matter if the Hill case is completely authentic (except in the broadest sense). It does matter that we learn how to
examine things critically, without the lens of prejudice or predisposition. IOW, if you look at a case intending to find it true or false, both sides
are making the same mistake.
For instance in the Hill case, it's frequently cited that it's accompanied by radar confirmation from Pease. In truth, here's what the actual
Betty called her sister Janet and told her about their experience. Janet urged her to report the UFO sighting to nearby Pease Air Force Base. Over
Barney's objections, Betty called the base and gave a report to Major Paul W. Henderson of the 100th Bomb Wing. When asked to do so by the Major,
Barney reluctantly gave his version of the sighting. Curiously, Pease AFB was the home of the 509th Bomb Wing in 1961, the same 509th Bomb Wing whose
home had been Roswell AAFB at the time of the "Roswell Incident" in 1947. According to Jacques Vallee in Dimensions, the Hills' sighting was
corroborated by a radar sighting at Pease AFB on 20 September 1961, but his reference for this is unclear. It's an excerpt from Report No. 100-1-61,
that says simply:
...a strange incident occurred at 0214 local on 20 Sept. No importance was attached to the incident at the time.
One thing that's still not explained is Barney's mental state prior to the 'incident'. He had already reported being menaced in his dreams or
subconscious by the 'staring man, looking down on him'.
Again, my take on it.
Here are two interesting sites, the second one a skeptic report.
Oh, yeah, here's a close up of the alien from Outer Limits
Whether they watched this show isn't clear, but it does show an illusion of wrap around eyes, if you look at still frames and such eyes had not been
reported up to this point that I'm aware.