It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Betty and Barney Hill hoaxers?

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 7 2009 @ 07:51 PM
link   
To answer the OP, the word "hoaxer" is not valid especially when the OP includes links to a website that doesn't say they were hoaxers. Instead, they're classified as "Executive summary: Self-proclaimed UFO abductee"

But this Hill thing has gotten tiring since every UFO newcomer brings it up instead of doing some research into the 204,000 sources mentioned in google. I'm sure that by going to google first every question you may come up with will be answered.

Frankly, Dr. Simon said he didn't believe they had an actual experience. And when you look into Betty's background you find that she was not some innocent bystander, she has a record of being active in UFO matters way before her claimed abduction.

Additionally, there was a TV episode where her details can be found.

Research anyone?



Originally posted by _BoneZ_
I'm not completely versed in every single aspect of the Betty and Barney Hill case, but I know enough to believe that what they said was real. In particular the star map.

Well, this website calls them both hoaxers:

Betty Hill - www.nndb.com...
Barney Hill - www.nndb.com...

Is there any truth to the "hoaxer" accusation or any evidence to support that they hoaxed and made up their stories? There's too much detail for me to believe they're hoaxers.




posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


They did a lot to help with the hoax:

1. Scuff marks on Barney's shoes.

2. Betty's dress was torn, and a pink substance was found on it.

3. Several circular marks the size of quarters were found on the automobile.

4. They both had to go through therapy after the experience and Barney's nervous problems that eventually led to his passing.

5. The radar confirmation of an unknown object by Pease AFB in the area of their sighting.

Not to mention the star map, which is detailed in the book "Captured". I still wonder how the got an Air Force base to go along with them.



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Learhoag
To answer the OP, the word "hoaxer" is not valid especially when the OP includes links to a website that doesn't say they were hoaxers.

Go read the links I posted again. Under "Occupation" it says they're Hoaxers.



Originally posted by Learhoag
I'm sure that by going to google first every question you may come up with will be answered.

If that's the case, I'll send messages to management letting them know we can shut down ATS since we have Google.



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by kidflash2008
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 

5. The radar confirmation of an unknown object by Pease AFB in the area of their sighting.

Not to mention the star map, which is detailed in the book "Captured". I still wonder how the got an Air Force base to go along with them.

These two points are the hard evidence, the rest are anecdotal. OK, there's the car's magnetic spots and stained dress, but they are much less convincing.

Betty reports a conversation with Major Paul Henderson of the 100th Bomb Wing at Pease Air Force base and says she was told that the light appeared on Radar. What the Major probably told them was that there was something on radar that night. It may or may not have been what they had observed.

From Captured! by Stanton Friedman:


As an “additional item,” Major Henderson included the following information on the front page of his intelligence report:
During a casual conversation on 22 Sept 61 between Major Gardiner D. Reynolds, 100th BW DCOI and Captain Robert O. Daughaday, Commander 1917-2 AACS DIT, Pease AFB, NH it was revealed that a strange incident occurred at 0214 local on 20 Sept. No importance was attached to the incident at that time. Subsequent interrogation failed to bring out any information in addition to the extract of the “Daily Report of the Controller.”
It is not possible to determine any relationship between these two observations, as the radar observation provides no description. Time and distance between the events could hint of a possible relationship. [Note: emphasis by author.]
Signed Paul W. Henderson
Major USAF
Chief Combat Intelligence


Carl Sagan debunked the map, noting that the match was not (and could not be expected to be) perfect, and random chance would produce at least one similarly good match to the map somewhere in the star catalog Fish used in her analysis.
en.wikipedia.org...

I don't remember where I read this: Marjorie Fish based her research on the best star map available at the time which had very inaccurate distances in some cases.

It would be interesting to compare with a more up-to-date 3D map. Gotta try this in Celestia or other software, it might be worth a try. But some of the nearest stars in the map have moved since 1964, so I don't know how accurate this will be.



posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Logic 101
Google presents information sources.

ATS allows for the discussion of the information.



Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by Learhoag
To answer the OP, the word "hoaxer" is not valid especially when the OP includes links to a website that doesn't say they were hoaxers.

Go read the links I posted again. Under "Occupation" it says they're Hoaxers.



Originally posted by Learhoag
I'm sure that by going to google first every question you may come up with will be answered.

If that's the case, I'll send messages to management letting them know we can shut down ATS since we have Google.



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by nablator
 


The powder on the test was seen and was examined, along with the tear on the dress. The circular spots on the car was seen by many people, so that too is physical evidence.

I recently saw the Outer Limits episode "The Bellero Shield". It may be possible the Hills saw the episode, but the alien depicted was a wimpy type. The people in the story were very evil, and the alien just wanted to go home. I would of had nightmares with "The Zanti Misfits", definitely not this episode that gets a lot of attention from debunkers.



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 02:55 PM
link   
There was no new evidence here to suggest the Hills were hoaxers,

regarding the starmap please review

this explanation

which places the vantage point of the map within our solar system with "trade routes" then corresponding to local missions in Sol, I think this makes more sense as Betty indicated aboard the craft she only knew of the planets within our solar system (on site above).



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by kidflash2008
 

I agree, about the Outer Limits episode, the aliens described by the Hills don't look similar at all. Nor do they look like the stereotypical Grey, with their stature, 5 feet +, large chest and prominent nose.

From Captured!:

The men were “human
in form,” Mrs. Hill recalled, but somewhat shorter than the average human, with larger chest cavities and somewhat larger noses. Their hair and eyes were black and their skin had a grayish hue.


The Bellero Shield is still on Youtube, I'm going to watch it before it gets zapped like so many videos, recently.



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 03:14 PM
link   
I don't believe that they set out to be hoaxers.

They were an interracial couple when that was far less accepted than it is now. I don't think that they would want any extra publicity.

Also, reporting a ufo back then kind of put you on the list of people that were one or two steps away from the funny farm.

So, I can't imagine anyone in their position reporting a ufo abduction as a hoax.



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


Well i sent them a message telling them that the title of occupation is incorrect because they dont have documentation proving this therfore this information is false and the site is misleading.

Suckers!

Peace!



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Learhoag
To answer the OP, the word "hoaxer" is not valid especially when the OP includes links to a website that doesn't say they were hoaxers. Instead, they're classified as "Executive summary: Self-proclaimed UFO abductee"

But this Hill thing has gotten tiring since every UFO newcomer brings it up instead of doing some research into the 204,000 sources mentioned in google. I'm sure that by going to google first every question you may come up with will be answered.

Frankly, Dr. Simon said he didn't believe they had an actual experience. And when you look into Betty's background you find that she was not some innocent bystander, she has a record of being active in UFO matters way before her claimed abduction.

Additionally, there was a TV episode where her details can be found.

Research anyone?



Originally posted by _BoneZ_
I'm not completely versed in every single aspect of the Betty and Barney Hill case, but I know enough to believe that what they said was real. In particular the star map.

Well, this website calls them both hoaxers:

Betty Hill - www.nndb.com...
Barney Hill - www.nndb.com...

Is there any truth to the "hoaxer" accusation or any evidence to support that they hoaxed and made up their stories? There's too much detail for me to believe they're hoaxers.


In the site it says that the their occupation is "Hoaxer"
Thats the part that is wrong. You cant make a claim about someone else when there is no proof. Also the same can be said for the truth factor.



posted on Mar, 9 2009 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Learhoag
Logic 101
Google presents information sources.
ATS allows for the discussion of the information.

We're trying to have a discussion here. Unless you're going to contribute to it, please stop wasting space in my thread, thanks.



Originally posted by Armour For Victor
Well i sent them a message telling them that the title of occupation is incorrect

Thank you. I meant to do that over the weekend, but been super busy.



posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 07:41 AM
link   
Bumping this thread because it fits with one I was going to make regarding this case.

This is the only modern case I can think of that I still believe 100% and they are the two most credible abduction witnesses I've ever seen or heard of. A lot of points have been brought up that I agree with the biggest being the star map. I have yet to see it debunked and I mean this in all due respect, but both Mr. and Mrs. Hill seemed to be simpletons in regards to astronomy or anything regarding scientific knowledge of physics, space, etc. They appeared to be just your average couple who went to work and carried on about their daily lives.

Another point that I think is very valid that I've never seen brought up (mind you I didn't read every post in this thread) is the fact that they were an interracial couple back in the 50's and 60's. IMO, that fact alone would almost be enough to not plan a hoax that would bring them the amount of attention they probably knew they would receive by going public.

Anyway, I was just wondering if anyone had any new info on this old and still very interesting case, because to this day I have never seen or heard of them being discredited in any way.

EDIT: Decided to read through the thread and saw where someone did mention the fact they were an interracial couple, so it's good to see others pointing out that fact.
edit on 11-10-2012 by MadhatterTheGreat because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 08:31 AM
link   
To be honest, I am not even sure why this thread was started back in 2009. The links take us to, well....hardly any information whatsoever, and certainly nothing about them being hoaxers.



posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 11:06 AM
link   
Betty also later reproduced a star map she claimed was shown to her by the captain. Marjorie Fish later analyzed it and claimed that all the little dots lined up perfectly with stars in the Zeta Reticuli system. But only if the viewing point of the star map is from somewhere other than Earth, and only if it's rotated and finagled a bit. This is one of the hardest points to refute, but Kottmeyer again draws similarities to a star map shown in Invaders from Mars. One thing strikes me as odd: Betty claims that the map shows numerous stars as well as planets; Fish's interpretation only works if you assume that all of the dots represent stars. Fish's interpretation demands that you ignore Betty's statement that some of the little dots are planets. I'm not going to argue that Betty got the map from one source or another: I argue that if you throw some dots down on a peice of paper, and are liberal in your interpretation as to which ones are stars, planets, asteroids, or whatever other junk is floating around in outer space, you are very likely to eventually match it up with something, somewhere.

Joke of a case.. I could scribble some dots on a piece of paper now and they would match near perfectly with some obscure alignment of stars out there.. people fail to grasp just how big the known universe is
edit on 11-10-2012 by therovers because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by therovers
Betty also later reproduced a star map she claimed was shown to her by the captain. Marjorie Fish later analyzed it and claimed that all the little dots lined up perfectly with stars in the Zeta Reticuli system. But only if the viewing point of the star map is from somewhere other than Earth, and only if it's rotated and finagled a bit. This is one of the hardest points to refute, but Kottmeyer again draws similarities to a star map shown in Invaders from Mars. One thing strikes me as odd: Betty claims that the map shows numerous stars as well as planets; Fish's interpretation only works if you assume that all of the dots represent stars. Fish's interpretation demands that you ignore Betty's statement that some of the little dots are planets. I'm not going to argue that Betty got the map from one source or another: I argue that if you throw some dots down on a peice of paper, and are liberal in your interpretation as to which ones are stars, planets, asteroids, or whatever other junk is floating around in outer space, you are very likely to eventually match it up with something, somewhere.

Joke of a case.. I could scribble some dots on a piece of paper now and they would match near perfectly with some obscure alignment of stars out there.. people fail to grasp just how big the known universe is
edit on 11-10-2012 by therovers because: (no reason given)


Another point...

How to tell what the schematic represents? Is the length between nodes proportional to distance? Is the schematic a planar projection of 3d space? If the line segment lengths are proportional, then it can't be a planar projection unless all the stars (and planets) are in the same plane (which is extremely unlikely). And of course, if some of the nodes are planets, then the planets are themselves moving around stars, so the relative distances are going to be in constant flux.



posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   
About the star map, aside from the argument that not enough was known until several years later to match it up, imagine building a 3D model with our Sun at the center plus only the 49 solar analogs that are known to exist out to a radius of 51 light-years, thereby containing only those 50 life-friendly stars out of the thousands that occupy that space. Then imagine testing random star maps produced by tossing 8 silver coins (to represent the stars on Mrs. Hill’s map today considered sunlike) onto a piece of cloth 2 feet square and photographing the result. Even looking at the spherical model from every angle, how many coin tosses do you suppose it would take to get a match? I pretty high number, I would guess. The test could be done with a computer program, using well-known techniques.



posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 02:15 PM
link   
I don't think they intentionally tried to hoax the public. Betty's description of the aliens changed between her first claim and hypnosis which happened almost two years after the incident. She came out later with a book called " A Common Sense Approach to UFOs." which had a lot of strange claims and was not popular. Later in life she railed against hypnosis but that is what made her claim forefront in the public eye. He she is in an interview late in life.




an interview with Betty Hill mcadams.posc.mu.edu...


Maybe she was led to here final story with outside help.



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by therovers
Betty also later reproduced a star map she claimed was shown to her by the captain. Marjorie Fish later analyzed it and claimed that all the little dots lined up perfectly with stars in the Zeta Reticuli system. But only if the viewing point of the star map is from somewhere other than Earth, and only if it's rotated and finagled a bit. This is one of the hardest points to refute, but Kottmeyer again draws similarities to a star map shown in Invaders from Mars. One thing strikes me as odd: Betty claims that the map shows numerous stars as well as planets; Fish's interpretation only works if you assume that all of the dots represent stars. Fish's interpretation demands that you ignore Betty's statement that some of the little dots are planets. I'm not going to argue that Betty got the map from one source or another: I argue that if you throw some dots down on a peice of paper, and are liberal in your interpretation as to which ones are stars, planets, asteroids, or whatever other junk is floating around in outer space, you are very likely to eventually match it up with something, somewhere.


The dots on the Hill map do not match up with the dots on the Fish map.. At all. If you take away the lines connecting the dots, all resemblance just vanishes.

The two main "Stars" on Fish's map, the ones she identifies as z1 and z2 Ret, are not stars at all on the Hill map - they are planets, either a double planet or a planet and a large moon. That's pretty clear in the hand-drawn Hill map, as they exhibit a crescent phase. Only solid bodies like planets and moons do that, not self-luminous ones like stars.

There is a correlation in star patterns from another star system, though. You have to remove the planets, and remove the lines, then start looking for pattern-matches. It's preferable to use up to date catalogs, rather than the now dated Gleise 1969 catalog Fish used. Positional data has been considerably enhanced since then.

I recommend starting your search from the vicinity of Beta Coma Berenieces. You may be surprised by what you find.

ETA: The larger circle in the middle of the map, just a circle, not filled in, and with no lines going to it - that appears to be the central star of the system being shown, going by the crescents on the planets and the shadows on the night side of them.




edit on 2013/5/22 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 08:01 PM
link   
If I remember the story correctly, Barney Hill stepped out of the car to look at a big saucer with windows showing the occupants and described an immediate sensation of overwhelming fear... to me, this alone points to the event being authentic. In the early days of ufo encounters, admitting you are "overwhelmed" with an intense feeling of fear was dismissed as a natural reaction. But nowadays this irrational fear inducement is considered a clear symptom of being affected by the ufo... which to me is the scariest aspect of the whole phenomena...



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join