posted on Apr, 11 2009 @ 06:23 PM
There are many points to consider, thanks OP for a good thread. I don't have the time to look for references, but off the top of my head I know a few
points should be considered with a skeptical point of view:
- first Betty Hill's map does not match closely the star map drawn by Marjorie Fish. The geometry is quite different and many dots do not match any
star, including the one in the middle, and many stars were dropped from the search including G, K, F stars. That's cherry picking evidence.
- The solar system at the time of the "abduction" is a better match than the stars proposed by Marjorie Fish:
- If no match could be found, looking further, a few light years, would find a match sooner or later, so finding a good match at such huge distances
from Earth is not surprising.
- The map is not the view of a star field from Earth or from the home planet of the ETs. It is seen from an arbitrary point in space, so stars CAN be
moved around a lot by changing the POV and the type of perspective
- There were many inaccuracies in the Gliese star catalog's distances dating from the 1950s used by Marjorie Fish's calculations.
- Why would the map not include stars that are not type G,F,K? When you draw a map, you don't put dots for cities only.
Astronomers like Carl Sagan were utterly unconvinced.