It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The Betty Hill Starmap - New insight

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 02:52 PM
I remember some discussion which also mentioned that nobody (including the aliens) every said that the map she was looking at was and actual map of the stars. For all anyone knows, it was a map of what might essentially be "stargates," free ranging space stations or outposts, trans-dimensional wormhole ports, spacetime folds or nodes, or something along those lines, and could have little or nothing to do with any kind of stars with inhabitable planets.

Betty asked the Leader where they were from. He asked her where she thought she was. She said she didn't know. The Leader told her that if she didn't know that, he wouldn't be able to explain where he came from.

This exchange has always puzzled me. The Leader could have simply pointed at the map and said, "Okay, here's where Earth is, and here's where we come from." This suggests to me that the "map" was not actually a map as we understand (or can understand it) at all.

Betty's map was just a sketch. It wasn't done with any precision. That anybody can get bits of a real star map to line up with it is interesting, but there's an awful lot of fudging to fit some very inexact and assumed data. But, like I say, interesting, for a number of reasons.

posted on Apr, 18 2009 @ 11:28 AM
I have been playing with Celestia, trying to align some of the stars like the image shows, and I cannot do it, if I align Zeta 1 and Zeta 2 Reticuli like on the image and then I align them with the Sun then all other stars are out of the image.

As Celestia is free, I suggest that those interested download it and try for themselves, it's easy to use after a look at the manual.

posted on Apr, 18 2009 @ 11:41 PM
reply to post by ArMaP

Exactly. Now, in Celestia, go to Bet Com (AKA: 43 Com; HIP 64394; HD 114710; SAO 82706 ), orbit it at around 1.8 AU, get our sun in the view, and look around for the pattern. Use Beta Coma Berenices at about 1.8 AU as the central star in the original starmap, ignore the planets for the moment (those things folks are identifying as Zet1 and Zet2 Ret) and see what you can identify. I think in Celestia you can go to the render options, and restrict the stars displayed to those within a certain distance of you current position. 100 ly might be a good place to start. Also, remember that the star pattern could be in ANY orientation on the horizontal axis. Left and right arrow keys will rotate the view.

nenothtu out

[edit on 2009/4/18 by nenothtu]

posted on Apr, 19 2009 @ 08:07 AM

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
I believe that Betty's star map came to her through her unconscious. And her experience was one akin to a '___' experience.

Of course I also believe our unconscious can deliver very good information, and that your research is not in vain.

However, being an "abductee" myself I feel these experiences are not objective in the least but wholly subjective. It doesn't however remove the importance and symbolism of these experiences.

I'm not sure how you would navigate a star map (blue print) through a '___' or pineal experience. I also think it's odd that Barney Hill would've had a '___' experience at exactly the same time...while driving. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm assuming you're suggesting the entire "abduction" scenario was '___' related...or something akin?

posted on Apr, 19 2009 @ 11:31 AM
There is just one thing that doesn't fit with Fish's interpretation of the Betty Hill starmap. Betty Hill said that the aliens were surprised and excited by Barney Hill's dentures, which to me means they were unfamiliar with our species and technology. However, Fish's interpretation puts Sol at the end of one of their trade routes. So why are they so unfamiliar with us while at the same time visiting our solar system regularly enough as to label it part of a trade route? I think that a more appropriate interpretation would be one where Sol is linked via a dotted line, signifying an exploration route.

PS: this is my first post, so hello everyone! Hopefully you guys will will see me on here on a regular basis :-).

posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 01:27 PM
reply to post by nenothtu

Celestia is so confusing... too many stars. So I made my own 3D map with coordinates from the ICRS 2000 catalog. Here is an isometric view of the main stars in the Fish interpretation, with zeta Tucanae hidden behind the zeta Reticuli binary.

I wanted to see if it is possible in perspective to be close enough to zeta1 and zeta2 Reticuli to see them both as distinct stars, and still get the same overall pattern. Well it's not, when moving the POV near the binary, the map gets distorted beyond recognition.

nenothtu : Now that I have the model and can add stars easily, I'd like your suggestions for a better set of stars and point of view. which stars should I add / remove? You said Beta Coma Berenices, what else?

[edit on 2009-4-20 by nablator]

posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 02:19 PM

Originally posted by Irako
So why are they so unfamiliar with us while at the same time visiting our solar system regularly enough as to label it part of a trade route?

Along with being fascinated by Barney's false teeth, the aliens also supposedly jammed a huge needle into Betty, as part of some kind of "pregnancy test." Hey, even us backward Earth dopes have better, less invasive tests than that! They've mastered interstellar travel, but don't have a handle on basic human physiology and chemistry? They apparently know English. So what's up with these guys?

My only thought (literally, my only thought) is that you have to remember that when you travel long distances in space, particularly at high speeds or in some tricky sub-spatial way, you're also traveling in time. "Regularly" visiting might mean every 15,000 years to us, every couple of weeks to them. So they might be surprised by any unusually rapid technological development they see from us.

In any event, there are some close encounter abduction scenarios where the aliens say some really odd things that just don't make sense. It makes me think a couple of things. One, that you can't trust aliens to tell you the truth about anything, and two, that there may be something going on with these things that are more complicated and subtle than just some alien critters out for a joyride.

I don't know what that thing is. Again, it suggests to me that somebody or something is screwing with reality in some way that we don't understand.

posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 02:52 AM

Originally posted by nablator
I wanted to see if it is possible in perspective to be close enough to zeta1 and zeta2 Reticuli to see them both as distinct stars, and still get the same overall pattern. Well it's not, when moving the POV near the binary, the map gets distorted beyond recognition.
[edit on 2009-4-20 by nablator]

Very interesting... (and great job!) Would it be that maybe it is another star/system that's in the "closest" position? Is there any star that could be close to zeta reticuli but (in this perspective then) closer to the POV? Would that distort the map too much?

posted on Apr, 23 2009 @ 04:39 AM
I added all stars closer than 11 light years from the Sun for now. The problem is to find good criteria for stars, because there are far too many. The best candidates for finding planets are not the only possible candidates. For instance the Kepler mission restricts search to type F, G, K stars. But Sirius, a type A star, has a large habitable zone.


In late September 2003, astrobiologist Maggie Turnbull from the University of Arizona in Tucson identified a shortlist of 30 stars (including Chara, 18 Scorpii, and 37 Geminorum), that were screened from around 5,000 that have been estimated to be located 100 ly of Earth, as the best nearby candidates for hosting complex Earth-type life.

If you can find this short list it would still be a good starting point. The links are dead on the NASA TPF project site:

posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 06:30 PM
reply to post by nablator

I know, it's not easy... Thing is however, we have a few things to consider before categorizing a star as being (at least potentially) "life acceptable"...

Really, most of G class are of the kind.
Most of early K class or late F class too.
Some M class can be (think of Gliese 581 for example)

You say, some A (actually even B class, or hell, why not O class even) can have a wide life zone. That's true, but then we've got to think that those stars have a stable lifespan of just a few hundreds of millions of years, at best. That is extremely short to consider life developing there. I reckon it does not necessarily prevent a planet with conditions to support life to be there, but then that implies nearly necessarily that if life is present there, it is either very primitive at best, or "imported"...

Actually, we know too little at present to make such assumptions probably, however it's amazingly human to let our assumptions go on about what we know so far.

[edit on 24-4-2009 by SpookyVince]

posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 05:42 PM
reply to post by nablator

I can't say which stars to include in your model. If I had progressed in my investigation far enough to know, I'd have already written it up

I would say to concentrate on spectral classes F5-F9, G, and K0-K5, as a start. Class M are much less likely, but not precluded entirely. But, as you say, there's too many of them. Same for the hotter stars. They have larger 'ecospheres', bUt are less likely (NOT entirely precluded) because of age constraints versus the time needed to develop intelligent life.

In Celestia, if you go to the 'render' menu at the top, and then to 'render options', down at the bottom of that popup is a slider that will allow you to decrease the number of stars displayed by limiting the display distance from your viewpoint. I suggest 100 to 150 light years, but you may find distances that work better for you. This will reduce the star clutter.

nenothtu out

posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 02:35 PM
This is a great thread, OP, S&F!
It occurred to me that we have no idea why an alien might show someone a 3D starmap. It doesn't follow that they would be trying to impart information tho. It could have been a test to see if an average human had the information & intelligence to recognise the local space, reorient it in their mind & pick out home.
In which case, if Betty could, the aliens would have found out something important: we were even more dangerous than we appeared.

posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 08:21 PM
If anyone would like a test at drawing a map from memory

Go load up Eve Online, turn on the full 3d star map.. rotate it, spin it around...

then try to draw a 2d map from it

I think, you may go mad first lol

as for the alien not taking the time to grab a sheet of paper and dot dot dot her a map, and instead doing exactly what we ourselves would have done by whipping out his star gps unit and showing her the same map that he himself used.

it just all makes sense.

if i found some lost african tribe, and they pointed to the stars i would be like oh you want to know what those are? i'd whip out the macbook load up Stellarium and show him the 3d view on the screen. ooo's... ahhhh's.. gasp's persist. The next week i find 2d starmaps drawn in the dirt around the campfire lol

ok just a little off hand made up story there but i hope it gets the point across.

posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 12:38 AM
Bumping a great thread with great research into one of the best pieces of evidence from a CLASSIC case in favor of proof for intelligent alien life visiting Earth. This thread has a GREAT discussion all around, from both sides of the argument.

posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 06:53 AM
Bumping an old thread there, but I was hoping that someone would have been interested in that case since now a year, and may have come with new stuff about 3D star maps, who knows?

However, another detail has sprung to me, and I thought it is important. Some people have argued that, because of her ignorance in stars, Betty Hill would have actually been drawing something that she had seen, but with terrible inaccuracy. However, accounts as they show that she was indeed interested in drawing it to the best of her memory. Examining the original drawing as it was printed (and thanks nenothu for the scan he sent me), it clearly shows that she has been erasing a few lines before redrawing them just next to where they were. That shows interest in having as close as possible to what she had seen.

I also spotted a few interesting quotes from the Wikipedia article:

Distance information needed to match three stars, forming the distinctive triangle Hill said she remembered, was not generally available until the 1969 Gliese Catalog came out.

Fish also was the first to note that all the stars on the map connected by lines (which Betty Hill said she was told were trade or frequently-traveled routes) fell in a plane, with Zeta Reticuli acting as a hub.

Also, I wanted to add the NASA Terrestrial Planet Finder link, with a Shockwave 3D model

posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 09:42 AM
Should also add that:

a) the stars are only visible in a hemisphere that is NOT her native hemisphere
b) she correctly identified the COLORS of the stars in her map, prior to Astronomers' confirmation of these

The star map remains a compelling argument for the encounters claimed by the Hills.

posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 09:46 AM
reply to post by Gazrok

The star map cannot be dismissed. I do not agree with Carl Sagan's theory of coincidence and luck. It's an insult to our intelligence, if you believe that.

posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 12:58 PM
This is a fascinating theme well worthy of astronomy-based analysis, so kudos to the OP for doing the work and sharing it.

Backing up one step, it seems to me there's an issue that has avoided analysis -- the bounds on the accuracy of the dots/lines as drawn by Hill.

How accurately could a person be expected to recreate a pattern seen only briefly and under great stress?

This question is subject to experimental exploration, and i've tried several times to initiate an experiment, as follows.

While on a TV program with folks with other views than mine on UFO reports, the subject of the Hill drawing has come up. I've asked how accurate it could be, and been told there's no reason to doubt it's accurate.

I've then said, essentially, "OK, let's test this."

I pull out a sealed envelope with the Hill drawing inside and ask any of the other panelists to undergo hypnotic regression, right here and now, and draw the map -- which they've seen often and for much longer periods than Hill ever did.

Funny thing, NONE of then, at the time or EVER after, agreed to perform the check.

None, to my knowlege.

Has anybody else ever tried, does anyone know? And if not, WHY NOT?

Are they afraid of dispelling a comfortable but brittle 'assumption' convenient to their desired conclusions?

edit on 20-9-2010 by JimOberg because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 01:12 PM

Originally posted by Gazrok
Should also add that:

a) the stars are only visible in a hemisphere that is NOT her native hemisphere
b) she correctly identified the COLORS of the stars in her map, prior to Astronomers' confirmation of these

The star map remains a compelling argument for the encounters claimed by the Hills.

Do you have evidence for the "colors" claim? As far I remember the map was done in black and white?

posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 01:24 PM
Just when you think that the past has become over done and boring, you really made it dance back into the present with this information, thankyou just goes to show there are gems still to be found in the Hill case.

Honestly I will have to go back up to the first OP's and absorb what this really means.

Glad that even though it was missed the first time as I recall, it is well worth discovering now.

edit on 20-9-2010 by antar because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in