Those who saw Larry King’s UFO hour Wednesday, July 6th, got a representative sampling of the UFO debate, the typical pros and cons. Susan Clancy, a psychologist with a pending anti-abduction book, dismisses abduction accounts as sleep disorders or psychological quirks.Jowly Budd Hopkins presented his usual threadbare arsenal of alien implants in and markings on alleged abductees.John Schuessler looked tired and bored, and presented nothing that viewers might be intrigued by.Bruce Maccabee was overly calm and reserved and deferred to Rob Swiatek when it came to photography evidence.(King spent more time with Swiatek than any other person on the panel.)Seth Shostak, regardless of how UFO believers defame him, came across as reasonable and scientific.King’s microcosm of the UFO universe resembled the debates that have been rife in ufology for 58 years, and even King insisted in asking why there is no hard-core evidence for UFOs or answer to the enigma in 58 years – the argument that most sane persons continue to ask.Most of the panel said they became interested in UFOs around the middle 60s. Where were the old-timers who became enthralled by flying saucers in 1947, and followed the phenomenon through the 50s when Keyhoe, Adamski, and others made UFOs viable as an intellectual topic?The history of UFOs doesn’t begin with the Hills, or even the neo-Roswellian furor of the late 70s. It began in 1947, and anthropologically much before that.So King and his panel represented a homely pastiche of believers and skeptics who added noting new to the UFO debate but the observation that ufologists don’t have a eye for fashion….as exampled by their dress and over all appearance.
View: Full Article | Source: rrrgroup.com
