Message #2772 - ASK_UFO 
   Date : 18-Apr-91  9:42
   From : Don Ecker
     To : All
Subject : CONFRONTATIONS/Book Review
This file is provided to the ParaNet(sm) Information Service by
UFO Magazine. All rights are reserved. You may distribute this file
freely as long as this header remains intact.

Almost a legendary figure, Jacques Vallee has done it once more in the UFO field. Confrontations is, as Vallee said it on the cover, "A scientist's search for alien contact. "

Known for his previous best selling works such as Anatomy of a Phenomenon, Passport to Magonia and Dimensions, Vallee has written a book that will not be well received by the "space-brother " faction in UFOlogy. On the other hand, he is an equal opportunity author; the nuts-and-bolts crowd will not like it either.

With Confrontations, Vallee continues to be controversial in the mainstream UFO Field. In past best selling works such as Messengers of Deception and Passport to Magonia, Vallee stirred the field with his unorthodox approach, and the conclusions he alluded to if not made outright. Having researched in previous works the folklore of past generations, and delivering the more contemporary warnings of cult manipulations and intelligence infiltration into the UFO field, Vallee now explores the UFO riddle via painful and sometimes lethal encounters.

This book is not to be confused with the wide-eyed wonder of Spielberg's "Close Encounters of the Third Kind, " in which a Vallee-like character was portrayed by French actor Francois Truffaut. On the other hand, this is also not quite a "War of the Worlds" scenario that would fit into so many purveyors of misinformation. It falls into the middle, and while not saying that all UFOs are bad, it does say that witnesses should be damned careful!

Vallee manages to take the reader on a journey to never-never land, in Central and South America. It is a journey worth experiencing in print, as most of us will never make it there in fact, and after assimilating what Vallee offers, I dare say that we would not want to. Vallee's UFOs are not the comforting symbols of the Billy Meier crowd, and they also fail the test of the Leo Sprinkle or Budd Hopkins variety. Here is a brief sample:

"In most cases the witnesses reported rectangular objects (sometimes compared to ice boxes) flying over the treetops and shining a beam toward the earth. The chupas (UFOs) are said to make a humming sound like a refrigerator or a transformer, and this sound does not change when the object accelerates. The object does not seem large enough to contain a human pilot. It has a light on the bottom and a light at one end, giving a sealed beam like a car headlight.

"The victims were Abel Boro, who died on October 17, 1981, while hunting with Ribamar Ferreira; Raimundo Souza, who died on October 19, 1981, while hunting with Anastacio Barbosa; Jose Vitorio and Dionizio General, who died on an undetermined date, the latter three days after the UFO encounter; and a man named Ramon, who lived in Parnarama.

"Muldoon and Richman quoted the mayor of Parnarama as confirming the cases, and the chief of police, Geraldo dos Santos Magela, as stating that he had examined two of the bodies, finding that the blood had been sucked from them."

Not the kind of information that either the "New Age" crowd or the "Nuts and Bolts " bunch may want to hear, but this book should be on the must read list of any serious UFO researcher or devotee.

However, there still are a couple of "caveat emptors." I totally disagree with Vallee on his conclusion with reference to the abduction question, as many undoubtedly will. The evidence is overwhelming that this mystery has affected possibly thousands of individuals, in a manner that far exceeds any possible psychosis. Vallee does not acknowledge the overwhelming physical evidence or the wide range of various "victims " which encompasses all different social, economic, and ethnic groupings. The enigma is real, Jacques, and the clock may be ticking. Another area dismissed is the idea that what we MAY be dealing with is an extraterrestrial phenomenon. Even with all the information developed in connection with the alleged Roswell case and the testimony from over a hundred witnesses, not one word is mentioned by Vallee. The evidence from this case is persuasive that POSSIBLY hardware from off world visited here in 1947. Could it be that this information makes the author very uncomfortable, since his stand is very anti-ET? Neither this magazine nor this writer is stating that the hypothesis of ET coming for a visit is the only explanation. There are many theories of what may be occurring. But Vallee may miss the boat if he closes his mind to this possibility. One thing to remember about this work is the extensive travels and research the author carried out. Vallee's research skills and scholarship have been sorely missed in the ufological community; I for one am glad to see him back in the active research arena. I think that this account will end up as a yardstick to judge future efforts. Confrontations is a book that will open your eyes to what a truly mysterious world the UFO inhabits, no matter where you stand.

-Don Ecker-

PS Vallee replied to the above, his reply follows.

Message #2773 - ASK_UFO 
   Date : 18-Apr-91 10:44
   From : Don Ecker
     To : All
Subject : Vallee responds
This file was provided to the ParaNet Information Service by
UFO Magazine. All rights are reserved. You may distribute this file
freely as long as this header remains intact.

The review of Confrontations (Vol. 5, No. 3) calls for a response and a few comments.

On the topic of abductions, Don states that "the evidence is overwhelming that this mystery has affected possibly thousands of individuals in a manner that far exceeds any possible psychosis." I totally agree with that statement. Where did I ever say that abductees were victims of psychosis?

On the contrary, Confrontations gives several examples of abduction cases that I have personally researched: the episode with Mrs. Victor in Chapter 6 fits a classic pattern, I have said that, in such reports, "I cannot agree with Philip Klass' conclusion that the witness is making up the whole episode. The abduction experience is real." Why is there such confusion, then, about my position on this issue? Simply because I do not believe that everything retrieved under hypnosis should be taken at face value.

I have stated (and will continue to state) that much of what passes for abduction research today is unscientific, unethical garbage that reeks of standard cult recruitment techniques. My appeals to more caution have infuriated some abduction researchers, who have made up the story that "Vallee rejects all abduction cases." Nothing could be further from the truth. Not only do I accept these cases, but I believe their evidence is much too important to be treated in the superficial way evidenced in the work of many "abductionists." I refer the reader to the ten-page discussion of the issue in Confrontations, starting on page 170. On the extraterrestrial origin of UFOs, my position is clear, too. If the witnesses are telling the truth about the behavior of the phenomenon, then it could be from anywhere at anytime. This naturally includes other planets in outer space, and I have not rejected this hypothesis; I only think it is insufficient. And there are many other, possibly more promising hypotheses that have not been seriously considered.

How could I "close my mind" to the possibility of extraterrestrial intervention? It is an hypothesis I defended vigorously 25 years ago. But we cannot be dogmatic in front of the data that has been accumulating during that period, much of which now contradicts the first level ETH (extraterrestrial hypothesis) to which most of American ufology is still clinging. It is time to open our minds to other possibilities.

Don rightly notices that I have not treated the issue of "saucer crashes," notably Roswell, in Confrontations. This may seem to be an important omission, but it was the result of a conscious decision, which was clearly disclosed at the very beginning. In the introduction, I took pains to state that I regarded three important topics to lie outside the scope of the book. They were the possible relevance of cult movements to the UFO phenomenon, cattle mutilations and government intervention and "cover-up." There is much to say, as everyone knows, about all three subjects, but a scientist learns to focus on a single issue at a time. The central theme in Confrontations was field research methodology and physical evidence. I may develop the other topics in a future work, and the Roswell crash (and other crashes) will then be treated under the rubric of "Government intervention and cover-up " where it rightly belongs.

In the meantime I did describe in great detail the analysis of physical samples reported to have come from UFOs, several of which I have in my possession and can supply to colleagues who would like to analyze them. I cannot make the same statement about the Roswell material, and I do not know anyone who can. It would have been inappropriate to mention Roswell in a book on the analysis of UFO evidence, no matter how many people have become fascinated with this particular story, because there is no Roswell material available to be analyzed. Again it is a case of individual readers projecting their own expectations into a very complicated topic, and expressing their frustration when conclusions are presented which differ from their own. There is very little I can do, as a scientist, to alleviate this problem. But I am grateful to Don Ecker for having set the framework for a useful and timely debate.

-Jacques Vallee-