Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here UFOs | Paranormal | Area 51 People | Places | Random Top 100 | What's New Catalog | New Books Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Our Bookstore is OPEN Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1997 -> Nov -> Here

From: clark@mn.frontiercomm.net [Jerome Clark]
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 17:44:54 PST
Fwd Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 06:59:10 -0500
Subject: Re: That Ol' Extra Terrestrial Hypothesis

> From: DevereuxP@aol.com [Paul Devereux]
> Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 09:15:19 -0500 (EST)
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: That Ol' Extra Terrestrial Hypothesis


> explained by some notion of spontaneous time travel (past and
> future memories, if you like)  - or temporally-'loose' imagery of
> some kind.

  Oh, dear. Of course the evidence for these sorts
of loopy "explanations" is somewhere between nil
and nonexistent, and they're interesting only because
they come from somebody who routinely alleges that
the ETH has no basis in evidence.  You have to
decide, Paul, whether you want to be a scientist or a
mystic.  It seems to me that you're blurring the
distinction all the time.

> The mental state or states I am discussing are also - *in part*
> -  the subject of David J. Hufford's "The Terror that Comes in
> the Night", which you may have noticed Jerome Clark refer to a
> couple of times recently (and in some pretty peculiar ways too,
> if I may say so).

'Fraid not, old chap.  Hufford and I are mutual admirers. (See
his kind words about me and my approach on the back cover
of High Strangeness.) When my review of his The Terror That
Comes in the Night was published in Fate in 1983, he told me
I was just about the only reviewer who seemed to grasp
the point of the book. (Others read it, in common [I gather]
with Paul, as an exercise in reductionism, when in fact it was
devastatingly critical of reductionist explanations of anomalous
phenomena as counter to the spirit of truth-seeking in
science.) By the way, I recommend The Terror  to anyone
seeking to understand the sorts of cultural biases implicit in
beliefs and arguments such as those Paul habitually reflects
and employs.

If anybody is using Hufford strangely, it's Paul here.  Hufford
once wrote me a hilarious letter parodying the theories of
Michael Persinger, one of Paul's heroes.  Hufford is not -- by
any stretch -- on your side of the argument, my friend, and it
ill behooves you to imply otherwise.

Jerry Clark