Posted: Aug 31, 2010 6:47 am
He did, didn't he? Well, he's always (as in, as long as I've known of him) been on a rather sensationalist slant so it's not wonder he doesn't more strongly rule out "extraterrestial origin of UFOs" (EOOU) hypothesis.
On the book, I was rather hoping it's not the usual "same shit" (the review posted in the above blog specifically says it steers clear of the most obvious pitfalls such as giving credence to the so-called abductees and contactees) tho the conclusions do appear to please the EOOU crowd.
On the book, I was rather hoping it's not the usual "same shit" (the review posted in the above blog specifically says it steers clear of the most obvious pitfalls such as giving credence to the so-called abductees and contactees) tho the conclusions do appear to please the EOOU crowd.