Order from a Major Online Bookstore
Ultimate Book Price Comparison Engine
Save Your Time And Money
| AnyBook4Less.com | Order from a Major Online Bookstore |
|
| Home | Store List | FAQ | Contact Us | | ||
| Ultimate Book Price Comparison Engine Save Your Time And Money |
||
 |
Title: The Ufo Book: Encyclopedia of the Extraterrestrial by Jerome Clark ISBN: 1-57859-029-9 Publisher: Visible Ink Pr Pub. Date: September, 1997 Format: Paperback Volumes: 1 List Price(USD): $21.95 |
Average Customer Rating: 4.08 (13 reviews)
Rating: 5
Summary: A Second Rebuttal, if you please...
Comment: Apparently, defending Jerome Clark's "UFO Book" and pointing out his critic's flaws has turned me into a UFO "zealot". Amusingly, I'm accused of "mudslinging", yet the previous reviewer does plenty of mudslinging himself, calling Clark a "crackpot" who only uses sources from other "crackpots", and this reviewer "lazy". He also didn't respond to many of the points in my other post, but for those that he did, here goes: at no point in his chapter on the Betty and Barney Hill UFO "kidnapping" case does Clark write that he believes that the Hills were abducted by a UFO. Instead, he simply gives their side of the story, the claims of their critics, and the claims of their defenders. That sounds like a balanced approach to me - you present one side, then the other, and then let the reader decide the truth. In fact, Clark writes in his "UFO Book" that the Hill case is "unprovable" and is indeed based on "circumstantial" evidence! Yet this is ignored by the previous reviewer, who claims that Clark's "UFO Book" omits anything negative about UFOs. This statement can easily be proven false merely by reading the chapter on the Hill case, in which Clark discusses both Klass AND Kottmeyer's criticisms of the Hill's story. Of course, the real problem here is that Clark doesn't agree with their criticisms, and thus must be a "crackpot". Klass didn't create his "excuse" for why he criticized the University of Nebraska for holding a UFO Conference until AFTER his claims had been publicized. In a memo written by the administrator who took Klass's bizarre phone call, Klass charged that he "has a personal feeling that...these {UFO} organizations, by publicly questioning the government, lend support to the Communist movement". Klass clearly didn't want to simply complain about there being no debunkers (specifically himself) at the conference. Instead, he bluntly equates "questioning the government" with "supporting the Communist movement" - an absurd charge. Klass also made this charge privately, and only AFTER it was exposed did he come up with the lame "excuse" now touted by his admirers. To use two of Klass's favorite words, how "logical" or "rational" is it to equate dissent with supporting Communism? "Cry me a river", indeed! As for the "Skeptic Annotated Bibliography", it clearly states "The Skeptic Annotated Bibliography is NOT sponsored by CSICOP". So, who's being "lazy" here? CSICOP continues to refuse to print virtually anything which is critical of its goals or methods. Just ask noted skeptic Dennis Rawlins, a onetime CSICOP admirer who wrote a hilarious article entitled "Starbaby" (you can easily find it on the web) in which he describes how CSICOP's leadership (including Klass) tried desperately to cover up a "research project" into astrology which was terribly botched due to scientific incompetence on the part of CSICOP's "investigators". So CUFOS, a ufologist group of which Clark is a member, promotes Timothy Good's book in which Good praises UFO "Contactee" and con artist George Adamski? Then why does Clark in his "UFO Encyclopedia" write a devastating critique of Adamski? Could it be that - gasp! - Clark doesn't agree with Good's assessment of Adamski? Apparently the notion that you can agree with a part of another person's writings and not agree with other parts is lost on debunkers, who insist that if they can find a single flaw in a ufologist's writings, then he is a "crackpot" who is no longer to be taken seriously. Of course, they don't apply this same judgement to themselves, as the "Starbaby" incident noted above proves. Ken Arnold sighting: the previous reviewer complains that "because there could be multiple explanations, {why do} you have to pick the fantastic one {aliens}"? Again, precisely where in the "UFO Book" does Clark write that Arnold definitely saw an alien spaceship? Can you quote it? What Clark actually does is to tell the story as Arnold told it, and then present the differing sides (as he does in the "UFO Encyclopedia"). It's called "balance", which is something that many UFO debunkers and "zealots" don't seem to understand. Why is it so troubling to debunkers that a UFO case may not have a prosaic, "mundane" explanation? Most UFO debunkers (as opposed to genuine skeptics) fall into what Dr. J. Allen Hynek used to call the "it can't be, therefore it isn't" school of thought. And so, finally, the previous reviewer is reduced to complaining about the layout of the "UFO Book", as if that had any relevance to its contents. The previous reviewer complains that the margins are too wide, there's not enough photos to suit him, and so on, which all very neatly prevents the reviewer from having to write about the book's substance. As to the previous reviewer's claim that the "UFO Book" "has nothing in it", my only assumption is that he's never read it. So far the previous reviewer has claimed that the "UFO Book" contains only "25 or so" UFO cases, when it actually has at least 60 cases, and numerous others are mentioned in broad chapters. He claims that the "UFO Book" "omits anything negative about UFOs", yet that claim is proven false merely by reading Clark's chapter on the "Hill" UFO case. Also, I'm NOT a UFO "zealot". I actually agree with Klass and other debunkers that SOME UFO cases (such as Roswell) are "explainable" in conventional terms. However, I also think that Clark and other ufologists are correct in arguing that other UFO cases are as yet "unsolved" (not aliens, mind you, just unsolved). However, this "neutral" position is unthinkable in the world of ufology, where "close-mindedness" is the norm. As a result the UFO "debate" now revolves around militant debunkers like Klass at one end, and UFO "zealots" like Art Bell and Steven Greer at the other. Jerome Clark falls somewhere in-between these two extremes, which drives debunkers (such as the previous reviewer) nuts. Bottom line: in a field as rife with intellectual dishonesty as this one, Jerome Clark's "UFO Book" is one of a handful of books to attempt (and usually achieve) a balanced and comprehensive overview of the UFO phenomenon. Period.
Rating: 1
Summary: Waste of paper
Comment: A prime example of bias in Jerome Clark's encyclopedia is the Hill abduction case. On page 289 Clark says:
"All debunking treatments of the Hill case endorse [doctor] Simon's theory that Barney incorporated his wife's dreams into an abduction fantasy. All neglect to mention Simon's antipathy to the UFO subject."
On the other hand, Jerome Clark fails to see his own religious faith in UFOs. Despite having no tangible evidence, Jerome Clark has to believe that an abduction occured. The question isn't whether or not Simon believed in UFOs, but what evidence, if any, shows that aliens were involved. The answer is none. Therefore, with statements like the above, it's pretty clear Jerome Clark has already made up his mind.
Once again, the UFO zealots (Battle Star Pegasus) resort to mud-slinging when their so-called "evidence" is questioned.
As for the University of Nebraska conference, Klass said they might be supporting communism because they were only presenting one side of the issue: the believer's side (Government Coverup). Klass thought they should have a skeptic to be fair on the issue. That's an incident which has been exaggerated by the believers through the years. Cry me a river.
And yes, CUFOS (Jerome Clark's organization) still does not mention any skeptical UFO literature on their website. What are they affraid of? Are they affraid people might stop wasting money on their junk? For some reason they still promote Kevin Randle and Don Schmidt's book of lies: "Truth About the UFO Crash at Roswell." Co-authored by a man who LIED about his background. Hmmm, what else are they omitting there?
CUFOS even recommends "Above Top Secret" by British investigator Timothy Good, who promotes contactees like George Adamski!
According to Battle Star Pegasus: "CSICOP has no ufologist literature listed on their website, so it's hypocritical to criticize CUFOS for not listing debunker literature."
Well, I guess you haven't looked hard enough. The "Skeptic Bibliography" contains probably thousands of book reviews, including a section on UFOs. Obviously BattleStarPegasus is either (1) lazy, (2) doesn't care about the skeptical viewpoint, or (3) both. He's probably never visited the CSICOP website. If this simple fact eludes BattleStar, then I wonder how many other facts elude him.
According to Battle Star Pegasus: "Ken Arnold sighting: there have been no less than 14 different 'explanations' for Arnold's sighting. One would think that if Arnold saw something conventional, there wouldn't be so many different explanations needed to 'solve' the case."
Why chose aliens then? What makes the alien explanation better than a meteorite? Just because there could be multiple explanations, does it mean you have to pick the fantastic one?
In summary, I've never seen such a huge book with nothing in it. I wouldn't recommend this book to anyone beginning research on UFOs. It omits anything negative about UFOs and is entirely pro-UFO. Sure, it makes a thick overview of everything you don't care or need to know about, but actual evidence is nil. Which brings me to another issue: the layout of the book. Terrible. Each page has about a 2 inch margin on the side. The book would've been half the size if most of the pages were filled. So, there's a lot of empty space in THE UFO BOOK. For such a gigantic 700 page encyclopedia, you'd think Mr. Clark (who's been studying UFOs for decades) could find some decent pictures to include? Nope, just the same fuzzy stuff from 1965. Mostly hubcaps and mirages and hoaxes. Why not some pictures of aliens? Or scoop marks? Or alleged alien implants? I assume then there's no evidence for these claims. At least, not here. Hey, if there IS evidence, then why not put it in here? Seems simple enough.
All the abductees are complaining about the Earth dying, so why not save some trees! And don't buy this book.
Rating: 5
Summary: A rebuttal to the debunkers...
Comment: I don't usually write rebuttals, but in this case I thought I'd make an exception. Jerome Clark (and it's Clark, not Clarke) is no "conspiracy theorist". The "UFO Book" is an abridged version of Clark's two-volume, in-depth "UFO Encyclopedia". In that book Clark DOES mention Phil Klass, Robert Sheaffer, and other prominent debunkers, sometimes at considerable length. He even includes seperate bios of Klass and Donald Menzel, the "original" UFO debunker. It IS rare for Klass to do any field investigations or to talk directly to the UFO witnesses. Instead, most of his "research" is done over the phone. As for the "rational thinking" of Klass & Company, in 1983 Klass tried to shut down a UFO conference at the University of Nebraska by privately telling a school administrator that people who studied UFOs were supporting Communism, and that for the university to sponsor a conference of ufologists would be the same as if they sponsored one held by Nazis! When he discovered that the administrator had released a written account of his absurd claim, an infuriated Klass threatened legal action (which never materialized). Robert Sheaffer, another CSICOP debunker, uses dubious sources such as the "National Enquirer" on his website (The Debunker's Domain), wherein he attacks not just UFOs, but Christianity, poor people (whose poverty is "an inevitable consequence of their achievement-hating values"), and "radical feminists" (and Sheaffer seems to think nearly all women are radical feminists). Sheaffer claims that American women have "bamboozled" their men into making "life-destroying exertions" to keep them living in style. Apparently, Sheaffer thinks it's absurd to believe that the government might be hiding evidence of UFOs, but it's OK to believe there's a vast female conspiracy to destroy American men. Go figure. As for the claim that ufologists are in it "just for the money", debunking is now a big business - CSICOP has more money than nearly all of the "pro-UFO" groups, such as CUFOS and MUFON, combined. CSICOP has no ufologist literature listed on their website, so it's hypocritical to criticize CUFOS for not listing debunker literature. As for the UFO cases listed below: CUFOS has consistently charged that the Ed Walters sightings and photos are a hoax. Dr. Mark Rodeghier, the director of CUFOS, wrote one of the first articles "debunking" the case. There's no need to use the so-called "skeptical" literature on Gulf Breeze when those supposedly "crackpot" fellows at CUFOS agree with them! As for Roswell, Clark NEVER claims that a UFO crashed there in 1947. He simply presents the story (including the 1994 Air Force report criticizing the case) and states that the arguments about Roswell are continuing. Karl Pflock's book debunking Roswell was published AFTER the "UFO Book", so it's unfair to criticize Clark for not using it. The 1890's "Airship" sightings: Clark has been writing about this subject since the sixties, and he was one of the first researchers to discover that the 1897 UFO crash near Aurora, Texas was a hoax (it was a prank by the local liar's club). Ken Arnold sighting: there have been no less than 14 different "explanations" for Arnold's sighting. One would think that if Arnold saw something conventional, there wouldn't be so many different explanations needed to "solve" the case. And Brad Sparks had this to say about the debunkers and the Arnold incident: "If UFO skeptics can't come up with one good explanation for a sighting, then several lousy ones will suffice". Cash-Landrum: Clark quotes from the report of Army Lt. Colonel George Sarran, who investigated the case for the JAG and wrote that Ms. Cash was a "credible" witness and that he had spoken to other witnesses to the event besides Ms. Cash and Ms. Landrum - that's far more than "just using MUFON" for source material! Estimate of the Situation: Curtis Peebles writes that Gen. Hoyt Vandenberg rejected the estimate because he felt it didn't make a convincing case that UFOs were alien spacecraft. Clark says the same thing - Vandenberg didn't find it convincing. Exeter: in the "UFO Encyclopedia" Clark does mention Klass and Sheaffer's books in his essay on the case. Falcon Lake: Clark quotes from UFO critic Roy Craig's book on his investigation of the case for the Condon Committee. Father Gill Sighting: Clark quotes from both Klass and Menzel's writings on the case. Menzel insists that Gill mistook Venus for the UFO, despite Gill's testimony that he saw both Venus AND the UFO, and Menzel ignores the fact that there were at least 25 other witnesses to the sighting. Klass (typically) accused Gill of simply hoaxing the event, yet he also ignores the 25 other witnesses. Klass came to this "solution" despite having done no field research or having interviewed any of the witnesses, including Father Gill. Dr. J. Allen Hynek, the founder of CUFOS, personally traveled to the Pacific island where the incident occurred and interviewed many of the 25 witnesses. Allan Hendry, a UFO researcher whom even Klass respected, interviewed 6 of the witnesses, and both Hendry and Jerome Clark spoke with Father Gill. The claim that Clark mentions only "25 or so" UFO cases is absurd - "The UFO Book" contains 60 actual UFO cases, and numerous others are mentioned in chapters such as "Close Encounters of the First Kind". The fact that some of these cases are decades-old doesn't mean they're irrelevant (I'm sure many debunkers would like for people to believe they're irrelevant, because then they wouldn't have to give their implausible "solutions" for some of them). I've read dozens of UFO books (including those of the debunkers mentioned above), and I have no doubt that "The UFO Book" is one of the best-researched and most reliable works on this controversial subject. Clark even includes a chapter on UFO hoaxes and con artists such as George Adamski. If your mind is already closed on the subject of UFOs (and I mean pro-or-con), then you'll probably hate this book. But, if you're looking for a good reference sourcebook on UFOs, then Jerome Clark's "UFO Book" is simply one of the best that you'll find, period.
 |
Title: Ufo Abductions: A Dangerous Game by Philip J. Klass ISBN: 0879755091 Publisher: Prometheus Books Pub. Date: March, 1989 List Price(USD): $25.00 |
 |
Title: Secret Life: Firsthand, Documented Accounts of UFO Abductions by David M. Jacobs ISBN: 0671797204 Publisher: Touchstone Books Pub. Date: 16 April, 1993 List Price(USD): $19.95 |
 |
Title: The Ufo Experience: A Scientific Inquiry by J. Allen Hynek, Allen J. Hynek, Jacques F. Vallee ISBN: 156924782X Publisher: Marlowe & Company Pub. Date: January, 1999 List Price(USD): $12.95 |
 |
Title: The Lure of the Edge: Scientific Passions, Religious Beliefs, and the Pursuit of UFOs by Brenda Denzler ISBN: 0520239059 Publisher: University of California Press Pub. Date: 02 June, 2003 List Price(USD): $19.95 |
 |
Title: The THREAT: Revealing the Secret Alien Agenda by David M. Jacobs ISBN: 0684848139 Publisher: Simon & Schuster Pub. Date: 11 March, 1999 List Price(USD): $18.95 |
Thank you for visiting www.AnyBook4Less.com and enjoy your savings!
Copyright� 2001-2021 Send your comments
