Margorie Fish interpretation of Betty Hill’s purported alien star map
via en.wikipedia.org
Attribution: Clementi
Zeta_reticuli.png (686 × 513 pixels, file size: 10 KB, MIME type: image/png)
In 1968, Marjorie Fish of Oak Harbor, Ohio read Fuller’s Interrupted Journey. She was an elementary schoolteacher and amateur astronomer. Intrigued by the “star map”, Fish wondered if it might be “deciphered” to determine which star system the UFO came from.
Assuming that one of the fifteen stars on the map must represent the Earth’s sun, Fish constructed a 3-dimensional model of nearby sun-like stars using thread and beads, basing stellar distances on those published in the 1969 Gliese Star Catalog. Studying thousands of vantage points over several years, the only one that seemed to match the Hill map was from the viewpoint of the double star system of Zeta Reticuli. Therefore she concluded that the UFO might have come from a planet orbiting Zeta Reticuli.
As a result of Fish’s hypothesis, some have dubbed the Hills’ account The Zeta Reticuli Incident. MostUfologists, however, continue to prefer the Hill Abduction or some similar term.
Distance information needed to match three stars, forming the distinctive triangle Hill said she remembered, was not generally available until the 1969 Gliese Catalog came out. Fish also was the first to note that all the stars on the map connected by lines (which Betty Hill said she was told were trade or frequently-traveled routes) fell in a plane, with Zeta Reticuli acting as a hub. Thus the displayed routes would be the most logical and efficient way of exploring the nearby stellar neighborhood for a civilization located in Zeta Reticuli. These points played critical roles in the subsequent debates over the validity of the Fish match to the Hill map.
Fish sent her analysis to Webb. Agreeing with her conclusions, Webb sent the map to Terence Dickinson, editor of the popular magazine Astronomy. Dickinson did not endorse Fish and Webb’s conclusions, but he was intrigued, and, for the first time in the journal’s history, Astronomy invited comments and debate on a UFO report, starting with an opening article in the December 1974 issue. For about a year afterward, the opinions page of Astronomy carried arguments for and against Fish’s star map. Notable was an argument made by Carl Sagan and Stephen Soter,[4] arguing that the seeming “star map” was little more than a random alignment of chance points. In contrast, those more favorable to the map, such as Dr. David Saunders, a statistician who had been on the Condon UFO study, argued that unusual alignment of key sun-like stars in a plane centered around Zeta Reticuli (first described by Fish) was statistically improbable to have happened by chance from a random group of stars in our immediate neighborhood.[5][6]
Skeptic Robert Sheaffer in an accompanying article said that a map devised by Charles W. Atterberg, about the same time as Fish, was an even better match to Hill’s map and made more sense. The base stars, Epsilon Indi and Epsilon Eridani, plus the others were also closer to the sun than the Hill map. Fish counterargued that the base stars in the Atterberg map were considered much less likely to harbor life than Zeta Reticuli and the map lacked a consistent grouping of sun-like stars along the lined routes.
In 1993, two German crop circle enthusiasts, Joachim Koch and Hans-Jürgen Kyborg, suggested that the map depicted planets in the solar system, not nearby stars. The objects in the map, they said, closely match the positions of the Sun, the six inner planets and several asteroids around the time of the incident.[7] This would parallel other abduction accounts where witnesses claim to be shown such depictions, though admittedly often elaborate and unmistakably our own solar system.
via
Betty and Barney Hill abduction
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betty_and_Barney_Hill_abduction#Analyzing_the_star_map
Read more at wewantnothing.tumblr.com
No comments:
Post a Comment