Dr. Jacques Vallee -an assessment

People in Ufology take it very personally when you criticise Jacques Vallee. Most I doubt have even read his books, I was once told "You CANNOT question Dr. Vallee!"  Screw you because yes I can.

Ufology has always done this. Harold T. Wilkins an early flying saucer author was a plagiarist and made stuff up and passed it off as fact. Things in his books I have back-tracked to the original sources and found them takenm out of context or even a different twist put on them. But, oh no, you could not criticise him.

Frank Edwards and his books gave out a lot of misleading information as did his radio show but he was a journalist with a buck to make. Yes, I criticised him and for good reason.

Donald E. Keyhoe was a legend and anything he wrote was true and the United States Air Force was lying. We KNEW that because...Keyhoe told us. facts twisted to push his agenda and it is interesting to learn now that he had racist leanings. But I go by what is written and presented and we know he was against Betty and Barney Hill because they were a "mixed race" couple.

John A. Keel -as with Keyhoe's books I enjoyed his work but he added "extras" to stories and again twisted facts because he had books to sell and the fact that he got a lot wrong in Operation Trojan Horse does not matter to Ufologists because they NEVER looked into what he was writing. They never check any sources.

I could go on but Keyhoe, Wilkins and Keel misled and lied to us and yet there was no open criticism of them allowed.

The same happened with Budd Hopkins. Nice guy. Delivering the facts and peer reviewed work. He lied. He knew that he was submitting faked evidence in his books and lectures and misused hypnosis. He corrupted Ufological research for three decades. Every CE3K or "abduction" case was rebooted so that now "Greys" were involved -even in the Hill case it seems!

David Jacobs. Historian. Used hypnosis incorrectly and totally lost the plot but when I criticised him, as I did Hopkins: "You cannot criticise an academic" -Hopkins and Jacobs, of course, "put bums on seats -sold tickets to events and made MUFON etc lots of money.

A small group promote Orbs and rods so that was another big thing. Explain the orbs or criticise the "stars" and "you cannot do that!"

Luis Elizondo and the whole counter  intelligence take over of Ufology where they have gotten people to stop calling UFOs by that term -we MUST call them "UAP" -and people are! These are people who have and are suppressing UFO reports and lying and having followers in Ufology attack people who for decades have tried to break into the secrecy. The truth seekers are now the enemy!

Yes I can criticise and ask for evidence just as you can. NO ONE is beyond question when it comes to research whether UFOs or not. Nothing is peer reviewed in Ufology.  With my own work absolutely no one is interested in papers on CE3Ks or the other work I have done for almost 50 years now. Therefore I present it in books. No big words (anything like that I explain because it is important that everyone knows what is going on and understands. Every case I write about or present is fully referenced which means that the data can be peer reviewed and the original sources  double and triple checked.

Here then is my assessment of Dr. Vallee and it is based on having read his books, watching interviews and reading what people who have met him say.

When I became one of "The New Guard" of Ufology in 1974 I was impressionable. But there was one thing I believed and that was that science needed to get involved in Ufology. Dear old Lionel Beer and his book service quickly supplied me with the two books that were must reading for serious Ufologists and after all the Adamski crap and decades of Contactees being the source of all technical UFO data.

The books were Challenge To Science: The UFO Enigma and Anatomy of a Phenomenon: UFOs In Space and both were written by Jacques Vallee (Challenge To Science being co-authored by Janine Vallee). Vallee, we were told was French. He was a scientist. And France was often far ahead of the rest of the civilised world and the French Academy of Science was, quite literally, the scientific body to be held in awe.

Vallee was a French scientist. That made these books far more alluring than a bag of chips to a young man (I am told that I should have gone from model soldiers to girls but I got side-tracked into UFOs).

Vallee was also young and willing to speak out so kudos to him. I sat down and read both books and tried to discuss them with others but found few had read them mainly because they were "a bit too technical"!

I digested most books  back then as much as I do now and I would often sit back later and go over things I had read and early in the morning I was still awake (my sleep pattern is...no sleep pattern!) and suddenly I realised something. I noted errors -in a graph for one thing but other things suddenly hit me.

I asked Franklyn Daviun-Wilson and we went over the books. I still have, after decades, Franklyn's copies and he annotated the actual pages (in all my books you will see LOTS of post-it notes) because writing in books was an old fashion thing -I have examples from 19th and early 20th century natural history and science books and so on. It was mainly so that you had your own thoughts on the actual page rather than later sitting there and thinking "What page was it I queried? What did I query??". Anyway, here are notes at the front of Anatomy of a Phenomenon:

sylogisms..an instance of a form of reasoning in which a conclusion is drawn from two given or assumed propositions (premises); a common or middle term is present in the two premises but not in the conclusion, which may be invalid (e.g. all dogs are animals; all animals have four legs; therefore all dogs have four legs ).

I believe the other word is pylogism..but I cannot make the rushed writing. Polylogism is the belief that different groups of people reason in fundamentally different ways. The term is attributed to Ludwig von Mises, who claimed that it described Marxism and other social philosophies. 

My own note on Vallee's graph:

"Err" -Errors as Vallee had included hoaxes, "mystery airships" (that were not and other incorrect data. As Franklyn put it: "Bad data input =bad data output"

When I was putting together data for The UFO Report I threw out Desmond Leslie and George Adamski's fictitious The Flying Saucers Have Landed but felt Vallee's work was still "safe". Then I started finding that I was correcting things like dates, etc. and I realised that this scientist who was bringing UFO research respectability was far from scientific in his approach to gathering and presenting data. it was quite bad.

Of course I did leap at getting a copy, from Lionel again, of Passport to Magonia: From Folklore To Flying Saucers because though I am a "nuts and bolts" kind of fella I am a sceptical researcher. I do not say "Folklore...flying saucers???" I keep an open mind and I read what is presented and then form my own opinion.

Before I forget; Dr J. Allen Hynek gave his approval of Vallee and that helped get Vallee's name "out there" to Ufologists who generally ignored anyone who was not British or American (there is a long list of French Ufologists who Vallee stands on the shoulders of but who are unknown outside of France).  Hynek made all the introductions and to read Vallee later talk down at Hynek and display an egotism -he apparently got quite angry and stroppy at one point because he was bypassed for an interview and someone else got interviewe.  All the information is online but Vallee also shows his ego and arrogance at times in his own books.

Passport To Magonia I read through and noted the various UFO related entity cases but then realised a big problem. Sources -or lack of them. A report is given but no source of the account or "a friend told me of..." which needs back-up. Who was this person? Were they a scientist or a lay person?  Seeing a "pan-like entity" could have been an altered state incident or even hallucination.  Witness confidentiality yes but why should we accept this as a genuine incident?

I have never met Jacques Vallee and so my opinions are not based on whether he is a "pleasant guy" or not.  His Catalogue of UFO Landings is pointless as it contains known hoaxes and misidentifications at the very time they were added. Quimper-Corentin, France, 1620: never happened as Vallee described.  Alencon, France, 1790: UFO and entity case -never happened and no report in the archives of the French Academy of Sciences as Vallee claimed:and he could have checked!

And to still use known hoax cases and cases proven to have other explanations and cite 

them as evidence to back up his personal theories.  Unforgivable.

For some cases cited there are no original sources given and we are expected to accept those reports and (those very few people who do research) are expected to base work and analyses on these? No. That is not how science works and Vallee who loves to keep pointing out (and hearing others stating) that he is a scientist knows that.

The number of Ufologists who go like giddy girls who have just met their favourite boy band when they state "I met Dr Vallee" or discussed something with Vallee is almost ridiculous. The fact that Vallee's data is included in catalogues without anyone checking it is the worship of dogma. I conducted a series of interviews with a person I cannot name but they had strong evidence of abduction by 7 feet tall, three eyed banana-like entities -if you accept that without checking then you are a dumb ass.

For years I kept contacting Ted Phillips to try to get some data on all of his Physical Trace evidence and the test results -I have asked his colleague Farrairo- nothing. How can you claim to be gathering scientific evidence on the phenomena (NOT phenomenon) to present to science and yet as far as I can find Phillips submitted no papers or test results for peer review from the 1960s until the time of his death (let's not go to the Marley Woods fiasco). Looking at what I eventually found of Phillips Trace catalogue contained entries that cannot be accepted as evidence. Anything prior to 1900 and up until trace samples began being gathered (1950s to a degree) and that you cannot see with your own eyes or have no test results on is junk data. Useless. Phillips was another worshipper of Vallee and his catalogue listing includes Vallee sourced stories; again the known fakes.

Vallee was the inspiration for the French scientist in the movie Close Encounters of the Third Kind. So what? That fact is cited by Ufologists and wannabe Ufologists on You Tube and elsewhere as if it is one of the greatest achievements ever. A French film director played a French scientist...not named Vallee. Dr J Allan Hynek was a consultant and IN the movie. (that is never mentioned).

Vallee, had he carried out first hand analysis of UFO reports would have seen that there is an unexplained natural phenomenon (I termed UNP back in 1983) and the reports of what appeared to be solid, constructed craft (whether hoax or genuine). Then you have the misidentifications, fraudulent interpretation of known phenomenon and insufficient data due to no investigation taking place. Instead he states that after all these decades he has no idea what "UFOs" are (his connection with some involved in the recent Elizondo affair is worrying) but strongly believes or hopes that they are multidimensional in some way because extra terrestrial "would be boring". 

The "great man" has "no idea what UFOs are" but knowing better than the rest of us concludes multidimensional. Which sounds like an egotist with his head up his own ass -the fact that people buy his published and very over priced diaries must be a great boost to his ego.

There is one photograph which, I think, sums up Vallee.

The End.

Franklyn Angus Davin-Wilson

 

Franklyn Angus Davin-Wilson d. 1st January 1984

Born in Winterbourne on the outskirts of Bristol, now part of South Gloucestershire, Frankly with with his parents and brother (Warwick) at the "Villa de France" which is a grand name but I believe a small farm back in the 1970s. Franklyn did not get on with either his brother or father and rebelled by using his mother's maiden name (Davin) to make the surname Davin-Wilson.

Franklyn was a graduate of Bristol Boys Grammar School and it seems a few graduates could be labelled eccentric in some way -I met at least one of his peers who not only looked like him but had the same mannerism in speaking (a proper education) and also smoked his cigarette, like Frankly, the "way gentlemen do".

He hated wasps. Apparently when he was a child a swarm had chased him and he had to take refuge in a farm shed. Wasps getting too close where not killed; Franklyn clapped his hands close to them and they were stunned until he moved or moved them. One he accidentally killed looked odd to him so he took it to Bristol City Museum where it was checked and found to be a new species -I assumed it carries his name.

I know Franklyn spent some time in the British Army and not sure whether he was attached to or actually in the Royal Army Medical Corps (RAMC),  He was a member (I later found out a founder) of the British Computer Society, hence usage of MBCS in official letters. In the early 1970s he campaigned for the use of computers in UFO studies and even designed a punch card system specifically to get the most data from UFO reports. He presented the idea to both the British UFO Research Association (BUFORA) and Contact (UK) and although Brinsley le poer Trench (later Lord Clancarty) thought the idea had "great merit" he "regretted" that no funds were available for such an undertaking. BUFORA, calling for the need for more scientific investigation gave Franklyn the run around until finally admitting that "Maybe it's something for the future when the situation has improved more" (ie: no money.

Franklyn also championed computer analysis of UFO photographs which, again, no UK group was interested in. "They are just clubs: we need science!" he told me in frustration.

Franklyn could go from cheeky playfulness to livid if angered. He was reading through a copy of a book by Ian Ridpath (astronomer) and yelled out "***** piece of crap!" and threw it across the room. He immediately apologised as he like my collection of "very interesting books".  At one point in the late 1970s he suffered a complete mental and physical breakdown and admitted himself to Manor Park Hospital. I visited daily all day until he started to recover.  Due to his breakdown I managed to see how the mind could affect the body and that helped with later UFO research.

I once saw a photo of Franklyn as a young man and had to look twice; he was thickset, had a very thick black beard and black hair swept back. Unfortunately, respiratory and kidney problems kicked in and he lost weight and hair. I visited him several times to find him red faced and gasping for breath and with a cough that got me concerned enough, along with the cracking coming from his chest, to tell him I was going to phone for a doctor (you could in those days). I knew that he had discussed the matter with his doctor, I had even chatted with the doctor, and I knew he had suggested Franklyn try "a special med". I found out that this was cannabis -illegal in those days for the doctor to suggest and Franklyn to buy but he knew a semi hippy couple and got cannabis from them. He knew my stance on drugs which is why he kept the use quiet (I had thought the smell was coming from a flat below on a couple occasions (Franklyn lived in old flats on Hotwells Road at the time). He could hardly "roll up" as he hacked out more coughing and gasped for breath so I had to roll him aa joint on the understanding he never tell anyone I had. I watched as within ten minutes the cough lessened and his breathing grew better. After that I started looking at the medical use of cannabis.

Franklyn scribbled notes in various coloured inks -ha had a system that he once explained but forget after all of this time. He had a large file of original research on Astronomers and UFOs, Unidentified Orbital Objects, Mars Mysteries and so on. I learnt one thing from Franklyn which has stuck with me all of my life.

I was showing him some research work when he visited my home and read through it. "You have two references for each case" he said. I happily nodded and he then looked at me and said: "Get three more. Get as many references as you can and cross check  what each says and if you can go to each source if you cannot get to the (witness) source!" Fully referenced is what I have done since and it was a good lesson to learn as I found how "very reliable" sources turned out not to be. It's why I do a lot of archive research and find so many photos, items or original sources "long lost" -it helps with peer review, too.

Franklyn could not type to save his life whereas I had been typing since I was 14 years old. He had gone to a pro typing agency to have his report on the Mirage of Bristol That Appears in Alaska. It was expensive and so I got roped in, through vary devious means (telling me how good and fast my typing was!). 

In 1983 I was admitted to hospital and on getting home found that Franklyn was finally going to have his kidney operation and it seemed to work and over Christmas dinner we discussed the major projects planned for 1984 on. He bid me a cheery farewell that evening and I had no idea that was to be the last time I would see him.

On getting back from work at the start of the new year my grandmother told me that a very polite young man who had bowed when greeting her (I knew that was Franklyn's hippy friend) had called around to speak to me. And when I finally met up with Ron and his partner it was to be told Franklyn had died on new year's day. He had apparently been feeling "a bit under the weather" so retired to bed just before midnight. When he was not up early next morning Rob checked and found Franklyn had died. At tat time, even after a major operation, warfarin was not prescribed to prevent blood clots and had it been prescribed then the blood clot that caused Franklyn's heart attack would not have formed.

I was then presented with a problem. I had no transport and the landlord wanted Franklyn's stuff removed within two days or it was going to be dumped in a skip. I ended up walking across the city and then a return was with three crammed bin liner bags and they were falling apart. At one point an old chap came out of his house and looked as I tried to push the papers back into the bin liners "I know what you need, son" he said and then went back inside to re-emerge a couple minutes later with a wheel barrow and he trusted me, a stranger, to return it. The next mile home was sheer joy!  I unloaded the bags and returned the wheelbarrow.

Franklyn had been a committee member of the British Flying Saucer Bureau and, with his work, a founding member of Project Grey Book. His whole outlook was to get science involved in UFO research. A good friend and an unknown British Ufologist these days. His archives are safely stored with my own.

Another founder, again a forgotten Ufologist, was Dave Cowdy who helped form Manchester Flying Saucer Research in the4 1950s had moved to Bristol and died a few years before from a heart attack (Dave taught me a lot about identifying fake UFO photos -his records and photos were lost when he died suddenly and the council moved in and ignored his written request (which a neighbour also told them of) that if anything happened to him I should be contacted to collect his papers.