"Wonders in the Sky" - New Jacques Vallée/Chris Aubeck book coming in October

[Facius_Cardan]

​

Great news for all Jacques Vallée fans. He'll be releasing a new book in October, written in colaboration with Magonia Exchange Group founder Chris Aubeck. "Wonders in the Sky" will compile inumerous reports of strange aerial phenomena since biblical times down to the 1800's. The description of the book in Amazon.com is as follows:

"In the past century, individuals, newspapers, and military agencies have recorded thousands of UFO incidents, giving rise to much speculation about flying saucers, visitors from other planets, and alien abductions. Yet the extraterrestrial phenomenon did not begin in the present era. Far from it. The authors of Wonders in the Sky reveal a thread of vividly rendered-and sometimes strikingly similar- reports of mysterious aerial phenomena from antiquity through the modern age. These accounts often share definite physical features- such as the heat felt and described by witnesses-that have not changed much over the centuries. Indeed, such similarities between ancient and modern sightings are the rule rather than the exception.
In Wonders in the Sky, respected researchers Jacques Vallee and Chris Aubeck examine more than 500 selected reports of sightings from biblical-age antiquity through the year 1879-the point at which the Industrial Revolution deeply changed the nature of human society, and the skies began to open to airplanes, dirigibles, rockets, and other opportunities for misinterpretation represented by military prototypes. Using vivid and engaging case studies, and more than seventy-five illustrations, they reveal that unidentified flying objects have had a major impact not only on popular culture but on our history, on our religion, and on the models of the world humanity has formed from deepest antiquity.
Sure to become a classic among UFO enthusiasts and other followers of unexplained phenomena, Wonders in the Sky is the most ambitious, broad-reaching, and intelligent analysis ever written on premodern aerial mysteries."

This is certainly a must buy book for everyone with an interest in UFOs. What are your thoughts and expectations about "Wonders in the Sky"?

 

[tyder001]

On one hand I look forward to it. On the other I hope it's not simply "story after story" and account after account. Because even though the subject is interesting "those kind" of books get kind of old quick. But, we will sell and I am certainly going to be looking out for it.

---------- Post added at 12:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:51 PM ----------

On one hand I look forward to it. On the other I hope it's not simply "story after story" and account after account. Because even though the subject is interesting "those kind" of books get kind of old quick. But, we will sell and I am certainly going to be looking out for it.

Sorry, I meant "we will see" not sell

 

[xLordSummerislex]

Sounds interesting.

 

[Kandinsky]

It sounds like the book will generate a lot of discussion and debates. I have to admit to cringing when pre-20th Century UFO accounts are trotted out, but that's just my view on them. Roboziero is a compelling case and falls within the typical behaviours of classic UFO events. Naturally, the Nuremberg events are also intriguing.

I listened to a Keel lecture where he describes a 19th Century airship incident as if it really happened when we now know it was a hoax. This is why I'm reluctant to get invested in pre-20th Century sightings. They could be hoaxes, bolides, religious 'visions' and anything else. Everyone's favourite-Ezechial's wheels- doesn't sound like a UFO event at all to me.

As an example, there's guys like Cremo & Philips. They present a strong case for races of giants and ooparts based on 19th Century articles in local news papers and journals.

It's hard enough trying to make sense of events in living memory without adding to the speculation by focusing on hearsay and old news stories.

I know it's bad form and 'not allowed' to criticise Vallee. I'm not doing that. I'm expressing concerns about how much such stories add to the subject.

 

[stphrz]

It sounds like the book will generate a lot of discussion and debates. I have to admit to cringing when pre-20th Century UFO accounts are trotted out, but that's just my view on them. Roboziero is a compelling case and falls within the typical behaviours of classic UFO events. Naturally, the Nuremberg events are also intriguing.

I listened to a Keel lecture where he describes a 19th Century airship incident as if it really happened when we now know it was a hoax. This is why I'm reluctant to get invested in pre-20th Century sightings. They could be hoaxes, bolides, religious 'visions' and anything else. Everyone's favourite-Ezechial's wheels- doesn't sound like a UFO event at all to me.

As an example, there's guys like Cremo & Philips. They present a strong case for races of giants and ooparts based on 19th Century articles in local news papers and journals.

It's hard enough trying to make sense of events in living memory without adding to the speculation by focusing on hearsay and old news stories.

I know it's bad form and 'not allowed' to criticise Vallee. I'm not doing that. I'm expressing concerns about how much such stories add to the subject.

Jacques Vallee is not immune to critisism. No one is. Personally, when I first read his stuff way back in the early 90's, I rejected nearly everything he had to say. However, as time went on I started to understand where he was coming from more and more. Now, I'm glad I kept the books!

I think it's important to understand that Vallee is not out there looking for a smoking gun. He has written about the pitfalls involved with that extensively. I think he makes a good case that more recent events coupled with the actions of the researcher's invovled, the media and the reactions of everyone else tends to kick up a cloud of noise and confusion where it is difficult to get real facts. It's one of the hallmarks of the phenomenon. He thinks it's better to wait a while, then look back and make note of how the event has changed everyone's perceptions. This sort of indirect method of investigation doesn't satisfy a lot of people and it's easy to understand why.

Thing is, more direct and recent investigations don't seem to satisfy either. People are left just as confused and frustrated as they were before. Getting caught up in it is maddening.

 

[Facius_Cardan]

Personally I don't think it should be "forbidden" to criticize Vallee. I'm an admirer of his work but he isn't above criticism.
The question about the quality of pre-1900 reports on aerial phenomena is a very important one, but I always ask myself: are today's chroniclers of such manifestations (including journalists) more objective and credible than their previous counterparts? For instance, if we were to make a research, 50 or 100 years from now, about news published/broadcasted about UFOs we wouldn't have a clear picture of the phenomenon. Most of the sightings, specially in the last decade, haven't been picked up by the major news agencies, newspapers or TV channels. When those reports get media attention, they are frequently treated as a fait divers news item (often in an funny vein, unfair to the sincerity of witnesses).
Regardless of all those factors, ancient reports are important to understand the impact that such anomalous manifestations had (and still have) on society and their repercussions on the scientific and belief structures of that age.

 

[rhcball]

As soon as I see the Bible and UFOs in the same sentence, I head on over to youtube for funny animal videos.

 

[Facius_Cardan]

I'm already happy today. Jacques Vallee is returning to The Paracast for an interview about "Wonders in the Sky". Sunday will be a great day!

 

[trainedobserver]

In reading Wonders in the Sky I was struck by the similarity of some of the reports with what I have always discounted as stings of balloons as in Mexico City's "sky serpents" and what have you.

 

[Kieran]

Personally I don't think it should be "forbidden" to criticize Vallee. I'm an admirer of his work but he isn't above criticism.
The question about the quality of pre-1900 reports on aerial phenomena is a very important one, but I always ask myself: are today's chroniclers of such manifestations (including journalists) more objective and credible than their previous counterparts? For instance, if we were to make a research, 50 or 100 years from now, about news published/broadcasted about UFOs we wouldn't have a clear picture of the phenomenon. Most of the sightings, specially in the last decade, haven't been picked up by the major news agencies, newspapers or TV channels. When those reports get media attention, they are frequently treated as a fait divers news item (often in an funny vein, unfair to the sincerity of witnesses).
Regardless of all those factors, ancient reports are important to understand the impact that such anomalous manifestations had (and still have) on society and their repercussions on the scientific and belief structures of that age.

The argument as always has been is, which theory feels more comfortable for me!

People question Vallée often, I guess because they don't believe in myths and legends, and tend to respect researchers like Stanton or Randle more, and have a believe, we are dealing with visitors from another planet!

IF people are criticizing Vallée for his opposing view, that is just downright stupid, you oppose his views based on the evidence. The evidence least in my opinion supports Vallée view on things, I have never read his books Vallée, but I understand the basic notion of his theories, and they make sense to make based on what I have read and heard in the last three years of my own research into this topic.

See we have many reports of objects been seen way before 1947, so what the hell, why are we still talking up 1947 as being the start point of this Phenomenon. It doesn't make any sense at all.

Cant wait for the episode finally a man who can tell us something worth listening to!

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

To get the best overview of Vallee's work, I suggest you read Dimensions. IMO, this book covers the most ground regarding his thinking. Another excellent book is Confrontations which deals exclusively with physical evidence cases. Oh, and of course there is his seminal work, Passport to Magonia, blah, blah, blahh

 

[trainedobserver]

I suggest you read Dimensions. IMO, this book covers the most ground regarding his thinking. Another excellent book is Confrontations which deals exclusively with physical evidence cases.

I think Revelations is a must read along with Messengers of Deception.

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

I think Revelations is a must read along with Messengers of Deception.

**SIGH**
Yup, there's no way around it: you just gotta read 'em all. And while your at it, read Operation Trojan Horse by John Keel...

 

[Trajanus]

Yet the extraterrestrial phenomenon did not begin in the present era.

What's this--Vallee changing his tune? It's interesting to know that there were over 500 UFO sightings prior to the modern era. Still, the phenomenon has undoubtedly intensified; every year since '47 probably saw several times more sightings than the figure mentioned for the more distant past.

 

[Kandinsky]

It's interesting to know that there were over 500 UFO sightings prior to the modern era. Still, the phenomenon has undoubtedly intensified; every year since '47 probably saw several times more sightings than the figure mentioned for the more distant past.

I agree. Whatever happened in the 40s, 50s and early 60s seems to be exceptional in recorded history.

 

[NTS]

I guess you'd have to do some kind of statistical analysis to know if UFO and other paranormal events are really more common at certain times. Apparent differences in numbers of experiences could be a product of larger populations, better communications, and how receptive the culture is to reports of strange phenomena.

 

[Trajanus]

I guess you'd have to do some kind of statistical analysis to know if UFO and other paranormal events are really more common at certain times. Apparent differences in numbers of experiences could be a product of larger populations,

I have doubts, considering that many things are witnessed by lone individuals, often in isolated areas. Also, I don't think population levels were much different in the late '40s compared to 5-15 years earlier.

..better communications, and how receptive the culture is to reports of strange phenomena.

Recent culture never struck me as being very receptive to reports of this kind, but they've proliferated nonetheless.

 

[ALPHA ROMEO UNIFORM]

Hi Gene & Chris,
Another excellent Paracast interview with Dr Vallee who hit a number of topics on the nail and open minded viewpoints on the paranormal within science like the parallel universe

Ja love,
BF

 

[Facius_Cardan]

There are many factors to consider when saying that the amount of UFO sightings increased after the 40's. Firstly there was a much larger media interest on the subject during the 40's, 50's and 60's, particularly due to some famous cases (Kenneth Arnold's observation for instance) and the US Air Force involvment through Project Blue Book. The popularization of science fiction as a literary and cinematographical genre certainly contributed to that too.
Regarding older sightings we must say that the rate of literacy on most countries was quite low before the 20th century. That reduces the possibility of making a sighting known by your own means. Only chroniclers (often official ones) had the power and opportunity to write about any subject. The advent of printed media during the latter section of the 19th century contributed to an easier access to anomalous occurences around the country and the world.
The permanently shifting media attention towards the phenomenon can also influence our perception about the frequency of UFO observations. Also important is the wilingness of witnesses to report what they saw. The last 20/30 years certainly haven't established the correct environment to allow people to come out and speak frankly about their experiences.

 

[trainedobserver]

Culture has everything to do with how these things are interpreted. Modern humanity is programmed at this point to interpret lights in the sky and other unrelated phenomena as evidence of extraterrestrials. Not that long ago they would have immediately been seen as witches, spirits, demons, dragons, gods, angels, or what have you.

We are pretty much guaranteed that no progress or serious scientific investigation of the UFO phenomena will occur as long as those insisting on this undertaking also insist that the conclusion be extraterrestrial. That is why the "Disclosure Movement" is doomed and serves as a counter-productive force in Ufology. They have a preconceived conclusion that they insist the government support regardless of what the facts may or may not turn out to be.