Magazine Summary

Pre-1947 UFO Bulletin

Magazine Issue MUFOB 1980s

Ever wanted to host your own late-night paranormal radio show?

Across the Airwaves · Narrative Sim · Windows · $2.95

You’re on the air. Callers bring Mothman, Fresno Nightcrawlers, UFO sightings, reptilian autopsies, and whispers about AATIP and Project Blue Book. Every reply shapes how the night goes.

UFO & UAP Cryptids Paranormal Government Secrets Classified Files High Strangeness Strange Creatures
The night is long. The lines are open →

Summary

Overview

This issue reviews an article from 'Awareness' magazine that analyzes 'The Andreasson Affair' and H.G. Wells' 'The Time Machine'. The reviewer questions the author's assertions, particularly the idea that hypnotic regression constitutes a 'direct account' and speculates about Wells' brain receiving cosmic signals. The article also draws parallels between the two works, suggesting shared archetypal sources or even the possibility of Mrs. Andreasson incorporating elements of 'The Time Machine' into her account. The reviewer advocates for treating both as works of imagination and criticizes the tendency within ufology to make rash generalizations.

Magazine Overview

Title: Pre-1947 UFO Bulletin
Issue: No. 6
Date: July 1980

This issue features a review of an article from 'Awareness' magazine (Vol. 9 No. 3, Autumn 1980) titled "The Andreasson Affair" and "The Time Machine: Was H.G. Wells an Unwitting Contactee?" by B.J. Burden MA. The reviewer, N. Watson, expresses skepticism towards some of Burden's assertions.

Analysis of Burden's Article

Burden's article is discussed, with particular focus on his claims regarding "The Andreasson Affair" by Raymond E. Fowler. Watson questions Burden's assertion that the narrative in Fowler's book is a "direct account of a strange experience," noting that it was recounted under hypnotic regression, which Watson argues is not "direct."

Burden speculates on a connection between the American "airship" phenomena of 1896-97 and H.G. Wells' "The War of the Worlds," suggesting Wells' brain might have been "inadvertently picking up a broadcast on the cosmic waveband." Watson finds this speculative and lacking concrete evidence, likening the argument to "jelly."

Burden also draws comparisons between "The Andreasson Affair" and "The Time Machine," noting similarities such as the mention of lemur-like beings and shared interests in concepts of time. Watson acknowledges these points but argues that ideas about time are common and that imaginative people can create fantastic scenarios without drugs, countering Burden's suggestion of drug usage influencing Wells.

Alternative Explanations

Watson proposes alternative explanations for the similarities between the works:

  • Archetypal Symbolic Source: Both Wells and Andreasson (or other contactees) might be drawing from the same "archetypal symbolic source" within human consciousness.
  • Factual Incident vs. Imagination: The contactee might have related her story as a factual incident because she lacked the ability to express her fears cogently, a mechanism suggested by John Rimmer in "Facts, Fraud, and Fairytales" (MUFOB No. 9, Winter 1977-78).
  • Incorporation of Fiction: A more mundane explanation is that Mrs. Andreasson might have read "The Time Machine" and unwittingly incorporated elements into her story.

Watson concludes that both "The Time Machine" and "The Andreasson Affair" should be viewed as works of imagination, with their differences in expression stemming from the individuals involved.

Subjectivity and Verification

Watson emphasizes that the experiences of Andreasson and most contactees are "entirely subjective." He states that no method has been found to empirically verify these stories, making it a "pointless exercise" to compare them with an author's work and conclude that the author revealed a real experience through fiction.

Recommendations and Criticisms

Despite his objections, Watson recommends reading "The Andreasson Affair" and "The Time Machine" for those who are curious. He also suggests looking at Burden's article, humorously wondering if it was written to "check the sanity of ufologists."

Watson then draws a parallel to Jenny Randles' assertion that the Fatima incident was a classic CE4 event. He criticizes the tendency within ufology to "lump together" data from historically, geographically, and culturally separated UFO flaps or waves, leading to "rash generalizations and mad theorizing" akin to Erich von Däniken's work. Watson advocates for "super scepticism" to counteract this trend.

Correspondence

The issue concludes with an invitation for readers to send "threatening literature" to N. Watson at Westfield Cottage, Crowle Bank Road, Althorpe, South Humberside, DN17 3HZ.

Recurring Themes and Editorial Stance

The recurring theme in this issue is a critical examination of UFO literature and the methodologies used by ufologists. The editorial stance is one of skepticism towards unsubstantiated claims and a call for rigorous analysis, distinguishing between imaginative works and verifiable phenomena. There is a strong emphasis on the subjective nature of contactee experiences and a critique of the tendency towards overgeneralization within the UFO community.

It is my opinion that we should regard both 'The Time Machine' and 'The Andreasson Affair' as works of the imagination, and that this is their fundamental relationship.

— N. Watson

Key Incidents

  1. 1896-1897USA

    The American 'airship' phenomena occurred, which the author speculates might have been connected to extraterrestrial signals, potentially influencing H.G. Wells.

  2. The Fatima incident is mentioned as a classic CE4 event by Jenny Randles.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the main focus of the article reviewed in this issue?

The article reviewed discusses 'The Andreasson Affair' and H.G. Wells' 'The Time Machine', examining potential connections and the nature of the experiences described.

What is the reviewer's opinion on the connection between 'The Andreasson Affair' and 'The Time Machine'?

The reviewer believes both should be regarded as works of imagination and that their fundamental relationship lies in this shared imaginative source, rather than a direct influence or extraterrestrial connection.

What criticism does the reviewer have of the article's author?

The reviewer questions the author's assertions, particularly regarding hypnotic regression being a 'direct account' and the speculation about Wells' brain acting as a cosmic receiver without concrete evidence.

What is the reviewer's concern about ufology?

The reviewer expresses concern that ufologists tend to make rash generalizations and lump together data from different UFO flaps or waves, potentially leading to flawed conclusions.

In This Issue

People Mentioned

  • B.J. BurdenMA
  • Raymond E. FowlerAuthor
  • H.G. WellsAuthor
  • John RimmerAuthor
  • Jenny RandlesResearcher
  • Erich von DänikenAuthor
  • N. WatsonCorrespondent

Organisations

  • MUFOB

Locations

  • USA, USA
  • South Humberside, UK
  • Althorpe, UK

Topics & Themes

UFOsContacteesLiterature AnalysisUFO BulletinAwareness magazineThe Andreasson AffairThe Time MachineH.G. WellsB.J. BurdenRaymond E. Fowlerhypnotic regressionairship phenomenacosmic wavebandlemur-like beingstime conceptsarchetypal symbolic sourcehuman consciousnessFatima incident