UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1998 > Jul > Jul 21

Re: Why Migraines Don't Explain UFOs

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 10:08:44 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 11:13:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Why Migraines Don't Explain UFOs

> Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 13:17:07 +0100
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> From: John Rimmer <j_rimmer@library.croydon.gov.uk>
> Subject: Why Migraines Don't Explain UFOs

> Harney puts forward migraine as a possible causative factor which
> should be considered when other mundane explanations do not fit
> the bill, it is *not* proposed as an explanation for *all* close
> encounter narratives. Those familiar with the case might like to
> consider that it could have been a causative factor in Elsie
> Oakensen's experiences.

> In the meantime I suggest that Mark Cashman and others read
> Sacks' book before taking this argument further.

I already made the point that this hypothesis cannot be
considered because it does not provide a discriminator, and that
it also shows no reason to be considered an explanation of UFOs
since the migrane case cited, presumably the best (i.e. closest
to the UFO experience) has no UFO content, and since the author
of the hypothesis presents no support for the existence of a
continuum between regular migranes and "close encounter
migranes".

It is _not_ my objection that all close encounters cannot be
explained by the migrane hypothesis, it is that the author of the
hypothesis has given us no reason to believe that _any_ are.
Perhaps Mr. Rimmer fails to understand that it is required as
part of science that the proposer of a hypothesis demonstrate a
clear causal connection between their proposal and the
observation to be explained.

One might equally well use tintinnus to explain UFOs, since it
causes odd noises to be heard. Of course one might actually also
consider that UFOs actually emit sounds. But that would be a use
of Ockham's Razor which would be unpleasant in this context.

Mr. Rimmer also misses the point that my message pointed out that
the burden falls on anti-OEH proponents to deal with why it
should be that a variety of completely unrelated physical,
optical, mental, and medical causes lead to a single result: the
UFO.

As for reading a book on migranes, why? I didn't read Corso's
book either, and as far as I can tell from the Magonia article,
Sacks' book has about as much relationship to UFOs as Corso's
did.

Remember, I don't have to disprove the hypothesis (though I did),
the proponent must prove it. That's science.

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, and UFO research -
Author of SF novels available at...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/library.htm
------