UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1998 > Jul > Jul 23

Re: Why Migraines Don't Explain UFOs

From: John Rimmer <j_rimmer@library.croydon.gov.uk>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 18:31:34 +0100
Fwd Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 14:02:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Why Migraines Don't Explain UFOs


>From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 11:33:12 -0400
>Subject: Re: Why Migraines Don't Explain UFOs
>To: updates@globalserve.net

For the benefit of a number of people on this list, may I
repeat: John Harney is _not_ proposing a universal theory of UFO
origin, merely suggesting that _some_ otherwise puzzling UFO
report might be explained by some of the medical symptoms of
migraine.

Cashman seems curiously over-eager to discount the possibility
that _any_ UFO reports could be the result of migraine, to the
extent of refusing to read the only easily accessible book on
the topic.

He is keen to point out all the things an investigator should do
to prove a linkage between UFO experiences and migraine:

>first you must prove the close encounter reporter suffers from
>migraine.

I agree, but Sacks' book suggests that this might not be as easy
to find out as Cashman thinks. Perhaps he _should_ read the book
after all. He'd be very scathing if I said I wouldn't read any
astronomy textbooks because I'd already decided the topic had
nothing to do with UFOs.

He also suggest that we should demonstrate 'a continuum of
migraine experiences from the most headache like to the most
close encounter-like'. Well hang on a minute. We've only been
talking about this for a couple of days and you want a full
research programme already? I thought the idea of putting a
suggestion like this up an a mailing list was so that people
could look at whether or not evidence existed. The particular
caser which John Harney mentioned in "ETH Bulletin" was _not_
presented as "best evidence", simply a convenient comparison
which was to hand and seemed to have a number of relevant
features. I would still say that the Elsie Oakenson case bears
looking at.

Rob Irving's contribution about St Hildegard also suggests a
possible line of study. The wicked old PSHers of course would
say it was typical that a strange and distubing experience would
be interpreted as a religious vision by a 12th Century mystic,
and something entirely different by an inhabitant of a modern
technological society.

Are the ETH-as-a-possible-explanation crew _really_ so
closed-minded that they have to jump, with very heavy boots, on
other theories?

Yours openmindedly
John Rimmer

--

Magonia OnLine: www.magonia.demon.co.uk