She wrote a popular book vs a journal article, I notice that she
tends to grandstand her views a bit. I found some of her opinions to
be a little biased. It's not a long book and doesn't really break any
It's true that Psychology is not a hard science however it is
considered a *science* (as apposed to an art or a pseudo-science.)
I think it's important to focus on witnesses to abduction type events
for no other reason than, that's all the evidence we seem to have.
Clancy points out that the stories are not at all uniform but seem to
be within the witnesses frame of reference, that's very suggestive
that the prime force of the stories are coming from within a witness
and not from an outside agency.
Her book is not perfect by any stretch but I think it's a step in the
right direction, only if people are really interested in finding the
truth. Those that believe will not be happy with Clancy but, they are
seldom happy with any systematic approach to the problem which might
invalidate their claims.
The Odd Emperor
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org
, John Beatty
> I've read of it, reviews are generally favorable in
> the evidence-based community. No one has defied what
> science there is to it, and that is not a lot.
> Psycology dosen't have a lot of testable evidence to
> support its claims as a science, and that might
> explain the lukewarm reception.
> --- odd_empire <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Hey!
> > I was wondering if any of you skeptics (or non
> > skeptics) have actually
> > read Susan Clancy's book 'Alien Abduction'. If so,
> > What do you think of
> > it?
> > Coincidentally (or not) many people have been
> > weighing in on both
> > sides of the issue. Clancy is uniformly hated by the
> > believer community
> > and most skeptics seem ambivalent. After reading the
> > book I think I've
> > found out why.
> > The Odd Emperor
> John D. Beatty, Milwaukee Wisconsin
> "History is the only test for the consequences of ideas"
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around