I didn’t realize at first that Jacques Vallee and Chris Aubeck in their Wonders in the Sky (2009) were going to have a whole second section of “evidence” from ancient history, this time evidence they themselves consider dubious. I’ve been rather harsh on the “best” evidence for ancient UFOs the pair presented, but I did enjoy some of the wacky cases that the two authors admit are sometimes “comical” examples of mystery-mongering alternative writers really stretching things to try to invent aliens out of nothing. Here are a couple of the highlights:
I wonder why Vallee and Aubeck didn’t apply the same critical thinking to the evidence they considered “true” (including pieces from UFO magazines, secondhand summaries of ancient material, and fabricated quotes) that they do with these pieces. I can’t see any real difference in quality between what they claim as “good” evidence and what they say is “bad.”
I am an author and researcher focusing on pop culture, science, and history. Bylines: New Republic, Esquire, Slate, etc. There's more about me in the About Jason tab.
Enter your email below to subscribe to my newsletter, The Skeptical Xenoarchaeologist, for updates on my latest projects, blog posts, and activities, and subscribe to Culture & Curiosities, my Substack newsletter.
Terms & Conditions
Please read all applicable terms and conditions before posting a comment on this blog. Posting a comment constitutes your agreement to abide by the terms and conditions linked herein.