Has anyone actually tried to read into the Varo-Jessup annotated report?

Question

You can download it here

http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/Varo-Jessup.PdF

after reading a bit of this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_Experiment

What a bunch of c**p. I was patient enough to go up to page 38, at which point the blatant ignorance of Modern Physics (already available at the alleged time of writing), contradictions in at times sophisticated Science Fiction, and unbelievable ignorance from "expert" comment, really got me grouchy. Notice the style that sounds suspiciously contemporary for something written in the 50's, the use of wording and some concepts ever present in today's Sci Fi, but way sophisticated to SF at the time and the absurdity of a translation of English to... English.

Take a look. Tell me what you think. Shouldn't the external links of the Wikipedia entry (where I found it) carry a link to "The Varo Jessup read with scientific literacy"? Unfortunately I don't have the time for such an undertaking, but maybe SCICOP should take an interest, don't you agree?

Answer 1

I went and looked at it just now, and I have to congratulate you on making it to page 38.  Typical UFO pseudo-evidence.  Take an already conjectural bit of UFOlogy, add some gobbleygook 'annotations' and call it evidence.

The quality of the logic from the UFO crowd is evidenced right in the first section, the forward by the editor of the version.  He mentions the question of whether the book is real or fake, and says " the fact that you are holding this edition confirms that it is real"  Oookay.....

Answer 2

Of course, I haven't had time to read it, but scanning over it I get the gist.  I believe Jessup's book, "The Case for the UFO" was dealt with by Philip Klass in one of his UFO books.  I can't remember which one.  

Not having read as much as you did, this is just another example of how utterly immersed some people can get in this UFO thing and how blinkered their views can become.  I've seen how some woo-woos are obsessively dedicated to extending and refining their pet theories.  Here, take a look at George Hammond's "scientific proof of God".

http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of...

There's lots more where that came from!