Somewhere in the Skies - The Andreasson Abduction

Episode Date: November 5, 2017

On episode 30 of SOMEWHERE IN THE SKIES, Ryan returns to UFOs with a detailed overview of the 1967 Betty Andreasson UFO abduction case.  One calm night, Betty was finishing dinner with her family when a group of non-human creatures entered her home, paralyzed her family into a state of suspended animation, and proceeded to abduct her and perform examinations on her aboard their craft.  This case is highly controversial and hotly debated. We'll hear from listeners on just what they think of the entire affair. We will then hear from Peter Robbins, UFO researcher and former assistant of the late abduction researcher, Budd Hopkins. What does Robbins make of this bizarre case? Could it all be an elaborate hoax? Or was Betty Andreasson taken aboard a craft in what she believed to be a half alien/half religious experience of cosmic proportions? Guest Bio: Peter Robbins is an investigative writer, author, and lecturer, best known for his books, columns, articles, radio commentaries, interviews and conference talks. He has appeared as a guest on and been a consultant to numerous television programs and documentaries. Peter was born in Queens New York and studied art, design, and theater at the University of Bridgeport in Connecticut. He received his BFA (painting, film history) from New York City’s School of Visual Arts (SVA) where he also taught painting for a dozen years. In the mid-1980s, he became seriously involved in UFO research when his knowledge of classified data indicated to him the US government was not telling the public the truth about UFOs. Patreon Campaign: CLICK HERE Website: CLICK HERE Order Ryan's Book here: CLICK HERE Twitter: @SomewhereSkies Instagram: @SomewhereSkiesPod Opening Theme Song, "Ephemeral Reign" by Per Kiilstofte Episode Edited by Jane Palomera Moore SOMEWHERE IN THE SKIES is produced by Third Kind Productions, in association with Antica Productions Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/somewhere-in-the-skies. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The following episode comes from a listener request by Bill S for his monthly contribution to the Somewhere in the Skies Patreon campaign. If you would like to decide on a certain guest or topic that I cover here on the show, consider becoming a Patreon subscriber today. To learn more and to contribute, visit patreon.com backslash somewhere skies. And now, on with the show. This is Somewhere in the Skies with Ryan Sprague. Welcome to Somewhere in the Skies. your host, Ryan Sprague. There are many accounts of alien abduction that have littered the tabloids, big and small screens, and hundreds of books for decades now. Some appear to be completely

fabricated or just couldn't stand the test of scientific or psychological rigor. But there are those rare cases that truly leave even the most skeptical of minds utterly baffled. Today, I cover an abduction case that has stood the test of time. and remains one of the most interesting and credible accounts to date. This is the incredible story of Betty Andreessen and the Andreessen Affair. In the city of South Ashburnham, Massachusetts, on the night of January 25, 1967, one of the most celebrated cases of UFO abduction began. Betty Andreessen was working in her kitchen while her seven children, mother, and father were in the living room.

Shortly after 6.30 p.m., the lights in the house briefly blinked. Immediately thereafter, a reddish light began to beam through the kitchen window. The sudden darkness in the house set the kids' nerves on edge, and Betty ran to comfort them. Her father ran into the kitchen to peer out the window and find the source of the unusual light. To his utter shock, he saw five odd-looking beings coming towards the house with a hopping motion. Before he could regain his composure, he saw the beings walk right through the wooden door. What happened next would test the imagination and strength of even an open-minded, adventurous person. The entire family was suddenly put into a state of suspended animation.

One of the creatures went to Betty's father, while one of the other four began to make telepathic communication with Betty. He was about five feet tall. The other four appeared to be around a foot shorter. All of the beings had a pear-shaped head with wide eyes and small ears and noses. Their mouths were only slits and never moved, though they were able to communicate through their minds. The beings wore a type of cover-all,

blue in color with a wide belt. There also was a logo of a bird on their sleeves. The hands had only three fingers, and they wore boots. The creatures did not move as a human, but floated as they went. Betty would later recall, though she was frightened, that she felt a sense of calm, even friendship, towards the beings. The creatures were holding Betty's children in a frozen state of consciousness,

but when Betty showed concern for them, they released her 11-year-old daughter to assure her that the children were not being harmed. Betty was taken by the creatures outside to a wading craft which rested on the side of a sloping backyard. The craft was estimated to be about 20 feet in diameter in the classic UFO shape of a saucer. Betty believes that after she was aboard the craft, it joined a mother ship where she underwent a physical examination and also was subjected to the effects of strange equipment. After this, she was given a type of bizarre test, which called her. caused her pain at first, but resulted in a kind of religious experience.

Here's an actual sound clip of Betty during an interview stating what happened during the examination. What did they do after they had examined you? Well, after they had examined me, they took me back to the cubicle where they told me to change into my regular clothes. And from there, I was escorted into this room that appeared like a quonset, a hut type room, half cylindrical and within it were eight glass-like chairs and they sat me down in the one of the chairs to the right and this hood glass-like hood came down and I could hear it click around me and then I felt very cold as if I was freezing and it seemed as if I was there for a very long time and from there I was taken and put into another chair to the left and again this glass like

hood came down and sealed around me and I could hear the snap and they also put some tubes in my nose and I could hear it as they put them into the glass I could hear it seal like and also a tube from my mouth and they told me to keep my eyes closed and they gave me this reddish color liquid to take and it tasted very sweet I felt very relaxed from it and meanwhile this gray liquid fell down you know was falling on my head and it was filling up in the bottom of the chair and when it was filled and vibrated like a whirlpool around about me. From there, they drained that out, took the breathing tubes out, and set me on this track

where one being was in front of me and one being was in back of me, and at this point they had their different uniform. It was a sort of a shiny aluminum-type uniform, and they put two black hoods on their heads. And we went out of this room into a very dark black ton of. It seemed as if it was chipped out of stone, and there were other entrances. I could tell because their uniform sent off like a bright light, and I could see like darker holes off to the sides. Did you start thinking that maybe these weren't angels after all at this point?

I didn't know what it was. The term alien still didn't crash your mind. I wasn't, you know, you weren't aware of mine, obviously. No, I wasn't aware of UFOs. Approximately four hours later, She was returned to her home by two of the captors. When she arrived, her entire family was still in a state of suspended animation. One of the creatures had stayed in her house, evidently, to watch the other family members.

After releasing the family from the Translake State, the creatures left. Betty would later state that the aliens had hypnotized her to not recall any of her experience until a designated time to be determined later. She was able to recall only certain things at a time of her experience, the red light through the kitchen window, and the beings entering the house being two of them. Before this bizarre happening, Betty had little or no knowledge of UFO folklore,

and being a devoted Christian, she believed that the abduction had had a religious meaning. It wouldn't be later until she began to view the abduction as alien in nature. Eight years later, Benny answered an ad from Dr. J. Allen Heinek, who was soliciting abduction experiences from the general public. Her letter was dismissed at the time because of its unusual details, and it would be January 1977 when her story would finally be fully investigated. The investigative team assigned to the Andreessen case included a solar physicist and electronics engineer in Arizona. in aerospace engineer, a telecommunication specialists, and a UFO investigator. The service of hypnotist and a medical doctor trained in psychiatry were also used.

Betty's case involved 12 months of investigation. Betty was given a character reference check, two lie detector tests, a psychiatric review, and an excruciating 14 sessions of regressive hypnosis. Small soundbites of the hypnosis sessions have, been released to the public. Here is a small portion of one of them. Now I must warn you, this may be a little disturbing. They're pulling something that needle again with a tool like on the end and pulling he's pulling it. It should. He's going to put that in my navel. The results of the Andreas and abduction case were startling. Betty, along with their daughter, relived a detailed account of their

experience, agreeing on all the basic aspects. These results were eventually, published in book form by renowned author and investigator Raymond Fowler. Fowler joined the U.S. Air Force in 1952, attended a special school for electronic espionage, after which he was assigned to the USAF Security Service under the auspices of the NSA. His civilian career included work on U.S. government projects, including the Minuteman Project Weapons System. Later in life, he became very interested in the UFO phenomenon, and would subsequently serve as director of scientific investigations for Mufon and also as a scientific associate for the Center for UFO Studies. He is internationally known as a highly competent

investigator and a trustworthy chronicler. In fact, Jay Allen Heinek, who developed the Heinek UFO classification system, recognized Fowler as one of the most outstanding investigators in the UFO field, stating that he personally knew of no other investigator more dedicated, trustworthy, or persevering as Fowler. In an interview about the case and about his book, the Andreessen Affair, Fowler had this to say. I'm probably acknowledges probably one of the most objective investigators in the United States, and I think my buddies who saw me produce this book wondered if I had lost all sense of objectivity and I'm really going on a limb really as far as my reputation goes and

and bringing this this book the Andreas Neffir out as I mentioned before we decided this was too strange to have just one person investigated we had a team of five and most of this team of five are engaged in scientific research and engineering research within the civilian scientific community and are really objective people all five and Investigators in their initial individual evaluations in this 528-page report indicated that they believe that the Andrius affair involved people who were telling the truth, who knew it to be, and that there was a real experience there. It was a sign that something really is happening to these people, especially since other cases exist similar to this. If this was just a unique case, I wouldn't be interested. But you did not go all the way to the point, or all the all the investigative.

of saying that yes, Betty Andriason and Becky Andreason did have a close encounter of the third kind. Yes, whatever that is, is a close encounter of the third kind type G. Now, the apparent stimulus for something like that is obviously extraterrestrial. But to accept the extraterrestrial hypothesis without physical proof would be non-scientific. Now, the Andreessen Affair remains one of the best-selling UFO abduction books of all time. And Fowler remains one of the most credible abduction researchers, as well. This case is still being investigated today and remains one of the most controversial, bizarre, but genuine abduction cases of all time. But I wanted to hear from you guys about what

you think of this case and just exactly what happened to Betty and her children on that bizarre night. Rob had this to say, quote, Betty's case is fascinating because it doesn't fit the normal mold of an abduction case. There were multiple eyewitnesses involved in the home while they took Betty on board the craft. The daughter was able to relive it through hypnosis as well as Betty. This case has been heavily investigated and still is and it has not yet been dismissed. Kate had this to say, quote, we have much the aliens want. Our soul, love, many things. We are worth something, or they would just dump us all into the ocean. A very thing. A very thing. A very thing. A very thing. A very famous experiencer once advised me not to do hypnosis. You don't want to remember that stuff.

Once you become a famous experiencer, you are subject to ridicule and rejection from the public in general. Take a look at several experiencers in how they are treated by the UFO world in general. Prove it and they spend their lives proving it and under attack constantly. David had this to say, quote, The Andreessen case is one of the most important abduction cases. thanks in large part to Raymond Fowler's detailed investigation. It established that there is a link between alien abduction and out-of-body or near-death experiences, and that the aliens are quite familiar with the out-of-body realm,

that their technology may actually operate on, quote, both sides of the veil. Tim says, quote, Betty's case is hugely important. To my mind, it calls to question the realist or the physicalist, view of reality itself, which is itself a metaphysical assumption or starting point, rather than the settled science the mainstream culture would have us believe. But in terms of that settled science, some are a bit more skeptical, I would say, with good reason. Sean had this to say, quote, you need to ask why. Why would they pass through a door yet need surgical instruments to perform experiments in terms of these creatures?

As a scientist, I always ask why before I even ponder if something did happen? Why would aliens who are apparently trying to be incognito light up their ships like a Goodyear blimp at a football game? Why pass through doors when they can just open them? Why freeze people in place when they could just sedate them? If it doesn't make sense, it probably didn't happen that way. And then we have the words of Tristan in an article from bizarre and grotesque.com. Tristan has this to say, quote, Betty's description of her abductors is strange and inconsistent.

Over the years, Betty went from describing the alien's eyes as white with pupils, to being entirely black like the aliens in close encounters of the third kind. The uniforms the aliens wore also don't make much sense. According to Betty, they wore heavy boots. but what would have been the point since the aliens apparently floated everywhere. Furthermore, hypnosis sessions and recovered memories are notoriously unreliable. It should not be taken as serious proof that an abduction actually happened. Tristan also says that, quote,

In February of 2007, Betty and Bob Lucas' son, Robert Jr., announced that the Andreessen affair was a hoax. In a 2000-word email, Robert. Robert Jr. claimed that his father was a compulsive liar who had a drinking problem. According to Robert Jr., Betty had been experiencing emotional shock because her two sons had earlier died in a car accident. After meeting her second husband, Betty would write about every dream she had as though it were an abduction. And Bob encouraged her and even manipulated investigators into leaving the story. So there's clearly more to this entire Andreessen affair than meets the eye. But I wanted to hear what someone who researched the alien abduction phenomenon with clear and objective approaches,

having even worked side by side for many years with claimed abduction researcher Bud Hopkins. So now, to give us a bit more insight and his personal thoughts on the case, here is my mentor and our special guest, Peter Robbins. Thank you for joining me today on someone in the sky. to talk about this. Glad to, Ryan. So I guess let's start with what sort of knowledge do you have at this case, Peter? I know that it is from the peripheral, as it were, but this is one of the more fascinating cases.

And you've been a part of some extremely fascinated in abduction cases, having worked with Bud Hopkins as well. But in terms of the Andreessen affair, where does this case land, in your opinion? Very high up. One thing that we need to take stock of here is where this case, to use the most dispassionate term possible for life-changing human affairs, to put it mildly, where it sits in the history of uphology, it was in 1967 that Betty Andreasen had the experience that ultimately became the core of the case. but she didn't contact anybody about it for another eight years. It wasn't until 1975 that she wrote a letter to the best known person in the world regarding UFOs at the time, Dr. Alan Heineck. And Heinek, who I'm sure had a very busy schedule, demurred in that he simply put the letter aside, like many letters, and not unlike memories of working with Bud over the years when something didn't really seem to be a priority.

Also in 1975, the whole study of abductions per se was in its infancy. The general attitude of the UFO research community internationally, as far as I'm concerned, was lights in the night sky, radar returns, physical traces, doing all you could, at best, to appear like a responsible grown-up because any responsible grown-up who claimed to have a serious interested in UFOs was already setting themselves up. as something of a social oxymoron. And Heinek understood that there was ridicule attached to this factor. If one started talking about the beings inside of the craft, there was fuel for ridicule.

And as Dave Jacobs once said to me, and I'm paraphrasing here, all of our attention was focused on the cars and none on the drivers. The fact is, this book came out in 1979, a full two years before Bud Hopkins' missing time. which puts it in a very special place. Also, it was researched, as Dr. Heineck tells us, by one of the original research team members that work with him when he returned his attention to that letter and realized this had potential tremendous importance. He asked Fowler, Raymond Fowler, if he would lead the investigation. Fowler did a brilliant job, and his name is a very important one in UFO studies. If you're entry level and trying to familiarize yourself with the literature or have a particular interest in the subject of abductions,

Raymond Fowler, who is still very much with us, but retired from the work, was such a careful, analytical, scientific, pragmatic researcher in the way that he progressed in his work. At the same time, we learn years after the fact because he keeps writing. There is the Andresen Affair, the Andreasen Affair Part 2, the Andreasen Legacy, and then a more general book on abductions inspired by the Andreessen studies called The Watchers. He lays out for us in very analytical terms why he takes this case so seriously and runs it through rigorous testing. In fact, one of the things that caught me off guard was leading up to his stupendous research on the Andresen incidents, because there are many of them. Dr. Heineck and his team did an exhaustive investigation of Betty Andreasen's claims interviewing family members. Her husband Bob had had an experience when he was young and one later in life. Her daughter, their daughter Becky,

had had experiences with her mom. And they looked at everything. The psychiatric examinations, stress analysis, checks on her character, analysis of the weather reports of the days that she said the weather was such and such, and supporting testimony of other observers. It turned out to be a 528-page single-space report. I mean, the initial investigation before Fowler began to focus in on it for years is really worth a great deal of respect. Also, again, this is 1979. Now, in general UFO studies, the abduction subject is taken very seriously. In, I guess, in a way, UFO counterculture, there's a strong trend, which I understand to look at things from more a Jacques Valet pioneered point of view or the more anomalous aspects of the theories of what UFOs are in the intelligences behind them. Ultimately, Fowler in his work has no where to go except to marry, to a degree, the world of hard UFOs, so to say, and the world of parapsychology. And the

confirmed and reconfirmed and reconfirmed facts that in the Andreessen and other significant cases, those two aspects of individuals' lives often intertwined. And I wanted to read just one quick quote from the introduction to the Andresen affair only because now it seems so passe but at that time even for a figure as respected as Alan Heinek I think it took great courage to say which is a former book by Mr. Fowler UFO's interplanetary visitors upholds this more popular concept of UFOs and many of the cases he describes tend to give strong support to that hypothesis. But here we have creatures of light who find walls no obstacle to free passage into rooms and who find no difficulty in exerting uncanny control over the witness's minds. If this represents

an advanced technology, then it must incorporate the paranormal just as our own incorporates transistors and computers, end quote. He says in short that they have mastered the puzzle of mind over matter. And again, that was kind of re-shocked me up when I was just preparing for this interview, how different the times were. From here, Fowler and his team go on to document a brilliantly analyzed and researched life history. We also find that the watchers, the beings, as Betty describes them, have an agenda, that although their interactions are often very frightening, to her, they have a message for humanity. It's not unlike certain biblical messages or contact team messages. We're messing up. We need help, and we're not giving it to ourselves. There's a fair amount of what I would call channeling involved a great deal of regressive hypnosis that seems

extremely responsible and well done. But it's quite an epic. And if you superimpose upon it, a book from almost 10 years later, Bud Hopkins Intruder's from 1987 about Debbie Jordan, Debbie Jordan Cabell's experience. You see almost template other important cases and analysis of claims of abductees have followed, of course, but I give a great deal of credit to Fowler. And I can't say I know Betty. We've met a number of times and have a very cordial acquaintanceship. I was scheduled to see her last month, but a health problem caused her to have to cancel out of the conference that she's going to speak at. So I am looking forward to seeing her again. I know that she and Bob have their own book out now, which I am sure will add to the important contactee and abductee literature that we have available to us.

One of the things I wanted to touch on a little bit, Peter, is that that idea of the paranormal. You know, I know that you personally worked with Bud on a case where a woman was literally floated out of a solid wall, out of a window, and onto a craft. Now, we have this claim by Betty that her family, when she was in her house and being taken, that they were left in a suspended animation, that they all were just frozen and that one of the creatures actually stayed behind to watch after them. So this whole idea of the paranormal being involved within a UFO case really struck me. This is why a lot of people consider this case very bizarre. And many people consider Linda's case, Linda Cortillo, a very bizarre case as well. Do you see any sort of connecting or similar things between these two cases? Sure.

First, the obvious that these are two women who were repeatedly taken from their places of residence through solid walls or windows. In Linda's case, which is the subject of Bud Hopkins' 1996 book, Witness the true story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO abductions, it would be one thing if it was this woman's account on her own. And to add outrageousness that she lives in Lower Manhattan, very close to the Brooklyn Bridge, and that the circular glowing UFO that she saw it but nobody else happened to, even though it's two in the morning, it's Manhattan.

That would be outrageous. The fact is that several other, several dozen independent individuals who we were able to confirm were actual people observed that glowing disc over their building around Lower Manhattan. Bud Hopkins being a well-known figure in UFO investigation at that time and a public person would be a likely person to receive correspondence on this. And this was a case that I worked with him for longer and with a deeper involvement than any other event in the years that I was his assistant. In fact, it was six regular years. It was 89 that he began his investigation and again six years later that the book was public. published, when several dozen people write to you, you being Bud, and they say, were they making a movie? I saw it from the Brooklyn Bridge. I saw it from the West Side Highway. I saw it from the loading dock of the New York Post or wherever.

And this is what it looked like. During this investigation, one of the most exciting parts for me, and I think, Bud, in a very quiet, researchy way, is that many of these letters, all this again, you know, pre-internet, actual letters sent. from different postal addresses with different handwritings, etc. Most of them or many of them included drawings. Butt and I, being trained artists, found it doubly moving because normally a witness drawing overwhelmingly, the chances are that it's done by an untrained hand. But one thing is almost certain. There's a great deal of intention in the drawing.

If it's not, you know, beautifully rendered, it's done with great integrity and attention to detail. Sometimes things are labeled. In this case, there was a specific color sequence to the craft, to the craft, and every single drawing captured the shape and the color sequence from different locations in Lower Manhattan. Again, this is what we call circumstantial evidence, but when added to a growing stack of very credible circumstantial evidence and then physical evidence, et cetera,

you have the makings of a very important investigation. All abductees that I've spent time with are told things in their heads. Some of them, obviously willing to share them. Many of them very much the same, seemingly word for word in certain cases. And I think that cuts across major abduction studies. If we wanted to dig and pick, I'm sure we could draw quite a number of parallels between Linda's case and Betty's case for sure. Right.

And another big aspect of Betty's case, in particular, Peter, is this idea of spirituality playing a very big role in this. Now, a lot of people, they know that Betty is very Christian, a very practicing religious person, and that this played a big role in her perception of what happened to her, the being of light, you know, this godly figure almost that she believes gave her these messages. Now, I'm sure you've come across this in your abduction research and working with abductees as well, that a lot of them do see this as either an angelic experience or something extremely spiritual. I know I have come across several experiencers who claim that even a UFO sighting was something angelic. Now, what do you make of this whole aspect of Betty's case?

And she said that last part, my first thought was a very important case, if you will. will, not so much for uphology, but for the Christian religion, is the famous miracle of Fatima. Yes. These uneducated shepherd children who observed what they called a vision of the Mother Mary, Virgin Mary in the sky, has become a huge part of the miracles of the Catholic Church from the early 20th century in this case. However, in the accounts very well documented of the time, when they're specifically asked to describe what that vision looked like, they don't describe the face of a beatific, beautiful, shrouded woman in the sky.

They describe a huge glowing circle. I am of a mind after more than 40 years of looking at this subject from different angles that there are variables that we, We may never be able to pin down. We know as well as we can that they, these other particular intelligences, they have the power or the technology or the psychic abilities or whatever the mechanism is to put certain things in the minds of the human beings they interact with, either what they may be thinking, feeling, or seeing. Also, and if that's so, then perhaps that is what these individuals are seeing, what we would call a screen memory, rather than what is actually in front of them, or what is actually in front of them. But then there's a third variable that some of our colleagues don't really take into consideration. I do for more than 20 odd years because I worked for years in crisis intervention. and part of our training was to understand the physiology of human shock. And if you're looking at something that you absolutely cannot accept in a total shock situation,

the mind is a powerful and in its own way wonderful thing and will mask that memory. Either it will become the repressed memory of your life or one of them, or it will emerge at a time that you can deal with it, either coaxed out or or naturally making itself apparent. So with those three understandings, number one, I'm damned if I know which one it is for Betty or which combination of them. What I do know is that in the case of Betty Andreas and the person that I know a little and like very much, yes, she is a religious Christian, as is her husband.

And they draw peace and comfort and positive aspects of their life from those deeply entrenched beliefs, I think in life, which can be tough enough, if something serves you, it's not necessary to push too hard and ask questions as to why or how, especially in the spiritual realm. God bless Betty and Bob. I know that they have been through tragedies in their life that would absolutely waste other people and that their belief in Jesus and the tenants that he taught have helped get them through and move on and live full lives. So I, I almost don't care. It's interesting because there was a time in my work that that was the driving force. Which are these things? Is it? Well, any of the above and all. And that's what we have here, a situation where the paranormal, the hard reality of UFOs, traditional Christian beliefs come together in a matrix.

It's important to note also that during the writing of these two books that in his investigative work, with Dr. Heineck beforehand. Raymond Fowler never made public the fact that he did later in life, that he was an abductee, very much in the spirit that Kathleen Martin did not make that public earlier in life. I think they both understood innately that it would be a distraction, it would be something that naysayers and ankle biters would pick at and try to find, meaning in also, Raymond Fowler is also a very Christian man. And I say that with a capital C and with all respect. And for me, part of my admiration for him as an investigative writer in a very complex subject, to put it mildly, is that his work straight through his career is completely analytical. It reminds me of one of the most important lessons I felt that was passed on to me by one of my three major mentors when I started, Colonel retired Coleman von Kovetsky, which as a Hungarian, I think 99% of whom are Catholics. Coleman went to church on Sunday. He practiced his religion religiously, but he had no patience for

people having their scientific UFO research informed by the kind of mysticism that he felt did not help us understand the nature of the subject that we were dealing. with. Again, if anything now, an even more complex subject with so many people looking at the whole UFO phenomena from a decidedly religious, quasi-religious sort of matrix. It is, it's an eternal struggle and battle, I believe, between science and religion that, again, if you have one of these experiences, it really is the lens in which you choose to perceive it, whatever you decide and choose to accept in your life as this is what happened to me. I would have to agree, Peter, that at this point in my research, I don't necessarily care one way or another.

This is what Betty believes happened. That's the story she's going to tell. And it's up to the listener and the other experiencers to decide if they choose to believe that or not. The other small thing I did want to bring up in terms of this case is that one of the family members came forward in the last few years or so, claiming that they believe that this entire incident was a hoax. betrayed by Betty, unfortunately. Now, in terms of family members coming forward and making these claims, what would you say to someone who is a severe skeptic and would believe that someone would make this entire thing up and spend the rest of their life talking about it? Like you mentioned, Betty went through a lot of hard times after this event happened. Family members were lost and whatnot.

What do you make of the idea to the skeptics who say, nope, none of this. It's all complete bullshit. Well, for starters, if somebody has an intention to deceive and they come off as a basically sincere person committed in every respect of behavior and language and pronouncements and working to make it seem the deception they want to perpetrate is actual. It's doable. For whatever reasons, it seems to be part of human nature that some people are intent on deceiving other people. And some people are very good at it. So let me put it this way, much as I like, respect, admire Betty, if it could be proved to my satisfaction, which is fairly high standard, that this family member's allegation were true. I'd go, gosh, that's kind of sad. And it happens.

It does not make other cases or other individuals who have claimed similar things and have them backed up scientifically, et cetera, wrong. It just means that this person wasn't telling the truth and was good at it and perpetrated a fraud. Yeah, those things happen. I think in euphology, they're well in the minority, but they certainly happen. I think that's a good point, too, is I spoke to a gentleman recently about being the first person to ever have witnessed the black-eyed children phenomenon. And he told me, you know, if someone could come forward and tell me that they pulled a prank on me that day or that this was all. you know, part of some elaborate hoax, he said, please, do it. Please tell me, please prove to me that what I saw was not a genuine experience. And I will, I will accept that and I will move on.

I think it's important that Betty has never claimed that, oh, try to prove me wrong, try to prove me wrong. She will say, if you can back up my case with scientific evidence, I hope you can. But until then, this is what I believe happened to me. And that's what I'm going to continue to believe and I think that's very important. So I would have to agree with you. Anyone who believes that this case is 100% a hoax, I highly suggest that they look at the work of Fowler and take the opinions and the educated opinions by people like yourself and other abduction researchers that something definitely happened to Betty. What exactly that was we may never know. But again, we deal with that every day with this topic. Yeah, I'm remembering at this point, there's no hard

statistic of how many of what type of beings abductees and experiences report having seen or interfaced or had exchanges with. And if such a statistic alleged to exist, we would immediately have to question it as problematic because there's no way of actually knowing. And maybe they'll never be. In the years I work with Bud, I think we both agreed informally that of all the reports of beings, other intelligences, aliens, a word I've never been comfortable with in this realm, etc. I don't know. Three quarters, 80% of them maybe were in the, very much in the range of what we'll call an archetypical gray. Also, it's interesting to note that in the Andreasen affair, the beings that we keep dealing with are these archetypical grays. But this book was written so long ago

that that term didn't exist at the time. But the other 20% or quarter or so varied wildly. Once again, was this a function of a fact that there are a whole lot of them and they look really different and maybe a range of them fit into the immortally wonderful Star Wars bar scene or that they're, you know, pulsating bits of amoeba that have no... relationship or appearance similarities to humanoids? Or is this something that is put in the minds of those involved by these intelligences, for whatever reasons, or is it informed by the physiology and defensive aspects of human shock or some combination thereof? I am completely sure

that I have no idea. I could not agree with you more, my friend. And I think that's where I land on this case as well. It is fascinating. I have no idea. yet what to make of it. I'm going to continue looking into it as I'm sure all the listeners will. And I have to thank you for taking the time to come on and talk through this with me today. I value your educated opinion on this, as I'm sure the listeners will as well. I guess to end, do you have anything coming up that you can let our listeners know about? Right now, it's funny, here in the Northeast, where the seasonal change is very visual as we have come into autumn. My schedule out there speaking in the world is now gone quiet for a while after a fairly

intense late summer and early autumn. And so this is where I go back to finishing up the book that I have been working on for a while that will be out sometime next year, hopefully early next year, begin to look for speaking jobs also for next year, drafting out a project that I had in mind for some time but need to complete this one on. And the odd bits of weatherproofing and getting ready for winter here in central New York, nothing you can relate to, I'm sure. I will say you one thing, my friend.

Adapting to the West Coast has been difficult, but I will not miss this coming winter. I'll tell you that much. Got it, man. With that, Peter, again, thank you for coming on somewhere in the skies today. My pleasure, and looking forward to our paths crossing again, next wherever and whenever. Always, always. All right, that is it for this week's episode. I hope

this episode served as a detailed overview of this hotly debated abduction case. Whether you believe, want to believe, or choose not to, I highly suggest checking out the work of Raymond Fowler on his investigation into Betty Andreessen's accounts. My thanks again to the listeners who shared their thoughts, and I'd still love to hear what you think of this case. Visit the website, somewhere in the skies.com and use the contact tab. My thanks also to Peter Robbins. Anyone wanting to reach out to Peter, he is always available on Facebook. Just search for Peter Robbins.

Again, check us out on Twitter at SomewhereSkies and on Instagram at SomewhereSkies pod. If you haven't already, please subscribe, rate and review the show on iTunes. Right now, if you do all three, I will send you an official Somewhere in the Sky's sticker. And speaking of stickers, the Somewhere in the Sky's store is open. with all types of merchandise, designed by loyal listener, Eduardo Lobo. Go to tpublic.com and search for somewhere in the skies. Again, that's teepublic.com. Lastly, if you'd like to choose my topic, like Bill did today, or even choose my guests,

or be on the show yourself, these options are all available through the Patreon campaign. With your monthly support of the show, we can grow and become more of a community. To learn more, check out all of the show. of the rewards and to become a patron, visit patreon.com backslash somewhere skies. Next week, we are tackling Hollywood and UFOs in a fascinating and entertaining ride with author and researcher Robbie Graham. Remember, keep your feet on the ground, but never stop searching. Somewhere in the Skies. Where in the Skies is produced by Third Kind Productions, in association with Antica Productions

and the Antica Podcast Network. To learn more, visit Anticaproductions.com. com.