In a perfect world, we would not yet be entertaining the question, "how did extraterrestrials get here," since we have yet to establish a general consensus that they are here. Sadly, when the evidence is presented, many otherwise reasonable people find it necessary to respond that extraterrestrials couldn't possibly be here, and couldn't possibly do the things they are alleged to do-- hardly a scientific attitude-- and therefore UFOs must be swamp gas, mass hysteria, hallucinations, sleep paralysis, lies, conspiracy, weather balloons, or the planet Venus. So the cart is put before the horse: We have to discuss how they could be here and do what they do before we can even entertain whether or not they're here and, if so, what they're doing.
Worse, we waste a lot of time speculating why extraterrestrials would behave as witnesses describe, as if not knowing their motives permits us to dismiss the idea that they exist. I wish the final answer were "we have no idea why. First, let's establish 'if' and 'what.'"
But it isn't. "We don't know how or why extraterrestrials would do what they reportedly do; therefore, they don't exist." This flawed logic flies surprisingly well with the general public (and examples can be found among the reviews here), and so books like this are necessary to offer some plausible "hows" and "whys."
Carol's part in the book is to entertain such conjectures. Her speculations are the sort that should occur to any reasonably bright person who is interested in both science and UFO phenomena-- in other words, anyone who has any business dismissing UFO reports on scientific grounds. But again, it's an imperfect world. For me, Carol's contribution felt mostly superfluous and the delivery corny, but for the level of thinker who assumes that science rules out the truth of all UFO reports, I think it's appropriate.
Budd's contribution is, as usual, gripping, even if you think he and his sources are making it all up. I find his style clear, coherent, witty, and even insightful. The subject matter is admittedly outlandish, and it's tempting to approach it armored in irony and sarcasm. "Hey, I'm readin' the crazy UFO guy!" Sure, that's fun. But it's not just one crazy UFO guy. To summarily dismiss UFO phenomena as laughable, you basically have to call all the witnesses a bunch of crazies and liars. Keep in mind that this list includes not only ordinary, otherwise sane individuals, but on-duty police officers, RAF aircraft spotters, pilots and their flight crews, security personnel at military bases where nuclear weapons are housed, and governments of NATO powers, among many others.
With this in mind, Budd doesn't seem quite so crazy.
Some have decided that Budd must be implanting suggestions in his hypnotic subjects, making them imagine "memories" that conform to Budd's idea of UFO abductions, but I have never seen anyone offer a single reason to think so, other than the fact that it's theoreticaly possible. Indeed, Budd provides transcripts of his hypnotic sessions in this book and elsewhere; so you'd think that if hypnotic suggestion were responsible for these abduction reports, we'd have plenty of examples of Budd leading the witnesses. I haven't noticed any, and the critics have so far failed to supply any. In fact, I'd say Budd goes to pains to avoid leading his subjects and takes measures to test the credibility of their recall. Furthermore, his witnesses report their abduction experiences before undergoing hypnosis, and many never do undergo hypnosis. They report these experiences, and then some undergo hypnosis to aid recall, not the other way around. Therefore, I fail to see how hypnotic suggestion could be the primary culprit, unless the effect is said to precede the cause.
Again, it shouldn't be necessary to make these points, but such is the level of public discourse on UFOs. So this book addresses a real need, and it's a page turner, too.
