Perhaps I’ve finally crashed and burned out flying these UFO books. Bishop does a fair job telling this modern tale of woe, though in my opinion the book suffers from some inconsistencies common to the genre. I found myself wishing that the author was more thorough in demarcating the source(s) for some of his assertions. There are so many actors (and agents) here that it is sometimes hard to tell who is telling whose story. I would find myself questioning whether certain facts or assertions were supported by the author’s own opinion, documents, or people, and how trustworthy or even who those people were. Perhaps this ambiguity is inevitable under the circumstances, but I have often gotten the feeling that these UFO books want to have the cake and eat it too, i.e. to somehow gain the respect (and attention) of the official authorities, but nevertheless maintain the attitude of unbridled speculation expected within the subculture. I will give an example: “When the NSA experts got a good look at this gadget, they were once again shocked that a man with little more than a master’s degree in physics had taken a few months and perhaps a few thousand dollars to tear a gaping hole in their multimillion dollar electronic house of cards. Techies ‘in the know’ informed [Richard] Doty that [Paul] Bennewitz ‘was really a genius at figuring things out.’” (p. 157) You too can stump the government's million-dollar boondoggles with only a "master’s degree in physics"! Who are these ‘techies’ exactly I wonder? How trustworthy is Doty (a rhetorical question) and what’s his motive for conveying such praise? Does Bishop find this information credible? Doty in particular seems untrustworthy (yet strangely likable!) in nearly every account I've read, yet much of the narrative appears to hinge upon his description. I would recommend the movie Mirage Men as I think the depiction of Doty in that film is much more in your face and closer to the truth as a master manipulator and professional conman. ‘Let the reader decide’ only gets you so far. I found myself wondering how much we really know about what exactly happened to Paul Bennewitz and who exactly was responsible for it. In a court of law I think they’d call a lot of this ‘hearsay’. Another example - the account of the 3 witnesses who spotted a strange experimental craft in Texas “belching fire” and surrounded by “twenty-three CH-47 Chinook helicopters” (did they count every one?!) stretched the boundaries of my own credulity. (Did no one else besides these 3 see such an incredible air show? That surprises me.) “Richard Doty thinks the craft was an atomic-powered anti-gravity-type craft that was on a test mission to fly out over the Gulf of Mexico and . . . had engine problems.” (pp. 169-71) Case closed. Yes, that was sarcasm. A bit of searching on Google uncovers plenty of skeptical debunking of this famous incident (‘Cash-Landrum’), and the $20 million civil suit against the U.S. government was eventually dismissed. Bishop’s uncritical presentation here is a prime example of the type of writing that prevents ufology from entering the (‘respectable’ or ‘official’ at least) mainstream. Certainly the notes of a rocket scientist scribbled in archaic German and turned over posthumously to the Air Force could easily become a movie script, but we are promised that “[t]here is a point to all this wild speculation.” (p. 171) Yet, this surreal and paranoid landscape is inescapable, and at times overwhelms the narrative. “It was a choice between millions of dollars of research, hundreds of hours of training, and an unknown number of lives, or the sanity of one U.S. citizen who was convinced . . . that an alien race was out to take over the U.S. government, and then the planet.” (p. 177) Framed like that, it hardly seems a choice at all. In the heat of Paul Bennewitz’s mind and in his garage, one can readily imagine the frenzied attempts to shield abductee “Myrna Hansen” from alien beams within the confines of a Lincoln Town Car wrapped in aluminum foil. (p. 18) I exaggerate a bit as it was only the windows of the Town Car that were covered, but (according to the Internet) Hansen’s nom de guerre matches a famous Hollywood actress, so perhaps you can forgive my theatricality. There is such scant information available about the abductee “Myrna Hansen” that I found myself wondering, are they the same person, the abductee and the actress? Information about the ufology mythos incarnation of Hansen is confined almost entirely to the books available and in context of the Bennewitz affair. I found myself wondering if she is a real person or a pseudonymous or invented identity. In fact, at the time of this writing, a blog interview of Bishop includes a link from the name “Myrna Hansen” to the Wikipedia entry for the actress. (See the ‘Think About It’ blog entry “2005: Project Beta and Underground Bases An Interview With Greg Bishop”) I was left wondering, ‘whatever happened to her anyway?’ None of the books I’ve read on this topic include any significant details or follow-up about Hansen’s life outside of her status as an abductee. Bishop notes only that Hansen “now lives somewhere in Northern California.” (p. 232) Adam Gorightly in his book Saucers, Spooks and Kooks puts forth the argument that Hansen was part of the disinformation campaign against Bennewitz. Gorightly says Hansen claimed to be 26 in 1980, so apparently a different person than the actress on Wikipedia, but is the abductee Hansen a real person or some type of disinformation patsy? Along these lines, I’m willing to admit that these failings that bother me are perhaps inevitable, to a degree, given the muddy terrain. We are often left on our own to sift for the ‘gold’, or fool’s gold as it were, which includes a “Cloudbuster/Spacegun” tested by the likes of Wilhelm Reich and later spotted resting on the tarmac “at an Air Force base in southern England”. It appears entirely possible that the “electronic wobbulation [!]” may be only in your own mind, or it could be the latest in surveillance drones using cutting edge “anti-gravity” technology!!! (pp. 163-69) Who can say ultimately? And even if they did say, could we trust them? After a while this starts to seem like conflicting stories whispered in the dark to explain the elephant in the room. Is this the trunk? The tail? The⸺!? Cue insane laugh track. Regardless of which part of the elephant is finally under examination in this somewhat plodding yet still readable account of the art of deception in modern life, and as practiced both by ordinary folk and the bureaucrats charged with protecting us, I found myself doubting everything and everyone by the end, which is perhaps the danger, or lesson, of this book.