Following recent discussions I have had with researchers Jeff Knox and Theo Pajimans, I recently sought permission from Dr Thomas E Bullard to upload a searchable scan of his two-volume work, “UFO Abductions: The Measure of a Mystery” (1987), which he has now kindly permitted. Volume 1 is a 414-page comparative study of abduction reports, with Volume 2 containing a 449-page catalogue / database of UFO abduction cases
The author of the leading encyclopedia on UFOs, Jerome Clark, has said that “Bullard’s work is, in my judgment, the most important yet done on the abduction phenomenon, and it is fundamental to any understanding and discussion of same” (Jerome Clark, UFO Updates Discussion List, October 1997) and “Nobody has ever written more intelligently, more knowledgeably, and more even-handedly than Bullard on the abduction phenomenon” (Jerome Clark, UFO Updates Discussion List, October 1999). Clark has made other comments over the years on material written by Eddie Bullard, including the views that it is “the best piece of writing I’ve ever seen on the subject anywhere”, contains “insightful analysis” and “an intelligent, balanced discussion devoid of the sort of polemics that dominate the abduction debate”.
Veteran UFO researcher Jan Aldrich has referred to Dr Bullard as “the most credible” investigator of the abduction phenomena (Jan Aldrich, UFO Updates Discussion List, October 1997).
UFO researcher Jim Speiser has said “UFO Abductions: The Measure of a Mystery” is a “monumental two-volume, 673 page work by a folklorist who set out to show that abductions were nothing more than 20th century fairy tales. He admits he failed. Anyone who says we’re not trying to take an empirical look at this subject should get a load of this” (Jim Speiser, 1989, ParaNet File Number 00098).
Jim Speiser has also said the research in Dr. Thomas E. Bullard’s “…. mammoth 600 page opus … shows that there is not much evidence to support the contention that individual regressionists have an influence on differences between accounts, nor does hypnosis seem to be a factor in general” (Jim Speiser, 1989, ParaNet File Number 00217).
I don’t mean to give the impression that everyone has agreed with all of Thomas E Bullard’s conclusions. For example, skeptic Peter Brookesmith has said “I think Ed Bullard is wrong in almost everything he’s said about the relationship between folklore and ufolore.” (UFO Updates Discussion List, October 1997). Earthlights researcher Paul Devereux has said Bullard “can be seriously, indeed fatally, faulted on methodological and logic grounds, and I’m sure someone will do so before too long.” (UFO Updates Discussion List, November 1997).
Incidentally, some of the more more scholarly articles debating who is right in relation to various abduction issues were published in journals/magazines which are not yet online, which someone really should try to sort out…
In addition to obtaining permission from Dr Bullard to upload this work, FUFOR (which originally published this work) also helpfully gave permission. Jeff Knox provided scans of both issues.
