{"apiVersion":"1","version":"sha256:faade27e0b75b2aca6311142ff65347b4dacc153e8d28cbdf0e8a237319331f9","data":{"id":"S7451","title":"Missing Time: A Documented Study of UFO Abductions","authors":["Budd Hopkins"],"publishedDate":null,"format":"Book","url":"https://search.worldcat.org/cs/title/missing-time-a-documented-study-of-ufo-abductions/oclc/1035524691","summary":"Retrospective and regression accounts of missing time are assembled by Hopkins.","subjects":["Abduction accounts","Hypnosis","Memory"],"people":["Budd Hopkins"],"review":{"label":"Supplied book read with gaps","scope":"Earlier 256-leaf narrative, endmatter, index, plates and caption repair remain reviewed. Specialists actually viewed 97 further disjoint v3 layouts: zero 161 and 168–207, 208–248, and 249–263. The received-v3 native union now covers all 265 layouts, zero 0–264, with no received layout unviewed. Chapter boundaries, the Clamar afterword, 89 numbered notes, 26 book and seven periodical bibliography entries, three index pages and a supplied blank are recorded. Apparatus entries do not establish cited-body reading. Root reviewed each whole final analytical report and evidence file and independently verified all inventories; root primary reading for these 97 layouts is false. Prior narrative duplication adds zero new body characters. Complete received-layout coverage does not resolve fine glyphs/photos, index-pointer collation, composite edition, impression year, original blanks/rear cover, physical-original identity or full rendition concordance. Whole-book completion remains held. Three later native field crops were independently viewed by root: WRKL at folio 111, NBC at 118, and a baseline period with no visible superscript immediately after Betty Andreasson at folio 209. This closes only those literal fields, with zero new leaf or narrative credit.","gaps":["The scan combines a later cover with an earlier interior. The alternate uploader reports padded front blanks and a missing rear cover; historical blank positions, exact impression year and complete original extent remain unverified.","Fine scar-photo detail and a full concordance between the 256- and 265-leaf renditions remain unresolved. Source-attributed memories, edited regression accounts and author interpretation do not establish independent clinical or physical causation.","The printed acknowledgement is dated 23 December 1980. Named assistance, typing and illustration attributions establish source dependence, not independently verified agency roles or current reproduction rights. Original recordings were not received in this lane.","The epigraph reproduces report-attributed Gemini sighting descriptions and a Jung quotation. Those original reports, mission records and Jung text were not opened; uncertain identification and the visible ellipsis remain. No new government-approach, custody or truth credit follows.","The introduction includes conventional misidentifications, a fruitless residue search and a reported suspected tumour proving nonexistent. Quoted report narratives, author estimates, anonymous relays and an explicitly hypothetical composite remain distinct from independently verified cases or clinical findings. Citation markers were read, not their cited original bodies. No patient records were collected.","Hopkins’s own 1964 Truro visual account is distinct from party guests, Boynton, tenants and O’Barski relays. Balloon, helicopter, fog, fence and floodlight possibilities, a failed headlight test and expressly brief investigation remain. Camera gear does not imply a photograph; reports from different nights are not multiplied as same-incident witnesses. Cited hypnosis, polygraph and NASA claims and government conjecture are not independently received originals, clinical validation or an agency approach.","Hopkins’s visits, calls and reenactment are distinct from translated Gonzalez, Pawlowski, Wamsley and anonymous FAA relays. The spokesman had no information on this case; another radar story is not its radar evidence. Refilled holes, possible dogs or headlights, police skepticism, absent lab results and date/time variants remain. Eight/nine witness counts are the author’s enumeration, not independently received originals. Tapes, maps, soil tests, broadcasts and agency records mentioned are not thereby received.","Kilburn session labels identify participants by narrative context; HM on folio 55 remains unknown. Quiet-recording failure, interruptions, inaudibles, tape-turn gap, editorial brackets and interviewer suggestions limit the published session text. Tapes were not heard in this lane. Hopkins’s observations of behavior are distinct from Kilburn’s claimed earlier experience; neither hypnosis nor distress validates the events or their cause.","The literal event year is 1973 on folio 62 and 1974 on folio 64. The second session is dated 1 December 1978; alleged independence after seven months is not authenticated. Arrival and clamp episodes are explicitly omitted despite the author’s dovetailing judgment. O’Barski declines hypnosis, time-gap arithmetic remains inference, and the author openly speculates.","Telepathy is introduced as a question and receives tentative assent; outside-voice reassurance is author interpretation. Clinical anecdotes and comparison cases are relays, not new patient records, physical specimens or clinical findings. Researcher contacts, credentials and an Air Force rank do not establish government tasking. Original recordings, sketches, charts and cited comparison bodies remain gaps.","Hopkins was absent from the Cooper examination; phone feedback is a relay and includes no unusual scars or puncture marks, with many possible causes for a tiny navel scar. Credentials and anatomical opinions are not original charts or event validation. Published sessions include recall revisions, gaps and recording breaks; NBC footage and original audio were not viewed. Kendall’s account passes through an investigator and Bloecher; an asleep child is not an observing corroborator.","Howard Rich is explicitly a substitute name. Initial no-time-lapse and later altered-programme or 2 a.m. recall remain separate versions. Neighbour and Fort Dix null reports, no exercises, raccoon, half-dream and possible pimple explanations remain. Howard initiated the Fort Dix inquiry; perceived prepared questions do not establish a covert approach. NASA debriefing wording is borrowed language. Original TV logs, stains, charts and agency records were not received.","Howard’s reported cold contrasts with a warm hand; no measured temperature, body marks or independently preserved blood spots are established. Mosquito, dream and ordinary tension alternatives remain. The David Oldham account is session testimony and family relay; the author’s case-count estimate is not a verified census. Howard-initiated Fort Dix questions remain relayed. Control, telepathy and anesthesia are author analogies or inferences.","The police record is quoted publication text, said to have been read aloud, rather than a received original sheet: 10:23 p.m., 4-5-69, with a sighting around 10:15 and three named boys. Dinner habits underlie the gap deduction. Bennett and Renata are explicit substitute names with conflicting observations. Dream discussion and repeated television viewing precede elicited later recall, including an acknowledged programme-drawing resemblance. NBC activity is media contact. Original police, broadcast, audio and clinical records remain gaps; the raster resolves WRKL (folio 111) and NBC (118).","Virginia Horton and Philip Osborne are explicit substitute names. Virginia’s picnic is Germany/Rhine/Frankfurt at folio 131 but France at 132, 133 and 157; southern Manitoba near Lake Superior at 129 remains literal and unrepaired. Childhood, dream, picnic, inquiry and hypnosis-session dates are kept distinct. Mother and grandfather voices are Virginia’s reenactment, rather than separate original tracks.","Television exposure, selected footage, mutual-friend relay, prior hypnosis discussion, prompting, inaudibles, tape change and isolated transcript sections limit independence and continuity. Ordinary barn injury, chicken blood, imagination, dreams, nighttime-drive explanations and awakening paralysis remain. Scars and bodily sensations establish no etiology. NASA interest, media work, TWA/JFK analogy and UT artist visit are not government approaches. Original audio, films, family accounts, charts and cited comparisons were not received in this lane.","Chapter 9 note 13, printed page 253/v3 zero 257, relays Hopkins’s unnamed good friend, a former USAF sergeant claiming top-secret clearance, reportedly shown a film with cleared personnel in the late 1960s. The film allegedly depicted Australian Air Force photomapping footage of four craft. Hopkins is not the viewer; the viewing period is not a capture date. Friend, base, film ID, original custody, aircraft identification, authentication and invitation remain unknown. No film was received; suppression is author interpretation.","Edited hypnosis dialogue, prompts, summaries, tape changes, dreams and prior exposure limit independence. Virginia disputes Hopkins’s interpretation; her literal 1957 recollection conflicts with repeated 1950 dating. Private sponsor, yacht and art invitations are not agency approaches. Catskill witnesses declined hypnosis; reported tumour tests were negative and marks faded. Mary’s six sessions retrieved no missing interval; Geis reported no time lapse, proposed terrestrial craft and refused hypnosis. Ordinary injury and dream explanations remain.","Clamar’s named afterword distinguishes real or imagined relief from authenticity: physical evidence was elusive, deeper psychological testing absent and normality did not exclude hallucination. Hypnosis does not prove an event. Imaginary presidential speech and a proposed UN repository were not executed briefings or programmes. The estimated 500 persons are not 500 independent incidents; Sharkey’s vague recollection is adverse. Original tapes, films, charts, official records, cited bodies, fine index glyphs and physical edition remain gaps.","At folio 209/v3 zero 213, Figure 14 is an in-text reference and no superscript is visible immediately after Betty Andreasson in the received raster. A separate superscript 6 belongs to Betty Hill. No footnote source is invented; this is a narrow crop observation, not authentication of original typography or completion of all fine glyphs. Broad photo, index-pointer, edition, original-record and physical-concordance gaps remain."]},"familyId":"S7451-SUPPLIED-COPY","citationUrl":"https://bioparity.io/sources/S7451","citation":"Budd Hopkins. Missing Time: A Documented Study of UFO Abductions. BioParity S7451. https://bioparity.io/sources/S7451"}}