Q & A with Diana Pasulka on AMERICAN COSMIC

essential reading

The recently published book AMERICAN COSMIC should be required reading for anyone with even a passing interest in the subject of UFOs. I asked the author a few questions, and here are her answers:

* * *

1) Creating a book can have a life of its own. When you set out to write this book did you know where it was headed?

Mike, I “thought” I knew where it was headed. I thought it would be a fairly straightforward comparison between historical aerial phenomena and interpretations of aerial phenomena today. However, about two to three months into the study I was confronted by inquiries from scientists, screenwriters, actors, and I realized that this was not your usual religious studies research. Yet, I also realized that these are the kinds of people who show up when something important is about to happen, or is happening, and in this case it is the birth of a new belief system. When I realized this, I was very excited and surprised.

2) You came into this arena as a scholar of religion, and you’ve framed the story from that point of view, and this seemed to allow for certain a level of objectivity. What was challenging for you about this book? And conversely, what was easy about this book?

The discipline of religious studies lends itself well to the study of this phenomena as most scholars of religion do not weigh-in on the truth or non-truth of the claims of believers. We look at effects, practices, etc. However, this position, my position, was seriously challenged because the people I was working with, scientists who studied the phenomena, were sharing their findings with me. Their findings made me think about their truth claims. I had to consider their claims, because they were not talking about whether or not a particular saint caused a painting to move, they were actually showing me scientific data. So, again, this was a surprising shift in my research.

In terms of your question, what was easy about this book… there was nothing easy about it. It became something that I had to write, which was difficult, as I have a “day job” that keeps me really busy, and I am a mother to middle schoolers. So, it was challenging in every way, psychologically and practically.

3) How was the coffee in Italy?

I cannot overstate the difference between the taste of the coffee in Italy in comparison to coffee in the United States. I don’t mean to offend anyone here, but when I tasted the wine, and the coffee in Italy, I was, to put it bluntly, very shocked. When I returned from Italy I searched and searched for wine shops that sold Italian wines and coffees. I did find some, but it took me months.

4) On page 8 you describe meeting, “the meta-experiencers, the scientists who studied the experiencers and the phenomenon.” Later in that same paragraph you wrote of experiencing: “an epistemological shock, that is, a shock to my fundamental understanding of the world and the universe.”

What happened?

It was John Mack, the Harvard researcher who studied and wrote a book about this phenomenon in the 1980s, who coined the term “epistemological shock.” It means that your “theory of reality” is being shifted, and that it is a shocking experience. I had gone into the study a disbeliever, and I left the study something entirely different. This was due to my association with the scientists. Their research convinced me, and note, I am not trying to convince anyone else here, but their research was compelling and I understood that the question of this phenomena is not so easy to answer. It was easy to show how people’s beliefs and practices are influenced by media, but it wasn’t easy to dismiss the research of vetted scientists. I couldn’t.

Diana Pasulka's book is now available!

order here

_______________________________________