Ya know Kev, maybe the authors UFO controversy started in the 1890s, or your perceived "real good UFO flap" occurred when you read his book.
However...Stuff like this dates back a bit longer than that. People used to paint and carve out weird things on their cave walls. I'd bet they thought their flap was bigger n' yours.
They'd probably laugh at your big flap.
Interesting stuff though eh?
Me? I think life exists elsewhere, on other rocks orbiting other star systems. I could be wrong. But I'd bet a cup of coffee I'm not.
And ya know what, I respect your opinion.
I think they defined a flap as 10 or more witnesses reporting the same event and having access to the original written records. That narrows down so many prior supposed sightings as a basis to work from that the 1890s flap jumps out as the first example of a UFO flap.
If you want to focus on the shakier evidence, that’s your prerogative. But it is not as reliable. Here’s an example: The first press release of the Wright brothers’ plane said something like it had 6 wings, was steam powered, flew & landed vertically, and carried several passengers. About the only thing they got right was that there WAS a flight that day. Requiring multiple sources makes the study of the phenomenon more focused.
Go ahead & read the book, and if you don’t think I’m a barrel of laughs, we should just change the title of the thread.