Do you remember what you where doing 50 years ago?

[Lang]

That Australian article covers some ground but it is as flawed as all the other stories. It is quite obvious the writer has his own conclusions and is selectively damning those which do not meet his theories.

Like most journalists he has used other peoples works as reference (even the most outrageous theories in various books on the subject were the result of their authors doing vast amounts of first person research) and has decided what is credible and what is not. It is merely a book review. Unfortunately he will now be quoted in references on the subject along with hundreds of others without one minute's detailed research or personal knowledge.

Guess we will never know.