UFO Casebook
Alien Abduction >> Alien Abduction >> Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abduction
http://ufocasebook.conforums.com/index.cgi?board=alienabduction&action=display&num=1369515542

Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abduction
Post by jjflash on May 25th, 2013, 3:59pm

Research of Alleged Alien Abduction: A Critical Analysis

http://www.ufotrail.blogspot.com/2013/05/research-of-alleged-alien-abduction.html

May 25, 2013

I encourage all interested parties to conduct their own search for truth and make up their own mind about the mysteries surrounding alleged alien abduction. The challenge most fail at in their search is obtaining a wide sample of material representing a wide range of credible sources. The challenge exists not because the material is difficult to obtain, but because most people do not desire to find it.

It is rare for people within UFOdom to have a reasonably working knowledge of such diverse topics as mental health issues, physiological issues and the intelligence community in proportion to their knowledge of abduction lore. The irony, of course, is that the former can be substantiated while the latter cannot – and that brings us to the heart of the problem with many abduction researchers.

They often assert to “know” this or that absolutely fantastic item to be true, the same as you can look around the UFO community and observe any number of its members doing, while they can prove no such assertion whatsoever. You need look no further than the websites of some of the researchers to see they claim to have proof of one thing or another that perpetually never amounts to much of anything more than rumors of yesteryear. Worst of all, individuals such as David Jacobs and organizations such as MUFON often do so under the claim of conducting scientific research.

That is a primary problem. I invite others to identify it as such, and following is why:

If people just want to hang out and reinforce their shared beliefs, then fine. Ghost stories around the campfire and all that.

If, however, they claim to be conducting scientific investigation, they have a responsibility to conduct themselves in accordance with the scientific method of investigation. Witness testimony and particularly subjective assessment carries minimal weight as compared to physical evidence, authenticated documents and such – along with all the other dynamics recognized by the professional research community which must either apply or, of course, professional research is not actually being conducted.

Again, I will point out that is fine – as long as it is not called science or professional research, because, by definition, it simply is not. A big problem therefore lies in the abduction researchers continuing to cling to methods of investigation circa 1964 and rightfully not recognized as valid by the professional research community. More specifically, the problem lies in researchers' persistence to do so while demanding acceptance from a scientific community they either fail to understand or try to exploit. For those unaware, the American Medical Association issued a statement clearly establishing it does not recognize or endorse the use of hypnosis for any purposes at all, much less as an effective memory retrieval tool.

Methodology

Part of my point being there is no supposedly proper method whatsoever of hypnotizing traumatized individuals and exploring the likelihood they have abusers originating from another planet, at least not as recognized by academia. As a matter of fact, a good argument could be made that such activities are barbaric. In the situation of Jacobs, however, no such argument is required, as he claimed to have developed therapeutic methods of regressive hypnosis that can quickly be rejected. The facts of the matter include he is not professionally qualified (as a historian) to design or conduct any type of psychologically therapeutic activity. One can see the contradictions involved in trying to accept Jacobs' claims of conducting scientific research when, in fact, his views on hypnosis require assigning him qualifications to design and assess hypnosis procedures, which he academically simply does not possess. To add insult to injury, we would have to give Jacobs' assertions more validity than we assign the AMA stance on the issue, a body which of course practices scientific principles and is far more qualified to assess medical techniques than is a historian.

Jacobs and his followers are entitled to believe anything they want. They are not entitled to misrepresent such beliefs as scientifically credible, and we are most certainly not required to silently accept such misrepresentations.

One of the most important and typically overlooked points is that the scientific process, of which such researchers as Jacobs claim to recognize and endorse, does not require critical thinkers to invalidate his attachments to the use of hypnosis. Rather, it is his responsibility to validate a hypothesis through the process of collecting data, submitting it to proper channels for peer review and so on, which neither he, Hopkins nor any of their faithful ever successfully navigated. As a matter of fact, Jacobs demonstrated adamant opposition to such, as documented by Ted Goertzel of Rutgers, among others.

That would be participating in the scientific process.

What about advances made in DNA research that could be implemented in abduction research? Dr. Tyler Kokjohn informs us important molecular evidence could be obtained long after the alleged fact, including testing those who suspect they may have been involved in breeding programs for many years after they may have carried some kind of hybrid fetus. Both Jacobs and Barbara Lamb repeatedly avoided such lines of discussion while often seeming largely unaware science had long since surpassed the circumstances required to keep the abduction narrative under a protective cloak of non-verifiable. The fact of the matter is such claims can now be verified – or shown to be unsubstantiated – if researchers care to do so.

Witnesses

Yet another principle point that should be emphasized involves the witness. Wild speculation and poor investigative procedures get us no closer to actually understanding what might be happening to people who may truly be experiencing circumstances of interest, and, much, much more importantly, witnesses are being injured in the process. In some cases, drastically and critically injured.

Suicides among self-described abductees are not particularly uncommon; UFO-related discussion forums typically have threads dedicated to tragic situations that should never have happened – but did; whatever one may choose to make of the Emma Woods case, it would seem painfully clear she was not helped by a historian conducting Skype-hypnosis about hybrids raping her night after night for days on end; Leah Haley was referred by Hopkins, after inquiring about a single childhood UFO sighting, to MUFON's John Carpenter who proceeded to 'help' her hypnotically construct an entire lifetime of alien and military torturous abductions, of which she may very well never fully recover from the emotional traumata experienced.

There are many more such circumstances. There is also no question that many people who find their ways into the UFO community would be much better served by a competent psychoanalyst than an overly enthusiastic hypnotist with grandiose dreams of alien-hunting, or, at the least, they would be better served by actual scientists or professional researchers than people masquerading as such under the camouflage provided by MUFON, ICAR or the like.

Summary

In review:

- An inherent challenge to ufology, and particularly alleged alien abduction, is that its followers do not seek information that provides a balanced and objective point of view. Actually, they are often quite unaware of the current mental health paradigm, symptoms of emotional traumata, relevant physiological circumstances and similar subject matter, the absence of which substantially obstructs their abilities to form objective and more complete understandings of what became known as the abduction phenomenon.

- A primary problem is many researchers misrepresent their activities to be scientific, exploiting the less educated and poorly informed, intentionally or otherwise.

- It is not my responsibility or the responsibility of anyone else to invalidate hypotheses related to regressive hypnosis, but the responsibility of its practitioners to validate the activity as an effective memory retrieval tool, which has never been accomplished. Neither have proponents of hypnosis ever competently or thoroughly addressed the dangers of emotional suffering inherent to the activity, all of which futilely result in, at best, nothing more than witness testimony.

- A primary problem is self-described witnesses seeking support are being deeply hurt. This is taking place while those who subscribe to alien abduction as established, literal occurrences, often to fanatical extents, are damaging the injured parties even further, commonly lashing out at them while making excuses for the incompetence of irresponsible hypnotists.

- If researchers want to be accepted by academia, they must adhere to rules and practices, i.e., peer review, proper recognition of standards of evidence, accept hypnosis is not a reliable memory retrieval tool, etc., that are established by academia, else stop claiming their work to have scientific merit. Equally important would be members of the UFO community learning to more accurately identify misrepresentations of scientific merit.

[See site for supporting links]
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by skizicks on May 25th, 2013, 9:18pm

A good artical pointing out the weaknesses of much of UFOlogy. There is a reason we use the phrase "do you believe in UFOs?" as so much of the issue is based on faith in the lore of UFOlogy rather than any science.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on May 26th, 2013, 05:02am

Great article, Jjflash! Going for a positive approach, how would you propose dealing with anekdotal abduction evidence (often: heartfelt personal testimony!), which scientific disciplines to apply first, and could you flesh out a 'proper scientific method' a little more?


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Silver on May 26th, 2013, 8:47pm

This is not rocket science.

My little 3 or 4 feet guys that abducted me in college had very human emotions.

These E.T.'s were just as scared of me as I of them.

The little ones were so scared that they got behind the tallest E.T. who was the leader.

Then very slowly they put me back to sleep with a white light from a stick that looked like a long pencil.

No deep thinking here, just very straight forward.

Their eyes were rectangle and they could have been wearing helmets.

They wore military uniforms with rank patches and other patches that look like red arrows and half-circles.

Their shoes were thick like diabetic shoes.

They were cute with a mean agenda.




Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by bewildered on May 27th, 2013, 12:27am

jjflash hits the bulls eye as usual. smiley

@purr: I have some thoughts that relate to the questions you direct to jjflash, so I hope you don't mind if I respond to them. They are questions that need an answer if we're to actually accomplish anything meaningful in understanding the strangeness of this phenomena. smiley

Quote:
...how would you propose dealing with anekdotal abduction evidence (often: heartfelt personal testimony!)...


Anecdotes, being a type of unverifiable witness testimony, is of little use to scientific pursuit. I can understand how this might lead some people to feel that "their story doesn't matter," but nothing could be further from the truth. Science first and foremost is a tool we use to attempt to achieve an objective understanding of a subject, and because of its reliance upon empirical evidence, the tool must be able to establish true or false values for all variables in a specific scheme. Another way of putting that might be "everything must be falsifiable."

Think of this essential function as it relates to the simple equation x + 3 = 8. A student stands up in class and shares how he knows that x = 7 because he saw it in a dream. Using the problem-solving algorithm called the order of operations, we can easily discover that x does not equal 7; we find that x = 5. I used an overly simplified example in this illustration, but I think it successfully demonstrates why anecdotes have no value in the scientific problem-solving system. Every assertion must be able to be tested to determine their true or false value.

Furthermore, in order to guarantee that research results are valid and genuine, other scientists must be able to test the assertion and arrive at the same result. This must be replicated over and over again in order to establish validity. Anecdotes cannot be tested nor subjected to scrutiny.

Quote:
...which scientific disciplines to apply first, and could you flesh out a 'proper scientific method' a little more?


In my opinion, a multi-pronged approach is needed in order to understand the phenomena of abduction. Whatever it is that's going on, there can be no disputing that certain people are affected adversely by it. People need to be listened to, and they need help. The only truly "objective" and scientific approach to psychology - behavioral psychology - needs to play a role in the intake process. Regardless of what abduction really is, it has tangible effects in the realm of human behavior.

The scientific method is a problem-solving algorithm. It can be summed up as follows:

1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena.

2. Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena. In physics, the hypothesis often takes the form of a causal mechanism or a mathematical relation.

3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations.

4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments.

(Derived from Appendix E: Introduction to the Scientific Method)

As a student of computer science, I study logic and algorithms. The "scientific method" is an algorithm specifically designed to provide a proofing process to retroductive reasoning. The null hypothesis is employed as a falsification tool in order to ascertain the true or false value of any assertion of logic. Through experimentation, observation, measurement, and peer review (rinse and repeat), an objective result can be arrived at which will deliver a definitive answer.

In the case of abduction, forensic analysis must be employed. This should be conducted separately from the treatment of the abductee. Regardless of the true or false value of their experiences, I am convinced they need assistance in dealing with psychological trauma. They should *never* be exploited, manipulated, or ever allowed to serve as vehicles for someone else's monetary gain.

Abductees are human beings deserving of the greatest care and respect. They should be protected from con artists and quacks like David Jacobs. Hypnosis, like the polygraph test, is inadmissible as evidence in both the laboratory and the courtroom. Hypnosis induces states of consciousness that increase the suggestivity of the subject, and studies have shown that hypnotized subjects will internalize the suggestions given to them during that state. It is for this reason that hypnosis should never be part of a forensic investigation process, and why reputable researchers and law enforcement agencies eschew its use.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on May 27th, 2013, 07:26am

on May 27th, 2013, 12:27am, bewildered wrote:
jjflash hits the bulls eye as usual. smiley

@purr: I have some thoughts that relate to the questions you direct to jjflash, so I hope you don't mind if I respond to them. They are questions that need an answer if we're to actually accomplish anything meaningful in understanding the strangeness of this phenomena. smiley



Anecdotes, being a type of unverifiable witness testimony, is of little use to scientific pursuit. I can understand how this might lead some people to feel that "their story doesn't matter," but nothing could be further from the truth. Science first and foremost is a tool we use to attempt to achieve an objective understanding of a subject, and because of its reliance upon empirical evidence, the tool must be able to establish true or false values for all variables in a specific scheme. Another way of putting that might be "everything must be falsifiable."

Think of this essential function as it relates to the simple equation x + 3 = 8. A student stands up in class and shares how he knows that x = 7 because he saw it in a dream. Using the problem-solving algorithm called the order of operations, we can easily discover that x does not equal 7; we find that x = 5. I used an overly simplified example in this illustration, but I think it successfully demonstrates why anecdotes have no value in the scientific problem-solving system. Every assertion must be able to be tested to determine their true or false value.

Furthermore, in order to guarantee that research results are valid and genuine, other scientists must be able to test the assertion and arrive at the same result. This must be replicated over and over again in order to establish validity. Anecdotes cannot be tested nor subjected to scrutiny.



In my opinion, a multi-pronged approach is needed in order to understand the phenomena of abduction. Whatever it is that's going on, there can be no disputing that certain people are affected adversely by it. People need to be listened to, and they need help. The only truly "objective" and scientific approach to psychology - behavioral psychology - needs to play a role in the intake process. Regardless of what abduction really is, it has tangible effects in the realm of human behavior.

The scientific method is a problem-solving algorithm. It can be summed up as follows:

1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena.

2. Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena. In physics, the hypothesis often takes the form of a causal mechanism or a mathematical relation.

3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations.

4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments.

(Derived from Appendix E: Introduction to the Scientific Method)

As a student of computer science, I study logic and algorithms. The "scientific method" is an algorithm specifically designed to provide a proofing process to retroductive reasoning. The null hypothesis is employed as a falsification tool in order to ascertain the true or false value of any assertion of logic. Through experimentation, observation, measurement, and peer review (rinse and repeat), an objective result can be arrived at which will deliver a definitive answer.

In the case of abduction, forensic analysis must be employed. This should be conducted separately from the treatment of the abductee. Regardless of the true or false value of their experiences, I am convinced they need assistance in dealing with psychological trauma. They should *never* be exploited, manipulated, or ever allowed to serve as vehicles for someone else's monetary gain.

Abductees are human beings deserving of the greatest care and respect. They should be protected from con artists and quacks like David Jacobs. Hypnosis, like the polygraph test, is inadmissible as evidence in both the laboratory and the courtroom. Hypnosis induces states of consciousness that increase the suggestivity of the subject, and studies have shown that hypnotized subjects will internalize the suggestions given to them during that state. It is for this reason that hypnosis should never be part of a forensic investigation process, and why reputable researchers and law enforcement agencies eschew its use.


Thanks for the explanation of science, Bewildered. I'll hang back some on answering some parts of your post, because I am kinda curious where Jjflash is taking us here. (It's his topic.)

But, preliminary thoughts. I would hope indeed that the forensic investigation of abductees would be separate from the 'treatment' of reporting alien experience. If only for the fact that these are people who remember (fragments of) difficult to frame, potentially deeply disturbing interaction with unknown entities. Sure, they must be approached therapeutically, not used for exploitation as you say. (This is not to say that abductees can only by helped by HC professionals or UFO researchers who work for free: we wouldn't want abduction investigators to die en masse of starvation.)

Like I said, I'm waiting for Jjflash to develop his own reasoning here. Yet to your suggestion that one cannot readily apply science to anecdotes (stories, testimony), I answer: this is an anecdotal phenomenon. It's anekdote DRIVEN. See, we could model it in various ways like below.


1) Aliens/extraterrestrials approach a human subject, induce an altered state of mind plus transport the abductee into another universe or dimension, to make contact / carry out medical procedures, and return this person to Earth, normal reality.

2) We are observing an as yet undefined psychiatric disorder, expressing as memory of encounters with ETs, which then persists in the mind of the abductee as real, emotionally harmful, memories.

3) Paranormal entities approach a human subject, masquerading as extraterrestrials, inducing hallucinations of being taken up into flying saucers, thus causing potentially traumatic memories in abductees.



There's option 5, 6, 7 without doubt, bewildered, but however abduction is ultimately caused, it comes to us in a majority of cases as ANEKDOTE. Guy or gal has harrowing / wondrous tale to tell.

What is your thinking on this? If the scientific method does not apply, has no truth-finding role to play on the testimony of abductees, doesn't this mean that Science is bound to dismiss Abduction as research subject, since it is unverifiable? Is Science unfit to investigate Abduction? And must not then scientists stretch their methods to fit the phenomenon presenting itself? (Such stretch might exactly involve the use of non-hard sciences like History and Psychology, leading to the efforts of Prof John Mack and Dr David Jacobs [I acknowledged the latter's specific error in practice], and many others including 'ufologists' attempting to create a wholly new science fitting alien experiences.)

Finally, from our agreement on the therapeutics staying separate from the forensics (in cases with trace), I submit the idea that hypnotic regression may support the healing needs of experiencers. These sessions do not yield solid, historical truth. But they can help rebalance a mind wracked by incomplete, fragmented memories of frightening, disturbing alien encounters. They may constitute part of effective therapy.

Final, final thoughts: in John Mack's (transcripted) sessions with abduction experiencers imo he demonstrated mastery of abstaining from suggesting/projecting memory. During Betty and Barney Hill's hypnotic regressions the UFO skeptical psychiatrist introduced negative suggestions (toward non alien explanations) and these failed to dissuade them, presumably due to the emotionaly intensity of these two early abductees' memories. This gives hope that raising Hypnotic Therapy standards may still yield more than healing. Even some information about what the abductees actually went through.


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by bewildered on May 27th, 2013, 11:06am

on May 27th, 2013, 07:26am, purr wrote:
Thanks for the explanation of science, Bewildered. I'll hang back some on answering some parts of your post, because I am kinda curious where Jjflash is taking us here. (It's his topic.)


Of course. It's a topic that greatly interests me, so I felt I might offer my thoughts. I have no doubt that jjflash will respond sooner or later. smiley

Quote:
But, preliminary thoughts. I would hope indeed that the forensic investigation of abductees would be separate from the 'treatment' of reporting alien experience. If only for the fact that these are people who remember (fragments of) difficult to frame, potentially deeply disturbing interaction with unknown entities. Sure, they must be approached therapeutically, not used for exploitation as you say. (This is not to say that abductees can only by helped by HC professionals or UFO researchers who work for free: we wouldn't want abduction investigators to die en masse of starvation.)


I don't see "abduction" as being distinct from any other traumatic experience; therapy should indeed be conducted by the appropriate professionals, because maladies like generalized panic disorder, anxiety disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, clinical depression, etc., are suffered by some abductees. I'm not a fan nor supporter of psychotropic medication, so I would rather see abductees enter therapy or counseling with a psychologist first.

What exactly is a "UFO researcher?" There's a big problem right there...what is their background in? Their credentials? Qualifications? As far as I know, anyone can proclaim themselves as a UFO researcher and go into business.

Quote:
Yet to your suggestion that one cannot readily apply science to anecdotes (stories, testimony), I answer: this is an anecdotal phenomenon. It's anekdote DRIVEN. See, we could model it in various ways like below.


1) Aliens/extraterrestrials approach a human subject, induce an altered state of mind plus transport the abductee into another universe or dimension, to make contact / carry out medical procedures, and return this person to Earth, normal reality.

2) We are observing an as yet undefined psychiatric disorder, expressing as memory of encounters with ETs, which then persists in the mind of the abductee as real, emotionally harmful, memories.

3) Paranormal entities approach a human subject, masquerading as extraterrestrials, inducing hallucinations of being taken up into flying saucers, thus causing potentially traumatic memories in abductees.



There's option 5, 6, 7 without doubt, bewildered, but however abduction is ultimately caused, it comes to us in a majority of cases as ANEKDOTE. Guy or gal has harrowing / wondrous tale to tell.


The experience that an abductee claims to have suffered is one thing, and any psychological effects they exhibit is another. The latter can be observed in the clinical environment, and quite frankly, helping these people learn how to cope with their issues is really the best thing anyone can do for them. It can quite literally destroy a person's life, and that's the real tragedy to me. sad

Without any form of corroborating evidence (DNA or physical evidence of some sort), you are correct: the abduction experience itself is beyond the ability of science to address. I don't "dismiss" it out of hand, and I can't think of any scientist worth their salt who would, either. Anything is possible, and as it stands, it is only possible to deal with abduction on a case-by-case basis. Unless abductees are willing to fully cooperate with forensic investigators, photographic experts, etc., any hope of science addressing their situation beyond helping them cope with the psychological distress will never happen.

My personal take on number 3 (just my conjecture): that might be what is actually happening, but someone's perception of the event and any participants might be hopelessly mired by individual bias, beliefs, and their state of mind at the time it happens. "Paranormal" might be properly understood to be anything beyond the recognized causative agents at work in the universe we think we perceive and understand. This universe is constantly changing (and growing) as we discover new things.

Quote:
What is your thinking on this? If the scientific method does not apply, has no truth-finding role to play on the testimony of abductees, doesn't this mean that Science is bound to dismiss Abduction as research subject, since it is unverifiable? Is Science unfit to investigate Abduction? And must not then scientists stretch their methods to fit the phenomenon presenting itself? (Such stretch might exactly involve the use of non-hard sciences like History and Psychology, leading to the efforts of Prof John Mack and Dr David Jacobs [I acknowledged the latter's specific error in practice], and many others including 'ufologists' attempting to create a wholly new science fitting alien experiences.)


The scientific method always applies, because unless we can establish some means of objectively assigning a true or false value to any assertion, any effort to study this phenomenon is a waste of time. If we are dealing with a "nuts and bolts" thing, then the matter vehicles and matter occupants will certainly leave a trace of their presence and activities. However - and this is purely hypothetical - if we are dealing with something inter-dimensional, everything changes. The existence of multiple universes is at a hypothetical stage at this time, but the thought behind their existence is rather compelling.

We are gaining ground. NASA's (Never A Straight Answer, I know cheesy ) "warp" research is an example of thinking out of the box. Objects don't move through space-time, space-time itself moves. This would actually begin to explain how certain unidentified objects exhibit such strange and inexplicable behavior and "violate" the laws of physics.

Quote:
Finally, from our agreement on the therapeutics staying separate from the forensics (in cases with trace), I submit the idea that hypnotic regression may support the healing needs of experiencers. These sessions do not yield solid, historical truth. But they can help rebalance a mind wracked by incomplete, fragmented memories of frightening, disturbing alien encounters. They may constitute part of effective therapy.

Final, final thoughts: in John Mack's (transcripted) sessions with abduction experiencers imo he demonstrated mastery of abstaining from suggesting/projecting memory. During Betty and Barney Hill's hypnotic regressions the UFO skeptical psychiatrist introduced negative suggestions (toward non alien explanations) and these failed to dissuade them, presumably due to the emotionaly intensity of these two early abductees' memories. This gives hope that raising Hypnotic Therapy standards may still yield more than healing. Even some information about what the abductees actually went through.


purr


I guess we'll agree to disagree on the subject of hypnosis. It is entirely too questionable to be of any real value to forensic research, and it is far too mysterious to be properly understood.

I've personally witnessed what I call an "unidentified hovering object" (it wasn't flying, it was motionless in the air). I don't doubt the essential reality of this phenomenon, but I do question a great deal of conventional and unconventional wisdom that's out there. It's merely a matter of our personalities and our individual strengths. I'm skeptical not because I don't want to believe anything, but because I wish to gain as much information as I can about a subject before I start forming opinions about it.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on May 27th, 2013, 12:55pm

My compliments to the OP on this long and very well put together diatribe. It reads very well, and there is a very strong chance that the casual UFO fan may eat it up as being the “truth”. While the more experienced fan will see that the majority of it is just PERSONAL OPINION…

It is equally important to understand the “BIAS” of people presenting information, Jacob’s bias, is that he is trying to sell books, my bias is that I have done enough abduction research to believe much of what Jacobs has to say in his books.

The wild-card here is that no one here can be certain of the OP’s BIAS…! Did Jacobs turn him down for an interview? Or is he an old-school UFO guy (like Hynek) that rejects the entire Abduction scenario? Or is he trying to be controversial in order to “sell” his own blog & website?

He quotes the AMA, does anyone know what the AMA’s stance is on UFO’s/Abductions? That might be important, don’t you think? For instance if the AMA does not believe that UFO’s exist, would it be a big surprise if they try to discredit any hypnosis involving abduction research?

The UFO field is full of detractors, people who take issue or counterpoint to established researchers or theories and this is no different than the any of those. It is all too easy for someone with a so-called skeptical mind to cross over into being a full-blown debunker when quoting (or worse yet) believing all the negative press that is out there on just about every UFO issue.

As well as the OP’s filibuster reads, I invite anyone to read the opening text in any of David Jacob’s books. In his third book (The Threat) on pages 35 – 60, he discusses at length a number of issues including: Normal Event Memory, False Memory Syndrome, Media Contamination, Consciously Recalled Events, Memories Recalled During Hypnosis, Leading the Witness, Abduction Confabulation, and Competent Hypnosis, he explains all of these at length.

What gets conveniently lost is that the MAJORITY of Abduction victims Consciously Recall parts of the Abduction PRIOR to any Hypnosis. These people are NOT blank slates that have a Abduction event implanted in their brains…

Here two questions: If an Abduction Victim recalls the same incident without Hypnosis that they recall UNDER Hypnosis, does that verify that the Hypnosis is NOT implanting, changing or embellishing the actual eventhuh? Wouldn’t that further validate that the hypnosis is simply recalling deeper details of an incident that the abductee already recalls?

Next, we are going to get a little technical, anyone
in manufacturing may be familiar with the term Cpk (Process Capability Index). Basically, it is a way of measuring the repeatability and consistency of a manufacturing process. Another technical term is DOE (Design Of Experiments), which is a way of conducting experiments in which you allow for and/or eliminate variables in order to insure that your findings are correct.

Let’s look at the data collected by five independent UFO Researchers; David Jacobs, John Mack, Budd Hopkins, Barbara Lamb, and Edith Fiore. All have used some form of hypnosis to extract details from their subjects.

In regards to Cpk, we have five different researchers, using five different hypnosis methods, which extract details that are consistent with other researchers’ data. That shows the capability of the process and the validity of hypnosis in terms of extracting reliable recollections.

In regards to DOE, we have five different researchers, using five different hypnosis methods, in five different parts of the country, with hundreds of different patients, yet somehow all five yield similar results (details), if anyone would care to explain that, PLEASE go ahead… Perhaps they are ALL lying?

We have people here who have the exact same recollections as the patients hypnotized by the above five, are they lying too?

I have said this before: with Abductions there is NOT a lot a gray-area, either someone is LYING or telling the TRUTH.

Now, to be clear, I do not necessarily believe in all of the deductions these five researchers make, nor do I agree with what they believe their data shows, but I do agree whole-heartedly on their use of hypnosis, if you don’t I have no problem with that, but don’t simply rely of a bunch of peoples words that do not believe in UFO’s in the first place.

Many people believe hypnosis is some magic thing out of a James Bond movie, which can be used to make ANYONE do or believe ANYTHING. Imagine lying back on a couch and daydreaming about some event in your past, imagine being able to focus on this event so clearly that you are (nearly) reliving it. All the time, you know you are on the couch and you know who is there with you, no magic, no voodoo, no mind-control, just a deeply relaxed state-of-mind.

CONCLUSION: The best part of the original post is where he tells everyone they should do their own research and make up their own minds! Don’t be fooled by all the pretty sounding words supposedly connecting the dots for you. And I would say if you have not read any of Dr. David Jacobs or Budd Hopkins books, do so and make up your minds from what you read and

Beware of the Message when you do not know the Messenger’s agenda…!

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by hyundisonata on May 27th, 2013, 1:41pm

A proper scientific and forensic investigative team transparent to the public would be a welcome addition to the UFO scenario, abduction is a serious issue when genuine and the last thing an abductees needs is a self imposing psychiatrist imposing his belief upon what is already a victim or some armchair scientist talking b/s because it is outside their scope of belief.
The abductee has to be believed until proven false, there are many cases that hold vital evidence to this scenario being a reality, the deckmont Livingston incident that was the only incident fully investigated by the police and forensic department and would be a good starting point. My own case is still unanswered to this date, lets see science give me a credible answer as I sure as heck cannot find one, I drove into a bend in the road at 60 MPH and two hours later fifty yards down the road exited the scenario at 60MPH. now I can rule out all the junk answers such as sleep paralyze etc as I had a passenger who suffered the same experience only he had to be admitted to hospital. Now if a proper open scientific body was available I could have had them investigate the incident thus avoiding a lot of ridicule but alas this is not the case and we end up with only witness testimony and in our incident hospital records. the big problem with there being no official body is that the door is wide open to abuse not only by fake claims but by those charlatans cashing in on what may seem a good story or possible film and this subject is overflowing with such . as for hypnosis I personally believe it a lot of crock and again opens the door to abuse and in the case of a genuine claim may do more harm than good, the abductees should be given respect and treated with dignity with there story listened too without judgment, if people stopped paying for books or videos or giving cash to such as Greer and eliminated any possibility of fame then we would see more honest reports of incidents without reason for falsification or exaggeration. Science on its own is like a gun without bullets totally useless and a balance of witness testimony along with forensic evidence is needed along with scientific review, I know from personal experience a form of radio activity is present around ET and it lingers for some time in any contaminated incident and again a good starting point for proof positive.
Remove the fame, gain, and most of all the secrecy such as all this anonymous stuff and start getting positive answers to something I know is a reality.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on May 27th, 2013, 2:15pm

Thanks, skizicks, purr and bewildered! I am glad you found the article of interest.

on May 26th, 2013, 05:02am, purr wrote:
...could you flesh out a 'proper scientific method' a little more?


Sure, purr. Some might find the following links helpful:

Introduction to the Scientific Method, courtesy Colby College.

Defining Critical Thinking, one of many thought provocative and informative articles located on the site of The Critical Thinking Community, which consists of a foundation and center dedicated to the promotion of critical thinking and its benefits.

on May 26th, 2013, 05:02am, purr wrote:
...how would you propose dealing with anekdotal abduction evidence (often: heartfelt personal testimony)...?


That of course presents challenges but is very important from several perspectives. I think one perspective is that it depends on what is trying to be accomplished. Does a witness want to obtain emotional support or professional investigation? The two are different services and should be sought (and provided) differently.

I also think there are, essentially, three kinds of information: One, that which can be verified as accurate, two, that which has been confirmed to be false and can be discarded, and, three, that which requires suspension of judgment pending further competent investigation. If those are applied, it does not matter if the testimony and claims are offered by self-described abductees, self-described mind control victims, former CIA personnel or anyone else – it only matters that we treat each testimony objectively pending further verification (or lack thereof).

Actually, it was my concern for the witness that added to my current stances on the topics. I was appalled at their treatment by people claiming to be helpful. That led to my interests in human rights violations concerning human research subjects.

on May 26th, 2013, 05:02am, purr wrote:
...which scientific disciplines to apply first...?


Services provided by psychiatric professionals would be very helpful. I think that is the case whether witnesses are seeking emotional support or scientific investigation, as mental health pros can of course assist with either. I am of the opinion that emotional trauma is both the most relevant and poorly understood aspect of the abduction phenom, at least poorly understood among members of the UFO community.

I also think biologists and professionals who contribute to such specialized services as crime scene investigation would be extremely helpful. Self-proclaimed abduction researchers have missed the proverbial boat on collecting DNA evidence, and it is only a matter of time until they will have to account for it. Proper testing would plain and simply confirm or invalidate some of the current claims, and should be implemented, or, at the least, those failing to do so while claiming to be conducting scientific investigation should be held accountable.

What do you think, purr?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by bewildered on May 27th, 2013, 2:19pm

on May 27th, 2013, 12:55pm, Mythos wrote:
We have people here who have the exact same recollections as the patients hypnotized by the above five, are they lying too?

I have said this before: with Abductions there is NOT a lot a gray-area, either someone is LYING or telling the TRUTH.


This raises the following question: how does one tell the difference between the truth and a lie, Mythos? If there's no concrete way to tell the difference, then there's no practical difference between them.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by hyundisonata on May 27th, 2013, 4:07pm

You will find that most cases of abduction carry little physical evidence and witness statement is the main fact, clinical diagnoses after the horse has bolted is pointless. Here’s a simple question JJflash do you believe abductees are telling the truth and the experience they describe is real ok maybe exaggerated a little but never the less true or do you prefer the clinical options a science that will not contemplate the reality of ET demands.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on May 27th, 2013, 5:52pm

on May 27th, 2013, 4:07pm, hyundisonata wrote:
You will find that most cases of abduction carry little physical evidence and witness statement is the main fact, clinical diagnoses after the horse has bolted is pointless.


Three points for consideration, please:

One, if you are referencing my comments and as related to the article posted, I was not addressing "most cases of abduction," but primarily addressing the research of such cases when misrepresented as scientific investigation. specifically, anyone is entitled to conduct research, as well as believe anything they want, but they are not entitled to call it science if it does not meet certain criteria.

Two, there is a great deal of potential DNA evidence available and as has been repeatedly explained by microbiologist Dr. Tyler Kokjohn. I submit for consideration that it is negligent of researchers, such as Jacobs, to claim to be conducting scientific investigation yet fail to attempt to obtain or even so much as address such DNA evidence, and...

Three, I disagree. Clinical diagnosis of people alleging contact with non-human beings might prove quite relevant.

on May 27th, 2013, 4:07pm, hyundisonata wrote:
Here’s a simple question JJflash do you believe abductees are telling the truth and the experience they describe is real...


I think there are many different explanations, whatever and however diverse those explanations may ultimately prove to be, for the many different reports. Actually, I am sure there are many different explanations, and it is much more complex than a matter of whether or not people are telling the truth.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by bewildered on May 27th, 2013, 9:06pm

Thanks for the link to The Critical Thinking Community, jjflash. I had no idea that such an organization existed - and online membership is complimentary, too! I'm looking forward to accessing their educational materials, as critical thinking is of paramount importance to my major. As I've learned from many hours spent in the programming lab, the most difficult part of problem-solving lies in navigating your own bias, perception, and cognitive "quirks." The computer is always correct...it's the human that has the issues. wink
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Silver on May 27th, 2013, 9:42pm

One can not talk about alien abduction unless one has been in that person shoes.

I agree the main problem is if this person is delusional, or if this person is telling the truth.

But a real abduction is very personal and it tests every thing you thought was real.

To be in a zone where time does not exists, where solid walls become fluid and transparent, where one is aware energy is coming from an unknown power source, then the abduction turns into an different level of existence.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by skizicks on May 27th, 2013, 10:46pm

I have a question. If hypnosis is such a good tool for dealing with traumatic experiences why isn't it used to treat veterans with PTSD? Or rape victims?
Surely knowing and remembering all the details of such events would alow them to heal as quickly as the abductee wouldn't it?
Or would it? Is remembering all the gory details really better than not?
Hypnotists do NOT have full control over the patient. The man who invented modern hypnosis tested that on his own family. The hypnotist does not have to plant the idea of abduction, the person is there to look for an abduction or they would not be there.
Once in the relaxed state they can fall prey to their own imagination. At the front of their mind is the idea of being abducted and as the tech talks to them and guides them to seek details their own mind will supply them.
To study abductions I agree that we need to avoid any furthur injury to the victim. What they remember on their own is what we need to work with. Our curiosity should defer to the health of the person.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by hyundisonata on May 28th, 2013, 02:28am

Nice hop skip and jump jjflash, it is not complex as there are only three answers, genuine, lies or mistaken circumstances. For instance a dream can be so life like the person actually is genuine in the belief that say abduction happened in their sleep so it is not a lie but mistaken circumstance unless there is proof that the alien carrying out the abduction left evidence then the dream was actually a reality but as science dramatically avoids the ET subject such evidence is lost due to no investigation hence the abductees is labeled a nutcase or liar. now we can grasp the skeptics view when it is bed time abduction as lots of different circumstance come in to play such as was the abductees using recreational drugs or alcohol , was it a dream , nightmare etc so we can understand science being wary of the subject if that was the only abduction scenario . But this is not the only scenario, we have work related abduction, social activity abduction such as sport participation fishing driving riding bicycles yet science avoids the subject WHY?
To quote that only scientific review is the only way forward and that those not following the doctrine are a waste of air space when science refuses to contemplate such is happening is pointless unless you practice what you preach and that clearly is not happening. If say ten people where abducted in Washington all hell would break loose and a mass investigation would come into play yet here we have many tens of thousands of people world wide claiming abduction and what do we get, that’s right NOTHING apart from the average Joe Blogs who is not a scientist or trained investigator who is at least trying to find answers to this massive dreadful scenario. With the expertise that science has at its disposal we should at least be seeing data bases of who, where etc abductions are happening thus giving a true picture of this scenarios seriousness yet we get nothing but people such as your self telling us that UFO investigators are useless due to not following scientific guide lines supplied by people who to be totally honest haven’t got a clue and are as useful as a bucket with holes in it unless they actually launch an official transparent investigation using resources the average Joe Blogs does not have access too. The abductee is a victim of crime no matter who carried out the abduction, support is needed such as counseling by people who will not judge or enforce their belief upon the victim and like any other victim they need to see their plight is taken seriously and fully investigated.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on May 28th, 2013, 04:27am

on May 28th, 2013, 02:28am, hyundisonata wrote:
Nice hop skip and jump jjflash, it is not complex as there are only three answers, genuine, lies or mistaken circumstances. For instance a dream can be so life like the person actually is genuine in the belief that say abduction happened in their sleep so it is not a lie but mistaken circumstance unless there is proof that the alien carrying out the abduction left evidence then the dream was actually a reality but as science dramatically avoids the ET subject such evidence is lost due to no investigation hence the abductees is labeled a nutcase or liar. now we can grasp the skeptics view when it is bed time abduction as lots of different circumstance come in to play such as was the abductees using recreational drugs or alcohol , was it a dream , nightmare etc so we can understand science being wary of the subject if that was the only abduction scenario . But this is not the only scenario, we have work related abduction, social activity abduction such as sport participation fishing driving riding bicycles yet science avoids the subject WHY?
To quote that only scientific review is the only way forward and that those not following the doctrine are a waste of air space when science refuses to contemplate such is happening is pointless unless you practice what you preach and that clearly is not happening. If say ten people where abducted in Washington all hell would break loose and a mass investigation would come into play yet here we have many tens of thousands of people world wide claiming abduction and what do we get, that’s right NOTHING apart from the average Joe Blogs who is not a scientist or trained investigator who is at least trying to find answers to this massive dreadful scenario. With the expertise that science has at its disposal we should at least be seeing data bases of who, where etc abductions are happening thus giving a true picture of this scenarios seriousness yet we get nothing but people such as your self telling us that UFO investigators are useless due to not following scientific guide lines supplied by people who to be totally honest haven’t got a clue and are as useful as a bucket with holes in it unless they actually launch an official transparent investigation using resources the average Joe Blogs does not have access too. The abductee is a victim of crime no matter who carried out the abduction, support is needed such as counseling by people who will not judge or enforce their belief upon the victim and like any other victim they need to see their plight is taken seriously and fully investigated.


Incisive, well reasoned post, Hyundisonata! Except to say that a bucket with holes is quite useful: you can fill it with water, hang it high and take a nice shower underneath.

cheesy


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on May 28th, 2013, 05:43am

on May 27th, 2013, 2:15pm, jjflash wrote:
Thanks, skizicks, purr and bewildered! I am glad you found the article of interest.



Sure, purr. Some might find the following links helpful:

Introduction to the Scientific Method, courtesy Colby College.

Defining Critical Thinking, one of many thought provocative and informative articles located on the site of The Critical Thinking Community, which consists of a foundation and center dedicated to the promotion of critical thinking and its benefits.


Thanks for the links, Jjflash. Still, referring back to my question about 'fleshing' out scientific method from general overview to any specific/detailed approach you may propose: you have not clarified yet how to apply the Method to folks coming out with an abduction account, to let's say their minister, general practitioner, police constable, a psychologist or (sorry Bewildered) calling in the local UFO expert. What assistance by (presumably) a team of scientists should be offered, and how to go about contacting them? Flesh out meant: be as precise as you can!


on May 27th, 2013, 2:15pm, jjflash wrote:
That of course presents challenges but is very important from several perspectives. I think one perspective is that it depends on what is trying to be accomplished. Does a witness want to obtain emotional support or professional investigation? The two are different services and should be sought (and provided) differently.


Agreed. From my reading an alleged abductee will need support first, and competent investigation shortly after. But we ought to be sensitive to individual needs.


on May 27th, 2013, 2:15pm, jjflash wrote:
I also think there are, essentially, three kinds of information: One, that which can be verified as accurate, two, that which has been confirmed to be false and can be discarded, and, three, that which requires suspension of judgment pending further competent investigation. If those are applied, it does not matter if the testimony and claims are offered by self-described abductees, self-described mind control victims, former CIA personnel or anyone else – it only matters that we treat each testimony objectively pending further verification (or lack thereof).


Again, I agree, but perhaps you make it sound too easy. Try making that determination for any thousand cases without trace evidence, without clear symptoms of psychopathology, resting on a story which remains consistent (in regard to the alien abduction experience). Your team of scientists will be pulling their hair, I predict they will be quite bald.


on May 27th, 2013, 2:15pm, jjflash wrote:
Actually, it was my concern for the witness that added to my current stances on the topics. I was appalled at their treatment by people claiming to be helpful. That led to my interests in human rights violations concerning human research subjects.


What the bleep are you talking about, Jj?! I never heard of human rights being violated of abductees! (Which Human Rights exactly?) I can imagine claims of malpractice, breaches of medical ethics (say: the Jacobs - Woods bodged regression sessions), and the general Wild Wild West situation in UFO 'expertise'. Abductees have no standard care to rely on. I also see a risk of Civil Rights infringed, if Psychiatry would use Conspiracist / UFO / Abduction beliefs BY THEMSELVES as indicators of serious mental illness. (New Zealand has flirted with this notion.)


on May 27th, 2013, 2:15pm, jjflash wrote:
Services provided by psychiatric professionals would be very helpful. I think that is the case whether witnesses are seeking emotional support or scientific investigation, as mental health pros can of course assist with either. I am of the opinion that emotional trauma is both the most relevant and poorly understood aspect of the abduction phenom, at least poorly understood among members of the UFO community.


Thanks to Obamacare in the US, and a similar HC system introduced ten years earlier in my country, The Netherlands, you might say that anyone suffering from mental problems (PTSD whatever the cause) has some (partially free) recourse in both lands to the mental health profession. I agree there is a need for this service to be available. My caveat: a phenomenon-specific (=Abduction related) mechanism needs to be devised excluding Psychiatrists from 'treating' or 'diagnosing' the abduction experience ITSELF as psychopathology. Like member Hyundisonata says: psychiatrists are not trained to determine reality/lack thereof of alien abduction or the existence of aliens. That's simply beyond their competence. Naturally abductees will vary widely, with some preferring a Psychologist, some free of psychiatric symptoms, so they will enter straight into the investigative process. (Some will just join UFO Casebook, and be welcomed in this here forum smiley !!)


on May 27th, 2013, 2:15pm, jjflash wrote:
I also think biologists and professionals who contribute to such specialized services as crime scene investigation would be extremely helpful. Self-proclaimed abduction researchers have missed the proverbial boat on collecting DNA evidence, and it is only a matter of time until they will have to account for it. Proper testing would plain and simply confirm or invalidate some of the current claims, and should be implemented, or, at the least, those failing to do so while claiming to be conducting scientific investigation should be held accountable.


I feel like accusing you of scientific optimism, Jjflash. Such UFO dream teams are extremely rarified. Sure I want them in the field, but the real world status quo amounts to sites like these, many 'experts' (full gamut of accreditation), UFO self-help groups, and MUFON like organizations. For now the UFO Community, flaws and all, is the best help for abductees on offer.

And before you can reasonably send in forensic scientists, playing CSI (funding... funding), you must formulate an objective standard of extraterrestrial DNA trace. Only then one may differentiate between merely earthly/human DNA presence, and finding ET was here.


on May 27th, 2013, 2:15pm, jjflash wrote:
What do you think, purr?


I think a lot of work yet needs to be done before abductees are treated with the dignity, fairness and quality of care their challenging experience merits.


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by bewildered on May 28th, 2013, 06:45am

on May 27th, 2013, 10:46pm, skizicks wrote:
I have a question. If hypnosis is such a good tool for dealing with traumatic experiences why isn't it used to treat veterans with PTSD? Or rape victims?
Surely knowing and remembering all the details of such events would alow them to heal as quickly as the abductee wouldn't it?
Or would it? Is remembering all the gory details really better than not?
Hypnotists do NOT have full control over the patient. The man who invented modern hypnosis tested that on his own family. The hypnotist does not have to plant the idea of abduction, the person is there to look for an abduction or they would not be there.
Once in the relaxed state they can fall prey to their own imagination. At the front of their mind is the idea of being abducted and as the tech talks to them and guides them to seek details their own mind will supply them.
To study abductions I agree that we need to avoid any furthur injury to the victim. What they remember on their own is what we need to work with. Our curiosity should defer to the health of the person.


There are far too many unanswered questions and murky areas for hypnosis to be of any value beyond self-help schemes like smoking cessation, changing other habits, etc. Even then it is not a cure-all.

@purr: You bring up something very important: some of the most plausible, cogent experiences offer absolutely nothing to observe, measure, or even look at except for the behavior of the abductee. This is why I look at therapy as the first line of defense and response to anyone who is suffering trauma from an abduction experience.

Abductees aren't "sick" nor are they "crazy." Many are dealing with the psychopathological side-effects of their experience. Our psychological well-being matters just as much as our physical health, and the two are typically intertwined.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on May 28th, 2013, 2:46pm

on May 28th, 2013, 02:28am, hyundisonata wrote:
Nice hop skip and jump jjflash, it is not complex as there are only three answers, genuine, lies or mistaken circumstances. For instance a dream can be so life like the person actually is genuine in the belief that say abduction happened in their sleep so it is not a lie but mistaken circumstance unless there is proof that the alien carrying out the abduction left evidence then the dream was actually a reality but as science dramatically avoids the ET subject such evidence is lost due to no investigation hence the abductees is labeled a nutcase or liar. now we can grasp the skeptics view when it is bed time abduction as lots of different circumstance come in to play such as was the abductees using recreational drugs or alcohol , was it a dream , nightmare etc so we can understand science being wary of the subject if that was the only abduction scenario . But this is not the only scenario, we have work related abduction, social activity abduction such as sport participation fishing driving riding bicycles yet science avoids the subject WHY?
To quote that only scientific review is the only way forward and that those not following the doctrine are a waste of air space when science refuses to contemplate such is happening is pointless unless you practice what you preach and that clearly is not happening. If say ten people where abducted in Washington all hell would break loose and a mass investigation would come into play yet here we have many tens of thousands of people world wide claiming abduction and what do we get, that’s right NOTHING apart from the average Joe Blogs who is not a scientist or trained investigator who is at least trying to find answers to this massive dreadful scenario. With the expertise that science has at its disposal we should at least be seeing data bases of who, where etc abductions are happening thus giving a true picture of this scenarios seriousness yet we get nothing but people such as your self telling us that UFO investigators are useless due to not following scientific guide lines supplied by people who to be totally honest haven’t got a clue and are as useful as a bucket with holes in it unless they actually launch an official transparent investigation using resources the average Joe Blogs does not have access too. The abductee is a victim of crime no matter who carried out the abduction, support is needed such as counseling by people who will not judge or enforce their belief upon the victim and like any other victim they need to see their plight is taken seriously and fully investigated.


WOW, great post....!
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on May 28th, 2013, 6:05pm

It appears there are no less than three issues being discussed simultaneously:

--> Research of alleged alien abduction, particularly that which is misrepresented as scientific when it is not, which was a large part of my original point.

--> The possible existence of alien abduction in an objective reality, and...

--> How scientists and researchers might measure and validate or invalidate such reported experiences.

In proceeding, I would find it helpful if some discussion participants would quote and paraphrase me more accurately. Several times I have been attributed with making statements and suggestions I simply did not make, so, please, be a bit more careful when concluding what you think I wrote. Thank you.

I would also find it helpful if my original message is kept in its intended context; the article posted dealt with research of alleged alien abduction, particularly unscrupulous research incorrectly presented as scientific investigation. While others might understandably migrate the discussion to various related considerations, please keep my initial points in context. Specifically, I never claimed to be designing or presenting research methodology. As a matter of fact, the initial article directly pointed out that it is not my responsibility or the responsibility of anyone else to invalidate a specific hypothesis, but the responsibility of researchers claiming to be conducting scientific investigation to follow proper due process with their hypotheses.

Please note that neither did I attempt to impose scientifically-based restrictions on any of your opinions, the validity of any of your experiences nor the research conducted by any members of the UFO community; I pointed out that if individuals such as David Jacobs and organizations such as MUFON continue to market their work as scientific investigation, they have responsibilities to adhere to proper scientific protocol. Please make an effort to accurately differentiate between one issue and another, and keep such things in context. Thank you.

on May 27th, 2013, 9:06pm, bewildered wrote:
Thanks for the link to The Critical Thinking Community, jjflash. I had no idea that such an organization existed - and online membership is complimentary, too! I'm looking forward to accessing their educational materials, as critical thinking is of paramount importance to my major. As I've learned from many hours spent in the programming lab, the most difficult part of problem-solving lies in navigating your own bias, perception, and cognitive "quirks." The computer is always correct...it's the human that has the issues. wink


You are welcome. Glad you found it useful.

on May 27th, 2013, 10:46pm, skizicks wrote:
I have a question. If hypnosis is such a good tool for dealing with traumatic experiences why isn't it used to treat veterans with PTSD? Or rape victims?
Surely knowing and remembering all the details of such events would alow them to heal as quickly as the abductee wouldn't it?
Or would it? Is remembering all the gory details really better than not?
Hypnotists do NOT have full control over the patient. The man who invented modern hypnosis tested that on his own family. The hypnotist does not have to plant the idea of abduction, the person is there to look for an abduction or they would not be there.
Once in the relaxed state they can fall prey to their own imagination. At the front of their mind is the idea of being abducted and as the tech talks to them and guides them to seek details their own mind will supply them.
To study abductions I agree that we need to avoid any furthur injury to the victim. What they remember on their own is what we need to work with. Our curiosity should defer to the health of the person.


Reasonable points and perspectives, sir.

on May 28th, 2013, 02:28am, hyundisonata wrote:
Nice hop skip and jump jjflash, it is not complex as there are only three answers, genuine, lies or mistaken circumstances. For instance a dream can be so life like the person actually is genuine in the belief that say abduction happened in their sleep so it is not a lie but mistaken circumstance unless there is proof that the alien carrying out the abduction left evidence then the dream was actually a reality but as science dramatically avoids the ET subject such evidence is lost due to no investigation hence the abductees is labeled a nutcase or liar. now we can grasp the skeptics view when it is bed time abduction as lots of different circumstance come in to play such as was the abductees using recreational drugs or alcohol , was it a dream , nightmare etc so we can understand science being wary of the subject if that was the only abduction scenario . But this is not the only scenario, we have work related abduction, social activity abduction such as sport participation fishing driving riding bicycles yet science avoids the subject WHY?
To quote that only scientific review is the only way forward and that those not following the doctrine are a waste of air space when science refuses to contemplate such is happening is pointless unless you practice what you preach and that clearly is not happening. If say ten people where abducted in Washington all hell would break loose and a mass investigation would come into play yet here we have many tens of thousands of people world wide claiming abduction and what do we get, that’s right NOTHING apart from the average Joe Blogs who is not a scientist or trained investigator who is at least trying to find answers to this massive dreadful scenario. With the expertise that science has at its disposal we should at least be seeing data bases of who, where etc abductions are happening thus giving a true picture of this scenarios seriousness yet we get nothing but people such as your self telling us that UFO investigators are useless due to not following scientific guide lines supplied by people who to be totally honest haven’t got a clue and are as useful as a bucket with holes in it unless they actually launch an official transparent investigation using resources the average Joe Blogs does not have access too. The abductee is a victim of crime no matter who carried out the abduction, support is needed such as counseling by people who will not judge or enforce their belief upon the victim and like any other victim they need to see their plight is taken seriously and fully investigated.


I generally disagree with your lines of reasoning, H. You have your opinions, I have mine and all that.

Perhaps more to the issues at hand, I am once again moved to point out people are entitled to believe anything they want and conduct research as they choose, but they are not entitled to call it science if it does not meet certain criteria. That was my original point, and debating the possible objective reality of alleged alien abduction is entirely a different issue, one, of which I interpret you nonetheless would like me to offer my opinions.

I suspect there may be some events of interest at the heart of what became known as the abduction phenomenon. I must seriously question, however, if people are literally being kidnapped by interplanetary visitors, much less on the scale Jacobs and Hopkins suggested. I would require much more verifiable evidence in order to accept such a conclusion.

I think the reason the extraterrestrial hypothesis for alien abduction remains outside the scope of scientific confirmation is simple: it is wrong. I think there are other explanations for the fantastic reports, and in some cases those explanations may indeed be fantastic, 'Alice in Wonderland'-type experiences themselves, but I doubt those explanations involve literal extraterrestrials.

You will recall, H, that I wrote that I think there are basically three kinds of information: One, that which can be verified as accurate, two, that which has been confirmed to be false and can be discarded, and, three, that which requires suspension of judgment pending further competent investigation. I would therefore say that witness testimonies of alien abduction fall into category three. More specifically, I do not have enough data to form an absolute conclusion. You asked me what I think, however, or at least I interpreted that you did, so I told you.

Please note the possible objective reality of literal alien abduction can only be a matter of testimony and opinion, at least on a public scale, as it cannot yet be verified. My point being that, while considering its possibilities might be interesting, to debate it at passionate length cannot result in any final resolution: it will continue to be choices of speculative opinion pending further competent investigation. I nonetheless empathize with you and your experiences, H, and I hope you find peace with it all.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on May 28th, 2013, 6:26pm

on May 28th, 2013, 05:43am, purr wrote:
Thanks for the links, Jjflash. Still, referring back to my question about 'fleshing' out scientific method from general overview to any specific/detailed approach you may propose: you have not clarified yet how to apply the Method to folks coming out with an abduction account... What assistance by (presumably) a team of scientists should be offered, and how to go about contacting them? Flesh out meant: be as precise as you can!


It was never my intent to offer or clarify any such method, purr. My article addressed unscrupulous research misrepresented as scientific investigation. It is not my responsibility to analyze anyone's claims or design related research methodology, but the responsibilities of researchers claiming to conduct scientific investigations to do so.

Concerning your interests, however, purr, you might choose to locate some of the comments and material published by microbiologist Dr. Tyler Kokjohn. He has repeatedly explained manners potential DNA evidence could be collected and analyzed in very practical and affordable manners. If literal aliens are interacting with people, much less impregnating them and such, obtaining evidence thereof would be relatively simple at this point in the evolution of human technology and forensic capabilities. He has written and commented about that on several sites, including my blogs, where there are also videos explaining such. You or others might also find Dr. Kokjohn's recent podcast discussion on Binnall of America of interest. The doctor discussed at length how scientific investigation could be applied to ufology, as well as several other topics of potential interest. I hope that is helpful.

on May 28th, 2013, 05:43am, purr wrote:
What the bleep are you talking about, Jj?! I never heard of human rights being violated of abductees! (Which Human Rights exactly?)


I did not write “human rights being violated of abductees.” I wrote that I was appalled at the way abductees were treated by people claiming to be helpful. I then wrote, “That led to my interests in human rights violations concerning human research subjects.”

My interest in such ufology cases as Woods and Haley dovetailed with my interest in the intelligence community. The extents the two communities mirror one another in their uses and explorations of hypnosis causes them to be virtually indistinguishable at times. Similar lines of interest could grow out of events surrounding Mark Schwartz and Castlewood Treatment Center, a saga I would highly recommend those check out with interests in hypnosis, false memories, exploitation of vulnerable demographics and similar such subject matter.

on May 28th, 2013, 05:43am, purr wrote:
I feel like accusing you of scientific optimism, Jjflash. Such UFO dream teams are extremely rarified. Sure I want them in the field, but the real world status quo amounts to sites like these, many 'experts' (full gamut of accreditation), UFO self-help groups, and MUFON like organizations. For now the UFO Community, flaws and all, is the best help for abductees on offer.

And before you can reasonably send in forensic scientists, playing CSI (funding... funding), you must formulate an objective standard of extraterrestrial DNA trace. Only then one may differentiate between merely earthly/human DNA presence, and finding ET was here.


Qualified experts disagree. The recent work on Ata contributed by Dr. Nolan demonstrated such capabilities. Similarly, Dr. Kokjohn indicated DNA evidence collection in cases of alleged alien abduction is not only possible, but the funding requirements have largely been misrepresented as more costly than is actually true. Dr. Kokjohn's related comments can be viewed at such links as Science versus sensationalism, part 3 of 4: A possible dead alien, as well as the fourth part in the series, Aliens and evidence. He also recently authored Science Catches Up With Ufology: The Unexamined Hypothesis, explaining how researchers such as David Jacobs, Barbara Lamb and Delores Cannon now have opportunities to extensively test their yet unsubstantiated hypotheses of ET-human hybrid breeding programs, if they desire to do so.

My personal opinion, purr, if helpful to know, is that there may very well be something of interest at the core of reported high strangeness. I am confident, however, that exploitation of vulnerable individuals and misrepresentation of what may actually be taking place is harmful from many perspectives; I am confident the UFO community has largely been duped by a number of people with a number of deceptive agendas. I am of the opinion that it has gone on to such an extent that those among us who promote careful fact checking and critical thinking are quickly and incorrectly labeled unreasonable debunkers. I think that evolved to be the prevailing culture because critical thinking is the nemesis of the deceivers, and, as stated in the article, the less educated and poorly informed are targeted for exploitation. The resulting dynamics are often not conducive to revealing or discussing actuality.

on May 28th, 2013, 06:45am, bewildered wrote:
...I look at therapy as the first line of defense and response to anyone who is suffering trauma from an abduction experience.


That's a reasonable perspective. I would agree that mental health professionals have a great deal to contribute to ufology. The reported abduction-experiences in themselves are frequently described as traumatic, and treatment would therefore logically apply. A reasonable perspective on the situation might include that people who disagree either fail to understand or underestimate the significance of the symptoms of emotional traumata, which, some will recall, I identified as, in my opinion, among the most relevant and least understood aspects of the abduction phenom.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by skizicks on May 28th, 2013, 8:01pm

Perhaps we should take a page from the investigation of a sex crime.
Let's consider that step one in any investigation of an abduction is an interview by a trained therapist to get a "feel", for lack of a better term, of the victims mental health, other than the abduction effects, and assess their voracity.
Two would take place if the therapist gives the victim a clean bill of mental health. This would be a physical examination of the site and the victim. Someone with at least some training in evidence gathering goes over the site and takes samples of the victim.
Then you need a lab of some kind to look at anything found to look for anomilies.
Establish it did happen as the victim says, that there is supporting physical evidence, and then maybe try to make sense of what was found.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on May 28th, 2013, 8:13pm

on May 28th, 2013, 8:01pm, skizicks wrote:
Perhaps we should take a page from the investigation of a sex crime.
Let's consider that step one in any investigation of an abduction is an interview by a trained therapist to get a "feel", for lack of a better term, of the victims mental health, other than the abduction effects, and assess their voracity.
Two would take place if the therapist gives the victim a clean bill of mental health. This would be a physical examination of the site and the victim. Someone with at least some training in evidence gathering goes over the site and takes samples of the victim.
Then you need a lab of some kind to look at anything found to look for anomilies.
Establish it did happen as the victim says, that there is supporting physical evidence, and then maybe try to make sense of what was found.


To follow your crime analogy: many (actually a majority) of abduction accounts involve reporting delays, call it a Cold Case structure. Where memories of alleged alien abduction come back after years or decades.

I am trying to ask Jjflash, I don't mind asking all posters, Skizicks. How to formulate a scientific approach to an anekdote driven phenomenon?


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on May 29th, 2013, 2:38pm

on May 28th, 2013, 8:13pm, purr wrote:
To follow your crime analogy: many (actually a majority) of abduction accounts involve reporting delays, call it a Cold Case structure. Where memories of alleged alien abduction come back after years or decades.

I am trying to ask Jjflash, I don't mind asking all posters, Skizicks. How to formulate a scientific approach to an anekdote driven phenomenon?


purr


Microbiologist Dr. Tyler Kokjohn recently wrote in his article, The Unexamined Hypothesis:

For decades, hypotheses have explained alien abductions and other interactions variously as nefarious conspiracies against all humankind, genetic hybridization programs and interventions to save us from destruction. New developments in DNA sequencing technology and biotechnology now enable direct testing of claims regarding modifications to the human genome, involuntary alien initiated and terminated pregnancies, and acquisition of disease resistance. That means investigators like Dr. David Jacobs, Barbara Lamb and Dolores Cannon will at last be able to provide the hard DNA or biochemical evidence confirming that their ideas have a medical basis.

The ever-evolving and expanding claims are astonishing and anyone able to corroborate them with reliable scientific data would certainly achieve fame and fortune. The burden of proof is on them, yet the investigators exhibit little inclination to employ the analysis tools now available to clinch the conclusive evidence. Where is the objective verification for alien initiated and terminated pregnancies? Because fetal cells persist in the mother decades after pregnancy (3), this has become an experimentally approachable question for Dr. Jacobs to explore. Dolores Cannon maintains that the DNA of the ‘third wave of volunteers’ is more ‘advanced’ and we are moving toward a future where we cannot get sick. Why then do we still have outbreaks of old infectious disease foes like cholera and measles (4, 5) in children? If the DNA itself has been altered or ‘junk’ sequences are being utilized in new ways as she claims, genetic analyses could reveal the underlying changes. Barbara Lamb has announced she knows the identities of human-alien hybrids. Why not perform a simple genetic profile test on them and see whether the unequivocal assertions stand up to scientific scrutiny?

Why some investigators seem reluctant to even mention the fact that their wild ideas could be swiftly confirmed, or refuted, by direct experiment is understandable. Should hard genetic and biochemical data ever confront the ornate hypotheses so carefully elaborated over decades of time, it is absolutely clear some won’t survive the test. Let’s face it, Dr. Greer also offers a superb example of an investigator who saw his beautiful, eminently marketable hypothesis go down in flames once he allowed it to be examined scientifically.

..................................................................

I am suggesting the UFO community collectively make a more intentional effort to reject poor research, particularly when misrepresented as scientifically credible, while simultaneously making a more intentional effort to accept sound lines of reasoning. Accurate identification of fact and fiction is much more part of the solution than the problem. Such actions advance the search for truth while moving closer to actually identifying the factors involved in the abduction phenomenon.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by bewildered on May 29th, 2013, 3:27pm

on May 28th, 2013, 8:13pm, purr wrote:
How to formulate a scientific approach to an anekdote driven phenomenon?


purr


Something is anecdotal only if it cannot be corroborated by empirical evidence. I apologize if I seem somewhat robotic on that point, purr, but since my personal interests and education lie in that direction (I aspire to code applications that permit a robotic machine to navigate terrain in an "intelligent" manner, among other things), I fear that sometimes I maintain a white-knuckled grip on the heuristics of algorithmic evaluation and design. grin

Until empirical evidence can be received through an intake process, qualified forensic investigators can only search for it. Science can do nothing with anecdotes. Because of this reality, anyone who claims to have been abducted must be willing to fully cooperate with investigators if they wish to advance human understanding of this complex of allied phenomena.

If there is any hesitation preventing that from occurring, our understanding will never advance.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by bewildered on May 29th, 2013, 3:55pm

on May 29th, 2013, 2:38pm, jjflash wrote:
Why some investigators seem reluctant to even mention the fact that their wild ideas could be swiftly confirmed, or refuted, by direct experiment is understandable. Should hard genetic and biochemical data ever confront the ornate hypotheses so carefully elaborated over decades of time, it is absolutely clear some won’t survive the test. Let’s face it, Dr. Greer also offers a superb example of an investigator who saw his beautiful, eminently marketable hypothesis go down in flames once he allowed it to be examined scientifically.

..................................................................

I am suggesting the UFO community collectively make a more intentional effort to reject poor research, particularly when misrepresented as scientifically credible, while simultaneously making a more intentional effort to accept sound lines of reasoning. Accurate identification of fact and fiction is much more part of the solution than the problem. Such actions advance the search for truth while moving closer to actually identifying the factors involved in the abduction phenomenon.


Bravo, jjflash. I took the liberty of applying bold emphasis to what I feel is the ultimate "point" of your article.

We each possess certain talents and individual strengths. Some people are idea-generators, others are idea-refiners, and then there are those who implement those ideas. As for myself, as I read jj's original article my mind immediately began generating the foundation of an algorithm that would possibly satisfy the requirements of a scientific intake process for people who claim to have been abducted by non-human and paranormal causative agents.

Like the solving of a mathematical expression or equation, we establish an order of operations. Without that, the problem-solving process is meaningless; problem-solving is one of the cornerstones of scientific pursuit. My rough outline looks something like this:

Does the alleged abductee want help? If yes, then:

The abductee should seek out qualified therapeutic assistance as soon as possible.

If no, then:

No further action is required.

Does the therapist feel forensic investigation is called for? If yes, then:

The appropriate authorities and/or experts are consulted.

If no, then:

The alleged abductee continues with the therapeutic regimen. I cannot stress this enough: everyone's mental and emotional well-being are of critical importance. Imagine, for a moment, all of the wasted human potential that occurs in this post-modern world our species has created. Everyone is equally important, and life is precious.

If forensic investigation occurs, all parties involved with the alleged abductee should cooperate fully. There is of course much more to this, but I think this will suffice as a rough framework. The alleged abductee is the "center" of this methodology...because we are talking about someone's life, after all. Scientific pursuit and adherence to the highest professional and ethical standards is the only acceptable route to take, in my opinion.

In the event that an investigation of an alleged abduction occurs, the therapist, along with the abductee, should be kept "in the loop" and informed of progress. I think the involvement of the therapist in this process is critical, because their primary concern is for their client, the abductee. Because of their foundational level of involvement, I imagine that the therapist should be a clinical psychologist. I suppose a psychiatrist could also be the contact person, but modern psychiatry in some ways (this is only my opinion, so I'm not attempting to assert this as a "fact") has devolved into nothing more than a psychotropic medication consultant for clinical psychologists and their mental health practices. This is why I'm inclined to favor a psychologist as the "first line of defense" for an abductee.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by skizicks on May 29th, 2013, 9:12pm

A man steps forward and claims he killed someone a few days ago. If he offers some information that leads to a body or physical evidence that a crime took place he could well end up in prison. But, if he claims such a crime and the police can find no evidence what so ever of such a crime the man is ignored as a crank.
Those same standards need to be applied to an abduction report. The interview at the begining should determine of further work is worth the effort.
memories that are "discovered" well after the fact are worthless. Digging through that person's mind has little chance of finding real proof and a good chance of causing harm to the person.
With all do respect we do not need more vague stories of half remembered nightmares. The key is physical proof.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by hyundisonata on May 30th, 2013, 01:45am

The difference being Skizicks is that both instances would be fully investigated by a competent body but when it comes to ET this does not happen so all we are left with is the story’s unless the abductee manages to get ETs head on a plate. Here in the UK even the police are ignored when it comes to ET so what chance does the average person on the street have apart from such as Greer or Nick Pope who we all know are only in it for the cash. About the only reliable evidence to prove or come close to proving abduction is genuine lies buried in the police archives regarding this case, http://www.factfictionandconjecture.ca/files/robert_taylor.html
This abduction was fully investigated by the police and forensic samples where taken, now due to advances in science and technology and as this evidence should still be available why the hell has no one reopened this case, who is blocking such from being brought into the public eye. It’s not all cut and dry and we could demand this and that until the cows come home but until the government get off their fat bums and launch an open investigation then anything else is pointless and worthless apart from telling a good story in the hope some people will start to listen.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on May 30th, 2013, 2:56pm

on May 30th, 2013, 01:45am, hyundisonata wrote:
The difference being Skizicks is that both instances would be fully investigated by a competent body but when it comes to ET this does not happen so all we are left with is the story’s unless the abductee manages to get ETs head on a plate. Here in the UK even the police are ignored when it comes to ET so what chance does the average person on the street have apart from such as Greer or Nick Pope who we all know are only in it for the cash. About the only reliable evidence to prove or come close to proving abduction is genuine lies buried in the police archives regarding this case, http://www.factfictionandconjecture.ca/files/robert_taylor.html
This abduction was fully investigated by the police and forensic samples where taken, now due to advances in science and technology and as this evidence should still be available why the hell has no one reopened this case, who is blocking such from being brought into the public eye. It’s not all cut and dry and we could demand this and that until the cows come home but until the government get off their fat bums and launch an open investigation then anything else is pointless and worthless apart from telling a good story in the hope some people will start to listen.


Great Case, I recall reading about it before, so he had 20 minutes of missing time? Too bad he did not undergo hypnosis.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by hyundisonata on May 31st, 2013, 02:55am

We hear people on here screaming for scientific investigation yet here we have a case that was investigated under strict criminal investigatory rules buy competent investigators, samples of clothing, medical evidence, samples and photographic evidence taken of the abduction site by forensic experts of that era close to the time of the incident yet it is ignored by those demanding proof. The evidence is there so why do they not follow up on this as it could answer a lot of questions scientifically as it was investigated as an UFO incident and correct me if I am wrong but are forensic experts not scientists.
There again we could just ask Nick Pope for the truth as no doubt the MOD would have been watching this with a beady eye , but again trying to get the truth from this man is like getting blood from a stone.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by hyundisonata on May 31st, 2013, 03:11am

Here is a little fact that is remotely connected to this case, I had the chief of the fire arms division and his colleagues along with an SNP politician in my home when they were planning to set night cameras etc on my land to catch the panther on film and they brought up the subject of UFO and the politician commented that since this incent with the forestry worker people had been leaving the area in droves as the UFO scenario was getting too much to handle. Now you have to understand these people are not interested in such and the normal talk is about sheep and weather and he was genuinely worried about this. I never let on that I investigate such but to me it indicated that it was a concern for the government and no doubt the MOD as someone high up pulled the plug on the investigation of the panther and stopped the use of the cameras that had night vision etc. this case of the forestry worker has to be the Achilles heel of all UFO incidents due to the in-depth investigation that took place.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on May 31st, 2013, 3:21pm

on May 31st, 2013, 03:11am, hyundisonata wrote:
Here is a little fact that is remotely connected to this case, I had the chief of the fire arms division and his colleagues along with an SNP politician in my home when they were planning to set night cameras etc on my land to catch the panther on film and they brought up the subject of UFO and the politician commented that since this incent with the forestry worker people had been leaving the area in droves as the UFO scenario was getting too much to handle. Now you have to understand these people are not interested in such and the normal talk is about sheep and weather and he was genuinely worried about this. I never let on that I investigate such but to me it indicated that it was a concern for the government and no doubt the MOD as someone high up pulled the plug on the investigation of the panther and stopped the use of the cameras that had night vision etc. this case of the forestry worker has to be the Achilles heel of all UFO incidents due to the in-depth investigation that took place.


That is interesting...
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Jun 1st, 2013, 11:57am

on May 28th, 2013, 6:26pm, jjflash wrote:
It was never my intent to offer or clarify any such method, purr. My article addressed unscrupulous research misrepresented as scientific investigation. It is not my responsibility to analyze anyone's claims or design related research methodology, but the responsibilities of researchers claiming to conduct scientific investigations to do so.

Concerning your interests, however, purr, you might choose to locate some of the comments and material published by microbiologist Dr. Tyler Kokjohn. He has repeatedly explained manners potential DNA evidence could be collected and analyzed in very practical and affordable manners. If literal aliens are interacting with people, much less impregnating them and such, obtaining evidence thereof would be relatively simple at this point in the evolution of human technology and forensic capabilities. He has written and commented about that on several sites, including my blogs, where there are also videos explaining such. You or others might also find Dr. Kokjohn's recent podcast discussion on Binnall of America of interest. The doctor discussed at length how scientific investigation could be applied to ufology, as well as several other topics of potential interest. I hope that is helpful.


I feel a bit disappointed, Jjflash, about you having no intention to "offer" or "clarify" a 'fleshed out', ah.. actually applicable version of the scientific method, specific to Abduction. Especially in view of (your position) Ufologists (like David Jacobs) conducting unscientific and harmful research, and there's now a right and proper, Scientific alternative for researching/understanding abduction claims.

"New developments in DNA sequencing technology and biotechnology now enable direct testing of claims regarding modifications to the human genome, involuntary alien initiated and terminated pregnancies, and acquisition of disease resistance."
Quoting Professor Tyler Kokjohn

Prof Kokjohn elaborated slightly, detailing how fetal cells live on for decades after a pregnancy, in the mother's body. Indeed presumably allowing for samples collected from female abductees, possibly including the DNA sequence of any children carried or delivered. Jj, I read all the articles by/referring to Kokjohn you linked. He reports on state-of-the-art DNA investigation. But no bridge to alien research is made: collected samples may be compared to a pre-existing DNA database, including the Human Genome, so we might establish either the absence of genes from Earth lifeforms, and even from individual human beings. OR, as used in criminal investigation, we find a certain human person left DNA trace, they 'WERE HERE'.

Not to immense surprise, Professor Kokjohn fails to provide a baseline for detecting a DNA based ET. (The complete genome of an alien species, but even a gen marker would be nice to compare with!) No baseline for establishing pure, unaltered, human genes, without health/immune system related modifications, without the presence of genetic hybridization. My lack of surprise is of course due to information on alien genomes (if existing) not being in the public realm. We don't know what an alien DNA sequence is. Nor do we have a date for when a hypothetical extraterrestrial-human hybridization 'program' was initiated. Consider these various theoretical starting moments: when the investigated abductee was taken / late 1940s / centuries ago / millennia ago / < 11,000 years Before Present (=duration of human history) / 200,000 years BP (time of modern man) / millions of yrs BP (competition between multiple pre-human hominids). Each of these dates for first genetic tampering by aliens would deliver dramatically different outcomes for separating out pure/original earthly, Human DNA from foreign changes. Taken back long enough, the human genome of course will more equal/closely resemble the so called ET genome. (And there's still the possibility of non-DNA alien lifeforms.)

The prof doesn't explain how he can establish as scientific fact the presence or absence of alien alterations without possessing genetic baselines for them. Perhaps if UFOlogists hold off on this experiment, and female abductees aren't lining up for invasive procedures probing for ancient fetal matter, it is because the research is unfinished. Collecting ET DNA isn't quite a science yet.


on May 28th, 2013, 6:26pm, jjflash wrote:
I did not write “human rights being violated of abductees.” I wrote that I was appalled at the way abductees were treated by people claiming to be helpful. I then wrote, “That led to my interests in human rights violations concerning human research subjects.”


Well, by associating the bad treatment of abductees with your ensuing interest in human rights violations, you appeared to insinuate as much. I simply wished to make clear abductee maltreatment concerned mainly Medical Ethics, and that you have proven it in only one case, Woods/Jacobs.


on May 28th, 2013, 6:26pm, jjflash wrote:
My interest in such ufology cases as Woods and Haley dovetailed with my interest in the intelligence community. The extents the two communities mirror one another in their uses and explorations of hypnosis causes them to be virtually indistinguishable at times. Similar lines of interest could grow out of events surrounding Mark Schwartz and Castlewood Treatment Center, a saga I would highly recommend those check out with interests in hypnosis, false memories, exploitation of vulnerable demographics and similar such subject matter.


We agree in principle about the risk of exploitation, and about potential harm to experiencers due to lack of training/credentials of self-acclaimed Abduction experts. But I am eagerly awaiting main stream scientists directly inviting abductees in for high quality care and research. Abduction research has turned into the Wild West BECAUSE many proper scientists wouldn't touch this stuff with a ten foot pole.


on May 28th, 2013, 6:26pm, jjflash wrote:
Qualified experts disagree. The recent work on Ata contributed by Dr. Nolan demonstrated such capabilities. Similarly, Dr. Kokjohn indicated DNA evidence collection in cases of alleged alien abduction is not only possible, but the funding requirements have largely been misrepresented as more costly than is actually true. Dr. Kokjohn's related comments can be viewed at such links as Science versus sensationalism, part 3 of 4: A possible dead alien, as well as the fourth part in the series, Aliens and evidence. He also recently authored Science Catches Up With Ufology: The Unexamined Hypothesis, explaining how researchers such as David Jacobs, Barbara Lamb and Delores Cannon now have opportunities to extensively test their yet unsubstantiated hypotheses of ET-human hybrid breeding programs, if they desire to do so.


I fully appreciate the capability to collect genetic sample. But as I argued previously, establishing ET presence (or absence) is still very much OUT THERE.


on May 28th, 2013, 6:26pm, jjflash wrote:
My personal opinion, purr, if helpful to know, is that there may very well be something of interest at the core of reported high strangeness. I am confident, however, that exploitation of vulnerable individuals and misrepresentation of what may actually be taking place is harmful from many perspectives; I am confident the UFO community has largely been duped by a number of people with a number of deceptive agendas. I am of the opinion that it has gone on to such an extent that those among us who promote careful fact checking and critical thinking are quickly and incorrectly labeled unreasonable debunkers. I think that evolved to be the prevailing culture because critical thinking is the nemesis of the deceivers, and, as stated in the article, the less educated and poorly informed are targeted for exploitation. The resulting dynamics are often not conducive to revealing or discussing actuality.


I am given to understand there's even something of interest at the core of the vacuum of space, Jjflash. Big question still is whether abductees really are taken by Visitors. You are no debunker but posing hard questions imo.


on May 28th, 2013, 6:26pm, jjflash wrote:
That's a reasonable perspective. I would agree that mental health professionals have a great deal to contribute to ufology. The reported abduction-experiences in themselves are frequently described as traumatic, and treatment would therefore logically apply. A reasonable perspective on the situation might include that people who disagree either fail to understand or underestimate the significance of the symptoms of emotional traumata, which, some will recall, I identified as, in my opinion, among the most relevant and least understood aspects of the abduction phenom.


On the much needed availability of mental health professionals to abductees we already agree. But a vital caveat imo remains. Some abduction experiencers will not ask for such help, they will 'disagree' (perhaps because they were not traumatized, or feel uncomfortable with 'shrinks' cheesy whatever) and in those cases I feel it should not be imposed. Respect for the individual and their needs must be paramount.


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Jun 1st, 2013, 1:32pm

Jj, here's back to basics with regard to using DNA forensic evidence, what we can prove (delineated from what as yet cannot be proven).

Forensic Science utilises the properties of DNA in several ways. The adage “every contact leaves a trace” indicates the importance of a technique able to type trace amounts of genetic material left during the commission of a crime.

Hairs or saliva left on a balaclava worn during a robbery, semen located at a rape scene, blood collected from an assault, perspiration on clothing, traces of assailant’s skin under a victim’s fingernails, can often be DNA profiled. This genetic information can then be used to include or exclude suspects as being the source of the genetic material.

It is not yet possible to test the whole of an individual’s DNA. Forensic analysis involves the testing of regions of an individuals DNA.

Databases have been compiled which list the abundance of a particular fragment of DNA in the population. From this information, an estimate of the abundance of combinations of DNA at several regions can be made and compared to the DNA of victims or suspects. In this way, an individual can be included or excluded as a possible source of DNA found in relation to a criminal investigation. Statistical interpretation of the information can be made to estimate the likelihood of material coming from a particular individual relative to coming from a random member of the population.

Source

Best not to assume the basics are in the forefronts of all our minds smiley hence this link.


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 1st, 2013, 3:13pm

on Jun 1st, 2013, 11:57am, purr wrote:
The prof [Kokjohn] doesn't explain how he can establish as scientific fact the presence or absence of alien alterations without possessing genetic baselines for them... Collecting ET DNA isn't quite a science yet.


Right, purr, and that is a large part of my point in critically reviewing research of alleged alien abduction. It is the responsibility of Jacobs to present conclusive and scientific evidence for his extraordinary assertions, particularly since he claimed to be dedicated to the scientific process.

If forum members and members of the UFO community at large desire to express their frustrations over the lack of sound scientific research methodologies and the lack of conclusive evidence, I think they should direct such expressions at Jacobs, Lamb and those claiming to conduct such research and possess such fantastic evidence. Those of us asking the relevant and proper questions are neither the problem nor responsible for it.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Jun 1st, 2013, 5:08pm

on Jun 1st, 2013, 3:13pm, jjflash wrote:
Right, purr, and that is a large part of my point in critically reviewing research of alleged alien abduction. It is the responsibility of Jacobs to present conclusive and scientific evidence for his extraordinary assertions, particularly since he claimed to be dedicated to the scientific process.

If forum members and members of the UFO community at large desire to express their frustrations over the lack of sound scientific research methodologies and the lack of conclusive evidence, I think they should direct such expressions at Jacobs, Lamb and those claiming to conduct such research and possess such fantastic evidence. Those of us asking the relevant and proper questions are neither the problem nor responsible for it.


As it happens I stand relatively neutral to the UFOlogists you named in a critical manner. But how can the thrust of criticism be that they negligently spurned scientific method, including prof Kokjohn's genetic sampling and testing procedures, if his own claims omit the factual basis (=alien DNA sequences to compare against) for scientifically establishing the presence or absence of ET gene traces?

Although I agree critical questioners, such as yourself, don't carry blame or responsibility for any errors in method/practice of UFOlogists, Regression Therapists, Cultists and the like, once you post (a text about) a superior alternative method for researching and helping abductees, you ought to check it for practicality and completeness.

Tyler Kokjohn's proposed DNA testing for alien abductees does not yet work, simply because it has ONLY human, and earthly DNA information to compare against. Can't establish alien DNA present, alien tampering with genes, or zero alien interference without base lines for COMPARISON of FACTUAL markers/patterns belonging to Visitors. At best the outcome would be academically formulated guesses.

I suspect that for now the 'alternative' on offer to UFOlogists of applying the scientific method to abduction is an impractical hypothesis. Abduction comes to us mainly as heartfelt testimony, requiring attentive listeners. Professor Kokjohn's claims extend well beyond his evidence (at least the parts I read), and for abductees / researchers to start using DNA tests as tool to verify ET's presence would be premature. Again in my humble opinion.


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by bewildered on Jun 1st, 2013, 5:11pm

on May 31st, 2013, 02:55am, hyundisonata wrote:
We hear people on here screaming for scientific investigation yet here we have a case that was investigated under strict criminal investigatory rules buy competent investigators, samples of clothing, medical evidence, samples and photographic evidence taken of the abduction site by forensic experts of that era close to the time of the incident yet it is ignored by those demanding proof. The evidence is there so why do they not follow up on this as it could answer a lot of questions scientifically as it was investigated as an UFO incident and correct me if I am wrong but are forensic experts not scientists.
There again we could just ask Nick Pope for the truth as no doubt the MOD would have been watching this with a beady eye , but again trying to get the truth from this man is like getting blood from a stone.


I understand that you're trying to make a "point" in this post, but the use of hyperbole to mischaracterize and exaggerate the activity of other members on this forum ("We hear people on here screaming for scientific investigation"), and then misrepresenting the behavior of other people through the use of rhetoric ("...medical evidence, samples and photographic evidence taken of the abduction site by forensic experts of that era close to the time of the incident yet it is ignored by those demanding proof...") doesn't remotely address the topic introduced by the original poster.

No one is "ignoring proof," hyundisonata. I would love to see any existing physical evidence subjected to the most exhaustive scrutiny possible. If it's out there, let's look at it!
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 1st, 2013, 6:57pm

on Jun 1st, 2013, 5:08pm, purr wrote:
As it happens I stand relatively neutral to the UFOlogists you named in a critical manner. But how can the thrust of criticism be that they negligently spurned scientific method, including prof Kokjohn's genetic sampling and testing procedures, if his own claims omit the factual basis (=alien DNA sequences to compare against) for scientifically establishing the presence or absence of ET gene traces?


Let's look at some specific circumstances. In an interview conducted in April of 2012 at the Ozark UFO Conference, Dr. Jacobs made some absolutely extraordinary assertions. In The Bizarre World of Doctor David Jacobs: An Interview and Review, his statements are presented. Among them were numerous claims which could not possibly be either known or confirmed without extensive research. Included in Jacobs' remarks about aliens, hybrids and their breeding programs among humans, were the statements to the effect that hybrids are now virtually exactly identical to humans other than sleep cycle and their abilities to control others.

In his bio for that very Ozark Conference, Jacobs asserted to be a devotee of the scientific method of research, as he states on his website and in other bios. I assert that someone cannot possibly be committed to the principles of scientific investigation who purports to know the physiological and mental attributes of an extraterrestrial species that has not yet been so much as demonstrated to exist. That is simply not science, no matter what Jacobs calls it, who can be incorrectly led to believe it or who he can get to make excuses for it.

Simlarly, Barbara Lamb has repeatedly set forth that she personally knows a number of ET-human hybrid beings. She was asked (Barbara Lamb and MUFON: 'ET-human hybrids: They are real and they are here') to be specific about what would lead her to make such remarks, and to clarify what, if any, medical exams had been conducted. The woman replied, in so many words, that she was too busy to organize the data which would conclusively reveal such astounding circumstances to the rest of the world.

MUFON, an organization purporting to be dedicated to scientific research, promoted Lamb and her claims, as it continues to do for Jacobs. MUFON, and specifically member of the board of directors Jan Harzan, was asked repeatedly to provide comment on how the organization could claim to be a scientific research organization yet jointly partake in such activities with Lamb. Harzan never responded.

Concerning Dr. Kokjohn, he is a qualified expert and a professional scientist. I therefore accept his opinions as put forth in his article, The Unexamined Hypothesis, and moreover, I agree with him and others that the scientific process dictates seeking corroboration of such fantastic claims as being made by Jacobs, Lamb and, indirectly, MUFON.

Basically, it all comes down to put up or shut up. I think that is particularly the case among self-described researchers claiming to be conducting scientific investigation.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Jun 2nd, 2013, 12:46pm

on Jun 1st, 2013, 6:57pm, jjflash wrote:
Let's look at some specific circumstances. In an interview conducted in April of 2012 at the Ozark UFO Conference, Dr. Jacobs made some absolutely extraordinary assertions. In The Bizarre World of Doctor David Jacobs: An Interview and Review, his statements are presented. Among them were numerous claims which could not possibly be either known or confirmed without extensive research. Included in Jacobs' remarks about aliens, hybrids and their breeding programs among humans, were the statements to the effect that hybrids are now virtually exactly identical to humans other than sleep cycle and their abilities to control others.

In his bio for that very Ozark Conference, Jacobs asserted to be a devotee of the scientific method of research, as he states on his website and in other bios. I assert that someone cannot possibly be committed to the principles of scientific investigation who purports to know the physiological and mental attributes of an extraterrestrial species that has not yet been so much as demonstrated to exist. That is simply not science, no matter what Jacobs calls it, who can be incorrectly led to believe it or who he can get to make excuses for it.

Simlarly, Barbara Lamb has repeatedly set forth that she personally knows a number of ET-human hybrid beings. She was asked (Barbara Lamb and MUFON: 'ET-human hybrids: They are real and they are here') to be specific about what would lead her to make such remarks, and to clarify what, if any, medical exams had been conducted. The woman replied, in so many words, that she was too busy to organize the data which would conclusively reveal such astounding circumstances to the rest of the world.

MUFON, an organization purporting to be dedicated to scientific research, promoted Lamb and her claims, as it continues to do for Jacobs. MUFON, and specifically member of the board of directors Jan Harzan, was asked repeatedly to provide comment on how the organization could claim to be a scientific research organization yet jointly partake in such activities with Lamb. Harzan never responded.

Concerning Dr. Kokjohn, he is a qualified expert and a professional scientist. I therefore accept his opinions as put forth in his article, The Unexamined Hypothesis, and moreover, I agree with him and others that the scientific process dictates seeking corroboration of such fantastic claims as being made by Jacobs, Lamb and, indirectly, MUFON.

Basically, it all comes down to put up or shut up. I think that is particularly the case among self-described researchers claiming to be conducting scientific investigation.


Thank you for those links, I have read them, and find it useful to refamiliarize with some of the popular/central figures in abduction investigation, Jjflash.

Like I suggested before, I feel neither inclined to attack or defend the likes of Jacobs or Lamb, or any other big names in 'abductionology' smiley. Credit is due to them for collecting and processing large volumes of data from this phenomenon. Perhaps they make mistakes: you seem well read up on the details of their activities, as is one of our other members (Mythos), so I would refer to arguments by both of you to come to a quality judgement of these Abduction Researchers.

I find it strange you are willing to blindly follow the "opinion" of Professor of Microbiology Kokjohn, without addressing my specific problems and objections to those opinions as presented in your linked articles. Slaving after a guy's opinion based on his academic credentials alone must be in contradiction to Skepticism, the principles of Reason, and betrayal of the Scientific Method. Honestly, I worry you practice Science as a Religion, Jj.

And based on his own words, Kokjohn style DNA testing uses state-of-the-art forensics, that is COMPARISON to pre-existing data bases of human and earthly DNA. Any suggestion this will track alien presence/activity on Earth has zero basis in fact. The prof has got no facts, no alien DNA sequences or markers to compare against. Therefore his assertion his DNA test will verify abduction claims imho are exaggerated.

I feel I should answer unequivocally to your repeated statements that abduction research in general and Dr. David Jacobs' research specifically fail the scientific standard. I agree. The excuse/explanation might be that abduction is too weird to fit scientific methods of investigation. Was Science blindsided by something beyond imagination? Jjflash, it's one of those Muhammad and the Mountain things here, either Abduction "puts up" or Science has to stretch is scope and methodology.


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Silver on Jun 2nd, 2013, 2:38pm

No one can really understand alien abduction or write about alien adduction unless that person has been abducted.

When one thinks about UFO's and alien abduction, you are talking about a new set of physics laws.

Most people's brains will not allow that person to think outside of out their reality.

Can you accept a new set of physics in a different existence ?

People can not, and can not accept alien abduction !

But it is real.


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Jun 2nd, 2013, 4:13pm

on Jun 2nd, 2013, 2:38pm, Silvermist wrote:
No one can really understand alien abduction or write about alien adduction unless that person has been abducted.

When one thinks about UFO's and alien abduction, you are talking about a new set of physics laws.

Most people's brains will not allow that person to think outside of out their reality.

Can you accept a new set of physics in a different existence ?

People can not, and can not accept alien abduction !

But it is real.



Sounds overly pessimist to my ears, Silvermist! I agree people can't fully comprehend another's experience unless they had that experience themselves. But I accept this strange phenomenon, and I think acceptance is widening as time goes on. I think Abduction needs investigators who will seriously listen and record the stories, analyse the bulk of data as it expands, and scientists to model theories to explain it.

We are not close to solving the puzzle now imo, because of official government denial, plus that the scientific community largely turns a blind eye. Also the debunking and ridicule let loose on abductees daring to go public can be devastating. Enough so to shut up some witnesses who don't want to become their surroundings laughingstock and even risk losing their job.


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Silver on Jun 2nd, 2013, 5:01pm

I just felt like what has been written has used being mental or sleep paralysis as the reason entirely.

I do not know the answers, but some abduction cases are real.

The problem is how does one know which are the real cases.

In my case I was awake studying for a college test, and that was the problem.

For what ever reason or mis-calculation, my E.T.'s did not expect to find me wide wake.

Besides time standing still, we had a face off, which of course, I lost.

I think the E.T.'s did not calculate the right time to enter my bedroom.

These E.T.'s were small, young, and had no experience, and stupid.


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Jun 3rd, 2013, 12:04pm

on Jun 2nd, 2013, 5:01pm, Silvermist wrote:
I just felt like what has been written has used being mental or sleep paralysis as the reason entirely.

I do not know the answers, but some abduction cases are real.

The problem is how does one know which are the real cases.

In my case I was awake studying for a college test, and that was the problem.

For what ever reason or mis-calculation, my E.T.'s did not expect to find me wide wake.

Besides time standing still, we had a face off, which of course, I lost.

I think the E.T.'s did not calculate the right time to enter my bedroom.

These E.T.'s were small, young, and had no experience, and stupid.



Should we even care about all the things written about abduction, Silver? I think mental disorders, sleep disorders and alien abduction are separate phenomena. Their overlap consists of every one of them getting experienced by the mind, while difference is that nr. 1 & 2 are brain based, and Alien Abduction involves imo outside, real players initiating contact.

I like to model abduction/contact as taking place on a massive scale, since like almost forever, they are all 'real', yet the number of physical takings is smaller than dream/spirit abductions. I wonder if WE ALL have met Others, but simply can't remember.

By the way there are numerable abduction accounts where the experiencers were wide awake, and/or have normal recall (without requiring hypnotic augmentation).


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 8th, 2013, 3:02pm

Hello, all -

Perhaps some might find my latest post at The UFO Trail of interest, Sham Inquiry Run Riot. A 2010 thesis written by scientist Sharon Hill is explored, including comments from Ms. Hill.

An excerpt from the post:

Hill's thesis contained a study of 1,000 websites of amateur research and investigation groups, each of which conducted activities focused around unexplained events, and a majority of which claimed to use science as part of their approach to investigation and research. She conducted a thorough examination, resulting in a qualified and factual analysis that those of us looking for the truth out there - and what Hill conclusively demonstrated to be its frequent misrepresentation - might find helpful to review.

Each amateur research and investigation group, or ARIG, involved in Hill's study had certain qualifying characteristics. ARIGs examined had primary interests in ghosts, UFOs, mystery animals and similar such reported phenomena. Group activities did not provide a primary income for participants, and groups studied were not part of an academic institution or headed by working scientists. The Mutual UFO Network, for example, fell within the criteria and was included in the study, as was The Atlantic Paranormal Society, known to ghost enthusiasts far and wide as TAPS.

[...]

When held accountable for explaining exactly what is scientific about their methods, Hill reported that ARIGs abandoned their platform of conducting scientific investigation. ARIGs provided vague answers and invalid explanations, demonstrated significant misunderstandings of science and withdrew their claims altogether of conducting scientific research. Hill concluded the groups were comfortable appealing to the public's sense of science while evading discussion of relevant issues when confronted by a knowledgeable inquirer.

"The most disturbing finding,” Hill wrote in the thesis, “is the emphasis by ARIGs to educate the public. In the process of communicating their work to the public, they most often promote a matter-of-fact paranormal viewpoint and present their methods and conclusions as sound. The public is delivered inaccurate information and a distorted view of science.”
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 14th, 2013, 8:23pm

A video pubished by microbiologist Dr. Tyler Kokjohn on August 12, 2011:



Almost two full years later, April 17, 2013:

Barbara Lamb and MUFON: 'ET-human hybrids: They are real and they are here'

Orlando Paranormal Examiner

MUFON Orange County, a California-based chapter of the Mutual UFO Network, distributed an email containing information about the activities of alien abduction researcher Barbara Lamb. Printed boldly in caps and large font across the top of the email was the proclamation, “ET-human hybrids: They are real and they are here.” The message contained information related to Ms. Lamb's speaking engagement at MUFON Orange County, where she appeared in March prior to her stop at the Cosmic Reunion Fourth Density Conference.

The email stated Lamb previously conducted regressive hypnosis sessions with some 900 individuals, “helping them to access details of encounters they've had with a variety of Extraterrestrial Beings [sic].” It was claimed that Lamb “discovered that many of her clients have unwittingly contributed to the ET's programs of creating ET-Human [sic] hybrids.” According to the MUFON email, such hybrids “live here among us on earth,” and some of them, it was stated in the email, “Barbara knows personally.”

'Orlando Paranormal Examiner' emailed Lamb and requested comment, specifically inquiring if she has provided evidence of her assertions to any qualified third parties for review. She was also asked if blood work and related physical examinations have been conducted on any of the alleged ET-human hybrids, as well as what justification she could present for such extraordinary statements as contained in the MUFON email.

“I am in a huge rush this week,” Lamb replied March 18, “but basically you would have to talk to the three people who are convinced (and I am convinced) that they are hybrids, and find out from them about blood tests, bone tests, etc. I don't know whether or not they would be willing to talk to you (whom they don't know), but if you are interested, I could ask them and they could decide.”

Lamb was encouraged in a subsequent series of emails to coordinate correspondence with the alleged hybrids and thanked for her efforts. When urged to provide direct answers to the questions concerning physical examinations and evidence available for public review, no further emails were received from Lamb. Neither has any correspondence been received from alleged ET-human hybrid beings.

Jan Harzan was emailed and asked to provide comment. According to the MUFON website, Mr. Harzan is a member of the MUFON board of directors and is the Southern California assistant state director.

Multiple emails were sent to Harzan at two different addresses provided on the website as points of contact. He was asked to comment on why MUFON, an organization purporting to be dedicated to scientific study, would circulate an email promoting as fact such unsubstantiated and fantastic claims. No replies were received.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by FlatEarth on Jun 17th, 2013, 9:50pm

Here's a Scientific American article on hypnosis. I wouldn't dismiss hypnosis as a tool for revealing lost memories just because it may have been misused by some.

Flat

P.S. Wow. Ms. Hill sure is a beauty! smiley
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Soryu on Jun 18th, 2013, 09:52am

Another fine “Scientific American” article on hypnosis.

The association of the posthypnotic amnesia (PHA) effect with brain activity in the occipital lobes, left temporal lobe and prefrontal cortex involved in explicit recall, as measured on the fMRI, is suggestive. Assuming that UFOs are a real phenomena (and there can be little doubt of that), and that at least some UFOs represent an ET technology with crews who indulge in occasional catch and release (treated skeptically by the majority), to account for abduction amnesia, perhaps they’ve developed a psychotronic device, which is to say, an electromagnetic device which impacts the psyche by disrupting ordinary perceptual and memory mechanisms in the brain.

When it comes to the use of hypnosis in what is essentially a therapeutic context, it is often overlooked that “truths” revealed under hypnosis are not “legal truths,” in other words, are not to be viewed as something like a smoking gun. As one author put it “the assumption [is] that therapy uncovers legally relevant “facts” connecting past trauma to current stress. A psychiatrist or other mental health professional, however, is not a detective. In psychology, mental reality is more important than objective reality. Punctilious history taking is not vital to therapy, and a patient does not – and need not – take an oath like a witness to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. What a patient tells a therapist about his or her [past] is not necessarily related to what actually happened. In the psychoanalytic dialogue, the attention is focused on continuity and coherence, not on historical truth. Psychoanalysis or other psychotherapy is not an archaeological dig but a search for a regenerative story.” (Slovenko, “The Effect of Return of Memory in Sexual Abuse Cases on Statute of Limitations and The Justification For a Counter Attack” quoted in Alan Gold, “False Memory Syndrome In Perspective” (1996) 6:2 Canadian Insurance Law Review 156 at 159.)

In a sense, there’s a fundamental “conflict of interests” between the applications of hypnosis as a therapeutic tool, versus its use as a fact-finding tool. There may be overlap, but a determination of the extent of the overlap requires recourse to other sources of veridical information which are, more often than not, unavailable. (Donald Soryu)

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 18th, 2013, 12:08pm

on Jun 18th, 2013, 09:52am, Soryu wrote:
When it comes to the use of hypnosis in what is essentially a therapeutic context, it is often overlooked that “truths” revealed under hypnosis are not “legal truths,” in other words, are not to be viewed as something like a smoking gun. As one author put it “the assumption [is] that therapy uncovers legally relevant “facts” connecting past trauma to current stress. A psychiatrist or other mental health professional, however, is not a detective. In psychology, mental reality is more important than objective reality. Punctilious history taking is not vital to therapy, and a patient does not – and need not – take an oath like a witness to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. What a patient tells a therapist about his or her [past] is not necessarily related to what actually happened. In the psychoanalytic dialogue, the attention is focused on continuity and coherence, not on historical truth. Psychoanalysis or other psychotherapy is not an archaeological dig but a search for a regenerative story.” (Slovenko, “The Effect of Return of Memory in Sexual Abuse Cases on Statute of Limitations and The Justification For a Counter Attack” quoted in Alan Gold, “False Memory Syndrome In Perspective” (1996) 6:2 Canadian Insurance Law Review 156 at 159.)

In a sense, there’s a fundamental “conflict of interests” between the applications of hypnosis as a therapeutic tool, versus its use as a fact-finding tool. There may be overlap, but a determination of the extent of the overlap requires recourse to other sources of veridical information which are, more often than not, unavailable. (Donald Soryu)


I very much agree that your points are relevant. Thanks for the post.

It appears to me that a vast majority of the general public, and, in turn, the UFO community, do not understand the dynamics of therapist-client relationships. That indeed results in a number of commonly held yet entirely inaccurate assumptions. Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing, or EMDR, is a good example of what can be an effective tool for treating trauma, yet the mental images experienced during its administration (and non-ordinary states of consciousness) should not necessarily be taken literally.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 18th, 2013, 12:21pm

on Jun 17th, 2013, 9:50pm, FlatEarth wrote:
Here's a Scientific American article on hypnosis. I wouldn't dismiss hypnosis as a tool for revealing lost memories just because it may have been misused by some.

Flat


Thanks for the article link, Flat. Researchers at Weizmann Institute seem to be systematically examining effects of hypnosis and its implications to human consciousness. Good for them, as such research could prove to be valuable in many fields and from several perspectives.

Three related yet different issues for consideration, please:

1) There are many different types and applications of hypnosis, reasonably all of which, to the best of my knowledge, the scientific community views as requiring further research (as apparently being conducted at Weizmann),

2) The lack of reliability of regressive hypnosis as an effective memory retrieval tool, and

3) The popularity of regressive hypnosis (RH) as an investigative tool for use on self-described alien abductees by individuals falsely claiming to practice science.

I think it is important to note and be aware of the issues and their differences.

The article cited, Hypnosis, Memory and the Brain, while interesting and informative, is not about RH. If I am understanding it correctly, it is about posthypnotic amnesia, or PHA, intentionally induced among research subjects. Subjects were then later hypnotically instructed to recall what they had been initially hypnotized to forget. Researchers concluded, among other observations, that the PHA, followed later by additional hypnotically induced suggestions, directly effected and produced brain activity and perceptions. That would be a conclusion that, if applied to regressive hypnosis at all, might be interpreted all the more to imply its high risk for participant susceptibility to suggestions and their potential for becoming unnecessarily traumatized. I can understand, though, how one might read the article in the context of hypnosis as a memory retrieval tool, leading us to the second issue.

As I understand the situation, the reliability of RH as a memory retrieval tool is a matter of sometimes RH might be effective and sometimes it is certainly not. That is not particularly different than is the case with any exercise designed to relax the mind and hopefully assist in recalling past events, such as writing with the less favored hand, the use of aromas to momentarily enhance memory and similar such activities. It is at best hit and miss, meaning it is by definition not 'reliable'. Moreover, mental health professionals inform us that even if one successfully recollects their original perceptions while under hypnosis, the degree of accuracy of those perceptions will continue to be unknown and called into question; you might relatively accurately remember events at a magic show, but that does not mean the magician actually sawed someone in half. All of the challenges and doubts are still applicable that apply to any seemingly recalled event or story someone narrates, if not more so. What's more, let's cut to the chase: RH was popularly embraced by abduction-researchers as an investigative tool largely because a poorly informed and exploitable segment of the public (which, by the way, once included me) was willing to incorrectly accept it as indicative of extraterrestrials in lieu of valid, scientific proof that continues to simply not exist.

About the third issue: Given that we conclusively know that regressive hypnosis cannot provide reliably accurate results – and even if it could, it only offers relatively inconsequential anecdotal testimony – hypnotizing people for the purpose of obtaining narrations about alien abductions is simply not a scientific procedure. People can do it if they want, and they can believe its accuracy if they choose, but, nonetheless, it is not science. Claims to the contrary are simply incorrect, and those are the types of circumstances I was offering for consideration in the original and subsequent posts.

Research related to all disciplines of physical and mental health should indeed continue to be professionally conducted by qualified experts in manners that the safety is prioritized of fully informed and consensual subjects. Then, as points are systematically learned and examined - as seemingly demonstrated at the Weizmann Institute in the article – detailed reports are submitted to journals and subjected to peer review. That is legitimate scientific inquiry, and the methods undertaken and reports produced by Weizmann show us specifically what we should be expecting, yet chronically failing to be offered, from researchers of alleged alien abduction. Self-described abduction-researchers, some of which are more accurately described as hypnotists falsely claiming to practice science, should take note – or at the least the public should take note, it could be argued. The use of RH as a memory retrieval tool for self-described alien abductees, and the related lack of reporting and lack of peer review by 'researchers' of abduction, are simply not science. Consumers are fully justified in questioning why RH practitioners and supporters are fraudulently labeling it as such.

The related issues and questions are not going to go away, no matter how much competent research is published by institutions such as Weizmann. As a matter of fact, it appears to me that such competent research continues to demonstrate just how unprofessional and poorly executed is typical abduction-research. The continuing lack of scientific reports and peer review shows us, it seems to me, that abduction-researchers proceeded with RH way too far, way too fast.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by FlatEarth on Jun 19th, 2013, 9:13pm

on Jun 18th, 2013, 09:52am, Soryu wrote:
Another fine “Scientific American” article on hypnosis.

The association of the posthypnotic amnesia (PHA) effect with brain activity in the occipital lobes, left temporal lobe and prefrontal cortex involved in explicit recall, as measured on the fMRI, is suggestive. Assuming that UFOs are a real phenomena (and there can be little doubt of that), and that at least some UFOs represent an ET technology with crews who indulge in occasional catch and release (treated skeptically by the majority), to account for abduction amnesia, perhaps they’ve developed a psychotronic device, which is to say, an electromagnetic device which impacts the psyche by disrupting ordinary perceptual and memory mechanisms in the brain.

When it comes to the use of hypnosis in what is essentially a therapeutic context, it is often overlooked that “truths” revealed under hypnosis are not “legal truths,” in other words, are not to be viewed as something like a smoking gun. As one author put it “the assumption [is] that therapy uncovers legally relevant “facts” connecting past trauma to current stress. A psychiatrist or other mental health professional, however, is not a detective. In psychology, mental reality is more important than objective reality. Punctilious history taking is not vital to therapy, and a patient does not – and need not – take an oath like a witness to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. What a patient tells a therapist about his or her [past] is not necessarily related to what actually happened. In the psychoanalytic dialogue, the attention is focused on continuity and coherence, not on historical truth. Psychoanalysis or other psychotherapy is not an archaeological dig but a search for a regenerative story.” (Slovenko, “The Effect of Return of Memory in Sexual Abuse Cases on Statute of Limitations and The Justification For a Counter Attack” quoted in Alan Gold, “False Memory Syndrome In Perspective” (1996) 6:2 Canadian Insurance Law Review 156 at 159.)

In a sense, there’s a fundamental “conflict of interests” between the applications of hypnosis as a therapeutic tool, versus its use as a fact-finding tool. There may be overlap, but a determination of the extent of the overlap requires recourse to other sources of veridical information which are, more often than not, unavailable. (Donald Soryu)

Hi Donald. I get your point and agree. I do believe there may be something to be learned from hypnotizing individuals who have lost memories, but it should be done by qualified professionals who do not have an agenda.

Flat
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by FlatEarth on Jun 19th, 2013, 9:16pm

on Jun 18th, 2013, 12:21pm, jjflash wrote:
Thanks for the article link, Flat. Researchers at Weizmann Institute seem to be systematically examining effects of hypnosis and its implications to human consciousness. Good for them, as such research could prove to be valuable in many fields and from several perspectives.

Three related yet different issues for consideration, please:

1) There are many different types and applications of hypnosis, reasonably all of which, to the best of my knowledge, the scientific community views as requiring further research (as apparently being conducted at Weizmann),

2) The lack of reliability of regressive hypnosis as an effective memory retrieval tool, and

3) The popularity of regressive hypnosis (RH) as an investigative tool for use on self-described alien abductees by individuals falsely claiming to practice science.

I think it is important to note and be aware of the issues and their differences.

The article cited, Hypnosis, Memory and the Brain, while interesting and informative, is not about RH. If I am understanding it correctly, it is about posthypnotic amnesia, or PHA, intentionally induced among research subjects. Subjects were then later hypnotically instructed to recall what they had been initially hypnotized to forget. Researchers concluded, among other observations, that the PHA, followed later by additional hypnotically induced suggestions, directly effected and produced brain activity and perceptions. That would be a conclusion that, if applied to regressive hypnosis at all, might be interpreted all the more to imply its high risk for participant susceptibility to suggestions and their potential for becoming unnecessarily traumatized. I can understand, though, how one might read the article in the context of hypnosis as a memory retrieval tool, leading us to the second issue.

As I understand the situation, the reliability of RH as a memory retrieval tool is a matter of sometimes RH might be effective and sometimes it is certainly not. That is not particularly different than is the case with any exercise designed to relax the mind and hopefully assist in recalling past events, such as writing with the less favored hand, the use of aromas to momentarily enhance memory and similar such activities. It is at best hit and miss, meaning it is by definition not 'reliable'. Moreover, mental health professionals inform us that even if one successfully recollects their original perceptions while under hypnosis, the degree of accuracy of those perceptions will continue to be unknown and called into question; you might relatively accurately remember events at a magic show, but that does not mean the magician actually sawed someone in half. All of the challenges and doubts are still applicable that apply to any seemingly recalled event or story someone narrates, if not more so. What's more, let's cut to the chase: RH was popularly embraced by abduction-researchers as an investigative tool largely because a poorly informed and exploitable segment of the public (which, by the way, once included me) was willing to incorrectly accept it as indicative of extraterrestrials in lieu of valid, scientific proof that continues to simply not exist.

About the third issue: Given that we conclusively know that regressive hypnosis cannot provide reliably accurate results – and even if it could, it only offers relatively inconsequential anecdotal testimony – hypnotizing people for the purpose of obtaining narrations about alien abductions is simply not a scientific procedure. People can do it if they want, and they can believe its accuracy if they choose, but, nonetheless, it is not science. Claims to the contrary are simply incorrect, and those are the types of circumstances I was offering for consideration in the original and subsequent posts.

Research related to all disciplines of physical and mental health should indeed continue to be professionally conducted by qualified experts in manners that the safety is prioritized of fully informed and consensual subjects. Then, as points are systematically learned and examined - as seemingly demonstrated at the Weizmann Institute in the article – detailed reports are submitted to journals and subjected to peer review. That is legitimate scientific inquiry, and the methods undertaken and reports produced by Weizmann show us specifically what we should be expecting, yet chronically failing to be offered, from researchers of alleged alien abduction. Self-described abduction-researchers, some of which are more accurately described as hypnotists falsely claiming to practice science, should take note – or at the least the public should take note, it could be argued. The use of RH as a memory retrieval tool for self-described alien abductees, and the related lack of reporting and lack of peer review by 'researchers' of abduction, are simply not science. Consumers are fully justified in questioning why RH practitioners and supporters are fraudulently labeling it as such.

The related issues and questions are not going to go away, no matter how much competent research is published by institutions such as Weizmann. As a matter of fact, it appears to me that such competent research continues to demonstrate just how unprofessional and poorly executed is typical abduction-research. The continuing lack of scientific reports and peer review shows us, it seems to me, that abduction-researchers proceeded with RH way too far, way too fast.

Hello, Jack. Thanks for taking the time to consider and respond to my post. I actually share your concerns regarding alien abduction research.

Also, I don't disagree that hypnosis isn't completely reliable, especially as it's used by some researchers today, however, there is at least one example, the Hills case, where it seems very possible that it revealed an actual alien encounter. The circumstances in that case were unique from every other abduction case that I've come across. Certainly, the doctor who hypnotized the Hills was not looking for an abduction story, and he was known to be one of the most qualified doctors in the field.

I believe the article I posted is relevant to the conversation even though it is not about RH specifically. If a subject suffers memory loss due to an abduction, then a possible cause may be attributed to induced amnesia, which may be related to PHA.

If RH subjects sometimes accurately recall abduction experiences, doesn't that mean that some of the subjects may have something important to tell us? John E. Mack was critical of the extreme skepticism of the scientific community. He felt that if so many experiencers were convinced they met alien life forms, then these people should be taken at their word and the experiences should be studied as real events. He said the vast majority of people he interviewed were not crazy, by the way. By not accepting this testimony, by treating it as useless and dismissing it outright, an opportunity to study the phenomenon is lost.

The problem is that qualified people are either unwilling to participate or resources are unavailable to fund the research. We're left with amateur researchers who may be doing the best they can, but there's always the stigma that they're in it for the money, and therefore the waters are muddied. Would a ufologist actually ever come to the conclusion that there's nothing to alien abductions? It's doubtful.

Flat
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 20th, 2013, 1:41pm

Hi, Flat. You bring up some points certainly worthy of deeper consideration. Perhaps in due time we will further discuss such issues as the Hill case and some typically held assumptions.

My initial point, however, that I would appreciate not getting lost in the mean time, was about some abduction-researchers and organizations misrepresenting their methods to be scientific. I appreciate you sharing related concerns, Flat. Thanks.

I think it is reasonable to point out that misrepresentation, or what Sharon Hill calls sham inquiry, as well as to ask why the community seems to be so collectively vested in enabling it. The sham inquiry is enabled to the point of not only allowing it, but making excuses for it and encouraging its continuation. I also think answers to that question (why sham inquiry in abduction-research is enabled) lie at least partially in the deep desire the community has for validation of its beliefs (and the related potential for exploitation and fraud).
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Jun 20th, 2013, 1:50pm

IT WAS KEPT CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL HER DEATH BUT,...BETTY HILL WAS IN FACT A MEMBER OF THE CASEBOOK FAMILY...OUT OF ALL THE OTHER SITES AVAILABLE...SHE FELT AT HOME HERE...

SHALOM...ZETAR
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jul 9th, 2013, 6:10pm

Motivated Reasoning and Research of Alleged Alien Abduction

The UFO Trail

July 9, 2013

Science and political journalist Chris Mooney wrote an article, The Science of Why We Don't Believe Science. It was published in the May/June 2011 issue of Mother Jones.

Mr. Mooney explored a 1950's era case study undertaken by renowned Stanford psychologist Leon Festinger. The study focused upon the activities of the Seekers, a Chicago-based group whose members were convinced they were interacting with aliens.

Those familiar with the present day phenomenon known as alien abduction will not find it surprising to read that the Seekers' interests included matters of religious and existential significance. They also believed their activities, which included transcribing messages through automatic writing from their alien counterparts, were both reliable and ahead of their time, not entirely unlike assigning such beliefs to regressive hypnosis.

One such message was believed to notify the group of not only an impending apocalypse, but its exact date, December 21, 1954. Careers were abandoned and preparations were made to be rescued by a flying saucer.

When the day of reckoning came and went, Festinger and his colleagues were eager to observe how the group would respond. Following a brief period of apparent confusion, a new message arrived. The Seekers, the message indicated, had gloriously saved the entire world from ruin. Their willingness to be drawn to the light and believe in the prophecy had negated the dark contents of the prophecy. The members of the group, Festinger documented, framed the lack of occurrence – and arguable destruction of their belief systems - in a manner that strengthened their resolve to believe.

Mooney explained that the behavior of the Seekers is what is known as motivated reasoning. Preexisting beliefs and emotions can be primary factors in forming conclusions, and far more so than the introduction of facts. More studies were cited by Mooney, demonstrating how people will cling to any number of political and social belief systems even after conclusive evidence to the contrary is presented. As Mooney concluded, “In other words, paradoxically, you don't lead with the facts in order to convince. You lead with the values - so as to give the facts a fighting chance.”

Cultural Beliefs

Factory owners in Bangladesh needed no convincing of Mooney's findings when they opted to shut the business down and hold special prayers to rid the site of a reported ghost. Skeptical author Benjamin Radford reported last month at Live Science that some 3,000 workers at the garment factory rioted due to what they believed was a haunted ladies restroom.

Interestingly, Mr. Radford noted, very few, if any, workers claimed to have actually seen a spirit. A woman who apparently started the chain of events did not report seeing a ghost, but said she felt sick and assumed such a ghost was responsible.

Are such unfounded cultural beliefs entirely different from some of those found in the UFO community, such as identifying short term amnesia, or “missing time”, as an indication of alleged alien abduction? Similarly, it could indeed be considered unreasonable to assume alien abduction, the perpetrators of which have yet to be so much as demonstrated to exist, typically occurs among multiple generations of a family. It would seem much more reasonable to establish a presence actually exists prior to claiming qualified to identify its preferred methods of operation. Should such a presence continue to defy identification, a valid argument could be made that alternative explanations should be considered, perhaps not altogether unlike seeking a more readily available explanation than a ghost for the Bangladeshi woman's illness.

Wanted: Abduction Researcher - No Ethics Required?

In recent weeks I have increased writing about UFO researchers and organizations that inaccurately claim to conduct scientific investigation. I subsequently participated in several discussions at a number of venues in which self-described abductees, self-described experiencers and various interested parties defended their chosen perspectives. Discussions evolved at times to some participants defending sham inquiry, or the misrepresentation of nonscientific activities as science, and as consistently committed by such individuals as David Jacobs and such organizations as the Mutual UFO Network.

I listened to many excuses made for sham inquiry, and why alleged alien abduction – and even UFOs in general – are such difficult subjects to research and investigate. I reasonably patiently entertained statements which included such claims as the definition of science is a matter of opinion. The same individual informed me that aliens use some kind of technique that somehow blocks human memory from functioning, as those familiar with abduction lore will quickly recognize as common subject matter. The individual then assured me that techniques such as regressive hypnosis implemented as a memory retrieval tool can effectively be used “side by side” with psychoanalytic techniques as developed by “Fraud and Young”.

Somewhat similarly, another individual undertook defending the actions of David Jacobs while recommending he be consulted by those fearing they might have been abducted by aliens. “He is a doctor of history, no ethics required for that,” the person wrote, apparently implying that Jacobs was not obligated to adhere to codes practiced by medical professionals, as well as mistakenly under the impression that such a statement strengthened their argument.

At one point an individual agreed with me that “abduction research in general and Dr. David Jacobs' research specifically fail the scientific standard.” They added that an excuse might be made that abduction is too weird to fit scientific methods of investigation. While that might or might not be effectively argued, it completely fails to address why Jacobs and others claim to follow scientific methods. One might not only ask why such false claims are made in the first place, but why excuses for them are made at all.

The enabling of sham inquiry is as much a part of the problem as is the perpetration itself. When the UFO community evolves to truly want answers – not excuses, not patronizing and not motivated reasoning – it will find them. Then and only then will it mature to seek what it has claimed it wanted all along: the truth.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on Jul 10th, 2013, 3:32pm

Anyone recall seeing that commercial that says "If you read it on the internet - then it MUST be true?'

http://www.ufotrail.blogspot.com/2013/07/motivated-reasoning-and-research-of.html

Well once again we have a Blogger bad mouthing David Jacobs and expressing his OPINON about what he considers scientific methods and ethics in UFO research.

Well if it is on the internet, it must be the truth right?

He wants to convince people that any researchers that DO NOT apply what he considers "scientific research" produce results that are completely useless, wrong, false, did not happen, have absolutely no value or are outright lies...

I'm sure most people here (especially the abductees) do not have such expectations, I mean does anyone know of a college that teaches programs in UFO research?

I am not a professional writer, so while my arguments are not as eloquent and slick, I don't have other obscure sources to quote but let logic be your guide. Try reading some of David Jacobs book where he explains his methods and talks about the detractors and form you own opinions. Yes, David has a PHD in History, but has been involved with UFO's for 45 years and he comes of MUCH MORE convincing than some Johnny-come-lately blogger that has some type of vendetta against him....
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by hyundisonata on Jul 10th, 2013, 5:00pm

Well said Mythos, the skeptic brandishes the term scientific research knowing the scientific community will not take up the gauntlet and investigate UFO apart from the odd thesis on how insane we all are. I would see the point if it was just the average run of the mill person claiming UFO but when you have military, police, doctors, and even the guys who have been in space claiming UFO then I cannot understand why the scientific community avoids UFO unless they have been deliberately told by their peers not to investigate UFO. If I was a skeptic I would be asking why science is avoiding this subject instead of attacking people without scientific knowledge who are the only people investigating this subject with very little means or equipment that the scientific community does have?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on Jul 10th, 2013, 7:51pm

on Jul 10th, 2013, 5:00pm, hyundisonata wrote:
Well said Mythos, the skeptic brandishes the term scientific research knowing the scientific community will not take up the gauntlet and investigate UFO apart from the odd thesis on how insane we all are. I would see the point if it was just the average run of the mill person claiming UFO but when you have military, police, doctors, and even the guys who have been in space claiming UFO then I cannot understand why the scientific community avoids UFO unless they have been deliberately told by their peers not to investigate UFO. If I was a skeptic I would be asking why science is avoiding this subject instead of attacking people without scientific knowledge who are the only people investigating this subject with very little means or equipment that the scientific community does have?


EXACTLY>>>!
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by skizicks on Jul 10th, 2013, 8:24pm

It has been asked before, but just what should science investigate?
Does anyone have one they will loan to the local college?
As for sightings what could you investigate there? How many reports can you read before they all sound alike?
What could an army of PHDs find from reading reports that we haven't already learned?
Science isn't magical, in the absence of a physical object to study and test all they can offer are theories. And these can be no more than what we have already come up with.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jul 11th, 2013, 12:46pm

on Jul 10th, 2013, 3:32pm, Mythos wrote:
Anyone recall seeing that commercial that says "If you read it on the internet - then it MUST be true?'

http://www.ufotrail.blogspot.com/2013/07/motivated-reasoning-and-research-of.html

Well once again we have a Blogger bad mouthing David Jacobs and expressing his OPINON about what he considers scientific methods and ethics in UFO research.

Well if it is on the internet, it must be the truth right?


Mythos, are you suggesting there was something untrue in the post you linked? If so, would you please clarify exactly what you perceive that might be? Please be specific.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jul 11th, 2013, 12:50pm

My intention was to critically explore research of alleged alien abduction. That included focusing upon researchers and organizations that claim to be conducting scientific investigation, yet clearly are not, as defined by both dictionaries and the scientific method.

An inherent problem to such circumstances is that researchers and organizations that misrepresent the scientific merit of their products and services, in doing so, exploit uninformed and uneducated individuals. Consequences include accepting misleading and unsubstantiated conclusions that were formed under false and misrepresented circumstances in the first place.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on Jul 11th, 2013, 3:12pm

on Jul 11th, 2013, 12:46pm, jjflash wrote:
Mythos, are you suggesting there was something untrue in the post you linked? If so, would you please clarify exactly what you perceive that might be? Please be specific.


To be very specific, your blog is neither true nor untrue, it is your opinions...!

The same way that the writers you attack, are voicing their opinions (in their books).

Of course you have the right to put down and attempt to discredit anyone you want and that is one of the main problems with the UFO culture...

I have nothing against you as a person, you seem well connected and well spoken, but I refuse to sit by and allow attacks on researchers that I respect (especially when they are not here to defend themselves).

I would love to hear about any actual UFO research you have done, including speaking with contactees..
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jul 11th, 2013, 6:16pm

on Jul 11th, 2013, 3:12pm, Mythos wrote:
To be very specific, your blog is neither true nor untrue, it is your opinions...!

The same way that the writers you attack, are voicing their opinions (in their books).


I disagree on several counts. For example, when individuals publish their work in books and present their perspectives at events such as a symposium, they should fully expect their findings and methodology to be discussed and reviewed.

I am not attacking anyone, but offering reasonable reviews and perspectives on the relevant related issues. I invite consideration that I scrutinize and criticize the actions of a person, not the person. Public figures expect such scrutiny.

Also, I am particularly attempting here to address the false representation of scientific research. It is relevant that not only do such researchers as Jacobs and Greer commit such false claims, but members of the UFO community often make excuses for the behavior. That should be considered important to people sincerely interested in actuality from any number of points of view.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jul 23rd, 2013, 9:21pm



"Although some claim human-alien genetic hybrids are among us now and pose a threat to humankind, the details of construction of these entities are vague. Examining two simple cases of gene transmission dynamics suggest hybrids face some inherent challenges."
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 7th, 2013, 9:05pm

Gary Hart on the Carpenter Affair

The UFO Trail

August 7, 2013

Long time UFO investigator Gary Hart commented tonight at The UFO Trail on the infamous Carpenter Affair. The series of events involved the betrayal of some 140 individuals who sought the support and services of John Carpenter and the Mutual UFO Network during the 1990's. The 140, including Leah Haley, underwent regressive hypnosis facilitated by Carpenter, a former MUFON director of abduction research. It was later learned Carpenter received some $14,000 in funding from Robert Bigelow in exchange for ongoing activities and providing him and his associates, which included Colonel John Alexander, with the case files of the 140. This was done entirely without the knowledge or consent of the 140 individuals. Much more about the Carpenter Affair can be read in the previous posts on the Leah Haley case, including The Leah Haley Case: John Carpenter, where Mr. Hart left the following comments:

Jack, as one of the principle reporters of the Carpenter Affair I found your posts quite interesting, especially in regards to what Mr. Carpenter had to say about everything. Perhaps I can clear up some few points that Mr. Carpenter chooses to repeatedly ignore or twist to a brighter point of view:

1) Mr. Carpenter originally wrote the section on handling abductee cases in the then current edition of the MUFON Field Investigator's Manual where he includes a sample form for the abductee to be presented with and sign if they wish to give a researcher permission to use their case material publicly. Mr. Carpenter, in a private communication, admitted that he had never had any of the abductees he worked with sign this or any other form of consent to sell or otherwise distribute their hypnosis files and that no researcher he knew followed his own suggested procedure.

Some files such as Leah Haley's would have been instantly identifiable even if Carpenter sold them without providing Mr. Bigelow with the identity of the person associated with each file. As I found out and was provided evidence of, Mr. Carpenter provided Mr. Bigelow with a name/case key list and even though every abductee I spoke with said that Carpenter promised he WOULD revisit them for their explicit permission to release any of their file materials if necessary yet he never did.

2) I brought the Carpenter case to public attention only after many of the abductees asked me to do so understanding that at that time he planned to write a book about them and was ALREADY selling a video for his personal profit that showed clips from some of their private hypnosis sessions with his professional credentials prominently listed on the videotape's cover.

3) Carpenter claimed, in a legal statement through his lawyer, that he did his hypnosis sessions as an amateur and thus could not be held to professional ethical standards - a point also made to me directly by then head of MUFON Walt Andrus. In fact, several of Carpenter's cases were referrals from other medical doctors. LCSW, by the way, is a professional designation - MO state Licensed Clinical Social Worker. MSW says that he has a masters in social work. All abductees I spoke with were shown only Carpenter's professional business card with these important licensing initials, not MUFON's more ordinary Investigator's ID card so he was promoting himself as a true health care professional.

4) Carpenter got to a point in the mid 90's where he double billed abductees: he asked them for personal payment for their hypnosis sessions and billed their insurance and there is proof of this.

5) Finally, as a result of my filing a complaint against Carpenter's professional license because of his unethical handling of abductee cases, he was put on 5 years probation by the State of Missouri and there is online proof of this also so the state did agree with the case we collectively presented to their investigative board.

MUFON still throws out the "we want to stop the backbiting and infighting in Ufology" line as if there never has been a legitimate legal issue with how MUFON board members and representatives (as John was as their then Director of Abduction Research). This was the case MUFON still would like to forget. This is the case that caused MUFON's Board in 2001 to vote and throw out the "member" designation so that from then on persons affiliated with MUFON would be "subscribers" only and have no voting rights as to how the organization does business.

Just to set things straight,

Gary Hart
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on Aug 8th, 2013, 12:36am

While I am the first to admit that I know absolutely nothing of Gary Hart or the Carpenter Affair, I wanted to add a few comments.

While it is a shame that 140 (supposed) Abductees were victimized in this manner, it should not take away from the fact that 140 people claimed they were abducted and it would be interesting to hear/see/read their accounts..

As for #4 "Double Billing", every insurance I have ever had - had partial or co-payments by the patient, as I said, I don't know about this case, but unless the Insurance is paying 100% then doctors (or wanna-be doctors in this case) are allowed to bill the patient directly for what is not covered by the insurance.

If he was in fact Double-Billing, that is; charging the Insurance Company as well as the Patient BOTH 100% of his fees, I would assume that would be breaking some type of law and then he could (and should) be arrested..


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 10th, 2013, 2:13pm

My personal UFO interests took a turn in recent years to the manners that experiencers frequently seem at risk of mistreatment and exploitation by the UFO community. It appears a given that whatever truly interesting phenomena might actually lie at the heart of ufology, it is often misrepresented and exploited for use by many people with many agendas. Such people include at least some of the self-described investigators who employ hypnosis as a primary investigative tool. My interests in such subject matter led me to the Carpenter Affair.

I subsequently invested resources in conducting research and interviewing certain individuals, among other activities. I concluded that the Carpenter Affair was indeed a significant series of events for a variety of reasons. A great deal about it and its players may be found on my blog, The UFO Trail, and particularly within the posts related to the Leah Haley case.

I choose to invest my resources in such projects because I think properly educating the UFO community about what has taken place will assist it in learning how to abstain from repeating its mistakes. I think that would be helpful to the experiencers, helpful in reducing their risk of exploitation and helpful in increasing the accuracy of information circulated.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Swamprat on Aug 10th, 2013, 5:29pm

There is nothing wrong with challenging one another's opinions and claims. In the hard sciences, that is done all the time. My son is a professor of physics who is conducting research in condensed matter. He has frequently said that most physics conventions/symposiums are chock full of arguments, confrontations, and challenges. (And THESE folks even have data backing them up!)

That being said, I find Billy Cox's latest blog entry very interesting. It is actually a slightly tongue-in-cheek comparison of ufology to some of the recent conversations regarding legalizing marijuana. However, he makes a valid point.

Swamp


We've had enough of Nixon

By Billy Cox, Herald-Tribune
Friday, August 9, 2013

Does anyone else see the parallels between the emerging momentum on marijuana and the cognitive dissonance on UFOs? Dr. Sanjay Gupta’s condemnation of Uncle Sam’s marijuana policy yesterday really brings it into focus. Finally — finally — somebody is applying science to ignorance. And it sure as hell isn’t coming from the people we elect as leaders.

Forty years after Richard Nixon proclaimed his “war on drugs,” with marijuana as Public Enemy No. 1, the catastrophic results are crushing us, economically and ethically. According to a recent FBI report, police made a marijuana arrest in this country once every 42 seconds in 2011. Today, we lead the entire world in inmate populations, at a cost that could fund NASA’s budget more than three times over. De Void waited in vain during the 2012 election cycle for this malignant policy blight to gain some traction during the primary and general-election debates. Nothing doing, of course, not with the fait accompli of Washington-insider hacks like Bob Schieffer and George Stephanopolous sticking to stale talking points and ignoring the 800-pound gorilla.

In 2006, two years before Barack Obama’s “hope and change” campaign, the Senator admitted “I inhaled frequently — that was the point,” so one couldn’t be blamed for thinking the future prez was serious about dismantling the business-as-usual crap. Among other things, Gupta was on Obama’s short list for Surgeon General during the first administration. But, like everyone who assumes residency in the White House, Obama went on to revert to type, and his AG started cracking down on medical marijuana dispensaries.

Then a funny thing happened nine months ago, when taxpayers in Oregon and Colorado said screw the federal laws and voted to legalize pot altogether. And on Thursday at CNN, Gupta did something he never could’ve accomplished in the White House. He admitted that “we have been terribly and systematically misled for nearly 70 years in the United States” about marijuana. This is huge.

Gupta will share more details of his research Sunday night at 8 p.m. with a CNN special called “Weed,” which will presumably address the fallacies of pot's Schedule I classification which have created monstrous numbers of fake criminals. What really grabbed De Void’s attention was how the Emmy-winning neurosurgeon revisited the roots of that error in 1970, when Assistant Secretary of Health Roger Egeberg advised categorizing pot with heroin.

As Gupta points out, Egeberg advocated branding weed with felony status “until the completion of studies now underway to resolve the issue” when, in fact, Nixon’s spear carrier was already sitting on 20 years worth of research indicating pot was less addictive than tobacco and had none of the harsh and potentially lethal withdrawal properties associated with other drugs like alcohol. “I calculated about 6 percent of the current U.S. marijuana studies investigate the benefits of marijuana,” Gupta added. “The rest are designed to investigate harm. That imbalance paints a highly distorted picture.”

Washington will likely remain tone-deaf to the growing body of research exonerating pot from the “Reefer Madness” clown show, but science, common sense, and public opinion are rapidly outflanking those calcified Beltway suits. They’ll be the last to join an intelligent conversation on a policy that remains, at best, inhumane.

Similarly, our official discourse on UFOs remains logjammed by another Nixon-era decree, when the U.S. Air Force and its analogue technology closed the books on further study of bizarre phenomena that continue to ply our skies. The long sad history of that doomed and tortured “study,” known as Project Blue Book, is thoroughly detailed in Michael Swords’ and Robert Powell’s UFOs and Government: A Historical Inquiry.

Gupta was surprised to learn about legitimate studies itemizing the medicinal uses of marijuana. Likewise, scientific scrutiny of UFOs continues, in the private sector, and abroad and, as with pot, growing evidence demands a formal re-evaluation of the issue. But the contemporary cultural environment for UFOs is about where pot was 20 years ago, when Bill Clinton could admit only that he’d tried it “a time or two” but never inhaled and didn’t like it.

Which made no sense whatsoever. Which made Obama look refreshing. At least for awhile.

One would hope Sanjay Gupta’s reporting will be the beginning of the end of our cruel and insanely disconnected laws on marijuana. There are well-placed and impeccably credentialed scientists who’ve done their homework on UFOs as well. We need them to step up, too.

We can document the extent of the damage our marijuana policies have inflicted upon this country. Calculating the cost of four decades of institutional denial surrounding the enduring mystery of UFOs may be impossible. But like marijuana, wishing it away isn’t working. Confronting it honestly, with a bit of integrity, could pay off in ways we haven't begun to imagine.

http://devoid.blogs.heraldtribune.com/13924/weve-had-enough-of-nixon/

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Sep 6th, 2013, 3:15pm

You're Getting Sleepy... and Misled: Regression Hypnosis in Ufology

The UFO Trail

September 6, 2013

Regression hypnosis has long been used during investigation of alleged alien abduction. Some have made up their minds that the activity provides reasonable evidence. For them, there is no amount of expert opinion or scientific research contradicting their belief that can motivate sincere review of the circumstances. Even the words of warning from former hypnosis subjects, lengthily explaining firsthand how its ill effects and misuses can be harmful, fail to inspire objective evaluation of the use of hypnosis as a mythical truth serum.

Much has been learned of memory functions, potential dangers of regression hypnosis and related issues since researchers first began hypnotizing self-described experiencers in hopes of uncovering hidden memories. However, many investigators continue subscribing to the now decades old concepts while the professional research community has long since updated its understandings. If you are sincerely interested in reviewing facts surrounding regression hypnosis, including taking into consideration some opinions of qualified experts and documentation of relevant circumstances, please continue reading.

British UFO Research Association

The fact of the matter is the professional research community has never established hypnosis as an effective investigative tool or a reliable memory retrieval technique. The American Psychotherapy and Medical Hypnosis Association released statements clarifying its members should not inaccurately represent the stance of the American Medical Association on such matters.

"The American Medical Association (AMA) is concerned that many individuals using hypnosis may be making the inaccurate statement that hypnosis is approved by the AMA as a legitimate therapy for medical or psychological purposes," the APMHA explained. "The AMA has a current position that this statement is inaccurate."

The AMA clearly does not recognize or define hypnosis as approved for use for medical or psychological purposes. That would of course include subjecting traumatized individuals to the exploration of the possibility they are regularly abused by perpetrators from other planets, to say the least.

It should be further understood that significant portions of the UFO community itself came to accept and agree with policies as established by the AMA. The British UFO Research Association (BUFORA) enacted a moratorium in 1988 on the use of hypnosis, and the policy continues to remain in place.

Full article:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2013/09/youre-getting-sleepy-and-misled.html
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Sep 16th, 2013, 12:58pm

Dear JJflash,be careful what you wish for,we had all best be careful,hypnosis is the only thing we have left.True it should be in the hands of both a willing hypnotist and one with the right frame of mind.Imagine going to a hypnotist thats never heard of alien abductions or worse having heard of alien abduction and come to the conclusion that its all just nonsense. So he resorts to what hes been taught.We had the right man in John Mack.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by skizicks on Sep 17th, 2013, 11:00am

The vast majority of abduction cases rest solely on the testimony of the victim or experiencer as you will.
The closest we have to confirmation is the few cases where there was more than one abducted and more than one is willing to discuss what happened.
Digging deeper into the mind of a single wittness will get nothing usable. The best you will get is more of a story you already know. If the story is a physical event you will get those memories that a person has from any traumatic event be it a car crash or a mugging. You will get a few more flashes of details that stood out.
If the story is a hoax or a mental illusion you may get more details as the mind has a chance to fill in the blanks, but if the subject wants to hold back they can, and that will leave you with nothing more.
In the Hill Case both displayed symptoms we now identify as PTSD following their experience. This shared physical result supports a shared experience. A mental illusion may effect the victim but not an other. This case is a classic example of a strong case for a physical event.
This is one of a very few cases where the hypnotist entered the case with few preconcieved goals and the testimony of both subjects fit together almost perfectly.
However very few cases since were handled the same way as hypnotizing people to look for hidden memories of various things became a cottage industry shortly thereafter.
To spend researchers time and money on cases that have no supporting evidence of any kind is a waste.
Hypnosis to recover memories is a scientificly proven failure. It should be abandoned except for those few cases like the Hills where other extraordinary proof exists that the subjects did have a traumatic experience, and the subjects truly WANT to know what happened. And then a team of researchers should watch and monitor every step to insure against contamination of the sessions and to guard against possible damage to the subjects mental health.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Sep 17th, 2013, 12:33pm

HEY SKIZICKS,

EXCELLENT POST TEMPERED WITH KEEN INSIGHTS...
I GUESS THE PROTOCOL TO CHOOSE/ASSESS THOSE OF THE HILL'S EXPERIENCE SHOULD BE NECESSITATED...IMHO...

SHALOM...ZETAR

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by FlatEarth on Sep 17th, 2013, 10:08pm

Agreed, Z. That was a great post from the old man. He still has it. grin

Flat
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Sep 21st, 2013, 1:06pm

on Jul 9th, 2013, 6:10pm, jjflash wrote:
Motivated Reasoning and Research of Alleged Alien Abduction

The UFO Trail

July 9, 2013

Science and political journalist Chris Mooney wrote an article, The Science of Why We Don't Believe Science. It was published in the May/June 2011 issue of Mother Jones.

Mr. Mooney explored a 1950's era case study undertaken by renowned Stanford psychologist Leon Festinger. The study focused upon the activities of the Seekers, a Chicago-based group whose members were convinced they were interacting with aliens...


More related, relevant and, in my opinion, interesting material:


Scientists’ depressing new discovery about the brain

Forget the dream that education, scientific evidence or reason can help people make good decisions

September 17, 2013

Salon

This article originally appeared on Alternet.

Yale law school professor Dan Kahan’s new research paper is called “Motivated Numeracy and Enlightened Self-Government,” but for me a better title is the headline on science writer Chris Mooney’s piece about it in Grist: “Science Confirms: Politics Wrecks Your Ability to Do Math.”

Kahan conducted some ingenious experiments about the impact of political passion on people’s ability to think clearly. His conclusion, in Mooney’s words: partisanship “can even undermine our very basic reasoning skills…. [People] who are otherwise very good at math may totally flunk a problem that they would otherwise probably be able to solve, simply because giving the right answer goes against their political beliefs.”

In other words, say goodnight to the dream that education, journalism, scientific evidence, media literacy or reason can provide the tools and information that people need in order to make good decisions. It turns out that in the public realm, a lack of information isn’t the real problem. The hurdle is how our minds work, no matter how smart we think we are. We want to believe we’re rational, but reason turns out to be the ex post facto way we rationalize what our emotions already want to believe.

For years my go-to source for downer studies of how our hard-wiring makes democracy hopeless has been Brendan Nyhan, an assistant professor of government at Dartmouth.

Nyan and his collaborators have been running experiments trying to answer this terrifying question about American voters: Do facts matter?

The answer, basically, is no. When people are misinformed, giving them facts to correct those errors only makes them cling to their beliefs more tenaciously.

Here’s some of what Nyhan found:

- People who thought WMDs were found in Iraq believed that misinformation even more strongly when they were shown a news story correcting it.

- People who thought George W. Bush banned all stem cell research kept thinking he did that even after they were shown an article saying that only some federally funded stem cell work was stopped.

- People who said the economy was the most important issue to them, and who disapproved of Obama’s economic record, were shown a graph of nonfarm employment over the prior year – a rising line, adding about a million jobs. They were asked whether the number of people with jobs had gone up, down or stayed about the same. Many, looking straight at the graph, said down.

- But if, before they were shown the graph, they were asked to write a few sentences about an experience that made them feel good about themselves, a significant number of them changed their minds about the economy. If you spend a few minutes affirming your self-worth, you’re more likely to say that the number of jobs increased.

In Kahan’s experiment, some people were asked to interpret a table of numbers about whether a skin cream reduced rashes, and some people were asked to interpret a different table – containing the same numbers – about whether a law banning private citizens from carrying concealed handguns reduced crime. Kahan found that when the numbers in the table conflicted with people’s positions on gun control, they couldn’t do the math right, though they could when the subject was skin cream. The bleakest finding was that the more advanced that people’s math skills were, the more likely it was that their political views, whether liberal or conservative, made them less able to solve the math problem.

I hate what this implies – not only about gun control, but also about other contentious issues, like climate change. I’m not completely ready to give up on the idea that disputes over facts can be resolved by evidence, but you have to admit that things aren’t looking so good for a reason. I keep hoping that one more photo of an iceberg the size of Manhattan calving off of Greenland, one more stretch of record-breaking heat and drought and fires, one more graph of how atmospheric carbon dioxide has risen in the past century, will do the trick. But what these studies of how our minds work suggest is that the political judgments we’ve already made are impervious to facts that contradict us.

Maybe climate change denial isn’t the right term; it implies a psychological disorder. Denial is business-as-usual for our brains. More and better facts don’t turn low-information voters into well-equipped citizens. It just makes them more committed to their misperceptions. In the entire history of the universe, no Fox News viewers ever changed their minds because some new data upended their thinking. When there’s a conflict between partisan beliefs and plain evidence, it’s the beliefs that win. The power of emotion over reason isn’t a bug in our human operating systems, it’s a feature.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by skizicks on Sep 22nd, 2013, 7:28pm

Why do so many refuse to evacuate in disasters?
The Russians and some other governments once tried to re-educate people to see the errors of their ways.
Would that make you happy? That we all march in step to the drummer?
Sounds good to me if I get to set the tune.
In a class on human behaviour a doctor explained his favorite theory as "You are what you were when."
He taught that the human develops how they deal with specific groups and events based on what was happening at specific points in their life.
He believed that by looking at the persons age and the major events they experienced you could understand why they behaved like they did and how the would react in different situations.
Break a life down into six year steps and look at what influenced the life and world at each step.
When I grew up we were taught to never trust a government, and don't rely on anyone to help you if times get tough.
So I don't
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by GhostofTheVoice on Oct 12th, 2013, 4:00pm

Op article very well written and well put. Its a very dodgy area for even seasoned researchers. In my time I have interviewed over 3 hundred alleged abductees globally. All rested at one point, no physical evidence. I'm trying to find a report I came across some years ago which detailed a thorough analysis of 50 alleged abductees, all were from a batch from USA and all were female. I recall that the testing done on these was psychological and personality testing and was extensive. What raised an eyebrow was the percentage from that batch of 50 which indicated a fantasy prone personality type, the percentage stated 85% of those tested, yes 85%. I must dig out that paper.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Oct 20th, 2013, 12:01pm

The Mutual UFO Network continues to be considered by many to be the leading and most prominent organization for UFO-related information. Consisting of groups in every state and several nations around the globe, the nonprofit public charity purports to be dedicated to the scientific study of UFOs for the benefit of humanity.

MUFON holds events at local, regional, national and international levels, and its annual symposium is a major fundraiser. The organization's events often showcase self-described researchers who present speculation of alien abduction and support the reported experiences as occurring in a literal reality.

Mark O'Connell maintains the blog High Strangeness. I recommend checking it out. He is in the process of composing a book on the life of J. Allen Hynek. Mark is also the Wisconsin MUFON chief field investigator. His latest blog post:


UFO Youth Outreach

High Strangeness

October 20, 2013

Back again after an intense week of working on my Hynek book... writing about the first time the good Doctor actually went out in the field to investigate a UFO incident, and it's a pretty cool story.

But in the midst of my busy week I got a call from Vxxxx, my MUFON State Director, who said, "Mark, I have a proposition for you." She explained that a news crew from CNN was going to come out to her and her husband's isolated desert bunker house in the middle of nowheresville, Arizona, to get some video of her husband training fresh-faced new MUFON Field Investigators. The catch was that Jxx, the new MUFON President, who set up the shoot, wanted the fresh-faced recruits to be "young." Meaning just out of diapers.

Naturally, Vxxxx thought of me first.

What could I say? I was flattered, of course, but I burst out laughing and said, "But Vxxxx... I'm not young" (I'm not sure which was more difficult: admitting I'm not young or pronouncing "Vxxxx"). She hesitated for a moment, then said, "Well, how old are you?" "Fifty-three," came the reply.

Vxxxx gasped. "What? You're fifty-three? I thought you were thirty!"

Then came my turn to gasp. "Thirty! I thought you were going to guess that I was twenty!"

Okay, that last part didn't really happen. I was happy with thirty and I told her so. But she wasn't in the mood. She was sorely disappointed that I couldn't be part of the TV shoot. "Here I was all set to pay your way to fly out here to Arizona to be in the segment! Now I have to keep looking..."

Sharp readers will notice a couple problems with this scenario. One: Why does the Wisconsin State Director live in a bunker in the Arizona desert? I'm still trying to figure that one out. Two: Why does a 53 year-old seem like a youngster in the ranks of MUFON? I don't know, but you can be damn sure I'm going to use it to my advantage from here on out. Three: Young people watch CNN?

It's going to take me a while to figure that one out, but while I'm thinking about it, there's this to chew on:

In her delirium, Vxxxx told me about some of the workings that had gone into setting up this gig with CNN, most notably that Jxx, the MUFON National Director, insisted on young, 20- to 30-something trainees, so that MUFON would look cool and youthful. "I told Jxx that wouldn't exactly be accurate," Vxxx told me, "But he just said, 'Oh, come on, do you think anything you see in reality TV is real?'"

So there you have it. MUFON is founded on lies, and Jxx and Vxxxx expected me to be a part of their web of deceit, depicting MUFONers as being all cool, hip, handsome, funny, well-dressed, articulate, charming, brilliant and sexy when in fact, aside from me, there is no one in MUFON like that at all.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Oct 22nd, 2013, 12:55pm

The Carpenter Affair: For the Record

A review of circumstances, people and documents related to the Carpenter Affair.

The UFO Trail

October 22, 2013

[See site for full article, copies of referenced documents and supporting links]

Two years ago I began publishing a series of posts on the Leah Haley case. I found a number of aspects of the woman's story of interest. Researching and writing about her experiences led to many intriguing and relevant aspects of ufology. Among them was something that came to be known as the Carpenter Affair, a chain of events in which hypnotist John Carpenter accepted approximately $14,000 for delivering copies of the case files of 140 clients – people suspecting themselves to be alien abductees – to Robert Bigelow and his now dissolved National Institute for Discovery Science. The 140, which included Haley, were not informed by Carpenter that he made such arrangements.

Carpenter was the director of abduction research for the Mutual UFO Network at the time, the 1990's. He was also a Missouri Licensed Clinical Social Worker. Several posts here at The UFO Trail addressed the Carpenter Affair, including The Leah Haley Case: John Carpenter, which contained statements obtained from the man during January, 2012. While Carpenter acknowledged he was provided cash from Bigelow on multiple occasions and that he delivered abductee information to Bigelow, Carpenter denied that any of his former clients were hurt in any way. Additional remarks of potential interest from Carpenter included stating that other researchers of alien abduction were approached with the same proposal as he and that some of them may have also shared data.

News of the Carpenter Affair first began to reach the public in early 2000, and Gary Hart became a principle reporter of the circumstances. He therefore viewed the related posts at The UFO Trail with interest. In August Mr. Hart chose to submit comments to the blog, addressing some key points that he stated Mr. Carpenter repeatedly ignored or twisted to a brighter point of view.

Mr. Hart and I then began a series of interactions. At my request, Hart explained how he came to provide MUFON in 2000 - and then the State of Missouri in 2001 - with information related to the Carpenter Affair.

[...]

Hart explained, “Immediately after filing my MUFON complaint I was told in no uncertain terms that MUFON had no intention of taking the complaint seriously and actually doing an investigation, so I investigated the case further and made a proper report/complaint to the state licensing board.”

A portion of Hart's formal complaint filed to MUFON was contained in a July, 2000, email published at UFO UpDates. Hart specified at the time that some of the information and documentation might well need to be on public display, emphasizing that the best interests of the organization and the public were not served by keeping the circumstances secret or out of public view. Such documentation, Hart wrote, included letters written by Carpenter to Bigelow, as well as a letter written by Carpenter's attorney. Some of those documents and their significance will be explored shortly.

[...]

“Perhaps the most important point in all of this is that MUFON's ethics code was all for show,” Hart reflected. “They had and apparently still have no intention of holding anyone, even a board member, to their code of ethics.”

Selling Case Files

John Carpenter told The UFO Trail in January of 2012 that his “data sharing” with Bigelow “was spread over three years around 1995” and that “reimbursements trickled in over the period.”

Carpenter additionally stated, “Despite rumors on the Internet, I NEVER SOLD my cases!!” (emphasis his)

Copies of letters written by Carpenter to Bigelow and included by Hart in his submissions of evidence to MUFON and the State of Missouri were provided to The UFO Trail. One such letter... dated June 29, 1996, primarily dealt with advising Bigelow that Carpenter and fellow hypnotist Yvonne Smith agreed to conduct work for Bigelow and receive financial compensation in return. Additional statements written by Carpenter, however, further suggested that his January, 2012, assertions to The UFO Trail were not entirely accurate, and that he had for all intents and purposes sold abductee case files, whatever terminology one might choose to describe it.

“Personally, I want to thank you, Bob, for your assistance regarding the 140 cases I mailed to you,” Carpenter wrote Bigelow in 1996. “That helped pay some bills. The remainder has been what we have been living on since last December at the rate of $600-$800 per month... What has really hurt this year – after I began copying and sending files – was the elimination of my bonus/incentive pay program at work.” (emphasis his)

Carpenter was recently offered an opportunity to comment. He was supplied a copy of the 1996 letter and specifically asked about the discrepancy between his statements of January, 2012, in which he emphasized he never sold his cases, and his above statements contained in the letter.

“I am now and always have been in complete possession of all original case files, approximately 140 in number,” Carpenter replied in an October 15 email. “Mr. Bigelow paid me for my time, expense, and labor in making some copies that his elite science panel could review in order to understand the abduction phenomenon more fully.”

While Mr. Carpenter may describe his activities as he chooses, it is not difficult for this writer to understand why some interpreted that case files were sold. One might also empathize with those who feel that to suggest otherwise is misrepresenting the circumstances, or, at the least, evading the relevant issues.

[…]

A 1997 letter from the law office of William E. Stoner, Carpenter's attorney, was mailed to legal counsel for Carpenter's former clients and in response to allegations of wrongdoing. The letter suggested Carpenter was not acting in a professional capacity when working with the individuals, making it a moot point whether or not he sold information contained in their files without their knowledge or consent.

The letter stated, “His [Carpenter's] collection of data is for his own personal pleasure as a hobby and as an interesting study. He does not do it for compensation.”

However, copies of additional documents provided by Hart clearly show that was not completely correct. A 1994 MUFON regional newsletter... crediting Carpenter as the editor and published some three years prior to the letter from Mr. Stoner's office, informed readers they could use credit cards, bill insurance companies and set up payment plans for Carpenter's hypnosis sessions. The newsletter also announced Carpenter's move to a new office at the Center for Neuropsychiatry where he would be conducting hypnosis sessions.

Carpenter's professional business card, stating his credentials as a social worker, was displayed at the top of a page. The announcement stated that his hypnosis practice and research of anomalous phenomena, and specifically “UFO abductions”, would be openly and professionally supported at the Center for Neuropsychiatry.

“The bad news,” the announcement stated, “is that there can be no more free hypnosis sessions. However there is good news: payment plans are possible and medical insurance may indeed cover your sessions. Even VISA and Master Card charges are allowed! Cost is $65 for the session – even if the session lasts 3–4 hours. (That is still a bargain!)”

Obviously, Carpenter prospected for self-described abductees, accepted financial compensation for conducting hypnosis sessions and did so from a professional medical facility while billing insurance companies. Clients had no reason to suppose they were dealing with a financially uncompensated man “collecting data for his own personal pleasure”, as Mr. Stoner's office framed it, as compared to a mental health professional conducting paid services bound by applicable laws and codes of ethics.

A 2001 two-page document prepared by Leah Haley... for inclusion in Gary Hart's complaint to the Missouri Division of Professional Registration further called into question the portrayal of the situation as described by Mr. Stoner's office and Mr. Carpenter. Ms. Haley explained how John Carpenter originally presented himself as a mental health professional, repeatedly assured her that all information discussed would be kept confidential and provided her with an assessment of her mental condition. Such circumstances would of course not lead one to interpret Carpenter was acting in a recreational capacity. Moreover, Haley paid Carpenter.

“The total amount I paid John for the 15 sessions was $825,” Haley wrote in 2001. “I have canceled checks for these payments.”

She concluded, “Had I known that John would sell my case files or disclose information he did not have permission to disclose, I would never have gone to him.”

Haley greatly revised her opinions of her experiences, the validity of regression hypnosis used as a memory retrieval tool and, unfortunately but understandably, the integrity of some members of the mental health industry.

Continued...
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Oct 22nd, 2013, 1:06pm

Continued...

[See site for full article, referenced documents and supporting links]

Hart's Formal Complaint

Hart's investigation and resulting 2000 formal complaint to MUFON cited specific violations of the MUFON code of ethics, some of which about witness care was ironically composed by Carpenter. Hart charged that Carpenter had engaged in “unprofessional conduct, unethical conduct, conduct unbecoming a MUFON official and negligent misrepresentation of himself as a health care professional during activities that involve 'abduction research', hypnosis, contact with witnesses and the general public.”

[...]

Hart's complaint suggested that Carpenter's unprofessional activities rendered his entire body of research worthless, as one could not determine truth from fiction within abductee accounts or Carpenter's conclusions. That was particularly the case, it was stated within the complaint, “given the exceptionally dysfunctional behavior this report documents as having occurred between John and his abductee contacts.”

[...]

Internal Affairs

About the time the Affair went public, Director Andrus handed off the job to MUFON board member John Schuessler. Critics feared Schuessler was biased towards minimizing the Carpenter circumstances and would not offer the situation objective concern, as he was a member of a science adivisory board for NIDS and Bigelow. Some argued it likely he knew about the situation and failed to take action for years.

[…]

That may very well have remained the case indefinitely had Gary Hart not filed a complaint to the Missouri Division of Professional Registration, apparently spurring further action. In the April, 2001, MUFON Journal, then-Director John Schuessler informed the MUFON nation, “John Carpenter has vacated the post of MUFON Director of Abduction Research, citing personal reasons and the need to spend more time with his career activities.”

[...]

The Missouri licensing board investigated Hart's complaint and handed down a five-year probation period on Carpenter's license as a clinical social worker. The period was completed in 2006 and the license is currently under no disciplinary status.

Comments?

John Carpenter was offered an opportunity to provide comments for this post, and subsequently wrote in an October 15 email, “Mr. Bigelow funded all of the major researchers in some fashion with equipment, various projects, conferences, documentaries, research trips, etc. Receiving help from him for a scientific and serious research endeavor was not unusual. Researchers presented many proposals to him. His elite science panel included two astronauts who had walked on the moon. We should be proud that that level of science and expertise was involved.”

Carpenter was also offered an opportunity to comment on some specific previous remarks in addition to those addressed earlier in this post. In January of 2012, Carpenter stated to The UFO Trail that additional researchers were approached with similar offers as he, and that some of them may have also shared data. Encouraged to directly address details of such circumstances and expand on those remarks, Carpenter chose not to do so.

Controversy would continue to surround the MUFON activities of both Mr. Bigelow and Mr. Schuessler. In more recent years a failed collaboration between the nonprofit UFO research organization and Bigelow Aerospace Advanced Space Studies included some major funding, initially reported to be provided by Bigelow. The deal went south amid many complications that included dismissals and resignations of MUFON personnel. In January, 2011, former international director for MUFON, James Carrion, wrote at his blog, Follow the Magic Thread, "Mr. Bigelow did not fund MUFON’s work for BAASS, instead 'sponsors' that Bigelow revealed to John Schuessler but not to the other MUFON Board Members put up the money."

Multiple attempts were unsuccessful to obtain comment from Robert Bigelow for this post. His statements continue to be invited should he ever be inclined to provide them.

John Schuessler was sent emails requesting permission to ask a few questions related to the Carpenter Affair. No responses were received.

Colonel John Alexander, a former NIDS staff member and among those originally confirming the Carpenter Affair, was asked earlier this year to please comment on related issues, such as any interest he may have had in the 140 case files. He was also asked, in his opinion, why Mr. Bigelow obtained copies of the files and financed Carpenter's activities. The colonel was additionally requested to please comment on whether other researchers supplied Bigelow with files, as Carpenter suggested.

“Lastly,” I wrote Alexander, “former MUFON Director James Carrion alleged that Bigelow moved funds on behalf of an undisclosed financial sponsor during collaborations with MUFON. Can you offer any comment on that? Is there anything you might be at liberty to discuss concerning relationships between Bigelow corporations and intelligence agencies?”

In an August email, Colonel Alexander replied briefly, “You should ask Bigelow if you are interested in old affairs.”

Relevance: Was 'Everyone' Doing It?

[...]

Whatever one may choose to personally think about John Carpenter, the facts of the matter are his actions were reviewed by applicable bodies, consequences resulted and Mr. Carpenter served his debt as ruled. That is the case whether or not any given party may feel consequences were either excessively strict or negligently soft.

The Carpenter Affair nonetheless continues to be relevant for a number of reasons. The investigation conducted by Gary Hart demonstrated, among other things, an extremely detrimental lack of clarified boundaries between hypnotist and client. Expectations of acceptable behavior were not clearly defined and were virtually nonexistent. Attempting to use information obtained during regression hypnosis as evidence of alien abduction stands on an extremely slippery slope under the best of conditions, but given the circumstances of Carpenter's activities, The UFO Trail tends to agree the work was rendered worthless as Hart previously observed.

One particular relevance of such circumstances is that the work continues to be periodically cited, while completely omitting mention of the environment and conditions in which hypnotic narrations were obtained. At this point and in actuality, some of Carpenter's former hypnosis subjects have revised their opinions of the validity of the information induced during their sessions.

Even more importantly, the circumstances were not isolated incidents. Other hypnotists have been demonstrated to similarly and detrimentally blur the lines between hypnotist and friend, investigator and therapist, entrepreneur and truth seeker, authority figure and lover. There is much material available on extreme errors in research methodology and resulting flawed conclusions associated with the work produced by ufology hypnotists. In spite of that being the case, their work continues to be selectively cited as justification for fantastic and unsupported assertions. Their work is also counter productively cited as reason to continue the futile use of regression hypnosis while their activities actually included many of the same emotionally unsafe and dysfunctional dynamics as did Carpenter's. 

As Hart documented in his formal complaint to MUFON, one well known researcher informed him "everyone does it," referring to researchers commonly both selling case files and having sexual relations with alleged abductees they investigated and hypnotized. Further complicating the circumstances were and continue to be tendencies to intermittently refer to such individuals as abductees, hypnosis subjects, witnesses, clients of some type, including therapy clients (and sometimes whether or not the hypnotist was actually qualified to conduct therapeutic activities), and similar such titles. It has become apparent enough during the past 20 years that a detrimental byproduct of the circumstances, if not an outright intention, is the creation of opportunities for hypnotists and organizations who support them to vacillate on the nature of the relationships. Ambiguity is maximized and accountability is minimized.

The well of regression hypnosis was tainted at the emotional and financial expense of, by any other name, research subjects, and to the benefit of some hypnotists. It was done while details of the activity and its minimal efficiency were and continue today to often be misrepresented.

All of that stated, the Carpenter Affair remains relevant for yet another reason: The circumstances involved many more people than just John Carpenter. While he receives the majority of the attention for obvious reasons, the chain of events directly involved and were enabled by significant members and organizations of the UFO community. The involved parties influenced trends and public opinion before, during and long after the Carpenter Affair.

Gary Hart emphasized during our interactions and while entertaining my questions that he felt a most relevant aspect of the Carpenter saga was the MUFON lip service given its code of ethics and official procedures. Some of the policies that were consistently violated, Hart pointed out, included failing to properly inform and obtain consent from research subjects of the terms and conditions of their participation, a policy that Carpenter himself suggested be implemented yet obviously neglected to practice. MUFON leadership not only failed to correct the circumstances, but supported their continuation for whatever combinations of reasons.

“We can only do the best we can to help prevent this from happening again,” Hart concluded.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Oct 22nd, 2013, 1:08pm

Time Line of the Carpenter Affair

The UFO Trail

An abbreviated chronological order of relevant events,
composed with the assistance of Gary Hart:

Late 1980's: Springfield social worker John Carpenter was conducting regression hypnosis sessions with Missouri and Arkansas abductees.

Early 1990's: Carpenter began working with Robert Bigelow on various projects. He soon began intermittently requesting and receiving financial gifts from Bigelow.

1991: Leah Haley became a hypnosis subject of Carpenter's and would eventually pay him a total of $825 for the sessions. Carpenter was appointed MUFON director of abduction research.

1994: Carpenter wrote in a regional MUFON newsletter that his professional office would be used for hypnosis sessions. Price and payment options were listed, which included billing medical insurance companies.

1996: Carpenter reached terms with Robert Bigelow to exchange copies of abductee case files for cash.

1997: Carpenter's former hypnosis subject and then-wife Elizabeth told abductees that Carpenter sold their files. Abductees were livid. Elizabeth secured evidence of the file sale, and divorce proceedings followed amid accusations of various forms of professional misconduct (Carpenter would later marry another of his hypnosis subjects). Carpenter and abductees sought legal counsel. Carpenter's attorney claimed in a letter that Carpenter collected abductee data for personal pleasure and was not compensated.

1999: Hart heard rumors of the circumstances and was given details when he met with some of Carpenter's clients while investigating a UFO case in the vicinity of Springfield. They told Hart about the file sale and that MUFON was doing nothing.

2000: Attorneys representing the abductees dropped the case. Elizabeth temporarily launched a website describing the Carpenter Affair, likely out of frustration and to inform the public of MUFON inaction. Hart saw the site, contacted Elizabeth and investigated the circumstances, including interacting with several of Carpenter's disgruntled former clients. John Velez reported on UFO Updates that Bigelow, Colonel Alexander and others confirmed the reality of the Carpenter Affair. After investigating the circumstances, Hart submitted verified details in a formal complaint to MUFON, which continued to drag its feet and enabled Carpenter to retain his MUFON position and activities.

2001: Hart submitted a report and formal complaint to the State of Missouri Division of Professional Registration. John Schuessler wrote in the MUFON Journal that Carpenter vacated his MUFON position. Carpenter's license as a clinical social worker was put on a five-year probation period.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Nov 10th, 2013, 4:12pm

Mental Health Malpractice Cover-up

By Douglas Mesner at Daily Kos

November 9, 2013

[...]

On November 21, 2011, the first of four disturbingly similar malpractice lawsuits was filed against Castlewood Treatment Center, LLC. Among the allegations, a former client of the St. Louis based eating disorders clinic, Lisa Nasseff, claimed that “under the influence of various medically prescribed psychotropic medications” she was “negligently hypnotized” and coerced into believing that, among other things, she “was a member of a satanic cult and that she was involved in or perpetrated various criminal and horrific acts of abuse.” Leslie Thompson, Brooke Taylor, and Colette Travers all followed suit, each also alleging the cultivation of traumatic delusions while undergoing treatment at Castlewood, particularly under the care and supervision of one Mark Schwartz and his (then) wife Lori Galperin. The stage was set for an intense legal battle when, according to KMOV 4 in St. Louis, “Castlewood denied implanting false memories in the women and called the allegations bizarre.”

[...]

This theory of “traumatic repression” therapy is a well-worn fictional plot device, similar to the slapstick theory that the only cure for head injury-induced amnesia is another good whack to the head… and just as dangerously ill-advised. Less generally known is the fact that such “therapy” is only distinguishable from mystical past-life regression sessions in narrative content, and identical “memory” retrieval tactics have provided the “evidentiary” basis for alien abduction claims. In fact it is well recognized, outside of the insular subculture of MPD/DID, that “recovered memories” are almost entirely worthless insofar as historical veracity is concerned. More often than recalling actual real-life events, clients subjected to Recovered Memory Therapies tend to confabulate false narratives that bear a striking resemblance to the presuppositions of trauma held by the therapist.

[...]

As a journalist documenting the continued problem of Recovered Memory Therapies I have collected literally hundreds of hours of interviews with people oppressed by false memories cultivated in irresponsible and unscientific treatment. I have spoken at length with heart-broken families torn apart by false -- sometimes even impossible -- allegations of revealed past abuse. I have documented individuals who came to recognize that their “recovered memories” were indeed false memories, as well as individuals who hold to bizarre and implausible beliefs revealed in the course of treatment. New cases come to my attention with distressing regularity, though this problem continually escapes general recognition. The problem has persisted due to both the spinelessness of the APA and relevant licensing oversight boards, as well as a legal climate that allows for, essentially, cover-up. Countless cases of malpractice have been filed only to find the plaintiffs paid a large settlement out-of-court, bound to an agreement that they will never disclose the facts of their case to the public-at-large. The accused therapist often leaves the institution where the offense occurred, or is silently removed from staff, free to move relatively untarnished to another facility where the same practice is taken up.

With the minor media sensation that surrounded the initial filing of claims against Castlewood, many hoped that the issue would finally see the main-stream light of day, making its way to a full trial. Disappointingly, I received news last night from a reliable source that it appears all four Castlewood litigants appear ready to settle for a hefty sum, with gag orders, “within the month”. I certainly hope this does not come to pass, and with that in mind, I address the below to plaintiffs Lisa Nasseff, Leslie Thompson, Brooke Taylor, and Colette Travers.

Full article:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/11/09/1254477/-Mental-Health-Malpractice-Cover-up
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Nov 12th, 2013, 7:57pm

Hypnosis: No Truth Serum

ABC News

August 27, 2013

Hypnosis that attempts to retrieve the truth may actually help convince you of something false, a new study says.

The study, presented Sunday at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, shows what many doctors already believe: Hypnosis can't help you recover "lost" memories. In fact, it tends to make people more confident in false memories.

[...]

"While hypnosis does not enhance the reliability of memory, there is some evidence that hypnosis leads to increased confidence in memories," said Green.

The author attributes the finding to what he called the myths surrounding hypnosis. In one of his previous studies, Green found that nearly nine out of 10 people in four countries thought hypnosis could help people recover lost memories.

"It's widely believed that hypnosis somehow acts as a truth serum, that it unlocks memory and permits people to perform mental operations that they otherwise couldn't do," said Green.

That idea — no doubt launched by fictional portrayals of hypnosis — took hold in earnest in the 1970s when hundreds of police departments hired hypnotists to enhance eyewitness testimony. The results showed that hypnosis increased the amount of information recalled — but the information was not always accurate.

Again, in the early to mid-1990s there were thousands of cases clogging courts based on recovered memories. Eventually it became apparent that many of these cases were actually false memories created during hypnosis.

"There are no reliable ways to recover memory," said Michael Yapko, a clinical psychologist. "Hypnosis is not some kind of truth detector."

Full article:

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=117259
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Nov 12th, 2013, 8:20pm

JJ,
ARE THESE DOCTORS CUT FROM THE SAME CLOTH THAT TURNED THEIR BACK ON DR.JOHN MACK?...
YOU KNOW I ASK THIS WITH ALL DUE RESPECT BUT RECALL THE HIATUS WHEN DR.MACK CHOSE TO GO PUBLIC...TEMPERED WITH HIS RESEARCH ON THE AFRICAN ENCOUNTER...AND HIS CLOSEST COLLEAGUES...WHOM PROBABLY CITED HIS RESEARCH.PRIOR TO HIS ENLIGHTENMENT...BUT FELL SUBJECT TO WHAT THEY OFTEN TREAT....PROFESSIONAL PEER PRESSURE...
MOREOVER,...WHEN ONE BREAKS A LEG...100% OF THE PHYSICIANS.WOULD TREAT A...BROKEN LEG...IS THE PSYCHIATRIC COMMUNITY EQUALLY UNIFIED IN THEIR LIST OF DIAGNOSIS?

I HAD A VERY CLOSE FRIEND WHOM CHAIRED THE PSYCHOLOGY DEPT.IN SCHOOL...WE HAD A PLETHORA OF CONVERSATIONS AND HIS INSIGHT WAS UNIQUE...AND REFRESHINGLY...OPEN MINDED.

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Nov 12th, 2013, 8:57pm

on Nov 12th, 2013, 8:20pm, ZETAR wrote:
JJ,
ARE THESE DOCTORS CUT FROM THE SAME CLOTH THAT TURNED THEIR BACK ON DR.JOHN MACK?


The study cited by writer Jeff Carpenter of ABC was conducted by Joseph Green of Ohio State University. The study had nothing directly to do with the late Dr. Mack, and I of course do not speak for the researchers. I interpret their work to have consisted of specific methodology that produced measurable outcomes indicating that hypnosis subjects recalled events no better then non-hypnosis subjects, and that those hypnotized were more prone to being incorrectly convinced of the accuracy of their inaccurate recollections.

I interpreted it to be a relatively straight forward research project. The conditions of the test were prearranged, making the quantifiable results dependent on the actions and responses of the research subjects. More about the project and personnel could of course be found through the OSU website, etc.


on Nov 12th, 2013, 8:20pm, ZETAR wrote:
I HAD A VERY CLOSE FRIEND WHOM CHAIRED THE PSYCHOLOGY DEPT.IN SCHOOL...WE HAD A PLETHORA OF CONVERSATIONS AND HIS INSIGHT WAS UNIQUE...AND REFRESHINGLY...OPEN MINDED.

SHALOM...Z


That does not surprise me at all. As a matter of fact, I think psychologists and the scientific community as whole get a lot more complaints within the UFO community than is fully warranted. There are many scientists willing to look at the paranormal objectively, including some that report experiences themselves.

Actually, many professional research papers have been done on such topics, but the UFO community collectively continues to consider itself persecuted. While there is some legitimacy in such complaints, a lot of scientific professional work has been conducted and published.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Nov 12th, 2013, 9:33pm

JJ,
I PROBE AND PROD HERE AND THERE...AND AM ALWAYS IMPRESSED WITH YOUR LOGIC...INDEED SIR...YOU HAVE MY RESPECT...
MOREOVER, I FOLLOWED YOUR RECOMMENDATION...ABBY...BRILLIANT ACADEMICIAN/JOURNALIST...AN ARTIST WITH UNIQUE SKILLS...THANX FOR NUDGING.ME TOWARD HER THOUGHTS...

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Nov 23rd, 2013, 8:11pm

An interview with retired historian and researcher of alleged alien abduction Dr. David Jacobs was recently published at Skeptiko. During the interview, Jacobs chose to make some comments related to the late Dr. John Mack. As a result, Mr. Will Bueche, a member of the board of directors at the John E. Mack Institute, posted the following comments:

In a recent podcast episode of Skeptiko, Dr David Jacobs is quoted as saying:

"This is not consciousness-raising; this is like consciousness denying. This is consciousness-lowering in a sense. So I don’t have any stake in this. It would be wonderful if it is. I think that John Mack was just dead wrong in his analysis of this. In fact, he tried and tried and tried to ram the abduction phenomenon into his preconceived ideas about consciousness and never could. Most people don’t realize that he gave up. He said, “That’s it. I don’t want to do it anymore,” because it could never conform to his ideas. Two years before he died he stopped doing abduction research altogether, closed up his peer group at Harvard, and told Budd Hopkins that maybe he’d been a little too gullible in this situation of abductions. He could never fit it into what he wanted it to be."

[...]

Jacobs has made these statements about Dr. John Mack before, notably in a documentary film by David Cherniak, and he remains wrong.

Jacobs' narrow view of the phenomenon is a holdover from early research which failed to accept that the alien encounter phenomenon involves different levels of reality and is deeply affecting in both positive and negative ways to those who experience it. This difference between Mack and Jacobs is of course widely known, and need not be debated here; Mack wrote expansively of what he learned from experiencers in Passport to the Cosmos, his second book on the subject.

But in particular to your inquiry, Jacobs' repeated claim that Dr. Mack gave up his interest in alien encounters is simply false. Jacobs made that same claim earlier in the Cherniak documentary.

In fact, Dr. Mack had wrapped up the research branch of his organization (PEER - the Program for Extraordinary Experience Research) a few years before his death, and this was reported in a press release from PEER to MUFON (I wrote that press release myself), but he continued to speak and write on the subject as well as to consult with the experiencers who saw him long-term until his death in 2004.

[...]

Jacobs assertion that John "gave up" "because it could never conform to his ideas" or "he could never fit it into what he wanted it to be" is pure bull. Jacobs likely heard what he wanted to hear when John shared his regrets. John has indeed said that he had regrets about how he approached the subject of alien encounters - most notably, he felt he may have erred in presenting such personal, transformational material to the public in such a direct way as a major book. His friend, philosopher Thomas Kuhn had discouraged him from using a book to present such revolutionary material as well, but John did not listen to him.

I could also imagine that Jacobs may be mishearing John's perpetual questioning about whether aliens were in fact simply aliens whose arrival is "revelatory" to people's lives in the most deeply personal - even spiritual - sense, or if the aliens were not what we saw them to be, but rather could be some kind of intelligence from a higher level of reality - closer to "Source" as John often dubbed this concept - which appeared to us in technological, futuristic guise that we saw as "aliens". Mack made sure not to come to a firm conclusion on that. He did not have enough evidence of the latter possibility to make a firm stance on it one way or another, and I'm sure he may have expressed that to both Jacobs and Hopkins - and Jacobs would heard it as a defeat rather than as a strength (this was not a failing, that he kept the possibilities open). If Jacobs were to simply say that John may have privately wished for the latter to be the case, I might agree - but ultimately it does not matter. If the aliens are simply aliens in the traditional sense, or if they are from some higher level of reality (and the reality may be a bit of both!), what matters is how they transform people, and that is what fascinated John, and what he wrote about - human transformation from alien encounters.

Simply said, Jacobs claim that Mack gave up is false, and if I were to speak freely, I feel it is a claim that feeds into Jacobs' narcissism - Jacobs opinion that he alone has the discernment to learn the truth about alien encounters. And what has Jacobs' discernment brought forth? A paranoid, limited view of the alien encounter phenomenon, in which he strips away all elements that do not match his 1950s style preconceptions about what alien encounters would be like (he explains in the Cherniak documentary that when experiencers report to him elements that do not match his narrow view of reality, he dismisses them as "confabulations", and I understand he does the same in this podcast).

This dismissal of elements he does not agree with is characteristic of Jacobs' work. Who can forget his attempt to marginalize the insights of non-threatened researchers by dubbing them "positivists" in his book, The Threat? This style is what he will be remembered for - and it remains offensive and disappointing to those who take what experiencers report seriously, without preconceptions.

Please feel free to share this widely. Perhaps Jacobs will see it and appreciate that his efforts to twist the alien encounter phenomenon into his own mold, and his efforts to twist the reality of John's career into his own mold, are symptomatic of a need to appear superior that is, frankly, egotistical.

Will Bueche

Currently on the JEMI Board of Directors, and former PEER member, 1999-2004
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Nov 23rd, 2013, 8:42pm

EXCELLENT POST AND OBSERVATION!
DR. MACK BROKE THE GLASS CEILING AMONGST HIS COLLEAGUES/PEERS IN LIEU OF VAST POLITICAL/ACADEMIC DISSUASION.
NOW KEEP IN MIND THE ABOVE AND THE INTENT OF ONE TRYING TO SPREAD SUCH PROPAGANDA...FIRST OF ALL...DR. MACK WAS A MAVERICK...LOVED THE CHALLENGE...PASSIONATE OF HIS INSIGHTS AND WORK.
DOES IT MAKE SENSE FOR ONE TO SAY...O.K...I WAS WRONG WITH ALL THE WORK/FIELD STUDIES THAT I DID.
WHAT JUMPS OUT REALLY TO ME...IS THE FEAR THAT ANOTHER COLLEAGUE WOULD PICK UP THE TORCH AND CARRY ON...
HENCE, HARD TO DIAGNOSE (EASY TO MIS-DIGNOSE)...PACK EM FULL OF MEDS...AND FOLLOW THEIR CLANDESTINE PROTOCOL...NOT SURE IF THOSE ACADEMICIANS ARE AFRAID TO CONSIDER/DENY THE POSSIBILITY...TO BE SO ACADEMICALLY FIT AND WEAR BLINDERS LIKE A MULE PULLING A WAGON...REALLY PRACTICING DENIAL IN THEIR OWN ENDEAVOR...IMHO!
AH...I SEE EM HUDDLED SUCKING THAT EXPRESSO DOWN PONDERING A STRATEGY...HOW CAN WE THWART THIS...
KINDA OF A CASE YA HAVE TO READ BETWEEN THE LINES...PRETTY OBVIOUS cool...IMHO wink

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Dec 13th, 2013, 6:45pm

Ethics of Exploring the Fringe, Part One: Sharon Weinberger and Nigel Watson on Responsible Reporting

The UFO Trail

December 13, 2013

Delving into controversial topics and related demographics has challenges that come with the territory. If one is inclined to research and write on matters and controversies typically receiving attention within ufology circles, various questions of ethics and integrity are destined to arise.

What responsibilities do writer/researchers have to individuals who become the subjects of their articles and blog posts? How might we assess if writers are dealing responsibly with their chosen subject matter? What challenges should writers expect to encounter when addressing such topics as the intelligence community, alleged alien abduction and claims of mind control?

I emailed writer/researchers Sharon Weinberger, Nigel Watson and Mark Pilkington, requesting permission to pose such questions. Each graciously agreed to share some experience and insight, and their time and attention is greatly appreciated. Comments provided by Sharon Weinberger and Nigel Watson are offered below, and statements from Mark Pilkington will be published in part two of this post.

Full article:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2013/12/ethics-of-exploring-fringe-part-one.html
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Dec 18th, 2013, 1:23pm

Ethics of Exploring the Fringe, Part Two: Mark Pilkington on Deception Operations, Witness Claims and More

The UFO Trail

December 18, 2013

The activities of Mark Pilkington have remained of interest to those following fringe culture since his days of making crop circles right up to his more recent venture of delving into the actions of spooks in ufology. He is a writer, publisher, curator and musician. Pilkington has written articles for The Anomalist and Fortean Times, among other publications. He is the author of two books, Far Out: 101 Strange Tales from Science's Outer Edge and Mirage Men, the latter of which was adapted to film. Pilkington's comments provided to The UFO Trail follow the questions below.

Full article:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2013/12/ethics-of-exploring-fringe-part-two.html
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jan 12th, 2014, 8:43pm

Thanks for posting those interesting links at ufotrail BlogSpot.
There has always been many problems in this area regarding egos , improper methods, and of course the marginality (and liminality) of the subject itself.
Anyone interested in these areas would do well to read The Trickster by Hansen and always keep in mind how 'grey' the whole subject can be.

smiley
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Equalizer on Jan 12th, 2014, 8:47pm

DrWu
Welcome back grin
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jan 12th, 2014, 9:01pm

on Jan 12th, 2014, 8:47pm, Father Karras wrote:
DrWu
Welcome back grin


Thank you..........perhaps it's my old age but I don't recall you....did you used to go by another board name?


smiley
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Equalizer on Jan 12th, 2014, 9:08pm

Yes this is just an assumed avatar while I am cleansing the forum of evil and all manner of foul spirits.
You knew me as Sys_Config .. grin

The interview your boy gave at Fortean times was stellar..
I can't wait to read his book..

http://www.forteantimes.com/features/interviews/43/george_p_hansen.html

Its always peculiar how North Carolina and Virginia pop up in these conversations..after reading..I understand a little better..

Hal is now INT23 if you run into him..Purr is still Precious Purr..
How is the weather out there!?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Jan 12th, 2014, 9:10pm

DRWU,

INDEED...THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL A.K.A'S FOR THE PADRE...NO SENIOR MOMENT grin

MOREOVER...MIGHT I ECHO THE PADRE'S SENTIMENT...WECOME BACK! smiley

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by MOKSHA on Jan 13th, 2014, 05:33am

on Jan 12th, 2014, 8:43pm, drwu23 wrote:
Thanks for posting those interesting links at ufotrail BlogSpot.
There has always been many problems in this area regarding egos , improper methods, and of course the marginality (and liminality) of the subject itself.
Anyone interested in these areas would do well to read The Trickster by Hansen and always keep in mind how 'grey' the whole subject can be.

smiley


Welcome back
Drwu23,
I like to test my believes to find out how strong they really are,
having a well red skeptic's perspective to refer to, is,
priceless.
MKW

smiley
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jan 13th, 2014, 07:51am

on Jan 12th, 2014, 9:08pm, Father Karras wrote:
Yes this is just an assumed avatar while I am cleansing the forum of evil and all manner of foul spirits.
You knew me as Sys_Config .. grin

The interview your boy gave at Fortean times was stellar..
I can't wait to read his book..

http://www.forteantimes.com/features/interviews/43/george_p_hansen.html

Its always peculiar how North Carolina and Virginia pop up in these conversations..after reading..I understand a little better..

Hal is now INT23 if you run into him..Purr is still Precious Purr..
How is the weather out there!?

Glad to see you found that interview interesting. We can learn a great deal from that perspective. BTW..I had not read that specific interview before. Pilkington is also an interesting person and I recommend his book also; Mirage Men.
Thanks for the heads up on the members.

The snow is melting and we are warming up.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jan 13th, 2014, 07:54am

Also thanks to MOKSHA and ZETAR for the welcome.


"Wherever you go, there you are."
Firesign Theater
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Jan 13th, 2014, 09:34am

on Jan 13th, 2014, 07:54am, drwu23 wrote:
Also thanks to MOKSHA and ZETAR for the welcome.


"Wherever you go, there you are."
Firesign Theater


I agree with MOKSHA's appreciation of skepticism, good to have you back drwu23.


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jan 13th, 2014, 7:28pm

on Jan 12th, 2014, 8:43pm, drwu23 wrote:
Thanks for posting those interesting links at ufotrail BlogSpot.
There has always been many problems in this area regarding egos , improper methods, and of course the marginality (and liminality) of the subject itself.
Anyone interested in these areas would do well to read The Trickster by Hansen and always keep in mind how 'grey' the whole subject can be.

smiley


Thanks, drwu23. Glad you find The UFO Trail interesting.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jan 17th, 2014, 7:34pm

Writer/researcher Nick Redfern indicated today that he believes the Betty and Barney Hill alleged alien abduction was part of Project MKULTRA, a CIA venture into mind control and behavior modification. Commenting at The UFO Inconoclast(s), Redfern added he had forthcoming material that would demonstrate that John Fuller, author of Interrupted Journey, was paid by the intelligence community to cultivate the concept of alien abduction.

"The Hill abduction? MKULTRA," Redfern initially wrote, then added, "I have something coming out on all this in a few months, something which will present Fuller in a whole new light... And not a positive light. The man is going to come crashing down like a ton of bricks."

Redfern then later wrote, "Fuller was paid well to help nurture the imagery of 'alien abductions' via The Interrupted Journey. And I don't mean paid well by his publisher..."
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jan 17th, 2014, 8:31pm

on Jan 17th, 2014, 7:34pm, jjflash wrote:
Writer/researcher Nick Redfern indicated today that he believes the Betty and Barney Hill alleged alien abduction was part of Project MKULTRA, a CIA venture into mind control and behavior modification. Commenting at The UFO Inconoclast(s), Redfern added he had forthcoming material that would demonstrate that John Fuller, author of Interrupted Journey, was paid by the intelligence community to cultivate the concept of alien abduction.

"The Hill abduction? MKULTRA," Redfern initially wrote, then added, "I have something coming out on all this in a few months, something which will present Fuller in a whole new light... And not a positive light. The man is going to come crashing down like a ton of bricks."

Redfern then later wrote, "Fuller was paid well to help nurture the imagery of 'alien abductions' via The Interrupted Journey. And I don't mean paid well by his publisher..."



That's interesting. I haven't read any Redfern for a while.
But Vallee also taks about military games and disinfo in his book Revelations.
But I have always questioned why the military would want to do such things. It seems to me it draws attention to the ufo phenom and not away from it and isn't a good cover story imo for their own projects.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by MOKSHA on Jan 18th, 2014, 07:19am

on Jan 17th, 2014, 8:31pm, drwu23 wrote:
That's interesting. I haven't read any Redfern for a while.
But Vallee also taks about military games and disinfo in his book Revelations.
But I have always questioned why the military would want to do such things. It seems to me it draws attention to the ufo phenom and not away from it and isn't a good cover story imo for their own projects.


Good question drwu23, what if the military is being used?
And the CIA did not disclose it's full agenda, another distraction to keep prying eyes away, to catch a deviate, think like a deviate.
We will never know, what we do not.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jan 19th, 2014, 12:55pm

on Jan 18th, 2014, 07:19am, MOKSHA wrote:
Good question drwu23, what if the military is being used?
And the CIA did not disclose it's full agenda, another distraction to keep prying eyes away, to catch a deviate, think like a deviate.
We will never know, what we do not.

Some things need to be kept secret or various agencies cannot protect us and do their jobs, but regarding the ufo phenom it's debatable/arguable whether or not the public has the 'right to know' the 'truth'...whatever that might be.
But my point was not about secrecy but about why the military would use ufo hinjinks and hoaxing to make people think the ufo phenom is legitimate. What's the point? How does it help any agenda they might have regarding covert projects not related to so-called alien/ ufos? It seems to me the best course would be to just deny that ufos are alien and that it's of any concern to them and let the ufo community argue amongst themselves, present wild conspiracy ideas, and let them look foolish all by themselves.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Jan 19th, 2014, 1:07pm

....It seems to me the best course would be to just deny that ufos are alien and that it's of any concern to them and let the ufo community argue amongst themselves, present wild conspiracy ideas, and let them look foolish all by themselves. ...

So, business as usual then ?

HAL
(INT21) smiley
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jan 19th, 2014, 1:18pm

on Jan 19th, 2014, 1:07pm, INT21 wrote:
....It seems to me the best course would be to just deny that ufos are alien and that it's of any concern to them and let the ufo community argue amongst themselves, present wild conspiracy ideas, and let them look foolish all by themselves. ...

So, business as usual then ?

HAL
(INT21) smiley


Absolutely.....
grin
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by FlatEarth on Jan 19th, 2014, 4:49pm

It doesn't make any sense that the Air Force would want us to think UFOs are not real while another branch of the military would do just the opposite.

I thought the title of this thread had something to do with critical thinking. rolleyes

Flat
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jan 20th, 2014, 6:51pm

Hello, all -

As is the case with any developing circumstances, we will have to wait and see exactly what Nick Redfern presents in order to ultimately judge its merit. In the mean time, we might consider the underlying issues present in some of the questions recently stated and implied in this thread. Such issues are typically raised when considering the possibility the intelligence community (IC) might be responsible for some perceptions of reported alien abduction. In my opinion, it would be helpful in more thoroughly understanding the possibilities and lines of reasoning by reviewing some of the following materials and circumstances contained therein.

The IC has a long and well documented history of intentionally misleading the public. It's simply what they do. Such circumstances include media manipulation on a mass scale, covert infiltration of groups conducting activism, covert use of involuntary human research subjects and executing false flag UFO events. Documentation with references is available in The UFO Trail article, One of Those Posts About Validated Conspiracy Theories.

More specific referenced documentation of the IC abuse of human research subjects is available in a series of posts at The UFO Trail. Interested parties might choose to read:

John Marks and 'The Search for the Manchurian Candidate'

The CIA and the Search for the Manchurian Candidate, Part One of Two

The CIA and the Search for the Manchurian Candidate, Part Two of Two

Circumstances specifically and directly relevant to ufology and involving the IC were cited and explored in Influence of the Intelligence Community in Ufology. Such circumstances included NSA intelligence analysts who came to be known as the Gulf Breeze Six, as well as virtually constant contradictions expressed by members of the IC who call themselves insiders. Circumstances additionally considered included ufology activities conducted by CIA and DIA men Ron Pandolfi, Paul Murad and Kit Green, and as documented by writer Gus Russo.

In a two-part post at The UFO Trail on ethics of exploring the fringe, writer/researchers Nigel Watson and Mark Pilkington discussed such circumstances as Paul Bennewtiz and Linda Moulton Howe being intentionally misled and manipulated. Watson's comments may be viewed in part one. Pilkington's remarks may be viewed in part two, which included his statement (of which I happen to very much agree), "While these UFO-themed operations are probably quite rare, the UFO community has to take on board the fact that they have happened, and that their purpose, and their methods, are necessarily obscure."

The purposes and methods are necessarily obscure. Again, that is what the IC does and the nature of its game.

More specific circumstances of intentionally leading the UFO community astray were documented and provided at Reality Uncovered. A series of relevant posts were made in Project Serpo Uncovered.

It is due to such well documented circumstances as contained in the posts linked above that some researchers suspect a percentage of involuntary research subjects might have incorrectly assumed themselves alien abductees. Whether or not such lines of reasoning are either accepted or fully understood, the circumstances referenced above indeed partially represent why some investigators think further research is justified into the possibilities; agree or not, those are some of the reasons.

Whether or not the suspicions of such researchers will ever be conclusively established is yet to be seen. Personally, I look forward to more credible work published on the related topics, as I am of the opinion that IC manipulation of ufology is an interesting, under reported and largely misunderstood area of research.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by skizicks on Jan 20th, 2014, 7:42pm

I recently bought a set of the old Long John Nebel radio programs and was listening to an interview with Arthur C. Clarke. In the interview Clarke explains his position on abductions.
He made the point that the numbers of abductees actually works against abductions being real.
His point is that if they were real it would only take a few to have real proof that they were happening. And the idea that a race from beyond would have worked up to full contact by that point in time if it was really happening.
And this was in the 1960s if I'm not mistaken.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jan 20th, 2014, 10:53pm

on Jan 20th, 2014, 7:42pm, skizicks wrote:
I recently bought a set of the old Long John Nebel radio programs and was listening to an interview with Arthur C. Clarke. In the interview Clarke explains his position on abductions.
He made the point that the numbers of abductees actually works against abductions being real.
His point is that if they were real it would only take a few to have real proof that they were happening. And the idea that a race from beyond would have worked up to full contact by that point in time if it was really happening.
And this was in the 1960s if I'm not mistaken.

That line of thinking ties in with Dr Vallee also who has been saying for years, since at least the 70's, that the vast number of abductions and sightings doesn't fit the idea that advanced aliens are surveying earth and humans. Any sufficiently technologically advanced aliens would have figured out our species a long time ago. This line of reasoning is presented in his '5 reasons against the extraterrestrial hypothesis' which can be found in the appendix to his book Revelations and on his Wiki page.
I also posted it here a year or so ago.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by skizicks on Jan 21st, 2014, 7:36pm

Dr.
I do remember your post, I just thought it worthwhile to point out that it was also considered a long time ago by a leader in the field at the time.
( Also I thought I would plug the recordings that are now available. ) grin

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by MOKSHA on Jan 22nd, 2014, 07:05am

If the 456 is just a imaginary cover story, who is really taking 2,300
people a day?

The Missing
http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/criminal_mind/forensics/americas_missing/2.html

Maybe these missing people "could" have some "proof" but then again,
maybe not.

undecided
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jan 22nd, 2014, 09:06am

on Jan 21st, 2014, 7:36pm, skizicks wrote:
Dr.
I do remember your post, I just thought it worthwhile to point out that it was also considered a long time ago by a leader in the field at the time.
( Also I thought I would plug the recordings that are now available. ) grin

I understand though Clarke was never a 'leader' in the field of ufo research or related aspects like exobiology/aliens but he was a sci -fi author and science writer with a background in engineering and physics who helped develop the concept of satellite communication, early radar, and was very interested in interplanetary travel. He also had an interest in the 'paranormal' though he became a skeptic in later years.
But as you pointed out Dr Vallee was not the first to question the sheer number of visits and abductions that seemingly are perpetrated by 'aliens'.


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jan 22nd, 2014, 09:12am

on Jan 22nd, 2014, 07:05am, MOKSHA wrote:
If the 456 is just a imaginary cover story, who is really taking 2,300
people a day?

The Missing
http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/criminal_mind/forensics/americas_missing/2.html

Maybe these missing people "could" have some "proof" but then again,
maybe not.

undecided


I read that short piece...didn't see space aliens mentioned. wink
My point is that people 'go missing' all the time and can be attributed to any number of prosaic reasons.
Let's not assume they are automatically being abducted by aliens.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on Jan 23rd, 2014, 12:12am

on Jan 20th, 2014, 10:53pm, drwu23 wrote:
Any sufficiently technologically advanced aliens would have figured out our species a long time ago.


I agree, if they were just here to figure out what makes a human "tick", they would certainly have been finished long ago. Just like a researcher may "abduct" an animal, study and tag it, then release it back in its native habitat.

But if the Aliens are in fact conducting inter-breeding experiments, (a theory poised by a number of researchers) that would certainly explain why they continue abductions and many generations of the same family-line, as has been reported (notice I did not say proved)...
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on Jan 23rd, 2014, 12:20am

on Jan 17th, 2014, 7:34pm, jjflash wrote:
Writer/researcher Nick Redfern indicated today that he believes the Betty and Barney Hill alleged alien abduction was part of Project MKULTRA, a CIA venture into mind control and behavior modification.


It is funny and fascinating what people are willing to believe.

The US Government can't keep Bill & Monica a secret, but they can perpetrate a mind-control project tied to Alien Abductions and keep it secret for nearly 50 years?

REALLY?


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jan 23rd, 2014, 5:18pm

on Jan 23rd, 2014, 12:20am, Mythos wrote:
It is funny and fascinating what people are willing to believe.

The US Government can't keep Bill & Monica a secret, but they can perpetrate a mind-control project tied to Alien Abductions and keep it secret for nearly 50 years?

REALLY?





Oh my...comparing Bill's indiscretions to keeping alien secrets...? Don't think they are in the same league at all.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jan 23rd, 2014, 5:23pm

on Jan 23rd, 2014, 12:12am, Mythos wrote:
I agree, if they were just here to figure out what makes a human "tick", they would certainly have been finished long ago. Just like a researcher may "abduct" an animal, study and tag it, then release it back in its native habitat.

But if the Aliens are in fact conducting inter-breeding experiments, (a theory poised by a number of researchers) that would certainly explain why they continue abductions and many generations of the same family-line, as has been reported (notice I did not say proved)...


I have never bought into the idea 'they' are interbreeding with humans. It's unlikely we are a dna match and even if our dna were compatible once again advanced aliens should have solved any bio reproduction issues by now and would have no need to do such a thing.
And again it could have been done a long time ago assuming that they have been here since Roswell. In over 50 years they would have far far more genetic material than they could possibly need.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jan 23rd, 2014, 5:24pm

on Jan 23rd, 2014, 12:20am, Mythos wrote:
The US Government can't keep Bill & Monica a secret, but they can perpetrate a mind-control project tied to Alien Abductions and keep it secret for nearly 50 years?


I can understand why one might present such a question, but doing so takes the topic and statements of Redfern out of context. Those who sincerely desire to understand more about the subject matter might choose to review such individuals as John Marks, Ewen Cameron and Martin Orne, as previously referenced. A basic understanding of such circumstances is required in order to reasonably interpret the lines of reasoning of such researchers as Redfern, and whether or not such lines of reasoing may ultimately prove to be accurate.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jan 23rd, 2014, 5:29pm

From the Magonia blog and relevant to the discussion, in my opinion:

"The closing of the US Internet mailing list 'UFO Updates' seems to be yet another nail in the coffin of ufology. To be honest the thing had been struggling for years and the days when it was the home to some intelligent passionate debates had long gone.

"Its problem was that for many of the contributors ufology was a religion not a science. Any critical discussion of classic cases was howled down with cries of 'pelicanist', 'skeptibunker' and the rest. The definition of these epithets was “anyone who suggests any explanation of UFO reports that does not involve non-human or at least exotic intelligences”. It’s clear that many on the list and wider saw their role as conservators of mysteries rather than as solvers of puzzles. Not surprisingly most well-known British ufologists joined the blacklist of those who were to be shouted down by, for example, Pope Jerry Clark. Magonians were joined by Nigel Watson, David Clarke, Andy Roberts and latterly Joe McGonagle (and I suspect that Jenny Randles and Paul Devereux were in there somewhere). Their crime was arguing that UFO reports were probably not generated by alien intelligences.

"At least critics of the classic cases were allowed to put their case, those who criticised Saint Budd and Jacobs were just thrown off the list. No matter how wild and dangerous their claims became, no matter that they wrecked people’s lives; that Jacobs went in for the shrillest kind of substitute antisemitism or however much John Mack cheer-led for the old apartheid regime in South Africa (even having the gall to attack Nelson Mandela for teaching the 'natives' white folks ways) they remained inviolate.

"Of course the defectors from the abductionist cult such as Carol Rainey got the worst of it. Rainey was portrayed as the caricature shrewish and vengeful ex-wife of Budd Hopkins, rather than someone who, having participated in his research had been eventually able to see the dangerous techniques and assumptions behind it. For this she was subjected to a barrage of misogynist abuse on UpDates, which provoked a number of contributors, including Magonia Online editor John Rimmer, to sever links with the list. Of course the Hopkins fan-boys and eager believers stayed to the bitter end and eventually drove it into the ground. It will be missed but not mourned."

Source:

http://pelicanist.blogspot.com/2014/01/northern-echoes-i-read-it-in-papers.html
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jan 23rd, 2014, 5:41pm

on Jan 23rd, 2014, 5:29pm, jjflash wrote:
From the Magonia blog and relevant to the discussion, in my opinion:

"The closing of the US Internet mailing list 'UFO Updates' seems to be yet another nail in the coffin of ufology. To be honest the thing had been struggling for years and the days when it was the home to some intelligent passionate debates had long gone.

"Its problem was that for many of the contributors ufology was a religion not a science. Any critical discussion of classic cases was howled down with cries of 'pelicanist', 'skeptibunker' and the rest. The definition of these epithets was “anyone who suggests any explanation of UFO reports that does not involve non-human or at least exotic intelligences”. It’s clear that many on the list and wider saw their role as conservators of mysteries rather than as solvers of puzzles. Not surprisingly most well-known British ufologists joined the blacklist of those who were to be shouted down by, for example, Pope Jerry Clark. Magonians were joined by Nigel Watson, David Clarke, Andy Roberts and latterly Joe McGonagle (and I suspect that Jenny Randles and Paul Devereux were in there somewhere). Their crime was arguing that UFO reports were probably not generated by alien intelligences.

"At least critics of the classic cases were allowed to put their case, those who criticised Saint Budd and Jacobs were just thrown off the list. No matter how wild and dangerous their claims became, no matter that they wrecked people’s lives; that Jacobs went in for the shrillest kind of substitute antisemitism or however much John Mack cheer-led for the old apartheid regime in South Africa (even having the gall to attack Nelson Mandela for teaching the 'natives' white folks ways) they remained inviolate.

"Of course the defectors from the abductionist cult such as Carol Rainey got the worst of it. Rainey was portrayed as the caricature shrewish and vengeful ex-wife of Budd Hopkins, rather than someone who, having participated in his research had been eventually able to see the dangerous techniques and assumptions behind it. For this she was subjected to a barrage of misogynist abuse on UpDates, which provoked a number of contributors, including Magonia Online editor John Rimmer, to sever links with the list. Of course the Hopkins fan-boys and eager believers stayed to the bitter end and eventually drove it into the ground. It will be missed but not mourned."

Source:

http://pelicanist.blogspot.com/2014/01/northern-echoes-i-read-it-in-papers.html


Can't say I disagree with most of that.
Over the years there have been many weirdos, 'bleevers', and opportunists that have inserted themselves into the ufo community and turned the whole thing into a religion at times. Many serious investigators using valid skepticism and science to try and ferret out any truth have either been scared off or neutralized by the 'giggle factor'.
I believe these 'wackos' as skizicks called them above have ruined the whole ufo area and made it impossible to do any real science and for anyone outside of this 'community' to take it seriously anymore.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by FlatEarth on Jan 23rd, 2014, 6:53pm

on Jan 23rd, 2014, 12:12am, Mythos wrote:
I agree, if they were just here to figure out what makes a human "tick", they would certainly have been finished long ago. Just like a researcher may "abduct" an animal, study and tag it, then release it back in its native habitat.

But if the Aliens are in fact conducting inter-breeding experiments, (a theory poised by a number of researchers) that would certainly explain why they continue abductions and many generations of the same family-line, as has been reported (notice I did not say proved)...

Mythos, I agree with you. If aliens are still doing their thing, we don't really know what their goals may be. If witnesses are still reporting encounters, then professionals should be investigating their claims. In Bud Hopkins defense, he admitted that he wasn't an expert and wished that those who were would step up.

All of Vallee's points are arguable. They are based on broad assumptions that are beyond our ability to know.

Flat
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by FlatEarth on Jan 23rd, 2014, 7:05pm

on Jan 23rd, 2014, 5:29pm, jjflash wrote:
...

"Of course the defectors from the abductionist cult such as Carol Rainey got the worst of it. Rainey was portrayed as the caricature shrewish and vengeful ex-wife of Budd Hopkins, rather than someone who, having participated in his research had been eventually able to see the dangerous techniques and assumptions behind it. For this she was subjected to a barrage of misogynist abuse on UpDates, which provoked a number of contributors, including Magonia Online editor John Rimmer, to sever links with the list. Of course the Hopkins fan-boys and eager believers stayed to the bitter end and eventually drove it into the ground. It will be missed but not mourned."

Source:

http://pelicanist.blogspot.com/2014/01/northern-echoes-i-read-it-in-papers.html


There is something wrong with someone undermining the work of an ex who also happened to be losing a battle with cancer. Carol Rainey may have been telling the truth, I can't say, but the nature of her relationship with Hopkins seriously taints her cause and puts her judgment into question. The thought of her gives me the creeps.

Flat
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on Jan 23rd, 2014, 11:33pm

on Jan 23rd, 2014, 5:29pm, jjflash wrote:
"Of course the defectors from the abductionist cult such as Carol Rainey got the worst of it. Rainey was portrayed as the caricature shrewish and vengeful ex-wife of Budd Hopkins, rather than someone who, having participated in his research had been eventually able to see the dangerous techniques and assumptions behind it.


Of course, everyone knows that ALL Ex-Wives are ALWAYS truthful and honest and should be believed 100% of the time in what they say about their ex-husbands...

Right or wrong Budd Hopkins dedicated a huge part of his life in the research of UFO's and Carols ONLY claim to fame is spending a huge part of her life trying to discredit him..

Sounds like a vengeful bitch to me...
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jan 24th, 2014, 7:18pm

on Jan 23rd, 2014, 5:41pm, drwu23 wrote:
Can't say I disagree with most of that.


Same here. I very much agree that while many claim to seek answers, a more accurate description would be that they seek unconditional support for their preferred and yet to be substantiated beliefs. A more helpful approach might be if people took more responsibility for identifying whether they are seeking accurate information or emotional support services.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jan 24th, 2014, 7:44pm

on Jan 23rd, 2014, 11:33pm, Mythos wrote:
Of course, everyone knows that ALL Ex-Wives are ALWAYS truthful and honest and should be believed 100% of the time in what they say about their ex-husbands...

Right or wrong Budd Hopkins dedicated a huge part of his life in the research of UFO's and Carols ONLY claim to fame is spending a huge part of her life trying to discredit him..

Sounds like a vengeful bitch to me...


Actually, Carol Rainey has a rather impressive resume. She has many accomplishments in addition to her contributions to the UFO community.

If you, Mythos, or others would care to cite and challenge specific points in her work, such as her article The Priests of High Strangeness or videos from her YouTube channel, in intelligent and reasonable manners, I would be pleased to hear you out and respond in kind. However, I will not be drawn into counterproductive name-calling and similar tactics that serve no helpful purposes.

Actually, that was a key point in the Magonia material: opponents were reduced to conducting personal attacks as opposed to presenting competent and objective rebuttal. I quote Kevin Randle, from February, 2011, A Response to Budd Hopkins:

"I read Carol Rainey’s article and am aware of the old adage that the true test of another’s intelligence is how much he or she agrees with you. I have thought, based on my investigations, my research, and my discussions with many others, that the answers for alien abduction did not lie in the stars, but here on Earth. I found terrestrial explanations that were far more satisfying than a group of aliens abducting humans to perform genetic experiments that would have been crude a half century ago.

"And now I have read Hopkins’ response ('Deconstructing the Debunkers: A Response,') to Rainey’s article and found it to more in line with a smear and less with a discussion of the scientific merit the abduction phenomenon. He reduced the discussion to his beliefs in UFO debunking, erecting strawmen to knock down but providing little in the way of objective evidence for his point of view."

The UFO community suffers from too much name-calling in lieu of meaningful, productive discussion. Let's be part of the solution, not the problem.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jan 24th, 2014, 7:47pm

The latest video, published this week, from microbiologist and popular podcast guest Dr. Tyler Kokjohn. The doctor explores the now decades old alien abduction dogma and how some researchers are responding.



Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jan 25th, 2014, 12:17am

on Jan 24th, 2014, 7:47pm, jjflash wrote:
The latest video, published this week, from microbiologist and popular podcast guest Dr. Tyler Kokjohn. The doctor explores the now decades old alien abduction dogma and how some researchers are responding.




Interesting video and the abduction believers are definitely going to need to put up or shut with the new advances in genome discovery.
If hybrids exist we will be able to show it easily with genetic testing.
Maybe the alien abduction research crowd should start looking for a new line of work.
wink
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jan 27th, 2014, 3:49pm

on Jan 27th, 2014, 3:46pm, jjflash wrote:
Tuesday, January 28, 9 p.m. EST, Carol Rainey will guest on Jeff Ritzmann's Paranormal Waypoint. Check out the discussion, chat room and more at KGRA Radio.

Ms. Rainey's The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the "Alien Abduction Phenomenon", and Dr. Tyler Kokjohn's Tainted, Toxic and Taboo: A Scientist's Assessment of Alien Abduction Research, may be viewed at:

http://www.paranormalwaypoint.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/paratopiamag_rainey_kokjohn.pdf

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Feb 2nd, 2014, 11:52am

Paranormal Waypoint Series: Problem, Evidence, Result

The UFO Trail

February 2, 2014

Jeff Ritzmann, host of Paranormal Waypoint on KGRA Radio, recently undertook a three-part series of shows dedicated to addressing challenges within research of alleged alien abduction. The series, designed to identify problems, evidence of such problems and their subsequent results, began with reviewing information presented by psychologist Dr. Scott Lilienfeld.

The doctor explained the lack of reliability in the use of hypnosis as a memory retrieval tool. Also covered were the inherent challenges related to witness narratives obtained via hypnosis. Such challenges include a high degree of cultural contamination within ufology, as well as biased hypnotists who are typically overeager to obtain predetermined outcomes. Regressive hypnosis is of course the preferred investigative tool of such trend setting researchers of alien abduction as the late Budd Hopkins and retired historian Dr. David Jacobs. Problem.

Ritzmann's second episode included guest Carol Rainey, an award-winning filmmaker, author, grant writer and ex-wife of Hopkins. Rainey drew both widespread support and emotionally-based criticism from the UFO community in 2011 when she published The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the “Alien Abduction Phenomenon”, an article documenting poor research practices by Hopkins and his misrepresentation of events.

Rainey followed up the essay by posting videos demonstrating Hopkins' exaggerations, including one clip in which the writer himself described his misleading portrayal of circumstances as stacking the deck. Additional clips on Rainey's YouTube channel include documentation of extreme inconsistencies in the Linda Cortile case and as additionally covered by veteran writer/researcher George Hansen and colleagues. Such circumstances are indeed evidence of problems.

The third and final episode of the Paranormal Waypoint series will cover results of the problems and will be broadcast Tuesday, February 4 at 9 p.m. EST. The show will focus upon circumstances surrounding the case of Emma Woods and the flawed research methodology of David Jacobs. The historian's reliance on regressive hypnosis as a primary investigative technique has been coupled with shameless promotion of completely unsubstantiated claims of human-alien breeding programs. Opportunities for researchers such as Jacobs to exploit such circumstances grew out of a ufology culture and subsequent following largely developed by Hopkins. Jacobs' now resulting iconic status has blinded many within the demographic to his researcher bias, circumstances affording him virtual immunity from critical review of his methodology, conclusions and care of research subjects.

Ritzmann extended an invitation to me, Jack Brewer, to join him and microbiologist Dr. Tyler Kokjohn on Paranormal Waypoint Tuesday evening. I look forward to supporting Ritzmann and his guests in their efforts to clarify circumstances and chains of events occurring within the alien abduction genre. Join us in the KGRA chat room and express your opinions about the material covered.

It should be noted that the Paranormal Waypoint three-part series consisted of individuals, including Ritzmann and Rainey, who do not dismiss reports of high strangeness out of hand. They are interpreted by this writer to be among a growing number of community members who recognize it is a poor choice to settle for premature conclusions in lieu of verifiable explanations, whatever those explanations may ultimately prove to be.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Feb 3rd, 2014, 9:59pm

How can ufologists best help or support UFO abductees?

Ufology Research

January 26, 2014

Recently, a notice was posted online which noted that a support group for UFO abductees was going to be created in a nearby city.

I was curious, because 20 years ago, I had been approached to create such a group. This was during the period when UFO abductees were just becoming more common and there was a great deal of attention focused on them. (It's waned a bit since the, although the abduction phenomenon still is significant in ufology, but has morphed a bit to become more of a contactee movement.)

Anyway, I responded to the post online, offering encouragement and asking about the clinical professional who would be leading or facilitating the group.

"Excellent! Which local clinical therapist will be facilitating? The abductee support group I helped with in Winnipeg back in the 1990s had a psychologist and a counselor for referrals too. I think both might be necessary, especially if some abductees are experiencing significant anxiety. We helped a number of people through their fears and concerns."

The reason I know the importance of working with a clinical professional was because several of the abductees who were members of the group turned out to have issues best dealt with by professionals, not ufologists. One woman had been raped and her memory of her "abduction experience" was a screen for the horrific trauma she had endured. Two other abductees attempted suicide because they were living in fear and paranoia since the aliens were watching them day and night. Others had showed signs of other issues that needed the assistance of professionals.

Such trauma is clearly beyond the realm of ufology, and it is clearly in the best interests of "experiencers" to help them as best as possible.

I was surprised that my query about this new group working with a clinical professional was met with hostility. The poster responded:

"Do clinical therapists, psychologists, psychiatrists, and counselors facilitate alcoholic anonymous, cocaine anonymous, or al anon meetings? They don’t...

"[It would be bad] If everyone has to talk in front of a psychiatrist who is not an experiencer that is treating it as mental illness. He knows NOTHING about UFOs. People need a safe environment ..., not a court room or mental examination room."

I was aghast. This was hardly the reaction I had expected. It showed a lack of understanding of both how clinical professionals view people in need and also how support groups for people with various issues are actually developed. It's also not a matter of speaking in front of a psychiatrist who would be judging you on your sanity. If a person is traumatized by his or her abduction experience, it is all the more important to have someone present who can help.

Full article:

http://uforum.blogspot.com/2014/01/how-can-ufologists-best-help-or-support.html?utm_source=ufologyprss.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=ufologyprss.com
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by hyundisonata on Feb 4th, 2014, 02:51am

I just love how everyone assumes abductees are all dumbcluckies like me who apparently do not have a clue; truth is abductees clearly come from all walks of life from police, military, science and yes even doctors’ nurses and the dreaded psychiatrist. Only problem is that such information is hidden on sites such as this due to every one being anonymous unless like Greer cashing in on the subject, there are groups for near every complaint and most get support from government i.e. NHS UK and as the abductee trauma has been around a lot longer than the internet then why has there never been any real help available, why is it ignored by the doctrine you so strongly support apart from them claiming it is mental health issues. Could it be because it is not a mental health issue that if investigated by these trained personnel expose it as a reality, yes the trauma that same as most aftermath problems that victims of crime suffer needs addressing in the manner you portray but the cause unlike murder rape etc is left a blank space when it comes to ET this indicates they are treating the cause as mental illness and not as a physical crime against the person, so no matter how much importance the need for such is shouted , until the cause is accepted as a reality and a crime it is a pointless exercise.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Feb 4th, 2014, 10:13am

I don't think 'everyone' assumes that all 'abductees' are 'dumbcluckies', but certainly some involved have psychological issues that need to be addressed by clinical professionals. Whether or not these issues are a result of 'abductions' or the psychological issues lead to the abduction beliefs should be determined on an individual basis....but if the ufo abductee community automatically reject any and all help from professional sources there will continue to be conflict and lack of resolution for those who truly need help.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Feb 4th, 2014, 6:55pm

on Feb 4th, 2014, 10:13am, drwu23 wrote:
I don't think 'everyone' assumes that all 'abductees' are 'dumbcluckies', but certainly some involved have psychological issues that need to be addressed by clinical professionals. Whether or not these issues are a result of 'abductions' or the psychological issues lead to the abduction beliefs should be determined on an individual basis....but if the ufo abductee community automatically reject any and all help from professional sources there will continue to be conflict and lack of resolution for those who truly need help.


Right. One way or another, an appropriate response to trauma is to seek competent and qualified treatment for it. Competent and qualified.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Feb 4th, 2014, 7:00pm

on Feb 4th, 2014, 6:43pm, freyasday wrote:
I see from the opening post of this topic that David M Jacobs is being criticized as not being a good scientist. Does this also mean that he is not an appropriate researcher for questioning individuals to confide in if their particular anomalous tales bear only a minimal similarity to his descriptions of abductees/abduction at www.ufoabduction.com ?


Perhaps you might choose to read such resources as my three-part series, The Bizarre World of Doctor David Jacobs: An Interview and Review, or listen in to tonight's Paranormal Waypoint extended special and decide for yourself. Let me know what ya think.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Feb 4th, 2014, 11:01pm

on Feb 4th, 2014, 6:43pm, freyasday wrote:
I see from the opening post of this topic that David M Jacobs is being criticized as not being a good scientist. Does this also mean that he is not an appropriate researcher for questioning individuals to confide in if their particular anomalous tales bear only a minimal similarity to his descriptions of abductees/abduction at www.ufoabduction.com ?


Hypnotic regression to 'recover' alleged 'abduction' memories has been a suspect tool from day one and many ufologists have written and talked about this including Dr Vallee one of the most informed and experienced ufo researchers still with us.
Dr Jacobs is not a scientist, nor a forensic expert, nor an expert in hypnosis. He is an historian from Temple University. His associate Budd Hopkins , now deceased, was an abstract artist from New York and also not an expert in hypnosis nor any type of forensic investigation or scientific background.
From what I have read over the last few years the problem lies in the fact they they had an agenda being believers in the abduction phenomenon and were simply not qualified regarding scientific methodology and used suspect techniques to gather their data. In other words it was biased data and anecdotal.
That does not mean they are/were unintelligent people but their methods were flawed. This is what Carol Rainey and others have said for some time now. Again this does not mean there might not be something to the 'abduction phenomenon' but that their data ,results, and conclusions are suspect.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Feb 5th, 2014, 12:11pm

Hi, freyasday -

Thanks for checking out the posts. Thanks, too, for letting me know what you thought about them.

I would agree with you that Jacobs and his public personality should not be accepted without questioning motives. I would most definitely say similar for his unsubstantiated claims, in that they should not be accepted at all, much less without questioning them greatly.

I would also agree with drwu23 in that we should not lose sight of the fact Jacobs is not a scientist at all; he is a now retired history professor claiming - falsely, I might add - to respect and follow scientific procedures. Most relevant point.

As for where an abductee should seek competent, qualified support, I would say they should first identify specifically what type of support they are seeking. Does the individual want professional emotional support? ...or are they seeking a thorough investigation of their reported circumstances? I encourage identifying the answers to such questions because they are entirely different types of services.

If emotional support and healing traumatic, disturbing memories is sought, I would invite consideration of seeing a mental health professional. I would also encourage such an individual to ask questions of the potential counselor before committing to schedule an appointment; ask how they feel about the UFO subject, ask if they are open to hearing distress related to the topic and similar such questions. A potential therapy client is entitled to do so, not entirely unlike how one might ask questions before hiring any kind of service provider to undertake work for them. A potential client is also entirely entitled to ask about sliding scale payments if concerned about costs, as such options are often available.

If an investigation of circumstances is desired, many more challenges arise than if seeking emotional healing and support. That is because there is often little to investigate in addition to witness testimony, and the events in question are often in the distant past. Even when this is not the case, substantial financial resources might be required, as well as specific expertise, to examine alleged implants, take xrays, conduct DNA analysis and similar possible avenues of research. That being the case, if I was to undertake such an investigation, I would network among UFO circles and privately enroll the help of specific, credentialed and trusted professionals.

I hope that is helpful. Sincere best wishes.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on Feb 6th, 2014, 12:46am

on Feb 4th, 2014, 02:51am, hyundisonata wrote:
I just love how everyone assumes abductees are all dumbcluckies like me who apparently do not have a clue; truth is abductees clearly come from all walks of life from police, military, science and yes even doctors’ nurses and the dreaded psychiatrist. Only problem is that such information is hidden on sites such as this due to every one being anonymous unless like Greer cashing in on the subject, there are groups for near every complaint and most get support from government i.e. NHS UK and as the abductee trauma has been around a lot longer than the internet then why has there never been any real help available, why is it ignored by the doctrine you so strongly support apart from them claiming it is mental health issues. Could it be because it is not a mental health issue that if investigated by these trained personnel expose it as a reality, yes the trauma that same as most aftermath problems that victims of crime suffer needs addressing in the manner you portray but the cause unlike murder rape etc is left a blank space when it comes to ET this indicates they are treating the cause as mental illness and not as a physical crime against the person, so no matter how much importance the need for such is shouted , until the cause is accepted as a reality and a crime it is a pointless exercise.


BINGO!

I love how "everyone" continually tries to discredit Hopkins and Jacobs, just because they were not clinically trained scientists, and wanting everyone to believe that every patient they worked with made completely false statements! Hundreds and hundreds of patients: none of them abducted, they were simply victims of the Artist and the Historian!

I also love how people fail to bring up the UFO "darling" Researcher John Mack was also NOT clinically trained, yet somehow managed to come up with very similar results, in his hypnosis sessions!

I also love how people fail to bring up the many clinically trained researchers, who have come up with very similar results in their hypnosis sessions!

I also love how people like to only bring up things that support their position while leaving out the things that detract from it!

I also love how these detractors ignore or criticize abductees as being liars, mentally ill, our made to believe they were abducted by some unclinically trained crack pot.

spread the love....
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by hyundisonata on Feb 6th, 2014, 01:34am

Reading Freyasdays post was interesting, over the years I have talked with quite a few people claiming abduction and most have been in the sleeping hours. When listening to their stories I have found that as in Freys story they never left their bed even though they believe they had. as in Frey’s story ET in a visitation manipulates the mind so if ET wants you to believe your sitting on a snow covered mountain then you will believe it really happened but in reality your still tucked up in bed only you have this alien standing next to you. I see two scenarios that are happening, visitation in your home and abduction when in active hours and as we see in Frey’s story she or he as no real information given is experiencing both scenarios, I myself have only experienced abduction but others I have spoken with understand they where still in bed and if it was not for their partner confirming the alien presence they would have doubted the experience and looked upon it as a dream or abduction as they appeared to leave their home. How ET manages to come and go I can only speculate due to the damage caused when such a visitation had gone wrong for ET and that footprint still exists intact to this day, as for the manipulation of the mind I have experienced such and it is scary when you dissect it after the incident and realize how easily they can take over your mind even at a distance and in my case I would estimate at least fifty yards from them when it started which is some feat not to be taken lightly.
http://ufocasebook.conforums.com/index.cgi?board=memberblogs&action=display&num=1391655244

Couldn’t agree more Mythos and I would like this form of abduction entered into the law books along with all the other criminal laws that exist then maybe it will be taken seriously and investigated properly.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Feb 6th, 2014, 04:13am

Jjflash, kudos on a long and informative thread here! I agree on the need for any therapist dealing with alien abductees to have proper credentials, be it in Psychology or Psychiatry. (Because of the likelyhood part of this experience entails serious psychological trauma.)

My addition is that such professional health care provider / doctor also must have some background, no 'credential' but of a demonstrated interest/affinity with the abduction experience* and with the enigma of extraterrestrial visitors. To prevent giving the impression he/she is only looking for a possible diagnosis of psychopathology.

Simply, imo a good abduction therapist must be prepared to deal with both an emerging mental disorder/psychosis, and with a classical alien abduction experience. Actually also with a combination of both, because the real deal is bound to mess up abductees' life some.

[*) Not because there's a known Alien Abduction Disorder, or UFOlogy is a scientific field, but on the grounds patients/clients present themselves with an unusual/rare experience. There are non-abduction precedents for such special focus, for instance patients reporting pre- and perinatal (relating to being in the womb and getting born) memories, conscious and extremely painful memories of surgical procedures where anesthesia failed, and accounts of a Near Death Experience.]


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Feb 6th, 2014, 11:07am

PURR,

THIS WAS A TOPIC I HAD PLANNED TO BROACH AND IT APPEARS YOU HAVE BROKEN THE ICE FOR MY INPUT.
OUT OF 297 PYCHOLOGICAL DIAGNOSES...CAN ONE POINT TO A CLEAR CLINICAL TEST FOR EACH DIAGNOSIS TO JUSTIFY SAME...WHICH IN FACT IS UNIVERSALLY ACCEPTED BY PEER REVIEW...THAT BEING A MINOR POINT IN THE MENAGERIE OF SUCH ENDEAVORS AND LET'S FURTHER CONSIDER THE ACADEMIC APPROACH TO ONE WHOM MAY HAVE HAD AN UFOLOGICAL ENCOUNTER WHICH HAS LEFT LINGERING FEARS~APPREHENSION~CONFUSION AND A QUEST FOR ANSWERS.

ONE MUST FIRST CONSIDER TRADITIONAL ACADEMIA HAS FROWNED UPON SUCH CONSIDERATION OF THE EXISTENCE OF THIS UFOLOGICAL PHENOMENA WITH THE EXCEPTION OF DR.JOHN MACK {WITH A PEDIGREED EDUCTATION}. MOREOVER, LOOK AT HOW HIS COLLEAGUES TREATED HIM~PEERED PRESSURED HIM BEYOND PROFESSIONAL BOUNDARIES... BUT PRIOR TO HIS AFFINITY TO UFOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF ABDUCTEES~HE WAS THE "GOLDEN BOY"...THE HERD MENTALLITY!!!...THEY OSTRACIZED HIM MUCH LIKE THEY DO WITH THOSE EXPERIENCING SUCH PHENOMENA!

THEREFORE...TRADITIONAL ACADEMIA WITH RARE EXCEPTIONS WOULD FIRST AND FOREMOST NOT BE RECEPTIVE TO SUCH EXPERIENCES (ALTHOUGH WOULD SCHEDULE AND BILL $$$) AND BY-IN-LARGE WOULD STATE SUCH IS REALLY A MANIFESTION IN ONES MIND{AND IN SOME INSTANCES SUCH IS THE CASE}...BUT THOSE WHOM HAVE ACTUALLY SEEN SOMETHING...ALONG THE LINES OF J.ALLEN HYNEK'S 5% OF UNEXPLAINABLE UNKNOWNS...WHAT CAN SUCH HEALTH PROFESSIONAL OFFER OTHER THAN MEDS~BEHAVIORAL MODIFICATION~AND PRONOUNCED ADJUSTMENTS OF COPING SKILLS...THUS...IF ONE WERE TO RELY ON SUCH OPINIONS~THERE REMIANS MUCH TO BE DESIRED FOR THOSE IN THE FOG OF UFOLOGICAL ENCOUNTERS AT WHAT EVER LEVEL...MED EM UP~TELL EM YA REALLY DIDN'T SEE WHAT YOU THOUGHT YOU SAW~AND LET'S TRY THESE COPING EXERCISES huh

THE ABOVE MENTIONED IS WHY FORUMS LIKE THESE SEEM TO CONTINUE AND IN SOME INSTANCES FLOURISH AS THOSE WHOM ARE IN THE QUAGMIRE OF UNDERSTANDING WHAT MAY HAVE HAPPENED~FIND MORE SYMPATHETIC VOICES~ FOR A PHENOMENA THAT HAS EXISTED FOR QUITE SOME TIME...HIDDEN IN THE PAPAL VAULTS...SEQUESTERED IN THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY...CATACOMBED IN NASA...THERE ARE THOSE WHOM KNOW!

WHY HAS SUCH NOT MET THE SUNSHINE OF GLOBAL ACCEPTANCE~FEAR~PURE AND SIMPLE...OF THE POTENTIAL LOSS OF THOSE VESTED TABOOS WHICH HAS AMASSED MASSIVE FORTUNES...ALL ON THE BACK OF PERPETUATIONING THIS ILLUSION SUCH IS A FIGMENT OF ONES IMAGINATION~TELL THAT TO BETTY AND BARNEY HILL~TELL THAT TO JAMES PENNESTON AND THOSE AT RENDELSHAM FOREST...AND WHO KNOWS HOW MANY OTHERS JUST LIKE THEM BUT NEVER HAD THE MEDIA HYPE TO CATAPULT THEIR STORY TO THE COURT OF DIGITAL OPINION...OR MEDIA OSTRICIZATION!

SOOOO...IS GOING TO A SHRINK POST FACTO FROM AND ENCOUNTER LIKE BEING AT A GROCERY STORE POST DISASTER AFTER HUNDREDS MADE A MAD DASH TO GET BREAD AND YOU GET THERE...AND ONLY ONE LOAF IS LEFT...AND ONE IS FORCED TO TAKE SAME~IMHO~ THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE!...AND HEREIN LIES THE TRAGEDY OF IT ALL wink

User Image
DR. JOHN MACK

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by hyundisonata on Feb 7th, 2014, 12:56pm

Excellent post ZETAR you have a way with words especially when it comes to reality, Freyasday if you believe your experience to be true then you do not need others approval . There are no experts we are all fumbling in the dark so be positive as you know what is happening in your life not some faceless person hiding behind a keyboard especially those intent on malice and ridicule as you discovered on your previous site. What I do suggest to others claiming abduction and visitation is that they confide in close family members that way you gather support from trusted people and as I have found you will probably find they are enduring a similar experience only like most they will feel isolated and keep quiet hoping it will go away.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Feb 7th, 2014, 8:15pm

Hello purr, ZETAR and all,

Thanks for your input. The topic could be discussed at length from many perspectives. That being the case, I would like to please choose a single topic for further consideration in this post, mental health services. Thanks for following along.

The scientific community and the medical profession is not perfection. There are scandals, corruption and incompetence. Purr's perspectives and ZETAR's points are worthy of consideration, and one should indeed avoid incompetent and biased services whatever their ailment and need for treatment. I would respectfully point out, however, that drwu23's perspectives are equally worthy of consideration.

ZETAR's presented perspective on the treatment of self-described abductees within the mental health industry, no matter how accurate it may or may not be to some specific circumstances, is a partial and incomplete representation of the industry as a whole. It is my confident understanding that a competent psychoanalyst does not express judgment of the perceptions of the client. Therapy is not about the story, it's about healing the trauma surrounding the story, assisting the client in functioning more healthily in their daily lives.

Key point here, please: There is a clear and specific difference between treating trauma and conducting an investigation. A mental health counselor, when hired to treat trauma and provide emotional support, is not seeking to either validate or invalidate the claims of the client. They are not conducting an investigation.

I therefore present for consideration that the middle ground is the rational choice; moderation. While one would not want a therapist totally opposed to entertaining the UFO subject, neither would they want one predisposed to validating alleged alien abduction. The latter of the two is not psychoanalysis.

To summarize... All mental health therapists are not bad. Neither are they all good. One could find a competent one that provides quality services and fits for them. It happens all the time.

If one were to get their leg broken and perceived it took place during an abduction, there would be little doubt they should seek proper medical treatment. A competent argument could be made that similar can be said for the often described mental distress sustained during reported abductions. It just involves a different kind of doctor.

I'd like to please remind everyone that I am not exploring the validity of reports of high strangeness. I have made an effort to consider specific aspects of research of alleged alien abduction. Please make a reasonable effort to differentiate, as the two are not synonymous.

In closing, I'd like to thank purr and ZETAR, as well as others, for expressing themselves in reasonable manners. Debate, when conducted intelligently, is entertaining and interesting. Thanks for providing examples.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Feb 7th, 2014, 8:24pm

Hi, freyasday -

As you are apparently finding, you will come across a wide variety of individuals promoting an even wider variety of points of view. Many of them will claim their views to be fact, even though their perspectives will often be in conflict and mutually exclusive to one another. Personally, I have come to exercise what I think to be reasonable skepticism in awaiting verification of claims.

Good luck to you in finding what you are seeking. Be well.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on Feb 7th, 2014, 8:47pm

on Feb 7th, 2014, 8:15pm, jjflash wrote:
I'd like to please remind everyone that I am not exploring the validity of reports of high strangeness. I have made an effort to consider specific aspects of research of alleged alien abduction. Please make a reasonable effort to differentiate, as the two are not synonymous.


Reminds me of the old adage that goes something like:

If you can't Attack the Message:

Attack the Messenger...


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Feb 8th, 2014, 06:23am

JJflash,

...Key point here, please: There is a clear and specific difference between treating trauma and conducting an investigation. A mental health counselor, when hired to treat trauma and provide emotional support, is not seeking to either validate or invalidate the claims of the client. They are not conducting an investigation...

I would disagree.

The therapist is defiantly conducting an investigation. How else is he/she to get to the source of the patients anxiety ?

If the patient is, in whatever form, delusional, then surely it is the therapists job to guide the patient to see that he/she is mistaken and to enable them to admit this mistake and move on.

HAL
INT21

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Feb 8th, 2014, 11:31am

on Feb 8th, 2014, 06:23am, INT21 wrote:
JJflash,

...Key point here, please: There is a clear and specific difference between treating trauma and conducting an investigation. A mental health counselor, when hired to treat trauma and provide emotional support, is not seeking to either validate or invalidate the claims of the client. They are not conducting an investigation...

I would disagree.

The therapist is defiantly conducting an investigation. How else is he/she to get to the source of the patients anxiety ?

If the patient is, in whatever form, delusional, then surely it is the therapists job to guide the patient to see that he/she is mistaken and to enable them to admit this mistake and move on.

HAL
INT21


In my admittedly professionally unqualified opinion, HAL, I would say one could find circumstances in which your opinion might apply. However, I remain convinced of my original statements in the context they were intended. I am extremely confident that a competent, qualified mental health counselor is not the least bit professionally interested in either validating or invalidating claims of alleged alien abduction during the course of treating trauma. They are not conducting a UFO investigation.

I would highly recommend interested parties research the subject matter further for themselves. A good overview is provided by Helpguide.org, Emotional and Psychological Trauma: Symptoms, Treatment and Recovery.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Feb 8th, 2014, 10:18pm

The Woods/Jacobs Tapes and the 'Oral History' Falsehood

The UFO Trail

February 8, 2014

Tuesday, February 4, this writer was pleased to be among guests on Jeff Ritzmann's Paranormal Waypoint. The show was a special three-hour finale to Ritzmann's multi-episode exploration of research of alleged alien abduction. Focus was upon the case of Emma Woods and its mishandling by the now retired Temple University historian Dr. David Jacobs. Fellow guests were microbiologist Dr. Tyler Kokjohn and author Jeremy Vaeni.

Ritzmann put a great deal of preparation into the episode, taking listeners on an informative and revealing audio tour of the case via taped interactions between Woods and Jacobs. Both were fully aware the recordings were being made at the time of their creation.

The Woods/Jacobs tapes provide irrefutable documentation of unsettling and often disturbing circumstances. Recordings presented and considered - which have long been public thanks to Woods - included interactions from the initial hypnotic regression sessions Jacobs began in 2004 and conducted by telephone. Ritzmann also took listeners through taped exchanges in which Woods confronted Jacobs about discrepancies in his ongoing and increasingly outrageous suggestions.Tapes were also played and discussed in which Woods attempted to clarify circumstances with Jacobs, who threatened her with consequences if she did not either support his conclusions or remain silent.

Leading

At the time of this post, the website of the International Center for Abduction Research, which is maintained by Jacobs, has a bio on Jacobs. Among other questionable items, the bio asserts that "Jacobs is a strong advocate of strict scientific and ethical research methodology", a claim that can irrefutably be shown to be false to the extent of insulting one's intelligence.

The following clip was featured on Paranormal Waypoint and contains details of a telephone hypnosis session between Jacobs and Woods. While Woods largely repeated that she was unsure of the circumstances and often replied, "I don't know," to Jacobs' questions, a scenario was nonetheless constructed in which she was aboard an alien craft. One unclear circumstance at a time, the Jacobs-led conversation progressed to Woods envisioning herself surrounded by beings. Around the eight-minute mark, the following statements were made:

Jacobs: Well, I'm just wondering if maybe they put him on top of you, basically.

Woods: Maybe. Yeah, I think so.

Jacobs: And I know that once again I'm leading you here so you have to be careful, and I understand I'm leading you, and you should understand that too. Okay, now I'm going to ask you a series of questions here and when you answer these questions, when you understand what's happening here, you will - it's not that there's going to be a revelation, but you're going to understand what's going on here and it's not what ya think. How's that for something odd?"

Jacobs then proceeded to create, nearly completely independently of Woods' statements, a scenario in which she was allegedly forced to have sex with what Jacobs described as another abductee.

"He's just some guy," Jacobs told the woman, "he's some, he's some guy that they got. You know, he's an abductee. It's happened to him all his life, and, uhm, he's just as much a victim in the situation as you are. They put him on you, he does his business. What happens - when you get a sense that he is about to ejaculate, what happens to him? What do they do with him?"

Woods proceeded to tell Jacobs that she did not think the man ejaculated. "I don't think he does," she explained, adding that she did not have a very strong visual sense of the situation and that the described scenario may be wrong.

Around the twelve-minute mark, Jacobs then apparently felt himself entitled and qualified to interpret and explain the entire circumstance at length, incredibly informing the woman, "This is a sperm collection procedure. They bring the guy to a height of sexual arousal. Before he ejaculates they pull him off and they collect the sperm in a receptacle, and they do this every single time that this event happens."

Jacobs continued to inform Woods how she should look at the situation in her role as the "facilitator of the sperm collection."

The entire clip:

http://www.paranormalwaypoint.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/hypnosis_session_2.mp3


The Chastity Belt Clip

Among the more infamous recordings to be published by Woods included the chastity belt clip. Jacobs explained to the woman that she could consider wearing a belt that "right where the vaginal opening is has a couple of nails sticking across." This he suggested, would slow down hybrids intent on committing repeated sexual assaults.

"They have these sex shops, ya know, and I went into one that specialized in bondage dominance, a place that I frequented quite often," the man claiming to be an advocate of strict scientific and ethical research told Woods during a long distance hypnosis session:

http://www.paranormalwaypoint.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/hypnosis_chastity.mp3


The Underwear Session

And then there was the request for underwear.

"Were you wearing underpants?" Jacobs asked Woods.

Woods: Yeah.

Jacobs: Uhm, did you wash the underpants?

Woods: Hmm, probably, yeah.

Jacobs: Even though it was yesterday?

Woods: I might have. I could look in the laundry. I could have a look.

Jacobs: Have a look. Put it in a plastic bag, if you find the ones...

Later during the same session, Jacobs instructed Woods, "Well, if you can dig up the underpants, without even thinking about it, just put 'em in a plastic bag, put 'em in an envelope, then just send 'em off to me. Totally, greatly appreciate it. Do not even think about it. Just do it automatically. No fuss, no muss and don't think about it afterward either."

Full clip:

http://www.paranormalwaypoint.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/hypnosis_send_underwear.mp3


More of the Woods/Jacobs tapes, including the historian's suggestion the woman had Multiple Personality Disorder during an ill conceived, convoluted and rather unbelievable plan to deceive the hybrids, may be found at Paranormal Waypoint. The thorough and expanding website of Emma Woods should also be viewed for more information.

If there is evidence of high strangeness to be found, it is not within such hypnosis sessions. Not only does the research subject find neither emotional support nor intellectual answers, they are at high risk of sustaining further trauma.

Further Considerations

It might be rather easy for many readers to write Jacobs off as an idiot, and there are certainly some within UFO circles who have done just that. I invite a bit further consideration, however, that regardless of his wanderings into abuse and absurdity, Jacobs indeed knew what kind of evidence he was seeking. I additionally suggest that after the man repeatedly failed in obtaining support for his hypotheses through his collection of samples, he ceased collecting potential evidence rather than revise suppositions.

A spring, 2011 newsletter published by the False Memory Syndrome Foundation reported that Temple defended the actions of Jacobs, primarily on the grounds that his research was limited to the collection of oral histories. Obviously, the collection of underwear is more than oral history. Moreover, The UFO Trail conducted an interview with Jacobs at the 2012 Ozark UFO Conference in which the doctor himself described multiple circumstances of collecting samples from research subjects. A 2012 exchange between Jacobs and The UFO Trail:

"I have taken material for analysis to various DNA testing places. They had negative results. There wasn't enough of it or they couldn't tell what it was – that sort of thing.”

“Are these tests available for the public to review?”

“Not yet.”

“Will they be?”

“I don't know. One I did many years ago at a local lab in Delaware. Another one was done by American Testing Institute in New York City – American Chemical? I can't remember the name of it now. That was also many years ago – about brown stains that people have; that's routinely there. I had another one done for a TV show..."

The collection of oral history defense is apparently both incorrect and a blatant misrepresentation of actuality. It additionally shows us that when this purported science advocate failed to obtain the valuable physical evidence supporting his theories, he shamelessly continued his promotion of a completely unsubstantiated assumption and with virtual disregard for the extents others were hurt in the process. He did so not only while coming up short with the samples he stated he obtained, but he failed to share the data with the public.

People are entitled to believe and conduct their affairs as they choose. They are not entitled, however, to conduct nonscientific activities and call them science without challenge. Neither is David Jacobs entitled to immunity from accountability.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Feb 14th, 2014, 3:53pm

Much appreciation is extended to Dr. Michael Heiser of the blog, UFO Religions, where the scholar recently posted, Alien Abductions Round Up. The post is highly recommended for those seeking a summary (with links) of what has recently been taking place concerning critical review of research of alleged alien abduction.

Also highly recommended is Dr. Tyler Kokjohn's latest article, I'm Sorry, Your Hypothesis Appears to be Dead. An excerpt:

"Alien abduction investigations have long been stymied by the lack of physical evidence that would definitively corroborate victim testimony. However, new genetic analysis technologies which could ferret out hybrids or pinpoint genomic adulterations in short order are now available. Representing nothing less than a potential sea change in the field, abduction researchers have either failed to adopt these methods or have not publicized their results. This static condition has persisted for years.

"Perhaps stunning genetic evidence confirming aliens have adulterated human heredity will be forthcoming soon. Dr. David Jacobs revealed in an interview with Jack Brewer (The UFO Trail http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2012/04/bizarre-world-of-doctor-david-jacobs.html) he has collected and analyzed samples for such purposes. Given the potential extreme significance of such work and the premium placed on priority in awarding credit for new scientific discoveries, he should be anxious to publish detailed descriptions of each effort undertaken to acquire genetic samples, the specific analytic methods he employed and a complete accounting of all results and data. The information should also include full explanations of chain-of-custody procedures and sample integrity safeguards, quality assessments, all process controls and the precise standards employed for sample inclusion/rejection. Complete procedural details are critical because they will enable reviewers to determine which, if any, conclusions are rigorously grounded, must be considered tentative or challenged as invalid. If alien or hybrid DNA cannot be revealed despite repeated attempts, carefully documented and controlled experiments will enable scientists to confidently decide whether his ideas are or are not supported by genetic evidence.

"For Dr. Jacobs, time may be running short. Clearly, since one investigator has claimed she knows some human-alien hybrids personally, he is not the sole investigator with access to potentially critical corroborating genetic samples. In addition, he is not necessarily restricted to collecting the retinue following inconveniently timed alien-perpetrated sexual assaults. He has also described subjects reporting events interpreted as evidence of missing pregnancies that were both initiated and terminated by alien intervention. While human-alien hybrid progeny are said to be spirited away, these missing pregnancy victims are known to him. Because cells from the developing baby may remain alive in the mother for decades (M. Barinaga, “Cells Exchanged During Pregnancy Live On,’ Science, 21 June 2002 [296:2169-2172]), these persons represent readily localizable subjects potentially harboring the direct genetic evidence of the nefarious alien manipulation of human genetics. But again, Dr. Jacobs faces potential competition when it comes to securing the first genetic proof of alien-induced missing pregnancies. The investigator/subject reporting she was used by aliens as a ‘breeder’ (Future Theater, 18 May 2013, http://www.futuretheater.com/) would both be rather easy to find and literally full of it.

[...]

"A consistent failure to produce any corroborating genetic evidence will have implications extending far beyond that of one investigator’s ideas not withstanding rigorous scrutiny. It will constitute nothing less than an utterly damning indictment of the methods and deductions of some abduction investigators. If confirmatory genetic data cannot be produced, these investigators will be forced to explain why their combined decades of work spawned breath-taking tales of a nefarious plot against humankind perpetrated through criminal assaults and sexual molestation all fabricated during a headlong and heedless rush down a scientific blind alley.

"A vital aspect of the scientific process is the application of brutally frank quality check procedures. A long delayed reckoning in the alien abduction field is now at hand as we shall soon see how well ornate hypotheses match authentic genetic data. That will enable us to judge how effectively the special knowledge and methods certain abduction investigators employed have served to expose the truth."

Dr. Kokjohn's full article may be viewed at:

http://jayvay.wordpress.com/2014/02/11/im-sorry-your-hypothesis-appears-to-be-dead/
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Feb 19th, 2014, 2:06pm

Try a New Hypothesis, Sherlock

JayVay

By Tyler Kokjohn, PhD

February 18, 2014

[...]

On September 2, 2009, Major George Filer offered for sale a medical device, ‘flu lights,’ he claimed prevented or cured influenza infections in humans as well as dogs and cats (Filer’s Files #36-2009). The source of this amazing new medical technology – testimony from alien abductees explaining they had been cured of ailments after exposure to blue or green lights employed by aliens. This purported influenza cure/preventative measure, unknown to medical science, would constitute an astonishing example of an alien technology transfer to humans. And priced at only $50 this miracle cure was also a true bargain. An influenza pandemic was emerging in 2009, so the Major must have felt it necessary to get his flu lights on the market with all due haste. Now, nearly 5 years after the crisis, neither he nor anyone else has yet come forward with a report on what would be nothing less than a lifesaving medical breakthrough and paradigm shattering discovery. The Holy Grail for ufology and medicine literally in hand and no one tests it, publishes any further information about the technology or details its amazing history? Welcome to ufology.

Dr. David Jacobs and other abduction researchers have presented numerous, detailed accounts of missing pregnancies and creation of human-alien genetic hybrids. It is now clear that during gestation mother and fetus exchange cells which may persist for years or decades after birth or termination of the pregnancy (M. Barinaga, “Cells Exchanged During Pregnancy Live On,’Science, 21 June 2002 [296:2169-2172]). Powerful new genetic analysis methods now enable investigators to perform prenatal examinations of the fetal genome after a simple blood draw from the mother (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/07/120704182127.htm) In the event of an alleged missing pregnancy, it may still be possible to recognize such hybrid cells for decades. Whether or not the hybrid baby is removed by aliens and taken to an inaccessible location, these mothers are known to the investigators and represent a potential source of critical hypothesis corroborating genetic data.

Abduction investigators have revealed varying degrees of direct personal involvement in the phenomenon with one claiming she knows the identities of hybrids and another asserting on an episode of Future Theater (18 May 2013) that she was employed by aliens as a “breeder.” Robert Sheaffer reported from the 2014 UFO Congress that one featured speaker revealed she has seven alien grandchildren (http://badufos.blogspot.com/2014_02_01_archive.html). These situations have afforded these investigators the unique opportunity to acquire and test samples at their leisure. A human-alien genetic hybrid might be detected with the simplest of genetic tests requiring only that the subject spit into a tube and the investigator mail it off to a commercial facility to await the report. Possibly the easiest opportunity in all history to collect what could be the most scientifically significant samples of the century and not one of them seems to have bothered.

It is important to recognize that these are not fleeting situations transpiring by dark of night at unpredictable times. These sources of critical evidence are readily and conveniently available to the investigators. However, despite the ease of collection, the most direct pathways to uncover substantive proof of nefarious alien intervention on our planet and provide concrete evidence strongly supporting the ETH have been ignored and left to lie fallow.

The best way to investigate any hypothesis is to actually investigate it. In contrast, ETH proponents devise arguments to disguise and rationalize failure. Reduced to defending a hypothesis because of the consistent inability to marshal convincing supporting evidence, it is astonishing they have so long, so diligently and uniformly refused to explore the obvious opportunities available to reach what should be their supreme goal. Worse, the experts or opinion leaders never demand investigators get this job done or even note these glaring discrepancies.

It is time to break the futile cycle of ufology. Try a new hypothesis, Sherlock. You certainly haven’t investigated the one you like.

Full article:

http://jayvay.wordpress.com/2014/02/18/try-a-new-hypothesis-sherlock/
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Feb 19th, 2014, 2:52pm

JJ,

"DITTO"

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Feb 20th, 2014, 7:20pm

on Feb 20th, 2014, 09:32am, freyasday wrote:
jjflash, before offering any feedback to this article you linked I should probably ask if you are "JayVay", and if so are you in complete agreement with the guest blogger "Tyler Kokjohn, PhD"?


JayVay is a blog maintained by Jeremy Vaeni, an author, relatively well known podcast personality within the UFO community and self-described experiencer of high strangeness. Vaeni is largely credited with initially breaking the Emma Woods story, along with former Paratopia co-host Jeff Ritzmann, who now hosts Paranormal Waypoint.

I am Jack Brewer. I write The UFO Trail and Orlando Paranormal Examiner.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Feb 20th, 2014, 9:51pm

Dr. Kokjohn's latest article, Try a New Hypothesis, Sherlock, looks pretty clear to me. He presented some specific points for consideration, cited and referenced related circumstances, and summed up the relevance. Specifically:

- In 2009 Major George Filer offered for sale "flu lights" of which he claimed the extraordinary healing capacities and technology were obtained from alleged alien abductees via aliens. However, Filer has to date offered no specific reports or related documentation of the effects of those lights and what would be absolutely extraordinary within the medical industry.

- Dr. David Jacobs and other supposed researchers have presented numerous, detailed accounts of alleged missing fetuses/induced pregnancies and hybrid circumstances. Many of these individuals such as Jacobs purport to be conducting scientific research.

- One such alleged abductee claimed on Future Theater that she was used by aliens as a "breeder".

- Another alleged abductee recently claimed at the International UFO Congress that she has grandmothered several aliens.

- Simple and cost-effective tests are available in which such claimed circumstances might be validated.

- Not only are such tests not employed - which could potentially provide the proof the UFO community has long claimed it desired - but the community and its leaders largely fail to discuss the fact that such researchers do not so much as bother to actually test their hypotheses and claims.

The article looks pretty clear and direct to me about those specific circumstances.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Feb 20th, 2014, 10:36pm

Quote:
- Not only are such tests not employed - which could potentially provide the proof the UFO community has long claimed it desired - but the community and its leaders largely fail to discuss the fact that such researchers do not so much as bother to actually test their hypotheses and claims.


Gee....what a surprise.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Feb 21st, 2014, 10:21pm

Carol Rainey has revised a previously released video. The new vid, 1996 Symbols Revealed as Evidence of Alien Abduction rev 022014, and its description:



"A newly revised excerpt from director Carol Rainey's documentary 'Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the Alien Abduction Phenomenon.' On 2/21/14. This segment shows Budd Hopkins revealing strikingly similar symbols that numerous abductees have reported seeing aboard alien spacecraft. Rainey looks at whether faulty research methods may have invalidated the use of these abductee drawings as evidence for the phenomenon. Music by Dano at http://danosongs.com. "

Find out who is trying to keep you from learning about such circumstances, as well as how they are going about it, in Jeremy Vaeni's latest blog post, Sean Meers, Internet Censorship, and YOU.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Feb 25th, 2014, 6:27pm

Carol Rainey: Open Letter to the UFO Community

The UFO Trail

February 24, 2014

The following open letter was provided Sunday to The UFO Trail by Carol Rainey. Learn more about Ms. Rainey and her work by visiting her website, carolrainey.com, viewing her YouTube channel and watching her videos posted in the sidebar to the right [see website for links and videos].

Open Letter to the UFO Community

Over the past several years, I've posted to my YouTube channel (Carol Rainey) a dozen film excerpts on the subject of UFO abduction research. They feature the work of my then husband, Budd Hopkins, and his book, "Witnessed," about the Linda Cortile abduction case. People interested in this field might find something of worth in the comments posted recently by one of my critics, followed by my response to him.

[**Note: If I didn't think the UFO phenomenon was a real and significant human mystery, I assure you that I would never have "wasted" the past twenty years and my personal resources on caring about this research.]

I was particularly struck by the commentator's religious attitude toward the researcher and the material. It led me to wonder, not for the first time, how many researchers and observers in this field secretly harbor an attitude and a mindset that utterly mitigate against an ability to uncover what lies behind the UFO phenomenon.

Here is the essence of his remarks:

"...Do you consider yourself more of an expert on the subject of alien abduction than Bud Hopkins was? You better be because you are going after a saint, and a lot of people will feel they have good reason to dismiss what you say out of hand."

Full quote below and my second response to the person:

tommytomted44 to Carol Rainey 20 hours ago

Thank you for your civil reply. It just strikes me as strange. You were married to Bud Hopkins.
You wrote books together, and now you are trying to take his work apart.

I understand this is new material, but this is not the first video you have made with this theme. I believe I have seen them all. To me there is just something very wrong with attacking the work of a dead man who is not here to speak for himself.

Without Bud Hopkins, David Jacobs and John Mack would never have been exposed to the subject of alien abduction. Bud carried the water on the subject for years with no help at all.

It looks to me as if you have some problems with his methods. It also looks to me like you are quite willing to toss the baby out with the bathwater. That really bothers me. It is hard enough to get people to take this subject seriously.

So you appear willing to throw out all Buds work. Do you actually disagree with his take on every case he did? Is there nothing of value to be saved here? Nowhere we can say that Bud was doing good work?

Bud Hopkins and Karla Turner are the closest people we have to saints in the area of alien abduction. So you don't agree with some of his methods. Are you really willing to tear it all down over that?

I'm not an expert on the history of the two of you together but didn't he do some of this work before you met and married him? And didn't you write a book or two together? I believe I've read those books and I don't remember you saying anything like this then.

Why now? Were you just blind to these things when you were with Bud? When you made that video did he know what you were intending to do with it? If not then you were just setting him up a little bit there don't you think?

And lastly, do you consider yourself more of an expert on the subject of alien abduction than Bud Hopkins was? You better be because you are going after a saint, and a lot of people will feel they have good reason to dismiss what you say out of hand.

I really don't like what you are doing. I could hear you in the video. It sure sounded to me like his partner in his work was setting him up, and he didn't even know it. Now that is just disgusting.

With Bud dead, and no one to speak for him, this has the look and feel of a hatchet job.


cr response 2/23/14

I said all of these things, with documentation, _before_ Budd died, so that charge has little power. He and his devout supporters had their say, just as you're still having yours.

You have some valid points, ones that I'll address in a longer form work - both in a documentary and in a book. Let me briefly say that your perspective and terminology suggest that you're in a religious frame of mind - one that won't help you be objective about good research methodology that will actually produce "knowledge."

If you regard ANYONE in this field as "a saint," I think you've lost that ability. Budd (note the 2 D's) made significant contributions in offering support to people who felt traumatized and in making the media and popular culture aware of anomalous experiences related to UFOs. I am not suggesting otherwise. I was a participant in some cases with him that I think are quite credible and I will be showing those, too. But I AM strongly opposed to Budd's manipulation of facts and his telling the world that certain individuals's UFO reports were factual and credible when they were neither.

Right now, I'm more interested in trying to ensure that there be no more Emma Woods out there - vulnerable people preyed upon by a "researcher" who has zero qualifications in psychology, hypnosis, medicine, cultural contagion, etc., and zero ability to handle the issues that arise. And now I'm speaking about someone who's quite alive.

Yes, I was Budd's partner and you can hear off-camera questions which indicate that I was always asking the hard questions. I supported what he was doing for many years, until the facts in front of me said that this was a deceptive and dangerous business. That's when my opinion changed and that's when I stopped being part of that community. The mark of a good investigator, scientists will tell you, is that he/she has the ability to change perceptions once the facts have changed or been more clearly perceived.

More at site:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2014/02/carol-rainey-open-letter-to-ufo.html
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Feb 28th, 2014, 5:14pm

I posted a link to Carol Rainey: Open Letter to the UFO Community at UFO Collective. A number of responses and observations were made. Among them was the following posted by Sue Johnson at my blog, The UFO Trail, and which I found particularly cogent and relevant:

"I've been following the Woods and Rainey issues with a great deal of interest since I became a voyeur of ufology a couple of years ago. The first thing I noticed about these two topics was that there were people actively trying to silence any discussion of or by Woods or Rainey. This, in a field where people otherwise seemed to be willing to discuss practically anything ad nauseum!

"The manner in which Woods and Rainey were silenced and discredited was also of interest. Rainy was billed at A Bad Wife (horrors!), and I actually read a posting where someone called Woods a hysteric. It’s not easy to call a woman a hysteric and not get laughed out of the room nowadays; has ufology finally invented the time machine?

"However, I would argue that the Woods and Rainey issues are central to ufology today and merit attention. First, they are women in a field in which almost all those with a public voice, and therefore defining the narrative of the field, are men. As such, their presence and work is of intrinsic interest.

"Second, they are participating in the public discourse of ufology as agents or actors rather in the role of victim or experiencer. They are thus in direct violation of the roles set for women (subordinate or victim) by the master narrative of gender relations set in the 1950s – ufology’s heyday. Although they stand on the shoulders of other women in the field, their work is still an interesting and important development in ufology.

"Third, they have presented clear, cogent, evidence-based logical arguments which are being silenced or ignored for reasons that have nothing to do with their actual content. In addition to the 1950s-era Bad Girl argument against paying attention to what Rainey and Woods have to bring to the table, I've also heard people say it’s simply not that interesting or important. To my mind, that’s a much more disturbing dismissal of their voices. Because:

"Fourth, the issues raised by Woods and Rainey illustrate instances in which the usual goings-on in ufology cross the line from being mostly harmless to being very probably dangerous and almost certainly unethical. This is the point at which the outside world starts to sit up and take notice. Ufology seems to be lagging a decade or two behind the outside world with respect to lessons learned from things like the satanic ritual abuse panic and iatrogenic multiple personality disorder.

"Over on the UFO Collective listserv I see this topic being debated in terms of validity of the ETH, the reality of abduction experiences, and the validity of regression hypnosis for retrieving memory. To me, these are side issues, or maybe even dead issues. The central issue is, why can’t ufology address the content of the critiques posed by Woods and Rainey? It may be that ufology, as it is constituted today, is not capable of answering that question."
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Feb 28th, 2014, 5:28pm

I read Carol Rainey's critique of Hopkins and Jacobs when it first came out and imo it speaks for itself, but anyone who has ever taken those two 'researchers' seriously over the years regarding their wild eyed ufo theories probably isn't using critical thinking to begin with and is probably in the 'spacemen are here and probing people' camp anyway- no matter what anyone else says.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Mar 3rd, 2014, 11:37am

Recently posted at UFO Collective and I would like to share here as well:

I would like to present a few specific points for readers to consider, please. To begin, however, I would like to emphasize that critical review of the work of such individuals as Hopkins and Jacobs is _not_ synonymous with negating all reported high strangeness. Each case and set of circumstances require careful investigation and fact-checking. If we are all in agreement that we prefer truth and accuracy to lip service and sensationalism, then we should unanimously agree that only the highest standards of research protocol should be accepted in forming our beliefs and opinions.

We therefore should not disproportionately interest ourselves in the extents we may or may not personally like any given individual as compared to the quality of their work. Specifically, the information documented and presented by Woods and Rainey is of interest to me entirely in proportion to its merit and importance, and completely independently of whether any of you were personal friends with Hopkins and similar such irrelevant factors.

In considering the quality of research provided by Budd Hopkins, please allow me to present for consideration the following video:

http://tinyurl.com/oeg4vt6

In the video, Hopkins asserted that when alleged abductees drew symbols that they stated they saw while aboard perceived alien craft, they always drew the same kinds of symbols. However, Rainey demonstrated that was entirely and conclusively false. Moreover, when specifically asked further about the circumstances, Hopkins clearly stated he was trying to "stack the deck."

I present for consideration that while such circumstances do not necessarily negate all of the man's work - and certainly do not negate all reported phenomena - we should most certainly subject his extraordinary claims to thorough review. This only seems reasonable to me. More circumstances of interest can of course be found in Rainey's additional work.

Please allow me to present for review a piece I recently published, 'The Woods/Jacobs Tapes and the 'Oral History' Falsehood':

http://tinyurl.com/l9lsnrr

The article contains links to such circumstances as Dr. David Jacobs claiming himself to be "a strong advocate of strict scientific and ethical research methodology." However, the piece also contains documented proof that Jacobs conducted such questionable activities as long-distance regressive hypnosis with a subject located on another continent and entirely alone without support. The tapes demonstrate that Jacobs admittedly led the hypnotized research subject, encouraged her to wear a chastity belt and requested she send him her underpants.

To be clear, my criticism of such circumstances in this specific context is due to their impossibility of producing quality results, and are not scientific procedures by any stretch of the definition or imagination. It therefore seems more than reasonable to me to strongly question Jacobs' assertions of ET abductions and covert breeding programs when such extreme and fantastic conclusions are derived from such questionable research methodology.

Further circumstances of interest presented in the article include Jacobs' claims that on numerous occasions he collected physical samples for testing from research subjects. The claim is in direct contradiction to statements previously released by his employer at the time, Temple University, which indicated the historian only collected oral histories during his research. Moreover, Jacobs indicated that the tested samples all failed to provide support for his hypotheses, yet he continued to promote his assumptions and neglected to make the tests available for public review. See the article for links and documentation.

Lastly, please allow me to present the work of Dr. Tyler Kokjohn. The microbiologist has informed us on multiple occasions that practical, affordable means are now available that would allow Jacobs and those believing themselves to personally be involved in ET-human hybrid circumstances to actually test their suppositions and hypotheses. Specifically, we need not argue in endless circles and perpetually philosophize because we could _test_ the accuracy of claims related to such circumstances as missing pregnancies - decades after the alleged fact. It would seem quite reasonable to me that we would hold researchers accountable for conducting tests that would potentially validate their claims, particularly when such researchers are trying to lead us to believe they are committed to scientific investigation.

See some of Dr. Kokjohn's related written work:

http://tinyurl.com/kkgxqrv

...or if you prefer video:

http://tinyurl.com/nle2qoe

In closing, please allow me to once again emphasize that holding researchers accountable for their unsupported claims and subjecting their work to critical review does not negate unexplained phenomena. It is the path to truth, whatever the truth may ultimately prove to be.

Regards,

Jack Brewer
The UFO Trail
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Mar 4th, 2014, 05:55am

on Feb 19th, 2014, 2:06pm, jjflash wrote:
By Tyler Kokjohn, PhD

Dr. David Jacobs and other abduction researchers have presented numerous, detailed accounts of missing pregnancies and creation of human-alien genetic hybrids. It is now clear that during gestation mother and fetus exchange cells which may persist for years or decades after birth or termination of the pregnancy (M. Barinaga, “Cells Exchanged During Pregnancy Live On,’Science, 21 June 2002 [296:2169-2172]). Powerful new genetic analysis methods now enable investigators to perform prenatal examinations of the fetal genome after a simple blood draw from the mother (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/07/120704182127.htm) In the event of an alleged missing pregnancy, it may still be possible to recognize such hybrid cells for decades. Whether or not the hybrid baby is removed by aliens and taken to an inaccessible location, these mothers are known to the investigators and represent a potential source of critical hypothesis corroborating genetic data.

Abduction investigators have revealed varying degrees of direct personal involvement in the phenomenon with one claiming she knows the identities of hybrids and another asserting on an episode of Future Theater (18 May 2013) that she was employed by aliens as a “breeder.” Robert Sheaffer reported from the 2014 UFO Congress that one featured speaker revealed she has seven alien grandchildren (http://badufos.blogspot.com/2014_02_01_archive.html). These situations have afforded these investigators the unique opportunity to acquire and test samples at their leisure. A human-alien genetic hybrid might be detected with the simplest of genetic tests requiring only that the subject spit into a tube and the investigator mail it off to a commercial facility to await the report. Possibly the easiest opportunity in all history to collect what could be the most scientifically significant samples of the century and not one of them seems to have bothered.

It is important to recognize that these are not fleeting situations transpiring by dark of night at unpredictable times. These sources of critical evidence are readily and conveniently available to the investigators. However, despite the ease of collection, the most direct pathways to uncover substantive proof of nefarious alien intervention on our planet and provide concrete evidence strongly supporting the ETH have been ignored and left to lie fallow.


Hi Jjflash, I stopped actively engaging in your excellent thread after our exchange in Replies # 34 - 37. Exchange dealt mainly with your claims concerning Prof Tyler Kokjohn, who proposed state-of-the-art DNA testing may be used on (purported) mothers of alien hybrids to ascertain presence/absence of ET-tampered fetal cells remaining in a female abductee/'breeder's reproductive system. If you allow me to refresh our memory, I posed critical problems targeting Kokjohn's method:

on Jun 1st, 2013, 5:08pm, purr wrote:
Tyler Kokjohn's proposed DNA testing for alien abductees does not yet work, simply because it has ONLY human, and earthly DNA information to compare against. Can't establish alien DNA present, alien tampering with genes, or zero alien interference without base lines for COMPARISON of FACTUAL markers/patterns belonging to Visitors. At best the outcome would be academically formulated guesses.


The gist of your reply then was a sense of confidence in professor Kokjohn's academic credentials, plus that you felt no responsibility for (explaining) errors made by Dr. Jacob's or various supporting 'hybrid-theory' UFOlogists. Uh.. you response was imho unresponsive, at least to my skeptical questioning of Kokjohn's ET detection method. But then you slightly changed avenues, expanding in various criticisms of other hybrid/fringe proponents, that's fine with me, and sofar an interesting read.

Now Kokjohn popped up again, still as viable scientific methodology to detect a hybrid's lingering geneprints in abductees' wombs. Still you present it as a failing by the Abduction/Hybrid UFOlogists not to have provided samples to Tyler Kokjohn (or fellow geneticists).

Would you now be willing to answer to my questioning of his genetic method? The good prof has (based on his own articles, which I read!) no baseline for ET DNA, no genetic dataset for comparison, delineating either PRESENCE or ABSENCE of extraterrestrial traces. (All geneticists have is the human genome sequence, and that of many other earthly lifeforms.)

Wouldn't you agree, lacking alien DNA, that genetic testing of hybrid-moms cannot yield definitive proof of the real/imaginary nature of their abduction memories?

(And then: why keep blaming Dr. Jacobs and company for not cooperating with an as yet unfinished medical technology?)

CRITICALLY ANALYSE THIS, if you please...

smiley

purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Mar 4th, 2014, 10:51am

Quote:
Purr said: Would you now be willing to answer to my questioning of his genetic method? The good prof has (based on his own articles, which I read!) no baseline for ET DNA, no genetic dataset for comparison, delineating either PRESENCE or ABSENCE of extraterrestrial traces. (All geneticists have is the human genome sequence, and that of many other earthly lifeforms.)

Wouldn't you agree, lacking alien DNA, that genetic testing of hybrid-moms cannot yield definitive proof of the real/imaginary nature of their abduction memories?

(And then: why keep blaming Dr. Jacobs and company for not cooperating with an as yet unfinished medical technology?)

CRITICALLY ANALYSE THIS, if you please...


I'm no expert in dna sequencing but I would think that any tampering/insertions of 'alien' dna into human dna by 'aliens' would show markers or unusual dna sequences in so-called hybrids that would raise a red flag. Has this been done in any of the claimed hybrids? If not, why not?

As to the other aspects regarding Jacobs and Hopkins it's clear from many who have looked into their methods that there were serious issues on how they did their research and regression hypnosis.
Dr Vallee and others have questioned this going back many years now before Rainey published her findings. This does not automatically mean Jacobs and Hopkins had an agenda per se but that at the very least they didn't do it in any scientific manner with proper controls etc. Neither man was a scientist in any manner and not trained in any of the methods needed to do a clean study of 'alien abduction'.
They were essentially self taught and both believers on top of that. Not the most judicious way to undertake such an involved look into which is by all accounts a very complex phenomenon.
After years of their regression work ,etc we know no more than we did before their work in that some people claim to have been 'abducted' and had encounters with 'aliens'. Something we already knew before they got involved.


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Mar 4th, 2014, 11:37am

on Mar 4th, 2014, 10:51am, drwu23 wrote:
I'm no expert in dna sequencing but I would think that any tampering/insertions of 'alien' dna into human dna by 'aliens' would show markers or unusual dna sequences in so-called hybrids that would raise a red flag. Has this been done in any of the claimed hybrids? If not, why not?

As to the other aspects regarding Jacobs and Hopkins it's clear from many who have looked into their methods that there were serious issues on how they did their research and regression hypnosis.
Dr Vallee and others have questioned this going back many years now before Rainey published her findings. This does not automatically mean Jacobs and Hopkins had an agenda per se but that at the very least they didn't do it in any scientific manner with proper controls etc. Neither man was a scientist in any manner and not trained in any of the methods needed to do a clean study of 'alien abduction'.
They were essentially self taught and both believers on top of that. Not the most judicious way to undertake such an involved look into which is by all accounts a very complex phenomenon.
After years of their regression work ,etc we know no more than we did before their work in that some people claim to have been 'abducted' and had encounters with 'aliens'. Something we already knew before they got involved.



Right.

Purr, I appreciate your inquisitiveness. I also appreciate your willingness to try to pose the difficult questions. Both are qualities I admire.

That stated, if you sincerely do not understand the problems in logic with suggesting/implying we not test self-proclaimed hybrids, etc., because we may not be able to accurately read the test results, I do not have any further ways of trying to explain it at this particular point in time. It is the responsibility of the researcher making the claim to test and validate the hypothesis. Jacobs, Lamb and Cannon, for examples, are making no efforts to actually do so and in spite of the apparent easy access to alleged hybrids.

Another point I find of interest is that Jacobs admitted to me during the 2012 interview in the Ozarks that he had indeed collected physical samples for DNA testing over the years. I find this relevant for a few reasons, purr, including his statements directly contradicted those released by his employer at the time, Temple University, which, when addressing the Woods fiasco, stated that Jacobs only collected oral histories. It is also relevant because he apparently made attempts to validate his hypotheses yet, in his own words, could not do so. He then and continues to fail to make the circumstances of the tests and their results available for public review, opting instead to continue promoting his unsupported suppositions.

Lastly, purr, I find such circumstances relevant because they are simply not scientific protocol, as Jacobs claims - falsely - to respect and follow. That is, as Sharon Hill calls it, sham inquiry: nonscientific activities misrepresented as science.

I interpret Dr. Kokjohn to be suggesting - correctly - that a researcher should attempt to validate their hypotheses. Such researchers should compose formal papers, submit their work for critical review and so on - as the scientific process dictates. To do otherwise could - and should - call their activities into question when presented as scientific research.

I encourage your curiosity and your willingness to question, purr. If such information as provided is not enough for you to adequately understand the inherent challenges to claiming and failing to produce evidence (or even conduct tests) of alleged hybrid circumstances, perhaps other sources would be more helpful to you.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Mar 5th, 2014, 02:48am

on Mar 4th, 2014, 10:51am, drwu23 wrote:
I'm no expert in dna sequencing but I would think that any tampering/insertions of 'alien' dna into human dna by 'aliens' would show markers or unusual dna sequences in so-called hybrids that would raise a red flag. Has this been done in any of the claimed hybrids? If not, why not?

As to the other aspects regarding Jacobs and Hopkins it's clear from many who have looked into their methods that there were serious issues on how they did their research and regression hypnosis.
Dr Vallee and others have questioned this going back many years now before Rainey published her findings. This does not automatically mean Jacobs and Hopkins had an agenda per se but that at the very least they didn't do it in any scientific manner with proper controls etc. Neither man was a scientist in any manner and not trained in any of the methods needed to do a clean study of 'alien abduction'.
They were essentially self taught and both believers on top of that. Not the most judicious way to undertake such an involved look into which is by all accounts a very complex phenomenon.
After years of their regression work ,etc we know no more than we did before their work in that some people claim to have been 'abducted' and had encounters with 'aliens'. Something we already knew before they got involved.



Hi Wu, indeed as you say, a test capable of showing something "unusual" indicates sumtin (or other) may have happened, but falls short of scientific proof aliens were here (or not). So imo one valid reason why abducted 'hybrid' mothers haven't been participating en masse in this type of DNA test is simply because it can yield only one more inconclusive (best guess-based) outcome. Be it academia approved...

smiley

As to Jjflash's critical questioning of Jacobs, I already agreed. I'm a little more positive about Budd Hopkins, think he meant well, however with most of his evidence witness driven, his work too is open to careful scrutiny.


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Mar 5th, 2014, 10:16am

on Mar 5th, 2014, 02:48am, purr wrote:
Hi Wu, indeed as you say, a test capable of showing something "unusual" indicates sumtin (or other) may have happened, but falls short of scientific proof aliens were here (or not). So imo one valid reason why abducted 'hybrid' mothers haven't been participating en masse in this type of DNA test is simply because it can yield only one more inconclusive (best guess-based) outcome. Be it academia approved...

smiley

As to Jjflash's critical questioning of Jacobs, I already agreed. I'm a little more positive about Budd Hopkins, think he meant well, however with most of his evidence witness driven, his work too is open to careful scrutiny.


purr


Hi back at ya.....
I would think if 'aliens' tampered with our genes, by inserting 'alien dna' , it would clearly be obvious and not look like a random human mutation. IMO it would be something to make science pay attention. A few tests on the alleged hybrids wouldn't hurt and might tell us something one way or the other.
As to Hopkins, I met the man once and he was a very nice man, but from the conversation several of us had it was obvious he was not using any scientific protocols and all of his material was anecdotal from alleged abductees from hypnosis usually. That does not mean it was all just stories but without any kind of objective data where can one go with it?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by FlatEarth on Mar 5th, 2014, 6:40pm

While David Jacobs and the late Bud Hopkins promote the idea of hybrids based upon the reports of numerous contactees, that may not literally be the case. If there really is tampering going on with a percentage of the population, it could be confined to manipulating our DNA, all within the confines of what could happen through normal evolution. Remember that evolution is actually a process that allows various species to adapt to ever changing conditions.

The idea of merging DNA with a totally alien species seems unlikely, so skepticism of this idea seems justified. However, if ET is here, they surely wouldn't make repeated trips just to sight see. We could choose to ignore all the reports and walk away, but it does make sense that if Part 1 is true, that aliens are here, then it's possible that Part 2 is also true, that they are up to something. Surely, whatever their agenda, it would be for their benefit first, and if we're lucky, ours also. We shouldn't just hope for the best. The subject deserves to be studied with an open mind.

Flat
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Mar 6th, 2014, 09:10am

on Mar 5th, 2014, 6:40pm, Flat wrote:
While David Jacobs and the late Bud Hopkins promote the idea of hybrids based upon the reports of numerous contactees, that may not literally be the case. If there really is tampering going on with a percentage of the population, it could be confined to manipulating our DNA, all within the confines of what could happen through normal evolution. Remember that evolution is actually a process that allows various species to adapt to ever changing conditions.

The idea of merging DNA with a totally alien species seems unlikely, so skepticism of this idea seems justified. However, if ET is here, they surely wouldn't make repeated trips just to sight see. We could choose to ignore all the reports and walk away, but it does make sense that if Part 1 is true, that aliens are here, then it's possible that Part 2 is also true, that they are up to something. Surely, whatever their agenda, it would be for their benefit first, and if we're lucky, ours also. We shouldn't just hope for the best. The subject deserves to be studied with an open mind.

Flat

I agree that if they are changing dna by just rearranging our own dna it would be very difficult to tell unless one had a baseline of these 'hybrids'.
As to 'alien' motivations for coming here , there could be many reasons for visiting and not necessarily any complex agenda. If they have achieved an easy method of interstellar travel they could be simply 'curious' about humans and might be visiting any number of planets.

The dna and human genetic manipulation 'theory' seems unlikely to me for the reasons many have proposed over the years. Could alien dna even mesh with ours? If they are advanced as we assume why the need to even do this? Can't they fix any problem they might have without human dna? Why create a hybrid at all? And how does that fit in with all the other bizarre activity attributed to the 'aliens'?

To me this is not a clear case of ET with an agenda to create hybrids.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by FlatEarth on Mar 6th, 2014, 12:50pm

on Mar 6th, 2014, 09:10am, drwu23 wrote:
I agree that if they are changing dna by just rearranging our own dna it would be very difficult to tell unless one had a baseline of these 'hybrids'.
As to 'alien' motivations for coming here , there could be many reasons for visiting and not necessarily any complex agenda. If they have achieved an easy method of interstellar travel they could be simply 'curious' about humans and might be visiting any number of planets.

We just don't know. There are many possibilities, and some are not palatable. We can't assume that "they are not a threat", as was the official line many years ago. How can anyone know that?

Quote:
The dna and human genetic manipulation 'theory' seems unlikely to me for the reasons many have proposed over the years. Could alien dna even mesh with ours? If they are advanced as we assume why the need to even do this? Can't they fix any problem they might have without human dna? Why create a hybrid at all? And how does that fit in with all the other bizarre activity attributed to the 'aliens'?

To me this is not a clear case of ET with an agenda to create hybrids.

As I said earlier, I agree that merging alien DNA with ours sounds unlikely. I think people tend to come up with an explanation for the unknown rather than deal with a myriad of possibilities. Perhaps the hybrid idea that is said to be commonly reported is the result of inadvertently leading the witness.

The disturbing message is that according to Hopkins and Jacobs, many abductees have claimed that samples were taken. In fact, one of the earliest cases, the Hills case, reported the same thing, and Hopkins and Jacobs were not involved with that one. People have consistently testified that this is happening, and while I agree that the best scientific procedures probably have not been followed by these guys, there is at least one case, the grandaddy of them all, that suggests this may be true. I just wouldn't rule it out.

Why so many samples would be needed is an open question, but I believe it would be an important clue for those who are experts in the field.

Flat


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on Mar 8th, 2014, 8:47pm

on Mar 5th, 2014, 6:40pm, Flat wrote:
The idea of merging DNA with a totally alien species seems unlikely, so skepticism of this idea seems justified. However, if ET is here, they surely wouldn't make repeated trips just to sight see. We could choose to ignore all the reports and walk away, but it does make sense that if Part 1 is true, that aliens are here, then it's possible that Part 2 is also true, that they are up to something. Surely, whatever their agenda, it would be for their benefit first, and if we're lucky, ours also. We shouldn't just hope for the best. The subject deserves to be studied with an open mind.
Flat


One thing I have found in the UFO arena is that pretty much everyone connects their own Dots-of-Logic differently.

Some people may connect their Dots-of-Logic in a manner similar to this:

1. Thousands of UFO reports = Some may be true
2. If true, what do they want?: Take over Earth, Destroy us, Study us, Observe us?
3. Since we have not seen them try to Take over or Destroy us: Reports seem to favor = Study and/or Observe
4. In order to Study or Observe: Which would be more informative: To Observe from afar or to Abduct and study up close?
5. Reports seem to favor both, Observe from afar & Abduct.
6. Are there Reports that would tend to confirm that UFO's may have Observed from afar? = YES, every time someone sees a UFO, they could possibly be Observing us.
7. Are there Reports that would tend to confirm that abductions have taken place? = YES, the Hills, Travis Walton, Charlie Parker, etc.
8. Has Budd Hopkins & David Jacobs EVER spoke with people who claimed to be abducted? = YES
9. Is there evidence proving that ALL of those people are lying?
10. Are Budd Hopkins & David Jacobs Scientists? = No, they are Amateurs or Self-taught.
11. Can Amateurs or people who are Self-taught ever be successful or make some correct Decisions? = Bill Gates & Steve Jobs did!
12. Did Budd Hopkins & David Jacobs make mistakes? = Probably!

13. If a scientist makes some mistakes does it nullify all their findings or make everything they did suspect?
14. Is it possible that some of the information gathered by Budd Hopkins & David Jacobs is correct and viable?

There are some people who have their connect the Dots-of-Logic in a different manner, as their answer to 13. is always: "YES" and their answer to 14. is always: "NO".


Logic is something that cannot be taught. And sadly, Logic in the hands of a Prosecutor can be bent and shaped into "proving" or "disproving" pretty much anything they want, just like a debunker...

Each of us need to use our own values, investigations and experiences in connecting our own Dots-of-Logic and not take the words of those who shout the loudest as the truth.




Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by FlatEarth on Mar 9th, 2014, 5:51pm

Very true, Mythos. We're on our own to figure it out. For that reason I like to hear what others have to say, from both sides, even though I'm firmly grounded on the believers side.

Flat
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Mar 10th, 2014, 1:09pm

Below are some excerpts from microbiologist Dr. Tyler Kokjohn's latest piece, Free Market Ufology: Demand a Better Supply. Published at Jeff Ritzmann's Paranormal Waypoint, I highly recommend reading the article in full and digesting it.

Free Market Ufology: Demand a Better Supply

March 10, 2014

By Tyler Kokjohn, Ph.D.

Ufology today is a product of market forces. Denied the governmental and private sector financial support lavished on mainstream science, UFO researchers have been forced to devise alternative ways to finance their work. While efforts to raise money have been rewarded, this success has come at an underappreciated cost.

The alien abduction research subspecialty reveals the consequences of a complex interplay between economic influences and perverse incentives. Now more a collection of balkanized boutiques than scientific exploration, consumers pick their preferred poison from a cornucopia of narratives ranging from alien colonization to Indigo children and everything in between. The bottom line in this business is the bottom line and the market has rewarded those who concocted elaborate tales and created a cottage industry now bearing scant resemblance to anything scientific. Whether intentional or not, this conglomeration of isolated mini-monopolies has suffocated progress by suppressing the essential activities of science – criticism, competition and hypothesis testing through experiment.

For example, the diverse array of competing explanations for the alien abduction phenomenon raises a nagging question – which one is correct? Did Dr. John Mack get it right, or was his body of work supplanted by researchers such as Budd Hopkins and Dr. David Jacobs? Is it conceivable all of them missed the fact that generations of modified children have been emerging on our planet? Then again, maybe hypnosis was not the best tool and the introspection method favored by Dr. Leo Sprinkle provides more reliable insights. Faced with similar confusion, mainstream scientists would probably convene to standardize the diverse methods and conduct direct, objective evaluations to reach consensus on the relative merits and weaknesses of each approach. If a meeting like that ever came about, it might end up being an uncomfortable affair because it is unlikely assertions certain investigators possess special abilities to discern the truth of hypnosis-acquired testimony would carry any weight. Even worse for some investigators would be explaining how they perforate the screen memories installed by aliens and acquire reliable information from hypnotized subjects. Confidence in the recovered testimony vanishes quickly in a trap of infinite logical recursion; the classic ‘they know you know’ argument. How could anyone ever prove these clever aliens did not plan for a breach of the first screen memory by pre-installing the memories you recovered, the ones they wanted you to discover? The best way to handle all these issues is to simply claim you have special abilities, have outsmarted the advanced aliens, move on and hope no one notices the contradictions. Answerable only to your customers and safely isolated from peer criticism, that strategy may succeed economically, but it does not advance knowledge.

[...]

Abduction research has reached a critical stalemate. It is clear that several investigators possess an unencumbered capacity to acquire genetic samples that could yield definitive evidence in support of some long-standing alien abduction hypotheses. Moreover, in some instances these samples could be obtained using non-invasive methods and analyzed rapidly at low cost commercial testing facilities. But an unencumbered capacity to perform tests literally means nothing when investigators do not possess the fundamental will to conduct the tests. To date these investigators appear unmotivated to either have genetic analyses performed or report the results.

Consumers will become steadily more familiar with genetic technologies as they are incorporated into routine medical practice for purposes of improving cancer treatments or aiding in the diagnosis of complex disease conditions. Increasing public sophistication regarding the amazing power of these methods and where and how they may be useful, may force investigators to adopt new tools or risk losing audience share. With such potent tools available and an inevitable consumer mandate to use them, will the end times soon be at hand for the pseudoscientists? Not necessarily. The market is an ever-changing thing and I suggest we may already see the outlines of the future emerging.

One strategy is akin to cutting out the middleman. If the real goal is simply selling products to the general public and not to perform a high quality scientific study able to sustain a bona fide peer review, there is no need for meticulous research. The heavily promoted Paracas Skulls story provides a fine example of DNA evidence stagecraft. Notwithstanding the hoopla, the Paracas Skulls investigation promoters actually revealed no primary data at all, the released information was preliminary and consisted only of vague characterizations and far reaching conclusions from an anonymous geneticist who simultaneously signaled the actual quality of the supporting information is questionable (http://www.disclose.tv/news/Shocking_NEW_DNA_Evidence_Reveals_Nephilim_Existence/99455). In this case data quality is not a primary concern as the ‘evidence’ serves the strictly instrumental purpose of chumming along an audience for an upcoming documentary. An anonymous geneticist touting preliminary and essentially invisible data clearly serves no scientifically significant ends.

Another strategy exploring the limits of nothing is being put forth by Dr. David Jacobs. He posits an evolutionary process for hybrids that yields entities ‘human in every way except for sleep cycle and ability to control others’ (http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2012/04/bizarre-world-of-doctor-david-jacobs.html). In one sense this ploy seems to neatly avoid some vexing questions by making it appear these entities could not be identified like the alleged earlier stage hybrids. The changes in sleep cycle and ability to control others must have been imparted through some mechanism executed by the aliens. At some level, these changes – genetic, biochemical, ultrastructural, cellular, or anatomic – will leave traces. In addition to powerful genetic analysis tools, scientific competition and market forces have combined to provide researchers with the ability to detect changes in protein profiles, perturbations in gene expression patterns and epigenetic modifications to the genome that alter gene activity without changing the basic DNA sequence. Pick your poison, Doctor. Although not at all hybrid privacy friendly, this free market has produced some amazingly powerful and useful analysis technology.

[...]

Investigators of paranormal phenomena are in the early phases of the genetic technology learning curve. To date, DNA sequencing methods have been employed comprehensively in Bigfoot investigations as well as examinations of unusual skeletal and other remains hypothesized to be alien. Although Bill Chalker blazed a trail many years ago, alien abduction investigators have remained steadfast in their near universal refusal to adopt the new technologies. Inevitably these investigators will come under pressure to test their hypotheses or modify them.

Free markets have advantages, but consumers are best advised to be cautious in their purchases. The use of DNA sequencing and other genetic analysis technology to examine paranormal phenomena is a positive development. However, it is important to recognize there will be situations in which the new methods are simply not useful. Another problem involves the complex issues in interpreting DNA sequence data. In mainstream science, the minimum standard is publication of the data after peer review. Unfortunately, this vital quality assurance step can be effectively faked or avoided outright by paranormal phenomenon investigators. These groups or individuals are under no obligation to function according to the norms and customs of mainstream science. Most simply mimic science.

Full article:

http://www.paranormalwaypoint.com/free-market-ufology-demand-a-better-supply/
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Mar 10th, 2014, 1:39pm

on Mar 8th, 2014, 8:47pm, Mythos wrote:
One thing I have found in the UFO arena is that pretty much everyone connects their own Dots-of-Logic differently.

Some people may connect their Dots-of-Logic in a manner similar to this:

1. Thousands of UFO reports = Some may be true
2. If true, what do they want?: Take over Earth, Destroy us, Study us, Observe us?
3. Since we have not seen them try to Take over or Destroy us: Reports seem to favor = Study and/or Observe
4. In order to Study or Observe: Which would be more informative: To Observe from afar or to Abduct and study up close?
5. Reports seem to favor both, Observe from afar & Abduct.
6. Are there Reports that would tend to confirm that UFO's may have Observed from afar? = YES, every time someone sees a UFO, they could possibly be Observing us.
7. Are there Reports that would tend to confirm that abductions have taken place? = YES, the Hills, Travis Walton, Charlie Parker, etc.
8. Has Budd Hopkins & David Jacobs EVER spoke with people who claimed to be abducted? = YES
9. Is there evidence proving that ALL of those people are lying?
10. Are Budd Hopkins & David Jacobs Scientists? = No, they are Amateurs or Self-taught.
11. Can Amateurs or people who are Self-taught ever be successful or make some correct Decisions? = Bill Gates & Steve Jobs did!
12. Did Budd Hopkins & David Jacobs make mistakes? = Probably!

13. If a scientist makes some mistakes does it nullify all their findings or make everything they did suspect?
14. Is it possible that some of the information gathered by Budd Hopkins & David Jacobs is correct and viable?




Let's look at those points a little:

1. Many reports indeed and indeed some may be true....but true what?
2. You are assuming they are aliens here
3, 4 , and 5 ..Again more pure speculation based on the belief they are aliens since without that the points are moot
6.Same again
7. Again speculation based on anecdotal material
8.see answer above
9.There isn't evidence one way or the other about whether they are all lying.
10.Agree they are amateurs regarding science.
11. Agree that talented amateurs in a field could arrive at a valid position..no guarantees one way or the other
btw Gates and Jobs were not 'amateurs' being trained in computer technology....Jacobs and Hopkins had no training or experience in anything close to science or investigations.
12. They did make mistakes.
13. No, but once again Jacobs and Hopkins were not scientists
14. It's possible that some of their data is useful...in the right hands.


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Mar 10th, 2014, 3:01pm

DRWU,

I GUESS IT IS PRUDENT TO ADOPT THE PHILOSOPHY THAT EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS REQUIRE EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE...BUT TO TOTALLY DISMISS AND BROAD BRUSH PAINT THIS TOPIC AS FANTASY/IMAGINATION SEEMS TO RESTRICT ONES 360 DEGREE VIEW OF WHAT MAY HAVE TAKEN PLACE AND/OR CONTINUES TO OCCUR.

I MENTION THIS DUE TO YOUR POSITION WHEREIN HOPKINS AND JACOBS WERE NOT ACADEMICALLY SKINNED IN THE/THIS ENDEAVOR~WHERE WOULD YOU SUGGEST SUCH INDIVIDUALS COULD HAVE BEEN TRAINED FOR SUCH WORK/PASSION...GRANTED THERE WERE/ARE GREY AREAS IN THEIR RESEARCH (POWER OF SUGGESTION~WHICH I GET) AND WHAT RESEARCH DOESN'T HAVE IT'S ROUGH EDGES {NOTHING PERFECT IN AN IMPERFECT REALITY}...BUT THERE WILL BE THAT PERCENTAGE OF INDIVIDUALS WHEREIN THAT "DOG DON'T HUNT" MUCH LIKE MATHEMATICIANS WHOM OPINED THE "BIG BANG" AND WITH THE LACK OF COMPUTATIONAL POWER TO ASSESS SAME...MANY ASPECTS OF THEIR RESEARCH/OPINION WAS>>>FOR~THE ~MOST<<< ROUNDED OFF TO SUIT THEIR HANDLERS AND COMPUTATIONAL CAPACITY. wink

SO LET'S FOLLOW YOUR LEAD FOR ONE MINUTE~I'M GAME! JACOBS AND HOPKINS~O.K.~LET'S CUT THEM LOOSE...HAVING SAID THAT...AND THEIR AMATEUR STATUS...(I DO THINK IT TO BE PRUDENT AND MUST INTERJECT THE VAST NUMBER OF DISCOVERIES WHICH WERE MADE BY AMATEURS OVER THE DECADES AND CENTURIES IN COUNTLESS FIELDS OF STUDY)
YOU DO KNOW THOMAS JEFFERSON NEVER RECEIVED A DEGREE~THAT IS WHY EVEN TODAY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA THOSE WHOM ATTAIN THEIR PhD~STILL ADDRESS THEIR COLLEAGUES AS MISTER OR MISS/MS.~JEFFERSON ANOTHER AMATEUR I GUESS...OF COURSE I'M BEING AN EXTEREMIST MERELY TO MAKE A POINT!!!

SHALL WE DISMISS J. ALLEN HYNEK~ DR. JOHN MACK~ I GUESS THEY WERE DILUSSIONAL AS WELL...I GUESS THE DILUSSION THE AFOREMENTIONED ACADEMICS ENCOUNTERED WAS THEY FACED THE DECEPTION PERPETUATED BY>>>THE POWERS THAT BE<<< AND THE HOST OF MINIONS USED TO TOUT THEIR POSITION THAT WE NEVER HAVE BEEN VISITED BY EXTRTERRESTRIAL/DIMENSIONALS NOR CONTINUE TO THIS DAY...I'M FURTHER GUESSING THEIR PARCHMENT/EXPERIENCE/RESEARCH/ACTUAL FIELD STUDY GAVE THEM ACADEMIC RIGHTS TO "OPINE" ON THE UFOLOGICAL MYSTERY.

I FURTHER ACCEPT THIS UFOLOGICAL MYSTERY WILL BE DIFFICULT TO WRAP IN A NICE PACKAGE WITH A BOW ATOP...BUT THOSE WHOM REMAIN IN DENIAL...REFUSE TO LISTEN...EXPECT SUCH ENTITIES TO TAP THEM ON THE SHOULDER AND SAY~WE'RE HERE~ARE SIPPING FROM THAT SAME "JUG OF DILUSION"~THAT DOES SOUND LIKE A NIFTY DRINK TO PROPAGATE grin...IT DOES SOUND LIKE A SNAKE OIL SALESMAN...GET YOUR "JUG OF DILUSION"...YOU WILL FEEL BETTER FOR IT...A LA {EDDIE BERNAYS}

IN LIEU OF THE AFOREMENTIONED~WHAT WOULD IT TAKE FOR YOU (SECOND PERSON PLURAL) TO GRASP SUCH VISITORS HAVE COME AND CONTINUE TO ENTER OUR AIRSPACE WITH IMPUNITY...WHAT WOULD BE THE NECESSARY EVIDENCE AND WHOM WOULD YOU SUGGEST BE THE GATEKEEPER OF SAME~THOSE WHOM WE KNOW HAVE INVESTED VAST AMOUNTS OF $$$ TO DISUADE/CONTAIN/RIDICULE~ OR A COLLECTION OF ACADEMICS PAID BY THE SAME GROUP (WE'VE BEEN THERE...DONE THAT...AND GOT THE CONDON T~SHIRT FOR IT)NEVERTHELESS~WHO~WHOM I ASK~AND I DO SO ASK WITH SINCERE INTENT TO GRASP WHAT WOULD BE THE ITEM OF EVIDENCE TO CLENCH IT FOR YOU(SECOND PERSON PLURALwink )...

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Mar 10th, 2014, 4:07pm

on Mar 10th, 2014, 3:01pm, ZETAR wrote:
DRWU,

I GUESS IT IS PRUDENT TO ADOPT THE PHILOSOPHY THAT EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS REQUIRE EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE...BUT TO TOTALLY DISMISS AND BROAD BRUSH PAINT THIS TOPIC AS FANTASY/IMAGINATION SEEMS TO RESTRICT ONES 360 DEGREE VIEW OF WHAT MAY HAVE TAKEN PLACE AND/OR CONTINUES TO OCCUR.

I MENTION THIS DUE TO YOUR POSITION WHEREIN HOPKINS AND JACOBS WERE NOT ACADEMICALLY SKINNED IN THE/THIS ENDEAVOR~WHERE WOULD YOU SUGGEST SUCH INDIVIDUALS COULD HAVE BEEN TRAINED FOR SUCH WORK/PASSION...GRANTED THERE WERE/ARE GREY AREAS IN THEIR RESEARCH (POWER OF SUGGESTION~WHICH I GET) AND WHAT RESEARCH DOESN'T HAVE IT'S ROUGH EDGES {NOTHING PERFECT IN AN IMPERFECT REALITY}...BUT THERE WILL BE THAT PERCENTAGE OF INDIVIDUALS WHEREIN THAT "DOG DON'T HUNT" MUCH LIKE MATHEMATICIANS WHOM OPINED THE "BIG BANG" AND WITH THE LACK OF COMPUTATIONAL POWER TO ASSESS SAME...MANY ASPECTS OF THEIR RESEARCH/OPINION WAS>>>FOR~THE ~MOST<<< ROUNDED OFF TO SUIT THEIR HANDLERS AND COMPUTATIONAL CAPACITY. wink

SO LET'S FOLLOW YOUR LEAD FOR ONE MINUTE~I'M GAME! JACOBS AND HOPKINS~O.K.~LET'S CUT THEM LOOSE...HAVING SAID THAT...AND THEIR AMATEUR STATUS...(I DO THINK IT TO BE PRUDENT AND MUST INTERJECT THE VAST NUMBER OF DISCOVERIES WHICH WERE MADE BY AMATEURS OVER THE DECADES AND CENTURIES IN COUNTLESS FIELDS OF STUDY)
YOU DO KNOW THOMAS JEFFERSON NEVER RECEIVED A DEGREE~THAT IS WHY EVEN TODAY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA THOSE WHOM ATTAIN THEIR PhD~STILL ADDRESS THEIR COLLEAGUES AS MISTER OR MISS/MS.~JEFFERSON ANOTHER AMATEUR I GUESS...OF COURSE I'M BEING AN EXTEREMIST MERELY TO MAKE A POINT!!!

SHALL WE DISMISS J. ALLEN HYNEK~ DR. JOHN MACK~ I GUESS THEY WERE DILUSSIONAL AS WELL...I GUESS THE DILUSSION THE AFOREMENTIONED ACADEMICS ENCOUNTERED WAS THEY FACED THE DECEPTION PERPETUATED BY>>>THE POWERS THAT BE<<< AND THE HOST OF MINIONS USED TO TOUT THEIR POSITION THAT WE NEVER HAVE BEEN VISITED BY EXTRTERRESTRIAL/DIMENSIONALS NOR CONTINUE TO THIS DAY...I'M FURTHER GUESSING THEIR PARCHMENT/EXPERIENCE/RESEARCH/ACTUAL FIELD STUDY GAVE THEM ACADEMIC RIGHTS TO "OPINE" ON THE UFOLOGICAL MYSTERY.

I FURTHER ACCEPT THIS UFOLOGICAL MYSTERY WILL BE DIFFICULT TO WRAP IN A NICE PACKAGE WITH A BOW ATOP...BUT THOSE WHOM REMAIN IN DENIAL...REFUSE TO LISTEN...EXPECT SUCH ENTITIES TO TAP THEM ON THE SHOULDER AND SAY~WE'RE HERE~ARE SIPPING FROM THAT SAME "JUG OF DILUSION"~THAT DOES SOUND LIKE A NIFTY DRINK TO PROPAGATE grin...IT DOES SOUND LIKE A SNAKE OIL SALESMAN...GET YOUR "JUG OF DILUSION"...YOU WILL FEEL BETTER FOR IT...A LA {EDDIE BERNAYS}

IN LIEU OF THE AFOREMENTIONED~WHAT WOULD IT TAKE FOR YOU (SECOND PERSON PLURAL) TO GRASP SUCH VISITORS HAVE COME AND CONTINUE TO ENTER OUR AIRSPACE WITH IMPUNITY...WHAT WOULD BE THE NECESSARY EVIDENCE AND WHOM WOULD YOU SUGGEST BE THE GATEKEEPER OF SAME~THOSE WHOM WE KNOW HAVE INVESTED VAST AMOUNTS OF $$$ TO DISUADE/CONTAIN/RIDICULE~ OR A COLLECTION OF ACADEMICS PAID BY THE SAME GROUP (WE'VE BEEN THERE...DONE THAT...AND GOT THE CONDON T~SHIRT FOR IT)NEVERTHELESS~WHO~WHOM I ASK~AND I DO SO ASK WITH SINCERE INTENT TO GRASP WHAT WOULD BE THE ITEM OF EVIDENCE TO CLENCH IT FOR YOU(SECOND PERSON PLURALwink )...

SHALOM...Z


Extraordinary claims do require extraordinary evidence and one would think that both ET proponents and skeptics would understand that.
I don't dismiss it all as fantasy and believe that there is a signal in all the noise. My problem is that too many have already decided it's 'space aliens' even when the jury is still out , too many have looked at various cases and not been discriminating enough, and too many are willing to accept just about anything as proof it's space aliens and are simply embarrasing themselves.

Not sure what comparing Hopkins and Jacobs to Big Bang astrophysicists has to do with anything, but imho neither man was qualified to do an investigation into a potential scientifc phenomenon of ET on earth.
At the very least they should have had real qualified hypnotherapists working and actually doing the regressions and real scientists collecting the data for analysis by them and also forensic analysts. They did not as far as I undersand it. This is why their work has been under suspicion for a very long time.
(not sure what Jefferson has to do with anything either..)

I do think Dr Hynek and Dr Mack are legitimate individuals though trained in 2 distinct science disciplines. Hynek came to believe that there was more to the ufo enigma than simple space aliens but did believe it was a legitmate phenom. The same applied to Mack in a different manner. He felt that the experiences of the people he worked with were real to them but was also not certain if this was an objective physical experience with aliens abducting people or some other form of experience though again he believed it was a legitimate phenom.
We need to listen to what experiencers have to say and think about it in a cautious and thoughtful manner. Sadly that's not the way that many approach this and they tend to 'believe' all too readily. Just as easily many tend to dismiss all too readily.

Your last paragraph is a bit jumbled and your style of writing and grammar a bit unusual so I'm not sure exactly what you are asking.
I get the impression you are asking what specific evidence would it take for a true skeptic to cross the line into believing space aliens are here and flying around and abducting people . I would think that nothing less than clear indisputable hard evidence would satisfy them; eg, confirmed alien dna,
part of a spaceship, dead body on public display, a major landing in Central Park, etc...and of course all or any of these confirmed by a panel of reputable scientists.
I already think that the ufo phenom is 'real'...my point has always been what does it really represent?


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Mar 10th, 2014, 4:51pm

DRWU,

AN ADMIRABLE ANSWER TO A VERY DECEPTIVE/COMPLICATED PHENOMENA...I WAS TRYING TO NUDGE AND PUSH BUT THE WISDOM OF UNEMTIONAL/LOGICAL RESPONSES ROSE TO MY EXPECTATIONS...NICELY DONE...I BET YOU PLAY CHESS QUITE WELL!!!

I ACCEPT YOUR CONTENTIONS OF PROTOCOL...BUT I MUST FURTHER RESPECT THOSE SIGNALS FROM EXPERIENCERS~WHICH OF COURSE SHOULD BE VETTED ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS...

THOSE WHOM HAVE VESTED INTEREST IN THIS MATTER REMAINING SEQUESTERED WILL DO ALL THEY CAN TO PREVENT ANY TRULY OPEN REVELATION OF SUCH. WHY? I HAVE MY OPINION AND SAME WILL BE FOR ANOTHER EXCHANGE.

THOSE WHOM HAVE RESEARCHED THE FLAP OVER D.C. IN 1952...SUCH SHOULD BE EYE OPENING AND HAVE BEEN RUDIMENTARY JUSTIFICATION FOR CONFIRMATION OF SOMETHING BEYOND OUR MAXIMUM TECHNOLOGY/TECHNICAL UNDERSTANDING/GRASP OF PHYSICS~ THE BATTLE OF LOS ANGELES AND THE COUNTLESS MUNITIONS THAT POUNDED THIS HOVERING OBJECT WITH NO EFFECT/AFFECT...ANOTHER EXAMPLE...IMHO...AND THAT LIST GOES ON....

E.T FROM DISTANT GALAXIES~DIMENSIONAL SURFERS...I'M SURE THERE ARE THOSE WITHIN THAT COMPARTMENTALIZED INNER LAYER OF THAT MAJESTIC ONION WHO/WHOM DO KNOW...AND DO WHAT THEY CAN WHEN ONE GETS TO CLOSE TO THAT ELUSIVE TRUTH...BUT THE WISDOM OF SCRUTINY...TO FERRET OUT THE HOAX~BLACK PROGRAMS~CONSCIOUS MANIPULATION OF THE MASSES~TERRESTRIAL EXPLANATIONS~SUCH IS S.O.P. FOR ME AND MUCH LIKE YOU...I BELIEVE/UNDERSTAND...THERE IS THAT SIGNAL VIBRATING FOR ONE TO ATTUNE TO...SOME TAKE THE HIGH ROAD AND SOME TAKE THE LOW ROAD...HERE'S WISHING WE ALL GET TO SCOTLAND...SOME MORNING wink

I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE YOUR RESPONE!!!wink

SHALOM...Z

EDIT TO ADD:

A PLANET AS BEAUTIFUL AS THIS~WHY WOULDN'T THOSE WANT TO VISIT grin grin grin
User Image

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Mar 12th, 2014, 7:12pm

The following blog post was made by Andy Russell, a young man who writes about crop circles, gov docs on UFOs and similar subject matter at his blog, The Truth Hides. I felt it a relevant post deserving of consideration.


Carol Rainey: Open Letter to the UFO Community

March 9, 2014

The Truth Hides

Carol Rainey is the former wife of Budd Hopkins. Just before his death, Carol made public the concerns she had regarding, as she saw it, the cult of alien abduction. It also brought sharply into focus the use of hypnosis and its practitioners. I believe she has some very valid concerns. The whole debate has been reignited by her open letter to the UFO community, which can be viewed here:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/carol-rainey-open-letter-to-ufo.html

There are large sections of the UFO community who have sat back in the belief that abductions were a done deal. They believed that people were abducted, hypnosis was the key to their repressed memories and what Messrs. Mack, Hopkins and Jacobs told them was pretty much the whole story. Too few continued to challenge, to investigate and to question.

When people dare to question, then things gets ugly. Carol has come under some increasingly personal attacks for daring to ask the questions she wanted answers too. In fact, Carol is raising some serious issues that evidently many in the UFO community do not want to deal with. Some information on the attacks can be found here:

http://redstarfilms.blogspot.co.uk/2011/03/carol-rainey-alien-abduction-cult.html

There are some serious cracks appearing in much of the abduction story that need to be answered. In fact, are overdue to be answered as they have been papered over for too long. This doesn’t mean that this could invalidate what has been reported before, but truth should always be at the heart of these subjects. So why go attacking those who are trying to get to the truth?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Mar 12th, 2014, 7:13pm

I would also like to share some comments contained in an email chain at UFO Collective. Peter B wrote in part in a March 5 email:

One notices over the years (and there have been many) that there
is a tendency, among those who want to believe that ET is visiting
us, to be unable to tell the difference between a skeptic and what is,
with questionable accuracy, called a debunker. Essentially what
this means is that if you ask too many questions, or (in some cases)
state the obvious, bells and books and candles are produced and
a lot of silly sarcasm is chanted, and no one takes any notice of
what the anathematized has to say after that. What there is not is any
display of interest, by the ululating ones, in discovering what might
be the truth. The prize current example of this lack of interest is, of
course, the failure of the allegedly good and great among US ufolo-
gists to consider that Mesdames Rainey and Woods might just have
the teeniest weeniest smidgeon of a point, and hear them out. So
much easier to cry "scorned woman" at Ms Rainey, & distort her
statements by fully 180 degrees, and consider it evidence of her
foolishness that she was de-subscribed from another list (by some-
one who by so doing showed he had no interest in disinterested
discussion): then no one has to think about anything too taxing.
Likewise, pronounce Ms Woods as suffering from MPD, when
that is exactly what Jacobs was trying to twist her into believing,
and evidence of which she had never demonstrated. But to those
who can't bear to have their fixed beliefs, or wishes, challenged,
the psychiatric opinion of an assistant professor of history must
not be gainsaid. The episode has been a disgrace to those concerned,
and to witter that it's "time to move on" is both shameful (or shame-
less) only confirms the diagnosis.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Mar 12th, 2014, 7:28pm

Lastly, this one is for you ZETAR smiley

I am sure you have read it before, but, as was the case with me, it had been a while, as it is from Dr. Mack's work. A Brief Review of Issues Relating to the Reality of the Abduction Phenomenon is the added appendix of Mack's book, Abduction.

The "brief review" is rather lengthy, but makes some relevant points, in my opinion. For example, those choosing to read it might please note the number of times - several - the psychiatrist noted that more research was required, as nothing was firmly established, given the nature and challenges related to lack of physical evidence combined with memory distortion and so on.

Dr. Mack wrote, "The interpretations and conclusions in this book are hypotheses, designed to invite others to join me in the exploration of this important mystery. The alien abduction field is a new one, and it deserves a broad and systematic multi-disciplinary inquiry."

Would he approve of the activities of such individuals as David Jacobs and as explored in this thread? The lack of peer review and the suppression of potential evidence? I'll leave the reader to contemplate the answers to such questions for themselves.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Mar 12th, 2014, 10:08pm

JJ,

I'LL PLAY grin...I WAS QUITE LUCKY TO HAVE A WELL PLACED SOURCE IN NASA...THE REAL DEAL...STELLAR CLEARANCE...I WAS QUASI~BRIEFED...SO FOR ME THE ILLUSION DOESN'T APPLY...MOREOVER...I'VE HAD A LIFETIME OF SIGHTINGS...FROM EARLY CHILDHOOD ONWARD...COINCIDENCE...YOU KNOW MY THOUGHTS ON SUCH...

NOW TO THE MIRAGE...YA EVER CONSIDER THAT THERE MAY BE MULTIPLE LAYERS OF THE MIRAGE...IN THAT THE SUGGESTION OR PSUEDO~IMPLICATION IS TO RETAIN THE SKEPTICISM AND CONFIDENTIALITY OF THE GOLDEN EGG(S) WHICH HAVE BEEN FOUND/BACK ENGINEERED/MILITARIZED...A LOT OF EFFORT AND $$$ HAS BEEN SPENT ON RELIGATING THE UFO MYSTERY TO A NON~PHENOMENA.

MOREOVER, IF YOU HAVE EVER READ ON EDDIE BERNAY AND THE PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACH TO SALES/MARKETING/MASS MANIPULATION...WELL...ANY PSY~OP...SUCH ENTAILS THE FINALE'...WHICH WITH ANY PRODUCT...YOU ARE BETTER OFF WITH THIS OR BELIEVING THIS, THAT, AND THE OTHER...REACHING THE INNER BELIEFS OF MAN.

FURTHERMORE...I AM WELL VERSED IN THE INS AND OUTS OF PROPAGANDA AS I HAD/HAVE A PASSION FOR POLITICAL SCIENCE AND PSYCHOLOGY...THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT MAKE ME TICK AND TOCK... THE AFOREMENTIONED JUST HAPPENS TO BE PART OF MY JOURNEY.

HAVING SAID THAT...WE ALL ARE A CULMINATION OF OUR EXPERIENCES AND EDUCATION AND COMMON SENSE...AND FOR ME...SAME IS TEMPERED WITH THE RECOGNITION OF COSMIC FORCES...IS IT MY RESPONSIBILTY TO CONVINCE ANOTHER OF SUCH...I'VE LERANED OVER THE YEARS THAT IS INAPPROPRIATE AS SOME ARE NOT READY TO REACH BEYOND THEIR COMFORT ZONE...VERY SIMILAR TO TRIBAL REGIONS WHOM WESTERN COUNTRIES TRY TO DEMOCRATIZE (MARKET REALLY~YA KNOW THE CAPITLAISM THINGY)...AND WHEN DOING SO ABRUPTLY RATIONALIZE THAT SAID COUNTRY/PEOPLE WERE NOT READY FOR SAME...MOREOVER, WHEN OPENING CERTAIN DOORS LACKING THE MATURITY...REASON...COSMIC UNDERSTANDING...SOME MERELY POP THEIR FUSE PANEL AS THERE'S NO GOING BACK...UNLESS ONE CHOOSES TO REMAIN IN COMPLETE DENIAL THROUGHOUT THIS SHORT LIFETIME.

THEN ONE SHOULD ASK...FROM ANCIENT HISTORICAL RECORDS OF EVENT AFTER EVENT...SOMETIMES...OH SO CRUDELY RECORDED/ACCOUNTED/DRAWN/CONSTRUCTED FROM OUR 21ST CENTURY PERSPECTIVE...THAT THERE WERE THOSE WHOM HAD EXPERIENCES BEYOND THEIR UNDERSTANDING AND SOUGHT TO SHOW RESPECT...MANY INSTANCES IT WAS WHOLE TRIBES WHOM GRASPED THE EXPOSURE AND FURTHER...COLLECTIVELY RECORDED AND SHARED FOR FOLLOWING GENERATIONS...COUNTLESS FRAGMENTED EVIDENCE WHICH FOR THE MOST PRECEDED THE MIRAGE...MATRIX...CONTAINMENT EDICT...

HAVING SAID THE ABOVE...MY PERSONAL PROTOCOL IS TO WEIGH EVERYTHING AGAINST A SKEPTICAL FOUNDATION...READ AND PARSE BETWEEN THE LINES UNTIL AND IF...CONSERVATISM AND SKEPTICISM DOES NOT APPLY...AND...I TRY TO CONSIDER MY SELF...AN EDUCATED~RATIONAL~PRAGMATIST cool...AM I RIGHT ALL THE TIME...ABSOLUTELY NOT...BUT I STRIVE QUITE HARD TO REMAIN IN THE TOP PERCENTILE...

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Mar 17th, 2014, 12:00pm

on Mar 4th, 2014, 11:37am, jjflash wrote:
Right.

Purr, I appreciate your inquisitiveness. I also appreciate your willingness to try to pose the difficult questions. Both are qualities I admire.

That stated, if you sincerely do not understand the problems in logic with suggesting/implying we not test self-proclaimed hybrids, etc., because we may not be able to accurately read the test results, I do not have any further ways of trying to explain it at this particular point in time. It is the responsibility of the researcher making the claim to test and validate the hypothesis.


Thanks for calling me inquisitive, Jjflash, although in truth I tried to be specifically skeptical towards Professor Tyler Kokjohn's hypothesis it may be possible to test for alien DNA trace (fetal cell material) left in so called hybrid mothers' reproductive systems.

Uh, I'm not sure the problem is I do not understand/see any logic of dna-testing such female abductees, rather that I am asking pesky/critical/SKEPTICAL questions regarding Kokjohn's theoretical test which you haven't answered. (Reason given: you are not responsible to do so.)

So, I am fine in principle with any line of investigation of Abduction, as long as it is voluntary, respectfully and (...sharing your preference here...) done by accredited professionals.

I am more than fine with applying scrutiny to extraordinary claims by UFOlogists, and have agreed on your historical point of David Jacobs behaving unethically in the Woods case.

A bit strange, as well as disappointing rolleyes that my repeated critical questions (see: topic header Critical Analysis etc.!) remain unanswered. There are currently no other scientific sources reviewing the viability of Tyler Kokjohn's claims, you have been presenting them in forum, so I do not know who else to ask really.

Gist of my skepticism/critique is that (as evident from the professor's linked articles) we have no alien DNA or alien 'markers' to compare Absence or Presence of ET tampering with abductees' or human fetuses genetic material. His line of research imo must be considered original, pure theory for now. And since your lack of an answer has left this DNA test theory undefended, I maintain it is as yet premature to offer it as a reliable test for alien trace in abductee cell matter.

Tyler Kokjohn's proposed test would amount to testing in the blind, a genetic fishing expedition imho!


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Mar 17th, 2014, 12:08pm

PURR,

NOTHING LIKE THOSE PESKY UNANSWERED QUESTION... grin

User Image

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Mar 17th, 2014, 12:59pm

I OFTEN LIKE HOW PURR IS SUCH A>>>CAT ~ ALYST<<< TO SPUR THE DEBATE FORWARD grin

User Image

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Mar 17th, 2014, 1:20pm

Purrhaps I could help clarify a couple things. Purrhaps not.

- Researchers such as Barbara Lamb claim to have direct direct and ongoing access to people claiming to be ET-human hybrid beings.

- Researchers such as David Jacobs claim to have direct and ongoing access to people who term themselves breeders, regularly interact with alleged hybrids and similar circumstances that would, at least theoretically, provide investigators with a hotbed of forensic evidence.

- As far as stating it is not my responsibility, Dr. Kokjohn's or anyone else's to clarify how such evidence should be handled and examined, purr, please allow me to expand on that concept a bit. Thank you.

In my opinion, criticizing the perspectives of Kokjohn misses the fundamental point that he is not the investigator asserting the initial claims. I interpret him to be suggesting further testing be done - and that such claims be actually verified, etc. - prior to making and promoting them. In short, it is never the reviewer's job to dismiss the claim, but the original researcher's responsibility to validate it.

- That stated, I understand that what you, purr, continue to question is whether alien DNA, if existent, could be accurately identified. I interpret it virtually doesn't matter in that any number of abnormalities should be subject to appear in samples collected from alleged hybrids, and, again, researchers should at the least check (or at least that would be the case if they believed their own claims). Please consider:

on Mar 10th, 2014, 1:09pm, jjflash wrote:
Below are some excerpts from microbiologist Dr. Tyler Kokjohn's latest piece, Free Market Ufology: Demand a Better Supply. Published at Jeff Ritzmann's Paranormal Waypoint, I highly recommend reading the article in full and digesting it.

Free Market Ufology: Demand a Better Supply

March 10, 2014

By Tyler Kokjohn, Ph.D.

[...]

Another strategy exploring the limits of nothing is being put forth by Dr. David Jacobs. He posits an evolutionary process for hybrids that yields entities ‘human in every way except for sleep cycle and ability to control others’ (http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2012/04/bizarre-world-of-doctor-david-jacobs.html). In one sense this ploy seems to neatly avoid some vexing questions by making it appear these entities could not be identified like the alleged earlier stage hybrids. The changes in sleep cycle and ability to control others must have been imparted through some mechanism executed by the aliens. At some level, these changes – genetic, biochemical, ultrastructural, cellular, or anatomic – will leave traces. In addition to powerful genetic analysis tools, scientific competition and market forces have combined to provide researchers with the ability to detect changes in protein profiles, perturbations in gene expression patterns and epigenetic modifications to the genome that alter gene activity without changing the basic DNA sequence. Pick your poison, Doctor. Although not at all hybrid privacy friendly, this free market has produced some amazingly powerful and useful analysis technology.

Full article:

http://www.paranormalwaypoint.com/free-market-ufology-demand-a-better-supply/


All of which brings us back around to the scientific process, or, purrhaps more aptly stated, the bastardization thereof; if said researchers are not going to conduct such tests, adjust their hypotheses accordingly and publish the work in appropriate journals, then it's not science as falsely claimed and as aptly pointed out by Kokjohn and others. We might also consider and question why such researchers are ever making the claims in the first place - under the flag of science - if they have no proof of their allegations, and particularly if they refuse to further test their hypotheses.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Mar 17th, 2014, 1:24pm

Posted today at UFO Collective

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ufo-collective/PHrkCvfmE-s

"ET – HUMAN HYBRIDS: THEY ARE REAL & THEY ARE HERE"

The above proclamation was copied and pasted from the top of an Orange County MUFON email distributed on several occasions leading up to the March 20, 2013 appearance of Barbara Lamb. The email went on to explain that hypnotist Lamb had discovered many of her clients to have unwittingly contributed to the creation of ET-human hybrid beings. Some of those clients, it was claimed, "have discovered that they themselves _are_ hybrid beings, with a certain portion of ET genes." [emphasis theirs]

The promotional email continued, "She will also show photos of human-looking hybrids who live here among us on earth, some of whom Barbara knows personally."

I subsequently wrote a short article, posted in April of 2013, focusing on the Orange County MUFON email and purported circumstances, and in preparation Lamb was contacted for comment. I asked what justification she could present for such extraordinary claims, as it would certainly seem that she and her colleagues would be extremely eager to get at and publish such readily available opportunities to examine blood composition, DNA and similar physical circumstances of those purported to possess "a certain portion of ET genes."

Lamb failed to directly address the related questions during an email exchange, and when further urged to do so she sent no more replies. To date she has never produced what would of course be the absolutely extraordinary data.

I also attempted to contact MUFON's Jan Harzan for comment, as he was not only in a role of MUFON leadership but I interpreted him to be responsible for Southern California operations as well as particularly familiar with the Orange County chapter. Multiple emails were sent inquiring why an organization purporting to be dedicated to scientific study would promote and provide a venue for such fantastic yet unsubstantiated claims. No replies were received from Harzan.

The full April article may be viewed at:

http://tinyurl.com/no8lotr

People are entitled to believe whatever they choose. They are not entitled, however, to misrepresent nonscientific activities as scientific study, as being repeatedly perpetrated by MUFON.

It would indeed be helpful if the collective UFO community evolved to decrease its demand for such circumstances, in turn decreasing some's temptation to provide the supply. I personally made a choice to stop financially supporting those who fail to be accountable.

Regards,

Jack
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on Mar 17th, 2014, 8:08pm

on Mar 17th, 2014, 1:24pm, jjflash wrote:
The above proclamation was copied and pasted from the top of an Orange County MUFON email distributed on several occasions leading up to the March 20, 2013 appearance of Barbara Lamb.

Regards, Jack


I'll start with this one, so that you can see that I do not always disagree with you:

I was at this OC-MUFON meeting and while Barbara Lamb comes off sounding sweet and sincere, her message / talk gets real kooky - real fast with layer upon layer of information all leading to a point where the listener just says "enough" and starts rejecting it all as a bunch of crap! No proof no evidence, just a long story leading you into a never-never land...
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on Mar 17th, 2014, 8:25pm

on Mar 12th, 2014, 7:28pm, jjflash wrote:
Lastly, this one is for you ZETAR smiley

I am sure you have read it before, but, as was the case with me, it had been a while, as it is from Dr. Mack's work. A Brief Review of Issues Relating to the Reality of the Abduction Phenomenon is the added appendix of Mack's book, Abduction.

The "brief review" is rather lengthy, but makes some relevant points, in my opinion. For example, those choosing to read it might please note the number of times - several - the psychiatrist noted that more research was required, as nothing was firmly established, given the nature and challenges related to lack of physical evidence combined with memory distortion and so on.

Dr. Mack wrote, "The interpretations and conclusions in this book are hypotheses, designed to invite others to join me in the exploration of this important mystery. The alien abduction field is a new one, and it deserves a broad and systematic multi-disciplinary inquiry."

Would he approve of the activities of such individuals as David Jacobs and as explored in this thread? The lack of peer review and the suppression of potential evidence? I'll leave the reader to contemplate the answers to such questions for themselves.


Again, I find it extremely amusing how people continue to place Mack in some special untouchable category while bashing Jacobs and Hopkins.

PLEASE someone, anyone (here) READ:
Abduction by John Mack
The Threat by David Jacobs
Sight Unseen by Budd Hopkins and his THEN Wife (turned Basher after he divorced her) Carol Rainey.

And report back here on who has the wackiest interpretations, conclusions and hypotheses!

It is my opinion that Mack's stuff is by far the most unbelievable, so anyone believing his "output" to be believable has no room to bash either Jacobs & Hopkins, even if you want to hide behind the SCIENCE card...
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Mar 18th, 2014, 3:48pm

I've read a lot of the published material of Mack, Jacobs and Hopkins, including the three books you mentioned, Mythos. I've attended their presentations and so on.

I'm not critical of holding fringe beliefs or expressing extreme perspectives. I'm critical of purporting it to be scientific when it's not, and I'm critical of demands to accept claims lacking conclusive evidence. The former is at best incompetent and often likely dishonest, while the latter is simply unreasonable.

I don't care what people choose to believe. Neither do I have an agenda about personal testimonies. If someone says something happened to them, so be it. It's their prerogative to interpret their experiences how they choose.

My agenda is about being opposed to sham inquiry, as Sharon Hill coined the term, the misrepresentation of nonscientific activities as science. I'm also opposed to researchers making assertions they can't back up with verifiable facts.

The reason I am concerned about such activities is because some people – some of those who publicly shared their experiences and came to interpret them the ways they did because of 'ufologists' – are being and have long been exploited by the so-called researchers. So are members of the UFO community, the people that financially support the organizations, the folks who buy the books, those who try to expand on the research (that was flawed in the first place) and a lot of other people as well.

There may actually be phenomena of interest at the heart of ufology and what has come to be called alien abduction. However, it is a reasonable conclusion that the circumstances have been manipulated, distorted and blatantly misrepresented to the point of actuality being virtually impossible to discern. The perpetrators include several demographics with an even greater number of motives. Such demographics include charlatans, individuals with good intentions but ultimately unhelpful who were drawn in by (and fell victim to) the rhetoric of the charlatans, the intelligence community and others. The resulting lies, distortions and misinformation were cultivated and spread for decades through conferences, regional meetings and publishing houses like influenza in the depths of winter.

We will never know how the present day public at large would have interpreted events of high strangeness if they had not been so deeply conditioned to accept preconceived – yet entirely unsubstantiated – conclusions. We will never know because it already happened, thanks to demographics as just mentioned... as well as the resulting bad television, bad documentaries, influence of Hollywood, CIA propaganda and manipulation of belief systems (similarly conducted by the KGB and global IC), sensationalism within the UFO community, bad so-called nonprofit orgs masquerading as scientific research groups, philanthropists with unclear and suspect motives and so on. The leading of the witness begins long before they ever meet the hypnotist.

By the way, I'm not a big fan of Mack. I offered the material he wrote because ZETAR has expressed an interest in him several times. The bottom line on Mack, Hopkins, Jacobs and all of them is that they can offer no conclusive evidence whatsoever of their pet theories. At least Mack did not claim conclusions, but the same cannot be said for the other two, Lamb, Cannon and many more.

Unfortunately, people become hurt in the crossfire, influenced (if not directly and intentionally led) to believe they are hybrids, influenced to believe they have parented hybrids, influenced to believe they have been repeatedly kidnapped and tortured (including sexually assaulted) by both human and non-human beings, had their case files - including hypnotic regression tapes - sold without their knowledge and subsequently had their trust deeply betrayed (see Carpenter Affair), emotionally devastated and the list of trauma on top of trauma goes on and on. PayPal accepted.

Meanwhile, there might actually be some events of interest taking place among experiencers, and some of the origins of those events might indeed be diverse and vast, while some may be the covert operations of quite human technology, corporations and agencies. Whatever the case may be from one specific incident to the next, those committing sham inquiry are certainly not getting any of us any closer to accurate understandings, and, more importantly, they are adding to the list of hurt, humiliated and devastated individuals already left trying to recover in the wake.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Mar 18th, 2014, 7:37pm

JJ,

NOT MANY POSTS YOU HAVE ~ FAIL TO GET MY ATTENTION ~ DID I SAY IT IS AN HONOR TO EVALUATE/CONSIDER/DIGEST YOUR THOUGHTS. wink

DO I COMPLETELY ACCEPT OR DENY HOPKINS, JACOBS, MACK, HYNEK, VON DANIKEN, etc....THE CAST OF CHARACTERS WHOM THROUGH NOTHING OTHER THAN THE TENACITY OF THEIR CURIOSITY AND PASSION SOUGHT TO REACH BEYOND THE NORM TO ATTEMPT TO UNDERSTAND A PHENOMENA WHICH SEEMS TO PRECEDE ANY MIRAGE (MOST RESPECTFULLY) ~ THE HISTORICALLY INNOCENT DAYS WHEREIN EXPLOITATION OF SUCH A PHENOMENA WASN'T EVEN CONSIDERED...BUT YET STILL CONTINUES...>>>NO<<<...DO I RECOGNIZE THE FALLIBILITY OF MAN AND OR EACH AND EVERY RESEARCHER IN THIS ENDEAVOR...>>>YES<<<...HOWEVER...I FURTHER GRASP THE FACT THAT IN THE TOTALITY OF THE AFOREMENTIONED RESEARCHERS THERE ARE NUGGETS OF TRUTH AND TREASURES TO CONSIDER...IT'S NOT ALL A MISS~ DIRECTION TO THWART THE MASSES/MANIPULATE THE MASSES...THOSE CONVENIENT TRUTHS AND BELIEFS WHICH HAVE AUGMENTED MANY A BLACK OP...BUT THE WISDOM OF MANY MYTHS (AS SOME MAY CONSIDER) IS THAT THERE ARE TRUTHS ATTACHED FOR SUCH MYTHOLOGICAL LONGEVITY TO EXIST...IMHO

TIS ALWAYS A TREAT TO READ YOUR POSTS MY FRIEND wink

User Image

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Apr 2nd, 2014, 1:46pm

What Happened to the Ambient Monitoring Project?

The UFO Trail

April 2, 2014

Three UFO organizations collaborated during the 1990's to launch a research project of unprecedented significance to the alien abduction genre. The Ambient Monitoring Project was an impressive, scientifically designed effort to actually quantify details of what to date had remained elusive and fleeting: what, if anything, out of the ordinary was physically taking place in the environment during an alleged abduction.

Researchers aimed to collect large amounts of data measurements from the homes of people reporting repeat alien abductions. The investigative venture consisted of investing in several years of designing equipment, tweaking its implementation and securing third party qualified consultants to analyze the resulting data.

In 2006, the MUFON newly appointed international director, James Carrion, announced during an interview with Tim Binnall that completing the Ambient Monitoring Project was among the organization's top five priorities. By 2008, the MUFON Journal reported the data collection phase of the project was complete and that analysis was underway. Individuals eager to hear more about it congregated to the MUFON forum, monitored announcements at conferences and kept watchful eyes on various publications.

However, neither the results nor a final project report were ever published. What happened to the AMP?

Full article:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2014/04/what-happened-to-ambient-monitoring.html
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Apr 3rd, 2014, 08:37am

on Apr 2nd, 2014, 1:46pm, jjflash wrote:
What Happened to the Ambient Monitoring Project?

The UFO Trail

April 2, 2014

Three UFO organizations collaborated during the 1990's to launch a research project of unprecedented significance to the alien abduction genre. The Ambient Monitoring Project was an impressive, scientifically designed effort to actually quantify details of what to date had remained elusive and fleeting: what, if anything, out of the ordinary was physically taking place in the environment during an alleged abduction.

Researchers aimed to collect large amounts of data measurements from the homes of people reporting repeat alien abductions. The investigative venture consisted of investing in several years of designing equipment, tweaking its implementation and securing third party qualified consultants to analyze the resulting data.

In 2006, the MUFON newly appointed international director, James Carrion, announced during an interview with Tim Binnall that completing the Ambient Monitoring Project was among the organization's top five priorities. By 2008, the MUFON Journal reported the data collection phase of the project was complete and that analysis was underway. Individuals eager to hear more about it congregated to the MUFON forum, monitored announcements at conferences and kept watchful eyes on various publications.

However, neither the results nor a final project report were ever published. What happened to the AMP?

Full article:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2014/04/what-happened-to-ambient-monitoring.html


I recall reading about something similar to that over 10 years ago. Don't recall the name of the project but those involved were going to set up monitoring equipment in the homes of alleged frequent abductees to see if they could capture anything on tape and other devices such as motion detectors etc.
Then nothing was ever heard again about the project.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by stiver on Apr 6th, 2014, 02:16am

on Apr 3rd, 2014, 08:37am, drwu23 wrote:
I recall reading about something similar to that over 10 years ago. Don't recall the name of the project but those involved were going to set up monitoring equipment in the homes of alleged frequent abductees to see if they could capture anything on tape and other devices such as motion detectors etc.
Then nothing was ever heard again about the project.


drwu23 , there were several attempts in the past to physically monitor abductees. According to Tom Deuley "...David
Jacobs about an attempt to use a video camera to monitor an
abductee, but the subject reported that just before the
abduction was about to occur, he got an overwhelming
desire to turn the camera off. Here again there was no
evidence of an external physical influence."

Read more: http://ufomania.proboards.com/thread/1062?page=1#ixzz2y5W7ZfWn

The difference about AMP is that the equipment was sealed and the device was broadcasting the data constantly in real time. No camera, though. That was a really good project at the time, one of the best, but unfortunately way outdated now. A regular smartphone can do almost the same today.

Iza (a.k.a stiver)

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Apr 6th, 2014, 1:04pm

on Apr 6th, 2014, 02:16am, stiver wrote:
drwu23 , there were several attempts in the past to physically monitor abductees. According to Tom Deuley "...David
Jacobs about an attempt to use a video camera to monitor an
abductee, but the subject reported that just before the
abduction was about to occur, he got an overwhelming
desire to turn the camera off. Here again there was no
evidence of an external physical influence."

Read more: http://ufomania.proboards.com/thread/1062?page=1#ixzz2y5W7ZfWn

The difference about AMP is that the equipment was sealed and the device was broadcasting the data constantly in real time. No camera, though. That was a really good project at the time, one of the best, but unfortunately way outdated now. A regular smartphone can do almost the same today.

Iza (a.k.a stiver)


Thanks for the info.
It would seem to me that something should have been 'caught' on devices by now in the homes of 'frequent abductees' yet we still have no good data/evidence.
Why is that? Are the 'aliens' so advanced that they can block things and even brainwash people to turn off the devices? I have a huge problem with that line of thinking.
The more time goes on and we still have no good evidence for 'alien abductions' makes me wonder what is really happening and if it's something else even more strange.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by hyundisonata on Apr 6th, 2014, 2:08pm

From my own experience of government entering my home covertly the first move is to disable cameras etc, and then we have the big problem of remote control. Most cameras have wireless remote that is easy to use to their advantage and at one time trying to film what I believed ET they pointed something that showed as a red dot on the view screen and the camera switched off so nothing to do with brain washing etc as that’s nothing more than fantasy or a get out clause for those trying to gain monetary or attention. Lots of evidence around it is just that no one is interested even though they falsely give that impression, take the Taylor case. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Taylor_incident now here is a well investigated case that could possibly give a lot of answers due to the advancement of forensics but do you see such as MUFON approaching the police to access the evidence gathered for investigation. Nope big nope and how many other incidents that hold vital information are being ignored? then we have the different forms of alleged abduction, home sleeping , at work, driving and if genuine leave trace but those seeking monetary gain or sensationalism never offer such and it is never investigated so we are left with nothing more than a story and that’s what those blocking the revelation of ET want. If those running the big organizations genuinely wanted to put this saga to bed they would employ a forensic team that could attend an incident quickly and prove or disprove the ET reality but that will never happen as they prefer to keep ET in limbo earning big bucks
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by B J Booth on Apr 10th, 2014, 11:00am

some very good comments. Be sure to check out my articles:

http://ufos.about.com/od/aliensalienabduction/i/abductionissue.htm

and

http://ufos.about.com/od/aliensalienabduction/a/bestabductions.htm

thanks
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Apr 10th, 2014, 11:04am

EXCELLENT WORK B.J.!!!

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by hyundisonata on Apr 10th, 2014, 5:21pm

I really need to get out more lol; I never realized that BJ was Billy Booth and I have been visiting his site for years lol sorry BJ. I can understand if it was just asleep in bed abduction the skeptic arguing sci fi but there are many scenarios and when you corner the skeptic with straight forward questions they run to the hills rather than supply an answer. I cannot say if I have or have not implants from ET but I did remove one in a tooth that sure as heck was human but if we are an experiment then like us they would tag their victim so the possibility of ET implants is a strong possibility and as their technology is outside our understanding then these chips of metal or glass might just be a transmitter we just do not know and because we do not know then how can the skeptic believe they are so correct in their assumptions. I look at abduction as a criminal act no matter who or what is behind it and strongly believe our governments should protect us against such, so long as there is denial and skepticism then this will never be investigated. if this was a criminal gang abducting just the children or women claiming abduction then every police force in the world would be searching for answers yet because those committing this crime against the person are mostly alien then nothing is done , it is not just a few people claiming such it is a vast number yet it is ignored and classed as a mental disorder yet you would think with it being such a vast number they would be concerned as to why so many where developing this madness yet again no government investigation, now if I was one of the so called sane ones then I would be extremely worried as it might be a form of say virus creating this mental disorder so I would demand the claims of the insane be investigated and not just ridiculed lol you could be next..
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by JohnnyB on May 7th, 2014, 2:56pm

on Apr 10th, 2014, 5:21pm, hyundisonata wrote:
I really need to get out more lol; I never realized that BJ was Billy Booth and I have been visiting his site for years lol sorry BJ. I can understand if it was just asleep in bed abduction the skeptic arguing sci fi but there are many scenarios and when you corner the skeptic with straight forward questions they run to the hills rather than supply an answer. I cannot say if I have or have not implants from ET but I did remove one in a tooth that sure as heck was human but if we are an experiment then like us they would tag their victim so the possibility of ET implants is a strong possibility and as their technology is outside our understanding then these chips of metal or glass might just be a transmitter we just do not know and because we do not know then how can the skeptic believe they are so correct in their assumptions. I look at abduction as a criminal act no matter who or what is behind it and strongly believe our governments should protect us against such, so long as there is denial and skepticism then this will never be investigated. if this was a criminal gang abducting just the children or women claiming abduction then every police force in the world would be searching for answers yet because those committing this crime against the person are mostly alien then nothing is done , it is not just a few people claiming such it is a vast number yet it is ignored and classed as a mental disorder yet you would think with it being such a vast number they would be concerned as to why so many where developing this madness yet again no government investigation, now if I was one of the so called sane ones then I would be extremely worried as it might be a form of say virus creating this mental disorder so I would demand the claims of the insane be investigated and not just ridiculed lol you could be next..


Hi Jimmy,

So a person is abducted and he/she reports this crime to the police. Then what? Do they draw up a sketch of the perpetrator and put his picture on the local news? I can just see a wanted picture of a an alien hanging in a post office.

I've seen people write that an abduction victim should call the police so they can do whatever they do when a person is raped or held against their will. Right, and what are they going to do with that if they find anything which is very doubtful.

Just a thought.

John
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by hyundisonata on May 7th, 2014, 3:14pm

I wouldn’t expect much from the police but what I would expect is that forensic evidence be gathered by professionals and made public, if physical evidence of this nature is put in the public domain then the governments would have to come clean and pointless squabbles over ET being real would be history then people such as your self would be believed not only by believers but a public that has been shown proof by an official body. We do not have the manpower or the equipment and doctorates behind us but the police do but they will only act if we complain that it is a criminal act against the person no matter who committed the crime.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on May 12th, 2014, 8:26pm

Just Close Your Eyes...

May 12, 2014

The UFO Trail

Fifty. That's the number of years since the Hills were hypnotized.

Hundreds of thousands. That's how many advances have been made in fields such as medicine, forensics and psychology during those fifty years.

Zero is the number of those advances that have been incorporated into research of alien abduction. By and large, the standard and preferred means of investigation, even by an organization (MUFON) that purports to conduct scientific research, continues after five decades to be to encourage witnesses to close their eyes, relax and describe what happened.

..............................................................................

Recommended further reading:

Hypnosis: The Key To Unlocking The Delusional Mind? Science Daily

Free Market Ufology: Demand a Better Supply Tyler Kokjohn, PhD Paranormal Waypoint

Your Brain on Story: Why Narratives Win Our Hearts and Minds Pacific Standard
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on May 14th, 2014, 2:06pm

Letter to Dr. Michael Swords

May 14, 2014

The UFO Trail

The message below to Dr. Michael Swords concerns a post at his blog in which he apologetically presented some information casting doubt upon the validity of hypnosis as a memory retrieval enhancer and investigative tool. When Emma Woods attempted to contribute to the comments section of the post, Dr. Swords chose to edit those comments to omit the name of Emma Woods, as well as Dr. David Jacobs, who was referenced in her comments. The letter below was submitted today in the comments section of the post in question.


Dear Dr. Swords:

This message is in response to your April 19 blog post, 'Abduction and Hypnosis: a Letter from the Past.' [sic], and particularly your remarks contained in the comments section. While your stance on preferring to remain independent of controversy surrounding hypnosis used as a memory enhancer and the extremely questionable activities of some of its proponents, such as Dr. David Jacobs, is noted, a reasonable argument could be made that a man in your position within ufology is not afforded any such skirting of the issues. This is by no means to suggest that you should be disproportionately criticized for the actions of others, but to moderately point out that a community should expect to look to its leaders for guidance on relevant issues.

In addition to subjecting hypotheses to direct tests, scientists employ a regular regimen of intense introspection. No less important than the basic investigations is the essential activity of critiquing the results and the means to obtain them. Are the data accurate and precise? Was the methodology sound? These questioning processes begin before the first experiment is conducted. Careers, money and prestige may all be on the line, but they all take a back seat to the review processes. In no case would the demands imposed for the responsible conduct of research ever be considered stirring up controversy. The bottom line is simple - scientists question everything, including each other.

A concern over the possible reactions of colleagues and friends for bringing up issues with hypnosis is a clear sign something is amiss. Your choice to edit the comments of Emma Woods and refuse to allow her to specifically name Dr. Jacobs as a controversial figure at your blog is indeed your prerogative. However, it could be interpreted to be much more of the problem than the solution. While reticence to delve into matters requiring legal remedies is both wise and appreciated, the fundamental problems with abduction research itself embodied by extraordinary reliance on a single problematic methodology and exposed by a long running public dispute warrant a broader discussion. Abduction research has imitated some facets of science, but without the underlying and critical procedures to ensure data quality and subject protections. The thin veneer of this faux 'scientific' process works well enough to mislead some, but those who know the difference have an obligation to sound the alarm.

While you are entitled to your perspective, an alternative and reasonable stance would be that denying public discussion of relevant issues impedes abduction research while indirectly supporting some perpetrators of unethical acts and adding to their undeserved credibility. Due to your position as a longtime member of the board of directors of the Center for UFO Studies, the UFO community might expect to count on you, as well as your peers and others holding similar positions in UFO organizations, to clarify and resolve relevant issues. Perhaps you will opt for alternative choices in the future, and contribute in more substantial manners to the much needed improvements in leadership within abduction research specifically and ufology in general. Notwithstanding friendships, loyalties and worries over making someone feel bad, it is impossible to have this both ways.

Sincerely,

Jack Brewer

Tyler A. Kokjohn, Ph.D.

Alfred Lehmberg

Harvey Price

Carol Rainey

Jeff Ritzmann

Jeremy Vaeni

Emma Woods
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by FlatEarth on May 14th, 2014, 4:53pm

Data is, not data are.


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on May 14th, 2014, 5:10pm

FLAT,

CAPTAIN ~ YES DATA ~ cool

User Image

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 18th, 2014, 1:23pm

Comments worthy of consideration from guyx recently posted at UFO Collective:

List,

If indeed there are hybrids among us, it's a simple matter to determine. Said hybrids ought to come forward and have a swab taken from the inside cheek. If there is any odd DNA upon testing it will show up rather easily. Further, testing living members of the same family will demonstrate any divergence of their DNA assuming there has been epigenetic tampering in the recent past, or an influx of off-planet DNA.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 18th, 2014, 10:10pm

on Jun 18th, 2014, 1:23pm, jjflash wrote:
Comments worthy of consideration from guyx recently posted at UFO Collective:

List,

If indeed there are hybrids among us, it's a simple matter to determine. Said hybrids ought to come forward and have a swab taken from the inside cheek. If there is any odd DNA upon testing it will show up rather easily. Further, testing living members of the same family will demonstrate any divergence of their DNA assuming there has been epigenetic tampering in the recent past, or an influx of off-planet DNA.

Absolutely.....so one wonders why none of the so-called hybrids and their supporters have done this simple test..?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 19th, 2014, 9:43pm

on Jun 18th, 2014, 10:10pm, drwu23 wrote:
Absolutely.....so one wonders why none of the so-called hybrids and their supporters have done this simple test..?


Yeah, one would think, wouldn't they? I've become about as unimpressed with those failing to address the circumstances and failing to hold the questionable 'researchers' accountable as I have the perps themselves.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 22nd, 2014, 1:00pm

I've noticed a couple of threads lately in which alien abduction is considered. I'd like to post a bit about it in this thread.

I'm posting it here because it is not my desire to perpetually oppose alien-related theories. I do not oppose open-mindedness or fringe topics.

That stated, there are a number of things about the typical abduction narrative - and particularly as certain researchers keep telling us we should believe - that deserve reasonable scrutiny. It perplexes me, for example, that so few people ask questions concerning the supposed inabilities of the alleged aliens to successfully induce amnesia. In other words, how do abduction-researchers decide what memories are correct and what memories are screen memories? And perhaps more importantly, why aren't we asking more about such circumstances and discrepancies?

In 2012 I did a three-part series of blog posts following an interview conducted with David Jacobs. The posts contained the interview and review (by qualified experts) of his assertions. An excerpt:

Frank Purcell is a career process design engineer and has previously provided comment to The UFO Trail. He holds degrees in Chemical Engineering, Chemical Engineering Science, Control Systems Engineering and Computer Science.

He recently provided The UFO Trail with the following comments on the work of David Jacobs:

"My understanding of Jacobs’ thesis is that alien abductions are real, and moreover that all abductions are centered on an alien agenda of making human/alien hybrids. The aliens are purportedly introducing the hybrids into society with the long term intent of take-over from within. At the same time, the aliens remain dominant with more power than the hybrids they’ve created.

"I’m skeptical for these reasons:

"1) There is no assurance that hypnosis as administered by Jacobs is professionally done. Jacobs is by training a historian and not a psychologist or scientist. He has done hypnosis on about 150 people that include, what he thinks, are 1100 abduction events. He readily admits that when he began hypnosis of subjects that he didn’t know what he was doing. He has said nothing yet to convince me that he somehow now knows what he is doing.

"He admits being selective in deciding what is true and what isn’t from abductee reports. Truth is defined by him as consistency with what he or others (Hopkins) have heard from the abductees. Things reported consistent with other reports are taken as factual; things that are outliers are discarded, or not held to be true until collaboration is established with additional reports. He does allow for progression of things reported, such as the growth of hybrids to maturity, by consistency of the reports.

"2) I know little of genealogy and defer to experts in that area. As far as I know it’s impossible to cross breed an elephant with a dog. If this is not an obstacle to the aliens because of their advanced technology, why then do they even bother with human DNA and not just directly engineer the results they want from either their own or from the human species?

"3) The abduction count is really unknown. It could be very low to non-existent. Estimated ranges in ‘Alien Discussions’ are between 8/10,000 and 200/10,000. The higher number is based on what most scientists consider to be invalid (and far too high) extrapolations of a Roper poll.

"4) The credibility of the aliens themselves (granting that they even exist) is suspect; what is supposedly learned from professed abductees as told to them by the aliens is suspect. We have almost unanimous reports that aliens are deceptive or misleading while the abductee is captured. Comments from supposed abductees indicate misleading or frivolous comments from aliens in response to straightforward questions. The anecdotal data indicates that aliens are at best secretive and at worst, dishonest. Moreover, if aliens have the ability to mentally control subjects they take, as Jacobs asserts, they could be programming into the subjects whatever disinformation they choose. Presumably, the aliens are working together and communicating among themselves. They could, for their own reasons, be inserting consistent and false memories in the abductees. I don’t know of any way to sort this out. We have ample data showing that aliens are furtive when reportedly observed on the ground outside of their saucers. Whatever their true agenda is, granting that they even have one, it seems doubtful that anyone, including Jacobs, has figured it out.

"But the fifth reason, below, seems the most compelling for discarding the hypothesis altogether: there is a huge mismatch between the rate of world population growth and the maximum reasonable introduction of hybrids into the general populace.

"5) The world population has been increasing by 78 million people per year, linearly, from 1960 through 2005 (R square for the data fit is 0.996).

"If we use an abduction rate of 8/10,000 people (Miller, p. 232, Alien Abductions) in the 45 years from 1960 through 2005, there were 5.16 million abductions, or 114,700 abductions per year. Most of these abductions were repeats (by Jacobs own data, 1100 abductions for 150 people). If we arbitrarily assume 100 hybrids produced per person abducted, we get at most 160,000 hybrids introduced into the general populace per year. That is 0.2 % of the overall population growth, and only 0.002% of the total population. While a case might be made that a few of these hybrids are designated for positions of power (political office), that seems to be special pleading and it also does nothing to support the idea of biological takeover from within. The analysis above can be off by 2 orders of magnitude yet still make the case that Jacobs’ hypothesis utterly fails."

I asked Frank about how one might frame the logistics of so many supposed people literally being abducted.

"The high estimate of abduction rate, of 200/10,000 by the Roper poll," he replied, "would put 140 million saucers into the sky over a 45 year span, or around 3 million per year."

Considering said Roper poll only addressed the number of Americans allegedly being abducted, suffice it to say that would be a lot of air traffic over the US.


Full post:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2012/05/bizarre-world-of-doctor-david-jacobs.html
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 22nd, 2014, 10:54pm

on Jun 22nd, 2014, 1:00pm, jjflash wrote:
I've noticed a couple of threads lately in which alien abduction is considered. I'd like to post a bit about it in this thread.

I'm posting it here because it is not my desire to perpetually oppose alien-related theories. I do not oppose open-mindedness or fringe topics.

That stated, there are a number of things about the typical abduction narrative - and particularly as certain researchers keep telling us we should believe - that deserve reasonable scrutiny. It perplexes me, for example, that so few people ask questions concerning the supposed inabilities of the alleged aliens to successfully induce amnesia. In other words, how do abduction-researchers decide what memories are correct and what memories are screen memories? And perhaps more importantly, why aren't we asking more about such circumstances and discrepancies?

In 2012 I did a three-part series of blog posts following an interview conducted with David Jacobs. The posts contained the interview and review (by qualified experts) of his assertions. An excerpt:

Frank Purcell is a career process design engineer and has previously provided comment to The UFO Trail. He holds degrees in Chemical Engineering, Chemical Engineering Science, Control Systems Engineering and Computer Science.

He recently provided The UFO Trail with the following comments on the work of David Jacobs:

"My understanding of Jacobs’ thesis is that alien abductions are real, and moreover that all abductions are centered on an alien agenda of making human/alien hybrids. The aliens are purportedly introducing the hybrids into society with the long term intent of take-over from within. At the same time, the aliens remain dominant with more power than the hybrids they’ve created.

"I’m skeptical for these reasons:

"1) There is no assurance that hypnosis as administered by Jacobs is professionally done. Jacobs is by training a historian and not a psychologist or scientist. He has done hypnosis on about 150 people that include, what he thinks, are 1100 abduction events. He readily admits that when he began hypnosis of subjects that he didn’t know what he was doing. He has said nothing yet to convince me that he somehow now knows what he is doing.

"He admits being selective in deciding what is true and what isn’t from abductee reports. Truth is defined by him as consistency with what he or others (Hopkins) have heard from the abductees. Things reported consistent with other reports are taken as factual; things that are outliers are discarded, or not held to be true until collaboration is established with additional reports. He does allow for progression of things reported, such as the growth of hybrids to maturity, by consistency of the reports.

"2) I know little of genealogy and defer to experts in that area. As far as I know it’s impossible to cross breed an elephant with a dog. If this is not an obstacle to the aliens because of their advanced technology, why then do they even bother with human DNA and not just directly engineer the results they want from either their own or from the human species?

"3) The abduction count is really unknown. It could be very low to non-existent. Estimated ranges in ‘Alien Discussions’ are between 8/10,000 and 200/10,000. The higher number is based on what most scientists consider to be invalid (and far too high) extrapolations of a Roper poll.

"4) The credibility of the aliens themselves (granting that they even exist) is suspect; what is supposedly learned from professed abductees as told to them by the aliens is suspect. We have almost unanimous reports that aliens are deceptive or misleading while the abductee is captured. Comments from supposed abductees indicate misleading or frivolous comments from aliens in response to straightforward questions. The anecdotal data indicates that aliens are at best secretive and at worst, dishonest. Moreover, if aliens have the ability to mentally control subjects they take, as Jacobs asserts, they could be programming into the subjects whatever disinformation they choose. Presumably, the aliens are working together and communicating among themselves. They could, for their own reasons, be inserting consistent and false memories in the abductees. I don’t know of any way to sort this out. We have ample data showing that aliens are furtive when reportedly observed on the ground outside of their saucers. Whatever their true agenda is, granting that they even have one, it seems doubtful that anyone, including Jacobs, has figured it out.

"But the fifth reason, below, seems the most compelling for discarding the hypothesis altogether: there is a huge mismatch between the rate of world population growth and the maximum reasonable introduction of hybrids into the general populace.

"5) The world population has been increasing by 78 million people per year, linearly, from 1960 through 2005 (R square for the data fit is 0.996).

"If we use an abduction rate of 8/10,000 people (Miller, p. 232, Alien Abductions) in the 45 years from 1960 through 2005, there were 5.16 million abductions, or 114,700 abductions per year. Most of these abductions were repeats (by Jacobs own data, 1100 abductions for 150 people). If we arbitrarily assume 100 hybrids produced per person abducted, we get at most 160,000 hybrids introduced into the general populace per year. That is 0.2 % of the overall population growth, and only 0.002% of the total population. While a case might be made that a few of these hybrids are designated for positions of power (political office), that seems to be special pleading and it also does nothing to support the idea of biological takeover from within. The analysis above can be off by 2 orders of magnitude yet still make the case that Jacobs’ hypothesis utterly fails."

I asked Frank about how one might frame the logistics of so many supposed people literally being abducted.

"The high estimate of abduction rate, of 200/10,000 by the Roper poll," he replied, "would put 140 million saucers into the sky over a 45 year span, or around 3 million per year."

Considering said Roper poll only addressed the number of Americans allegedly being abducted, suffice it to say that would be a lot of air traffic over the US.


Full post:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2012/05/bizarre-world-of-doctor-david-jacobs.html


I can't say I disagree with those stats and conclusions which is why I have taken the position that it's very unlikely that real space aliens are flying around abducting people for some bizarre genetic hybrid program.
But that still begs the question: what is really going on then?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on Jun 23rd, 2014, 01:33am

on Jun 22nd, 2014, 1:00pm, jjflash wrote:
I've noticed a couple of threads lately in which alien abduction is considered. I'd like to post a bit about it in this thread.

I'm posting it here because it is not my desire to perpetually oppose alien-related theories. I do not oppose open-mindedness or fringe topics.

That stated, there are a number of things about the typical abduction narrative - and particularly as certain researchers keep telling us we should believe - that deserve reasonable scrutiny. It perplexes me, for example, that so few people ask questions concerning the supposed inabilities of the alleged aliens to successfully induce amnesia. In other words, how do abduction-researchers decide what memories are correct and what memories are screen memories? And perhaps more importantly, why aren't we asking more about such circumstances and discrepancies?

In 2012 I did a three-part series of blog posts following an interview conducted with David Jacobs. The posts contained the interview and review (by qualified experts) of his assertions. An excerpt:

Frank Purcell is a career process design engineer and has previously provided comment to The UFO Trail. He holds degrees in Chemical Engineering, Chemical Engineering Science, Control Systems Engineering and Computer Science.

He recently provided The UFO Trail with the following comments on the work of David Jacobs:

"My understanding of Jacobs’ thesis is that alien abductions are real, and moreover that all abductions are centered on an alien agenda of making human/alien hybrids. The aliens are purportedly introducing the hybrids into society with the long term intent of take-over from within. At the same time, the aliens remain dominant with more power than the hybrids they’ve created.

"I’m skeptical for these reasons:

"1) There is no assurance that hypnosis as administered by Jacobs is professionally done. Jacobs is by training a historian and not a psychologist or scientist. He has done hypnosis on about 150 people that include, what he thinks, are 1100 abduction events. He readily admits that when he began hypnosis of subjects that he didn’t know what he was doing. He has said nothing yet to convince me that he somehow now knows what he is doing.

"He admits being selective in deciding what is true and what isn’t from abductee reports. Truth is defined by him as consistency with what he or others (Hopkins) have heard from the abductees. Things reported consistent with other reports are taken as factual; things that are outliers are discarded, or not held to be true until collaboration is established with additional reports. He does allow for progression of things reported, such as the growth of hybrids to maturity, by consistency of the reports.

"2) I know little of genealogy and defer to experts in that area. As far as I know it’s impossible to cross breed an elephant with a dog. If this is not an obstacle to the aliens because of their advanced technology, why then do they even bother with human DNA and not just directly engineer the results they want from either their own or from the human species?

"3) The abduction count is really unknown. It could be very low to non-existent. Estimated ranges in ‘Alien Discussions’ are between 8/10,000 and 200/10,000. The higher number is based on what most scientists consider to be invalid (and far too high) extrapolations of a Roper poll.

"4) The credibility of the aliens themselves (granting that they even exist) is suspect; what is supposedly learned from professed abductees as told to them by the aliens is suspect. We have almost unanimous reports that aliens are deceptive or misleading while the abductee is captured. Comments from supposed abductees indicate misleading or frivolous comments from aliens in response to straightforward questions. The anecdotal data indicates that aliens are at best secretive and at worst, dishonest. Moreover, if aliens have the ability to mentally control subjects they take, as Jacobs asserts, they could be programming into the subjects whatever disinformation they choose. Presumably, the aliens are working together and communicating among themselves. They could, for their own reasons, be inserting consistent and false memories in the abductees. I don’t know of any way to sort this out. We have ample data showing that aliens are furtive when reportedly observed on the ground outside of their saucers. Whatever their true agenda is, granting that they even have one, it seems doubtful that anyone, including Jacobs, has figured it out.

"But the fifth reason, below, seems the most compelling for discarding the hypothesis altogether: there is a huge mismatch between the rate of world population growth and the maximum reasonable introduction of hybrids into the general populace.

"5) The world population has been increasing by 78 million people per year, linearly, from 1960 through 2005 (R square for the data fit is 0.996).

"If we use an abduction rate of 8/10,000 people (Miller, p. 232, Alien Abductions) in the 45 years from 1960 through 2005, there were 5.16 million abductions, or 114,700 abductions per year. Most of these abductions were repeats (by Jacobs own data, 1100 abductions for 150 people). If we arbitrarily assume 100 hybrids produced per person abducted, we get at most 160,000 hybrids introduced into the general populace per year. That is 0.2 % of the overall population growth, and only 0.002% of the total population. While a case might be made that a few of these hybrids are designated for positions of power (political office), that seems to be special pleading and it also does nothing to support the idea of biological takeover from within. The analysis above can be off by 2 orders of magnitude yet still make the case that Jacobs’ hypothesis utterly fails."

I asked Frank about how one might frame the logistics of so many supposed people literally being abducted.

"The high estimate of abduction rate, of 200/10,000 by the Roper poll," he replied, "would put 140 million saucers into the sky over a 45 year span, or around 3 million per year."

Considering said Roper poll only addressed the number of Americans allegedly being abducted, suffice it to say that would be a lot of air traffic over the US.


Full post:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2012/05/bizarre-world-of-doctor-david-jacobs.html


I would like to know how many (supposed) Abductees Frank Purcell has interviewed?

QUOTE: "Frank Purcell is a career process design engineer and has previously provided comment to The UFO Trail. He holds degrees in Chemical Engineering, Chemical Engineering Science, Control Systems Engineering and Computer Science."

Perhaps with all those degrees, he only has time to write articles for your blog that criticizes the authors that you do not agree with?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 23rd, 2014, 10:09am

Mythos said:" I would like to know how many (supposed) Abductees Frank Purcell has interviewed?
( "Frank Purcell is a career process design engineer and has previously provided comment to The UFO Trail. He holds degrees in Chemical Engineering, Chemical Engineering Science, Control Systems Engineering and Computer Science.")

Perhaps with all those degrees, he only has time to write articles for your blog that criticizes the authors that you do not agree with? "
---------------------

How many abductees does he need to' interview' since it has already been done by Jacobs, Hopkins, and Mack. One can simply read their books as well as other material and look at the data to draw their own conclusions.

Regarding his education degrees, I agree that is not always a reason to believe that a person is correct in their assumptions....but it helps if one knows a little about science when looking at evidence and data.



Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 23rd, 2014, 5:14pm

on Jun 22nd, 2014, 10:54pm, drwu23 wrote:
I can't say I disagree with those stats and conclusions which is why I have taken the position that it's very unlikely that real space aliens are flying around abducting people for some bizarre genetic hybrid program.
But that still begs the question: what is really going on then?


In my opinion, Doc, a lot of things. Some of those things may be highly unusual, and some of those things are most certainly not. No matter how much the pro-abduction advocates avoid inventorying likely explanations, the reality will remain that those explanations exist (and apply a certain percentage of the time). Examples would include incorrect assumptions drawn through social conditioning, various medical conditions and hoaxes, among many more. Lots of different things are going on from one specific case to the next.

Do any of the reported experiences represent circumstances deserving of the term high strangeness? In my opinion, a sincere effort to answer that question would include not averting from peer review and its challenges, but embracing them through multidisciplinary approaches. More specifically, abduction-researchers honestly desiring to validate or void their hypotheses would enthusiastically facilitate forensic testing, psychological evaluations and similar procedures.

Important point here, please: The most relevant part of such an investigation would be establishing that something took place in an objective reality. That should be square one, and cases containing such circumstances could be prioritized.

Unfortunately, the current scrupulous aversion to peer review does not earn much confidence for either the researchers or their theories. Perhaps the most hurt and disappointed of all should be the self-described experiencers, who seem to frequently become pawns in unethical games of tug of war between various demographics of investigators and interested parties staking claim to the truth.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 23rd, 2014, 8:45pm

on Jun 23rd, 2014, 5:14pm, jjflash wrote:
In my opinion, Doc, a lot of things. Some of those things may be highly unusual, and some of those things are most certainly not. No matter how much the pro-abduction advocates avoid inventorying likely explanations, the reality will remain that those explanations exist (and apply a certain percentage of the time). Examples would include incorrect assumptions drawn through social conditioning, various medical conditions and hoaxes, among many more. Lots of different things are going on from one specific case to the next.

Do any of the reported experiences represent circumstances deserving of the term high strangeness? In my opinion, a sincere effort to answer that question would include not averting from peer review and its challenges, but embracing them through multidisciplinary approaches. More specifically, abduction-researchers honestly desiring to validate or void their hypotheses would enthusiastically facilitate forensic testing, psychological evaluations and similar procedures.

Important point here, please: The most relevant part of such an investigation would be establishing that something took place in an objective reality. That should be square one, and cases containing such circumstances could be prioritized.

Unfortunately, the current scrupulous aversion to peer review does not earn much confidence for either the researchers or their theories. Perhaps the most hurt and disappointed of all should be the self-described experiencers, who seem to frequently become pawns in unethical games of tug of war between various demographics of investigators and interested parties staking claim to the truth.


Well said and for the most part I agree.
Imo what we call the paranormal exists but 'what exactly is the paranormal' is the question, as Bonehead might ask.
wink
A multi-disciplinary approach is definitely needed and as you probably know Dr Vallee has mentioned this before in his books years ago.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on Jun 24th, 2014, 11:14pm

on Jun 23rd, 2014, 10:09am, drwu23 wrote:
How many abductee's does he need to interview?


How about just ONE?








Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 25th, 2014, 12:32pm

on Jun 24th, 2014, 11:14pm, Mythos wrote:
How about just ONE?


One is a very low sample.....wouldn't you say...? wink
But that wasn't my point at all. What I was saying was that plenty of people have done interviews and analysis of 'abductees' over the last 35 years. One can choose whichever position one likes from the various books and use it to draw your own conclusions. That is what that author did....and he supported it with his own ideas and position from a science model. I have no problem with that. It doesn't mean that you or I have to agree with him.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on Jun 28th, 2014, 12:50am

on Jun 25th, 2014, 12:32pm, drwu23 wrote:
One is a very low sample.....wouldn't you say...? wink
But that wasn't my point at all. What I was saying was that plenty of people have done interviews and analysis of 'abductees' over the last 35 years. One can choose whichever position one likes from the various books and use it to draw your own conclusions. That is what that author did....and he supported it with his own ideas and position from a science model. I have no problem with that. It doesn't mean that you or I have to agree with him.


Well I would just imagine that someone who has interviewed HUNDREDS of (alleged) Abductee's might know a bit more about it that a guy who has never looked into the eyes of a single one!

But if you have a blog and are looking to bash UFO researchers certainly anyone with a wall full of degrees MUST be quotable..
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 28th, 2014, 3:19pm

on Jun 28th, 2014, 12:50am, Mythos wrote:
Well I would just imagine that someone who has interviewed HUNDREDS of (alleged) Abductee's might know a bit more about it that a guy who has never looked into the eyes of a single one!

But if you have a blog and are looking to bash UFO researchers certainly anyone with a wall full of degrees MUST be quotable..


You are still missing the point. He chooses not to interpret the data the same way as the 'believers' do.
Just because an abductee researcher, like Jacobs, thinks its aliens doesn't mean it is.
And it sounds to me like you are simply taking the side of the alien abduction believers because that's your side also. How is that objective and non biased and any less bashing?
huh

We need an objective look into the phenomenon without taking sides . As Vallee has said before there's a chance to do some good science here and perhaps discover something very important but all we get are amateurs with no real science background biased from the start and then writing books to support their own beliefs.
The fact is that neither Hopkins (now deceased) nor Jacobs ; the two foremost abduction researchers of the last 25 years, had any background in science, forensics, or investigation techniques. Hopkins was an abstract artist from New York and Jacobs a history prof from Temple University. I was fortunate enough to have met Hopkins once at a ufo seminar in Grand rapids MI, and he was a very nice man but he was not well versed in the ufo phenom over all and admitted he spent almost all of his time focusing on abductee interviews and their issues.

We need some seriously focused experts or the 'abduction phenom' will remain lost in the clouds.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 29th, 2014, 3:39pm

Among the most debilitating challenges to ufology is its community's widespread inabilities to rationally and objectively weigh information. This often includes:

- Inabilities to accurately differentiate between functionally challenging assertions and personally attacking the researcher

- Inabilities to accurately differentiate between an opinion and an established fact

- Inabilities to consider or realistically comment on how we might challenge unsubstantiated claims if not by asking reasonable questions

- Inabilities to stay on specific points without changing the focus of a discussion to other unsubstantiated and often completely unrelated assertions

- General partisan perspectives accompanied by inclinations to defend the party lines regardless of credibility of information presented that contradicts the preconceived belief

- Overall lack of understanding that the professional research process includes checks and balances, and failing to support and abide by the protocol results in environments conducive to extremely poor quality of information

It is for these very reasons that the UFO community is such an attractive destination for charlatans and hoaxers. A reasonable argument could competently be made that a majority of its members prefer an entertaining lie to the truth.

I was recently involved in an exchange at UFO Collective which included the previously posted comments of guyx:

on Jun 18th, 2014, 1:23pm, jjflash wrote:
Comments worthy of consideration from guyx recently posted at UFO Collective:

List,

If indeed there are hybrids among us, it's a simple matter to determine. Said hybrids ought to come forward and have a swab taken from the inside cheek. If there is any odd DNA upon testing it will show up rather easily. Further, testing living members of the same family will demonstrate any divergence of their DNA assuming there has been epigenetic tampering in the recent past, or an influx of off-planet DNA.


The exchange led to comments from Peter Brookesmith, who wrote in part, "Ufology was never 'scientific', because its proponents have never understood what science actually is, how it works, or what it really does."
I would recommend considering his comments in full:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/ufo-collective/PHrkCvfmE-s/GxWJdz5GTcYJ

Mr. Brookesmith's remarks were followed shortly by some from Kevin Randle, who noted, "The same research methods that failed in the twentieth century are being used today. Abduction researchers will not accept the idea that sleep paralysis does explain some abductions (mention this and the retort is always, "Some of the abductees were wide awake when it happened.") Even when it is clear that sleep paralysis explains a specific case they feel the need to argue...

"The point is this: I don't believe that anything will change because the people involved do not want real answers, they want their belief structures validated. They don't want research, they want to be included in some group. Contrary to stated opinion, this is a group that some wish to join. It is not going to change and it really doesn't matter what we do. Twenty years from now we'll be having the same discussion."

I would also recommend reading and considering Mr. Randle's email in full.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 29th, 2014, 6:10pm

From jj's post:
"The point is this: I don't believe that anything will change because the people involved do not want real answers, they want their belief structures validated. They don't want research, they want to be included in some group. Contrary to stated opinion, this is a group that some wish to join. It is not going to change and it really doesn't matter what we do. Twenty years from now we'll be having the same discussion."
--------------------------

Unfortunately I also think that's true about many of those involved with the abduction phenomenon.
They seem more interested in the belief structures than the truth, whatever it may be.



Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Jul 5th, 2014, 03:56am

We cant blame anyone for what interests them now can we?I have an almost rabid interest in abduction,I once thought that this brought everything together.Yuppers I did.You see a ufo you wonder about it and then you read of abduction stories.Two and two make four. Thats the very reason there here thought I.To create a hybrid race of beings,part us and part them.I no longer believe that.It was much much simpler back then.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by hyundisonata on Jul 8th, 2014, 04:07am

That’s like the kettle calling the pot black WU, you stick to your belief structure like glue trying to enforce your belief. Will it change over time I doubt it not because of belief but manipulation by those seeking monetary gain, power or fame? This attitude that everyone who suffers such as abduction should have in depth knowledge of science etc when trying to explain something they haven’t a clue about and probably never will also does not help. We all assume too much and over-write the stories with our own thoughts and not the truth as we all like to believe.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jul 8th, 2014, 10:06am

on Jul 8th, 2014, 04:07am, hyundisonata wrote:
That’s like the kettle calling the pot black WU, you stick to your belief structure like glue trying to enforce your belief. Will it change over time I doubt it not because of belief but manipulation by those seeking monetary gain, power or fame? This attitude that everyone who suffers such as abduction should have in depth knowledge of science etc when trying to explain something they haven’t a clue about and probably never will also does not help. We all assume too much and over-write the stories with our own thoughts and not the truth as we all like to believe.


I feel the need to correct you...once again.
I have no specific 'belief structure' regarding abductions or the ufo enigma except to say that I don't believe the ETH explains the enigma well enough to use that model exclusively.
And without science and other disciplines the 'abduction phenom' will remain lost in no man's land with cult ideas and not with rational investigation.

btw...in case you forgot the title of this thread is Critical Analysis of Research Alien Abductions. That certainly sounds like rational scientific thought to me. Something which is sorely lacking with many in the ufo community at large.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Jul 8th, 2014, 12:11pm

on Jun 28th, 2014, 3:19pm, drwu23 wrote:
You are still missing the point. He chooses not to interpret the data the same way as the 'believers' do.
Just because an abductee researcher, like Jacobs, thinks its aliens doesn't mean it is.
And it sounds to me like you are simply taking the side of the alien abduction believers because that's your side also. How is that objective and non biased and any less bashing?
huh

We need an objective look into the phenomenon without taking sides . As Vallee has said before there's a chance to do some good science here and perhaps discover something very important but all we get are amateurs with no real science background biased from the start and then writing books to support their own beliefs.
The fact is that neither Hopkins (now deceased) nor Jacobs ; the two foremost abduction researchers of the last 25 years, had any background in science, forensics, or investigation techniques. Hopkins was an abstract artist from New York and Jacobs a history prof from Temple University. I was fortunate enough to have met Hopkins once at a ufo seminar in Grand rapids MI, and he was a very nice man but he was not well versed in the ufo phenom over all and admitted he spent almost all of his time focusing on abductee interviews and their issues.

We need some seriously focused experts or the 'abduction phenom' will remain lost in the clouds.



Well speaking only for meself it was years and years of believing that this was aliens.I mean what else could it be? I believed this with all of my heart forever and ever.Then one night I was thinking and thinking its true that your head actually hurts.Then it struck me like little else ever has.Its not aliens from another planet at all.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jul 8th, 2014, 12:52pm

on Jul 8th, 2014, 12:11pm, carolnistri wrote:
Well speaking only for meself it was years and years of believing that this was aliens.I mean what else could it be? I believed this with all of my heart forever and ever.Then one night I was thinking and thinking its true that your head actually hurts.Then it struck me like little else ever has.Its not aliens from another planet at all.


I don't completely rule out the possibility that some
ufo related events are ET but after years of reading and looking at the various reports the whole area is truly bizarre on several levels.
I have trouble thinking that any advanced alien race would travel all this way to just play around with humans, buzz our skies, and do some weird genetic abduction experiement . It just doesn't work for me.
I would contact the human race openly and have an exchange of ideas. Unless these aliens have no ethics at all and no interest in open dialogue with other sentient races , I can see no reason for the alleged actions over the years.
But I also have no concrete idea on what 'they' really are.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by hyundisonata on Jul 8th, 2014, 4:34pm

Lol WU we will just have to beg to differ on that one, as for rational investigation how can you achieve such especially on boards such as this where every one is living the lie embedded with secrecy. If we cannot even attempt openness here then we haven’t a hope in hell of getting to the truth as anything put forward by people anonymous cannot be verified.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jul 8th, 2014, 4:50pm

on Jul 8th, 2014, 4:34pm, hyundisonata wrote:
Lol WU we will just have to beg to differ on that one, as for rational investigation how can you achieve such especially on boards such as this where every one is living the lie embedded with secrecy. If we cannot even attempt openness here then we haven’t a hope in hell of getting to the truth as anything put forward by people anonymous cannot be verified.


Would you care to elaborate on how board member anonymity has anything to do with rational investigation of the ufo enigma in general? And what do you mean by living the lie embedded with secrecy? What openess would you like to see?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Jul 8th, 2014, 5:03pm

DRWU ~ I MOST HUMBLY ASK THAT IF ANY MEMBER ELECTED TO WALK OUT INTO THIS STADIUM AND ANNOUNCE ~ I AM HERE ~ REFERENCING ONES UNKNOWN AERIAL OBSERAVATIONS ~ I ASK FOR YOU TO EXPLAIN IN LAYMANS TERMS AS TO THE BENEFIT TO YOU AND THE UFOLOGICAL COMMUNITY wink ~ RESPECTFULLY ~ NUDGIN THINGS ALONG HERE grin grin grin

User Image

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by hyundisonata on Jul 8th, 2014, 5:56pm

Lol WU unlike your self I hide from no man that way I can be honest and speak my mind without fear, you on the other hand hide behind a veil of secrecy making demands like others visiting sites such as this living in fear. Now how can you expect governments or military to be truthful and transparent when you all cannot even accomplish such on a forum its just sheer hypocracy, face facts to get a proper in-depth investigation the only people that have the power to order such is the worlds governments but do you honestly believe they are taking notice of anonymous people making demands on forums. Break the chains guys it’s not hard to do then you can be taken seriously on a very controversial subject as UFO and force transparent investigation, alas such will never happen as the established fear is well rooted and you will continue to shout your mouths off as long as you do not have to say who you are that way you avoid getting involved in reality safe in your cyber worlds lol and still expect to be taken seriously. You’re an intelligent guy WU yet you still fall for the secrets game as they expect you to do then apply it to your own life, to get a transparent investigation establishing the truth for or against ET you your self have to be transparent, a simple case of practice what you preach.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jul 9th, 2014, 1:46pm

As I discuss the actions of David Jacobs, particularly concerning his interactions with Emma Woods, with members of the UFO community, I continue to find that a high percentage of people seem to avert from actually reviewing the relevant circumstances. I understand there are a number of reasons for that being the case. Nonetheless, it would seem we should educate ourselves on the circumstances and be aware of what they indicate, especially if we offer opinion on his work and related matters.

Bearing that in mind, those who choose to do so may listen to an audio file (under 3 minutes in length) of Jacobs telling Emma during a hypnosis session conducted by long distance telephone that he, a historian, "diagnosed" her as having Multiple Personality Disorder:

http://emmawoodsfiles.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/hypnosis-session-29-david-jacobs-suggestions-mpd2.mp3

Emma explained the convoluted and extremely questionable circumstances further at her website:

Dr. Jacobs has admitted publicly that he did this, during an interview on the Coast to Coast AM radio show, ET Hybrids / Ultraterrestrials, on December 19, 2010. He has tried to justify it as a convoluted and outlandish “tactic” against “aliens” and alien-human “hybrids”.

[...]

This is a short explanation of what occurred. If you have any further questions, feel free to contact me about it.

1) I was Dr. Jacobs’ research subject between 2004 through 2007, and he investigated my anomalous experiences using hypnosis.

2) During that time, Dr. Jacobs told me that he was in danger from “hybrids/aliens” because of his “alien abduction” research, and in my considered personal opinion, his behavior became quite strange.

3) Dr. Jacobs said that he also believed that those “hybrids/aliens” could read my mind (and the minds of other experiencers.)

4) Consequently, while Dr. Jacobs had me under hypnosis, he planted suggestions in my mind that I had Multiple Personality Disorder. He did this ostensibly to try to fool the “hybrids/aliens”, not because he really believed that I had MPD.

5) Dr. Jacobs ostensibly believed that the “hybrids/aliens” would read my mind, see that he had a new theory ‘that everyone telling abduction stories was actually suffering from MPD’, and that the “hybrids/aliens” would therefore lose interest in him.

6) Dr. Jacobs told me that he actually believed in “alien abduction”. He said that he believed that his life was in danger from the “hybrids/aliens” because he knew that they had a “secret” program to infiltrate Earth by using “hybrids” to blend into human society.

7) Dr. Jacobs was ostensibly trying to use my mind as a shield to protect himself from “hybrids/aliens”, whom he said he believed would use mind control on him, or even possibly kill him, to stop his “alien abduction” research.

8) However, I am of the opinion that Dr. Jacobs probably knew that he was not really in danger from “hybrids/aliens”, because I do not think that he would have put his family in danger to do his “alien abduction” research.

9) Dr. Jacobs did not ask my permission before he put the suggestions in my mind that I had MPD, and I did not know that he was going to do it.

10) I understood at the time that Dr. Jacobs’ suggestions were intended for the “hybrids/aliens” benefit, but because I was hypnotized, they still affected me.

11) After Dr. Jacobs had brought me out of the hypnotic state, he continued to reinforce to me that I must keep it in my mind, so that the “hybrids/aliens” would believe it.

12) I tried to deal with it by making light of it at the time, but it nevertheless frightened me.

13) Dr Jacobs is not a medical doctor. He is a historian. Even if he had really believed that I had MPD, which he did not, he would not have been able to diagnose it.

14) Gary Haden has published further information about Dr. Jacobs putting hypnotic suggestions in my mind that I had MPD, and his opinions about the issue, on his former Speculative Realms blog. He has kindly allowed me to post a PDF archive of it here:

They’re On to Me: The MPD Game from Hello to Goodby – Speculative Realms PDF Archive

15) In my considered personal opinion, Dr. Jacob’s actions were the self-absorbed and unethical actions of a researcher so involved in either his agenda, or fantasy world, that he lost total regard for my well-being, and had no concern for the injury and ramifications that those hypnotic suggestions might ultimately have on me.

16) This is not a character assassination of Dr. Jacobs. I am merely trying, in the only way that I know how, to make my story known, so that others will not suffer the same treatment from Dr. Jacobs, or from any other researchers.

17) Unfortunately, the phenomenon is still so suppressed by society, that there are few places people can turn to for help. There appear to be no effective regulations in place to protect vulnerable experiencers of the phenomenon. It seems as though word of mouth is the main protection that we have at this time.

See Emma's sitte for full post and supporting links:

http://ufoalienabductee.com/
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Jul 9th, 2014, 2:52pm

Hyundisonata,

.. alas such will never happen as the established fear is well rooted and you will continue to shout your mouths off as long as you do not have to say who you are that way you avoid getting involved in reality safe in your cyber worlds lol and still expect to be taken seriously..


Perhaps, when you have a spare minute, you can tell us how you define reality.

And why any of us should accept your definition. After all, reality, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

HAL
INT21
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jul 9th, 2014, 6:23pm

on Jul 8th, 2014, 5:03pm, ZETAR wrote:
DRWU ~ I MOST HUMBLY ASK THAT IF ANY MEMBER ELECTED TO WALK OUT INTO THIS STADIUM AND ANNOUNCE ~ I AM HERE ~ REFERENCING ONES UNKNOWN AERIAL OBSERAVATIONS ~ I ASK FOR YOU TO EXPLAIN IN LAYMANS TERMS AS TO THE BENEFIT TO YOU AND THE UFOLOGICAL COMMUNITY wink ~ RESPECTFULLY ~ NUDGIN THINGS ALONG HERE grin grin grin

[SHALOM...Z


And what does that have to do with anything ...?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jul 9th, 2014, 6:25pm

on Jul 8th, 2014, 5:56pm, hyundisonata wrote:
Lol WU unlike your self I hide from no man that way I can be honest and speak my mind without fear, you on the other hand hide behind a veil of secrecy making demands like others visiting sites such as this living in fear. Now how can you expect governments or military to be truthful and transparent when you all cannot even accomplish such on a forum its just sheer hypocracy, face facts to get a proper in-depth investigation the only people that have the power to order such is the worlds governments but do you honestly believe they are taking notice of anonymous people making demands on forums. Break the chains guys it’s not hard to do then you can be taken seriously on a very controversial subject as UFO and force transparent investigation, alas such will never happen as the established fear is well rooted and you will continue to shout your mouths off as long as you do not have to say who you are that way you avoid getting involved in reality safe in your cyber worlds lol and still expect to be taken seriously. You’re an intelligent guy WU yet you still fall for the secrets game as they expect you to do then apply it to your own life, to get a transparent investigation establishing the truth for or against ET you your self have to be transparent, a simple case of practice what you preach.


What in God's name are you ranting about? Who is hiding behind a veil of secrecy?
The more you and a few others post the more you guys sound paranoid......I'm sorry but that's how you act.
Transparent in what manner...?
huh
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Jul 11th, 2014, 09:56am

This is from JJflash,its written by Emma Woods

16) This is not a character assassination of Dr. Jacobs. I am merely trying, in the only way that I know how, to make my story known, so that others will not suffer the same treatment from Dr. Jacobs, or from any other researchers


The heck it isnt.She may as well have held up a neatly sliced off package of gonads.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jul 11th, 2014, 11:16am

on Jul 11th, 2014, 09:56am, carolnistri wrote:
This is from JJflash,its written by Emma Woods

16) This is not a character assassination of Dr. Jacobs. I am merely trying, in the only way that I know how, to make my story known, so that others will not suffer the same treatment from Dr. Jacobs, or from any other researchers


The heck it isnt.She may as well have held up a neatly sliced off package of gonads.


Question, please, carolnistri: Have you read the review of Dr. Jacobs' work I posted and listened to the recordings provided by Emma?

If not, why not?

If so, what do you make of them?

Also, how might one go about assessing the value or lack thereof of activities such as conducted by Jacobs if not presenting them and critiquing them? In other words, why, specifically, do you oppose the findings of individuals such as Emma, Frank Purcell, Tyler Kokjohn and others quoted in my posts?

If anyone cares to field such questions, please be as specific as possible about the particular points contained in their statements.

Thanks.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jul 11th, 2014, 2:09pm

For my two cents...I have read the controversy around Jacobs (and Hopkins who is now deceased) over the least 10 years or so and find it troubling.

Neither man was really qualified to do hypnosis nor any forensic investigations regarding ufos and abductions.
By that I mean they had no science background, psychological backgound , nor any investigation experience. Jacobs is a history professor and I honestly don't see how that qualifies him to do anything except teach history.

Many will say , 'well neither do many other ufologists', and I would say you are right. There are a lot of unqualified people running around making claims and writing books about ufos and abdutions who have little to no scientific background , medical ,nor investigative experience. That is a huge part of the problem with the ufo area.

I can't comment on any unethical activities by Jacobs as well as jjflash who has been fiollowing the case closely but I'm not sure that an artist-Hopkins not a history prof-Jacobs should have been doing the things they did.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Jul 12th, 2014, 04:32am

They should let qualified scientists take over..phoeey,weve all been waiting and waiting and waiting for that to occur.JJflash,I do believe that Emma Woods should have written to Jacobs directly.She shouldnt have made public an accusation of this nature,as for Jacobs it seems to me it was an honest mistake.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jul 12th, 2014, 11:20am

Hi, carolnistri,

I can assure you my low opinions about the state of so-called abduction research, and particularly the actions of Jacobs, are the results of rather lengthy consideration of specific and verified circumstances. But you don't have to take my word for it, and, furthermore, I would discourage you doing so. We should each feel free and encouraged to challenge claims and research practices, and, if the claims and practices are sound, they will stand up to our challenges - or not.

So let's start with square one: Jacobs claims to conduct scientific investigation. That's a problem, because he not only does not, but he is unqualified to do so (as drwu23 aptly points out). Please note that was a primary issue in the beginning of this thread: individuals claiming, falsely, to conduct scientific investigation. I would agree that there is nothing wrong with conducting research, forming opinions and publishing those opinions - it's what I do. But claiming it is scientific when it is not is the first problem, should be stopped and community members should not make excuses for/enable it because all a researcher need do is simply not make the false claim.

During my interactions with Emma Woods (a pseudonym) and those close to her, I have on numerous occasions reviewed audio files demonstrating Emma's attempts to negotiate the circumstances with Jacobs and clarify his stances on various items of which she grew increasingly concerned. I bring this up because you question the extents she interacted with him directly and tried to resolve her concerns. Those efforts can be easily verified as extensive via audio files not only available to interested parties and researchers, but posted on her website.

Consider, please, a circumstance in which Emma tried to clarify DJ's position on some questionable issues, resulting in Jacobs threatening to publish Emma's actual identity if she spoke out about details of their relationship and the questionable things that had occurred:

http://emmawoodsfiles.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/david-jacobs-threat-reveal-my-identity1.mp3

You might also choose to give the audio files a listen and think the circumstances over a bit that I will put in my next Casebook post (that were contained in a previous post). Please allow me to emphasize that, in my opinion, a common mistake made is misinterpreting accurate vs. inaccurate as debunker vs. believer. They're not the same thing.

I interpret examining the questionable work of self-described researchers as entirely necessary. It is the path to truth, whatever the truth may ultimately prove to be.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jul 12th, 2014, 11:21am

on Feb 8th, 2014, 10:18pm, jjflash wrote:
The Woods/Jacobs Tapes and the 'Oral History' Falsehood

The UFO Trail

February 8, 2014

Tuesday, February 4, this writer was pleased to be among guests on Jeff Ritzmann's Paranormal Waypoint. The show was a special three-hour finale to Ritzmann's multi-episode exploration of research of alleged alien abduction. Focus was upon the case of Emma Woods and its mishandling by the now retired Temple University historian Dr. David Jacobs. Fellow guests were microbiologist Dr. Tyler Kokjohn and author Jeremy Vaeni.

Ritzmann put a great deal of preparation into the episode, taking listeners on an informative and revealing audio tour of the case via taped interactions between Woods and Jacobs. Both were fully aware the recordings were being made at the time of their creation.

The Woods/Jacobs tapes provide irrefutable documentation of unsettling and often disturbing circumstances. Recordings presented and considered - which have long been public thanks to Woods - included interactions from the initial hypnotic regression sessions Jacobs began in 2004 and conducted by telephone. Ritzmann also took listeners through taped exchanges in which Woods confronted Jacobs about discrepancies in his ongoing and increasingly outrageous suggestions.Tapes were also played and discussed in which Woods attempted to clarify circumstances with Jacobs, who threatened her with consequences if she did not either support his conclusions or remain silent.

Leading

At the time of this post, the website of the International Center for Abduction Research, which is maintained by Jacobs, has a bio on Jacobs. Among other questionable items, the bio asserts that "Jacobs is a strong advocate of strict scientific and ethical research methodology", a claim that can irrefutably be shown to be false to the extent of insulting one's intelligence.

The following clip was featured on Paranormal Waypoint and contains details of a telephone hypnosis session between Jacobs and Woods. While Woods largely repeated that she was unsure of the circumstances and often replied, "I don't know," to Jacobs' questions, a scenario was nonetheless constructed in which she was aboard an alien craft. One unclear circumstance at a time, the Jacobs-led conversation progressed to Woods envisioning herself surrounded by beings. Around the eight-minute mark, the following statements were made:

Jacobs: Well, I'm just wondering if maybe they put him on top of you, basically.

Woods: Maybe. Yeah, I think so.

Jacobs: And I know that once again I'm leading you here so you have to be careful, and I understand I'm leading you, and you should understand that too. Okay, now I'm going to ask you a series of questions here and when you answer these questions, when you understand what's happening here, you will - it's not that there's going to be a revelation, but you're going to understand what's going on here and it's not what ya think. How's that for something odd?"

Jacobs then proceeded to create, nearly completely independently of Woods' statements, a scenario in which she was allegedly forced to have sex with what Jacobs described as another abductee.

"He's just some guy," Jacobs told the woman, "he's some, he's some guy that they got. You know, he's an abductee. It's happened to him all his life, and, uhm, he's just as much a victim in the situation as you are. They put him on you, he does his business. What happens - when you get a sense that he is about to ejaculate, what happens to him? What do they do with him?"

Woods proceeded to tell Jacobs that she did not think the man ejaculated. "I don't think he does," she explained, adding that she did not have a very strong visual sense of the situation and that the described scenario may be wrong.

Around the twelve-minute mark, Jacobs then apparently felt himself entitled and qualified to interpret and explain the entire circumstance at length, incredibly informing the woman, "This is a sperm collection procedure. They bring the guy to a height of sexual arousal. Before he ejaculates they pull him off and they collect the sperm in a receptacle, and they do this every single time that this event happens."

Jacobs continued to inform Woods how she should look at the situation in her role as the "facilitator of the sperm collection."

The entire clip:

http://www.paranormalwaypoint.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/hypnosis_session_2.mp3


The Chastity Belt Clip

Among the more infamous recordings to be published by Woods included the chastity belt clip. Jacobs explained to the woman that she could consider wearing a belt that "right where the vaginal opening is has a couple of nails sticking across." This he suggested, would slow down hybrids intent on committing repeated sexual assaults.

"They have these sex shops, ya know, and I went into one that specialized in bondage dominance, a place that I frequented quite often," the man claiming to be an advocate of strict scientific and ethical research told Woods during a long distance hypnosis session:

http://www.paranormalwaypoint.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/hypnosis_chastity.mp3


The Underwear Session

And then there was the request for underwear.

"Were you wearing underpants?" Jacobs asked Woods.

Woods: Yeah.

Jacobs: Uhm, did you wash the underpants?

Woods: Hmm, probably, yeah.

Jacobs: Even though it was yesterday?

Woods: I might have. I could look in the laundry. I could have a look.

Jacobs: Have a look. Put it in a plastic bag, if you find the ones...

Later during the same session, Jacobs instructed Woods, "Well, if you can dig up the underpants, without even thinking about it, just put 'em in a plastic bag, put 'em in an envelope, then just send 'em off to me. Totally, greatly appreciate it. Do not even think about it. Just do it automatically. No fuss, no muss and don't think about it afterward either."

Full clip:

http://www.paranormalwaypoint.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/hypnosis_send_underwear.mp3


More of the Woods/Jacobs tapes, including the historian's suggestion the woman had Multiple Personality Disorder during an ill conceived, convoluted and rather unbelievable plan to deceive the hybrids, may be found at Paranormal Waypoint. The thorough and expanding website of Emma Woods should also be viewed for more information.

If there is evidence of high strangeness to be found, it is not within such hypnosis sessions. Not only does the research subject find neither emotional support nor intellectual answers, they are at high risk of sustaining further trauma.

Further Considerations

It might be rather easy for many readers to write Jacobs off as an idiot, and there are certainly some within UFO circles who have done just that. I invite a bit further consideration, however, that regardless of his wanderings into abuse and absurdity, Jacobs indeed knew what kind of evidence he was seeking. I additionally suggest that after the man repeatedly failed in obtaining support for his hypotheses through his collection of samples, he ceased collecting potential evidence rather than revise suppositions.

A spring, 2011 newsletter published by the False Memory Syndrome Foundation reported that Temple defended the actions of Jacobs, primarily on the grounds that his research was limited to the collection of oral histories. Obviously, the collection of underwear is more than oral history. Moreover, The UFO Trail conducted an interview with Jacobs at the 2012 Ozark UFO Conference in which the doctor himself described multiple circumstances of collecting samples from research subjects. A 2012 exchange between Jacobs and The UFO Trail:

"I have taken material for analysis to various DNA testing places. They had negative results. There wasn't enough of it or they couldn't tell what it was – that sort of thing.”

“Are these tests available for the public to review?”

“Not yet.”

“Will they be?”

“I don't know. One I did many years ago at a local lab in Delaware. Another one was done by American Testing Institute in New York City – American Chemical? I can't remember the name of it now. That was also many years ago – about brown stains that people have; that's routinely there. I had another one done for a TV show..."

The collection of oral history defense is apparently both incorrect and a blatant misrepresentation of actuality. It additionally shows us that when this purported science advocate failed to obtain the valuable physical evidence supporting his theories, he shamelessly continued his promotion of a completely unsubstantiated assumption and with virtual disregard for the extents others were hurt in the process. He did so not only while coming up short with the samples he stated he obtained, but he failed to share the data with the public.

People are entitled to believe and conduct their affairs as they choose. They are not entitled, however, to conduct nonscientific activities and call them science without challenge. Neither is David Jacobs entitled to immunity from accountability.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Jul 13th, 2014, 03:52am

To your knowledge did "Emma" and Jacobs ever share a bed?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jul 13th, 2014, 11:12am

on Jul 13th, 2014, 03:52am, carolnistri wrote:
To your knowledge did "Emma" and Jacobs ever share a bed?


No. I am entirely under the impression Emma was deeply hurt and offended by the sexual content of Jacobs' statements, particularly considering the fact they were made during the vulnerability of hypnosis... by international telephone, no less.

I interpret she attempted to trust him as a hypnotist with exploring her experiences. Over time, however, his leading reached what she felt was a point of absurdity about hybrids, sperm collections and winding, convoluted plots of interplanetary intrigue. When she confronted Jacobs about the discrepancies in such scenarios, such as how he could be a prominent speaker while simultaneously claiming to be on the run from hybrids wishing to kill him (like, can't they find the UFO convention?), she increasingly lost trust in his intentions as a researcher. She and others strongly suspected his shameless leading of the witness as an effort to compile book material, and his inappropriate sexual references as unethical and extremely questionable conduct.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jul 13th, 2014, 11:17am

I think it worthy of mention there are other subjects of Jacobs in addition to Emma who became disturbed with what they felt were his attempts to frame their experiences in manners that misrepresented their interpretations while supporting his preferred theories. We could discuss that further if anyone would like, but I would also like to make another point, please, that builds off of the last one: When I composed the three-part series on the work and claims of Dr. David Jacobs, I intentionally omitted complaints of his research subjects. I did that because I wanted to allow the man to make his case and have his say, then examine his own statements and assertions. In other words, it became increasingly clear there were any number of reasons to greatly question the man's work and claims completely independent of the complaints of his research subjects.

The resulting series was an interview with Jacobs followed by comments from qualified professionals, both past and current at the time, about his methods and claims:

on May 21st, 2013, 3:24pm, jjflash wrote:
The Bizarre World of Dr. David Jacobs: An Interview and Review, Part One of Three includes an interview with historian and researcher David Jacobs.

Part Two addresses mental health issues commonly omitted from discussion and considers critical review published by parapsychologist Susan Blackmore, Rutgers sociologist Ted Goertzel and expert on rhetoric Stephanie Kelley-Romano, who delved extensively into alien abduction.

Part Three of the series includes review contributed by retired process design engineer Frank Purcell and microbiologist Tyler Kokjohn.


Lastly, I would please like to re-emphasize why I conduct the kinds of activities I do, as I interpret the relevance and intentions get lost on occasion. My primary interests and motives include conducting activism involving:

1) Ufologists and UFO organizations who falsely claim to conduct scientific research and investigation,

2) The resulting detrimental effects it has on public perception of truth, particularly as related to the circulation of accurate and verifiable information, and, very importantly,

3) People being hurt in the process.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Jul 13th, 2014, 11:31am

Sigh,is there no one to trust undecided
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by skizicks on Jul 13th, 2014, 9:11pm

I'm sure that there are trustworthy researchers out there. but I doubt they are writing books and making self serving speeches at conventions.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Jul 14th, 2014, 10:52am

Dont mind me dear Ski,I was very very impressed with Jacobs interview he did with UFO Evidence. Here have a read when you get the chance.

http://www.ufoevidence.org/topics/DavidJacobs.htm

I remember reading The Threat and going to sleep with the lights on.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Oldtimer on Jul 16th, 2014, 6:19pm

After Karla Turner was killed I have not been to a convention or kept up with who is the latest greatest investigator. I sort of withdrew from everything and everyone. I doubt even many around Karla know much if anything about me. She may have mentioned me after my talks with her to some; I have no real clue.

I have seen very little if any serious evidence of Critical Analysis outside a few individuals I know personally. But again as I say I have not been looking either. Karla was killed, Mack was killed. You have to gain our trust and those giants had.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Jul 17th, 2014, 08:27am

Oldtimer,many of us believe John Macks accident was no accident,however in order for others to believe it weve got to have proof.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Oldtimer on Jul 17th, 2014, 11:04am

on Jul 17th, 2014, 08:27am, carolnistri wrote:
Oldtimer,many of us believe John Macks accident was no accident,however in order for others to believe it weve got to have proof.


His death may have been a real accident or what is referred to as a "happy accident". You may never know the truth one way or the other just as you may never know if Karla's death was a true health accident or an actual follow through to the threats she received. I'm sorry to say it however there are ways that such things can be done and with the Powers That Be interests that none of this ever come to light you can take it to the bank it will not at least not in my lifetime. Not one person believed our government or those working for it would experiment on fellow government employees or civilians with drugs without the subjects knowledge or consent however today we know these things have gone on under official sanction of the U.S. Government. Look it up. How many people involved were ever held accountable or ever criminally charged? I hate to break it to you but I found out in the military that there are those ABOVE THE LAW!

I once knew a Captain, I will not say in what branch of service, to help shield his identity who was one of several responsible for classified documents in the Pentagon. One document he read so bothered him he resigned his commission, totally lost all faith in the US Government, and went into the ministry. That is where I met him; while he was in training to become a Christian minister. I know the contents but I'm not going to repeat it here for several reasons. First, I don't want to put him in danger even now. Second, you will not believe me or him as you say "there is now proof". You could verify that the incident occurred but it was officially listed as an accident after government investigation which was in fact a factual impossibility. Anyone involved would be classed "expendable" and they were as it is said following orders. The public has zero clue what goes on inside the "black budget", neither does Congress, or most of the U.S. Military. It is compartmentalized to keep it that way so that if any part is by any means exposed it is limited to that compartment only.



Look up the meaning of "happy accident". They are real as I heard the term used in the military. I also use the term often "sheepeople" as a hold over from references to civilians easily manipulated. Sometimes where there is smoke there really is fire.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Jul 17th, 2014, 3:26pm

on Jul 17th, 2014, 11:04am, Oldtimer wrote:
His death may have been a real accident or what is referred to as a "happy accident". You may never know the truth one way or the other just as you may never know if Karla's death was a true health accident or an actual follow through to the threats she received. I'm sorry to say it however there are ways that such things can be done and with the Powers That Be interests that none of this ever come to light you can take it to the bank it will not at least not in my lifetime. Not one person believed our government or those working for it would experiment on fellow government employees or civilians with drugs without the subjects knowledge or consent however today we know these things have gone on under official sanction of the U.S. Government. Look it up. How many people involved were ever held accountable or ever criminally charged? I hate to break it to you but I found out in the military that there are those ABOVE THE LAW!

I once knew a Captain, I will not say in what branch of service, to help shield his identity who was one of several responsible for classified documents in the Pentagon. One document he read so bothered him he resigned his commission, totally lost all faith in the US Government, and went into the ministry. That is where I met him; while he was in training to become a Christian minister. I know the contents but I'm not going to repeat it here for several reasons. First, I don't want to put him in danger even now. Second, you will not believe me or him as you say "there is now proof". You could verify that the incident occurred but it was officially listed as an accident after government investigation which was in fact a factual impossibility. Anyone involved would be classed "expendable" and they were as it is said following orders. The public has zero clue what goes on inside the "black budget", neither does Congress, or most of the U.S. Military. It is compartmentalized to keep it that way so that if any part is by any means exposed it is limited to that compartment only.



Look up the meaning of "happy accident". They are real as I heard the term used in the military. I also use the term often "sheepeople" as a hold over from references to civilians easily manipulated. Sometimes where there is smoke there really is fire.


Appears an extreemely happy accident, Oldtimer. Who would be made so happy by Mack's accident, and in what way precisely? If indeed his killing was authorized, it might be due to his scientific support for real extraterrestrials, plus disseminating an unvetted, continually expanding body of information directly from experiencers/abductees and from the alien abductors themselves. He entered forbidden territory.

His death gave back a measure of control to those charged with managing this type of information.


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Oldtimer on Jul 17th, 2014, 4:00pm

If you go back through enough history in this field connecting dots it may start to form a picture. If it does it might be a picture no one wants to see or allow to be seen. Think seriously about that and then start connecting the dots.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Jul 18th, 2014, 3:56pm

on Jul 17th, 2014, 4:00pm, Oldtimer wrote:
If you go back through enough history in this field connecting dots it may start to form a picture. If it does it might be a picture no one wants to see or allow to be seen. Think seriously about that and then start connecting the dots.


I think I have connected the dots, and didn't like that pictiure, Oldtimer. My question: how do you connect the dots, specifically in relation to abduction experience, for instance your own, and any reliable reports you trust? Why are abductors abducting?


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Oldtimer on Jul 18th, 2014, 7:14pm

These things have been grooming mankind. They plan to come forth at a pre-determined time (Next 10 year I believe) as the returned creators of mankind here to save their creation but demanding total obedience, loyalty, and worship of the one they point to as "God"! Failure to obey will result in death.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jul 18th, 2014, 9:29pm

Oh my...that same old doom and gloom belief has been around for many decades in the ufo conspiracy circles.
It troubles me that people believe such things as readily as others like the Christians et al believe that the End Times are coming and we need to fight and be ready for the Rapture.
Religion is religion no matter what form it takes.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Oldtimer on Jul 18th, 2014, 11:46pm

on Jul 18th, 2014, 9:29pm, drwu23 wrote:
Oh my...that same old doom and gloom belief has been around for many decades in the ufo conspiracy circles.
It troubles me that people believe such things as readily as others like the Christians et al believe that the End Times are coming and we need to fight and be ready for the Rapture.
Religion is religion no matter what form it takes.


Yes, it is so troubling perhaps they all should be exterminated? My, did I say that out loud?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Jul 19th, 2014, 12:40am

on Jul 18th, 2014, 7:14pm, Oldtimer wrote:
These things have been grooming mankind. They plan to come forth at a pre-determined time (Next 10 year I believe) as the returned creators of mankind here to save their creation but demanding total obedience, loyalty, and worship of the one they point to as "God"! Failure to obey will result in death.


Perhaps their grooming has failed, Oldtimer. Mankind is aggressive, increasingly secular, overeager to shoot anything intruding on our territories/airspace. ESPECIALLY if they are aliens with bad manners methinks. And including if it's 'Jesus' coming back in a fairsized flying saucer with a plasma gun.


purr


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Oldtimer on Jul 19th, 2014, 01:34am

on Jul 19th, 2014, 12:40am, purr wrote:
Perhaps their grooming has failed, Oldtimer. Mankind is aggressive, increasingly secular, overeager to shoot anything intruding on our territories/airspace. ESPECIALLY if they are aliens with bad manners methinks. And including if it's 'Jesus' coming back in a fairsized flying saucer with a plasma gun.

purr



Fear is a great motivational tool and what "they" can do to you gives a whole new meaning to the word Unless you know their weakness.

You forget I was part of NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command) when stationed and training inside the United States in my primary branch of service while in the U.S. Army (impressed yet) Air Defense Artillery, Small Unit Missile Commander.

"They" like to play games with our militray but our military do not like the rules sometimes.

Do the Internet searches about UFOs hovering over Missile Silos and what happens.There are hundreds of the below type articles to choose from but here are just three that may help address your concerns with links to the complete articles.

UFOs eyed nukes, ex-Air Force personnel say - http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/09/27/ufos-showed-interest-in-nukes-ex-air-force-personnel-say/


Missile Base Incidents - http://www.nicap.org/babylon/missiles.htm

UFOs Deactivate Nuclear Missiles Around The World -http://www.collective-evolution.com/2013/03/02/ufos-deactivate-nuclear-missiles-around-the-world/
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Jul 19th, 2014, 03:10am

Oldtimer,is it true that the air force has chased UFOs?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Oldtimer on Jul 19th, 2014, 07:56am

on Jul 19th, 2014, 03:10am, carolnistri wrote:
Oldtimer,is it true that the air force has chased UFOs?


LOL, due a web search for the number of times.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Jul 21st, 2014, 04:18am

I feel we have a goldmine in you,yet you seem to afraid to talk much,too bad.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Oldtimer on Jul 21st, 2014, 10:36am

on Jul 21st, 2014, 04:18am, carolnistri wrote:
I feel we have a goldmine in you,yet you seem to afraid to talk much,too bad.


I came here in hopes to warn you all of what I know is coming for you from over 60 years of conscious "alien" abduction not hypnotic recalled memories. As I have stated in other posts here, my recall of contact is 99.9% conscious memory. Your overall reception has been hostile to the message which is your right. However, I see no point in going any further in such a hostile environment since there are so few open minds here. I am an Abductee not a miracle worker and "they" have not allowed me to bring back anything but the marks and scars on my body, along with the after affects. I'm truly sorry that is not enough for you to at least give me an open hearing. That I seemed "to afraid to talk much" is due to my advancing age and experience with human behavior both in civilian and military environments. I would love to be surprised sometime.

If any of you want any more information on the subjects of UFOs, or Abduction by both "Aliens" and American Government Agencies also called "MILABS". I suggest a massive Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) bombardment of the U.S. Government. There are more than enough cases to use if you care to actually get at the truth. If you can get any Lawyers to tear themselves away from defending terrorists, murderers, and Illegal aliens long enough to file the briefs. From what I see the majority of Americans just like the majority here do not really want to find out the truth because it would destroy to many of their preconceived ideas. If that changes FOIA as I will have no further comments.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jul 21st, 2014, 1:20pm

Oldtimer,
Let's have you put the shoe on the other foot.
What if you were not an abductee and had to respond to claims like yours from an anonymous person who didn't really have any way to support or prove their case; how would you react to their claims and what questions would you ask to get at some measure of truth or would you just automatically believe them and join in their belief system?

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Oldtimer on Jul 21st, 2014, 1:47pm

on Jul 21st, 2014, 1:20pm, drwu23 wrote:
Oldtimer,
Let's have you put the shoe on the other foot.
What if you were not an abductee and had to respond to claims like yours from an anonymous person who didn't really have any way to support or prove their case; how would you react to their claims and what questions would you ask to get at some measure of truth or would you just automatically believe them and join in their belief system?



I am not and do not ask you to believe me or any Abductee. What I expect is for us to receive the respect due any other human being. You have NO concept what we have experienced and the majority of us will tell you it was against our will over years of time. I would not treat my dog the way they have treated us. I expect people to at least try to help members of your fellow human race and to at least try to investigate what they say with an open mind before ridiculing and condemning what they are saying by trying to be "scientific" in an investigation! Like in my case when I was called a liar about not having prior nasal cavity surgery but I had not according to my wife, my mother, or my memory in any hospital; period. Start with that simple concept; how could I have Physical Evidence of Nasal Cavity Surgery in my head when to all my family's knowledge I had never had such a surgery before. Well of course my fellow humans say I and all my family MUST BE LYING because the alternative is not an acceptable reality! Is it too much to ask of my fellow man to at least TRY to examine the physical evidence objectively before destroying it?

As you say, try being in my shoes and have that be your reality. How would you respond?

Again, I am not asking you to believe or enter into our belief system. Just treat us like fellow human beings not as contaminated lab rats.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jul 21st, 2014, 2:21pm

on Jul 21st, 2014, 1:47pm, Oldtimer wrote:
I am not and do not ask you to believe me or any Abductee. What I expect is for us to receive the respect due any other human being. You have NO concept what we have experienced and the majority of us will tell you it was against our will over years of time. I would not treat my dog the way they have treated us. I expect people to at least try to help members of your fellow human race and to at least try to investigate what they say with an open mind before ridiculing and condemning what they are saying by trying to be "scientific" in an investigation! Like in my case when I was called a liar about not having prior nasal cavity surgery but I had not according to my wife, my mother, or my memory in any hospital; period. Start with that simple concept; how could I have Physical Evidence of Nasal Cavity Surgery in my head when to all my family's knowledge I had never had such a surgery before. Well of course my fellow humans say I and all my family MUST BE LYING because the alternative is not an acceptable reality! Is it too much to ask of my fellow man to at least TRY to examine the physical evidence objectively before destroying it?

As you say, try being in my shoes and have that be your reality. How would you respond?

Again, I am not asking you to believe or enter into our belief system. Just treat us like fellow human beings not as contaminated lab rats.


Fair enough....I don't believe your scenario of alien conspiracy based on what little you have said so far but I do believe (or it's at least possible) you had some 'paranormal' (define that any way you like) experiences.
Regarding the shoe on the other foot if I were you I would try to answer all questions honestly and not simply link to someone else's web site (Turner et al..) and use their tale.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Jul 21st, 2014, 2:23pm

Oldtimer,

...I am not and do not ask you to believe me or any Abductee. ..

Oh yes you are. You (and others making similar claims) get very upperty when the skeptics (like myself) start to ask for some kind of proof. They then leave the site and claim they were forced off.

Not playing fair, are you ?

...Just treat us like fellow human beings not as contaminated lab rats...

So, as the fate of the redundant lab rat is the incinerator, your future doesn't look too bright, does it ?

HAL
INT21 wink
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Oldtimer on Jul 21st, 2014, 2:49pm

on Jul 21st, 2014, 2:23pm, INT21 wrote:
Oldtimer,

...I am not and do not ask you to believe me or any Abductee. ..

Oh yes you are. You (and others making similar claims) get very upperty when the skeptics (like myself) start to ask for some kind of proof. They then leave the site and claim they were forced off.

Not playing fair, are you ?

...Just treat us like fellow human beings not as contaminated lab rats...

So, as the fate of the redundant lab rat is the incinerator, your future doesn't look too bright, does it ?

HAL
INT21 wink


You are a liar, I am not claiming I am being forced off. I am withdrawing from further comments in the areas I specified; if you read my posts. Try being honest and quote me accurately.


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Jul 21st, 2014, 3:07pm

Oldtimer,

You wrote,


...You are a liar, I am not claiming I am being forced off. I am withdrawing from further comments in the areas I specified; if you read my posts. Try being honest and quote me accurately.

You want an honest quote ? ok.

....As I have stated in other posts here, my recall of contact is 99.9% conscious memory.
Your overall reception has been hostile to the message which is your right.
However, I see no point in going any further in such a hostile environment since there are so few open minds here. ...

Isn't there just a hint from you that I (we) are applying pressure to you and that you see no point in continuing here ?

Could that not reasonably be construed as being 'forced off' ?
HAL
INT21
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jul 21st, 2014, 8:49pm

In all fairness to Oldtimer he never said he was being forced off...it was thelmadonna that said that about various posters here.
Though I can see why someone might get that impression from what he said about a hostile reception.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Oldtimer on Jul 21st, 2014, 9:23pm

on Jul 21st, 2014, 3:07pm, INT21 wrote:
Oldtimer,

You wrote,


...You are a liar, I am not claiming I am being forced off. I am withdrawing from further comments in the areas I specified; if you read my posts. Try being honest and quote me accurately.

You want an honest quote ? ok.

....As I have stated in other posts here, my recall of contact is 99.9% conscious memory.
Your overall reception has been hostile to the message which is your right.
However, I see no point in going any further in such a hostile environment since there are so few open minds here. ...

Isn't there just a hint from you that I (we) are applying pressure to you and that you see no point in continuing here ?

Could that not reasonably be construed as being 'forced off' ?
HAL
INT21



A comment taken out of context is a pretext to support your false claim.

Did I bruise your ego Hal? If so I apologize.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on Jul 22nd, 2014, 12:33am

on Jul 18th, 2014, 9:29pm, drwu23 wrote:
Oh my...that same old doom and gloom belief has been around for many decades in the ufo conspiracy circles.
It troubles me that people believe such things as readily as others like the Christians et al believe that the End Times are coming and we need to fight and be ready for the Rapture.
Religion is religion no matter what form it takes.


Yes, unlike people, some rumors never die...
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Jul 22nd, 2014, 03:53am

Oldtimer,

You are beginning to sound suspiciously like a recently departed member. Even you phraseology is similar.

One has to wonder.

You do seem to make much of your great age. In fact you refer to your 60+ years in around half of your post (Yes, I checked) now, why do you do that ? Once would be enough to make the point.

An officer in Air Defense ?
With your background in the weird and wonderful, how did you get in ? I mean, what military organisation would want someone who claims to be in touch with aliens anywhere near heavy weaponry. Don't they do psychological testing in the US forces ? Or did you conveniently not mention it.

Scary that you should be in such a position.

Sorry old boy, but having just read through most of the stuff you have posted since you arrived, and I did find it very repetitive and totally unbelievable, I have to declare openly before my peers that I don't believe you.



HAL
INT21
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Jul 22nd, 2014, 10:26am

on Jul 21st, 2014, 10:36am, Oldtimer wrote:
I came here in hopes to warn you all of what I know is coming for you from over 60 years of conscious "alien" abduction not hypnotic recalled memories. As I have stated in other posts here, my recall of contact is 99.9% conscious memory. Your overall reception has been hostile to the message which is your right. However, I see no point in going any further in such a hostile environment since there are so few open minds here. I am an Abductee not a miracle worker and "they" have not allowed me to bring back anything but the marks and scars on my body, along with the after affects. I'm truly sorry that is not enough for you to at least give me an open hearing. That I seemed "to afraid to talk much" is due to my advancing age and experience with human behavior both in civilian and military environments. I would love to be surprised sometime.

If any of you want any more information on the subjects of UFOs, or Abduction by both "Aliens" and American Government Agencies also called "MILABS". I suggest a massive Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) bombardment of the U.S. Government. There are more than enough cases to use if you care to actually get at the truth. If you can get any Lawyers to tear themselves away from defending terrorists, murderers, and Illegal aliens long enough to file the briefs. From what I see the majority of Americans just like the majority here do not really want to find out the truth because it would destroy to many of their preconceived ideas. If that changes FOIA as I will have no further comments.


I am truly sorry you feel that way Oldtimer.This board is one of the more polite ones Ive been on.You cant blame anyone for not believing your tale.I do wish you would reconsider leaving and start a thread starting from the beginning.As it is your all over the lot.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by GForce on Jul 22nd, 2014, 11:10am

on Jul 22nd, 2014, 03:53am, INT21 wrote:
Oldtimer,

You are beginning to sound suspiciously like a recently departed member. Even you phraseology is similar.

One has to wonder.

An officer in Air Defense ?
With your background in the weird and wonderful, how did you get in ? I mean, what military organisation would want someone who claims to be in touch with aliens anywhere near heavy weaponry. Don't they do psychological testing in the US forces ? Or did you conveniently not mention it.





HAL
INT21


Hal, Oldtimer, is not the former member you're thinking of!

As for background in the military? I can say that I know several retired military members who either took part in paranormal programs such as remote viewing or had paranormal experiences such as interaction of UFO's while flying a plane. Since I do not know Oldtimer I can't verify his experience but they are many that served who has had experiences. I don't think it's fair to question his mental state of mind since we don't know him personally.

As for claims of being forced off? I don't think anyone is forced off here, I do think some find it inhospitable and leave which is regrettable at times. I know many believers/experiencers feel they're being put under the microscope unfairly.

My response to all here is to remain civil and debate the topics. If Oldtimer or anyone else doesn't want to answer questions that is his right. No one if forced to believe a claim nor should anyone call another member names. When a thread gets heated or members get personal it defeats the whole discussion and eventually forces the mods to lock threads. I'm close to doing it here!
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jul 22nd, 2014, 11:29am

G Force: As for claims of being forced off? I don't think anyone is forced off here, I do think some find it inhospitable and leave which is regrettable at times. I know many believers/experiencers feel they're being put under the microscope unfairly.

My response to all here is to remain civil and debate the topics. If Oldtimer or anyone else doesn't want to answer questions that is his right. No one if forced to believe a claim nor should anyone call another member names."
-------------------------------------------------------------



It's difficult to 'debate' or even discuss claims when someone comes to the board with 'outlandish' claims ,states them as fact, and then when asked hard questions refuses to answer and then says they are being harassed.
How does one even approach a situation like that? Are we to tap dance around this and step so lightly that we end up basically discovering nothing but what the person wants to tell us?
huh
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Jul 22nd, 2014, 11:46am

DRWU,

YOUR POINT IS ASTUTE AND CERTAINLY WELL TAKEN! I MIGHT ADD THAT WHEN ONE IS QUESTIONED AND CHOOSES NOT TO ANSWER SPECIFICS (IF THAT MAY BE THE POINT OF CLARIFICATION) ~ OFTEN SUCH SAID IN THE DRONE OF SILENCE MAY BE CLARIFICATION ENOUGH ~ MOREOVER, ANY ANSWER LACKING CIVILITY ~ WELL ~ YOU SHOULD KNOW MY THOUGHT(S) ON SAME BY NOW cool

User Image

SHALOM...Z

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by GForce on Jul 22nd, 2014, 11:55am

on Jul 22nd, 2014, 11:29am, drwu23 wrote:
G Force: As for claims of being forced off? I don't think anyone is forced off here, I do think some find it inhospitable and leave which is regrettable at times. I know many believers/experiencers feel they're being put under the microscope unfairly.

My response to all here is to remain civil and debate the topics. If Oldtimer or anyone else doesn't want to answer questions that is his right. No one if forced to believe a claim nor should anyone call another member names."
-------------------------------------------------------------



It's difficult to 'debate' or even discuss claims when someone comes to the board with 'outlandish' claims ,states them as fact, and then when asked hard questions refuses to answer and then says they are being harassed.
How does one even approach a situation like that? Are we to tap dance around this and step so lightly that we end up basically discovering nothing but what the person wants to tell us?
huh


No one has to believe any claim here nor should they until they either get responses to question or read enough to form an opinion.

Any NEW member just coming into a forum is going to be apprehensive. That often shows in how they respond to questions. I think most become defensive out of habit and not knowing any of the members or being familiar with their beliefs. I also know the older members are quite aware of the number of hoaxers and trolls that frequent these forums.

The advice I'd offer is to give them ample time to get their feet wet. That doesn't mean turn a blind eye or not to question their claims. If someone doesn't want to answer questions then indirectly they're answering them if you think about it.

Those coming in solely looking for attention leave if they don't get it or I end up banning them after they show their @$$. IF someone doesn't answer questions posed it's good to step back, going forward will be a dead end anyway. You're not going to get blood out of a turnip by trying to force their hand. You're only going to get confrontation. That serves no one!

Honestly it's next to impossible to debunk a personal experience. All anyone can do is ask questions, research claims and see if they can find contradictions or the member gives answers. At some point the truth will come out. Petty bickering serves no point.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jul 22nd, 2014, 1:55pm

This thread is titled Critical Anlaysis Of Alien Abduction, and I think most of us know that means hard questions, scientific approach, and dissecting responses.
IMHO if someone comes here making an abduction claim then they should expect all of that and more from those using critical anlaysis. It doesn't mean being rude and here I agree with you but it does mean not putting up with evasive non answers. If the 'abductee' or proponent of same can't handle that then imho they don't belong on a board that's gong to critically analyze their claims then perhaps they should be on an abduction support group board .

BTW.....I'm not asking nor implying that any current members should leave but simply making a point.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by GForce on Jul 22nd, 2014, 2:08pm

on Jul 22nd, 2014, 1:55pm, drwu23 wrote:
This thread is titled Critical Anlaysis Of Alien Abduction, and I think most of us know that means hard questions, scientific approach, and dissecting responses.
IMHO if someone comes here making an abduction claim then they should expect all of that and more from those using critical anlaysis. It doesn't mean being rude and here I agree with you but it does mean not putting up with evasive non answers. If the 'abductee' or proponent of same can't handle that then imho they don't belong on a board that's gong to critically analyze their claims then perhaps they should be on an abduction support group board .

BTW.....I'm not asking nor implying that any current members should leave but simply making a point.


You make a valid point drwu, one of which I don't disagree with.
My point is hammering away and attacking doesn't work. In the case of this thread I would say the member who doesn't want to defend a post should step away and stick to other threads. My point is bickering only shuts down a thread and diverts attention away from the subject. Passionate beliefs are fine, name calling like liar etc aren't necessary.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Jul 22nd, 2014, 2:40pm

GForce,

You can put away the key. I'll leave off querying Oldtimer's claim.


HAL
INT21 smiley
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by GForce on Jul 23rd, 2014, 11:26am

on Jul 22nd, 2014, 2:40pm, INT21 wrote:
GForce,

You can put away the key. I'll leave off querying Oldtimer's claim.


HAL
INT21 smiley


Hal, I would never try to silence you or anyone else. I know it wouldn't work anyway! smiley My point is and always has been there comes a time when it's fruitless to continue arguing a point.

I won't knock someone for not responding to questions. People have their own reasons for not responding. I can see both sides of the argument. I think the tone of questions plays a role. I think people sense certain things and go into defense mode.

For this forum or any other to thrive we need to hear both sides of the argument if not it will dry up and die.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jul 25th, 2014, 3:04pm

on Jul 23rd, 2014, 11:26am, GForce wrote:
...I won't knock someone for not responding to questions. People have their own reasons for not responding. I can see both sides of the argument. I think the tone of questions plays a role. I think people sense certain things and go into defense mode.

For this forum or any other to thrive we need to hear both sides of the argument if not it will dry up and die.


I agree but it's really hard to have a discussion if the other party ain't willing to discuss except along the lines they wish.
undecided

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by GForce on Jul 25th, 2014, 5:25pm

on Jul 25th, 2014, 3:04pm, drwu23 wrote:
I agree but it's really hard to have a discussion if the other party ain't willing to discuss except along the lines they wish.
undecided


Hi drwu, I agree but until skeptics and their views/questions can be received by believers as thought out and inquisitive thoughts rather than seeking a gotcha moment or to humiliate them. Only then may be able to have honest debate. From both sides skeptic and believer it comes down to perception of the other side. That of course creates trust issues. Dan


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Jul 26th, 2014, 12:53pm

Maybe it is time to revisit the 'Believers Only Club' idea.

Let's look at what we have. Or should I say 'had'.

We had trolls. Guys just out to stire it up and have fun at others expense.

We had Skeptics. people who don't find the evidence compelling, but are prepared to modify their views as the evidence gets stronger.

We had debunkers. They do believe that there is something going on, but are keen to make every thing seem like swamp gas and Lennies. They tend to toe the military line.

We have believers. They are sure of what they saw and can't see why the rest of use don't see it their way.

But now, we have the UFOJihadi.

These guys are not only rock solid in their belief, but are instantly on the ready to pour scorn on anyone who dares to doubt them. These guys have seen it all, got the radiation burns to prove it. You must not ask them how they know; they do, and that is enough.

No response to this post yet please, it's not finished. I have to go out for a few minutes. Back soon

Ok, The annoying thing about the UFOjihadi is that there is nothing you can tell him or ask him. In this he is very much like the religious hardliner. And if you dare say, but how do you know this ? Like his religious counterpart, he will become enraged and try to 'kill' you.

So, let us create the club.

Image it rather as a Victorian gentleman's Explores Club.

The hard liners can sit around in (metaphorically speaking) a cosy room with a blazing fire. A few overstuffed chairs and some dark wood paneling will help create the atmosphere of exclusivity.

Over a glass or two of brandy they can discuss the latest from Alpha Centuri, Guffaw over how old Harris hasn't been able to sit on a hard chair since he was probed by those pale aliens who passed through last year. And generally swap tales of their meetings and exploits.

All very chummy.

They insist that you don't know what it is like until you have experienced it yourself.

But don't they say the same about toothache ?

HAL
INT21
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Silver on Jul 26th, 2014, 3:30pm

Hal,

I realized a long time ago that no one would believe any thing I had to say about UFO's.

With the thousands of reports around the world each year, it seems our world does not care or be concerned.

Since I saw my first UFO in the 4th grade, nothing has changed.




Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by GForce on Jul 27th, 2014, 3:16pm

on Jul 26th, 2014, 12:53pm, INT21 wrote:
Maybe it is time to revisit the 'Believers Only Club' idea.

Let's look at what we have. Or should I say 'had'.

We had trolls. Guys just out to stire it up and have fun at others expense.

We had Skeptics. people who don't find the evidence compelling, but are prepared to modify their views as the evidence gets stronger.

We had debunkers. They do believe that there is something going on, but are keen to make every thing seem like swamp gas and Lennies. They tend to toe the military line.

We have believers. They are sure of what they saw and can't see why the rest of use don't see it their way.

But now, we have the UFOJihadi.

These guys are not only rock solid in their belief, but are instantly on the ready to pour scorn on anyone who dares to doubt them. These guys have seen it all, got the radiation burns to prove it. You must not ask them how they know; they do, and that is enough.

No response to this post yet please, it's not finished. I have to go out for a few minutes. Back soon

Ok, The annoying thing about the UFOjihadi is that there is nothing you can tell him or ask him. In this he is very much like the religious hardliner. And if you dare say, but how do you know this ? Like his religious counterpart, he will become enraged and try to 'kill' you.

So, let us create the club.

Image it rather as a Victorian gentleman's Explores Club.

The hard liners can sit around in (metaphorically speaking) a cosy room with a blazing fire. A few overstuffed chairs and some dark wood paneling will help create the atmosphere of exclusivity.

Over a glass or two of brandy they can discuss the latest from Alpha Centuri, Guffaw over how old Harris hasn't been able to sit on a hard chair since he was probed by those pale aliens who passed through last year. And generally swap tales of their meetings and exploits.

All very chummy.

They insist that you don't know what it is like until you have experienced it yourself.

But don't they say the same about toothache ?

HAL
INT21


Well Hal, you made me smile! Believers only would never work nor should it but I understand the frustration having not having questions answered. About all you can do when you run up against a wall is go on record via post to get your voice heard.

I will be the first to admit I don't know it all, I will also admit that I haven't form an opinion on a lot of things. Because of that I am suspect on most things hence the label skeptic. That said I can be swayed by a good argument. But it takes dialog something obviously lacking not only here but also in the real world.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Jul 28th, 2014, 04:18am

on Jul 22nd, 2014, 2:40pm, INT21 wrote:
GForce,

You can put away the key. I'll leave off querying Oldtimer's claim.


HAL
INT21 smiley



I for one believe everything Oldtimer said.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Jul 28th, 2014, 05:20am

You faith in the honesty of humankind warms the cockles of my heart.

HAL
INT21 smiley
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jul 28th, 2014, 09:28am

on Jul 28th, 2014, 04:18am, carolnistri wrote:
I for one believe everything Oldtimer said.


So then...let me get this straight.
You believe that evil aliens (multiple species...)are making genetic hybrids and are in league with evil humans in some global secret conspiracy, ie the NWO, to take over earth by coming back in huge spaceships in the sky and pretending to be "God" and then enslaving us all.

Is that about it?
grin

BTW...I'd love to hear what Dr Vallee thinks about these bizarro theories and if the new direction of ufo research he is referring to on that radio show is one where everyone is batshit crazy.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Jul 28th, 2014, 09:59am

LOL! Now you know that my own opinion of whats going on has changed,so I believe that Demons are
taking full advantage of men like Oldtimer,btw lets hope together that Dan heard Vallee last night,I could just spit at having missed him.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jul 28th, 2014, 10:15am

on Jul 28th, 2014, 09:28am, drwu23 wrote:
BTW...I'd love to hear what Dr Vallee thinks about these bizarro theories and if the new direction of ufo research he is referring to on that radio show is one where everyone is batshit crazy.


Top play nominee there, Doc.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Jul 28th, 2014, 10:59am

BTW...I'd love to hear what Dr Vallee thinks about these bizarro theories and if the new direction of ufo research he is referring to on that radio show is one where everyone is batshit crazy.

Well Knowing Dr.Vallee he wont offer one iota if it includes anything negative about the person offering that bizarro theory.Weve got to got to keep an open mind,the whole subject matter of UFOs is bizzare,for all we know weve heard the truth about whats happening and because it doesnt fulfill us with the things we know or think we know ,oh I dont know.I liked my mood much better when I got up this morning.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jul 28th, 2014, 1:01pm

on Jul 28th, 2014, 09:59am, carolnistri wrote:
LOL! Now you know that my own opinion of whats going on has changed,so I believe that Demons are
taking full advantage of men like Oldtimer,btw lets hope together that Dan heard Vallee last night,I could just spit at having missed him.



Well...I answered the way I did because that seems to be what OT believes.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 1st, 2014, 7:31pm

Whatever Happened to Alien Abductions?

By Nick Pope via UFO Digest

August 1, 2014

In the late Eighties and throughout the Nineties, alien abductions were at the heart of ufology. How did what might be regarded as a subset of ufology become its central meme? Abductions (irrespective of whether one believes they take place in a literal sense) could arguably be regarded as an evolution of the contactee phenomenon, and for those who believe UFOs are extraterrestrial spacecraft, it’s only logical that one should look beyond the vehicles and focus on the nature and agenda of the occupants.

[...]

All this time, abductions were the central focus for much of the UFO community, and the three charismatic figures of Budd Hopkins, David Jacobs and John Mack were at the heart of things.

[...]

Now let’s fast forward to 2014. One hears comparatively little about alien abductions, even within the UFO community, where the main current areas of interest are government cover-ups, ‘Disclosure’, secret space program/‘breakaway civilization’, the Rendlesham Forest incident, and – perhaps most prominently of all – the resurgence of the ancient astronaut/ancient aliens hypothesis. What’s going on?

[...]

What other factors could explain the lack of coverage and (apparent) lack of interest in abductions? One cannot overstate the influence of individuals when it comes to driving the agenda in a subject, whether they do so deliberately or not. Simply put, Budd Hopkins, David Jacobs and John Mack played a huge role in putting abductions centre stage within ufology, and now that Hopkins and Mack are both dead, the greater part of that impetus is gone. This is in no way meant to disparage the work of other ufologists and abductees, or downplay the continuing influence of writers such as Whitley Strieber, but there’s no getting away from the fact that the deaths of Hopkins and Mack dealt a hefty blow to abduction research.

There have been other assaults on the validity of abductions and the credibility of both abduction researchers and abductees. The debate over whether regression hypnosis can recover hidden memories, distort existing ones or even implant false ones was the first shot across the bows. Concerns about using regression hypnosis on abductees segued into wider concerns about the propriety of ufologists dealing with abductees. This was essentially a therapist/patient relationship in a situation where some of the people claiming abduction experiences (real or not) were extremely vulnerable. Were abduction researchers suitably qualified or otherwise equipped to deal with such people in a professional and ethical way? The allegations made by “Emma Woods” against David Jacobs brought that debate into focus, as did the criticisms made by filmmaker Carol Rainey regarding her former husband, Budd Hopkins. The recent arrest of self-described abductee Stan Romanek on charges of possessing and distributing child pornography may turn out to be the final nail in the coffin.

Alien abduction may be down, but it isn’t altogether out. Travis Walton remains popular on the conference circuit and hopes to see a remake of “Fire in the Sky”. Researchers such as Yvonne Smith continue to fly the flag for the subject, while this month’s “Contact in the Desert” conference in Joshua Tree has a panel discussion on the “contact experience”. This latter point is particularly noteworthy, because it seems that we’ve gone from contactees to abductees and now back to contactees – the more neutral term “experiencers” is sometimes used, but that’s another story.

In all of this, here’s the key question about the apparent rise and fall of alien abductions: does it tell us something about the true nature of the UFO phenomenon, or does it tell us just as much – and maybe even more – about ufology and ufologists?

Full article:

http://ufodigest.com/article/alien-abductions-0801
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Aug 3rd, 2014, 04:39am

What an excellent article,even tho Pope wrote it, wink
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by alvaroslash on Aug 3rd, 2014, 2:24pm

Pope is right. We have nothing new about this topic, the same goes for close encounters. I think it has something to do with our technological advance here. Since it's easier to fake that kind of stuff, people are taking it less seriously, and of course, the number of hoaxes increased.

Who knows? Maybe the researchers were just wrong? Maybe only 1 or 2 patients were abducted? Or maybe not? Maybe they just failed with their projects? Who knows...
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 3rd, 2014, 3:26pm

Hi, guys. I thought Pope made some valid points.

Whether or not we all agree on the nature of the actions of Woods and Rainey, an extremely relevant point remains: The circumstances documented in their material have no reasonable defense.

I also think there is another point that is very important yet omitted from Pope's considerations. A lot of the abduction narrative that was pushed upon us has become testable by advances made in forensics. The trail went cold for Jacobs' hybrids as the public became increasingly educated on the relevance of genetic testing.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Aug 3rd, 2014, 4:38pm

JJ,

I HAVE AN ALL TO CURIOUS CONSIDERATION FOR YOU ~ AND THAT IS ~ IN LIEU OF EXORCISMS/DEMONIC/DAIMONIC AND THE ALIEN QUESTION/MYSTERY ~ YA THINK THE PAPACY HAS A METHOD OF DIFFERENTIATION (SINCE THEY CLEARLY HAVE RECORDS ON THE AFOREMENTIONED AND ACKNOWLEDGE THE LATTER) BETWEEN THE TWO OR WOULD THEY BE LUMPED UNDER ONE HEADING? ~ OR WOULD THE RELIGIOUS PRETEXT OVERIDE ANY CONSIDERATION FOR THE AFOREMENTIONED

User Image

SHALOM...Z

EDIT TO ADD:

OR IS IT JUST ONE BIG ~ grin

User Image

User Image
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 4th, 2014, 12:44pm

on Aug 3rd, 2014, 4:38pm, ZETAR wrote:
JJ,

I HAVE AN ALL TO CURIOUS CONSIDERATION FOR YOU ~ AND THAT IS ~ IN LIEU OF EXORCISMS/DEMONIC/DAIMONIC AND THE ALIEN QUESTION/MYSTERY ~ YA THINK THE PAPACY HAS A METHOD OF DIFFERENTIATION (SINCE THEY CLEARLY HAVE RECORDS ON THE AFOREMENTIONED AND ACKNOWLEDGE THE LATTER) BETWEEN THE TWO OR WOULD THEY BE LUMPED UNDER ONE HEADING? ~ OR WOULD THE RELIGIOUS PRETEXT OVERIDE ANY CONSIDERATION FOR THE AFOREMENTIONED


Ha - that's an intriguing line of thought. I wouldn't know why the office of the Pope would take certain stances on such issues, but suffice it to say I wouldn't think that accuracy and discerning objective reality would be at the top of the list of priorities, fine and awe inspiring religion as it may be.

On the subject in general, I'd say it depends on who you ask. It would sure appear that, at least sometimes, the difference between a haunted house and an alien infestation is whether the home owner called TAPS or MUFON.

I strongly suspect that such circumstances do nothing to help us further understand what may be taking place in what we might term situations of interest. Actually, I'm quite sure the bias of the 'investigator' is extremely detrimental at times.

What do you think, ZETAR?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by GForce on Aug 4th, 2014, 2:24pm

on Aug 1st, 2014, 7:31pm, jjflash wrote:
Whatever Happened to Alien Abductions?

By Nick Pope via UFO Digest

August 1, 2014

In the late Eighties and throughout the Nineties, alien abductions were at the heart of ufology. How did what might be regarded as a subset of ufology become its central meme? Abductions (irrespective of whether one believes they take place in a literal sense) could arguably be regarded as an evolution of the contactee phenomenon, and for those who believe UFOs are extraterrestrial spacecraft, it’s only logical that one should look beyond the vehicles and focus on the nature and agenda of the occupants.

[...]

All this time, abductions were the central focus for much of the UFO community, and the three charismatic figures of Budd Hopkins, David Jacobs and John Mack were at the heart of things.

[...]

Now let’s fast forward to 2014. One hears comparatively little about alien abductions, even within the UFO community, where the main current areas of interest are government cover-ups, ‘Disclosure’, secret space program/‘breakaway civilization’, the Rendlesham Forest incident, and – perhaps most prominently of all – the resurgence of the ancient astronaut/ancient aliens hypothesis. What’s going on?

[...]

What other factors could explain the lack of coverage and (apparent) lack of interest in abductions? One cannot overstate the influence of individuals when it comes to driving the agenda in a subject, whether they do so deliberately or not. Simply put, Budd Hopkins, David Jacobs and John Mack played a huge role in putting abductions centre stage within ufology, and now that Hopkins and Mack are both dead, the greater part of that impetus is gone. This is in no way meant to disparage the work of other ufologists and abductees, or downplay the continuing influence of writers such as Whitley Strieber, but there’s no getting away from the fact that the deaths of Hopkins and Mack dealt a hefty blow to abduction research.

There have been other assaults on the validity of abductions and the credibility of both abduction researchers and abductees. The debate over whether regression hypnosis can recover hidden memories, distort existing ones or even implant false ones was the first shot across the bows. Concerns about using regression hypnosis on abductees segued into wider concerns about the propriety of ufologists dealing with abductees. This was essentially a therapist/patient relationship in a situation where some of the people claiming abduction experiences (real or not) were extremely vulnerable. Were abduction researchers suitably qualified or otherwise equipped to deal with such people in a professional and ethical way? The allegations made by “Emma Woods” against David Jacobs brought that debate into focus, as did the criticisms made by filmmaker Carol Rainey regarding her former husband, Budd Hopkins. The recent arrest of self-described abductee Stan Romanek on charges of possessing and distributing child pornography may turn out to be the final nail in the coffin.

Alien abduction may be down, but it isn’t altogether out. Travis Walton remains popular on the conference circuit and hopes to see a remake of “Fire in the Sky”. Researchers such as Yvonne Smith continue to fly the flag for the subject, while this month’s “Contact in the Desert” conference in Joshua Tree has a panel discussion on the “contact experience”. This latter point is particularly noteworthy, because it seems that we’ve gone from contactees to abductees and now back to contactees – the more neutral term “experiencers” is sometimes used, but that’s another story.

In all of this, here’s the key question about the apparent rise and fall of alien abductions: does it tell us something about the true nature of the UFO phenomenon, or does it tell us just as much – and maybe even more – about ufology and ufologists?

Full article:

http://ufodigest.com/article/alien-abductions-0801


I would only disagree with Pope on the lack of interest in abductions. There's no question there's been an increase in UFO related television shows. Some have focused on abductions. Personally I think abductions are the most interesting part of Ufology. Tales of abductions are either real or a lie...no gray area unless you want to consider it a dream.

Everything else falls into a questionable area. Most either wind a story around a conspiracy or theories. Even photo's and video's are subjected to great skepticism with just cause. The only thing that is hard to debunk are personal experiences. I don't think abductions no longer happen, I think abductees are just keeping quiet. Personally I don't blame them I would too.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Aug 4th, 2014, 3:04pm

I have no doubt that people continue to have 'alien abduction' experiences. They may be less forthcoming about them these days.
For me the question has always been are these truly 'alien' in origin or some other phenomenon(a).
I have never met anyone in person who claimed such an experience and had the chance to discuss it with them, but I don't doubt the sincerity of most (not all..) who have had these strange experiences.

I suspect that when we do discover the 'truth' it probably won't lead us to 'outer space aliens' as the culprits but it's certainly a possibility.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 4th, 2014, 3:57pm

on Aug 4th, 2014, 2:24pm, GForce wrote:
I don't think abductions no longer happen, I think abductees are just keeping quiet. Personally I don't blame them I would too.


I think that's a point that deserves to be on the table. I additionally think we can look to the same places as sources of the problem as we have been considering: Hopkins, Jacobs and self-described experts that scrupulously resisted peer review and constructive criticism. In short, some of the most dogmatic 'researchers' have consistently labeled all others who demonstrated an interest in the subject as ill informed and incompetent, and it's now taking a toll.

When Rutgers sociologist Ted Goertzel presented Jacobs with assessments made by the late historian and self-described abductee and MILAB Dr. Karla Turner, who suggested Jacobs selectively omits data from his assessments, Jacobs dismissed Turner as an irresponsible member of the UFO fringe. He said the same about George Hansen when Goertzel confronted Jacobs about Hansen's concerns about certain situations. It is well known that Hopkins failed to collaborate with others for years, including resisting inquiries from advisors of the very organization he founded himself, the Intruders Foundation.

If a newer generation of experiencers have opted out of such circumstances, I would only see that as a good thing. Being manipulated and exploited into a chapter of a book should not be preferred over obtaining accurate and honest info.

People shouldn't settle for having others come along and try to tell them what happened to them. I support them not putting up with it, and, from that point of view, GForce, I agree your point deserves consideration. It's no more valid to try to impose ideas of alien abduction on people than it is to tell them they imagined it all.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Aug 4th, 2014, 7:07pm

JACK,

ALWAYS A WELL SEASONED ~ ASTUTE ~ RESPONSE! wink

I GATHER THE INNER LAYERS OF THIS COSMIC MIRAGE grin HAS A GRASP ON VARIOUS ASPECTS (REAL/PERCEIVED) ~ IMHO ~ YEAH ~ I PONDER WHAT THE PAPACY MAY HAVE SEQUESTED OVER THE YEARS ~ wink

User Image

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 4th, 2014, 8:28pm

on Aug 4th, 2014, 7:07pm, ZETAR wrote:
JACK,

ALWAYS A WELL SEASONED ~ ASTUTE ~ RESPONSE! wink

I GATHER THE INNER LAYERS OF THIS COSMIC MIRAGE grin HAS A GRASP ON VARIOUS ASPECTS (REAL/PERCEIVED) ~ IMHO ~ YEAH ~ I PONDER WHAT THE PAPACY MAY HAVE SEQUESTED OVER THE YEARS ~ wink


Thanks, Z. I think you bring up another point that deserves its share of consideration: If the so-called disclosure activists were sincere, there are a lot of places they could direct their efforts in addition to the US federal government.

But they leave such orgs out of the mix as Bigelow/BAASS, MUFON, the stories surrounding talk of vaults and such at the Vatican, Greer, Jacobs and Lamb (that claim to have access to walking, talking hybrids), Streiber (who says he's got an alien implant in his ear) etc., etc., etc., while going after the White House that doesn't even claim to be interested. I'm by no means suggesting Greer, Lamb et al actually have access to any of the evidence they claim, but my point is that for disclosure activists to badger the feds while giving everyone else a free pass suggests a lack of sincerity on behalf of all involved.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 5th, 2014, 1:48pm

on Aug 4th, 2014, 8:28pm, jjflash wrote:
Thanks, Z. I think you bring up another point that deserves its share of consideration: If the so-called disclosure activists were sincere, there are a lot of places they could direct their efforts in addition to the US federal government.

But they leave such orgs out of the mix as Bigelow/BAASS, MUFON, the stories surrounding talk of vaults and such at the Vatican, Greer, Jacobs and Lamb (that claim to have access to walking, talking hybrids), Streiber (who says he's got an alien implant in his ear) etc., etc., etc., while going after the White House that doesn't even claim to be interested. I'm by no means suggesting Greer, Lamb et al actually have access to any of the evidence they claim, but my point is that for disclosure activists to badger the feds while giving everyone else a free pass suggests a lack of sincerity on behalf of all involved.


Along those lines:

on Aug 5th, 2014, 12:13am, jjflash wrote:
[Sheehan], Cameron, Bassett and similar ETH advocates will be featured at an event in Toronto at the end of this month. It's affiliated with UFOContact.com, an outfit that sells an app for making contact with ET, among other purported functions. The website does not provide clear info about conference organizers or funding entities, but does offer an email address for media inquiries.

The upcoming retreat will include workshops and contact experiences with ET - if it doesn't rain. I kid you not:

http://ufocontact.com/retreat/

We see the focus to be on the explanations and role of the consciousness connection to what we know as ET or inter-dimensionals; raising our awareness of the essential nature of paradigm world view issues; and the exploration of different methods to create effective ET contact. Your resident retreat package includes 2 or 3 night accommodation, all meals and snacks, all seminars, workshops and weather permitting creating Human Initiated Contact Experiences under the Canadian skies! Non resident packages include all meals, seminars, workshops and evening contact sessions!


I submit for consideration that the perennially discussed UFO cover-up is, in actuality, actively being conducted by members of the UFO community, at least as much as it is currently being carried out by the US government. It is being conducted by self-proclaimed experts who find it quite advantageous to cultivate a never-ending mystery surrounding alleged aliens.

What are they concealing? That the reported experiences are being manipulated and molded to conform to their preferred ETH, when, in reality, people report a wide variety of phenomena that is in no way, shape or form explained by such an overly simplistic possibility. Also, there are a number of explanations that most certainly apply to a high percentage of the reported cases, but are ignored in pursuit of mystery mongering. The smaller percentage of interesting cases that may remain are of little to no value to the mystery mongers, as they appear to have no motives whatsoever to actually investigate the circumstances in reasonable manners.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Aug 5th, 2014, 5:12pm

JJ,

INDEED, OFTEN THERE HAS BEEN THIS "DOUBLE/TRIPLE STANDARD" WITH SOME ~ NOT ALL ~ NEVERTHELESS, IT'S ALWAYS UP TO THE "INDIVIDUAL" TO DO HIS/HER RESEARCH TO ATTEMPT AT DRAWING AN INFORMED CONCLUSION/ANALYSIS ~ IMHO

User Image

User Image

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 15th, 2014, 9:15pm

Discussing the Carpenter Affair on Paranormal Waypoint

The UFO Trail

August 15, 2014

Jeff Ritzmann is the host of Paranormal Waypoint, a podcast that airs Tuesdays at 9pm ET on kgra.com. I accepted Jeff's invitation to be on the show this Tuesday, August 19, to discuss a chain of events that became known as the Carpenter Affair. I very much encourage readers to listen and develop understandings of the significance of the circumstances. I will provide some relevant links and points of reference below.

John Carpenter is the former MUFON director of abduction research. He is a social worker and hypnotist who supports the literal reality of alien abduction.

MUFON Orange County recently announced it will feature Carpenter as a speaker. A promotional email circulated by MUFON and received today implied Carpenter advocates scientific research. The email further suggested that Carpenter's experience in the field of researching alleged alien abduction entitles him to present his preferred beliefs. As a matter of fact, it was stated in the email that John Carpenter would present "proof supporting the reality of UFO abductions".

I dispute those claims.

While serving as the MUFON director of abduction research, John Carpenter provided Robert Bigelow with copies of case files of some 140 possible alien abductees. This was done in exchange for cash and without the informed consent of the experiencers, some of whom had been his paying clients. Additionally, I was presented evidence during the course of researching the circumstances that Carpenter created and marketed tapes of regressive hypnosis sessions. The chain of events were dubbed the Carpenter Affair.

Further research revealed, as one investigator stated, "Everyone does it," referring to both selling case file information and having sex with hypnosis clients. In the circumstances of John Carpenter, he married two former hypnosis clients.

I assert that such research conditions are unscientific and encourage bias. Specifically, John Carpenter was financially motivated to persuade research subjects to narrate extraordinary experiences. I also assert that having sexual relations with research subjects creates dysfunctional dynamics to the point of calling the entire body of work into serious question.

Further dysfunction was perpetrated by the MUFON board of directors. In an incredibly questionable chain of events, Carpenter conducted hypnosis sessions with Leah Haley, inducing mental imagery which suggested she was aboard an alien spacecraft when it was downed by US military forces. Before it was over, this saga evolved to include two more MUFON directors, Donald Ware and Robert Reid, coordinating a hike with Haley across Eglin Air Force Base in search of the site of the downed spacecraft. Then, in 1995 a fourth MUFON director, Tom Deuley, told The Tampa Tribune-Times that MUFON did not embrace "such ridiculous stories" as Haley's, and that "it doesn't help the serious scientific work being done."

Trouble was, Deuley failed to inform The Trib that it was his very own fellow board members who played key roles in cultivating those stories. He also failed to mention that during the very time his remarks were published, the MUFON Journal was publishing an ongoing column written by Carpenter, in which Carpenter was proclaiming the reality of alien abduction.

I dispute on several grounds the integrity of such circumstances as well as the claims contained in the MUFON email promoting Carpenter's work. I dispute that the man's activities resulted in virtually any information worthy of serious consideration. I entirely and emphatically dispute that his research was scientific.

Perhaps what we really learn from his upcoming Orange County engagement is the depths proponents of literal alien abduction must stoop to try to impose so-called evidence upon us. If the topic is reduced to presenting the work of John Carpenter as "proof" of alien abduction, it is indeed a defeated state.

Perhaps much more important and telling is what the chain of events tells us about the concern - or lack thereof - for the welfare of research subjects. It would seem the genre has been reduced to encouraging regressive hypnosis, its inherent emotional trauma, and all with no crisis of conscience from what we have learned and the intentional omission of relevant information.

Please tune in Tuesday the 19th at 9pm to kgra.com. The chat room is highly recommended.

Related reading:

The Carpenter Affair: For the Record

The Leah Haley Case: John Carpenter

The Leah Haley Case: The Eglin Expedition

The Leah Haley Case: Tom Deuley, The Tampa Trib and MUFON Unaccountability
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Aug 15th, 2014, 9:47pm

As I said in another thread somewhere this whole alien abduction area, as well as most of the ufo area in general, has become a circus.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 17th, 2014, 12:32pm

Here is a link containing a pretty thorough accounting of what Jeff Ritzmann and I will be discussing Tuesday night, the Carpenter Affair and related circumstances:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-carpenter-affair-for-record.html

The post includes an abbreviated time line of relevant circumstances, as well as details of extremely questionable activities surrounding the 'abduction-research' of John Carpenter. Also included are documents that were presented in a formal complaint filed by Gary Hart in 2001 to the State of Missouri Division of Professional Registration (a licensing board), as Carpenter is a licensed social worker. The board imposed a five-year probation period upon Carpenter's license (which was completed in 2006).

Such circumstances carry a number of relevant implications to the genre of alleged alien abduction, including checks and balances on the quality of research protocol. We might of course express concern about the degree of accuracy of information that results. We should indeed be greatly concerned about the care of witnesses and research subjects.

As interested parties, we not only have the right to question and discuss such circumstances, we have responsibilities to do so.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Mythos on Aug 19th, 2014, 12:38am

on Aug 15th, 2014, 9:47pm, drwu23 wrote:
As I said in another thread somewhere this whole alien abduction area, as well as most of the ufo area in general, has become a circus.


And "Circuses" are real too!

The fact that some Abduction cases are fake does not prove that ALL Abduction Cases are fake any more than a bunch of blurry-bug photos that are claimed to be alien craft negate ALL other UFO photos...!

Critical Reasoning must be included in Critical Analysis!

Here is a question: If a Skeptic will NOT accept anything as proof, what is the definition of a Debunker?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Aug 19th, 2014, 04:19am

Mythos,

...Here is a question: If a Skeptic will NOT accept anything as proof, what is the definition of a Debunker?..

You statement that a skeptic will not accept anything as proof is flawed.

A skeptic will accept reasonable proof and will modify his belief in light of the new knowledge.
He is aware, however, that nothing is ever absolute. and that he may need to further tweek this knowledge as more emerges.

As for the debunker.. To me the debunker is a person who has some agenda to follow. Someone who may believe something but tries to ass it off as something else.

The often have an interest to protect.

HAL
INT21

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Aug 19th, 2014, 10:35am

on Aug 19th, 2014, 12:38am, Mythos wrote:
And "Circuses" are real too!

The fact that some Abduction cases are fake does not prove that ALL Abduction Cases are fake any more than a bunch of blurry-bug photos that are claimed to be alien craft negate ALL other UFO photos...!

Critical Reasoning must be included in Critical Analysis!

Here is a question: If a Skeptic will NOT accept anything as proof, what is the definition of a Debunker?


Not much critical reasoning in that post.
wink
My point about the Circus is not to deny that some events might be legitimate but that fringe personalities and others have turned the whole area into a three ring circus with barkers, hoaxsters, knee jerk bleevers, cultists, and money makers who have clouded the whole issue to the point that serious investigation and investigators is almost impossible.

Case in point is that Dr Vallee, a scientist and perhaps the most knowledgeable person about all aspects of it, and a believer in reality of the phenomenon, has said many times that any chance to get at the bottom of it to do some good science has been thwarted time and time again by the fringe elements who have ruined serious investigation and interest into the enigma.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 22nd, 2014, 8:16pm

Dr. John Mack and His Irrational Argument for Hypnosis

The UFO Trail

August 22, 2014

The video below was recently posted by Paul Kimball. It contains a couple or so minutes of footage shot by Mr. Kimball at a press conference conducted at the 2001 MUFON Symposium in Irvine, California.

In the video, the late Dr. John Mack attempts to defend the use of hypnosis, or what he prefers to call a relaxation exercise, as a memory retrieval tool for alleged alien abductees.

Attempts.

I find the doctor's lines of reasoning profoundly irrational. Shockingly so, as a matter of fact.



Arguing the validity of hypnosis, Mack offered an example he apparently felt would support his point. He explained that an alleged abductee recalled an alien-related experience in a quite different manner before hypnosis as compared to during hypnosis. Mack astonishingly seemed to view the discrepancy as evidence of the value of hypnosis in clarifying actuality, as opposed to calling the validity of the memories into question.

It went something like this:

Witness testimony: I met a very friendly alien.

Witness testimony under hypnosis: I met a very unfriendly alien.

Hypnotist: That is an excellent example of how hypnosis assists the client in discerning reality.

I challenge the validity of such lines of reasoning.

In the event one might wonder, yes, I have read Mack's material. I also attended one of his presentations during the 1990's. I was not surprised to find him well spoken and entertaining. His activities were of course greatly appreciated by proponents of alien abduction as a literal reality.

His work was of course of interest to many at the time due to his credentials and status in the academic community. It seemed there might actually be something to the fantastic reports and witness testimonies - and there still may be. I'm not suggesting that everything from Mothman to Fatima necessarily hinges on Mack coming down with a case of mind freeze during a UFO con presser.

Nonetheless, I challenge the logic behind the example Dr. Mack presented. It is simply irrational.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Aug 22nd, 2014, 10:44pm

on Aug 22nd, 2014, 8:16pm, jjflash wrote:
Dr. John Mack and His Irrational Argument for Hypnosis

The UFO Trail

August 22, 2014

The video below was recently posted by Paul Kimball. It contains a couple or so minutes of footage shot by Mr. Kimball at a press conference conducted at the 2001 MUFON Symposium in Irvine, California.

In the video, the late Dr. John Mack attempts to defend the use of hypnosis, or what he prefers to call a relaxation exercise, as a memory retrieval tool for alleged alien abductees.

Attempts.

I find the doctor's lines of reasoning profoundly irrational. Shockingly so, as a matter of fact.



Arguing the validity of hypnosis, Mack offered an example he apparently felt would support his point. He explained that an alleged abductee recalled an alien-related experience in a quite different manner before hypnosis as compared to during hypnosis. Mack astonishingly seemed to view the discrepancy as evidence of the value of hypnosis in clarifying actuality, as opposed to calling the validity of the memories into question.

It went something like this:

Witness testimony: I met a very friendly alien.

Witness testimony under hypnosis: I met a very unfriendly alien.

Hypnotist: That is an excellent example of how hypnosis assists the client in discerning reality.

I challenge the validity of such lines of reasoning.

In the event one might wonder, yes, I have read Mack's material. I also attended one of his presentations during the 1990's. I was not surprised to find him well spoken and entertaining. His activities were of course greatly appreciated by proponents of alien abduction as a literal reality.

His work was of course of interest to many at the time due to his credentials and status in the academic community. It seemed there might actually be something to the fantastic reports and witness testimonies - and there still may be. I'm not suggesting that everything from Mothman to Fatima necessarily hinges on Mack coming down with a case of mind freeze during a UFO con presser.

Nonetheless, I challenge the logic behind the example Dr. Mack presented. It is simply irrational.


That does sound a bit convoluted coming from an MD and psychiatrist with a solid reputation.
Perhaps he was having a bad day. wink

BTW...I have read his books and I don't think he ever said he believed space aliens were abducting people but that the people did believe it themselves and he could find no clear reason that they were psychologically unbalanced.
He also implied that the experiences might be something of a spiritual nature and dimensional/astral rather than on an objective physical plane. Interesting comments from an MD from Harvard.
Or am I misreading his position?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 23rd, 2014, 12:25pm

on Aug 22nd, 2014, 10:44pm, drwu23 wrote:
That does sound a bit convoluted coming from an MD and psychiatrist with a solid reputation.
Perhaps he was having a bad day. wink

BTW...I have read his books and I don't think he ever said he believed space aliens were abducting people but that the people did believe it themselves and he could find no clear reason that they were psychologically unbalanced.
He also implied that the experiences might be something of a spiritual nature and dimensional/astral rather than on an objective physical plane. Interesting comments from an MD from Harvard.
Or am I misreading his position?


I hear ya. I suspect he may have taken a bit more politically and scientifically correct positions in his published work, while perhaps his true opinions were more accurately depicted in statements such as contained in the video. I dunno, but you've probably heard of the comments of some of those who knew him personally and suggested from time to time that he could seem a bit naive, or at the least overly enthusiastic about Hopkins and such.

Imo, it's one thing for someone like Hopkins to take overly simplistic perspectives, like, 'why would a witness say it if it isn't true?', and it's another thing for an esteemed mental health professional to take such a stance. Bizarre and concerning, actually.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Aug 24th, 2014, 02:20am

on Aug 22nd, 2014, 10:44pm, drwu23 wrote:
That does sound a bit convoluted coming from an MD and psychiatrist with a solid reputation.
Perhaps he was having a bad day. wink

BTW...I have read his books and I don't think he ever said he believed space aliens were abducting people but that the people did believe it themselves and he could find no clear reason that they were psychologically unbalanced.
He also implied that the experiences might be something of a spiritual nature and dimensional/astral rather than on an objective physical plane. Interesting comments from an MD from Harvard.
Or am I misreading his position?


I read (and massively enjoyed) his work too, dr Wu, and I'd say that's a fair representation of his findings.

If his defense of hypnosis in abduction research became convoluted here it may be simply due to his conviction, evolved over 10 years of research, that indeed his clients/abduction experiencers had less symptoms of disorder than the population on average!

Inescapable logic (to the psychiatrist's mind) emerges here: if there's no causality chain like DISORDER [leads to] EXPERIENCE [leads to] HYPNOSIS AUGMENTED RECALL, one simple alternative chain might be: EXPERIENCE [leads to] HYPNOSIS AUGMENTED RECALL.

Never mind there's some distortion in such recall. At least it yielded (distorted) additional information about something real and potentially important. (One may compensate for distortion, just like one may compensate for lies, confabulations and delusions.)


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Aug 24th, 2014, 4:26pm

PURR,

WELL SAID ~ AND ~ A PURR-FECT ASSESSMENT!

SHALOM...Z

EDIT TO ADD:

LOOKING PAST/BEYOND THE DISTORTION...MAY LEAD TO ENLIGHTENMENT
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Nov 15th, 2014, 9:18pm

Emma Woods is steadily creating a website full of relevant information and valuable resources. I'm very pleased that a number of podcasts related to both her case and the inherent challenges to employing hypnosis as an investigative tool are now readily available:

http://ufoalienabductee.com/radio-podcasts/

Emma has also been getting info posted about the roles the intelligence community have played in ufology:

http://ufoalienabductee.com/ufology/

I'm honored that she chose to prominently include 'The UFO Trail' in the sections.

Jack Brewer
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Nov 16th, 2014, 10:55am

Regarding alien abduction research , it's a shame that no hard core forensic experts that specialize in kidnap and or missing person cases have looked into the 'alien abduction syndrome'. It would be interesting to see if they might find some objective evidence that all the amateur ufo investigators have missed. Even aliens, assuming they are actual biological beings, must have dna and leave other trace evidence from time to time unless they all wear gloves and wipe down the places they visit.
I'm not trying to make fun here but one would think that a good solid forensic look after one of these abductions would turn up something.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Nov 17th, 2014, 03:36am

Like what? Here you have a terrified human being and your asking of them What? Actually I know what you mean,btw Dr.Wu,remember when those "glass beads" were found among the dust of a bedroom in which the person claimed to have been abducted? Whatever happend to that study?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Nov 17th, 2014, 3:01pm

on Nov 17th, 2014, 03:36am, carolnistri wrote:
Like what? Here you have a terrified human being and your asking of them What? Actually I know what you mean,btw Dr.Wu,remember when those "glass beads" were found among the dust of a bedroom in which the person claimed to have been abducted? Whatever happend to that study?


Any forensic evidence at all would be nice. Any trace chemicals ,dna , particles, fibers, etc left behind by the 'aliens'.
Don't recall what was ever found about the 'glass beads'.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Nov 18th, 2014, 03:53am

Don't recall what was ever found about the 'glass beads'.


But you Do recall that it was you that posted the post that told us of those glass beads? Right?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Nov 18th, 2014, 08:02am

on Nov 18th, 2014, 03:53am, carolnistri wrote:
Don't recall what was ever found about the 'glass beads'.


But you Do recall that it was you that posted the post that told us of those glass beads? Right?


It may have been me....I simply don't recall that one, but again there has never been any good forensic work done at any abduction events that I am aware of. The only thing recovered were so-called implants in a few of the 'abductees' and those were always after the fact and sometimes months and years later before the 'abductee' noticed.
I have mentioned before that a forensic exam of Walton's body right after he wandered into town might have given us some good data.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Nov 18th, 2014, 08:30am

Ive been trying to get to the bottom of those glass beads for ever,the net has nothing on it.Hmm.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Nov 18th, 2014, 08:37am

Here I found this.


http://aaarc.abduct.com/abduction.htm


(Now this is interesting)This is from that report on abduction.


Another type of physical evidence has recently been identified in household dust. Marilyn Ruben has been working closely with world-renowned physicist, Dr. William Levengood, a retired professor from the University of Michigan. Dr. Levengood has discovered, what could be called, the fingerprints of alien abduction. Under powerful magnification, he identified small hollow spheres, and another elongated crystalline form that he refers to as “pseudo-crystals.” Ruben indicated that these microscopic forms are not a part of our natural environment, and have only been found in homes where alien visitations have occurred. At Marilyn's request, I provided dust samples from my own home for Levengood’s analysis. When the results came back, I was shocked to learn that the samples were laden with pseudo-crystals and hollow spheres!

In addition to implanted and microscopic objects, aliens have left behind other calling cards. Large burned spots have been found in the grass outside abductees’ homes and in nearby fields. Earth samples tested from these areas are many times greater in magnetic material content than surrounding unaffected soil. Also, microscopic beads of glass have been discovered, which usually indicates exposure to very high temperatures


But what would account for those glass beads in ones bedroom?

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Nov 18th, 2014, 09:03am

on Nov 18th, 2014, 08:37am, carolnistri wrote:
Here I found this.


http://aaarc.abduct.com/abduction.htm


(Now this is interesting)This is from that report on abduction.


Another type of physical evidence has recently been identified in household dust. Marilyn Ruben has been working closely with world-renowned physicist, Dr. William Levengood, a retired professor from the University of Michigan. Dr. Levengood has discovered, what could be called, the fingerprints of alien abduction. Under powerful magnification, he identified small hollow spheres, and another elongated crystalline form that he refers to as “pseudo-crystals.” Ruben indicated that these microscopic forms are not a part of our natural environment, and have only been found in homes where alien visitations have occurred. At Marilyn's request, I provided dust samples from my own home for Levengood’s analysis. When the results came back, I was shocked to learn that the samples were laden with pseudo-crystals and hollow spheres!

In addition to implanted and microscopic objects, aliens have left behind other calling cards. Large burned spots have been found in the grass outside abductees’ homes and in nearby fields. Earth samples tested from these areas are many times greater in magnetic material content than surrounding unaffected soil. Also, microscopic beads of glass have been discovered, which usually indicates exposure to very high temperatures


But what would account for those glass beads in ones bedroom?


Far more samples need to be taken of control areas to see if these spheres etc are simply part of natural dust debris before claiming them to be of alien origin.
Burned spots of course are a known anomaly in reported ufo cases....not sure how often these alleged glass beads show up.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Nov 18th, 2014, 10:09am

The info you are discussing is about William "Lefty" Levengood and his research. The likely cause of the glass fragments was suspected to be heat.

I would strongly suggest abstaining from drawing conclusions not yet available. Lefty was often attributed with beliefs that my interactions with him would suggest he did not necessarily foster. I think some overly enthusiastic so-called researchers tried to exploit his willingness to explore fringe phenomena in efforts to further their agendas and beliefs. As a matter of fact, Lefty's preferred hypothesis on unexplained crop circles had nothing to do with aliens, he thought some formations might be the results of complex weather phenomena as can be read about in his papers on the topic.

The post below came from the following thread:

http://ufocasebook.conforums.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&&num=1402086323&&start=33#2

The original source/post contains mention of the glass particles reportedly found in the homes of self-described abductees, as well as a link to its source.

on Jun 14th, 2014, 5:09pm, jjflash wrote:
Here's some related stuff I find fascinating:

Source: http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2011/04/crop-circles-part-three.html

In 1975 in Orton, Ontario, Lindy Tucker and her neighbors began experiencing events of such high strangeness that Tucker's subsequent investigations led to founding a research organization and having some of her work published in the MUFON Journal.

[...]

Following at least two sightings of unidentified aerial phenomena, in which Tucker perceived what she described as “telepathic contact,” she experienced electronic anomalies, including telephone disconnections and appliances inexplicably turning on. Tucker further reported “compasses spinning” in her hand and “odd rashes or burns after being out late in the fields trying to get closer to this mysterious force.”

While all this was taking place, one day Tucker discovered a nearby field of corn “went down.” Every single stalk in the field, as far as the eye could see, she wrote, was “laid down” and the crops “looked singed.”

Then her garden produced a whopping 75-pound cabbage.

User Image
Tucker with the amazing cabbage

[And get a load of this from the same blog post...]

The work of William C. “Lefty” Levengood... includes examinations of crop circles and cattle mutilations, as well as investigations of alleged alien abduction.

[...]

As the story went, Levengood supplied [a] female abductee with an assortment of hair curlers, each having a plastic capsule stuffed in it which had seeds, allegedly wheat seeds, placed in it. Each night, before going to sleep, she was to put a hair curler in her hair. Each morning, she was to properly date and store the curler, documenting in a journal if she had experienced anything unusual during the previous night or 24 hours.

According to various Internet sources, the woman experienced some type of high strangeness, or possible alien abduction, one night during the experimentation period. Levengood would later find the seeds to indeed be altered which coincided with the date of the strange experience. As the story went, the seeds were completely fried.

I contacted William “Lefty” Levengood in 2010 so I could find out more about such extraordinary claims. Levengood graciously agreed to participate in two telephone interviews conducted during July of 2010. As is often the situation with tales circulating around the Internet, Levengood informed me there is truth mixed with inaccuracy in the hair curler story. However, in this case, I found the truth even more interesting!

[...]

The story did actually happen, as Levengood thought it would be a good idea to use seeds to try to document the presence of abnormal energies surrounding the female abductee.

“I could give you a whole day's lecture on work just with her,” he proclaimed.

The first inaccuracy in the story was the type of seeds. The actual seeds used were Arabidopsis thaliana, a small flowering plant in the mustard family commonly used by the international research community.

He said the woman followed instructions very well, doing an excellent job of documenting details of her activities. Every seven days Levengood would retrieve the hair curlers from the previous week while supplying her with seven more, each packed with a plastic capsule containing seeds. He would then dig the plastic capsule out of each returned curler, review the related written information, and, interestingly enough, plant the seeds. He eventually came across the journal entry indicating an experience of high strangeness and the corresponding plastic capsule.

“My God, I was dumbfounded,” Levengood recalled.

The two halves of the capsule shell were melted together, he said, and the entire capsule appeared to be imploded. He carefully worked at the capsule long enough to separate the two halves, at which time he said it made a whooshing noise, indicating it had been placed under some kind of vacuum.

“It was heated, of course,” he said.

I confidently suspect Levengood's assertion the capsule had been heated is why the inaccurate detail circulated that the seeds were fried, a detail that was simply incorrect. According to Levengood, the seeds were not wasted. Quite the contrary. Levengood stated the seeds in question grew with “increased vigor,” significantly outgrowing the other seeds!

Upon discovering this to be the case, I was immediately reminded of Tucker and her 75-pound cabbage. I was therefore eager to hear more about circumstances of which Levengood was aware in which growth rates of plants were obviously altered by whatever was taking place around them. Quite interestingly, one such circumstance included what Levengood called the “most unusual crop formation” he ever saw.

“This crop formation was in Kansas,” he explained. “It had no bent nodes, the crops were not knocked down, there were no expulsion cavities, there were no visible signs, except, in these circles, the wheat grew at a different (increased) height!”

.................................................................

So I suspect the intelligence community may sometimes be stirring the pot. I think it may sometimes be intentionally, while, at other times, just a byproduct of complex events and circumstances.

Lastly, I would highly encourage people to use forums such as this or blogs such as mine as spring boards to conduct their own research. Find credible sources, practice professional research protocol and form their own opinions - don't adopt the opinions and views of others without due process.

Thanks again for the comments and interest. They are appreciated.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Nov 18th, 2014, 10:18am

Another related post:

on Oct 18th, 2013, 3:43pm, jjflash wrote:
Life and Times of Lefty Levengood

The UFO Trail

October 18, 2013

Biophysicist William C. Levengood recently passed away. Mr. Levengood, who suggested during telephone conversations in 2010 that I call him Lefty, lived to see many decades of the ufology circus and its tent of hypotheses, research, exaggerations, hoaxes, lies and everything else it contains. As many are aware, Lefty became well known around ufology for his willingness to try to apply scientific research to what he termed crop formations and bovine mutilations. He conducted experiments in his Michigan laboratory and did field work.

I contacted Lefty in 2010 in order to inquire about some points he had previously addressed in some of his research. He was quite willing to discuss his work with me and agreed it would be a good idea for me to record our conversations. He proceeded to tell me about such things as the "most unusual crop formation" he had ever seen. That was of reasonable interest coming from a guy who stated he had personally examined plants from over 300 formations. The most unusual, Lefty explained, was located in Kansas.

"It had no bent nodes," he said, "the crops were not knocked down, there were no expulsion cavities, there were no visible signs, except, in these circles, the wheat grew at a different (increased) height!"

The formation was further described in Crop Circles, Part Three, one of a series of posts I published in April and May of 2011 with the help and contributions of stiver. This week stiver pieced together some more of Lefty's statements from my 2010 interviews and offered them below:





My personal favorite Lefty story was about a female self-described abductee and an experiment that involved hair curlers and mustard seeds. Lefty instructed the woman to place a curler containing seeds in her hair each night before bed. She would then label each curler with a date while keeping a journal of any unusual experiences she might perceive. Again from Crop Circles, Part Three:

"He [Lefty] said the woman followed instructions very well, doing an excellent job of documenting details of her activities. Every seven days Levengood would retrieve the hair curlers from the previous week while supplying her with seven more, each packed with a plastic capsule containing seeds. He would then dig the plastic capsule out of each returned curler, review the related written information, and, interestingly enough, plant the seeds. He eventually came across the journal entry indicating an experience of high strangeness and the corresponding plastic capsule.

"'My God, I was dumbfounded,' Levengood recalled.

"The two halves of the capsule shell were melted together, he said, and the entire capsule appeared to be imploded. He carefully worked at the capsule long enough to separate the two halves, at which time he said it made a whooshing noise, indicating it had been placed under some kind of vacuum.

"'It was heated, of course,' he said...

"According to Levengood, the seeds were not wasted. Quite the contrary. Levengood stated the seeds in question grew with 'increased vigor,' significantly outgrowing the other seeds!"

Controversial and willing to take the heat, pardon the pun, Lefty contributed significantly to the UFO community in a variety of ways. In addition to his clever experiments, he also published a number of professional research papers. Lefty hypothesized that some crop formations may result from natural phenomena and that ion electron avalanches might play key roles. Some of his peer reviewed research papers were challenged and some were not.

My interest in Lefty's work wound The UFO Trail through several circumstances, one of which was the blog of Dr. Jacques Vallee. Suffice it to say the doctor had some of his own extremely interesting ideas about crop formations that offered possible explanations much more down to earth than popularly discussed.

The publishing of my above referenced series of posts on crop circles also resulted in some exchanges with the ever skeptical Lance Moody. I recall that Lance challenged some of the material, resulting in what I recall to have been a productive exchange of credible information and personal interpretations between Lance and I. That interaction indeed built a foundation for what became my respect for Lance Moody's opinions, as well as increasing my appreciation for constructive critical inquiry, an activity that Lefty, as well as Lance, also encouraged.

William C. Levengood was not without controversy. Neither was he without critics. He did, however, do more than his part in challenging researchers to up their crop circle and cattle mute games. If more accurate ways to interpret and analyze the phenomena than currently employed are not utilized in our lifetimes, it's no fault of Lefty's.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Nov 18th, 2014, 3:13pm

Carolnistri.

re : At Marilyn's request, I provided dust samples from my own home for Levengood’s analysis. When the results came back, I was shocked to learn that the samples were laden with pseudo-crystals and hollow spheres!..

is it known if this person also provided a control sample to another lab. or kept a sample for them self for later analysis ?

HAL
INT21
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Nov 19th, 2014, 08:24am

on Nov 18th, 2014, 3:13pm, INT21 wrote:
Carolnistri.

re : At Marilyn's request, I provided dust samples from my own home for Levengood’s analysis. When the results came back, I was shocked to learn that the samples were laden with pseudo-crystals and hollow spheres!..

is it known if this person also provided a control sample to another lab. or kept a sample for them self for later analysis ?

HAL
INT21


That's the problem and there is a lot of junk probably in the dust in our houses including dust mites and other organisms and could be just natural debris of one kind or another.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Nov 19th, 2014, 12:28pm

If I recall correctly, biophysicist Levengood never published an actual paper on the woman in question and the related seeming anomalies. It's been a while since I last listened in their entirety to the interviews he gave me, but that's how I remember it. He specifically said that he could do an entire day's lecture on her alone, but I do not think he ever more formally composed an accounting of the evidence, its chain of custody and so on. It remained anecdotal to the best of my knowledge.

I do not think the following was the case with Levengood but, in my opinion, a big reason that many 'abductologists' do not employ forensic experts and more traditional investigative techniques is that they fear the outcomes will damage their poorly constructed hypotheses. I particularly recall testimony from a podcaster who claimed that he offered to introduce a high profile abduction-researcher to a medical professional he knew who was interested in the alleged disappearing fetus syndrome and had the resources to substantially contribute to its investigation. The abduction-researcher wanted nothing to do with it.

Similar circumstances were demonstrated by David Jacobs. While Temple defended his offensive and extremely bizarre actions as limited to collecting oral histories, that was clearly not entirely accurate. Jacobs actually claimed during an interview that he collected physical samples and checked for forensic evidence on multiple occasions. Not only did the tests conducted fail to result in support for his theories, but he failed to make details of such tests and their reports publicly available, all while Temple falsely claimed he never even collected such samples.

Another clear case of obfuscation of data collection surrounding reported abductions was the Ambient Monitoring Project. We could go on and on about failed opportunities and their rationalization, whatever all the ultimate causes may be.

Again, I did not interpret Levengood to be particularly problematic in that area. The genre as a whole is indeed so, however. An argument could be made that its survival depends on it. The problem, of course, is that what legitimate mysteries and circumstances of interest may actually exist become lost in the ill advised fanatical promotion of unsupported claims.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Nov 20th, 2014, 03:54am

A comprison study should be easy,you go to several houses that the owner says was not visited by "aliens" and you look for the glass beads there,if none is found than you um,go on from there.. wink
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Nov 20th, 2014, 03:56am

on Nov 19th, 2014, 12:28pm, jjflash wrote:
If I recall correctly, biophysicist Levengood never published an actual paper on the woman in question and the related seeming anomalies. It's been a while since I last listened in their entirety to the interviews he gave me, but that's how I remember it. He specifically said that he could do an entire day's lecture on her alone, but I do not think he ever more formally composed an accounting of the evidence, its chain of custody and so on. It remained anecdotal to the best of my knowledge.

I do not think the following was the case with Levengood but, in my opinion, a big reason that many 'abductologists' do not employ forensic experts and more traditional investigative techniques is that they fear the outcomes will damage their poorly constructed hypotheses. I particularly recall testimony from a podcaster who claimed that he offered to introduce a high profile abduction-researcher to a medical professional he knew who was interested in the alleged disappearing fetus syndrome and had the resources to substantially contribute to its investigation. The abduction-researcher wanted nothing to do with it.

Similar circumstances were demonstrated by David Jacobs. While Temple defended his offensive and extremely bizarre actions as limited to collecting oral histories, that was clearly not entirely accurate. Jacobs actually claimed during an interview that he collected physical samples and checked for forensic evidence on multiple occasions. Not only did the tests conducted fail to result in support for his theories, but he failed to make details of such tests and their reports publicly available, all while Temple falsely claimed he never even collected such samples.

Another clear case of obfuscation of data collection surrounding reported abductions was the Ambient Monitoring Project. We could go on and on about failed opportunities and their rationalization, whatever all the ultimate causes may be.

Again, I did not interpret Levengood to be particularly problematic in that area. The genre as a whole is indeed so, however. An argument could be made that its survival depends on it. The problem, of course, is that what legitimate mysteries and circumstances of interest may actually exist become lost in the ill advised fanatical promotion of unsupported claims.


I do believe that abductions take place in the mind,no one is taken out of there bedrooms the "abduction" takes place in the mind.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by thelmadonna on Nov 20th, 2014, 06:12am

I have never, up until now had need or want to tell you to shut the **** up.
Here is a ufocasebook page, the abductors t5hat do not abduct come in vehicles like these, that apparently do not exist.. The one from Grangemouth is about a quarter of a mile from my home.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Nov 20th, 2014, 06:27am

Thelmadonna,

...I have never, up until now had need or want to tell you to shut the **** up...

Not a very nice way to address a fellow member who's opinions are of equal value to your own.



HAL
INT21
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Nov 20th, 2014, 06:37am

Carolnistri,

...I do believe that abductions take place in the mind,no one is taken out of there bedrooms the "abduction" takes place in the mind...

Inside the head is one place where such occurrences happen on a regular basis.

We know them as dreams. A realm where the strangest things can happen yet no one else can see.

So you may be right.

HAL
INT21
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Nov 20th, 2014, 08:11am

on Nov 20th, 2014, 06:27am, INT21 wrote:
......

Not a very nice way to address a fellow member who's opinions are of equal value to your own.



HAL
INT21


For those who have had 'experiences' no amount of alternate explanations nor evidence is going to convince them it was not in their head nor space aliens.
It has become similar to a religious experience to them no matter how one tries to interpret or discuss the events.
And I understand why they feel like that but once you commit to a 'belief' the truth ,whatever it is, becomes very difficult to get at since one has already made up their mind regardless of what else comes up. This has always been a hallmark also of paranormal experience.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Nov 20th, 2014, 08:15am

on Nov 20th, 2014, 06:12am, thelmadonna wrote:
I have never, up until now had need or want to tell you to shut the **** up.
Here is a ufocasebook page, the abductors t5hat do not abduct come in vehicles like these, that apparently do not exist.. The one from Grangemouth is about a quarter of a mile from my home.



User Image

Is this what you have seen....?
BTW...no one is saying that all sightings nor abduction experiences are all in the head.
No one is making fun or trying to discredit the fact people have 'ufo related sightings'. ....but looking at all the possibilities for answers to what can be very different events.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Nyx on Nov 20th, 2014, 8:54pm

One has to walk in that person's shoes to have any understanding at all.


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Nov 21st, 2014, 08:37am

on Nov 20th, 2014, 8:54pm, ghostofsilver wrote:
One has to walk in that person's shoes to have any understanding at all.



To have any understanding at all...? No.
To understand that person's feelings about it? Yes.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Dec 18th, 2014, 12:45pm

A post last year from @AFutureGhost that makes some points worthy of consideration, in my opinion:


Defense of the Linda Cortile case

A Future Ghost

January 3, 2013

Many months after losing interest in the controversy of UFO abductions and the research thereof, I stumbled upon a site by Sean Meers and a self-published defense of the case. I've started reading the defense. It seems to be thoroughly documented and very impassioned. Meers points out several apparent errors by Paratopia in attacking the late Bud Hopkins and seeks to discredit the criticisms of Carol Rainey. Having gained some distance from the whole "abduction" controversy, my opinions have settled down to a few remaining impressions... largely informed by some life experiences.

I think that the fundamental reason that sciences refuses to touch the abduction phenomenon is because the experiences bear more-than-a-casual resemblance to mental illness and other brain anomalies, including the oft-cited "temporal lobe epilepsy." Unfortunately, science cannot publicly say this, for a number of important reasons. A diagnosis of mental illness is not easily nor lightly made, so (in defense of science), the scientist has no choice but to stay as far away from the subject as possible.... which leaves the abduction research mostly to investigators not trained in psychology.

Now, does this mean that abductions are signs of mental illness? No. But look at it from this perspective. If I saw a strange object in the sky and did not know what it was, I'd call it an unidentified flying object, implying, in the popular imagination, that it was an alien craft. However, a trained pilot might come along and say, "Oh, that's not a UFO. I know exactly what that is. It's a C-43-whatever." When we see objects in the sky, we consult with professional aviators to rule out pedestrian explanations (and trust that the pilots aren't covert CIA disinfo agents). Unfortunately, it's quite taboo for an investigator to consult with a psychiatrist when documenting perceptions of events that fall outside the range of normal. The experiencer might be recalling a "real" abduction--or he might be experiencing psychosis. We just don't know.

This problem is compounded by the fact that many paranormalists who report very bizarre experiences also show an obsession with a number of ill-informed conspiracies. Their beliefs are often indistinguishable from the truly delusional. So, science isn't going to go there.

Unfortunately, because science can't (or won't) touch these cases, we cannot know their true nature. We simply don't know what's causing them. And I argue that we, as lay people, should tread lightly on these cases and not rush to argue that they are, in fact, what they appear to be.

(How does this differ from investigations of near-death experiences? Well, NDEs usually happen in a clinical setting and are studied by researchers who specialize in medical science. And more often than not, they can convincingly argue that the NDE was "real" and not the result of known problems of perception.)

I actually bought Bud Hopkins' book on the Cortile incident right after it came out (albeit at discount from a second-hand store). Someone had bought it and quickly resold it for reasons unknown. I was very impressed with the book. Bud Hopkins was a good writer who was able to convey an aura of authority to his material. When I read George Hansen's critique of the case shortly thereafter, I thought, "Hey, wait a minute... this makes a lot of sense, too." Ultimately, I was more convinced by Hansen's critique for an important reason. Hopkins told an extraordinary story that defied logical explanation, and while it was fascinating and well-told, it was unsubstantiated. It was an extraordinary, profoundly strange experience that lacked the necessary hard proof. We were asked to accept the account as-is, based on the testimony of some of the participants. As a result, Hansen was able to cause me to doubt the testimony by highlighting some significant flaws in the narrative. For all I know, the Cortile case might have gone down the way that Hopkins said it did. But after Hansen, I doubted it then, and I still do now.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Dec 30th, 2014, 06:54am

Latest at my blog, 'The UFO Trail':

Security of Budd Hopkins Archive Called into Question, David Jacobs Shares Responsibility

December 30, 2014

The UFO Trail

Peter Robbins, who described himself on the Dec. 17 Jimmy Church 'Fade to Black' show as a former assistant and confidant to the late Budd Hopkins, told Church that David Jacobs recently provided Retired Col. Charles Halt with a copy of a tape recorded regressive hypnosis session conducted by Hopkins many years earlier on subject Larry Warren. Robbins framed the circumstances, about which Warren expressed outrage earlier this month, as a misunderstanding on the part of Jacobs.

This blog has previously explored issues central to the ethics of UFO research. They include how abduction researchers have dealt with in the past and continue to deal with witness confidentiality. The story of the leaking of Larry Warren's audio-taped session(s) to Charles Halt continues this exploration. Let's begin with a summary of some of the players and what was stated on recent podcasts.

Read the full post at:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2014/12/security-of-budd-hopkins-archive-called.html
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jan 4th, 2015, 9:41pm

Carol Rainey Responds to Peter Robbins

The UFO Trail

January 4, 2015

Witness confidentiality and accompanying issues were recently explored on this blog in the post, 'Security of Budd Hopkins Archive Called into Question, David Jacobs Shares Responsibility'. Peter Robbins subsequently chose to voice some perspectives about the piece and make some related assertions. Carol Rainey chose to respond. Rainey's response was received in an email today, and is posted below with her consent:

Carol Rainey’s Response to Peter Robbins, January 4, 2015

I would like to respond to Peter Robbins’ categorical statement below, which was posted to Sacha Christie’s Facebook page on January 1st:

“For the record – Budd Hopkins NEVER allowed the release of any tape recording or confidential file except to the individual themselves. David Jacobs has always followed this policy as well – except in single case of the event in question [the release of Larry Warren’s tape to Col. Halt].”

Budd Hopkins’ supporters have shown a disturbing commitment to turn him into “a saint” by revising and sanitizing every act and event of his life. Budd was a human being – often warm and caring, but also often thoughtless and careless about other people’s safety and needs. So are most of us divided between our good and our selfish impulses. So, please, folks, there is no need to attempt to present him as perfect and without flaw – in retrospect. That simply is not who he was. We were married for ten years, most of those happily, and long enough for me to know his character and his work.

Prior to his death, however, Budd did not make adequate provisions for the posthumous safety and protection of his subjects’ records. In other fields, a researcher’s archives are often given in trust to an academic institution or major library. The archives are transferred to these safe havens along with strict legal contracts that specify who, why, and how other individuals with serious research projects may or may not use them. If I had been one of Budd’s subjects, that would have been my strong preference for where my records would have ended up.

Peter is simply and utterly wrong when he asserts that Budd “NEVER allowed the release of a tape or file to anyone but the individual themselves [sic].” What would Peter call the fact that Budd allowed David Jacobs, at some point in the late 1990’s, to take hundreds of Budd’s hypnosis tapes back to his home in order to make copies of those confidential “patient records?”

And we both know that Budd, in his studio or living room, often played excerpts of his subjects’ regression sessions to visitors like Col. Halt, Roger Leir, John Mack, and others. I saw him play these regression tapes for journalists, for television producers, for other abductees. He also played a videotaped interview with John Cortile, aged eight or nine when it was shot, in his studio for outsiders to see, although he’d promised John’s mother that he would not.

It’s public knowledge that in his first interaction with John Mack, Budd handed him a stack of his unopened, personal mail. These were letters, often up to eight pages long, that had been sent to him in confidence by people who spilled out their deepest fears that their anomalous experiences meant they might be abductees. The names and addresses of these confidential letters (often marked “Confidential” on the envelopes) were fully in view. John has mentioned this in his writing and in conference presentations. Greg Sandow, too, has posted on the Web about Budd handing him, early on, a stack of unopened letters as a way of convincing him to take the phenomenon seriously.

In his last year of life, Budd (or his assignee) handed over to one of his supporters videotape to be publicly posted on a website that defended the “Witnessed” case. The unfortunate facts are that what Budd handed over to be made public was footage that belonged to me, footage that I’d shot with alleged abductees and witnesses for a documentary. I had obtained proper releases from each for inclusion in my film. But Budd had no release or contract whatsoever with the individuals on my film. Yet he was apparently untroubled by the ethical concerns of having handed over stolen material to be posted on a supporter’s site in full violation of my copyright -- not to mention the rights of the subjects who were then publicly “outed.”

Although I have less knowledge of David Jacobs’ policies and procedures, I am aware that Emma Woods has objected strongly, in the past, about his passing along the audiotapes of her own regressions to be listened to and transcribed by other alleged abductees.

In summary, I’d suggest to people concerned about such matters to familiarize themselves with the strict U.S. Department of Health and Human Services HIPAA regulations. More information about privacy rights for healthcare information can be found at http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa/complaints/index.html.

Carol Rainey

New York City, 2015

..................................................................................................

Related posts:

Security of Budd Hopkins Archive Called into Question, David Jacobs Shares Responsibility

Carol Rainey: Open Letter to the UFO Community
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Apr 7th, 2015, 09:30am

In a post recently published at the blog of Alfred Lehmberg, it was implied that retired historian and researcher of alleged alien abduction Dr. David Jacobs might consider consulting with microbiologist Dr. Tyler Kokjohn for research purposes, particularly testing material allegedly related to Jacobs' claims of ET-human hybrids. In the comments section, Dr. Kokjohn wrote:

Quote:
Alfred -

If I may offer one point of clarification...

Although I agree completely that acquiring and analyzing samples from alleged hybrids is essential, it is not possible for me to work with Dr. Jacobs. The rules regulating research conduct at my institution would prohibit that collaboration.

Defending himself from the accusations of improper conduct leveled by Emma Woods, Dr. Jacobs took refuge in the claim that he was not actually conducting any research. Instead, he stressed he was only taking oral histories.

Here is the problem from my perspective - the ambit of oral history taking certainly does not include collection of biological samples and their analyses. Moreover, since Dr. Jacobs explicitly stated he was not doing research (biomedical or otherwise), it seems unlikely he provided his subjects with sufficiently detailed informed consent documents to allow for sample collection. In order to obtain permission from my institution to collaborate on any research involving human subjects, it would be necessary to provide full documentation of the research scope, all informed consent documents and plans for dealing with any adverse events that might be foreseeable. Afeter all the necessary documentation has been reviewed, investigators must receive formal approval or an explict declaration of exemption from the Institutional Review Board before any work may proceed. These requirements are non-negotiable and approvals can never be obtained retroactively.

But what if Dr. Jacobs, now working as an independent investigator, decided to finally do some real research and collect samples under the aegis of acceptable informed consent rules? Even if the new work met every standard for the ethical and safe conduct of human subject research, I would still refuse to collaborate with him. The events and information regarding the Emma Woods debacle all convinced me I want nothing to do with Dr. Jacobs.

Tyler Kokjohn


What we might refer to as how research is conducted in the real world...
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Apr 7th, 2015, 09:44am

From my 2012 interview with David Jacobs and what Dr. Kokjohn was referencing, at least in part:

We discussed further why Jacobs stated millions of dollars in funding is required to conduct DNA tests on individuals or items allegedly coming in contact with aliens or hybrids.

“The reason I say millions,” Jacobs said, “is because Lloyd Pye has this skull and he estimates it costs several million dollars to get the skull completely sequenced. That estimate apparently has been agreed upon by other people too.

“The point is that if somebody comes along and wants to do it, fine, then, you know. I have taken material for analysis to various DNA testing places. They had negative results. There wasn't enough of it or they couldn't tell what it was – that sort of thing.”

“Are these tests available for the public to review?”

“Not yet.”

“Will they be?”

“I don't know. One I did many years ago at a local lab in Delaware. Another one was done by American Testing Institute in New York City – American Chemical? I can't remember the name of it now. That was also many years ago – about brown stains that people have; that's routinely there.

“I had another one done for a TV show and they didn't know what the heck it was. They just sort of laughed about it and I got to look at those reports.

“Maybe one day I'll put them on the Internet. I don't know, but I'm still old school. It never occurs to me to put things on the Internet, but that's an idea 'cause they're just sitting in my files. But with this purity of DNA that comes directly from a hybrid, that would be another order of things.”

“Am I correct in my understanding,” I asked, “that Barbara Lamb claims to personally know a hybrid?”

“You're going to have to ask Barbara that. I don't know. I haven't talked to Barbara in a couple of years, actually.”

“What I'm getting at,” I explained, “again, is the possible opportunities to do some testing. It would seem like she would prioritize such a thing if she knew a hybrid... Am I correct that you understood hybrids to have sent you text messages and emails?”

“Yes, yes,” Jacobs said, “and that I will be writing a book about. Within context, you'll see the build up to it and how it's all logical; how this came about. Now, I can't tell whether it's a hoax or not. The only way whether I can tell if it's a hoax is by looking in this person's window while typing, instant messaging, and she lives 125 miles away from me – and I'd have to be typing the whole way and then looking in her window to see whether she's sitting there or some guy's sitting there, ya know what I mean?

“So, I don't know. All I know is that the woman I've known for 13 years and I still know her, and she's wonderful and she's great, and she's never ever, ever, ever lied to me in any conceivable way.”

“Is this the woman known as Elizabeth?”

“Yes.”

“Okay,” I began, “I can empathize with someone being 125 miles away... I can empathize with that -”

“You can't look in her windows anyway,” Jacobs interjected. “She sent me pictures of her room. There are curtains and the air conditioner and this and that and you can't even see inside.”

“...and can you empathize,” I continued and asked, “with people that might say if a camera or fingerprint stood between you and a Nobel, it seems like we could figure out how to get the goods on this hybrid?”

“It was much more difficult than you think. This was something that - we – it's much more easy – she wouldn't even remember what was happening until I'd talk with her the next day. By that time, there are no fingerprints. She's already - I'm just going to have to write this thing up and let people decide for themselves. I'll let people decide for themselves on this but, to me, it was typical hybrid discussion, having heard hundreds and hundreds of hybrid discussions from abductees – but I don't know, we'll see, we'll see.

“I'm not going to make any claims one way or the other. All I know is it's one of the scariest things that ever happened to me.”

As I began to ask another question, Jacobs requested I turn off the audio recorder.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Apr 7th, 2015, 3:44pm

jj,

I'm going to ask you a difficult question.
Do you believe that Dr Jacobs is delusional and that his 'abductee' subjects are also or that something legitimate is happening regarding alien contact?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by DrDil on Apr 7th, 2015, 6:16pm

on Apr 7th, 2015, 3:44pm, drwu23 wrote:
jj,

I'm going to ask you a difficult question.
Do you believe that Dr Jacobs is delusional and that his 'abductee' subjects are also or that something legitimate is happening regarding alien contact?

Hi Wu,

Knowing how adept you are at acknowledging & highlighting fallacious arguments then isn’t that an example of your garden variety ‘association fallacy'?


Cheers. wink

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Apr 7th, 2015, 7:10pm

on Apr 7th, 2015, 3:44pm, drwu23 wrote:
jj,

I'm going to ask you a difficult question.
Do you believe that Dr Jacobs is delusional and that his 'abductee' subjects are also or that something legitimate is happening regarding alien contact?


I don't know, drwu23, but I think there are a lot of reasons people make the claims they do. I don't think literal aliens are abducting people, especially on the scale Jacobs, Hopkins et al would have had us believe. I am willing to suspend judgement on the possibilities there may be genuine mysteries and less conventional explanations involved, particularly that have nothing to do with extraterrestrial space travelers. I think the idea of aliens got inserted circa mid 20th century via various origins, and it stuck, but was never correct.

As for Jacobs, I don't think he believes the platform he promotes. I think some of the people who sought "help" from him and Hopkins, for examples, were predisposed to the dogma long before the "investigation" began. Basically, I have very little reasons to believe Jacobs is sincere. He either lacks understandings of proper protocols concerning working with human research subjects or he doesn't care, neither of which bode well.

Let me put it this way, if an academic researcher regularly talking with a woman by long distance telephone sincerely believed she was being sexually molested on an ongoing basis by hybrids, people or, for that matter, anything else, would you think an appropriate response would be to offer to send her a chastity belt? I wouldn't describe that as sincere, no. I'd say an argument could be made that he's delusional at best.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Apr 8th, 2015, 1:51pm

on Apr 7th, 2015, 6:16pm, DrDil wrote:
Hi Wu,

Knowing how adept you are at acknowledging & highlighting fallacious arguments then isn’t that an example of your garden variety ‘association fallacy'?


Cheers. wink


I'm not sure what you mean by 'association fallacy'..?
Can you describe that term?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Apr 8th, 2015, 1:53pm

on Apr 7th, 2015, 7:10pm, jjflash wrote:
I don't know, drwu23, but I think there are a lot of reasons people make the claims they do. I don't think literal aliens are abducting people, especially on the scale Jacobs, Hopkins et al would have had us believe. I am willing to suspend judgement on the possibilities there may be genuine mysteries and less conventional explanations involved, particularly that have nothing to do with extraterrestrial space travelers. I think the idea of aliens got inserted circa mid 20th century via various origins, and it stuck, but was never correct.

As for Jacobs, I don't think he believes the platform he promotes. I think some of the people who sought "help" from him and Hopkins, for examples, were predisposed to the dogma long before the "investigation" began. Basically, I have very little reasons to believe Jacobs is sincere. He either lacks understandings of proper protocols concerning working with human research subjects or he doesn't care, neither of which bode well.

Let me put it this way, if an academic researcher regularly talking with a woman by long distance telephone sincerely believed she was being sexually molested on an ongoing basis by hybrids, people or, for that matter, anything else, would you think an appropriate response would be to offer to send her a chastity belt? I wouldn't describe that as sincere, no. I'd say an argument could be made that he's delusional at best.


Thanks for your reply.
What are some possible explanations then iyo as to what these people are really experiencing...?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Apr 8th, 2015, 2:16pm

JACK,

TO WIT:

"Let me put it this way, if an academic researcher regularly talking with a woman by long distance telephone sincerely believed she was being sexually molested on an ongoing basis by hybrids, people or, for that matter, anything else, would you think an appropriate response would be to offer to send her a chastity belt? I wouldn't describe that as sincere, no. I'd say an argument could be made that he's delusional at best."

I CERTAINLY ADMIRE YOUR INSIGHT grin

User Image

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Apr 8th, 2015, 10:38pm

on Apr 8th, 2015, 1:53pm, drwu23 wrote:
Thanks for your reply.
What are some possible explanations then iyo as to what these people are really experiencing...?


Thanks for asking, Doc, but I don't have any particularly original ideas to add to what's already on the table. I'm sure some reports are hoaxes, others stem from emotional trauma, some are nothing more than hypnotic confabulations and so on.

I think it's important to remember that if there are any genuine mysteries represented in any of the reports, then their authenticity does not hinge on the competency or sincerity of Jacobs, Hopkins et al. Just because a lot of those guys exploited the situations does not necessarily mean there is nothing of interest to be learned.

What that might be, I couldn't say. You know the drill... the Buddhists and Hindus might be in the ballpark with their worldviews... maybe bizarre magnetic occurrences and electronic frequencies account for some peculiar perceptions... I dunno, but I do know legitimate research will be required to ever uncover actual explanations that may exist, not hypnosis and bogus Roper Polls and such.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Apr 8th, 2015, 10:42pm

Thanks, ZETAR. Insults to intelligence come to mind... I'll probably do a blog post on that.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Apr 9th, 2015, 08:32am

on Apr 8th, 2015, 10:38pm, jjflash wrote:
Thanks for asking, Doc, but I don't have any particularly original ideas to add to what's already on the table. I'm sure some reports are hoaxes, others stem from emotional trauma, some are nothing more than hypnotic confabulations and so on.

I think it's important to remember that if there are any genuine mysteries represented in any of the reports, then their authenticity does not hinge on the competency or sincerity of Jacobs, Hopkins et al. Just because a lot of those guys exploited the situations does not necessarily mean there is nothing of interest to be learned.

What that might be, I couldn't say. You know the drill... the Buddhists and Hindus might be in the ballpark with their worldviews... maybe bizarre magnetic occurrences and electronic frequencies account for some peculiar perceptions... I dunno, but I do know legitimate research will be required to ever uncover actual explanations that may exist, not hypnosis and bogus Roper Polls and such.


Not to put you on the spot, but it sounds like you don't believe that any of these events are related to possible 'alien entities' in any way, shape, or form. You think they all have some sort of prosaic explanation. Is that correct?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Apr 9th, 2015, 09:23am

on Apr 9th, 2015, 08:32am, drwu23 wrote:
Not to put you on the spot, but it sounds like you don't believe that any of these events are related to possible 'alien entities' in any way, shape, or form. You think they all have some sort of prosaic explanation. Is that correct?


You are correct that I do not believe that any of the reported events are related to aliens. If circumstances one day prove otherwise, so be it.

Do I think all the reports have prosaic explanations? Not necessarily, no, but possibly.

The two scenarios are of course not synonymous. If any legitimate research is to emerge, it will be conducted professionally, not by authors who promote fantastic yet unsubstantiated content, in my opinion.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Apr 9th, 2015, 09:30am

My latest blog post, 'David Jacobs and Insults to Intelligence', reads in part:

It is not unusual for me to be asked my thoughts on various aspects of alleged alien abduction, including the actions of David Jacobs. I have identified his work to be so extremely poor and misrepresented to contain evidence it actually does not that it has become increasingly difficult for me to express my views about it in what I feel are proper proportion to its lack of validity. There is so much ineptness that it is actually challenging to adequately cover it.

I will offer a few points for consideration below, but please allow me to emphasize that the possibility some people may experience phenomena representing genuine mysteries does not hinge upon the competency or authenticity of David Jacobs and his peers. The fact such researchers could reasonably be interpreted to have made fools of themselves does not equate to necessarily nullifying Fortean topics as a whole.

The subjectivity and shameless promotion of unsupported beliefs contained in the statements of typical abduction-researchers virtually negates their efforts in and of themselves. The lack of rationality has become so prevalent that at this point I seriously doubt many of them sincerely believe their claims and pro-ETH stances, as compared to simply promoting an agenda they view as advantageous.

Concerning David Jacobs specifically, I find the following points and contradictions to be relevant:

- In 2011 the False Memory Syndrome Foundation reported ( https://web.archive.org/web/20110519074925/http://fmsfonline.org/fmsf11.407.html ) that, in response to the accusations leveled by Emma Woods, Temple University asserted Jacobs was only collecting oral histories, not conducting research.

- Contradicting the Temple stance, Jacobs claimed in 2012 to have facilitated DNA-related tests and conducted such research.

- Jacobs further stated the tests in question provided no conclusive results, yet he failed to revise his hypotheses or make details of the tests available for public review. Issues of informed consent and related concerns may apply.

- During a 2014 presentation, Jacobs asserted that he does not conduct hypnosis with alleged alien abductees, but uses relaxation techniques. This is in direct contradiction to the facts he has frequently discussed hypnosis as an investigative tool during his presentations, repeatedly written about its implementation as a memory enhancer, claimed to have been composing a book on the use of hypnosis with abductees and, earlier in literally the same presentation, stated that he began doing hypnosis in 1986.

- While claiming to believe Emma Woods was being assaulted on an ongoing basis by sexually deviant ET-human hybrids, David Jacobs suggested as a partial solution that he could send her a chastity belt. He became familiar with the device, he explained to her, at a sex shop specializing in bondage dominance that he frequented quite often. Suffice it to say that is not standard protocol for providing functional support to the sexually abused. Neither is it indicative of sincere concerns for the woman or suggestive of authentic belief in dangerous hybrids.

- Jacobs claimed to believe electronic messages originating from the computer of "Elizabeth," an alleged alien abductee, were composed and sent by a menacing ET-human hybrid, not Elizabeth. When pressed to explain why forensic evidence of the circumstances could not be obtained, Jacobs stated, among other dubious excuses that actually did not make sense, Elizabeth had curtains over her windows and one could not see inside.

There is much more, but if you require more than that to have your intelligence insulted, I don't know what to tell you. I've been thoroughly insulted for quite some time now.

Full post:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2015/04/david-jacobs-and-insults-to-intelligence.html
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Apr 9th, 2015, 10:15am

on Apr 9th, 2015, 09:23am, jjflash wrote:
You are correct that I do not believe that any of the reported events are related to aliens. If circumstances one day prove otherwise, so be it.

Do I think all the reports have prosaic explanations? Not necessarily, no, but possibly.

The two scenarios are of course not synonymous. If any legitimate research is to emerge, it will be conducted professionally, not by authors who promote fantastic yet unsubstantiated content, in my opinion.


Ok...setting 'alien abductions' aside for the moment since your position is they are all non alien in origin, ....where do you stand on sightings of ufos and close encounters by alleged non human entities..? Do you believe they all have prosaic explanations or that some ufos seen in the sky and landed ufos might be actual encounters with aliens or inter-dimensional beings?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by DrDil on Apr 9th, 2015, 10:40am

on Apr 8th, 2015, 1:51pm, drwu23 wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean by 'association fallacy'..?
Can you describe that term?

Hi Wu,

Here’s the (ahemgrin) Wiki page on it.

Quote:
An association fallacy is an inductive informal fallacy of the type hasty generalization or red herring which asserts that qualities of one thing are inherently qualities of another, merely by an irrelevant association.

It was really just a joke Wu as the way you phrased your question seemed to imply that the entire abduction scenario hinged on whether or not Jacobs was telling the truth:

on Apr 7th, 2015, 3:44pm, drwu23 wrote:
jj,

I'm going to ask you a difficult question.
Do you believe that Dr Jacobs is delusional and that his 'abductee' subjects are also or that something legitimate is happening regarding alien contact?

I appreciate that you were referencing those cases which Jacobs had something to do with but it seemed like there was no middle ground, i.e. if Jacobs is lying then every alien abduction scenario was -by association- false.

Hence, the association fallacy…



Cheers.





**Edit to add quote I was replying to (Doh!!)

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Apr 9th, 2015, 11:02am

on Apr 9th, 2015, 10:15am, drwu23 wrote:
Ok...setting 'alien abductions' aside for the moment since your position is they are all non alien in origin, ....where do you stand on sightings of ufos and close encounters by alleged non human entities..? Do you believe they all have prosaic explanations or that some ufos seen in the sky and landed ufos might be actual encounters with aliens or inter-dimensional beings?


I'd invite consideration that suspending judgment, and refraining from selecting a belief, is an option. "I don't know" is an appropriate response to questions when one does not know the answers.

I prefer to not pick a side, so to speak, and let the data speak for itself. In that regard, I see no current reasons to literally believe intelligent non-human beings from outer space or other dimensions are involved. If and when conclusive evidence proves otherwise, I would accept that evidence.

I think we should become more comfortable with applying "I don't know" when appropriate. A belief or suspicion does not always have to be inserted.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Apr 9th, 2015, 3:07pm

on Apr 9th, 2015, 10:40am, DrDil wrote:
Hi Wu,

Here’s the (ahemgrin) Wiki page on it.


It was really just a joke Wu as the way you phrased your question seemed to imply that the entire abduction scenario hinged on whether or not Jacobs was telling the truth:


I appreciate that you were referencing those cases which Jacobs had something to do with but it seemed like there was no middle ground, i.e. if Jacobs is lying then every alien abduction scenario was -by association- false.

Hence, the association fallacy…



Cheers.
**Edit to add quote I was replying to (Doh!!)


Ahh....now I 'see'. I wasn't implying that at all but I 'see' how it could have been interpreted that way.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Apr 9th, 2015, 3:12pm

on Apr 9th, 2015, 11:02am, jjflash wrote:
I'd invite consideration that suspending judgment, and refraining from selecting a belief, is an option. "I don't know" is an appropriate response to questions when one does not know the answers.

I prefer to not pick a side, so to speak, and let the data speak for itself. In that regard, I see no current reasons to literally believe intelligent non-human beings from outer space or other dimensions are involved. If and when conclusive evidence proves otherwise, I would accept that evidence.

I think we should become more comfortable with applying "I don't know" when appropriate. A belief or suspicion does not always have to be inserted.


The old....'I don't know ' routine.
I use that one with the wife all the time....very diplomatic.
wink

Just curious....in your reading on the ufo enigma have you run across any cases you feel 'might be' attributed to non human/alien entities?
BTW...I posted a link here on another thread to those close encounter cases in Dr Vallee's book Confrontations, but you never read them nor responded about them.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Apr 10th, 2015, 2:15pm

I don't view it as diplomatic, Doc, I see it more as taking responsibility to support a culture which respects and practices professional research protocol. I subsequently do not assign belief to anecdotal stories provided by writers that are often second hand if not several parties removed from the original sources, all of which rely upon the sincerity and interpretations of the initial witnesses in the first place.

As I have stated on multiple occasions, I am willing to suspend judgment. I do not want to try to tell anyone what they did or did not experience.

Belief and drawing conclusions, or even forming suppositions, however, are other matters. I simply refrain from drawing conclusions where they are not yet available. Perhaps I have not been clear on that, but I feel I have.

About Vallee, I do not currently prioritize re-reading his work and fact-checking it, seeking alternative explanations and so on (as Colavito seems to be willing, at least to some extent). If you or others wish to do so, I would support that choice and be interested in reading about what you find.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Apr 10th, 2015, 6:43pm

JACK,

TO WIT:

"I don't view it as diplomatic, Doc, I see it more as taking responsibility to support a culture which respects and practices professional research protocol. I subsequently do not assign belief to anecdotal stories provided by writers that are often second hand if not several parties removed from the original sources, all of which rely upon the sincerity and interpretations of the initial witnesses in the first place."

I SUPPORT DOC'S DIPLOMACY WITH RESPECT TO THIS PHENOMENA ~ CERTAINLY WE HAVE ENOUGH DIVISION AMONGST THE RANKS ~ BUT I GET YOUR POINT INDEED...

WITHOUT AN HYPOTHESIS ~ WHERE WOULD >>> ALL <<< SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH BE?

Hypothesis

Andreas Cellarius hypothesis, demonstrating the planetary motions in eccentric and epicyclical orbits
A hypothesis (plural hypotheses) is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon. For a hypothesis to be a scientific hypothesis, the scientific method requires that one can test it. Scientists generally base scientific hypotheses on previous observations that cannot satisfactorily be explained with the available scientific theories. Even though the words "hypothesis" and "theory" are often used synonymously, a scientific hypothesis is not the same as a scientific theory. A working hypothesis is a provisionally accepted hypothesis proposed for further research.[1]

A different meaning of the term hypothesis is used in formal logic, to denote the antecedent of a proposition; thus in the proposition "If P, then Q", P denotes the hypothesis (or antecedent); Q can be called a consequent. P is the assumption in a (possibly counterfactual)

MOREOVER, WE ARE NOT IN SHORT SUPPLY OF HYPOTHESES A LA CASEBOOK CAFE'

User Image

THE ABOVE BEGS THE QUESTION ~ WHICH CAME FIRST...THE HYPOTHESIS OR THE SCIENTIFIC FACT...grin

MERELY SHARING INTELLECT WHICH I KNOW CONTINUES TO INTRIGUE YOUR PASSION... wink

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Apr 11th, 2015, 12:31pm

on Apr 10th, 2015, 2:15pm, jjflash wrote:
I don't view it as diplomatic, Doc, I see it more as taking responsibility to support a culture which respects and practices professional research protocol. I subsequently do not assign belief to anecdotal stories provided by writers that are often second hand if not several parties removed from the original sources, all of which rely upon the sincerity and interpretations of the initial witnesses in the first place.

As I have stated on multiple occasions, I am willing to suspend judgment. I do not want to try to tell anyone what they did or did not experience.

Belief and drawing conclusions, or even forming suppositions, however, are other matters. I simply refrain from drawing conclusions where they are not yet available. Perhaps I have not been clear on that, but I feel I have.

About Vallee, I do not currently prioritize re-reading his work and fact-checking it, seeking alternative explanations and so on (as Colavito seems to be willing, at least to some extent). If you or others wish to do so, I would support that choice and be interested in reading about what you find.


I understand,,,,,so it seems that you don't have any inclination to possibly believe that the ufo enigma could be ET, inter-dimensional, or even secret govt technology. But you do seem 'obssessed' with the idea of govt intel and disinformation ,etc with regard to the phenomenon.
If this is the case that you use the 'Null Hypothesis' how and why did you even get involved at this level with research into the enigma? Is it just about the military intel aspects that you are intrigued?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by DrDil on Apr 11th, 2015, 3:08pm

I recently posted something about, “Culture-Bound Syndromes” by Steve Mizrach which I think puts an interesting new spin on the Psychosocial Hypothesis (PSH).

Mizrach suggests that whilst an abduction experience is temporarily dissociative (i.e. the person's normative identity is disrupted) but that this involves a voluntary act of dissociation similar to the hypnotoform trance that is witnessed in ceremonial possession rituals. These rituals are already widely recognized as therapeutic and that the subjects give themselves over voluntarily and its even argued it’s an improvement on more traditional methodology, for example when verbally trying to express one’s unconscious self on an analysts couch as it’s argued that the ‘possession’ is a psychotherapeutic technique for working through one’s problems via a dramatic interaction with people who are the significant others in the subjects life.

It’s also worth noting that the possession rituals that are referred to are a well-documented phenomenon and have been subjected to significant academic research, anyhoo, here’s a snippet:

Quote:
In psychological anthropology (specifically, ethnopsychiatry), "culture-bound syndromes" (CBSes) are recognized as unusual or abnormal behavioral episodes that appear to be "madness" or illness to outside observers, but are in fact carefully regulated, culturally governed outlets of social tension. Perhaps the most famous case is that of the Amok frenzy of Pacific Islanders, which involves a great deal of simulated (and sometimes actual) aggression toward family, friends, and neighbors. Other cases include the ataque de nervios (nervous attack) and susto (soul loss) reported by Latin Americans, and the piblotoq of the Eskimos, which may include episodes of tearing clothing, running about aimlessly, glossolalia, and coprolalia. There has even been some argument as to whether the 'universal' DSM-III diagnostic category, "schizophrenia," might in fact be a Western, folk, culture-bound syndrome.


Full post is here.

Whilst this isn’t intended to be a catch-all theory (by a long shot) I thought it provided an interesting and more specific alternative to the all-encompassing PSH, which truth be known I've found to be guilty of over-generalising multiple reports to the point of insignificance by ignoring case-specific elements (and by doing so ultimately detracting from the relevance that the PSH could otherwise offer).

Food for thought if nothing else…



Cheers.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Apr 12th, 2015, 12:34pm

Thanks, DrDil. I agree it's all relevant.

Some might appreciate and find comments of interest that were submitted in response to my latest blog post, 'David Jacobs and Insults to intelligence'. I did.

Part of the original post is in reply #349 of this thread. It can be viewed in full, along with the readers' comments at:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2015/04/david-jacobs-and-insults-to-intelligence.html
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Apr 13th, 2015, 3:47pm

on Apr 11th, 2015, 3:08pm, DrDil wrote:
I recently posted something about, “Culture-Bound Syndromes” by Steve Mizrach which I think puts an interesting new spin on the Psychosocial Hypothesis (PSH).

Mizrach suggests that whilst an abduction experience is temporarily dissociative (i.e. the person's normative identity is disrupted) but that this involves a voluntary act of dissociation similar to the hypnotoform trance that is witnessed in ceremonial possession rituals. These rituals are already widely recognized as therapeutic and that the subjects give themselves over voluntarily and its even argued it’s an improvement on more traditional methodology, for example when verbally trying to express one’s unconscious self on an analysts couch as it’s argued that the ‘possession’ is a psychotherapeutic technique for working through one’s problems via a dramatic interaction with people who are the significant others in the subjects life.

It’s also worth noting that the possession rituals that are referred to are a well-documented phenomenon and have been subjected to significant academic research, anyhoo, here’s a snippet:



Full post is here.

Whilst this isn’t intended to be a catch-all theory (by a long shot) I thought it provided an interesting and more specific alternative to the all-encompassing PSH, which truth be known I've found to be guilty of over-generalising multiple reports to the point of insignificance by ignoring case-specific elements (and by doing so ultimately detracting from the relevance that the PSH could otherwise offer).

Food for thought if nothing else…



Cheers.


Thanks for the link to the article on 'Culture Bound Syndromes'...this connected to the PSH can certainly account for a large percentage of ufo events of several types.
If you havent read it I suggest Grand Illusions by Greg Little. While he approaches it from Jungian archetypes it expresses several similar ideas.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on May 16th, 2015, 11:58am

on May 15th, 2015, 8:31pm, jjflash wrote:
Dr. D. Ellen K. Tarr of Project Core has posted a rather detailed analysis of methodologies employed by FREE (The Foundation for Research into Extraterrestrial Encounters), particularly concerning the group's statements about its surveys. Her commentary was posted at fellow Core team member Jeff Ritzmann's Paranormal Waypoint.

Dr. Tarr considers the manners the FREE survey questions are constructed, as well as what keeps such efforts from being scientific, in spite of the frequent claims to the contrary. The immunologist also suggests what researchers can do to improve the situation in her article, 'Commentary on the FREE Experiencer Research Study Preliminary Findings', which I highly recommend:

http://www.paranormalwaypoint.com/commentary-on-the-free-experiencer-research-study-preliminary-findings/

I think it's worthy of noting that Tarr and her Project Core colleague, microbiologist Dr. Tyler Kokjohn, have demonstrated a willingness to participate in ufology and weigh circumstances with an open mind. I interpret that does not mean, however, that they will accept substandard work without critical comment or believe every fish story without question. This is a shot of B12 for ufology, in my opinion, and a whole lot more of it is needed.

Learn more about the Project Core group, its perspectives and Tarr's willingness to consider the paranormal by listening to Jeremy Vaeni's 'The Experience' podcast on Whitley Strieber's Unknown Country website:

http://www.unknowncountry.com/experience/latest


Additional objective, critical review of investigation of alleged alien abduction could include considerations of an article published in January of 2015 by the Association for Psychological Science. 'People Can Be Convinced They Committed a Crime That Never Happened' reports on a study in which research subjects were surprisingly easily led to construct memories and narrations of events that never actually happened yet the subjects nonetheless believed to be true.

https://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/news/releases/people-can-be-convinced-they-committed-a-crime-they-dont-remember.html

The implications to investigators of alien abduction (and UFOs, for that matter) should be obvious enough. The study concluded that wording of questions is key, as are the manners the questions are presented and explored.

“All participants need to generate a richly detailed false memory is 3 hours in a friendly interview environment, where the interviewer introduces a few wrong details and uses poor memory-retrieval techniques,” psychological scientist Julia Shaw reported.

My point is that qualified professionals should be consulted for purposes of creating and interpreting surveys, interviewing witnesses and similar investigative activities. Additionally, resulting narratives and suppositions have to be independently corroborated to be accepted as indicative of objective reality, particularly when the investigators are not trained professionals in the first place.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on May 16th, 2015, 12:30pm

I was wondering, can a psychiatrist who does not believe in aliens fairly conduct an examination of some one claiming alien abduction. Or will he/she always be saying, maybe subconsciously ' this person is a fraud, aliens don't exist. What is the real story here?'

And conversely a psychiatrist who believes in aliens may be biased into accepting the purported abductee's story even if it isn't a very convincing one. Simply because it reenforces his/her belief.

HAL
INT21
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on May 17th, 2015, 11:09am

on May 16th, 2015, 12:30pm, INT21 wrote:
I was wondering, can a psychiatrist who does not believe in aliens fairly conduct an examination of some one claiming alien abduction. Or will he/she always be saying, maybe subconsciously ' this person is a fraud, aliens don't exist. What is the real story here?'

And conversely a psychiatrist who believes in aliens may be biased into accepting the purported abductee's story even if it isn't a very convincing one. Simply because it reenforces his/her belief.

HAL
INT21


The ideal situation would be to have a neutral investigator, but that's not easy since most of us have a bias one way or the other even if we won't admit it.
Dr Mack (now deceased) claims he went into it with no bias and wrote two books on the subject of alien 'abductions'. His conclusions were that the people he used in his study did not have any classical psychological disorders but yet they believed they had encounters with aliens or some unknown entities. His books are an interesting read. But he was fooled by one lady/undercover agent who pretended to be an abductee and she managed to get into his study. Mack did not figure out that she was a fraud and was there to trip him up.......so does that negate all of his work then?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Bubbles on May 18th, 2015, 7:38pm

on May 16th, 2015, 12:30pm, INT21 wrote:
I was wondering, can a psychiatrist who does not believe in aliens fairly conduct an examination of some one claiming alien abduction. Or will he/she always be saying, maybe subconsciously ' this person is a fraud, aliens don't exist. What is the real story here?'

And conversely a psychiatrist who believes in aliens may be biased into accepting the purported abductee's story even if it isn't a very convincing one. Simply because it reenforces his/her belief.

HAL
INT21


My psychiatrist is only on one end of the spectrum (He does not believe in aliens...visiting this planet anyhow). I wish I had access to one that was at least open to the idea. He believes my belief in aliens is delusional and that the contacts I have had with them are simply hallucinations. I don't think he is right, but I also realize I could be wrong. I just don't believe that I am wrong. I try to be open minded. So I continue to see the psychiatrist.

I can see what you are talking about in any case. It seems that they might be bias either way. Instead of taking an honest middle ground.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on May 27th, 2015, 8:42pm

Robert Sheaffer at 'Bad UFOs' shares some ufology history and questions several aspects of both the Hill alleged alien abduction and the actions of those who promoted it:

Betty Hill’s Last Hurrah – A Secret UFO Symposium in New Hampshire
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on May 28th, 2015, 11:45am

on May 27th, 2015, 8:42pm, jjflash wrote:
Robert Sheaffer at 'Bad UFOs' shares some ufology history and questions several aspects of both the Hill alleged alien abduction and the actions of those who promoted it:

Betty Hill’s Last Hurrah – A Secret UFO Symposium in New Hampshire




Looking forward to reading that article when I get home from running some errands.
btw...there is an interesting short section in Dr Vallee's Forbidden Science regarding the Hill case and later contact he had with Betty . I'm going to reread that also and post any connections to the article you linked.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on May 28th, 2015, 8:20pm

on May 28th, 2015, 11:45am, drwu23 wrote:
Looking forward to reading that article when I get home from running some errands.
btw...there is an interesting short section in Dr Vallee's Forbidden Science regarding the Hill case and later contact he had with Betty . I'm going to reread that also and post any connections to the article you linked.


Thanks, Doc. Let me know if you find anything interesting.

And speaking of Dr. Vallee, looks like he was out and about again:

http://ufocasebook.conforums.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=interviews&num=1223924966&start=45#1432862258
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on May 28th, 2015, 10:27pm

on May 28th, 2015, 8:20pm, jjflash wrote:
Thanks, Doc. Let me know if you find anything interesting.

And speaking of Dr. Vallee, looks like he was out and about again:

http://ufocasebook.conforums.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=interviews&num=1223924966&start=45#1432862258

Thanks for the Vallee interview.

Haven't had a chance to find that piece in my Vallee book but did read your article. Nothing new there ,,,no surprise I suppose.
I did read Friedman's book that came out a few years back about Hill. What I found interesting about it was the stuff about the 'paranormal experiences' she claimed she had weeks , months , and years after her 'abduction'. What's that all about...?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on May 28th, 2015, 11:11pm

on May 28th, 2015, 10:27pm, drwu23 wrote:
Thanks for the Vallee interview.

Haven't had a chance to find that piece in my Vallee book but did read your article. Nothing new there ,,,no surprise I suppose.
I did read Friedman's book that came out a few years back about Hill. What I found interesting about it was the stuff about the 'paranormal experiences' she claimed she had weeks , months , and years after her 'abduction'. What's that all about...?


I interpreted that Robert Sheaffer (in his recent post about the meeting of Betty and researchers in New Hampshire) was suggesting that Betty was clearly struggling to discern actuality. While that may or may not have anything to do with events of 1961, I strongly suspect Sheaffer's interpretation was reasonably correct.

I also thought his post was interesting in that it suggested the researchers in attendance, who previously supported the possibility the Hill case was an alien abduction, were very disappointed in observing Betty's behavior combined with the overall lack of valid evidence. Sheaffer went as far as to suggest that the event and its publication were initially planned as a means to further validate the case, but given the fact it actually cast more doubt on it, the non-disclosure agreement remained in place for longer than originally expected. I also tend to believe that is correct because we have all observed researchers, particularly those trying to cast alleged abductions in a positive light, exaggerate and lie through omission.

I'm not claiming I know what did or did not happen to the Hills in 1961. I realize she is a well liked personality, and I may very well have admired and respected her myself had I known her - but none of that means she interacted with aliens, much less repeatedly. I think we end up the same place with this case that so many other cases lead us: It is unreasonable for so-called investigators to expect people to accept their conclusions, particularly when they are absolutely extraordinary, when they have no proof to support those conclusions.

A person can suppose or even believe anything they want, but if they expect others to agree, proof is in order. Otherwise, it's just unreasonable.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on May 29th, 2015, 07:16am

JACK,

TO WIT:

"I also tend to believe that is correct because we have all observed researchers, particularly those trying to cast alleged abductions in a positive light, exaggerate and lie through omission."

OH THOSE PESKY OMISSIONS...

User Image

NEVERTHELESS ~ THERE IS A FURTHER CONCERN OF CONTINUED/POTENTIAL DIVISIVENESS WITHIN THE UFOLOGICAL COMMUNITY ~ IMHO ~ BRINGING SUNSHINE TO >>> OMISSIONS <<< IS INDEED THE PRACTICAL/PRUDENT VETTING PROCESS ~ CONSEQUENTLY, RESEARCH WHICH DETAILS A SPECIFIC BUSINESS PLAN FOR EXPLOITATION ~ WELL ~ ONE MUST PEER INTO THOSE BLURRED LINES ~ WITHOUT REPRESSING OTHER RESEARCHERS WHOM MAY HAVE...EVIDENCE OF THE UNKNOWN!

THOSE FINE LINES ~ RED LINES ~ BLURRED LINES ~ A LINE BY ANY OTHER NAME cool

User Image

User Image

SHALOM...Z




Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on May 29th, 2015, 09:12am

on May 28th, 2015, 11:11pm, jjflash wrote:
I interpreted that Robert Sheaffer (in his recent post about the meeting of Betty and researchers in New Hampshire) was suggesting that Betty was clearly struggling to discern actuality. While that may or may not have anything to do with events of 1961, I strongly suspect Sheaffer's interpretation was reasonably correct.

I also thought his post was interesting in that it suggested the researchers in attendance, who previously supported the possibility the Hill case was an alien abduction, were very disappointed in observing Betty's behavior combined with the overall lack of valid evidence. Sheaffer went as far as to suggest that the event and its publication were initially planned as a means to further validate the case, but given the fact it actually cast more doubt on it, the non-disclosure agreement remained in place for longer than originally expected. I also tend to believe that is correct because we have all observed researchers, particularly those trying to cast alleged abductions in a positive light, exaggerate and lie through omission.

I'm not claiming I know what did or did not happen to the Hills in 1961. I realize she is a well liked personality, and I may very well have admired and respected her myself had I known her - but none of that means she interacted with aliens, much less repeatedly. I think we end up the same place with this case that so many other cases lead us: It is unreasonable for so-called investigators to expect people to accept their conclusions, particularly when they are absolutely extraordinary, when they have no proof to support those conclusions.

A person can suppose or even believe anything they want, but if they expect others to agree, proof is in order. Otherwise, it's just unreasonable.


Finally reread the short section in Vallee's book Forbidden Science . In the summer of 1967 ( June) , almost 6 years after the Hill's 'abduction' event, Betty who had claimed she was in contact with the aliens for years since the event, agreed to have an event experience to call the ufos to them on her property (she claimed she was now a 'transducer'...). Dr Vallee and his wife were invited, Dr Simon, John Fuller, Bob Hohmann and of course Betty and Barney.
After many hours battling mosquitos and muggy weather they ended the vigil with no ufos appearing. But in the community her and her sister were known to have frequent 'visits' by 'ufos'. Allegedly others in the town claimed to also see ufos and it became something of a status symbol in the area if you had seen any.
An interesting fact came up in the short section in that Janet, Betty's sister, also has had ufo sightings going back to 1957. Vallee did not elaborate on this .

It's obvious from reading the Friedman /Marsden book that Betty became obsessed with the ufo phenom and related paranormal events up until her death.
Some other additional facts:
Dr Simon did not see and hypnotize the Hill's until 2 years after the event.
He remains certain that the event is part of their reality but does not say he believes they were literally abducted.
Dr Vallee says he thinks something odd did happen to them but is not convinced it was a space ship with aliens.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on May 29th, 2015, 12:03pm

Thanks, drwu23. I agree that the points you bring up are potentially important.

I particularly think the lapse between the date of the alleged event and the point the Hills sought treatment for trauma with Dr. Simon is relevant for a lot of reasons. Just one of those reasons is that people in the 'community' tend to discuss details of the alleged encounter as if those details are a base point and we should begin investigating from there. The fact of the matter, though, is that many of those supposed details were not even put forth until years after the date in question.

In other words, we don't actually know what took place, we only know what the Hills said during trauma-treatment long after the fact. Nonetheless, the story is often recounted by writers and 'investigators' in a supposedly chronological order that does not reflect the time line of many of those details actually begins with statements in Simon's office, not events on a New England highway. I agree with you that is relevant.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on May 29th, 2015, 12:32pm

ZETAR,

I think it's quite a stretch to suggest the MIT work Crystal posted carries implications to legitimizing hypnotic regression and the fantastic claims put forth by some investigators. I'll explain, please.

If I am understanding the MIT work correctly, they used proteins to block what they suspect helps mice form and recollect memories. They then implemented a technique they suspected would counter the induced amnesia, which their preliminary research indicated worked.

I would assert that has extremely little to do with the process of retrieving complex human memories via such techniques as hypnosis. Psychologist and memory expert Dr. Elizabeth Loftus directly addressed such circumstances in a 1996 paper in which she reported there was no cogent scientific support indicating that forgotten experiences or suppressed memories could consistently be recalled through the use of special techniques, or that such techniques provided reliable results.

In more recent times, Loftus was invited to speak at a classified CIA Tedx event. Although the details are not currently available for public review, I suspect it had to do with her renowned expertise on memory, as well as her recently published research about sleep deprivation and false memories, which carries a lot of implications to witness confessions, interrogation techniques and similar circumstances (including in this context, of course, investigating so-called abductions).

In the event you're not aware of it, I'd also strongly recommend taking a look at an article published earlier this year by the Association for Psychological Science, 'People Can Be Convinced They Committed a Crime That Never Happened'. All participants needed to generate a richly detailed false memory, researchers found, was three hours in a friendly interview environment, the introduction of a few wrong details and the use of some poor memory retrieval techniques. That should ring some bells to the UFO community.

But I think an even bigger point is that our debate is skirting the fringe of the overlying and more important question: Where is the alien?

Inferences are made about studies using mice because there is no proof of alien abduction. See what I'm saying?

It's really going to always keep coming back to trying to substitute satellite arguments for the direct point of lacking proof of alien abduction. Until a time in which such proof can be presented, the rest of it is debating other issues that arguably serve as a means to detract from the actual lack of evidence of the primary point, alleged alien abduction.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on May 29th, 2015, 1:15pm

JACK,

TO WIT:

"ZETAR,

I think it's quite a stretch to suggest the MIT work Crystal posted carries implications to legitimizing hypnotic regression and the fantastic claims put forth by some investigators."

MERELY AN HYPOTHESIS MY FRIEND ~ MY PATTERN RECOGNITION LOOKS AT...

User Image

MARIE CURIE ~ AND ~ WHERE WE'VE COME FROM HER WORK ~ ALL THINGS RELATIVE ~ THE HYPOTHESIS IS >>> FREE <<< THE TASK TO CARRY SUCH TO INFINITE LEVELS ~ RESTS WITH ONES IMAGINATION...PLACE NO LIMIT THERE SIR!...AS EVERYHTING THAT EXISTS...WAS ONCE >>> IMAGINED <<< cool

User Image

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on May 29th, 2015, 2:34pm

.....AS EVERYHTING THAT EXISTS...WAS ONCE >>> IMAGINED <<<..


There are those amongst us who insist that all our knowledge comes from inter galactic super beings (aka Aliens).

Would those people go so far as to suggest that our fair Polish chemist was visited by 'other worlders?'

HAL
INT21
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on May 29th, 2015, 4:35pm

on May 29th, 2015, 2:34pm, INT21 wrote:
.....AS EVERYHTING THAT EXISTS...WAS ONCE >>> IMAGINED <<<..


There are those amongst us who insist that all our knowledge comes from inter galactic super beings (aka Aliens).

Would those people go so far as to suggest that our fair Polish chemist was visited by 'other worlders?'

HAL
INT21


And again a thread goes off topic .....but then maybe our esteemed gnostic Zetar is implying that Miss Curie was once abducted by aliens.

wink
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on May 29th, 2015, 5:41pm

HAL-N-WU,

TO WIT:

"Zetar is implying that Miss Curie was once abducted by aliens."

THERE YA GO ~ PUTTIN WORDS IN MY MOUTH ~ I'M A GUESSIN MARIE CURIE'S OBSESSION WITH > RADS < ~ PUN INTENDED ~ WAS ATTRIBUTED TO HER QUEST FOR IDEAS ~ I HAVE NO OPINION NOR INSINUATION >>> THE M.C. OF MEGA RAD IDEAS <<< WAS "once abducted by aliens." ~ cool

User Image

SHALOM...Z

EDIT TO ADD:

User Image
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on May 30th, 2015, 04:53am

ZETAR,

You wrote,

..."Zetar is implying that Miss Curie was once abducted by aliens."


Drwu wrote..

...And again a thread goes off topic .....but then maybe our esteemed gnostic Zetar is implying that Miss Curie was once abducted by aliens.

You do see the difference ?

By the way, she never was Miss Curie.

She was Miss Marie Skłodowska . Later to become Mrs Curie.

Just being picky.

HAL
INT21 smiley
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on May 30th, 2015, 06:56am

on May 16th, 2015, 12:30pm, INT21 wrote:
I was wondering, can a psychiatrist who does not believe in aliens fairly conduct an examination of some one claiming alien abduction. Or will he/she always be saying, maybe subconsciously ' this person is a fraud, aliens don't exist. What is the real story here?'

And conversely a psychiatrist who believes in aliens may be biased into accepting the purported abductee's story even if it isn't a very convincing one. Simply because it reenforces his/her belief.

HAL
INT21


Hi INT21, I also read Wu's comments on your post, and I tend to think nor 'fair' nor vetting for simulating 'agents' comes into it, because Psychiatrists are trained to look for symptoms of mental disorder or ABSENCE of said symptoms. Mack's contribution in this light is significant in his finding of a slightly lower incidence of symptoms/disorder in his sample group of abduction experiencers than the general population.

Meaning (assuming not all of them were infiltrators, faking abduction memories tongue): abductees on the whole are not crazy, nor does abduction memory in itself indicates some psychiatric disorder.

So imo it is not within that field's scope to determine whether people are abducted, merely to assess the likelyhood they are in the grip of a mental illness moving them to present such testimony. It may suffice if a mental health worker is trained to the level where they are capable of finding patients in reasonable mental health smiley (rather than delusional) regardless of what they describe. Mack was brilliant (so sad he was lost to us) in not deciding on the reality of abduction, one way or another, but on the quality of his subject's psychological reality. Did their mind function normally? John Mack in general says yes.


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on May 30th, 2015, 07:23am

HAL,

TO WIT:

"You do see the difference ?"

I IN FACT SEE/SAW THE DIFFERENCE ~ grin

TO WIT:

"There are those amongst us who insist that all our knowledge comes from inter galactic super beings (aka Aliens).

Would those people go so far as to suggest that our fair Polish chemist was visited by 'other worlders?'"

HMMMMMM ~ IT DOES APPEAR YOU NUDGED DRWU TO OPINE THIS...

TO WIT:

""Zetar is implying that Miss Curie was once abducted by aliens."

THEREFORE, I FELT IT PRUDENT TO ADDRESS YO >>> TAG TEAM <<< APPROACH grin

PICKY ~ PICKY ~ PICKY wink

User Image

YO INFINITE STIRRING ~ ALWAYS APPRECIATED!

SHALOM...Z


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on May 30th, 2015, 09:16am

ZETAR,

Not quite.

...And again a thread goes off topic .....but then maybe our esteemed gnostic Zetar is implying that Miss Curie was once abducted by aliens.

By missing out the first part of the sentence your response didn't appear to take into consideration that Drwu was suggesting that MAYBE you were thinking Mdm Curie was visited by aliens. Not that you were implying as much.My reading, and I may be wrong.

HAL
INT21 smiley
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on May 30th, 2015, 09:53am

HAL,

WE CAN FIND SOMETHING MORE OF INTEREST TO >>> STIR <<< ONES SYNAPSES ~ EH rolleyes

NEVERTHELESS ~ RATHER THAN LEAVE YOU WONDERING...

TO WIT:

"Drwu was suggesting that MAYBE you were thinking Mdm Curie was visited by aliens. Not that you were implying as much.My reading, and I may be wrong."

THE SCHOLARLY APPROACH...

User Image

AGAIN ~ IT DOES REST WITH ONES DEFINTION OF...MAYBE cool

may·be/ˈmābē/
adverb
adverb: maybe

1. perhaps; possibly.
"maybe I won't go back"

synonyms: perhaps, possibly, conceivably, it could be (that), it is possible (that), for all one knows; More
literaryperadventure, perchance

"maybe the bus will be on time today"

noun
noun: maybe; plural noun: maybes
1. a mere possibility or probability.
"no ifs, buts, or maybes"

User Image

SHALOM...Z

EDIT TO ADD:

THAT ANXIETY AWAITING ONES RESPONSE ~ ALL IN A DAY ~ A LA CASEBOOK CAFE' grin

User Image

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on May 30th, 2015, 11:52am

purr and all,

I think purr raised some valid points that deserve deeper consideration in the grand scheme of the genre of alleged alien abduction. I've come to think that reviewing published papers by qualified experts is a must in understanding their fields and related work. Otherwise we're limited to partisan arguments often based on relatively uninformed opinion or, at the least, we fail to understand how and why scientists and mental health professionals arrive at their platforms.

In addition to such papers and links I already posted, I would recommend 'Psychiatric Evaluations of Asylum Seekers:Is it Ethical Practice or Advocacy?'. It's a 2007 article authored by Dr. CA Morgan, a colleague of the recently mentioned Dr. Loftus (in other words, another renowned psych expert).

The article addresses and considers the plight of refugees seeking political asylum and the roles of psychologists who evaluate them - and often advocate on their behalf. Many of the refugees claim to be torture victims in order to gain asylum. As a matter of fact, there is even a black market for obtaining stories of actual torture survivors so that details may be woven into the stories of new applicants.

I think the work makes many interesting parallels with investigation of the abduction phenom, and that it is useful in further understanding some of the dynamics. Dr. Morgan warned, for instance, that there is no scientific means to measure the effects of trauma. He cited circumstances run wild during the 1990's in which therapists unwisely tried to rely upon stories and symptoms of trauma to be indicative of the claimed events and the perceptions of the traumatized individual. That is of course not always the case.

Perhaps most interestingly, though, was that Morgan sternly warned that advocacy and treatment are not the same things, and that advocacy does not necessarily best support the treatment or the needs of the individual. He suggested that mental health professionals are often unqualified to dissect and evaluate the validity of the claimed traumatic experiences, and that doing so is outside the scope of their training. Much more importantly, he maintained, would be providing the traumatized individual treatment that would facilitate them meeting their living needs and improving their qualities of life.

I thought it a relevant work. Many lessons could be drawn not only to advocacy vs. treatment in the mental health community, but advocacy vs. investigation when those mental health pros turn abduction-researcher. I'd also argue that such dynamics would certainly be relevant among self-described investigators who attempt to implement therapeutic-like techniques, but actually practice advocacy of alleged abduction, all while completely lacking any training whatsoever as a mental health pro.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on May 30th, 2015, 3:00pm

This also ties in and was an interesting read......
http://www.publishersweekly.com/978-0-520-22432-2
THE LURE OF THE EDGE: Scientific Passions, Religious Beliefs, and the Pursuit of UFOs

Brenda Denzler, Author
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on May 31st, 2015, 11:44am

on May 18th, 2015, 7:38pm, Bubbles wrote:
My psychiatrist is only on one end of the spectrum (He does not believe in aliens...visiting this planet anyhow). I wish I had access to one that was at least open to the idea. He believes my belief in aliens is delusional and that the contacts I have had with them are simply hallucinations. I don't think he is right, but I also realize I could be wrong. I just don't believe that I am wrong. I try to be open minded. So I continue to see the psychiatrist.

I can see what you are talking about in any case. It seems that they might be bias either way. Instead of taking an honest middle ground.


Bubbles, 'not believing in aliens' is fine, although I believe when solving problems we ideally should not believe in anything at all. If however your psychiatrist is absolutely sure, BELIEVES that aliens/ETs have never visited our world, there exists imo a risk of unfairness (as INT21 proposes) to patients presenting continuing, vivid, emotionally intense Abduction/Contact experiences. (If a patient reports meeting/conversing with such visitors, the psychiatrist's worldview alone then forces labels like hallucination/delusion getting slapped on the abduction story and teller.)

Establishing alien reality is outside Psychiatry's purview. (It is virtually impossible to prove aliens are/aren't visiting, so complete certainty either way seems not entirely rational for anybody.) laugh

I'm just a layperson, knowing nuttin from nuttin, but I'd say mental health professionals dealing with patients reporting abduction experiences ought not to bring too heavy baggage into the diagnostic process. Taking the time to look at how someone on the whole lives their life, functions, thinks, might yield a better picture. (There's no known disorder which limits itself to abduction experience exclusively. Whether one is troubled or OK, it kinda spreads over all of life.)

My idea of a good psychiatrist would be: someone fascinated by minds.


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on May 31st, 2015, 11:58am

PURR,

TO WIT:

"Establishing alien reality is outside Psychiatry's purview. (It is virtually impossible to prove aliens are/aren't visiting, so complete certainty either way seems not entirely rational for anybody.)"

THE DIFFICULTY WITH ABOVE OVERLAPS WITH MOST...IF NOT ALL (MYSELF INCLUDED) WHEN WE PONDER/SPECULATE THE COMPEXITY OF THE UNKNOWN ~ OR AS HAL PUTS IT ~ THAT WHICH WE HAVE NOT EXPERIMENTED ENOUGH ON TO BREED NEW IDEAS/THEORIES...

User Image

"My idea of a good psychiatrist would be: someone fascinated by minds."

INDEED!

User Image

SHALOM...Z





Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on May 31st, 2015, 12:07pm

Honest analyst to purported ufo abductee.

'I'm sorry, I can't offer any explanation as I don't believe in ufos'

Abductee,

So, your logic precludes the existence of the ufo hence I could not have been abducted by crew of said craft.

Analist.

Yes, exactly. I'm so glad you understand'

Abductee,

'I'm so glad you were honest with me. Now , one quick question before I leave.

DO you believe in God ?'

Analyst.

'Yes, of course.'

Abductee,

'why'.



HAL
INT21 smiley
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on May 31st, 2015, 12:11pm

Bubbles,

You could use the life of the lately deceased mathematician John Nash as an indication that, even if something in you mind is making you have these beliefs, it isn't the end of the world.

Half the battle is knowing.

HAL
INT21
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Bubbles on May 31st, 2015, 1:10pm

on May 31st, 2015, 12:11pm, INT21 wrote:
Bubbles,

You could use the life of the lately deceased mathematician John Nash as an indication that, even if something in you mind is making you have these beliefs, it isn't the end of the world.

Half the battle is knowing.

HAL
INT21


Agreed. Not the end of the world.

I am just not sure at this point if it is one thing or the other (real - not real).

On a positive note I have not had any alien encounters in a long time. Over a year now.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on May 31st, 2015, 7:22pm

PURR,

TO WIT:

"abductees on the whole are not crazy, nor does abduction memory in itself indicates some psychiatric disorder."

OR MIGHT IT BE ALONG THE LINES OF...PTA/ED...POST TRAUMATIC ABDUCTION/EXPERIENCE DISORDER...THINKING OUT OF THE CASEBOOK ZONE...

User Image

SHALOM...Z

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 1st, 2015, 08:20am

on May 31st, 2015, 11:44am, purr wrote:
Establishing alien reality is outside Psychiatry's purview. (It is virtually impossible to prove aliens are/aren't visiting, so complete certainty either way seems not entirely rational for anybody.) laugh


purr


But establishing psychological problems is in it's purview which js exactly what needs to be done in the beginning imho. Anyone who has one of these 'paranormal' experiences should imho rule out mundane causes first before they start attributing it to space aliens....or demons or whatever.
I do agree that an unbiased doctor would be helpful but we all have biases so that's going to be next to impossible to achieve. I think it's a poor idea for a person to run into the arms of a ufo group for hypnosis or support because it will usually merely reinforce the viewpoint of the group and not look at the situation evenly.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Jun 1st, 2015, 09:35am

DRWU,

TO WIT:

"it will usually merely reinforce the viewpoint of the group and not look at the situation evenly."

INSIGHTFUL ~ I QUITE AGREE ~ ONE CAVEAT...

"it will usually merely reinforce the viewpoint of the group"

THIS CUTS BOTH WAYS/TWO WAY STREET ~ TO THE SKEPTICS/GNOSTICS...IMHO!

User Image

NEVERTHELESS ~ YOU MAKE AN EXCELLENT POINT!

SHALOM...Z





Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Jun 1st, 2015, 11:00am

on May 31st, 2015, 11:58am, ZETAR wrote:
PURR,

TO WIT:

"Establishing alien reality is outside Psychiatry's purview. (It is virtually impossible to prove aliens are/aren't visiting, so complete certainty either way seems not entirely rational for anybody.)"

THE DIFFICULTY WITH ABOVE OVERLAPS WITH MOST...IF NOT ALL (MYSELF INCLUDED) WHEN WE PONDER/SPECULATE THE COMPEXITY OF THE UNKNOWN ~ OR AS HAL PUTS IT ~ THAT WHICH WE HAVE NOT EXPERIMENTED ENOUGH ON TO BREED NEW IDEAS/THEORIES...

User Image

"My idea of a good psychiatrist would be: someone fascinated by minds."

INDEED!

User Image

SHALOM...Z









User Image
"..So tell me, what are your earliest memories of your mother...?"




Hi ZETAR, just the other day I remarked to my fam that cats (and by extension dogs, any socially intelligent housepets) make for excellent therapists! Better yet, they work for food cheesy, mehbi shelter and a lilbit kindness thrown in!

My serious point of psychiatric limitations (namely to diagnose and treat mental disorders) I meant to make in the same vein as topic host Jjflash, who defensibly argued that therapists (of various accreditation) are (mis)using it as vehicle to prove that aliens/ET are real. Works both ways imo. The field of psychology indeed is unfit to establish aliens are real... ...as similarly they are unable to show aliens do not exist. Good ones (like the late Mack) figure out what is on their patients' minds, and leave the rest to Physicists, people named Stanton Friedman and the overall membership of UFO Casebook naturally.


smiley


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 1st, 2015, 11:09am

What doesn't cut both ways though, gentlemen, and as Wu suggests, is that it is not open-minded to approach fantastic claims, regardless of specific content, as if it is 50/50 likelihood of accuracy. That begins to approach advocating for the cause, rather than providing therapeutic treatment.

Also, an argument could be well made that self-described abductees would benefit from professional treatment for trauma regardless of the specific causes of the trauma. I am of that opinion because the experiences are virtually always described as traumatic. Given the symptoms of trauma, it only makes sense to encourage treatment. I'd say that's the case if we prioritize quality of life for the individual, as well as if we value accuracy of reports and quality of resulting information.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 1st, 2015, 11:17am

purr, while we have some differences in opinions on some specifics, I generally agree with you that it is not the responsibility of the therapist to discern reality for the client - either way. Yes, ma'am, I agree with that. A professional therapist assists the client in coming to their own terms with various circumstances. That is different, for instance, than independently conducted evaluation, as I understand the circumstances.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Jun 1st, 2015, 11:44am

PURR,

TO WIT:

"My serious point of psychiatric limitations (namely to diagnose and treat mental disorders) I meant to make in the same vein as topic host Jjflash, who defensibly argued that therapists (of various accreditation) are (mis)using it as vehicle to prove that aliens/ET are real. Works both ways imo. The field of psychology indeed is unfit to establish aliens are real... ...as similarly they are unable to show aliens do not exist. Good ones (like the late Mack) figure out what is on their patients' minds, and leave the rest to Physicists, people named Stanton Friedman and the overall membership of UFO Casebook naturally."

I LIKE IT WHEN YOU >>> SHOW OUT <<< grin

User Image

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Jun 1st, 2015, 11:44am

JJflash,

..I'd say that's the case if we prioritize quality of life for the individual, as well as if we value accuracy of reports and quality of resulting information...

I would tend to disagree.

While not suggesting that the individual be mistreated, I think that the priority is to find out whether the individual is delusional or not.

The problem is that there is an outside chance that he/she is telling the truth. And if that can be proven then the whole thing takes on very serious meaning.

There is no 'nice' answer to this one.

HAL
INT21



Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Jun 2nd, 2015, 04:43am

on Jun 1st, 2015, 08:20am, drwu23 wrote:
But establishing psychological problems is in it's purview which js exactly what needs to be done in the beginning imho. Anyone who has one of these 'paranormal' experiences should imho rule out mundane causes first before they start attributing it to space aliens....or demons or whatever.
I do agree that an unbiased doctor would be helpful but we all have biases so that's going to be next to impossible to achieve. I think it's a poor idea for a person to run into the arms of a ufo group for hypnosis or support because it will usually merely reinforce the viewpoint of the group and not look at the situation evenly.


"Needs"..."should"... sure, dr Wu but much depends on how much pressure is put on those reporting abduction experiences to get themselves psychologically evaluated.

This is logical followthrough from Jj's passionate critique on Jacobs (and any similar abductionists smiley): once we frown on the therapist's instruments being (improperly) used to establish the reality of alien abduction/aliens, we cannot then turn round and start flirting with imposing psychiatric evaluation/treatment on all experiencers/abductees, INCLUDING THOSE WHO DON'T ASK FOR IT!

Simply, once we limit Psychology to its proper, legal practice, it ideally should be offered to anyone who feels they needs help, or to disturbed folks constituting a danger to society. Abduction (-memory) isn't a known disorder (although earlier posters correctly stated that resulting traumas may qualify as treatmentworthy PTSD). Abductees are not especially likely to be disordered. They pose no threat. Therefore once some abductees (perhaps scared, shocked yet holding up!) choose not to take the couch route I propose everybody ought to respect this.

Imo it's OK if abductees tell their story, it gets recorded and people decide for themselves whether they believe it or not.


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 2nd, 2015, 09:21am

on Jun 2nd, 2015, 04:43am, purr wrote:
"Needs"..."should"... sure, dr Wu but much depends on how much pressure is put on those reporting abduction experiences to get themselves psychologically evaluated.

This is logical followthrough from Jj's passionate critique on Jacobs (and any similar abductionists smiley): once we frown on the therapist's instruments being (improperly) used to establish the reality of alien abduction/aliens, we cannot then turn round and start flirting with imposing psychiatric evaluation/treatment on all experiencers/abductees, INCLUDING THOSE WHO DON'T ASK FOR IT!

Simply, once we limit Psychology to its proper, legal practice, it ideally should be offered to anyone who feels they needs help, or to disturbed folks constituting a danger to society. Abduction (-memory) isn't a known disorder (although earlier posters correctly stated that resulting traumas may qualify as treatmentworthy PTSD). Abductees are not especially likely to be disordered. They pose no threat. Therefore once some abductees (perhaps scared, shocked yet holding up!) choose not to take the couch route I propose everybody ought to respect this.

Imo it's OK if abductees tell their story, it gets recorded and people decide for themselves whether they believe it or not.


purr


You have a tendency to change the parameters when discussing things and bring in side issues not originally mentioned.
No one is saying that 'abductees' should be forced to have psychiatric analysis nor that they should be treated against their will.
That has to be up to the experiencer and any family involved especially if they are in crisis and might pose a danger to themselves or others as you mentioned.
Personally I think it's an excellent idea for all so-called abductees and experiencers of these high strangeness cases to have psychological testing and analysis done simply to rule out any mundane causes and or medical issues before proceeding onto more esoteric explanations.
It's irresponsible and selfish not to, imho.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 3rd, 2015, 01:39am

Thanks for mentioning that book, Dr. Wu. I took a look at it and it looks interesting.

You had written...

on May 29th, 2015, 09:12am, drwu23 wrote:
It's obvious from reading the Friedman /Marsden book that Betty became obsessed with the ufo phenom and related paranormal events up until her death.
Some other additional facts:
Dr Simon did not see and hypnotize the Hill's until 2 years after the event.
He remains certain that the event is part of their reality but does not say he believes they were literally abducted.
Dr Vallee says he thinks something odd did happen to them but is not convinced it was a space ship with aliens.


Which got me to thinking...

on May 29th, 2015, 12:03pm, jjflash wrote:
Thanks, drwu23. I agree that the points you bring up are potentially important.

I particularly think the lapse between the date of the alleged event and the point the Hills sought treatment for trauma with Dr. Simon is relevant for a lot of reasons. Just one of those reasons is that people in the 'community' tend to discuss details of the alleged encounter as if those details are a base point and we should begin investigating from there. The fact of the matter, though, is that many of those supposed details were not even put forth until years after the date in question.

In other words, we don't actually know what took place, we only know what the Hills said during trauma-treatment long after the fact. Nonetheless, the story is often recounted by writers and 'investigators' in a supposedly chronological order that does not reflect the time line of many of those details actually begins with statements in Simon's office, not events on a New England highway. I agree with you that is relevant.


Over at Robert Sheaffer's 'Bad UFOs', writer/researcher Peter Brookesmith has offered some helpful comments to the post Robert did on the private conference involving Betty. Brookesmith was in attendance and co-authored 'Encounters at Indian Head', which was on the Hill case.

Addressing the issue of the time frame of Betty's emerging story, Brookesmith recently explained:

"Betty's abduction story emerged not under hypnosis but in a series of dreams (not in chronological order, she said) that occurred after she had read a number of UFO-related books. The only one she recalled reading was Keyhoe's "Flying Saucer Conspiracy", from which, I maintain (see the book), she could well have developed the story she did. Her original notes on the dreams were lost (she said), and the account of them we have is one reorganized into chronological order... how much might she have elaborated in the process is anyone's guess.

"Despite Betty's protestations to the contrary, Barney knew about these dreams well before he started hypnosis with Dr Simon. At least once she recounted them in public in his presence (a recording exists). I think it's fair to say that when, under hypnosis, he departs from Betty's dream material, he tells Simon, and us, more about himself than about aliens, &c.

"It's also worth bearing in mind that Simon wasn't trying to get to 'the truth' about what happened, but to purge the Hills of their anxieties about their experience. In this he seems to have succeeded, if not wholly in Barney's case."

That doesn't necessarily rule anything out, but it is potentially relevant, in my opinion, particularly as compared to the more popular and overly simplistic accounts of the chain of events.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Jun 7th, 2015, 1:36pm

on Jun 2nd, 2015, 09:21am, drwu23 wrote:
You have a tendency to change the parameters when discussing things and bring in side issues not originally mentioned.
No one is saying that 'abductees' should be forced to have psychiatric analysis nor that they should be treated against their will.
That has to be up to the experiencer and any family involved especially if they are in crisis and might pose a danger to themselves or others as you mentioned.
Personally I think it's an excellent idea for all so-called abductees and experiencers of these high strangeness cases to have psychological testing and analysis done simply to rule out any mundane causes and or medical issues before proceeding onto more esoteric explanations.
It's irresponsible and selfish not to, imho.


Dr Wu, any critical analysis of Abduction may benefit from establishing (better) parameters for dealing with its reports and reporters. Jj has been challenging us to do just that, and several posters (you and me included) added their 2cts worth. If it's a "side issue", we all own it here.

on Jun 1st, 2015, 08:20am, drwu23 wrote:
establishing psychological problems is in it's purview which js exactly what needs to be done in the beginning imho. Anyone who has one of these 'paranormal' experiences should imho rule out mundane causes first before they start attributing it to space aliens....or demons or whatever.


"It" in your post is psychology/psychiatry, establishing disorder well within it's purview, and you state it should be applied to alleged abductees "in the beginning", and "first", that is: before they tell their story from their personal perspective. And those not submitting themselves to evaluation you consider "irresponsible and selfish"!

Wu, you are correct in saying no one, least of all yourself, is proposing force, throwing a net over abductees. cheesy But your repeated insistence on immediate psych evaluation imho FLIRTS with the idea. Calling people irresponsible, selfish, basically negligent for not consulting a psychiatrist does put potential pressure on experiencers on the whole. (Obviously some did seek qualified counselling, the Hills, John Mack's patient group etc.)

Problems. Problems. If we accept as a parameter for ALL serious, responsible abduction experiencers that they first talk to a psychiatrist, the result will be that ALL abduction reports will be made by psychiatric patients. I can see debunkers dancing in the streets! For the many abductees who don't feel the need to go the mental health route, does belief in their own sanity somehow disqualifies them from being believable?

To end, there's no basis for kinda 'shrinking' abduction to size. Professor Mack's ten years of research into abduction reporters found a slightly lower incidence of mental disorder in abductees than in the general population. It would (almost) seem that NOT having been abducted makes one more likely to be in need of a Psychiatrist! laugh

(I agree with Jjflash that if experiencers decide to seek help, it should be provided by trained mental health professionals.)


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Jun 7th, 2015, 2:24pm

PURR,

TO WIT:

"It would (almost) seem that NOT having been abducted makes one more likely to be in need of a Psychiatrist!"

THAT OUGHT TO KEEP EM PEEKIN...

User Image

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 7th, 2015, 6:13pm

on Jun 7th, 2015, 1:36pm, purr wrote:
Dr Wu, .......
(I agree with Jjflash that if experiencers decide to seek help, it should be provided by trained mental health professionals.)


purr


The most relevant comment in your post.
They should indeed do this rather than run into the arms of so-called ufo abduction experts.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Jun 9th, 2015, 05:39am

on Jun 7th, 2015, 6:13pm, drwu23 wrote:
The most relevant comment in your post.
They should indeed do this rather than run into the arms of so-called ufo abduction experts.


Perhaps I should count myself lucky you selected a snippet of relevance in my post, dr Wu!

grin

purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Jun 9th, 2015, 05:47am

on Jun 7th, 2015, 2:24pm, ZETAR wrote:
PURR,

TO WIT:

"It would (almost) seem that NOT having been abducted makes one more likely to be in need of a Psychiatrist!"

THAT OUGHT TO KEEP EM PEEKIN...

User Image

SHALOM...Z


You have impeccable taste in gifs, ZETAR! laugh Of course I'm attempting to get Jjflash to take a peek (and even look seriously) into the paradox of abductees reporting the most vivid, life changing and paradigm shifting alien encounters, yet not having been found to be more, rather: LESS disordered than the general population (by John Mack's research).

What CAUSES these experiences, if not insanity?


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Jun 9th, 2015, 08:55am

PURR,

YOUR TACTICAL APPROACH ~ DEMANDS ADMIRATION grin

TO WIT:

"What CAUSES these experiences"

I'M GUESSING THAT YOU MUST EXPOUND UPON >>> experiences <<< cool

User Image

ONE COULD RESEARCH THE ABOVE AND THOSE OF THE ILK LIKE EINISTEN ~ TESLA ~ WELL...SHANT I LIST THOSE INSPIRATIONAL MINDS WHOM...REACHED BEYOND INTO THAT ETHER (EINSTEIN-ROSEN BRIDGE)...NO DOUBT THERE ARE THOSE SINGING THAT LYRIC TO THAT LED ZEPPLIN SONG...WHERE'S THAT CONFOUNDED BRIDGE ~ cool ~ I'M GUESSING LAY MINDS OF SUCH PERIODS DEALING WITH THE AFOREMENTIONED TRAILBLAZERS...WERE QUESTIONING THE SAME THING...

" What CAUSES these experiences"

User Image

STIRRING YOURS...

SHALOM...Z


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 9th, 2015, 09:37am

on Jun 9th, 2015, 05:47am, purr wrote:
Of course I'm attempting to get Jjflash to take a peek (and even look seriously) into the paradox of abductees reporting the most vivid, life changing and paradigm shifting alien encounters, yet not having been found to be more, rather: LESS disordered than the general population (by John Mack's research).


I think it depends on specifically who you're talking about, purr. To discuss "abductees" in general can become a bit problematic, the more we get down to details.

A few points, please:

- Some work published by Dr. CA Morgan and recently posted in this thread could be interpreted to question Dr. Mack's approach. Specifically, Morgan very much warned of the inherent dangers to clinicians advocating the subjective interpretations of the patients as compared to providing treatment, the latter of which was within the scope of professional training and the former was subjective.

- To better understand how and why people will report vivid experiences in which the content is questionable (and sometimes entirely false), I invite review of the work of Dr. Elizabeth Loftus, among others. It is not speculative, but demonstrated fact through years of clinical trials and research.

- Such circumstances as addressed by Morgan and Loftus do not necessarily account for all reported abductions, but it definitely accounts for some, if not a very high percentage. In my opinion, much less easily explainable experiences would involve less sensational claims, such as indoor light phenomena, orbs, multiple witness occurrences of such indoor light phenomena and so on, more what we might call "high strangeness" than alien doctors from the stars. There are lots of reasons people interpret themselves to see the things they see, including seeing unusual phenomena, and I think we'd need to talk more specifics to make sure we're on the same page when discussing such reports.

on Jun 9th, 2015, 05:47am, purr wrote:
What CAUSES these experiences, if not insanity?


Lots of things. Trauma would be a major cause. I'd highly recommend learning more about it and its symptoms if your question is sincere.

In my estimation, the leading cause of the spike in reported abductions during the 1990's was emotional trauma combined with an overeager UFO community that quickly encouraged people to consider themselves alien abductees when they reported fragmented memories and such. That, along with extremely questionable investigative tactics, led to a great deal of rather dubious reports.

Again, one would need to understand the work of Loftus and colleagues (the significance of how questions are asked effects what the individual believes they remember) to more fully grasp all the implications. That doesn't necessarily account for all reports, but there is no doubt that a high percentage of those reports is very suspect, and the UFO community's failure to educate itself about the psych paradigms and the effects of trauma only continues to add to the misunderstandings.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 9th, 2015, 10:33am

on Jun 9th, 2015, 10:12am, ZETAR wrote:
JACK,

TO WIT:

" (the significance of how questions are asked effects what the individual believes they remember) to more fully grasp all the implications. That doesn't necessarily account for all reports, but there is no doubt that a high percentage of those reports is very suspect, and the UFO community's failure to educate itself about the psych paradigms and the effects of trauma only continues to add to the misunderstandings."

WELL SAID SIR!


Thanks for noticing, sir. Perhaps it would be helpful if I reiterated my stance on the topic, or at least I would like to do so.

I'm not saying there are no reports of alleged alien abductions or UFOs that are of potential interest. There may be some intriguing events surrounding some of them, and perhaps some of it involves currently unexplained phenomena. I don't know.

When I started this thread - what has now been quite some time ago - I tried to explain that my interest lies in the exploitation and mistreatment of individuals who get mixed up with the UFO community. As drwu23 and some others have noted, I also took an interest in the intelligence community for similar reasons.

That is not to suggest there is necessarily nothing else of interest to be found in any of this stuff. The paranormal just doesn't happen to currently be on my list of extremely interesting topics, I have other specific areas of interest, and the subject matter is simply too wide and diverse to try to focus upon all of it at the same time.

I think it is very important to apply functional filters to the data, and understanding the roles of poor investigators and the intel community become relevant and interesting to me. Hopefully some others will find my contributions of interest.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 9th, 2015, 2:57pm

on Jun 9th, 2015, 05:47am, purr wrote:
.....I'm attempting to get Jjflash to take a peek (and even look seriously) into the paradox of abductees reporting the most vivid, life changing and paradigm shifting alien encounters, yet not having been found to be more, rather: LESS disordered than the general population (by John Mack's research).

What CAUSES these experiences, if not insanity?


purr


One limited study (Mack's work..) does not prove anything and of course needs to be replicated for any validity. Have any other research psychiatrists confirmed his work? Could it be that Mack was biased?
He was badly fooled during the course of his work with 'abductees' by a lady who pretended to be one.
Are 'abductees' indeed more well adjusted than non abductees? No offense but that sounds ridiculous on the face of it and not very scientific at all. But then psychology in general is a soft science.

I don't think we can make any valid conclusions from Dr Mack's work .


I mentioned these before but 2 books that pertain to this whole paranormal area ,experiencers, and psychology/sociology are:
Lure of the Edge by Brenda Denzler
The Trickster by George Hansen



Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Jun 9th, 2015, 5:37pm

on Jun 9th, 2015, 2:57pm, drwu23 wrote:


One limited study (Mack's work..) does not prove anything and of course needs to be replicated for any validity. Have any other research psychiatrists confirmed his work? Could it be that Mack was biased?
He was badly fooled during the course of his work with 'abductees' by a lady who pretended to be one.
Are 'abductees' indeed more well adjusted than non abductees? No offense but that sounds ridiculous on the face of it and not very scientific at all. But then psychology in general is a soft science.

I don't think we can make any valid conclusions from Dr Mack's work .


I mentioned these before but 2 books that pertain to this whole paranormal area ,experiencers, and psychology/sociology are:
Lure of the Edge by Brenda Denzler
The Trickster by George Hansen




Well, nobody said anything about 'proving' anything, Wu. Ten years of abductee research by a Harvard Psychiatrist does constitute a compelling body of work imho.

Since your good self (in fairness with Jj leading the way in this forum) has been advocating how excellent an idea it is for alleged abduction experiencers to get themselves evaluated by accredited mental health professionals (to weed out disordered folk, while offering high standard counselling to authentic abductees), I'm rather surprised that you appear dismissive to Mack's long term group study doing precisely that, WHICH FOUND THEY WERE IN SLIGHTLY ABOVE AVERAGE MENTAL SHAPE.

Haven't a clue what it proves, but it stands to reason it means sumtin. These people believe they met aliens/ETs, communicated, interacted with them, felt this deeply and this CHANGED them in profound ways. Again, if not insane, how were their experiences caused, doctor?


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 10th, 2015, 11:36am

on Jun 9th, 2015, 5:37pm, purr wrote:
Well, nobody said anything about 'proving' anything, Wu. Ten years of abductee research by a Harvard Psychiatrist does constitute a compelling body of work imho.

Since your good self (in fairness with Jj leading the way in this forum) has been advocating how excellent an idea it is for alleged abduction experiencers to get themselves evaluated by accredited mental health professionals (to weed out disordered folk, while offering high standard counselling to authentic abductees), I'm rather surprised that you appear dismissive to Mack's long term group study doing precisely that, WHICH FOUND THEY WERE IN SLIGHTLY ABOVE AVERAGE MENTAL SHAPE.

Haven't a clue what it proves, but it stands to reason it means sumtin. These people believe they met aliens/ETs, communicated, interacted with them, felt this deeply and this CHANGED them in profound ways. Again, if not insane, how were their experiences caused, doctor?


purr


A lot of aspects there that need to be discussed.
Without secondary studies Mack's work remains inconclusive. He was also an academic psychiatrist (also a writer by profession..) and not a clinician...a valid point imo. Was there bias involved since he became obsessed with the abduction phenom.? Why was Harvard upset about his 'work' with so-called alien abductees? Was it politics or more going on..?
Did he use a control group? What does 'slightly above average mental shape' even mean'..? Would another doctor agree with him? Did any other professionals look at his 'data' and evaluate it?
Why was he so easily fooled by the lady posing as an abductee? (This tends to indicate he had no strong protocols or screening in place and did he have any scientific methodology in place to prevent data and factual errors?) I notice you have ignored that point several times in your replies..?
Many unanswered questions and no follow ups. I suspect Dr Mack had a personal interest in the phenom and went about this on his own with little regard for safeguards and rigid protocols....and then wrote 2 books .
In the end does it really mean 'sumtin' ? Or are you biased to wanting it to mean 'sumtin'.?

As an end note, I enjoyed his 2 books but I honestly can't say they tell us anything more about the abduction phenom than what we already knew before his 'study'.
And another thought goes to why no other psychiatrist similar to Mack has tried to replicate his work. Surely there must be serious reseachers at Harvard and elsewhere who think this is worth looking into? Where are they?
ps: I forgot to weigh in on what's causing the experiencers to have these 'abduction' memories. I suspect that the vast majority are psychological imagination and or dream recollection that don't fall under the rubric of being 'crazy' which is why Dr Mack did not bring this into play. In some cases there might be an actual objective trigger event that currently lies outside of our understanding. I do not support the idea that space aliens are literally abducting people. IMHO it's the least likely scenario.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Jun 10th, 2015, 12:54pm

Drwu wrote,

..I do not support the idea that space aliens are literally abducting people. IMHO it's the least likely scenario...

Seems eminently sensible to me. After all, no one can show that aliens, in the accepted sense, even exist.

Surely that would be a prerequisite to even begin to consider abductions by them.

HAL
INT21
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Jun 11th, 2015, 4:37pm

on Jun 9th, 2015, 09:37am, jjflash wrote:
I think it depends on specifically who you're talking about, purr. To discuss "abductees" in general can become a bit problematic, the more we get down to details.

A few points, please:

- Some work published by Dr. CA Morgan and recently posted in this thread could be interpreted to question Dr. Mack's approach. Specifically, Morgan very much warned of the inherent dangers to clinicians advocating the subjective interpretations of the patients as compared to providing treatment, the latter of which was within the scope of professional training and the former was subjective.

- To better understand how and why people will report vivid experiences in which the content is questionable (and sometimes entirely false), I invite review of the work of Dr. Elizabeth Loftus, among others. It is not speculative, but demonstrated fact through years of clinical trials and research.

- Such circumstances as addressed by Morgan and Loftus do not necessarily account for all reported abductions, but it definitely accounts for some, if not a very high percentage. In my opinion, much less easily explainable experiences would involve less sensational claims, such as indoor light phenomena, orbs, multiple witness occurrences of such indoor light phenomena and so on, more what we might call "high strangeness" than alien doctors from the stars. There are lots of reasons people interpret themselves to see the things they see, including seeing unusual phenomena, and I think we'd need to talk more specifics to make sure we're on the same page when discussing such reports.



Lots of things. Trauma would be a major cause. I'd highly recommend learning more about it and its symptoms if your question is sincere.

In my estimation, the leading cause of the spike in reported abductions during the 1990's was emotional trauma combined with an overeager UFO community that quickly encouraged people to consider themselves alien abductees when they reported fragmented memories and such. That, along with extremely questionable investigative tactics, led to a great deal of rather dubious reports.

Again, one would need to understand the work of Loftus and colleagues (the significance of how questions are asked effects what the individual believes they remember) to more fully grasp all the implications. That doesn't necessarily account for all reports, but there is no doubt that a high percentage of those reports is very suspect, and the UFO community's failure to educate itself about the psych paradigms and the effects of trauma only continues to add to the misunderstandings.


Hi Jj, I suppose initially I took the lazy route, of letting you (gradually as conversations develop in your thread) define Alien Abduction, its Research and what you envision when proposing critically analyzing methods, relevant sciences and various investigators of this phenomenon.




User Image
"....and when I snap ze fingers you WILL CLEARLY REMEMBER all ze little aliens and zeir amaaayzing MOTHERSHIP....[..snap..!]......"




You made a compelling case for hypno-regression being (ab)used to 'prove' in disturbing detail how mankind has been the victim of rather nasty probing, physical abductions, genetic crossbreeding and terrifying psychological interactions purportedly by alien/ET visitors. Imo some of these strange, often frightening reports could be indicative (not proof) of unknown entities attempting to contact human individuals, inviting further research.

Also, on the 'Emma Woods' case, I'd say most reasonable minds would agree with you on the regression therapy sessions conducted with this specific client falling well short of applicable standards. Difference between us, Jjflash: you extrapolate this instance of probable malpractice to all of Jacobs' clients and abduction work, potentially even to all experiencers choosing regression by the hand/fobwatch by a selfstyled therapist or trained MH professional. But imo the case does not necessarily impugn the entire phenomenon: the Emma Woods account allows for Jacobs, lacking formal training, becoming so absorbed by his own Abduction and 'Hybrid' hypothesis that he succumbed to (often felt) terror from these apparently hostile aliens, even to the point of becoming momentarily disordered himself(!), causing an instant of bizarre/unethical conduct (planting false hypnotic memories in Woods' subconscious). If indeed Woods was a fluke, his other clients might have fared better, exemplifying both normal and regression augmented memories of the abduction experience. Of course Jacobs' error has little or no bearing on longterm research by accredited psychiatrists like professor Mack or on the Barney and Betty Hill sessions by dr Simon. (I recall both doctors taking care not to 'lead', except for leading regression subjects AWAY from alien interpretations, without having discernible effect on these weird memories.)

I see no problem (and you seem to agree) with the following statement by CA Morgan smiley ......

At present, it is likely there is a legitimate reason, distinct and separate from the process of advocacy, for a psychiatrist to perform evaluations of asylum applicants. It is this: To provide clinical assessments and treatment for an individual whose psychiatric symptoms may be interfering with his or her ability to work with his or her attorney during the process of seeking asylum. This is within our scope of training and expertise; extending beyond evidence-based uses of our clinical skills to achieve a legal goal is advocacy, not ethical practice, and it will undermine the credibility of our profession.

Simply, whether assessing abductees or asylum seekers: WE CANNOT SEE INTO PEOPLE'S HEARTS. As I tried to say earlier, psychiatry is designed to reveal how the mind works, be it disordered, relatively symptom free or highly functional. Not pretend to establish the ultimate reality of an experience. In the final analysis a good therapist may equally treat, alleviate the mental suffering, of traumatized torture victims or deeply terrorized abductees seeking help!

Loftus' intriguing, sometime ominous paper on sleep deprivation (and other memory inducing experiments) shows convincingly that memories, accurate or false, are caused, they (of course) do not miraculousy selfgenerate. It takes hard and brilliant work to make folks remember stuff in the psych lab. Takes me back to my original question: what caused abduction experiences in subjects (Mack patient group) who were not fullblown PTST or Schizophrenia sufferers, or diagnosed with a type of debilitating disorder. (Trauma/delusion then does not compute imho.)


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Jun 11th, 2015, 6:41pm

PURR,

TO WIT:

"(gradually as conversations develop in your thread)"

LIKE MINDS EH...

"indicative of unknown entities attempting to contact human individuals, inviting further research."

THAT SEEMS TO BE THE PATTERN!

"Takes me back to my question: what caused abduction experiences in subjects (Mack) who were not fullblown PTST or Schizophrenia sufferers, schizophreniacs, or diagnosed with a debilitating disorder."

ONE MUST FACTOR ~ SCREEN MEMORIES ~ IMHO ~ CERTAINLY SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WITH MULTIPLE EXPERIENCERS AT THE SAME EVENT ~ PERCEIVING DIFFERENT RECOLLECTIONS ~ SUMPTIN I OFTEN PONDERED ~ IN MY LAY OPINION...grin

"Freud used the term "screen memory" to denote any memory which
functions to hide (and to derivitively express) another, typically
unconscious, mental content. Freud distinguished between three types of
screen memory: those in which a recollection from childhood "screens" or
conceals some event contemporary with it, those in which a later
recollection stands for a memory of a childhood event, and those in which
a childhood recollection represents a later concern (Freud, 1901b; Freud,
1899a). Freud called the latter variety "retrogressive screen memories"

THIS ALWAYS ENTERESTED ME AS RATHER THAN CHILDHOOD CAUSE AND EFFECT ~ EVENT/EXPERIENCE ORIENTED STIMULI ~ CERTAINLY RAISES TANGENTIAL APPLICATIONS TO SCREEN MEMORIES...AGAIN IMHO... cool

HOPE I GOT THAT MOTOR PURRRRRRING...cool

User Image

SHALOM...Z

EDIT TO ADD:

" I'm attempting to get Jjflash to take a peek (and even look seriously) into the paradox of abductees reporting the most vivid, life changing and paradigm shifting alien encounters, yet not having been found to be more, rather: LESS disordered than the general population (by John Mack's research)."

I CON-PURR WITH THAT APPROACH...

Song by Steppenwolf, Bikers & Blues, ...WITH MODERATION FROM ZETAR

Get your motor PURRIN'
Head out on the highway
Looking for adventure
In whatever comes our way

Yeah, darlin'
Gonna make it happen
Take the world in a love embrace
Fire all of your guns at once
And explode into space

I like smoke and lightnin'
Heavy Metal thunder
Racing in the wind
And the feeling that I'm under

Yeah, darlin'
Gonna make it happen
Take the world in a love embrace
Fire all of your guns at once
And explode into space

Like a true nature's child
We were born
Born to be PURRIN
We can climb so high
I never wanna die

Born to be PURRIN
Born to be PURRIN




Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 12th, 2015, 4:09pm

purr,

Thanks for your thoughtful and pointed post. I think we share several of the same perspectives, even if we come at them from diverse angles.

If there would be a point I seem to most differ with you, it would be the potential effects of trauma. Perhaps another way of looking at it would be that there are of course lots of reasons for why people say the things they say, other than the statements necessarily indicate accuracy.

That stated, I am more than willing to again concede that all self-described abductees, or even all of the late Dr. Mack's abductees, are not necessarily incorrect that they encountered some kind of unusual phenomena. My primary objections would include:

- their narrations cannot be taken at face value without corroborating evidence

- tactics such as employed by Mack do not move the conversation forward, but stagnate it if not move it backwards

- people/experiencers have and continue to be hurt in the process by self-described investigators who try to present themselves as scientifically oriented while actually deviating greatly from Mack's call for a moderate approach

But I understand what I interpret to be your concerns, purr, that the experience itself not get lost in the complicated shuffle, and that the experiencer not be degraded and minimized. People deserve respectful treatment, and that was indeed part of my motive for ever sticking with all this as long as I have.

Thanks again for your post and comments. Your input is appreciated.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by purr on Jun 14th, 2015, 12:04pm

on Jun 11th, 2015, 6:41pm, ZETAR wrote:
PURR,

TO WIT:

"(gradually as conversations develop in your thread)"

LIKE MINDS EH...

"indicative of unknown entities attempting to contact human individuals, inviting further research."

THAT SEEMS TO BE THE PATTERN!

"Takes me back to my question: what caused abduction experiences in subjects (Mack) who were not fullblown PTST or Schizophrenia sufferers, schizophreniacs, or diagnosed with a debilitating disorder."

ONE MUST FACTOR ~ SCREEN MEMORIES ~ IMHO ~ CERTAINLY SHOULD BE CONSIDERED WITH MULTIPLE EXPERIENCERS AT THE SAME EVENT ~ PERCEIVING DIFFERENT RECOLLECTIONS ~ SUMPTIN I OFTEN PONDERED ~ IN MY LAY OPINION...grin

"Freud used the term "screen memory" to denote any memory which
functions to hide (and to derivitively express) another, typically
unconscious, mental content. Freud distinguished between three types of
screen memory: those in which a recollection from childhood "screens" or
conceals some event contemporary with it, those in which a later
recollection stands for a memory of a childhood event, and those in which
a childhood recollection represents a later concern (Freud, 1901b; Freud,
1899a). Freud called the latter variety "retrogressive screen memories"

THIS ALWAYS ENTERESTED ME AS RATHER THAN CHILDHOOD CAUSE AND EFFECT ~ EVENT/EXPERIENCE ORIENTED STIMULI ~ CERTAINLY RAISES TANGENTIAL APPLICATIONS TO SCREEN MEMORIES...AGAIN IMHO... cool

HOPE I GOT THAT MOTOR PURRRRRRING...cool

User Image

SHALOM...Z

EDIT TO ADD:

" I'm attempting to get Jjflash to take a peek (and even look seriously) into the paradox of abductees reporting the most vivid, life changing and paradigm shifting alien encounters, yet not having been found to be more, rather: LESS disordered than the general population (by John Mack's research)."

I CON-PURR WITH THAT APPROACH...

Song by Steppenwolf, Bikers & Blues, ...WITH MODERATION FROM ZETAR

Get your motor PURRIN'
Head out on the highway
Looking for adventure
In whatever comes our way

Yeah, darlin'
Gonna make it happen
Take the world in a love embrace
Fire all of your guns at once
And explode into space

I like smoke and lightnin'
Heavy Metal thunder
Racing in the wind
And the feeling that I'm under

Yeah, darlin'
Gonna make it happen
Take the world in a love embrace
Fire all of your guns at once
And explode into space

Like a true nature's child
We were born
Born to be PURRIN
We can climb so high
I never wanna die

Born to be PURRIN
Born to be PURRIN





PURRIN away just to keep up with you, ZETAR smiley, and you clearly are on a roll!

Screen memories. This explanation for the (usually partial, fragmentary, highly strange, like of meeting a terrible talking bunny etc.) memories of abduction experiencers is well accepted within the UFO/Abduction community.

I think the two applicable types are screens for a real, hidden event (X) contemporary with its (false) screen memory, as well as real events misremembered as its later occurring (true) screen-event.

(Any "retrogressive screen memory" of an alleged abduction, would inevitably qualify as false memory, or a delusion.)

I would be interested to hear you theorize about any real (or otherwise) abduction event 'screened' by our (complex, layered, wonderfully CREATIVE) Human Memory.

ZETAR: what's happening to these folk, in your opinion?


purr
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Jun 14th, 2015, 1:34pm

PURR,

TO WIT:

"ZETAR: what's happening to these folk, in your opinion?"

WITHOUT LIMITING THE POSSIBILTIES...MY THOUGHTS CENTER AROUND...

1) ACTUAL EXPERIENCE

2) PLASTICITY

3) TELEPATHY ~ AS SUCH FITS MY UNDERSTANDING OF SCREEN MEMORY (ENTITIES CAPABLE OF MANIFESTING SUCH IN INDIVIDUALS) ~ WHICH INDEED IS A REACH ~ BUT ONE MIGHT FACTOR A SPECIES WHOM MAY BE SOME 1,000,000 YEARS/DIMENSIONS OUR SUPERIOR ~ IMHO ~ WOULD BE CHILDS PLAY

User Image

SO WE'LL PONDER THE TERRESTRIAL POSSIBILITIES PRIOR TO CONSIDERING ETH/DIMENSIONAL CONSIDERATIONS...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121005103330.htm

Researchers from the University of Exeter Medical School have for the first time identified the mechanism that protects us from developing uncontrollable fear.

Our brains have the extraordinary capacity to adapt to changing environments -- experts call this 'plasticity'. Plasticity protects us from developing mental disorders as the result of stress and trauma.

Researchers found that stressful events re-programme certain receptors in the emotional centre of the brain (the amygdala), which the receptors then determine how the brain reacts to the next traumatic event.

These receptors (called protease-activated receptor 1 or PAR1) act in the same way as a command centre, telling neurons whether they should stop or accelerate their activity.

I'M GUESSING SOME ARE ~ MORE CAPABLE OF HANDLING SUCH EXPERIENCES WITHOUT YE OLE FUSE BOX SNAPPING FUSES ~ THEN THE QUESTION OF INTENT BY SUCH ENTITIES SHOULD BE PONDERED...AND...GET YOUR MOTOR PURRIN AS...LEMME GUESS >>> THIS CONCEPT FIXATES YOUR CURIOSITY <<< AS DOES MINE I MIGHT ADD grin

AS THE DISCUSSION DEVELOPS...WHICH REQUIRES COLLATERAL INPUT ~ MIGHT YOU AGREE wink

User Image

SHALOM...Z

EDIT TO ADD:

"(Any "retrogressive screen memory" of an alleged abduction, would inevitably qualify as false memory, or a delusion.)"

I AM UNABLE TO CONFIRM NOR DENY THE ABOVE REFERENCED...grin
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Jun 15th, 2015, 05:14am

what I believe has happend is that the little darlins have been found out,not by you and me but professional researchers that have stumbled on the "answer". So the little bastards have gone underground until they feel the coast be cleared.I know that sounds bizzare but its what Ive come to believe,the abductions happens in the mind only.For that bright light to appear just before an experience is somewhat a bit to conventiant.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Jun 15th, 2015, 05:48am

Carolnistri,

...the abductions happens in the mind only...

So, if the abductions happen only in the mind, would you agree that the expression 'it's all in the mind' is appropriate ? Nothing really happens in reality ?

And how do your demons fit into this are they also all in the mind ? If so it would seem to imply that as demons are of religious origin, then religion is also all in the mind.

I.e a fiction created by humans.

HAL
INT21
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Jun 15th, 2015, 09:46am

HAL,

TO WIT:

"And how do your demons fit" ~ "in the mind" ~ PARDON MY FOCUSED APPROACH grin

THAT IS INDEED THE QUESTION ~ AND TEMPERED WITH SECONDARY CONSIDERATIONS ~ WHEN AND IF THOSE/THAT MENTAL STIMULI MAY HAVE MANIFISTED ITSELF IN PHYSICAL REALITY ~ cool

The Catholic Church revised the Rite of Exorcism in January 1999, though the traditional Rite of Exorcism in Latin is allowed as an option. The ritual assumes that possessed persons retain their free will, though the demon may hold control over their physical body, and involves prayers, blessings, and invocations with the use of the document Of Exorcisms and Certain Supplications.

According to the Vatican guidelines issued in 1999, “the person who claims to be possessed must be evaluated by doctors to rule out a mental or physical illness.”[7] Most reported cases do not require an exorcism because twentieth-century Catholic officials regard genuine demonic possession as an extremely rare phenomenon that is easily confounded with natural mental disturbances. Many times a person just needs spiritual or medical help, especially if drugs or other addictions are present. After the need of the person has been determined then the appropriate help will be met. In the circumstance of spiritual help, prayers may be offered, or the laying on of hands or a counseling session may be prescribed.

User Image

THE ABOVE IS AT LEAST ONE AVENUE OF EVALUATION...IMHO cool

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Cliff-67 on Jun 16th, 2015, 01:26am

This is most definitely a serious subject,,,, if only the whole population knew,,,,,. Just sayin.

If those who had extraordinary events take place knew where the right place was to go and who to confide with, it may alleviate some of the trauma they carry. There's good points made on here and much to consider but the end result is what is best for those seeking answers.

Individual evaluation (by whom ?) in each case is important IMO. Who is qualified when they're evaluating the real scenario ? How will it be dealt with ?

Is the world ready for this ? No, IMHO.


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 16th, 2015, 3:23pm

It is a serious subject. Far too serious to be left to amateurs like so-called abduction experts and ufologists who usually have no background in anything useful.
Example: 'Dr Jacobs is a history teacher and Budd Hopkins was an abstract artist.
How do those backgrounds help us to solve a complex enigma like alien abduction?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Jun 16th, 2015, 6:21pm

I don't think a persons background is so important,

Hopkins, who I've met, may even have had an advantage in this kind of thing as it is in itself very abstract. An abstract artist will by definition tend to think outside the box.

I imagine that the more important thing is to be able to gather all the relevant threads of the matter together and analyse the connections etc.

HAL
INT21
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 16th, 2015, 10:35pm

on Jun 16th, 2015, 6:21pm, INT21 wrote:
I don't think a persons background is so important,

Hopkins, who I've met, may even have had an advantage in this kind of thing as it is in itself very abstract. An abstract artist will by definition tend to think outside the box.

I imagine that the more important thing is to be able to gather all the relevant threads of the matter together and analyse the connections etc.

HAL
INT21

Of course it's important. How does one even know to 'gather relevant threads ' when they don't even have any science or forensic background to do this..?
Would you ask a baker to solve a crime or a detective to cater a wedding?
This is exactly the problem with almost all of the investigations going on in the ufo arena. The people doing it have no expertise in science or investigating to begin with and most of them are believers to begin with which is biasing their investigation from the start.
I think JJ has mentioned this many times already.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 16th, 2015, 11:13pm

I think the article below is applicable to this thread, and it serves as an example there are lots of reasons people say the things they say, other than their statements are accurate. There is not any single explanation as to why people report perceptions and memories of fantastic events, but lots of reasons.


Abducted by aliens? Neurologist finds similarities in alleged victims

The Hawaii Tribune Herald

June 13, 2015

Neurologist Dr. Michael B. Russo says that he initially didn’t know what to make of the first few patients who told him they’d been abducted by aliens from outer space.

“Their doctors sent them to me because they had headache pain or some sort of neurological problem,” he said. “Their primary physicians didn’t know they were having the problem due to abduction. But I would find out as part of my interview when I would ask how long they’ve had the problem, when did they first notice it. … Then they’d tell me.”

As part of his regular testing of patients, Russo used his $200,000 dense-array electroencephalography, or DEEG, machine — the only one of its kind in Hawaii — to map the electrical activity in the brains of his patients.

New patients, including several from the Big Island, came in with similar complaints about being abducted, leading Russo to wonder if there was anything the patients shared in common when it came to brain wave activity.

“The patients were just coming to me, and I started noticing patterns across the patients. I’ll see three or four patients with something that’s similar, and then I’ll try to find an explanation for what it is I’m seeing,” Russo said.

Each of the patients who claims to have been abducted by aliens and believed that a transmitter was implanted in their brain has shown abnormalities in brain wave activity in their parietal lobe.

“That’s the area that does visual and auditory integration into higher order thinking,” he said.

“The parietal areas process visual and auditory data, but they can intrinsically create it themselves and then send it to the pre-frontal region, where you become aware of it. … Our thinking is that there’s something in the parietal areas that’s generating (the feeling that transmissions from aliens are being sent to the brain).”

The electrical brain wave activity of the alien abductee patients looks similar to that of patients who have experienced traumatic brain injury, he said.

Russo, who operates offices in both Honolulu and Hilo, says that he tries to look at the patients’ experiences from their point of view and works with them to try to help alleviate their problem.

“I’m not casting judgment about what it is they’re saying and their history,” he said Friday.

“All I’m saying is that these areas of the brain are similar between patients. … Patients would not come to me if I did not take them seriously and their problems seriously. I don’t discount what they’ve said. I try to make the pain or discomfort or anxieties diminish.”

Russo said that when he is performing the DEEG tests, patients will often ask him if he can see the transmitter.

“‘No, I can’t see the transmitter,’ I’ll tell them. ‘But I can see the brain signals,” he said.

Russo said that so far, when he has explained his findings to his patients, they have responded well.

“It validates what they’re experiencing. It’s something that can be detected or measured using human equipment — most of what they’ve had is an extraterrestrial experience. So, I’m able to say, ‘Yes, I can see your brain and the area where there are communication difficulties,’” he said. “‘And I have medicines that may help the pain you’re experiencing or turn down or off the transmissions you’re experiencing.’”

Russo says he has experienced some success using various pharmacological therapies in alleviating the headache pains and feelings of receiving unwanted transmissions.

Russo will present his findings, which were co-authored with Ryan Nillo, Shane Endicott, Judith Profant and Melba C. Stetz, at the upcoming meeting of the Organization of Human Brain Mapping, held Sunday through Thursday at the Hawaii Convention Center.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Jun 17th, 2015, 05:39am

Drwu,

Maybe I should have said that the ability to analyse is more important than the actual occupation of the analyst. What the nice people in the job centres call 'transferable skills'.

There are many very highly educated ex-university people who can't get work in their chosen field and have to take what they can get whilst hoping something will come along.

There once was a saying that there are better musicians playing on the street corners of Tel Aviv than in the New York Philharmonic.

So the person who flips your burgers may actually be a cosmologist with a Phd. Would you deem him to be unsuitable to write a book on cosmology ?

...The people doing it have no expertise in science or investigating to begin with and most of them are believers to begin with which is biasing their investigation from the start...

How does one train someone in a field that the vast majority don't believe is a possibility ?

But what happens when a respected, say, psychoanalyst is forced to accept that abduction does happen ? Do we say 'well, know we know' or do we say 'he was probably a closet believer anyway' .

It is indeed a tricky one.

HAL
INT21


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Jun 17th, 2015, 07:43am

HAL,

PER DRWU...

TO WIT:

"which is biasing their investigation from the start"

IMHO...THAT BIAS IS A TWO WAY STREET ~ FROM BELIEVERS TO SKEPTICS ~ AS EACH GROUP OFTEN EAGERLY CLAIMS THEIR POSTION BASED ON A PREDISPOSITON...grin

"How does one train someone in a field that the vast majority don't believe is a possibility ?"

"But what happens when a respected, say, psychoanalyst is forced to accept that abduction does happen ? Do we say 'well, know we know' or do we say 'he was probably a closet believer anyway' ."

"It is indeed a tricky one."

OUSTANDING!

User Image

@ JACK

TO WIT:

"As part of his regular testing of patients, Russo used his $200,000 dense-array electroencephalography, or DEEG, machine — the only one of its kind in Hawaii — to map the electrical activity in the brains of his patients."

“‘No, I can’t see the transmitter,’ I’ll tell them. ‘But I can see the brain signals,” he said."

I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR YOU ~ IN LIEU OF THE ABOVE ~ DO YOU DISCOUNT ANY/ALL FORMS OF TELEPATHY ASSOCIATED WITH EXPERIENCERS/N.T.E.(NON TERRESTRIAL ENTITIES) ~ MOREOVER ~ IF YOUR ANSWER CONSIDERS SAME ~ WOULD SUCH >>> Russo used his $200,000 dense-array electroencephalography, or DEEG, machine <<< BE CALIBRATED TO FACTOR SUCH POTENTIALITY?

User Image

SHALOM...Z

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 17th, 2015, 11:37am

on Jun 17th, 2015, 05:39am, INT21 wrote:
Drwu,

Maybe I should have said that the ability to analyse is more important than the actual occupation of the analyst. What the nice people in the job centres call 'transferable skills'.

There are many very highly educated ex-university people who can't get work in their chosen field and have to take what they can get whilst hoping something will come along.

There once was a saying that there are better musicians playing on the street corners of Tel Aviv than in the New York Philharmonic.

So the person who flips your burgers may actually be a cosmologist with a Phd. Would you deem him to be unsuitable to write a book on cosmology ?

...The people doing it have no expertise in science or investigating to begin with and most of them are believers to begin with which is biasing their investigation from the start...

How does one train someone in a field that the vast majority don't believe is a possibility ?

But what happens when a respected, say, psychoanalyst is forced to accept that abduction does happen ? Do we say 'well, know we know' or do we say 'he was probably a closet believer anyway' .

It is indeed a tricky one.

HAL
INT21



You are moving the goal posts in that response but that's ok I get your point.
The abduction phenom and indeed the ufo phenom in general should be treated as any other scientific unknown or mystery and approached in this manner imho.
But sadly as many have pointed out over the years it attracts those who have an agenda or are believers to begin with (see Lure of the Edge by Denzler)and don't have any applicable skills to investigate it. They already have 'solved the problem' since they believe in aliens and are merely collecting data to support their belief. That's not science .
I'm not anti ufology or against most of those in the field. They all seem like decent people but for the most part they don't have any usefull skills to invesitgate such a complex enigma.

btw...Dr Vallee once said that what we need are teams of experts. Physicists, physicians, psychologists, forensic lab experts, folklorists and anthropologists...etc.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 17th, 2015, 11:50am

on Jun 17th, 2015, 07:43am, ZETAR wrote:
HAL,


IMHO...THAT BIAS IS A TWO WAY STREET ~ FROM BELIEVERS TO SKEPTICS ~ AS EACH GROUP OFTEN EAGERLY CLAIMS THEIR POSTION BASED ON A PREDISPOSITON...grin
....................

"How does one train someone in a field that the vast majority don't believe is a possibility ?"

"But what happens when a respected, say, psychoanalyst is forced to accept that abduction does happen ? Do we say 'well, know we know' or do we say 'he was probably a closet believer anyway' ."

"It is indeed a tricky one."
.....................


I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR YOU ~ IN LIEU OF THE ABOVE ~ DO YOU DISCOUNT ANY/ALL FORMS OF TELEPATHY ASSOCIATED WITH EXPERIENCERS/N.T.E.(NON TERRESTRIAL ENTITIES) ~ MOREOVER ~ IF YOUR ANSWER CONSIDERS SAME ~ WOULD SUCH >>> Russo used his $200,000 dense-array electroencephalography, or DEEG, machine <<< BE CALIBRATED TO FACTOR SUCH POTENTIALITY?



Firstly skeptics have no bias by definition so we want to use someone who is skeptic going into an investigation.
Debunkers are biased ...on that I will agree.
Believers are also biased.

We need people who have science training , forensic training , and investigative training. As well as medical professionals in both general medicine and psychiatry.
BTW...how does a 'respected psychoanalyst' accept abduction as genuine? Based on what? Anecdotal material? His or her personal belief? Is that valid? Because no one has ever provided anything in the way of hard evidence in a soft science like psychology regarding aliens.

And why should we accept an experiencers word that 'genuine telepathy' happened? Based on what empirical evidence? Again it's anecdotal, so we shouldn't act like it's genuine data. It's a story.
The DEEG does show empirical data of brain dysfunction.

I'm not saying we discount all anecdotal material....I think the people telling their tales did experience something. But it should not take priority over actual evidence that we might gather during the course of the investigation.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Jun 17th, 2015, 2:35pm

ZETAR,

Electroencephalography (EEG) simply allows the displaying of the electrical energy being active within the brain. It still has to be interpreted.
Today's technicians are becoming better at relating certain response patterns to certain stimuli. But many closely related stimuli can produce very similar results.

So while the EEG may show evidence of a particular trauma, it doesn't tell you what caused it.

Drwu,

My Psychoanalyst may be forced into the conclusion that, in the case of his patient, he had removed all other probable causes for the patient's (abductee's) claimed and nothing was left but to believe the something along the lines had happened.
He would be highly dissatisfied with this conclusion and would probably always have the thought in the back of his mind 'have I missed something ?'

Anecdotal information is, in the end, all we have simply because we cannot reproduce the alleged abduction.

I have mentioned before that, one day a few years ago, I was walking along and heard, crystal clear, a voice call my name. It was so clear I stopped and looked around expecting to find someone I knew stood behind me. There was no one there.

Now, was this a telepathic call ? If so, from whom ? Or was it a sign of a momentary wrong connection of a couple of brain synapses ? Who knows.

I will add that I do believe there is a possibility of telepathic communication at some level between people who are 'tuned' to a particular mental state. Not communication as in the form of one to one conversation, but the ability to know when someone is trying to get your attention.

To relate this to Zetar's question, you first have to know if alien life forms are even possible.

Maybe they are and are entirely in the mental plane without solid form.

There are those here that know I am struggling with this question.

HAL
INT21

Edit to correct ECG to EEG.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Jun 17th, 2015, 3:11pm

HAL,

TO WIT:

"To relate this to Zetar's question, you first have to know if alien life forms are even possible.

Maybe they are and are entirely in the mental plane without solid form.

There are those here that know I am struggling with this question."

OK ~ WE ARE IN THE REALM WHICH I FIND QUITE INTERESTING ~ HYPOTHETICALLY ~ COULD AN ALIEN LIFE FORM EXIST AS PURE ENERGY ~ NO FORM ~ SHAPE ~ PLASMA?

User Image

THIS...IN MY LAY SPECULATION ~ OPENS POSSIBILITIES IN AN AREA OF CONTINGENTS WHICH IS INTRIGUING...

SHALOM...Z

EDIT TO ADD:

"Maybe they are" ~ AMAZING ~ SUCH PROGRESS cool

User Image

"Electroencephalography (ECG) simply allows the displaying of the electrical energy being active within the brain. It still has to be interpreted"

INDEED ~ MUCH LIKE RADAR BLIPS...

User Image
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by INT21 on Jun 17th, 2015, 7:17pm

ZETAR,

Begs the question 'does the mind exist outside the brain ?

And if you answer 'yes' then the question becomes 'where' ?

HAL
INT21
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Jun 17th, 2015, 7:33pm

HAL,

TO WIT:

"Begs the question 'does the mind exist outside the brain ?

And if you answer 'yes' then the question becomes 'where'"

I'VE BEEN A ROSICRUCIAN IN SEARCH OF PERFECTION FOR DECADES ~ SO SUCH ASSIMILATES IN MY MIND COMFORTABLY...

"built on esoteric truths of the ancient past", which, "concealed from the average man, provide insight into nature, the physical universe and the spiritual realm"

MERELY ANOTHER BRICK IN THE WALL ~ NEVERTHELESS ~ PROVIDES INSIGHTS NECESSARY TO EVALUTE THE UNIMAGINABLE... cool ~ IMHO...

User Image

" then the question becomes 'where'" ~ THAT MY FRIEND ~ MUST BE AN INDIVIDUAL JOURNEY cool

KEEP ON TRUCKIN...

User Image

SHALOM...Z
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 17th, 2015, 8:32pm

on Jun 17th, 2015, 07:43am, ZETAR wrote:
@ JACK

TO WIT:

"As part of his regular testing of patients, Russo used his $200,000 dense-array electroencephalography, or DEEG, machine — the only one of its kind in Hawaii — to map the electrical activity in the brains of his patients."

“‘No, I can’t see the transmitter,’ I’ll tell them. ‘But I can see the brain signals,” he said."

I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR YOU ~ IN LIEU OF THE ABOVE ~ DO YOU DISCOUNT ANY/ALL FORMS OF TELEPATHY ASSOCIATED WITH EXPERIENCERS/N.T.E.(NON TERRESTRIAL ENTITIES) ~ MOREOVER ~ IF YOUR ANSWER CONSIDERS SAME ~ WOULD SUCH >>> Russo used his $200,000 dense-array electroencephalography, or DEEG, machine <<< BE CALIBRATED TO FACTOR SUCH POTENTIALITY?


I think that's a stretch. I'd agree with what drwu wrote. I think too often people are trying to force conclusions on the data that just aren't supported. Ideally one would work from the data forward, not from the conclusion backward.

I think it worth mentioning that the work Dr. Russo, the neurologist in the article I posted, is conducting is an excellent example of professionally treating the patient rather than conducting advocacy. Remember I cited the work of psychologist Dr. Morgan who warned of the dangers? Well, Russo is treating symptoms that can be observed and measured, with minimal concern of their origin. The content of the stories is beside the point. Rather than advocate for the reality or lack thereof of alien abduction, Russo is practicing medicine, circumstances that are within his field of expertise, as compared to trying to establish the extents of validity of any given person's statements.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Jun 17th, 2015, 8:46pm

JACK,

I ALWAYS RESPECT YOUR INSIGHTS AND OPINIONS...

TO WIT:

"Russo is practicing medicine" ~ wink

AND CLUELESS ABOUT EXPERIENCES BEYOND HIS TRAINING ~ cool ~ BUT I GET THE COPING MECHANISMS INVOLVED ~ CERTAINLY ~ IF IT AIDS THOSE WHOM ARE IN A MENTAL FLUX ~ I'M DOWN WITH IT LIKE FOUR FLAT TIRES... grin

OFTEN IN AN IMPASSE ~ ONE MUST AGREE TO DISAGREE

SHALOM...Z

EDIT TO ADD:

EASY JACK ~ I'M KEEPING IT STIRRED...

User Image
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 17th, 2015, 9:24pm

I'm suggesting that a high percentage of self-described alien abductees suffer from untreated emotional trauma which contributes to their confusion about events that did not include extraterrestrials. That does not have to mean that none of the reports are of interest or that all of them have the same explanation, but to fail to acknowledge that witness confusion accounts for a large number of reports is ignoring the reality of the situation, in my confident opinion.

It has been cited in this thread (and readers can certainly conduct research on their own and establish) that studies now show emotional trauma literally alters the physiology of the brain. That can particularly be the case in children.

Key points here, please: Parts of the brain altered and stunted are those that account for such functions as critical thinking, memory and putting events in chronological order. In other words, traumatized individuals may experience a great deal of difficulty identifying details of traumatic events, including when they happened and what happened. It is common that they fail to understand the reasons their narrations may not make sense or even be logistically possible. Fragmented memories are common, as is the misunderstanding that the event is recurring. The extent of trauma is not dependent on the event, but how the event is perceived, and the condition and resulting symptoms are not unusual by any means. I assert that traumatized people find refuge in the UFO community, and that some unethical investigators particularly exploit them.

I am suggesting that in many cases of reported abductions, nothing particularly out of the ordinary even occurred at the time of the supposed abduction. Sometimes the specific date is not even available, it's just a distant memory. I think that often the individual is confused about untreated childhood trauma and a variety of additional circumstances combine to weave the narrative. Such circumstances include overeager "investigators" who do not encourage treatment for trauma, a UFO community that touts relatively mundane symptoms as indications of alien abductions, and attempts to sort out memories of alleged abductions that were years in the past, if they happened at all.

The result is the literal manufacture of alien abductees. Again, I am not asserting that all reports of high strangeness should be discarded, but to deny that a high percentage of alleged abductees are simply misinterpreting the circumstances is detrimental to a search for the truth. If it can't be established that something, whatever it may be, happened during an alleged abduction in an objective reality, one would be wise to assume that is because it didn't, or at least that would be the case pending more conclusive information.

On the other hand, the people may often experience anxiety, deep emotions and related symptoms of trauma because terrible circumstances indeed befell them, they just didn't necessarily have anything to do with aliens. The events may have been at another time and under different circumstances altogether than suspected. That is what trauma is, folks. The stuff I'm writing here is not an original theory or fringe idea by any means, but what would be considered generally accepted common knowledge among mental health professionals and trauma specialists that don't have UFO-related agendas.

If you want to establish alien abduction as a literal occurrence, then you indeed have to establish it. You can't keep trying to come at it from all different kinds of indirect angles and using poor investigative techniques just because you can't establish it any other way, at least not and do so with any integrity and credibility.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Jun 17th, 2015, 10:01pm

JACK,

WE HAVE SYS ENTERING STAGE RIGHT...

TO WIT:

"Key points here, please: Parts of the brain altered and stunted are those that account for such functions as critical thinking, memory and putting events in chronological order. In other words, traumatized individuals may experience a great deal of difficulty identifying details of traumatic events, including when they happened and what happened. It is common that they fail to understand the reasons their narrations may not make sense or even be logistically possible. Fragmented memories are common, as is the misunderstanding that the event is recurring. The extent of trauma is not dependent on the event, but how the event is perceived, and the condition and resulting symptoms are not unusual by any means. I assert that traumatized people find refuge in the UFO community, and that some unethical investigators particularly exploit them."

TOUCHY ~ TOUCHY ~ ARE WE...HEY JACK...I'M QUITE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE ABOVE REFERENCED QUOTE!

QUITE A TREAT WHEN YOU STEP UP!

RIDE THE WAVE...

User Image

SHALOM...Z

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Sam on Jun 17th, 2015, 11:15pm

I have evidence (photos) to proved the aliens, Grey( photo only show three grey 's head), big flying saucer ( I have no proved it is mechanic or bio- type) all exist, And they have been described by abductee before. Was abduction really happened? Figure out by yourself ! To me, some cases are true.

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 18th, 2015, 10:43am

on Jun 17th, 2015, 11:15pm, Sam wrote:
I have evidence (photos) to proved the aliens, Grey( photo only show three grey 's head), big flying saucer ( I have no proved it is mechanic or bio- type) all exist, And they have been described by abductee before. Was abduction really happened? Figure out by yourself ! To me, some cases are true.


Why don't you post your photos of evidence Sam so we can all see them?

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Cliff-67 on Jun 18th, 2015, 6:42pm


That gave me a thought Drwu.

If/when, we finally have the technology to project on a screen, hologram,etc., an accurate depiction of what the eyes have seen, would that count ?


Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 18th, 2015, 8:54pm

on Jun 18th, 2015, 6:42pm, Cliff-67 wrote:
That gave me a thought Drwu.

If/when, we finally have the technology to project on a screen, hologram,etc., an accurate depiction of what the eyes have seen, would that count ?



Count as what Cliff? I'm not sure what you mean.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Cliff-67 on Jun 19th, 2015, 12:21am



If/when, we finally have the technology to project on a screen, hologram,etc., an accurate depiction of what a persons eyes have seen, would that count as evidence ?
(Sorry, I left some of that out Drwu.) smiley

@ JJFlash - Hi JJ smiley

I respect what you're doing here and agree in many areas, thank you ! I don't mean to go out on a tangent with the above question since we do not have that technology - yet.

------ Quote:
As part of his regular testing of patients, Russo used his $200,000 dense-array electroencephalography, or DEEG, machine — the only one of its kind in Hawaii — to map the electrical activity in the brains of his patients.


This is interesting and worth further studying. Again, thank you ! smiley

Cliff








Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 19th, 2015, 10:03am

Thanks, Cliff. Yeah, it is interesting. Those who might like to read some more about what may be happening in the brain during perceptions of unusual experiences might choose to read some about work conducted by Michael Persinger. I particularly found his work as described by Susan Blackmore very interesting.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 19th, 2015, 10:22am

on Jun 19th, 2015, 12:21am, Cliff-67 wrote:
If/when, we finally have the technology to project on a screen, hologram,etc., an accurate depiction of what a persons eyes have seen, would that count as evidence ?
(Sorry, I left some of that out Drwu.) smiley




If we could accurately depict what they 'saw' then I suppose it would count as evidence ...but would we ever be 100% certain it was what they saw or what they 'thought they saw'?
wink
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jun 19th, 2015, 10:24am

on Jun 19th, 2015, 10:03am, jjflash wrote:
Thanks, Cliff. Yeah, it is interesting. Those who might like to read some more about what may be happening in the brain during perceptions of unusual experiences might choose to read some about work conducted by Michael Persinger. I particularly found his work as described by Susan Blackmore very interesting.


Thanks for the links....Persinger has been around for a long time postulating his theories about what people are experiencing regarding ufo type phenomena.
Looking forward to reading that article on him.

From the article:
"I'm taking part in a vanguard experiment on the physical sources of spiritual consciousness, the current work-in-progress of Michael Persinger, a neuropsychologist at Canada's Laurentian University in Sudbury, Ontario. His theory is that the sensation described as "having a religious experience" is merely a side effect of our bicameral brain's feverish activities. Simplified considerably, the idea goes like so: When the right hemisphere of the brain, the seat of emotion, is stimulated in the cerebral region presumed to control notions of self, and then the left hemisphere, the seat of language, is called upon to make sense of this nonexistent entity, the mind generates a "sensed presence."

Persinger has tickled the temporal lobes of more than 900 people before me and has concluded, among other things, that different subjects label this ghostly perception with the names that their cultures have trained them to use - Elijah, Jesus, the Virgin Mary, Mohammed, the Sky Spirit. Some subjects have emerged with Freudian interpretations - describing the presence as one's grandfather, for instance - while others, agnostics with more than a passing faith in UFOs, tell something that sounds more like a standard alien-abduction story."

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 25th, 2015, 10:47am

UFO Community Members Weigh in on Dubious MUFON Speakers

The UFO Trail

June 25, 2015

"We hope to bridge the gap between science and ufology. They're one in the same."

- MUFON International Director Jan Harzan, 'Las Vegas Sun'


Concerns were expressed in the wake of the Roswell Slides debacle about organizations such as the Mutual UFO Network continuing to promote those who supported and enabled the empty claims surrounding the alleged slides. Don Schmitt was quickly back in the spotlight at a recent MUFON PA event, for instance, and beWITNESS promoter Jaime Maussan was invited to speak at the upcoming 2015 MUFON Symposium. MUFON WI Assistant State Director and Chief Investigator Mark O'Connell subsequently urged the organization to remove Maussan from the list of speakers. He also requested MUFON ban Maussan and Schmitt from future events, along with their slides colleagues Tom Carey, Richard Dolan and Anthony Bragalia. It seems Adam Dew has relatively removed himself from ufology, at least as compared to his beWITNESS associates and for the time being.

Further consideration reveals the challenges to be common and merely among the latest of what is relatively standard operating procedure concerning the low quality of speakers and information typically offered. MUFON and the North American UFO community in particular have systemic problems of credibility and poor quality of information circulated, as observable in not only the invitation extended to Jaime Maussan to speak at the annual MUFON conference, but the additional inclusion of such questionable figures as Paul Hellyer. Many people particularly object to the circumstances in light of the organization's claim to be dedicated to the scientific study of UFOs, an assertion now so widely taken for granted as false that it no longer even generates significant discussion.

Adding insult to injury is an upcoming MUFON PA event in which the keynote speaker is yet another dubious figure, Dr. David Jacobs, who, as of this blog post, quite questionably continues to claim to be a "strong advocate of strict scientific and ethical research methodology." Trouble is that if those claims were to be taken any more seriously than the underachieved MUFON mission statement, Jacobs has been repeatedly shown to fail miserably at actually implementing such purported advocacy into his own work. The retired historian's so-called investigations were conclusively demonstrated to be extremely ethically questionable and completely absent scientific merit. Nonetheless, MUFON is opting to roll out the red carpet and present him with a lifetime achievement award, as if it had no knowledge of either the actual definition of science or Jacobs' confirmed actions, detrimental to both his research subjects and the quality of the genre's collective body of information.

Several members of the UFO community were recently contacted and asked to submit comment on the above circumstances for inclusion in this blog post. Following are their most appreciated contributions.

Full post:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2015/06/ufo-community-members-weigh-in-on.html
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jun 27th, 2015, 8:45pm

on Jun 25th, 2015, 10:47am, jjflash wrote:
UFO Community Members Weigh in on Dubious MUFON Speakers

The UFO Trail

June 25, 2015

[...]

Full post:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2015/06/ufo-community-members-weigh-in-on.html


It was recently brought to my attention that the International UFO Congress is currently in the selection process for speakers for its 2016 event, and suggestions from the public are requested. Suggestions for speakers and/or related concerns about the process may be sent to:

contact@ufocongress.com

Learn more at:

http://ufocongress.com/speakers/
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Sys_Config on Jun 27th, 2015, 9:57pm

The lack of finding good people seems endemic to us. I cant speak to the Europeans, but those links of JJ clearly show they have moved on to a more..for lack of a better word holistic approach using the historical record for times, events, cultura contexts ..I believe they are ahead of us in understanding and adapting to some of the theories originating, but not followed up in the same manner, here.

I don't doubt for second..that early traumas..can like an embedded sleeper cell..be activated under certain conditions that would be considered remote and totally disconnected..like a scene on a billboard..or large get flying overhead , while driving, half of which is almost trance like anyway..no preconditioning scripting or chemical exposure necessary like the old Manchurian programming did. I don't doubt either for a second that the latter programming has been quite fashionable and provided some, despite the collateral damage to volunteers and involunteers an acceptable cost, useful tips to the PTB. With good control of the media..nd repetitive stimuli ..you can bamboozle an entire population..they read in the middle of a recession the economy is great..they believe it..
promote fear..they will see a terrorist around every corner..
Asteroid approaching..
If one can imagine the stress entire groups are under as a cloud....then any element in that cloud might ignite inexplicably but not unpredictably. It does not have to be therefore a blunt trauma..an early child hood abuse.or personal injury but a societal byproduct in nature...its how the brain copes with any sudden overload..usually a shutdown..barely remembered..when its a deliberate experiment then for all sakes and purposes your brain has been hijacked or abducted..with the window dressing added afterwards.
Being sensitive creatures .we are aware at all times of cognitive dissonance..holding conflicting opinions..and sensing when others do as well..sometimes the conflict is managed and we function normally with family and peers..
other times..the results can be out of this world for the individual..and for entire communities as in the past and present.


















Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jul 13th, 2015, 11:55pm

The article below is very relevant to hypnotic regression and so-called memory retrieval procedures typically used by the American UFO community.

Tormented by a past that never was...


The legacy of implanted Satanic abuse ‘memories’ is still causing damage today

The Conversation

July 13, 2015

When 21-year-old nurse Carol Felstead went to her doctor complaining of repeated headaches, she wasn’t just prescribed painkillers. Instead, she was referred for psychotherapy that would ultimately involve hypnosis to “recover” so-called repressed memories of childhood sexual abuse. Carol subsequently came to believe that her parents were the leaders of a Satanic cult and that her mother murdered another of her children, sat Carol on top of the body and then set fire to the family home.

But these allegations were untrue and the memories they were based upon were incorrect. Today, almost 30 years on, “recovered memory therapy” has been discredited by the scientific and academic community and is known to implant false memories, apparent memories for events that never actually happened.

Experimental psychologists have repeatedly demonstrated the ease with which false memories can be implanted in a sizeable proportion of the population under well-controlled laboratory conditions. But it is also undoubtedly the case that such false memories can arise spontaneously as well as in the context of psychotherapy.

Although we are typically not consciously aware of it, we often have to judge whether an apparent memory is real. Is it based upon mental events that were purely internally generated (for example, by imagination or a dream) or based upon events which really took place in the external world?

Implanting false memories

One of the techniques that has been shown to result in false memories is asking people to imagine events that never actually took place. It appears that, eventually and especially in people with good imaginations, the memory of the imagined event is misinterpreted as a memory for a real event. The use of hypnotic regression is a particularly powerful means to implant false memories.

The correct chronology in Carol Felstead’s case is as follows: there was another daughter who was ill from birth and she died in hospital in 1962 from problems associated with a defective heart. The house fire was a tragic accident that occurred in 1963 and made the front page news of the local newspaper. But Carol was born in 1964. These events happened before she was alive. Carol later falsely claimed to have given birth to six babies who were meant to have been conceived and ritually sacrificed by the Satanic cult. Her medical records show that Carol was never pregnant.

User Image
Carol Felstead (later Myers)

Carol cut off contact with her family, changed her name to Carole Myers, and died in 2005, aged 41, in circumstances that are still unexplained. Prior to receiving psychotherapy, she was a bright and intelligent young woman with her life ahead of her. Her story highlights the inherent dangers associated with unproven psycho-therapeutic techniques which seek to recover putative repressed memories of childhood trauma, in particular childhood sexual abuse.

The latter is an abhorrent crime that can have devastating consequences for victims. Yet, while we must not lose sight of this, it is also important to remember that no one benefits from false allegations. Victims of childhood sexual abuse have difficulty forgetting –- not remembering -– what happened. False memory also has serious consequences and can lead to family breakdown and miscarriages of justice.

False memories aren’t limited to cases of alleged childhood abuse. The field of anomalistic psychology attempts to propose and, where possible, empirically test explanations for bizarre experiences based purely upon accepted psychological principles. Based upon my own anomalistic psychology research and that of others, there is little doubt in my mind that sincerely held bizarre memories of past lives and alien abductions are best explained as being false memories. Such memories can sometimes be distressing for those that hold them but rarely cause distress for others.

Unfortunately, this is not true of Satanic abuse claims. For many people, it is all too easy to believe, even in the absence of convincing evidence, that memories of childhood sexual abuse may be repressed and then recovered during psychotherapy. This is partly because it is sadly true that such abuse is a lot more common than was once accepted.

But it is also because Freud’s pseudoscientific influence lingers on. The psychoanalytic notion of repression is that when something extremely traumatic happens an automatic involuntary defence mechanism kicks in that pushes the memory for the trauma into an inaccessible part of the mind. But this is simply not supported by the empirical evidence.

Helping victims

The only definitive way to tell false memories from real ones is by reference to independent external evidence. Subjectively, false memories can be every bit as detailed and compelling as real ones. The best that can be hoped for is that, by appealing to external evidence, one can convince the victim that their memories do not reflect reality thus converting them into what psychologists refer to as “non-believed memories”.

In the case of Carol Felstead, it would have been a very easy matter to have checked her claims with the documented historical record and to have established that they were delusions. Instead, those that treated her uncritically accepted her account and fuelled those delusions.

Allegations of childhood abuse should always be listened to and examined carefully. But we must treat stories based on “recovered memories” with the level of scepticism they deserve.

Original post with links:

https://theconversation.com/the-legacy-of-implanted-satanic-abuse-memories-is-still-causing-damage-today-43755
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Jul 14th, 2015, 09:56am

From JJ's article above:
"The only definitive way to tell false memories from real ones is by reference to independent external evidence. Subjectively, false memories can be every bit as detailed and compelling as real ones. The best that can be hoped for is that, by appealing to external evidence, one can convince the victim that their memories do not reflect reality thus converting them into what psychologists refer to as “non-believed memories”.


I suspect this applies to many or even most so-called 'alien abduction' cases.
We have seen from past research and investigation into these events that some abduction 'researchers' have a vested interest in maintaining their own beliefs and approach at the expense of those who need help.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jul 16th, 2015, 11:13pm

My latest at 'The UFO Trail' considers the dark history of collaborations between the intelligence community and mental health professionals in which objectives included inducing false memories, and how research and development may have overlapped with ufology:

Hypnosis, the Intelligence Community and Ufology
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Jul 27th, 2015, 10:55pm

on Jul 21st, 2015, 2:09pm, jjflash wrote:
As fate would have it, ZETAR, I happen to currently be rather submersed in the work of Carol Rainey and aspects of the Cortile case for my own forthcoming work. Among other sources, I'd very much recommend the following vid. The case is indeed an interesting set of circumstances with a lot of implications, and I'd confidently say it unfortunately looks like the UFO community was once again taken for a ride.







Learn more at Carol Rainey's YouTube channel.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 1st, 2015, 09:51am

In his latest essay for the UFO community, Dr. Tyler Kokjohn considers the implications of why those who support Dr. David Jacobs and suggest there are additional circumstances surrounding the Emma Woods-David Jacobs debacle don't present evidence of those circumstances. Why does the UFO community continue to downplay the significance of the actions of Jacobs and fail to address what is taking place?:

https://jayvay.wordpress.com/2015/07/31/unhelpful-hints-deflection-and-withholding-evidence-in-the-david-jacobs-scandal/
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by carolnistri on Aug 1st, 2015, 1:39pm

What has this got to do with UFOs?
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Aug 4th, 2015, 09:40am

I thought for sure that JJ would have answered Carol's obvious question by now being 3 days out but......if one cares to read the title of the thread: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abduction- the answer is self contained. This thread and JJ's posts are about the analysis of alleged alien abductions (allegedly aliens come out of ufos), the reports, and how these cases have been handled or mishandled by various people and groups.
Pretty obvious indeed as is the connection to ufos.

smiley
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 7th, 2015, 09:55am

Jeremy Vaeni on David Jacobs and Supporters: 'Time for Some Answers'

The UFO Trail

August 7, 2015

Jeremy Vaeni hosts 'The Experience', a popular show at 'Unknown Country'. He also maintains the blog, 'JayVay'. Back in 2010, he and co-host Jeff Ritzmann were producing 'Paratopia', a podcast in which the two extensively covered the scandalous handling of the Emma Woods case by author and investigator of alleged alien abduction, Dr. David Jacobs. Their coverage of the disturbing circumstances led to Vaeni's much read and discussed 'UFO Magazine' article, 'Aliens Versus Predator: The Incredible Visitations at Emma Woods'.

Jacobs and his apologists persist in evading discussion of the relevant issues, while chronically implying there are extenuating circumstances that justify the conduct of Jacobs. Now, some five years later, they continue to fail to disclose details of any such circumstances, causing some to ask why the evidence should not be interpreted as it appears. The weekend of July 24, Jeremy Vaeni extended invitations to David Jacobs, Richard Dolan and Peter Robbins to guest on 'The Experience', account for their positions on the Emma Woods case and explain their related previous statements.

Permission was subsequently sought by 'The UFO Trail' to pose some questions to Jeremy Vaeni about the situation for a blog post. He cooperatively agreed. Following are the questions and his responses.

'The UFO Trail': The reasons you would invite David Jacobs to guest on your show to discuss his actions with Emma Woods and his resulting stance on the issues are self-explanatory. Would you please summarize why you invited Richard Dolan and Peter Robbins to explain and account for their positions?

Jeremy Vaeni: I can concisely answer this by giving you the email I sent all three of them. It was this:

Aloha, Gents:

I recently watched yet another person on an internet forum defend David against the Emma Woods charges by citing a personal confirmation from Peter that he was to be trusted, as if there were some secret facts about the Emma Woods tapes/claims to which we are not privy. And then it occurred to me: it's 2015. Jeff Ritzmann and I brought this to the public in 2010. So where are these facts? What is the defense? It's been five years.

Richard, you too have used this line, or one similar to it, in staving off the question of whether or not a soon-to-be lifetime achievement winner in ufology was on the level when he told a woman under hypnosis that she had multiple personality disorder, so that aggressive hybrids would read her mind about his belief and leave him alone.

Another time, David, we hear you prescribing a chastity belt with nails at the vaginal opening to ward off--or at least anger--hybrid rapists who frequently attacked her. Was that the type of scientific rigor you've talked about practicing? Or is there more to the story that we've all been clueless about, left in the dark for five years?

Will any or all of you gentlemen come on my show and explain this once and for all so we can move on?

Thanks for considering. I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Jeremy Vaeni

Read the rest of the post (with links) at:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2015/08/jeremy-vaeni-on-david-jacobs-and.html
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Aug 7th, 2015, 12:01pm

Thanks for the update JJ.
I don't think anyone will ever get any straight answers from Jacobs about this case since doing so would make him look even worse than he already has over the years when it comes to his 'work' in the ufo abduction area.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 7th, 2015, 8:17pm

Thanks, Doc. You're probably right, and I thought Jeremy covered the bases pretty well, too. There's really just nothing good that can be said about a situation like Jacobs' handling of the Woods case and his peers enabling it. I think it's reasonable to hold them accountable for their failure - after some five years now - to specify why it is the evidence presented by Woods should not be accepted. For MUFON, an org purportedly dedicated to scientific study, to offer Jacobs a lifetime achievement award should arguably be considered an insult to the entire UFO community.

I think another key point Jeremy made was that Emma is not the only such exploited individual, far from it. She just happens to be among the most outspoken. There are lots of them out there.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 11th, 2015, 10:47am

My latest post at 'The UFO Trail' begins like this:


MUFON, Sham Inquiry and the Woods/Jacobs Scandal

The UFO Trail

August 11, 2015

Retired historian, author and investigator of alleged alien abduction Dr. David Jacobs will be presented a lifetime achievement award at an upcoming conference conducted by MUFON PA in Philadelphia. Jacobs is also the keynote speaker for the October event. In a bio on his website, Jacobs purports to be "a strong advocate of strict scientific and ethical research methodology," and MUFON purports via its mission statement to be dedicated to "the scientific study of UFOs for the benefit of humanity."

Well, I'm always up for some good strict scientific info on UFOs, so hot [dang]! This outghta be great, right?

Right?

I emailed MUFON Executive Director Jan Harzan and MUFON PA State Director John Ventre and asked permission to pose a few questions. For the sake of accuracy and context I will share an August 8 email exchange, rather than summarize it, that subsequently occurred with Ventre. I will then present what I interpret to be significant points of interest.

Read the rest at:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2015/08/mufon-sham-inquiry-and-woodsjacobs.html
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by ZETAR on Aug 11th, 2015, 12:34pm

JACK,

TO WIT:

"I emailed MUFON Executive Director Jan Harzan and MUFON PA State Director John Ventre and asked permission to pose a few questions. For the sake of accuracy and context I will share an August 8 email exchange, rather than summarize it, that subsequently occurred with Ventre. I will then present what I interpret to be significant points of interest."

THIS OUGHT TO BE INTERESTING ~ wink ~ DO KEEP US POSTED ON ANY DEVELOPMENTS!
User Image

User Image

SHALOM...Z

Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 11th, 2015, 1:10pm

Thanks for your interest, ZETAR. An email exchange with MUFON PA State Director John Ventre and my related thoughts are in the blog post:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2015/08/mufon-sham-inquiry-and-woodsjacobs.html
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 23rd, 2015, 8:23pm

Looking Back Along 'The UFO Trail'

The UFO Trail

As you read this, it is entirely possible that I am sitting at my laptop, surrounded by coffee cups and protein bar wrappers, writing my way through the homestretch of a forthcoming book. The book is about questionable activities conducted by a variety of (quite human) sources within the UFO community.

That's largely what this blog was about in the first place, and earlier this year I decided to write more extensively on the topic. I can certainly empathize with those who find potential paranormal aspects of the UFO phenomenon interesting, but I reached a point where I was kind of like, "Wow, never mind the aliens and entities, is anybody paying any attention to what those people are doing?!"

User Image

So as I hunt and peck my way to the final chapter, I'd like to share a few of my favorite posts here at 'The UFO Trail'. Perhaps that might help new readers get a good idea of what I write about, as well as provide long time readers a review of how we got here. I appreciate you all.

Read the rest of the post at:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2015/08/looking-back-along-ufo-trail.html
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 25th, 2015, 3:04pm

Food for thought from an interview with Dr. Jacques Vallee conducted approximately 15 years ago:

Vallee: I've also antagonized a lot of people because I think that the way abductions are being handled is wrong. It's not only wrong scientifically, it's wrong morally and ethically. I've been telling people, don't let anyone hypnotize you if you've seen a strange light in the sky. I think a lot of those people prominent in the press and in the National Enquirer and in the talk shows and so on are creating abductees under hypnosis. They are hypnotizing everybody who's ever had a strange experience and telling them they are abductees by suggestion. And they are doing that in good faith. They don't realize what they are doing. But to my way of thinking, that's unethical.

60GCAT: What do you think of John Mack, the Harvard psychologist who believes that alien abductions are a real phenomenon? Of course, he uses hypnosis on his patients to liberate "repressed memories" of those abductions.

Vallee: I respect him for his courage in addressing the issue, but I don't agree with his methods.

I've taken some witnesses who wanted to be hypnotized, taken them to specialists in two cases out of maybe 70 cases of abductions that I've studied. And usually the specialists tell me that hypnosis is not necessarily the best way of helping these people. Nor is it the best way to recover memories. It may help in very specific cases. But I've never hypnotized anybody--I'm not qualified to do it.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Aug 25th, 2015, 3:38pm

^ and once again as I said on your other post JJ....everyone here needs to read that interview and Vallee's ideas in general.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 27th, 2015, 11:18am

Latest updates at 'Emma Woods Files' include contributions from Carol Rainey and Sue Johnson:

http://ufoalienabductee.com/updates-4/


User Image
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Bubbles on Aug 27th, 2015, 10:59pm

I once contacted Dr. Jacobs via email. He never got back to me. So I don't have much good to say about him. However, Kathleen Marden did get back to me and she used my information in her attempts to catalog things that were similar in other people's abductions. It seems she is real big into statistics as far as alien contact or abduction goes.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by LoneGunMan on Aug 28th, 2015, 1:47pm

on Aug 11th, 2015, 1:10pm, jjflash wrote:
Thanks for your interest, ZETAR. An email exchange with MUFON PA State Director John Ventre and my related thoughts are in the blog post:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2015/08/mufon-sham-inquiry-and-woodsjacobs.html


JJ,
I just finished reading this article and I really enjoyed the way you used your questions to try to draw his real motives for Jacobs award.
I agree that MUFON has become nothing more than a pipeline for charlatans to make money off the uninformed!

There is NO scientific method used in any of Jacobs musings and I'm not sure he should be considered for a doctorate in garbage collection. Although he'd be pretty good at it!

Lone
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Aug 28th, 2015, 2:20pm

on Aug 28th, 2015, 1:47pm, LoneGunMan wrote:
JJ,
I just finished reading this article and I really enjoyed the way you used your questions to try to draw his real motives for Jacobs award.
I agree that MUFON has become nothing more than a pipeline for charlatans to make money off the uninformed!

There is NO scientific method used in any of Jacobs musings and I'm not sure he should be considered for a doctorate in garbage collection. Although he'd be pretty good at it!

Lone


Thank you, sir! I sincerely appreciate you sharing that.

Obviously, I agree with you about MUFON, Jacobs and their sham inquiry. No matter what might be said in defense of the paranormal, reported UFO sightings and such, the fact will remain that MUFON and various investigators are misrepresenting their activities as scientific. No way around that, and no excuse for it either, in my opinion.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Sep 17th, 2015, 11:08am

In her latest website update, Emma Woods, a critic and former research subject of David Jacobs, presents some discrepancies contained in his recently released book. She quotes and particularly takes issue with his claim that research subjects were not aware of the testimonies of one another, which, Jacobs asserts, increases the credibility of their testimonies obtained during hypnosis.

Woods offers several specific points of contention, and backs them up with nine audio recordings. From the post:

Quote:
Dr. Jacobs features the cases of fourteen research subjects in Walking Among Us. He implies that these subjects were unaware of each others testimony, and that therefore the patterns in their testimony are significant.

However, contrary to what Dr. Jacobs implies, his methodology ensures that his subjects are, in fact, aware of the testimony of his other subjects. For example:

- Dr. Jacobs tells his subjects directly, including while they are hypnotized, about his other subjects’ testimony.

- Dr. Jacobs holds regular get-togethers with his current and former subjects at his home.

- Dr. Jacobs updates his subjects on new developments.

- Dr. Jacobs hires his subjects to transcribe each others hypnosis sessions.


Woods then goes on to demonstrate her points via audio recordings, including how Jacobs told her during hypnosis about the alleged statements of other research subjects, as well as the purported actions of otherworldly beings that cannot be proven to so much as exist. She concludes:

Quote:
In my considered personal opinion, the audio evidence that I have provided here proves conclusively that Dr. Jacobs’ statements in Walking Among Us implying that his subjects did not know other subjects’ previous testimony, and that therefore the patterns in their testimony is significant, are blatant lies.

In my considered personal opinion, Dr. Jacobs’ methodology, including leading and suggestion while conducting hypnosis, hosting get-togethers with his current and former subjects, updating his subjects on new developments, and arranging for his subjects to transcribe each others hypnosis sessions, purposely ensures that his subjects confabulate false hypnotic memories of a narrative that he wants, without regard to the effects on his subjects.

In my considered personal opinion, Dr. Jacobs’ statements in Walking Among Us are part of a deception intended to promote a narrative that he created through exploitation of his subjects, in order to further an undisclosed agenda.


Listen to the audio clips and read the full post at:

http://ufoalienabductee.com/dr-david-m-jacobs-2/walking-among-us-jacobs-critical-review/david-jacobs-tells-subjects-previous-testimony/
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Sep 26th, 2015, 7:47pm

David Jacobs Wants Scientists To Take His Work Seriously. A Scientist Does Just That.

JayVay

September 26, 2015


The Unrecognized Revolutions

by Guest Blogger,
Tyler Kokjohn, PhD.

A Review of Walking Among Us: The Alien Plan to Control Humanity by David M. Jacobs


This new book by Dr. Jacobs reports his recent findings regarding the alien abduction phenomenon. Extending the themes he developed and published over an almost 30 year career in abduction work, both the material as well as some prominently featured abductee testimony will probably seem familiar to some readers.

Picking up essentially where his last book, The Threat, ended, Dr. Jacobs dives in with a briefly sketched background providing sparse citations to help any readers new to the topic acquire a broader perspective. The new book is not a scientific treatise; his analyses and conclusions are insufficiently detailed, uncorroborated and based on erroneous approaches. The descriptions of methodology are likewise perfunctory, often little more than reassurances to readers regarding his knowledge and superb skills at rooting out the truth behind the alien abduction mystery. Revolving around Dr. Jacobs so tightly, the book leaves an overall impression of him as an isolated, arrogant investigator dismissive of the ideas of others and disinterested in exploring new opportunities.

Read Dr. Kokjohn's full review at:

https://jayvay.wordpress.com/2015/09/26/david-jacobs-wants-scientists-to-take-his-work-seriously-a-scientist-does-just-that/
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Oct 17th, 2015, 6:21pm

More audio evidence from the 'Emma Woods Files' of David Jacobs both leading hypnosis subjects and making them aware of the testimony of one another, directly contradicting his claims otherwise. Moreover, it is he, not the hypnosis subject, who initiates the potentially traumatizing subject matter again and again:

Traumatizing Research Subjects

An excerpt:

In addition to leading me while I was hypnotized, Dr. Jacobs often talked to me just before he put me in the hypnotic state about what to expect to remember. One of many instances of him doing this occurred at the beginning of my fourteenth hypnosis session. Dr. Jacobs told me that hybrids had a wide range of sexual desires that were built into them. He said that they knew that they could do anything they pleased, and that you were going to forget all about it. He said that it was a “total power situation”. Dr. Jacobs told me that hybrids were not socialized properly, that they did not have a sense of morality, and that it was because they could abduct people at will and bend them to their will, so they did not need a sense of morality. He said that there were no repercussions, that they did not live in a world where there were any consequences, and that there was no reason for them to be socialized for our customs and sensitivities.

[...]

During the discussion at the beginning of my fourteenth hypnosis session, Dr. Jacobs told me that another subject had been sexually assaulted by three hybrids at once, and that it was “absolutely pure sexual assault.” He said that the hybrids did not care what they did to the woman because they knew she was going to forget, so they could do anything that they wanted to her and they did.

Read the entire post and listen to the accompanying audio clips at:

http://ufoalienabductee.com/dr-david-m-jacobs-2/walking-among-us-jacobs-critical-review/traumatizing-research-subjects/

So-called recovered memory techniques warrant much more critical and rational evaluation than is currently the case in UFO circles. Individuals accepting such stories as promoted in Jacobs' 'Walking Among Us' and similar works without independent corroboration are simply deluding themselves.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by jjflash on Feb 5th, 2016, 9:28pm

Some of you might find the latest post at 'The UFO Trail' of interest. It's the first of a two-parter authored by Carol Rainey and titled, 'The Singer's Hybrid Daughter'. It's an excerpt from her in-progress work, 'The Abductionist's Wife: A Memoir'. Check it out at:

http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2016/02/the-singers-hybrid-daughter-part-i.html

Jack
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by Lawdzilla on Feb 8th, 2016, 05:03am

Do not really have a thing for abduction cases but will check it out.
Re: Critical Analysis of Research of Alien Abducti
Post by drwu23 on Feb 10th, 2016, 11:10am

on Feb 5th, 2016, 9:28pm, jjflash wrote:
Some of y