April 4th show - Hopkins, Randle & Jacobs

[Capnkumquat]

6. Do you think my dog wonders why I might sit on a couch on a winter Sunday, watch a 60" TV viewing screen and get excited/upset by grown men with helmets and pads throw a leather ball around on a 100 yard field of grass. Don't you think my dog, who himself is entranced by thrown objects wonders: "why doesn't he just take my bone outside and throw it around the yard? What the hell does he need to watch this crap on TV for?" Humans trying to deduce what these entities are doing and why is similarly futile but fun to think about.

I think this is my favorite Ufological futility example to date. Nice.

 

[IndigoEyes]

Great thread. Some random thoughts/rants. I also have no dog in this hunt - or whatever the saying is. I introduce these for the sake of thought experimentation, I don't pretend to have any answers. How can you with such a subject?

I use "alien" and "ship" below for ease of explaination - I know not that we are being visited by either but rather by "things" that at least appear at times like such.

1. Hypnosis cleary seems a mixed bag. Certainly like any information processed from the brain there are some serious issues with taking hypnosis derived info at face-value. Having said that it does seem to offer some value in the right circumstances. I don't know if DJ or BH are offering any value to their "patients". Is it better for a person to think they are being helped if they really didn't need the help in the first place? My answer would be if they felt compelled to engage these guys in the first place, and they later feel they got value out of it, that's the way it is and don't chastise the parties involved. If they feel harmed by the experience, they should make their voices heard so others can avoid the same fate. That doesn't necessarily mean suing the other person in court..

Your assumption is that the people involved are not being hurt AND/OR that the people involved could recognize if they have been hurt. My contention is that hypnosis for regression does hurt people in that it causes false memories to be implanted into the victim, er, I mean patient. Now, that patient may feel "helped" to have released all these horrifying or glorious memories (perhaps the confabulation puts the patient into a juicy victim state that will ellicit lots of sympathy and allow that person to become part of a never ending alien abduction therapy group - at last, this poor individual has a group identity and people who love him! Perhaps the memories proclaim that this particular person is the alien's special favorite, someone who is enlightened and has the spiritual role to enlighten planet Earth. So you see such poor saps running around trying to get 6 billion people to listen to their new "sacred truth" via the aliens). Some abductees claim they have been trained to operate the alien ships and to be "activated" when the call comes to save planet Earth! However, this happened so long ago that many are now using walkers and canes to get around, and are collecting social security. So the aliens are cutting it a bit close.

So, I'd have to say that we'd have to agree whether practices used by abduction researchers are harmful, even if they feel good to some of the patients. A wild analogy: I may be in extreme pain and go to some store front "healer" who gives me morphine pills. I'd feel just great on morphine, and think that this healer was God's gift to humanity. Yet is an addiction to morphine a valid answer to pain? Some may say it is, but others might disagree. I have a personal story like this. In college I had a hard time studying late at night. My stomach could not tolerate coffee, so a helpful friend suggested "speed". He got them off the back of a truck (ha, ha). Well, speed made me feel totally FABULOUS! I could go days without sleep and felt like my mind was working at optimum efficiency. Need I go further?

OK, these examples are medicinal, but they are the only analogies I can come up with on the fly. I don't think a person is always qualified to know whether they are really being helped or not.

2. Standards vs. regulation - Agreed there should be some standard organizations or at least some 3rd party developed code of ethics. However these should be competing programs and completely voluntarily. Government regulation in this area will do nothing but stifle creative thought and ultimately harm those seeking help by limiting expert supply and discouraging freedom of choice. The AMA is a great example of how not to do this - a third party organization in bed with the government. It's a one size fits all approach that I am sure many of us have had frustrations with in personal experience. We would do better to start an ebay-like (though not monopolistic) rating system for practitioners in this field so people can assess the risks and feedback from patients...

If hypnosis is really dangerous and should only be administered by a medically trained person, rather than some artist or history professor or some house wife who took a 4 hour training class at the local Marriot Hotel, then there should be regulations about using it. I again think it comes down to harm. There are many practitioners in the USA who call themselves psychic healers, for examplle. I've gone to a Reiki master. It felt really good, but my ailment continued unabated afterwards. I paid $85 for a lovely afternoon with a beautiful lady who ran her hands along the energy points of my body while pretty New Age music played in the background. Then she said that her angels were directing her to have me pick cards from a tarot deck for her to interpret for me. I did so, and got some inspiring and pep rally type advice. All pretty harmless really except I lost $85 and felt just as lousy as before by the next day. But she did no harm. However, if someone is going to go prospecting in my brain, and chang who I think I am by way of changing my life history, then that's rather serious. Perhaps an analogy is cults. Cults routinely sort of brainwash and indoctrinate their members. Are they illegal? Well, in the USA they are not illegal unless they start stockpiling weapons and teaching their drones that they must prepare for a civil war against the government. Even then, they are probably just watched closely, although you do end up with an occasional WACKO TEXAS situation. There is always a balance between individual liberty and group psychosis and insanity.

3. I don't need a freaking PhD to get stitches. Do you need a license to practice hypnosis? Granted "abductee phenomenon" would seem to be a more serious matter - or is it? Who knows since we know not where the truth lies. Where do you draw the line? How many years of schooling is enough for abductee hypnosis? Will only Harvard trained hypnosis researchers suffice? What academic hypnosis programs currently instruct on precisely this topic? You can definitely go overbaord. These are all reasons to let consenting adults make decisions based on what's available. Again, developing an ebay-like rating system would seem the better option. Are the detractors from BH and DJ saying these guys should goto jail? Stop talking to patients? Are they saying they have not helped anyone? Should I not be allowed to work with these guys if I think they might help? Do you really think most doctors help people who claim abduction experiences? Licensed doctors are not always the answer, though perhaps often for other areas of medicine they are usually the answer....

You seem to have an aversion to what you might consideir "elitist" training, e.g., Harvard or some other medical certification. So the next time you need dental work, why not just ask some guy behind the counter at BURGER KING to help you out, eh? :

There are unscrupulous people out there (well, duh!) who take advantage of people who cannot find help in mainstream medicine. They use bogus technology and fanciful claims to supposedly help people, e.g., people who claim to have natural cures for cancer, but really just bilk the poor person dry of money and then they die anyway. So you advocate NO RULES for any of this? We just assume everyone is an adult with perfect discernment? If you know someone is shooting colored water into peoples' veins or using some electronic gizmo that pretends to send healing rays into the cancer tumor, do you just shrug and say "Let the buyer beware. We are all adults here." IIt seems to me that as a society we have some rules to protect the innocent, gullible and elderly.

4. If you are seeking truth in these matters with help from the government or from the government itself you are by definition "doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different result".....

I don't have a clue what you mean by this. Are you talking about the Disclosure Movement or do you just hate the government in general?

5. We so often fall prey to the "but these aliens don't act like aliens should" line of thinking. I heard Nick Redfern say on the most recent podcast, something like "but why would aliens be interested in nuclear weapons if they didn't have a vested interest in our planet"? Nick was talking about lazy intellectualism and seemed to fall into the trap in the same breath.

I agree we constantly project ourselves onto the so-called alien.

6. Do you think my dog wonders why I might sit on a couch on a winter Sunday, watch a 60" TV viewing screen and get excited/upset by grown men with helmets and pads throw a leather ball around on a 100 yard field of grass. Don't you think my dog, who himself is entranced by thrown objects wonders: "why doesn't he just take my bone outside and throw it around the yard? What the hell does he need to watch this crap on TV for?" Humans trying to deduce what these entities are doing and why is similarly futile but fun to think about. Thought experiement.

Hey, you are doing what you sort of criticized Redfern for - projecting your thoughts into the mind of a dog (instead of an alien). My dog ignores my TV totally. Does that mean he's more intellectual than your dog? When I read a book, does my dog think "Hey, instead of reading about other peoples' experiences, why don't you make some of your own?" I think my golden retriever's thought patterns generally revolved around "Feed Me! Love Me! Groom Me! Take me for a Walk! I have to go poddy outside - open the door! Play with me". He does, however, seem genuinely perplexed when I plop my body into a bathtub. He puts his head on the bathtub rim and just stares at me. I won't put thoughts into his head. I suspect he might be thinking "As long as you are sitting in that strange pool of water, you cannot feed me, love me, groom me, take me for a walk, let me out to go poddy, play with me". I could be wrong. Maybe he is just thinking "You are a moron. No one volunteers to get wet!" Seriously, I get what you mean by the analogy.

7. Is it possible that the visitations we are experiencing are from a society so completely unlike ours that we should not expect their behavior to be in any way logical? There seems to be a grand assumption that the aliens that are visiting us are acting in concert, especially if they are of the same visible appearance. What if instead they have such advanced technology that every "ship" or group of entities seen are completely autonomous, like super individualistic space nomads. If they can really fold time and space wouldn't that impose difficulties in trying to coordinate any kind of large society and or body of knowledge? Like the explorers of the "New World" each ship is exploring the universe on its own with its own intentions. I imagine if technology advanced to the point where you could tap a zero-point, limitless, energy source and transverse the universe in an instant, I would probably go out for an exciting adventure in my Mercedes Saucer and might never come back 'cuz it'd be too damn fun and intersting buzzing the schlep Neanderthals near Alpha Centauri. Also with extreme forms of nano-technology, supergoo, and ability to control minds and memories - is it any wonder we see extreme divergence in many visual appearances of entities and their craft? I mean I suspect these aliens don't drive one car model, nor do they only keep one dress shirt and pair of shoes. The crypoterrestrials podcast also talked about an impoverished race of beings - also seems highly unlikely to me. Their technology, if we understand its ability to travel at great speeds, with no need for conventional energy sources, must create abundance in all ways. Again, thought experiment..

Why do you have to automatically assume that we are dealing with a civilization? I like all your science fictiony ideas - great fun. But what if this is just some sort of impersonal energy that manifests in whatever ways seem to garner attention for itself, like plants developing beautiful blooms to attract bees to act as cross-pollination agents? Let's get way outside the box. Why does this have to be Star Trek type aliens? That is so so human. If we had evolved from dogs, I suppose we'd assume that all aliens liked to knaw on bones and search the universe for the largest trees and fire hydrants! Maybe that last statement is agreeing with you, but my point is that it is a HUGE assumption to make that this involves some vaste civilization somewhere. How do we know that? I was just reading Lynne Kitei's book about the Phoenix lights today (coincidentally while taking a bath as my dog watched!). She saw some amber lights in the sky. Within the first few pages, these amber lights are magically transformed in her mind into an alien advanced civilization that is trying to contact her. Now Lynne seems to be part of the Exopolitics movement.

8. One reason for abductions and cattle mutilations that seems obvious but I don't hear talked about - is if the aliens were attempting to change our environment or genetics through some kind of subtle technology - they would want to continuously take samples from us and our environment to see if they are getting the "desired effect".

What if mutilations are done for some sacred satanic ritual with the added side effect of driving logical human beings crazy? Maybe it's all an art project, like the guy who constructed a mile long temporary fence across the desert made up of orange linen strung from clothes lines. Maybe its a rite of passage. To be a "man" you gotta go to earth and get the lips and genitals from a cow and suck out all the blood, then present it to your mate as a wedding gift! 8)

9. Abduction evidence. Obviously this is lacking. So is evidence of hybrids. But really guys, is the evidence for UFOs themselves that much stronger? It seems in both cases highly circumstancial, breaks current scientific theories and usually flaunts "human logic" to boot. However there just seems too many of these stories that are too similar to be simply dismissed out of hand - even if you ignore BH/DJ. Is Paul Kimball and others saying there is no such phenomenon as 'alien abduction' or just that BH/DJ evidence should be completely dismissed? There are also many many examples of extreme strangeness like the "no batteries" example whilst trying to take a photograph explained earlier. There seems like there might be some kind of "perception-stealth" technology or methods used in these cases in addition to invisibility and ability to manipulate witness actions (like the abductee turning off the video camera). Budd also have a talk which explained some stories where photographs were taken of abductees, shorly after an incident and they showed up invisible on the images - which he displayed. Stretches belief to be sure.

So you are basing your belief in all the abduction stories on what the abduction researchers tell you? Don't you see the logical hole there? It is like saying that it is obvious that all paranormal encounters are demonic. Why? Because all the fundamentalist ministers say so (and that's the only literature you read about the paranormal). Yes, there is a real phenomena here, and I suspect Paul Kimball agrees very much, or why waste his time? But just picking out some inane simple answer (like Exopolitics does) does not appeal to all of us. Budd says he has photos where the people were invisible, or whisked up into a UFO as the picture was taken. Budd says so. Gee, that's proof enough for me. NOT!

10. We need to find some willing abductees who would be OK with having a small team monitor them, without abductee knowledge. In other words, have them sign a waiver to be spied on, and then setup cameras in the house where they don't know they exist, set them up across the street, use other means of evidence collection that they don't even know about, like Dave Jacob's radiation detection sewn into clothing and other ideas.

I'm just being picky here, but how do you get willing abductees to agree to be monitored if they are not supposed to know they are being monitored? I'm supposed to sign a waiver saying others can watch me every minute of the day, and somehow forget all about it? So does that mean that WE would have to abduct the abductees, put secret tracking devices (implants) into them, and then wipe out their memories? What a twisted web we weave....I don't think any of this would work anyway, since the diabolical aliens from Zeti Reticulae are just too crafty for us.

11. DJ and BH are first and foremost claiming to try to help, what they consider traumatized people, cope with a scary situation first and foremost, so I can understand where evidence collection is a secondary priority. Besides that would you want a person treating you for some condition you have to simultaneously be questioning you for veracity of your claims? We can knock these guys for not having enough experience to treat using hypnosis but then don't also knock them for not collecting evidence from those same patients, unless that's what the patients want to do. Having said that these guys should be partnered with to try and find willing abductees who want to participate in collecting evidence as stated in #10.

That's funny. I thought their first and foremost claim was to get material for their next book. So you don't think it is possible for a professional (OK, Budd and Jacobs are NOT professionals so perhaps you are right) to help someone and at the same time keep meticulous logs, like a doctor? Where are the clothes that have supposedly been stained with strange amber liquid? Budd and or other abduction researchers have claimed to have such materials. Where are the doctor's sworn testimony that a woman was pregnant and that the baby has been mysterious evaporated out of the womb? That should be easy to get if true. If a hybrid rapes a poor human woman, why can't she rush to the ER and have the semen extracted and preserved for the abduction researcher to send to a lab? Won't it have strange little alien wiggly things inside it, e.g., sperm with big black almond eyes that abduct the egg instead of swimming over to it?

Seriously, hope you don't mind me having some fun with your comments. They were excellent and I appreciate them.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

So you wear it as a badge of honor then? I can, if you wish, remove it for you (I think).

 

[IndigoEyes]

So you wear it as a badge of honor then? I can, if you wish, remove it for you (I think).

Gene, I removed my comments because I feared they would spark ill feelings. I'd like to have it removed if possible because those were "perilous times" and people were very emotional. I gave as I got. Things have become much more civilized and peaceful now. I stand by the comments I made back then in terms of what it takes to professionally moderate a forum like the Paracast and how such a person has to exercise fairness and decorum. Things were really getting out of hand, but this seems to have totally stopped while I was gone. Now the worst that happens is an occasional reference to "soft ufo porn". :redface:

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Some of those alien women reported by the early UFO contactees surely fit into the category of "soft UFO porn." Your forum record is now expunged.

 

[IndigoEyes]

Some of those alien women reported by the early UFO contactees surely fit into the category of "soft UFO porn." Your forum record is now expunged.

Thank you. Now I can start a new life, since I've paid my debt to society.

Sometimes it really is the planet Venus:

Earlier this week around 10 p.m. I was in my backyard (dog needed to go out for the 100th time). I saw this incredibly bright light in the southwest sky. It seemed to have beams of light coming from it in multiple colors. I ran and got my binoculars, and saw a huge white light with waves of red and blue light flowing across it in waves. I was excited.

Then I got to thinking "Venus is usually in that position. If it is a UFO I doubt it will be there tomorrow night at the same time."

So I went out the next night and sure enough - it was there. This time the light was obviously a star. The atmospheric conditions (OK, the smog!!!) was not at the perfect intensity to create the light show. Instead, it was just a big old bright light.

I tried this the following nights and Venus was still there. Consequently, I now get what some of the debunkers meant when they used to tell people in the 60's and 70's that they just saw the planet Venus. Under the right conditions, Venus can razzle and dazzle you.

 

[paraschtick]

Just a quickie. I just want to go back to the "sexual" idea for a moment. If one listens to the "catheter" incident mentioned in one of the hypnosis audio files that Emma has posted (yeah I know some people believe that they've been edited ... but just for now believe that is not so) ... you see how very sexual an hypnosis session with Dr Jacobs might be. He even starts talking rather gynecologically ... and to tell you the truth there seems to me to be a little too much glee in his voice ...

I just thought this had to be mentioned for the record since people have stated the overt sexual content in The Threat.

 

[brownie]

As far as abduction theory being "soft-porn", I have met two people in my life who claim to be abductees. I have talked to their families. Their stories were largely consistent with what Dr. Jacobs writes about. Now, this has raised my interest in the topic, so I have read a number of books on this particular topic, as well as listened to a number of interviews on C2C and various podcasts. What does this say about my character? I frankly would not characterize abduction literature as "soft-porn" -- far from it.
Tom

Hello Tom,

I never stated "abduction theory" (as you choose to label the subject) is "soft-porn". I quite specifically referred to David Jacobs obsession (re. his book The Threat) with aggressive, sex-addicted hybrids (that also somehow have the time, outside of their sexual escapades, to threaten him in IM messages ) .

Other researchers have written books on the abduction phenomena and have noted the reproductive/familial component. However they don't have an ongoing obsessive theme of aggressive-hybrids having promiscuous sexual daliances with humans (mostly female humans). Jacobs hybrids put bonobos to shame, for goodness sake!

---------- Post added at 01:44 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:00 AM ----------

---------- Post added at 01:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:44 AM ----------

[

What?!?! No "Doctor" Richard Boylan? He seems to fit in with these two hucksters, so I am surprised they haven't linked up, joined arms in a three musketeers sort of "all for one and each for himself" sort of allegiance.

I don't think they'd mix well. Hot-Tub Richie teaches (demands in his forum) that the word "alien" is racist. No one is allowed to use it. If I remember correctly, the proper term is "star people".

Jacques Vallee laid out what he thought should be the proper way to investigate abdutions and ufo's in general in his excellent trilogy back in the 1990's. As usual, it fell on deaf ears. I recently reread the trilogy and they are extremely topical to 2010 ufology. He also pointedly lambasts abduction research based on hypnosis. If George Noory and Tim Binnell (sp?) can get the one-and-only Jacques Vallee for an interview, perhaps the Paracast could do so? Seriously. Can you look into that? Just about everyone in ufology at least gives lip service to having very high esteem for the man, even if ufology pretty much ignores what he wrote.

I'd add following MUFON case investigation protocol to a tee (not that MUFON is perfect, far from it, but it's protocols are probably the best so far). For example - if Hopkins had simply done this with the Linda Napolitano case (Witnessed) he wouldn't have been busted by George Hansen and colleagues (who *did* follow the protocols and exposed the case as a likely hoax of the sci-fi book Night Eyes).

Also, the bad abductionologists have to be rooted out of the field (that would mean Jacobs and Hopkins as far as I'm concerned). Otherwise, it's like asking what are the best surgery procedures for cardiac bypass. Well, if you have a bad surgeon to begin with, it doesn't matter what the best surgical procedures would be.

 

[ArchieBedford]

I'd add following MUFON case investigation protocol to a tee (not that MUFON is perfect, far from it, but it's protocols are probably the best so far). For example - if Hopkins had simply done this with the Linda Napolitano case (Witnessed) he wouldn't have been busted by George Hansen and colleagues (who *did* follow the protocols and exposed the case as a likely hoax of the sci-fi book Night Eyes).

Have you read "Nighteyes"? I have a copy on order but it hasn't been delivered yet.

People I know who have read "Nighteyes" say that the content of the plot is absolutely nothing like the Napolitano case and there are virtually no resemblances whatsoever except an alien abduction back-story, that Hansen and co were a bunch of fraudsters who seem to have concocted a pack of lies and half-truths in order to discredit Linda, and that they assumed 99% of people would never bother to read the book so they could be safely just fed a line. As we know, once mud is thrown out on the web, some tends to stick particularly with the lazy and ignorant who do little personal research and are inclined to believe whatever reinforces any prejudice or incredulities they may hold dear.

If you have read "Nighteyes" I'd appreciate your comments about these claims, though I'll find out for myself by reading it soon.


On the theme of MUFON investigating abduction cases, different MUFON groups have investigated many over the years. Some of the more well-known ones would be Betty Andreasson, the Allagash case and the Pascagoula case, the first two of which were the subject of excellent summary reports made into books by Ray Fowler and subsequently published (I expect you have read them and know these cases).

 

[Tom From Hong Kong]

Regarding Dr. Jacobs' books, particularly The Threat, I have to say that I did not find it overly sexual in tone, nor did I get the impression that Dr. Jacobs was 'obsessed' with sex. The way it has been described here in this thread you would think you were reading The Penthouse Forum.

 

[ArchieBedford]

DJ and BH are first and foremost claiming to try to help, what they consider traumatized people, cope with a scary situation first and foremost, so I can understand where evidence collection is a secondary priority. Besides that would you want a person treating you for some condition you have to simultaneously be questioning you for veracity of your claims? We can knock these guys for not having enough experience to treat using hypnosis but then don't also knock them for not collecting evidence from those same patients, unless that's what the patients want to do. Having said that these guys should be partnered with to try and find willing abductees who want to participate in collecting evidence as stated in #10.

Thanks for your excellent, intelligent and thoughtful post. You make some good and interesting points.

Yes, "should be partnered" - by whom? Most of the people who have been motivated to get invloved in this important field have spent years asking, petitioning, urging other professionals to get involved with them - with little success. Almost no-one wants to spend time doing primary case investigation; no-one can be bothered. As a consequence, the 10 or 20 or so researchers in the public eye are left to do the work. Thousands of people all over the world who have these experiences have nowhere else to turn (fat lot of good it does going to a "medical professional" - you're going to get absolutely nowhere by doing that) and that's why they write to these guys. No-one else is looking into it, or understands the phenomenon at all in any detail. It's that simple. Earlier in the thread I suggested to Paul Kimball that, rather than carping from the sidelines, he get involved in the work and the investigation, meet some suspect abductees, work out protocols to overcome the difficulties of getting film of these events. Of course, he can't be bothered to do that, which is a typical attitude and in no way particularly directed at him - just a live example. It's much more satisfying to sit on the sidelines and criticise others who are actually giving their time, free, to trying to help these people.

Any professional who offers to "partner" an abduction researcher, there ain't going to be any resistance. On the contrary. Find some, please. Of course they won't be paid. No-one is. There's no money in it.

On your point 10, contact me if you want some volunteers. No shortage. Problem is not that "we need to find some willing abductees..." problem is, as outlined above, finding anyone competent and willing to do the monitoring.

BTW is "abexman" something to do with the Ab-Ex art movement?

---------- Post added at 05:09 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:00 AM ----------

Also, the bad abductionologists have to be rooted out of the field (that would mean Jacobs and Hopkins as far as I'm concerned).

"Rooted out" by whom? You?

Where can we access your original research into this phenomenon please - since you're obviously so "good" and have so much to teach us?

 

[IndigoEyes]

On the theme of MUFON investigating abduction cases, different MUFON groups have investigated many over the years. Some of the more well-known ones would be Betty Andreasson, the Allagash case and the Pascagoula case, the first two of which were the subject of excellent summary reports made into books by Ray Fowler and subsequently published (I expect you have read them and know these cases).

Archie, Archie, Archie,

Ray Fowler admits he is a fundamentalist Christian. How amazing then that his aliens via Betty Andreasson confess to belief in Christ and seem to mirror all of Betty's born-again American style Christian beliefs. Raymond also admitted in a recent interview t(while hawking his auto-biography) hat he feels he has been abducted by aliens who supported his fundamentalist American style Christian belief system. And the beat goes on....

Tell me, Archie, since the aliens always seem to mirror the belief system of the abduction researcher and his clients, what are your aliens like? Do they vote Labour or Conservative Party?

As for the Allagash case, isn't it interesting that in Raymond's book about this case, the men involved do not even manage to have the same recollection of what the aliens looked like? Fer heaven's sake (no pun intended), but you'd think they'd at least get that straight. Then it turns out that none of the men had the same "experiments". One man had sperm extraction via some monstrous machine, another with a simple tube (something like that). The bottomline is that these guys don't even recall the same experience under hypnosis. Did something happen to them? Sure. But we'll never know what really happened, thanks to Ray mucking about in their minds with a hypnotist.

But, keep the faith baby, because when all is said and done, the current state of alien abduction "research" is more a religion than a science.

As for Jacob's sexuality, I would never deem to know what lurks in his mind on this subject. That is no ones business.

However, I found THE THREAT to also be pretty kinky when I read it years ago. It seems that even alien parents have trouble when their kids become teenagers....human looking hybrids hanging out at the mall, zapping people with ray (Fowler?) guns, raping innocent abductee women....it all sounds like a bad movie directed by Edward Woods (PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE). No, I tell a lie. It sounds exactly like a 50's movie called TEENAGERS FROM OUTER SPACE. Yes, there is such a movie. I collect old 50's movie posters, and this one has the words "Teenage hoodlums from another world on a horrendous rampage!"

So now we know where Jacobs got his information. Funny how the subliminal mind expresses such memories. I know, I know. You will assure me that Jacobs has never been to a movie his entire life and never watches TV. Uh huh. AM I serious that Jacobs got his paranoid delusions from that movie? Of course not. But I do think there is a tremendous amount of cultural contamination that we never notice. FATE and other pulp magazines have featured alien abduction and invasion scenarios since at least the 1930's. The 1950's onward had a torrent of badly made alien abduction style/invasion style movies. Then along came the Twilight Zone and Outer Limits on TV, etc. I'd be surprised if abductees didn't have a somewhat generic story to tell, what with all the decades of cultural indoctrination.

To end this on a hopefully comical but cynical note:

I think Jacobs should put out some sexy abduction calendars. Suggestions:
1. Hot Hybrid Men (Shirtless, of course - maybe wearing sleek wraparound sunglasses)
2. Abductee Playmate of the Month
3. Male Hybrids and the Women who Love Them

I can hardly wait for the coffee mugs, key chains, and children's lunch box collection. "Be the first on your block to collect all 12 Hybrid Rapist bubble gum cards!" (Reference: do a google search on Mars Attacks bubble gum cards from the 1960's in the USA).

The older I get (and I've studied this for over 40 years) the more absurd it all seems. I will rejoice the day Hopkins and Jacobs finally retire from ufology. They've really helped turn it into a total mess and have pretty much handed that mess off to the Exopolitics movement, which will turn that mess into something so incredibly laughable that ufology itself may not survive.

Have a good Sunday.

 

[ArchieBedford]

The older I get (and I've studied this for over 40 years) the more absurd it all seems.

Where please can we read and study the results of all your personal investigations and work on this phenomenon?

Please supply us with a list of your published work and I for one will read all of it, then after studying your research methodology and case studies, I'll get back to you.

As you probably know, 99% of people with these experiences have no interest in UFOlogy, read no books on the subject and don't - at least initially - know anything about the field. They just want to make sense of what is happening to them. It sounds like you might be able to enlighten or at least assist them. Of course if they read your books (it sounds like you have a long and impressive publishing history) then if your research conclusions resonate with them, you'll be receiving letters from thousands of people all over the world - like other researchers - won't you?

---------- Post added at 07:50 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:37 AM ----------

As for the Allagash case, isn't it interesting that in Raymond's book about this case, the men involved do not even manage to have the same recollection of what the aliens looked like? Fer heaven's sake (no pun intended), but you'd think they'd at least get that straight.

As I write this, I am looking at and comparing the drawings made by the four Allagash abductees who as you probably know were all professional or semi-professional artists.

The beings in these four sets of drawings look to me to be close enough to be considered identical.

None of the Allagash Four were particularly Christian, certainly not fundamentalist. If you have to describe people by type, they could best be described as East-coast, academic, university-educated liberals. Betty Andreasson was a devoted Christian and yes, worked hard to fit her abduction experiences into her pre-existing belief system. People do this, understandably.

You believe what you want to believe. You obviously have your religion.

 

[Paul Kimball]

Where can we access your original research into this phenomenon please - since you're obviously so "good" and have so much to teach us?

Everytime someone criticizes someone else's research, you can bet biscuits to navy beans that the old "well, show us your research" defence will get trotted out. It's the last refuge of someone who doesn't have anything constructive to say, and can offer no sound rejoinder to the original criticisms.

The quality of the research is either there or it isn't, and should be manifest to anyone looking at it. Whether the people critizicing it have done any research of their own is absolutely irrelevant.

 

[Cabal]

Seriously, hope you don't mind me having some fun with your comments. They were excellent and I appreciate them.

No worries IndigoEyes I have thick skin and had fun writing this - obviously I wrote too fast and "from the hip" as there were some inconsistencies and lots of typos.

On letting adults consent - sorry if this is straying off topic - I think people to readily jump to government regulation as a "solution". I am not assuming that "people involved are not being hurt AND/OR that the people involved could recognize if they have been hurt" - you are absolutely correct. However this is a dangerous principle to live by - a nanny state attitude. Who is the ultimate arbiter to recognize when YOU are being hurt? A person owns their own body and they must make decisions about that body. No one else can do that for them. Otherwise I can start making all kinds of decisions about your body and your health in the claim that "you, IndigoEyes" don't know what's good for you. If collectively we decide that hypnosis does not help, fine, we can discourage others from using it. That's good, where I object is using government coercion to prevent others from using it should they feel it necessary to do so.

If I disagree with you that hypnosis is bad for me, do I have a right to comply with how I think? If I have a right to comply with how I think would you use government to forcibly deny me the right to do so? It's a rather simple principle, that like life, does not mean that we all live in a perfectly safe world, but it's the best kind of world to allow us to live as free peoples IMO.

To explore this simple but radical philosophy further:

have an aversion to what you might consideir "elitist" training, e.g., Harvard or some other medical certification. So the next time you need dental work, why not just ask some guy behind the counter at BURGER KING to help you out, eh

I do not have an aversion to elitist training per se - my issue is with using coercive government regulation to say, one-size-fits-all, who is qualified to provide a solution for everyone else. First, not all Harvard trained guys are necessarily better anyway just because they went to Harvard and have a government license - but let's assume they are. Maybe a Harvard medical cert is not enough for me and I want him also to have 30 yrs experience, have been a dentist in Vietnam and be able to floss my teeth with his eyes closed - my choice. However perhaps if I am really poor I want to goto the BURGER KING dentist because that is all I can afford. Or perhaps my only dental need is dental flossing - the guy at BURGER KING can surely do that if he has a tiny bit experience. Avoid government from outlawing the BURGER KING guy from providing his dental floss treatment and you help those who cannot afford the Harvard guy and make the Harvard guy have to compete with lower prices. Simple market economics.

Yes, you lost $85 on Reiki. A hard lesson learned no doubt - but a lesson for you alone. I have an aunt with a degenerative muscular disease who uses Reiki and swears by it. I don't pretend to know why she thinks its good and you say it didn't work. Would you outlaw Reiki and deprive my aunt of what she feels helps her? These are decisions that can only be made by the individual regarding their own health - which in some cases may lead to problems. This is a preferred scenario to having one overall Bureau of Medicine & Silly Walks who decides what is good treatment and what is bad treatment.

Re: governments - yes I have a distaste for the truth in government statements whether it be "disclosure", economics, WMD, terrorists, etc.

Re: Logic. Yes it is true - pretend everything I said about dogs, etc. are thought experiments. I guess I'm just asking to push the boundaries on the intellectual discourse through analogy. We need to stop thinking so linearly and consider more what might be if X & Y were true about the state of technology or our living conditions - as it might be for these other intelligence(s). Maybe we'd start to get some better insight that way.

Why do you have to automatically assume that we are dealing with a civilization?

You are right, I should have prefaced, "if this phenomenon is a civilization of some kind". It might be some weird energy thing like you suggest.

So you are basing your belief in all the abduction stories on what the abduction researchers tell you?

I take what BH and DJ are telling me as data - that is all. Perhaps it is crap data. I am not sure what to think of the abduction stuff - again there are enough different people reporting similarities that it certainly is intriguing but at the end of the day I don't know. About the surest I can be is of my own experiences and even that invites problems as it does for Neo in the Matrix.

So does that mean that WE would have to abduct the abductees, put secret tracking devices (implants) into them, and then wipe out their memories

Unfortunately, I think this might be true. We need to find people to consent to having themselves tracked and watched for purposes of tryinhttps://www.theparacast.com/forum/images/icons/icon6.pngg to collect evidence. Shouldn't be too hard - haven't you seen these internet celebs who put webcams all over their house and then charge you for it? I mean I realize it's all a bit strange but of all the claimed-abductees there's gotta be someone willing to work with a serious set of researchers.

Yes, "should be partnered" - by whom?

Well the research community - hopefully some group like MUFON or Bigelow's paranormal research teams - admittedly these groups could be better funded but they are the best we've got. I was excited by some of the things James Carrion was undertaking along exactly these lines, including quick-deploy research teams funded by Bigelow's company but alas, Carrion has taken a lesser role and the new leadership I fear is too much like the old leadership. There was even a TV show that followed Carrion on some investigations and they did some pretty good work debunking some crap cases. I think it showed promise. I'd love to get more involved but alas time commitments are too much at this point and I do fear what this material would do to my professional career despite Paul Kimball's assertions to the contrary. Dave Biedny anyone?

BH also has his intruders foundation - could that be a source of research work? I am sure all of these groups would have funding challenges but I think most important to getting any research done of value is first having some organizational systems and planning in place to undertake the effort. Abexman has nothing to do with art 8).

 

[IndigoEyes]

Everytime someone criticizes someone else's research, you can bet biscuits to navy beans that the old "well, show us your research" defence will get trotted out. It's the last refuge of someone who doesn't have anything constructive to say, and can offer no sound rejoinder to the original criticisms.

The quality of the research is either there or it isn't, and should be manifest to anyone looking at it. Whether the people critizicing it have done any research of their own is absolutely irrelevant.

Paul, another classic "straw man" arguement is to respond to any criticism by saying "Could you do any better?" This is usually meant to shut a person up, but means nothing.

As a trivial example, I once criticized George Noory's spontaneous interviewing skills. He seems to just read questions from a list, and doesn't seem to even listen to the guest's answers half the time. Well, when I stated this on a Coast to Coast forum, I got the standard straw man, "Could you do any better?"

The answer to that question is NO, I COULD NOT DO ANY BETTER. But that is irrelevant. I am not the guy who has devoted his entire working life to a broadcasting career. I am not the guy who is being paid a substantial amount (I assume) to do this job every night. I would expect THAT GUY to do better!

I also cannot perform brain surgery, do professional plumbing or electrical work. I cannot work on my own car (it would invalidate the warranty if I tried). Does this mean I cannot criticize those who do shoddy surgery, awful plumbing work, terrible electrical work, or dangerous car work?

We know good work when we see it. We know bad work when we see it. The matter of whether we each personally can do better is ridiculous. By this logic, if a doctor removes my gall bladder instead of my appendix, I shouldn't complain because I couldn't do any better!

Of course, as you noted, the "straw man" response of "show me your research results" is a belittling technique that also assumes that the average person is too stupid to reach valid conclusions after 40 years of investigation on a topic. Such a person has no validity UNLESS they've managed to get an article published in UFO MAGAZINE or had a book published on the subject. (Note: I've also had a successful marriage for 35 years and raised a wonderful daughter. But I've never written a book about it nor had anyone interview me for a magazine nor submitted my marriage to peer review in a scientific journal).

Vanna White, whose contribution to the human race was turning around the blocks on a US TV game show for years while wearing a plastic smile, had a best selling book in the USA. Having a book published is hardly my idea of a certification of validity in this culture.

I think we can all recognize a "straw man" deflection when we see one.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

As a trivial example, I once criticized George Noory's spontaneous interviewing skills. He seems to just read questions from a list, and doesn't seem to even listen to the guest's answers half the time. Well, when I stated this on a Coast to Coast forum, I got the standard straw man, "Could you do any better?"

The answer to that question is NO, I COULD NOT DO ANY BETTER. But that is irrelevant. I am not the guy who has devoted his entire working life to a broadcasting career. I am not the guy who is being paid a substantial amount (I assume) to do this job every night. I would expect THAT GUY to do better!

I think lots of people can do better, actually.

 

[IndigoEyes]

No worries IndigoEyes I have thick skin and had fun writing this - obviously I wrote too fast and "from the hip" as there were some inconsistencies and lots of typos.

On letting adults consent - sorry if this is straying off topic - I think people to readily jump to government regulation as a "solution". I am not assuming that "people involved are not being hurt AND/OR that the people involved could recognize if they have been hurt" - you are absolutely correct. However this is a dangerous principle to live by - a nanny state attitude. Who is the ultimate arbiter to recognize when YOU are being hurt? A person owns their own body and they must make decisions about that body. No one else can do that for them. Otherwise I can start making all kinds of decisions about your body and your health in the claim that "you, IndigoEyes" don't know what's good for you. If collectively we decide that hypnosis does not help, fine, we can discourage others from using it. That's good, where I object is using government coercion to prevent others from using it should they feel it necessary to do so.

If I disagree with you that hypnosis is bad for me, do I have a right to comply with how I think? If I have a right to comply with how I think would you use government to forcibly deny me the right to do so? It's a rather simple principle, that like life, does not mean that we all live in a perfectly safe world, but it's the best kind of world to allow us to live as free peoples IMO.

To explore this simple but radical philosophy further:

I do not have an aversion to elitist training per se - my issue is with using coercive government regulation to say, one-size-fits-all, who is qualified to provide a solution for everyone else. First, not all Harvard trained guys are necessarily better anyway just because they went to Harvard and have a government license - but let's assume they are. Maybe a Harvard medical cert is not enough for me and I want him also to have 30 yrs experience, have been a dentist in Vietnam and be able to floss my teeth with his eyes closed - my choice. However perhaps if I am really poor I want to goto the BURGER KING dentist because that is all I can afford. Or perhaps my only dental need is dental flossing - the guy at BURGER KING can surely do that if he has a tiny bit experience. Avoid government from outlawing the BURGER KING guy from providing his dental floss treatment and you help those who cannot afford the Harvard guy and make the Harvard guy have to compete with lower prices. Simple market economics.

Yes, you lost $85 on Reiki. A hard lesson learned no doubt - but a lesson for you alone. I have an aunt with a degenerative muscular disease who uses Reiki and swears by it. I don't pretend to know why she thinks its good and you say it didn't work. Would you outlaw Reiki and deprive my aunt of what she feels helps her? These are decisions that can only be made by the individual regarding their own health - which in some cases may lead to problems. This is a preferred scenario to having one overall Bureau of Medicine & Silly Walks who decides what is good treatment and what is bad treatment.

Re: governments - yes I have a distaste for the truth in government statements whether it be "disclosure", economics, WMD, terrorists, etc.

Re: Logic. Yes it is true - pretend everything I said about dogs, etc. are thought experiments. I guess I'm just asking to push the boundaries on the intellectual discourse through analogy. We need to stop thinking so linearly and consider more what might be if X & Y were true about the state of technology or our living conditions - as it might be for these other intelligence(s). Maybe we'd start to get some better insight that way.


You are right, I should have prefaced, "if this phenomenon is a civilization of some kind". It might be some weird energy thing like you suggest.

I take what BH and DJ are telling me as data - that is all. Perhaps it is crap data. I am not sure what to think of the abduction stuff - again there are enough different people reporting similarities that it certainly is intriguing but at the end of the day I don't know. About the surest I can be is of my own experiences and even that invites problems as it does for Neo in the Matrix.


Unfortunately, I think this might be true. We need to find people to consent to having themselves tracked and watched for purposes of tryinhttps://www.theparacast.com/forum/images/icons/icon6.pngg to collect evidence. Shouldn't be too hard - haven't you seen these internet celebs who put webcams all over their house and then charge you for it? I mean I realize it's all a bit strange but of all the claimed-abductees there's gotta be someone willing to work with a serious set of researchers.


Well the research community - hopefully some group like MUFON or Bigelow's paranormal research teams - admittedly these groups could be better funded but they are the best we've got. I was excited by some of the things James Carrion was undertaking along exactly these lines, including quick-deploy research teams funded by Bigelow's company but alas, Carrion has taken a lesser role and the new leadership I fear is too much like the old leadership. There was even a TV show that followed Carrion on some investigations and they did some pretty good work debunking some crap cases. I think it showed promise. I'd love to get more involved but alas time commitments are too much at this point and I do fear what this material would do to my professional career despite Paul Kimball's assertions to the contrary. Dave Biedny anyone?

BH also has his intruders foundation - could that be a source of research work? I am sure all of these groups would have funding challenges but I think most important to getting any research done of value is first having some organizational systems and planning in place to undertake the effort. Abexman has nothing to do with art 8).

Abexman, You make some very valid points. I do not want the government to regulate Reiki masters or alternative medicine. However, if it is determined that some practice does harm people, and this can be proven medically and scientifically, then I would accept government intervention. Yes, standards for what constitutes harm would have to be established, but these would have to something easy to quantify. For example, giving morphine to children just to keep them docile would seem like an obvious crime to me, wouldn't you agree? Shouldn't the government have a right to intervene and stop parents or unethical doctors from doing such a horrible thing?

I have a gay brother. He has suffered all his life due to the government inflicting the moral views of a minority or narrow minded religious people upon him and other gay people. They still cannot serve openly in the military, even though this is common in most western countries. (I do not want to open a can of worms about gay rights, but this is a near-to-home example for me). I think it is in the best interests of a society for a government to enforce minimal standards of equality for ALL citizens. That is not the same a political correctness. So this is a case that may confirm your worst fears - a government that acts to harm its citizens based on prejudice. But this same government COULD enforce equality, as it has tried to do for minority races and religions (although the Christian Right want to turn the USA into a theocracy - I hope I never live to see that - we had enough witch burnings in the past).

I have a libertarian friend who thinks the government should butt out of everything. I asked him "What if you were a minority race and wanted a job, but no one would hire you?" His brilliant response was "Well, then I guess you'd have to move to a different town or country".

I think agents like Fox News and their mouthpieces are turning tolerance and compassion into "socialism" and telling everyone it is great to be selfish and self-centered. I grew up literally seeing the police dogs attacking people who marched for civil rights. One of the original 9 Black students who integrated Little Rock highschool (which federal troops needed to keep back the hate filled mobs gathered there) lives near my daughter in Marin, California. Her story is incredible. Thank GOD for the federal government ending long term institutionalized hate and segregation in this country.

My point? There are times when an overall government intervention is required for the betterment of society. Would you prefer to leave it all up to private corporations? Yeah, they sure care about YOU and your family!

Anyway, I respect your point-of-view, but think each situation has to be evaluated individually. When someone uses the term "nanny state" I just roll my eyes, because it sounds like some slogan from Fox News. (Actually, that was a favorite term for the Conservative Party in Britain when they fought against any social welfare program like universal health care). So any time the government acts on behalf of society as a whole, it is a "nanny" state? I just don't buy that. Slogans really set off alarm bells in my head, because I think they can be excuses for not thinking about a subject deeply.

Again, I appreciate your thoughts. They are very well formed, even if you have not been published or submitted them to peer review in a scientific journal (just a joke - referring to Archie's comments and Paul's response).

---------- Post added at 06:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:59 PM ----------

I think lots of people can do better, actually.

Well, I couldn't because I'm old and senile!

Here's a short list of people who could do better:
1. Gene Steinberg
2. Paul Kimball
3. Chris O'Brien
4. George Knapp
5. Glenn Beck (just kidding....I can hear him now "Those grey aliens are just midget socialist Marxist Nazi infiltrators who want to indoctrinate your embryo's to accept universal health care!"

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Abexman, You make some very valid points. I do not want the government to regulate Reiki masters or alternative medicine. However, if it is determined that some practice does harm people, and this can be proven medically and scientifically, then I would accept government intervention. Yes, standards for what constitutes harm would have to be established, but these would have to something easy to quantify. For example, giving morphine to children just to keep them docile would seem like an obvious crime to me, wouldn't you agree? Shouldn't the government have a right to intervene and stop parents or unethical doctors from doing such a horrible thing?

I have a gay brother. He has suffered all his life due to the government inflicting the moral views of a minority or narrow minded religious people upon him and other gay people. They still cannot serve openly in the military, even though this is common in most western countries. (I do not want to open a can of worms about gay rights, but this is a near-to-home example for me). I think it is in the best interests of a society for a government to enforce minimal standards of equality for ALL citizens. That is not the same a political correctness. So this is a case that may confirm your worst fears - a government that acts to harm its citizens based on prejudice. But this same government COULD enforce equality, as it has tried to do for minority races and religions (although the Christian Right want to turn the USA into a theocracy - I hope I never live to see that - we had enough witch burnings in the past).

I have a libertarian friend who thinks the government should butt out of everything. I asked him "What if you were a minority race and wanted a job, but no one would hire you?" His brilliant response was "Well, then I guess you'd have to move to a different town or country".

I think agents like Fox News and their mouthpieces are turning tolerance and compassion into "socialism" and telling everyone it is great to be selfish and self-centered. I grew up literally seeing the police dogs attacking people who marched for civil rights. One of the original 9 Black students who integrated Little Rock highschool (which federal troops needed to keep back the hate filled mobs gathered there) lives near my daughter in Marin, California. Her story is incredible. Thank GOD for the federal government ending long term institutionalized hate and segregation in this country.

My point? There are times when an overall government intervention is required for the betterment of society. Would you prefer to leave it all up to private corporations? Yeah, they sure care about YOU and your family!

Anyway, I respect your point-of-view, but think each situation has to be evaluated individually. When someone uses the term "nanny state" I just roll my eyes, because it sounds like some slogan from Fox News. (Actually, that was a favorite term for the Conservative Party in Britain when they fought against any social welfare program like universal health care). So any time the government acts on behalf of society as a whole, it is a "nanny" state? I just don't buy that. Slogans really set off alarm bells in my head, because I think they can be excuses for not thinking about a subject deeply.

Again, I appreciate your thoughts. They are very well formed, even if you have not been published or submitted them to peer review in a scientific journal (just a joke - referring to Archie's comments and Paul's response).

---------- Post added at 06:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:59 PM ----------



Well, I couldn't because I'm old and senile!

Here's a short list of people who could do better:
1. Gene Steinberg
2. Paul Kimball
3. Chris O'Brien
4. George Knapp
5. Glenn Beck (just kidding....I can hear him now "Those grey aliens are just midget socialist Marxist Nazi infiltrators who want to indoctrinate your embryo's to accept universal health care!"

And hundreds of other talk show hosts who understand how to ask simple questions and listen for the responses. I make no claims that what I do is anything special.

 

[brownie]

9. Abduction evidence. Obviously this is lacking. So is evidence of hybrids. But really guys, is the evidence for UFOs themselves that much stronger? It seems in both cases highly circumstancial, breaks current scientific theories and usually flaunts "human logic" to boot. However there just seems too many of these stories that are too similar to be simply dismissed out of hand - even if you ignore BH/DJ. Is Paul Kimball and others saying there is no such phenomenon as 'alien abduction' or just that BH/DJ evidence should be completely dismissed? There are also many many examples of extreme strangeness like the "no batteries" example whilst trying to take a photograph explained earlier. There seems like there might be some kind of "perception-stealth" technology or methods used in these cases in addition to invisibility and ability to manipulate witness actions (like the abductee turning off the video camera). Budd also have a talk which explained some stories where photographs were taken of abductees, shorly after an incident and they showed up invisible on the images - which he displayed. Stretches belief to be sure.

10. We need to find some willing abductees who would be OK with having a small team monitor them, without abductee knowledge. In other words, have them sign a waiver to be spied on, and then setup cameras in the house where they don't know they exist, set them up across the street, use other means of evidence collection that they don't even know about, like Dave Jacob's radiation detection sewn into clothing and other ideas.

Hi axeman,

In your points of no. 9 you suggest the possibility of a "stealth technology". I think that's fascinating! Essentially a control system/technology which at best, we simply call high strangeness. I've thought , for a long time, that we're way in over our heads. And yet I do think we are obliged to keep on reporting and investigating; as long as the subject matter doesn't affect our mental health.

It's so frustrating that no. 10 has been tried, with the abductees knowledge though, and it seems to fail. I'm not sure if abductees having no prior knowledge would make a difference, considering the high strangeness factor.

FUFOR (Fund for UFO Research) investigators Rob Swiatek, Don Berliner and Richard Hall (the late) investigated the Anna Jamerson/Beth Collings case [ Connections by Beth Collings & Anna Jamerson]. Swiatek and some other FUFOR members set up elaborate devices as well as stayed within the house and outside of it for weeks on end. The various devises turned off (often power loses where the electrical devices were set up). And, the investigators and volunteers from FUFOR who were suppose to be awake to keep watch, fell asleep or became strangely distracted during the times one or both women suspected something had happened to them.

For example , one investigator became suddenly obsessed with looking at and then going into the horse barn for hours. He had no prior interest in horses or barns, but that night he was fascinated with them. This is the sort of peculiar diversion that often is reported when possible abductees and their investigators try to witness (or stop) an abduction or catch something on camera.

However, maybe someway hard evidence will be discovered somehow. And, the anecdotal evidence of how potential witnesses are made to be distracted or fall asleep or 'shut of', is important to keep cataloging.

The Collings/Jamerson case came to the public's attention at the M.I.T. Conference in 1992, which focused on alien abduction and UFOs which was co-chaired by M.I.T. physicist David Pritchard (ph.d) and Harvard psychiatrist John Mack (the late). The two women were first extensively written about in C.D.B. Bryan's (the late) book on the conference - Close Encounters of the Fourth Kind. They were introduced to Budd Hopkins at the conference, who regressed them both in Boston and then some months later in NYC, at his home where they stayed for a few days. Bryan was privy to record and report in his book and in the womens' book, on the hypnosis sessions by Hopkins.

What's interesting, is in their own book - Connections, Collings and Jamerson reported many aspects of their highly strange life - and abduction experiences- that Hopkins didn't ask them about. For instance they had lots of unmarked helecopter activity over their farm, over their cars as they were driving, over their relatives and friends when they were visiting. Their lives were full of synchronicity too. They also suspected MILAB involvement, which Hopkins didn't pick up on.

Debbie Toomey (the subject of Hopkins book Intruders) also wrote her own book, co-authored with her sister. They included so much paranormal activity (ghosts, poltergeists, shadow people/shadow animals, synchronicity ect.) which Hopkins never reported but which she(Toomey) claimed to have shared with him.

I think it's a good thing that supposid abductees have written their own books of their own experiences if only, at the very least, it reveals what investigators (in these two cases Hopkins) either weren't interested in or left out because it may not fit with the investigator's hypothesis or agenda.

---------- Post added at 03:33 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:57 AM ----------

Have you read "Nighteyes"? I have a copy on order but it hasn't been delivered yet.

People I know who have read "Nighteyes" say that the content of the plot is absolutely nothing like the Napolitano case and there are virtually no resemblances whatsoever except an alien abduction back-story, that Hansen and co were a bunch of fraudsters who seem to have concocted a pack of lies and half-truths in order to discredit Linda, and that they assumed 99% of people would never bother to read the book so they could be safely just fed a line. As we know, once mud is thrown out on the web, some tends to stick particularly with the lazy and ignorant who do little personal research and are inclined to believe whatever reinforces any prejudice or incredulities they may hold dear.

If you have read "Nighteyes" I'd appreciate your comments about these claims, though I'll find out for myself by reading it soon.


On the theme of MUFON investigating abduction cases, different MUFON groups have investigated many over the years. Some of the more well-known ones would be Betty Andreasson, the Allagash case and the Pascagoula case, the first two of which were the subject of excellent summary reports made into books by Ray Fowler and subsequently published (I expect you have read them and know these cases).

Archie,

I read Nighteyes several months after reading Witnessed. When I'd first read Witnessed I knew nothing about the counter-investigation and controversy, but I did have the impression the book strained credulity because of Hopkins never meeting the men involved as well as the woman involved. He had to rely on Cortile/Napolitano and her word that they existed.

Then when I read Nighteyes I remember that sinking feeling in my stomach. At the time I still wanted very much to believe in Hopkins because I thought he did so well with Missing Time and Intruders at Copley Woods. But, Nighteyes made me realize he'd been punked/hoaxed by Napolitano (who probably had a couple of other friends in on it).

About MUFON groups and their investigations. I'm very aware that the groups are hit or miss. You may find one group that is new-age. Then another group that doesn't believe in the possibility of abductions at all. It's the protocols that must be focused on, with personal biases and agendas oput aside.

I'm aware of Raymond Fowler and have great respect for him. I've read everything he's written. Though he's come up for criticism, his consistencies in meticulously following protocol in investigating cases from his very early years right on to his retirement is impressive to me. He also would call in other MUFON members, fulling giving them credit as they'd work together. His opinion of UFOs and Abductions evolved over the years and he humbly pointed out mistakes he believed he had made in the past. And of course, Ray's from Massachusetts (and he devoted so much to the ufo reports and encounters in this state especially) so I'm naturally biased.