April 4th show - Hopkins, Randle & Jacobs

[grannysmith]

Either people believe in what Ms. Woods has published on the internet, or they are holding off for a more formal process, if one is to occur at all.

You missed at least two other positions

a. they make snidey claims about Emma's mental health
b. they defend Jacobs at all costs (call the case 'bullshit' - which is hardly 'holding off') in the face of the currently available evidence.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

You missed at least two other positions

a. they make snidey claims about Emma's mental health
b. they defend Jacobs at all costs (call the case 'bullshit' - which is hardly 'holding off') in the face of the currently available evidence.

Until the alleged available evidence is independently verified, particularly audio recordings that are readily manipulated, the full extent of any alleged misconduct won't be apparent.

That doesn't prevent me from being concerned about laymen doing hypnotic therapy, however, whether it relates to UFO abductions or other issues.

 

[brownie]

One thing clearly has resulted from all of this drama: two people are now banned from The Paracast Forum and a whole bunch are now pissed off at one another.

Tom, What you've written is interesting. You appear to know alot of behind the scenes activity here at the paracast forum. Regarding the "two people that are now banned" -- was one of them 'Schuler'? I ask because I dd some back reading and couldn't help but notice the appalling vile swears, curses and ad hominems he wrote at other posters who quesitioned Jacobs. Surely his being a moderator would not exempt him from forum rules......or would it? I wouldn't like to think there's a double-standard here. Thanks in advance for your answer.

 

[paraschtick]

You missed at least two other positions

a. they make snidey claims about Emma's mental health
b. they defend Jacobs at all costs (call the case 'bullshit' - which is hardly 'holding off') in the face of the currently available evidence.

I think those two go together in one lovely big ball of 3rd position . Thats why I've been so vocal (has anyone really noticed me anyway??? ) in defending Emma. To me its clear as day, that she has provided very good evidence that she has mean badly treated by a well known researcher in the ufo/abduction field, and is being attacked rather viciously I think for doing so.

Yet the same people who claim to be rational (since those defending Emma are clearly not in their eyes) defend the person who believes in alien hybrids, has not only received instant messages from them but has even gone on the run from them ... in some strange "The Invaders" kind of way ... but apparently could still do his day job teaching history at a University where he could be easily found. And ON TOP of all this, he admits to putting notions of Multiple Personality Disorder in Emma whilst under hypnosis.

I know who I would believe.

[ps and I can believe in Emma more than I can even believe in God ... at least I've heard her voice ... and talked to her in here ... which is more than I can say for Hisnibs ]

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Tom, What you've written is interesting. You appear to know alot of behind the scenes activity here at the paracast forum. Regarding the "two people that are now banned" -- was one of them 'Schuler'? I ask because I dd some back reading and couldn't help but notice the appalling vile swears, curses and ad hominems he wrote at other posters who quesitioned Jacobs. Surely his being a moderator would not exempt him from forum rules......or would it? I wouldn't like to think there's a double-standard here. Thanks in advance for your answer.

There is no double standard. If you attack people unjustly, misrepresent what they say and/or display a clear inability to read things correctly, you may find yourself excluded from these forums. That doesn't depend on whom you believe.

In case you're wondering, two people who have been excluded from this forum became attack dogs who displayed in obvious problem with reading acuity, or were just trying to start trouble. Rather than assume which one of these possibilities turned out to be correct, they simply had their privileges removed.

Would you care to join them?

 

[brownie]

In my case, Dr. Jacobs threatened to reveal my identity if I talked in public about the "warning" that he received from a "hybrid" (a.k.a. Elizabeth) on instant messenger about working with me. That was a reprehensible thing for a researcher to do, and was one of the many abusive actions that he took towards me. This is an audio clip of Dr. Jacobs threatening to reveal my identity

OMG, Emma - I heard it before this, but liistening to Jacobs again in this conversation gives me the chills! :frown:

 

[Gene Steinberg]

OMG, Emma - I heard it before this, but liistening to Jacobs again in this conversation gives me the chills! :frown:

I'm amazed you can't understand that what you might be hearing is either taken out of context or so severely edited as to convey a misleading impression of what actually happened. You really take audio clips as accurate without questioning their authenticity? What about UFO photos?

 

[paraschtick]

Tom, What you've written is interesting. You appear to know alot of behind the scenes activity here at the paracast forum. Regarding the "two people that are now banned" -- was one of them 'Schuler'? I ask because I dd some back reading and couldn't help but notice the appalling vile swears, curses and ad hominems he wrote at other posters who quesitioned Jacobs. Surely his being a moderator would not exempt him from forum rules......or would it? I wouldn't like to think there's a double-standard here. Thanks in advance for your answer.

Blimey ... thats what really got me riled up about all this in the first place: Schyuler and his attacks and talk of Emma being "bat shit insane" (excuse my French). I saw an intelligent articulate yet vulnerable woman being attacked for stating her belief that a well known and respected researcher in this crazy mixed up field of ours was not quite what he seemed. And Schyuler in my opinion attacked her like a rabid dog. I thought it was quite bizarre, and so had to go on the defensive for Emma (yes ... I'm that chivalrous ... ).

Anyway, all I've noticed since he lost his (very brief) job as a moderator is that he's gone very quiet. And I have no idea whether he's been banned or not. I've definitely noticed though that the tension around here decreased quite considerably when he quietened down until that is a certain Archie (naming no names of course ) turned up a while back.

Oh and yeah it was a horrendous double standard at the time: that Schuyler was a mod, and was taking one side in the discussion in such a vituperative way.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Moderators come and go. It's a volunteer position and a thankless one at that. I don't think I care to provide personal information as to why someone in that position is no longer contributing to the forums.

 

[brownie]

I'm amazed you can't understand that what you might be hearing is either taken out of context or so severely edited as to convey a misleading impression of what actually happened. You really take audio clips as accurate without questioning their authenticity? What about UFO photos?

Gene, I'm very aware that UFO photos, videos, alien photos/videos *and* audios of anything can be faked. From what I've read of the requirements to fake an audio, I don't think Emma has the technical ability (not many people do). And if she had others in NZ to do this, what's the point of it? NZ isn't a hotspot of alien abductee investigators who'd be after Jacobs position in the abductionologist world (which is still the 'ghetto' of ufology). I await Jacobs' audio recordings too (all of them)- as he recorded some of their interactions.

 

[paraschtick]

I'm amazed you can't understand that what you might be hearing is either taken out of context or so severely edited as to convey a misleading impression of what actually happened. You really take audio clips as accurate without questioning their authenticity? What about UFO photos?

I believe Gene myself that you are utterly wrong in this matter. UFO photos are far easier to fake than such (in some cases fairly long) audio clips. To put things words and phrases together in such a way as not only to make them seem off the cuff, but to hide any breaks (except for the ones that Emma has admitted making when she has been taking out names, personal details etc), and to keep the conversations fluid and not mechanical would in my opinion not be impossible but as Douglas Adams would say ... just very very improbable.

So ... as I don't usually rely on Occams Razor, in this case I believe thats to be whats needed in this matter. Did Emma fake the audio tapes? I doubt it since it would have been a superhuman effort to do so. I feel thats a fairly reasonable assumption to make, and I've yet to see any other contradictions with any of her other evidence either.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Gene, I'm very aware that UFO photos, videos, alien photos/videos *and* audios of anything can be faked. From what I've read of the requirements to fake an audio, I don't think Emma has the technical ability (not many people do). And if she had others in NZ to do this, what's the point of it? NZ isn't a hotspot of alien abductee investigators who'd be after Jacobs position in the abductionologist world (which is still the 'ghetto' of ufology). I await Jacobs' audio recordings too (all of them)- as he recorded some of their interactions.

Tens of millions of people can cut, copy and paste text on their personal computers. Doing the same thing with audio recordings requires the same skills. You don't have to be an expert.

Since Emma admits to editing "some" content, perhaps you should look for obvious edit points and see how significant they are before you make assumptions about this.

The problem is that, without independent analysis of the unedited recordings, you'll never know for sure.

---------- Post added at 04:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:29 PM ----------

I believe Gene myself that you are utterly wrong in this matter. UFO photos are far easier to fake than such (in some cases fairly long) audio clips. To put things words and phrases together in such a way as not only to make them seem off the cuff, but to hide any breaks (except for the ones that Emma has admitted making when she has been taking out names, personal details etc), and to keep the conversations fluid and not mechanical would in my opinion not be impossible but as Douglas Adams would say ... just very very improbable.

So ... as I don't usually rely on Occams Razor, in this case I believe thats to be whats needed in this matter. Did Emma fake the audio tapes? I doubt it since it would have been a superhuman effort to do so. I feel thats a fairly reasonable assumption to make, and I've yet to see any other contradictions with any of her other evidence either.

You speak from total ignorance of the process. You don't have to remove words. Just take out whole sentences or paragraphs and/or move them into a different position in the audio segment. There are typically long pauses in those recordings, so it can be done quite seamlessly. This is easy stuff. You want to believe Emma and thus you don't want to accept the possibility that what has been edited — consciously or otherwise — changes the meaning of what you've heard.

She has an ax to grind. Jacobs, in denying the charges, also has an ax to grind. He says his words were edited to create a false meaning.

Until or unless someone independently analyzes the original recordings, you will never know. You can believe what you want.

Frankly, at this point, my interest has waned considerably. Whatever you believe will not help us get to the bottom of the abduction mystery.

 

[paraschtick]

You speak from total ignorance of the process ...

Thank you for your kind and wiise words, sir . But can you imagine how much time it would take to go through hours of recordings to find the right bits that might not even be there just so that you can move them around and put them in another place to fake an argument ... and keep them sounding natural. Again, I can't believe anyone in their right mind would do such a thing ... oh yeahhhh .

And as for Emma having an axe to grind. Wouldn't you if you had had someone put ideas of Multiple Personality Disorder (admittedly by Dr Jacobs) in your mind so that the alien hybrids would be thrown off the scent?

 

[Gene Steinberg]

At best there are only a few hours posted out of — what? — 100-150 hours of recordings? Do the math. With that wealth of raw "footage" there's plenty of room to find Jacobs saying just about anything to prove one's point of view. You could probably have him confess to the Kennedy assassination too if you wanted with judicious editing!

You know nothing about Emma or her background, except what vague details she chooses to provide, which you cannot confirm, since you don't even know her real name. And, as I said, Jacobs isn't an innocent party either.

I'm surprised you haven't begun to recognize this is all a distraction that doesn't serve the interests of UFO research.

 

[Jonah]

With regard to the tapes, has Jacobs claimed foul here?

In essence, although Emma has admittedly edited the tapes for public consumption, it implies that the originals are complete and could be presented without edits to whatever deliberative body requests them down the road. It's for this reason (I suspect) that Jacobs hasn't strongly disputed the content and instead has focused his defense on questioning (and strongly implying) that Emma suffers from some type of obsessive mental disorder.

I'm also concerned that the treatment given Emma by some here (and elsewhere) smells slightly misogynistic as it seems to be mostly the male voice that's the harshest when it comes to criticisms.

Bottom line, I'd suggest the good doctor consider rehab...works for everyone else.

Just sayin...

 

[Gene Steinberg]

OK, so you haven't bothered to actually read Jacobs response, posted on his site. You look at one side of the story and reach a conclusion.

And, before we take this to the next absurd level: It doesn't matter if Emma was really Emmett and a male. The conclusion would have to be the same.

Besides, why is she going to therapists if there's nothing to treat?

Can't we get past this distraction now?

 

[brownie]

I'm also concerned that the treatment given Emma by some here (and elsewhere) smells slightly misogynistic as it seems to be mostly the male voice that's the harshest when it comes to criticisms.

Bottom line, I'd suggest the good doctor consider rehab...works for everyone else.

Just sayin...

I've noticed the misogyny too. I didn't want to believe sexism would/could rear its ugly head, but from what I've observed and personally experienced it has. I've been threatened twice now [ in two separate threads] of being banned. Yet I see some posters, of the male gender, on the opposite side of this topic write truly vile and trollish posts with no accountabilty.

Let's do some gender-role reversing. Imagine David Jacobs as 'Davida Jacobs'......a 60-something female History professor who's white-haired, chubby, homely, wears spectacles and has a gruff personality. 'She' also writes controversial books about 'her' small sample of abductees who ,'she' claims, have on-going sexual relations with alien hybrids (who conveniently look just like us). The hybrids need humans to instruct them in sex (and lots of it!) , grocery shopping and apartment living (they love apartments!). 'Davida' gets this information while hypnotizing 'her' abductees. A problem has developed because now the hybrids have IMed and threatened 'Davida Jacobs', as 'she' now knows too much, so 'she' chooses to use unethical practices to throw them off'her' trail.

'Davida Jacobs' has 'he'r longtime colleague in abductionology, an even older woman named 'Buddia Hopkins', who, when not creating modern art, also hypnotizes 'her' abductees and writes books about them. Strangely though, 'Buddia' hasn't come up with adult hybrids that are living with us and threatening 'her', as they do 'her' longtime colleague and friend 'Davida'. The two of them however could be called the high-priestesses of alien abduction and support eachother completely. Some might suggest their relationship is a co-dependent one, within the field of ufology. They even appear on interviews together.

Now a younger and male, very well-spoken and well-written 'Emmet Woods' comes into play. 'He's' been psychologically abused and threatened by 'Davida' (and received a nasty letter from 'Buddia', backing 'Davida' up)and 'Emmet' is not going to take it anymore. 'Emmet' has methodically created 'his' own investigation into 'his' potential abduction experiences and 'his' findings don't necessarily square with what 'Davida' insists is happening to 'him'.

'Emmet' especially won't take 'Davida's' threats, blackmails and horrendous behavior of implanting MPD ideas into 'him' while under longdistance hypnosis. 'Emmet' won't take 'Davida Jacobs' publically lying about 'him' anymore either. 'Emmet' is exposing 'Davida' through taped conversations the two had. And 'Emmet' goes to some forums and discusses the matter, particularly when 'he' is being discussed publically on the forum and on podcasts. 'Emmet' is greeted with a mostly positive reception. The guys in these forums give 'him' a high-five for taking down that old abduction witch 'Davida Jacobs'.

People, that's how I think it would be going here, if the genders were reversed in this matter. I doubt that most of the defenders of David Jacobs would be defending a 'Davida Jacobs'. And, I suspect UFO Watchdog would have put a 'Davida Jacobs' into the Hall of Shame, alongside Linda Mouton Howe ......a long, long time ago.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

How many people do you think are defending Jacobs here? So far as I see, very few. Some of us defend nobody. We prefer to move towards something productive.

 

[Jonah]

I read Jacob's statement Gene and all I could find that pertained to the recorded conversations is the following...

It contains out-of-context snippets of illegally recorded phone conversations, out-of-context sections of confidential hypnosis sessions, and any other false information that would put me in a bad light.

I suppose what I'm getting at here is that there doesn't seem to be an accusation on Jacob's part that any form of editing took place that put's words in his mouth or any denial that the statements he makes aren't in fact his, in other words, edited together as some imply here. Out of context, maybe, but his words. In fact he readily admits to what has become the crux of the accusations here. So it baffles me why you go on about the validity of the recordings.

Besides, why is she going to therapists if there's nothing to treat?

I sincerely hope your not being serious.

As for "Emma" or Emmett" it's not the "conclusion" one may come to regarding this case, it's the manner in which Ms Woods is being addressed by some here (and elsewhere). While I'm at it, I'll compliment Ms. Woods on the way she has composed herself, here in particular. She's taken the worst and IMO, bested most of her critics here when it comes to the simple act of civility.

Touche, Emma

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Do you understand the implications of out of context? In other words they create a misleading impression. Now unless we begin to move past this distraction, I'm going to close this thread. It has become a monumental waste of time.