January 18, 2015 — Greg Bishop

[Burnt State]

This is not abnormal for me I tend to grind new data. Makes it easer to incorporate it in whit old data. I try to get in 3 hours study daily. Drives my wife nuts!

I'm having very similar experiences. Is it altering yourself in any way?

 

[SheaOlmsford]

Did you share the same beliefs? Did sharing dreams happen before or after? Were discussions shared about dream floating or these beings before that incident?

Thanks for sharing. Very interesting.

No to all questions.

 

[SheaOlmsford]

First of all, I want to double up on Constance's comments regarding what you have experienced as I do believe that the witness/experiencer like yourself needs to be approached with unique care and I don't think public forums like this can provide that. Here we already are disassociated and so it's easy to re-victimize a person who tells a series of stories as you have. You have the conviction and your own proofs that what happened, happened. That's probably the best starting point. You also have specific family history that is interwoven with the experiences and those also appear to be important starting points of investigation. So I'm also sorry that you had to live through these events that have dramatically affected yourself and family, as they obviously still bring difficult emotions to the surface. Thanks for sharing this, as anyone who claims "abductee" is always relegated to the outlier position and labelled "kook" or "pretender." I don't get the sense that you are either, but that you have memories of specific, fantastically terrifying events.

Where to go from here: my thoughts about abductions & contact continue to evolve as i engage in different stories. The ones that have any inkling of physical proofs are extremely complex as they appear on the surface to suggest the impossible: non human intelligences interacting with humans, and not just in their minds but in the real world.

I'm currently reading Abductions & Aliens: What's Really Going On? by Chris Rutkowski who is offering up some more developed perspectives for me given the frequency of his involvement with people who feel they have had direct contact with alien intelligence. His blanket statement for the text: Alien Abduction Syndrome is real; no two abductions are the same in terms of experience, the personal history of the individual or their aftermath. He also feels there is limited proof if any that can conclusively identify aliens as responsible for this syndrome. Consequently, he feels a lot more serious, collective scientific inquiry is needed, especially by clinicians who are caring for people. Have you ever sought out clinical care as a means to process the situation, family history etc. (that is if you could find someone whose mind is not already made up on what it is you have experienced)?

I do see how many episodes of those dealing with AAS have experienced somehing akin to a schizophrenic or delusional episode - this repeats in the literature i've scanned. That's the closest known human experience that is comparable. In some cases that's exactly what is happening, and in others - there is simply not enough info to confirm, guess, deny or say much of anything that is helpful to those suffering from this syndrome. I've had some participation with the schizophrenic experience through friends - it is horrifying, inexplicable and has profound effects on them and all who are connected to them personally. These breaks with reality, especially those that involve outside agents, voices, and what appears to be physical forms manipulating the individual in the realm of AAS are not things we have any adequate explanations for at all. I hope none of this has frustrated you in any way.

Thank you and Constance for your kindness and sensitivity.

I have had psychiatric care for 3 years starting in 2010 due to clinical depression and high anxiety (which always reminds me of the Mel Brook's movie) which only manifested in 2010. I have related this in some detail in the thread that Chris O'Brien created where he bashes psychiatry and claims it is a FAKE. This is based on his sharing of an article written by someone who is a Scientologist. I suggest you read this thread:

A Whole Branch of Science Turns Out To Be Fake!

The first sentence was:

"[Psychiatry is nothing more than the deaf leading the blind, categorizing 297 types of mental disease so that the drug companies can target their marketing for new drugs. Disgusting and disturbing eye-opening piece! —chris]"


I responded with my personal experience that showed how extremely helpful psychiatry is to those of us who have actually used it and are not Scientologists. I didn't seem to be getting anywhere on that thread so I stopped participating.

This psychiatrist is one of the top 10 in his field, per his peers. He also allowed me to discuss my unusual experiences with no judgment. His basic rule was that to him it did not matter if they were factually real. What mattered is how they fit into the context of my entire life and what needed to be healed. He used Freudian and Jungian techniques along with medication for depression and anxiety. I am sure he would have known if I suffered from schizophrenia. Also, I had worked with the same people for 15 years. They might have noticed if I was hearing voices, having hallucinations and breaks with reality. I am very confident I do not suffer from any other mental ailment except depression and anxiety, which I may have simply inherited from my mother and which became invoked due to the paranormal nature of my life, plus being bullied a lot as a kid for being gay. I only include such details NOT to be a victim but to share the complexity that surrounds the life of someone involuntarily involved with paranormal expeiences. However, as I noted one time here, I believe everything of that nature stopped around 1995.

Interestingly, I am not bothered by someone on this forum not believing my wild tales. But I was extremely upset yesterday by Chris O'Brien's ignorant thread bashing all psychiatry. This really angered me. I felt that after sharing intimate details of my experience with a psychiatrist, no one was really listening. I also contradicted Chris, who said all prescription medication ads should be banned from TV. I said that they were ironically helping people to realize how dangerous prescription drugs are, since each such commercial seemed mandated to give the possible negative side effects from taking the drug. This alone is educating a lot of people to realize that drugs can have a severe price and should not be taken casually. But Chris just responded in all capitals about how all such ads must be banned. So it was like talking to a brick wall. I felt shaky and angry that my views seemed totally irrelevant to the "rant" against psychiatry and drugs. I thought I might even be banned from the forum today when I logged in. It is very unwise to contradict one of the hosts of the Paracast!

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

...I was extremely upset yesterday by Chris O'Brien's ignorant thread bashing all psychiatry. This really angered me. I felt that after sharing intimate details of my experience with a psychiatrist, no one was really listening. I also contradicted Chris, who said all prescription medication ads should be banned from TV. I said that they were ironically helping people to realize how dangerous prescription drugs are, since each such commercial seemed mandated to give the possible negative side effects from taking the drug. This alone is educating a lot of people to realize that drugs can have a severe price and should not be taken casually. But Chris just responded in all capitals about how all such ads must be banned. So it was like talking to a brick wall. I felt shaky and angry that my views seemed totally irrelevant to the "rant" against psychiatry and drugs. I thought I might even be banned from the forum today when I logged in. It is very unwise to contradict one of the hosts of the Paracast!

Talk about "a brick wall!" My thoughts as posted DID NOT "bash all of psychiatry," but rather it pointed out the unholy relationship and the collusion that exists between big pharma and the medical establishment. You obviously didn't read my posts carefully. Therefore, since you have your mind made up that I am an ignorant "ranter," I will not address this issue w/ you further and we don't ban people for their opinions. I'm sorry if you feel I'm insensitive and that made you "shaky and angry," and that you felt I thought your views were "irrelevent," (which is NOT the case—everyone is entitled to their opinion). That said, you can feel all warm and cozy and continue w/ this thread all you want—it's all yours.

 

[DissectionStalker]

I also contradicted Chris, who said all prescription medication ads should be banned from TV. I said that they were ironically helping people to realize how dangerous prescription drugs are, since each such commercial seemed mandated to give the possible negative side effects from taking the drug. This alone is educating a lot of people to realize that drugs can have a severe price and should not be taken casually.

Imo, you are correct about those warnings with side effects even causing death! Few people can even read the extreme fine print on prescription drugs or do so. I've had two nasty side effects from over-the-counter medications, and I was lucky to survive one reaction. It was before it was later recognized it could cause extreme reactions, even death, in children.

That's amazing that you shared the same dream(?) or ? with someone without any prompting or cuing for such an extreme experience. That has to be very rare and unique in the abduction experience from what I learned, but I'm not up to speed with those experiences. It does challenge my thinking about it, since I thought that experience is isolated to the individual. Freaky. Good thing you both awakened. Did you discuss it immediately or ?

Again, thanks for you sharing such matters.

 

[Constance]

In my past when I had such encounters, I would initially go through terror. Then an immense illogical calm would engulf me. My observer mind would realize that this reaction was not logical considering the circumstances. I therefore assumed it was imposed upon me from outside.

I think this is an important detail and others have reported the same thing. Often it seems to be the result of the encountered entity conveying to the individual that he or she need not be afraid. This has happened not only in some abduction experiences but also in cases in which people encountered landed ufos and were approached by one or more of the apparent occupants of the ufo. Almost always the individual reports telepathic communication from the entity and the comprehension of what the entity is communicating (both the 'do not be afraid' message and also repeated warnings concerning the damage our species is doing to the planet). Even young children, as in the Zimbabwe event, report these same communications. Both types involve clear and consistent intentionality on the part of the entity.

Missing time is another consistent element of both close encounters with ufos (often on highways and also in woodlands and fields) and in cases in which abductions are recollected at least partially. Missing time therefore presents another objective type of data tying together human experiences with ufos and aliens.

Notably in abductions, the individuals memories of the event are repressed, another clearly intentional effect achieved by the entities involved. The purpose seems to be to spare the abductee from subsequent distress, but often people remember enough to become distressed anyway, and in those cases seek help in getting a grip on what happened to them. Hypnotic regression has been the obvious available therapy employed by professional psychologists and psychiatrists and some others to aid in the recall of what happened in order to help individuals come to terms with it and then move on with their lives.

Finally, the immobilization of individuals coming into proximity to landed ufos has been so widely reported, over six decades, that we can't ignore it as another intentional effect produced by the entities involved.

The consistency and coherence of these effects produced in thousands of cases by the entities involved should, in my opinion, be considered objective evidence of the reality of these entities and a general indication of intentions that are rational and even respectful concerning those they interact with. What we have available to us to consider in interpreting the nature of these consistent elements of alien encounters and abductions constitutes a "multiplication of perspectives" on an apparently uniform phenomenon, exactly what is sought in phenomenology to reach a fuller understanding of any phenomenon. In general, we are each limited to our personal perspectives on phenomena, which we can supplement by multiplying our own perspectives on a given phenomena (moving around and closer to objects we encounter phenomenally in our environment) and additionally by combining what we discern with what others have discerned in their perspectives, on the basis of their own experiences. As I see it, based on the body of reports by individuals in close encounters and also in abductions, we can conclude that there are objects and sentient beings behind the phenomena presented to witnesses of ufos and entities occupying them. Phenomena are generated not from the brain but from objects and beings in the world as we encounter them, as they appear to us from our perspectival positions in relation to them. The multiplication of perspectives on given phenomena gathered by members of our species (including experiencers and researchers in the case of ufos) constitute increasing knowledge of what is there in ufo and entity encounters.

 

[Constance]

DS, I think it is fair to say that you are especially concerned with one of the currently dominant memes in popular ufo discourse -- the notion that the 65-year-long modern ufo phenomenon has been a production of the PTB in an attempt to control the populations of earth. People who buy into this hypothesis believe, among other things, that the governments and militaries of the planet, especially those of the US/UK, never took ufos seriously. The cure for that misconception is to read the book at the link, coauthored by seven or eight major ufo researchers and consisting of governmental and military documents that reveal what governments and militaries actually feared and did in response to the succeeding waves of ufos seen and reported by masses of people (ordinary people and people in the military) in the air, in and around the sea, and on the ground.

"Governments around the world have had to deal with the UFO phenomenon for a good part of a century. How and why they did so is the subject of UFOs and Government, a history that for the first time tells the story from the perspective of the governments themselves. It's a perspective that reveals a great deal about what we citizens have seen, and puzzled over, from the "outside" for so many years.

The story, which is unmasked by the governments' own documents, explains much that is new, or at least not commonly known, about the seriousness with which the military and intelligence communities approached the UFO problem internally. Those approaches were not taken lightly. In fact, they were considered matters of national security. At the same time, the story reveals how a subject with such apparent depth of experience and interest became treated as if it were a triviality. And it explains why one government, the United States government, deemed it wise, and perhaps even necessary, to treat it so. Though the book focuses primarily on the U. S. government's response to the UFO phenomenon, also included is the treatment of the subject by the governments of Sweden, Australia, France, Spain, and other countries.

This large-format, fully illustrated book is the result of a team effort that called itself "The UFO History Group," a collection of veteran UFO historians and researchers who spent more than four years researching, consulting, writing, and editing to present a work of historical scholarship on government response to the UFO phenomenon. Michael Swords was the primary author of the United States chapters. The work was coordinated and edited by Robert Powell. Clas Svahn, Vicente-Juan Ballester Olmos, Bill Chalker, and Robert Powell contributed country chapters. Jan Aldrich was the primary content consultant, with additional content consultation and writing coming from Barry Greenwood and Richard Thieme. Steve Purcell was the primary photo illustration editor.

From the foreword by Jerome Clark:

"While UFOs and Government revisits an often unhappy history, the reading of it is far from an unhappy experience. The authors, eloquent, intelligent, sophisticated, and conscientious, provide us with the first credible, comprehensive overview of official UFO history in many years... Most of the current volume deals with U.S. military and intelligence responses to the UFO phenomenon, but it also features richly informative chapters that expand the story across the international arena. If you're looking for an example of a nation that dealt productively with the UFO reports that came its official way, you will take heart in the chapter on the French projects... From here on, every responsible treatment of UFOs and government will have to cite UFOs and Government prominently among its sources... this is the real story as accurately as it can be reconstructed in the second decade of the new century. I expect to keep my copy close at hand and to return to it often. While it cannot be said of many books, UFO-themed or otherwise, this is among the essential ones. Stray from it at your peril."

 

[SheaOlmsford]

Imo, you are correct about those warnings with side effects even causing death! Few people can even read the extreme fine print on prescription drugs or do so. I've had two nasty side effects from over-the-counter medications, and I was lucky to survive one reaction. It was before it was later recognized it could cause extreme reactions, even death, in children.

That's amazing that you shared the same dream(?) or ? with someone without any prompting or cuing for such an extreme experience. That has to be very rare and unique in the abduction experience from what I learned, but I'm not up to speed with those experiences. It does challenge my thinking about it, since I thought that experience is isolated to the individual. Freaky. Good thing you both awakened. Did you discuss it immediately or ?

Again, thanks for you sharing such matters.

We were both awakened by these owls hooting loudly on our roof. Then we both started choking. For me, it was like something was running down my throat. We each have a sink of our own, so each spit out blood. After this similarity, we realized we had shared the same dream. If you want to rationally view this, you are probably going to hit Chris's proverbial brick wall. It makes no sense. Mike Clelland also claims that a lot of abductees see/hear owls. What is THAT all about? The entire thing is crazy. That is why I am glad it is over. Hopefully, we both passed our "sell by" date.

 

[SheaOlmsford]

Talk about "a brick wall!" My thoughts as posted DID NOT "bash all of psychiatry," but rather it pointed out the unholy relationship and the collusion that exists between big pharma and the medical establishment. You obviously didn't read my posts carefully. Therefore, since you have your mind made up that I am an ignorant "ranter," I will not address this issue w/ you further and we don't ban people for their opinions. I'm sorry if you feel I'm insensitive and that made you "shaky and angry," and that you felt I thought your views were "irrelevent," (which is NOT the case—everyone is entitled to their opinion). That said, you can feel all warm and cozy and continue w/ this thread all you want—it's all yours.

Chris, The name of the thread is


A Whole Branch of Science Turns Out To Be Fake!

When the thread was opened, you presented a 2 part ranting article by Ron Rappoport (spelling is probably wrong), a close conspiracy obsessed pal of Jeff Rense and a Scientologist, claiming that psychiatry was total bunk.

But first, your initial sentence was:

"[Psychiatry is nothing more than the deaf leading the blind, categorizing 297 types of mental disease so that the drug companies can target their marketing for new drugs. Disgusting and disturbing eye-opening piece! —chris]"

Yes, the article did claim that psychiatrists were essentially whores for the Pharmaceutical industry. It is true that modern psychiatry has taken advantage of many drugs that do remove anxiety and lessen depression. Unlike what he said, no one turns into a mindless zombie. Anyone who feels that way is over medicated and should contact their doctor immediately.

The point of the article was to totally denounce psychiatry, claiming it to be a illegitimate field. I believe this fine gentleman also felt the same way about psychology and any therapy for the mind. One person posted his findings about the author and Scientology, and how basic Scientology dogma proclaims that MILLIONS OF YEARS AGO psychiatrists were the root cause of all evil in the world. Much projection from the demented mind of L. Ron Hubbard ya think?

After my rebuttal of this stance (by sharing my own experience with the literally life saving power of psychiatry when used by a professional of 25 years), you narrowed your complaints down to reflect the above post.

Nonetheless, the original intent of the thread was to share an article by a man of dubious integrity that totally denounced the entire field of psychiatry.

You made up the title for the thread, which again stated that you were going to reveal to us a totally FAKE profession. So how can you come here and proclaim that I was wrong and did not read the posts!

I think a better man may have recanted any faith in the article that YOU posted that totally destroyed the field of science known as psychiatry. . This was not done.

I realize it is hard to say you are wrong at times. So just blame the person who pointed it out. That is my last comment on this, although I would not be surprised if there will be another comment from Chris to restate how RIGHT he was and how WRONG I was. This entire thread was a disgrace to the forum.

Here again is the title. How else do you interpret this, as formulated by Chris?

A Whole Branch of Science Turns Out To Be Fake!

 

[Mrmajix]

I was going to be critical of the Bishop episode, complaining Gene allowed him to turn it in to just another episode of Misterioso. Greg beat me to the punch earlier in the thread admitting his show is loose. RM can at times unapologetically wander, leaving all but ufology insiders lost. It's too bad though. I would have loved to see Gene pin him down on some of his opinions about certain cases and topics. Listening to RM, Greg's apathy over the UFO topic can lull you believe there's nothing here worth listening to and just before you tune out, says something that makes you realize this guy knows his stuff. It is my bad luck that the shows I like seem to be disproportionately focused on the personalities of the UFO field. They also have branded themselves with this "hip" skepticism that paints the ETH as "so 80s dude!" to avoid having to take an opinion (not to be confused with believing).

 

[DissectionStalker]

They also have branded themselves with this "hip" skepticism that paints the ETH as "so 80s dude!" to avoid having to take an opinion (not to be confused with believing).

Plenty of "personalities" engaged in UFO media never want to solve "this mystery". IT IS A TRICKSTER'S BUSINESS. A lifelong business that for the most famous/infamous personalities all started in the 1980's. They were put into a blender with Moore, Doty, Collins, Bennewitz, Linda Howe, Friedman, OSI, Intelligence/Military types, [etc.] all engaged in the ET-UFO 'is real' agenda.

Then we find-out all these players were screwed by PSYOPS. Some were driven insane at least temporarily or cycled/cycle in it. Two I mentioned above I believe have been brain damaged or "mind warped" by these beliefs w/Psyops applied to "warp it" and are still in its aftereffects. They manage to function within that ET-UFO world they still believe in. One might be one of the shrewdest dissonance disinformation agents the government doesn't even have to pay or employ. She was wound-up and never stopped.

Bottom line, these people make money, are controversial, still pedal their beliefs, and have conferences and media that love to use them. They're all from the 1980's of ET-UFO fame, and freaky as hell were their stories. Hollywood and the MIC LOVE IT. Make BILLIONS on it.

It may be sooo 80's, but how can we ignore it? These people aren't going anywhere anytime soon.

 

[DissectionStalker]

Then we both started choking. For me, it was like something was running down my throat. We each have a sink of our own, so each spit out blood. After this similarity, we realized we had shared the same dream.

Perhaps there was some kind of vapor, poison, drug, ingested, inhaled involved? Blood, choking, at same time, it's a mystery.

 

[Burnt State]

Having an opinion and evolving an opinion are two different philosophies in approaching this mystery. Being open to possibilities and recognizing that there's a lot of paradox taking place in ufology is an approach that has more potential to get a little closer to the phenomenon than trying to force an ETH or IDH widget through an odd sized hole.

When you look at those people in the field who are persistent seekers I don't see them making much cash and certainly not a having a living wage from work in this field. If anything, those people who continue to push the envelope all have jobs in non-paranormal areas of employment. This means they are not tied to going along with whatever is currently filling seats or selling books. The most interesting writers on this topic imho continue to reinvent the paradigm and are not satisfied with resting on nor pushing their theory. They also don't sell ufo field communication flashlights, crystals, or plaster casts of alien footprints.

 

[Constance]

I see your point, Burnt. I read several interviews with Vallee tonight and have a somewhat better appreciation of where he's coming from now, indeed the several perspectives he's been coming from, all interesting and all having merit. I can see why he has been inspirational for a new generation contemplating the ufo phenomenon. I have some additional books to add to my reading list. It's also clear that he has had insider contact of various kinds with those developing new technologies. I hope he has written, will write, and publish another still more informative book about those technologies and that he will be frank in expressing his opinions on their relative value and risks.. He clearly knows much more than most of us do, and we need to know what he knows.

Looking forward to hearing your discussion on the Paracast.

 

[DissectionStalker]

I have some additional books to add to my reading list. It's also clear that he has had insider contact of various kinds with those developing new technologies. I hope he has written, will write, and publish another still more informative book about those technologies and that he will be frank in expressing his opinions on their relative value and risks.. He clearly knows much more than most of us do, and we need to know what he knows.

I would check-out his fiction too, since he said in the same interview I referenced that he can say things there that he cannot do in non-fiction; meaning, he is offering some real information that is very useful to the non-fiction ideas. Imo. I would start with his most recent fiction.

 

[Constance]

Thanks, DS, but I'll pass on Vallee's fiction and what I might postulate (correctly or incorrectly) by reading 'between the lines'. I've been hoping for years that Vallee will eventually express what he knows directly, within the lines of a text. I can't believe that he has anything to fear by doing so.

 

[DissectionStalker]

Thanks, DS, but I'll pass on Vallee's fiction and what I might postulate (correctly or incorrectly) by reading 'between the lines'. I've been hoping for years that Vallee will eventually express what he knows directly, within the lines of a text. I can't believe that he has anything to fear by doing so.

Well, I think he intends to MAYBE do more interviews, but he's indicated he won't be writing anymore books. That doesn't mean he couldn't also release some ideas online or in some presentation paper or talk. Let's hope he does.

 

[Constance]

Well, I think he intends to MAYBE do more interviews, but he's indicated he won't be writing anymore books. That doesn't mean he couldn't also release some ideas online or in some presentation paper or talk. Let's hope he does.

Really? I think that would be irresponsible because literally unresponsive to all the questions he's raised. It would be one thing if he had a close group of grad students and post-doc researchers following him around, taking notes, and preparing to write explications of the great man's thoughts. But that doesn't appear to be the case. If he actually leaves us swimming in the ambiguity of what he's written so far, I have to take him less seriously than I began to take him last night.

 

[LatentCauses]

Really? I think that would be irresponsible because literally unresponsive to all the questions he's raised. It would be one thing if he had a close group of grad students and post-doc researchers following him around, taking notes, and preparing to write explications of the great man's thoughts. But that doesn't appear to be the case. If he actually leaves us swimming in the ambiguity of what he's written so far, I have to take him less seriously than I began to take him last night.

To be fair to him, he got out of the field a decade or so ago as he was completely dispirited with competing ideologies, and dedication to single theories in an area not responsive to close minded thinking.

He went on with his venture capital business in California to the best of my knowledge. I know from interviews in the last couple of years that here's dipping his toes in the field. He was integral to a large and very important, invitation only, meeting at the French Academy of sciences last year at which 100 scientists from all around the world in different areas, where invited to consider new research methodologies for the UFO phenomena.

I don't think we have heard the last from him, i certainly hope not, as he of all people really opened my eyes to just how nuanced and strange these topics are

 

[LatentCauses]

If he actually leaves us swimming in the ambiguity of what he's written so far, I have to take him less seriously than I began to take him last night.

Ouch! Here's a link to a snapshot of his current thinking - at least of the last couple of years. tries to summarise the ambiguity a little bit, but alas, no conclusions - Jacques Vallee Interview | Our Strange Planet | Our Strange Planet