• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

The Alien Abdution Cult

  • Thread starter Thread starter Paul Kimball
  • Start date Start date

Free episodes:

I can't explain why, but Budd Hopkins has always struck me as a bit sinister. And I agree that he mucks with people's heads.

But so do psychologists. A lot of their research involves nothing more than throwing crap at the wall and seeing what sticks. That's how they came up with electroshock therapy. Anyone who has ever known a psych major -- or googled "Ewan Cameron" or "MK-Ultra" -- will come away with a healthy distrust of that profession, though there are certainly good ones out there.

Nowadays, it's possible to get just about any academic degree if you're capable of paying for it. And I've taken enough history courses to know that they don't train you in interviewing techniques.

Paul, I really appreciate your level-headed approach, but I am not prepared to dismiss all the accounts of abductions, especially since the phenomenon seems to go back well before the modern era (as described by Jacques Vallee and Graham Hancock). What do you have to say about those pre-modern accounts?

Hi,

Check what I originally wrote - last line. I don't dismiss all accounts either, although I think the vast majority are explainable in conventional terms. My problem is that the likes of Hopkins and Jacobs have so monopolized, and marginalized, the phenomenon, that if there is any truth there to a paranormal aspect it is lost. They are the noise, not the signal.

In 2005 I wrote [original at: http://redstarfilms.blogspot.com/2005/05/experiencers.html ]

The Experiencers


I do not use the word "abductees" when discussing those who claim to have been abducted by alien beings. It implies an objective conclusion that, on the basis of the available evidence, simply cannot be proved.

This does not mean that some of these people did not have a genuine experience with something that our science cannot explain.

Accordingly, I use the term "experiencers."

This is the term that I also use, with the utmost respect, to describe people who claim to have had direct contact with the Divine. Again, an experience that science is unable to explain.

Take, for example, the "experience" of Atlantic Canada's most important religious leader, Henry Alline (painting below), a man whose life and writings I have studied extensively. In 1776, the 28 year old Alline underwent a spiritual conversion that changed his life. It led him to launch a "New Light" Christian ministry that was nothing short of revolutionary. By the time of his death eight short years later (from the tuberculosis with had plagued him throughout much of his time as an evangelist), his "Great Awakening" had changed society in Atlantic Canada (and, to a somewhat lesser extent, New England) in ways that are still felt today.



It is his description of his "experience with the Divine," however, that is most intriguing.

He wrote in his Journal:

"My whole soul, that was a few minutes ago groaning under mountains of death, wading through storms of sorrow, racked with distressing fears, and crying to an unknown God for help, was now filled with immortal love, soaring on the wings of faith, freed from the chains of death and darkness, and crying out my Lord and my God; thou art my rock and my fortress, my shield and my high tower, my life, my joy, my present and everlasting portion."

The sudden, transforming power of Alline's experience - his spiritual regeneration, as he termed it - led him to declare that he had been "ravished with a divine ecstasy" and wrapped up in God." Over and over in his sermons, pamphlets and hymns in the years that followed, he referred to being "married" to his Saviour. He was overwhelmed by a Divine Love, a spiritual rapture, which I simply cannot comprehend, but accept as sincere - and real.

Time and space stopped for him, seemingly literally. God, he wrote, lived in "One Eternal Now" and that the "redeemed" inhabited the same place - in a sense, meaning that they could transcend temporal boundaries, and travel through time. For the truly converted there was no sense of "Time, and Space, and successive Periods." Salvation and Damnation, Alline wrote in Two Mites:

"originate here at your own Door; for with God there never was any such Thing, as before or after, Millions of Ages, before time began, and as many more, after Time is at a Period, being the very same instant; consider neither Time past nor Time to come, but one Eternal NOW; consider that with God there is neither Succession nor Progress; but that with Him the Moment He said let us make Man, and the Sound of the last Trumpet, is the very same instant, and your death as much first as your Birth... with God all things are NOW... as the Center of a Ring, which is as near the one side as the other."

Historian George Rawlyk put this amazing experience into perspective in New Light Letters and Songs (Wolfville, Nova Scotia: Lancelot Press, 1983):

"Conversion, therefore, was not only the means whereby those who had freely chosen the 'Electing Love of God' were able, in a spiritual sense, to return to paradise but also the God-given instrument of telescoping time into the 'Eternal Now.' Regeneration was the process which destroyed artificial time and space and astonishingly transformed, for each individual, the mundane - what Alline described as the world of 'Turnips, Cabbages and Potatoes' - into the cosmic and heavenly - 'the Eternity you once, was, and knew.'"

Michio Kaku might take note.

So, you may ask, how does this relate to ufology?

I'm not sure, exactly.

It could be simply that the world is full of strange things that we cannot explain, in many different, unrelated areas.

But I sense it might be more than that - something bigger, more profound. That there are links... that there are people who experience things that are "otherworldly." These experiences may be tailored to a certain era - Alline, accordingly, believed his was spiritual, because that was the common reference point of his time. People in our technological era may use different language, and even tell different stories, to describe what is, essentially, the same thing - an "experience" with an intelligence that we cannot comprehend.

A final note. Simeon Perkins, a prosperous merchant in Liverpool, Nova Scotia, and contemporary of Alline, kept a journal throughout his life. He eventually broke with Alline over theological differences (the devil is always, it seems, in the - very human - details), but initially he was favourably impressed. After attending a sermon by Alline, he wrote, "This is a wonderful day and Evening. Never did I behold such an Appearance of the Spirit of God moving upon the people."

What makes Perkins interesting is that he also recorded Canada's first UFO sighting. In 1796, he wrote:

"A strange story comes from the Bay of Fundy, that ships have been seen in the air. Mr. Darrow is lately come from there by land. I inquired of him. He stated that they were said to be seen at New Minas, near Mr. Ratchford's, by a girl about sunrise. The girl cried out and two men, who were in the house, came out and saw them. There were 15 ships and a man forward with his hands stretched out. They made to the eastward. They were so near people saw their sides and ports. The story did not obtain universal credit, but some people believed it."

The Bay of Fundy - the same general area where Henry Alline had met his God twenty years earlier, and, forever changed by that experience, went on to make history.

Time past, time present, time future.

To paraphrase the Bard, "there are more things in heaven and earth, Ufology, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
 
Aw, crap - just noticed I spelled "abduction" wrong in the thread header. D'oh! ::)
 
And from 2007 [original at: http://redstarfilms.blogspot.com/2007/04/jacques-vallee-on-abductionology.html]:

Jacques Vallee on "Abductionology"


In his book Confrontations: A Scientist's Search for Alien Contact, Dr. Jacques Vallee had some eminently sensible things to say about research into the alien abduction phenomenon. While pointing out that blanket dismissals like those of the late Phil Klass go too far, he was extremely critical of the "methodology" of leading abductionologists like Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs.

I recommend that anyone who has not read Confrontations find a copy somewhere and read it. In the meantime, I'll provide a few well-thought out excerpts which should resonate today more than ever.

First, Vallee on the usefulness of lie detectors tests:
As for lie detector tests, which are routinely used by ufologists and the media to "prove" that UFO abductees are "telling the truth," their effectiveness is practically nil, as a long list of scientific references would show... A recent Harvard Medical School study has shown that truthful people flunked polygraph tests more often than actual liars. A possible explanation is that innocent people react to the stress of the test, while the guilty do everything in their power to remain calm. (p. 158)​
Vallee went on to talk about the need to understand the overall context of the abduction phenomenon:
There is another very important aspect to the entire abduction problem that has never been considered seriously by American ufology, obsessed as it is with immediate facts and first-order explanations. By ignoring this other aspect, we reduce considerably our chances of understanding the entire question. What I am referring to is the simple fact that abduction stories are not specific to the UFO phenomenon and certainly did not begin with Betty and Barney Hill in 1961. I pointed out in Invisible College that the structure of abduction stories was identical to that of occult initiation rituals. Several years before, I had shown in Passport to Magonia that contact with ufonauts was only a modern extension of the age-old tradition of contact with nonhuman consciousness in the form of angels, demons, elves, and sylphs. Such contact includes abduction, ordeal (including surgical operations), and sexual intercourse with the aliens. It often leaves marks and scars on the body and the mind, as do UFO abductions. Reaction to the publication of these facts was curious. In the United States, many ufologists simply denied them or ignored them. As late as 1988 Budd Hopkins summarily rejected the Magonia data as "folklore of obviously uncertain authenticity." (pp. 159 - 160)​
It should be noted that not all American ufologists ignored these facts - Kevin Randle details them in his excellent study The Abduction Enigma, which he co-wrote with Russ Estes and Dr. William Cone. But Kevin is in the minority.

As noted above, Vallee discusses the problems with the use of hypnosis (something I've talked about here in the past - see The Alien Abduction Cult and The Abduction Phenomenon and Hypnosis), but does he dismiss it out of hand? No. Instead, what he does is point out that the real problem is with the use of hypnosis by untrained ufologists like Hopkins and Jacobs who have an agenda to pursue. Vallee's recommendation?
Can help be provided to the traumatized witness who has experienced a close encounter and possibly an abduction? Absolutely. He or she should be directed to a qualified, professional hypnotherapist who is open-minded on the question of the UFO reality and who has reached no personal conclusion regarding the nature and origin of the phenomenon. And the ufologist should only be in the room at the request of, and under the control of, the therapist. Any other procedure, in my opinion, is unethical and unprofessional. Besides, it runs the risk of polluting the delicate, complex abduction database with fantastic and spurious material. It can drive UFO research over a very dangerous cliff. (p. 159)​
Vallee wrote this is 1990. Alas, few in ufology listened, and ufology was driven over that dangerous cliff, with predictable consequences: further marginalization by the legitimate scientific community, a withering of public interest as the stories of abductions (and crashed flying saucers, abductionology's evil twin) became commonplace (see Robert Fulford on Abductions for a recent sample of media reaction), and more often outrageous, all of which has led to a loss, as Vallee said elsewhere, of the true "signal" amidst the "noise", while most ufologists in the United States either openly embraced the very things Vallee warned them against, or through their silence signalled tacit acceptance.

Which, unfortunately, for the most part remains the status quo today.

Paul Kimball
 
Hey Paul.

Out of curiosity, what percentage of "Abductees" do you really think are the real deal?

This is something I've been pondering a LOT lately, and am curious as to whether or not there seems to be some criteria that is intrinsically common between ALL abductees?
 
Hey Paul.

Out of curiosity, what percentage of "Abductees" do you really think are the real deal?

This is something I've been pondering a LOT lately, and am curious as to whether or not there seems to be some criteria that is intrinsically common between ALL abductees?

Hi Tommy,

I think many cases may be the real deal, in the sense that the people involved aren't lying or making things up, but are actually going through something... although not paranormal in nature. Still, I know that's not what you meant, so...

I don't know. I think that the only people who assign percentages to things like this are people who have no real clue what they're talking about (I don't mean you here amigo! :)). I would prefer to study it on a case-by-case basis, i.e. give me a really good, genuinely weird case, and we'll take it from there.

I do know that Karl Pflock always said that there were no alien abductions today, but he believed that there were a couple of legitimate cases in the past, particularly the Betty & Barney Hill case. His idea was that the aliens came, ran a few experiments, checked out the planet... and then left, much the same way that European explorers did for many years with places they visited. Karl was always waiting for them to come back!

Of course, that's assuming you assign an "alien" explanation to those abduction cases which transcend a normal explanation. ;)
 
Thats a weird conclusion to come to... "Oh there used to be abductions, but theres not any more".

What evidence is there that earlier abduction cases are any more credible? I always saw those earlier accounts as a completely different phenomenon than the modern abduction scenario. So in essence Pflock is saying that he doesnt buy the modern abduction scenario?

If so, I guess I could understand that.
 
Thats a weird conclusion to come to... "Oh there used to be abductions, but theres not any more".

What evidence is there that earlier abduction cases are any more credible? I always saw those earlier accounts as a completely different phenomenon than the modern abduction scenario. So in essence Pflock is saying that he doesnt buy the modern abduction scenario?

That's exactly what he thought. :)
 
Aw, crap - just noticed I spelled "abduction" wrong in the thread header. D'oh! ::)

We all know that government disinfo agents can't spell!!! HE'S ONE OF THEM!!! THEY!!!!

Heheheheheh. Man I need to find something to do after my nap. Oh yeah, read Ecker's book!

Seeya!
 
Mr. Kimball,

Have you researched the Travis Walton case? Read any material on it? Here we have an alleged abduction experience with alleged witnesses, 4 or 5 of them. Of course, they do not claim actually to have witnessed a cloud whisking Walton away into heaven, but they do claim to have seen the object knock him out with a blast of light. Here, they became terrified enough to abandon their friend. Then comes Walton's claims, unmediated by hypnotic regression.

What are your thoughts?

Oh, I forgot to mention that they all five of them underwent lie detection testing and thus unequivocally established the absolute truthfulness of every claim that any of them would ever make about UFOs. Yes, the usefulness of lie detector tests extends into the future, as well, by measuring any lies that a person is likely ever to tell.
 
Mr. Kimball,

Have you researched the Travis Walton case? Read any material on it? Here we have an alleged abduction experience with alleged witnesses, 4 or 5 of them. Of course, they do not claim actually to have witnessed a cloud whisking Walton away into heaven, but they do claim to have seen the object knock him out with a blast of light. Here, they became terrified enough to abandon their friend. Then comes Walton's claims, unmediated by hypnotic regression.

What are your thoughts?

My thoughts are that the Walton case is rife with inconsistencies, and remains at best "alleged". The skeptical take: http://www.debunker.com/texts/walton.html
 
I think the travis walton case is so full of holes that it isnt even worth considering. I know people have gotten angry on here before when I have said this, but its always a bit suspicious when a bunch of people who are ufo enthusiasts suddenly find themselves in a ufo close encounter.
Not saying it can;t happen, but it does make me think a little harder about the case, and when the story is full of holes anyway i tend to disregard it.
 
What we need is a modern version of the Travis Walton incident.

With our new science, and ability to gather real evidence, we could get to the bottom of things much faster I believe.
 
Original at: http://redstarfilms.blogspot.com/2007/01/alien-abduction-cult.html
The Alien Abduction Cult


I've met both David Jacobs and Budd Hopkins at different UFO conferences. They seem like nice enough people - witty, even charming, until you realize that they, and other "abductionologists" like them, have spent decades spouting absolute nonsense about "alien abductions", and in the process have caused very real trauma to very real people (and created, by the way, a nice little cottage industry for themselves).

Budd Hopkins has written [Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions]:
"Everything I have learned in twenty years of research into the UFO abduction phenomenon leads me to conclude that the aliens' central purpose is not to teach us about taking better care of the environment. Instead, all of the evidence points to their being here to carry out a complex breeding experiment in which they seem to be working to create a hybrid species, a mix of human and alien characteristics."
All of the evidence?

What "evidence"?

Memories induced by hypnosis?

I've written about the usefulness of hypnosis as an investigative technique before, particularly when it's done by self-taught amateurs (see: The Abduction Phenomenon and Hypnosis).​


I am curious to know Paul, what percentages of the cases Hopkins and Jacobs (let's include Mack here as well) have been involved with that required any hypnosis at all? Since your beef seems to be with the use of hypnosis as a tool by the them, and you accuse them of creating a "cottage industry" by it's use, surely you'll have the raw data to support your contention. Is it 100%, 75? 25?

Or does it matter?

Here's the uncomfortable truth - the abductionologists, feted at UFO conference after UFO conference, are the problem, not the solution. It isn't little green / grey men from some other planet that are causing pain to the people "studied" by Hopkins et al - the pain, the damage, is being caused by the "investigators" themselves, feeding questions, and then answers, to people who may have real problems.

And how do you come to this conclusion? Have you interviewed their subjects? Is there some sort of '"abductionologists" screwed me up' club you're privy to? Or is this simply conjecture?

Disagree with me? That's your prerogative, of course, but before you start wailing, and crying "foul", do me one small favour - show me the hard evidence that supports the claims made by the abductionologists.

First of all, your characterization of those you may choose to exercise their prerogative to disagree with you as "wailers" and "cryers" is extremely weak as is your "show me the hard evidence" canard. More on that later...

How about witnesses to an abduction - not hypnotically regressed ones, mind you, but independent witnesses who actually saw an abduction happen.

Where are they? I mean, we have myriad UFO cases with multiple independent witnesses.

Why not abductions?

Kevin Randle, Russ Estes and William Cone got it right in The Abduction Enigma when they wrote, at p. 359:
"Here's what it all comes down to. There is not a single shred of physical evidence that alien abductions areaking place other than the tainted testimony of the abductees. The physical evidence to support the claims is nonexistent. What has been offered as proof has been eliminated through testing by objective scientists or additional research by unbiased investigators. The scars, the missing fetus, or the implants do not carry the proper medical documentation to make a strong case, and in fact, suggest something else altogether."​


The other side of this argument from David Grinspoon and his aptly named article, "There's a Hole in my Philosophy":

"Science says, "Without objectively verifiable evidence, assume that it doesn't exist." But it is more accurate to say, "Without such evidence, we can't say whether it exists." We must be careful not to become lazy and let our skeptical mind-set become a closed one.

We have a certain view of how aliens will and will not behave and manifest their presence here. We get huffy when these imagined rules of interplanetary etiquette (of necessity based on projections of ourselves) are not followed. Skeptics complain that the aliens reported by UFO enthusiasts don't act like real aliens. Real aliens would not spend that kind of money on space fuel (energy is money). They'd stay home and improve things in their own systems. Real aliens wouldn't be interested in kidnapping humans and examining us or stealing sperm and eggs. We can't think of a good reason for them to behave like that. Real aliens would surely leave some spare parts or space trash or footprints behind for us to study. Don't you know anything about aliens?

Yet, science faces some special challenges in applying itself to the question of intelligent aliens. Our methodology and philosophy assume that nature doesn't care about and isn't aware of our experiments. (Some ufologists assume the opposite). We don't really know how to study something that knows it is being studied or might not want to be studied, or that might even be studying us. All our standards of evidence and proof - repeatability, multiple witnesses, material evidence, and so on - might fail with something that is actively messing with our minds, aware of us, and being careful not to be of interest to mainstream science."

http://www.astrobio.net/news/article692.html

I'll go further than Randle, Estes and Cone, who confined their critique to stating that the abductionologists had simply not proven their case. In my view, this has become an Alien Abduction Cult (of personality), aided and abetted by some in ufology who should know better. The abductionologists themselves are beyond irresponsible - they are dangerous, causing real pain and suffering to people who in at least some cases no doubt need real help.

Another question? Of all those who have approached Hopkins, Jacobs, Mack etc,, how many of those people have they, after consultation, referred to others for what they may have considered more appropriate help. You don't have any idea, do you?

Perhaps it's high time that the proper authorities take a closer look, not at "alien abductions", but rather at those who claim to be investigating them, because, with one or two notable and courageous exceptions like Kevin, "ufology" has proven itself wholly unwilling to confront the creators and purveyors of the Alien Abduction Cult.

Funny stuff. Based on what evidence (other than that of the conjecture of a somewhat whiny "anomalist")? However, if it floats yer boat and your so concerned, feel free to file the complaint. I would suggest a 'class action' would be the way to go, but then you'd have to find some litigants first which, I suspect, you'd be hard pressed to do.

Meanwhile, the ultimate irony for anomalists is that, should there really be a paranormal element to a few of these "abduction" cases, the Alien Abduction Cult has so muddied the waters with their bunk that it will be almost impossible to ever chart a different course.

The real "ultimate irony" is that the cause behind the abduction phenomena doesn't really give a rats ass how desperate anomalist are to "chart a different course". And they'll continue to 'do their thing' regardless. You'll figure it out on their timetable, not your own. I do hope that leaves you a bit chagrined, but doubt that it will keep you from creating your own little "cottage industry", what with the films and all.

While my responses may seem harsh, know that that it is simply irritation at having to respond to yet another misguided "Cult of the Abductee" thread on yet another Forum -and- my sadness that this one, coming from you, was weaker than most. However, please trust that I do hope you "live long and prosper".

BTW and lastly, I think the Tricksters had their way with you, what with the misspelling in the thread title.

"Abdution"

Priceless...

~Jonah





 
Back
Top