valiens
Skilled Investigator
My 2 cents:
1.) Experiencers don't have an obligation to share anything at all.
2.) Researchers have an obligation to share everything, which means explaining why they edit. (Note: this doesn't include details they hold back to see if experiencers will make blind correlations.)
Researchers, such as Budd Hopkins, who do have an extensive data base of experiencer testimony need to reevaluate the big picture. It's a fine line but there has got to be a way to weed out delusional testimony from testimony you consider outlier. You can't have outliers of an unknown topic can you? You create outliers based on the amount of testimony you receive, but the type of testimony people give up is often (consciously or not) going to be based on what they think you're willing to hear.
So if 50 people come to you and say, "Gray doctors abduct me and do experiments" and 5 people come to you and say, "Tall light beings told me everything is going to be okay," well it's Hopkins' instinct to throw those 5 out or convince them it's a screen memory from the gray doctors. This may have made sense in the beginning but does it now that he must have heard hundreds of people talk about tall light beings? ("Well 200 people talk about lights beings. I'll throw that away because 5,000 people talked about gray doctors.") That doesn't make sense to me anymore unless you've got this story you need to preserve to "make sense of" the thing you've now forgotten is still AN UNKNOWN.
So who is delusional at that point?
Now, add to all of this that slowly but surely, all sorts of paranormal testimony creeps into both sets of people. The thing the light being experiencers and the gray doctor experiencers have in common is that they've both seen ghosts, or experienced poltergeist-like activity, or developed some sort of psychic powers. Maybe both feel a great responsibility to the environment or were seemingly taught similar things on board a "ship."
Now, add a final ingredient: Both sets of people, after some years, feel like this isn't aliens completely separate from us. Some claim to be alien souls who agreed to come here or a permutation of that story. Some don't believe that. They aren't able to articulate what exactly this 'bond" is between human and other. Still, they feel the bond, for better or for worse.
How much of that can you throw out 30 years into your research? How much of that can you cover over with "Oh it's just what the alien doctors want you to think and Stockholm Syndrome?"
When do you relent and reevaluate the alien doctors myth?
1.) Experiencers don't have an obligation to share anything at all.
2.) Researchers have an obligation to share everything, which means explaining why they edit. (Note: this doesn't include details they hold back to see if experiencers will make blind correlations.)
***
Researchers, such as Budd Hopkins, who do have an extensive data base of experiencer testimony need to reevaluate the big picture. It's a fine line but there has got to be a way to weed out delusional testimony from testimony you consider outlier. You can't have outliers of an unknown topic can you? You create outliers based on the amount of testimony you receive, but the type of testimony people give up is often (consciously or not) going to be based on what they think you're willing to hear.
So if 50 people come to you and say, "Gray doctors abduct me and do experiments" and 5 people come to you and say, "Tall light beings told me everything is going to be okay," well it's Hopkins' instinct to throw those 5 out or convince them it's a screen memory from the gray doctors. This may have made sense in the beginning but does it now that he must have heard hundreds of people talk about tall light beings? ("Well 200 people talk about lights beings. I'll throw that away because 5,000 people talked about gray doctors.") That doesn't make sense to me anymore unless you've got this story you need to preserve to "make sense of" the thing you've now forgotten is still AN UNKNOWN.
So who is delusional at that point?
Now, add to all of this that slowly but surely, all sorts of paranormal testimony creeps into both sets of people. The thing the light being experiencers and the gray doctor experiencers have in common is that they've both seen ghosts, or experienced poltergeist-like activity, or developed some sort of psychic powers. Maybe both feel a great responsibility to the environment or were seemingly taught similar things on board a "ship."
Now, add a final ingredient: Both sets of people, after some years, feel like this isn't aliens completely separate from us. Some claim to be alien souls who agreed to come here or a permutation of that story. Some don't believe that. They aren't able to articulate what exactly this 'bond" is between human and other. Still, they feel the bond, for better or for worse.
How much of that can you throw out 30 years into your research? How much of that can you cover over with "Oh it's just what the alien doctors want you to think and Stockholm Syndrome?"
When do you relent and reevaluate the alien doctors myth?
