kruggutter
Paranormal Maven
Not a problem Vesvehighfolk. Thank you for taking the time to consider it.
-
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!
Carol Rainey (Mrs. Budd Hopkins)
- Thread starter Creepy Green Light
- Start date
- Status
Not a problem Vesvehighfolk. Thank you for taking the time to consider it.
Heidi Lemmer
Paranormal Adept
I'll add something here that isn't really specific to this case but seems a trend, one which I find beyond frustrating. When the legwork on an old case is done it's incredible how much crap, inaccuracies, tall tales tucked within and opinion repeated as fact get's piled on. What fascinated me about Roswell? Trying to figure out what originally was reported! Bud Hopkins has been heavily smeared, it takes some work to go back and find either the truth or the weighing in on his findings by all the talking heads in the field. The Socorro case and the emblem, the testimony all get flip flopped. And somehow everyone forgets that when you ask a person to repeat a story twenty times over thirty years the story will change. We are not computers. Anyone surface skimming this subject will come away thinking most cases are hoaxes and most witnesses want attention. Honestly I'm finding the opposite. I'm finding very dry reporting and media frenzy, ufologist frenzy, ego driven book writers and skeptic/debunkers toss totally unrelated crap into the mix to see what sticks. A pilot reports a ufo and it becomes the matrix fairy. I mean, wtf!!! Seriously! Are we to lock our doors now in our made up matrix, trickster, sky critter worlds because people can't know what their reporting anymore? We are smearing witnesses beyond reason. Yes, it's true, people make shit up. It happens everywhere, involving every subject. But we as a people collectively tend to be honest. If you don't know this your in a bubble. If you don't know that people tend to say what they see without making it up, your our of sync and tuned into a negative aspect only of the human condition.
When people in this field decided that hypnosis was not a credible means of collecting information suddenly every abduction researcher was smeared with radical analysis. No comment on the hundreds of sessions where hypnosis was not used. Didn't happen. Abduction is bunk. How dumb is that? Instead of following it through, continuing to follow the research it was flat out rejected. I have no idea what the final conclusion is, and I doubt I ever will. There aren't many people that pursue it nor are there many who research it.
All I know now is that when it's common to say "the trend" is such and such it's code for me to look deeper. Jesus, people are afraid of their own shadow in this world. Oh quick, a mosquito just flew in.....duck....it might be the matrix collapsing into a thousand fairies!!!!!!!!!!
kruggutter
Paranormal Maven
Amen to that Heidi. A very good point.
Creepy Green Light
Paranormal Adept
Like I said, still amazing that planes hit the WTC and there's thousands of witnesses/videos. Plane lands in Hudson and there's thousands of witnesses/videos. Flying saucer sucks woman out of downtown New York City apartment multiple times and miraculously there's no videos, real witnesses (ones that can be interviewed & verified on camera).
Stagger Lee
Paranormal Adept
1989 middle of the night vs morning 2001. Non issue.
Creepy Green Light
Paranormal Adept
That makes no sense. So if the WTC was hit in the middle of the night or a plane crashed in the middle of the night nobody would have seen it and there would be no video? In NEW YORK CITY? Lol.
Stagger Lee
Paranormal Adept
How many video camera's would have been pointing at the top of an apartment complex in 1989? All the camera's I had ever seen back then, and there weren't many, had to be pointed at the entrance/exits of convenience stores, banks, etc. No one filming windows of an apartment complex in 1989. Diff world tech wise.
Creepy Green Light
Paranormal Adept
Doesn't matter. There still were too many cross section angles and private citizens with cameras and video recorders. SOMEONE would have captured SOMETHING....if something ever happened. At THE VERY LEAST there would be thousands of eyewitnesses. But in the city that never sleeps, I guess everyone happened to be sleeping...on those exact nights.
Stagger Lee
Paranormal Adept
You are focusing on the fact a video camera wasn't pointed at the top of an apartment complex at 3 am in the winter of '89. Like I said, a non issue- considering such technology as cameras were only pointing where a man could walk, in those days. The main focus, imo- should be the witnesses on the bridge (Janet Kimball) and what her surviving family could provide. The fact that none of them would come forward, while understandable, does concern me.
kruggutter
Paranormal Maven
It's also important to remember that two other firsthand eyewitnesses (New York Post workers Yancy Spence and Robert "Bobby" N.) to the beginning of
Linda's November 30, 1989 UFO abduction have come forward to Budd Hopkins in person and had their accounts documented. This means that it doesn't
all rest on Janet Kimball's shoulders, nor is she the only firsthand eyewitness to the incident.
Tyger
Paranormal Adept
I perhaps agree with others that video-taping was not an 'in' thing to be doing back then (it's hard to believe how currant that phenomenon really is) but I do agree with Creepy_Green_Light in general.
Two additional witnesses do not make this credible. New York is always 'awake'. The paucity of witnesses is strange. People in so many locations should have seen something like this easily. Maybe someone has to experience NYC to understand how 'awake' 24/7 that city really is. People are everywhere. In fact a mere two extra witnesses sound suspicious - there should be dozens more witnesses at the very least, if not hundreds. The police lines should have been sizzling that night - they weren't.
Burnt State
Paranormal Adept
'Why was it not in the news the next morning?' is a significant question. It's a major, fantastic physical spectacle of the highest order. This ain't a logging crew in the middle of nowhere. But like Walton, this story disobeys many of the normal abduction patterns. It also claims the most significant group of witnesses of high status, that apparently can only come forward by word of mouth or once in a blue moon if that.
This physical carnival event was a performance of the highest order with levitation of beings in a super densely populated space with supposed super blinding light - couldn't have been missed, really. Where's the rest of humanity missing this event and just not really talking about it, reporting it. This is Brooklyn after all who as we have recently seen likes to talk about UFO's. The whole legacy of witnesses and whether or not Richard and Dan really exist is still highly debatable.
If Richard and Dan do exist why is there not a series of police reports documenting the physical abduction, attempted murder and repeated other abduction and stalking episodes that persisted? Is it not reasonable for a parent to want to have nothing but the absolute protection of law enforcement to protect you and yours given the attempted assault? Certainly a man of God as close to the big guy as a Cardinal would by necessity need to, if not demand, that the law be pursued in such a case. These features make no sense to me.
Whether or not all the evidence has been forged or confabulated remains a reasonable option given the various unanswered questions and in the face of the excessively detailed pro and con assertions. There's certainly nothing confirmed there that I can see. And like Walton, if it was true then it has to be hands down the single most important case in history that has paranoid implications for the nature of our social structure that confirm some of the most far end spectra of the Alien Abduction Phenomenon. It's one or the other.
This physical carnival event was a performance of the highest order with levitation of beings in a super densely populated space with supposed super blinding light - couldn't have been missed, really. Where's the rest of humanity missing this event and just not really talking about it, reporting it. This is Brooklyn after all who as we have recently seen likes to talk about UFO's. The whole legacy of witnesses and whether or not Richard and Dan really exist is still highly debatable.
If Richard and Dan do exist why is there not a series of police reports documenting the physical abduction, attempted murder and repeated other abduction and stalking episodes that persisted? Is it not reasonable for a parent to want to have nothing but the absolute protection of law enforcement to protect you and yours given the attempted assault? Certainly a man of God as close to the big guy as a Cardinal would by necessity need to, if not demand, that the law be pursued in such a case. These features make no sense to me.
Whether or not all the evidence has been forged or confabulated remains a reasonable option given the various unanswered questions and in the face of the excessively detailed pro and con assertions. There's certainly nothing confirmed there that I can see. And like Walton, if it was true then it has to be hands down the single most important case in history that has paranoid implications for the nature of our social structure that confirm some of the most far end spectra of the Alien Abduction Phenomenon. It's one or the other.
Creepy Green Light
Paranormal Adept
Agree with Tyger. The thought of there NOT being thousands of eyewitnesses is ridiculous. Even more so if you know NYC (or have experienced it).
Creepy Green Light
Paranormal Adept
Well put Burnt State.
Nah. Much as our perceptive capacities open us to awareness of the local environment around us they do not enable us to be aware at once of all points of possible focus within the cone of vision. How long were the visible manifestations of the 1989 phenomenon actually visible, and how near would one have to be to focus on it? On the bridge beneath and a block or two from Cortile's apartment [btw, what floor was it on?], many people might well not have had the event even within the periphery of their vision (focused, like their attention, on the traffic ahead or, it appears, on the problem of their cars having stalled). These last few arguments are not strong enough imo to support a conclusion that the event could not have occurred.
Burnt, do you really think the New York Times would have broken its long-standing policy of ignoring the ufo phenomenon to report this event? Who would have reported it to them? Would that person or persons be taken seriously? Would the police confirm it, and on the basis of whose testimony (even if one of their own officers called it in)? And how often, over how many decades, have we seen the reluctance of people to report ufos? They've learned not to 'get involved'. Nor would a UN official or G-men of some sort get involved lest they lose their positions. Moreover, what could a Cardinal do, other than try to provide some support to the woman who had this experience or thought she did?
There's no way to go back to or reconstruct the situation that night in 1989. One can only decide whether or not to take seriously the witnesses who have stood up concerning it. Some people, including Budd Hopkins and kruggutter (both of whom appear to me to be/have been intelligent and well-informed about this case) do take the witnesses seriously. Others will not, on the basis of more or less, usually less, information accumulated about the case. What's the point of arguing about it endlessly on ambiguous or non-existent grounds?
There's no way to go back to or reconstruct the situation that night in 1989. One can only decide whether or not to take seriously the witnesses who have stood up concerning it. Some people, including Budd Hopkins and kruggutter (both of whom appear to me to be/have been intelligent and well-informed about this case) do take the witnesses seriously. Others will not, on the basis of more or less, usually less, information accumulated about the case. What's the point of arguing about it endlessly on ambiguous or non-existent grounds?
Last edited:
kruggutter
Paranormal Maven
The reported duration of the UFO's visibility during the November 30, 1989 UFO abduction incident was reported to have
been between 90 seconds to 3 minutes. The area within which the abduction took place was on the Lower East Side. The
locations within that area to see the abduction were primarily the Manhattan side of Brooklyn Bridge, the Manhattan side
of the Manhattan Bridge, the FDR drive between the two aforementioned bridges, South Street between the two aforementioned
bridges and Catherine Slip. There is always, in that general vicinity, people and traffic of some sort. However, the vicinity is not
Times Square in regards to the number of people present.
It's important to note that one cannot accurately gauge the number of witnesses to an event simply based on the number of
witnesses who came forward. The beginning of the November 30, 1989 UFO abduction incident was reported to have been
extremely terrifying and fantastical to witness, so much so that it took a long time for many of the witnesses to get up the nerve
to write to someone about it to report it. This apprehension on their part is a composite of fear and fear of ridicule. The November
30, 1989 UFO abduction incident was not, based on what has been reported, something that was particularly pleasant to witness.
It's also important to recognise that some of the witnesses who did come forward did not recollect the incident in full until years
later, a feature which is also prevalent in the UFO abduction phenomenon.
It is not known if any of the witnesses reported the incident to the police or military. Even if they did the police and military are
not in the custom of making such reports readily accessible public knowledge, at least without significant red tape.
The Linda Cortile case is comprised of public record witnesses and private record witnesses. Some people are not in a position to
be going public with what they saw, others have no inclination to. That is the nature of life and this phenomenon.
been between 90 seconds to 3 minutes. The area within which the abduction took place was on the Lower East Side. The
locations within that area to see the abduction were primarily the Manhattan side of Brooklyn Bridge, the Manhattan side
of the Manhattan Bridge, the FDR drive between the two aforementioned bridges, South Street between the two aforementioned
bridges and Catherine Slip. There is always, in that general vicinity, people and traffic of some sort. However, the vicinity is not
Times Square in regards to the number of people present.
It's important to note that one cannot accurately gauge the number of witnesses to an event simply based on the number of
witnesses who came forward. The beginning of the November 30, 1989 UFO abduction incident was reported to have been
extremely terrifying and fantastical to witness, so much so that it took a long time for many of the witnesses to get up the nerve
to write to someone about it to report it. This apprehension on their part is a composite of fear and fear of ridicule. The November
30, 1989 UFO abduction incident was not, based on what has been reported, something that was particularly pleasant to witness.
It's also important to recognise that some of the witnesses who did come forward did not recollect the incident in full until years
later, a feature which is also prevalent in the UFO abduction phenomenon.
It is not known if any of the witnesses reported the incident to the police or military. Even if they did the police and military are
not in the custom of making such reports readily accessible public knowledge, at least without significant red tape.
The Linda Cortile case is comprised of public record witnesses and private record witnesses. Some people are not in a position to
be going public with what they saw, others have no inclination to. That is the nature of life and this phenomenon.
Tyger
Paranormal Adept
A feature that makes anyone's testimony highly suspect imo.
kruggutter
Paranormal Maven
Perhaps, but it is commonplace within the abduction phenomenon.
Stagger Lee
Paranormal Adept
kruggutter posted above- the duration of the incident between one and 3 minutes. It is also interesting, that of Janet Kimball's description. Being one of the cars that had shut down on the bridge, the object had flicked on like a light bulb. She had originally thought it a movie production, I suppose the object "turning off" like a light bulb and the screams of others on the bridge changed her mind?
I've always considered Hopkin's intelligent, and genuine. I found it hard to believe that he could have been taken on a hoax by Linda- unless it is as George said, a case he "needed" to believe in.
I've always considered Hopkin's intelligent, and genuine. I found it hard to believe that he could have been taken on a hoax by Linda- unless it is as George said, a case he "needed" to believe in.
- Status