I'm not sure what AFAIK means but if the "implant" can't communicate, what is it's purpose? Are you suggesting its akin to an eartag we place on livestock for purposes of accounting or marking ownership? What is AFAIK?
AFAIK=as far as I know. Naturalists tag and release animals to study movements, so maybe aliens do it to humans, but... who knows?
I know we disagree on this, but the Travis Walton case is pretty convincing to me. Especially after 19 polygraphs and all 7 guys say they saw a craft that zapped Walton. Then that craft took him. He was gone for 5 days. I think this part of the abduction phenomenon is for real. I think he experienced what he says he did. Now most of the other stories I hear about little guys floating people through walls and ceilings I attribute to things like sleep paralysis, imagination, B.S., or very lucid dreams. Until an implant is shown to be something of scientific interest I doubt they are all that significant either. Probably just natural occurring tissue or some sort of debris the body has wrapped up. But, there are a very select few cases of the abduction phenomenon that are interesting and multi-witness verified. I have been reading a lot about the Allagash case lately. It's too bad those guys dont talk about it. I would like to hear their story first hand.
Randle, who is no fan of abduction accpounts, concluded the Walton case is a hoax. He said Walton flunked the polygraph. But given the other witnesses I concur with you. Leir thinks otherwise. Right, like the 3 KY women taken earlier the same year as alagash--1976.
Where is the evidence for Walton flunking the polygraph? I have only heard of Allen Dallas flunking one of the polygraphs but passing a couple others.
That's what KDR wrote in his The Randle Report. Randle also thinks Walton got the idea for a star map from the movie UFO Incident (starring James Earl Jones and Estelle Parsons) aired just before the abduction report, in October 1975.
Polygraphs are inadmissible in court. For very good reasons. Asking how accurate polygraphs are is like asking how accurate the keyboard of your computer is. The answer is, both can be made to say anything you want them to say. This is even more true with hypnosis. If ever there were pseudoscientific voodoo investigative practices these are it. Hooking up traumatized witnesses with wires and grilling them on their veracity or hypnotizing them and asking leading questions in search of support for preconceived notions of truth is repulsive. Not only that, they are shortcuts. They are often used instead of sound investigative practices. In such cases they lead away from the truth. So not only are you not getting anywhere near the real story, you are damaging real human beings in the process. Wonderful.
Not all psychologists and polygraph people are cranks. All too often, in abduction cases, where there's no conscious memory, hypnosis is the only way to obtain witness testimony.
The problem with hypnosis is that often times the therapist's thoughts make their way into the experience of the patient.
It is very important to understand the motive for subjecting someone to either one of these methods. Is it to help someone who is traumatized or to gather evidence? Polygraphs have only one use. To attempt to gather evidence. Of guilt, of deception etc. Polygraphs have no theraputic use. The administrator of such a test cares nothing of the well being of the subject. To have a person suffering from mental trauma endure such a test is vile. Hypnosis can be used to do either or both. Any use of hypnosis other than to try to help someone who is suffering is in my opinion unethical. If gathering evidence is the primary goal, then the well being of the patient is second at best. Any hypnotherapist who forgets his primary obligation to a patient is dangerous. This is why so many refuse to do it and speak out against their colleagues that do. Setting aside the risks involved in as Angel said, "the therapist's thoughts making their way into the experience of the patient", there is also no way for the therapist to acertain the veracity of what the client is saying. Just because you have a memory of an event does not mean that event actually happened. <!-- END TEMPLATE: newreply_reviewbit --><!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: newreply_reviewbit -->
Well, it's not like abductees are forced to undergo hypnosis or polygraphs. Many want to know what happened as much as anyone. There have been other kinds of evidence, notably in the Hill case---unusual smell, warts etc.
Throwing out any speculation about ETs, aliens, and whatnot doesn't the "phenomena" of the "alien abduction claims" present a interesting subject of study and discussion in and of itself? A large number of people report essentially the same experience, some claiming a family history of "abductions"? I cannot discount all of these experiences as sleep related phenomena. I cannot discount all of it as psychological problems or hoaxes either. Many of these people appear to be and reportedly lead otherwise normal lives aside from their abduction claims. What is really going on with the "abduction" phenomena? To simply dismiss it completely out of hand seems as irrational as taking it all at face value. Why do human beings report seeing UFOs, structured craft with occupants? Why do human beings report being abducted, examined, and even cross-bred by the occupants of UFOs? If it were four or five people in a trailer park in the Ozarks I might be able to simply ignore it. However, its a bit more involved than that. Personally, I don't think any of this (UFOs, abductions, etc.) is what it appears to be or what we imagine it to be. I don't think it is safe to assume anything about the information the phenomena allegedly supplies about itself as in the cases were aliens communicate things to abductees or when "documents" suddenly appear in someone's mailbox. I honestly don't know what to think about it other than something does appear to be actually happening to some of these people. Its true origin and nature are unknown and perhaps unknowable by me personally. I don't believe that "experiencing" it has helped any of the participants in their understanding either. Experiencing something is only half the equation if you understand the unreliability of the human senses and mind in interpreting and presenting reality to our awareness.
Well said. None of us can pretend to know for sure what is happening to these people - to say it is absolutely an alien abduction is a leap in logic that has no basis. We can discount many as sleep related issues, psychological problems, hallucinations, etc. Perhaps some of them are not a result of those reasons, but for now we just don't know.
Understatement. True, lay people can't be absolutely sure what we're dealing with. But in the aggregate, the phenomenon appears to represent a more advanced, nonhuman, technological system. IMO there's enough evidence to conclude that much. I'm well aware the phenomenon is highly deceptive; much information related to contactees is garbage. And many apparitions, and reported behaviors, are very strange. But we shouldn't allow ourselves to be overwhelmed by all that. IMO the best interpretation is that ETs are here, probably for some nefarious purpose, and want to confuse us to keep us from reaching any definite conclusions, and taking serious actions based on them. If that's true, boy, the visitors sure know their stuff, lol. Here we are, over 6 decades into the modern era, and there's still no clear consensus (among us lay types) even on the most basic issues such as what the phenomenon is.
Here's an interesting little item I found on my travels to and fro on the internet. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christopher-ryan/sheryl-crow-and-ufos_b_607205.html
Shall I quote a Slayer song that fits these same categories ? The human mind..terrifying and fucking stupid. The correlation is interesting, though we (mankind, that is ) search for patterns in everything it seems.
