I revised my post after you quoted it, but the good intentions on my part were still there.
Yeah, I noticed and appreciate your revised edition!
-
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!
Free episodes:
>
- Status
Yeah, I noticed and appreciate your revised edition!
IndigoEyes
Guest
Yeah, I noticed and appreciate your revised edition!
This is very corny, but as we all know, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions".
By the way, I agree with your description of THE THREAT by David Jacobs as soft porn. However, I am afraid that description might prompt others to buy it. Trust me - you can do much better in the porn department by just cruising the internet. Nonetheless, the book is an text book example of paranoia tinged with madness. I really have to wonder at this point what kind of place Temple University is, some sort of private Bible college or a party school for rich dingbats? Their standards certainly do not seem very high for a private school if Jacobs is their idea of an appropriate member of staff.
Thank you brownie, Jacobs does seem sex obsessed with the ravaging of his female subjects by those horny hybrids who appear to have a slight tendency to sadism. Marquis de Jacobs? I seem to recall some comment from emma woods on the paratopia cast where Jacobs requested some of her underwear so he could presumably trace hybrid DNA. As the saying goes "yeah right".
Come on David out of the closet!
---------- Post added at 05:10 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:06 AM ----------
Yes indigo eyes Temple must be as their name implies some sort of bible college who also happen to be rich dingbats. Dont these places have to pass any criteria to be able to call themselves a university??? Standards please.
Consider the audience though. Most of us aren't into the really raunchy hardcore porn. Well, I can't speak for males I suppose. But, I suspect for those of us interested in such an outre subject as abduction that it's easier for our conscience to accept a little titillation under the guise of alien abduction research.
Another gem of Jacobs was his authoritative explanation on how babies are made [The Threat and I think also in his previous book Secret Life] . The greys look a female in the eyes while she's parylized helpless on their examination table. Their huge eyes do their mojo on her optic nerves to release an egg and to orgasm (can I print that here?) and be impregnated (by those hybrids again, that are conventiently standing naked off to the side or the occasional human male abductee, standing naked in a stupor).
For those of us who screamed EEEEEEEK when we read of eloquent Whitley Streiber's no-no hole violation, Jacobs far lesser writing skills made for even more EEEEEEEkishness.
Not to mention Jacobs is misinformed on reprodution. A pregnancy does not usually occur right away and the big O isn't necessary to facilitate it. [Hey, you're going to get me in trouble here, Indigo!]About Temple U. - no it's not a bible school that I'm aware of. Certainly not like Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell's Univerisities, where the holy ghost is most certainly present and accounted for. 8)
---------- Post added at 05:28 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:21 AM ----------
Y/W. codex! Love the "Marquis de Jacobs" and that is so creepy about the request for Emma's undewear to trace the dna of those pesky hybrids! Major ick factor!
Your Paracast Newsletter -- April 17, 2010
This conversation has clearly descended beyond the absurd. It's time to move beyond this nonsense and discuss the best ways to investigate UFO abductions. That's what was really discussed on the episode in question.
If this thread continues to move into unsavory directions, it will be closed.
This conversation has clearly descended beyond the absurd. It's time to move beyond this nonsense and discuss the best ways to investigate UFO abductions. That's what was really discussed on the episode in question.
If this thread continues to move into unsavory directions, it will be closed.
Tom From Hong Kong
Sleeping with one eye open . . .
Brownie,
With all due respect, do you happen to know Dr. Jacobs personally? Do you have any reasonable basis to make the claim that he is "unstable, unethical" any more than someone can make exactly the same claim that Ms. Woods is unstable and unethical (or indeed, "bat shit insane"), particularly given that none of us know the facts of the case in their totality? I don't think anyone would condone hypnosis over the telephone or Dr. Jacobs' apparent suggestion to a patient that she may suffer from MPD. But until a thorough review of the evidence can occur, I personally would refrain from attacking anyone's character.
Additionally, assuming that Ms. Woods' claims are complete and true, is there any evidence that Dr. Jacobs has acted like this in other instances (outside of the one other anonymous claim made by Ms. Woods)? Perhaps in this one instance Dr. Jacobs 'lost it' because he unjustifiably believed himself to be threatened -- haven't you ever done something that you later to regret because you weren't thinking clearly or were operating under a false impression? Did your actions adversely impact another person, by chance? Worse yet, have you ever done something with planned intent that harmed another person? Would you characterize yourself as "unethical" as a result? The one person whom I know who does know Dr. Jacobs personally speaks very highly of his character, by the way.
As far as abduction theory being "soft-porn", I have met two people in my life who claim to be abductees. I have talked to their families. Their stories were largely consistent with what Dr. Jacobs writes about. Now, this has raised my interest in the topic, so I have read a number of books on this particular topic, as well as listened to a number of interviews on C2C and various podcasts. What does this say about my character? I frankly would not characterize abduction literature as "soft-porn" -- far from it.
Tom
Remember that Emma had been under the care of a therapist. The situation was clearly bad enough to cause her to seek help from total strangers on the other side of the world.
Now then: How should UFO abductions be properly investigated? Any ideas?
Now then: How should UFO abductions be properly investigated? Any ideas?
ArchieBedford
Partly experienced
There is a very good collection of essays published by Kansas University Press in 2000 about the abduction phenomenon and how it might be studied to the best academic standards:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0700610324/?tag=rockoids-20
with essays by Stuart Appelle, Ron Westrum, Don Donderi, Michael Swords, Jerry Clark, Tom Bullard, David Jacobs, Budd Hopkins, John Mack and Michael Persinger. Chapter eight is an essay by Budd Hopkins titled "Hypnosis and the Investigation of UFO Abduction Accounts" which makes interesting reading and, to those members who have not read it, may shed some light on BH's surprisingly detailed and careful methodology. All the essays are of a consistently high academic standard and definitely worth reading, even those written by non-believers in the physical reality of abduction events such as Michael Persinger.
One paragraph in Hopkins' essay may be worth quoting to get the general tone:
"Critics are fond of remarking that there should be corroborating outside evidence to support material that is recovered hypnotically. I agree and will go even further: there should be corroborating evidence to support nonhypnotic testimony too, whether we are dealing with police work, clinical hypnotherapy, or UFO abduction accounts. I will therefore present several categories of evidence that support the physical reality of specific abduction cases. Familiarity with at least some of these complex cases is essential to an understanding of the reasons many UFO investigators regard abductions as actual, rather than 'imaginal', events."
The rest of the essay focuses on specific other categories of evidence such as prolonged PTSD symptoms sometimes manifesting for decades, multi-witness events (in two cases where seven people were involved, and everyone should know the case of the Allagash Four investigated by Ray Fowler and his team back in the 1970s), the common types of physical marks found on abductees' bodies, physical traces on the ground such as soil baked hard in a big circle following UFO sightings accompanied by abduction events, and photographic and film evidence which does exist in some cases. There is a lot of it, if you study the case materials in detail and dig deep. It rarely comes down to uncorroborated accounts retrieved by amateur hypnosis, and to claim this is all there is really betrays little knowledge of this field.
Many members may have this book and be already familiar with its content, and with other work by all these writers on the subject. I don't think any of the content is available online, but would be pleased to be corrected on this point. Otherwise, you'll need to buy or borrow the book.
C D B Bryan's book "CE4" is also worth reading, if you don't know it:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0140195270/?tag=rockoids-20
Bryan's best-known published book is "Friendly Fire" which predates CE4 by a few years. CE4 details his journey from non-belief in the reality of alien abductions founded largely on ignorance and lack of acquaintance with the data, to serious professional and personal interest in the phenomenon after attending the 1992 MIT Conference chaired by John Mack, interviewing abductees and personally investigating their cases.
Cheers.
Your Paracast Newsletter -- April 17, 2010
Fair enough Gene, methodology needs to be professional. research for ufo abduction which can easily be the target of ridicule needs to co-researched ie when abductees are interviewed particularly under hypnosis there needs to be another researcher else present to evaluate the quality of questioning to ensure it is not leading.
Above all, as people seem to note, there is the need to respect the abductee in terms of his or her safety both during and after interviews.
In terms of researchers they need to remember that without abductees they would be without a shoe to shine so to speak. So their research isn't to give them a public profile but is to honor and respect abductee experiences.
Apols for veering off the subject in prev thread responses but I am upset that a researcher seems to have chosen a sensitive area to eventually self-aggrandise. Emma Woods hasn't been treated with the dignity and respect she deserved. Her website clearly shows that the methodology employed by Jacobs wasn't professional and therefore (in my opinion) casts a shadow on methodology he has employed with other abductees. We can all muck up as no one is prefect but I do not think it is OK to pretend that he is above constructive criticism - Jacobs initiated the name-calling and what I consider to be quite harming accusations ("stalker") . It is what we can learn from the experience of a researcher being in one country, the abductee in another- how would that best be managed or should it not be done at all? And how do we safeguard a field of research which is important and close to our hearts from abuse?
regards
codex
Fair enough Gene, methodology needs to be professional. research for ufo abduction which can easily be the target of ridicule needs to co-researched ie when abductees are interviewed particularly under hypnosis there needs to be another researcher else present to evaluate the quality of questioning to ensure it is not leading.
Above all, as people seem to note, there is the need to respect the abductee in terms of his or her safety both during and after interviews.
In terms of researchers they need to remember that without abductees they would be without a shoe to shine so to speak. So their research isn't to give them a public profile but is to honor and respect abductee experiences.
Apols for veering off the subject in prev thread responses but I am upset that a researcher seems to have chosen a sensitive area to eventually self-aggrandise. Emma Woods hasn't been treated with the dignity and respect she deserved. Her website clearly shows that the methodology employed by Jacobs wasn't professional and therefore (in my opinion) casts a shadow on methodology he has employed with other abductees. We can all muck up as no one is prefect but I do not think it is OK to pretend that he is above constructive criticism - Jacobs initiated the name-calling and what I consider to be quite harming accusations ("stalker") . It is what we can learn from the experience of a researcher being in one country, the abductee in another- how would that best be managed or should it not be done at all? And how do we safeguard a field of research which is important and close to our hearts from abuse?
regards
codex
Capnkumquat
Skilled Investigator
When a 747 goes down in a fiery crash, the NTSB collects every single piece of the plane they can find to get as much info as they can about the crash. They don't do this to rebuild the airplane so it can fly again, they do this so they can examine similar airplanes for problems and keep them from crashing.
This is how I would approach the Emma Woods story. Her plane is damaged beyond repair. Learn what you can, and see if you can use it as a way to investigate other cases that have not crashed and burned yet.
Xylo
Paranormal Adept
Wow. This is a human being we're talking about. Your wording is a bit harsh, don't you think. I understand your sentiment, but you could have put it down with a bit more subtlety.
Capnkumquat
Skilled Investigator
Oh c'mon, it's called an analogy.
I have been on Emma's side from the first time I heard the story. Besides, I'm not talking about how you treat Emma, but how you deal with the problem of a "damaged" witness.
Puleeeze.
I have been on Emma's side from the first time I heard the story. Besides, I'm not talking about how you treat Emma, but how you deal with the problem of a "damaged" witness.
Puleeeze.
P
Paul Kimball
Guest
Just received this from UFO Updates:
Intruders Foundation Seminar Series Announcements - Please do
not reply to this email.
The IF Seminar Series Presents
Historian
Dr. David M. Jacobs and
Budd Hopkins,
Executive Director of the Intruders Foundation
In a two-part program
Updates and New Cases
On Saturday evening, April 24, IF will present its first seminar of the year. It will feature historian Dr. David M. Jacobs and Budd Hopkins, director of the Intruders Foundation, in a two-part program Updates and New Cases. In their dialogue on the current state of UFO abduction research, Dr. Jacobs, author of Secret Life and The Threat, will discuss the issue of hybrid beings interacting with humans here on earth, a subject he has touched on before that he continues to investigate. It remains a fascinating topic of serious interest to the research community. Budd Hopkins, author of Missing Time, Intruders and Witnessed, as well as a recent memoir, Art, Life and UFOs, will concentrate on abduction cases he is currently investigating and will update the audience on new developments in a few ongoing cases. Finally, in something of a change from our familiar program format, we hope to provide more time than usual for the Q & A portion of the evening in order to allow for a more extensive dialogue with the audience. Thus, in our April 24th IF seminar we are offering the audience not only an extended opportunity to interact with these two accomplished UFO abduction investigators, but also the chance to learn more about cutting-edge research in the field. We urge you to attend this important event.
REGISTRATION & INFORMATION
Seminars will be held at the new meeting rooms of A.R.E., located on the SECOND FLOOR at 241 W. 30th Street (between Seventh and Eighth Avenues), New York, NY . The price of seminars is $20 for members, seniors, students, and non-members. Reservations will be accepted by telephone at 212-645-5278.
Reservations will be filled on a first come, first served basis.
Ugh. These men have no shame.
On the upside, here's the big chance for The Clueless One, who as I seem to recall lives in NYC or thereabouts, to step up to the plate and confront Jacobs in public about the Emma Woods case. He says he's been looking for his chance - well, here it is. Take a tape-recorder, Jeremy, and have at it. I say that not as a dare, but in genuine hope that you'll go, and confront Jacobs publicly, and in person, as one of the two guys who have been pushing the "Emma Woods" case the most vociferously. That's an episode of Paratopia I think everyone here would want to hear.
Intruders Foundation Seminar Series Announcements - Please do
not reply to this email.
The IF Seminar Series Presents
Historian
Dr. David M. Jacobs and
Budd Hopkins,
Executive Director of the Intruders Foundation
In a two-part program
Updates and New Cases
On Saturday evening, April 24, IF will present its first seminar of the year. It will feature historian Dr. David M. Jacobs and Budd Hopkins, director of the Intruders Foundation, in a two-part program Updates and New Cases. In their dialogue on the current state of UFO abduction research, Dr. Jacobs, author of Secret Life and The Threat, will discuss the issue of hybrid beings interacting with humans here on earth, a subject he has touched on before that he continues to investigate. It remains a fascinating topic of serious interest to the research community. Budd Hopkins, author of Missing Time, Intruders and Witnessed, as well as a recent memoir, Art, Life and UFOs, will concentrate on abduction cases he is currently investigating and will update the audience on new developments in a few ongoing cases. Finally, in something of a change from our familiar program format, we hope to provide more time than usual for the Q & A portion of the evening in order to allow for a more extensive dialogue with the audience. Thus, in our April 24th IF seminar we are offering the audience not only an extended opportunity to interact with these two accomplished UFO abduction investigators, but also the chance to learn more about cutting-edge research in the field. We urge you to attend this important event.
REGISTRATION & INFORMATION
Seminars will be held at the new meeting rooms of A.R.E., located on the SECOND FLOOR at 241 W. 30th Street (between Seventh and Eighth Avenues), New York, NY . The price of seminars is $20 for members, seniors, students, and non-members. Reservations will be accepted by telephone at 212-645-5278.
Reservations will be filled on a first come, first served basis.
Ugh. These men have no shame.
On the upside, here's the big chance for The Clueless One, who as I seem to recall lives in NYC or thereabouts, to step up to the plate and confront Jacobs in public about the Emma Woods case. He says he's been looking for his chance - well, here it is. Take a tape-recorder, Jeremy, and have at it. I say that not as a dare, but in genuine hope that you'll go, and confront Jacobs publicly, and in person, as one of the two guys who have been pushing the "Emma Woods" case the most vociferously. That's an episode of Paratopia I think everyone here would want to hear.
IndigoEyes
Guest
What?!?! No "Doctor" Richard Boylan? He seems to fit in with these two hucksters, so I am surprised they haven't linked up, joined arms in a three musketeers sort of "all for one and each for himself" sort of allegiance.
As for The Clueless One, I realize (from reading between the lines) that you two do not get along very well personally. Frankly, The Clueless One has been very rude and bizarre towards me. I think the guy likes verbally slapping people in the face, even when they might have initially been well intentioned. But I hope you send your (above) post to him at Paratopia. Does the big "J" lurk here? They made this public annoucement a few episodes ago saying they were not going to sully themselves further by responding to the ufo community. So I hope you send your suggestion to the source, so he can ponder it while sitting in his famous "Fart Chair" at Jeff's house. Now, I think both Jeremy and Jeff do EXCELLENT work, when they aren't acting like Beavis and Butt-head. I don't know if it is a generational difference or if they are just uncouth jerks at times, but if they'd leave behind the very unfunny attempts at junior highschool humor, and STOP insulting people in ufology who might otherwise be their allies, they'd get their valid messages across much better.
Going back to the original topic of your post - this does actually make me a bit sick to my stomach. These guys have no shame, as you say. Of course, some folks here in the Paracast would claim they have good intentions. Uh huh.
---------- Post added at 04:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:20 PM ----------
Jacques Vallee laid out what he thought should be the proper way to investigate abdutions and ufo's in general in his excellent trilogy back in the 1990's. As usual, it fell on deaf ears. I recently reread the trilogy and they are extremely topical to 2010 ufology. He also pointedly lambasts abduction research based on hypnosis. If George Noory and Tim Binnell (sp?) can get the one-and-only Jacques Vallee for an interview, perhaps the Paracast could do so? Seriously. Can you look into that? Just about everyone in ufology at least gives lip service to having very high esteem for the man, even if ufology pretty much ignores what he wrote.
P.S. With great respect to Archie, I would NOT recommend any book that was editted and put together by none other than David Jacobs. Will you ever stop promoting this man?
Check our archives.
He has already been on The Paracast.
He has already been on The Paracast.
IndigoEyes
Guest
Check our archives.
He has already been on The Paracast.
He has?!?!?!?!
Well, hush my mouth and call me a cab! I've got to find that one. So, that brings up the question, if you had an interview with Vallee, how come you still need to ask the question of how to investigate abductions? I suppose that is a flippant question, but this guy has laid out what he thinks is a valid methodology. He is a scientist, and has traveled the world (especially South America) to personally investigate this phenomena. No arm chair pontification!
The Clueless One and Jeff Ritzman have commented on him a great deal on their podcast. So how come the Paracast seems "in the dark"? Maybe the Paracast needs a staff (unpaid) researcher who stays on top of all the latest ufology drek and occasional pearls of wisdom. Don't look at me, I'm too busy obsessing on my enlarged prostate right now (more information than you needed to know....hopefully, that doesn't fit under soft porn!)
He has?!?!?!?!
Well, hush my mouth and call me a cab! I've got to find that one. So, that brings up the question, if you had an interview with Vallee, how come you still need to ask the question of how to investigate abductions? I suppose that is a flippant question, but this guy has laid out what he thinks is a valid methodology. He is a scientist, and has traveled the world (especially South America) to personally investigate this phenomena. No arm chair pontification!
The Clueless One and Jeff Ritzman have commented on him a great deal on their podcast. So how come the Paracast seems "in the dark"? Maybe the Paracast needs a staff (unpaid) researcher who stays on top of all the latest ufology drek and occasional pearls of wisdom. Don't look at me, I'm too busy obsessing on my enlarged prostate right now (more information than you needed to know....hopefully, that doesn't fit under soft porn!)
It comes down to the fact that we don't spend 99% of our time covering UFO abductions. But we've had leading researchers in the field and we continue to explore the matter without excess emotion. The main site has a convenient search feature where you can check out all the episodes.
But there are other topics to cover as well, and The Paracast is only a weekly show. We cannot do everything.
However, if someone wants to volunteer to assist with research, we're not going to refuse.
IndigoEyes
Guest
You and the co-hosts do an excellent job.
On second thought, it might not be wise to delve more deeply into ufology. You might start getting threatening emails or instant messages from alien hybrids! When I visited Scottsdale's Old Town a few years ago, the place was full of them, all wearing souvenier cowboy hats and tee-shirts. Happily, I knew that hybrids are repelled by the smell of garlic, so I was safe!
You and the co-hosts do an excellent job.
On second thought, it might not be wise to delve more deeply into ufology. You might start getting threatening emails or instant messages from alien hybrids! When I visited Scottsdale's Old Town a few years ago, the place was full of them, all wearing souvenier cowboy hats and tee-shirts. Happily, I knew that hybrids are repelled by the smell of garlic, so I was safe!
I don't live too far from there. On your next trip, we'll get some pizza topped with garlic.
Great thread. Some random thoughts/rants. I also have no dog in this hunt - or whatever the saying is. I introduce these for the sake of thought experimentation, I don't pretend to have any answers. How can you with such a subject?
I use "alien" and "ship" below for ease of explaination - I know not that we are being visited by either but rather by "things" that at least appear at times like such.
1. Hypnosis cleary seems a mixed bag. Certainly like any information processed from the brain there are some serious issues with taking hypnosis derived info at face-value. Having said that it does seem to offer some value in the right circumstances. I don't know if DJ or BH are offering any value to their "patients". Is it better for a person to think they are being helped if they really didn't need the help in the first place? My answer would be if they felt compelled to engage these guys in the first place, and they later feel they got value out of it, that's the way it is and don't chastise the parties involved. If they feel harmed by the experience, they should make their voices heard so others can avoid the same fate. That doesn't necessarily mean suing the other person in court.
2. Standards vs. regulation - Agreed there should be some standard organizations or at least some 3rd party developed code of ethics. However these should be competing programs and completely voluntarily. Government regulation in this area will do nothing but stifle creative thought and ultimately harm those seeking help by limiting expert supply and discouraging freedom of choice. The AMA is a great example of how not to do this - a third party organization in bed with the government. It's a one size fits all approach that I am sure many of us have had frustrations with in personal experience. We would do better to start an ebay-like (though not monopolistic) rating system for practitioners in this field so people can assess the risks and feedback from patients.
3. I don't need a freaking PhD to get stitches. Do you need a license to practice hypnosis? Granted "abductee phenomenon" would seem to be a more serious matter - or is it? Who knows since we know not where the truth lies. Where do you draw the line? How many years of schooling is enough for abductee hypnosis? Will only Harvard trained hypnosis researchers suffice? What academic hypnosis programs currently instruct on precisely this topic? You can definitely go overbaord. These are all reasons to let consenting adults make decisions based on what's available. Again, developing an ebay-like rating system would seem the better option. Are the detractors from BH and DJ saying these guys should goto jail? Stop talking to patients? Are they saying they have not helped anyone? Should I not be allowed to work with these guys if I think they might help? Do you really think most doctors help people who claim abduction experiences? Licensed doctors are not always the answer, though perhaps often for other areas of medicine they are usually the answer.
4. If you are seeking truth in these matters with help from the government or from the government itself you are by definition "doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different result".
5. We so often fall prey to the "but these aliens don't act like aliens should" line of thinking. I heard Nick Redfern say on the most recent podcast, something like "but why would aliens be interested in nuclear weapons if they didn't have a vested interest in our planet"? Nick was talking about lazy intellectualism and seemed to fall into the trap in the same breath.
6. Do you think my dog wonders why I might sit on a couch on a winter Sunday, watch a 60" TV viewing screen and get excited/upset by grown men with helmets and pads throw a leather ball around on a 100 yard field of grass. Don't you think my dog, who himself is entranced by thrown objects wonders: "why doesn't he just take my bone outside and throw it around the yard? What the hell does he need to watch this crap on TV for?" Humans trying to deduce what these entities are doing and why is similarly futile but fun to think about. Thought experiement.
7. Is it possible that the visitations we are experiencing are from a society so completely unlike ours that we should not expect their behavior to be in any way logical? There seems to be a grand assumption that the aliens that are visiting us are acting in concert, especially if they are of the same visible appearance. What if instead they have such advanced technology that every "ship" or group of entities seen are completely autonomous, like super individualistic space nomads. If they can really fold time and space wouldn't that impose difficulties in trying to coordinate any kind of large society and or body of knowledge? Like the explorers of the "New World" each ship is exploring the universe on its own with its own intentions. I imagine if technology advanced to the point where you could tap a zero-point, limitless, energy source and transverse the universe in an instant, I would probably go out for an exciting adventure in my Mercedes Saucer and might never come back 'cuz it'd be too damn fun and intersting buzzing the schlep Neanderthals near Alpha Centauri. Also with extreme forms of nano-technology, supergoo, and ability to control minds and memories - is it any wonder we see extreme divergence in many visual appearances of entities and their craft? I mean I suspect these aliens don't drive one car model, nor do they only keep one dress shirt and pair of shoes. The crypoterrestrials podcast also talked about an impoverished race of beings - also seems highly unlikely to me. Their technology, if we understand its ability to travel at great speeds, with no need for conventional energy sources, must create abundance in all ways. Again, thought experiment.
8. One reason for abductions and cattle mutilations that seems obvious but I don't hear talked about - is if the aliens were attempting to change our environment or genetics through some kind of subtle technology - they would want to continuously take samples from us and our environment to see if they are getting the "desired effect".
9. Abduction evidence. Obviously this is lacking. So is evidence of hybrids. But really guys, is the evidence for UFOs themselves that much stronger? It seems in both cases highly circumstancial, breaks current scientific theories and usually flaunts "human logic" to boot. However there just seems too many of these stories that are too similar to be simply dismissed out of hand - even if you ignore BH/DJ. Is Paul Kimball and others saying there is no such phenomenon as 'alien abduction' or just that BH/DJ evidence should be completely dismissed? There are also many many examples of extreme strangeness like the "no batteries" example whilst trying to take a photograph explained earlier. There seems like there might be some kind of "perception-stealth" technology or methods used in these cases in addition to invisibility and ability to manipulate witness actions (like the abductee turning off the video camera). Budd also have a talk which explained some stories where photographs were taken of abductees, shorly after an incident and they showed up invisible on the images - which he displayed. Stretches belief to be sure.
10. We need to find some willing abductees who would be OK with having a small team monitor them, without abductee knowledge. In other words, have them sign a waiver to be spied on, and then setup cameras in the house where they don't know they exist, set them up across the street, use other means of evidence collection that they don't even know about, like Dave Jacob's radiation detection sewn into clothing and other ideas.
11. DJ and BH are first and foremost claiming to try to help, what they consider traumatized people, cope with a scary situation first and foremost, so I can understand where evidence collection is a secondary priority. Besides that would you want a person treating you for some condition you have to simultaneously be questioning you for veracity of your claims? We can knock these guys for not having enough experience to treat using hypnosis but then don't also knock them for not collecting evidence from those same patients, unless that's what the patients want to do. Having said that these guys should be partnered with to try and find willing abductees who want to participate in collecting evidence as stated in #10.
I use "alien" and "ship" below for ease of explaination - I know not that we are being visited by either but rather by "things" that at least appear at times like such.
1. Hypnosis cleary seems a mixed bag. Certainly like any information processed from the brain there are some serious issues with taking hypnosis derived info at face-value. Having said that it does seem to offer some value in the right circumstances. I don't know if DJ or BH are offering any value to their "patients". Is it better for a person to think they are being helped if they really didn't need the help in the first place? My answer would be if they felt compelled to engage these guys in the first place, and they later feel they got value out of it, that's the way it is and don't chastise the parties involved. If they feel harmed by the experience, they should make their voices heard so others can avoid the same fate. That doesn't necessarily mean suing the other person in court.
2. Standards vs. regulation - Agreed there should be some standard organizations or at least some 3rd party developed code of ethics. However these should be competing programs and completely voluntarily. Government regulation in this area will do nothing but stifle creative thought and ultimately harm those seeking help by limiting expert supply and discouraging freedom of choice. The AMA is a great example of how not to do this - a third party organization in bed with the government. It's a one size fits all approach that I am sure many of us have had frustrations with in personal experience. We would do better to start an ebay-like (though not monopolistic) rating system for practitioners in this field so people can assess the risks and feedback from patients.
3. I don't need a freaking PhD to get stitches. Do you need a license to practice hypnosis? Granted "abductee phenomenon" would seem to be a more serious matter - or is it? Who knows since we know not where the truth lies. Where do you draw the line? How many years of schooling is enough for abductee hypnosis? Will only Harvard trained hypnosis researchers suffice? What academic hypnosis programs currently instruct on precisely this topic? You can definitely go overbaord. These are all reasons to let consenting adults make decisions based on what's available. Again, developing an ebay-like rating system would seem the better option. Are the detractors from BH and DJ saying these guys should goto jail? Stop talking to patients? Are they saying they have not helped anyone? Should I not be allowed to work with these guys if I think they might help? Do you really think most doctors help people who claim abduction experiences? Licensed doctors are not always the answer, though perhaps often for other areas of medicine they are usually the answer.
4. If you are seeking truth in these matters with help from the government or from the government itself you are by definition "doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different result".
5. We so often fall prey to the "but these aliens don't act like aliens should" line of thinking. I heard Nick Redfern say on the most recent podcast, something like "but why would aliens be interested in nuclear weapons if they didn't have a vested interest in our planet"? Nick was talking about lazy intellectualism and seemed to fall into the trap in the same breath.
6. Do you think my dog wonders why I might sit on a couch on a winter Sunday, watch a 60" TV viewing screen and get excited/upset by grown men with helmets and pads throw a leather ball around on a 100 yard field of grass. Don't you think my dog, who himself is entranced by thrown objects wonders: "why doesn't he just take my bone outside and throw it around the yard? What the hell does he need to watch this crap on TV for?" Humans trying to deduce what these entities are doing and why is similarly futile but fun to think about. Thought experiement.
7. Is it possible that the visitations we are experiencing are from a society so completely unlike ours that we should not expect their behavior to be in any way logical? There seems to be a grand assumption that the aliens that are visiting us are acting in concert, especially if they are of the same visible appearance. What if instead they have such advanced technology that every "ship" or group of entities seen are completely autonomous, like super individualistic space nomads. If they can really fold time and space wouldn't that impose difficulties in trying to coordinate any kind of large society and or body of knowledge? Like the explorers of the "New World" each ship is exploring the universe on its own with its own intentions. I imagine if technology advanced to the point where you could tap a zero-point, limitless, energy source and transverse the universe in an instant, I would probably go out for an exciting adventure in my Mercedes Saucer and might never come back 'cuz it'd be too damn fun and intersting buzzing the schlep Neanderthals near Alpha Centauri. Also with extreme forms of nano-technology, supergoo, and ability to control minds and memories - is it any wonder we see extreme divergence in many visual appearances of entities and their craft? I mean I suspect these aliens don't drive one car model, nor do they only keep one dress shirt and pair of shoes. The crypoterrestrials podcast also talked about an impoverished race of beings - also seems highly unlikely to me. Their technology, if we understand its ability to travel at great speeds, with no need for conventional energy sources, must create abundance in all ways. Again, thought experiment.
8. One reason for abductions and cattle mutilations that seems obvious but I don't hear talked about - is if the aliens were attempting to change our environment or genetics through some kind of subtle technology - they would want to continuously take samples from us and our environment to see if they are getting the "desired effect".
9. Abduction evidence. Obviously this is lacking. So is evidence of hybrids. But really guys, is the evidence for UFOs themselves that much stronger? It seems in both cases highly circumstancial, breaks current scientific theories and usually flaunts "human logic" to boot. However there just seems too many of these stories that are too similar to be simply dismissed out of hand - even if you ignore BH/DJ. Is Paul Kimball and others saying there is no such phenomenon as 'alien abduction' or just that BH/DJ evidence should be completely dismissed? There are also many many examples of extreme strangeness like the "no batteries" example whilst trying to take a photograph explained earlier. There seems like there might be some kind of "perception-stealth" technology or methods used in these cases in addition to invisibility and ability to manipulate witness actions (like the abductee turning off the video camera). Budd also have a talk which explained some stories where photographs were taken of abductees, shorly after an incident and they showed up invisible on the images - which he displayed. Stretches belief to be sure.
10. We need to find some willing abductees who would be OK with having a small team monitor them, without abductee knowledge. In other words, have them sign a waiver to be spied on, and then setup cameras in the house where they don't know they exist, set them up across the street, use other means of evidence collection that they don't even know about, like Dave Jacob's radiation detection sewn into clothing and other ideas.
11. DJ and BH are first and foremost claiming to try to help, what they consider traumatized people, cope with a scary situation first and foremost, so I can understand where evidence collection is a secondary priority. Besides that would you want a person treating you for some condition you have to simultaneously be questioning you for veracity of your claims? We can knock these guys for not having enough experience to treat using hypnosis but then don't also knock them for not collecting evidence from those same patients, unless that's what the patients want to do. Having said that these guys should be partnered with to try and find willing abductees who want to participate in collecting evidence as stated in #10.
- Status