April 4th show - Hopkins, Randle & Jacobs

Emma · Apr 27, 2010

brownie said:
I think it's safe to say that webmistress/abductee 'Elizabeth' has a certain particular taste when it comes to what is attractive in a man. I wonder what her husband and children think of all of this - remembering how she wrote so much on her blog about her ongoing tutoring (re. sex life) with the adult hybrids in their apartments. And why apartments? Geesh.....even the notorious Irish Travelers live in homes on the east coast.

Now if 'Elizabeth' comes clean and admits her hoax implicating Jacobs as suspectible to it or being part of it.....bingo! I'd think that Jacobs is only tolerating her , at this point, in order to ensure her loyalty. If she were a smart cookie she'd be thinking about her husband and children, not some misbegotton crush on Jacobs.

I think that Elizabeth tried to confess her hoax to Dr. Jacobs in 2006.

Dr. Jacobs told me that in May 2006, he received a communication from Elizabeth from her computer saying something to the effect that she had lied to him about everything, that she was a bad person, and that she was sorry. He said that he immediately rejected it because she would never have said that. He told me that when he asked her about it later, she told him that she had no memory of it. He then conducted a hypnosis session with her on it and she "remembered" a "hybrid" forcing her to write it.

I think that Elizabeth probably lost the courage to persevere in telling Dr. Jacobs that she had lied to him about everything when he rejected it.

Dr. Jacobs told me that in June 2006, he received another communication from Elizabeth's computer saying that she had lied to him. He said this time she refused to write it, so the "hybrid" took over and wrote it himself. He said that the "hybrid" eventually "dropped his persona as Elizabeth" and began to communicate openly with him as a "hybrid".

The "hybrid" instant messaging was born, in my opinion, from Elizabeth's abortive attempt to confess her hoax to Dr. Jacobs, and his refusal to accept it.

Dr. Jacobs' and Elizabeth's relationship is so enmeshed and dysfunctional that they are compromised to each other. They have both demonstrated their viciousness to anyone who questions them, and their willingness to harm an innocent person to cover up their actions. I imagine that they are both afraid of each other. In my opinion, that is why they are continuing to maintain her farcical hoax.

Brownie, you are absolutely right. If Elizabeth was a smart cookie, she would put her husband and children first, and put a stop to it by confessing what she has done.

dyingsun · Apr 27, 2010

Emma said:
I think that Elizabeth tried to confess her hoax to Dr. Jacobs in 2006.

Dr. Jacobs told me that in May 2006, he received a communication from Elizabeth from her computer saying something to the effect that she had lied to him about everything, that she was a bad person, and that she was sorry. He said that he immediately rejected it because she would never have said that. He told me that when he asked her about it later, she told him that she had no memory of it. He then conducted a hypnosis session with her on it and she "remembered" a "hybrid" forcing her to write it.

I think that Elizabeth probably lost the courage to persevere in telling Dr. Jacobs that she had lied to him about everything when he rejected it.

Dr. Jacobs told me that in June 2006, he received another communication from Elizabeth's computer saying that she had lied to him. He said this time she refused to write it, so the "hybrid" took over and wrote it himself. He said that the "hybrid" eventually "dropped his persona as Elizabeth" and began to communicate openly with him as a "hybrid".

The "hybrid instant messaging was born, in my opinion, from Elizabeth's abortive attempt to confess her hoax to Dr. Jacobs, and his refusal to accept it.

Dr. Jacobs' and Elizabeth's relationship is so enmeshed and dysfunctional that they are completely compromised to each other. They have both demonstrated their viciousness to anyone who questions them, and their willingness to harm an innocent person to cover up their actions. I imagine that they are both afraid of each other. In my opinion, this is why they are continuing to maintain her farcical hoax.

Brownie, you are absolutely right. If Elizabeth was a smart cookie, she would put her husband and children first, and put a stop to it by confessing what she has done.

And you know Dr. Jacobs relationship with his other, lets say patients, how exactly ? I'm sorry, but some of your comments raise big red flags to me.Please consider also I don't have any stake in this.

Emma · Apr 27, 2010

dyingsun said:
And you know Dr. Jacobs relationship with his other, lets say patients, how exactly ? I'm sorry, but some of your comments raise big red flags to me.Please consider also I don't have any stake in this.

I know about Dr. Jacobs' relationship with Elizabeth because he involved me in it while I was his research subject. He talked to me extensively about her case, her private life, and about his interactions with her.

I have published the recordings of a number of telephone calls that I had with Dr. Jacobs on my website at:

Conversations with Dr. David Jacobs - Audio Clips

During these conversations, we discuss the situation with Elizabeth, and if you listen to them it will be clear how I know these things. (During at least two of these conversations, Dr. Jacobs talks about how the "hybrid" instant messaging started, which is what I have detailed in my post above.)

I have published other details about Elizabeth's "hybrid" instant messaging hoax, including quotes from emails that I received from Dr. Jacobs, as well as quotes from Elizabeth's blog site, at:

Emma Woods: Dr. David Jacobs' Account of a Hybrid Warning

In addition, I am in the process of publishing audio clips of excepts from my hypnosis sessions in which Dr. Jacobs told me about Elizabeth's case while I was hypnotized, at :

Emma Woods: Rebuttal to Dr. David Jacobs

I imagine that anyone who has been Dr. Jacobs' research subject for an extended period of time is aware of his practice of telling his research subjects about his other research subjects' cases, and about his relationships with them.

I know a lot about Elizabeth's private life from Dr. Jacobs (which I have not made public as it is not relevant), and I am sure that she likewise knows a lot about mine.

Dr. Jacobs' habit of talking about people extended beyond his research subjects. He talked to me about Budd Hopkins' personal life as well, including intimate details about his marital relationships, health problems, and so on (which I have again not made public as it is not relevant.)

In my opinion, Dr. Jacobs' lack of discretion is one of the reasons that he is now compromised to Elizabeth.

ArchieBedford · Apr 27, 2010

Wickerman1972 said:
To elaborate on her obsessive behavior I was amazed when I learned that she reported him to the United States Department of Health and Human Services. Now, obviously she is intelligent enough to know that a body like that isn't going to be interested with anything associated with alien abductions. If she wasn't she wouldn't be able to write as well as she does. So the culprit must be some obsessive disorder. I can just imagine the chuckles that erupted in that department when they received that material.

Note to anyone interested in understanding reality: To 99% of people this is an absurd topic. There is no such thing as good UFO researchers and bad ones. They are all equally loony. If the HHS was interested in punishing those involved with abduction research they would have done so long ago. They wouldn't need Emma's material to do so. To them the simple fact that these people are even taking the topic seriously would be convincing proof of their incompetence and wrongdoing. That they haven't done anything shows that they view the matter as a harmless circus. I know people who can barely read or write who feel intellectually superior to me because I am interested in this subject. Now imagine the degree to which that feeling can escalate when dealing with an educated person working at HHS. Considering all of that it amazes me that an intelligent person would actually send such a complaint there. What did she expect to happen? Did she think they would be alarmed by the accusations, that someone working there would say, "An alien abduction researcher conducting research in a less than professional manner? We've got to get on this right away!" Hell no. Instead they're going to say, "Well,...duhhhhhhhh! You got what you asked for."

Sure, going to the HHS seems more than just normally obsessive; it looks insane. Can you hear the laughter ringing round that office before her petition is fed into the shredder?

Internet forums are not the real world: this whole circus doesn't amount to a pile of beans. If she continues to pump out this repetitive deluge for years and years and years, then eventually even the obsessives will get bored with it (might take months or years for the really stupid ones to switch off, but eventually they will).

Best wishes

Sean Elifritz · Apr 27, 2010

Temple University presented a case to the OHRP that Dr. Jacobs' research does not constitute "research", but is simply "oral history", and that therefore it does not come under the OHRP jurisdiction. The OHRP accepted this argument, and therefore did not investigate it. If they had determined that his research did constitute "research", it would have come under their jurisdiction, and they would have investigated it.

And all of that sounds like professional speak for, "This topic is so ridiculous that it isn't worth investigating." If you're able to convince them otherwise I'll be quite surprised.

Daktari Impossible · Apr 27, 2010

Gene Steinberg · Apr 27, 2010

I think it's high time we move past this. You can believe as you wish, but none of this helps us figure out the cause of those UFO abductions. It's a distraction with tabloid appeal, but little more, beyond the interests or concerns of the individual parties who can do what they wish — or not.

Emma · Apr 27, 2010

Gene Steinberg said:
I think it's high time we move past this. You can believe as you wish, but none of this helps us figure out the cause of those UFO abductions. It's a distraction with tabloid appeal, but little more, beyond the interests or concerns of the individual parties who can do what they wish — or not.

If we are to figure out the cause of UFO abductions, it will have to involve research that is conducted with "abductees", who are human beings. The protection of human research subjects is the most important requirement of all research.

Dr. Jacobs is a leading "abduction" researcher, working with human research subjects. He says that he is writing a book on the proper methodological techniques for the hypnosis and therapy of abductees. His conduct in regard to the protection of his human research subjects is pivotal to assessing his own research, and as he is a leading researcher, it has implications for the field as a whole.

As a former research subject of Dr. Jacobs, I have provided testimony backed by evidence that he has engaged in extremely psychologically abusive conduct towards me.

Dr. Jacobs put me into a hypnotic state, and then implanted hypnotic suggestions in my mind that I had Multiple Personality Disorder. That was an abhorrent act for any researcher to carry out on a vulnerable hypnotized research subject. Not only did he do that to me, but he has published a statement on his website justifying it. His justification is blatantly dishonest, but even if it were true, it cannot possibly be considered a defense for his actions.

After doing this to me, Dr. Jacobs took on a twenty-one-year-old research subject. He put him into a hypnotic state, and used hypnosis to try to instill a message to "aliens" in the young man's mind, saying that the young man was "the bad guy", and not himself, so that the "aliens" would go after the young man and not him. Once again this was an extremely abusive act for any researcher to carry out on a vulnerable hypnotized research subject.

It is a matter of importance that the UFO research field address these issues of the abuse of human research subjects squarely, if "abduction" research is to progress.

If the UFO community fails to address these issues, or even worse, covers them up in order to retain a false image of Dr. Jacobs as an ethical researcher championing the cause of "abduction" research, then this research is not only going nowhere fast, but it is harming human research subjects in the process.

Daktari Impossible · Apr 27, 2010

This isn't a tabloid case. I'm afraid you're on the wrong side of this one Gene. Paracast Forum is, I agree, given your ownership of the site, the wrong place to discuss it.

The proper venue is in court.

Gene Steinberg · Apr 27, 2010

I see you're on the verge of joining a few others in misrepresenting my views.

My side is that there's fault on both sides. I see no evidence to indicate anyone is innocent here. You clearly agree with Emma, which is fine. But so far no independent agency has determined that Jacobs is guilty of any misconduct. What's more, digital recordings can be easily edited with little or no evidence of what those edits might be or where they were performed.

To be fair, it remains he said/she said, and therefore there's little point in pursuing this further, since it doesn't help resolve the abduction mystery.

Nchant · Apr 27, 2010

Gene Steinberg said:
I think it's high time we move past this. You can believe as you wish, but none of this helps us figure out the cause of those UFO abductions. It's a distraction with tabloid appeal, but little more, beyond the interests or concerns of the individual parties who can do what they wish — or not.

I rarely comment on Boards and am usually content to remain a lurker, sifting and sorting the discussions. I do, however, feel the need to jump in on this one. I'm not quite sure how: (1) the use of hypnosis on research subjects; (2) the methodology and conduct employed by the leading researchers (of which you feature on your show); (3) the question of research validity and the conclusions drawn; and (4) the discussion of the methodology and its effect on the abductees themselves--are considered tabloid material.

In fact, I tuned in to the Paracast precisely because it was NOT tabloid material. I liked learning about what was considered good and bad in the community. How many discussions have there been about Billy Meier/Tom Horn or the damage that the exopolitics crowd --Greer, Webre, et al--have on serious research? No one ran screaming that those discussions were tabloid and that we have to wait for others to weigh in.

Damage was done here on many levels--imagined/perceived or real.

I am starting to gather that the folks behind this show have some history with the folks that brought this to light. Clearly, the bias is evident. The "move along folks, nothing to see here" attitude is everything that is wrong with ufology.

Again, a widely recoginized researcher IMPLANTING suggestions that the abductee has MPD while under hypnosis is a fact. We've all heard the tape by now. No amount of "context" can compensate for that.

On a more human level, some compassion for this and future research subjects should be shown. Abductees have a hard enough time of it. Ufology does eat its own.

I suspect that most of us have Jacobs and Hopkins books on our shelves and have heard them speak. The mental status, the motivations, and the methodolgy employed on abductee subjects (of which they will write books and of which the Paracast, will no doubt, have on the show to discuss that material) should be a vital topic. Lawdy, we do need to Peer Review this! Where else can it be done? Who is looking out for the community?

These types of issues can often further the field--valid or not. It often takes jolts to achieve reform. This is a jolt. Let's not sweep it under the rug.

Gene Steinberg · Apr 27, 2010

I have no history with Hopkins or Jacobs. Other than the interviews, I haven't had much interaction with them.

As to the "implanting" charge, we don't know how or if the recordings were edited, so that claim can't be sustained. Jacobs has an explanation for what he said, and it goes back to the he said/she said issue.

This isn't a jolt. It's a symptom of non-professionals attempting to deal with issues that might involve mental health, and that is my problem.

Yes, move on.

Nchant · Apr 27, 2010

I saw NO explanation from Jacobs regarding the MPD implanting issue whilst under hypnosis. Could you point me to it?

My lawdy mate, did you listen to ALL of the tapes? And peruse the documents and material? And listen to her interview for inconsistencies? I have spent days on it. More evidential than circumstantial. It would take a HUGE amount of professional sound editing, equalizing, looping, and thought analyses to create the words and scenario used in those many HOURS without the typical blips found in a 'master' --if it's even possible.

You are turning a blind eye and sporting a deaf ear. Another one bites the dust.

As for the bias--I meant towards the Paratopia folks. Someone mentioned awhile back that there were issues there, perhaps I read it wrong. My bad.

paraschtick · Apr 27, 2010

Again coming back to this thread I've heard the same arguments that I first heard when this whole thing blew up:

(1) Emma is insane. No.

(2) Emma is obsessed. Nope.

(3) There is nothing to see here ... nobody is at fault. Nope again.

My reasons for these answers are simple

(1) Emma is/was a vulnerable person who was pointed in the direction of a well known respected and trusted individual in the abduction research field. After spending a couple of years working with Dr Jacobs, it was SHE who came to the conclusion that HE believed that he was being sent instant messages from ALIEN HYBRIDS. Elizabeth his erstwhile(?) webmistress has confirmed this as well as Doctor Jacobs himself on Emmas audio files. Emma concluded, entirely reasonably, from this that there was something very wrong with both Elizabeth and Dr Jacobs. Dr Jacobs concluded that, however, Emma was mentally unstable since she thought that he was deluded in thinking these IMs were from extraterrestrials although Dr Jacobs could not diagnose this since he is a doctor of History and has no medical background. Emma, therefore, concluded fairly reasonably under these circumstances that that she wanted to break off their relationship but wanted do it in a considerate, polite and civil manner that would make noone look bad. Dr Jacobs wanted nothing of this and tried to control what she was going to publish on her website. All these acts do not make me think that Emma is insane. Again, remember, also it was HE not SHE who instilled notions of Multiple Personality Disorder into HER mind. This is not something any reasonable ethical person would do to any research subject ... except maybe ... for those psychiatrists working on the MK Ultra projects which started in the late 1940s/early 50s.

(2) Emma is not obsessed. Anyone in their RIGHT MIND would pursue this in the same way but maybe not in the thorough way Emma has. She has been abused by someone who she thought was trustworthy and decent but unfortunately discovered was a controlling, unethical abuser of his supposed authority. She is therefore going through things in the same thorough, intelligent, and excellent way she has with her own research. She has luckily taken note of anything and everything and is showing to a high rate of truth, in my mind anyway, exactly what she has stated on her website, in her audio files and in these and other forums. I have not seen any contradictions from her so far on this matter.

(3) The nobody is at fault thing is nonsense as well. Obviously someone is at fault. Dr Jacobs himself has admitted to putting notions of Multple Personality Disorder into Emma's head. In any reasonable person's mind, that is unethical and a truly horrible thing to do. He could never have known what that might have done to her in the long run. And doing this truly terrible thing under no hypnotherapist licence at all is also maybe illegal (I think it is in the UK anyway). At the very least, Dr Jacobs should apologise for doing this. I don't believe he has and will ever do.

Those of us who are sticking up for Emma Woods are I believe not obsessed, fanatical or anything similar. I myself believe that Emma has shown a great deal of evidence that she was abused as she says. I see no vindicativeness at all coming from her end at all either. In fact, I see the most spitefulness coming from those who have been calling Emma "insane".

At the very least, if any of Dr Jacobs defenders believe that hypnotising someone and purposefully, and deliberately, and admittedly instilling the idea of Multiple Personality Disorder into the head of a vulnerable research subject's head is ethical, then they are being highly disengenous.

Simonemendez · Apr 28, 2010

paraschtick said:
[Oh and if you are going to be conspiratorially minded I can think of at two other more likely scenarios: (1) A guy working for shady people with intelligence connections who is leading people to believe that there are scary alien hybrids breeding with human beings ... leading the gullible away from the true facts (whatever they are) and (2) A guy who is experimenting on "research subjects" in a continuation of MK Ultra experiments of the 50s and 60s

True, such does not have to be Jacobs specifically, but your scenario is PLAUSIBLE and probably an existing one, whether past and or present. I KNOW OF AT LEAST four Ufologist who were(are) Central Intelligence Agency. Two were open about it. One of those I was good friends with, but he died. One has been contract for --years--, and to this day is not public about it. I was aquaintences with him. One was an informant. Not OSI, Not DIA, Not NSA,.........**C*I*A**. (Actually I did know a DIA ufologist..) (MK-Ultra has been the CIA's badboy..)
I wonder to this day, what became of Ron Pandolfi of 'The Ufo Desk' at Langley. Anyone know? (Just curious). I never had any contact with him. Though he might know about me, since I used to hang out at Open Minds Forum, and talk to Dan Smith (very briefly) (in the chat forum) (OM became too NewAgey for Mua).

paraschtick · Apr 28, 2010

Simonemendez said:
True, such does not have to be Jacobs specifically, but your scenario is PLAUSIBLE and probably an existing one, whether past and or present. I KNOW OF AT LEAST four Ufologist who were(are) Central Intelligence Agency. Two were open about it. One of those I was good friends with, but he died. One has been contract for --years--, and to this day is not public about it. I was aquaintences with him. One was an informant. Not OSI, Not DIA, Not NSA,.........**C*I*A**. (Actually I did know a DIA ufologist..) (MK-Ultra has been the CIA's badboy..)
I wonder to this day, what became of Ron Pandolfi of 'The Ufo Desk' at Langley. Anyone know? (Just curious). I never had any contact with him. Though he might know about me, since I used to hang out at Open Minds Forum, and talk to Dan Smith (very briefly) (in the chat forum) (OM became too NewAgey for Mua).

Oh I have no idea whether any MK Ultra type situations are a work in the UFO community .. but I wouldn't at all be surprised if the CIA or whoever has a big input into the ufo debate. I mean they have used it in the past for various things ... and they did drive Paul Bennewitz mad.

I found out a couple of days ago that the people behind the future Stan Romanek documentary (if it ever gets made) are also related to the Open Minds forum. Which I thought was interesting ... as I don't trust the OM folks as far as I could throw them.

Listening to that interview with Stan Romanek in which the presenter/interviewers lambast the Paratopia lot for hijacking an online chat they had with him last sunday, I think it was, Stan comes across as being strangely sincere. I have half a mind at the moment to think that maybe something similar is going on there to the Bennewitz affair(???). Just thinking out loud ... this could of course be contradicted by his silly robot voice stuff and the horrible puppet alien video ... whatever its a very strange case.

That podcast can be heard here (see below). But beware one of the podcasters is a deluded christian by the sounds of it, and the other is a smug tosser

(oh the ad hominem attacks

):

http://thechurchofmabus.podbean.com/

[ps ... the word "church is rather worrying, don't you think???]

---------- Post added at 11:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:47 AM ----------

Nchant said:
I saw NO explanation from Jacobs regarding the MPD implanting issue whilst under hypnosis. Could you point me to it?

My lawdy mate, did you listen to ALL of the tapes? And peruse the documents and material? And listen to her interview for inconsistencies? I have spent days on it. More evidential than circumstantial. It would take a HUGE amount of professional sound editing, equalizing, looping, and thought analyses to create the words and scenario used in those many HOURS without the typical blips found in a 'master' --if it's even possible.

You are turning a blind eye and sporting a deaf ear. Another one bites the dust.

As for the bias--I meant towards the Paratopia folks. Someone mentioned awhile back that there were issues there, perhaps I read it wrong. My bad.

As far as I know, Dr Jacobs only talks of the "tactics" he used in the audio files Emma has on her site. Otherwise he mentions MPD on his website where he talks about her defamation on there: http://www.ufoabduction.com/defamationcampaign.htm

(Its about half way down the page I think ...)

And I agree, and have stated myself a number of times in these here forums that editing those files would have taken a superhuman effort. Putting them into an wave editor shows in my opinion that they have not been faked but as Emma states just edited for names, and personal details. Occams razor has been shown to be a great help in this case, as well as all the detailed evidence from Emma which so far has not shown any contradictions or inconsistencies ... as far as I am aware.

brownie · Apr 28, 2010

Hi Daktari Impossible,

I enjoy your blog and have posted a comment or two on it a week or so ago.

I agree with what you've posted here and I give credit to Emma for having the strength and fortitude to take on someone who has treated her so terribly and visciously trashed her reputation behind the scenes.

I think this is, arguably, the biggest ufo related story (within the field), in a long time. And if those of us who're interested in ufology for whatever our reasons , don't clean out our own 'house', the professional debunkers will gladly do it for us. And, they'll lump all of us together with David Jacobs.

Jacobs hybrid mythos, first obsessively written about in The Threat (they lived in apartments then too - can't imagine how they rented without social security numbers, background credit checks and jobs) along with his terrible treatment of Emma (and Elizabeth as well as others I suspect) casts a shadow on his first book and doctoral thesis: The UFO Controversy in America. How he went from that to The Threat and his ever-expanding obsession with hybrids is a cautionary tale of how a 'dark' subject like alien abductions can damage a susceptable person's psyche and spirit.

ArchieBedford · Apr 28, 2010

brownie said:
Those of us who are sticking up for Emma Woods are I believe not obsessed, fanatical or anything similar. I myself believe that Emma has shown a great deal of evidence that she was abused as she says. I see no vindicativeness at all coming from her end at all either. In fact, I see the most spitefulness coming from those who have been calling Emma "insane".

You don't even know who she is. You don't even know her name, or where she lives, or indeed anything about her beyond what she chooses to tell you on the internet. The whole defamation campaign is carried out behind an assumed ID. Think about the implications of that for a moment. Use yer brain. Is anyone who has been genuinely "wronged" EVER going to proceed by splattering manufactured defamation material all over the internet? Every single quasi-official body she has assaulted with this garbage, from Temple University to the Department of Health etc., just laughs out loud and tells her to go get a life.

I confidently predict that even the youngest person reading this thread will be long dead of old age before this ridiculous manufactured circus gets any genuine consideration from a "court" or "deliberative body", before "Emma Woods" ever reveals her real name and before all the 150+ hours of testimony of her relating to Jacobs exactly what she reported as happening to her over many years is ever released, UNEDITED AND UN-DOCTORED, for any kind of public scrutiny. Why? Because it will incriminate her and reveal the truth, that's why.

Research Borderline Personality Disorder. A good place to start is:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0380713055/?tag=rockoids-20

and

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_n...u+don't+leave+me&x=0&y=0&tag=genesteinbergina

You're being conned. It's skilful, dedicated and persistent, but it's clearly about attention-seeking and character-assasination. Out in the real world, no-one cares about this nonsense and never will. It's a defamation campaign. It has nothing to do with reality.

Waste your time with it by all means. It's your life. You'll work it out eventually.

The Pair of Cats · Apr 28, 2010

Fastwalker said:
I think Gene is being inconceivably clueless about the entire Emma-David situation. IT IS THE BIGGEST STORY IN UFOLOGY IN MANY YEARS!!

Are you kidding? This story is the single most BIGGEST WASTE OF TIME AND SPACE IN MANY YEARS!
You know there is not much going on in the realms of UFOlogy when this she said/he said cat fight becomes the most popular topic on these forums. C'mon, you either believe one attention seeker or the other. If either party was serious about sorting this tangled mess out properly, they would be seeing each other in court not deluging us with copious amounts of post to try and convince people who have some or no interest in this, vested or otherwise, of who is right and who is wrong. The only person "Emma" has to convince is the judge!

Gene has every right to wash his hands of this mess. Let's move on and find something more interesting.

brownie · Apr 28, 2010

ArchieBedford said:
You don't even know who she is. You don't even know her name, or where she lives, or indeed anything about her beyond what she chooses to tell you on the internet. The whole defamation campaign is carried out behind an assumed ID. Think about the implications of that for a moment. Use yer brain. Is anyone who has been genuinely "wronged" EVER going to proceed by splattering manufactured defamation material all over the internet? Every single quasi-official body she has assaulted with this garbage, from Temple University to the Department of Health etc., just laughs out loud and tells her to go get a life.

I confidently predict that even the youngest person reading this thread will be long dead of old age before this ridiculous manufactured circus gets any genuine consideration from a "court" or "deliberative body", before "Emma Woods" ever reveals her real name and before all the 150+ hours of testimony of her relating to Jacobs exactly what she reported as happening to her over many years is ever released, UNEDITED AND UN-DOCTORED, for any kind of public scrutiny. Why? Because it will incriminate her and reveal the truth, that's why.

Research Borderline Personality Disorder. A good place to start is:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0380713055/?tag=rockoids-20

and

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_n...u+don't+leave+me&x=0&y=0&tag=genesteinbergina

You're being conned. It's skilful, dedicated and persistent, but it's clearly about attention-seeking and character-assasination. Out in the real world, no-one cares about this nonsense and never will. It's a defamation campaign. It has nothing to do with reality.

Waste your time with it by all means. It's your life. You'll work it out eventually.

Archie,

You've attributed a quote to me that I didn't write.

But hey, I took a look at your links about the symptoms for BPD and couldn't help but notice they tend to square with Jacobs behavior (however his persistent belief in hybrids IMing and Stalking him probably fits also into Paranoid Schizophrenia). But then, I'm not a mental health professional, unlike all-knowing you no doubt. After all it was you, in this thread, who confidently called MUFON investigators George Hansen, Joseph Stefula and Richard Butler - "fraudsters" because they exposed the Linda Napolitano/Cortile hoax on Jacobs colleague Budd Hopkins. Your agenda is too obvious, Archie!

April 4th show - Hopkins, Randle & Jacobs

Paranormal Novice

Paranormal Adept

Paranormal Novice

Partly experienced

Administrator

Skilled Investigator

Forum Super Hero

Paranormal Novice

Skilled Investigator

Forum Super Hero

Paranormal Novice

Forum Super Hero

Paranormal Novice

Paragilmorian guy

Skilled Investigator

Paragilmorian guy

Skilled Investigator

Partly experienced

a.k.a Philip Deane

Skilled Investigator