Hopkins Ex-wife Dumps

[Decker]

Dr. Jack Sarfatti forwarded the following to me and it may really stir the pot. For all your information.

Decker

http://www.paratopia.net/paratopia_magazine/mag_preview_final.pdf


Well here's where it starts folks, the biggest upset we've seen on the UFO scene for years.....
Carol Rainey, former wife of Budd Hopkins, puts the verbal knife into his reputation and that of his buddy David Jacobs.
Leslie Kean doesn't emerge unsullied either in Carol's magazine account on the above link and there's apparently a documentary out soon to serve up the unsavoury dish with even more spice.
Unfortunately this will play right into the hands of the debunkers and give abductees an even tougher time than they suffer already.
This one - as they say - will run and run.....


Dave Haith

 

[Sean Elifritz]

Paratopia has a mag now? Wow, those guys really have a hard-on for Jacobs and Hopkins.

 

[Jonah]

Shitty thread title...great article.

Thanks both to Carol for her sharing her insights as one who was there and Emma for her tenacity and persistence in the pursuit of a higher integrity when it comes to abduction research. Yes, the fallout will be with us for awhile and will be quite contentious. Growth sometimes involves pain and in the end, IMO, this was an inevitable outcome.

“The truth is rarely pure and never simple.” ~ Oscar Wilde

 

[Sean Elifritz]

Just finished reading the Rainey article. Wow, that was BRUTAL. Much more effective than Vaeni's article imo, which was too snarky for its own good. But one of the last things she said in it floored me for how cold it was, "Especially not the man lauded for his role in its creation—an artist whose brief, shining moment in the art world passed over forty years ago." That's a straight-up personal insult! Goodness, guess their marriage didn't end well if she's willing to say things like that. But I'm not going to allow that one juvenile line to distract me. 99% of her article was quite devastating. I, for one, never believed the Cortile case. Always seemed too cloak and dagger and movie-like to me. So I've always known Budd can be fooled. God knows Ed Walters played him like a card (She didn't even mention that). But overall I had a positive outlook of him. Nowadays I don't know what to believe. Seems like the entire sand castle of ufology is coming down. If somebody can convince me that Allagash, the Hills, and Kelly Cahill are bunk then there's nothing left for me.

 

[Anaximander]

That was quite the article.

She totally destroyed Hopkins.

I don't know what else to say, I'm kind of in awe at her debunking skills right now.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

I should mention, not to defend anyone's behavior, that Hopkins wrote an autobiography where he very much confessed to his transgressions. I don't think the "revelations" of one's ex-spouse are necessarily useful as investigative tools, unless we are investigating one's marital history, or evidence of illegal acts where the spouse may have knowledge that is no longer covered by marital privilege.

Is that really going to help us figure out the cause of UFO abductions?

Thank heavens I'm still friends with my first wife.

 

[Anaximander]

Is that really going to help us figure out the cause of UFO abductions?

Well if it turns out that certain abductions didn't occur, then knowing that will allow researchers to focus on other cases which might have a basis in reality.

The more bogus cases that can be ruled out, the closer abduction researchers come to finding out the cause of the abductions - that is if they even happen at all.

 

[ALPHA ROMEO UNIFORM]

All seems to be getting out of hand and all will lose out in the end. Another sad historical tag for Ufology it seems.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

This is getting very sleazy. Do we really want to go there? If so, let us know.

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

This is getting very sleazy. Do we really want to go there? If so, let us know.

I don't know Gene, it would seem like ambulance-chasing to me... we've already given the the abduction-dudes and their blind-spots time. I'd rather talk w/ the Kelly Cahills & Travis' and others who seem to have had real, inexplicable experiences.

 

[Facius_Cardan]

This is yet another sad example of people washing their dirty clothes in public. Mixing personal relationships with abduction research and evidence is utterly ridiculous. Sadder yet is the fact that some people are actively interested in using this type of material to corrode the image of a man and his work. The fact is that, at least to me and a few others, Hopkins' work was already perfectly neglectable and the only relevant thing about it is that many subjects actually had their lives messed up because of it. I think we'll look back at the work done with supposed abductees during the last 3 or 4 decades as something so abhorrent and quasi-medieval as exorcising a schizophrenic patient (before they actually knew that medical condition existed). There is something of medical, psychological and even anthropological importance behind the abduction reports, but its sad to see how some "experiencers" end up falling in the hands of self-intitled researchers that, instead of actually helping them are just creating a whole new set of problems. As many have pointed out before, this is a matter of health and there should be some inquiries into this subject in order to prevent amateurs from using hypnosis and other potentially dangerous methods without any kind of professional supervision.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

I've never believed that what Hopkins and Jacobs found any proof of alien abductions - I've always agreed with Sagan on this topic. However, information coming from an ex-wife from a marriage that sounds like it ended badly needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

I've never believed that what Hopkins and Jacobs found any proof of alien abductions - I've always agreed with Sagan on this topic. However, information coming from an ex-wife from a marriage that sounds like it ended badly needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

Agreed in the last part. Besides, we can remove Hopkins and Jacobs from the picture and still have an abduction mystery that needs to be explored.

But so long as tawdry stories of this sort make headlines, the bottom-feeders will go after them.

 

[Kieran]

What is that old saying Don, "It's a dirty job but someone has got to do it"? I give kudos to Vaeni and Co. for taking this stance in such a pro active way. People are going to really hate them for this'un, but ever since Hopkins went pompously around with that UfollyStar BIMBO Linda Cortile Napolitaaaaaaannnnnooooo, Ms. Spagetti Sauce(sauc-er) herself, all glossily dominating the cover of the MUFON Journal with her acrylic nails, false eyelashes, and stilettos, I was like, "Ohhhhhh MyGawd, I see what the deal is now." How could someone in their ---right--- mind have believed all that stuff about the sexually obsessed Secret Agents, etcetera? Even for one second? How? And those other cases Bud took in and Truly Beeleeved. They were un mitigated DISASTERS.
What will we do now, about people with ufo sightings and missing time? I mean, I myself had experienced both those things. I guess all those people will have to do as I have done. Stuff it deep down, and break out the Mad Dog 20/20, in front of your favorite TV show. THATS ALL.

If Paratopia had not run with this information lot of this stuff would have never come up. I agree give credit were it is due. It's a dirty business!

 

[Ron Collins]

Jacobs and Hopkins are irrelevant in this subject. They have been for years. Cataloginig sordid affairs is good daytime drama for those that care. Most, I suspect, won't care. I agree with Chris. Let's focus on the abductees that don't need hypnosis to recall that they had an abduction.

 

[Elendil]

Well, even though it comes from an ex, some of the info is very useful. While I was far away from believing that Budd can't be fooled, I couldn't even imagine that he could be fooled in such a way as described on the Mortellaro case. I can't comprehend why in the nine hells wouldn't anyone just try and check his phone calls? Go to his hometown - at least meet the wife and the neighbor and make one rudimentary check? Reading through the text - every single claim from that guy seemed like the Disclosure stuff - evidence is coming soon but don't ask me when exactly - the neighbor of my aunt's second cousin actually knows the brother of some guy whose wife's uncle worked at Roswell as a towel boy back in '47 and he still has the towel one of the doctors used after the autopsy. But MIB is hot on my trail so we still need to lay low about that one...

It's really something else to see that a researcher who should by definition be on the lookout all the time could be so easily fooled. Guess that's another win for the human psychology vs. the search for truth.

Nowadays I don't know what to believe. Seems like the entire sand castle of ufology is coming down. If somebody can convince me that Allagash, the Hills, and Kelly Cahill are bunk then there's nothing left for me.

I totally agree with this...

 

[trainedobserver]

Is that really going to help us figure out the cause of UFO abductions?

Well, there is evidence that has been around for a long time that suggests that the alien abduction experience can be induced and that these induced experiences are completely psychological in nature. This does not say all such experiences are therefore completely mental events but it is solid evidence that they can be and that some method of testing for the difference and isolating those occurrences is needed.

From Vallee's Messengers of Deception, 1979.
"...demonstrates that the “abduction” experience is a constant that hypnosis can trigger in almost everybody. This demonstration that contactee experiences can be induced comes from a professor of English at California State University in Long Beach, Al Lawson. … eight subjects finally selected were hypnotized by a clinical hypnotist, Dr. William C. McCall. ...The results of the experiments were shattering. …”All of the imaginary subjects described many details which are identical to ones found in the literature. These patterns range from the obvious (saucer shaped) to rare and even obscure though well-established details of high strangeness."

 

[NTS]

Whatever her ultimate motives were for writing the article, Hopkins' ex-wife did work with him on his research and (unless she's flat-out lying) provides very damning information about it. I don't agree at all that this is just "dirty laundry". For that she could have talked about things that were a lot more intimate, which she doesn't.

 

[trainedobserver]

The two most important points I came away with:

After a decade of involvement in the field, I’m struck that most people with a ufological fascination don’t hold their leading researchers to anything like these scholastic, scientific, or even ethical standards. Many people may not even be aware that such standards exist. But they exist for a reason, folks, and sometimes UFO abduction research—as fascinating as it may seem—violates every one of the basic principles for the getting of knowledge and the protection of human subjects.

They’re not required to get authorization for their experimentation on human beings from an Institutional Review Board (IRB), a clearance that’s required of every legitimate institutional researcher in the country. It’s peer review of a proposed study using human subjects, it’s strict, and researchers are required to report back to the IRB with their findings. None of this applies to UFO researchers.

 

[James1]

Carol Rainey has written an important article IMO. She has knowledge of Hopkins' that exposes how utterly incompetent and damaging it is. We need to know this is we are to progress and develop better methodology. If we continue to see Hopkins as a capable researcher and rely on his information we carry on the same path to nowhere. Thank goodness she made this public. Perhaps ufology can break a long pattern and start to learn from these colossal mistakes and abuses of subejcts' welfare by Hopkins and Jacobs.