Hopkins Ex-wife Dumps

[Sean Elifritz]

Not to be cynical, but "Emma Woods" has made herself into a sort of celebrity by playing the victim. She has spent countless hours editing and posting material for her site, and sending letters to anyone who'll listen to her tale of abuse. Had she simply made complaints to the proper parties and pursued legal remedies, few would know her name, or rather her pseudonym. As an alleged abductee, she ought to have a lot of valuable evidence to provide to researchers. Instead, she's dedicated her life to attacking David Jacobs, and yet she claims she is perfectly normal.

She ain't the only one. The other show someone else mentioned is pretty much a one note affair nowadays. Would seem to me that an equally aggressive examination of Whitley Strieber might be warranted for all the oddball things he's said and done over the years. But I don't see that happening because unlike Hopkins and Jacobs he espouses viewpoints they are in favor of.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Emma Woods is not "playing the victim". She was a victim. It's because she made it known that we know about it. We need to know about it in this field. How can anyone say an abuser should go unchecked in ufology and there is a fault with the victim for making it known? It is an attitude that covers up the abuse and keeps it going. We need a thorough examination and stock taking in this area of ufology.

If Jacobs is the abuser, yes, he should be dealt with. But "Woods" has made herself into a sort of celebrity by milking this role for all its worth. I'm sorry you don't see that.

---------- Post added at 04:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:10 PM ----------

Respectfully, Gene, but I don't care if he planted something as benign and trivial as the recipe for chocolate cookies.

The question is: why would he be allowed to plant ANYTHING on the mind of a person he's investigating? Who granted him such powers?

Let me ask you the same question that's been avoided over and over again: Did you actually read Jacobs' response on his site?

 

[red_pill_junkie]

Let me ask you the same question that's been avoided over and over again: Did you actually read Jacobs' response on his site?

I have not. Care to provide a link for it? I would greatly appreciate it.

 

[James1]

And you read Jacobs' response on his site as to what information he planted — and why? Or did you bother?

I read it. I also heard him on tape in the conversations on Woods' website. I compared what he said in his response to what he said on the tapes. He is lying in his response IMO.

---------- Post added at 11:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:14 PM ----------

Sadly the lunatic fringe is always going to be a part of this genre, and anyone doing any kind of research in this field is tapdancing in a minefield.

Who is the lunatic fringe here? Emma Woods and Brian Reed who trusted Jacobs as an expert? Or Jacobs who implanted hypnotic suggestions in his subjects' mind she had multiple personality disorder?

 

[Gene Steinberg]

I read it. I also heard him on tape in the conversations on Woods' website. I compared what he said in his response to what he said on the tapes. He is lying in his response IMO.

Inasmuch as you don't know and can't know what was edited or changed in those recordings, you can't say you have the entire picture. What's more, Jacobs also went into detail about how "Emma" (whom he calls "Alice") would call him excessively, and when she sent him hateful email messages that she claimed were actually sent by "them." You think those are lies too? Or did you notice?

You sound as if you read "Woods" response, not the actual statement itself.

For those who want to see it, here's the link:

International Center for Abduction Research

If can be found in 10 seconds on Google.

I do not pretend to know the entire story here. But if you don't read both sides, you'll never get a sense of what may have really happened.

---------- Post added at 04:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:18 PM ----------

Here's part of what Jacobs says on the multiple personality disorder matter:

If the situation Alice reported was true and actual “hybrid beings” were threatening her, I felt I had to try to protect her from them. And obviously if Alice's reports were true, I had to try to protect myself as well. If abduction research can be trusted, alien beings have telepathic abilities and know what people are thinking; therefore, protecting both Alice and myself was a major challenge.
I thought long and hard about what, if anything, I could do. I decided that one approach would be, during hypnosis, to give Alice ideas to think about that would throw "mind-readers" off my trail. I explained my thinking to her before I acted. Then at one point during a hypnosis session I told her that as a researcher I was interested not in abductions but in multiple personality disorder. I chose this because it is believable--the disorder has characteristics in common with the effects of abductions. I hoped that she would be able to keep this idea in her mind and convey it to her abductors, thereby relieving some of the pressure both she and I felt. At no time did I think that Alice had multiple personality disorder, and of course neither did she. She knew exactly what was happening and why.
In hindsight, I realize that Alice's reports of alleged alien threats and physical abuse resulted in a heightened sense of urgency that led me to act quickly, perhaps too quickly. As it turned out, the multiple-personality-disorder ploy I invented as a defense was useless. Although the ploy was an ineffective defense against her alleged tormentors, ironically it has become an effective weapon against me. Through selective editing and misleading claims, Alice has turned it on its head and is using it to defame me.

Whether you believe Jacobs or not, I'd like to see some scrutiny of his statements, rather than just outright dismissal by people who give evidence of only casual familiarity with that short article.

 

[James1]

Jacobs also went into detail about how "Emma" (whom he calls "Alice") would call him excessively, and when she sent him hateful email messages that she claimed were actually sent by "them." You think those are lies too? Or did you notice?

Yes, I think they were lies.

I heard Woods and Jacobs discussing those emails on tape. They were not "hateful" email messages. Importantly why does Jacobs in his response not disclose her sleep disorder of acting in her sleep, and she believes she wrote them asleep. They talk about this on the tapes but in his response he never mentions this, which makes her look nuts. How dishonest is that? What is more, she didn't claim they were sent by "them". She was trying to tell him she thought she wrote them as her sleep activities. Jacobs was the one not listening to her and telling her they were written by "them". Of course, he doesn't say any of this in his response.

Have you actually listened to those conversations yourself and compared them to Jacobs' response? If you do, you might be surprised.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

So she writes hateful letters while asleep. That indicates someone who definitely has a problem.

As to comparing the conversations to Jacobs' response, since it's not possible to know whether they are presented in the proper context, and that key sections haven't been removed, it would be a waste of time. With all that material available, I could easily make anyone say anything, quite incriminating.

Again, I ask you to read the full message Jacobs posted. You are only responding to the two paragraphs I quoted. You give no evidence of seeing the rest of it.

As to the "Woods" case, I think we've discussed this to a fare-thee-well, and it won't be resolved here. So let's drop it unless you actually have something new to contribute. We've covered this ground again, and again, and again.

And since it's clear to me that there is nothing more to be said, this thread is closed.