It's Official Emma Woods Sounds...

[paraschtick]

I agree with that. Here is my conclusion, which Jacobs' recent behaviour has only served to confirm - he is a dangerous fraud, who has caused immeasurable harm to dozens of people who probably needed real help. He, and those in ufology who have enabled him (and his "colleagues" like Budd Hopkins), have brought discredit to serious research into the UFO phenomenon. Anyone who fails to speak out and repudiate the abduction cult should be ashamed, and in the end bears as much responsibility as Jacobs et al for the damage they do.

Couldn't agree any more with you PK. I just had the unhappy fortune to read his "defamation" essay, and the guy is an incredible piece of work. I just love the way that he acknowledges that he put the notion of "MPD" in Emma's head, and then accuses her of her using it to defame HIM. I think the term is "chutzpah".

However, I'm not going to comment any further (yeah ... right ) until I hear the latest episode. I just hope that Gene and Chris gave Jacobs and Hopkins enough rope ... thats I guess all I can ask for at the moment .

 

[Gareth]

Heavily edited my ass.

I don't believe Jacobs for a second. What bullshit.

---------- Post added at 03:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:04 PM ----------

Paul I really don't understand how you can say Woods has "deapseated psychological problems".

What is the basis for that comment? I see absolutely nothing in that evidence to come to such a strong conclusion.

 

[dyingsun]

Heavily edited my ass.

I don't believe Jacobs for a second. What bullshit.

---------- Post added at 03:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:04 PM ----------

Paul I really don't understand how you can say Woods has "deapseated psychological problems".

What is the basis for that comment? I see absolutely nothing in that evidence to come to such a strong conclusion.

One question comes to mind : Why would they even engage such a topic, Jacobs and Hopkins don't have anything to gain from it. I'm far from defending here, but..why ?

 

[codex]

as we see the story from the other side - dr jacobs and not some hybrid IM - kept on changing

is anybody else out there - not in the paranormal sense as we know there is. Has Dr Jacobs treated any other research subjects with the same disdain?? Emma has broekn the cone of silence - go Emma!!!

To some of us though even though we've heard only one side of the story ... and we are still waiting for the other side, what has been presented to us so far has been damning. But I for one am convinced that Emma Woods is not "bat shit insane" and is not manipulating anything. To me manipulating the audio files would have been a herculean task, and so far what I have read of the documentation has seemed reasonable and not something like the MJ12 documents ie dodgy.

Emma Woods herself has shown herself to be reasonable, intelligent, focussed on getting her story out, considerate, patient, thoughtful, adult, not prone to fantasy (remember the ALIEN HYBRID IMs and the APARTMENT), organised and not deluded in any way as far as I can tell. Whereas the opposite parties have been seen to be belligerent, condescending, childish, fantasy-prone, nasty, incompetent, and disorganised.

And why discredit someone when you can play audio files of the same person showing themselves to be all of the above I have just mentioned??? So much easier don't you think??

ps and I really object to people insinuating that she is a "troubled individual". This woman has been hurt badly by someone poking around in her head for a few years by a supposedly reputable person who has been shown to be an unqualified hypnotherapist. She may have been silly to go to him in the first place but in her vulnerable state she felt she had nowhere left to turn, and I feel that anyone in her position would have done something similar. Her current state of mind is a result of this trusted individual abusing his position for what ends I have absolutely no idea ... power trip, ego, money??? ... and what she gets in return is "insinuations" that she isn't right in the head. I am astonished that she has turned out as well as she has if the accusations (and I believe that they probably are) are correct.

 

[brownie]

as we see the story from the other side - dr jacobs and not some hybrid IM - kept on changing

is anybody else out there - not in the paranormal sense as we know there is. Has Dr Jacobs treated any other research subjects with the same disdain?? Emma has broekn the cone of silence - go Emma!!!

Ditto! Go Emma!! (who's been kept from posting here in paracast, by Gene Steinberg, because she won't identify herself....Yet an alledged abductee called "Doug" was interviewed on paracast podcast and allowed to use that fake name). :frown:

As for the frequent use of the word "troubled" to describe Emma, it is David Jacobs who's "troubled" -- anyone who'd believe that hybrids, living in apartments, being schooled and sexed by his webmistress/research subject 'Elizabeth' and that are after him.....well, is that "troubled" or not? But then what's to be expected from the author of 'The Threat'.

---------- Post added at 02:59 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:50 AM ----------

Hells teeth. I think the Paratopia guys have a hell of a lot more credibility if the good Dr Jacobs really does think that an alien hybrid (ie extraterrestrial) was talking to him via INSTANT MESSAGES over his computer. And he knew where these ALIEN creatures (FROM A DIFFERENT PLANET) were living (IN AN APARTMENT) ... and reading his webmaster's blog (which was here :Blogger: Blog not found) ... he apparently had at some point not only pictures of alien hybrids but film as well.

I can't get enough of Jacobs pathological fixation with those mean apartment dwelling hybrids that want to lay-the-smack down on him! You'd think being half-ET they'd just beam themselves into Jacobs home or beam Jacobs up onto a flying saucer. (Oh, wait though , 'Elizabeth' did write that she saw a naked Jacobs on a ship, during one of her abductions).

 

[Gene Steinberg]

These attacks on Jacobs are getting excessive. Feel free to criticize his methods, but more extreme behavior will mean removed messages and infractions.

The distinction between Doug and Emma is that the former hasn't tried to turn himself into a public personality, complete with Web site seeking sympathy and support. Doug remains under the radar.

I'm sorry you don't see that.

 

[codex]

These attacks on Jacobs are getting excessive. Feel free to criticize his methods, but more extreme behavior will mean removed messages and infractions.

The distinction between Doug and Emma is that the former hasn't tried to turn himself into a public personality, complete with Web site seeking sympathy and support. Doug remains under the radar.

I'm sorry you don't see that.

Hi Gene

I think Emma has become a public personality because Dr Jacobs began to refer to this woman with the inference that madness was her middle name in radio shows and interviews etc. It is clear Emma knew he was referring to her so began to tell her side of the story. The name Emma became public in that a public forum chose to display hear her side of the story.

Her story is that, as a research subject, she was attacked by Dr Jacobs - the audio tapes show his aggressive manner and attitude - explicit in both hypnosis sessions and teleconversations - and, what I regard to be, the implanting of memory to the point where she was when under hypnosis told by Dr Jacobs that she had multiple personaility disorder. If that isn't abuse by a so-called professional I don't know what is.

Even if Emma is crazy she still deserves to be treated as a human being. She hasn't asked for my sympathy however she gets it.

People who experience anomalous experiences aren't exactly treated with dignity and respect by the so-called mainstream. I would have thought someone researching the area would realise that and behave with compassion and diginity. I do not see that with Dr Jacobs and his cohorts who have sought to ostracise Emma and to stop her story.

Dr Jacobs will get my respect when he treats his research subjects with compassion and not contempt.

Yes I am upset because I see it more a case of when he falls not if he falls. What will that mean for our community? Will we become even more ostracised.

I hope you see this as reasonably presented criticism and not just an attack. If you are unable to see that Emma Woods has validity in her claims that is your choice. However I do think it is about time we as a community begin to talk about the effect Dr Jacobs', in my opinion in the least shabby at worst malpractice, methodology will have on public acceptance of our experiences.

No I do not think Emma has doctored the tapes.

No I do not believe Emma is phoney.

No I do believe she is mad.

I do doubt Dr Jacobs professionalism.

I do not think he has responded professionally.

Please do not forget that HE is the one who has obtained a public identity from others' experiences.

regards

codex

 

[Gene Steinberg]

I am interested in evidence, not belief, and recordings are easily manipulated. At least we know who Jacobs really is and can judge him as to his methods and results.

Emma may have a case, but when it comes to figuring out what is really happening, she is a distraction. She doesn't help us understand the abduction scenario beyond question one researcher's possible research technique.

I'm sorry you can't see that.

 

[Tom From Hong Kong]

Even if Emma is crazy she still deserves to be treated as a human being. She hasn't asked for my sympathy however she gets it.

People who experience anomalous experiences aren't exactly treated with dignity and respect by the so-called mainstream. I would have thought someone researching the area would realise that and behave with compassion and diginity. I do not see that with Dr Jacobs and his cohorts who have sought to ostracise Emma and to stop her story.

Dr Jacobs will get my respect when he treats his research subjects with compassion and not contempt.

Codex,

Once again, the best means of protecting everyone's dignity and ensuring fairness is for Ms. Woods to bring her complaints against Dr. Jacobs in a court of law or an administrative court. These neutral tribunals have procedures in place to ensure the validity of facts presented and to protect everyone's due process rights. Importantly, this view is not a defense of Dr. Jacobs and his apparent actions, as some continue to repeatedly charge, but a recognition that sometimes things are not as they appear -- witness what occurred in the Duke Rape Case in 2006 in the U.S., where the lives of three innocent young men were ruined by false allegations. And yet once again: if you are a victim of a tort or a crime, the best place to seek redress is a court of law, not an internet chat forum.

Regarding Doug, the former guest of the Paracast, it is important to note the differences between him and Ms. Woods. Doug was referred to the Paracast by Budd Hopkins, who had met him personally on numerous occasions. Despite this referral, David Biedny interviewed Doug several times at length on Skype before putting him on the air. David knew Doug's true identity, and tested his claims of abduction. Most importantly, Doug was not making charges of wrongdoing against another person -- serious charges best handled in court. Simply stated, Doug was merely telling the Paracast audience about his experiences. I highly doubt David and Gene would have put him on the air if Doug was persistently pursing a complaint against another person. Apples and oranges.

Ms. Woods' complaints will gradually disappear from the public consciousness over time, while Dr. Jacobs and his work will likely endure, absent a proper court case to get to the underlying truth. Whether this is ultimately just or not we can't say, not knowing the facts as determined by a neutral tribunal, but this is the course Ms. Woods has apparently chosen to follow.

Tom

P.S.: having read the complaint guidelines issued by the Department of Heath and Human Services, I do not think they have jurisdiction to hear Ms. Woods' complaint. Indeed, if this was going to occur, three years into this disagreement, I suspect something would be formally filed and on public record by this point in time.