-
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!
March 22nd / interview with Mike C!
- Thread starter mikec
- Start date
- Status
Playing Devil's advocate:
I'm not sure what this proves.
People who've been through terrible upheavals often react in strange and unpredictable ways. Sometimes it's because they're in shock and haven't realized the seriousness of what's happened to them. Other times it's because human beings are weird.
This is an ugly example, but it's the one that comes to mind: Think of that poor woman who said she was assaulted by Kobe Bryant a few years back. One of the reasons people disbelieved her account of being raped was because she went and slept with someone consensually within a day or two. People (including the jury, IIRC) thought that someone just wouldn't do that if they'd been raped. But they weren't in her shoes. It's possible she was looking for comfort, or was trying to replace a bad experience with a good one. Who knows. It seemed to me that while it may not have been a typical reaction, it was still a very human one.
I could see how being followed by a film crew might offer a sense of safety to someone concerned about being abducted.
Ya that was really funny too. Don't quit your day job.
I do agree with Gen that people are weird. Message boards are even weirder!
Schuyler
Misanthrope
You keep saying that. I'm not accusing you of being dishonest. It's just that there's nowhere else to go with this. I feel like we're running in place here, churning and not getting anywhere.
How about those Mets?
Here's an area of obscurity in the Mike C case that I think he himself might be able to shed some light on:
In some of your statements you say, "So-and-so attempted to hypnotized me, but it was unsuccessful."
I think some people (myself included) are not quite sure which of these is the case:
A) You were unable to be hypnotized.
B) You were hypnotized, but unable to recall any memories of "encounters".
These could both be considered "unsuccessful", but they are different scenarios.
In some of your statements you say, "So-and-so attempted to hypnotized me, but it was unsuccessful."
I think some people (myself included) are not quite sure which of these is the case:
A) You were unable to be hypnotized.
B) You were hypnotized, but unable to recall any memories of "encounters".
These could both be considered "unsuccessful", but they are different scenarios.
mikec
Skilled Investigator
Reply to Brandon D:
________________
I was unable to be hypnotized.
I have attempted to be hypnotically regressed 4 different times, with 4 different hypnotherapists.
At no time do I feel that I was ever successfully "put under" ---- I was nice and relaxed, but my impression was that I was not - at any time - in any sort of altered state.
On one occasion, while attempting a session with Budd Hopkins. As he tried to retrieve the missing time events from 1974 I did get some very vivid views of my old neighborhood in michigan, but not much more.
He attempted to lead me along the route I would have walked on the way home from the high school football game. At the point on the sidewalk where I know the orange flash took place, the image in my mind's-eye just froze.
Budd tried multiple tricks to try and get me past this moment, but nothing happened. I got to that spot on the sidewalk and things just got stuck. Eventually we abandoned the effort and I sat up again.
Afterwards, he told me: "I've seen a lot of people who were blocked, but you were REALLY blocked."
________________
I was unable to be hypnotized.
I have attempted to be hypnotically regressed 4 different times, with 4 different hypnotherapists.
At no time do I feel that I was ever successfully "put under" ---- I was nice and relaxed, but my impression was that I was not - at any time - in any sort of altered state.
On one occasion, while attempting a session with Budd Hopkins. As he tried to retrieve the missing time events from 1974 I did get some very vivid views of my old neighborhood in michigan, but not much more.
He attempted to lead me along the route I would have walked on the way home from the high school football game. At the point on the sidewalk where I know the orange flash took place, the image in my mind's-eye just froze.
Budd tried multiple tricks to try and get me past this moment, but nothing happened. I got to that spot on the sidewalk and things just got stuck. Eventually we abandoned the effort and I sat up again.
Afterwards, he told me: "I've seen a lot of people who were blocked, but you were REALLY blocked."
AnnetteMarie
Skilled Investigator
lahk ah said y'all, I t'ain't never said I wuz frum anwair but s'ketchewan
a bit heavy maybe, but each and every bit can be found somewhere in Saskatchewan, even if they are putting it on for the tourists
wicro
Skilled Investigator
I don't see why being skeptical (as I am) makes you 'outside' but the asshole fits well!
skunkape
Paranormal Maven
Admitting one is an asshole is the first step on the road to recovery.
Schuyler
Misanthrope
No, it does, Lance. I thought Hopkins claiming mike was 'really blocked' when he didn't find anything was tremendously 'leading' and presumptive. He's basically claiming lack of evidence is bigger evidence, which makes no sense. I am very distrustful of any hypnosis or any 'talking therapy' that psychologists promote as healing.
Plus, if the witness is 'tainted' by virtue of reading books and accounts of abductions beforehand, you have a whole other level of mistrust thrown in. I'm not being critical of mike here because I'm in the same boat (though NOT an 'experiencer') But what I mean is, if someone 'hypnotized' me my testimony would be worthless because I've read all these books on abductions, from Strieber and Hopkins all the way back to Adamski and Bethurum. I've got many stories to choose from.
wicro
Skilled Investigator
Any time I can be of service just ask! Now try to post a comment without treating everyone on this board as some homogeneous group that subscribes to the same belief systems. Seriously try it, or would that deflate your ego just too much?
You don't know what you're talking about. Inform yourself before you start playing know-it-all. You can start with the BBC documentary on hypnosis.
Hypnosis has been proven to work, plain and simple. It can retrieve lost memories and create dramatic altered states. It is not 100% fool-proof, but neither is our ordinary memory.
Schuyler
Misanthrope
Never did. I have a lot of the books. Most of them are very simple tales. Fry started it, followed by Adamski, Menger, and Bethurum. (As I remember, you have a favorite as well) Reading them sequentially like that I get the distinct impression they cribbed off of each other and gradually embellished their tales with more and more detail.
My favorite is Bethurum's hot Latin space captain from the planet Clarion: Aura Rhanes! Yowzaa! With a short red dress and a black blouse with a beret at a jaunty angle, speaking English in a lilting rhyme. she was mentioned as a co-respondent in Bethurum's divorce papers.
wicro
Skilled Investigator
You may want to read my 12,404 dissertation on sociological aspects of the UFO phenomenon before you make that assessment. I use a neo-Schutzian analysis(mainly based on his ideas of 'multiple realities' and 'typification' if your familiar with the works of Berger and Luckmann 'The social construction of reality' they borrowed heavily from Schtuz) on the phenomenological experience of the UFO and how it is created through media representation.
I've coupled this with a 'crisis theory' loosely based on 'social liminality' ( taking the anthropological idea and using it on a macro level) and Giddens ideas of ontological insecurity to help explain UFO 'wave' and 'flaps' tied to social context they take place in. I'm in the initial stages of a PhD thesis in a similar style which hopefully look more broadly at the whole 'paranormal' field, which you may one to look up in a few years as well.
Wait......not skeptical enough for you? How do you define 'skeptic' then? Someone that can't keep a civil tongue when addressing other people on a public forum ? Don't mistake not making snide comments on opposing view points post with a lack of skepticism.
Let me make sure I understand this correctly: You're criticizing me for citing a documentary, and to support your position you cite an article?
Were you one of the scientists in this study? I'll bet I know your answer!
So.... you got your information secondhand, just as I did.
But since, for some inconceivable reason, print seems to impress you more than video, here is the result of 2 seconds worth of googling:
Solving Crimes By Hypnosis
http://www.marxhowell.com/Articles/Article_2/article_2.html
In addition to this, I personally know someone whose best friend was hypnotized by law enforcement authorities, and her hypnosis helped them catch a serial murderer who killed someone on her street. This was not publicized (and it is seldom publicized), I only know about it because I'm friends with the girl.
Usually, when there exists evidence to support the validity of something, and this something happens to run contrary to "common knowledge", there are still people who irrationally cling to the consensus opinion.
These people are, whether they know it or not, victims of suggestion.
So, in a way, they also support the validity of hypnosis!
By the way, after a little research I think the documentary I cited may be a Discovery Channel documentary, not BBC. It's been years since I watched it.
I can't find it online anywhere, on most video sites it's been removed because of copyright issues. However, luckily I happen to own the documentary, so if anyone would like me to make it available I can put it up on zshare for people to download.
Some of the notable parts of the documentary:
- They interview a man who was convicted and sent to prison for murder. He insisted all along that he was innocent, and while in prison he was told by other inmates the names of the actual killers. By the time he had an opportunity to speak to lawyers, he had forgotten the names. He was placed under hypnosis and was able to recall the names. Those men are arrested and found to be guilty, and he was set free.
- A hospital in Central America has a small budget, because of this they're unable to afford anaesthesia. The doctor places his patients under hypnosis and operates on them *with no anaesthesia*. They actually film a woman under hypnosis with her leg being cut open by the doctor. She is awake and talking the entire time.
Of course there is no reason to be a "true believer" in anything that one hasn't witnessed firsthand, but to say that there doesn't exist strong evidence to support the validity of hypnosis is just being dishonest (or at best, ignorant).
- Status