It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Debunking Abduction Debunkers

page: 10
28
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 11:06 AM
link   
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE


You are just spouting an opinion, your right of course, with zero evidence to back it up.

I have linked several articles to back up my opinion. There was actual studies done that dispute the psychology today articles. I will provide sources when I get a chance.

my only contention with the abduction phenomenon is that people like Jacobs want to make it into something its not. People have anomalous experiences. I have had them. There are a wide range of experiences that get ignored or even molded into "abductions". Its actually a very narrow viewpoint. What about John Macks work or the alien like beings seen while in altered states? All dismissed because Jacobs can't fit that into his view.




posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: noeltrotsky
No worries. First off I'd recommend researching into the controversy that arose when Multiple Personality Disorder changed name to Dissociative Identity Disorder (much more accurate name). On top of that, the controversy that arose when some psychologists in the eastern US (I forget which cities) were basically the only ones dealing with the disorder.

When it becomes focalised like that, it becomes suspicious... it is imperative to note these cases all involved hypnosis and strong external suggestion.

Its an exact parallel of this scenario. It calls all of his work into question, because the methodology is flawed. I learned PERSONALLY that you could influence someone to believe anything under this state. It is DANGEROUS!


I don't accept that a researcher in a field of study can be classified as biased simply because he focuses on one subject

He's biased because he believes it to have one underlying cause and as Ive already shown, if a patient specifically seeks out an 'abduction specialist' that indicates that they have already made up their mind. They have the choice to go a standard psychologist. They will not ridicule the belief, because what matters in psychology, is that the patient believes it. Note - a psychiatrist may ridicule them, but that is apples and oranges.


Jacobs actually points out many things he's heard over and over from hypnosis that are NOT well versed in popular culture

This is a fallacious argument, because you are assuming that it's on the patient to know these things. They have to have a general understanding of it, but that's it. The imposition comes from the hypnotist. Jacobs clearly demonstrates a bias, considering that this is his only practice. Anything in his mind or imagination can be transferred onto the patient.

Bottom line, he is not acting professionally.



posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE
That's right, everyone who doesn't blindly believe in aliens is a holocaust-denying pedophilia whitewasher.



posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

Hypnosis is done by tens of thousands of psychology and psychiatric professionals in the US and around the world, with mixed results - the same as most other medicines and treatments. Yet most other medicines and treatments do not get the same bad reputation as hypnosis, why? Why the double standard? Is it because big pharma does not and can not profit from it? Does big pharma have any influence on the industry? Could big pharma possibly influence the industry to look down on something it does not profit from? Is this within the realm of possibility?

Do not be concerned about my observations, they are just that, observations, I try not to have judgement as I know it is ego driven.

I am not anguished about others not seeing it my way, I was just suggesting to the other poster that we discuss this topic with others who generally address the points in the OP; if some are going to use circular reasoning, such as "abductions can't be happening because aliens don't exist", it is kind of a waste of time to attempt to disprove an argument that at face value is illogical.

You have addressed the hypnosis issue, which I think is valid somewhat, but as I said this method has widespread use around the world so it certainly on its own does not negate the assertions in the OP.



posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 11:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
my only contention with the abduction phenomenon is that people like Jacobs want to make it into something its not. People have anomalous experiences. I have had them. There are a wide range of experiences that get ignored or even molded into "abductions". Its actually a very narrow viewpoint. What about John Macks work or the alien like beings seen while in altered states? All dismissed because Jacobs can't fit that into his view.


It is true that Jacobs isn't the beginning and end of abduction research! He gets a lot of attention now because of the volume of his work and the results he is finding and putting out there. There is a good UK researcher on abduction...can't remember the name off hand thou. Saw him on Ytube awhile ago.

There are others working in altered states and making contact and such. Personally I don't see that as 'abduction' so didn't think to discuss it here.

I'm not so sure how dismissive Jacobs is of other areas being researched. He does seem to be highly focused, but he has stated that happened because he was hearing the same story from victims. If others say aliens are friendly and helpful that's what they are findings...Jacobs is pretty clear he doesn't see that.



posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 11:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Ridhya
Believer: "Alien abductions are a factual reality
Skeptic: "So may I ask what evidence you have?"
Believer: "The acclaimed work of Dr Jacobs"
Skeptic: "But a simple Google search will produce Psychology academics who discredit his methods and conclusions"
Believer: "They are wrong"
Skeptic: "How did you reach that conclusion?"
Believer: "Because Dr Jacobs said so"
Me: "Ah, that's nice, but I remain unconvinced"



posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ridhya
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE
That's right, everyone who doesn't blindly believe in aliens is a holocaust-denying pedophilia whitewasher.


I don't know why you are so angry. You should try not to identify with a mental position, this is just the ego, if you do then when that position is threatened your ego will see it as a threat to it's existence, and fight back with emotional engagement, and usually that leads away from rational discussion.

Anyway, I did not say that, please do not put words in my mouth, those are cheap and dirty debate tactics used by the desperate, and that is just my observation not judgement.

I just said we should not shy away from topics just because they are uncomfortable.



posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 11:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
You have addressed the hypnosis issue, which I think is valid somewhat, but as I said this method has widespread use around the world so it certainly on its own does not negate the assertions in the OP.
Equally, it does not confirm the assertions either. If folk here state "I believe because..." instead of "It is a factual reality because..." then I would have no issue. It is just the claims of fact based solely on Jacobs questionable methods which shall of course attract questions from those who doubt the validity of his work.



posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE
Where did I ever say I was angry? Ive been politely replying to trotsky and explaining some important points about hypnotism.

You made the insinuation. And I quote:

Should we have ignored the Holocaust? Should we ignore child abuse and molestation? For you and I this is a rhetorical question, for others I'm not sure.....they would love to shut us up on this topic. Some only seem to like freedom of speech when it agrees with them.



posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 11:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Ridhya

No way I'm talking about changes to the DSM V !!! Holy landmine! I've read a bit and simply let professionals argue out what the standards of diagnosis will be.

I agree that Jacobs work is limited because there are so few researchers doing it. I don't see that as evidence Jacobs is presenting his work in a biased manner. It is more possible for him to be biased and 'get away with it' because there simply isn't enough research. This is normal in early fields of work. It's just a cautionary flag we all have to accept when thinking about the subject.

A person seeking out an 'abduction specialist' shouldn't be written off as having no real memories. Many cases people have a few memories and they are disturbing and reveal alien involvement. This naturally leads to an 'abduction specialist' because a regular psychologist would bury you in years worth of talk therapy while the psychiatrist would drug you up so much driving home wouldn't be possible. It is very natural to seek a voice that won't ridicule you. This doesn't mean the initial memories are fake, neither that the recalled memories in session are fake.
I think we're going to agree to disagree on this point. I understand confabulation can and does happen. I understand leading questioning can and does happen. From what I've learned of Jacobs work he has tried to avoid that as much as possible. Hypnosis isn't the best evidence by a long shot. Ideally we'd drive up to a building and see chambers of hybrids hanging off the wall.

You might be expecting Jacobs to act professionally according to a Psychology bodies guidelines on hypnosis. I can agree that he likely doesn't meet that standard. Does that sound reasonable?



posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: Ridhya
Believer: "Alien abductions are a factual reality
Skeptic: "So may I ask what evidence you have?"
Believer: "The acclaimed work of Dr Jacobs"
Skeptic: "But a simple Google search will produce Psychology academics who discredit his methods and conclusions"
Believer: "They are wrong"
Skeptic: "How did you reach that conclusion?"
Believer: "Because Dr Jacobs said so"
Me: "Ah, that's nice, but I remain unconvinced"


Insulting and not a valid characterization of the thread at all. Typical from you thou.



posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 11:54 AM
link   
a reply to: noeltrotsky
Oh, it was just a representation of how I perceive the arguments of believers in this thread. You may choose to feel insulted by it if you wish, but you are also free to provide a stronger case for your assertions than just the questionable work of Dr Jacobs.
I have no problem if you believe it yourself, but when you present his findings as fact I shall continue to remind other members that a Google search will produce many psychology academics who cast doubt on his methods and conclusions.
If you refrain from presenting it as fact I'll dismiss and ignore it as merely your stated beliefs.



posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 11:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: Ridhya
Believer: "Alien abductions are a factual reality
Skeptic: "So may I ask what evidence you have?"
Believer: "The acclaimed work of Dr Jacobs"
Skeptic: "But a simple Google search will produce Psychology academics who discredit his methods and conclusions"
Believer: "They are wrong"
Skeptic: "How did you reach that conclusion?"
Believer: "Because Dr Jacobs said so"
Me: "Ah, that's nice, but I remain unconvinced"



What are the points these people are making? Can you spell them out for us? Is it just because they don't like hypnosis? Hypnosis doesn't always work? Well, like I have said multiple times now, why the double standard for hypnosis? Most other treatments and medicines, in fact all treatments and medicines, have varying levels of efficacy, yet their use is not frowned upon because they don't always work. Does big pharma profit from hypnosis? No. Does big pharma have influence in the industry? Yes. Is it possible big pharma would try to discredit something it does not profit from? Of course.

In no way are Dr. Jacobs assertions invalidated because some professionals have a bias against hypnosis. If they were true professionals they would proceed to examine his assertions on the basis that the hypnosis was valid, that is the way science is conducted. Elimination of bias is the number one goal to the true scientist.



posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE
OK, so you believe in Jacobs work, I don't.
One thing is for certain though, Jacobs work does not confirm that alien abductions actually happen, and as long as that is the only evidence you can bring to the table I and many others will remain unconvinced.



posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
You have addressed the hypnosis issue, which I think is valid somewhat, but as I said this method has widespread use around the world so it certainly on its own does not negate the assertions in the OP.
Equally, it does not confirm the assertions either. If folk here state "I believe because..." instead of "It is a factual reality because..." then I would have no issue. It is just the claims of fact based solely on Jacobs questionable methods which shall of course attract questions from those who doubt the validity of his work.


Okay, hypnosis does not confirm or deny his assertions, so let's leave hypnosis out of the discussion.

There are other relevant points in the OP, that I have put forward, it is up to others to try to refute them without resorting to the "hypnosis" debunk.

Also, as mentioned in the OP, even though many cases involved hypnosis, some did not, even though all the similar aspects were reported in those cases. How do people explain that?



posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 12:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE
OK, so you believe in Jacobs work, I don't.
One thing is for certain though, Jacobs work does not confirm that alien abductions actually happen, and as long as that is the only evidence you can bring to the table I and many others will remain unconvinced.


I don't actually think I ever said I believe it. I do remember saying given the assertions he puts forward, it seems a topic worthy of investigation; I certainly have seen thousands of topics over the years not worthy or barely worthy of investigation; why don't you ask yourself why this topic, which if there is even a shred of truth to it (and I BELIEVE that is true), is not investigated more? If true would it not have tremendous ramifications for the human race? Doesn't something that has tremendous ramifications for the human race, even if it has a 0.01% chance of being true, merit investigation?



posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: noeltrotsky
Hahahah yeah, DSM-IV actually, but it definitely was a landmine subject! DSM-V was even more difficult.

You have to look at it like a physical problem. Your stomach hurts and you feel sick and tired all the time. So you go to the Cancer Clinic for help. This shows that you have a bias towards that conclusion, before actual diagnosis. This doesnt mean for a second you dont have cancer, but its not the only possibility, nor the most likely.

Like I said in that very long response, I would never believe a recovered memory under hypnosis, except in an extremely controlled environment.

He's not an accredited psychologist, much less specialist, particularly in trauma counselling. Regardless of whether or not they were actually abducted by aliens, they were traumatised, and he is inciting further damage. He is part of the problem.



posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 12:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: PlanetXisHERE
Doesn't something that has tremendous ramifications for the human race, even if it has a 0.01% chance of being true, merit investigation?
Absolutely. I wholeheartedly support further research on the subject because right now the evidence supporting such claims is sorely lacking. Even in this thread the only case presented is the work of Dr Jacobs, and it is clearly not confirmation that alien abductions are a factual reality, so of course I support further research.



posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 12:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: noeltrotsky

No I asked if it was not odd that someone thought they heard aliens in their mind. Aliens who described themselves with smooth skin as "grey aliens" standing in someone's backyard. Intergalactic speed dating hey?

Now that might seem quite normal to someone who is convinced aliens exist, who abduct people and is desperately trying to prove it.

But there could well be another explanation for all of this couldn't there?

Nope. The only explanation that makes sense is that people are telling the truth.





posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 12:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ridhya
a reply to: Scdfa
You accused Zeta of ad hominems and ignoring messages, when YOU did both those things to me. You keep calling everyone else closed-minded while denying the alternative theories. You keep ignoring the fact that mainstream news channels aired all the footage and even had alien specials on CNN and Fox. Every bloody cartoon had aliens in it. Movies, books, the media pushes belief in aliens. You're a believer, accept it.

There was never any doubt that Blue Book was a cover campaign, the CIA freaking admitted it. Back before everyone believed that experimental craft were flown by aliens, people suspected Soviets. Then suddenly comes out this promotion that they are extraterrestrial.

Your lack of knowledge on this is pathetic. You believe that saying 98% of cases were explainable would dissuade people? What a joke. So why on earth didnt they say 100%? They clearly left room for speculation. Yet you dont find that suspicious.


I never said any such thing, and for the life of me I can't understand what you are trying to say about Project Bluebook. Do you? What is it about Bluebook that "suspicious"' and what does that suspicion point to in your opinion? You insult my intelligence, but you can't even communicate your point effectively. Pathetic, you say?
edit on 11-1-2015 by Scdfa because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join