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: 28
28
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

I didn't accuse anyone of anything, but if you draw Venn diagrams of debunkers and disinfo agents, by definition, there is a large area of intersection.

I'm not going to play this game. I respectfully request that you stop insinuating that I or anyone else that disagrees with you is a "disinfo" agent. Thanks


Unfortunately, your use of a ad hominem attack on Dr. Jacobs proves nothing as it is a logical fallacy, he is not the only one to have studied this issue, and others have had similar findings.

Stating someone's data is bogus is not an ad hominem nor is stating that my dog poohs an ad hominem, however, calling someone "professor panties" might be.
Bud Hopkins "research" is equally troubling. John Mack? well, Jacobs said his findings were wrong....so?




posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

It's all speculation. That's the point.



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 09:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mehmet666Heineken

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Mehmet666Heineken

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

Has it ever occurred to you that maybe people like him are employed by the government to foster ignorance?


So far I've not at all got that vibe from Paulides. Unless he hasn't made his strategic pivot yet and is still building up for that moment. As of now he's a total role model for active and retired law enforcement


Actually, Paulides has a shady past and apparently did not "retire" from law enforcement as he claims. Nor was he a police detective as he claims. He was a police liason officer until he got caught using official police stationary fraudulently. This raises questions about his credibility.

www.sjretirement.com...


afutureghost.blogspot.com...


Ok I'll read those but if he is a piece of crap that doesn't mean I also shoot his message down. Right now I think the main thing is to see if there are inconsistencies within his stories because so far I have found a few in terms of slight exaggeration which might prove enough to screw over his theories and accounts.


I'm not sure to which Paulides' message you refer. Could you explain?



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 09:46 PM
link   
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

Okay, I get it no need to repeat it for the hundredth time, hypnosis is not allowed in court. It is also used by thousands of psychiatric and psychological professionals around the world.

Hypnosis is certainly used for helping people lose weight, stop smoking and a number of other maladies where "suggestion" is used to strengthen will power and that sort of thing. Sports psychologists use it for improving performance. As a memory retrieval tool, it is utterly useless. That is pretty well established now.


ANYWAY Dr Jacobs also stated not all memories from his subjects were retrieved using hypnosis, some memories were just plain remembered and not hidden.

Again, you don't have to be under hypnosis to have someone lead you into a false memory. it really comes down to how suggestible someone is. Also false memories can happen all on their own. All this info is readily available. Further, we really have no clue about any of Jacob's subjects except for what he tells us.


If Dr. Jacobs has no credibility, how did he keep his position at a well-known university?

He was a history professor at Temple. I am sure he was qualified to teach history. The Temple faculty washed their hands of the whole affair and he retired from there soon after his credibility as alien abduction researcher took a nose dive. He also used Temple letterhead to mislead his subjects into thinking they were participating in a study under Temple www.alien-ufos.com... Temple had nothing to do with anything concerning his "research" and wanted nothing to do with it either.


One or two subjects out of hundreds complain about Dr. Jacobs, how is that different from any other professional?

I am truly at a loss here. An actual professional would have lost their license. This is about as clear as it gets in that respect. The reason that Jacobs lives on as "researcher" is because he has people that follow him and that are willing to ignore the whole sad truth about him. He answers to nobody and has no license to lose. People are willing to believe anything he tells them and don't require anything but his word. That is incredibly obvious.

You do understand that these sessions are incredibly personal, right? You also understand that someone who has been psychologically abused isn't going to be really forthcoming with this information. You also know that Jacobs threatened Emma, right? His defense is that she is crazy! He tried to suggest that she had Multiple Personality Disorder while she was under hypnosis in order to throw the hybrids of HIS trail because they were sending him text messages! HOW DO YOU DEFEND THIS?


How do we know Emma Stone did not set him up?

I am confused here. First its Emma Woods. Second, what difference does it make? Criminals are set up all the time. Are you saying that he didn't actually say or do all those things that we hear him saying on the recordings? No amount of rationalization will change anything.

I have to stop before my head explodes

edit on 22-1-2015 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-1-2015 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2015 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Concerns of the American Medical Association (Summarized):

The American Medical Association (AMA) has brought to the attention of both the American Society of Clinical Hypnosis (ASCH) and the Society of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis (SCEH) that many individuals using hypnosis, some of whom may be members of one or both Societies, may be making the inaccurate statement that hypnosis is approved by the AMA as a legitimate therapy for medical or psychological purposes. The Societies have been advised by the AMA that this statement is inaccurate, and refers to a 1958 Council on Mental Health report that was rescinded by the AMA in 1987. If any members of the Societies are utilizing the name or initials of the AMA, they are requested to remove the name or initials of the AMA from those products, services, and/or promotional materials. The AMA objects to the use of its name in connection with hypnosis as it could imply the AMA's endorsement of those specific products and/or services and could violate the rights of the AMA including significant infringement of its trademark.
www.asch.net...



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 04:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Raufu
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

HI I have considered hypnosis and there seem to be different methods, but I'm not compatible with deep relaxation excercises (I don't know how exactly to explain it, I can stay awake right until the point where I fall asleep but there's not much in between, like a trance state, and I'm far too self-aware of my body in such a state)

But that means, and I was told so, that we had to work with my "awake-state" clear memories. Again, the psycho docs are all about solutions and not very interested in recovering picturesque descriptions just because they find them curious, at least I haven't found that type of psychologist yet.

I don't think that that memories that have been "recovered" under hypnosis are false entirely, but recovered memory therapy could be causing false memories and even false memory syndrome (reading about it right now). Seems to be a controversial topic though. FMS is not recognized as a mental illness either.

However I did discover all memories on my own, not one single memory came up when a the therapist was present.

Still doesn't explain scars, wounds and weird things like neatly folded blankets and other things that I'd rather not talk about because it's impossible without going into details.

I'd like to ask you why there is such a strong, overwhelming rejection of the idea that this phenomenon could be more than meets the eye. Sometimes the efforts to reduce the universe to exactly what humans can perceive, are baffling to me.

The problem is that analytical science is per definition the art of picking things apart, reducing them to components and then look at those components. You can only pick apart what you can perceive. If there is phenomenon that's caused by an external source that we cannot perceive directly, all efforts to "analyze" it will ultimately fail because the root cause itself is not perceivable. It's like staring at a distorted shadow on the wall and trying to figure out how the real object looks like - impossible, since you cannot extrapolate the 3D dimensions of an object solely by it's 2D shadow. At the same time some cave men (referring to Plato's allegory of the cave) would argue until their dying day that there is no real 3D object (they can only perceive the shadow), hence the shadow cannot possibly exist, even if they're looking right at it, and has to be an illusion or hallucination.


I'm very interested about your scars, though I respect your choice not to talk about them.

Just another example of an abductee reluctant to discuss the experiences, while debunkers claim abductees are clamouring for fame and notoriety - the opposite seems to be true, and anonymously posting on the internet can hardly be counted as going public.

Raufu, I do have another question if you are willing to answer. Dr. Jacobs and other researchers have discovered that this is an intergenerational phenomenon, do you know if your parents have had any abduction experiences similar to yours? Are you old enough to have had children, and do you think they have experienced it?



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 05:00 AM
link   
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE


Just another example of an abductee reluctant to discuss the experiences, while debunkers claim abductees are clamouring for fame and notoriety - the opposite seems to be true, and anonymously posting on the internet can hardly be counted as going public.


Skeptics do not claim that "abductees are clamoring for fame and notoriety." Obviously, people who have experienced psychological trauma can be reticent about discussing it, whatever the true origin of that trauma is. It is hoaxers and, worse still " abduction researchers" who are motivated by notoriety, which in turn can aggravate rather than decrease the suffering of the traumatized. Self-proclaimed "experts" can do more harm than good in this area.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 07:05 AM
link   
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE


Just another example of an abductee reluctant to discuss the experiences, while debunkers claim abductees are clamouring for fame and notoriety - the opposite seems to be true, and anonymously posting on the internet can hardly be counted as going public.

I haven't seen one person in this thread remotely hint at this. Have you? Are you implying that there are no debunkers in this thread? Why do you ignore the actual points raised but argue against a point that is completely fabricated?

I want to add that I fully support people that share their experiences. In fact, I consider myself an advocate for these folks. Emma Woods is a good example of someone that has had experiences that really cant be explained by "mental illness" or "sleep paralysis". I think that there may be more here than "psychological" explanations and saying so probably puts me in a different grouping than "debunker", wouldn't you agree? My contention is with people like Jacobs and Hopkins and their methodologies. I would even say that I am not willing to dismiss the works of Dr. John Mack entirely. I am not even ruling out aliens but I don't think "aliens" should be defining the phenomenon either.

edit on 23-1-2015 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 11:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian

I came late to this thread and totally admit that I did not read all 28 pages first, I'm sorry. But this post actually made me laugh -- in a good way -- so I decided to respond.

I should start by saying that I once had many 'anomalous' experiences, but that was like 20 years ago, and I am sadly but intentionally under-educated on this topic (in part because I feel like everything messes with my belief systems and memory, so I'd just rather not go there. I also have, generally, a disinterest in the topic, which I get over cyclically but briefly, talk about it on the internet and then ignore it for another 6 months or several years).


Hypnosis is certainly used for helping people lose weight, stop smoking and a number of other maladies where "suggestion" is used to strengthen will power and that sort of thing. Sports psychologists use it for improving performance. As a memory retrieval tool, it is utterly useless. That is pretty well established now.

I have a decent chunk of personal experience with this topic. Much of what is taught and now heralded as hypnosis officially is progressive relaxation and mostly pablum. Really, since the 40's it's been as subject to intentional disinformation as other more controversial ATS topics. Hypnosis can do a lot more than merely 'will power' both physiologically and psychologically, and used properly can work very decently to assist with retrieving hidden/lost memory. However, 'used well' is the key and like any other tool, it's subject to at least 99% of the people using it being poorly qualified (often the more 'officially' qualified they are, the more inept. Kind of like modern disease-treatment allopathic technical specialists, vs. people who actually know something about good health).

Also, subjects seldom being free of so much mental chaos and interference it's nearly pointless anyway. Memory retrieval is often tried with witnesses of crimes, but by the time they get to that, the person's had so much rehashing the memory, and questioning, and emotion, and time between , their memory's a mess by any standard. That doesn't really speak to the ability of proper hypnosis work, but rather, to the pitfalls of how messy you can make someone's mind before getting around to it. Anyway, it's like any other topic -- one could find 'experts' saying nearly any point of view about it. Suffice to say, it's my personal feeling that issues with using hypnosis are seldom as due to its limitations as to its implementation, and the conditions of doing so.


(from previous poster not the one I'm responding to) ANYWAY Dr Jacobs also stated not all memories from his subjects were retrieved using hypnosis, some memories were just plain remembered and not hidden.

Most people I've known personally with 'anomalous experiences' including myself remembered them consciously on our own, usually at or near the experience in time, and often recorded them one way or another (such as in journals or letters) without ever having corresponded with anybody else about it, and in some cases (such as mine in the early days) without being exposed to more than the barest minimum of unavoidable (even for someone who actually avoided the subject) generic media info about it. Hopefully this is not in question, far too many fairly reasonable seeming people have made this clear for decades now.

Actually the effort to make it seem like hypnosis is needed, and/or always used, before people have such recall, is part of the chronic disinformation about the phenomenon.


Again, you don't have to be under hypnosis to have someone lead you into a false memory. it really comes down to how suggestible someone is. Also false memories can happen all on their own.

Absolutely. I practiced conversational hypnosis for some time (as a hypnotist I mean) and it's actually pretty deeply disturbing how easy nearly everybody is to lead into whatever you want and make them think it's their own idea.

And here I thought that was reserved for women doing it to men. Ha! Ha! I'm kidding, before anyone freaks out.

Mostly...

However, this is in general conversation, and about philosophy or modern social ideas -- changing someone's recall of things that have some meaning and importance to them is do-able, and not rocket science either, but it takes a good deal more subtle effort. Of course, if you're helping them remember it in the first place -- as opposed to discussing with them something they already recall and believe -- that would make it easier.


Further, we really have no clue about any of Jacob's subjects except for what he tells us.

To be fair, we have no clue about anybody beyond what a book or movie or video tells us. How is that different for Jacobs' people than anybody else? And given the virulent evangelistical zeal that scoffers have in this topic, I can't imagine any subject wanting to be too public.


I am sure he was qualified to teach history.

Wingnuts come in all colors... and degrees.


(quoting someone else, not the person I'm responding to) One or two subjects out of hundreds complain about Dr. Jacobs, how is that different from any other professional?

Do they? I know nothing about that, this post is actually my first exposure to this - er, controversy about him, if that's what it is. I know people who've been deeply involved in this topic's study for many decades and they attend meetings where J has lectured and try not to laugh at him from the back of the room. Some people respect his work, some don't. Most I know respect that the topic is a valid inquiry, and that he probably has been well intentioned, but feel that he is personally biased and it likely creates a number of 'artifacts' in the subjects and their recall (and his interpretation or allowance of their recall).


You also know that Jacobs threatened Emma, right? His defense is that she is crazy! He tried to suggest that she had Multiple Personality Disorder while she was under hypnosis in order to throw the hybrids of HIS trail because they were sending him text messages! HOW DO YOU DEFEND THIS?

That's hilarious! Seriously?! First: MPD symptoms often overlap with abductee symptoms. Second, depending on your level of paranoia, some of it may be real and intentional and cloaking other less esoteric things. Third -- he actually said hybrids were sending him text messages? He said this publicly?!

I have no idea what's real and really don't believe or dismiss anything on the surface without knowing a great deal more detail. The reason I think it's so funny is because he said it publicly, apparently. (yes? where? is that in the previous 28 pages somewhere?) I would expect anybody who was themselves psychologically balanced and professional, ought to know well enough to keep their mouth shut about things like that.

RC



posted on Jan, 24 2015 @ 12:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
My contention is with people like Jacobs and Hopkins and their methodologies. I would even say that I am not willing to dismiss the works of Dr. John Mack entirely. I am not even ruling out aliens but I don't think "aliens" should be defining the phenomenon either.

I agree completely. I think framing it all as anomalous experience and simply being curious about it is likely to lead to far more insight than trying to stuff it into some existing paradigm -- let alone a chaotic, misunderstood, nebulous, disinfo-prone paradigm. We prechoose the answer by prechoosing what constitutes evidence or its form or meaning when that happens. I personally think that archetypes and synchronicity on the woo side and a great deal more rogue civilian research on the paranoid side deserve more respect as possible theories -- bearing in mind that ALL theories may be some degree of true and false all at the same time, making it a big mess to try and figure out anything with all those different sources, and some pretending to be others -- but we'll never be looking for Truth (if there is such a thing in the "interworlds experiences" of humanity) as long as we think we're sure we know what we're looking for in advance.



posted on Jan, 24 2015 @ 12:50 AM
link   
a reply to: RedCairo

Jacobs never intended for any of this to get out. Emma Woods has made public 180 hours worth of recorded sessions with Jacobs. Its a bit of a drama but its one of those things that I feel very strongly about for some very personal reasons. I will highlight the infamous MPD/Hybrid session.


www.carolrainey.com... In later sessions, Jacobs, hyperventilating, can be heard telling Emma that he’s in terrible trouble—that an outraged hybrid (who knows that Jacobs is the only person on the planet, other than Hopkins, who knows the evil fate that aliens are planning for human-ity)—that this hybrid is sending him threatening Instant Messages on his AOL account to make him cease and desist his work with the abductee Emma Woods. Jacobs is “the man who knows too much.” Personal IMs from a bloodthirsty hybrid who is entirely theoretical. It doesn’t get more hallucinatory than that.

Afraid for his life, Jacobs panics. To throw the wily hybrid off his trail, the good researcher liberately instills into the hypnotized Emma’s mind the information that he is now an expert on this “public epidemic,” that she suffers from Multiple Personality Disorder—not alien abductions—and she “needs to take medication for the disorder.” www.ufoalienabductee.com... (Note to Jacobs: Multiple psychiatric journals state that medication is not recommended for someone with this disorder and that Multiple Personality Disorder, now known as Disassociative Identity Disorder, is serious, chronic and the sufferer is at risk for suicidal attempts, self-injury, violence, substance abuse, and repeated victimization by others. Good call, DoctorPracticing-Medicine-Without-a-License.Save your own skin and the patient be damned.)



ufotrail.blogspot.com... “What I'm getting at,” I explained, “again, is the possible opportunities to do some testing. It would seem like she would prioritize such a thing if she knew a hybrid... Am I correct that you understood hybrids to have sent you text messages and emails?”

“Yes, yes,” Jacobs said, “and that I will be writing a book about. Within context, you'll see the build up to it and how it's all logical; how this came about. Now, I can't tell whether it's a hoax or not. The only way whether I can tell if it's a hoax is by looking in this person's window while typing, instant messaging, and she lives 125 miles away from me – and I'd have to be typing the whole way and then looking in her window to see whether she's sitting there or some guy's sitting there, ya know what I mean?


you can listen here: ufoalienabductee.com...


Hypnotic suggestions of Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD)

Many people now know that while Dr. Jacobs was conducting hypnosis with me, that he implanted hypnotic suggestions in my mind that I had Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD), a serious mental disorder, and that I should take medication for it. He did this even though he is not a medical doctor, and he knew that I did not have it.

Dr. Jacobs has admitted publicly that he did this, during an interview on the Coast to Coast AM radio show, “ET Hybrids / Ultraterrestrials”, on December 19, 2010. He has tried to justify it as a convoluted and outlandish “tactic” against “aliens” and alien-human “hybrids”.

I have presented here an audio clip of Dr. Jacobs putting the hypnotic suggestions in my mind that I had MPD.

(NOTE: This audio clip is taken from the recording of my twenty-ninth hypnosis session. Dr. Jacobs has a copy of the full recording.)

More on Jacobs:
michaelsheiser.com...
www.paranormalwaypoint.com...
www.skeptiko.com...
www.michaelsheiser.com...
crab.rutgers.edu...
(scroll down to see audio files and archived web site)
www.paranormalwaypoint.com...
www.alien-ufos.com...

Oh, and here is his defense:www.ufoabduction.com...

Yeah, he's a scum bag...

edit on 24-1-2015 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2015 @ 01:41 AM
link   
a reply to: RedCairo


To be fair, we have no clue about anybody beyond what a book or movie or video tells us. How is that different for Jacobs' people than anybody else? And given the virulent evangelistical zeal that scoffers have in this topic, I can't imagine any subject wanting to be too public.

Fair enough. Jacobs research is quite a bit different than research conducted at a university where there will be supervision, standards, ethics...There would be some trail, yes? After all, you do have to defend your research somehow. I really know of no other research model where there is a sole keeper of everything. Is that normal? How about when there is a case of misconduct as gross as what Jacobs has displayed? Certainly there would be an investigation by some committee.

In this case, Jacobs answers to nobody. People willingly ignore his gross misconduct and incredibly poor methodologies because they want to hear about aliens.

I understand you are not familiar with the case, so....



posted on Jan, 24 2015 @ 07:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE


I want to add that I fully support people that share their experiences. In fact, I consider myself an advocate for these folks. Emma Woods is a good example of someone that has had experiences that really cant be explained by "mental illness" or "sleep paralysis". I think that there may be more here than "psychological" explanations and saying so probably puts me in a different grouping than "debunker", wouldn't you agree? My contention is with people like Jacobs and Hopkins and their methodologies. I would even say that I am not willing to dismiss the works of Dr. John Mack entirely. I am not even ruling out aliens but I don't think "aliens" should be defining the phenomenon either.


Okay, great, given these statements I think we can find some common ground for discussion.

My contention all along has been this issue is worthy of research and discussion, yet if you bring up the idea in polite company and academia all you will get is rolled eyes and an awkward silence. We have been socially conditioned to have this response. Why? It seems that 60 years ago this topic would not have garnered the same response.

Okay, so you agree there may be more here than "psychological" explanations (of course I agree that some cases may be psychological).

You stated you weren't willing to rule out aliens, but you don't think aliens should be defining the phenomenon either.

Let's examine that statement. You don't think aliens should be ruled out, so the corollary is you believe they may be involved, but you don't want their involvement to define the issue.

Don't you think that if aliens were kidnapping people, testing them, from around the world, over the last 6 or so decades, etc, that this would be one of the most important issues for mankind? I think if the question were put to people as something that is occurring and not some hypothetical possibility, the overwhelming majority would agree.

So on the one hand, we have one of the possibly greatest situation/challenge mankind has ever faced, and you don't think that should define the issue? I'm seriously asking, this is not a rhetorical question. Would you rather hypnosis techniques defined the issues? What do you think should define the issue?

So if much of the phenomenon is not psychological, what is causing it? You don't like the methodologies, sure, I can see, they are not great, but what other tools do we have? Really, what would you recommend? Let us hear it!

Would you rather use imperfect tools to study the phenomenon, or just skip its study all together? You know in most scientific research improvisations and compromises occur all the time, and the research is still accepted. I'm sure you have heard that the perfect is the enemy of the good.



posted on Jan, 24 2015 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

Really, what would you recommend? Let us hear it!

I will give this a try but I am not sure if its what you want to hear. First we have to be able to freely examine anyone's work, ask questions, critique it, reject it or even accept it without being accused of having secret agendas to hide the truth. We need to be knowledgeable about other areas of study outside of Ufology. If all your information comes from one type of source like this that is outside of the mainstream, you are bound to get misled one way or another. If you want to be accepted by mainstream science then you need to conform to mainstream standards. To be honest, Jacobs and the Roper report don't meet any standards accepted by mainstream and the complaint is that mainstream wont touch it.

Here is an example of an analysis done on the Roper report by Ted Goertzel of Rutgers in Camden, N.J. - Measuring The Prevalence of False Memories: A New Interpretation of a "UFO Abduction Survey"

Notice in the authors biography that he is not involved with Ufology.

Rutgers is about 15minutes from Temple and is also where I graduated from. Jacobs is mentioned in the paper and was even there lecturing on his research around the time I attended Rutgers. I was not aware of Jacobs until a few years ago.


Hopkins, Jacobs and Westrum's (1992) assertion that 3.7 million Americans are suffering from "UFO abduction syndrome" has been criticized for methodological and logical deficiencies (Stires, 1993; Klass, 1993; Hall, Rodeghier & Johnson, 1993; Dawes and Mulford, 1993). In an attempt to remedy these deficiencies, my research methods class at Rutgers University in Camden undertook to replicate Hopkins, Jacobs and Westrum's survey.
-----------------------
The survey data promise some relief from this subjectivity, thanks to the objectivity of random sampling and statistical analysis. However, even when the data are collected and reported accurately as they apparently were in this case, the biases of the investigator can enter into the interpretation. In this case, only a strong belief in the prevalence of the abduction phenomenon led the researchers to interpret questions about seeing ghosts or having "out of body" experiences as indicators of abduction. Our data show that there is no objective basis for that assumption.

The observed correlations are part of a broader psychological syndrome which includes non-UFO related phenomena. Of course, none of this proves that UFO abductions have not occurred in a small number of cases. In fact, two of our respondents volunteered that they had experienced such events. (We made no attempt to verify their accounts.) However, the public can rest assured that there is no evidence that millions of Americans are being abducted.

Further research on the psychological phenomenon of cryptomnesia, however, is warranted. Both our survey and Hopkins, Jacobs and Westrum's representative national sample suggest that it is an identifiable syndrome affecting several million people in American society.


So this is a clear example of where academia does in fact show an interest in the phenomenon and attempts to recreate Jacobs research. The only problem being is that it doesn't support any of Jacobs assertions.

There are other efforts to examine the phenomenon. Project Core was a recent effort that ATS members Jeff Ritzmann and Jeremey Vaeni were involved with. The thread got very little attention here. I think it was a really good effort to apply mainstream standards to this phenomenon and I believe it takes the right approach. Its open ended and no conclusions were drawn. So people are free to examine the data collected. I am free to take their study and go in the direction of psychology while others are free to go the paranormal direction. The data is comprised of "hypnosis free" recall from people that experienced "anomalous" events.

So my short answer is good data collection untainted by Ufology and analyzed objectively.
edit on 24-1-2015 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-1-2015 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2015 @ 06:11 PM
link   
a reply to: ZetaRediculian

I was unaware of Project Core. Thank you for alerting me. I just finished looking at the data and reading the commentaries which are most interesting, especially the commentary of Jeff Ritzmann who discusses liminality and the work of Jacques Vallee and George P. Hansen. My all-time favorite book is Hansen's The Trickster and the Paranormal. I learned a great deal from the book. I wonder if we might start a discussion about liminality.



posted on Jan, 24 2015 @ 09:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

I kind of got "schooled" by jeff a few years ago. Funny thing was that I had just binged listened to his podcasts about Emma Woods and had no idea who I was talking to. www.abovetopsecret.com...


I wonder if we might start a discussion about liminality

Yeah, sure. I don't know what I can offer but I think I am kind of done here. Maybe we can bump up the project core thread and get a fresh discussion going and I can take a break from my disinfo job.


edit on 24-1-2015 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2015 @ 09:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: Tangerine

I kind of got "schooled" by jeff a few years ago. Funny thing was that I had just binged listened to his podcasts about Emma Woods and had no idea who I was talking to. www.abovetopsecret.com...


I wonder if we might start a discussion about liminality

Yeah, sure. I don't know what I can offer but I think I am kind of done here. Maybe we can bump up the project core thread and get a fresh discussion going and I can take a break from my disinfo job.



Thanks for the link. I just finished reading the thread. I wish everyone interested in the UFO topic would read Vallee and Hansen. They explore entirely different ways of looking at strange phenomena without selling a foregone conclusion.



posted on Jan, 25 2015 @ 05:19 PM
link   
a reply to: PlanetXisHERE

hi,

I don't think my parents were ever involved in such things. However when I was very little, my father and my step-mother saw some very strange things and things in the night sky and my stepmother seemed to have had a closer look at them but I never got to ask her about any details before she died. Honestly, I don't think I'd ever have asked her. Yes, posting anonymously at ATS is my first attempt to get some relief, since I haven't told this to anyone before other that one person and my girlfriend, who got incidentally involved a few times.

Tangerine asked whether the memories came to me some point after the experience or immediately after. Well, that depends. There are crystal clear memories, as clear as it gets, and they are "just there", without any time delay. Like you would remember your job interview after you've walked out of the office building. Something happens, and you remember it, but in this case there is a cut in between two moments, and something is missing, but I do not know what that is. Clear memory, cut, another clear memory, in the blink of an eye.






edit on 25-1-2015 by Raufu because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-1-2015 by Raufu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2015 @ 05:44 PM
link   
PS

mainstream science can't explain it. When I read some nonsense about ball lightning, in a case where even a video of a triangular craft with two white and one red lights exists, that's just pure denial. It's nonsense, and it's highly regarded science people who say these things. Honestly, I don't think there will ever be consensus about this as long as one party has never had any first-hand experience..

By the way, ball lightning is unexplained too. If a phenomenon has been studied over and over again and on one ever found an explanation for it, it's probably "out of scope" of traditional methods. "We know everything there is to know, nothing can be completely new but must be an odd combination of already known causes, and people who experience things are either making it up, crazy, or mistaking life-changing experiences for the planet venus or swamp gas". That's what they are telling us.
Mainstream science is extremely conservative. it's a harsh world, and every other scientist is just waiting for an opportunity to rip your hypothesis a new one.

It's not the "lack of evidence" that prevents them from taking up the subject. A species that does nothing of any relevance and instead focuses on killing and torturing each other enforcing political / economical systems that are based on resource scarcity and exploitation can't possibly be interested in revealing the truth behind it all.



posted on Jan, 25 2015 @ 07:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Raufu

It's not the "lack of evidence" that prevents them from taking up the subject. A species that does nothing of any relevance and instead focuses on killing and torturing each other enforcing political / economical systems that are based on resource scarcity and exploitation can't possibly be interested in revealing the truth behind it all.


Thanks Raufu for coming on here and sharing more of your experiences and views. I didn't really anticipate posters coming on to this thread to share genuine abduction experiences, but you and the others that have really enriched the thread.

Yes, it is hard to reconcile the importance/significance of abductions with continued suppression of the truth from the government and "science". I believe 99% of science today is bought and paid for, meaning they are told what they can and cannot study.

I found a video recently on another thread that nicely explains how at some point in the 1950's the government decided to go all out on suppressing this information:



Funny, given President's Truman's statements on UFO's a few years earlier:



Raufu, can you share with us how your girlfriend was involved?


edit on 25-1-2015 by PlanetXisHERE because: addition



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join