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: 6
28
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 08:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: noeltrotsky
you cant be serious.

If there is a claim of insemination then there is a possibility of some discharge of the material inseminated. It may shock you, but yes, Jacobs does try to find physical evidence when the memories indicate there might be some available. That's called investigating.




posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 08:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: amazing
Great thread...and brings up the most important point, if you firmly don't believe in Abductions. Why are millions of people reporting them and what are the psychological implications of that?



Millions of people in America also believe in Angels and Zombies.



But that misses the point. I believe in God, but have never reported a sighting of him. He's never spoken to me.

It's one thing to believe in something and state that you believe it. It's quite another to say that you've had a personal encounter...a physical encounter of some sort. Especially with the climate of ridicule about this subject. If I openly say I believe in abductions or I believe in God, no big deal. But if I openly say, God just spoke to me or I was abducted, then I'm ridiculed and more. It's a weird phenomenon that requires more study, if we're being honest with ourselves and not trying to be funny with Zombie comments.


Actually, saying you believe in something and saying you have had a physical encounter with it are exactly the same in that they're both claims. When you can produce testable evidence, then you'll have something.



posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 08:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: noeltrotsky
As usual, another interesting thread devolves into evidence / no evidence arguments. I wonder how many have really looked into Dr. Jacobs work on abductions.


Apparently, you've looked into them. CIte the testable evidence that conclusively proves Jacob's claims that extraterrestrials have abducted people.



posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 08:35 PM
link   
Hello folks!

Can we please stop the name calling and keep to the topic. Go after the ball and not the player.

Failure to do so can and will result in suspension of posting abilities.

Thanks for your cooperation!

Hefficide



posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 08:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: funbox
a reply to: Argyll

I wonder how many abductees have cameras with motion sensors ? still, even if a photo was taken it would be useless,

as well you know.

funbox



Good question. Ever wonder why Whitley Strieber didn't set up a camera triggered by motion? I can think of an answer.



posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 08:41 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 08:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

because he knew it was a act of futility as scientist of repute would never except a photo as evidence of the abduction phenomena ?

if you was to believe the film Christopher Walken tried this and was rebuked by a rubber blue kobold

amazing the length's that will be sought to deny photographic reproduction , having your video camera muscled away by a blue gurning troll , amazing




funbox




edit on 10-1-2015 by funbox because: picadd



posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 09:03 PM
link   
a reply to: noeltrotsky

how do you rationalize all his other actions?



posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 09:14 PM
link   
a reply to: ZetaRediculian

have you busted into Lockheed yet? got some info on bushman? don't forget your broom technique if you haven't , I got a sneaking suspicion that it maybe lacking


do you know of a method in which to extract some definable proof from alien abductions , for some reason I don't think the broom will help , and as Argyle and tangerine pointed out Cameras maybe a tool , but I feel even a photo would not be sufficient, but if not a photo what would be ? what tools could a scientist use to outwit a potential intelligence that's has a reported , unnerving grip on reality ?

certainly a brain teaser


funbox



posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 09:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

That's an original thought.



posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 09:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: funbox
a reply to: ZetaRediculian

have you busted into Lockheed yet? got some info on bushman?

nah. I moved on with my life.



do you know of a method in which to extract some definable proof from alien abductions , for some reason I don't think the broom will help , and as Argyle and tangerine pointed out Cameras maybe a tool , but I feel even a photo would not be sufficient, but if not a photo what would be ? what tools could a scientist use to outwit a potential intelligence that's has a reported , unnerving grip on reality ?


At this point I believe its obvious that they don't exist in external reality.



posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 10:11 PM
link   
Jacobs is not an (“Aliens have people in pickle jars) kind of researcher.

I read the book years ago and might read it again.

Then I recall the impression of a serious minded guy looking for some objective truth if possible.

He sounds an alarm but not an obsessive compulsive conspiracy theory.

He also unlike a lot of these guys has a sense of humor.

I think Ill dust his book off tomorrow and read it again, if I could find it.



posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 10:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine
Apparently, you've looked into them. CIte the testable evidence that conclusively proves Jacob's claims that extraterrestrials have abducted people.

Jacobs himself tells everyone all the time that the evidence he gathers under hypnosis isn't valid in a court of law and has many problems with it. Sorry but you won't like the evidence he's collected or the way he's done it. Much like circumstantial evidence isn't liked in Law Courts, but when it piles up and points in one direction then the Judge accepts it and convicts. Of course Science knows better than the Legal system on determining truth and fiction, right?

I think you accidentally clicked on the wrong forum if your looking to test evidence. This topic is on the edge of human understanding currently. Much like the Higgs Boson was a few years ago before testing built up a circumstantial case that it existed. Of course to 'find' the Higgs billions of dollars was spent. Jacobs works with no support except people that buy a book or two.



posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 10:17 PM
link   
ufotrail.blogspot.com...

The Woods/Jacobs tapes provide irrefutable documentation of unsettling and often disturbing circumstances. Recordings presented and considered - which have long been public thanks to Woods - included interactions from the initial hypnotic regression sessions Jacobs began in 2004 and conducted by telephone. Ritzmann also took listeners through taped exchanges in which Woods confronted Jacobs about discrepancies in his ongoing and increasingly outrageous suggestions. Tapes were also played and discussed in which Woods attempted to clarify circumstances with Jacobs, who threatened her with consequences if she did not either support his conclusions or remain silent.

Leading
At the time of this post, the website of the International Center for Abduction Research, which is maintained by Jacobs, has a bio on Jacobs. Among other questionable items, the bio asserts that "Jacobs is a strong advocate of strict scientific and ethical research methodology", a claim that can irrefutably be shown to be false to the extent of insulting one's intelligence.

The following clip was featured on Paranormal Waypoint and contains details of a telephone hypnosis session between Jacobs and Woods. While Woods largely repeated that she was unsure of the circumstances and often replied, "I don't know," to Jacobs' questions, a scenario was nonetheless constructed in which she was aboard an alien craft. One unclear circumstance at a time, the Jacobs-led conversation progressed to Woods envisioning herself surrounded by beings. Around the eight-minute mark, the following statements were made:

Jacobs: Well, I'm just wondering if maybe they put him on top of you, basically.

Woods: Maybe. Yeah, I think so.

Jacobs: And I know that once again I'm leading you here so you have to be careful, and I understand I'm leading you, and you should understand that too. Okay, now I'm going to ask you a series of questions here and when you answer these questions, when you understand what's happening here, you will - it's not that there's going to be a revelation, but you're going to understand what's going on here and it's not what ya think. How's that for something odd?

Jacobs then proceeded to create, nearly completely independently of Woods' statements, a scenario in which she was allegedly forced to have sex with what Jacobs described as another abductee.

"He's just some guy," Jacobs told the woman, "he's some, he's some guy that they got. You know, he's an abductee. It's happened to him all his life, and, uhm, he's just as much a victim in the situation as you are. They put him on you, he does his business. What happens - when you get a sense that he is about to ejaculate, what happens to him? What do they do with him?"

Woods then told Jacobs that she did not think the man ejaculated. "I don't think he does," she explained, adding that she did not have a very strong visual sense of the situation and that the described scenario may be wrong.

Around the twelve-minute mark, Jacobs then apparently felt himself entitled and qualified to interpret and explain the entire circumstance at length, incredibly informing the woman, "This is a sperm collection procedure. They bring the guy to a height of sexual arousal. Before he ejaculates they pull him off and they collect the sperm in a receptacle, and they do this every single time that this event happens."

Jacobs continued to inform Woods how she should look at the situation in her role as the "facilitator of the sperm collection."

The Chastity Belt Clip
Among the more infamous recordings to be published by Woods included the chastity belt clip. Jacobs explained to the woman that she could consider wearing a belt that "right where the vaginal opening is has a couple of nails sticking across." This, he suggested, would slow down hybrids intent on committing repeated sexual assaults.

"They have these sex shops, ya know, and I went into one that specialized in bondage dominance, a place that I frequented quite often," the man claiming to be an advocate of strict scientific and ethical research told Woods during a long distance hypnosis session:

The Underwear Session
And then there was the request for underwear.

"Were you wearing underpants?" Jacobs asked Woods.

Woods: Yeah.

Jacobs: Uhm, did you wash the underpants?

Woods: Hmm, probably, yeah.

Jacobs: Even though it was yesterday?

Woods: I might have. I could look in the laundry. I could have a look.

Jacobs: Have a look. Put it in a plastic bag, if you find the ones...

Later during the same session, Jacobs instructed Woods, "Well, if you can dig up the underpants, without even thinking about it, just put 'em in a plastic bag, put 'em in an envelope, then just send 'em off to me. Totally, greatly appreciate it. Do not even think about it. Just do it automatically. No fuss, no muss and don't think about it afterward either."

More of the Woods/Jacobs tapes, including the historian's suggestion the woman had Multiple Personality Disorder during an ill conceived, convoluted and rather unbelievable plan to deceive the hybrids, may be found at Paranormal Waypoint. The thorough and expanding website of Emma Woods should also be viewed for more information.

If there is evidence of high strangeness to be found, it is not within such hypnosis sessions. Not only does the research subject find neither emotional support nor intellectual answers, they are at high risk of sustaining further trauma.

Further Considerations
It might be rather easy for many readers to write Jacobs off as an idiot, and there are certainly some within UFO circles who have done just that. I invite a bit further consideration, however, that regardless of his wanderings into abuse and absurdity, Jacobs indeed knew what kind of evidence he was seeking. I additionally suggest that after the man repeatedly failed in obtaining support for his hypotheses through his collection of samples, he ceased collecting potential evidence rather than revise suppositions.

A spring, 2011 newsletter published by the False Memory Syndrome Foundation reported that Temple defended the actions of Jacobs, primarily on the grounds that his research was limited to the collection of oral histories. Obviously, the collection of underwear is more than oral history. Moreover, The UFO Trail conducted an interview with Jacobs at the 2012 Ozark UFO Conference in which the doctor himself described multiple circumstances of collecting samples from research subjects. A 2012 exchange between Jacobs and The UFO Trail:

"I have taken material for analysis to various DNA testing places. They had negative results. There wasn't enough of it or they couldn't tell what it was – that sort of thing.”

“Are these tests available for the public to review?”

“Not yet.”

“Will they be?”

“I don't know. One I did many years ago at a local lab in Delaware. Another one was done by American Testing Institute in New York City – American Chemical? I can't remember the name of it now. That was also many years ago – about brown stains that people have; that's routinely there. I had another one done for a TV show..."



posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 10:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: noeltrotsky
how do you rationalize all his other actions?

You're welcome to ask a specific question about Jacobs work and I'll pass on what I've learned if relevant...but I sure can't sum up years and years of work and 'rationalize' it.

You see, I understand that Jacobs isn't a scientist. I accept he fell into this issue and was fascinated by it. He has fumbled along, struggling to gather evidence when nobody wants to look at the issue. I don't expect scientific rigor from him. I expect unbiased gathering of memories from people. I know those memories are poor, but there value increases when multiplied by thousands of investigations. I personally value what people say much more than a scientist I guess.



posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 10:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ridhya
a reply to: Scdfa
Ill say the same for you. The Air Force has been promoting belief in aliens for decades, and you fell for it.

Despite the lack of any physical proof, you remain a true believer. Ill stick to testable evidence, thank you.


So the Air Force has been promoting UFOs for decades? With what? Project Bluebook? Project Sign? Project Grudge? How about the Condon Report, where half the scientists quit in protest when they were told the finding would be there are no UFOs? Denial after denial after denial.

But you would have us believe that when they say "no", they really mean "yes". Hope you never make that mistake on a date.


edit on 10-1-2015 by Scdfa because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-1-2015 by Scdfa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 10:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: noeltrotsky

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: noeltrotsky
how do you rationalize all his other actions?

You're welcome to ask a specific question about Jacobs work and I'll pass on what I've learned if relevant...but I sure can't sum up years and years of work and 'rationalize' it.

You see, I understand that Jacobs isn't a scientist. I accept he fell into this issue and was fascinated by it. He has fumbled along, struggling to gather evidence when nobody wants to look at the issue. I don't expect scientific rigor from him. I expect unbiased gathering of memories from people. I know those memories are poor, but there value increases when multiplied by thousands of investigations. I personally value what people say much more than a scientist I guess.


ra·tion·al·ize

1. attempt to explain or justify (one's own or another's behavior or attitude) with logical, plausible reasons, even if these are not true or appropriate.


The audio tapes of the sessions with Emma clearly show that he is completely leading her. He is doing about 99% of the talking and the "remembering". Those are clearly not her memories, they are his fantasies. It is so blatantly obvious that I really have a hard time taking anyone serious that defends this. How can anyone seriously conclude his research is legitimate after listening to more than 5 minutes of those audio clips?

I understand peoples need to believe but seriously? Why not get behind John Mack?
edit on 10-1-2015 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 11:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Scdfa

So the Air Force has been promoting UFOs for decades? With what? Project Bluebook? Project Sign? Project Grudge? How about the Condon Report, where half the scientists quit in protest when they were told the finding would be there are no UFOs? Denial after denial after denial.

But you would have us believe that when they say "no", they really mean "yes". Hope you never make that mistake on a date.

Up front the deny but behind the scenes they plant the seeds. The believers do the rest. Did you watch Mirage Men yet?



posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 11:05 PM
link   
a reply to: ZetaRediculian

I don't know anything more about the Woods case that you're linking to.

My understanding of Jacobs techniques in hypnosis is that the process isn't quite like 'normal' hypnosis. Over the years he has learned specific ways to help people past blocks and tricks to get imposters to slip up during examination. The ways past blocks involve skipping short periods of time and questioning resuming where it seemed the topic was headed. That can be somewhat leading however the subject should pick up where they are and deny any leading statement. It's a common method to see a fake 'memory' by sending in some leading statements and watching the hypnotee agree despite a previous contradictory memory.

The main problem with Jacobs work is hypnosis and memory from that process being poor. One case could easily be poorly done by Jacobs or he could be duped by a fake. The only strength in evidence Jacobs gets is his large body of work when taken in total.



posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 11:11 PM
link   
a reply to: JadeStar




TextNo one who looked for the Higgs Boson alleged there was a government coverup which was keeping them from finding it.


Yes, jade, and that is the point. There are people, very serious, educated, respectable, credentialed people, who testify that they were warned and threatened to remain silent.




top topics



 
28
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join