The History Of Abduction Mythology, & Why Rigorous Study is Both Lacking and Needed.

a reply to: AceWombat04

From serious investigations there are facts about abduction cases that go undisclosed to the general public so as to prove something to be true without there being any relation through conscious manipulation by T.V. books, media, internet or radio.

It is a case of the abductee observing something extraordinary during abduction which is constantly reported to certain investigators such as Anne Streiber and i think another was Stanton Friedman and maybe Linda Moulton Howe by independent witnesses who had no prior knowledge to the same experience other abductees went through but related identical precise information.

a reply to: southbeach

I have heard this claimed, inducing by individuals I would consider credible - or at least not consciously duplicitous. And I have even experienced that dynamic myself, on a limited basis; the holding of information highly specific and unique that no one should be able to know outside of having had the same or similar experience, and then encountering someone also possessing that information which they should not have without having had said similar or identifical experience. So I know it happens.

The problem with this however, is that such claims are unfalsifiable by anyone not already privy to said supposed facts. And since they keep that information close to the vest, ostensibly in the interest of having a sort of quasi-control, we have no way of confirming or denying its veracity. For that reason, even my own experiences along those lines aren't something I could ever consider objectively or scientifically valid for anyone else's purposes. Regardless of knowing that they happened.

The issue, to me, isn't so much whether such things happen. I've had my own firsthand experiences which defy mundane explanation despite my best efforts. The issue is the ability to prove this to others outside my own direct subjective experience, and that of others.

I like to think of it as the difference between personal gnosis versus objective knowledge. The former may be useful and valid for the individual, and that individual may even find others with similar experiences who agree with their gnosis, but to the extent that Ufology is meant to be a collective and scientific inquiry into specific verifiable or falsifiable phenomena, the latter - objective knowledge anyone can look at, review, and either refute or concede - is required at some point or we may as well regard it solely as a personal experience with only personal implications, and not a scientifically tenable pursuit.

Which is a valid position to take of course if it's what one wants to get out of all this. But I feel a rigorous and objective investigation of the phenomenon as a whole, with a large sample and proper controls, that could be peer reviewed, would be beneficial to say the least. Because when there are as many potential complicating factors as those mentioned in my post(s,) the more rigor the better imho. No matter how honest and well intentioned the investigator, and no matter how persuasive the evidence may seem on that individual basis, or even on the basis of a group, the larger the sample and the better the controls, and the more open to peer review that data, the better the chances of preventing bias, self-delusion, and outright mistakes from clouding our picture of what may or may not be happening.

That we still can't say with any certitude, "This is what's happening and why," after all this time speaks for itself imo. Granted, it's possible whatever is occurring is beyond our ability to ever pin down with any certainty. But we need to try in my view.

Not that I hold much hope of that ever happening.

Peace.

a reply to: AceWombat04

The Decline of Ufology thread was written with a very provocative slant because I was trying to liven this place up. I know a whole bunch of people won't even read the whole thread and get defensive about their beliefs straight away. I quoted a chunk of Jim Oberg's musings on the subject as well and he points out the arguments the "I believe aliens are coming here" crowd all brought up in the thread. Even though everyone ignored everything Jim Oberg wrote. They are of course entitled to believe whatever they wish. I simply hoped it would open up a decent debate and I think it has.

I do actually think something is going on. B ut people focus too much on what they want to be true until they are convinced it is true. Rather than looking at the evidence and where it takes you and where it stops you from making further conclusions. I keep trying to find a good UFO/alien case but every time I look into them there is no definitive proof that aliens are coming to Earth nor that UFOs are anything more than well UFOs. In fact the more I dig the less robust almost all cases become

As for abductions I've always felt they are problematic. If aliens were coming here then it is logical to think they might want to take biological samples from the native population. But how come no one can retrieve any proof from an alien spaceship, no webcam records the moment they are taken, no radar reports of air traffic hazards hovering above their home and why do the aliens seem to be able to live and breathe in the same atmosphere and gravity as Earth. The little grey guys don't even wear clothing in many accounts. And the technology they use seems very old fashioned.

Then we have the tales that aliens would make an agreement with US government about it all. Why would they do such a thing with a leader that could be gone in 4 years, who looked after 5% of the global population and 6.5% of the actual Earth? It doesn't make any real sense.

So I tend to dismiss it all as probably a psychological phenomenon that particularly afflicts Americans. Why that is I am not sure. We don't get anywhere near the amount of abduction reports here in Europe. But then we didn't make any agreements with the aliens according to UFO Lore.

Of course that psychological phenomenon could be something caused by another intelligence and it manifests as 'aliens' to the experiencer. We may not be able to perceive or understand what it's all about and hence the lack of any real world evidence.

Regards MM


I

a reply to: AceWombat04

I enjoyed reading all of that so thanks for writing something with a few more details than we usually see in OPs.

The abduction area of ufology is like the bad side of town where most people prefer not to go in case they catch something that itches. Or they worry they'll get hustled and robbed by the crazies there.

You mention a 'rigorous and objective investigation of the phenomenon' and that's something I'd like to have seen too. The problem is that such a thing is no longer possible and the horse has apparently bolted. People reporting the abduction experience have decreased depending on whose claims we listen to.

I think a successful investigation would not be possible due to garbage in, garbage out. That's not to say I don't find some of the accounts very intriguing; some of the cases remain fascinating and puzzling. It's the plain fact that none of the prominent names in abduction research were able to sit around a table and form a consensus on what they thought was happening. On top of that, psychologists from outside the field could only see the subject as occupying areas of abnormal psychology: borderline personality disorder, schizotypical traits etc.

Karla Turner was getting into the MiLab scene before she died, Mack was increasingly transcendental in interpretation, Cannon was into the reincarnation angle, Velez and Bueche thought it was all over and Jacobs was arguing for planetary overthrow by humans being diluted from the terrestrial gene-pool. He's recently moved on with a neologism, hu-brids, which are human/alien hybrids.

That's some heavy diversity right there and they are people who accepted abduction phenomena as fundamentally real. Toss in the non-connected, skeptical academics and there's not likely to be anything but disagreements taking place.

a reply to: mirageman

That too is a possibility. But rather than dismissing them and assuming psychological or neurological basis for such experiences, I'd much prefer to see an objective study demonstrating this. It should be doable imo. I doubt it ever will be, however.

a reply to: Kandinsky

All of this is precisely why I feel strongly that no hypothesis should be formed at all (barring "something is happening and we know not what with certainty,") until a large sample, thoroughly controlled study can be objectively carried out and reviewed empirically. First establish that something anomalous is actually happening (I believe it is, but belief is not sufficient imho,) and control for certain possible explanations, then hypothesize what exactly is happening (can be more than one thing) and test those hypotheses.

That's what I meant when I said, "abduction researchers are largely cowboys working in isolation." It doesn't matter if it's OBEs, MiLabs, hybrids, interdimensional trickster archetypes, or what have you, if it all stems from a constellation of parasomnias and temporal lobe abnormalities in a large number of cases (as just one possibility.) But we won't know if that's the case without such a thorough study carried out at that level of rigor. (Again, not that I expect it will ever happen.)

The point of this topic is not to insist that such a study be conducted, but to explain why I feel without it, we can literally never know if there's anything to claims of abduction experiences at all, or if so, what they are, unless we limit ourselves purely to personal belief akin to religion or spirituality. (Which, again, is fine if that's what people want out of it.)

Peace.