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.

 

Was Dr. Steven Greer paid to lie...?

page: 5
12
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 28 2008 @ 06:16 PM
link   
personally i think he's being fed A LOT of disinformation, a la Project Beta...how Doty fed poor Bennewicz all that malarky and made him out to be a raving lunatic. i think Greer is convinced he's speaking the truth.




posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
ET research getting us nowhere?

Well I never did any ET research and the last UFO magazine must
have been still in the 50s..

And with all the western worlds money and political and government
systems behind them its a snap keep it all hidden.

I don't thinks its 'ETs' behind it all, its 'Illuminatis'.


Yes, the fact you have never done any serious investigation or research into the ET issue is obvious.



posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by MrdDstrbr
 


But they don't have to be if they paid for the technology we say is
alien.

And paid for all the dis information as well and still are paying for
it with $4 a gallon gas.

Money makes the world go round (governments etc.) and the ufos too.
The Air Force has been saying we don't know anything, it must be
alien since the 40s. If its not a worn out record by now it must have
been thrown out by the masses as they continue their lives unencumbered
by lairs and falsehoods.

It is a simple task to step into the electrified air created by Tesla but
it can't happen with the Illuminati against it.

Well a part of the video had an agent who went to UFO events to soften
up the witnesses. He said if he didn't work the MIB were sent in.
He mentioned engines without fuel and perhaps it used Helium.
Well Helium is quite rare and perhaps too explosive when hit by a Tesla
coil. Not enough for everyone yet Helium is created by alpha particle
emissions. Imagine, energy is being created as we speak.

Greer put the onus on government and disclosed nothing.
Paid to cloud the issue is more like it.



posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by jritzmann

Well the whole hybrid breeding program thing I don't buy into anyway


Well, it's only been reported independently and in identical detail by tens of thousands of abductees, and we only have thousands of female abductees with ovarian cysts, uterine scarring, clinically documented missing pregnancies and other gynae problems so severe that hysterectomies are common. So I suppose you're probably right: there is nothing to it.


It's become obvious to me, and should be to most people by now that these beings, whatever they are can effect your perceptions to a high degree


Yes.


The experience is heavily multi-layered. and perceived by different people in different ways. More often then not you won't hear of the more bizarre aspects, which is where multi-layered experiences are more recognizable


The scientific investigative method looks for the similarities in narrative and in forensic evidence (the biopsy scars, the nasal implants, the 3rd party witnesses) and not the one-off oddball accounts, until they become corroborated by other independent accounts and no longer remain one-off. The narratives in tens of thousands of cases are near-identical in eccentric detail.


Speaking only for me, it's clear "they" don't wish us to know exactly what they're doing


You're right there. They are very, very secretive and do not want to be discovered or stopped until the program is completed, in case discovery leads to preventive measures.


Perhaps we're incapable of truly perceiving the enigma in it's truest form, but I think at some point we have to try, and in doing so move past the easy answers. I think at this point it's shown itself to be much more complex then thought of 60 years ago. (Or perhaps much like today we don't get the whole story, but the one that is filtered for public consumption.


Don't understand what you mean here. For many years there were no answers of any kind, let alone 'easy' ones. There is enough worldwide evidence now though to draw some pretty firm conclusions.

How many abductees have you worked with, or even interviewed? How many cases reviewed? How thoroughly acquainted are you with the published literature?


Until we get out of that, we'll stagnate in this field like we have been for the past several years.


I cannot agree these is stagnation. But then again, I do a lot of work and give up a lot of time to advance understanding on this phenomenon so can measure the giant strides of progress made over the past few years, and recognize we know a lot more now than we did even 15 years ago, let alone 50 years ago.

Cheers



posted on Apr, 29 2008 @ 06:19 PM
link   
If Greer knew anything real would be a challenge.

It must be lack of research.

Why must he depend on others or believe others.

Two abductions that I recall can easily be explained by cover up
and pressure to tell tails so the UFO could be an alien source.

UFOs are not alien sourced, therefore there are no aliens.
The ET was made up to cover UFO technology.

If Greer can't figure it out, how could anyone find out in UFOology.

If two are fakes, the rest might as well be fakes to cover the UFO.
Not an abduction but Billy Meier included, a UFO event covered very well.

That is what they do as testified in the disclosure Project.
Pressure people out of saying they saw a UFO or convincing them
that it must be something they never saw before so it must be
extraterrestrial when it is not. Why the pressure to say ETdid it.



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 05:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
UFOs are not alien sourced, therefore there are no aliens.
The ET was made up to cover UFO technology.
If Greer can't figure it out, how could anyone find out in UFOology.


Says the poster who never did any ET research and the last UFO magazine must
have been still in the 50s.


Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
Well I never did any ET research and the last UFO magazine must
have been still in the 50s.


But continue the debunking.



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by bovarcher
Well, it's only been reported independently and in identical detail by tens of thousands of abductees, and we only have thousands of female abductees with ovarian cysts, uterine scarring, clinically documented missing pregnancies and other gynae problems so severe that hysterectomies are common. So I suppose you're probably right: there is nothing to it.


All the female issues you mention however, can be caused by many, many other things. Most of what you're referring to in the reports are gleaned from hypnotherapy sessions, which are highly suspect, and are never a good way to obtain accurate lost memories. Don't believe me, talk to psych scholars and professionals - many of them are horrified when what goes on in the name of UFO research (in the hypnosis sense) is describe to them. More often then not, the subject is lead, or culturally contaminated to a very large degree (why would they be going to regression if they dint believe already that they were abducted.)

The point is, much like "implants" there's just no solidified undeniable data for it. Implants are usually equatable to glass, metal shards, and bio fragments. Most of the hybrid "breeding program" as well has no undeniable data.

I would suggest there's plenty about the experience the general public has not been told due to researcher's agendas. Those agendas have gotten us where we are today.

And, as far as stagnation? You show me one verifiable piece of data we have that we haven't had before. There's more of it, but nothing more then we've ever had to explain it. No one wants to look past the agendas, and bad research on the experiencer phenomena.



posted on May, 5 2008 @ 05:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by jritzmann

...You show me one verifiable piece of data we have that we haven't had before. There's more of it, but nothing more then we've ever had to explain it. No one wants to look past the agendas, and bad research on the experiencer phenomena.


Sorry for the delay in response Jeff, but if you're still with this then here goes.

Basically I find the hardheaded, skeptical and thoroughly scientific approach taken by the IF & ICAR in general, and by Hopkins and Jacobs in particular, hard to fault. Their data and their conclusions therefore merit serious consideration. Jacobs in particular would vigorously defend his methodology against anyone accusing him of having an 'agenda.' He does not have one. He examined the evidence for 35 years before proposing a hypothesis based on the accumulation of testimony, experience and the supporting forensic/3rd party witnesses.

At the end of the day, this is the best we've got. Those who might justifiably be accused of pushing an 'agenda' might include Sprinkle, Cannon and a number of others pushing the 'enlightened space brothers' thesis. Good for them. I for one can not accept it, as it does not sit with my personal experiences, nor those of my now deceased mother and grandmother.

The subject of hypnosis is another point. If done correctly, like any medical procedure it yields good results. As a subject on 2 occasions, I can categorically report that if a memory is uncovered, then there is no doubt about it: you REMEMBER it. It just returns to normal memory, and more and more comes out in the following weeks as you just go about normal life. You do not make stuff up. At least, I don't. If you don't remember anything, then you just don't remember. No-one can put ideas into your head to try and make you invent things that didn't happen. This is a myth propagated by the ignorant who want to denigrate the technique in order to rubbish the evidence. Either memory is opened or it's not. That's all there is to it.

You have to start somewhere. Proceed with this thing with as many checks and balances as possible, but proceed. Progress and understanding is what we are after. Some things are pretty certain: like the ETH, which I would rate at between 95 & 99%. There comes a point when to pretend otherwise in the 'interests of the scientific method' or whatever becomes dishonest.

And, IMO, the evidence for the hybrid breeding program over the past 120 years or so is so utterly overwhelming that to choose to deny it really is flying in the face of a reality so obvious that it amounts to deluding yourself (for whatever reason). Unless, of course, you are not familiar with the mountain of existing evidence, in which case you need to acquaint yourself with it at the earliest opportunity. And then, please, explain it away in a way which might convince the thousands of abductees who have witnessed this program at first hand in all its evolving but consistent complexities.



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by bovarcher
 


Bovarcher-
I can respect your view, however I don't hold the same outlook on the experience. Firstly, hypnosis is NOT what should be done with anyone regarding UFO abductions. I've consulted a lot of professionals, who as I said, gasp at the procedures of regression for abduction events. In short it has it's use only in very specific instances.

The problem is that the vast majority of abduction scenarios involving a "hybrid" program are gained by means of a hypnosis session...one that is already in place when someone goes to be hypnotized. Cultural contamination is what it is, and cannot be disregarded. If you go to be regressed because you had a sighting and missing time...of course youre going to "recount" an abduction in the classic sense of what Hopkins and Jacobs put forth. There are many factors besides cultural contamination - there's also false memory symdrome-

"its especially destructive because the person stubbornly refuses to accept any evidence that might challenge the memory. Thus it takes on a life of its own which is resistant to any effort to discover the truth." -Dr. John F. Kihlstrom, PhD.

Sound familiar? It should, because it most likely accounts for the majority of "abductees", because it seems most have done regression.

Forget the leading questions (which I've seen countless times with my own eyes), the subject trying not to disappointed the therapist (which is very common), and cultural contamination. False memory syndrome is solid, documented, and well known.

But, we need not leave it to human error. Suppose these abduction victims were truly contacted by a non human presence. Screen memories are all too common - now are they "alien" induced or concocted by our mind when we cannot resolve what is happening?

There's plenty of people just like me, who have had this experience all their lives and don't need hypnosis to recall anything. It happens and you remember it. What you don't you leave alone. Maybe it's a self-preservation thing.

I have no need for hypnosis, so I would rather not contaminate what I *know* happened with stuff that could very easily be induced by my mind under hypnosis - false memories, or screen memories...or for that matter a host of other issues that are brought on by misuse of hypnosis. If you talk to serious psychologists/hypno-therapists, they'll tell you about a lot of this.

Another main issue is as Vallee just said on the Paracast-UFO researchers shouldn't be doing regression on anyone. They already have their mind made up anyway, and are also subject to cultural contamination.

Short of it? A lot of people think they've been abducted when they might not have. And the recollection of that experience is gained by a proven, faulty method with hosts of problems (only some of which I've mentioned here).

I've had this experience my entire life up till some years ago. Not that it means anything in the grand scheme of things, but I have never had any sort of "breeding" scenario presented in *any* experience I ever had. What I don't recall, I don't recall. Simple as that. Obviously I couldn't handle it.

Now, I'm not saying such events don't happen just because I didn't have it. I have however been regressed and recall the majority of experiences with no help. So has my wife, who was with me for one instance.

What I am saying is there's no reason to buy the hypnotically retrieved memories as factual recall, not with all we know about it's faults, and unless you look outside of UFOlogy for answers on that topic, you will not understand that. Forget reading a book, because thats someone else's work and bias. You have to get involved on your own.

There's also the other side, which I mentioned before. These beings can effect your perception, and I personally have no doubt of that since I saw it myself. So, unless you're aware when this happens, you could also recall that as a factual representation of memory. You have to be able to separate that too. It aint easy.

So, in the end, could the whole breeding thing be implanted memories by "them"? Sure. But the experience is multi-layered and complex...it's also deeply personal and almost tailor-made for the individual.

We need to get serious about the deeper levels of the experience and stop ignoring it to focus on hypno-babble and possible screen memories or FMS pointing to breeding programs of which there's no solid evidence for.

You can think about this - if this is an advanced culture (obviously) capable of interacting with us, and we not even recall it...then why the dog and pony show of "breeding programs". They could do what they want and we'd never know it. It seems like a very backward step for "aliens" to work with genetics in this way. But, thats all speculative. We cant guess the "alien" mindset.

For that matter, we can't even figure out what they are.


[edit on 7-5-2008 by jritzmann]



posted on May, 8 2008 @ 02:06 AM
link   
reply to post by jritzmann
 


OK we agree to differ.

I knew almost nothing about any alleged hybrid breeding program until a couple of years ago, as believe it or not I had never read the literature and tended to avoid the subject. Becoming acquainted with the evidence of the thousands who have reported aspects of it, I initially rejected it as too outlandish (my culturally determined notions of what ETs 'would' or 'would not' do). But more and more I realized it might explain things which happened to us over the generations. My soreness and genital marks following teenage abductions, which at the time I dismissed and disregarded as having no reference to understand what the heck was happening. Plus there were other psychological and psychic issues relating to the sightings and abductions.

More pertinently, my mother's two 'missing pregnancies' in her 20s, each time at the end of the first trimester. Her subsequent problems with ovarian cysts, fallopian and uterine scarring and pain, leading to hysterectomy at age 36. The gynaecologists insisted she had had former extensive and intrusive surgical intervention, which had certainly never been carried out by any human medical agency. She was a lifelong abductee all right, but never knew it even until her death on 11 September 2000. Her mother too, with the same weird juxtaposition of obstetric/gynae/pregnancy issues and the same psychic and clairvoyant abilities opened up in adolescence, the same lifelong sense of being 'guided' and 'watched over' (you know they do this to you).

None of us understood there might be an ET connection to any of this. I did not connect my childhood and teenage sightings and abductions to the 'my-young-brother/sister-to-be-just disappeared' phenomenon of Mum's missing pregnancies.

I would never have made any of these connections on my own, but patience, time, research, working with the IF, corresponding with Dr. Jacobs, and close friendship and support with Peter Robbins in particular has slowly brought it all together. I cannot be persuaded that the ET hybridization (Carol Rainey says more accurately these creations are 'transgenic' rather than 'hybrid') program is some kind of fantasy. There is too much hard evidence for it, and it explains too much about our life happenings, and the improbable but near-identical narratives of so many thousands of others.

Hypnosis will remain a controversial issue but in my experience can and does recall real memory if it's done right. About one third of abductees seem to have near-total recall of the events so never undergo hypnosis. A large number who do not remember much, like you, do not want to so they don't undergo hypnosis either. The small number who do, interestingly, often recover the same narrative as those with natural memory recall. Protocols need to be followed and it needs to be done with skill, but if done right then it can be useful and it is a mistake to reject the idea out of hand.

I rejected my first hypnotherapist after 2 sessions not because of a lack of skill on his part, but due to his very positive and 'new age' spin on the phenomenon, so I would be the first to admit that contamination of one kind or another may happen. However, I never believed I remembered anything that might not be true. Either the memory returns, or it doesn't. Often the memory returns weeks after the session: it just pops in and you think 'how the heck did I forget that?' But if you want to reject all memory recovered by hypnosis then fine: a very large body of evidence remains even when these retrieved accounts are removed and disregarded.

Do you attend, or have you never attended, any support groups? Or have you corresponded with/met up with anyone from the IF of ICAR?



posted on May, 11 2008 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by bovarcher
A large number who do not remember much, like you, do not want to so they don't undergo hypnosis either.


I actually remember quite a lot,if not all in some instances - not sure where ya got that I don't "remember much".

Again, with regard to this hybrid stuff we have anecdotal evidence, and nothing else. If we had more? We wouldn't be having this conversation. Because it would be a known issue.

As for Hopkins/Jacobs and their respective organizations, no I have not contacted either. I saw no reason to when I first came to the realization of what was happening to me, and had been going on since approx. age 5.

Don Ecker has recently stated on the Paracast an interesting story about Hopkins/Jacobs and the whole "missing fetus" issue. He knew a well qualified gynecologist who was very interested in the whole abduction issue. He put this Doctor in contact with Jacobs and Hopkins because this doctor could verify information professionally/independently, and document concretely the so-called "proof" of the stolen fetus claims.

This was a golden opportunity for Jacobs and Hopkins. Someone with no connection to the UFO subject, and no preconceived notions to verify their theory, or at least support the information.

And neither "lifted a finger" to do anything with this Doctor. Nothing.

I believe much as Ecker does, neither of them wanted their theories disproved because it would negate all the information they have put out there in one quick stroke.

The bottom line is this for me: Most if not all psychiatric organizations I spoke with saw hypnosis as "more of a behavioral modification tool then any sort of way to recover lost memories", and labeled what abduction researchers do with it as "dangerous", and potentially damaging.

Again, no one wants to talk about the deeper experience. Largely because they don't want to make the issue more complex (and thats not truly studying the phenomenon). Everyone wants the "answer" of some sort of breeding program by extraterrestrials...because they want an answer. It's part of the frustration of having no solid, and undeniable proof.

There is an agenda to protect a theory. Much like several researchers do, they become entrenched too early in the study and have to defend their outlook, and hard-line positions. Back peddling is not looked upon kindly by this field when researchers claim to have answers. Therefore those researchers take the "don't bother me with facts, my mind's made up" approach.

I would suggest perhaps we aren't looking in the right place, and it's FAR too early for claiming to know whats going on.

I do not negate anyone's experience, and it's certainly possible that your scenario happens. Anything is possible. But I see no real undeniable evidence for it, and the majority of the information is based on hypnotically generated memory. (with all the issue I've already covered, which make it highly unreliable.) As far as the 1/3 ratio, I'd like to know where that statistic came from.

In the end we don't know who these beings are, what they are really doing, and until we go outside the UFO "field" to look, we probably never will.



posted on May, 11 2008 @ 09:30 AM
link   
No, I don't think Dr. Steven Greer is being paid to lie


Still waiting for the CSETI DVDs to arrive....



posted on May, 12 2008 @ 04:17 AM
link   
Thank you bovarcher and Jeff for a great debate! (if not slightly of topic)

This is what these forums are all about.

I have to swing towards Jeff (at the moment) on this one, because:

1) I agree, as does bovarcher, that hypnosic regression is an unreliable source of information. Until it is possible to distinguish a true memory from a false one then it is hard to accept it as evidence.

2) If Jeff is correct, Jacobs and Hopkins did not take the opportunity to have their work peer reviewed. This puts straight into the suspicious pile and gives strong evidence to the "agenda" argument.

But, none the less, a very entertaining, and for me, who has no experience in abduction, a very educational debate. I am gonna read it all again.

Thanks!


Now, as far as Greer goes, if he is starting to talk in metaphysical, pseudoscientific and spiritual language in relation to the disclosure agenda then he needs to step aside.

I am not saying these points of are invalid or unimportant, but I believe very, very strongly that they pale in significance when compared to the challenge of getting our world governments, our public servants, to disclose, fully, what they know about apparent E.T. technologies, visitations and alien civilisations.

Straying into "mystical" territory does nothing besides make the job of those who oppose disclosure, easier. Every mention of "a new consciousness" or "a higher awareness" damages the campaign for disclosure. It must be done in a logical, credible and scientific way so that the powers that be find it hard to refute the evidence that will be and is being offered to the public.

Greer's past work has been excellent, almost revolutionary and yet it can al be undone in a blink of a proverbial eye, if the "mystical" stuff becomes a focal point.

We, luckily, have people out there ready to champion this cause; people who speak to the language needed to give disclosure the credibility it desperately needs.

And these are just a few of the names I know in my limited experience.

James Fox and the Out of The Blue team
Dr Lynne Kitei
Fife Symington - his turn around from open, public ridicule to experiencer gives disclosure an excellent credibility boost.

It seems to me that people like this have already started taking the reigns from Greer.

And he should let them ... then he can continue his own journey without getting us all lost.



posted on May, 12 2008 @ 05:19 AM
link   
Oh yes ... a star for both of you, bovarcher and Jeff



posted on May, 12 2008 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Horza
Thank you bovarcher and Jeff for a great debate! (if not slightly of topic)

This is what these forums are all about....

...Jacobs and Hopkins did not take the opportunity to have their work peer reviewed. This puts straight into the suspicious pile and gives strong evidence to the "agenda" argument.


I will ask Budd about this. Do you know how the contact was initiated? The IF gets literally thousands of emails each week and it might be that this communication simply was not read and disappeared in the multitude. It's all handled by volunteers and unfortunately most of them have day jobs.

Certainly in the past many medics/researchers have linked up and become involved in reviewing the evidence, eventually being persuaded. John Mack was one of the better known ones, but only one of many. Their work in any case has certainly been 'peer reviewed' ad infinitum the past 15 years, and continues to be so.

Both Hopkins and Jacobs are now in their late 70s and not as energetic as they used to be. Budd was very ill for several weeks this year. This needs to be considered also.


But, none the less, a very entertaining, and for me, who has no experience in abduction, a very educational debate. I am gonna read it all again

Thanks!


Thanks, you're welcome. I was afraid we were going off topic somewhat, but we did start with Greer and things just developed from there.


... I believe very, very strongly that they pale in significance when compared to the challenge of getting our world governments, our public servants, to disclose, fully, what they know about apparent E.T. technologies, visitations and alien civilisations.


Are you involved with the Exopolitics movement? Do you know Stephen Bassett? If not, I suggest you make contact with him.



Greer's past work has been excellent, almost revolutionary and yet it can al be undone in a blink of a proverbial eye, if the "mystical" stuff becomes a focal point.


Yes, we agree. He's blown it with many, many former supporters by 'going off the rails.' Not to mention the huge ego, the 'You Have To Trust Me For I Am The One Who Knows' attitude; and the money. Oh, yes: the money.


And these are just a few of the names I know in my limited experience.

Dr Lynne Kitei


She's a hell of a woman all right, but...er...have you heard her SING?



...It seems to me that people like this have already started taking the reigns from Greer


Also Richard Dolan, Grant Cameron, Rob Simone, Bruce Maccabee and most of all Stephen Bassett. And many others now around the world. Here's a few more of them:

www.paradigmresearchgroup.org...

Cheers.



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by bovarcher
Also Richard Dolan, Grant Cameron, Rob Simone, Bruce Maccabee and most of all Stephen Bassett. And many others now around the world. Here's a few more of them:

www.paradigmresearchgroup.org...


I'd take Simone off that list, as he's (as my friend at X-Conference said) nothing but a paranormal paparazzi. Joker.

I can appreciate what Bassett is trying to do, but he really disappointed me at the end of the last conference.



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by jritzmann
I'd take Simone off that list, as he's (as my friend at X-Conference said) nothing but a paranormal paparazzi. Joker.

I can appreciate what Bassett is trying to do, but he really disappointed me at the end of the last conference.


OK I can kind of agree with you about Simone up to a point, though 'paparazzi' is a bit strong.

What exactly are you doing to promote disclosure? Sorry to appear confrontational (which it's not meant to be) but you do come over as very critical of other researchers who for the most part are generally dedicated, hardworking and committed to this issue and definitely (i.e. Bassett) not in it for the money or for any kind of personal gain.

So where can we review your work please?



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by jritzmann

I actually remember quite a lot,if not all in some instances - not sure where ya got that I don't "remember much".


Sorry, misunderstood.


Again, with regard to this hybrid stuff we have anecdotal evidence, and nothing else. If we had more? We wouldn't be having this conversation. Because it would be a known issue.


The evidence can not really be described as 'anecdotal.' It's witness testimony, there is a lot of it, and all over the Earth the narrative is near-identical. You may not accept any of it. Fine. That's your privilege. I know many of these people, and I find them thoroughly believable, my own experience corroborates what they all report and the evidence is therefore compelling. I consider my position on this to be reasonable in the circumstances.



Don Ecker has recently stated on the Paracast an interesting story about Hopkins/Jacobs and the whole "missing fetus" issue. He knew a well qualified gynecologist who was very interested in the whole abduction issue. He put this Doctor in contact with Jacobs and Hopkins because this doctor could verify information professionally/independently, and document concretely the so-called "proof" of the stolen fetus claims.


Could you link me to this please? I have trawled through a load of Ecker's stuff and can find no reference to this one gynecologist. (I do not have a very high opinion of Ecker as a researcher by the way, but that's not relevant to this issue).

For 30 years, Hopkins has urged researchers, academics, medical professionals and scientists of every discipline to investigate this phenomenon. Many professional gynecologists are numbered amongst those who have got off their butts, spent time and effort in investigating cases, interviewed witnesses and done the work. Whoever this one single individual you cite is, the way is open for him to do the same. If he/she can be bothered to do the work, the evidence is there. Why doesn't he/she do that?

Do you have his/her contact details please?

You may know that when David Jacobs first heard that Hopkins was working with people who believed they had been abducted by aliens back in the 1980s, his first reaction was 'They must be crazy, and so must he for believing them.' But Jacobs is a Professor of History, a serious academic and a skeptic. He approached the phenomenon with an open mind. He took away a couple of boxes of the thousands of unopened letters Budd was receiving from abductees all over the world and went to work. Years later, after having interviewed and worked with a few hundred of them, developed protocols, checked with other researchers and investigators, applied rigorous skeptical methodologies and written up the cases, he changed his mind about the 'crazy' part.

Any medic/academic/researcher can do this for themselves if they are serious. They just need to 'lift a finger' themselves and do the f***ing work, as others do. Sorry, but it IS that simple.


This was a golden opportunity for Jacobs and Hopkins. Someone with no connection to the UFO subject, and no preconceived notions to verify their theory, or at least support the information.


Those who meet and interview witnesses, investigate cases and do the work will discover whether the claims of those who have done such work are true or not. Many hundreds of academics with 'no connection to the UFO subject and no preconceived notions' have already been through the process. Quite honestly, one more is not exactly a 'golden opportunity.' It's just one more. Either he/she wants to find out and will do their own work, or they don't. They need to 'lift a finger' and get on with it, like the rest of us.


I believe much as Ecker does, neither of them wanted their theories disproved because it would negate all the information they have put out there in one quick stroke.


OK, you believe that. I have worked with abductees and know otherwise.


The bottom line is this for me: Most if not all psychiatric organizations I spoke with saw hypnosis as "more of a behavioral modification tool then any sort of way to recover lost memories", and labeled what abduction researchers do with it as "dangerous", and potentially damaging.


Everyone has an opinion. Doesn't mean they are right, or that they know what they are talking about.


Again, no one wants to talk about the deeper experience. Largely because they don't want to make the issue more complex (and thats not truly studying the phenomenon).


Please talk about this here. What deeper experience exactly?


There is an agenda to protect a theory. Much like several researchers do, they become entrenched too early in the study and have to defend their outlook, and hard-line positions. Back peddling is not looked upon kindly by this field when researchers claim to have answers. Therefore those researchers take the "don't bother me with facts, my mind's made up" approach.


Some are like that, maybe.


I would suggest perhaps we aren't looking in the right place, and it's FAR too early for claiming to know whats going on.


What is the place we should be looking?


In the end we don't know who these beings are, what they are really doing, and until we go outside the UFO "field" to look, we probably never will.


I would be interested to read your research/theories on this.



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 10:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by bovarcher

Could you link me to this please? I have trawled through a load of Ecker's stuff and can find no reference to this one gynecologist. (I do not have a very high opinion of Ecker as a researcher by the way, but that's not relevant to this issue).


I would also like to see this reference.



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 11:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Horza

...

Now, as far as Greer goes, if he is starting to talk in metaphysical, pseudoscientific and spiritual language in relation to the disclosure agenda then he needs to step aside.

I am not saying these points of are invalid or unimportant, but I believe very, very strongly that they pale in significance when compared to the challenge of getting our world governments, our public servants, to disclose, fully, what they know about apparent E.T. technologies, visitations and alien civilisations.

Straying into "mystical" territory does nothing besides make the job of those who oppose disclosure, easier. Every mention of "a new consciousness" or "a higher awareness" damages the campaign for disclosure. It must be done in a logical, credible and scientific way so that the powers that be find it hard to refute the evidence that will be and is being offered to the public.

Greer's past work has been excellent, almost revolutionary and yet it can al be undone in a blink of a proverbial eye, if the "mystical" stuff becomes a focal point.

...



Re: Greer - I don't recall anyone voting him to represent them. As far as I can tell from watching Greer for over 10 years, he is just a citizen, using his personal resources and knowledge to campaign for public disclosure. Every one of you is free to do the same.
Greer has steadfastly refused to put the 'negative spin' on HIS understanding of ETs/UFOs - and he HAS had the pressure to do so. Good on him!
But I fail to see why he owes you anything. Why should he keep to science and logic - when to understand the phenomenon it is looking like we will have to throw out our understandings of science anyway?
All this 'he should', 'he should not' is just weenie baloney. He can damn well do what he wants. If people don't like it - then they should do something better.

I get so sick of all the whingers and whiners out there who do nothing but snipe at people who bother to give a dam and do something about it.

Feel free to disagree with his opinions, but do everyone the courtesy of understanding where he is coming from. His last book traces his personal path of experiences and involvement. He has put up with far more ridicule and criticism from people than he deserves.

Governments, public servants, military types and spooks all do what they are told. Period. When they are told to disclose, they will.

And when it happens, I'd worry more about what spin they will be putting on it - rather than wishing one person out there trying to make a difference, would couch his terminology in a way so as to cater to people who would rather watch American Idol anyway.

Science and logic are what is used for social thought control. It's the "mystical" stuff that will allow us to evolve out of the matrix.

peace

Duncan



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join