The creation of the Abduction Phenomenon (new video) : Manhattan Abduction

As some of you may know, ufo/abduction researcher Budd Hopkins' former wife (Carol Rainey) has recently been rather critical of Budd's research.

She has now released a video (which she has stated is the first in a series) about the research methods used by some of the leading UFO abduction investigators--research that is:

"flawed in methodology, can be unsafe for subjects, lacks oversight, and is even unethical, at times".

The video is embedded below:



This first video focuses on the Linda Cortile Case and claims that she was abducted in Manhattan.

Carol Rainey states that the video "tells the story of how one key witness was discovered to be a clever (but not totally resolved) hoax".

For those not familiar with the Linda Cortile Case which is the focus of this first video in relation to the creation of the alien abduction phenomenon:

(1) It is discussed in a quite a few books and on various websites, including the one below:
www.ufocasebook.com...

An extremely compelling and controversial case of alien abduction is that of Linda Napolitano, (originally aliased as Cortile) which was researched by the well-known and respected Budd Hopkins. Napolitano claimed that she was abducted by the so-called "greys," who floated her from a closed bedroom window into a hovering UFO. The craft was waiting for her above a Manhattan apartment building at about 3:00 A.M. November 30, 1989. Linda's experience, though intriguing, was hampered at first by memory loss. She could recall only bits and pieces of the abduction. She could remember vividly the actual kidnapping and the room where she was examined, but the transportation process itself was totally lost to her. Further details of the case would be forthcoming via the passage of time, other witness statements, and through regressive hypnosis.

Hopkins, as to be expected, has been ridiculed by many of his peers, but has been steadfast in searching out the consistent, underlying themes that run through alien abduction cases. Napolitano's case is remarkable and unique in itself, although following the general abduction pattern on some points. More than a year after Cortile's experience, Hopkins received mail correspondence from two witnesses, (known as Richard and Dan) who claimed to have actually seen the abduction.

Doubtful at first about these witnesses, their claims would ultimately be a building block of the case itself. Agreeing perfectly with Linda's account of the abduction, the two men were bodyguards of a senior United Nations statesman who was visiting Manhattan. This diplomat would eventually be identified as Javier Perez de Cuellar, who, according to his two bodyguards, was visibly shaken while viewing the surreal scene. These three men encountered an unbelievable sight...the plight of a woman being floated through the air, and not only that...but three entities were also being floated, accompanying her on a short trip to a massive hovering flying craft.

(2) Here is a short video featuring Budd Hopkins relating to it:


The series of videos promised by Carol Rainey is certain to increase the (already rather considerable) amount of controversy - even amongst ufologist - regarding alien abduction research. In particular, it is likely to cause renewed questioning about the use of hypnosis in such research.

Here in England, the use of hypnosis was suspended by the main national UFO research group (BUFORA) many years ago. Several other UFO groups and researchers in England have a similar policy of avoiding the use of hypnosis due to the dangers involved.

Few American groups and researchers have, so far as I am aware, adopted a similar policy (although I'd be in hearing about any groups that have done so).


All the best,

Isaac

Star and flag for an interesting thread. Don't have the time now but will definitely give it a good once over when I have the time.

reply to post by IsaacKoi

Vital info here - thanks. It's not quite clear why the early abduction 'researchers' chose hypnotic regression as their investigative method of choice, but I'd guess that the key reason was that it worked to produce the goods from Barney and Betty Hill (at least then a medical professional conducted the hypnosis) and if you're going to publish a successful book about abductions, you really need those accounts.

It's often claimed that people recall abductions without hypnosis, but they didn't before the results of hypnosis were published to the mass reading public. If Budd Hopkins, followed by various other individuals devoid of medical training, hadn't decided to use hypnosis, many sensitive and maybe fragile individuals wouldn't have been persuaded that they were under physical and mental attack, and were part of a forced interbreeding programme. For some that was probably exciting. For many it was terrifying, and apparently still is.

There are good reasons why the results of regression are not admissible in court, and why it is useless in assisting amnesiacs to recover their memories. That's because its results are miserably unreliable, and it doesn't access truth in a way the researchers would have you believe. After 30 and more years there is no objective physical evidence of a single abduction, so the results of regression stand alone - they can't be used as confirmation because there's nothing to confirm.

Back in 1998 I was publishing an irregular newsletter about abductions and, with input from some very helpful people in relevant fields, I put out an issue about the problems caused by hypnosis, and the way that the US courts had punished its inappropriate use. It still seems quite relevant . . .

magonia.haaan.com...

reply to post by IsaacKoi
It’s a complicated case, as most people already know, with a variety of supporters and detractors. Hopkins has cited it as one of his ‘best evidence’ cases. Purported witnesses of this ‘abduction’ include two intelligence agents and a cavalcade of people escorting a Secretary General of the UN, who was also an alleged witness.

Apart from the word of Napolitano/Cortile, Hopkins received the other witness statements by post. They arrived in envelopes and the existence of the senders was never formally authenticated. One of the letters was apparently from a woman driving across the Brooklyn Bridge and seeing the abduction take place. I’ve posted about this witness a few times in the past couple of years. It just seemed implausible and had the narrative elements of fiction.

There’s a rather good analysis of the whole case, from a sceptical perspective, at this link that raises enough questions to cast major doubts on the claims. It’s been posted a lot on these boards and most people with an interest will have read it already. Rainey adds to the substance of the article by highlighting what looks like the same source for the letters Hopkins received form the alleged witnesses. The analysis of the handwriting in the letters is more evidence against the credibility of the case.

What immediately caught my attention in the video isn’t something that is mentioned. It returns us to the claims of the woman on the bridge, ‘Janet Kimball.’ From 1:40, we see Hopkins pointing out the apartment from where the abduction supposedly took place. ‘Kimball’ claimed that the car engine died and her attention was captured by a bright light that lit up her car like daylight. As she watched, she saw figures being levitated from their apartment windows. One figure in particular stood out; it was a woman in a ‘long white nightgown.’

Based on the footage from the point where ‘Kimball’ claimed to have seen the incident, it seems unlikely that she could have seen what she claimed to have seen. Imagine that distance at 3am, night-time, and being able to identify not only human figures, but what they were wearing too?

This case has always struck me as an obvious hoax, the elements just don't add up.

Bumpety bump bump for now because this an important & fascinating issue that is on the verge of having it's "day" so to speak. Back later.

OK then---IF someone said claim they saw a UFO, they had missing time, and something was deeply bothering them but they didn't know why----what would you suggest other than what is legally avalable, hypnosis?

I read this which to me sounded quote a real-sounding report:

The Daze After Manhattan Stood Still, by Yancy Spence

what do you think?

reply to post by IsaacKoi


1 question would this be considered the creation or the first people to admit or go public with it. I happen to believe if anything. If the word got spread right here that they were the first to go public.

Because I doubt they were the first to be abducted. If said events take place.

reply to post by Kandinsky


I think it's pretty obvious that Napolitano/Cortile was sending Hopkins those eyewitness accounts.

reply to post by IsaacKoi


1989 no sorry. There was reports of alien abductions alot earlier then that. So the title of the thread is incorrect.

Originally posted by Vicarious10000
reply to post by IsaacKoi

 

1989 no sorry. There was reports of alien abductions alot earlier then that. So the title of the thread is incorrect.

Your right, of course--Here is first famous case Alien Abduction: Looking Back at America's First Case Barney and Betty Hill.

And I think something that has been ignored by maybe nearly all investigators of it (and I am only briefly mentioning, cause I dont want to derail this thread) is that their case was very significant in those times when mixed 'race' couples were very controversial because of the racism of those times in the U.S.)

Trying to understand the purpose of a supposed hoax used against Budd Hopkins, was this an attempt by some intelligence agency to discredit him? ( regardless of any current status) ..

Or was it some nutty attempt by false witnesses hoping to cash in on some book ? either? niether?

Interesting situation for sure..

reply to post by alienreality


I highly doubt "intelligence agencies" even care what Budd Hopkins does or doesn't do. My bet is this was some attention seekers looking to get a book deal or some personal excitement.

Originally posted by alienreality
Trying to understand the purpose of a supposed hoax used against Budd Hopkins, was this an attempt by some intelligence agency to discredit him? ( regardless of any current status) ..

Or was it some nutty attempt by false witnesses hoping to cash in on some book ? either? niether?

Interesting situation for sure..

Hopkins split the earnings from the book with Napolitano/Cortile.

To me, the adduction phenomena has much in common with the signature of one of the members here which goes something like, "Just because it's a UFO doesn't mean it's a Spaceship."

So the phenomena is real, obviously, but what it might be remains to be seen. You would think that having two such experiences as a kid, as I did, I would be more interested in the phenomena. But even though they were very "real" feeling to me, I had worked it out in my mind as I got older that it was most probably some psycho-social phenomena...although I've kept an open mind.

So, I never read Communion or any other books on the subject because I didn't want to be influenced into believing my experiences to be real. Not because I was scared to believe it, but because I realize the ability that the power of suggestion has over the mind. There is definitely something to the "meme" concept.

In the past few years, I've spent a little time reading about it on the net. But until Cripmeister & Kandinsky pointed it out on a recent thread, I didn't realize how widespread hypnotic regression was in the field. They leave that part out of many accounts--I wonder why? It really ticked me off.

A look at the field of so-called "Past Life Regression" shows that it's rife with stories that get ever more grand as time goes on. That's the danger--and almost certainty imo--of using hypnosis. Especially from the unqualified true believer that has either a conscious or subconscious motivation to validate their belief/agenda.

I didn't know, but I'm glad to hear, that BUFORA has long since discarded hypnosis as an untrustworthy investigative technique. The Brit Ufologists have always impressed me as a more level-headed lot on the whole. Although some of those crop circle guys are a tad woo-woo if you ask me.

Someone is surely going to come along and say that Carol Rainey is lying because she has an axe to grind with ex-husband Budd Hopkins. But although I do believe she's probably pressing some wine from sour grapes, I also believe that it's fairly easy to see that her information is accurate and to the point regardless of her personal issues with Budd.

My current hypothesis is weird enough in its own right, so I'm not a downright skeptic as far as the abduction phenomena goes, but for anyone who truly wants to get to the bottom of the issue: Budd Hopkins or David Jacobs and the like will not only confuse the issue, but more than likely psychologically damage the very folk they claim to want to help.

Thank you IsaacKoi and those mentioned above for fighting the good fight. Most humbly sorry for the wall of text.

Originally posted by The GUT
To me, the adduction phenomena has much in common with the signature of one of the members here which goes something like, "Just because it's a UFO doesn't mean it's a Spaceship."

So the phenomena is real, obviously, but what it might be remains to be seen. You would think that having two such experiences as a kid, as I did, I would be more interested in the phenomena. But even though they were very "real" feeling to me, I had worked it out in my mind as I got older that it was most probably some psycho-social phenomena...although I've kept an open mind.

So, I never read Communion or any other books on the subject because I didn't want to be influenced into believing my experiences to be real. Not because I was scared to believe it, but because I realize the ability that the power of suggestion has over the mind. There is definitely something to the "meme" concept.

In the past few years, I've spent a little time reading about it on the net. But until Cripmeister & Kandinsky pointed it out on a recent thread, I didn't realize how widespread hypnotic regression was in the field. They leave that part out of many accounts--I wonder why? It really ticked me off.

A look at the field of so-called "Past Life Regression" shows that it's rife with stories that get ever more grand as time goes on. That's the danger--and almost certainty imo--of using hypnosis. Especially from the unqualified true believer that has either a conscious or subconscious motivation to validate their belief/agenda.

I didn't know, but I'm glad to hear, that BUFORA has long since discarded hypnosis as an untrustworthy investigative technique. The Brit Ufologists have always impressed me as a more level-headed lot on the whole. Although some of those crop circle guys are a tad woo-woo if you ask me.

Someone is surely going to come along and say that Carol Rainey is lying because she has an axe to grind with ex-husband Budd Hopkins. But although I do believe she's probably pressing some wine from sour grapes, I also believe that it's fairly easy to see that her information is accurate and to the point regardless of her personal issues with Budd.

My current hypothesis is weird enough in its own right, so I'm not a downright skeptic as far as the abduction phenomena goes, but for anyone who truly wants to get to the bottom of the issue: Budd Hopkins or David Jacobs and the like will not only confuse the issue, but more than likely psychologically damage the very folk they claim to want to help.

Thank you IsaacKoi and those mentioned above for fighting the good fight. Most humbly sorry for the wall of text.

What is your current hypothesis on the abduction and ufo enigma?

Originally posted by johnthejedi24
What is your current hypothesis on the abduction and ufo enigma?

Government and alphabet agency prostitution of the abduction phenomena--as well as ufology & the contactee movement in general--for what we might term "psyops" purposes notwithstanding some possible validity to the "high-strangeness" aspects of the phenomena. Not to include MILABS…although I haven't totally thrown that out yet.

Meaning, I guess, that active government involvement and high-strangeness aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.

Sorry if that's not terribly clear, but A.) I don't wanna go too off topic and B.) it's an early stage hypothesis that I'm currently researching and trying to put materials together for that aren't from the "fringe." I'm wishin' myself luck on that one ha.

I will say that I'm an Air Force brat and my personal research--and a helpful member on another thread--has turned up relevant oddities & similar accounts from other people associated with the two main military installations that I grew up on/around.

I wasn't on this exact track/thought process until those turned up and begged at least a look-see. One of those similar "accounts" has definitely been hypnotized in the past, however, and I'm having to dismiss them as a reliable source other than gleaning a few details I might be able to check further.

And it just goes to show that I was probably wise to skirt the issue for all those years: Having heard these folks accounts that were similar to mine in content & location(and time period in one instance) and while I haven't swallowed any possible meme whole, I am "tasting" it so to speak…and as such I might already be tainted with disinformation.

I'm certainly NOT going to be hypnotized. I actually remember my experiences--whatever they were--anyway. But even that's not to say I may have tainted memories??

Thanks for asking/showing an interest. Oh man…did I go & post a wall of text again? Sheesh.

reply to post by The GUT


With regard to the possibility of government, agencies, 'TPTB' and similar being involved either in giving the impression of abduction having taken place ('MILABS' were the idea of some very left-field writers, and probably grew from that theme in the X-Files), or in shaping the abduction story, I just haven't come across any evidence.

I reckon that we've already identified the key players in pushing belief in abductions - Mack, Hopkins, Streiber, Jacobs and a few others - and I'd guess that they've fed off the very long history of human beings having religious/mystical experiences for which they want and need explanations. I don't know where we should draw the line between those 'key players' promoting their own agenda possibly because they genuinely believe in the 'abduction' explanation, and possibly because they are tempted - consciously or not - by money, fame and a lot of control over others. All are very common human responses.

OK say I came to one of you and said I had had an experience of seeing a UFO, and then had missing time, and I was very disturbed about something but I dont know what. Just what would you recommend me do?