Science and the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis in Ufology

Originally posted by Ectoplasm8
Dr. David Jacobs believes: "...alien-human hybrids are engaged in a covert program of infiltration into human society with possibly the final goal of taking over Earth. He asserts that some of his research subjects are teaching these hybrids how to blend into human society so that they cannot be differentiated from humans, and that this is occurring worldwide"

Your "scientific approach" crosses into the tin-foil hat approach including abductees. Especially claims from this clown. He shouldn't even be mentioned in this thread if you're trying to show something scientific in the way of "Ufology".

I'm not sure I said anything about abductees. Maybe I hit the wrong key or something. The only reason I bring Dr. Jacobs into the discussion is to reply to another member regarding the potential professional consequences in academia of expressing interest in - much less openly researching - taboo topics such as this.

By the way, what did you think of the Redlands case I directed you toward at your request? Never heard back from you after that.

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian
There are recordings of the hypnosis sessions that were done over the phone. I don't think anyone denies this happened. I think that this is a good thread otherwise but that guy is just a low life.

Nope. Nobody denies it, even Jacobs himself.

Because I knew no one who was familiar with the UFO abduction phenomenon where Alice lived, I decided to try to help her. I could conduct memory recovery via telephone. Hypnotists widely use the telephone to work with clients at a distance. Of course, telephone communication alone is not optimal because the hypnotist can't observe the person's facial expressions and deportment, both of which can help indicate emotional problems

source

Originally posted by Orkojoker
reply to post by ZetaRediculian

 

Hard to know what to think, but I'm not sure I would crucify Jacobs just yet. Should probably look into it a little more before passing judgement. Always a good policy to examine both sides.

Absolutely. Thanks for your even response. There is a TON of this stuff out there so if you like twists and turns and bizarreness, then you should be pretty well occupied. Regardless of the motivations of "Emma" or "Alice" or the hybrids, the one thing that is pretty damaging is that there is actual audio recordings.

Originally posted by bluestreak53

Originally posted by Orkojoker
Hard to know what to think, but I'm not sure I would crucify Jacobs just yet. Should probably look into it a little more before passing judgement. Always a good policy to examine both sides.

As you can see, this is old, old, old "news". From what I gather, Jacobs was never found to be "guilty" of anything, as far as I can tell.

You are right since there are no laws pertaining to this.

Originally posted by Orkojoker
I'm not sure I said anything about abductees. Maybe I hit the wrong key or something. The only reason I bring Dr. Jacobs into the discussion is to reply to another member regarding the potential professional consequences in academia of expressing interest in - much less openly researching - taboo topics such as this.

I don't think Jacobs would be the best example of an academic whose career was affected by his interest in alien abductions. (Note: You are right that you didn't bring up alien abductions, but that is the focus of Jacob's work)

I'm not sure if Dr. Jacobs published anything "alien/UFO/abduction" related as part of his work at Temple University. But Dr. John Mack certainly did face extensive scrutiny for his research at Harvard.

In any case, with Mack and Hopkins gone from this earth, and Jacobs retired and getting on in years himself, is there anyone else getting involved in researching this field?

I know there are a couple who have touched it (like Susan Clancy), but it certainly doesn't seem to have the focus it used to have.

As far as UFOs, it seems the time has long passed when there was any academics or scientists willing to stick their toe into the study of UFOs and the possibility that some might provide evidence of ET technology. It seems like the field is even more fringe now than ever.

Originally posted by bluestreak53
I don't think Jacobs would be the best example of an academic whose career was affected by his interest in alien abductions. (Note: You are right that you didn't bring up alien abductions, but that is the focus of Jacob's work)

I'm not sure if Dr. Jacobs published anything "alien/UFO/abduction" related as part of his work at Temple University. But Dr. John Mack certainly did face extensive scrutiny for his research at Harvard.

In any case, with Mack and Hopkins gone from this earth, and Jacobs retired and getting on in years himself, is there anyone else getting involved in researching this field?

From what I came across, Temple wants little to do with Jacob's "research". You are right about John Mack and he is a better example of what Orkojoker was getting at. Now Mack essentially endored a "trial" at Harvard for his work
en.wikipedia.org...

InvestigationIn May 1994, the Dean of Harvard Medical School, Daniel C. Tosteson, appointed a committee of peers to confidentially review Mack's clinical care and clinical investigation of the people who had shared their alien encounters with him (some of their cases were written of in Mack's 1994 book Abduction). In the same BBC article cited above, Angela Hind wrote, "It was the first time in Harvard's history that a tenured professor was subjected to such an investigation." Mack described the investigation as "Kafkaesque": he never quite knew the status of the ongoing investigation, and the nature of his critics' complaints were not revealed to Mack until the committee had prepared a draft report eight months into the process. Because the committee was not a disciplinary committee, it was not governed by any established rules of procedure; the presentation of a defense was therefore difficult and costly for Mack.

Upon the public revelation of the existence of the committee (inadvertently revealed during the solicitation of witnesses for Mack's defense, ten months into the process), questions arose from the academic community (including Harvard Professor of Law Alan Dershowitz) regarding the validity of an investigation of a tenured professor who was not suspected of ethics violations or professional misconduct. Concluding the fourteen-month investigation, Harvard then issued a statement stating that the Dean had "reaffirmed Dr. Mack's academic freedom to study what he wishes and to state his opinions without impediment," concluding "Dr. Mack remains a member in good standing of the Harvard Faculty of Medicine." (Mack was censured in the committee's report for what they believed were methodological errors, but Dean Tosteson took no action based on the committee's assessment.) He had received legal help from Roderick MacLeish and Daniel P. Sheehan,[6] (of the Pentagon Papers case)[7] and the support of Laurance Rockefeller, who also funded Mack's non-profit organization for four consecutive years at $250,000 per year.[8]

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian

Originally posted by Orkojoker
reply to post by ZetaRediculian

 

Hard to know what to think, but I'm not sure I would crucify Jacobs just yet. Should probably look into it a little more before passing judgement. Always a good policy to examine both sides.

Absolutely. Thanks for your even response. There is a TON of this stuff out there so if you like twists and turns and bizarreness, then you should be pretty well occupied. Regardless of the motivations of "Emma" or "Alice" or the hybrids, the one thing that is pretty damaging is that there is actual audio recordings.

Jeez. Looking through some of those transcripts I have to say that Dr. Jacobs seems to be doing a LOT of the talking, apparently creating these scenarios and suggestions while the subject occasionally says things like, "Um, yeah" and "I think so". Not at all what I would think you would want to do if you're trying to help the subject remember something accurately. I've only read a little of it, but I didn't really care for what I was reading. Seems highly fishy to me, unless I'm somehow taking what's being said way out of context.

Originally posted by Orkojoker

Jeez. Looking through some of those transcripts I have to say that Dr. Jacobs seems to be doing a LOT of the talking, apparently creating these scenarios and suggestions while the subject occasionally says things like, "Um, yeah" and "I think so". Not at all what I would think you would want to do if you're trying to help the subject remember something accurately. I've only read a little of it, but I didn't really care for what I was reading. Seems highly fishy to me, unless I'm somehow taking what's being said way out of context.

The accusation is that the audio tapes were edited and are out of context. What I understand is that the audio was edited to remove names. There does not seem to be any evidence that the audio was altered otherwise. The audio is out there for anyone to scrutinize. There does not seem to be a lot in Jacob's favor with regards to this.

Originally posted by Orkojoker

I'm not sure I said anything about abductees. Maybe I hit the wrong key or something. The only reason I bring Dr. Jacobs into the discussion is to reply to another member regarding the potential professional consequences in academia of expressing interest in - much less openly researching - taboo topics such as this.

By the way, what did you think of the Redlands case I directed you toward at your request? Never heard back from you after that.

I ditched that thread because I became exhaustingly bored repeating the same thing over and over.

How can anyone take seriously a report that describes the "UFO" as making a "high-pitched whining sound much like that of the 'FLYING SAUCER' seen on TV program, The Invaders", that in reality turns out to be an emergency vehicle? A tape was apparently the only "physical" evidence that corroborated the sighting. If there wasn't a tape, then people would still be using: "It made this unusual high pitched sound...." as one more example and further proof of a strange UFO sighting. Witnesses also go from 2 to 200. Some witnesses say it had red lights all around, some say it was green and red with 7 jets shooting orange flames out the bottom. If that's the case, there goes the "anti-gravity propulsion" that's used to explain the wild movements of these ET UFOs. Seeing jets with flames just shows the mindset of the time(late 60's). With no, or limited, knowledge of UFO travel being said to use "anti-gravity", as seems to be the explanation now, jet power is suggested. But then again, maybe aliens only found out about anti-gravity travel after 1968

Too many inconsistencies. If this wasn't a hoax, and if the easily identifiable sound of an emergency vehicle can be confused for the sound of a UFO, then how many other things could be confused visually for a UFO? I don't see this case as a strong indication of something extraordinary. Certainly not of "alien" involvement.

Originally posted by Ectoplasm8

Too many inconsistencies. If this wasn't a hoax, and if the easily identifiable sound of an emergency vehicle can be confused for the sound of a UFO, then how many other things could be confused visually for a UFO? I don't see this case as a strong indication of something extraordinary. Certainly not of "alien" involvement.

So you go with hoax over misinterpretation of conventional phenomenon? Do you mean hoax by the witnesses or hoax on the witnesses? In other words, did they see something or not see anything? If they did see something, what do you suppose that something might have been that would account for the reported appearance and movements of the object?

Another excellent thread from Ork. Not joking, either.


Mike Swords – long may he live – has one of the sharpest minds in the whole field of UAP research and I’m slowly ploughing my way through his latest book.

But IMHO even Swords has been led astray by the unscientific popular habit of interpreting the ET hypothesis to mean visitation by humanoid aliens with human-style agendas. Jim McDonald was wiser, he acknowledged that the intelligence in his hypothesis of intelligent ET surveillance could be cybernetic in nature.

All the relevant evidence since Jim’s time has supported the McDonald cybernetic conjecture.

And since 2006, Steven Dick’s notion of an Intelligence Principle operating within a postbiological universe has given us a much better intellectual framework than Mike Swords’s outdated one for interpreting reports such as Redlands:


The maintenance, improvement and perpetuation of knowledge and intelligence is the central driving force of cultural evolution [within a probable postbiological universe], and to the extent intelligence can be improved, it will be improved.

www.setileague.org...


Like NASA’s Curiosity Rover, the Redlands UAP may have been simply gathering intelligence – perhaps for the benefit of postbiologicals a thousand light years away.