Recent developments in UFO 'Abductology'

[Rramjet]

Okay, I've had a bit of free time now, and have got some links on confabulation and implanting of false memories during hypnotism. This link is very comprehensive. Well worth reading the whole section on the 5 problems referred to on the first page linked.

This is a summary of the Brandon Report, a report by the Royal College Of Psychiatrists on recovered memories. The memories in question are of childhood sexual abuse, but the findings have general significance outside of the specific remit of the report. I'll quote the relevant bits:

There is no doubt that hypnosis used as an aid to memory recall is problematic. Primarily it seems that it cannot be predicted when an accurate recall will be brought forth and when a confabulated one will emerge. That is why I pointed to cases where no hypnosis was necessary. For example:

The Antonio Villas Boas Abduction (5 Oct 1957)
(http://www.interstellar-travel.com/l...oids/2-AVB.cfm)
(http://www.ufocasebook.com/boastotalabduction.html)

The Pascagoula, Mississippi - Hickson/Parker Abduction (10 Oct 1973)
(http://www.ufocasebook.com/Pascagoula.html)
(http://www.ufologie.net/htm/pascagoula.htm)

My point is (and has always been) that the alien abduction phenomenon – as a phenomenon - is real. So far no adequate explanation of why people experience alien abduction has been forthcoming. You may decry the use of hypnosis in such cases (and legitimately so) but that does not detract from the fact that the phenomenon is occurring and that we have no adequate explanation for it.

 

[Frying Dutchmen]

The Antonio Villas Boas Abduction (5 Oct 1957)
(http://www.interstellar-travel.com/l...oids/2-AVB.cfm)
(http://www.ufocasebook.com/boastotalabduction.html)

Oh this story will be interesting.

“He didn’t like the subject to be made public. He was always very discreet and didn’t want to discuss his experiences. But one day received an offer from a famous television personality, Flavio Cavalcanti, and he accepted. But NASA kept him from appearing,” Odercia revealed.

Believable, totally

Alone in the chamber, Antonio perceived how some tubes jutting from the wall emitted a grayish gas that made him feel nauseous and on the verge of vomiting. Later on, the frightened farmer would receive another unexpected visit: this time from a nude, white-skinned female with slanted blue eyes, high cheekbones, thin lips, straight blond hair, broad hips and heavy thighs. And this was precisely the least likely part of the abduction experience: Antonio claimed to have entered a state of progressive, uncontrollable sexual excitement that he attributed to the liquid that had been rubbed onto his flesh. He made love twice to the unknown female

hot

Dr. Olavo Fontes, a major name in Brazilian ufology, who subjected Villas Boas to a battery of physical and psychological tests after the event (February 22, 1958). The witness showed no signs of mental instability and had a series of physical alterations caused during the alleged alien encounter.

It's a good idea to have the tests years after the event. It's all the rage back in the 50s

The Pascagoula, Mississippi - Hickson/Parker Abduction (10 Oct 1973)
(http://www.ufocasebook.com/Pascagoula.html)
(http://www.ufologie.net/htm/pascagoula.htm)

From the first link

Harder and Hynek interviewed Hickson and Parker together. Harder hypnotized Hickson, but he became so frightened that the session had to be aborted.
The two abductees were encouraged to take a lie-detector test, which they both passed. Harder and Hynek, both highly respected in their professions, believed the two men's story.

Umm yeah. So you have one story and another where the one of the subjects was hypnotized.

My point is (and has always been) that the alien abduction phenomenon – as a phenomenon - is real. So far no adequate explanation of why people experience alien abduction has been forthcoming. You may decry the use of hypnosis in such cases (and legitimately so) but that does not detract from the fact that the phenomenon is occurring and that we have no adequate explanation for it.

well we can it's just you who doesn't accept anything other then it being Aliens.

 

[Akhenaten]

My point is (and has always been) that the alien abduction phenomenon – as a phenomenon - is real. So far no adequate explanation of why people experience alien abduction has been forthcoming. You may decry the use of hypnosis in such cases (and legitimately so) but that does not detract from the fact that the phenomenon is occurring and that we have no adequate explanation for it.

The phenomenon of people seeing Jeebus in pieces of toast and his Mum in bowls of spag bol is real too. The phenomenon of people believing that ouija boards can pass on messages from dead people is real. The phenomenon of people believing their system is going to win the Lotto for them is real enough to finance an enterprise worth billions of dollars.

The perfectly adequate explanation for it all is that people are delusional.

Anything else you need help with?

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

There is no doubt that hypnosis used as an aid to memory recall is problematic.

Hooray. Good, so we're finally in agreement on that point. Glad to know that you'll now disregard any testimony gained under hypnosis, and that you're retracting the evidence that you have presented as being the best there is which relies on hypnosis.

I'll watch out for that.

Primarily it seems that it cannot be predicted when an accurate recall will be brought forth and when a confabulated one will emerge.

And, as I said from the start, that memories "recovered" under hypnosis are more likely to be confabluated than ones which aren't.

Or, to put it another way "Testimony gained under hypnosis has no value." Now, I wonder whether we could have saved a lot of time and effort had you just accepted that statement of mine right from the start?

That is why I pointed to cases where no hypnosis was necessary.

You do know that people can read back over the thread, right? That people can read how you've been defending it and presenting cases where all the testimony was gained under hypnosis? Lying about it now isn't going to make your previous posts magically disappear. Or be abducted, or whatever.

 

[Rramjet]

You do know that people can read back over the thread, right? That people can read how you've been defending it and presenting cases where all the testimony was gained under hypnosis? Lying about it now isn't going to make your previous posts magically disappear. Or be abducted, or whatever.

I see now why people in this forum have such trouble in accepting evidence contrary to their point of view. If they change their POV in light of the evidence, then they will be accused of lying!

All I really contended initially was that there was a debate considering whether hypnosis is a legitimate methodology (and I linked to articles that concluded both for and against) – and there is such a debate – I have simply come down on the “against” side of the ledger in this instance. Would you have preferred me to dogmatically stick to a “for” POV against the evidence you presented?

I have now simply listed a couple of abduction cases where hypnosis was not used to elicit the “story” to show that hypnosis is not necessary to the abduction phenomenon and that the phenomenon therefore cannot be written off merely as the product of confabulated memory under hypnosis. There is much more to the story than that. Simply, the phenomenon has not been adequately explained in mundane terms – and surely that is deserving of research - not denial, abuse and ridicule?

 

[Akhenaten]

I see now why people in this forum have such trouble in accepting evidence contrary to their point of view. If they change their POV in light of the evidence, then they will be accused of lying!

All I really contended initially was that there was a debate considering whether hypnosis is a legitimate methodology (and I linked to articles that concluded both for and against) – and there is such a debate – I have simply come down on the “against” side of the ledger in this instance. Would you have preferred me to dogmatically stick to a “for” POV against the evidence you presented?

I have now simply listed a couple of abduction cases where hypnosis was not used to elicit the “story” to show that hypnosis is not necessary to the abduction phenomenon and that the phenomenon therefore cannot be written off merely as the product of confabulated memory under hypnosis. There is much more to the story than that. Simply, the phenomenon has not been adequately explained in mundane terms – and surely that is deserving of research - not denial, abuse and ridicule?

Here's a useful link for you, Mr Rramjet.

 

[Frying Dutchmen]

I see now why people in this forum have such trouble in accepting evidence contrary to their point of view. If they change their POV in light of the evidence, then they will be accused of lying!

All I really contended initially was that there was a debate considering whether hypnosis is a legitimate methodology (and I linked to articles that concluded both for and against) – and there is such a debate – I have simply come down on the “against” side of the ledger in this instance. Would you have preferred me to dogmatically stick to a “for” POV against the evidence you presented?

I have now simply listed a couple of abduction cases where hypnosis was not used to elicit the “story” to show that hypnosis is not necessary to the abduction phenomenon and that the phenomenon therefore cannot be written off merely as the product of confabulated memory under hypnosis. There is much more to the story than that. Simply, the phenomenon has not been adequately explained in mundane terms – and surely that is deserving of research - not denial, abuse and ridicule?

Do you have me on ignore? Because I posted a paragraph from one story saying that one of victims was put under hypnosis. Is it really that hard to read your own links?

There is much more to the story than that. Simply, the phenomenon has not been adequately explained in mundane terms – and surely that is deserving of research - not denial, abuse and ridicule?

Yes, but the thing is you refuse to accept any hypothesis other then alien maybe you should I don't know get rid of your biases and look at this subject with a more open mind. That would be a start.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

I see now why people in this forum have such trouble in accepting evidence contrary to their point of view. If they change their POV in light of the evidence, then they will be accused of lying!

No, if you present cases which rely entirely on hypnosis and then claim that you never have, then you will be accused of lying.

Incidentally, as Flying Dutchman has said, one of the hypnosis-free cases you're presenting actually mentions one of the witnesses being hypnotised.

 

[Rramjet]

Do you have me on ignore? Because I posted a paragraph from one story saying that one of victims was put under hypnosis. Is it really that hard to read your own links?

You mean this case?

The Pascagoula, Mississippi - Hickson/Parker Abduction (10 Oct 1973)
(http://www.ufocasebook.com/Pascagoula.html)
(http://www.ufologie.net/htm/pascagoula.htm)

But you quoted:

” Harder and Hynek interviewed Hickson and Parker together. Harder hypnotized Hickson, but he became so frightened that the session had to be aborted. The two abductees were encouraged to take a lie-detector test, which they both passed. Harder and Hynek, both highly respected in their professions, believed the two men's story.” (bolded the relevant bit for you. Rr)​

Clearly nothing was gained under hypnosis! Their story was all from conscious recall. So I merely assumed the record stood for itself (verifying my contention that hypnosis was not used to elicit information in this case) and thus it required no direct reply to you about it.

I stated”
” There is much more to the story than that. Simply, the phenomenon has not been adequately explained in mundane terms – and surely that is deserving of research - not denial, abuse and ridicule?”

Yes, but the thing is you refuse to accept any hypothesis other then alien maybe you should I don't know get rid of your biases and look at this subject with a more open mind. That would be a start.

I have never (repeat NEVER) contented the ETH is the answer. So maybe “…you should I don't know get rid of your biases and look at this subject with a more open mind.”?

 

[Sherman Bay]

My point is (and has always been) that the alien abduction phenomenon – as a phenomenon - is real. So far no adequate explanation of why people experience alien abduction has been forthcoming.

Then this post shall be the great enlightenment you have been waiting for. But are you ready for it?

Here's the adequate explanation, which fits all known postulates perfectly. Note that the same explanation can be used to justify fairies, angels, demons, childhood fantasies and MLK in toast:

Imagination!

Imagination,
Imagination,
Take me on a trip around your mind,
If you don't mind.

Imagination,
Be my transportation.
Let my fancy fly so fancy free,
Won't you please let me:

Paint dreams, fill in the color...
Paint dreams, fill in the color scheme!


-- Music by Alan O'Day

 

[Frying Dutchmen]

You mean this case?

The Pascagoula, Mississippi - Hickson/Parker Abduction (10 Oct 1973)
(http://www.ufocasebook.com/Pascagoula.html)
(http://www.ufologie.net/htm/pascagoula.htm)

But you quoted:

” Harder and Hynek interviewed Hickson and Parker together. Harder hypnotized Hickson, but he became so frightened that the session had to be aborted. The two abductees were encouraged to take a lie-detector test, which they both passed. Harder and Hynek, both highly respected in their professions, believed the two men's story.” (bolded the relevant bit for you. Rr)​

Clearly nothing was gained under hypnosis! Their story was all from conscious recall. So I merely assumed the record stood for itself (verifying my contention that hypnosis was not used to elicit information in this case) and thus it required no direct reply to you about it.

Hardly points to that conclusion.

I stated”
” There is much more to the story than that. Simply, the phenomenon has not been adequately explained in mundane terms – and surely that is deserving of research - not denial, abuse and ridicule?”

They have been, You are the one refuses to accept that your the one that abuses and ridicules any explanation that isn't your pet theory calling things mundane terms to try to muddy the water.

I have never (repeat NEVER) contented the ETH is the answer. So maybe “…you should I don't know get rid of your biases and look at this subject with a more open mind.”?

You have but since I'm the bigger man...

I'm not going to dive into another one of your semantic battles Lets just say they are ET makes it clearer to all reading this thread. Or do you have issues with the word extra?

 

[Correa Neto]

So, Rramjet is again presenting the Vilas Boas case?
King of the Americas must be very pleased...

Conclusion- Alien chicks don't shave it.
Oh, OK, it was decades ago or maybe she was one of those women who don't shave their armpits too...
Yuck.

Its another testimony to Rramjets's and UFOlogists' as a whole poor methods and gulliblity - and this is the best case scenario.

UFOlogists! Use your brains! The odds of aliens being able to breed with humans are the same of humans being able to breed with petunias.
Extraordinary, isn't it?

And if you want to stick to UFOlogists' sexual fantasy, why messy oiled sex would be needed? Just use your alien high-tech devices to grab whatever genetic material you need from the human (stem cells, regular cells, sperm, etc.).

Oh, OK, its UFOlogists' sexual fantasy and she was an alien female sex bot built to collect sperm from a redneck...

But why not getting genetic material from the best available human stock: top-ranking athlethes, artists, intellectuals?
Oh, OK, its just UFOlogists' sexual fantasy... Oooooh... Great alien skygods! Please abduct me, seduce me, use me, abuse me, so I will lose my virginity!

 

[Rramjet]

Then this post shall be the great enlightenment you have been waiting for. But are you ready for it?

Here's the adequate explanation, which fits all known postulates perfectly. Note that the same explanation can be used to justify fairies, angels, demons, childhood fantasies and MLK in toast:

Imagination!

Unfortunately “imagination” does not explain the abduction phenomenon. Studies have shown that UFO abductees do not seem to be any more or less fantasy prone than the general population (some studies do, some studies don’t - but such equivocalness is what you would expect if there really is nothing explanatory to be found in that regard) and as UFO abductees also seem no different to the general population on any other researched psychometric, then you have to explain why some people have abduction experiences and others do not – and “imagination” just does not do it.

I stated in consideration of your quote from (http://www.ufocasebook.com/Pascagoula.html):

” Harder and Hynek interviewed Hickson and Parker together. Harder hypnotized Hickson, but he became so frightened that the session had to be aborted.​

That ”Clearly nothing was gained under hypnosis!”

Hardly points to that conclusion.

Oh, I am sorry …I had assumed you had read the paragraphs proceeding that quote you cited. For example:

As the two men began to regain their composure, they were uncertain as to what they should do. Reluctant to report their harrowing experience, they felt obligated to tell someone. Despite fearing ridicule, they telephoned Kessler Air Force Base in Biloxi. Kessler referred their problem to their local sheriff's office.

Afraid of what reaction they might get from law enforcement, they opted instead to drive to their local newspaper. Finding the office closed, they decided to take their bizarre story to the sheriff after all.​

I stated”
”There is much more to the story than that. Simply, the phenomenon has not been adequately explained in mundane terms – and surely that is deserving of research - not denial, abuse and ridicule?”

They have been…

Oh, then you will be able to support that unfounded assertion with evidence then?

You are the one refuses to accept that

I certainly do refuse to accept that an adequate explanation for the abduction phenomenon has been put forward. However as you seem convinced that it has been adequately explained - then perhaps you will be able to provide the evidence that will change my mind?

…your the one that abuses and ridicules any explanation that isn't your pet theory…

That is mere unfounded assertion. Why do you act as if you believe that the mere statement of unfounded assertion will somehow magically confer veracity on such statements?

…calling things mundane terms to try to muddy the water.

Now I simply have no idea what you are talking about. You need to support your unfounded assertions with evidence and/or logical argument. Unless you do that we are legitimately entitled to dismiss them as unfounded.

I stated:
” I have never (repeat NEVER) contended the ETH is the answer.”

You have but since I'm the bigger man...

In my opinion only a very small man would make such a claim in direct contradiction to my own statements on the matter without backing it up with evidence.

So, Rramjet is again presenting the Vilas Boas case?
King of the Americas must be very pleased...

Conclusion- Alien chicks don't shave it.
Oh, OK, it was decades ago or maybe she was one of those women who don't shave their armpits too...
Yuck.

That you would have such a reaction to the natural female form does not surprise me... and this type of attitude is precisely what women have been fighting hard against. Simply it denigrates and serves to represses them.

Its another testimony to Rramjets's and UFOlogists' as a whole poor methods and gulliblity - and this is the best case scenario.

This is simply mere unfounded assertion. It begins to seem that all debunkers have a faith based belief that the mere act of stating an unfounded assertions will somehow magically confer veracity on it.

UFOlogists! Use your brains! The odds of aliens being able to breed with humans are the same of humans being able to breed with petunias.
Extraordinary, isn't it?

What is perhaps extraordinary is your presumptive arrogance in assuming to know that aliens were involved and that the woman involved was an alien and – if aliens were directly involved – both their motivations and genetic makeup… as I say – presumptive arrogance.

And if you want to stick to UFOlogists' sexual fantasy, why messy oiled sex would be needed? Just use your alien high-tech devices to grab whatever genetic material you need from the human (stem cells, regular cells, sperm, etc.).

No, it may have been Villas Boas sexual fantasy, but just because it is reported by others does not mean that those others hold the same view. It seems to me that the debunkers are the ones who actually seem to spend an inordinate amount of time mentioning and discussing the sexual aspect of abductions – and that says much more about them than it does the Ufologists. To whit – you just cannot seem to let that aspect go…

Oh, OK, its UFOlogists' sexual fantasy and she was an alien female sex bot built to collect sperm from a redneck...

…and this is precisely what I would expect from the debunker community – ridicule and abuse! This is helpful in what way (apart from displaying your somewhat bigoted point of view to the world)?

But why not getting genetic material from the best available human stock: top-ranking athlethes, artists, intellectuals?

And now your presumptive arrogance is breathtaking. You simply denigrate those who by circumstance or choosing follow a different path in life than your presumed elites. Let’s call a spade a spade. It is such bigoted attitudes that enabled slavery, the repression of women and the holocaust.

Oh, OK, its just UFOlogists' sexual fantasy... Oooooh... Great alien skygods! Please abduct me, seduce me, use me, abuse me, so I will lose my virginity!

Now that is your sexual fantasy - and it merely points to the veracity of my claim that it is the debunkers who seem obsessed with the sexual aspect of the abduction phenomenon – not Ufologists.

Clearly such rdiculous, abusive and bigoted responses as above from the debunker community are precisely the reason why so many are both unwilling to come forward and when they do, are unable to receive the help they so obviously require.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

It's probably worth noting that the "abduction phenomenon" is far more likely to be many different phenomena which present in the same way. There's not likely to be just the one cause.

 

[Correa Neto]

You know what is actually abusive and ridicule?

A guy claiming to be a scientist and saying (among other nonsense):
Squids are fish
Evidence is evidence
There's no such thing as extraordinary evidence

Its also ridicule a guy who claims to be a scientist showing complete ignorance of descriptive geometry, perspective, experimental error and history of science, among other things.

Its ridiculous and abusive when such a person distorts other people's arguments, cherry-pick quotes and tries to use false accusations to defeat an argument.

Its ridicule and abusive such a person trying to lecture people who are real scientists.

 

[Rramjet]

It's probably worth noting that the "abduction phenomenon" is far more likely to be many different phenomena which present in the same way. There's not likely to be just the one cause.

You could be right - and I would note the same thing about the UFO phenomenon in general - I think (if we ever get around to conducting proper researrch) we will find that there are a number of different causes to all this.

 

[carlitos]

researrch

lol

 

[Akhenaten]

Now I simply have no idea what you are talking about.

It has ever been thus, despite the best efforts of many.

You need to support your unfounded assertions with evidence and/or logical argument.

You do indeed.

Unless you do that we are legitimately entitled to dismiss them as unfounded.

We have, Kemo Sabe

 

[Sherman Bay]

Unfortunately “imagination” does not explain the abduction phenomenon. Studies have shown that UFO abductees do not seem to be any more or less fantasy prone than the general population (some studies do, some studies don’t - but such equivocalness is what you would expect if there really is nothing explanatory to be found in that regard) and as UFO abductees also seem no different to the general population on any other researched psychometric, then you have to explain why some people have abduction experiences and others do not – and “imagination” just does not do it.

Imagination explains the "perceived phenomenon" perfectly. It's the only explanation that does. It also explains beliefs about fairies, Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Most kids grow out of these beliefs, but some retain their fantasies into adulthood. It's a very human thing, and doesn't require anyone to be especially "fantasy prone," just someone who wants to believe and who doesn't want to accept reality.

Since no object has ever been brought forward that could not have been made by man or found on earth naturally -- an artifact from an alien space ship -- and no proof of abductions has ever been established that is satisfactory to science, we are left with nothing but imagination.

With imagination, all things are possible. There are no limits. A fantasy doesn't have to make sense or follow any laws of the Universe. That's what makes it so fun. But it doesn't make it true.

"Imagination...take me on a trip around my mind, if you don't mind..."

 

[Rramjet]

I stated:
” Unfortunately “imagination” does not explain the abduction phenomenon. Studies have shown that UFO abductees do not seem to be any more or less fantasy prone than the general population (some studies do, some studies don’t - but such equivocalness is what you would expect if there really is nothing explanatory to be found in that regard) and as UFO abductees also seem no different to the general population on any other researched psychometric, then you have to explain why some people have abduction experiences and others do not – and “imagination” just does not do it.”

Imagination explains the "perceived phenomenon" perfectly. It's the only explanation that does.

Perhaps in those terms imagination is the only explanation needed for everything! In the real world however …perhaps you should consult the research, for I could have sworn that “sleep paralysis” was a prime contender… but why would I expect you to consult the scientific literature before making your pronouncements…

It also explains beliefs about fairies, Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.

Gee, all that academic literature on Mythologies and Theologies etc. and so on - when you had the only answer necessary all along… imagine …

Most kids grow out of these beliefs, but some retain their fantasies into adulthood. It's a very human thing, and doesn't require anyone to be especially "fantasy prone," just someone who wants to believe and who doesn't want to accept reality.

No, what we want – indeed require - is an explanation in terms of individual differences (at the very least). Why do some people experience and others not? Why do some people believe and others not? Why do some people behave and others not? THESE are the pressing questions - for it is only through answering such questions can we gain an insight, not only into phenomenology, but ourselves.

Since no object has ever been brought forward that could not have been made by man or found on earth naturally -- an artifact from an alien space ship -- and no proof of abductions has ever been established that is satisfactory to science, we are left with nothing but imagination.

…and a whole lot of multiple eyewitness, radar, photographic and film and physical trace evidence…

With imagination, all things are possible. There are no limits.

Imagine yourself flapping your arms and flying then. Are you (flying now)?

A fantasy doesn't have to make sense or follow any laws of the Universe.

The whole point is that the scientific literature has shown no propensity for fantasy proneness among abductees…

That's what makes it so fun. But it doesn't make it true.

Oh… you disappoint me … I thought you would be flying by now…

"Imagination...take me on a trip around my mind, if you don't mind..."

Around your mind? …pass.