UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1997 > Oct > Oct 6

Re: Solved Abduction cases?

From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 17:53:20 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 23:00:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases?

>Date: Sat, 04 Oct 1997 14:31:34 -0700
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases?

I wrote:

>>There's an Australian abduction case --maybe someone, Chris R., can supply a
>>citation -- in which a woman, I believe, claimed to be being abducted while,
>>at the time, she was actually sitting in a car seat next to one of the
>>investigators. Seems unlikely ET was invovled in that one!

Skye (I hope I've got the right respondent) wrote:
>How do you know the investigator's perceptions were "unbroken?"
>That there wasn't a lapse of consciousness in which the abductee
>was gone?

You can always step to one side of an observation and raise another
objection -- in which case I should probably stop while I'm ahead
(time-wise, anyway).

Obviously, you missed my earlier point, so I'll reiterate it. What you're
doing is "demonizing" the aliens. Not by making them "bad" (demons per se),
but by ascribing one power after another to them until you've raised them to
the status of all-powerful, omnipotent beings.

What I tried to suggest was that you can't have it both ways. You can't
continually embue them with the power to do absolutely any and everything
(space travel, invisibility, etc.) while at the same time limiting them (in
terms of sperm & ova extraction techniques and so on). You need to go read
up on what is currently feasible in terms of terrestrial science in regard
to in vitro fertilization, genetic engineering, cloning, etc., and get back
to me. I don't have the time to do it for you.

The easy out is to further "demonize" (see previous posts about the use of
quotation marks) their alleged actions by ascribing human motives to them
(which you accuse me of doing). Thus, while they can purportedly remain
invisible if so desired, they also allow themselves to be routinely
photographed by John Velez and others. But not to worry: John Deardorff, in
his own initimable way, will have an answer for this problem as well. The
point is, if the aliens were a billion years in advance of us in terms of
aeronautics, they would probably be at least half that time along in terms
of genetic engineering as well.

>No, wait, here's one from the abduction arena: I do seem to
>recall an experience of Betty Luca in which she saw herself lying
>on a couch, paging through a magazine at the end of an abduction
>experience, meaning that perhaps the ETs had somehow fragmented
>her consciousness/body in such a way that she was two places at

You have only Betty's -- not the aliens' -- word that she even had such an
experience in the first place, unless you can claim to have been an
astralplane witness yourself to same. You might as well give us your
calculations on the number of angels (or demons) that can fit on the head of
a pin.

>Need I remind everyone that there is much about these events that
>is extremely multidimensional-seeming, and since none of us knows
>much about that, we're hardly in a position to comment on what's
>possible (or even likely) or not.  If you're going to insist on
>these events maintaining strict adherence to traditional physics,
>you're in the wrong business.

No, I'm not. You are. Because you insist on mystifying personal anecdotes,
for which no other evidence, in most cases, -- _other than the anecdote
itself, often recovered under hypnosis_ -- has been presented or confirmed,
never mind the ufologists' favorite word of choice, "documented." When
reason, common sense and "traditional" physics have all been thoroughly
exhausted, I'll be happy to consider your particular, personal brand of
multidimensional metaphysics. That exhaustion has not yet happened. The
brutal truth is that it hasn't even been remotely approached, whereas you
seem to think it's been tried in every instance and found wanting.

>Budd Hopkins has a case, from Australia I believe, in which a
>woman and her son were abducted right out of a park, "in plain
>sight" of many people, including the woman's husband who was
>taking her picture at the time. (It's an interesting picture,
>full of red haziness.)  And Linda Cortile's family has
>experienced similar events.  (And, no, I can't prove any of this
>happened, and probably neither can Budd, so get off my case!)

No, I won't get off your case. The whole point is that you can't prove it,
Budd can't prove it, and even the people who took the pictures can't prove
it. So what are you left with? Some faded photographs and anecdotes. I was
present when Budd presented this case at a MUFON symposium and, frankly, I
thought it was one of the most laughable things I'd ever seen in my life.
In essence Budd said here's a case involving UFO invisibility, and to
demonstrate same I'm going to show you an old snapshot in which a UFO
doesn't appear! Could I sell you some land in west Texas or, failing that, a
bridge in Brooklyn or San Francisco?

>I raise all this because your assumption that "ET involvement
>seems unlikely," is not all that certain a proposition.

I guess not, although I was only referencing a single case at the time, one
which you obviously knew nothing about, and, moreover, an instance of cases
which you had requested list members submit. On the other hand, if the two
investigators who were present at the time the woman said she was on a
spaceship said she wasn't, who do you go with? I opt for the odds, which
were two to one in this case. What if I had said that ET played no role in
the re-election of Bill Clinton? Would you beg to differ, as "not all that
certain a proposition"?

>OK, but your objection is based on the assumption that line is
>traveling across only the surface of one dimension.  What if it
>"travels" through to another space-time (or even to points
>outside of space-time entirely)? Then any number of possibilities
>open up.

It wasn't an objection, but an observation and comment. Your observations
and comments, on the other hand, are almost entirely incomprehensible. Even
if they were valid, my point wouldn't have changed: why does the UFO move in
a straight line from sighting to capture, examination and release in one
instance, and not do so in others?

>Doesn't make sense to our traditional ways of understanding
>things.  But obviously we're going to have to expand our thinking
>a little bit. ;-)

I don't want you to expand your thinking. That's the goddam problem. I just
want you to think in the first place.


>These people know what they are doing and they are
>doing it on an *extremely large scale*.  Therefore, I don't think
>they are "gathering samples."  They are gathering genetic
>code/product, apparently for the purpose of creating a hybrid

Says who? And if so, why do it so crudely, having already conquered
multidimensional space travel, two-places-at-once-reality and God only knows
what else? You get some human DNA (assuming you hadn't already mastered the
art of creating the desirable genes on your own), you engineer it just so,
and you get on with your life. You don't have to keep re-abducting human
males for more samples, for God's sakes! How many times do I have to say
this? A good milking of a human male probably results in something like 100
million spermatozoa. Even if you want genetic diversity, there's no need to
abduct the same male ever again. You've already got a hundred million of the
guy, you go on to someone else. _It's the apparent necessity to repeat the
same abduction scenario itself that doesn't make sense._

You might as well argue that a billion years from now, our own terrestrial
scientists, despite having conquered the mysteries of quantum mechanics and
faster than light space travel in the interval, will still somehow be
obsessed with human sexuality in terms of sperm and ova -- and feel
compelled to physically and forcefully (not to mention repeatedly) extract
same -- not yet quite having figured out how to manufacture and manipulate
same on their own. Believe me: If ET has been there and done that as far as
space and interdimensional travel is concerned, then they've been there in
terms of genetic engineering, too. In short, sober up, folks. There is
nothing we could offer them -- even if we wanted to.

>Why would they do that, gather such quantities/such diversity of
>"samples?"  Well, you don't have to go very far in our literature
>to find a hint of this.  Check out The Tower of Babel story.
>Something, and perhaps "the language" being referred to in that
>story was that of genetics, was scattered all over.  There were
>then "many voices." I strongly suspect the Greys are reassembling
>those fragments into one cohesive code, one language.  In a very
>real sense, I don't think they are creating a human-Grey hybrid
>race.  They are creating a former human-Grey hybrid race, which
>might be something else altogether.

And everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Although your Tower of Babel
analogy seems wholly appropriate here, I won't even ask what the difference
is between a "human-Grey hybrid race" and a "former human-Grey hybrid race"
because, frankly, I don't want to have to respond to same.

>I can't imagine how you assume that we are further along in
>genetic research and artificial insemination than the Greys are.
>Unless you know a lot more about the genetic work being done by
>the Greys than I do, and the difficulties therein (which I
>suspect are many), then you are hardly in a position to comment
>on it.

>Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>

So go read the terrestrial literature. Failing that, channel Zircon from
Zeta Reticuli like I do (reason, common sense and traditional physics having
failed me). That's why I'm in the position I'm in. You mere mortals never
cease to amaze me.

As a last resort, you might consider the possibility that our own genetic
engineering capabilities resulted from the recovery of the Roswell crash

SA Sasquatch

Search for other documents from or mentioning: dstacy | turel33

[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com