UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1997 > Oct > Oct 9

Re: Solved Abduction cases?

From: Dennis <dstacy@texas.net>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 22:08:27 -0500 (CDT)
Fwd Date: Thu, 09 Oct 1997 00:37:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Solved Abduction cases?

>From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
>To: "'UFO UpDates - Toronto'" <updates@globalserve.net>
>Subject: RE: UFO UpDate: Re: Solved Abduction cases?
>Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 10:04:42 -0400

>Supposedly they make women cuddle hybrid babies. They invent
>games to make children practice telekinesis. They create r
>elationships, bringing abductees together (Linda and Richard,
>remember?). They deliver environmental messages, which even
>if they're not genuine might involve a study of our reactions. They
>do the procedure David Jacobs labelled "mindscan," fastening their
>big black eyes on ours, and somehow entering our minds.

>Again, Dennis...you don't have to believe any of this goes on. But
>it's all in the abduction literature, and outlines a scenario in
>which the aliens cultivate relationships with us. They may also
>be using all the advanced technology you decide they ought to
>have -- while reverting to elementary procedures to make sure
>we know what's going on.

>Time to retire that tired old Vallee argument.

>Greg Sandow


Greg:

Who could forget Linda and Richard? The trouble with Tribbles and
the latter, though, is that, aliens and Linda aside, no one else
has ever peered deep into his eyes.

As for "it's all in the abduction literature"...I would say
that's precisely the problem, as opposed to any sort of
"solution." Corso is in the UFO literature, too, but that in no
way makes him any more believable, even by as much as one little
iota.

The fact of the matter is that if you go back and read Eddie
Bullard's classic study of the then (circa 1987) existing UFO
abduction literature, you'll find that it's undergone some not so
subtle and significant mutations in the decade since his analysis
was published. The most obvious of these is the fact that, in
1987, _there was no such thing as a hybrid baby,_ not one, out of
the some 300 cases in the literature that Bullard looked at. In
addition, one of the eight stages that Bullard identified, the
Tour (of the ship), focused mainly on technological aspects, such
as the "bridge" or the power plant. That's now been replaced by
the so-called "Nursery." In addition, Bullard's "Examination"
stage of the time had little or nothing sexual about it, and we
all know what that's been replaced by, don't we? The types
(species?) of aliens allegedly involved have exploded
exponentially as well. And while I'd have to go back and check my
Bullard to be absolutely sure, I suspect the much bruited but
never confirmed "implant" falls into the same category.

So where did the abrupt -- in less than a decade -- changes come
from, the aliens themselves, or a complex interaction between the
experiencer and the investigator, with much unbridled hypnosis
thrown in for good measure? In other words, do we see a real
change in the alien program (progrom?), or do we see influences
that were rife throughout society at the same time, ie, child
abuse, abortion anxiety, political correctness over sexual abuse,
missing children, concerns over global warming, etc., merely
reflected, or made manifest in the abduction literature, as any
sociologist worth his salt would no doubt argue?

The majority of these new elements were introduced into the
literature by first Hopkins and then Jacobs. John Mack, for
instance, took essentially some of their same case pool and came
up with an entirely different "literature," one which included
past lives lived as aliens or hybrid aliens. At Roswell this past
July, Mack said something to the effect that "15 minutes spent in
the presence of the aliens was worth 15 years of meditation." Leo
Sprinkle and John Salter (now going under the name of John Hunter
Grey, if memory serves) seem to think that being abducted is
pretty groovy, too. It's also in the abduction literature that
"one in forty of us" has been abducted. Also in the abduction
literature: Strieber, Jordan, Boylan, Haley, Wilson, Turner,
Hill, Walton, Collings, Jamerson, and so on.

So what does "abduction literature" _mean_ -- in any meaningful
sense, that is? Do you want me to believe all of it, and then try
to make sense of it? Or am I allowed to say, "No, I'm sorry, but
both you (the abductee) and you (the nominal investigator) are
going to have to come up with something more convincing in the
way of circumstantial evidence before I believe any of it"?

The problem with the abduction "literature" is, mainly, that it's
just that -- literature, stories, anecdotes, tales told by who
knows who, full of sound and fury, sex and circumstance, pomp and
paranoia, but in the end signifying nothing, nothing that any of
us can lay hands on, anyway.

As for the real abduction literature, my advice would be to wait
for Don DeLillo's next novel. Maybe he'll give it the treatment
we've all been waiting for -- and no doubt richly deserve.

Dennis



Search for other documents from or mentioning: dstacy | gsandow

[ 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