UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1997 > Oct > Oct 18

Re: Abduction Sat 5 Oct

From: wlmss@peg.apc.org [Lawrie Williams]
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 03:04:06 +1000 (GMT+1000)
Fwd Date: Sat, 18 Oct 1997 08:33:30 -0400
Subject: Re: Abduction Sat 5 Oct

> Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 03:40:20 -0500
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> From: Michael Wayne Malone <MWayne@bigfoot.com>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Abduction Sat 4 Oct 1997

>>> WHY DID YOU DO THIS?????????????????????
lw>>Try not to get so excited Michael.

mwm> I'm sorry if playing with the mental health of your witnesses in
   > a cavalier and dangerous manner gets me excited.

mwm>>> From this point on, any further data gained from these subjects is
   >>> tainted.

lw>> In other words, I had to give them the run-aound, tell them lies
  >> or avoid telling them the full truth.

> What full truth?  You didn't give them a "truth" you gave them
> your "belief" based on unsupported data.....

My truthful opinion.

> While you were at it, why did you hold back from giving the girl's
> parent's the "full truth" if you are so ethical and everything?

So as not to involve confidential information.

mwm>>> If they have any experiances that in any way match what you told
>>> them, there is no way of knowing the real from the imaginary planted
>>> by you.

I have been abducted, it is not like that at all. It is very hard
to lead abductees.

lw>> Absolutely untrue. If I knew what I know now based on the evidence of
>> hundreds of other abductees, I would have gained far more information
>> during my various and sundry encounter experiences.  I was preparing
>> them for whatever comes next.

mwm> Whatever.  If you can't see the basic underlying problem and the
> pure taint you've placed on this case, then you are lost to the
> realm of scientific endeavour.

I supplied the information needed to help them know what to watch for.
Who is the most scientific? Who has the biggest one? Who is reacting
in the most extreme way?

>                    ......  And if you can't see the intense
> psychological harm you could have caused your "witnessess" then
> the only thing we have to hope for is they find strong and
> talented counslers later in life......< deletia >

Thank you for the free psychiatric diagnosis.

Witness contamination has been discussed ad nauseum on many mailing
lists and newsgroups for years and years. Abductees still call it as
it is. They seem to be more emotionally labile in some cases, I grant.

I know that high profile investigators and counsellors are
informally ranked according to the use or misuse of hypnosis and the
extend to which they lead witnesses. I don't know if that has evolved
yet to a stage where you all shuffle sideways around a dining table
until the correct hierarchy is reflected in the order of seating.

Abductees are above all else just people who want honest opinions.
True, if I was still trying to prove the humanoids in saucers axiom
I could have withled that knowledge from her, but that has already
been accepted on this list. I know because I put it up and there
were no valid objections to that step forward. Remember? You were
part of the decision. Is it going too fast for you?

> ... I thought we were on a UFO discussion list, and were discussing
> ufology and abductions.  Perhaps you and I can discuss the evils of
> modern media in an approprate mailing list.

No. You were discussing how flawed information gets transmitted and
you and several other guys wanted to make me a scapegoat. You
cannot trick me that easily.

I've already taken a large Hollywood industry mailing list to task
over the dogs dinner they made of "Fire in the Sky", so I am proactive
in that area, which deserves urgent attention from UFOlogy. There is
no need to distort the appearance or behaviour of exotic entities
so why is it done? People would prefer a little more accuracy.

> As a counsler, your job wasn't to give advice, but to help the
> subject deal with the unexplainable emotional side-effects of her
> alleged abduction.

The only drama comes from you and 2 or 3 others.

> As a ufologist, you were to investigate without taint, without
> bias, and without preconcieved ideas as to the end result of your
> research.

I know exactly what I am doing.

> And as a responsible human being, you were not to scare young
> women with the worst case senerio.

There is a continuum?
1  share freely with old males,
2  With old women or young males you have to withold some data,
3  With young females you have to withold a lot more for their own good

This is ufology? Is this to be part of some code of conduct?

BTW I assure you I know of "worse cases"!

> What evidence did you have that this is how her abduction
> experience would turn out.

Plenty. Had you the same experience, you would know.

> .... Perhaps if you had recieved stronger peer review before, you
> wouldn't have made such an untrained rookie mistake.

You are my peer?

> But that aside, how objective are you in your research?

If I was dishonest with myself then I'd learn less.

> From the post, I found you to have closed your mind completely to
> everything but what you've already determined as TRUTH.

I reported a simple conversation for the benefit of science.

Lawrie Williams_______uncharacteristically reasonable

Search for other documents from or mentioning: wlmss | mwayne

[ 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