UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2002 > Jun > Jun 4

Re: Fewer Abductions? - Velez

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2002 04:51:39 -0400
Fwd Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002 16:15:13 -0400
Subject: Re: Fewer Abductions? - Velez

 >From: Will Bueche <willb3d@hotmail.com>
 >To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2002 20:46:45 -0400
 >Subject: Re: Fewer Abductions?

 >>Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2002 16:29:43 -0400
 >>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
 >>From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
 >>Subject: Fewer Abductions?


 >>I really have no idea why
 >>the number of reports is way down. What I do know is; they
 >>_are_ down and that that means something. Possibly something


Hello Will,

You wrote:

 >Awareness of this came to us at Dr. Mack's organization from the
 >experiencers whom Dr. Mack has remained in touch with (some for
 >many, many years).

Interesting but not surprising that it should come from the
experiencers first. In my own life I have not had any
'interactions' for quite some time now. Even the frequency of
'sightings has dwindled down to near nothing. And that after an
extended period of high activity/frequency. Among the members of
the AIC group there are only one or two "frequent fliers" left
who still report any 'current' activity. Seems that thankfully
all is 'quiet on the Western Front' for many experiencers these

(*For those who may not know 'who' Will Bueche is; he is the
former webmaster for John Mack's PEER website. When I ran Budd's
Intruders Foundation website we were 'counterparts' to each
other and I have communicated with him on and off for many
years. In spite of some purely philosophical differences, I like
and respect Will very much.)

 >These personal reports of decreased contact seemed more common
 >than the occasional ebb that people have reported off and on in
 >their lives. Far more importantly, the decrease this time was
 >accompanied by the experiencers sensing or feeling that a large
 >part of the effort has concluded. I use the words "sensing or
 >feeling" because I do not beleive anyone put it into words
 >beyond that. But the feelings were strong.

I have heard those same thoughts/feelings being expressed by
others too. Although it is tough to properly 'weight' such
information. I have a tendency put stuff like that on a back-
burner until some corroboration comes along. That is what
motivated the post in the first place. With your exposure to,
and experience at PEER, your observations and comments have
genuine value here in this discussion. That makes three major
(abduction) data gathering venues that we have heard from.
(CUFOS, PEER, AIC/'old' Intruders Foundation.)

*It would be nice to hear from whoever is running the current
incarnation of the IF website. I would be curious to know if
they too have noticed a significant drop in 'new' reports. And
although he never participates, I know that David Jacobs reads
this List. I'd love to hear from him on this issue.

I'm going to e-mail Debbie (Jordan) Kauble shortly and inquire
if the same thing is happening over at her busy/popular
abduction related website. I'll let you know what she says via
this List/thread if I can get a 'timely' response from her.

 >On a personal note, it is potentially a little disturbing to
 >speculate why the 'alien presence' (using quotes to convey alien
 >as meaning unknown) felt it neccesary to wrap things up now;

Which is why - other than using it as a 'hook' at the opening of
the post - I refrained from doing so. I was careful to qualify/
categorize such a discussion as pure speculation.

BTW, I always wrap quotes around the word 'alien' myself and for
the same reason. :)  Keeping an open mind free of dogma is a
full-time job.

 >Then again,
 >maybe they were able to wrap it up for a less nervousness
 >inducing reason: this seems to be coming after a large number
 >(how many? I mean only in relation to our group, not a
 >statistically valid sample) of women experiencers said they felt
 >that the hybrid project had at last been perfected, after many
 >problems. So perhaps that is all that needed to be accomplished:
 >the birth of a new race. Who knows.

Who knows indeed. But all possibilities should be considered.
Even if only as a part of a process of speculative extrapolation
that is based on existing data/theories. Mack, Hopkins, Jacobs
et al all do just that every time they publish a new book on the
subject. No harm in indulging in a bit of it ourselves from time
to time. We may be mere 'front-line' grunts but based on our own
years of dedicated hard work, our bleats have some value as

 >(Man, it sickens me how much we
 >don't know about how telepathy and other forms of connection,
 >such as empathy and even feelings, work).

Double-edged sword. There _are_ legitimate privacy issues
involved. But I suspect that most people are simply scared to
death of that kind/level of intimacy Will.

It means (literally) opening up the contents of their minds
(soul) to the scrutiny of another. Many dread the mere thought
of standing mentally naked for fear of having all their little
secrets exposed. Those of us who do not keep 'secrets' or lead
'double lives' have no fear of such exposure. I figure we are a
part of a very small minority that would actually welcome such a
state of affairs.

 >I agree that we are entering a new era. The question is, what is
 >to come? Something different, certainly. But what?
 >Some have made speculations of open contact; Whitley Strieber
 >called it "social contact" in a recent online editorial and he
 >described a potential scenario that he thought he had been told
 >by someone who was in his house one night (not exactly a
 >Communion-like experience, rather, he thought he'd gone
 >downstairs during the night and had a conversation with
 >someone.). The uncanny part of this - a part which should undue
 >anyone's particular sentiments regarding Strieber's honesty - is
 >that the same information had been received a couple months
 >earlier by one of our experiencers.

I don't give _any_ 'channeled' information two cents worth of
credence, but it is interesting and thought-provoking
information nonetheless. Food for thought.

 >Will whatever came to visit simply go away having completed
 >whatever they may have been doing, or might they decide to be
 >away for so long as to become a myth? If so, what a shame, for
 >that would mean we really never managed to grasp what was going
 >on, and maybe don't deserve to know, having proven ourselves far
 >too capable of deluding ourselves into blindness to what we do
 >not wish to acknowledge. But if we have managed to figure out
 >even the basic framework of what has gone on in our time, then I
 >hope that we may have an opportunity to _know_ that our "dreams"
 >were the stuff reality is made of.

It would be a shame, and IMHO it is a grave injustice every time
an experiencer/abductee goes to the grave without ever knowing
the 'why' of it all. I'd like some *answers _before_ I depart
this mortal coil.

*Although I sometimes fear that 'maybe' we are better off not

Warm regards,

John Velez

[ 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