From: J. Maynard Gelinas <j.maynard.gelinas.nul> Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 11:57:06 -0500 Archived: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 12:42:34 -0500 Subject: Re: Hopkins & Jacobs >From: Dave Haith <visions1.nul> >To: UFO UpDates <post.nul> >Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 16:24:00 -0000 >Subject: Re: Hopkins & Jacobs >Meanwhile I'd like to ask - are we really going down the path of >denying the massive amount of alien abduction data because a >couple of researchers may have got a little carried away with >their hypnosis? >As convenient as the sceptics on this List would like it to be >that Hopkins and company invented the whole 'little greys' >scenario and we can now tuck it away for good alongwith with the >loony contactees, well I'm sorry - it ain't gonna happen! Dave, Where's the physical evidence? If abductees are regularly abducted by aliens, then there exists a target for investigation. One assumes that surveiling a sample of abductees over time ought to generate not just one instance of recorded evidence, but a plethora. Repeated again and again. Where is this evidence in the public record? I haven't seen it. Why not? At least with some UFO sightings there are multiple witness sightings, multiple simultaneous RADAR echoes, film and video recordings across a range of the visible and nonvisible EM spectrum, and even physical traces. I will remain skeptical of abduction researcher's claims until they provide enough evidence to support their assertions. Not before. -M Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp