UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2011 > Feb > Feb 3

Re: Hopkins & Jacobs

From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul>
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 12:21:33 -0500
Archived: Thu, 03 Feb 2011 08:14:13 -0500
Subject: Re: Hopkins & Jacobs

>From: Rick Nielsen <nilthchi.nul>
>To: post.nul
>Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 07:15:59 -0800 (PST)
>Subject: Re: Hopkins & Jacobs


>If any of the conclusions of Hopkins, Jacobs, Mack and others
>are in any part true, then the abductees need rescue, and the
>abductors need to be stopped.

>But what exactly are we dealing with here? No one knows for sure.

And therein lies the problem with trying to deal with abductions
in a rational manner to "stop" the activity. I think it was
acknowledge long ago by many that the act of "abducting" people
is a horrific act that should be stopped if possible. But, I'm
not sure how that could be accomplished under the circumstance.

>We've gazed at the greys. We've dreamed the reams. We've even
>experienced the experiencer's experiences.

>Is there really a 'standard abduction experience'? Or do we
>accept as 'canon' >the multitude of types of aliens and
>contacts? (You can get an idea of the many types by checking
>out the encyclopedic works of smarter folks than me, like Jerry
>Clark, et al.)

I believe there is a "standard" experience that researchers have
identified, and that's part of the mystery. My understanding is
that there are un-publicized "markers" that researchers look for
to verify certain aspects of an alleged experience. This is
similar to police investigations where they don't give all the
facts to the press. I also believe that some of the key
similarities in the abduction events relate to the descriptions
of the craft and specifics of what they recall.

>Once we decide what we're talking about, what standards do we
use to support the subjects and to interpret the interviews?

>Since we're talking about research involving human beings, we
>need standards which respect all the rights of those
>participating: We must first do no harm. We must have ethics.
>We must have real peer-review.

We have one researcher that sold his abduction case files to
Bigalow's group, which caused quite a stir a number of years
ago.  I believe there is another case where case file
information loaned by one researcher to another was publicly
released without permission, so there is certainly a need to
bring ethical behavior and "respect" to a much higher level in
the genre. I would suggest that some of the issues you've raised
apply to ufology in general, and not just to the abduction side
of the equation.

>And this is the very point that stops the ethical researchers.
>This point creates an ethical dilemma for those who want to
>continue and don't know how to resolve the matter. As we've
>seen, with Hopkins and Jacobs, there were compromises and the
>abductees were made to suffer more.

In 1992 there was a week-long Abduction Conference held at MIT,
which allowed researchers from all around the world to gather
and share information. The book "Close Encounters of the Fourth
Kind" is an author's view of the event, and the information
presented is available in a publication that can still be found,
I believe.

This field is far larger than the three primary researchers
we've mention here can account for, but they've been the most
prolific over the years in writing about the subject.  I have a
few friends who believe they are abductees, and while I'm not
necessarily convinced that they have, I can't look them in the
eye and say that they haven't. Until I can, a mystery (in my
mind) remains.

Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast



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 Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com