UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2011 > Feb > Feb 16

Re: Refuting The Hopkins Jacobs Mack Synthesis

From: Tyler Kokjohn <TKOKJO.nul>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 14:00:48 -0700
Archived: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 07:27:26 -0500
Subject: Re: Refuting The Hopkins Jacobs Mack Synthesis


>From: J. Maynard Gelinas <j.maynard.gelinas.nul>
>To: post.nul
>Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 19:00:46 -0500
>Subject: Re: Refuting The Hopkins Jacobs Mack Synthesis

>>From: Tyler Kokjohn <TKOKJO.nul>
>>To: <post.nul>
>>Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2011 10:37:08 -0700
>>Subject: Re: Refuting The Hopkins Jacobs Mack Synthesis

>Further, I would argue that these questions of fact will not be
>resolved by the taking of additional testimony. What's necessary
>to move forward is the use of new technologies and instruments
>able to sort fact from opinion and personal interpretation.
>Collecting more personal testimony just continues what for so
>long hasn't worked. That said, I question your continuing focus
>on Dr. Jacobs and Mr. Hopkins. Since you have apparently allied
>yourself with an ex-wife of Hopkins and another woman claiming
>ethical violations by Jacobs, why would you want their data? Why
>prod Jacobs in this way? And, as has been made plain on list,
>why bother with Hopkins at all given what some say is a very
>serious illness he currently faces?

>Perhaps a better question to ask is: Why don't YOU do this? You
>have the resources, an academic institution with access to the
>requisite equipment, and a clearly falsifiable theory. Instead
>of hoping for Jacobs to pursue this research - never mind that
>it's not his specialty, whereas it is yours - why don't you put
>together a good study, collect and analyze the data, and then
>publish it?

>That said, I do have one speculative question to consider:
>Assuming that the Hopkins-Jacobs-Mack synthesis and analysis is
>correct, that biological extraterrestrial aliens are, in fact,
>using superior technology to abduct humans in order to pursue
>the modification of humanity on Earth, are there _other_
>technical procedures than genetic that could be used? I'm
>thinking specifically of epigenetic shifts that might result in
>morphological changes to an organism - perhaps even changes that
>could be passed down subsequent generations - without there
>being a detectable genetic change for DNA analysis. Is this
>possible? I'm honestly not certain.

Mr. Gelinas -

Once again, some excellent questions and insights. I hope you
find my answers satisfactory.

My understanding is that Mr. Hopkins may not be conducting
research, although he does seem able to write. Perhaps he will
outline his thoughts soon, perhaps never. I wish him a speedy
recovery from whatever health problems he may have. Dr. Jacobs
may still be actively working, but I do not know this for a fact
either. Why do I want their data? I don't. Why prod them in this
way? Plain and simple - they put forth the hypotheses, one or
both of them (if possible) has a responsibility to supply the
supporting hard data to confirm the truth of some rather
sweeping claims.

Your question as to why I do not do this myself is excellent. I
could deflect and evade by telling you (truthfully) I am not
funded for such work, restrictions regarding use of lab
resources, etc. But I will be blunt and tell you that more than
several legitimate operational concerns, it is a matter of hard-
earned experience. I recognize a hairball when I see one. And I
am unwilling to take away from other work to assume a primary
leadership role gathering data attempting to prove someone
else's hypothesis that my gut feeling tells me is completely
wrong in the first place. You probably suspected as much,
because if these harrowing hypotheses are correct, it is an
almost instant Nobel prize (and an existential threat to
humanity). Please note I am not saying I will not help, I will
contribute if requested, subject to limits regarding the precise
nature of the request. However, the primary burden (time,
expense and effort) to prove their assertions rests properly and
squarely on the hypothesis proposers.

Your next question literally leads into new territory and also
cycles back to ideas already discussed. In theory, I think there
may be many ways to manipulate human genetics or cells.
Epigenetic modification is one, and we could probably scheme up
quite a few more like autocatalytic proteins. Those would leave
few tangible genetic traces (although I think there are ways to
run them to ground) and I bet you see the issue clearly -
failing a definitive demonstration of its validity through
direct genetic evidence, is the original hypothesis ever truly
falsifiable through a lack of supporting evidence? There are so
many ways to shift the argument if the data run contrary to
desires it can be impossible to conclude the matter. What I
foresee is this - investigators finding themselves mired in a
situation in which positive corroborating data cannot ever seem
to be obtained. That will decidedly undermine the original
hypothesis, but technically not kill it. So, after much effort,
an unwary altruistic investigator could end up right back in the
midst of a you can't disprove it situation.

I like your idea of seeking alternative funding sources for the
work. The reality is that mainstream science is disinterested in
the area and options are limited. Along this line, you might
look at the work of Lloyd Pye who is now creatively attacking an
equally complex issue. His determination and courage are
impressive and exemplary.

There is another thing to mull over - the times are changing. In
a not too distant future, third generation sequencing
technologies are projected to bring costs of determining entire
human genomic sequences to under 1,000 US dollars. And that may
usher in a new situation in which genomic data are employed more
routinely in medicine. What does that imply? As genomic
sequences are acquired routinely, it sets up a situation in
which a hybrid might be revealed by accident, vast datasets
could be mined to reveal suspicious alterations or investigators
(taking care to safeguard subject confidentiality completely)
could delve into direct research far more easily. It will become
difficult for independent hybrids to avoid detection while
becoming steadily easier for investigators to obtain
comprehensive genetic data. The day will soon dawn when
individuals may find it tough to propagate frightening
hypotheses in the absence of corroborating data. By the way, did
you know the entire human genomic sequence is available to the
public in its entirety (free)? Any investigator today with a
belief he/she has an adulterated gene sequence in hand may
compare their data to the human standard immediately. Soon, we
may well have a similar capacity for complete personal genomes.
And that could change a lot of things.

Prior to hearing the terrible Emma Woods allegations, I had zero
interest in alien abductions. But her story made me ask what the
hell was going on. I can't do much about a lot of what may or
may not have transpired with her, but felt it was time to point
out some directions to take scientifically that had not yet
seemed to have been considered that could yield progress
regarding the basis of this mystery. Perhaps understanding will
come with the sudden revelation of unequivocal genetic data.
More likely I feel that comprehending alien abductions will
necessitate a frustrating process of elimination and be long in
coming. At least there exists a starting point in my view.

I am grateful that UFO UpDates has allowed me to offer my
opinions and thankful that individuals like you read and
consider them. Still, they are opinions and as such must
ultimately bow to the facts. I hope that Dr. Jacobs and Mr.
Hopkins will come forward with data and/or explanations.
Regardless, ultimately the field will have to forge ahead
without them one day. When and how these investigators leave
things still remains their choice.


Best wishes and thank you for your thoughts.

Tyler



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 Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com