From: David Cherniack <davidc.nul> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:48:15 -0500 Archived: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 12:42:49 -0500 Subject: Re: Woods/Jacobs - A Salient But Missing Point >From: Gene Steinberg <gene.nul> >To: post.nul >Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 07:49:03 -0700 >Subject: Re: Woods/Jacobs - A Salient But Missing Point >1. 'Emma Woods' is a deceiver. She posted messages supporting >herself in our forums (and elsewhere I understand) under a fake >name, other than the fake name she is already using. Wearing the >mask of anonymity, she has turned herself into a celebrity of >sorts as the alleged abused victim, with a Web site, thousands >of e-mails, message board posts, magazine articles, and radio >appearances. I'm sorry to say that this conclusion is also supported by the transcripts of the phone call session she has now allowed to be published on another site, (even though the recordings do not belong to her) whose author liberally quotes from posts here without permission, thus showing his diminished sense of ethical standards. Nevertheless we can thank the scurvy bloghard because the transcripts clearly show the she knew that the MPD suggestion would be implanted before the hypnosis begins. However in her unsolicited mass six-part e-mail of February 12, 2010 she states: "Dr. Jacobs did not ask me beforehand whether he could do this to me and I did not know that he was going to do it. I realized at the time that it was intended for the 'hybrids' benefit, but because I was hypnotized..." Clearly not true. And I'm sure if she ever did manage to launch a law suit David Jacob's lawyer would have a field day questioning her honesty. 'Emma' whoever she is. would seem to be a profoundly disturbed individual and David Jacobs is a profoundly easy target. His conclusions about the abduction phenomenon are at a minimum controversial, and at a maximum, quite possibly delusional. Nevertheless, when I interviewed him for UFOs: The Secret History I came to the opinion that he sincerely believed he was warning the world about a real threat, and it was clear he had been terrified by the the messages posing a danger to him and his family. Should he have been more questioning of the veracity of his conclusions? I think so. Very little about the ontological nature of the abduction phenomenon is certain from my point of view, other than the reality of the experience to the experiencer. Indeed there may be many different kinds of experiences that are being wrapped together under one heading. But I would also grant that researching such profoundly anomalous experiences can be precarious to one's mental equilibrium. Should he have been more careful of his choice of subjects? Little doubt about that one. Nevertheless, I've found him to be honest, which I can't say for 'Emma' and friends, many of whom are just hard core skeptics looking for any excuse to bring Jacobs, and by association, Hopkins, down. That some ufologists feel the need to defend the honour of a wronged damsel in distress is gallant indeed, but perhaps they should pick a more deserving subject for their chivalrous tendencies. And as for 'Emma' I hope she'll realize that revenge is poor medicine and get the help she needs, rather than relying on the support of those who only want to use her. And finally, as others have observed, it's a shame her annonymous ramblings are allowed to seed this list. ---------- AllinOneFilms.com --------- Visit the new site 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