                          Abduction Digest, Number 83
 
                           Thursday, January 7th 1993
 
     (C) Copyright 1992 Paranet Information Service.  All Rights Reserved.
 
Today's Topics:
 
                             Re: Abduction Digest 81
                                  Delaware Talk
                                 False abductees

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: uu3.psi.com!david
Subject: Re: Abduction Digest 81
Date: 29 Dec 92 03:24:16 GMT

From: David L Jarvis <david@dynamix.com>

Directed to David Jacobs:

Greetings David ... I'd like to comment on a few replies you've posted to
other individuals ... I'll state my intentions up front, intelligent
debate, period ... I do consider myself a skeptic, but in the true nature
of the word I am very open-minded and do not allow the beliefs/values of
others fog my analysis (scientists telling us all 'it isn't possible' etc)
So with that ...                  

+ From: David.Jacobs@p0.f21.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (David Jacobs)
+ Subject: Linda case
+ Date: 7 Dec 92 07:25:50 GMT
+ 
+     John,
+   Unfortunately, Budd does not have a book contract at the present time but he
+ is busy trying to put the enormous complexity of the case into logical order
+ in order to publish it.  This is a case that deserves a book to do it justice
+ and I hope that he eventually does publish it.  He is coming out with an

Stand on the other side of that statement, say, from the perspective of
someone not involved in the field other than as a consumer (but someone who
is trying to research and find some answers).  
Do you hear how that sounds???  'This case deserves a book ...'  
Sure it does, but is that the motive for keeping quiet about it all?
Why is it the only way someone like me gets to learn anything about this
field called UFOlogy is by buying your books?  (or subscribing to any one
of the numerous magazines/journals, one of which you list below)

+ article in the next (?) MUFON UFO JOURNAL on one of the witnesses to the event.
+ After that, I hope that he can publish the material as a book. Budd has spent
+ nearly two years researching this case.  The amount of time and energy he has
+ put into it have been enormous.  As all serious UFO researchers know, you do
+ not go into this line of endeavor to get rich.

Really now?  So, publishing books, making the rounds as guest speaker for
all the UFO conferences, special-guest tv appearances, lectures, magazine
articles ... all that, is for what?  If it *wasn't* to make money, then why
won't Budd come out public (read: free) with all the information about this
case?  Why wait to publish a book about it?  
Again, from the 'consumer' point of view (at least from one who's even
minutely aware), it looks pretty obvious.  

On another topic, I've always wanted to ask you and Budd a question:
Do you perform hypnosis/regression on possible abductees yourselves?          
I understand that Budd is an artist/sculptor (?) and you are a History
professor, so my obvious question was, what qualifications do either of you
have to not only extract and extrapolate, but also to interpret the 
information contained in the minds of your subject?  
(if I remember my reading of Hopkins 'Intruders' he indicated he 
performed hypnosis on subjects himself)

Best Regards,

#----------------------------------------------------------------------#
#          David L. Jarvis                 SOFTWARE  /                 #
#          david@dynamix.com                       /  DYNAMIX          #
#----------------------------------------------------------------------#





--------------------------------------------------------------------


From: Anson.Kennedy@p0.f25.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Anson Kennedy)
Subject: Delaware Talk
Date: 30 Dec 92 05:57:00 GMT

[This is also to David Jacobs.]

Regarding the "wiring" of abductees in order to obtain hard data of an
abduction:

I've seen that David Jacobs (and others) have noted that whenever monitoring
equipment is used on abductees, the abductions stop.  Then, when the equipment
is removed (or turned off, or malfunctions - for whatever reason) the
abductions start up again. I can think of two explanations for this phenomenon:
The (alleged) aliens are aware of the monitoring attempts and do not abduct
people when they could be "caught in the act;" or the abductees monitored are
not actually being abducted, that is their abductions are psychological
manifestations (fantasy-proneness or whatever).

First, if you (or anyone else) can think of any other possibilities, I'd be
interested in hearing them.

Second, I have a suggestion which may help eliminate or confirm the second
possibility (that the abductions in question are psychological). Has any
attempt been made to monitor an abductee without his (or her) knowledge, i.e.
with "hidden cameras?" One approach *might* be to have two cameras, one the
abductee knows about and one of which he is unaware. Then the first camera can
be disconnected, with the abductee's knowledge (and with some plausible
pretense), and the second one left active. If he then reports an abduction
which the second camera did not record, then it would seem safe to state that
the event was fantasy. If, on the other hand, he reports an abduction and it
*is* recorded, then that would be the ever-so-elusive proof. If, on the third
hand :-) , he reports no abduction, then the test is inconclusive.

The main problem I have with this expriment is the idea of deceiving the
subject. However, I can think of no easy way of settling the issue of
monitoring otherwise.

Comments?

                                     --- Anson

--  
Anson Kennedy - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Anson.Kennedy@p0.f25.n1012.z9.FIDONET.ORG



--------------------------------------------------------------------


From: David.Jacobs@p0.f21.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (David Jacobs)
Subject: False abductees
Date: 30 Dec 92 08:09:43 GMT


   Jim, sorry for the delay in ansering your Dec. 6, messsage.  I fully  agree
that we need to know more about those people who claim to be  abductees and who
are not.  You will be doing us all an important service  by publishing your
material about this case.  We have to learn to  separate the wheat from the
chaff by rigorous methods.  Congratulations  on the excellent leg work that
you have put forward for your case!

--  
David Jacobs - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: David.Jacobs@p0.f21.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG


*******************************************************************************
Submissions                                          abduct@scicom.alphacdc.com
Administrative requests                      abduct-request@scicom.alphacdc.com
FTP archive                           grind.isca.uiowa.edu:/info/paranet/abduct
Permission to distribute                             Michael.Corbin@paranet.org
Private mail to Paranet/Fidonet users            firstname.lastname@paranet.org
UUCP gateway                                             {ncar,isis,csn}!scicom
********************End**of**the**Abduction**Newsletter************************

