The Anatomy of an Alien Abduction

reply to post by cripmeister

You never watched the X-Files?

Yeah, I've watched a few episodes over the years. But I learnt maybe 1% of what I know about abductions from the X-Files. It would also require a person to have watched a fair few episodes of the X-Files (assuming the episodes are fairly informative - I can't really remember). Further, if I were going to make up an abduction story, I know I would add a whole lot of ridiculous things that sound cool. I believe if these people were actually spouting fantasies, there would be so much variation and fantastical aspects to these stories that it would be utterly impossible to pull any sort of corroborating information from these stories. But that isn't what we see, The Threat and Taken go hand in hand, both corroborating each other and providing the same old information, as do many of the abduction accounts posted on ATS. The most coincidental thing by far though, is that each genuine sounding story will contain multiple aspects of an abduction that are commonly reported, but yet don't contain a bunch of discrepancies such as purple bird aliens. The cases that do describe these fantastical events are usually lacking any signs found in genuine accounts, and are clearly just hoaxes.

BTW, did you ever accuse that female ATS abductee (the one who had eggs taken from her during one abduction and a sack removed from her during another) of watching too much X-Files?

After that incident I styarted looking up aliens, and the whole abduction thing, and i realized I wasn't alone with this, many women had their babies taken from them for hybrid purposes, i was shocked, terrified and upset. I was made fun of, and ridiculed by people who didn't know me, they said for me to stop watching the x-files, and i have to admit I am not an x-file girl, i can't stand that show, in fact before this I wasn't interested in aliens at all!

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
It would obviously be based in on the percentage of the surveys with answers that strongly indicated they were abductees.

And what was the criteria he used to determine what strongly indicated a person was an abductee?

Originally posted by WhizPhizthis whole topic is far from solid as it is.

And yet you still insist it to be an objective reality.

Originally posted by WhizPhizIt is not reliable in the sense the majority of information acquired from abductees should be trusted, but is is some what reliable in the sense that a portion of what they say is potentially factual. We can also use certain techniques which increase the reliability of the information by a considerable degree.

And how do you do that when you cannot trust the information in the first place?

reply to post by WingedBull

And what was the criteria he used to determine what strongly indicated a person was an abductee?

Common things such as missing time, floating through wall, excessive UFO sightings, sudden sleep syndrome, things of that nature.

And how do you do that when you cannot trust the information in the first place?

You build a body of reports and work out all the common factors of an alien abduction. You then look at all the reports containing these factors and assess their validity. I personally feel these commonalities aren't the result of cultural influence and memes. I'm not 100% sure of that, but I am fairly certain. As I said, I'm not trying to prove anything here, and I'm not claiming hypnosis is "reliable". But I have done all I can to provide alternative accounts not derived from hypnosis, I've also done all I can to show how hypnosis isn't completely invalid, and also that the methods can be strengthened. I've done all I can to point out the similarities and also how these events actually effect people in real life. You are continuing to argue hypnosis is unreliable when I've clearly agreed with you many times now. You are absolutely ignoring every other aspect of this and attacking all the weakest points over and over again. Lets move the discussion along already.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
I've also done all I can to show how hypnosis isn't completely invalid, and also that the methods can be strengthened.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
You are continuing to argue hypnosis is unreliable when I've clearly agreed with you many times now.

You can't have it both ways. Hypnosis is in fact, completely invalid. The issue is that confabulated recall and FMS cannot be qualified from actual recall (if there is any at all).

Regular recall from memory is also fraught with issues: it is also possible for cultural contamination to intrude as well as other issues regarding the way memory actually works. Your mind is not a DVR where you can pull up a situation and replay it. The mind reconstructs memory - and that's what you recall.

Not to be missed here is a significant problem often found in the outliers data: often than not, experiences of "abduction" are said to have a feeling of an altered state of consciousness. It's widely reported that experiencers have seen "visionary" episodes brought on by "alien" contact. So clearly, we have a phenomena that can drastically effect human perception.

To that end, it's very difficult to correlate an experience because like it or not, many are tailor made and personal to the individual. The notion of a "typical abduction scenario" in this framework is absurd. There isn't one. What is typical is the recall from the hypnotic procedure - that procedure has been widely circulated and is now part of the public culture. This is why you find few correlative aspects from say, India, or Russia.

To me, this points to a phenomena capable of skinning itself with the cultural filter of whomever it interacts with. That's the reason for infighting as to the nature of the phenomenon - everyone knows what they experienced, but that doesn't always translate across boundaries of culture.

This is only one nail in the coffin that the abduction phenomena is related to the ETH. There's plenty more to that as well - for instance that extraterrestrials could traverse whatever distance or overcome the obstacles to get here. Think about the level of sophistication it would take.

Now, think about the stereotypical "abduction" experience...packed with needles and probes, implants and hands on fetus extraction, etc. Compare that to the base level of the premise, that these are ultra advanced ETs - and you'll see how absurd the notion of needles and probes are. It's ridiculous on the face of it.

This is only one example, that this is far more complex an issue than has previously been treated by the mainstream ufological community. There is a cultural aspect that cannot be ignored - however doesn't fit into the preconceived notions of "abductionists" - so it's been ignored and shoved to the back, when it ought to be examined and put into play - even if we don't know exactly where it leads us. Yes, it can make it harder to accept or more difficult to think about - and to my own way of thinking it's been ignored in large part to one problem: people don't want to think too much. They want the Reader's Digest version.

And that version while woefully inaccurate is easier to accept and discuss than cultural filters and the nature of human perception - it also sells books and lecture tickets, and feeds more into campfire stories than actual dissection and examination of what possibly is really going on under the veil of what we know as "alien abduction".

The experience is likely in my opinion, a symptom of something much larger - and by that I do not mean mental illness. I mean bigger and more complex phenomenon, which makes us critically examine our own perceptions and the nature of reality. That could after all be, what the enigma is doing: evolving human perception to a greater degree, and forcing us at fear-point to look deeper and evaluate past the normal black and white world we live in.

reply to post by jritzmann

You can't have it both ways. Hypnosis is in fact, completely invalid.

No, it would be completely invalid if it weren't capable of collecting factual memories from a person.

EDIT: You know what I find to be ridiculously absurd. This thread only has 16 flags after a whole day, it took me several days to put together and is surely the largest thread covering the abduction phenomena on ATS. Yet when you or WingedBull make a post you receive at least one star almost immediately. It's amazing. Here I am thinking no one is reading this thread but you guys have the magical ability to receive instant stars. This forum is so one sided it's not funny.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
No, it would be completely invalid if it weren't capable of collecting factual memories from a person

It's completely invalid from using this as a memory retrieval tool. Why? Because confabulation cannot be separated from any assemblance of true recollection. We have absolutely no idea what is, and what is not, actual memory.

That means, as a tool, it's completely invalid. The data does not pass the rules of evidence, and is to be discarded if we are to move forward with better options.

Hypnosis as a whole is a behavior modification tool - not a method for recovering memory. I'd say looking at the UFO alien abduction issue, it's behavior modification aspect has worked, as many are under the wrongful impression that their memories from hypnosis represent actual memory.

The real danger here is that to them - it IS real memory. This is the dangerous precedent of hypnosis: it is creating false memories that are every bit as real to the individual as actual memory, and perhaps more strong than real memory because they are visually compelling.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
Yet when you or WingedBull make a post you receive at least one star almost immediately. It's amazing. Here I am thinking no one is reading this thread but you guys have the magical ability to receive instant stars. This forum is so one sided it's not funny.

Getting agitated when people calmly don't agree with you, and give succinct reasons why based on professional psychology and the nature of memory and hypnosis, isn't really helping your promoted viewpoint. It's the sign of a weak argument and shows you have more of a belief system in place for yourself which is being questioned and systematically broken down.

And, I can tell you it's far from the largest abduction thread on ATS. It's also far from the most critically thought out premise.

This is UFOlogy's #1 problem: it's become a belief system for many based upon faulty and questionable practices and ethics of research...and houses of cards that have been built upon shaky or non-existent foundations. There is a phenomenon. However it's been presented by in large by people who look only at surface level details and rarely, if ever, go outside paranormal circles to garner their information. This has given rise to a belief system that is horribly inaccurate and discounts or outright ignores issues that can ultimately help us get closer to some better questions.

No one has answers. We desperately need better questions, and we need to dismiss nonsensical theories that have not given us better direction, nor deeper understandings.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
No, it would be completely invalid if it weren't capable of collecting factual memories from a person.

The fact the patient is unable to tell which memories are real and those that are confabulated renders hypnosis invalid.

Neither you nor the abductionists can tell us how one distinguishes between real and contrived memories.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
This thread only has 16 flags after a whole day, it took me several days to put together and is surely the largest thread covering the abduction phenomena on ATS. Yet when you or WingedBull make a post you receive at least one star almost immediately. It's amazing. Here I am thinking no one is reading this thread but you guys have the magical ability to receive instant stars. This forum is so one sided it's not funny.

Whining does not make for a very convincing argument. You have more flags in one thread than I have total. What was that you were saying about being one-sided?

reply to post by jritzmann

No one has answers. We desperately need better questions, and we need to dismiss nonsensical theories that have not given us better direction, nor deeper understandings.

Then go ahead and dismiss it! But don't try and tell me or others what we can and cannot dismiss. I'll decide that on my own thank you.

reply to post by WingedBull

You have more flags in one thread than I have total. What was that you were saying about being one-sided?

You have started two threads. I don't really care about how many flags this thread has, what I am saying is, the number of flags was much lower than expected. The only people really posting are a few of you skeptics and me, but yet there are also others reading this thread staring your posts almost instantly. Yeah, I must be crazy, but I have watched it happen several times now. Here I thought I was posting on a conspiracy forum where at least a few people might like to have some extended discussion involving alien abduction, but it seems more like people around here only care about the most mundane of cases and UFO evidence. The same things are rehashed over and over again but continue to receive recognition, and a thread like this will be mainly ignored and filled with extreme skepticism. If I wanted a forum full of hard skeptics I wouldn't have posted at a website where the discussion is supposedly going to lean in favor of conspiracy and cover-up. I thought people around here would be quite opened minded to the idea of alien abduction, but the reality seems to be anything but that.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
Then go ahead and dismiss it! But don't try and tell me or others what we can and cannot dismiss. I'll decide that on my own thank you.

Look at who is dismissing what or the reasons for it. Critics of memory-recovery via hypnosis base that on evidence; our beliefs fit the evidence. You and the abductionists dismiss the evidence because it does not fit your belief.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz Here I thought I was posting on a conspiracy forum where at least a few people might like to have some extended discussion involving alien abduction

It seems we are having an extended discussion of alien abduction; between the two threads you have made about abductions, there are have been 257 replies.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz thread like this will be mainly ignored and filled with extreme skepticism

There is no extreme skepticism here. We are reciting facts. The only person exhibiting any extremism is the person who refuses to accept the evidence because it does not support their beliefs.

Originally posted by WhizPhizI thought people around here would be quite opened minded to the idea of alien abduction, but the reality seems to be anything but that.

You did not open-mindedness of any sort. You wanted agreement. They are not one in the same.

Here is a good primer to help you better understand what open-mindedness is and isn't...

Open-Mindedness

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
Then go ahead and dismiss it! But don't try and tell me or others what we can and cannot dismiss. I'll decide that on my own thank you.

I'm telling you what is valid and was is not, based upon what scientists, academics, and doctors have found - people much better educated in these matters than you or I. There's is no decision.

Originally posted by WhizPhizThe only people really posting are a few of you skeptics and me, but yet there are also others reading this thread staring your posts almost instantly.

"Skeptics"? Really now. You know of any "skeptics" who are also publicly admitted experiencers? I've been public with my own for 2 decades. So try that lame duck excuse on someone else.

What I'm not into is continuing the dialogue of hypnotic recall nonsense that has poisoned this subject matter for years - and painting a woefully inaccurate picture for the public as to what the "alien" experience is. I'm not interested in nightmarish fairy tales from hypnosis and some "researchers" preconceived notions using a invalid tool, when it's been clearly discounted and doesn't pass the filter of legitimate data. To boot, that psychological tool being used by people with no formal training or education whatsoever in it's use or misuse.

That's UFOlogy for you. Sell a book, give a lecture, do a radio guest spot to...promote a book. It's all about finding the next sensationalistic nonsense this marginal field will buy into.

I'm more interested in understanding what the experience is, and what the better questions are for addressing it. But you're right - if you choose to go on deluding yourself be my guest. Don't be surprised when you're out of the loop regarding serious inquiry into the phenomenon.

Your first quoted statement here defines you as someone with a belief system, in the clearest sense of that definition. The problem is people seriously interested in this topic in rational and critical ways aren't interested in your belief systems. Because they're based upon wish fulfillment, junk data, and pop culture pseudo psychological nonsense provided by people who shouldn't be near anyone's psychological well-being.

Myself, I'm not into deluding myself about my own experiences - and I'm not into allowing this sort of tripe to go unanswered. The UFO community, as a friend of mine recently put it - defines the acceptable level of quality research being done in this field by supporting it, or not supporting it.

I would encourage everyone reading to empower themselves to look for new ways to study this facet of the subject rather than waste any more time wallowing in the nonsense this field has been fed by hypnotic recall.

reply to post by jritzmann

"Skeptics"? Really now. You know of any "skeptics" who are also publicly admitted experiencers? I've been public with my own for 2 decades. So try that lame duck excuse on someone else.

What I'm not into is continuing the dialogue of hypnotic recall nonsense that has poisoned this subject matter for years - and painting a woefully inaccurate picture for the public as to what the "alien" experience is. I'm not interested in nightmarish fairy tales from hypnosis and some "researchers" preconceived notions using a invalid tool, when it's been clearly discounted and doesn't pass the filter of legitimate data. To boot, that psychological tool being used by people with no formal training or education whatsoever in it's use or misuse.

Well I wasn't aware you were an "experiencer". Have you written a thread about those experiences? I would love to hear about it. Did you consciously remember the events, just like most of the abductees from Taken? Or are you just talking about a UFO sighting? You seem like maybe you've have a positive abduction experience and don't agree with my "nightmarish" depiction of abductions.

reply to post by WingedBull

It seems we are having an extended discussion of alien abduction

No, we are having an extended discussion about the validity of hypnotism.

There is no extreme skepticism here. We are reciting facts.

Exactly, you are "reciting" facts about hypnotism over and over again. Like my "narrow mind" is "not getting it". You keep saying the same things over and over again when I've clearly agreed with you on many things and have kindly asked to move the discussion along. You act as tho my disagree is a total dismissal and denial of the truth, but it's actually just a difference in perspective and what we are willing to consider.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
No, we are having an extended discussion about the validity of hypnotism.

Because hypnosis is the rotted foundation abductionists have built this belief on.

Originally posted by WhizPhizExactly, you are "reciting" facts about hypnotism over and over again.

It is quite apparent they are not sinking in.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
Like my "narrow mind" is "not getting it".

I never said you were narrow-minded.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
You keep saying the same things over and over again when I've clearly agreed with you on many things and have kindly asked to move the discussion along. You act as tho my disagree is a total dismissal and denial of the truth, but it's actually just a difference in perspective and what we are willing to consider.

Because it is a total dismissal and denial of the truth. While you claim to acknowledge the flaws of hypnosis, it is only lip-service; in the same breath you claim that hypnosis is reliable.

EDIT: You got two stars on that post! No fair! This forum is so one-sided!

reply to post by WingedBull

Because hypnosis is the rotted foundation abductionists have built this belief on.

Wich is why, fot the 5th or 6th time, I used multiple accounts not acquired using hypnosis. Yet you keep focusing on just that one part of my entire thread.

I never said you were narrow-minded.

Indeed, it was cripmeister, I was just "reciting" the different things said by the skeptics.

Because it is a total dismissal and denial of the truth. While you claim to acknowledge the flaws of hypnosis, it is only lip-service; in the same breath you claim that hypnosis is reliable.

*sigh* Just because hypnotism has flaws doesn't mean it's completely invalid. THERE IS A POTENTIAL for truth in what is said. I'm not freaking saying it's "reliable" for Christs sake, why don't you try reading what I'm saying and understand it, as you claim I need to do. I can acknowledge the flaws in something whilst still understand it's potential for use. I just so happen to think there's a degree of corroboration that goes beyond a "popular culture" or "meme" explanation, and your arguments to counter that are weak. I'm very critical of anything said under hypnosis, but I do not completely ignore every bit of information acquired from hypnosis, I find that is ignorant. Have you ever heard of "separating the noise from the signal"? A lot of research tools aren't going to be "reliable" just because you want them to be, even in science. Some times the degree of noise involved in experiments can make finding any signal almost impossible. But there is a signal, and it can be found. Even with hypnosis there are methods and techniques to "separate the noise from the signal". When it comes to conspiracy theories, you can't constantly be demanding perfection. Connecting the dots, as they say, is a game where many of the puzzle pieces are deliberate fakes (disinformation and fantasy) which can lead you to put together a false picture. But if you're smart enough the correct picture, the signal, can be located. Conspiracy theories aren't a game of hard science, I don't need scientists to tell me their is an alien presence around Earth before I can reach such a conclusion. Believe it or not, my beliefs can be potentially formed without needing direct confirmation from science.

EDIT: You got two stars on that post! No fair! This forum is so one-sided!

You're completely twisting what I said, as always.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
Which is why, fot the 5th or 6th time, I used multiple accounts not acquired using hypnosis. Yet you keep focusing on just that one part of my entire thread.

Out of curiosity, which cases did you cite that did not require hypnosis for a complete recall of all of the events in the encounter?

How often does this occur?

If hypnosis were not the corner stone on which abductionists base their beliefs, they would not fight so adamantly against the established evidence to defend it.

Originally posted by WhizPhizIndeed, it was cripmeister, I was just "reciting" the different things said by the skeptics.

Instead of responding to things I didn't say, perhaps you should concentrate on what I do say.

Because it is a total dismissal and denial of the truth. While you claim to acknowledge the flaws of hypnosis, it is only lip-service; in the same breath you claim that hypnosis is reliable.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
*sigh* Just because hypnotism has flaws doesn't mean it's completely invalid.

Yes, it does. What you fail to grasp, and perhaps purposefully, is that we are not talking about a minor or insignificant but a fundamental flaw that puts everything in doubt.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
I'm not freaking saying it's "reliable" for Christs sake, why don't you try reading what I'm saying and understand it, as you claim I need to do.

Sure...

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
So is hypnotism really reliable at all? Yes it is.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
I can acknowledge the flaws in something whilst still understand it's potential for use.

Obviously, you do not.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
I just so happen to think there's a degree of corroboration that goes beyond a "popular culture" or "meme" explanation, and your arguments to counter that are weak.

Explain; all you have done is dismiss them arguments as weak without demonstrating any actual thought as to why.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
I'm very critical of anything said under hypnosis

No, you are not. In fact, you accept everything the abductionists claim without any exploration of the other side of the issue, depending on the abductionists to tell you what to think of the critics and their criticism.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
but I do not completely ignore every bit of information acquired from hypnosis, I find that is ignorant.

No, like the abductionists, you only ignore that which does not fit the narrative you favor, as evidenced in your opening post and your last response to Mr. Ritzmann.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
Have you ever heard of "separating the noise from the signal"?

Abductionist are unable to distinguish between the two, even while they actively participate in the creation of "noise".

Originally posted by WhizPhizA lot of research tools aren't going to be "reliable" just because you want them to be, even in science.

If a tool is found to be unreliable to the degree that hypnosis is, then that tool is rejected. Any scientist who depends on unreliable tools will quickly find himself a laughingstock and his data rejected.

Originally posted by WhizPhizBut there is a signal, and it can be found.

You are assuming there is a signal to be found, which is the danger we have talked about all this time. This is how the abductionists actively participate in the creation of false memories.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
Even with hypnosis there are methods and techniques to "separate the noise from the signal".

And what are they?

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
But if you're smart enough the correct picture, the signal, can be located.

I see, the reason people disagree with you is not because of the facts and evidence on their side, it's because they just aren't smart enough.

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
Conspiracy theories aren't a game of hard science, I don't need scientists to tell me their is an alien presence around Earth before I can reach such a conclusion. Believe it or not, my beliefs can be potentially formed without needing direct confirmation from science.

Once again, facts and evidence be damned.

As Mr. Ritzmann said, you are far more interested in promoting a belief system than taking a critical look at the phenomenon. You have no interest in the truth.

Originally posted by WhizPhize]You're completely twisting what I said, as always.

I'm not twisting anything. I'm mocking you. There's a difference.

Bump! I wont let these skeptics deter me from my own thread! I will only be replying to kind and constructive responses, if you want to debate hypnosis do it without a snide know-it-all attitude and I might listen.

reply to post by WhizPhiz


In other words, your giving up the debate?

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
I will only be replying to kind and constructive responses

No one has been anything but kind and constructive (albeit, I do admit that I did mock your off-topic rant). "Kind and constructive" responses do not equate to "only those responses that agree with me" or "the questions with easy answers".


if you want to debate hypnosis do it without a snide know-it-all attitude and I might listen.

Sure, I apologize for our "snide, know-it-all attitude"...

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
But if you're smart enough the correct picture, the signal, can be located. Conspiracy theories aren't a game of hard science, I don't need scientists to tell me their is an alien presence around Earth before I can reach such a conclusion. Believe it or not, my beliefs can be potentially formed without needing direct confirmation from science.

Originally posted by Turiddu
reply to post by WhizPhiz

 

In other words, your giving up the debate?

If you were paying attention I gave it up a long time ago. If I had the will or energy to debate you two properly my last few posts would be a lot different, and we'd have gone on another 5 pages by now.

And that was some fast responses you guys, wow! On-the-ball

Sure, I apologize for our "snide, know-it-all attitude"...

Originally posted by WhizPhiz
But if you're smart enough the correct picture, the signal, can be located. Conspiracy theories aren't a game of hard science, I don't need scientists to tell me their is an alien presence around Earth before I can reach such a conclusion. Believe it or not, my beliefs can be potentially formed without needing direct confirmation from science.

That isn't snide or anything of the sort, I'm just stating science isn't the be-all and end-all of what I will form my beliefs around. Scientists get things wrong too, and a lot of the time just flat out ignore some areas of research because it will make them look crazy and ruin their reputation, or that they already know the answer - it's so crazy it can't be real - therefore, they claim to make educated and informed decisions on certain subjects, as a so called scientist, but without having actually done the research for themselves. They then proceed to mock and criticize other scientists who were willing to explore those areas of research. So science is far from the perfect and infallible tool you think it is - and that's because imperfect humans created it.