Thoughts about people claiming alien contact

Originally posted by christmaspig
I'm afraid I don't have much in the way of input, but I had to commend you on a fascinating post. The discussion that has followed has been very interesting. It seems to be human nature to discredit something without pyhsical proof that it exists or that it happened. The exception to this however is religion. Many christians accept the Bible and everything written within as proof of God and past events. They do not hesitate to belive that Jesus was crucified and then rose again 3 days later. However someone says they were driving along, saw some lights and lost the rest of the day they must of course be delusional or sleep deprived or any other excuse.
Just to make it clear I'm not trying to bad mouth religion or anything, I believe in God myself I just dont agree with organised religion. It just confuses me how so many people can believe im somethjng so wholeheartedly on faith alone, and dismiss other things on the basis there is supposedly no evidence. It seems kind of hypocritical to me. My mum for example is a Christian and believes in God and the Christian faith, however refuses point blank to even think about the possibility of other life in the universe. I dont know, it just confuses me, lol.
Once again I am not trying to cause some angsty religious debate, its just the comparison that always appears in my mind when people are mocked or dismissed for their experiences or beliefs :-/

I really like this post. I have found through some investigation that many of the objectors or complainers are insecure that the existence of ETs would replace their idealistic versions of reality. As you mention many are religious in fact. Some will use their belief systems as forms of self validation by competing with others. Naturally, this manifests through common patterns of ridicule and so forth.

In a sense, even security agencies are out there (or in here) trying to preserve social balance by refuting any new belief system that might replace the sedentary regime of acceptance that has been indelibly stained into our psyches through ancient esoteric belief systems and the socioeconomic configuration that serves the oil mammon.

These cases go beyond the claimed sightings of extraterrestrial objects, to actual physical contact. Here's a perfect opportunity to have some type of evidence that alien beings are visiting Earth. We're not talking about only a handful of cases, which would be reasonable to assume no evidence was gathered, but we're talking about thousands of cases. Given the fact that alien contact won't be proven by a photograph or video, why has there been no physical evidence of abductions if this is a physical happening involving thousands of cases and 50+ years?

Believers typically accept less-than "evidence", ie: stories told, and turn that into being factual to fit what they want to believe. That's a common thread on all levels throughout this phenomenon.

I have also had tens of thousands, if not millions, of conversations with other human beings through my life, which did not lead to them handing me any physical evidential proof that said "I had a conversation with ____."

Originally posted by g2v12
I really like this post. I have found through some investigation that many of the objectors or complainers are insecure that the existence of ETs would replace their idealistic versions of reality. As you mention many are religious in fact. Some will use their belief systems as forms of self validation by competing with others. Naturally, this manifests through common patterns of ridicule and so forth.

Explain what type of "investigation" did you do to come to this conclusion and with whom? I'm not religious, I'm not frightened that my perception of reality will be destroyed by finding out alien visitation is real. I'd like nothing more than alien visitation to be a fact. Those are just the typical assumptions/conclusions to explain away skeptics or non-believers "irrational" thoughts and needs with this phenomenon. Just as the: "Skeptics wouldn't believe if a UFO landed on the White House lawn". Same message, different tactic.

I don't ridicule the authors of these stories. I just need something concrete and physical involving an assumed concrete and physical event. Don't trivialize an extraordinary event such as an alien race visiting Earth, by so easily accepting stories without physical evidence.

Originally posted by RedCairo
I have also had tens of thousands, if not millions, of conversations with other human beings through my life, which did not lead to them handing me any physical evidential proof that said "I had a conversation with ____."

Yes, but can you prove for a fact that human beings exist? Now, can you prove for a fact that alien beings exist? So, it's much more likely that conversation was had with a human, than it is for someone had a conversation with an alien being.

That's a bad analogy.

Originally posted by Ectoplasm8
These cases go beyond the claimed sightings of extraterrestrial objects, to actual physical contact. Here's a perfect opportunity to have some type of evidence that alien beings are visiting Earth. We're not talking about only a handful of cases, which would be reasonable to assume no evidence was gathered, but we're talking about thousands of cases. Given the fact that alien contact won't be proven by a photograph or video, why has there been no physical evidence of abductions if this is a physical happening involving thousands of cases and 50+ years?

Believers typically accept less-than "evidence", ie: stories told, and turn that into being factual to fit what they want to believe. That's a common thread on all levels throughout this phenomenon.

Well, I think that anyone interested enough in this subject to really look at it would soon realize that these contact experiences occur in such a manner as to conditionally preclude any form of 'physical' evidence. There's several logical reasons for this fact.

First and foremost, the perpetrators (extraterrestrial or other) are quite adept in providing the best scenarios for their missions, which are obviously clandestine and highly classified in nature. Anyone observing us closely, socially, perhaps intimately through our own thoughts, will know that it is our nature to require certain regiments of evidence, be it physical or otherwise, assuredly provable by all accounts. Knowing this (as your post clearly illustrates your preconditions) they have designed an approach that takes advantage of human sleeping habits, and other elements where people would be unsuspecting and vulnerable to these operations.

I guess my point would be that if you are approaching this matter from a purely material criteria of evidence, you've already sacrificed the whole idea of studying it in the first place. That's not what real skeptics do and its certainly unscientific by default. People with analytical and scientific minds are both curious and skeptical (sensibly) about things that don't make sense. So, if you think that being open minded is also being gullible (as you mentioned above) that's just a cop out for not doing your homework. Its easy to refute something that doesn't require you to show any knowledge of the subject. The pseudo-skeptic merely throws semantically laced rebuttals into the discussions (pennies into the fountain) without providing any evidence to support his claim.

Einstein's theories were developed without physical or material evidence necessarily. He said, “Imagination is everything. It is the preview of life’s coming attractions. Imagination is more important than knowledge”...“I have no special talent. I am only passionately curious.”

Who makes the rule that because people claim to have physical contact with strange beings they are somehow burdened to produce physical evidence for the luxury of others? And, what would that evidence be? When people create preconditions for believing or investigating a phenomenon, they are in effect denying their own intellect the opportunity to explore the 'possibilities' (or perhaps an excuse for not have one).

Its conceivably arrogant in a sense to act as a prefect in any capacity over the right of others who make unusual claims, at the risk of being socially eviscerated in their own society.

I would only say that there are several classic cases involving for example the sighting by a deputy of a disk shaped craft, strange beings, radioactive measurements, pod marks and vitrified sand. The evidence is there in a historical context, in well documented accounts if one is objective and curious in seeking the information. But to be a real skeptic, you have to be smart enough to look for the data.

reply to post by g2v12

You never provided your "investigation" into the skeptics.

So let me get your explanation straight, these highly intelligent aliens want to go undiscovered and choose the "perfect" unsuspecting times such as when people are sleeping to abduct. That's a pretty convenient explanation and works great. However, how do you explain two of the most popular and relied upon cases with abduction believers, Betty and Barney Hill and Travis Walton? Both were fully awake and fully aware of what's going on. They aren't the only "awake" abductions on the list, I might add. I have a sneaking suspicion you're familiar with "sleep paralysis"...

You're basing everything you said on beliefs and assumptions. Arguments you've made up in your mind to explain what's happening. When faced with thousands of claims of a physical event, I'm not interested in could-bes, may-bes, possibly. I want facts to back up these incredible claims. We aren't speaking in terms of a new species of fish in the Atlantic, or insect in the Amazon. It's alien visitation. Not a trivial event. You don't require facts and settle for the convenient, fantastical explanations of your mind, while I require concrete facts and won't settle. There's the difference. It's funny you pull out the "scientific" card to support your belief though.

Originally posted by Ectoplasm8
reply to post by g2v12

 

You never provided your "investigation" into the skeptics.

So let me get your explanation straight, these highly intelligent aliens want to go undiscovered and choose the "perfect" unsuspecting times such as when people are sleeping to abduct. That's a pretty convenient explanation and works great. However, how do you explain two of the most popular and relied upon cases with abduction believers, Betty and Barney Hill and Travis Walton? Both were fully awake and fully aware of what's going on. They aren't the only "awake" abductions on the list, I might add. I have a sneaking suspicion you're familiar with "sleep paralysis"...

You're basing everything you said on beliefs and assumptions. Arguments you've made up in your mind to explain what's happening. When faced with thousands of claims of a physical event, I'm not interested in could-bes, may-bes, possibly. I want facts to back up these incredible claims. We aren't speaking in terms of a new species of fish in the Atlantic, or insect in the Amazon. It's alien visitation. Not a trivial event. You don't require facts and settle for the convenient, fantastical explanations of your mind, while I require concrete facts and won't settle. There's the difference. It's funny you pull out the "scientific" card to support your belief though.

edit on 31-8-2013 by Ectoplasm8 because: (no reason given)

I fully appreciate where you are coming from. Yea, the prospect for alien contact is critical for humanity and that requires serious study. When I used the example of people sleeping to express vulnerabilities, that was just one example.

The Walton and Hill stories are comparable due to the scenario of isolation and multiple witnesses. Although the Walton event had fully conscious multiple witnesses, they are no more believable to someone who applies too many preconditions and false rules of criteria for the type of evidence.

That simply brings you back to the inflexibility of your approach to the whole matter. And the scientific card is certainly valid. There are good scientists out there using what information, data and other evidence is available to conduct a serious study. If you are waiting for Pres. Obama to march down main street USA carrying a dead extraterrestrial, I feel sorry for you.

As far as my investigation into the skeptics, I don't have anything published to offer, since I was hired to do the study in a confidential manner. Nevertheless, I have interviewed numerous self named skeptics and have found various forms of anxiety repression manifested through pseudo skepticism, some of which is connected with psychological origins unassociated with the question of alien visitation. You may want to do some introspection or seek a therapist who can help you identify the underlying cause of your compulsions in this matter.

NB: I have included responses to teslahowitzer, christmaspig, Ectoplasm8, and g2v12 in this reply in an effort to keep the thread as lean as possible.

Originally posted by teslahowitzer
The character Randy Quaid played in Independence Day had a history of contact and it changed his life and relationships. After the "invasion" and as they were begging for pilots, the scene followed as he claimed to be an abductee, he was ridiculed even as they were preparing for an attack on an alien race, this is the irony of ignorance we strive to maintain as we breech the unknown everyday. Do not let other people be your throttle in pursuit of the truth...

This is an excellent point. Randy Quaid was the comic relief and was transformed into the tragic hero at the very last moments. It is odd that a movie about alien invasion creates a nutty comic relief character due to his belief that he had been abducted. I think this speaks volumes about our mindset. Thank you for your insightful input.

Originally posted by christmaspig
My mum for example is a Christian and believes in God and the Christian faith, however refuses point blank to even think about the possibility of other life in the universe. I dont know, it just confuses me, lol.

I think this goes back to Springer's comment in this thread. I believe that in a vacuum this topic wouldn't be anymore controversial or taboo than any other topic. Here are Springer's comments: post by Springer
I would like to add that maybe this taps into a natural fear that we have which would enhance the taboo nature of the topic.

Originally posted by Ectoplasm8
I don't ridicule the authors of these stories. I just need something concrete and physical involving an assumed concrete and physical event. Don't trivialize an extraordinary event such as an alien race visiting Earth, by so easily accepting stories without physical evidence.

Ectoplasm8, I really enjoyed reading your comments. I want to play the bongos now for some reason. I think you have a very healthy attitude. You want evidence but you see no value in ridiculing people. I don't think this field consists of only two camps. It seems to be a continuum. However, the far left and far right seem to make up the majority. What are you thoughts?

Originally posted by g2v12
Its conceivably arrogant in a sense to act as a prefect in any capacity over the right of others who make unusual claims, at the risk of being socially eviscerated in their own society.

g2v12, this is a powerful line and I would like to use it in a summary of this thread once it wraps up. I agree.

Originally posted by g2v12

First and foremost, the perpetrators (extraterrestrial or other) are quite adept in providing the best scenarios for their missions, which are obviously clandestine and highly classified in nature.

Originally posted by Ectoplasm8
...
That's a pretty convenient explanation and works great. However, how do you explain two of the most popular and relied upon cases with abduction believers, Betty and Barney Hill and Travis Walton? Both were fully awake and fully aware of what's going on.
...
You're basing everything you said on beliefs and assumptions. Arguments you've made up in your mind to explain what's happening. When faced with thousands of claims of a physical event, I'm not interested in could-bes, may-bes, possibly. I want facts to back up these incredible claims.

It is certainly about beliefs. I highlighted g2v12's quote that may sum up his position regarding evisceration in society. At worst we should say, "Well that's strange. I will file this away and wait for further evidence". At best we could say, "Wow that is interesting. I think I believe you."

I also wanted to comment about the vast number of sightings without evidence. I find this particular argument interesting because it has a corollary. I believe it is as follows:

1.) There are so many sightings and witnesses. It must be true.
2.) There are so many sightings without evidence. It must be false.

I think in the end it is difficult to talk about because we are dealing with a hypothesis that essentially allows for anything to be true from a technological perspective. In other words, it is very conceivable for an FTL space faring race to have the means to disguise themselves and speculating about their motivations really doesn't bear any fruit.

Originally posted by Ectoplasm8

Originally posted by RedCairo
I have also had tens of thousands, if not millions, of conversations with other human beings through my life, which did not lead to them handing me any physical evidential proof that said "I had a conversation with ____."

Yes, but can you prove for a fact that human beings exist? Now, can you prove for a fact that alien beings exist? So, it's much more likely that conversation was had with a human, than it is for someone had a conversation with an alien being.

That's a bad analogy.

Cranky. See, I thought it was a pretty good one, but I'll agree to disagree.

So with that, you make clear you are not asking people to evidence that they conversed (or whatever) with what some people choose to call aliens; but rather, you are asking them to provide evidence for those who have not, that aliens "are real."

(I hope they don't also have to prove they are 'space aliens,' since I personally doubt this in most cases.)

If we lived in a time prior to cameras and you had never visited China, you would be forced to rely on the eyewitness testimony of people who had visited China. Similarly, we do not appear to have the current technology to evidence wherever they are living, and you are stuck relying on eyewitness testimony.

Many of the people with this testimony could convict a nun in a court of law -- unless you watch the media of course. The media tend to choose 'debunkers' with a long string of letters after their names, and choose "Believers" (capital B) who are some loony preacher in the desert with shrines to aliens and a congregation of his dog or whatever. Oh yeah, and nobody ever 'remembers' alien interaction unless they were hypnotized. Oh yeah, and said interaction is always having something stuck up their butt. Media, sigh...

One of the most unsettling and eventually validating element of this topic for me (my own experiences aside, initially, since I needed validation for those too) was how many incredibly intelligent, accomplished, respectable people whose testimony would never be doubted about anything else, have had such experiences. And I do not mean someone hypnotized them and they remembered it. I mean, like me, they were often fully aware of what was going on and sometimes wrote it down immediately after.

Since you say you "would like nothing better" than for aliens to be real, I recommend you join the support for The Disclosure Project. Some of the persons you'd likely find most credible are prohibited from sharing their experiences due to various security clearances. Getting the government to waive imprisonment-etc. for sharing those accounts would certainly provide a lot of information into the public domain from people employed in areas where objective technology is often one of the measures, not just human testimony.

As an aside, I personally found the topic rather horrible when forcibly exposed to it, even totally aside from it being embarrassing. The "bigger picture" of its implications would cyclically hit me like a shock. I would far rather a bunch of people be deluded than the so-called aliens be real. The former is just a trivia for a few "unusually creative" (in that case) people. The latter brings up very disturbing questions about our entire culture and what we believe about reality, our governments, our origins and more.

This is one of those things you can't un-see, so to speak, and I had a great deal more peace of mind before than after.

Peace.

reply to post by compressedFusion



Nice commentary. You summed it up with a well balanced viewpoint and for that, thanks. Are you a published writer?

...we are dealing with a hypothesis that essentially allows for anything to be true from a technological perspective. In other words, it is very conceivable for an FTL space faring race to have the means to disguise themselves and speculating about their motivations really doesn't bear any fruit.

Precisely. In the end, all argument could come down to arguing whether "a technology exists that we don't know about" -- rather than arguing about individuals. And it all goes nowhere.

reply to post by AlienView

Also there was a concept I once heard that the human mind acts as filter of reality - that if the filter is not working properly we would see so much that we would go insane

The biological filter and entrainment since birth (if not before) go a long way to making everyone feel sure they're in the same 'reality.'

I had a couple theories while this was going on, after deciding that neither insanity (because I found other people with impossibly similar accounts) nor archetypes (because if they can become physical or leave physical evidence, that word profoundly fails in its job as a descriptor) were probably the case, which were:

1. Perhaps some individuals are more neurologically affected than others by the massive overdose of EM pollution in our society, and perhaps one of the effects is literally to sort of "shift" the frequencies which they are able to perceive. They may be "reading between the lines of reality" you might say.

2. I lived in southern coastal California when all this began. I eventually felt that if I moved (because I literally kept getting impetus to 'get out' as if it were doomed) that perhaps, if nothing else, the "interactive visions" of catastrophic environmental doom would go away. I left in March 1995 and traveled around the country for a bit, got married in Florida, moved to Portland OR for awhile, visited Cour d'Alene ID for a bit then moved to Seattle WA for a couple years. And guess what? A whole lot more of it vanished the minute I left California than I expected.

One friend's theory: clandestine research subject.
Another friend's theory: you expected it to improve, so it did.
Another friend's theory: your job was stressing you out, so leaving that solved the psyche weirdness.
I don't agree with those, I'm just being fair and sharing some other perspectives.
I have no theory now, but my theory back THEN was:

That perhaps where I lived in CA had ongoing, extensive but very very subtle geomagnetic events going on under the surface all the time. And I lived and worked in a valley "on a giant anthill" as one maintenance worker called it -- the big Jan 94 quake was incredible where I was, even some of the aftershocks, while my friend on a shale hill about a mile or two away was hardly affected.

So my theory was that maybe in response to very subtle effects physiologically, my mind perceived a threat, and was "expanding my perception" -- as a survival skill. So, similar to first theory, but different cause.

There were many things that happened more not less when I left, such as certain identities, certain negative experiences particularly with dreams, a variety of fey-type stuff (e.g. I met a Spider Deva [?!]), and your basic spontaneous chakra / altered state / psi experiences.

But some things happened radically less, to include the constant blondes/bugs/fragiles interaction (although I had a sort of esoteric experience which may relate to that stopping), and to include ALL, literally all (!) of the "interactive visions," as well as several offbeat symptoms I think are best put in the schiz category.

I also got pregnant in late '95 (I had met my husband in a small private UFO online group, and we felt very 'encouraged' to each other. Too bad it didn't last past our kid's conception, lol). So given a few of the memories (I have vastly fewer in the category of sex/genetics/breeding than some people), perhaps that simply disqualified me for a lot of what had been going on prior, who knows.

With that in mind I would attempt to control your dreamings to avoid possible madness - Notice I'm not saying eliminate it entirely, just try to maintain control, We aliens prefer to communicate with sane humans.

Funny. I don't know what it's like for other people, as I don't think I've really asked anyone about this particular element, but I wasn't asleep for a lot of it. I called much of it dreaming at the time because I had absolutely no words for a third category of experience that was neither this-world nor dreaming, and I felt that relegating it all to being 'waking dreams' made it seem much safer and less crazy. At least 'waking dream' I have a term for.

I am almost ridiculously functional in most ways at least, which is probably why I got through a couple years of intense experiences that put some others in straightjackets, with little more than some PTSD and a long case study my poor friend felt obliged to wade through since I wrote it for her. Seriously, there were times when I went right from writing about the (entities, aliens, psychic stuff, whatever it was) to work and gave a presentation to the board of directors. (I was a corporate officer in a small but very intense and complex R&D firm.) I spent huge efforts keeping my "weird life" in line so it wouldn't screw up my "real life" which to me was my job or computer. It did a little, particularly when I started remembering multiple timelines for awhile and having impossible, literally hours of-3-second-advance-deja-vu (blessedly that passed) but not too much.

I was more concerned with what was good for me, what let me function without freaking out (paranoia, obsession, and more kept getting sparked by the survival-skill fear of my body about it all), and what mental-model about it all allowed it to simply "be," whatever it was without too much judgement, all under the assumption that eventually, all the bizarre stuff would sure either go away, or start to make more sense.

It actually did start as chaos but gradually started making more sense, then making emotional and eventually 'spiritual' connections with me. I think people who go to a psychiatrist early on, they're in chaos and they get drugged, they have fear added to that, and it doesn't end well for them. A lot of it did start getting some organization pattern to it over time with me. This might be the mind's survival instinct just making-it-make-sense, who knows?

And eventually some of it went away, and later, most of the rest of it went away.

The experiences I have now are mostly limited to intentional imaginal meditations, the occasional dream, and psi. All the really out-there stuff from the case-study period, I don't have anymore.

Though the profound change in my style of thinking, belief systems et al. was certainly permanent.

I pretty much stay out of abduction threads because I am a skeptic and I am not here to bash people that claim they were torchered/abducted. Whatever their reasons are for claiming or believing it happened to them I dont know and let's just say I am agnostic skeptic about it there is just no way for me to be certain of the legitimacy of their claims but there is a chance it could be true so I just leave it be.

That being said I have been in other threads not about abductions where someone chimes in off topic about being abducted usually followed by information on different species of aliens, traits, and so forth. Those are the ones I just think are nut jobs looking for attention. Those types IMO are the ones who drive the stereo type and most likely the reason such claims are usually dismissed out of hand by most as imaginary.

I am also a skeptic on many other issues as well where I will call out quackery when I see it but that is because I have drawn my conclusion based off the same evidence everyone else has or can obtain. Abductions though are unique untestable or verifiable and i try not to speak on things I have no experience with.

I like your 'mood altering brain parasites' thread. Maybe that explains aliens. Kidding.

Originally posted by g2v12
The Walton and Hill stories are comparable due to the scenario of isolation and multiple witnesses. Although the Walton event had fully conscious multiple witnesses, they are no more believable to someone who applies too many preconditions and false rules of criteria for the type of evidence.

You mean the one precondition of no physical evidence in thousands of cases and 50+ years of the abduction claims? How is that to be avoided as something that needs be addressed? You're not curious as to why? You can so easily write it off to some fantastical explanation and be okay with that? That's far more than simply being open-minded. Even your own explanation of people being abducted while in a vulnerable state doesn't work as shown by the two most popular and believed abduction cases. You qualify it by adding something else to your explanation. Is that how your methodology typically works? Adding things to make it work?

That simply brings you back to the inflexibility of your approach to the whole matter. And the scientific card is certainly valid. There are good scientists out there using what information, data and other evidence is available to conduct a serious study. If you are waiting for Pres. Obama to march down main street USA carrying a dead extraterrestrial, I feel sorry for you.

That again, is another version of the 'incredible unrealistic and irrational thinking' of skeptics and non-believers. You'd believe only the story. I'd want a little more than just a story.

As far as my investigation into the skeptics, I don't have anything published to offer, since I was hired to do the study in a confidential manner. Nevertheless, I have interviewed numerous self named skeptics and have found various forms of anxiety repression manifested through pseudo skepticism, some of which is connected with psychological origins unassociated with the question of alien visitation. You may want to do some introspection or seek a therapist who can help you identify the underlying cause of your compulsions in this matter.

From your quickie and "professional" online diagnosis, I will certainly seek a therapist.

Originally posted by Ectoplasm8
Even your own explanation of people being abducted while in a venerable state doesn't work as shown by the two most popular and believed abduction cases. You qualify it by adding something else to your explanation. Is that how your methodology typically works? Adding things to make it work?

I cannot speak to this particular debate on topic, but on communication, I'd like to point out that we are typing in little boxes on the fly here. We are not writing entire books on the subject and trying to cover every possible imaginable element per post. You bring up something new, someone responds with something new. That is why threads continue, as opposed to having only one book-length post per user per thread. It seems injust to imply he is being disingenious by pointing out something he hadn't put into a previous post. Debate the topical matter, not the integrity of the individual communicating, and maybe this thread will stay conversational instead of becoming pedantic-flaming like so many in this forum on similar topics.

Originally posted by RedCairo
I cannot speak to this particular debate on topic, but on communication, I'd like to point out that we are typing in little boxes on the fly here. We are not writing entire books on the subject and trying to cover every possible imaginable element per post. You bring up something new, someone responds with something new. That is why threads continue, as opposed to having only one book-length post per user per thread. It seems injust to imply he is being disingenious by pointing out something he hadn't put into a previous post. Debate the topical matter, not the integrity of the individual communicating, and maybe this thread will stay conversational instead of becoming pedantic-flaming like so many in this forum on similar topics.

g2v12 added another explanation to his "vulnerable state" to explain away other possible reasons. It's staying right on track with his methodology and there's no interpretation of his belief. He's stating it himself.

..."seek a therapist" is a silly attempt at flaming, but far too funny to report.
Of course it probably will be met with a response something like: "No, I wasn't flaming, I was seriously offering advice so you can get a full understanding of your compulsion".. Sincere of course.

On the Walton and Hill cases, we really don't know if they were asleep or a awake aside from the their own accounts, correct? Nobody witnessed Travis Walton going up into the UFO. They left him laying on the ground unconscious and drove away if I have the story correct.

The Hills were driving late at night on an isolated road and pulled over when they saw the UFO. The people I know aren't all wide awake recording devices under these conditions. The possibility remains that they simply fell asleep like so many others under the same conditions. Why would this be unlikely? I guess I need a therapist too.

reply to post by compressedFusion


I think they get shunned because nobody wants to hang out with crazy people.

I personally know three people who claim to have been abducted. One is an ex-hippe who was into every sort of drug you could imagine in the 60's and 70's and you can tell most of her brain is gone just from talking to her. I married her hot daughter though.

Another is a guy who obviously has mental issues. He is socially awkward, lives in filth and plays world of warcraft almost 24-7. He is on disability and lives in section 8 housing in NYC. I met him online when I used to play WoW (I quit many years ago) and when I moved to NYC I made arrangements to meet him. I was shocked with how he lived, I already knew he was weird from talking to him on Ventrilo, but when he started spouting off abduction talk I told him I had people waiting and I had to go.

Another is an "ex marine" I knew growing up in GA who is about 70 now. He says he has been abducted almost 20 times...I don't even know what to say about that crazy old man. He's crazy. I just painted his house for him last time I went back to Visit the Fam and I have to admit, hearing his abductions stories were fun, but man were they out there. He actually traveled through a black hole you know...

So typically, being associated with abductions is hand in hand with being associated with full out crazy. I would recommend anyone who regularly has visits with aliens to contact a neurologist and take a lie detector. If they say all is clear then I'll believe the story.