                          Abduction Digest, Number 30
 
                           Monday, October 21st 1991
 
Today's Topics:
 
                                An Old Editorial
                                 Re: abductions
                                 Re: abductions
                                 Re: Abductions
                                   abductions

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

Subject: An Old Editorial
Date: 17 Oct 91 22:17:00 GMT

Thought y'all might get a kick out of this article I wrote way back in '88,
when I first heard of the Fantasy-Prone Hypothesis. Its not as well-written as
I would have liked, but I was bit PO'd at the time, so forgive me....
--------------

PARANET EDITORIAL: THE SNOBS AMONG US
by Jim Speiser


      As  I  have  stated before on many occasions, the idea that abduction
experiences  represent  objectively  real encounters with extraterrestrials
represents  an  hypothesis,  one that must be evaluated and weighed against
other  hypotheses or alternative "explanations." In terms of true scientif-
ic  objectivity,  no  one hypothesis has any more weight than any other un-
less  it can be shown to be more consistent with our knowledge and with all
the  pertinent facts. A psychological explanation is no more valid than any
other  simply by virtue of having been proposed by a more mainstream psych-
ologist;  it  must  prove itself on the weight of the evidence. Occam's ra-
zor,  however,  dictates  that  more mundane, less extravagant explanations
must  be evaluated and discarded before we can fully accept the more outre'
scenarios  into  the hallowed halls of "knowledge." You have to start some-
where.

      Abduction  specialists  such as Budd Hopkins have long paid much lip-
service  to  their  efforts to investigate the more subjective explanations
such  as  delusion  or  fantasy,  and so I am curious as to how he and they
will  react  to  the article in the Winter 1987/88 edition of the Skeptical
Inquirer,  entitled   "The Aliens Among Us: Hypnotic Regression Revisited,"
by  University  of Kentucky psychologist Robert A. Baker. While the article
is  flawed  in  many  respects,  it  compensates by offering the hypothesis
outlined in the following extract:

<<
          If  these  abductees were given...intensive diagnostic testing it
      is  highly  likely  that many similarities would emerge--particularly
      an  unusual  personality  pattern  that Wilson and Barber (1983) have
      categorized  as  "fantasy-prone."  In an important but much neglected
      article,  they  report  in  some detail their discovery of a group of
      excellent  hypnotic subjects with unusual fantasy abilities. In their
      words:

          Although  this study provided a broader understanding of the kind
          of  life  experiences  that may underlie the ability to be an ex-
          cellent  hypnotic  subject,  it  has  also led to a serendipitous
          finding  that  has  wide implications for all of psychology -- it
          has  shown  that  there exists a small group of individuals (pos-
          sibly  4%  of  the  population) who fantasize a large part of the
          time,  who  typically  "see,"  "hear,"  "smell,"  and "touch" and
          fully  experience  what  they  fantasize;  and who can be labeled
          fantasy-prone personalities.


      <<  Wilson  and Barber also stress that such individuals experience a
      reduction  in  orientation to time, place, and person that is charac-
      teristic  of  hypnosis  or  trance  during their daily lives whenever
      they  are  deeply  involved  in a fantasy. They also have experiences
      during  their  daily ongoing lives that resemble the classical hypno-
      tic  phenomena.  In  other words, the behavior we would normally call
      "hypnotic"  is  exhibited  by these fantasy-prone types (FPs) all the
      time.  In  Wilson  and  Barber's  words: "When we give them 'hypnotic
      suggestions,'  such  as for visual and auditory hallucinations, nega-
      tive  hallucinations,  age regression, limb rigidity, anesthesia, and
      sensory  hallucinations,  we are asking them to do for us the kind of
      thing they can do independently of us in their daily lives."

      <<  The  reason  we  do  not  run into these types more often is that
      they  have  learned long ago to be highly secretive and private about
      their  fantasy lives. Whenever the FPs do encounter a hypnosis situa-
      tion  it  provides them with a social situation in which they are en-
      couraged  to do, and are rewarded for doing, what they usually do on-
      ly  in  secrecy and in private. Wilson and Barber also emphasize that
      regression  and  the  reliving  of  previous experiences is something
      that  virtually  all  the FPs do naturally in their daily lives. When
      they  recall the past, they relive it to a surprisingly vivid extent,
      and  they all have vivid memories of their experiences extending back
      to their early years.
          >>

      While  there  are  many  aspects of the abduction syndrome left unex-
plained  by  this scenario, it appears to be a description of a personality
type  that  is consistent with some of the more famous "abductees," such as
Whitley  Streiber.  While  researching his two books, Budd Hopkins retained
the  expertise  of  psychologist Aphrodite Clamar, who administered psycho-
logical  evaluation tests to nine abduction percipients, all of whom proved
to  be  normal,  sane  individuals. The point Baker makes, however, is that
these  FPs  ARE  ALSO SANE, and would no doubt pass such a test. He further
claims  that  there are more stringent tests designed to weed out such FPs,
and  I maintain that, in the interest of true scientific objectivity, it is
incumbent  upon  researchers such as Hopkins to arrange to have such a test
administered  to another group of abduction claimants. We have been provid-
ed  with  an earthly alternative; we owe it to the public, to the skeptics,
to  other  researchers, and to the claimants themselves (who Hopkins claims
are  actually  quite fearful of the ETH) to investigate fully this new pos-
sibility.

      There  is  another,  admittedly  more  selfish and spiteful reason to
objectively  evaluate  the  "FPH." Baker, typical of many CSICOP "hit-men,"
has  succumbed  to  snobbery  and  unabashedly claims the intellectual high
ground  in  his article. He was doing just fine until his "Consequences and
Summary"  section.  Some  quotes typify his attitude: "Need we be concerned
about  an  invasion of little gray kidnappers? Amused, yes. Concerned, no."
"Should  we  take Streiber, Hopkins, Kinder, et al. seriously? Not really."
"Tolerance  IS the mark of a civilized mind." Well, BLESS you, Prof. Baker.
You  seem  to  forget,  however,  that YOUR hypothesis has not been tested,
either,  and  consequently  you  have  as  yet no legitimate claim to being
"right."  And  as  I stated before, your article is flawed. It doesn't take
into  account  the physical evidence, such as scarring, landing traces, and
"exoglyphic  exemplars."  It  relies heavily on generalizations and quoting
of  previous studies which only tangentially impact the abduction scenario.
And  it  weakly  waves  off  the  marked similarities between abduction ac-
counts.

      If testing of the FPH should provide a clear indication that a psych-
ological  explanation is warranted, I fully expect abduction researchers to
acknowledge  that their hypothesizing of alien intervention stands on weak-
ened  legs.  If, however, the results of such testing show no such correla-
tion,  I  would  appreciate  it  if  Prof.  Baker and other debunkers would
propose  solutions  in  a  more  detached, even-handed, level-headed manner
more  becoming  of the TRULY civilized. Failing this, I would appreciate it
if they would kindly shutup.
  <<>>
Copyright (c)1988 National Fringe Sciences Information Service. All rights
reserved.

--  
Jim Speiser - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Jim.Speiser@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG



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


From: Sue.Widemark@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Sue Widemark)
Subject: Re: abductions
Date: 20 Oct 91 08:01:00 GMT

>Would you not agree, using this criteria, that the same might be
>said of the savior of the christian faith, his desiples, and last
>but not least, one certain Paul, whose dreams opened the faith for
>the Gentiles? 
 
No, because Paul didn't really say he was chosen.  He was merely 
interested in sharing what he felt to be the message about Jesus. And 
no, Jesus did not show any schizophrenia.  He was rather normal, as a 
matter of fact until He somehow managed to raise Himself from the dead 
(or at least, really convince a bunch of people of such event, to the 
point that they became very dedicated).  Keep in mind, this story of 
Jesus has not died out over 2000 years.  You might find a book by 
Bishop Sheen, entitled THE LIFE OF CHRIST rather interesting.
 
> > Descriptions of examinations are often confusing and described
> > as if  these aliens, possessing a far greater technology
> > than ours, are rather  primitive in the methods of examination.
> 
>From this, I assume that the contents of a modern operating room
>would make sense to you if you suddenly woke up and found yourself
>there without remembering the trip?
  
Doesn't answer the above point..
 
>I'd be interested in seeing a statistical breakdown of the percentages
>of cases wherein investigators have given credence to drunken 
sightings.
>As one trained in psychology, I find your last comment extremely
>interesting.  How do you come to the conclusion that people who
>see the unexplainable are
>"lacking in stability?"
 
Not a conclusion *I* came to but one observed by several writers.
 
>It is my personal opinion that the above paragraph summizes your
>REAL agenda in making this post.  Why do you feel that people who
>are "into Christianity" are more stable than those who are not?
>I can make a large number of arguments to show that there are many
>facets of that faith that DESTABILIZE the personality. I'm not here
>to bash Christians, but for someone to make an assertion that is
>false on the face as you have done cannot go unchallenged.
 
It has been observed by psychologists that people who have a religious 
orientation tend to deal with disability and age better than those who 
don't.  Also, Bill W., the founder of AA makes a rather impressive case 
that atheistic beliefs caused alot of his problems.  People who join AA 
and embrace the Deistic orientation tend to deal with their lives 
better than they did before joining.
 
>I trust the above comments will get you started.  I'm interested
>in seeing hard, statistical answers to back up your generalities.
>I'm also interested in anything in your background that would lend
>cedability to your opinions.  It may seem that I am attacking you
>personally. I am not.  The attack is on unsubstantiated generalities
>which you put forth as givens.  I attack your methods, and your
>reasons for making the post, not you as a person. The above posts
>are made by me personally, and not in my role as echo coordinator.
 
I didn't feel your message was attacking at all.  I have expressed the 
fact that what I posted was my impression from the books I had read. I 
am interested in reading the 'other side' and would be interested in 
your presenting some evidence to refute what I have stated.

--  
Sue Widemark - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Sue.Widemark@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG



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


From: Sue.Widemark@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Sue Widemark)
Subject: Re: abductions
Date: 20 Oct 91 08:07:00 GMT

>What, in your opinion, compromised their creditability? What constitutes a
>"creditable witness" in your mind? Perhaps a Christian priest? Plenty
>of those in the database....
    
Golly, Jim, I'm not that biased.  No... it isn't what a witness does - 
it's more HOW he observes what happened, how subjective and relational 
he is (as opposed to logical), how emotionally involved etc etc.
    
>Again, please define "vague" and what you would term "specific".
>If I remember correctly, the book I recommended was "Uninvited Guests"
>by Hall? That contains an entire appendix of specific cases with
>specific data that can be researched.
   
Don't know how else I can put that.  The book you suggested for me, was 
more of the same stuff I had read before.  Vague data i.e. not really 
factual but more emotional observations.  Highly emoutional imaginative 
witnesses. etc.
    
Will upload biobliography soon (as soon I as type it in as it's on the 
MAC and I don't have a modem on that machine at present...

--  
Sue Widemark - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Sue.Widemark@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG



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


From: Sue.Widemark@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Sue Widemark)
Subject: Re: abductions
Date: 20 Oct 91 08:09:00 GMT

>  And as to why a UFOnaut might be more meaningful then God - the
>answer seems obvious to me.  God is all talk and no action and many
>people are ready for some action and are hoping the ETs will supply
>it.
    
Actually, people would tend to THINK something humanoid would be more 
action than God just because we have an easier time conceiving of 
something humanoid.

--  
Sue Widemark - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Sue.Widemark@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG



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


From: Clark.Matthews@p1.f816.n107.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Clark Matthews)
Subject: abductions
Date: 21 Oct 91 10:30:00 GMT

In a message to Jim Delton <20 Oct 91 01:09> Sue Widemark wrote:

 >>  And as to why a UFOnaut might be more meaningful then God - the
 >>answer seems obvious to me.  God is all talk and no action and many
 >>people are ready for some action and are hoping the ETs will supply
 >>it.

Oh, I don't know.  The God of Moses knew all about leyden jars ... er, the Ark
of the Covenant, I mean.

But then old Horus apparently knew a bit about storage batteries and
incandescent lighting.  And airfoils.  Too bad they never hooked up and formed
a grid.

 SW> Actually, people would tend to THINK something humanoid would be
 SW> more action than God just because we have an easier time
 SW> conceiving of something humanoid.

Well, I think that what we're dealing with here could turn out to be the "God
of a Thousand Faces".  From the Red Sea miracle to Fatima, there's every
indication that alien "gods" can play the role of ultimate imposters and
peerless imposers of their own "miracles".

What interests me is that some of these interpretations show a deeply spiritual
side (both good and evil), and others are patently, deliberately bogus --
almost designed to dash the expectations they raise.

Best,
  Clark


--  
Clark Matthews - via FidoNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Clark.Matthews@p1.f816.n107.z1.FIDONET.ORG



****************A**B**D**U**C**T**I**O**N****D**I**G**E**S**T*******************

Submissions UUCP..{ncar,isis,csn}!scicom!abduct
Submissions DOMAIN..abduct@scicom.alphacdc.com
Admin Address...abduct-request@shemtaia.weeg.uiowa.edu

Mail to private Paranet/Fidonet addresses from the newsletters:
DOMAIN..firstname.lastname@paranet.org
UUCP..scicom!paranet.org!firstname.lastname
 
****************A**B**D**U**C**T**I**O**N****D**I**G**E**S**T*******************


