Friday, August 19, 2011

Central Issues of the Emma Woods Case

Many within ufology have become acquainted with the Emma Woods case. If you are not among those familiar with it, here is a crash course:

A woman residing in the Pacific region and now calling herself Emma Woods had some very interesting experiences that some would interpret as related to alleged alien abduction. She eventually came in the acquaintance of self-described researcher David Jacobs, who proceeded to go down the regressive hypnosis path. Things got more and more odd between Woods and Jacobs, culminating in numerous e-hypnosis sessions, Jacobs' claims that alien hybrids were on the verge of throttling him (I hate it when that happens), and a host of additional questionable circumstances increasing in absurdity. For details, see Woods' website, which consists of excellent documentation and verification of the chain of events.

As the reader is surmising, the lure of being an interplanetary liaison involved in alien hybrid death stakes and high cosmic intrigue did not prove enough to keep Woods from thinking critically. Woods eventually called game over, told us all what had been going on – along with presenting thorough verification - and has been getting battered by the True Believers (and those who have interests in keeping the True Believers well stocked in foolishness) ever since.

Fast forward to the present. The latest (and chronic) attack on Woods comes from personnel of Paracast forum. Woods recently made a typically well researched and comprehensive post, documenting relevant circumstances on the matter and responding to the latest series of accusations leveled against her. The accusations include what have become the now usual assortment of allegations of mental disorders and supposed resulting behavior, as well as both suggestions and demands that Woods cease expressing herself.

I should first remind those who wish to censor Woods that we are dealing with a demographic that Jacobs and others are encouraging to talk about everything from underground alien bases to aliens who rape and pillage. If you want to make a case for some woman being too weird, obsessive or most anything else, for that matter, to allow her to participate on a UFO forum, you better come loaded for bear.

As if Woods' thorough documentation of facts and the predominantly tolerant and open-minded nature of the UFO community are not reasons enough to allow Woods to speak her peace, there are three primary points I find wrong with the statements of those seeking to silence Woods:

1) None of those who try to saddle Woods with psychiatric disorders are actually qualified to diagnose or identify such conditions.

2) None of those who accuse Woods of unacceptable behavior provide documentation of specific circumstances.

3) My personal experience interacting with Woods gives me no reason whatsoever to suspect her to be anything other than reasonable.

None of us are above an occasional errant remark that would have been better off not being made, particularly in the often passionate and heated world of ufology. Let's just say there aren't many angels treading around these parts where the rest of us rushed in.

I do not wish to be in anybody's camp. I am not interested in taking sides in any forum wars. I could point out some good points and some not so good points expressed by most all of us, and I am not looking to crucify anyone.

That stated, I want to strongly encourage the UFO community to take a closer look at the real issues in the Woods case. I could list a lot of things the issues are not (that keep getting discussed), but it is more productive to remind you what they are. The central issues of the Woods case are largely being lost in the crossfire, and some of the key points are:

- A real hard look needs to be taken at the protection of human research subjects who work with self-described ufologists, especially as it relates to supposed investigative techniques that throw critical thinking under the bus and ignore American Medical Association policy.

- Outright lies have been told and promoted about Woods' actions and circumstances, tactics comparable to defense attorneys attempting to defame the victim to deflect attention from what their client, the criminal, actually did.

- Woods consistently communicates clearly, expressing herself well and providing specific documentation of her points, while her detractors level unspecific accusations lacking verification and substance.

- Jacobs clearly tries to lead his research subjects to predetermined points. The well is so tainted it should be capped.

- Jacobs, at best, made some extremely poor errors in judgment while interacting with Woods.

- If Jacobs or any of the rest of the witch hunt gang would ever present any actual evidence, as defined by the professional research community, of alien abduction and of which they chronically and falsely claim to possess, they would have no need to conduct such public relations campaigns as have become the norm.

- Woods had some interesting experiences. Anybody remember those: interesting experiences?

- Woods has every right to discuss her case and the related abuse as long as she so chooses.

- By any definitions, it is irrational and unreasonable for others to suggest Woods should silence herself and cease discussing her own case and related abuse while they, no less, continue discussing both her and her case. To suggest such is simply unreasonable.

Thursday, August 4, 2011

Suspending Judgment or Knowing: Mind Control and Alien Abduction

One is required to suspend judgment on conclusions in order to consider the feasibility of alleged alien abduction. No conclusive evidence exists that non-human beings, much less inter-planetary visitors, are conducting experiments against the will of their human research subjects. No suspension of judgment is required, however, in accepting the existence of state-sponsored mind control victims.

If a person walks up to you at a meeting for discussion of paranormal subject matter and tells you they are a mind control victim, of course you should be skeptical - as you should if they tell you they have been on an alien's examination table. A difference in the two is that mind control victims conclusively exist, so it is simply a question of whether or not you happen to be actually talking to one at that particular point in time.

The general mind control hypothesis as an explanation for reported alien abduction – the simple version - goes something like this: It is a well documented fact that substantial resources were invested in mind control. Some of the victims may have either been intentionally led to believe they were alien abductees or inadvertently drew such incorrect conclusions about their ordeals.

A brief sample of supporting evidence includes intelligence projects such as MKULTRA. See, for instance, Vietnam Veterans of America versus Central Intelligence Agency, a case currently pending in California Federal court.

Further study might include the experiments conducted at Allan Memorial Institute in Montreal, in which the U.S. Department of Defense paid damages to unknowing victims who sought psychiatric care. Incidentally, Martti Koski, one of the victims, claimed his abusers told him they were from another planet.

There is much, much more, but you get the idea. Mind control experiments indeed happened.

The mind control hypothesis for alien abduction brings out the worst in both the True Believers and the Stubborn Skeptics, for whatever reasons. It is not hard to understand why the Believers take exception, as they do with any and every hypothesis that dares suggest witness testimony and hypothetical lines of reasoning should only be accepted with suspensions of judgment.

The Skeptics are subject to getting bent out of shape for any number of reasons, all of which, as in the case of their starry eyed counterparts, hamper the sincere pursuit of truth. There should be no problem with the open and rational discussion of any hypothesis if certain protocol is respected and followed, such as accurately identifying differences between terms like 'facts' and 'opinions,' and 'objective conclusions' and 'subjective beliefs.'

The Stubborn Skeptics would have you believe, for example, that the U.S. state-sponsored mind control movement stopped in the 1970's. Even if that were conclusively the case, which it is not, it by no means gives us rational reason to completely discount the consideration that some reports of alien abduction may be attributable to trauma sustained during such experiments. Furthermore, such human rights violations remain an issue and the development of related technologies were not ceased, as demonstrated by Project Censored of Sonoma State University.

Are mind control experiments and related human rights violations responsible for any reports of alien abduction? I do not know.

I do not know if any alien abductions ever happened. I know mind control experiments happened. That is not a statement based on subjective belief or emotional preference. It is, indeed, a fact. The subsequent relevant questions and their implications to the abduction phenomenon deserve reasonable consideration.