Tuesday, August 11, 2015

MUFON, Sham Inquiry and the Woods/Jacobs Scandal

Recipient of MUFON PA
2015 Lifetime Achievement Award,
Dr. David Jacobs
Retired historian, author and investigator of alleged alien abduction Dr. David Jacobs will be presented a lifetime achievement award at an upcoming conference conducted by MUFON PA in Philadelphia. Jacobs is also the keynote speaker for the October event. In a bio on his website, Jacobs purports to be "a strong advocate of strict scientific and ethical research methodology," and MUFON purports via its mission statement to be dedicated to "the scientific study of UFOs for the benefit of humanity."

Well, I'm always up for some good strict scientific info on UFOs, so hot damn! This outghta be great, right?


I emailed MUFON Executive Director Jan Harzan and MUFON PA State Director John Ventre and asked permission to pose a few questions. For the sake of accuracy and context I will share an August 8 email exchange, rather than summarize it, that subsequently occurred with Ventre. I will then present what I interpret to be significant points of interest. 

The Email Exchange

My initial email read as follows:

Hello Gentlemen:

Jack Brewer here from the blog, 'The UFO Trail'.

Would it be okay if I email you a few questions about the upcoming MUFON PA conference in Philadelphia and include your responses in a blog post? I would particularly like to obtain information about the selection process resulting in Dr. David Jacobs as the keynote speaker and recipient of a lifetime achievement award as described in the following link:

Thanks for your consideration,

The UFO Trail


Below is John Ventre's reply and the subsequent exchange between the two of us with minor edits for grammar and clarity.


I already answered that question on the UFOinfo forum and don't plan to do that again. There are 3-4 antagonist haters on that site that ruins it for everyone else.

If you are writing an objective article then I will reply.


My response:

Thanks for your reply. I'm not familiar with your forum post, but perhaps you will offer responses to the following items at your convenience:

Who was empowered to select Dr. David Jacobs as a recipient of a lifetime achievement award?

What was the criteria used to select a recipient? 

Given the MUFON mission statement of dedication to scientific study for the benefit of humanity, would you please explain specifically what methodology employed by Jacobs was identified as scientific? What makes it so?





I select the speakers for our 3 Pa conferences which you can view at www.mufonpa.com. I have read approx. 30 UFO books in the past year as I try to figure out the origin of the Grey abduction phenomena. The only 3 names referenced multiple times in these books are Mack, Vallee and Jacobs. I was surprised that Kathie Marden who heads up MUFON's abduction research was never mentioned. I tried to book Vallee who said he no longer does conferences and Mack is no longer with us. We also try to recognize a veteran in the field with a lifetime achievement award. In the past, we recognized Stanton Friedman, Linda Moulton Howe, Bill Birnes and Travis Walton. We are also recognizing Loren Coleman at our Pitt Conf in Nov. I also don’t theme my Pa conferences and offer a variety of speakers and topics including Bigfoot and the paranormal etc. You also need to know that MUFON states operate fairly independent of HQ so these were my decisions. Jacobs was a pioneer in this field when there were few. Jacobs and Hopkins basically wrote the book on regressive hypnosis and many of their techniques are still used today. For critics who say he had no formal training, I say he has a PhD and there was no formal training in this field when he started. I think Jacobs is highly qualified and I say to the critics that you can view it as an Elia Kazan 1999 Academy Award. You don’t have to like the man or his methods but his contributions to Ufology stand. I for one absolutely agree that the ETs are not here to help. That is Jacobs' message. I have a different view on who they actually are and you can read all about that in my new book, "Case for UFOs" in September. . . . . .

John Ventre


Thanks, John, and I understand that you would obviously be tolerant of Dr. Jacobs' methodology, else you would not have offered him a lifetime achievement award - but that does not address my inquiry about scientific study. 

So I would pose the question this way, please:

Did you identify any of Jacobs' methodology as scientific, or did you decide you were not concerned about his lack of practicing scientific study?

Also, would you please offer a quote or two on how you resolve your choice of Jacobs as an award recipient with the Emma Woods scandal?

If helpful, here is a page containing specific quotes and recordings of interactions between Jacobs and Woods during hypnosis:

Would you please explain, specifically, how you reconcile such statements with presenting a lifetime achievement award from a purportedly scientific research organization?





State conferences do not follow the same criteria as the yearly Symposium. They can be informative, entertaining or instructive. I once had a punk rock band perform a UFO song for us at the end of the conference. I thought it was great. I read Bill Birnes' take on Jacobs and Woods years ago. That’s for the courts to decide, not me. By your logic, we should condemn NASA and the US space program because we recruited NAZI scientists and Wernher von Braun. Not my place. Jacobs has contributed much to the field and is one of the few voices who doesn’t believe abductions are for our benefit and "They" are here to help us. John Wayne and Clint Eastwood were never really great actors but they won academy awards for their body of work.

Be sure to send me a link to your article.


I sincerely do not mean to be overly aggressive on the point of scientific study, John, but you are arguably evading the question. 

Did you or did you not consider sound scientific research principles as criteria for potential lifetime achievement award recipients?

Would you please explain your stance on the Emma Woods scandal in relation to bestowing David Jacobs with an award?

Those do not seem like unreasonable questions to me. If you disagree, I am more than willing to quote any explanations you might care to provide as to why the points are not valid or are unreasonable.


[Note: Ventre soon sent three emails before I replied further. One simply stated, "Here’s a name I wouldn’t give a LT Achievement award to: Stan Romanek," another read:]

The main reason I want [David Jacobs] to lecture is that he and Whitley Strieber are the only 2 out there that have concluded that abductions are evil and not for the benefit of mankind. I agree. Most abduction groups are self-deluded with liberal metaphysical beliefs that "they" are here to save the planet or cure diseases. Hasn’t happened and won’t happen. Jacobs' message needs to get out. His message will do more good than focusing on the Emma Woods case. I believe many people thought she was unstable.

[Note: Wow. Is that implying that hypnotically suggesting MPD, instructing a woman to send her undergarments and telling her to wear a chastity belt, for examples, are irrelevant as long as "many people" think she is unstable? For whatever reasons, those many people seem to ignore that it was the same methodology as employed during the Woods case that Jacobs used with other research subjects to develop that message he markets. We'll come back to that in a bit. Another email, of which I opted to respond, stated:]


If you dig deep enough you will find something to critique on every name in this field. I am honoring his body of work just as I did LM Howe and Bill Birnes who I am sure you could critique also.

I think you are confusing my state event with the International MUFON Symposium which usually features 7-8 PHD level speakers. Emma Woods is not the deciding factor; his overall contribution is.


Just to be clear, John, are you suggesting that MUFON PA does not concern itself with the MUFON mission statement, and that you do not expect your lifetime achievement award recipient to conduct scientific study?

Is that a reasonable interpretation of your comments?



No Jack, that’s what you want to write. My award is for the person’s body of work and contributions to the field.


Okay, then would you please explain specifically what you identify about David Jacobs' "body of work and contributions to the field" that involve scientific study?

Is that not a reasonable question?

If not, why not?

[Note: No further emails were received from Ventre, and Harzan did not reply to the initial query.]

Sham Inquiry 

With scientific study for the benefit of humanity like that, who needs bias and exploitation?

Robert Sheaffer presenting at the
2012 Independent Investigations Group Awards
Sharon Hill of 'Doubtful News' coined the term, "sham inquiry." It is basically defined as non-scientific, often questionable research activities misrepresented as scientific procedures. The detrimental consequences can be numerous and severe. In the case of MUFON's ongoing assertions of engaging in scientific study, Robert Sheaffer of 'Bad UFOs' summed it up quite well when he recently suggested that maybe the organization should just drop the false pretense and acknowledge what it actually does.

"Perhaps MUFON should simply admit that it is in the business of providing people with titillating and exciting UFO stories, without worrying about whether they are true," Sheaffer wrote.

The issue is indeed relevant. MUFON PA and any other group are entitled to invite whoever they want to speak as guests and bestow awards upon them. However, if they invite figures who employ regressive hypnosis as an investigative tool and declare humankind to be under invasion by diabolical aliens and their sexually deviant hybrids, while providing no corroborating conclusive evidence and failing to demonstrate systematic research methodology, then they are not entitled to label their activities scientific. That would be the case whether they do so directly, indirectly or while evading relevant questions. 

Please allow me to emphasize the point as it seems to often be elusive: People are entitled to believe virtually anything they choose, as well as pursue whatever activities they want, as long as they fall within the limits of the law. They are not entitled to call any given activity scientific, however, unless it meets certain criteria. To do so, and conduct sham inquiry, is often an attempt to deceptively add unwarranted credibility to an activity and related agenda that otherwise lacks legitimacy.


The ethical implications are staggering. Emma Woods provided ufology with extensive documentation through audio recordings that David Jacobs conducted regressive hypnosis via international telephone calls (Ya caught that, right? ...conducted regressive hypnosis via international telephone calls?) in which the associate professor of history suggested she had Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD). Both Jacobs and Woods were aware they were being recorded during the sessions. In one such session, Jacobs admittedly led and shaped Woods' statements about an alleged abduction in which she was sexually assaulted and used as what he termed the facilitator of sperm collection. In another hypnosis session he suggested she start wearing a chastity belt, the type of which he could select for her because they have them at a sex shop he frequented, he explained, and it would put a "kink" in the plans of hybrids allegedly committing ongoing sexual assaults (Yes, he literally said that). He additionally suggested to Woods during hypnosis sessions, according to the recordings, that she mail him her underpants - and to not think about it afterward. Is it just me, or is it difficult to fit such behavior into the context of strict scientific and ethical research methodology?

A ufologist supply store specializing in devices used to 
discourage sexual assaults committed by ET-human hybrids, 
or an adult novelty shop, depending on who you ask

John Ventre may have been correct when he suggested that some of Jacobs' actions might warrant attention from legal authorities and the court. To add some context, let's consider a recent case currently pending and allegedly involving extremely questionable use of hypnosis.

The law license of Ohio attorney Michael W. Fine was suspended pending further investigation when police recorded Fine apparently using hypnosis to manipulate a female client into participating in sexual acts without her consent. According to a November, 2014 complaint filed with the State of Ohio, "Jane Doe 1" reported that she discovered her clothing disheveled after meetings with Fine, and that she found herself unable to remember parts of their interactions. She reported similar memory loss following telephone conversations with the attorney. 

Eventually a police investigation was launched, and a warrant was obtained to record a meeting between Doe 1 and Fine without his knowledge. Police came out of hiding and intervened when Fine allegedly used code words to induce a hypnotic state, followed by issuing graphic sexual commands.  

Interestingly, a second woman, "Jane Doe 2," who reportedly did not know about the first woman, approached authorities with similar allegations about the same attorney. According to the complaint filed, Doe 2 stated that Fine urged her to allow him to teach her what he called meditation and relaxation techniques. She suspected she was being hypnotized for exploitative purposes, and reported experiencing circumstances similar to Jane Doe 1. Police therefore obtained corroborating testimonies from independent witnesses.

Expert opinion was provided to the court, including "scientific support for both the therapeutic and manipulative use of hypnosis," by clinical psychologist Dr. Ross Santamaria. He reported Fine's behavior to be in violation of professional protocols, and the complaint charged that Fine represented "a substantial threat of serious harm to the public." Dr. Santamaria explained that hypnosis can be used to manipulate individuals in immoral, unethical, illegal and inappropriate ways.

Back home in ufology, the license of clinical social worker, hypnotist and former MUFON Director of Abduction Research John Carpenter was put on a five-year probation period in 2001 after investigator Gary Hart filed complaints with MUFON and the State of Missouri, where Carpenter was licensed. The complaints cited a series of actions which became known as the Carpenter Affair, in which Carpenter provided copies of case files of 140 hypnosis subjects and possible alien abductees to controversial philanthropist Robert Bigelow in exchange for approximately $14,000. The subjects, some of which had paid Carpenter for his services, were not informed their files were copied and shared, and Carpenter went on to marry two of his former clients. MUFON failed to act on Hart's complaint. 

"Immediately after filing my MUFON complaint," Hart explained to me during a 2013 email exchange, "I was told in no uncertain terms that MUFON had no intention of taking the complaint seriously and actually doing an investigation, so I investigated the case further and made a proper report/complaint to the state licensing board."

Founding member of MUFON,
John Schuessler
When MUFON continued to enable the circumstances and left Carpenter in a leadership role, Hart submitted the complaint to the Missouri Division of Professional Registration, which handed down the five-year probation. Carpenter subsequently resigned from his position as Director of Abduction Research, according to the April, 2001 MUFON Journal, in which John Schuessler described Carpenter as vacating the position for "personal reasons and the need to spend more time with his career activities." The vast majority of the 140 and much of the MUFON membership never knew of the Carpenter Affair. The probation period placed on Carpenter's license as a clinical social worker was apparently successfully completed in 2006.

David Jacobs, in contrast to attorney Fine and social worker Carpenter, to the best of my knowledge does not hold any type of license directly compromised by his reckless hypnosis activities. It would seem reasonable to suspect that he and the late Budd Hopkins, his long time associate and fellow hypnosis advocate, avoided undertaking professional training, certification and accepting payment for their endeavors for the very reason of minimizing options of legal redress available to their hypnosis subjects.
Significance of the Woods/Jacobs Scandal

Ethical standards are prioritized among professional researchers for reasons in addition to valuing the safety of the research subject. While the subject's well being should certainly be prioritized, especially if your mission statement includes reference to the benefit of humanity, there is another very important reason ethics matter: They effect the quality of the research conducted and the subsequent accuracy of information reported. All games aside of evading accountability about scientific study and criteria for selecting award recipients, there are some very significant issues at the heart of the Emma Woods and David Jacobs scandal that should be addressed and resolved. Failing to do so calls into question Jacobs' other "research" offerings, as well as the judgment and motives of those who support his work.

For starters, the Emma Woods case cannot be surgically removed from Jacobs' body of work. The very methodology employed with Woods, and the resulting stories of ET-human hybrids having their way with human females, is what Jacobs built his entire thesis upon. The Woods debacle is the byproduct of Jacobs' method of operation, not the nucleus of the problem. It's a result of the problem and sham inquiry.

Ill advised activities and resulting unsupported assumptions were used to prop up more assumptions, each in turn misrepresented as facts, leading to a body of work in which the Woods case is but a reflection. Moreover, former Jacobs research subject Brian Reed corroborated the Woods complaints and leveled accusations of his own. Woods is not the isolated incident she is made out to be by Jacobs apologists. And if Jacobs was wrong about and/or retracted virtually everything he was going to write on her experiences, what does that suggest about the cases he continues to assure us are solid? 

Any way one chooses to look at it, Emma Woods is obviously and understandably very unhappy with the evolution of her interactions with David Jacobs, and he didn't fare so well himself. He was utterly ineffective in both mining credible data and assisting the witness. If we're willing to temporarily play along with the idea Jacobs even remotely believes the story he peddles, it becomes important to know exactly what chains of events led him to jump the shark. Both he and Woods were very unhappy with the outcome of the interaction, as well as many more people, so what, exactly, is he doing to correct his course?

That is relevant in identifying what actions Jacobs and other investigators should take to ensure they do not make the same mistakes again. If he and his colleagues are sincere about conducting research that bears reliable results, which is increasingly doubtful (if even a reasonable assumption) at this point, they must embrace critical analysis and peer review. To continue to fail to do so while seemingly hoping people will just stop talking about sham inquiry and the Emma Woods case suggests Jacobs and his supporters are much more interested in campaigning for their agendas and preconceived conclusions than conducting even reasonable research, much less scientific study as purported. It also suggests they are well aware that transparency and accountability would be devastating to David Jacobs, and, by association, the flailing alien abduction narrative of which they hitched their wagons.

Shouldn't we be asking what, if any, reasons remain at this point to reject the evidence presented by Emma Woods, Carol Rainey and others? Will Jacobs or any of his supporters ever actually address points raised by Woods and Rainey, rather than dismiss them out of hand with insulting and irrelevant stereotypes? After five years now, it appears not.

If we don't ask the relevant questions, we enable the problems, enable sham inquiry and continue to get more of the same: Entirely unsupported stories of aliens and ET-human hybrids, spun by self-described investigators promoted by a purported scientific research organization which consists of directors who, by all appearance, either do not understand or do not care about criteria of the scientific study they are entrusted to conduct and facilitate. In the mean time and if Emma Woods is any indication, women are getting called on the phone, hypnotized and subjected to suggestions they suffer from MPD, enlisted to discuss items sold at sex shops, and instructed to mail their unwashed underpants absent any afterthought, all under the guise of conducting strict scientific and ethical research - and then called crazy when they voice objections.



'Aliens Versus Predator: The Incredible Visitations at Emma Woods', Jeremy Vaeni

'The Priests of High Strangeness: Co-Creation of the "Alien Abduction Phenomenon"', Carol Rainey

'Emma Woods Files', the website of Emma Woods, in which the home page includes an audio recording of Jacobs' hypnotic suggestions of MPD

'The Woods/Jacobs Tapes and the 'Oral History' Falsehood', Jack Brewer, includes audio clips

Paratopia Episode 94: Brian Reed Vindicates Emma Woods, podcast interview conducted by Jeremy Vaeni and Jeff Ritzmann

'Unhelpful Hints: Deflection and Withholding Evidence in the David Jacobs Scandal', Tyler Kokjohn, PhD


  1. Excellent article. There needs to be more investigative journalism like this to clean up this field. The problem, of course, is that once the field is cleaned up there will be very few researchers left.

    As for the MUFON PA State Director, all you need to know can be gleaned from reading the following article:


    1. Thank you, sir. Much appreciated.

    2. jack you did an awesome job.Just by the feel of it ,iknew mufon was off.I did not pay my dues this year because i believe them to be compromised.I have come to believe it's part of the brainwash.I fully support and thank you for bringing this to light.We want the truth,and nothing but the truth.

  2. So - question. I believe I read somewhere above that you mentioned a 'peer' group to review/critique the work of these researchers. Just who might that be? Mix in with the researchers the added element of intelligence infiltrators, some of whom are participating as 'researchers' in their collective fields, you now have a veritable witches brew of mixed agendas JUST within the research community (let alone all the other areas of research).

    You cannot research this field as you would other fields of study down here on earth. Get real, folks. This entire phenomena is such that it is elusive and I would suggest to you that this is deliberately so. The technologies of these beings, of which I've borne witness myself, are beyond what most of us have seen on the terrestrial end. Sleep paralysis isn't the answer for most of whom experience these anomalies and does even begin to account for the plethora of accounts provided by individuals all around the world who have oft described identical case scenarios to those of whom describe like events across the globe. It has taken an enormous amount of courage for some of these contactees/abductees to come out publicly and speak about their experiences. Are there hoaxers in the mix? Most likely, but I would surmise not as many as skeptics would perhaps have us believe.

    This phenomenon is not about science. It is not something one can measure. And that's the point. In order to even begin to try to understand some of what is happening here, one has to step outside that box of belief systems we've been told is truth down here and kick that damned box a thousand miles away. You can criticize all you want those researchers who have been doing the leg work, but who would you suggest you replace these researchers with? I'm personally not a huge fan or either Jacobs OR Hopkins. I have issues with both of their work (most especially with Jacobs).

    1. Hello, 'mom,

      A concise response to your comments might be that nothing you expressed excuses Jacobs and MUFON from claiming they conduct scientific research. I don't support excuses for their false pretenses.

      Hope you're doing well.

  3. My favorite researcher, hands down, was Dr. Karla Turner. She was fabulous. She was meticulous, intelligent, articulate and she would not back down from the dark side to this phenomenon. She believed in providing ALL research criteria she collected; she did not withhold any research info. she found simply because it did not 'fit' with the majority of case work reported by other researchers.

    She truly believed in withholding bias and believed in providing complete transparency regarding her work. She stated during one of her lectures that she did not believe wearing a paternal type stance when it came to submitting her research within the community. She felt the community at large could HANDLE the research that was being collected, good or bad. That's what I loved about her work (and her). I've frankly not witnessed anyone else in the research community that I feel come close to the integrity and courage Karla possessed.

    The amount of arguing and back stabbing I have seen with ADULTS involved in this research sickens me to my core. There are those of whom do not want ANY truth about any of this phenomenon to leak out, for whatever the reason.

    Black ops and our abc's are heavily invested in this genre. Billions, if not trillions of $$ are invested within these black ops units for various agendas/purposes. Greed, power, thirst for control and just plain decadence seems to rule this earth (and beyond for that matter). Until and unless, humanity (and all others) pull their collective acts together, NO truth from ANY of the so called research down here is going to amount to anything even close to the truth.

    So - to me, all those critics out there that criticize those that are doing the research...if you all think you can do it better, then DO IT! Do the leg work needed, cause Lord knows, more help is needed.

    What you are asking for in the way of science and 'proof' is somewhat like expecting to stop a tsunami with nothing more than a pail and shovel. The average researcher is not funded! The cover up re this issue has made it next to impossible to even remotely come close to the funding that is so desperately needed to do the research!

    So let's start there. Who wants to fund a major abduction research project? Anyone here able to fund any of the research currently being done? I'd love to be able to fund this type research, but not able to. Have I myself criticized some of those in the field? You bet, most especially those of whom SOLD files in exchange for glory and $$. That was a truly despicable thing to do. There are those out there who desperately need help trying to find answers as to why they've had these events happening to them and to their loved ones. They deserve answers. But I would say I would be hard pressed in recommending most of the researchers out there, at this time, to anyone who is seeking help.

    1. I agree about the late Karla Turner, who was mentored by the late Barbara Bartholic, another excellent researcher, now passed on, as well as Elaine Douglass who blogger Mike Clelland was friends with and did an excellent 'final' interview before her passing. All three did research that was far more interesting and in-depth than Jacobs. Jacobs first book (his thesis on modern era ufos) was very good though. After that he went down a slippery slope.

      As for Lifetime Achievement awards regarding researchers (still living) that are more deserving (imo) than David Jacobs, it seems to me Raymond Fowler, now retired, would more than qualify. Interestingly Fowler was the only well-known fellow researcher who publically commented on and criticized Jacobs behavior regarding 'Emma Woods' (on a UFO Magazine blog comment). Just because a researcher is retired (or passed on) shouldn't be an excuse (for Ventre) to not award them with this accolade, imo.

    2. Agreed. I also agree with you re the late Barbara Bartholic and Elaine Douglass (she was a trip - loved her).

      As for awards given: Why does ANYONE need an award? I realize on some level within all our egos there's this need (somewhat) for recognition. But how about just good old fashioned hard work, presented in a credible, non-biased fashion and then presented as such? How about no holding back, no matter what the research shows and providing same in a thoroughly transparent manner? How about brushing all ego aside and just do what you need to do, with as much integrity/credibility as you can muster?

      That would be a start...

      Helping your fellow man should be all the reward one needs...

  4. Jack: Let's get real about MUFON; that organization is a joke. Always has been. Again, this phenomenon is NOT about science!!! It's much, much more than that. It's about something deeper. And it's also a subject which invokes fear in just about everyone I've ever met (other than the lovers and lighters, and don't get me started on that).

    My comments were not meant to invoke 'excuses' for the likes of Jacobs and others who have deliberately deceived, despoiled and are, generally speaking, in this particular field for nothing more than glory and ego. I would surmise this encompasses most of the reasons anyone is involved in this research (for the most part).

    Personally, I truly absolutely no one 100% in this field.

    As to your last statement, as do my 'doing well.' No, I'm not always doing well. I've been hit hard these past several years with this stuff and it pisses me off. I've had a lot happen to me, our son and my husband and I have genuinely felt I have absolutely no one to go to for help. Up until these events started happening all over again, I was living a fairly normal life. I am a former legal assistant, married to an attorney; I have one son (who rather unfortunately has had the displeasure in going through some of these events with good old mom here), and quite frankly, it's been extremely difficult.

    I've been able to seek help with a therapist out here who has been of some help, but bless her heart, she's in this over her head. She has been extremely helpful, but has no real answers for me or my family. My Dad has finally, at the ripe old age of 80, owned up to being involved with black ops (he admitted this, finally, to a family member), but he won't talk. He's been with one of the abc's for years (since he was approx. 19 years of age).

    My mom tried telling me about some of this several years ago. I told her I didn't believe her. Then wham. Several years later, here we are. Found out she was telling me the truth. She's passed on, now. She was dying when she finally came out with the truth. But by then, I was too livid with her because I realized that no one in my family had told me any semblance of the truth when I was a kid, going through all this stuff.

    So no, Jack. I am now always doing well these days. Don't get me wrong; I'm a feisty person and I do, for the most part, get through my days well enough. But I do have to take things one day at a time. Just one day at a time. That's all I can do at this point.

    1. Sorry to hear about the issues you are dealing with. I hope things get better over time. I know how hard it can be trying to work out what is going on in a situation where there is no easy way to find the answers..

  5. MUFON is nothing more than an arm of the intelligence community. People like Ventre are merely wannabe spooks, Harzan and those further up probably already are (see Harzan stumble lately when asked about CIA and NSA involvement with MUFON?) The Bigelow deal told us everything we need to know. Bigelow is still involved with MUFON and still also buying up UFO and abduction data from private researchers. To all those in MUFON thinking that they are doing a service to their country - you aren't. The information goes into private organisations that have no interest in the security or safety of any one nation's population. To all in MUFON thinking you are fighting the good fight. You are simply paying to go data gathering for those upstairs. The only place you will see your results are on Hangar 1 (i.e. utter fiction). Given this backdrop is there any surprise that David Jacobs would be selected for a lifetime achievement award by one of the wannabe spooks in this organisation? It's totally fitting. It makes a mockery of the subject and promotes the anti-liberal agenda of Mr Ventre as he transparently outlined in his responses.

  6. @Anonymous,

    YES! THANK you for saying what I've known for many years now. Back in 2006, when I was starting to remember some things from my past (mostly my childhood), I was told by none other than Hopkins that I should speak with my state's local MUFON State Director. Biggest mistake I ever made. During the time I worked with the (then) Ohio State MUFON Director (Ohio is my home state), our family started to immediately experience harassment of the ilk you read about in so many other accounts. Our son, then in middle school, was unhappily the recipient of black ops harassment simply when walking home from school with a friend of his. It was absolutely horrendous.

    MUFON is NOTHING more than a data mining collection pit. It is serving no one's best interest, other than those involved in this whole sordid cover up. And that's the truth. They are absolutely making a mockery of this subject, but that was the intent all along.

    So yes. Those of whom are now working for MUFON and think they're somehow helping humanity, you've been taken for a ride. You have been deceived into the false belief that you are helping your fellow human beings, when nothing could be further from the truth.

    I was told confidentially, several years ago, that MUFON has ALWAYS been an intelligence gathering front. I have this information from an excellent, credible source. From what I and my family witnessed when I was working with MUFON (at that time I did not know what I now know about my own family background with intelligence), I can say truthfully that MUFON is nothing more than a cover up front for the powers that be that are interested in data mining.

    1. The U.S government can't stop this phenomena from entering the U.S air space, they can't stop abductions and they can't (in fear of panic) tell the public that they have no control of the phenomena.

      And yet they need to collect information to be able to work on this issue.

      So if MUFON is a government front, or if they have infiltrated the organization to gather information... then they are at least active and are trying to do something to solve this problem.

      I understand that someone who is affected by the phenomena will feel abandoned by the entire world and used by their own government who should serve the nation and its people. But how should they go about to do their job if going public about the phenomena might lead to a collapse of the society ?

      Would it be better if they went public to get all the best scientists to work on this phenomena and risk chaos, or is it better to hide the truth and work quietly with a few selected top scientists under normal political and economic conditions ?


  7. Missouri MUFON is having Michael Horn speak which is almost as bad as Jacobs.

  8. I'm pretty sure MUFON is an arm of the un-intelligence community. Even his reading of Strieber's take on the phenomenon is wrong. But at least he's set a bar for lifetime achievement at... that's right... Romanek. lol

    More confusing than his not understanding what "scientific achievment" means is the MUFON policy for being able to use their name. You can give a MUFON award and not have it be MUFON-approved? Whaaaaaat? That sounds as preposterous as everything else.

    Best of all, he's written a book. What a wonderful addition to the serious literature that must be.

  9. "...Even his reading of Strieber's take on the phenomenon is wrong..."

    Yes, Jeremy! That's precisely what I was thinking when I read that statement. I'm not a huge fan of Strieber's per se, but I have read a number of his books. He's a brilliant author, but I'm pretty sure his take on Strieber's opinion about the Greys is incorrect.

  10. Okay, one more thing bugging me here. It's this whole simplistic notion of good vs. evil. He likes David Jacobs because David Jacobs thinks evil aliens are here. And he agrees with that assessment. Therefore, lifetime achievement award. How is this different from religion?

    Perhaps the award should be more about identifying (or in David's case, creating) evil space demons we can exorcise than about science. Why not? It's not as though MUFON approves or disapproves anything with their name on it.

    1. It's definitely material for study by sociologists and students of psychology. And we haven't even gotten to the part yet where Jacobs wanted his email messages coded, everybody to use aliases and threatening text messages from those dastardly hybrids. And then there were the research subjects conducting hypnosis with one another via texting.

      In all seriousness and as Jeremy is aware, I've only scratched the surface here with what goes on in Camp Jacobs. Religion/cultism is indeed not an unreasonable stretch at all.

    2. As for Ventre, I'm not sure what his deal is, but he definitely did not demonstrate an ability to isolate issues and discuss them systematically. I can understand the comparison to religion of the relatively nonexistent award selection process. It seems primary factors included notoriety and how much Ventre happened to agree with the dogma peddled.

      I developed the idea that Ventre wanted to express something along the lines of he enjoys what he does and wished I'd just go away with all this 'explain yourself' stuff. I felt as if he simply does not know how to come to terms with the glaring contradictions.

  11. As for Ventre? As with a lot of people in this field he's way above his head. Anyone with only an average intelligence that studies the literature of the past 70 years would be able to conclude that the experiences/folklore/accounts of the alleged experiences run the entire spectrum - from the most miraculous (good?) to the seemingly evil (bad?). To then try and manipulate this narrative shows not only a woeful lack of respect to the subject but also a total disregard for science. (Yes... that S word again). Only a complete idiot would assimilate the said extremes into liberal and non-liberal agendas. A severe case of the "for us or against us mind set" in more ways than one.

  12. Kudos to you jack for another great post and asking the questions, even though they were avoided by mr ventre.

    I'm very sure that there is something going on that is effecting certain people, like bayareamom. I'm just not so sure the something is aliens and hybrids.

    Jacobs wrote a book that made me get scared and freak out in a high school lets go look for bloody Mary type of way. He's a doctor and a professor right? People like him are supposed to be kinda smart right? Then how did jump into believing these abduction memories and decide there was a hybrid program? Yet the moment he is busted being pervert he calls his patient crazy! Um...I think the crazy label needs to slapped on Jacobs forehead. Hypnotism thru the phone? Ahahaha! Come on people. What a duck egg.

    It's really messed up because obviously Emma and others are experiencing something very real and very upsetting. They don't need to be taken advantage of the way they have been.

    I've been researching this phenomena for quite a while and I still don't know what I believe. I know very few things for certain. One being that David Jacobs is a hack, and aliens are douchebags. :)

    1. Thank you very much for the encouragement. It is appreciated.

      I, too, am willing to suspend judgment on select reports of high strangeness. As you suggest, I'm not willing to be administered large doses of unsupported, fantastic proclamations without question.

  13. @Saint Theresa:

    There are many credible people who have come out openly and have discussed their experiences. The Black Triangle Abduction is a fabulous book and one of the first books I read on this subject. Dan Sherman, who was formerly with the NSA, wrote a book entitled, "Above Black," which is also a very good book. Sherman is a bit bland during his speeches/interviews, but he is extremely credible, articulate and forthcoming in his approach. He will not venture outside his knowledge/need to know boundaries when he describes what happened to him several years back when working with the NSA.

    Your research into this area need not proceed in some sort of linear fashion. It might behoove you to read up on several different types of events connected to the phenomena to try to glean a better grasp as to what this is all about. But above all, suspend your conditioned belief system and keep an open mind as you go through your research. Not all is as it seems and this is most especially true when delving into this phenomena.

    I, too, at times have been unwilling and/or unable to suspend a particular mindset regarding some of this phenomena, until certain events transpired which FORCED me outside that conditioned box I was living in. As someone very wise once said to me, and I'll repeat it here yet again, "You need to kick that conditioned box you've been living in a thousand miles away from you," when delving into the mysteries surrounding the events you are experiencing.

    As they say, you cannot unring that bell. Once me, our son and my very left-brained attorney husband witnessed what we have out there, there simply was no turning back. We HAD to suspend our preconceived notions about all of this and learn to accept what was being presented to us.

    I assure you - aliens DO exist, SOME of them are extremely benevolent, and some just as much, are not. Most, perhaps, fall somewhere in between.

    They are here. They've never NOT been here. And there is a plethora of information out there to confirm that, if you are only willing to dive in head first and look, learn and listen.

    1. "They've never NOT been here." - Then are they alien or is that a Western construct?

    2. Oh boy.. there are so many layers to both the statement and the question!

    3. yes,i also agree that they have always been here.I have also had an experience.

    4. Bayareamom, with all due respect, you do not know I have knowlege of and you need not assume I haven't done my home work. My grasp is fine thank you very much.

      I will not believe in aliens because a poster on the Internet told me they're real. If that make you think I'm missing something then you're no better than anyone who pushes their experiences as truth.

      Theres nothing on the Internet that confirms aliens are here or were here either.

      I'll give you a chance to give me a better grasp, and prove you're right, link me to some evidence.

      I've read the books you've mentioned and I've been reading and researching this phenomenon for over 20 years and I know the world isn't what we have been taught to see, I don't doubt your experiences. They are simply your experiences, and no one else's. I don't think you are crazy I'm sure you've been thru hell because of these experiences you've had.

      What's been presented to me is that there are a lot of people out there making tons money off of people who are vulnerable, and others carrying out an agenda from up high, as well as those who simply get off on the attention.

      I have not seen any aliens though yet.

  14. @Jeremy:

    Yes. They are alien (not just a Western construct). They've been here well before the human race ever existed. Technically, the human race is the so-called Visitor, not the other way around.

    I was told by someone I do trust within the agency that humans tend to make this alien issue/mystery much more complicated than it actually is. After some of what my family and I have been through, I tend to agree with this statement (but it took me awhile to reach that level of understanding). Humans tend to 'shoot first, ask questions later" when it comes to something they do not understand.

    Fear seems to be the underlying emotion I have witnessed time and time again whenever someone - anyone - is confronted with this alien issue. It's exasperating, on so many levels. But I've been there, too.

    At times, I just want to throw up my hands, and shout out, "They're here! Grow up and deal with it."

    Timothy Good is another great researcher; his books are, I think, a good source for material if you're looking into government/military involvement/issues re this phenomena. Forgot to mention him in my above post...

    I'm not a frequent commenter here and I don't have any plans to do so. I will not become caught up in a web of discussion/debate about this issue. My family and I have been through a helluva lot these past 8 years or so. Truthfully, it's changed us and our perspective about this world/universe in ways we could never have imagined. I have always said I just wanted to know the truth...always.

    I think it's fair at this place in my life that I have, indeed, experienced a modicum of truth because of the events we have experienced. I think it's also fair to say that those of whom profess to want to know the truth about all of this...would they ever experience just half of what my family has experienced, they would just as difficult a time as we have, in accepting it. It's that damned conditioned box we've all been living in and it will throw you for a loop when you are shown in very overt ways, that what you've been taught is truth...isn't the truth whatsoever.

    Joe Lewel's book, "Rulers of the Earth," is another great book to read. No ONE book/document is going to provide you with everything you need to know re this subject. You need to have patience and read, read, read, in order to glean a big picture perspective on perhaps what is going on with all of this.

    In the end, we've discovered that there is actually no reason to have any fear about any of this. It's all about perspective/perception. It's not really about the aliens and/or the ufo mystery at all.

    It's about US, i.e., who we are, why we're here and how we fit in with the rest of the universe and other life that exists. If you want to make it more complicated than that (as I have for quite a bit of my own journey), feel free, but I guarantee you, making things more complicated than it need be with all of this, doesn't get you very far.

    1. thank you so much-this really has given me something to think about.It will be a great reference point and a way to stay grounded.

    2. Sandra,

      Your comment actually made my day. I spoke from my heart and am glad someone was helped with what my observations have been with all that has happened to me and to my family.

      This has not been an easy journey by any means. We have had absolutely lovely events occur with all of this, and some events have been sheer hell. That saying that 'what doesn't kill you will make you stronger,' is an apt statement re all that we've been through. In a way, I wouldn't wish any of this on my own worst enemy, but yet on the other hand, I can certainly see a level of personal growth with myself (and my family) that I can truthfully say I don't think would have occurred had these events not happened.

      Best to you.

  15. What has been obvious to discerning parties for decades now is that the upper hierarchy of MUFON has been corrupt, delusional, and deceptive since its beginning in 1969.

    The board of MUFON, and many of their higher-level personnel, with some exceptions, has been anything but scientific or able to conduct objective, empirical investigation.

    While there are a number of state field investigators and directors who are honestly trying to work within this organization's structure as possible, they will always have their efforts impugned and negatively impacted by the leadership of MUFON, sad to say.

    For MUFON to give a "lifetime achievement" award to the likes of an awful, sleazy reprobate like David Jacobs, or to permit people like Jaime Maussan to be a keynote speaker at their upcoming symposium, clearly illustrates how decrepit, fragmented, and sick the organization has always been and how it has gone from bad to worse.

    They have nothing to offer except disinfotainment, and they have discredited themselves so completely that any rational, objective person interested in UAPs should both avoid and distance themselves from the idiocy and lunatics running MUFON.

  16. That Ventre is giving Jacobs a lifetime achievement award does not surprise me. My knowledge of him is limited to the two episodes of Hanger One that I somehow managed to sit through. He struck me as a perfect fit for that kind of television - prone to sensationalism and a disregard of facts. But the sad part is that compared to what I have seen offered by local MUFON groups, Jacobs might indeed be considered "scientific" and Maussen might be considered to be a "journalist."

    Although I have no doubt that there are people working within MUFON who want to conduct proper investigations, I wonder when some of them are willing to share the stage with Michael Horn, Romanek, JoAnn Richards, and a host of others that have nothing to do with science or rational investigation.

    Until MUFON does not perceive the lowest denominator as a way to advance the organization, and until members demand more, then all the lifetime awards that could be given will amount to little.

  17. Jack - Another great investigative piece! MUFON? Just a carny side show now. I recently spoke to an Ohio MUFON investigator who got quite upset when I mentioned Maussan and his latest hoax. She thought he was legit. These people are either gullible, greedy, or both.

    Pertaining to Jacobs - please edify us further on his sick fraudulent activities. You've done a terrific job of exposing him. But, there's more? Do tell!

  18. Thank you all very much for your interest and encouragement. Much appreciated!

  19. An excellent piece of investigative journalism, Jack! Well done! Bravo!!!
    I wrote a similar piece on David Jacobs in my own book in one chapter titled: "DO YOU RETURN YOUR PHD OR DOCTORATE IN ALIEN ABDUCTION RESEARCH WHEN YOUR WORK IS FAULTY?" However, i like your approach to getting to the heart of your inquiry, do you mind if I quote you?
    As for MUFON, it has long been infiltrated by intelligence agencies much like APRO (which I use to belong to back in the "60s) and NICAP, so it should come as no surprise that agecies like the CIA would via MUFON support Jacobs body of work because it's disinformation and misinformation. In other words Jacobs' body of research work is corrupted!

    1. Glad you appreciate the post, Terry. Thank you.

      Anyone may quote or reference my blog posts as they wish. I just ask for reasonable attribution and it be linked to the original post. Thanks.

    2. Hi Terry, I would be interested to read your book, but cannot find it online. Do you have a link to it? It would be greatly appreciated.

  20. > using hypnosis to manipulate a female client into participating in sexual acts without her consent

    There was a conviction in the UK a couple years ago for just this sort of thing.

    Amateur hypnotist jailed for sexual assault

    1. Thanks, Terry! Hypnosis-related criminal convictions are indeed potentially relevant to the alien abduction genre, unfortunately.

      Some might find a post I did last year of interest, 'Hypnosis as a Criminal Defense', exploring the long history of people being manipulated via hypnosis, sometimes apparently into committing crimes, and the subsequent CIA interest in the possibilities:


  21. Dr David Jacobs scientific methology is to collect memories from people under hypnosis and wait for these memories to be corroborated by other subjects he works with before he presents them as evidence of what is happening to these people.

    Dr Jacobs is the first one to admit that he sometimes screws up and would love to see that the academia would look in to this subject and prove him wrong.

    1. By definition, that's not "scientific methodology." There is simply no way to justify the activities of David Jacobs as conducive with his claims of advocating strict scientific and ethical research methodology. That's simply all there is to it.

    2. Hi anonymous, I think it is important to separate what Dr. Jacobs says he does, from what he actually does. They are two completely different things.

      Dr. Jacobs does not collect memories from people, and then wait for them to be corroborated. He implants memories in people, and then makes sure that his other subjects remember the same things. He does this by directly telling this subjects under hypnosis about it, so they then confabulate the same memories, and sometimes by getting them to transcribe each others hypnosis sessions, so they know about it that way, and then confabulate similar things under hypnosis.

      Dr. Jacobs' claim that he waits for corroboration is an outright lie. He has been telling that lie for years, and is doing it again in his forthcoming book. You can see a sample of the book on Amazon, and the very first page has the same lie.

      If you interested in knowing more about what Dr. Jacobs actually does, instead of what he says he does, keep an eye on my website. In the next few weeks I am going to be putting up audio from my hypnosis sessions of Dr. Jacobs talking to me at length, while I was hypnotized about what "Bernard", "Betsy", and others were "remembering" under hypnosis, and leading me confabulate similar "memories".

      Dr. Jacobs is the last person to admit that he "screws up". In fact, he has shown that he does everything he can to cover it up, including lying about it, and defaming people, and then carries on doing it.

    3. There is a difference between collecting experiences and the kind of things that Jacobs and others do with hypnosis.

      The problems with using hypnosis to establish abduction encounters have long been recognized. Before such stories were popular, Jacques Vallee ("Mesengers of Deception") wrote about a study that used hypnosis to reproduce the kind of experience that Barney and Betty Hill described. Seven out of eight participants described almost identical encounters under hypnosis. The people in the study had been carefully selected to screen those who had any interest or knowledge about the subject. But there seems to be a narrative that can be induced under hypnosis that is far different than collecting information.

      I also think about it how people were hypnotized during the ritual satanic abuse scare to "recover" memories. Or how some MUFON experiencer groups equate interest in the phenomenon with things that can be "uncovered" during hypnosis. Some have discovered they have experienced both abductions and other forms of victimization (such as "repressed memories"of being "super-soldiers"). It is little wonder that hypnosis cannot be used as forensic evidence in court.

      Jacobs would have done well to heed Vallee's example, who stated "I've taken some witnesses who wanted to be hypnotized, taken them to specialists in two cases out of maybe 70 cases of abductions that I've studied. And usually the specialists tell me that hypnosis is not necessarily the best way of helping these people. Nor is it the best way to recover memories. It may help in very specific cases. But I've never hypnotized anybody--I'm not qualified to do it."


    4. Thanks, erickson. Given the overwhelming and conclusive professionally compiled evidence on the lack of reliability of hypnosis as a tool for enhancing memory, if there is something currently deserving more study, it would be why people continue to argue in favor of hypnosis as an investigative tool.

      Then, as Emma points out, another issue is plain ol', outright leading the witness. I have personally listened to a substantial amount of the recordings Emma published, and they indeed contain examples of Jacobs informing the subject, during hypnosis sessions, what other subjects report. It's an insult to intelligence, even without all the other problematic aspects of his activities.

      I'll check out that link to the Vallee quote. Looks good.

    5. Jack Brewer, what scientific methology would you recomend to apply to study this phenomenom when memories are all that you have ?

    6. Hi Emma ! I'm somewhat familiar with your tapes and I agree that David Jacobs conduct towards you was beyond forgivness. David Jacobs discredited him self on those tapes.

      But I have also heard a tape where David Jacobs does a hypnotic regression with Marie Kayali where he doesn't ask leading questions (well... exept on three occations during the two hour session). And I must admit that that session was very interesting. Did these things really take place as Marie Kayali described under hypnosis ? I don't know.

      I will follow what you post on your web page. Thanks for your reply !

    7. Hi Anonymous, thanks for your supportive comments. it is much appreciated.

      I heard the tape of Marie Kayali's hypnosis session a while ago. The leading was not as overt as the leading on my tapes, but it was still there. When you are hypnotized, you are in such a suggestible state that comments that would not affect you in normal consciousness can create false memories in that state.

      It is a while since I heard the tape of Marie's session, but from memory she had a conscious memory of sitting at a table with a benevolent being, and her hands were on the table. During her hypnosis session, Dr. Jacobs tried to change that memory into her lying on a table being probed by aliens. I think he also tried to change her memory of he hands being on the table to one of the aliens using little restraints on her.

      Marie has said herself that she thinks that D. Jacobs was trying to lead her to remember her experience differently.

      For myself, I seriously doubt that the "memories" that Dr. Jacobs' subjects have under hypnosis with him, being led by him, are real.

    8. Hi Emma ! I understand that Marie Kayali wasn't satisfied with the hypnotic session she had with Dr. David Jacobs. She expressed later that Dr. Jacobs had distorted her memories while she was under hypnosis.

      And I don't (for obvious reasons) know if her consious memory was a real memory, a screen memory or a phantasy. And I don't know if what she experienced under hypnosis war a real memory, a distorted memory under Dr. Jacobs influence or confabulation.

      I understand that memory is something fragile and that we don't fully understand what hypnosis is or how it affects us and our memory. I my self have never been under hypnosis, so I can't even say from own experience what it's like to be under hypnosis.

      This phenomenom interests me, although I don't know what the source of phenomenom is, the phenomenon still fascinates me. I just wish that a professional group of people would look into this phenomenom, but it astounds that there doesn't seem to be an interest among the professionals to look into this strange phenomenom.

  22. > Jack Brewer, what scientific methology would you recomend to apply to study
    > this phenomenom when memories are all that you have ?

    One, if my objective was to conduct scientific research, I'd find qualified people willing to partner and help me. I think Project Core, for example, gives us a good working model of how questions can be posed and evaluated concerning reported high strangeness while maintaining scientific integrity. Systematic and objective examination is essential to producing reliable results.

    Secondly, cost-effective forensic investigative techniques could be employed in any number of circumstances in which the so-called investigators impede collection of samples much more than facilitate it. I think we could collectively do a much better job of holding the relevant parties accountable.

    Third, there are different kinds of research. Not all of it has to be scientific. I do not conduct scientific study, for instance, but I try to maintain a certain standard of research, such as recognizing and respecting definitions of credible sources as established by the professional research community.

    Most importantly, what I or anyone else does has no bearing on the fact David Jacobs and MUFON misrepresent their activities as scientific study. Failing to produce desired results is not justification for deviating from the stated mission. I neither make nor entertain apologies for the fact they commit sham inquiry. Important point, please: They don't have to claim their work is scientific.

    If, however, any given individual or organization desired to conduct more scientific investigation of reported high strangeness, there are qualified people willing to offer consultation. They should be contacted and their input should be heeded. If we don't find the answers we're looking for, that's not an excuse to promote unsupported conclusions and take up ill conceived activities. It's certainly not an excuse to call such things science.

    1. ...One, if my objective was to conduct scientific research, I'd find qualified people willing to partner and help me......

      I immediately envisage the following scenario: A security agency official reads your recommendations and - takes them to heart. He provides you with qualified people willing to help you.... yet influenced, as most people are, to conform, to serve the powers that be.*
      You make a public statement: You're so disappointed. Next time, we'll be wiser.

      Next time, we might choose to adhere more to the scientific method itself. The method of which a most accomplished scientist of the most accomplished science, said the following: ".....Therefore, I think equation guessing might be the best method to proceed to obtain the laws for the part of physics which is presently unknown. Yet, when I was much younger, I tried this equation guessing and I have seen many students try this, but it is very easy to go off in wildly incorrect and impossible directions. I think the problem is not to find the best or most efficient method to proceed to a discovery, but to find any method at all." - R. Feynman, his Nobel lecture http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1965/feynman-lecture.html
      If he was a Provocateur, he has followers. Some are scientists I know in my private life, here's one public: https://edge.org/response-detail/25398

      (* If the USG can twist arm of governments of former great powers (UK, France, Russia), what can you expect in the domain of a small, obscure study?)

      In all other respects, we think very much alike. I might say that we demand, or stand for decency and sincerity, and we look for decency and sincerity.

  23. Jack Brewer, You made some very good points. A professional group of psychologists, psychiatrists and certified hypnotherapists should conduct a study into this phenomenom before someone can call the study into this strange phenomenom as based on a scientific methology.

    Dr. David Jacobs is an amateur and should be recognzed by MUFON as an amateur. Dr. Jacobs study should not be recognized as based on a scientific methology, nor should Dr. Jacobs accept a reward on the assumption that his study is based on a scientific methology.

    1. My unqualified guess is: Lifeforms on this planet have done their best in conquering this planet. One of these lifeforms are today trying to conquer the solar system. If there is an intelligent lifeform out there who has started to do interstellar travels, then they would have began to conquer neighbouring solar systems... before someone else out there does it and becomes a threat to them. Since they are not natural inhabitans of our planet and not adjusted to life on our planet they would be forced to create a lifeform, a hybrid, part us and part them to conquer our world.

  24. Emma has added several recent updates at her website, 'Emma Woods Files'. Updates have been happening daily. Included are links to informative and interesting articles by Dr. Tyler Kokjohn and Sue Johnson, as well as a new page containing links to material and videos from Carol Rainey, and much more. Check it out at:


  25. Here is what the late Dr. Karla Turner had to say about hypnosis:

    CF: You mentioned the use of hypnosis, which has been the subject of a lot of controversy. Some of the other researchers have said that people under hypnosis can come up with scenarios that did not happen, in order to please the hypnotist. Some have said that the multiple levels of experience -- where one can break through screen memories and ferret out buried memories that are different -- are artifacts of the process of hypnosis. What are your opinions about these issues?

    KT: I think those positions are completely untenable, they grow out of what I call armchair research. I don't conceive you will find them being espoused by anyone who has actually had the experiences. If they have been through them and want to come back and talk about what happens when they undergo hypnosis, to look at what they consciously remember, then we can have a dialogue. Right now, they are speaking without knowledge. They are speaking hypothetically, and their opinions are based on erroneous understandings of the phenomenon, of the experiences, and of the control exerted upon abductees during these experiences. It is easy to philosophize any number of explanations, but that does not mean that those explanations have any relationship to what is really going on. Also, there are bad hypnotists and good hypnotists. (Note: A bad hypnosis is one who in essence takes advantage of the individuals psychological vulnerability by engaging in what amounts to 'psychological rape'. A good hypnotist will NOT violate a persons' will, or try to alter their perception of reality, or inject unsolicited post-hypnotic suggestions in the individuals mind, or attempt to make them do or believe things that they would NOT consciously accept while in a waking state. THIS is the danger of hypnosis. While in this state, a hypnotic subject is completely at the mercy of the hypnotist. This is why a hypnotist dealing with suppressed memories must be someone WHO CAN BE ABSOLUTELY TRUSTED, and one should NEVER be "put under" unless there is at least one other trustworthy individual in the room monitoring the hypnotist. Hypnotism is serious business and should NOT be attempted by anyone who is not qualified. - Branton). A bad hypnotist probably can foul up a number of things. I know that people who have gone to hypnotists for smoking or dietary problems have sometimes suffered more after hypnosis. Obviously, some things can be mishandled. But my experience with hypnosis and the veracity of what is recalled has, in several cases, been proven to me to be accurate. I have been able to investigate these cases. At times erroneous material does surface, or is created because of the situation, but that is not typical. I conclude that hypnosis is, by and large, one of the most excellent tools we have. Used properly, it may be the only tool we have to get certain pieces of information (or levels of information) back up to the conscious state. I have been able to test a number of hypnotically recalled memories against externally verifiable evidence, and they have proven to be correct."

    Link to above dialogue:


    1. > what the late Dr. Karla Turner had to say about hypnosis:

      Recall that Turner was not a physician or therapist, she had a doctorate in literature. She is not an authority on hypnosis. For instance:

      > KT: I think those positions are completely untenable, they grow out of what I call armchair research.

      Actually, they are the positions of psychiatrists who used hypnosis to treat people who suffered from anxiety, neurosis and trauma.

      Lewis Wolberg, who is cited in Interrupted Journey as reflecting "the present medical attitude" about hypnotic recall, believed such memories were very useful but not necessarily accurate. He writes in his book Hypnoanalysis (1945): "Most incidents recovered under psychoanalysis and hypnosis are those remembered in part, with hazy details" (p 226). Wolberg also reported blatantly false memories: "As part of the pattern of compliance associated with hypnosis, [patients] will deluge the hypnotist with fantasies that may have no basis in fact" (p 167). (These are the "demand characteristics" famously described by psychologist Martin Orne in 1969.)

      Wolberg was not overly concerned with this problem; his case studies show he agreed with Freud that what was more important was getting the patient to interpret and work through the hypnotic reminiscences as a way to consciously rebuild character: "Freud insisted that such 'cover memories' were no less important than memories of real events, since the patient responded to them as though they were true" (pp 224-5). In fact, Wolberg frequently invited patients, under hypnosis, to invent or dream about imaginary scenarios that could then be discussed.

      Other psychiatrists also reported distorted and highly symbolic "recall" of traumatic events, such as Edward Wiltcher Arluck, in his book Hypnoanalysis: a Case Study, (1964). Arluck also suggested that his patient, a WWII soldier, imagine or dream up content to be discussed. Again, the "truth" of the memories were not important; rather, they were grist for the psychotherapeutic mill.

    2. "I think those positions are completely untenable, they grow out of what I call armchair research. I don't conceive you will find them being espoused by anyone who has actually had the experiences. If they have been through them and want to come back and talk about what happens when they undergo hypnosis, to look at what they consciously remember, then we can have a dialogue. Right now, they are speaking without knowledge. They are speaking hypothetically, and their opinions are based on erroneous understandings of the phenomenon, of the experiences, and of the control exerted upon abductees during these experiences. It is easy to philosophize any number of explanations, but that does not mean that those explanations have any relationship to what is really going on. Also, there are bad hypnotists and good hypnotists..."

      I think the above states quite well the issues as to the use of hypnosis re the abduction phenomenon. Nothing I've witnessed myself, nor as to what I've researched on this subject, reflects otherwise.

    3. @Bayareamom

      I don't want Jack to ban such comments as yours -- because I can disprove them all day long -- but do you understand the utter worthlessness of your argument?

      I refuted Turner's statement about "armchair research" by citing professional sources ... and your response was merely to repeat the statement and add an appeal to your personal experience.

      How is that convincing in any way?

      What Turner said about hypnotic research was plainly false -- it was a demonstrable lie. The medical hypnosis literature has made this clear for at least 70 years. Psychiatric associations have been warning about the misuse of hypnosis since the early 1960s (the APA released a statement February 15, 1961).

      Alien abduction advocates tell lies about the medical research on hypnosis. You should not be okay with that.

  26. As has been pointed out, qualified professionals have unequivocally concluded that hypnotic regression is not reliable as a memory retrieval tool. That is not subject to debate, whether or not the UFO community and its enthusiasts accept it.

    As early as 1979, the previously referenced hypnosis expert and psychologist Martin Orne wrote, "[A]ctual memories cannot be distinguished from confabulations either by the subject or by the hypnotist without full and independent corroboration."



    Orne's findings were further established as accurate by Morgan, Lilienfeld, Loftus and a host of qualified professionals, their clinical trials and subsequent review. The issue is not open to interpretation, it is conclusively established.

    If some of you choose to pursue hypnosis as a memory enhancer, or accept its results, without allocating proportionate attention to its inherent potential emotional challenges, as well as its unreliability, that is your choice. Please be advised, however, that comments/arguments attempting to frame those beliefs in the context of logic and professionally conducted research will not be published further, as I interpret them to be a disservice to potential readers and misrepresentation of actuality. The issue of hypnosis as an unreliable memory enhancer has long since been concluded.

    Thanks for all of your interest.

  27. More updates at the website of Emma Woods, including demonstrating via audio clips how assertions made by David Jacobs in his latest book were blatantly false:


  28. For a wealth of incredible information on the power of hypnosis and the dark history of its use in Mind Control by the U.S. military may I suggest the book "Operation Mind Control" by Walter H. Bowart. This suggests far greater implications than simply botched memory retrieval or fictitious memories. The mind is programmable. There may still be an argument for treating trauma with relation to the UFO subject, but as a data gathering tool - you've got to be kidding me? And let's not even mention the training or standards of the hypnotherapists who inhabit this field. I've been told even Mack was a lousy hypnotherapist.

  29. As stated in my Sep. 17 comments above, arguments in support of hypnotic regression as an effective memory retrieval tool are not being entertained further. They have become repetitive and, in my opinion, distractions from more significant issues. Please try to keep comments succinct, on topic and constructive.


  30. How about this for a succinct and relevant comment on hypnotic regression? According to their own websites, every single person employed by MUFON to hypnotically regress alleged alien abductees claims that they can also hypnotically regress people to their previous lives, and partially earns their living by doing this for money. So we're either looking at fraud, or a bunch of people who unanimously believe multiple unconnected wildly unlikely and scientifically unproven things because they want to.

    Given the extreme probability of people who are in what is by definition an extremely suggestible state being influenced by the beliefs of their hypnotists, I'm sure you can draw your own conclusions as to the reliability of this process when conducted by these people...

  31. > According to their own websites

    Can you provide a link, count? That would be something I'd like to add to my notes.

    1. Hey, Terry, I'm not sure which hypnotists the count might have been referring to, but I happened to be aware of this one... On the Florida MUFON Meet Up page, we can see that "David Putney Hypnotherapy" is listed as a sponsor:


      The website for the hypnotherapist no longer seems to be active, but the WayBack Machine allows us to see a version of the site from Nov., 2014, in which services listed included "regression therapy and past life regression":


      Scientific study, that.

    2. Might as well share this, as long as I'm at it... Florida Assistant State Director Teri Lynge, who organizes the Meet Up group referenced above, describes herself on her card as a "demonologist":


      They're blinding me with science.

  32. Hey, Terry the Censor! Most of the links I found are somewhere on this page: http://www.mufon.com/experiencer-research-team.html

    As you can see, it's not a thing they're trying to hide; the only difficulty is that they tend to be old people who are bad at doing the interweb, therefore you need to follow multiple links to find out what they're really talking about, usually involving the name of the researcher rather than the organizer they're involved with, because these organizations tend to have multiple ramshackle unconnected websites with hideous designs and slightly different names. Therefore you need to poke around for a while to find quotes like this:

    "In other words, a very large, and statistically significant number of people who claim to have been abducted – really have been abducted. I admit, the only thing we have to go by is their reports, and occasionally a scoop mark or an implant. In this field, however, that is evidence that weighs the same as a couple of so-called slides – maybe even more. We forget at times that there are no experts in Ufology, but there are people who know more than others do about the science. There are no answers to any of the phenomena we record, research and report. There are only creative and theoretical suppositions regarding the presence of, activities of, and purpose of alien visitation to our planet. We can only hope that one day soon, someone will stumble upon the conclusive evidence. Even then – do we really need conclusive evidence? Ask an abductee about conclusive evidence, and then pull up a chair – you will be there for a while as they describe a lifetime of contact and interaction with otherworldly beings. Conclusive as you can get! Who needs slides? Not Abduction Researchers!"

    That's from senior MUFON member Michael Austin Melton, the alleged founder of a ridiculous organization called Starborn Support International whose internet presence is such a mess that I can't even find out whether he's the same person as the other alleged founder of this wacky gathering, "Audrey Starborn", who is supposedly both a woman and a space-alien with superpowers. I don't blame this guy for wanting to be a woman even though I personally don't, but for entirely different reasons I still think he's nuts.

    And so on. A brief spell of browsing the official websites linked on the MUFON website will tell you all you need to know. But if you want the best of the lot, go here: http://www.kathleen-marden.com/the-ufo-psi-connection-in-my-own-life.php

    That's MUFON's supreme head of alleged alien abduction research talking insane fantasy-prone shite. Scroll down to the bottom of the page where she reveals that she didn't summon medical assistance for a suspected heart attack because she's too stupid to live. In her case, that's not an insult, because going by her own words, it's literally true.

    And then we've got this: http://www.explorewithhypnosismn.com/PastLives.html

    And this: http://www.hypnofl.com/past_life.htm

    And this: http://www.explorewithhypnosismn.com/PastLives.html

    I simply can't be bothered to find every example of how gullible and confused these people are because it would take hours, but as far as I can see, they're not actually hiding anything; they're just incapable of putting together a website that's easy to browse. I hope this is helpful.

    1. Thanks, count. Some snippets from those links:

      "metaphysical memories"

      "There do not appear to be any specific passages in the Christian Bible stating that past lives are not real."

      "There are also people with fears or physical ailments which are found to have their origins or cause in previous lives."

      "- Are past lives real?
      "That depends upon your belief system."

      And Kathleen Marden claims a channeled Zetan cured her of an unspecified illness.


  33. Is it still possible to make a case for ufo's through professional eyewitnesess corroberated by radar tracks and fotographs ? We all know that the U.S government studied the ufo phenomenom for 21 years.

    And can we make a case for ufo abductions through conscious memories, missing time, persons gone missing and then found again, implants, marks on the body, waking up in someone elses pyjamas, pregnancies followed missing embryos ? As far as I know the U.S government has never studied this phenomenom.

    If we can make a case of the reality of ufo's then we should take a closer look at the abduction phenomenom as well since people do report having experienced close encounters with aliens. Or is all this just smoke without a fire ?

    And is it possible to build enough on conscious memories to say what has taken place for those who say that they have had these experiences ?


    1. Hello, Marco,

      In my personal opinion, one of the biggest challenges to the study of seemingly anomalous phenomena is when claims are made of conducting scientific study, yet the activities are, in fact, not scientific. That is an ongoing problem in the UFO community, particularly perpetrated by organizations such as MUFON and individuals such as David Jacobs, and thus why I continue to point it out in articles such as the one posted above. The practice of sham inquiry, as Sharon Hill coined the phrase, is detrimental for many reasons.

      Considering the legitimacy of reports of the strange is another matter, closely as it may indeed be related. In the event you or other readers are not aware of it, a private group of experiencers and scientists undertook assessing a large sample of reports without preconceived assumptions, and called their endeavor Project Core:


      If ground is to be gained, I strongly suspect it will include minimizing sham inquiry while asking the right, relevant questions without preconceived conclusions. I don't see how else legitimate study could be conducted.

      Thanks for your comments and interest in the blog, Marco. Much appreciated.

    2. Jack, regarding scientific investigation and ufology, I'd like to add a comment I recently made on Rich Reynold's site:

      The mere piling up of reports does not, of itself, logically lead to true general statements about reality. This "problem of induction" has been observed at least as far back as Sextus Empiricus and was most famously taken up by Karl Popper in The Logic of Scientific Discovery. (I'm not too deep into Popper but so far he is surprisingly easy to read, and makes all his big points up near the front.)


      Popper: "...the most misleading model of the growth of knowledge -- the model of an accumulating heap of observation statements" (p xxv, second English edition, 1967).

      "Now it is far from obvious, from a logical point of view, that we are justified in inferring universal statements from singular ones, no matter how numerous; for any conclusion drawn in this way may always turn out to be false..." (p 4) And here he gives the famous example of white swans (which is mentioned in the link above).

      "But how is the system that represents our world of experience to be distinguished? The answer is: by the fact that it has been submitted to tests, and has stood up to tests" (p 17)

      Data does help us form theories; and the better the data, and the more we have, the better our theories. But without testing, general claims of knowledge are just a kind of "metaphysical theorising" (Popper's term). Untested general assertions are not of themselves empirical knowledge about reality.

      I would argue that ufology suffers from both a data problem and a logic problem. This is the fault of those studying the phenomena; it is not the fault of skeptics.

      It is no wonder UFO proponents do not cite Popper, but instead allude to Kuhn's "paradigm shifts."

  34. Don't trust any enourmous organization, they are infiltrated and if it's not for the money it will be for disinfo. The truth is hated in this world, if you see a group rejected by people they might be the ones telling the truth.

    I knew mufon was compromised, probably since the begining, I also feel even their conception had an agenda.