UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1998 > Jun > Jun 15

Re: Memory

From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 18:24:05 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 22:09:33 -0400
Subject: Re: Memory


>Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 17:09:41 -0500
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>Subject: Was: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke, Now: Memory

>>From: Cathy Johnson <cej@idirect.ca>
>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke
>>Date: Sun, 14 Jun 1998 14:48:30 -0400

>>>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 20:09:27 -0700
>>>From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

>>>>From: Cathy Johnson <cej@idirect.ca>
>>>>To: "UFO UpDates - Toronto" <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke
>>>>Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1998 10:07:31 -0400
>>>>>Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 07:29:52 -0700
>>>>>From: Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
>>>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>>>>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

>>>>>>Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 12:55:01 -0500
>>>>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>>>>From: John Velez <jvif@spacelab.net>
>>>>>>Subject: Asking Pamela Stonebrooke

>>>>><snip>

>>Dear Skye,

>>For the sake of brevity I have snipped a bunch.

>>Cathy Johnson

<snip>
>If you are 'going public' then I believe that you should be able
>to:

>1. Be willing to substantiate your claims.

How do you propose to do that?  What do you offer as "evidence,"
that will be accepted by anyone, including the most hardcore
debunkers?

>2. Be willing to subject yourself to verification, ie;
>psychological exam, MRI/x-ray, polygraph, or any other
>(non-intrusive) form of testing or verification.

Which Whitley Strieber and others have already done (I don't
know about the polygraph test, but those aren't accepted
anywhere), to absolutely no avail.

>3. On a personal level- be willing to answer/respond to tough
>questions, and to have the ability to question/explore the
>nature of your own experiences in as (objective) a manner as
>possible.

How do you know Pamela hasn't done this?  Just because she
hasn't discussed her experiences with you, doesn't mean she
hasn't fully explored.  As a matter of fact, I know she has
talked to researchers/psychologists in the field.

>BTW, I know that a 'polygraph' cannot show the reality of an
>event but it can sure help to eliminate those who are being
>intentionally deceptive or who are trying to pass off pure
>'imagination' as reality.

No, it can't and that's why it's not admissible in a court of
law.

>That's not a lot to ask of someone who publicly claims that they
>are interacting with a non-human agent, don't you agree?
>Everything else is just speculation and superfluous. It
>contributes nothing new or of value and only serves to divert
>attention away from what [I think] is -a very real core
>phenomenon.-

When someone testifies at a murder trial, or in any eyewitness
situation, they are generally not expected to undergo such
"testing." The very idea of expecting this of an ET experiencer
demonstrates such a negative preconceived notion that it isn't
likely to alter their opinion at all.  So why bother?  I
certainly wouldn't.

A good example of this phenomenon is the CIA's "AIR" report that
was an evaluation of the military remote viewing unit.  There
were two primary researchers involved in the study.  One was a
member of CSICOP, well known for his anti-psi stance; the other
was one of the US's top statisticians, who is open to the
validity of psi.  Despite many factors that tended to reduce the
scores of the RV sessions being judged (that they were only
practice sessions, because the researchers didn't have the
necessary clearances to review the real world sessions...that
the data evaluated only included ONE remote viewer -- the rest
were tarot card readers and the like...that the study only
spanned the final two years of a 20-year program), the scores
were statistically better than chance.

What was the debunker's formal response to this?  That the
science of statistics obviously wasn't evolved enough and
therefore further analysis of the remote viewing program would
have to wait for 100 years!

This is roughly analogous to what's happened with ET experiencer
"testing."
>
>The first thing I did was to have myself tested/evaluated by a
>competent psychologist. When someone (validly) asks me, "How do
>you know you're not crazy or imagining things?" I have a solid
>answer for them based on my having put my sanity to the acid
>test. I don't know, what do -you- offer in response to such a
>question? Well gee, you gotta believe I'm not disturbed because
>I'm telling you so! Sorry, not good enough.

If it's any help, I have a degree in psychology and I say that
Pamela's as sane as anyone else running around Los Angeles.

<snip>

>It is -partly- because of all the confusion that surrounds this
>subject that we are not taken seriously by a majority of people.

No.  I think it's because most abductees are intimidated into
silence.  If the average person on the street knew how many of
their friends, co-workers, professors and other highly respected
people in their lives were abductees, they might pay more
attention.  I know many people who are not abductees themselves,
but have met enough individuals they respect enough who ARE
abductees, that they have become convinced of the validity.

It also doesn't help that many abductees are almost apologetic
about having the experiences they have.  They feel guilty.  They
question their sanity.  And they do this publically enough that
their stories are not very compelling.

BTW, Pamela DID write a response to your initial comments.  It's
all over the Internet.  Of course, since you didn't direct those
comments to her, I don't know why she'd feel compelled to send
her response to you.


--

Skye Turell <turel33@west.net>
ICQ Pager 6797092


[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com