UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1999 > Jan > Jan 28

Re: 1999 UFO Alien Abduction Conference Announced

From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 99 10:43:04 PST
Fwd Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 12:14:44 -0500
Subject: Re: 1999 UFO Alien Abduction Conference Announced

>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 00:46:33 EST
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: 1999 UFO Alien Abduction Conference Announced

>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>>Subject: Re: 1999 UFO Alien Abduction Conference Announced
>>Date: Wed, 27 Jan 99 11:29:24 PST

>>>From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
>>>Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 22:23:11 EST
>>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>>Subject: Re: 1999 UFO Alien Abduction Conference Announced

>>>>From: Stig Agermose <stig.agermose@get2net.dk>
>>>>Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 02:02:26 +0100 (MET)
>>>>Subject: 1999 UFO Alien Abduction Conference Announced
>>>>To: updates@globalserve.net

>>>>Source: "alt.ufo.reports".


>>Second of all, unless you are claiming telepathic powers, I
>>don't think you know what I'm going to say, and I resent the
>>implication that I am involved in some sort of misleading
>>propaganda effort.

>I didn't claim telepathic powers. Instead, I suggested, based
>on the past history of those speakers, that a certain point of
>view will be in evidence. Are you suggesting that there will be
>a contrary point of view? Are you suggesting that you are going
>to suggest that some abductions might be the result of well
>established psychological pathologies? Are you going to suggest
>that some abductees might have invented their tales for the
>attention that it brings them?

For crissake, Kevin. Since clearly you can't be bothered to
learn my actual views before criticizing them, I am almost
tempted to respond sarcastically. Oh, what the hell, why not?

NO, Kevin. I believe that _no_ abductions "might be the result
of well established psychological pathologies." NO, Kevin, I
don't believe in the existence of hoaxes. I believe that
without exception, every single abduction story recounts
an actual instance of intervention by alien entities.

>Please note that I have not suggested that _all_ abductees have
>psychological problems or have invented their tales. I'm only
>suggesting that some do, a point that we, in the UFO community,
>are reluctant to mention.

I've got my serious hat again. I would sure like to know what
this last sentence means, other than that apparently you're not
reading the UFO literature much. For the past decade and a
half, ufologists have furiously debated the meaning,
significance, and nature of the abduction phenomenon. Some of
this debate, in case you haven't noticed, has taken place on
this very list. Many ufologists have argued for conventional or
quasiconventional psychological explanations for abduction
reports, and there has been a huge amount of discussion, a good
part of it highly critical, about the utility of hypnosis.
Ufologists have written entire books arguing skeptical views.
Therefore, your assertion that ufologists refuse to recognize
possible "psychological problems" of some abductees is simply as
unfounded as some of the critical attacks on the Roswell
incident that you have so eloquently refuted.

In point of fact, the "psychological problems" of some abductees
have been demonstrated empirically; see, for example, the crucial
paper by Rodeghier, Goodpaster, and Blatterbauer
("Psychosocial Characteristics of Abductees," JUFOS 3, 1991).
Have you read it?

Frankly, Kevin, given your evident ignorance of the history of
ufology's interaction with abduction phenomenon (not to mention
your ignorance of the views of individual ufologists such as the
undersigned), I am naturally concerned that your forthcoming
book will merely recycle arguments familiar to others if not to
you. The critical views themselves have been the subject of
vigorous criticism and controversy, much of it covered in the
pages of (for example) IUR and JUFOS (see, for example, Stuart
Appelle's "The Abduction Experience: A Critical Evaluation of
Theory and Evidence," JUFOS 6, 1995/1996, for a crash course on
the many different approaches and hypotheses that have figured
in ufologists' discussion of the phenomenon).

I hope that your book advances this discussion, but so far,
based on what you've said here, I see no reason to be wildly

Jerry Clark

P.S. Those of you who may be interested in my actual views on
the abduction phenomenon are referred to the discussions in The
UFO Encyclopedia, 2nd Ed., pp. 221-24, 388-90, and 841-43. I
think it is fair to say that where the phenomenon in general is
concerned, I am an agnostic. My views. in fact, are close to
those of Eddie Bullard and David Hufford.

I might add here, by the way, that the abduction phenomenon and
I go back a long way. I investigated my first case in the early

[ 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