UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1999 > Jan > Jan 29

Re: 1999 UFO Alien Abduction Conference Announced

From: Kevin Randle <KRandle993@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 18:20:28 EST
Fwd Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 08:36:22 -0500
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: Thu, 28 Jan 99 10:43:04 PST

<snippety do dah>

Jerry -

I am surprised at the angry tone of your missive. Haven't you
suggested to others that there are two letters - the one you
write in the heat of passion and the one you send?

If you are concerned that the book will examine many of the
issues discussed here and elsewhere, there will have to be a
recapitulation of that earlier information in case not all are
as informed as you.

If you want to trade journal cites, then let me throw in, for
laughs if for no other reason, "Tolerance of Ambiguity and the
Perception of UFOs" by Houran, Perceptual and Motor Skills,
1997, 85, 973-974. How about "An Assessment of Contextual
Mediation in Trance States of Shamanic Journeys" by James
Houran, Rense Lange, and Michelle Crist-Houran, Perceptual and
Motor Skills, 1997, 85, 59-65. How about "Measured Personality
Characteristics of Persons Who Claim UFO Experiences," by June
Parnell, Psychotherapy in Private Practice, Vol. 6(3) 1988
(though this might be too old by your standards).

All this means is that I have looked at the literature in great
detail, including the psychological journals. Like Greg Sandow,
I have read nearly every article on UFOs that shows up in the
literature, and like Greg, I was surprised at the lack of
first-hand investigation. The point, however, is that yes, we
looked at all of this.

My questions to you were merely a request for information
because I don't like having my points defended by others. Yes,
I'm sure that you will be thoughtful and intelligent, and that
you will cover the material as you see it. But it will be your
point of view and not mine, and I have seen, in the past, that
sometimes some things gets lost in the translation.

And of course the Intruders Foundation can invite whomever they
want and they can promote whatever point of view they want. But
when you move into a public arena, then you invite questions and
comments and that is what I did.

I'm very sorry that it has angered you to the point it has. It
was not my intention to suggest any sort of a conspiracy on the
part of John Velez, Greg Sandow or Budd Hopkins. It was,
however, my intention to suggest that the list of speakers and
researchers was not balanced, in my opinion and here you can't
argue because it is my opinion. You can suggest that my opinion
is wrong, but you can't argue my opinion, which is what I have
offered.

And if you want to have a contest as to who first investigated
an abduction, then you win. I didn't look at any of them, with
any sort of interest until sometime around 1972, and made my
first, long term investigation of a case in 1974.

But you know as well as I that the face of abduction has changed
since it was first reported by the Lorenzens and John Fuller,
and the other pioneers. In fact, if we read Fuller's book
carefully, we find that the face of the abductors has also
changed from the first telling to those we hear today.

Jerry, take it easy. I just offered a contrary point of view.

KRandle


[ 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