UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2003 > Dec > Dec 14

Re: Denzler Abduuctee Survey? - Velez

From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 13:58:49 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 15:58:04 -0500
Subject: Re: Denzler Abduuctee Survey? - Velez


>From: Brenda Denzler <denzlerb@bellsouth.net>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
>Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 12:14:01 -0500
>Subject: Re: Denzler Abduuctee Survey?

>>From: John Velez <johnvelez.aic@verizon.net>
>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
>>Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 16:16:25 -0500
>>Subject: Denzler Abduuctee Survey? [was: Re: Asking Jesus For
>>Intervention...]

>>>From: Brenda Denzler <denzlerb@bellsouth.net>
>>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net>
>>>Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 19:40:57 -0500
>>>Subject: Re: Asking Jesus For Intervention Stops Abductions

>>>>From: Greg Boone <Evolbaby@aol.com>
>>>>To: ufoupdates@virtuallystrange.net
>>>>Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 11:23:49 EST
>>>>Subject: Re: Asking Jesus For Intervention Stops Abductions

>>>>John, it would be of interest to know religious backgrounds of
>>>>abductees. Has anyone got stats on this?

>>>In my survey of people who believe they have been abducted, 44% said
>>>they were Protestant Christians, 15% were Roman Catholics, 3% are
>>>Jewish, 10% are agnostics or atheists, and 29% identified themselves
>>>merely as "other". N = @765, gathered from paper interviews handed out
>>>at conferences and from electronic interviews completed
>over the Web.

>>Not to be a PITA or a stickler but... what diagnostic criteria
>>was employed to determine that the respondents were "abductees"?

>You're not being a stickler at all, John. It's a perfectly
>reasonable question. And the answer is, none.

>My object was not to delineate a "true" abductee from a "false"
>or "wannabe" abductee. For one thing, I have no psychological
>training as a basis from which to make such a distinction. For
>another thing, I find the whole question devilishly hard
>and suspect that this would be the case even *if* I had
>psychological training.

Precisely! And the reason you kinda got 'used' a little here. When
I read your response I saw the opportunity to reiterate another
of the things I am always going on about; the lack of a generally
accepted set of diagnostic criteria that (theoretically) any
researcher out in the field can use to determine which UFO
abduction cases/reports call for further investigation.

That kind of -basic- information -based on existing research-
 has been lacking for 30+ years. Why, after so much time, is
there no established set of diagnostic criteria for UFO
abduction reports? Everyone is familiar with CE-I, CE-II, CE-
III, and CE-IV designations and what they represent. But nothing
similar exists to assist research people in the field to deal
with and catalog UFO occupant contact or interaction cases.

Dick Hall, Jim Speiser, myself and a couple of others attempted
to do this last year. It became immediately apparent that
funding and other *hard resources (*computers, data entry people
etc.) were needed in order to do the kind of initial cataloging
and basic research needed to actualize it. None of us had the
time, money or the hardware so it all kind of went by the
boards.

It is not for lack of wanting to, or people being willing to do
the work. It all boils down to cash, compensation and hardware.
In another thread I have suggested that a formal proposal should
be drafted and submitted to CFI and the Sci-Fi channel to see if
funding cannot be found to put Dick Hall to work on this
project. Dick can _easily_ round up many good people who will be
ready, willing and able to assist in whatever capacity may be
required/needed. All it takes is -grease- moola-boola, cash on
the barrel-head. The end result would be a worthwhile and
invaluable database, set of statistics, and diagnostic tools.
Tools that would have been formulated/based on the data.

It would allow those who wish to take a scientific approach to
studying the phenomenon to have a pre-existing foundation of
information and basic stats from which to launch their own
studies.

>For a third thing, this approach does
>the skeptics the favor of taking seriously their claim that
>*everyone* is a wannabe abductee, and THEN looking at the
>characteristics of the people who comprise that group. The
>skeptical community is wont to make all kinds of statements
>about people who believe they have been abducted by aliens.

It's _all_ they do, Brenda.

Just about every time I chime in on an abduction related thread
it is generally to remind whoever is participating that the
possibility that some reports are accurate and of actual events
also exists/needs to be taken into consideration. They often
forget to even give a nod to the fact that abductions are real.
In the psycho-social feeding frenzy, the testimony of thousands
of people is dismissed as -wrong, mis-perception, or just plain
delusion. Never or rarely is abduction considered as a set of
reports of actual events.

>This data gave/gives me a way to comment on those statements in
>a more informed way than just sticking out my tongue and saying,
>"Nuh-uh."

I don't think it's physically possible to say "Nuh-uh" with your
tongue sticking out!  <G>

>My object was to look at the profile of anyone who felt
>sufficiently identified with the term "abductee" or
>"experiencer" that they would be willing to fill out my survey.

Again, I wasn't criticizing your survey, Brenda. I was using the
opportunity to bring up the need for basic research on UFO
abduction.

>The implicit criticism in your query is that my survey may have
>measured indiscriminately the wanna-be's and the real things (as
>defined from the UFO insider's point of view), lumped them all
>together, and thereby skewed the results. And you're right, that
>could be the case.

No criticism was implied or intended.

>I am, by the way, continuing to collect survey data (albeit in a
>very slow manner nowadays), so if anyone knows of anyone who
>would be a likely candidate to fill out the forms, I would very
>much appreciate it if you'd pass along my name and email
>address, and/or my website.

Good luck. At least somebody is trying to do something. It beats
the hell out of the current state of affairs.


Warm regards, best...

John Velez