From: Jason Gammon <boyinthemachine.nul> Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:43:55 -0400 (EDT) Archived: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 07:57:16 -0400 Subject: Re: Scattered Not Unified >From: Don Ledger <dledger.nul> >To: <post.nul> >Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:02:09 -0300 >Subject: Re: Scattered Not Unified >>From: Jason Gammon <boyinthemachine.nul> >>To: post.nul >>Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 21:43:27 -0400 (EDT) >>Subject: Re: Scattered Not Unified >>>From: William Treurniet <wtreurniet.nul> >>>To: post.nul >>>Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:19:13 -0400 >>>Subject: Re: Scattered Not Unified >><snip> >>>In the recent exchanges, it was only one person who opined that >>>"Abductees lie. Abductees make up stories and add all kinds of >>>details to their narratives." The posts by others, about >>>"dimensions" for example, were actually based on accepting the >>>reality of the experiences. Experiencers should see that as a >>>plus. >><snip> >>Lest you misconstrue my words Mr. Treurniet, I did not imply >>that there was nothing to alien abduction. I merely stated that >>is a well known fact, something called confabulation. Several >>abduction researchers have commented on this with regard to >>alien abduction. >>Hopkins and Jacobs have both touched on this several times, that >>is the difficulty in determining which part of the narratives >>are true and which parts are false. >>For example, Jacobs believes talk about the aliens' faces being >>blurred or that the abductee is somehow prevented from seeing >>the faces is simply not true and he feels that if you push >>through with hypnosis that this has arisen in the mind of the >>abductee and was not apart of the experience. >>This is but one small example and confabulation can become quite >>complex in detail with regards to other examples. So what I was >>cautioning against is the mere acceptance of abductee narratives >>at face value. Parts of the experience may be real and parts may >>be fantasy invented by the abductee and included in the >>narrative. >Thanks for bringing the obvious to our attention. This is old >think being recycled. Rest assured that if the "media" focused >their attention on this discussion your downgrading of the >veracity of all of those affected by this phenomenon will >instantly be suspect and all will be then confabulators. >I can assure you that none of those I interviewed back in the >beginning were the least bit interested in public exposure but >were indeed seriously affected by what happened to them; some to >the point of seeking psychiatric help. Unfortunately a small >percentage of the affected do confabulate, identifying >themselves with the phenomenon for other psychological reasons >that have nothing to do with actual abduction. >The fringe will always be present whether they be be politicians >or abductees. Mr. Ledger, You have misunderstood me. You are a confabulator, as am I, as we are both human. Confabulation is the creation of a false memory, something untrue. A memory can be completely invented. A real memory can be warped to include details, even intricate details, that were not part of the real experience. Confabulation is a part of being human. We do not store memories like in the manner of a machine. We alter, change, add to, and even subtract from memories constantly. I am not denying the reality of alien abducton. Nor am I claiming abductess should not be believed at all. I am merely stating the abduction narratives told by abductees can not be taken at face value because they most likely contain confabulation. This confabulation may be small, it may be large, and in some cases the entire experience may be confabulated. The job of the abduction researcher is to separate the wheat from the chaff, if you will, and get down to the core "real" experience. So let me give you a couple examples of confabulation. Jacobs has spoken and written about how many abductees claim that the aliens do something to them to preven them from seeing their faces, making their faces blurry. These abductees who claim this usually add that this was done to them to prevent them experiencing fear and panic. Jacobs believes this is confabulation, as in it is something the abductee has invented, a fantasy, and not a part of the actual experience. Jacobs has stated that if you push past this in hypnosis the person will realize it's not true, that they can see the faces. Jacobs also notes that the aliens have shown their faces many times to the abductees in the past so it doesn't make sense that all of a sudden the aliens decid to mask their faces. This is an example of a small bit of confabulation. For a possible example of a larger, more detailed version of confabulation you may recall the experienes of the alleged abductee, Betty Andreasson. Her detailed, "spiritual experiences" smack of fantasy, inventions she created herself. Now, I know her case is controversial and that at least one alleged relative came forward saying it was a hoax. However, if she is a real abductee then her spiritualy-related claims can be interpreted as being confabulation. Now, I'm not saying she wasn't abducted. I'm not saying she hasn't had real experiences. I'm just saying the spiritual-related claims of her experience are suspect and may be confabulation. This is why we must be cautious when dealing with the narratives from abductees. -Jason Gammon Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp