Yes I have got this; but haven’t had chance to read yet. But when I have I’ll be posting a piece on it at the blog.

One more try… Have you seen this?

http://www.nicap.org/JAR_page.htm

Jess

along these lines have you seen this extremely odd magazine the “NICAP” guys have put out? Some interesting reading in the least.

http://www.nicap.org/JAR_page.htm

Jess

I agree. Particularly in abduction stories, researchers are almost conditioned to expect a story of little gray men with black eyes and large heads extracting DNA.

Maybe they are.

But conducting an investigation with a pre-conceived notion of what to expect and what to find (whether consciously or unconsciously) is a fatal mistake.

How we correct things I’m not sure, as expectation and belief are human traits.

But I do know that many of the methods employed to investigate abductions are seriously flawed.

Doesn’t mean nothing is going on (I’m firmly convinced that something weird *is* afoot re abductions); but it does mean that some investigators are their own worst enemy because they aren’t trained in the areas that they delve into.

A completely new methodology is needed, but I have no clue what it should be.

I would think that these kids *could* be hypnotised, but the bigger question is: *should* they be hypnotised?

I have to say that I have sat in on 2 hypnosis sessions undertaken by people with no formal training and whose expertise in hypnosis came from reading books on the subject.

This is very reckless. More importantly, I have seen on both occasions examples of (albeit unintentional) leading of the subject.

One, for example, I can cite almost word for word from memory. The interviewee asked the person under hypnosis something like: “Did the aliens have the usual large black eyes and big head?”

Well, the interviewer was certainly sincere, but asking a question in that fashion instills in the mind of the interviewee that these things are (a) alien; (b) have large black eyes; and (c) have big heads.

It’s rather like me saying to you: “Annie, do not - under any circumstances - think of a pink colored elephant.” If I say that, you cannot fail to think of it - even though I’m asking the oppostite of you.

And that’s the problem I have with abductions and hypnosis. While I am convinced that there is a real abduction puzzle, I’m not sure that hypnosis is the right way to resolve it when certain players in the subject have not a clue about the right way to use hypnosis as a valuable tool - and in a fashion that does not plant (again, unwittingly) imagery in the mind of the person under hypnosis.

Because then, we’re not sure how many of those memories are *real* and how many are driven by the questions asked.

That’s a necessarily condensed explanation on my concerns, but I think they are valid ones.

Whoa!!!

That’s exactly what it’s like!!!

It’s like as if someone was to chuck a mini atomic bomb at a garbage mountain but instead of vapourising it, or reducing it to tiny bits strewn over a very wide area, it causes the garbage to reassemble itself into a sort of even more intelligent hybrid of everything going on in ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’.

Only, for ‘garbage’ read ‘mind’.