UFO UpDates Mailing List
From: jvif@spacelab.net (John Velez)
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1996 04:44:42 -0500
Fwd Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1996 12:19:38 -0500
Subject: Re: The Most Authentic 'Alien' Image Ever
>Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1996 14:27:56 -0600 (CST)
>X-Sender: dstacy@texas.net
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>From: Dennis Stacy <dstacy@texas.net>
>Subject: The Most Authentic Alien Image Ever
>Velez: NOPE! I firmly believe that we are dealing with a physical (as in
>occupies 3 dimensional space, and has mass and substance) phenomenon. I
>believe that if you knock on a UFO you'll hear the "Ping"!
>
>Sasquatch: Then you have a dilemma, don't you? You've both had the same
>experience, but one of you thinks it was at the hands of physical ETs and
>the other doesn't. Now what is an outsider like me -- indeed, _any_
>outsider -- supposed to make of this situation? You can't fault me for
>being confused...
I'm not sure that Whitley has denied their "physicality" My take on his
remarks was that he thought they had the ability to pop in or out of (or
may have originated from) other dimensions. Not sure Dennis, maybe you're
right and he has said that. Whitley if your lurking, could you clarify this
for us please. The man raises a valid point and it deserves clarification.
>if the heart of the experience is such that it can support both
>"interpretations," as well as others.
Despite the disparity, there is a core of reported attendent phenomena that
fall into a narrow and pretty specific range. Perhaps by eliminating items
that are only reported once, by single individuals it would make it easier
to inventory what's left and then begin an analysis of the material that
crops up again and again. I hear you though, I found Macks book to be full
of contradictory accounts myself. There was material that I could relate to
immediately and then there was stuff that I couldn't identify or identify
with. Believe me, I appreciate the dillema that anyone that tackles this
material is confronted with. I wasn't trying to censor your "theory" Dennis
I jumped in to redflag you over the Strieber comment and to tell you my
oppinion. Don't let my New york gruffness make you feel like there's
anything personal in it. I am grateful to anyone who takes the time of
their lives to help figure this mess out.
>Sas: And what "personal issues" would those be, John? Are you saying that
>I'm not allowed to ask questions and propose theories?
Would never do that nor did I. I only expressed in maybe too personal terms
what (I) as an experiencer thought of it. (And between you and me I still
think it's a pig in a poke, but then it's just my oppinion and nothing
more.
Am I supposed to go see a psychiatrist because I came up with a theory
that attempts to grapple with the Roper Report numbers,...
Nope. Only if you believe that the abduction experiences can all, or even
partially be explained by fetal/infanticidal guilt complex. It 'sounded '
to me like a projection on your part of some personal issue. That's how far
out I thought it was, I had trouble figuring out where you got it from. If
I was wrong, I believe EBK has a wet piece of lettuce laying about that you
can beat me senseless with. <G>
>I would be perfectly happy personally if the Roper numbers would just go
>away, in which case there wouldn't be any need for a theory like mine. But
>abductionologists continue to cite them as if they really meant something.
You'll get no arguement from me. I agree that the Roper numbers are
"questionable". The sheer numbers of aliens and flying saucers required to
abduct so many individuals would fill the skies and we wouldn't be having
this discussion. However, there are a large number of apparently sane and
ordinary individuals reporting abduction related experiences. Maybe what's
needed is another more specific poll. I don't know what it would prove, but
maybe that's whats needed to put this Roper business to rest. Do you know
if anyone is contemplating such a poll?
>Are you paranoid? Where is there the least suggestion in what
>I've said that I'm trying to get you or anyone else to "just go away"?
Telling me to keep my mouth shut in my eyes is tantamount to saying "go
away" And, I only get paranoid when I see bright lights shining thru my
window at night. Or when I awaken suddenly to find a group of small bug
eyed beings surrounding the bed. I'll bet you dollars to donuts that crap
like that would make you paranoid too! <G>
>While you're here, though, there is one thing I wish you'd do and that's
>read David Hufford's "The Terror That Comes in the Night: An
>Experience-Centered Study of Supernatural Assault Traditions," University
>>of Pennsylvania Press, 1982. Your library should have it, and I believe a
>paperback edition is still in print. ISBN 0-8122-7851-8.
I'll try to get my mits on it and give it a read. Is Hufford an MHP?
>To return briefly but to one other issue you raised: anomalous scars and
>scoop marks. Have you ever heard of stigmata? Do you then believe that
>individuals who suffer or display same were crucified by real Roman
>soldiers? There is a vast body of literature, medical, religious,
>>anecdotal and other dealing with the remarkable ability of the mind to
>>influence matter, in this case the human body.
I don't think it's a valid comparison for two reasons Dennis.
1- We don't bleed from the palms, ribs, and feet. Stigmata BTW is a
"temporary" manifestation, the episodes pass and the (what do you call
them?) stigmatee returns to normal with little or no evidence of the cuts.
(I've only heard of one case where the individual retained scars after the
experience. A young girl from Italy, sorry, don't remember her name or just
where I read it.
2- I posted an open invitation on my website along side the photo's of the
abductees bodys for physicians to comment on the marks and scars. I've
gotten two replys. One from a general practioner and one from a radiologiat
that specialises in neurological radiology. Both identified the scoop marks
as being identical in size and appearance to what they called a "Punch
biopsy" I've asked some of the folks (I couldn't reach them all) if they
have ever had such a proceedure, the response was a uniform NO. Splain
dat one Reeky!
>There are also thousands of people today who testify to sexual abuse and
>satanic cults (and sacrifice) for which there is absolutely no objective
>evidence whatsoever. Should one conclude from that there is absolutely no
>sexual abuse nor satanic cults anywhere? Of course not. One nonetheless
>remains obliged to come up with some theory that would account for the
>obviously "false" cases, even when the experiencer of same may remain
>completely convinced of the reality of their experience. In some cases they
>are simply (and demonstrably) wrong -- which hasn't prevented the ruin of
>numerous lives. (Maybe you ought to take in the new movie of Arthur Miller's
>"The Crucible" this weekend and think deeply about any possible
>implications, assuming you don't consider that another "insulting" exercise
>on my part.)
I don't have any personal experience or knowledge of Satan or any of his
fan clubs. I do about aliens though. Yeah I'm sure there are some that are
simply adopting the symptoms for reasons of their own, but the majority of
the folks that I deal with show no "obvious" psychotic traits. When someone
is screwed up it bleeds through into other aspects of their personalities
and behavior. If they are screwed up, their lives are screwed up, and they
sound screwed up. Contrary to popular belief it's easy to spot a genuine
"looney," they are in trouble and it shows. Granted, not in all cases. But
the folks presenting abduction experiences (for the most part) are very
ordinary family and working people who have found themselves in the
confusing and life disrupting position of having to deal with experiences
they cannot explain any other way. No BS Dennis, I would rather believe
that I snapped a bridge cable. But EVERYTHING points the other way. Do I
"sound" nuts to you? I'm not, and neither are (many) that I have come to
know on a much better than casual basis. We quite literally have to be
investigated on a case to case basis which makes the job all the more
complex and challenging. But not impossible.
>I'm sorry you didn't like the answer I came up with. I'll try to do better
>next time.
I'm sure you will. If at first you don't succeed,.....Hey Dennis, why not
look into the possibility of rock concert induced brain damage? Lord knows
I've been to plenty of those in my lifetime! Look at what rock music did to
those greenhouse plants that they exposed to a steady diet of heavy guitar,
and drums! <G>
>In the meantime, not going nowhere, neither...
Good! A chicken from texas would of necessity have to be extremely large!
Three-and-a-half foot tall aliens are one thing, but a 6'5" tall chicken is
something else altogether! How would we explain (its) existence? <G>
Take care sas, I'm sure our trails will cross again. It's in the stars!
John Velez
jvif@spacelab.net
"INTRUDERS FOUNDATION ONLINE"
http://www.spacelab.net/~jvif/bhhp.html
UFO UpDates - Toronto -
updates@globalserve.net
Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp - ++ 416-696-0304
A Hand-Operated E-Mail Subscription Service for the Study of UFO Related
Phenomena.
To subscribe please send your first and last name to
updates@globalserve.net
Message submissions should be sent to the same address.
|
Link it to the appropriate Ufologist or UFO Topic page. |
Archived as a public service by Area 51 Research Center which is not
responsible for content.
Financial support for this web server is provided by the
Research Center Catalog.
Software by Glenn Campbell.
Technical contact:
webmaster@ufomind.com