Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here UFOs | Paranormal | Area 51 People | Places | Random Top 100 | What's New Catalog | New Books Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Our Bookstore is OPEN Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1996 -> Dec -> Here

From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@cyberport.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 06:57:17 -0700
Fwd Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 14:52:35 -0500
Subject: Re: Code of ethics



----------
> From: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> To: updates@globalserve.net
> Subject: UFO UpDate: Re: Code of ethics
> Date: Sunday, December 15, 1996 11:13 AM
>
> Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1996 13:05:27 -0500
> From: "Steven J. Powell" <sjpowell@access.digex.net>
> To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
> Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Code of ethics
> References: <2.2.32.19961212082533.0075e8dc@globalserve.net>
>
> > From: "Clark Hathaway" <earthwrk@cyberport.com>
> > Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Code of ethics
> >
> > > We are incorrect if we expect traditional psychologists to
be
> > > the alien abduction private detectives that the
abductionists
> > > pretend to be.  That is something they are _not_ trained
for and
> > > something they are generally _not_ going to be good at.

> > Correct. But, due to the tremendous amount of psychic shock
> > attendant to most if not all 'alien' abduction cases, these
are
> > the 'professionals' who are likely to be chosen to deal with
the
> > problem. Privately (now known by any who reads this), I feel
> > that the shock would be better dealt with by one steeped in
> > spirituality then in psychology. I suspect that spirituality
has
> > everything to do with the problem. By 'spirituality' I AM
not
> > necessarily referring to those of a clerical persuasion,
> > although there are certainly those of the ministry that are
of a
> > high degree of spirituality. There are a multitude of facets
to
> > this gem of inquiry my friend. Among these is awareness.
>
> We have self-claimed experiencers from virtually all faiths
and
> religions so I'm think that a spiritual approach might be
pretty
> difficult to come up with.  Certainly for some people their
particular
> religious faith is going to be severely challenged by these
experiences.

Question: How did my statement refer necessarily to any of
RELIGIOUS persuasion John?
Question: Why and how does the term SPIRITUAL equate to the
condition of RELIGION?

In my view, spirituality and faith have really very little to do
with religion and dogma John.
It has been my experience that religion has served to retard
spirituality and hinder faith in many rather than to perpetuate
it.

> > > Tough question:  What's more important - getting the
> > > self-claimed abductees off the bench and back into the
game; or,
> > > finding out what really happenned to them?
> > Both are of equal importance John and both can be
accomplished
> > in my view.
>
> But if you could _only_ pick one to start with????

Ahhhh well, responsibly I would work toward getting the player
off of the bench.


> > > Take a glance at the Hippocratic Oath and it'll give you a
> > > clue as to the answer the mental health community selects.
> > Don't get me started on that one!  <grin>
>
> Hahahaha!!!  The point was that no matter how badly we want to
know what
> has happenned, and I really want to know what happenned, our
_first_
> priority has to be to the health and wellness of the _person_.

I buy that!  :-)

> > > So, if we separate treatment from the detective work I
think
> > > we can see that virtually all MHPs are basically qualified
to
> > > initiate (or to facilitate) work with a self-claimed
abductee.
> > The only facet of the equation that pertains to mental
health
> > and this is marginal, is the extreme amount of trauma
> > emotionally that one receives as a result of this type of
> > experience. I was very nearly a basket case by the time that
> > hypno-regression was offered to me by a practicing
psychologist.
> > Having had no other offered alternative or not being aware
of
> > one, I jumped at the chance.
>
> That's the facet I'm talking about, that's the _only_ MHP
aspect I'm
> talking about.  Just looking after the health/wellness of the
> experiencer, dealing with the trauma in a traditional
theraputic
> setting.  That is something MHPs do all the time and they
really don't
> have to have been raped to know how to help rape victims and
they really
> don't have to know much if anything about alleged alien
> abductions/contact to help those people.

Unfortunately, the particular mental health professional in
question didn't provide any therapy at all, but rather attempted
to convince me that my experience was a beneficial one conducted
by benevolent beings. This really only served to compound the
problem. When I began to attempt to take a look at my experience
from a metaphysical/spiritual viewpoint after some research, I
was able after a time to begin to accept what had happened to
me. I must however qualify that I only accept that something
exceedingly strange happened. I recall the events as having a
third dimensional reality, but question a great portion of that
as being fact.

> > > Another misconception regarding psychotherapy that
sometimes
> > > confuses things is the notion that whatever it is that's
bother
> > > someone must be either proven right to be dealt with
successfully or
> > > must be proven wrong and elimnated from their minds before

> > > theraputic success can occur.  Both are completely wrong
and neither
> > > are a part of traditional psychotherapy.
> > I suppose to some degree I experienced this, but as you must
> > realize, I AM somewhat an independent thinker and I couldn't
> > honestly buy the 'party line'. I have always run partially
on my
> > intuition and at times it has kept me alive.
>
> Standard therapy isn't about whether your experience is real
or not, its
> just about the issues related to you and your reactions.

Well, I suppose that this is true. I know that I have come to an
understanding of my reactions concerning the event.

> > Don't ask me to elaborate because I won't.
>
> Ok, I won't <grin>.
>
> > > Well, I suspect the debate on hypnotic regression isn't
going to go
> > > away anytime soon so you and can just respectfully
disagree for now
> > > <grin>.
> > It takes an intelligent, honest and unbiased practitioner.
> > However, it is O.K. that we have different opinions, I still
> > like yuh. <grin>
>
> Its not the type of thing that either of us need to be right
or wrong
> on, and eventually it'll get sorted out <grin>.

Given my concerns John, I sincerely hope so. :-)

> > > I have several papers on my BBS dealing with eyewitness
observation
> > > studies.  Children are more easily fooled, and more easily
> > > fool themselves but the problem doesn't go away with age.
Adult
> > > observational accuracy is only about 50%.
> > Julie states that she is familiar with what you are stating
and
> > that you are correct.
> > But she adds, that has nothing to do with hypnosis and
> > everything to do with eyewitness observation. Eyewitness
> > accounts contain the most fault of all as they are nearly in
> > every case different from one another.
>
> Yep, those studies and the ones I'm familiar are not in any
way
> _directly_ related to hypnosis.
>
> > > I can only, just barely, in the most modest way,
appreciate
> > > what you experienced.  But remove yourself from the
equation for a
> > > moment.  You had extraordinary experiences, some of which
may have
> > > been witnessed (or maybe they were shared).  But aside
from the
> > > testimonial power of taking your word for it how do we
objectify the
> > > experiences and convince anyone else that they occurred?
> > I don't know other than to undertake what you have
suggested,
> > that is to be constantly monitored.
>
> Some experiencers go through a period when its extremely
important for
> them to tell others about what happenned to them for the
purpose of
> self-testing their own telling of the experiences and for the
purpose of
> self-testing their belief by attempting to transfer some
amount of that
> belief to the listener.

Sure. I found myself in the position of seriously questioning my
own sanity. Equally important from my standpoint, was that I was
thrown into absolute confusion and resulting fear as well as
shock over the fact that some very elite training that I had
undergone years ago and which some attributes of this I had
practiced for the better part of my life had availed me nothing.


> As an example only, I'm sure most of us have at one time or
another met
> a recently converted born-again type person who was totally
intent on
> converting _us_ at that very moment.  Part of what's
happenning in that
> event is that the person is getting something positive simply
from the
> telling/re-telling of their story.  They belief in their
experience is
> invigorated by the re-telling of it.  Another part of what's
happening
> is that the person is hoping to get a form of validation by
causing the
> other person to accept their story.  After all, if you can
convince
> someone else that what you're saying is true then, in an odd
sort of
> referential way, it must be true - if it can be believed by
someone else
> then it must be believable.

I don't know John. You need to appreciate that I was questioning
my sanity. I feel that this has been the case of many others as
well. It is a difficult thing to accept that others may think
that you are not playing with a full deck. I had to come to a
place where I had accepted what had happened to and to accept
that unless also experienced by another, there was simply no way
they could understand where I was coming from and to be O.K.
with that. I don't really think that other experiencers are too
different from me except that some of them haven't been as
successful at integrating the experience as I have. I AM not so
sure that my statement is fair moreover due to the fact that for
some of them the experiences have continued.

> > However, I want to present another can of worms.
> > This may in reality be a REAL catch 22, John.
> > The indicator of this is the seeming fact that the phenomena
> > itself controls it's own flow of information concerning
itself.
> > Vallee has done a lot of discussion on this aspect if I
> > understand it correctly. I suspect that in many if not all
of
> > the cases, if a person is being monitored, the events will
cease
> > or failing that the monitoring equipment will be rendered
> > useless for a period of time corresponding to yet another
> > reported abduction. What does one do in such a situation? It
is
> > obvious that something is occurring, but what?
>
> Of the two options I'd prefer to have the events cease and I'm
sure the
> 'subject' would too!

To be sure! :-)

> There is a catch-22 here.  If we establish elaborate
electronic
> monitoring and that equipment shows _NO_ physical activity and
_NO_
> signs of tampering with the gear, yet the abductee reports
that they
> were in fact abducted, we would have no choice except to
assume that
> whatever happenned was non-physical.

That does not make the events any less real nor dangerous.
Man is after all, a multi-dimensional creature. The vast
majority of us have barely scratched the surface of our
realization of this. We have much to learn.

> > You got me, buddy. Still, you have to admit that based upon
the
> > numbers alone, there is something decidedly strange going
on.
>
> I've been convincved that something was going on for
decades...

As have I. Furthermore, I have come to suspect that persisting
in attempting to gain any understanding utilizing a traditional
approach is/will be futile.

> > I feel it is ominous. It serves to unsettle me to a degree.
> > I don't feel good about it when I think of it. Furthermore
on
> > another note, it is most unsettling to note that on the New
> > Age/UFO/E.T. conference circuit, we witness proclaimed
experts
> > declaring that the Alien Space Brothers are on their way
here
> > with eminent arrival to completely restructure our systems
of
> > religion and to replace the ten commandments.
>
> Who asked 'em?  I'm not a member of any system of religion so
I guess I
> get the short end of the stick?  I'd be better served if the
aliens
> replaced my cable TV company...

I feel that systems of religion have little to nothing
whatsoever to do with this equation John.

> > What does that tell you about the experts that promote this
type
> > of material?
> > I suggest that these folks are looking for a messiah that
is,
> > someone to relieve them of the responsibilities for their
own
> > actions. This was the case of the Jews when Jesus came onto
the
> > scene. They were looking for the messiah to take them out of
> > hard times to sever the Roman yoke.
>
> I think most people go through periods when they question what
they
> believe and period when they want a set of beliefs that
actually work
> for them.  I don't think that now is fundamentally different
from any
> other period of time except that things happen much faster in
this time
> period.

We are discussing something that greatly has to do with
spirituality or the lack thereof John, that is responsibility.
As far as the speed with which as well as the frequency of
things happening, well that is indirectly related to
spirituality as well. Today people are constantly complaining
that things (events, problems to solve, LIFE) are being thrown
at them with never before experienced frequency, speed and
intensity. When asked why, I attempt to explain it, but the
person usually expresses denial. <chuckle>
They then go their way doing the same things over and over
expecting different results, but receiving the same ... still
searching for the causation.

> > > No argument there.  But imagine this:  Imagine the leaders
of
> > > the AMA, the APA and a dozen other prestigeous medical
groups held a
> > > news conference and announced that, Yes, aliens are here
abducting
> > > people.
> > You gonna have some panic'd people.
>
> Some.

A bunch I'd wager. And I needn't remind you John, Fear usually
breeds violence.

> > > That constitutes recognition of the (alleged) problem but
what
> > > good would it do, what would happen next?
> > After the excitement wore down, it might get some real and
> > useful research in progress.
> > I AM compelled to add however, that this research does not
> > necessarily call for an abundance of mental health
> > professionals. I don't feel professional status or
occupation in
> > these regards are as important as ethical principles.
>
> It actually doesn't call for an abundance of anything except
funding.

If it involved electronic monitoring I agree with you.

> > I understand that. I have even met a couple who privately
shared
> > with me the strange events that they had experienced not too
> > dissimilar to my own. Perhaps what is needed is a revolution
of
> > sorts that will remove the minority from visibility and
place
> > those of true ethics in the spotlight.
> > However, how this could be accomplished I have no idea.
Somehow
> > these in the minority should be shown for the scam artists
that
> > they are.
>
> Those changes happen across generations.  As one generation
moves out or
> prominence another one moves in.  It takes time.

What if time is not a commodity that we can any longer enjoy in
these regards?

> > > But I don't think this is about scientists having an open
> > > mind.  I'll go out on a limb and suggest that this is
really about
> > > experiencer's wanting much greater acceptance than they
currently
> > > have...
> > I don't know. I have somewhat disassociated myself from the
> > emotional turmoil that was a result of my experience(s). It
> > doesn't bother me overmuch that you can't accept outright
what I
> > recall happened to me. To you it is only information subject
to
> > question. It is not a part of your subjective experience
..I.E:
> > Knowledge. To me however, a good deal of it is knowledge.
>
> You've passed through that period when you _needed_ people to
believe
> you (because it helped you to believe you).  It _shouldn't_
matter to
> you that others don't or can't believe you, and you realize
that.
> That's about as rock-bottom normal as you cannget <grin>.

John, there is a great deal concerning my recalled (vividly
real) experience that I DO NOT for a second believe. The second
part of your statement is true though.

> > > > Electronic monitoring. I suppose it is possible John,
but at
> > > > what cost?
> > > A few thousand dollars, at most.  Possibly even for free
_IF_
> > > abductees were to start filing police reports.
> > I would be willing to do that as I AM sure others would, if
> > assured that there would be NO ridicule from those within
this
> > profession. I feel however, that this is extremely unlikely.
>
> It occurred to me when I was writing that that in those areas
where we
> are _already_ using electronic monitoring of pre-release
convicts the
> costs would be essentially zero.  The equipment is already in
place as
> are the people to do the monitoring.

Then it should be utilized.

> > > You lost me on that one.  Please try again.
> > Some will see paranormal occurrences while some won't.
> > There is much more to 'sight' then the physical eyes.
> > Something does NOT have to be a part of everyone's
subjective
> > experience in order to be real.
>
> I get it, yes.

<grin>

> > > I think you've lost me again.  Reality is.  That is a
> > > fundamental concept that would require an enormous amount
of
> > > scientific evidence to shake.  One very basic assumption
is that
> > > there is a thing called 'reality' that we can, with much
work,
> > > observe and figure out.
> > Reality IS, yes, but it is composed of layers or levels.
> > Energy IS and All is composed of energy. Matter and energy
after
> > all is transmutable.
> > Energy can be described as vibrating at different frequency,
> > that is the different components that comprise it vibrate at
> > different rates. What I AM suggesting here is that as this
> > planet's rate of vibrational frequency is on the rise, so it
is
> > that everything of a non-sentient nature is rising with it.
> > Occupants of this planet that bear sentience must let go of
> > certain qualities that serve as restriction in order to rise
> > along with everything else. This higher frequency is
disrupting
> > the natural electrochemical action within the brains of many
of
> > those who are most resistant to this vibratory rise. These
may
> > all be metaphysical tenets to be sure, but I believe that I
read
> > a respectable scientific report somewhere that indicated
that
> > the vibratory rate of this planet was indeed on the upswing.
> > Although not constituting absolute proof of the above, the
> > indications are there.
>
> How do we objectively prove that things are vibrating at a
higher
> frequency, how do we prove that this affects human thinking?

That is two questions. As to the first, I suspect that our
physical instrumentation may be at or near their limitations of
possibility. However, we can catalog the effects upon measurable
phenomena of forces of higher frequency. Kirlian photography and
newer, related technologies are an example of this. Of course,
there have been other suggested explanations tendered for the
phenomena observed in Kirlian photography, but no conclusive
proof that I know of.

Secondly, it affects awareness more than the thinking process.
It serves to distort.

> > > On the flip side, we do _assume_ that while 'reality'
changes
> > > a tiny bit over time, and while we change a tiny bit over
time, that
> > > the combined change is not sufficient to invalidate
'reality' or our
> > > observations of it.  The dangerous assumption inherent in
the basic
> > > assumption is that we don't think our 'mind' (our
consciousness) is
> > > changing much.  Since we do all of our observing and
understanding
> > > with our mind it would be a big problem if _that_ was the
element
> > > that was evolving...<grin>
> > All is in a flux of evolvement and change in my view, John.
>
> You and I have a very different vocabulary but we may be
talking about
> pretty much the same thing.

I wouldn't be surprised. ;-)  <wide grin>

In any event, the concepts I AM attempting to convey are
difficult to find useful words for.

> > > The human mind uses all sorts of checks and balances
during
> > > normal conscious worktime to 'determine' the veracity of
incoming
> > > data (memory).  Most if not all of those checks and
balances are
> > > suspended or drastically reduced during hypnotic
regression.  An
> > > item comes into a person's memory stream without passing
through
> > > those checks and balances and once it is there it is
recorded as if
> > > it _did_ pass through those checks and balances.  In other
words,
> > > the person 'acquires' these 'memories' and has no real
reason to
> > > disbelieve them and every reason to accept them.  They are
stored in
> > > the person's mind as if they were real and once stored
that way they
> > > cannot be changed (without active, aggressive and
intrusive
> > > "brainwashing").
> > I must constitute an anomaly, John. I remember things and
for me
> > they are extremely real, but certain of these I strongly
> > question. Even though I disagree with nearly everything that
the
> > practitioner who regressed me espouses, he did not create
any
> > confabulation in my mind by suggestion as to where my
experience
> > was leading. I would like to lay that on his doorstep along
with
> > other things, but I honestly can't.
>
> But the point is that you wouldn't be able to detect the
confabulation
> generally.  (Specifically, if confabulation happenned to be
counter to
> somehting you already knew you might get a hint of it.)

Well, what I AM trying to imply is that I do recall his
questions, there weren't many. Of these, none were as obviously
leading as those of another researcher who I will not name who
has demonstrated his technique on at least one television
documentary. I believe that it was on the Discovery Channel. At
any rate I AM not stating that there was NO confabulation. I AM
stating that there was no confabulation by the human
practitioner in my case. However, yes I do suspect that there
was a bit of confabulation in my case, but that this constitutes
a phenomena for study in itself.

> > There have been encounters of sorts and attempts, but they
have
> > been nipped in the bud.
> > I can tell you that these were of a purely paranormal
nature.
> > Most of them involved Julie as well.
>
> I don't know why most abductionists ignore the paranormal
aspects of the
> event.  Until recently the paranormal aspects were _actively_
censored
> out of abduction accounts, even by MUFON.

I will state that I feel with every fibre of my being that this
is the aspect that is the key.
That this aspect of nearly every case is all but ignored by
nearly every researcher that I know of, is doing themselves and
more importantly the rest of us, a great disservice. If it is
there, then it is of significance.

I think that many have already made up their mind that this
phenomena comes to us from across the galaxy, John. I think that
they fear that if the incidence of paranormal phenomena is
recognized, then abduction incidents in general will be declared
non-physical. Frankly even if they were, I fail to understand
the significance of that. The phenomena is still occurring and
leaving circumstantial physical evidence. Put another way, the
phenomena is occurring and may be partially of a non-physical
nature or para-physical nature leaving physical effects in some
cases. In any case, something is happening and it may well be
very dangerous.

> > > One of the basic elements of the alien abduction event
scenario is
> > > that abductions routinely occur to abductees and are
> > > cross-generational. That should make it easy to find
suitable
> > > candidates for electronic monitoring.
> > Yes, I understand this to be true. I do not know if this
applies
> > in my case and if it did, I feel sure that it would be
strongly
> > denied.
>
> I don't know if that's _actually_ true but its what the
abductionists
> are saying.

In many cases yes. There also seems to be some suspicion that it
happens to a greater percentage of military people and/or their
dependents.

> > > NO argument about the trauma.  I (personal opinion)
suspect
> > > that they are not physical events at all.  Electronic
monitoring
> > > would likely prove that.  That doesn't mean it isn't real
but it
> > > would change the direction of abduction research.
> > I could recite a few of the more recent episodes that would
> > underline what you suggest above.
> > Julie awoke in the middle of the night during one of these
to
> > see a gray coming out of the ceiling above pulling me up
toward
> > it out of my body. The more physical portion of my body
still
> > reposed flat on it's back. She made a loud noise and I
vividly
> > recall her stating that if I lay back they couldn't take me.
> > Needless to say, I did. Now this isn't something that any
> > instruments can capture other than the physical secondary
sounds
> > which aren't necessarily present in each occurrence or all
> > occurrences.
> > The above is the tail end of one of these episodes. What
started
> > the episode was Julie being awakened by a droning noise that
> > increased in volume. She opened her eyes and began to notice
> > that the room we were in was becoming lighter and lighter.
She
> > could 'feel' who ever was causing this become cognizant of
the
> > fact that she (Julie) was aware of what was going on. At
that
> > point, the room began to grow dimmer. Julie would close her
eyes
> > to experience the same thing a little later on. She stated
to me
> > the next day that she found the event to be extremely
interesting.
> > Finally she went totally back to sleep only to be awakened
with
> > the view of me being pulled upward.
> > No such activity has occurred since we have been here in the
> > four corners area.
>
> I guess the move was a benefit in more ways than one!

We've had certain phenomena 'bug' us here, but I AM not prepared
to relate it to what occurred in Sacramento. The 'flavor' of
these episodes have been different. I'd like to point out that a
former colleague in Sacramento moved to Utah for a few months.
When he did, his attitude seemed to change much to the good.
Upon moving back to Sacramento however, his attitude reverted to
even worse than it was when we left. this only served to deepen
my suspicion that this individual is under some sort of powerful
negative influence in the Sacramento area.

> Your description suggests that it was much more a 'paranormal'
event
> than a physical event.

Yes. Much more readily discernible as such than my experience in
1990.

> > I follow you. However, this training that I alluded to isn't
> > necessarily mental, but spiritual.
>
> Well, to be acceptable it'll have to 'packaged' in such a way
as to be
> non-spiritual <grin>.

It is packaged as a heightening of awareness.
I understand that most people take the term 'spiritual' with a
religious connotation.
That is unfortunate, but incorrect nonetheless.

> > > Suppose this was done by _real_ mainstream scientists and
> > > MHPs.  Even then do you think the taxpayers of this
country would
> > > stand still for nationwide taxpayer-funded abductee
version of a
> > > flu-shot???
> > Again, I follow you. However, not many medical people in my
> > experience would be qualified to provide this training much
less
> > suggest where to obtain it. I also wish to point out that
those
> > who are qualified to provide this training would accept very
> > little recompense for it. It would also be extremely
difficult
> > if not impossible to provide this type of training in a
> > classroom type setting.
> > But then again, I might be serving to limit things. :-)
>
> If average people can be trained then so can medical people,
if
> medical people can be trained then they should be able to
train
> others...  Just may take a little more work.

Any could be trained with suspension of Ego.
Ego serves to hamper understanding.

> > > You and I won't live long enough to see that.  We know
that
> > > dowsing is a real, objective and physical phenomenon but
we really
> > > don't have a good model for how it works.  We know that
magnetic
> > > fields are somehow involved in functinal dowsing but we
don't really
> > > know how. We also know that magnetic fields are involved
in a number
> > > of mind-reality phenomena, some of which are
observational.  That's
> > > (so far as I know) about the sum total of what we can
safely say we
> > > know to date. (Except that magnetic fields, like
gravitational
> > > fields, don't exist on their own but are the result of
something
> > > else.)
> > O.K.  I'll tell you that I strongly feel that the majority
of
> > mankind had better see it John.
> > This phenomena is occurring to more and more people all of
the
> > time.
> > We are entering a new paradigm and I feel that mankind's
well
> > being as a whole may depend upon this. There are those of
> > mankind however that will feel no impact of these
occurrences.
>
> I just don't think it'll happen that quick.  It might, but I
just don't
> see any indication that it will.

My only honest response is that I suppose that time will tell.
<grin>

> In fact, the best indicators right now suggest to me that the
entire
> area of so-called alien abductions is ging to winding down
over the next
> roughly 10 or less years.  If there's nothing new to report
then you
> have to re-report the past and you can only re-report the past
a few
> times before it becomes boring...

I have a hunch that something will happen long before then to
get everyone's attention.

> > I do not feel that these phenomena fall into an MHP realm
John.
> > It is NOT a mental phenomena. Some of the cases may occur at
> > least partially on a physical (third dimensional) level, but
> > other aspects of each case seem to occur on a higher level
of
> > reality.
> > Our explanation of the etheric seemed to make some sense to
you.
> > If this is in fact a level of reality in support of the
physical
> > as I have tried to indicate, and most of the occurrences do
take
> > place upon this and/or the astral or auric,  then perhaps
you
> > can extrapolate the possible ramifications upon the
physical.
>
> Our vocabulary differences and the terminology could get thick

> here...<grin>

<chuckle>

> When I say 'mental' I'm not suggesting 'non-real,' I'm only
making the
> distinction between physical and non-physical.  What you call
the
> 'etheric,' because it is non-physical, doesn't necessarily
mean non-real
> and I think is an aspect of the 'real,' non-physical, mental
realm.

Paranormal to many (including me) is exceedingly real. If it has
any carryover effect into the physical, then even though it
constitutes a great mystery, the indications of it's reality is
there.
Again, I must state that man is a multi-dimensional creature.
That which is termed the paranormal is but another aspect of
that condition.

> The idea that because something is 'mental' and/or
non-physical that is
> is therefore non-real is _wrong_ (my opinion).

I AM in complete agreement with you here.

> The MHP aspect of this is _strictly_ related to the therapy
associated
> with the trauma of the experiences.

Okay.

> > I AM suggesting that perhaps mankind is being undermined
here.
>
> Could be.  I don't know enough to know if its a negative or
positive
> thing.  I don't even know enough to know if concepts like
'negative' or
> 'positive' are even applicable.

I don't have anything concrete to substantiate one way or
another.
All I can state is that my deepest inside 'feelings' are
profoundly unsettled when it comes to this subject. I just don't
feel good about it and I long ago learned I need to pay
attention to these types of 'feelings'.

Kindest Regards,

     Clarke