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 -> 1999 -> Jun -> Here

From: Roger Evans <moviestuff@cyberjunkie.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 21:15:00 +0000
Fwd Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1999 09:35:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Budd Hopkins


>From: Jerome Clark <jkclark@frontiernet.net>
>Date: Thu, 17 Jun 99 19:58:05 PDT
>Fwd Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 12:48:32 -0400
>Subject: Re: Budd Hopkins

>>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
>>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>>Subject: Re: Budd Hopkins
>>Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 11:37:44 +0100

Previously Jenny had offered:

>>Dennis is absolutely right. The day when a
>>genuine researcher gets into serious legal difficulties as a
>>result of hypnotic regression is a racing certainty. It may not
>>be Budd. It could be anyone. But it will happen and, I'm afraid,
>>UFOlogy will be rightly hauled over the coals by the media for
>>allowing it to get that far.

Hello all,

I've been tied up in a massive documentary film project for the
last several months and haven't been able to participate in the
list. However, Jenny's statement above reminds me of my first
commercial film project when I was about 24 or so. I used a
piece of copyrighted music without permission (naughty me) and
after handing the film over to a distributor began to feel pangs
of guilt. I asked a friend of mine (who was a lawyer) if I might
really get sued by the music's producers.

His response? "One can only hope so," he said. "For, surely, it
would be an indication of great profits for your little film.
You would have made enough money for them to actually feel
cheated!"

Likewise, we can only hope that Jenny's concerns about impending
lawsuits against ufologists are well founded. Why? Because, for
damages to be proven, the "memories" dredged up by the use of
hypnosis would have to be accepted (at some point) as fact; not
only by the "victim" but by the courts as well.

Despite the aftermath, it will be a welcome day when society and
the courts declare _any_ UFO experience as "real". Though I
personally don't believe hypnosis is worth beans as an
investigative tool, I wouldn't want to prevent Mr. Hopkins or
anyone else from carrying on with their efforts. Sometimes the
ends do justify the means...

Take care all,

Roger Evans