|
"I still
find it curious why the physical evidence that Budd Hopkins and
David Jacobs have collected are never mentioned by the debunkers.
Both researchers have tried to include it in various television
specials about abductions. Nobody seems all that interested in it.
Perhaps because with specimens and artifacts that backup abductees'
reports, it makes the debunking process all too difficult."
– Kay Wilson
Anyone who
has been involved in the field of ufology has come across various
people claiming to offer their own distinct views about what they
believe is occurring to UFO witnesses and people claiming abduction.
While they would like to have you believe they are highly qualified
and indeed special in their own right, most are not. In fact,
many are simply mean-spirited people. The case of Mrs. Victoria
Lacus Alexander is no different.
Victoria
is the wife of John B. Alexander, a Ph.D., retired colonel, and
a former science advisor for Robert Bigelow's now defunct NIDS: National Institute
for Discovery Science. Mrs. Alexander has recently circulated -
by way of the internet - a disparaging article about abductees and
those who research them titled, What Would Freud Say?
Mrs.
Alexander begins by letting the reader know that she is responding
to criticisms made about her own criticisms regarding Dr. Helmut_Lammer's article Preliminary Findings of Project MILAB. What
the reader of her material and of this article should understand
is that she has not chosen this time to merely respond to criticisms
from years past, but rather, to attack Dr. Lammer's work on the
eve of the release of his new book titled MILABS![1]
Although
she waits until her last paragraph to inform the reader, she thanks
her husband - not "John," but "John B. Alexander,
Ph.D." for his "...support, review, and insightful contributions
to this article." It makes me wonder why "John B. Alexander,
Ph.D." did not add his own name to this article. Perhaps it
is due to his close affiliation with Robert Bigelow and NIDS; an
organization and an individual who are no mystery to ufology. Indeed,
in the not-so-distant-past, Robert Bigelow has helped MUFON, CUFOS,
the Fund for UFO Research, Budd Hopkins, John Mack and others, funding
various investigative UFO projects. Probably the most well-known
are the two Roper Polls that measured American's "Unusual Personal
Experiences."[2]
A Freudian
Focus
In Mrs. Alexander's
article What Would Freud Say? she states, "There has
been much emotionally based consternation about my generalizing
comments about alleged dysfunction relating to abductees."
She then goes on to provide no less than three pages of quoted material
from several researchers (Mack, Hopkins, Jacobs, Fiore) and her
favorite abductee to publicly badger, Debbie Jordan (alias Kathy
Davis of Intruders).
I compare what
Mrs. Alexander has done with her debunking article to going through
a police file of reported rape cases and omitting everything about
the victim except their description of the most lurid details of
the sexual nature of the crime. It is indeed "Freudian"
to place so much focus on the sexual nature of abductions. There
are many other events that have been reported by abductees, but
just as she did two years ago, Victoria is still obsessing about
the sexual aspects of the phenomenon.
In my Researcher's
Supplement I went to great lengths to separate and analyze the
different components of my experiences. After studying my journals,
which contained over a decade of experiences, I found that only
3% of my experiences involved anything relating to sex. In other
words, 97% of my experiences involved other things happening than
sex with aliens or hybrids or whatever the debunkers feel like accusing
us of.[3]
Indeed, this
brings us to Victoria's criticism-of-the-week: "Have aliens
become the scapegoats for life-threatening and ostracizing obesity,
failed relationships and marriages, sexual inadequacies, lifelong
medical problems, and chronic masturbation, etc?"
Has Victoria
undertaken or referenced any scientific studies that would indicate
a higher incidence of health problems with people claiming abduction
as compared to a control group? No. She has not. Therefore, her
question is pointless, as it was intended to be. Mrs. Alexander
has taken particular narratives out of various books and has once
again thrown them into the same proverbial pot to support her own
assumptions.
One of the
things all abductees can do is honestly report what has occurred
to them. However, it seems that when they do they are attacked and
their experiences debunked in every manner conceivable. Amazingly,
after pages and pages of dissected material, Victoria makes the
following request:
"I urge
all men and women who have been harassed, abused and kidnapped by
military personnel to publicly come forward."
Why in the
world would any abductee take advice or honor a request from
Mrs. Victoria Alexander? I am certain I am not alone in wondering
what she has planned for us this time. Perhaps an attack with a
"non-lethal beanbag propelling weapon"?
The truth of
the matter is, we have come forward and several MILAB abductees
have shared their information with Dr. Lammer. He published some
of that information in his MILAB article, and much more is contained
in his new book MILABS!
Victorian
Flawed Statements
The following
section focuses on specific statements made by Mrs. Alexander and
shows that - as opposed to being a true skeptic - she is nothing
more than an irrational debunker.
"At this
time there is absolutely no incontrovertible proof that aliens are
abducting, experimenting on, sexually abusing, and mating with humans
to produce a hybrid race."
The phrase
"incontrovertible proof" is an excellent choice of words
to use in this portion of her argument. What she does not tell
the reader is that "incontrovertible proof" even in
a court of law, is rare. I still find it curious why the
physical evidence that Budd Hopkins and David Jacobs have collected
are never mentioned by the debunkers. Both researchers have tried
to include it in various television specials about abductions.
Nobody seems all that interested in it. Perhaps because with specimens
and artifacts that backup abductees' reports, it makes the debunking
process all too difficult.
Five years
ago I stated in my Researcher's Supplement, "Until
we began using DNA testing procedures, women could not prove that
they had been raped by a particular man. All the police had to
go on was the woman's word, the word of eye witnesses (if there
were any) and perhaps a gynecological exam if the woman reported
the rape immediately. Did that negate the fact that women were
raped? Unfortunately, sometimes it did. But never, ever
to the woman who survived the rape."[4]
Victoria states,
"Ongoing fast-track advances in genetic engineering clearly
indicates that physical intercourse (or simulated impregnation)
to produce 'hybrids' is extremely inefficient and unnecessary....Earth's
scientists do not even need sperm or ova to reproduce offspring.
Yet we are asked to believe clumsy, archaic procedures are conducted
by a technologically superior species."
The obvious
flaw in this statement is that abductee reports do not all involve
reports of clones or the cloning process. As a matter of fact,
only a small minority involve any mention of cloning. The majority
of abductees who talk about hybrids do so based on their memories
of the event. Many of these memories are conscious memories,
and were not retrieved by way of regressive hypnosis.
The understanding
is these offspring were created through sexual intercourse, or
through the collection of sperm and ova with fertilization and
gestation sometimes occurring in a third host. Where are all of
the reports stating that abductees are saying all of the hybrids
are clones? Victoria's statement is simply inaccurate and does
not represent the whole picture of what we have learned about
the apparent hybridization process.
Victoria states,
"All we have are stories," [from abductees and the researchers
who study their information.]
Rather than
using terms like "eye-witness testimony," "self-reports,"
or "conscious memories," she chooses the word "story"
to describe the information related by abductees. The word choice
is intended to lessen the believability factor. For example, we
tell "stories" to children. Children tell "stories"
when they lie. Abductees do not tell "stories."
Other tools
debunkers like Victoria use are types of phrasing, simple word
choices and the use of quotation marks to give the reader the
impression that the information they are reading about [by or
from abductees] is not worthy of being considered in a serious
manner.
Victoria states,
"...the 'abduction experience' [see the use of quotation marks
again] in some way enriches the lives of abductees by either purging
their troubled psyches, or allows them to undergo an 'arthritic
sci-fi shamanic jaunt' (without the burden of leaving the comfort
of bedroom and home)."
It is true
that when victims of crimes talk about their experiences one-on-one
or in a support group situation it helps to purge the awful pent-up
feelings and emotions that can alienate a person who is trying
to get their life back on track. In the field of mental health
it is appropriate and encouraged for victims to share by purging
their inner feelings and fears. However, according to Victoria,
it is inappropriate for abductees to do so. And, even worse if
we find ourselves enriched by surviving our ordeals. We are not
looked at as being strong - we are placed in a virtual no-man's-land
simply because we cannot produce a physical extraterrestrial for
Victoria and other debunkers to poke and prod.
Victoria states,
"... If these alien sexual episodes are not taking place in
physical reality, then they certainly should be classified as 'sexual
fantasies.' "
Sexual fantasies?
Using Victoria's analogy, this is like saying events that occur
in a spiritual reality are mere spiritual fantasies. I
wonder how Victoria would defend her statement to the Reverend
Billy Graham or to the leaders of other churches and religions?
Are beliefs that we cannot presently back up with a physical
existence really simple fantasies? Is a belief in God a fantasy?
Conclusion
I will abstain
from providing other examples of Mrs. Alexander's inaccurate statements
that relate to people claiming alien abduction. The reader (and
the public) should have a good idea of the types of blanket criticisms
covered in her article. It is interesting to note however, that
it is not until page five that she gets to the supposed real reason
for writing her article in the first place. She is attempting
to respond to criticisms made about her own criticisms regarding
Dr. Helmut_Lammer's article "Preliminary Findings of Project
MILAB."
It is clear
Mrs. Alexander's article is a vehicle with which to throw a few
spars at the better known abduction researchers and abductees,
while muddying up the waters on the eve of the release of Helmut
and Marion Lammer's new book. During her criticisms of Dr. Lammer,
she states completely false material and attempts to use our military's
past blunders (their failure to "get" Khaddafi, Noriega,
Hussein, etc.) as an excuse not to believe abductees. Perhaps
what Victoria does not understand is that there is a big difference
between military targets and political diplomacy.
Victoria
naively reminds us that "...we live in a democratic society
with laws against kidnapping and medically experimenting on its
citizens." Where was Mrs. Alexander when MKULTRA and its
many subprojects were exposed? Where was she when Hazel O'Leary
announced the release of secret DOE documents showing that, among
other groups and corporations - Quaker Oats was feeding radioactive
cereal to children?
It is time
for "Victoria & Company" to wake up and realize
that secret atrocious medical and psychological experiments have
been carried out on American citizens. It happened. There are
documents to prove it happened, and we will be smelling the stench
from those atrocities for decades to come.
Victoria
boldly doubts the claims of a small number of abductees who have
consciously remembered seeing military and other government personnel
during their experiences. Our government has experimented on its
citizens before - why should we not suspect that a small segment
of our government or military may be involved in MILAB
experiments - especially when we have seen them with our own eyes?
Maybe Victoria
is correct. There may not be aliens after all. It may just be
those same old humans doing the same old thing to a few unfortunate
citizens living in our wonderful democratic society. Which, in
the end, makes Helmut_Lammer and those he writes about right,
doesn't it?
NOTES
[1] Preliminary
Findings of Project MILAB were originally published in the December
1996, and February 1997 editions of The MUFON Journal. Marion
and Helmut_Lammer, Ph.D., MILABS: Military Mind Control and Alien
Abduction, Illuminetpress, 1999.
[2] Budd Hopkins,
David Jacobs, Ron Westrum, The UFO Abduction Syndrome, Unusual
Personal Experiences: An Analysis of the Data From Three National
Surveys (Las Vegas, NV: The Roper Organization, 1992); And, Robert
Bigelow's NIDS: National Institute for Discovery Science Update 2008: NIDS is now defunct.
[3] Kay Wilson,
The Alien Jigsaw Researcher's Supplement (Puzzle Publishing,
1994)50.
[4] Ibid.
123. |