Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Abduction Digest Number 72
Abduction Digest, Number 72
Friday, August 21st 1992
(C) Copyright 1992 Paranet Information Service. All Rights Reserved.
Today's Topics:
Selection Factors
Mail Problems
EARLY ABDUCTION
Return and Clarifications
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Peggy.Noonan@p0.f605.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Peggy Noonan)
Subject: Selection Factors
Date: 17 Aug 92 23:27:03 GMT
Hello David,
What an interesting and thoughtful reply that was! Thank
you so much!
I have wondered about the handicapped abductee problem and,
since the last time I posted to you here, it occurred to me that
perhaps the reason they're underreported might have something to do
with the "nobody will believe me" factor. In such a vulnerable
position to begin with (as, say, a person confined to a motorized
wheelchair might be, for one example) I can appreciate how that
person might feel very chary of mentioning anything that could
possibly compromise his or her independence. That is, "they" let
you live your own life independently *provided* you demonstrate that
you don't need supervision. If such a person were to report any
form of UFO event, it might call his or her mental stability into
question and that would entail a much greater risk than the non-
handicapped person would face in reporting UFO events.
So, perhaps these events are less often reported because the
disbelief scale is more dangerous for these people. It is
interesting, however, that you say that now some cases are coming
in. It has been my understanding from reading books such as your
own that eventually the burden of a UFO experience, even if not
consciously remembered, becomes so great that the person to whom
this experience has happened feels compelled beyond all self-will to
act on it, either to "erase" it by what some call "confession" or to
understand it, to try to discover what is at the root of certain
"aberrations" or similar roads leading to the same destination.
Of course, if "They" were sampling all the population,
they'd surely include in their random harvest all types they could
obtain. Perhaps it might be a higher degree of difficulty to
harvest disabled people, either because they may be attended by
others or because they tend not to arrive in the remote or
semi-remote locations which UFOs seem to prefer for harvest sites.
Perhaps you noticed some months ago that I had posted a
short newspaper item called "Alien Chocolate." This was an item
from a local weekly about a UFO group in the Pacific Northwest led
by John Strongbow in which J.S. said that aliens were harvesting
humans to obtain something called "adrenal-chrom" but that they
avoided people who smoked, ate garlic or chocolate, or consumed
alcohol because those things somehow tainted the "adrenal-chrom." I
have not spoken to Strongbow (yet) so I don't know what evidence he
might have, but I wonder if there is such a preference selection in
force. I cannot recall any of the abductees mentioning that they
smoked, for instance, but it's quite a stretch to think *none* had
consumed either chocolate or garlic, or had imbibed alcohol in a
reasonable time prior to the event. Still, it makes one wonder.
Is there a computerized registry which stores and compares
data from UFO contact reports? If so, that would make it much
easier to cross-check and rule out factors such as physical defects
or even mental ones.
Yours was a most interesting reply and will give much food
for thought. Thank you very much.
==Peggy
--
Peggy Noonan - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Peggy.Noonan@p0.f605.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ncar!csn!jrblack@scicom.AlphaCDC.COM
Subject: Mail Problems
Date: 19 Aug 92 19:34:26 GMT
From: Roger Black <csn!jrblack@ncar.UCAR.EDU>
Every time we mail out one of the ParaNet digests, a number of copies
are returned to us as undeliverable. The reasons for this are as
varied as modern computer technology can make them, including:
- the recipient's account no longer exists
- the recipient's disk quota is exhausted
- the recipient's mail is being forwarded to a nonexistent address
- the host machine's spool disk is full
- the host machine's name server has lost its memory
- the host machine is temporarily unavailable
- the host machine is permanently shut down
- an intervening network or router is down
- an intervening mail gateway has gone insane
- somebody's security program has run amok
and so on, ad infinitum. Such problems sometimes persist literally for
months on end, apparently without the subscriber being aware of what is
going on. When that happens, they may be missing not only the digest
but potentially lots of other important things as well.
When mail bounces back to us, we make every effort to contact the
intended recipient, either directly or through the site's postmaster.
But it has often happened that, despite our best efforts, we simply
cannot find any way to contact the person we are trying to reach. When
that happens, we have no choice but to remove them from the mailing
list.
Usually, after a couple of weeks we receive an anxious note from the
subscriber asking what happened to the digest. Most of the time this
means that whatever problem existed has now been corrected, and we
immediately restore them to the list. However, we have seen situations
where a subscriber could send mail but not receive it. As a result, we
kept getting increasingly impatient and frustrated notes from someone
we couldn't respond to--which frustrated us as well.
So if the digest ever stops arriving for what seems like an unusually
long time, try sending us a note. If we don't respond in a couple of
days, ask yourself how long it has been since you received ANY mail
from outside your local site. If necessary, ask someone else on the
net to send you some test mail, or contact your local postmaster to see
if there is some kind of problem. You may be doing yourself a favor,
as well as us.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Pony.Godic@f6.n1040.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Pony Godic)
Subject: EARLY ABDUCTION
Date: 20 Aug 92 19:15:00 GMT
In FORTEAN TIMES Issues 1-15 (1973-1976), a volume that I would highly
recommend to anyone with a serious interest in the paranormal, I found the following, whilst browsing:
>From a letter to the Manchester Evening News, 20 Nov 68.
(Credit: Peter Rogerson).
"When my family were young we spent many happy years camping in (the upper
reaches of the River Wharfe in Yorkshire). Mr Reay (an article on that area
appeared by him in the M.E.N., the previous Saturday) says that there is a
wonderful air of mystery about it all, an air of `farawayness and remoteness,'
and I too would describe the place as spooky. I will never forget on one
occasion when we had climbed up over the moors. The children played around,
while my wife and I rested among the heather, basking in the sunshine. Whether
I dozed off or not, I do not know, but suddenly I became aware that my wife was
not with us. I called the children and asked them where she had gone, but they
could not tell me anything - I got the queerest impression that she had been
spirited away by the `fairies' - there was nowhere on the moors that she could
have hidden, and I began to get panicky. This district has that effect on one -
the isolation and peace of the place give one the impression that unearthy
(sic) things could happen. It is the weirdest place I know.
"We began to get really worried, and even Paddy, our dog, who always
accompanied us on our outings, started to whimper and appeared very distressed.
Suddenly, apparently from nowhere, my wife was with us again, and there was a
faraway smile on her face. We questioned her as to where she had been, but she
could offer no explanation, and had no recollection of having been away from us
at all. There is no doubt in my mind that something very odd had happened -
something associated with the `farawayness and remoteness' of the place."
Since this letter appeared in 1968 and its writer referred to an earlier time
when his children were young, this incident would appear to predate the modern
abduction era by some years. I know it's a very long shot, but does anyone
know any more about the above?
Anyone interested in purchasing the FORTEAN TIMES Issues 1-15 (1973-1976)
volume or in subscribing to the magazine itself, can write to:
Fortean Times
20 Paul St
Frome
Somerset BA11 1DX
U.K.
--
Pony Godic - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Pony.Godic@f6.n1040.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Vladimir.Godic@f7.n1040.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Vladimir Godic)
Subject: Return and Clarifications
Date: 21 Aug 92 04:02:00 GMT
+ I would like to take a few minutes to discuss the curent
+ controversy that has arisen with a few of the Paranet members.
+ When I was asked to be moderator of the abduction bulletin
+ board, I was asked to respond
+ to questions about the current state of abduction research in
+ general and
+ my own findings in particular. There was no doubt in my mind
+ that I was going to be controversial. After all this is an
+ extremely controversial
+ subject and because methodology has not yet been standardized,
+ other researchers may well have difficulties with my results
+ because they have not found the same things. I expected a
+ lively give and take and in the main this has been the case. I
+ think that my exchanges with Keith Basterfield are good
+ examples of that give and take. (I will have more to say about
+ the Puddy case in an upcoming IUR--if I can get the time to
+ write it up). A few people, however, have decided that
+ exchanges over the material are not adequate for debate and
+ have resorted to critically picking apart my messages. This is
+ often not too difficult because I
+ usually log on to the BBS late at night when I am too tired to
+ continue my work. I write my messages off the top of my head
+ and send them. There are bound to be contradictions and
+ ambiguities. I am fair game for those who delight in pointing
+ these out. I am not, however, fair game for personal attacks
+ and I will not abide by them--I have had enough of those from
+ the lunatic fringe debunkers to last a life time, thank you very
+ much. I hope that this will be my last word on the subject and
+ that we can get back to discussing in a reasonable and rational way the
+ mysteries of the enormously important abduction phenomenon.
AMEN!!!!
--
Vladimir Godic - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Vladimir.Godic@f7.n1040.z9.FIDONET.ORG
*******************************************************************************
Submissions abduct@scicom.alphacdc.com
Administrative requests abduct-request@scicom.alphacdc.com
FTP archive grind.isca.uiowa.edu:/info/paranet/abduct
Permission to distribute Michael.Corbin@paranet.org
Private mail to Paranet/Fidonet users firstname.lastname@paranet.org
UUCP gateway {ncar,isis,csn}!scicom
********************End**of**the**Abduction**Newsletter************************
