Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Abduction Digest Number 71
Abduction Digest, Number 71
Monday, August 17th 1992
(C) Copyright 1992 Paranet Information Service. All Rights Reserved.
Today's Topics:
Re: "Vision"
Selection factors
Return and Clarifications
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Linda.Bird@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (Linda Bird)
Subject: Re: "Vision"
Date: 16 Aug 92 18:12:00 GMT
Hi Tom,
Thanks for your reply about my vision of the stars and universe. That
happened about 2 1/2 years ago, and I had no physical symptons of any
kind at the time.
I just had an EKG, check-up, etc. and am in pretty good shape for being
40-something. :-)
Thanks for writing!
Best,
Linda
--
Linda Bird - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Linda.Bird@f100.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David.Jacobs@f21.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (David Jacobs)
Subject: Selection factors
Date: 12 Aug 92 07:32:18 GMT
Thanks for your note Peggy. We are not sure of the selection factor for
abductees. My best guess is that it was originally random probably at the
beginning of the century or thereabouts. Through natural population increase,
marriages, divorces, remarriages and so forth, the population of abductees
expanded in a cone-like effect. So that while it might have started
relatively small, it is now relatively extensive.
Our population is not large enough to include everybody in it. For example
I know of no Eskimos who are abductees. That is not to say that there are
none, but we have not yet seen any. My own population includes black, white,
Jewish, Christian, male, female, young, old, Hispanic, and so forth. But
there are so many different human groupings that we just do not know if any
groups have been left out. I have heard from people who are Asian, Egyptian,
Iranian, and from other countries as well, but I have not worked with them so
I guess they must remain in the "potential" abductee category.
I have also thought about the problem of gross physical disabilities as
being underrepresented in the abductee population. However, I have recently
heard of an abductee who is a paraplegic, one who has scleraderma, and several
others with serious medical problems. So I think that the more we learn about
the abductee population the more it might include all groups suggesting once
again that it might indeed be random.
Ultimately, the only way to determine if the group is random is to do
extensive medical analyses of bones, blood, genes, and everything else. This
has not been done so far but it is something that I believe must be done in
the future. Right now there is nothing overt--weight, size, facial hair, and
so forth--that would set abductees off from the rest of the population. The
only significant factor that we can find that determines if a person is an
abductee is whether one or both of his or her parents were abductees as well.
Via SPITFIRE Bulletin Board System - Version 3.2
--
David Jacobs - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: David.Jacobs@f21.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David.Jacobs@f21.n1010.z9.FIDONET.ORG (David Jacobs)
Subject: Return and Clarifications
Date: 13 Aug 92 22:17:34 GMT
I'm back in town for a few days and on August 19 I will be going to England
for about ten days. I will give a few lectures there thanks to the help of
Stuart Smith and Steve Gamble. One will be in Manchester and one will be in
London. I am looking forward to describing my research and probably fanning
the fires of controversy.
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.
Via SPITFIRE Bulletin Board System - Version 3.2
--
David Jacobs - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: David.Jacobs@f21.n1010.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************************
