|
Post by Henka on Aug 31, 2011 3:30:32 GMT 9.5
But if you are just a screenname, forgive me for being skeptical as to why I should believe you over John. This attack is reminiscent of a certain individual that goes by the initials BC. It is unworthy of you Stewart. I've known about John Mack for years. Anyone who ever listened to Art Bell will know who he is.
|
|
|
Post by Henka on Aug 31, 2011 3:33:18 GMT 9.5
Kids. Still doesn't prove what they saw were extraterrestrials.
|
|
|
Post by cwhite on Aug 31, 2011 4:11:35 GMT 9.5
"Kids. Still doesn't prove what they saw were extraterrestrials."
But 60 kids seen the same thing. In all respect, I ask, what else could it be?
|
|
|
Post by stewartedwards on Aug 31, 2011 4:13:06 GMT 9.5
But if you are just a screenname, forgive me for being skeptical as to why I should believe you over John. This attack is reminiscent of a certain individual that goes by the initials BC. It is unworthy of you Stewart. I've known about John Mack for years. Anyone who ever listened to Art Bell will know who he is. Let me chew on your words for a few days or so Henka. I didnt write this as an attack, and the fact that you have taken it as such may mean that I need to reflect a bit more when I type. So let me chew on it while I work out how my thoughts did not translate all that well. Anyhow apologies where due. If I have erred here, until I can see it for myself, can I thank you for pointing it out Henka, for by helping people realise when they err we can progress.
|
|
|
Post by Henka on Aug 31, 2011 5:21:39 GMT 9.5
This attack is reminiscent of a certain individual that goes by the initials BC. It is unworthy of you Stewart. I've known about John Mack for years. Anyone who ever listened to Art Bell will know who he is. Let me chew on your words for a few days or so Henka. I didnt write this as an attack, and the fact that you have taken it as such may mean that I need to reflect a bit more when I type. So let me chew on it while I work out how my thoughts did not translate all that well. Anyhow apologies where due. If I have erred here, until I can see it for myself, can I thank you for pointing it out Henka, for by helping people realise when they err we can progress. I'm not particularly worried about it. The fact is that some of us are using the screen-names to protect our identities from those who would cause us harm, like the aforementioned individual. He always tries to bait others into revealing who they are in order to use what they say, out of context, against them. I am not saying you would do so, just keep in mind there is a reason some of us choose to remain anonymous. You actually are familiar with me from another forum.
|
|
|
Post by Henka on Aug 31, 2011 5:24:23 GMT 9.5
"Kids. Still doesn't prove what they saw were extraterrestrials." But 60 kids seen the same thing. In all respect, I ask, what else could it be? Government operated electrogravitic craft, with the pilots disguised as classic "aliens" to spread disinformation. I know people in the Intelligence community. They are quite capable of such things.
|
|
|
Post by tamrin on Aug 31, 2011 6:13:29 GMT 9.5
I do like when people use Wiki as as info source I met the man at a conference, talked to him one on one, listened to him explain his views to the packed auditorium. He screened out every single abductee who was ill in some way before they got to him, a world renowned expert in the field, psychiatrist. While he never said yes "that person has been abducted by aliens" which he could not do for he was not there at the time of the abduction, he did say very clearly that something real had happened to them. And that "real" was not illnes of any physical or mental form. Actually Wikipedia has outperformed the online Encyclopedia Britannica in a large study of the quality of its information. I could go to other sources (more reliable than the ones believers are wont to cite), however you concede: 'While he never said yes "that person has been abducted by aliens".' So there doesn't seem to be much point in pursuing this pilloried professor.
|
|
|
Post by tamrin on Aug 31, 2011 6:25:08 GMT 9.5
So he didn't advocate there was a physical reality to these reported abductions. Instead an externalised, inner mystical experience. So he feels they were somewhat akin an unintended "Vision Quest." In other words, not madness in the popular, demonised perception of the term but rather an inner psychic (i.e., emotional) event for which modern, Western society ill prepares its citizens. Very interesting but I would still consider it a Mental Health issue. The MH community tends to split in terms of the prevalence of such issues (one branch believes that normal is sane, another that we all are mad to some degree, and others are on the continuum in between).
|
|
|
Post by tamrin on Aug 31, 2011 6:41:06 GMT 9.5
May the saints (including Elvis) preserve us!
|
|
|
Post by tamrin on Aug 31, 2011 11:20:06 GMT 9.5
Forgot to ask again, if anyone here feels that they are more highly professionally qualified or experienced in psychiatry than John Mack into assessing abductees then I am listening, eagerly. If anyone else here has any qualifications and professional psychiatric experience, their contribution would be welcome.
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Aug 31, 2011 12:48:10 GMT 9.5
So he didn't advocate there was a physical reality to these reported abductions. Instead an externalised, inner mystical experience. So he feels they were somewhat akin an unintended "Vision Quest." In other words, not madness in the popular, demonised perception of the term but rather an inner psychic (i.e., emotional) event for which modern, Western society ill prepares its citizens. Very interesting but I would still consider it a Mental Health issue. The MH community tends to split in terms of the prevalence of such issues (one branch believes that normal is sane, another that we all are mad to some degree, and others are on the continuum in between). So Jesus, Mohammad, Buddha and all other sainted people and prophets were just common folk with mental health issues?
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Aug 31, 2011 12:54:48 GMT 9.5
Forgot to ask again, if anyone here feels that they are more highly professionally qualified or experienced in psychiatry than John Mack into assessing abductees then I am listening, eagerly. If anyone else here has any qualifications and professional psychiatric experience, their contribution would be welcome. The few that I have met socially are a bit 'different'. Nutty professor types who found it difficult to socialise. Q - how come you place so much emphasis on qualifications and professional status here whilst totally dismissing the qualifications and professional status of those who witnessed ufo's and abductions? Whats good for one should be good for the other.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Aug 31, 2011 13:04:46 GMT 9.5
When I was young my church taught me (implicitly) that the human race was the center of Creation and that no other species was intelligent, merely clever.
This avoided a range of theological problems including whether human-equivalents in other systems might not have had problems in their Gardens of Eden and hence be spiritually superior to Earth humans.
So the concept of aliens was theologically difficult and it was better that there were no aliens at all.
I have failed to detect any modern logic that leads to the conclusion that no humanoid aliens exist at all yet such logic must exist as many rational humans take that position.
Would anyone care to expound the secular logic for my edification?
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Aug 31, 2011 13:20:47 GMT 9.5
LIFE almost certainly exists on other planets, scientists claimed last night.
There are up to 50 billion planets just like our own in our Milky Way galaxy, they said, and the likelihood that none harbours life is so slim it can be safely discounted.
The breakthrough was made by astronomers analysing light reaching Earth from nearby stars.
Dr Norman Murray, of the Canadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics, said more than half of the stars he had observed appeared to have absorbed rocky, iron-rich material, flung into them by the gravitational pull of orbiting planets.
Although we do not yet have the means to detect them, these …
www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-109598624.html
|
|
|
Post by stewart edwards on Aug 31, 2011 14:58:16 GMT 9.5
Forgot to ask again, if anyone here feels that they are more highly professionally qualified or experienced in psychiatry than John Mack into assessing abductees then I am listening, eagerly. If anyone else here has any qualifications and professional psychiatric experience, their contribution would be welcome. I am hesitant to type this while I am still chewing on Henkas words, but Tamrin you seem to be deflecting again. Takle a deep breath and think. The point is, you who may well be a decent honourable chap in real life, are but a screenname, who has openly stated his view as to the mental health aspects of the alien abduction phenomenon. John Mark apart from being a world renowned Harvard psychiatrist, had a team of doctors weed out those with any sort of physical or mental illness before they got to him. And the 100s he did then see, after been checked for any type of health problem, he took seriously and concluded that they had a "real" experience". (and not a mental health one) He was so convinced of this, that he toured the ufo circuit lecturing on it. Quite a brave thing for a chap in his position. He has, I understand, also experience as expert witness in courts of law on this issue. It would be difficult to find anyone who has more experitise in the field, backed up by professional qualifications and experience. Hence when anyone simply puts a belief in alien abductions down to mental illness, especially someone who, for understandable reasons, operates behind a screenname it is not unreasonable to ask if they have more professional training, experience, and resources than John Mack had while he spent years assessing hundreds of cases. Now if you do have these things then fair enough (and worklingin the mental health field could mean anything form a cleaner to being more highly qualified and experienced than John Mack), but if you dont, please forgive me for placing more credence on a world renowned expert, appropriately qualified and experienced, court expert witness, than someone who quite frankly could be anyone. I do listen to you Tamrin, but I hope that you see my point. And before you ask in my researching into all of this I contacted qualified and experienced people who were distinctly in your position as well as the likes of John Mack, people like Susan Blackmore(?, names were never my strong point) who puts it all down to sleep paralysis etc. Even academics who had published on the psychology of it all.
|
|
|
Post by tamrin on Aug 31, 2011 15:04:14 GMT 9.5
If anyone else here has any qualifications and professional psychiatric experience, their contribution would be welcome. The few that I have met socially are a bit 'different'. Nutty professor types who found it difficult to socialise.
Q - how come you place so much emphasis on qualifications and professional status here whilst totally dismissing the qualifications and professional status of those who witnessed ufo's and abductions?
Whats good for one should be good for the other.I was "mirroring" Stewart's post placing emphasis on qualifications and professional status, to make that point. Forgot to ask again, if anyone here feels that they are more highly professionally qualified or experienced in psychiatry than John Mack into assessing abductees then I am listening, eagerly. Late P.S. Will you be rebuking Stewart for his post?
|
|
|
Post by Henka on Aug 31, 2011 15:04:37 GMT 9.5
I know who Tamrin is, where he lives and what he does for a living. He is a good man and more than simply a screen name.
|
|
|
Post by tamrin on Aug 31, 2011 15:10:56 GMT 9.5
So he feels they were somewhat akin an unintended "Vision Quest." In other words, not madness in the popular, demonised perception of the term but rather an inner psychic (i.e., emotional) event for which modern, Western society ill prepares its citizens. Very interesting but I would still consider it a Mental Health issue. The MH community tends to split in terms of the prevalence of such issues (one branch believes that normal is sane, another that we all are mad to some degree, and others are on the continuum in between). So Jesus, Mohammad, Buddha and all other sainted people and prophets were just common folk with mental health issues? Jesus, if he existed, appears to have been gravely misrepresented and deified, Mohammad suffered frequent seizures and needed reassurance from his first wife that he wasn't delusional and Buddha taught a highly rational form of spirituality, which has since split into different camps.
|
|
|
Post by Henka on Aug 31, 2011 15:26:01 GMT 9.5
Mohammad suffered frequent seizures and needed reassurance from his first wife that he wasn't delusional Not to mention that he was a pedophile that married a 6 year old and consummated the marriage when she was 9.
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Aug 31, 2011 16:55:51 GMT 9.5
You two make me realise just how happy I am ;D
Now a little bit of common sense .... a rational person reading this thread will have realised by now (or about 2 pages ago) that it is futile to attempt to convince the other that their belief system is wrong.
As the thread is about Abduction/s and you are not interested in that topic because you deem it silly/stupid/deluded then don't join in. Just start you own thread about something that you believe in.
Easy.
In the meantime just let we 'silly people' enjoy our own intellectual pursuits in peace.
|
|