"'Alien Abductions May Be Vivid Dreams: Study; Research Center Says Pre-Sleep Activities Influenced 'E.T.'-Like Encounters'

"Researchers say they have conducted 'the first experiment to ever prove that close encounters with UFOs and extraterrestrials are a product of the human mind.'

"In a sleep study by the Out-Of-Body Experience Research Center in Los Angeles, 20 volunteers were instructed to perform a series of mental steps upon waking up or becoming lucid during the night that might lead them to have out-of-body experiences culminating in encounters with aliens.

"According to lead researcher Michael Raduga, more than half the volunteers experienced at least one full or partial out-of-body experience, and seven of them were able to make contact with UFOs or extraterrestrials during these dream-like experiences.

"Raduga designed the experiment to test his theory that many reports of alien encounters are actually instances of people experiencing a vibrant, lifelike state of dreaming. If he could coach people to dream a realistic alien encounter, he said, that could prove that reports of such encounters are really just a product of our imaginations.

"'When people experience alien abductions in the night, they usually don't know they are actually in REM sleep and having an out-of-body experience,' Raduga told 'Life's Little Mysteries,' adding than an estimated 1 million Americans have such experiences each year.

"'It's very realistic and people cannot understand how it happens. [Our study] shows that it's not about aliens, it's about human abilities, and it can happen to almost anyone.'

"Study participants were told to try to 'separate from their bodies' every time they became half-awake or lucid during the night. If they were able to dream that they had separated from their sleeping bodies, they were then supposed to look for aliens in their homes. If they were unable to have an out-of-body dream experience, they were told to go back to sleep and try again later in the night.

"'Some could do it by the first attempt. Some needed three to five attempts to have an out-of-body experience. Not everybody could do it — some were unable to do it because of their fear. They were able to separate from their body but they became too afraid to look for aliens,' Raduga said.

"By the end of the study, 35 percent of the volunteers said they had made visual contact with aliens, and they described their encounters for the researchers.

"One participant, identified as Alexander N., recalled making a successful attempt to separate from his body: 'I [then] tried to find aliens. Three of them materialized right before my eyes. They seemed more like creatures from the movie "The Thing" than tadpoles with eyes like Princess Jasmine. They wanted to scare me, not to "make contact." As a result, I was extremely frightened and regained awareness in my own body.'

"Raduga plans to publish his results and to conduct further studies on humans' ability to fabricate alien encounters that seem real."

(Natalie Wolchover, "Alien Abductions May Be Vivid Dreams: Study; Research Center Says Pre-Sleep Activities Influenced 'E.T.'-Like Encounters," under "Science on MSNBC.com," 26 October 2011, at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45051979/ns/technology_and_science-science/#.TqnBT0axjqI)



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 10/27/2011 06:32PM by steve benson.

Steven, Steven, Steven, your like dracula guarding the blood bank bank. I am not typing this but my keyborad is just going crazy when you bait us like this. In real research, trying to duplicate spontainious events in nearly imposible. When a researcher is designing a reseach experiment that proves the hypothis to be true he is not a real researcher. A real scientific study always tries to prove the NULL hypothesis. The research designe is flawed, the objectivity and double blind has excellent glasses, ramdomness is non exsistent. I am open to any and all posibilities, but fools doing research on such intangable subjects reminds me of my education at BYU. When I got into graduate work they taught me to smell flawed research. I smell shit here. It may be just me, but this is flim flam, rabbit out of a hat stuff. If it floats your boat that OBE are mental nonsense, it is ok with me. But I am interested in real truth, not stand up comedy. I will now be quiet and behave. The rabbit out of a hat reminds me of Mr. Smith's tricks pulling gold plates out of hats and angel stuff. Good entertainment, poor research.

And who are you to complain at all? Recall, please, that it was you who exclaimed awhile back in defense of NDEs, "But what about the silver cord? Explain the silver chord!," as you quoted from the Bible:

"Remember him--before the silver cord is severed, or the golden bowl is broken; before the pitcher is shattered at the spring, or the wheel broken at the well, and the dust returns to the ground it came from, and the spirit returns to God who gave it." (Ecclesiastes 12:6-7)

Remember that? Of course you do. You're the one who linked to it:

http://www.near-death.com/experiences/research12.html

http://outofbodytravel.ning.com/forum/topics/nde-and-the-silver-cord?commentId=2060876%3AComment%3A86000&xg_source=activity

Talk about smelling bull pucky.



Edited 8 time(s). Last edit at 10/27/2011 06:50PM by steve benson.

Not bein nit picky but....really, who?

This is an interesting experiment.

However, it proves nothing. Except that Michael Raduga was able to create something that mimicked the reports of some people who believe they were subjected to alien abductions.

Michael Raduga's hypothesis is probably right, but that's not the same as his experiment being valid.

I promised to be quiet, but just like any good mormon training, I was lying for the lard. The silver cord quote appears to be talking about death. In about 20% of OBE not NDE, they are totally different experiences, the subjects leaving their bodies report seeing a silver, or white cord running from the head region of the physical to the spritual. It may be some type of life line, or unbicular cord. They report that if that cord is tangled or severed they will not return to the body, it is death.

I do not pretend to know what this all means or how it comes together. The leap of faith you do on this topic, involves ignoring certain facts, that do not fit your conclusions. For real truth and science to prevail we are not able to pick and choose what facts we want to include in our conclusions.

A good attorney and scientist can argue both sides of the issue with compentence. We have to read and be aware what the other side of the issue is, and what facts are common to the question at hand. It appears that you are purhaps a good defense attorney, but if called upon in any case to be the prosecutor, all you can do is dance on the table and state you preconcieved opinions.

I studied this OBE and some NDE for over twenty years. There are still no hard fact conclusions. There is equal agreement on both sides of the issue that it may be brain contained, or it may have another answer. If it is a sprit body that is not a great concern to me. If appears vital to you that that conclusion is never reached. Why? Facts are facts, science is science. If it proves us right or wrong so what. It does not put me on the floor like a 2 year old one way or the other. Truth and science should fit like a glove.

By the way, Steve, Steve, Steve, I did not mean to call you Steven. I have a son, Steven and you remind me so much of him.
That is good and bad. Your well documented, but tend to bring only your side of the issue to the table. Having a spirit body does not bother me in the least, even as an atheist. What is...is.Let's let science move along at it's own pace and teach us. Predicting science and making conclusions can and often does make us look.....well uninformed. I promise to not respond again unless, my keyboard starts typing on it's own. The keyboard is like an exwife, I can't control either of them.

Is this called "cording for the Lording"?

The research cited helps explain "alien encounter" dreams as being in-brain, not out-of-brain.

If you want to claim otherwise, go ahead, Flat Earth Boy. :)



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 10/27/2011 10:08PM by steve benson.

I did not write the bible, I only quoted what others have said in the bible, and coordinated that with hundreds of reports by those who have expereince this event. I can't so easily dismiss hundreds and thousands that have no known connections, from all over the world, reporting such identical events. Do you suppose that all these eyewitness reports is some type of con job? Please explain to me how you account for these thousands of diversied reports....please.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/27/2011 11:40PM by get her done.

I did not write the Book of Mormon, I only quoted what others have said in the Book of Mormon, and coordinated that with hundreds of thousands of reports by those who have experienced the spirit of the lord. I can't so easily dismiss hundres of thousands who have no known connections, from all over the world, reporting such identical witnesses of the spirit. Do you suppose that all these spiritual witness reports are some type of con job? Please explain to me how you account for these hundreds of thousands of diversied testimonies....please.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/27/2011 10:57PM by steve benson.

kolo....the group you quoted was NOT ramdom, very important key point. A group that are a cult with cult teachings is a far cry from a ramdom group with nothing in common. Your mixing apples and oranges. The two groups you compared are nothing like each other. If all the mormons testifying to the book of mormon, never knew each other, never was taught any common language or culture and then all spontainiously (sp) began to testify that would be as amazing as the diverse populations reporting OBE experiences. Your confused, concerning ramdomness and it's importance in recogized science. You and Steve make a great team....the blind leading the blind.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/27/2011 11:28PM by get her done.

mtm....have I made any arguments one way or the other concerning this topic...I have said over and over, I do not know what all this eyewitness and quasi experiments mean, prove or disprove. I think I should get a testimoney glove and talk to it. I MAKE NO CONCLUSIONS ON THE TOPICS AT ISSUE, I ONLY RESERVE THE RIGHT TO READ GOOD, WELL DOCUMENTED MODERN ACCEPTED SCIENCTIFIC METHOLOGY. GOOD GRIET IF UCSU TAUGHT YOU ANYTHING, WASN'T READING 101, WITH THE COURSES ON FRESHMAN ENGLISH? I AM OPEN AND HAVE NO OPINION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. YOU CAN NOT PUT WORDS OR THOUGHTS IN ME THAT I NEVER SAID AND DO NOT BELIEVE.

ARE YOU TRYING OUT FOR CHEERLEADING FOR STEVE? GOOD GOLLY MISS MOLLEY. READ WHAT I WROTE, AND READ NOTHING ELSE INTO IT. THANKS

Analysis of dreams involving encounters with aliens, as reported by the cited study, indicate that to be the case.

Don't fight against the scientific facts. Happily humble yourself, like a good clear-headed ex-Mormon, and bow before them.

Now, back to your nap. :)



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 10/28/2011 12:23AM by steve benson.

Steve, I am still laughing at the flat earth boy comment. I don't know what sheephearders think like, but maybe it is a compliment, thanks. I did not call you names, or observe your thinking powers. I am waiting for the negitive spelling comments that are on the way. Really, I am trying to be serious here. You are not answering any questions but just dancing. How do you explain all the reports, of OBE, NDE and alien visitations??? Are all these people just trying to make your preconcienved theory look....well I guess the word is...stupid. Is this a gaint conspirency (sp) against you. I take meds not to be this paranoid....speak..please...What hard evidence do you have that your death does not include some type of continued exsistence. Why is that so threatening to you?

SIGNED...........FLAT EARTH BOY........

NOW THAT IS FUNNY AND IF DON'T THINK SO YOU NEED TO GET OUT OF HERE



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/27/2011 08:00PM by get her done.

You don't even deal with the research that's presented in the OP. It's like some alien spaceship has come down to Earth, beamed you up, sucked out your brain and put you on auto-pilot toward La-La Land: BYU-Mars or something.

P.S./Hint for ya: Bible-era sheepherders didn't think like scientists. You don't help your case any by quoting them.



Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 10/27/2011 08:19PM by steve benson.

There are only two constant streams of comedy in this world, your post and the scams of the mormon church..Flat earth boy, that is still funny. I can see no answer will be forthcoming, so I am going to take a nap and maybe see an alien or get a good OBE or I am still laughing so hard at the "flat earth boy", and the high intelligece of sheephearders, I could end up with a NDE. Anyway, I usually learn a lot from you, but the jury is still out on this post.

And the jury is no more out on alien OBEs than it was on the Kinderhook Plates.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 10/27/2011 09:04PM by steve benson.

i think many mormons and many exmormons still think they know it all. big egos? who knows.

some still have the mentality "i believe so, and that settles it. everything else is rubbish". when somebody says something different from what they think, they call it persecution or start with the name calling or character assassination or simply they get defensive.


can't we just get along and be open minded?



having said that...


there are brilliant and dumb people who believe in aliens; there are brilliant and dumb people who don't.

here are some of the brilliant ones -most people would recognize who they are.

Edgar Mitchell believes in aliens.
Stephen Hawkins says they probably do exist.
Carl Sagan believed in aliens --co-founded SETI
Jimmy Carter believed
J. Edgar Hoover believed.
Michio Kaku believes
Albert Einstein believed.
Herman Oberth believed

and so on...



my take is:

** i don't know ** if there are aliens out there. maybe. why not. however, there's no actual aliens we can talk to to find out for sure. there's no substantial evidence --only circumstantial evidence: paintings, written accounts, etc. that circumstantial evidence allows us to speculate simply out of curiosity. is that immoral? illegal maybe?


all of sightings out there, it would only take one of them to be a true alien UFO to claim validity to the many of the claims. what are the chances of all those thousands sightings to be man-made or nature made UFOs? __i don't know__


on the other hand, the nazis built pretty advanced aircrafts that easily passed for alien UFOs. that technology was passed on the US thanks to the project paper-clip in the 40s.


i think most sightings fit the definition of U.F.O.: we don't know what those objects are but they do fly.

That said, people can, of course, believe whatever they want. As they say, dreaming is believing.

After all, that what's Mormons do, despite empirical evidence to the contrary. :)



Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 10/27/2011 10:51PM by steve benson.

I think most researchers and professors at my alma mater, UCSC, would think arguments from get her done are crazy. If there is zero proof of the "silver cord" why would anyone spend energy or thought on it at all.

The "Out-of-Body" experiment appears to be valid, but relies on self-report data, which is always suspect. We can't rely much on experiments that have conclusions which are based totally on self-report data like this with no corroboration with measurable, objective data. People can easily claim anything.

Still, it seems valuable enough to do the research, and interesting that the out of body experience may be taught as a mental state upon awakening. The study may shed light on why many people have reported such fantasies that feel real to them.

OK, I'm seeing if I can separate from my body tonight. Don't know if I'll look for "aliens."

Michael Raduga got his PhD from where? Did his fellowship where? Is a professor...where?

Sure, someone could come up with a well-designed experiment without having those kinds of academic credentials. It's just that in the absence of same, I'm going to be more than a little skeptical.

As if we haven't repeatedly gone the rounds on this subject here on RfM, with TBMs (True Believers in Myth) still faithfully clinging to OBEs and NDEs as supposed "proof" of eternal life (which includes, the testimony goes, real-life contacts with extra-terrestrials abiding in heaven or some other make-believe locale).

Right.

Earth to the dreamy Alien Abduction crowd: Science has a good handle on how the human brain works and so, then, has a good handle on how OBEs and NDEs work.

Damn the facts. Faithfully follow the fiction and beam me up, Scotty.



Edited 10 time(s). Last edit at 10/28/2011 12:20AM by steve benson.

>The research cited simply reports that these so-called "alien dreams" are inner-cranial, not extra-terrestrial or out-of-body


...and yes, that's one possible explanation. for instance, dr. richard mcnally adheres to that opinion --that's just the subject's imagination, etc.


others believe that "alien dreams" (including abductions) are real. one of those proponents is dr. john mack who conducted a rather extensive study on the matter.


both were from the same university.
both offer compelling empirical evidence for their studies.
both are serious professionals.
both non-mormons.


i recommend you read both studies --if you are so minded of course. they are really interesting to say the least.

or "damn the facts [of both sides]" as you graciously pointed out.

:)

. . . during the night, in order to determine the influence of that encouragement on the subjects' subsequent dreaming.

The research indicated that imagining themselves contacting or being kidnapped by aliens in that "half-awake" state of mind subsequently produced . . . (drum roll, please) REM-state, realistic dreams on the part of the subjects in which they imagined contact with, or being abducted by, aliens.

In other words, prompted to dream about aliens, they dreamed about aliens.

It's the brain at work.
_____


Now, whether there is empirical evidence to show that extra-terrestrial aliens actually exist and have had physical contact with, or have physically kidnapped human beings from planet Earth only to return them to terra firma after experimenting on their bodies and/or implanting strange objects under their skin, is another matter entirely.



Edited 13 time(s). Last edit at 10/28/2011 01:40AM by steve benson.

not sure about all the details of the experiment you mention. not sure about demographics for example. that's why i'm a bit cautious on the matter.

let me explain my point:

it would be interesting to find out if the alien beings the subjects saw during their dream have the same shape, form, and size. the subjects could express that through drawings or verbal depiction of the beings --not hypnosis. the researcher gathers all that and makes some sort of library with those drawings. unlikely **all** drawings will be the same.


and to avoid possible data contamination, the researcher should compare those same type of dreams and drawings with the ones from subjects of the same gender and age but from a different geographic area who don't have access to sci-fi movies or any type of access to research on the matter.

in other words, a comparison between dreams from subjects from japan versus dreams from subjects from the jungles of papua new guinea.

if both sets of pictures match, then that rules out hollywood completely and we are onto something. more data are required. perhaps are different setting. i insist on reading dr. john mack's findings who conducted similar experiments.

(unless you are from carl jung's school. of course. he had an interesting theory about it.)

now if both sets of pictures do not correlate, then more data are needed. it might be that their imagination was propelled by the media of our time. again, see dr. richard mcnally's findings.

there. my two cents.

. . . cooperated with them in any way, shape or form.

(Note: Late-night "Coast-to-Coast" radio chat with George Noory or Art Bell does not count as general scientific consensus).



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 10/28/2011 02:29AM by steve benson.

but you see my point right? about the demographics on the subjects?



unlikely you'll see a general scientific consensus on the matter.

it's not mainstream.

a lot of people, including the brilliant carl sagan, said he didn't want to go public with his beliefs in extra-terrestrials for fear of losing grants. who can't blame him.

it's a shame really. universities are supposed to be an example of free thinking and expansion of human knowledge.


if you ask me, i think i like better carl sagan's efforts than msnbc's.

. . . of course, that scientifically-demonstrable evidence has not yet been discovered:

"Carl Sagan was captivated by the notion of life beyond Earth. Yet in [a NOVA] interview, conducted shortly before the well-known champion of science died in 1996, Sagan says that extraterrestrial intelligence is 'a wonderful prospect, but requires the most severe and rigorous standards of evidence.' Sagan doubted that the various proponents of so-called 'alien abduction' making headlines in the 1990s had met those scientific standards."

In a publicly-broadcast television interview, Sagan was asked t "[s]peculate for a moment on the parts of human nature, the commonality of believing in abductions, or aliens anyway, and the part of human nature that wants to search for other life forms in the universe."

Sagan responded:

"I personally have been captured by the notion of extraterrestrial life, and especially extraterrestrial intelligence, from childhood. It swept me up, and I've been involved in sending space craft to nearby planets to look for life and in the radio search for extraterrestrial intelligence. It would be an absolutely transforming event in human history.

"But, the stakes are so high on whether it's true or false that we must demand the more rigorous standards of evidence—precisely because it's so exciting. That's the circumstance in which our hopes may dominate our skeptical scrutiny of the data. So, we have to be very careful. There have been a few instances in the [past]. We thought we found something, and it always turned out to be explicable.

"So, a kind of skepticism is routinely applied to the radio search for extraterrestrial intelligence by its most fervent proponents. I do not see [in] the alien abduction situation a similar rigorous application of scientific skepticism by its proponents. Instead, I see enormous acceptance at face value, and leading the witness, and all sorts of suggestions. Plus, the contamination by the general culture of this idea.

"It seems to me there is a big difference between the two approaches to extraterrestrial intelligence, although I'm frequently written to [to] say how could I search for extraterrestrial intelligence and disbelieve that we're being visited. I don't see any contradiction at all. It's a wonderful prospect, but requires the most severe and rigorous standards of evidence.

Sagan was then asked to "please comment on the part of the quality of the evidence that is put forward by these so-called "abduction proponents."

Sagan's response:

"Well, it's almost entirely anecdote. Someone says something happened to them, and people can say anything. The fact that someone says something doesn't mean it's true. Doesn't mean they're lying, but it doesn't mean it's true.

"To be taken seriously, you need physical evidence that can be examined at leisure by skeptical scientists: a scraping of the whole ship, and the discovery that it contains isotopic ratios that aren't present on Earth, chemical elements from the so-called island of stability, very heavy elements that don't exist on Earth. Or material of absolutely bizarre properties of many sorts—electrical conductivity or ductility. There are many things like that that would instantly give serious credence to an account.

"But there's no scrapings, no interior photographs, no filched page from the captain's log book. All there are are stories. There are instances of disturbed soil, but I can disturb soil with a shovel. There are instances of people claiming to flash lights at UFOs and the UFOs flash back. But, pilots of airplanes can also flash back, especially if they think it would be a good joke to play on the UFO enthusiast. So, that does not constitute good evidence.

"A very interesting example of this sort of thing is the so-called crop circles in England in which wheat and rye and other grains—these beautiful immense circles appeared and then—this was in the '70s and '80s—and then over progressive years, more and more complex geometries. And there were lots of people who said that these were made by UFOs that were landing and that it was too complex or too highly mathematical to be a hoax.

"And it turns out that two blokes in Southern England, at their regular bar one night, thought it would be a good idea to make a kind of hoax to see if they could lure in UFO enthusiasts. And they succeeded every time—every time an explanation was proferred: a peculiar kind of wind, they then made another one which contradicted that hypothesis. And they were very pleased when it was said that no human intelligence could do this. That gave them great satisfaction. And for 15 years, they succeeded in these nocturnal expeditions using rope and board—all the technology they needed.

"And in their 60's, they finally confessed to the press with a demonstration of how it was done. And, of course, the confession received very little play in the media. And the claims of alien influence had received prominent exposure."

("Carl Sagan on Alien Abduction," broadcast by "NOVA," 27 February 1996, at: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/sagan-alien-abduction.html)


A good example of that currently futile endeavor is the ongoing SETI search for extra-terrestrial intelligence via computerized scanning analysis of radio signals from outer space.

So far, nothing.



Edited 9 time(s). Last edit at 10/28/2011 03:19AM by steve benson.

no, no conclusive data has been provided that aliens do exist or visit us. there's only circumstantial evidence but that's not good enough in my opinion. appealing, sparks curiosity, but not good enough.

i don't think SETI is futile per se. there's lots of problems with the idea yes, but finding the hyperlink to other civilizations certainly calibrates our idea of our position in the universe. who knows what we can learn from other beings. who knows how our lives could be improved with that knowledge.



this is something i'd like you to clarify though. i hope you don't take it the wrong way.

you would like to see a general scientific consensus for extra-terrestrial life. by "general" i'm assuming you mean lots of scientists.

on the other hand, you settle for one (1) article you read on msnbc to top it all off. the experiment in my opinion didn't consider demographics correctly and who knows what other flaws it's got.

are you biased towards non-believers of ET or do you want to get to the bottom of it, being real truth seeker wherever that may take you?

the latter view took you out of mormonism just like me. i strongly advocate that system.

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,329160,329507#msg-329507



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/28/2011 03:04AM by steve benson.

no, i don't believe i misrepresented his views. not at all.
i never mentioned carl sagan's views on alien abductions.

i said "beliefs in extra-terrestrial life". you subject line corroborates that and no editions have been made to my posts.


now, what's your answer?


let me quote myself:

this is something i'd like you to clarify though. i hope you don't take it the wrong way.

you would like to see a general scientific consensus for extra-terrestrial life. by "general" i'm assuming you mean lots of scientists.

on the other hand, you settle for one (1) article you read on msnbc to top it all off. the experiment in my opinion didn't consider demographics correctly and who knows what other flaws it's got.

are you biased towards non-believers of ET or do you want to get to the bottom of it, being real truth seeker wherever that may take you?

the latter view took you out of mormonism just like me. i strongly advocate that system.

You said (and I quote):

" . . . [T]he brilliant carl sagan, said he didn't want to go public with his beliefs in extra-terrestrials for fear of losing grants. who can't blame him."

But Sagan did, in fact, go public with is views on extra-terrestrials. He did not, contrary to your framing of his opinions, refer to them as "beliefs" but rather described them as follows:

"I personally have been captured by the NOTION of extraterrestrial life, and especially extraterrestrial intelligence, from childhood. It swept me up, and I've been involved in sending space craft to nearby planets to look for life and in the radio search for extraterrestrial intelligence. It would be an absolutely transforming event in human history.

"But, the stakes are so high on whether it's true or false that we must demand the more rigorous standards of evidence—precisely because it's so exciting. That's the circumstance in which our hopes may dominate our skeptical scrutiny of the data. So, we have to be very careful. There have been a few instances in the [past]. We thought we found something, and it always turned out to be explicable.

"So, a kind of skepticism is routinely applied to the radio search for extraterrestrial intelligence by its most fervent proponents. I do not see [in] the alien abduction situation a similar rigorous application of scientific skepticism by its proponents. Instead, I see enormous acceptance at face value, and leading the witness, and all sorts of suggestions. Plus, the contamination by the general culture of this idea."

(Sagan in the previously-quoted NOVA interview, emphasis added)


By reading his comments in context, you should be able to see that Sagan was excited about the possibility of discovering extra-terrestrial intelligence but that he did not regard certain extraordinary claims that had been made about its purported actual existence (claims that he specifically described) to be sufficiently scientifically robust.
_____



Edited 11 time(s). Last edit at 10/28/2011 03:57AM by steve benson.

it's really interesting. hopefully we can continue only if you are willing to look at the whole picture. not just one side of the story. it's late. i love interacting with people who think differently. it's obvious by now that you are biased against ET believers. but why settle for one lousy article from msnbc for crying out loud bro?


oh but please man with all due respect please please don't play the goddamn lawyer game on me "you said this" "you said that": "guilty!". missing my ideas and your ideas in between. it's late i don't go there even if it's twelve noon.


i insist. there isn't substantial evidence to assert they (aliens) do exist. there are efforts like SETI but nothing really has come up. the whole ET issue is not mainstream. more data are needed. that's it. and as an anecdote, i brought up carl sagan's early fears of going public. that was it man!

again.

i never mentioned carl sagan's views on alien abductions. you did. i did, again, say about his views on extra-terrestrials which seem to corroborate your article.

the only difference is now you argue that he never feared to go public. i argue he did feared at one point. obviously his views on public perception changed.

let's look at the data:

notice the dates. you article is from 1996. his fears for going public predates that. this is from 1984.

In an interview with research journalist and author Paola Leopizzi-Harris she said :

“My recollection is that Hynek said it was backstage of one of the many Johnny Carson Tonight shows Sagan did. He basically said (to Hynek) in 1984, ‘I know UFOs are real, but I would not risk my research (College) funding, as you do, to talk openly about them in public.’ ”

ref: http://www.examiner.com/ufo-in-denver/carl-sagan-knew-ufos-are-real-confidant-reveals-but-kept-viewpoint-quiet-to-avoid-losing-funding

until we meet again...good night man. i'm tired.

There is, indeed, a breathless claim floating around out there, about which you need to be reasonably skeptical (but about which which you unfortunately do not appear to be so inclined).

It is the one you cite that comes courtesy of a UFO buff publication out of Denver (as reported by "ZlandCommunications News Network)," in which it is asserted that "[r]enowned astronomer and astrophysicist Dr. Carl Sagan revealed to Dr. J. Allen Hynek that he believed UFOs were real but avoided any public statements to prevent the loss of academic research funding. Sagan's once powerful influence on mainstream science to play-down the reality of UFOs is now in question."

Let's look at the source for that information, as provided by that article:

"In an interview with research journalist and author Paola Leopizzi-Harris she told ZlandCommunications:

“'My RECOLLECTION is that Hynek said it was backstage of one of the many Johnny Carson "Tonight" shows Sagan did. He BASICALLY SAID [to Hynek] in 1984, ‘I know UFOs are real, but I would not risk my research [College] funding, as you do, to talk openly about them in public.’"

Note that Leopizzi-Harris describes her claim as a "recollection" of a statement Sagan is alleged to have made backstage during a Johnny Carson "Tonight Show" episode, to an individual who is now dead (Hynet having died back in 1986).

Not exactly a stunning trail of evidence.

Moreover, Sagan's claimed connection to Hynek appears speculative, with the same article describing "Sagan’s link to UFOs and POSSIBLY to Dr. Hynek occurred in 1966 when Sagan was a member of the Ad Hoc Committee to Review Project Blue Book."

("Carl Sagan knew UFOs are real - confidant reveals, but kept viewpoint quiet to avoid losing funding," by Jeff Peckman, "Denver UFO Examiner," 6 May 2010, at: http://www.examiner.com/ufo-in-denver/carl-sagan-knew-ufos-are-real-confidant-reveals-but-kept-viewpoint-quiet-to-avoid-losing-funding, emphasis added)

It should be noted that "ZlandCommunications News Network [ZNN]" describes itself in sensationalistic language as "a news service dedicated to the compilation, distribution and analysis of news relating to the Disclosure of information concerning the EXTRATERRESTRIAL PRESENCE ENGAGING THE PLANET AS MANIFESTED BY THE UFO PHENOMENON AND OTHER RELATED ANOMALOUS EVENTS."

("Zyland Communications" blogspot at: http://zlandcommunications.blogspot.com/, emphasis added)

It should also be noted that the writer for the "Denver UFO Examiner," Jeff Peckman, comes across as a non-mainstream "science writer (to use the term loosely), as witnessed by his own sensationalist description of what he does:

"Jeff Peckman's Extraterrestrial Affairs Commission campaign and 'alien-in-the-window-video' press conference became global news in 2008. He advocates exposing government cover-ups of UFO's and extraterrestrials."

This guy is not only not mainstream, he is flying far outside the Earth's orbit. For an idea of his wild-eyed rides, see:
"Jeff Peckman, Denver UFO Examiner," at: http://www.examiner.com/ufo-in-denver/jeff-peckman; as well as a sampling of Jeff Peckman's "articles" at: http://www.examiner.com/user-jpeckman108)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzlG28B-R8Y



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 10/28/2011 04:13AM by steve benson.

me putting words on his mouth? i was just quoting/paraphrasing same like you.


i don't see how msncb or any other tool of the mainstream media apparatus is any more credible than UFO tabloids out there.

now i think you are getting defensive and completely missing out on exchanging ideas. i still haven't heard any original ideas or suggestions how to improve the research that sparked this post. instead, you decided to just blindly accept it as face value and started attacking other posters with name calling because they didn't play with your toys.

now it looks like you are trying to prove me wrong for something i said or didn't say. completely futile discussion. "he said", "no, you said". big deal. you are completely missing the point.

ok. NOW it's late. take care.

:)

When Science speaks, the thinking has been done.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/28/2011 02:08AM by steve benson.

Have you read "DMT: Te Spirtit Molocule", Steve? I think it pokes at a pertty good scientific explanation of the human brains disposition to fabricate interesting experiences. I would recomend it to anybody dealing with metaphysical types.