LINDA CORTILE AND THE BROOKLYN BRIDGE ABDUCTION CASE –

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS, NEWEST DISCLOSURES,

AND AN UPDATE TO THE BOOK WITNESSED
Saturday, June 3, 2006
Mark your calendars!  The Intruders Foundation will offer a presentation by Budd Hopkins illustrating the development of the extraordinary Brooklyn Bridge abduction case, as well as an extended dialogue with the central figure, Linda Cortile.  Linda will be appearing to discuss her experiences, her subsequent intriguing contacts with the late Cardinal John O’Connor, and evidence that the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church has shown a surprising interest in the UFO phenomenon – a subject that was not covered in Hopkins’ book WITNESSED.  The audience will hear the initial tape recording by a government agent, whose all-important first-hand account of Linda’s witnessed abduction triggered the case investigation.  Hopkins will also present taped excerpts from one of Linda’s hypnotic regressions in which she describes the abduction as it unfolded.

There has probably never been an abduction case with so many witnesses to one or more aspects of the event, nor one that so clearly suggested an alien interest in earthly political matters.  Several relatively unknown facets of the phenomenon, such as the “Mickey-Baby Ann” scenario and the power of alien cooption techniques, were clearly displayed, as well as a range of physical evidence, including an x-ray of an implant in place in Cortile’s body.

Linda continues to receive occasional phone calls from the agent named “Richard,” and Hopkins is privy to an ambiguous letter of denial from the “Third Man” which, in style and format, is virtually identical to the confessional letters Hopkins had received from him during the investigation.  In the final part of the evening, Linda will answer the audiences’ questions about the case. 

We are hopeful that one or two witnesses whose eyewitness accounts were not included in the book might also speak briefly about what they saw on November 29, 1989.¼br /> If you are interested in the events of that fateful night, we urge you to reserve your place soon.  Seating is limited.  Doors open at 7:00 PM.
 

REGISTRATION & INFORMATION

The seminar will be held on June 3 at the new meeting rooms of A.R.E., located on the SECOND FLOOR at 241 W. 30th Street (between Seventh and Eighth Avenues), New York, NY.  The price of the seminar is $30 for non-members and $20 for members of IF, seniors and students.  Reservations must be made by telephone at 212-645-5278, and will be filled on a first come, first served basis.  Payment must be made in advance to secure the reservation.  Make checks payable to the Intruders Foundation, P.O. Box 30233, New York, NY 10011.  Book early!  Only 60 reservations will be accepted!

On-street parking is generally available in the neighborhood.  The seminar will begin at 7:30 PM and end at 10:00 PM.  Doors open at 7:00 PM.  There will be a one half-hour intermission, during which light complimentary refreshments will be served.  A book table will offer books, videotapes and other material for sale to those interested.  For additional information, call IF at 212-645-5278.

Hope to see you there!
———-
The Intruders Foundation Seminar Series is presented in the interests of open-minded scientific learning and the free exchange of research, ideas, and theories.  IF makes no specific claims or endorsements regarding any materials, views, or subject matter presented by our guests.

———-
Want to know more about Budd Hopkins and his nonprofit scientific research organization, as well as past and future IF events?  Please visit our web site…
Intruders Foundation Web Site:  www.intrudersfoundation.org

LSD guru Timothy Leary made fun of abductees

Leary claimed that middle-aged female abductees are sex-starved spinsters with fantasies of having alien sex.

10/27/2000

Flying Saucers over Hollywood! by filmmaker Paul Davids offers a rare glimpse into the great Hollywood UFO films.

It’s “Smash an Icon Week” here at FLYING SAUCERS OVER HOLLYWOOD, and so we’re decapitating Timothy Leary again. In 1997, Strand Releasing distributed a feature-length documentary film I directed (and produced with Todd Easton Mills) about the “Turn on, Tune in, Drop out” psychedelic 1960s leader that ended with a notorious scene of post-mortem decapitation for cryogenic preservation of the brain. That ending has now been video-streamed as a Halloween spectacular at www.ilooks.com. The film is called TIMOTHY LEARY’S DEAD, a title that comes from a line in the famous Moody Blues song about Leary called “Legend of a Mind.”

In the last year of Leary’s life, I conducted many hours of videotaped interviews with him, dressing him up in a stylish and appropriate green Nehru jacket for the occasion, as well as an elegant white suit. Leary, or “Dr. Tim” as his friends called him, abandoned a commitment to dressing cool long before that point, and for 365 days out of the year (and for almost all of his interviews) he basically wore one rumpled black and white jacket that had a psychedelic pattern. I changed that. In the interviews, we covered many of the nooks and crannies of his rabble-rousing life, from his Fighting Irishman youth and days as Harvard’s most eccentric and risk-taking psychology professor, through his days leading the League for Spiritual Discovery (LSD) at a mansion in Millbrook New York. Remember, Dr. Tim was on “the wrong side” in the Drug War - he advocated the responsible use of Psychedelic Vegetables, as he referred to them - and Richard Nixon declared him “The Most Dangerous Man Alive.” We journeyed through his magic mushroom days in Mexico, his incarceration as a political / philosophical prisoner - and in one session we got around to the subject of flying saucers.

Though Leary had blown his own mind countless times and could imagine infinite possibilities in our vast universe, he somehow still clung to the negative attitudes of orthodox, skeptical psychology regarding the subject of extraterrestrial flying saucers. Like most psychologists of his generation, he believed that life exists throughout infinite space. However, he stated in my film that he DOES NOT believe that extraterrestrial beings would “package alien beings in spaceships and send them hundreds of light years through space so that they could land in farm pastures and rape little old ladies in Iowa.” That seemed to be the extent of his understanding of the alien abduction enigma. He was no Dr. John Mack of Harvard, that’s for sure. And then he took a drag on his cigarette, paused for reflection and added: “But those little old ladies . . . they’d LIKE to be raped by space aliens, wouldn’t they? THAT’s the point!” He actually didn’t use the word “rape.” He used another four-letter word for sex that begins with an “F” and ends with a “K” and which we can’t print here at AlienZoo because we’re PG-13.

TIMOTHY LEARY’S DEAD is a VERY irreverent movie. Timothy lived to blow people’s minds, and I realized that my film would never be seen by more than a handful of people if I didn’t blow a few myself. I may have over-done it. Not only did the movie invite the wrath of the Establishment (the folks who were SUPPOSED to hate it), that mind-blowing final scene made me persona non grata with more than a few of Dr. Tim’s most loyal followers. It seems they decided they loved me about as much as they loved G. Gordon Liddy the night he invaded Millbrook with a small army of narcs and arrested Leary for possession of a geranium plant (that Liddy thought might be marijuana). I took my unpopularity in stride. In the movie business, you learn to take your licks. And speaking of licks, our movie poster had a star on it that said LICK THIS POSTER. A few people did, thinking there was acid on it, and in Berkeley, the police methodically removed every single poster from the billboards and telephone poles. That is, every poster that was left after the Aging Hippies and gang-bangers swiped a bunch of them to eat.

To dramatize Timothy’s statements about alien abductions, I actually rented an alien costume from Sony Pictures’ Props department and went to the home of the publisher of UFO Library, who agreed to dress up like a little old lady. She put her hair up in curlers, powdered her hair gray and climbed into bed, where she read a UFO magazine. We then filmed a scene of me (as the alien) jumping on top of her in bed and (CENSORED) as we (CENSORED) up and down, the camera capturing every lurid instant of (CENSORED), while the bed springs squeaked and (CENSORED). We then showed me as the alien with the old Iowan lady in bed after sex, smoking a cigarette. So much for Dr. Leary on the subject of contact experiences. On to his next favorite controversy. . .

Throughout the interviews, Dr. Tim talked about his plans to have his head removed and frozen (using cryonics) when he died. He was dying of cancer when we shot this film and had only about six months to live. Dr. Tim figured there was one chance in ten million that he could be brought back to life one day if they froze his head, but he figured the odds were zero if they didn’t. Dr. Tim explained that if they unfroze his head some day, he didn’t want his old, sick body back. He wanted a new clone of himself or his brain popped into the body of a brain-dead person.

The official story is that Leary changed his mind about the deep freeze a month before he kicked the bucket. This might be true and might not, so don’t ask me, this is not a press conference. The point is, Timothy Leary finally announced that he didn’t want his head becoming an icon, and that he distrusted cryonics labs. So the official story is, he chose another publicity stunt for his farewell party instead - he was cremated and had some of his ashes shot into space.

But within a few months of Timothy Leary’s death, our movie came out with an ending scene that showed Dr. Tim’s demise, decapitation, and the storage of his frozen head. That’s when the LSD guru’s most serious-minded devotees got VERY upset with me and threatened to banish me if I ever showed up at one of their raves. Apparently, they kicked me out of Hippie-Land forever, and never again would I show up in San Francisco with flowers in my hair. Many of the former leaders of the Psychedelic Revolution denounced me because I had the audacity to do something UNTHINKABLE. They forgot that the very lesson Timothy taught us was that NOTHING is UNTHINKABLE, so do it (as long as it doesn’t hurt anybody).

As I said at the outset, you can see the controversial ending to TIMOTHY LEARY’S DEAD right now, today, as a Halloween Spectacular at www.ilooks.com, a site I would recommend to you anyway, whether Timothy Leary was playing there or not. Finish reading this article and then click over to ilooks and get grossed out. (One patron barfed in the theater where this film showed in Berkeley and our theatrical playdates were then cut very short in the Bay Area). You may even want to order a VHS copy of the whole movie while you’re there, and I hope you will because only a fraction of you probably saw it. With the www.ilooks.com connection, which I authorize, you’ll promptly receive your copy.

The critics were evenly divided over the authenticity of the decapitation scene. A study of the news articles adds up to unique research in journalistic sociology. For the New York Times, the scene was real. Their review stated that Leary was now a “Headless Body in Topless Orbit.” Ed Guthman, of the San Francisco Chronicle, decided it was real, and he denounced the film on the day it opened because the ending was done in unspeakably bad taste. At the New York Post, Michael Medved also concluded it was real. Like many other critics, he warned all “decent” people everywhere to avoid it at all costs. “Turn on, tune in, DON’T GO” he shouted. But he didn’t like Timothy Leary alive or dead.

But love him or hate him, all free-thinking people have to admit that Timothy Leary started a revolution that has been helping Republicans get elected ever since. Dr. Tim was certainly not a Republican. He ran for Governor of California against a Republican named Ronald Reagan, and they threw him in jail during the campaign. In fact, one of Dr. Tim’s greatest fears about cryonics was that he might be resuscitated during a Republican administration.

ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY gave the film a “B,” a higher grade than they gave to STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, but they decided the ending was an egregiously clever put-on. I don’t mind anybody thinking that. Dr. Tim realized that if the Establishment thought that his frozen head, suitable for cloning, DID exist, it was only a matter of time until authorities would find an excuse to search every cryonics lab in the world until they found his head so they could pull the plug. The Establishment would do anything to prevent Timothy Leary from returning from the dead, quite possibly to the point of making door to door searches for the head, perhaps at the same future time they go door to door to confiscate guns. “Excuse me, ma’am, do you have any unregistered handguns? And we’ll just take a quick look in your freezer while we’re here, step aside, please.”

The Toronto Star declared: “He’s dead, but where’s his head? TIMOTHY LEARY’S DEAD purports to show the severing of the Acid King’s head from his body, soon after his death from prostate cancer. But is it really Leary’s head on screen, or just a mask? Davids considers this his biggest mystery.” It goes on to say: “Davids is convinced the anti-Leary forces are out there, waiting to interrupt Leary’s final experiment.”

From Silicon Valley, Steve Rhodes Reviews says: “It seems that Leary, with his inflated view of the power of his brain, wanted his head frozen so his brain could be preserved for future generations. We get to witness the actual decapitation. And it is as horrific as it sounds.” Steve Rhodes is definitely in the camp that believes Leary lives in a freezer.

Newsweek described the ending as “The most shocking scene in a movie . . . sure to cause a furor.”

THE Izine DECLARES: “For any scholar or keen observer of the ’60s and ’70s this visual mantra will fulfill your wildest fantasies, and for those who seek a portal into eccentricity, then this will blow your mind. An exceptional piece of documentary film-making for an exceptional pioneer.”

Reviewer Andrea Chase said: “The last scenes of TIMOTHY LEARY’S DEAD show his head being removed and frozen. But can we believe our eyes? Considering his relationship with reality, it’s the perfect Leary-esque parting shot.”

From the New York Underground Film Festival: “Even post-mortem, Leary makes sure to shock audiences: graphic footage of his head being severed from his body for cryogenic storage will be sure to wake up even the most burnt-out Hippie devotee.”

ON SCREEN rates films giving them between one and four eyeballs, with four being the best. They said: “Any movie in which the hero weighs the possibilities of expiring live on the net, having his head cryogenically frozen, or shooting his cremated remains into space, is good for at least three eyeballs in my book.”

So what’s actually going on here? Could the Leary loyalists be lying when they claim the ending of our movie was nothing but a cosmic wink, a parting joke? Are they guilty of a coverup, to secretly work for the success of Leary’s future biological return? Time and space do not permit me to make a full reply to those complex questions today, but if you don’t believe it, consider this: Timothy Leary signed one of his books to me, writing the words: “HERE’S TO THE SUCCESS OF OUR FILM! LET’S MAKE THE SEQUEL IN 2020!” So how do you think he expects me to direct him in the sequel, if he didn’t freeze his head intending to be resuscitated within two decades?

See you next week at FLYING SAUCERS OVER HOLLYWOOD, as we continue our endless search for THE TRUTH, wherever we can find it. In the meantime, maybe a bit of the truth is lurking over at www.ilooks.com. Happy Halloween.

Do Grey aliens really come from Zeta Reticula? Betty Hill might hold the answer.6/30/2000

Flying Saucers over Hollywood! by filmmaker Paul Davids offers a rare glimpse into the great Hollywood UFO films.

I just returned from the premiere of ROCKY AND BULLWINKLE at Universal City. No saucers or aliens, but there was plenty of mind control of the most deliciously satiric kind. Fearless Leader, played by Robert de Niro, takes over all television stations of the world. His company, RBTV, short for REALLY BAD TELEVISION, is so bad it stupefies everyone that watches. Actually, it Zombifies them.

Entranced, they are so pliable they can easily be commanded to vote for Fearless Leader for president. The CIA could have learned a thing or two for its MK-ULTRA mind control program from Boris and Natasha. Delightful, with fabulous special effects, the film is a treat, a true cousin to WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT - and bull-brained Bullwinkle steals the show. Now if they had only worked in some flying saucers . . .

In a recent article, I confided in AlienZoo fans about how my career as a producer started with a stint on a syndicated TV show called LIE DETECTOR, and we DID find a way to bring the subject of saucers into our program. One of our guests on that early 1980s show was none other than Betty Hill, the woman who made alien abductions famous in America. She took a polygraph for us on TV and passed it.

All of you avid ufologists surely know the story of Betty and Barney Hill, but for those who need a quick ufology refresher course, here’s the scoop:

Betty and Barney Hill were an inter-racial couple living in New Hampshire. Barney worked for the Post Office. Returning from a car trip September 19, 1961, they saw a strange light in the sky. They stopped their car to get a better look. The light approached. Later, they claimed they could see “beings” through windows or portholes in what was a large flying saucer. Then came a period of missing time. When this occurred, there were no stories of alien abductions being bandied about. Alien abduction had not even begun to emerge as one of the century’s great urban myths. (This is not to say that alien abductions are a myth and do not occur - merely to acknowledge that ever since the publication of Whitley Strieber’s COMMUNION, they have taken on the grandiose proportion of myth in our culture).

Betty and Barney Hill were the first abductees known to have submitted to hypnosis in order to recovery memories of exactly what happened to them. They filled in the missing time with recollections of being taken aboard the flying saucer and probed in medical experiments of some sort. The details can all be found in the book about their experience, THE INTERRUPTED JOURNEY. Suffice it to say, for the purpose of this article, that under hypnosis, Betty Hill recalled having been shown a STAR MAP by the humanoid aliens who she claimed abducted her and her husband. Both Betty and Barney described and drew the aliens in a similar way - and that description became the basis for what we commonly think of today as the “Grey.”

Later, Leonard Stringfield talked with other abductees and military people who claimed to see corpses of this species of alien. He added details that are consistent with the Betty and Barney Hill description: The aliens’ approximate height is three to four and one-half feet tall, weighing about 40 pounds. They have almond-shaped eyes, large heads, like the head on a 5-month old fetus, thin necks, and no earlobes. Their noses consist of two nares with only a slight protuberance. The mouths are a small “slit” without lips. The bodies are hairless, or with slight fuzz. They have long, thin arms that reach to their knees, no thumbs, four fingers (two fingers are longer than the others), and a slight webbing between fingers. The beings also have short, thin legs.

Barney did not describe the star map, but Betty recalled it in detail under hypnosis. She even drew a picture of it. She claimed the aliens explained to her that it was a map of the stars in their “trading group”, thus it was a sort of trade map that showed the location of the earth and that of the aliens’ home star system, a double star. The aliens did not tell her the English name of their star system. The only clue as to where these aliens might have originated was in the layout of the star map itself. Was Betty’s memory accurate? If so, how accurate? What could the double-star system have been?

When we invited Betty Hill to be a guest on LIE DETECTOR, we had to find the best way to ask questions that would substantiate or invalidate her story. We decided to focus on her STAR MAP. The polygraph could not be used to determine whether Betty’s story was fact or fiction, or whether the details were precise or fuzzy in her memory. The polygraph can only measure the subject’s beliefs. For example, did Betty Hill REALLY believe that she saw the star map when she was aboard an alien flying saucer, or did she deliberately invent the story? Was it a fabricated story, or was it her best and most honest recollection of something she BELIEVED really happened in her life?

The polygrapher was Ed Gelb, former President of the American Polygraph Association. As I mentioned in a previous FLYING SAUCERS OVER HOLLYWOOD! column, Ed Gelb later conducted polygraphs of those who witnessed the Travis Walton abduction on November 5, 1975. Ironically, the Walton abduction occurred shortly after a made-for-TV movie about the Betty and Barney Hill abduction fourteen years prior titled THE UFO INCIDENT. Some debunkers suggested Walton got the idea for his abduction tale from that movie. Never mind that Walton neither saw, nor heard about the movie. But that’s another story . . .

On LIE DETECTOR, we found Betty Hill to be TRUTHFUL. The polygraph results left no doubt that Betty Hill sincerely believed that she saw that star map aboard a saucer when she was abducted. It doesn’t prove that it didn’t come to her in a dream, or that it wasn’t just a series of mental images that popped into her mind during hypnotic regression. In other words, her truthful result didn’t prove that the abduction truly happened. However, it was strong evidence that Betty Hill didn’t just “make up” her story - it was no hoax. She believed it happened. And she believed the details of the star map were an accurate representation of what the aliens showed her.

It so happens that an astronomer named Marjorie Fish studied the Betty Hill star map in extraordinary detail. She wanted to use the data to try to establish where the aliens came from. She erected a three-dimensional model of the star map, hanging stars on strings from the ceiling in her home, so they could be seen from many different angles. In her model, she did her best to make the distances between the stars, and their relative sizes, accurate to the proportions and distances in Betty Hill’s drawing. After looking at the model from many different angles, she finally came to the conclusion that the double-star in Betty Hill’s drawing was the star system ZETA RETICULA. As Richard Hoagland has pointed out (www.enterprisemission.com), Zeta Reticula is 33 light-years from earth. He marvels over the numerology connection with Masonry. The highest level a Mason can reach is the 33rd degree. Reticulum means “fisherman’s net” - and so there is also a connection to Christian imagery. (”It’s all a code,” he insists, and he says we can’t understand the power elite until we can decipher the codes in which they tip their secret meanings).

What are the odds that by selecting Zeta Reticula, that Marjorie Fish reached the correct conclusion about Betty Hill’s star map? That depends on many factors. There’s been a continuing debate and battle in the UFO literature about this very issue. The principal writer is nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman, who defends the Betty Hill star map research. The main detractor, not unexpectedly, is debunker Philip Klass, who challenges the possible accuracy on many grounds. First, of course, he does not accept that Betty Hill was actually abducted, but leaving that aside, he asks what the odds are that under hypnosis, many months or years after the supposed abduction event, that Betty Hill could remember the star map details so accurately?

If she was incorrect in the distances she drew on her map, even by ten or twenty percent, wouldn’t that have led Marjorie Fish to a different conclusion? Maybe other double-star systems would have fit the data better, in that case, and she would not have come up with “Zeta Reticula.” Klass asks how long Betty Hill could possibly have looked at this star map in the spaceship. Does she have photographic memory? If she saw it only for a minute or two, if that long, how could she possibly have been so precise. The questions he asks are logical and reasonable. Stanton Friedman’s reply has been that during an experience so profound, traumatic, and intense as an abduction, the subconscious mind probably burns in all the details, since they have such high emotion attached to them. However, under most abduction scenarios - and certainly in the case of Betty and Barney Hill - they consciously remembered virtually nothing that happened during the missing time. Were it not for deep hypnosis, the time would have just been a blank and a fog, something erased from consciousness. Could the details of the star map have been restored so successfully and accurately by the hypnotic trance?

Most people in the field of ufology tend to believe that the Hills were actually abducted. You can believe in the abduction, and you can even believe (as we confirmed on the show LIE DETECTOR) that Betty Hill does not believe she fabricated the star map story. But that doesn’t mean you need to accept the remarkable possibility that she reproduced that map perfectly. And if she missed on some of the details, then you’d have to say that Marjorie fish probably pinpointed the wrong star system.

Why is this so important? What difference does it make, really, whether we know where these “Greys” come from, since we are technologically incapable of traveling to visit them anyway? Believe it or not, it’s strikingly important, precisely because much of modern-day ufology is wedded to the notion that the “Greys” are from Zeta Reticula. So much so, that we even hear some claims of certain “government papers” referring to the Zeta Reticulans.

This is where your personal “disinformation meter” should be flashing red. For example, consider the testimony of Bob Lazar about the U.S. secretly having alien technology and alien discs hidden at sector S-4 of Area 51, with flying saucers in hangars. We can debate the credibility of Lazar from now until sunset, but even the debunkers have to admit a few things that are definitely REAL about Mr. Lazar’s claims. Lazar was able to take witnesses out to Mail Box Road near Area 51 at the exact date and time of test flights of weird and exotic aeroforms. John Lear, son of the designer of the Lear Jet, was one of those witnesses. Lazar knew when those flights would be. They were photographed and videotaped as a result, and the world began to take the possibility of UFO’s at Area 51 seriously. Lazar also produced a legitimate W-2 form indicating he was paid by Naval Intelligence with a security clearance that has the letters “MAJ” (as in MAJESTIC - MJ-12).

Bob Lazar tells us on his video, which is commercially available, that while employed at Area 51 he was shown a book called “The Government bible.” He stated that the government bible told an alternative version of mankind’s history to the one we are conventionally taught. That includes that we are a species created from primitive hominids by deliberate genetic manipulation - that our genetic code was “tampered with” over twenty specific times during the course of our biological history. Now here’s the rub: Bob Lazar states that “The Government bible” stated that the aliens that did this were from ZETA RETICULA, the double-star system. Further, the photos of the aliens Bob Lazar saw, and the supplementary descriptions, conformed with what we have come to think of as the “Grey” aliens with the large almond-shaped eyes.

There was no explanation as to the likelihood that a double-star system would have planets that could harbor life. It’s difficult enough, it seems, finding other stars in “single star” systems that have planets capable of supporting life. If there were TWO stars involved, wouldn’t the amount of heat from the stars fluctuate incredibly as the planets rotated around the two suns?

What is the possibility that Bob Lazar really was shown such a “Government bible” and that he was subjected to disinformation? Could he have been deliberately manipulated - made to reach certain conclusions that may or may not have been true? Could he have been shocked and amazed and surprised and astonished by what he read and saw - to the point that he went public with the information, and he genuinely believed it? But was the information he saw true? Remember this: If Marjorie Fish was wrong about the Betty Hill star map and she erroneously injected Zeta Reticula into ufology, then government disinformation specialists have found it convenient to continue injecting the same “error” into bogus documents used to befuddle, excite, and startle ufologists for the last decade.

Similarly, Col. Wendelle Stevens, publisher of UFO Photo Archives in Tucson, has published an abduction book that refers to a Zeta Reticula connection. It’s even called ABDUCTION FROM RETICULUM. It’s the story of William Hermann who encountered, photographed, and then was abducted into a flying saucer in North Carolina. He claimed continued contact, continued abductions, and communications - and claimed to have an alien artifact. His abductors were “Greys” and they told him they were from Zeta Reticula.

Read the last installment of FLYING SAUCERS OVER HOLLYWOOD (if you haven’t already), to learn about “intelligence agents” code-named “Falcon” and “Condor”. Both appeared in silhouette on a much-promoted UFO documentary called UFO COVERUP LIVE around 1989. The show was sponsored in part by AT&T, which put in heavy ad dollars. And it featured “Falcon” and “Condor” with electronically disguised voices describing the anatomy of the “Grey” aliens and also stated that they were from ZETA RETICULA! (Of course, they also threw in the observation that one of these aliens, code-named EBE-1, liked strawberry ice cream, provoking laughs and tipping the hand that there was disinformation involved in the information).

“The Government bible”, the William Hermann abduction case, and the testimony of “Falcon” and “Condor”, among others, inevitably must be connected to what we think about the credibility that Marjorie Fish interpreted the star map correctly, and that Betty Hill made a perfect representation of what the aliens showed her when she made her drawing.

If you believe in UFOs, and that aliens pilot many of them, but you have your doubts about the precision of the claims of Fish and Hill, then you must call into question other aspects of ufology you might also be tempted to believe. For example, the “Government bible” at Area 51, as well as the accuracy of what William Hermann was told by his abductors (and note that he has an excellent abduction case with many supporting details). Also, every instance where “Zeta Reticula” pops up in connection with “Grey” aliens in any purported “genuine, official documents”, or any time “government agents” such as “Falcon” and “Condor” spouted the term.

Of course, if like Stanton Friedman, you’ll bet your money that Marjorie Fish got it right, none of these other issues will be any problem for you. Then it’s an open-and-shut case that the “Greys” ARE from Zeta-Reticula, so all the rest of this information gains credibility as a result.

I know from my experience on LIE DETECTOR that Betty Hill was truthful - that she was not a hoaxer or liar - but that doesn’t prove to me that her star map was accurate. I have to admit it’s hard for me to believe she could have totally, accurately duplicated the star map. For that reason, I’ve always felt that there was a large possibility that Marjorie Fish got it wrong - which does not mean that I reject Betty Hill’s abduction claims.

I have been intrigued for years with the possibility that Bob Lazar accurately reported what he saw at Area 51 - i.e., that he did see tests of flying saucers that had “small chairs” in them as if built for tiny aliens. Perhaps he was “seeded” with false information from a “Government bible” that was science fiction, developed as a “cover story” to hide the real TRUTH about the origin of the discs he saw. And if you want to ask me what that real TRUTH is, I can only tell you that I’m still flying my hovercraft over Hollywood Boulevard looking for it. One of these days, I’m sure to find it . . .

This is your AlienZoo correspondent in Hollywood, signing off for FLYING SAUCERS OVER HOLLYWOOD until next Friday. See you then!

Ed Gelb, polygrapher who ‘acquitted’ John and Patsy Ramsey, was key player in Travis Walton

The media never mentions the UFO connection.

6/9/2000

Flying Saucers over Hollywood! by filmmaker Paul Davids offers a rare glimpse into the great Hollywood UFO films.

If you turned on a TV this week, or read a newspaper or tabloid, then you saw the spin-game in action as the Ramsey affair took a bizarre twist on the national stage. It is not so intriguing that JonBenet Ramsey’s parents passed a private polygraph test regarding the 1996 murder. Nor that the media had a field day with the story - CNN and Establishment news shows tended to support the Ramseys, while Jay Leno played fire-snorting skeptic, and the National Enquirer played their game of “spin-the-buzz” with a headline: HOW JONBENET’S PARENTS PASSED LIE DETECTOR.

The bizarre part is that our dumbed-down media never came up with one of the most interesting angles about polygrapher Ed Gelb, which would have tossed a UFO spin into the mix. FLYING SAUCERS OVER HOLLYWOOD has often been described as my personal search for THE TRUTH along Hollywood Boulevard, and the joke and wink, of course, is that TRUTH with a capital “T” always bounces, shrinks or stretches depending upon who is packaging and promoting it.

The story you probably heard was that the wealthy couple from Boulder, Colorado, who the tabloids attacked mercilessly for involvement in or cover-up of the murder of JonBenet, got a clean bill of health from Ed Gelb. He was not a government-affiliated polygrapher - not the FBI hiree that law enforcement would have liked to have handle the job. But Gelb is about as close to FBI as you can get without actually wearing a badge. The Ramseys made a strategic (and probably wise) decision to select Gelb to be the one to test them, given his excellent reputation as former head of the American Polygraph Association and the respect he is afforded by police departments throughout the land. The aim of the Ramseys seems to be to go on the offensive against their accusers and to try to quell any plans for a possible indictment that might be festering back in Colorado.

Now I’m well aware that the readership of FLYING SAUCERS OVER HOLLYWOOD is likely to be as divided about the issue of polygraphs as it is about everything ufological, conspiratorial, political, and cosmic. The naysayers will snap back that polygraphs are not admissible in courts of law for a good reason - because they are easy to fake. They’ll quote books such as HOW TO STING THE POLYGRAPH, by Doug Williams, a detective sergeant in the Oklahoma City Police Department who claims polygraphs have only about 50 percent accuracy, so you’d might as well just flip a coin. Others still swear by polygraphs and think they’re good as gold. Ed Gelb claims about a 95% accuracy rate for polygraphs.

Ed Gelb is a man I know and respect, and my personal opinion on polygraphs is much closer to Gelb’s opinion than that of Williams. A surprise for FLYING SAUCERS OVER HOLLYWOOD readers - I used to work for Ed Gelb. In fact, my very first job and credit as a Hollywood producer was on Ed Gelb’s TV show, LIE DETECTOR. It wasn’t Gelb’s show alone. He shared the spotlight with none other than attorney, F. Lee Bailey, famous for the Patty Hearst case as well as for having been one of O. J. Simpson’s “Dream Team” attorneys. I found working for the team of Bailey and Gelb to be an education of incalculable value. We shot about sixty half-hour shows of LIE DETECTOR before the show died a cruel, but not unusual, ratings death. Each show had between one and three guests. People would come on the nationally syndicated TV show wanting to prove they were telling the truth about something important. Sometimes it was people accused of having committed a crime, and they claimed to be innocent. Usually the polygraph reinforced their guilt, but very occasionally we found indication of a miscarriage of justice. Other times it was people who had an unbelievable story, and they wanted to show that sometimes fact is stranger than fiction. One of the most interesting and popular segments I produced involved psychic detective Dorothy Allison, who passed away very recently, but whose book on how she solved many crimes by psychic means has attained cult classic status.

An unusual synchronicity about this tale is the fact that the Los Angeles Times ran the following story this week about the Ramseys and psychic Dorothy Allison - RAMSEYS PUT SKETCH OF A SUSPECT ON WEB. The story states, “John and Patsy Ramsey have posted a psychic’s composite sketch of a suspect in their daughter’s murder on their Internet site. The sketch is based on the work of the late psychic Dorothy Allison, who claimed to have assisted police investigations. Allison, who died last year, came up with her vision of the suspect during a 1998 appearance on a network television show.”

It was both surprising and interesting that the Ramseys selected one of our former LIE DETECTOR guests to be their psychic detective. It’s unlikely Gelb referred them to Allison, as the Ramsey’s association with Allison was two years prior to Gelb administering their polygraph. However, note that when Dorothy Allison appeared in the segment of LIE DETECTOR which I produced, she was found to be truthful. She sincerely believed she solved her most famous case by “psychic detective” techniques, and had not exercised any deception by hiding any “inside information” that could have been given to her in a conventional way. (I highly recommend a book written about her, THE DOROTHY ALLISON STORY).

Ed Gelb administered a polygraph on camera to each person who came on the show. We pre-screened the subjects, so Gelb and Bailey could determine that we would probably get clean answers on the air, meaning a firm “true” or “false,” rather than the gray zone of “inconclusive.” Pre-screening also gave the benefit of additional certainty about the results, since each subject was essentially tested twice. I learned during that year or so of TV segment producing that Ed Gelb was a master at the polygraph. He could explain the charts brilliantly, and there were always complexities and subtleties that you needed to be highly trained to understand. Many times the results on the TV show would surprise me. I would get to know a guest I had brought in to be on the show, I’d size up the person’s story, and I’d form my own personal opinion of whether the guest was “Honest John” or a B.S. artist. It was surprising to me the number of times my guess proved wrong. Often our instincts about someone’s truthfulness are flatly contradicted by the polygraph. It’s also a fact that the polygraph is much more likely to show an “inconclusive” result than it is to show a truthful person as a liar or a liar as “Honest John.”

Now for the UFO connection

It so happens that Ed Gelb was called in after Travis Walton claimed he was abducted from a forest in Snowflake, Arizona, by space aliens and kept for five days aboard their spaceship before being returned to Earth. There were five witnesses to Travis Walton being beamed aboard an alien craft. Ed Gelb ran the polygraphs on those witnesses. All of the witnesses had been under suspicion of murdering Travis Walton. When Walton was reported as a missing person, and when Walton’s fellow loggers told their story about the flying saucer, the sheriff was none too impressed. The suspicions about these witnesses, and whether they committed foul play against the missing Walton, was dramatized rather well in the motion picture FIRE IN THE SKY, starring James Garner as the sheriff. It’s true that the film had one obvious failing - the way it exaggerated what Travis claimed happened to him aboard the spaceship. Hollywood made it a very scary experience. They turned the aliens into sado-masochistic medical experimenters, like a Joseph Mengele in outer space, which other abductees claimed, but not Walton. However, FIRE IN THE SKY was quite a straightforward dramatic presentation of what Travis Walton and his five witnesses said actually happened on November 5, 1975. The film was based on an excellent book by Travis Walton that has since been republished as FIRE IN THE SKY: THE WALTON EXPERIENCE. I highly recommend it, especially the last 100 pages or so which castigate UFO debunkers like Philip Klass as brilliantly as anything else I have read.

Ed Gelb gave tests to those five witnesses and then gave them a clean bill of health. He stated that each of the tests was conclusively “truthful.” Then he declared that the statistical odds of five people “beating the machine” all on the same incident they witnessed was about one in a million. Five liars would have to conspire to tell a false “flying saucer story” and then successfully get results out of the polygraph that said they were telling the truth. Ed Gelb is one of the best interpreters of polygraph tests in the U.S. It seemed rather gutsy when he publicly stated that conclusion. By declaring the witnesses “truthful,” he essentially endorsed as fact that Travis Walton really was zapped aboard a cosmic craft and flown through the universe with bug-eyed Greys for five days, before showing up back in the woods of Snowflake, Arizona. You’ll find a video clip of a much younger Ed Gelb making that declaration in an early UFO video called UFOS ARE REAL (the video released under that name before Stanton Friedman did a subsequent video using the same title. Friedman appears extensively in both). I’m very surprised that no one working for CNN or any other news outlet tracked down that footage to put on TV last week when Ed Gelb was a number one news story.

Needless to say, at the time of the Walton abduction, the Establishment hated Ed Gelb’s results. As we all know, the Establishment takes the official position that neither flying saucers nor alien surveillance craft exist. How could Ed Gelb have been right without the Establishment being dead wrong? The chief watchdog of “the Establishment’s Paradigm,” UFO-debunker and author Philip J. Klass, refused to accept Ed Gelb’s results or conclusions. He believed that five witnesses had indeed “tricked” a polygraph machine, and that Ed Gelb had been duped. In Klass’s klassic anti-UFO book called UFOS EXPLAINED, he dumps all over Travis Walton and the witnesses, making all sorts of charges that I believe most fair-minded readers would feel were absurd or malicious. As mentioned earlier, Walton makes quick work of Klass in the last 100 pages of the republished version of his book.

Klass offered skeptics the opportunity to believe that Walton and his fellow woodcutters were in violation of a contract they had for clearing land, and that only an “Act of God” could have excused them of their dereliction under the contract. Thus, he thinks that these fellows invented an “Act of God” by concocting a ridiculous story about a UFO. Klass attacks the polygraph results, but he never had any reasonable basis to do so. His charges about the woodcutters and the land-clearing contract have been shown to be utterly without merit.

It may be contrary to the common “urban myth” to say this, but I for one do not believe that people can “beat” the polygraph machine when the test is given by a really competent examiner. But let’s assume for a moment that I’m wrong and that Doug Williams, author of HOW TO STING THE POLYGRAPH, is correct in claiming polygraphs have no better than a 50% accuracy rate. Using Douglas’s figures, for two people to beat the machine, the odds would be 25%. For three witnesses to fool it, we’re down to 12.5%. Four witnesses have a 6.25% chance, and for all five Walton Witnesses to beat the polygraph (if each had a 50-50 chance of fooling the machine), the odds were only 3.125 in 100. Take your pick. Approximately three chances in one hundred (as Douglas would calculate) or one chance in a million (as Gelb would calculate), either way Gelb’s polygraphs on the Travis Walton witnesses would lead any reasonable person to the following conclusion:

It is VERY probable that Travis Walton was actually abducted by aliens as he claimed and spent five days aboard an extraterrestrial flying saucer that the government tells us does not and cannot exist.

Suppose CNN and the Establishment TV shows and newspapers had added this fact about Ed Gelb’s past polygraph activities to their story on the Ramseys. Those shows tended to SUPPORT the Ramseys. Thus, they would have been in the uncomfortable position of having to support the existence of aliens and flying saucers, too. If they accepted Gelb’s reputation and skills in a case with two witnesses (the Ramseys), they certainly would have been backed into the corner of accepting his results in a case with five witnesses (the Walton abduction). This may explain why the Walton matter was left off the air. Perhaps some junior news exec DID come up with this fascinating information about Gelb. We can only imagine how it was cut by the execs above who would have said “no time for that.” Or perhaps no one in the media ever did pick up that fact. Perhaps our country truly has a media run by sleepwalking nitwits who excel at “dumbing down” the public precisely because their own intellectual deficiencies are so profound.

Of course, the anti-Ramsey factions didn’t pick up on the Gelb/UFO connection, either. Jay Leno’s writers were also asleep on the job, and so was the National Enquirer. They missed their chance to spin the Ed Gelb story, to make him look like something of a gullible fool. “First he wants us to believe a UFO alien abduction story, then he brings us news of the Ramsey’s innocence - when will he try to sell us a bridge in Brooklyn?” Of course, that kind of attack would have been quite unfair to Ed Gelb, in my opinion. I personally think the man is about as level, sincere, tough, and immune to manipulation as anyone I’ve met.

All of this amounts to an extraordinary lesson in media hypocrisy, and the fact that THE TRUTH, as the Establishment defines it, is like computer morphing software. If the shoe fits, they wear it. If it doesn’t fit, they will hide the shoe and claim it never existed, and then they will change the subject. Or, if they are asleep on the job (as is often the case), they’ll never find the shoe and they’ll dance barefoot through the dandelions, thinking they’re buttercups.

And so there you have it, folks. The world spins. Hollywood spins. Our heads spin. And throughout the spinning, inconsistencies are glossed over, material facts are omitted and hypocrisy rules. But we’ll find THE TRUTH yet, won’t we? Join me again at AlienZoo next Friday for more FLYING SAUCERS OVER HOLLYWOOD, and we’ll keep trying!

John Carpenter: An authority on alien abductions

Clinical therapist discusses findings and experiences covering 12 years of research
3/28/2000

Written by Wiggz…also known as the AlienZoo prohibitor of dullness.

Among the foremost experts in alien abduction research is John Carpenter, a Springfield, Missouri-based social worker and clinical therapist. Over the last 12 years, Carpenter has worked with 140 abductees, to a large extent through his work with MUFON, the Mutual UFO Network.

What’s interesting about Carpenter is that he sees himself as a data collector — someone who doesn’t pass judgment or edit his subject’s responses. “People call me an expert,” he said at his presentation at the International UFO Congress, held in Laughlin, Nevada, earlier this month. “I still feel like a student learning.”

Carpenter has produced six videos, and is in the process of writing a very in-depth book that covers his years of research. He doesn.t want to leave anything out; to the contrary, he wants to drag, as he puts it, his readers through the experience of collecting and analyzing details regarding more than 80 cases, including the backgrounds of his subjects. A lot of charts and drawings will be involved. “I will not edit anything out,” he says. “Nobody else has done this.” He foresees publishing his book in a couple of years.

Carpenter has traveled throughout the world to gather information on alien contactees. In 1996, he produced a video titled Aliens Captured in Brazil?, regarding his research on the Varginha, Brazil case of 1996, in which two extraterrestrials were captured by the military. That same year, Carpenter released Encounters in Australia.

In his UFO Congress talk, Carpenter revealed an in-depth overview of what the 140 abduction cases he’s seen hold in common. Remarkably, people who have never seen or read about a Gray before can describe in remarkable detail the one they encountered. In Missouri, Carpenter works with artist Susan Dusenberry, who draws what Carpenter’s subjects cannot. The results are often the same: aliens with four fingers, almond-shaped eyes, and “coin-slot” mouths. What’s more, a lightning flash, or serpent-like emblem is perceived as being affixed to aliens’ uniforms. These aliens are sometimes seen carrying a wand.

Reports given by children are staggering

A key section of Carpenter’s talk centered around accounts given by child contactees. Carpenter told the story of visiting a classroom of 30 3-year-olds, whom he asked to draw an image of an alien. Although too young to know about alien TV shows, the children drew fantastic, vividly imaginative renderings of ETs. Most important, none of the drawings matched. “I had 30 wonderful, creative little drawings, and not one of them was a Gray,” the therapist noted.

Carpenter contrasted these pictures with child experiencers, who can recall visits with Grays with remarkable detail.

There was 5-year-old Eric, who in 1989 drew “the leaders of the king of the mean ones,” who floated the boy through a wall. The beings were rendered as being hairless, and having large, black eyes and white faces.

An 8-year-old boy depicted his Gray abductors with black eyes and four fingers. When Carpenter showed the boy’s drawing to an art therapist, she immediately saw telltale signs of post-traumatic stress disorder. The child drew himself with clenched fists, chattering teeth, and disturbed eyes.

A 3-year-old Australian girl revealed to Carpenter her story of being taken up in the sky by a hairless lady with large, black eyes, who spoke to the child with her mind. Further, a young woman showed Carpenter a doodle she drew at a very young age, some 20 years earlier. The image was that of a little, light being; she couldn’t explain how the angelic creature could float into her room, so she drew the being as having wings.

Typical abduction scenarios

Carpenter points out that abductions take place in stages. In a home abduction, typically, a golf-ball-sized light is seen in a room. Next, a team of three Grays form a triangle around the abductee (so that two walk on the subject’s right, and one walks on the left), and float him or her through a wall or window (The window need not be open.).

If an abductee is taken outdoors, a bright flash may appear in the sky, and beam of light may lift the subject up. For this reason, some people may have a phobia of falling upward. Carpenter figures that the light ray can be a by-product of some anti-gravity pull.

If a ship is encountered in the woods, that craft may have the capability to appear and disappear, so that the witness may be able to see it only when standing within a 30-foot range.

Once on the craft, abductees may find themselves in a round, cornerless room, with a domed ceiling. A table or two may be present in the typically undecorated room. Aliens may stand over their subject, and stare deeply into his or her eyes. While this is traumatic for many, Carpenter thinks the stare plays a positive role. Aliens have strong hypnotic-telepathic powers; their stare represents an effort to calm their subjects. The stare might conceivably be used to help abductees imagine themselves encountering a white owl — an image that is much easier for our minds to accept.

In examinations, Carpenter says, it’s not uncommon for subjects to see something like a small baby, or hybrid creature. The baby is presented to the subject, but the subject is at first disinterested in it. Soon, though, the subject will want to touch the infant. And, before long, the subject will not want to let go.

Carpenter told the story of a woman who had a baby implanted in her, but the aliens took it away. Around that time, she had dreams of white ants with black eyes congregating around a mushroom table. Although she loved children, she had a fear of becoming pregnant; it turns out that she was afraid of having a child taken from her.

Talking with Carpenter: Helping people find missing time

While at the IUFOC, Carpenter graciously spared a moment to talk with AlienZoo about his involvement with abduction research. A majority of our interview is printed here.

AlienZoo: John, how did you become involved with working as a hypnotherapist with alien abductees?Carpenter: I had been in the field of psychiatry, as a social worker and clinical therapist for a number of years. Then I read that professionals were helping with hypnosis for people who had missing time experiences. I had followed UFOs ever since I was a little boy, so I was already very familiar with things in the field and was willing to help out. So I volunteered. I had no idea [laughs] that I’d be swamped with 140 cases — and all sorts of things that I could not expect. But I welcomed it, and was open to it, and learned a lot.I had been in the field of psychiatry, as a social worker and clinical therapist for a number of years. Then I read that professionals were helping with hypnosis for people who had missing time experiences. I had followed s ever since I was a little boy, so I was already very familiar with things in the field and was willing to help out. So I volunteered. I had no idea [laughs] that I’d be swamped with 140 cases — and all sorts of things that I could not expect. But I welcomed it, and was open to it, and learned a lot.AlienZoo: Did your involvement with MUFON help expand your work?Carpenter: That was one way. I had written to Budd Hopkins, and he sent me cases. And then the MUFON network signed me up right away. Now, I’m promoted to MUFON’s board for abduction research. So, yes, that puts me in touch with a lot of people. I don’t advertise — people find me or see me on TV. They see that I’m from Springfield, Missouri, so they look me up in the phone book, or mail me things, or call me.

I had been in the field of psychiatry, as a social worker and clinical therapist for a number of years. Then I read that professionals were helping with hypnosis for people who had missing time experiences. I had followed s ever since I was a little boy, so I was already very familiar with things in the field and was willing to help out. So I volunteered. I had no idea [laughs] that I’d be swamped with 140 cases — and all sorts of things that I could not expect. But I welcomed it, and was open to it, and learned a lot.That was one way. I had written to Budd Hopkins, and he sent me cases. And then the MUFON network signed me up right away. Now, I’m promoted to ’s board for abduction research. So, yes, that puts me in touch with a lot of people. I don’t advertise — people find me or see me on TV. They see that I’m from Springfield, Missouri, so they look me up in the phone book, or mail me things, or call me.AlienZoo: What were some of your most memorable cases out of the 140 you worked with?Carpenter: Probably the 17 multiple-participant cases, which simply means that two or more people were taken at the same time. This creates an opportunity, where you can actually work independently with each person, and compare and contrast stories. This means that you can take things well beyond imagination or hoax, because they have no idea what questions you’re going to ask, or what tricks you’re going to pull.Probably the 17 multiple-participant cases, which simply means that two or more people were taken at the same time. This creates an opportunity, where you can actually work independently with each person, and compare and contrast stories. This means that you can take things well beyond imagination or hoax, because they have no idea what questions you’re going to ask, or what tricks you’re going to pull.What’s interesting about these cases is that they see each other on board at different times, and they’ll know what each person is doing. I’m just amazed — people may not know what happened for 20 years, and maybe a different hypnotist worked with them. And their stories will come out. They’re not identical; you’ll get a set of experiences here, and a set of experiences there. They’ll overlap, and maybe one will have seen other things. The stories may not contradict; they’re just a part of the experience. I’d compare it to sending 50 people to a movie theater, and as they come out asking them about what they saw. Some people will remember some parts, and some people will have been daydreaming at those points. Some people will be focusing on photography, while others will be focusing on acting or music. People will come out with a different set of memories about the same thing. Or they may have been in different rooms of the craft, and saw different things going on, but they may come back together at a certain moment.

Probably the 17 multiple-participant cases, which simply means that two or more people were taken at the same time. This creates an opportunity, where you can actually work independently with each person, and compare and contrast stories. This means that you can take things well beyond imagination or hoax, because they have no idea what questions you’re going to ask, or what tricks you’re going to pull.What’s interesting about these cases is that they see each other on board at different times, and they’ll know what each person is doing. I’m just amazed — people may not know what happened for 20 years, and maybe a different hypnotist worked with them. And their stories will come out. They’re not identical; you’ll get a set of experiences here, and a set of experiences there. They’ll overlap, and maybe one will have seen other things. The stories may not contradict; they’re just a part of the experience. I’d compare it to sending 50 people to a movie theater, and as they come out asking them about what they saw. Some people will remember some parts, and some people will have been daydreaming at those points. Some people will be focusing on photography, while others will be focusing on acting or music. People will come out with a different set of memories about the same thing. Or they may have been in different rooms of the craft, and saw different things going on, but they may come back together at a certain moment.In these cases, maybe one person was taken and one wasn’t. Maybe both were taken. Maybe neither were taken. Whatever one says, the other can correlate it. It’s almost unbelievable for me to say this, but matching has occurred in 100% of the 17 cases. In 100%, the general story of what happened was the same. To me, it’s easier to match what they’re recalling than to think of some wild psychological reason as to why that happened.

People don’t know what to invent. I will suggest to them very logical answers: “Okay, so they’re pulling on your arms while you’re in bed, and they take you out of the room, down the stairs, and out of your house, right?” And they will respond, “No. It’s like I’m in a blue light, and they float me through the wall into the night air.” Now, I know that’s typical. They’re going against my logic, in telling me this bizarre stuff. They’ve never heard any of this before. They don’t know how it could make any sense. I might try to trick them, too, by asking what color hair they have. And they say there’s no hair, and there’s no ears, either. I try to trip them up in all sorts of ways. But their stories are very cohesive, and very consistent.

AlienZoo: What are some of the techniques you use to guide someone into a hypnotic state? Is deep breathing common?Carpenter: Sure. There are a number of classic procedures. You want their breathing to be slow and deepen. You may want them to detach themselves from their present surroundings, and focus on a place that they enjoy being in, that’s fun and easy to visualize. And then you start tuning in on their senses: sight, hearing, and smell — smelling the air, or bedsheets. Doing that helps put them in other places.Sure. There are a number of classic procedures. You want their breathing to be slow and deepen. You may want them to detach themselves from their present surroundings, and focus on a place that they enjoy being in, that’s fun and easy to visualize. And then you start tuning in on their senses: sight, hearing, and smell — smelling the air, or bedsheets. Doing that helps put them in other places.And when I try to get people to recall missing time, I’ll try to move a little bit further into that period of amnesia by asking, “What did you hear next?” They’ll say, “I heard a buzzing sound.” And I’ll say, “With that buzzing sound, did you see anything?” And they’ll tell me about a light in the window. And I’ll ask, “Do you feel anything?” They’ll respond, “My body is tingling.”

Sure. There are a number of classic procedures. You want their breathing to be slow and deepen. You may want them to detach themselves from their present surroundings, and focus on a place that they enjoy being in, that’s fun and easy to visualize. And then you start tuning in on their senses: sight, hearing, and smell — smelling the air, or bedsheets. Doing that helps put them in other places.And when I try to get people to recall missing time, I’ll try to move a little bit further into that period of amnesia by asking, “What did you hear next?” They’ll say, “I heard a buzzing sound.” And I’ll say, “With that buzzing sound, did you see anything?” And they’ll tell me about a light in the window. And I’ll ask, “Do you feel anything?” They’ll respond, “My body is tingling.”Each time they get a new clue, it triggers more of the recollection. The best way to describe this is if you had a dream, and wake up and don’t remember it, then walk down the street the next day and see something or somebody who is in the dream. Boom! You go, “I had a dream, and you were in it!” It all comes back.

AlienZoo: Some people feel like they have very positive experiences from an abduction. Others, though, who may be troubled by their experience, will come to you. Do you notice a difference in the way people approach their feelings, when they’re positive rather than negative?Carpenter: Oh, sure. It’s like any experience in our lives. If it’s positive, you probably want to share it with the people in your life. You.re content and comfortable. But if it’s not that way — if it.s nightmarish or disturbing — you.re going to want help, either to put it out of your mind, explain it, or put a logical answer to it. People come to me because they know something is not right. They want a logical answer for it. They want that missing time to be explained. They want to be sure that nothing happened. They don’t wish for it or want it.Oh, sure. It’s like any experience in our lives. If it’s positive, you probably want to share it with the people in your life. You.re content and comfortable. But if it’s not that way — if it.s nightmarish or disturbing — you.re going to want help, either to put it out of your mind, explain it, or put a logical answer to it. People come to me because they know something is not right. They want a logical answer for it. They want that missing time to be explained. They want to be sure that nothing happened. They don’t wish for it or want it.For some people, they just need to go through a process, where they can get over the fear and terror. Basically, these beings do not cause harm or deliberate discomfort. They’re not mean. They’re not trying to take over the planet. Even though abductions have a negative connotation, basically they’re not bad experiences. They’re perceived as bad. Actually, they’re no different from what we do with our wildlife.

Oh, sure. It’s like any experience in our lives. If it’s positive, you probably want to share it with the people in your life. You.re content and comfortable. But if it’s not that way — if it.s nightmarish or disturbing — you.re going to want help, either to put it out of your mind, explain it, or put a logical answer to it. People come to me because they know something is not right. They want a logical answer for it. They want that missing time to be explained. They want to be sure that nothing happened. They don’t wish for it or want it.For some people, they just need to go through a process, where they can get over the fear and terror. Basically, these beings do not cause harm or deliberate discomfort. They’re not mean. They’re not trying to take over the planet. Even though abductions have a negative connotation, basically they’re not bad experiences. They’re perceived as bad. Actually, they’re no different from what we do with our wildlife.AlienZoo: But fears take over.Carpenter: Oh, yes. When you don’t understand something, or don.t have answers, you freak out. You fear the unknown. But when you have more information and experiences, you learn to be more comfortable with it. You may not like it, but you grow more comfortable with it.Oh, yes. When you don’t understand something, or don.t have answers, you freak out. You fear the unknown. But when you have more information and experiences, you learn to be more comfortable with it. You may not like it, but you grow more comfortable with it.

Oh, yes. When you don’t understand something, or don.t have answers, you freak out. You fear the unknown. But when you have more information and experiences, you learn to be more comfortable with it. You may not like it, but you grow more comfortable with it.

Presentation by Dr. Jonathan Reed fills UFO Congress

Figure’s controversial tale sparks heated debate.

3/10/2000

Written by Wiggz…also known as the AlienZoo prohibitor of dullness.

The story of Dr. Jonathan Reed is viewed skeptically by more than a few UFO experts. This controversy is probably what inspired a standing-room International UFO Congress (IUFOC) crowd to see Reed discuss his experiences with meeting an alien in the woods in the fall of 1996, and trying to survive the “warfare” brought on by life-threatening agents in the years since.

More than 700 Congress attendees were present at Reed’s talk. Interest in the former child psychologist’s case is due in large part to his appearance on several Art Bell programs over the last 18 months.

Reed, accompanied by writer and supporter Robert Raith, gave a tearful and emotional account of meeting a part-Reptilian, part-Gray alien while on a walk with his dog. He expressed particularly intense sorrow when he talked about watching his dog die. As the story goes, the dog veered away from their intended path, and when Reed caught up to his pet, a vibrating alien was shaking the attacking dog, to the point where its head ripped in half, and disintegrated into a pile of white ash.

After the dog was killed, Reed struck the alien with a baseball bat, and captured on film the creature and its accompanying obelisk — which is possibly a spaceship, or possibly a doorway to another dimension. In his video, which he played before the IUFOC audience, Reed can be heard panting heavily, to the point of hyperventilating. However, critics say the video didn’t shake enough, and his panic was too audible, to be authentic.

Reed took the alien home, where he made a video of investigating the four-and-a-half-foot being. He told the audience that his attempts to cut the alien’s clothes were thwarted, as its black, spandex-like outfit automatically sewed itself up. When asked whether the being were male or female, Reed said he didn’t know, adding offhandedly that he hadn’t “made love to her.” Ultimately, the being disappeared from Reed’s freezer, presumably because it was stolen by burglars who reportedly had governmental license plates.

Reed has been on the run ever since. Wiping his eye, he admitted that he’s been beaten up by agents three times, and two of his close friends have been killed. He goes as far as saying his life has been ruined, that he has lost nearly all of the things he enjoyed before his encounter, such as a steady job, home, and girlfriend. Recently, he was shot in the shoulder, after trying to wrest a gun from stranger approaching him in a parking lot.

With an equally emotional Raith, the controversial contactee recently co-authored a book called The Link, which contends that mysterious agents are chasing Reed for a technology that the alien wore on his wrist. Something like a transmitter-receiver, this hieroglyphic “link” bracelet turned from silver to black when Reed clasped it on the alien’s arm. It is believed that the wristband served as a tracking device that maintained a connection with the alien’s nine-foot-long, granite-like craft.

Some Congress attendees are unshakable proponents of Reed and his story. Shawn Atlanti, of San Diego, is convinced that government agents are bent upon torturing Reed to death, by physical and psychic means. Dan Iaria, of Indianapolis, having spent hours with Reed this week, contends that the purportedly hunted Reed demonstrates credibility and character as he tells his story. Dr. Heim, a remote viewing specialist from Colorado, told the audience that his colleague was able to remotely view the alien’s craft with little prompting.

Reed, Raith, and their book’s publisher were given a standing ovation at the close of their presentation.

Regardless, the skeptical argue that Reed’s video comes across as having a little too much polish. They also take issue with his seemingly overdone emotionality, as demonstrated by his tendency to weep in mid-sentence. Further, critics wonder why Reed didn’t make a greater effort to relate his story to the police, from the very beginning.

It’s clear that the Reed story will continue to inspire debate for the near future. Most likely, the case will decisively divide the ufology community, as experts grapple with how much credence should be given to an encounter experienced by one person, alone in the woods.