The Abduction of Scientific Methodology

    Those supportive of the belief that alien abductions are an inescapable reality are possibly the most sensitive of the various groups to be found in ufology. While unsupportable speculations in favor of the belief that persons are indeed being abducted by alien beings for hithero unknown purposes are welcomed with little opposition, an open declaration of skeptical disbelief can be expected to meet with some of the most vitriolic and intensely defensive responses.

    This is very noticeable among the many internet message boards and mail lists  where little serious consequence can be expected. It is one of the many contradictions in ufolgy that such hate and spite filled tirades are launched by these pro abduction advocates so readily even when responding to the mildest of skeptical inquiry. Yet the messages these same proponents claim to have recieved from their alien mentors, and they also claim to be promoting, are ones of peace and love for ourselves and our planet. Oh well, chalk it up to human nature. Or not, as I have.

    It is as if questioning the validity of these abductees claims is considered unthinkable, and to do so constitutes some form of vile cruelty. More likely, it is the automatic defense of a belief held in faith and credulity. It cannot be defended rationally so they must attack to avoid being placed in the defensive position. A position which is inherently, indefensible. The severe and harsh responses toward skeptical scrutiny of these claims is usually justified on the grounds that abductees are victims of psychological and physical traumas at the hands of terrifying alien creatures.  Accordingly, to them , they should be protected from any unpleasant questioning of their claims, much less be asked to provide proof.

    Really it is little more than a smokescreen. To me it is in part an attempt to capitalize upon, and manipulate, our deeply ingrained senses of compassion and fear we may feel when confronted with a fellow human being in distress. The feelings of compassion arise from empathy while the fear is more complex yet just as powerful. Either can contribute significantly to our decisions as to what our responses will be. The fear is due to our not being sure of the psychological consequences if we decide to openly express our doubt as to the abductees credibility or veracity.

   This fear may be not just of being wrong but of somehow exacerbating the problems that have resulted in what appears to be an already questionable stability of mind. Considering their  heavy reliance upon the claims that they are ostracized and ridiculed for their attempts to publicize and therefore somehow solve the riddle of their claimed abductions it isn't an inappropriate suggestion. It appears that it is hoped these intense responses will discourage skeptical examination by playing upon the fear one may have of leading these emotionaly troubled people to further psychological trauma or even physical harm.

   This is a unjustified concern however  in that alien abduction has never been ruled the cause of nervous breakdown or anything so dramatic as suicide. If this were not the case then it should be obvious to anyone that these individuals would be much better served seeking competent, conventional means of treatment. Not abduction "specialists" and support groups where the question of whether or not they were actually abducted is ignored and instead a collective back patting is instituted as therapy. Indeed, the only tangible results of all these experts and support groups efforts has been a perpetuation and growth of the enigma. Not a single step towards a resolution of the problems they claim to experience has been taken. They end up "resigned" to their fate of being abductees and facing further abductions.

    If these people must insist upon continuing to ignore conventional psychological treatment where confidentiality can be assured and instead prefer to place themselves in the spotlight then they must also be willing to accept that their claims are going to be scrutinized to the tiniest detail. If they truly wished to be believed they would doubtless understand that they must be questioned. Belief cannot be forced through intimidation or bought through compassion. It must be earned by strength of fact or how well the story survives examination.

    Concentrating on what I'll loosely call the psychological angle  I've noticed what appears to be a serious discrepancy in the claims regarding the psychological stability of these persons claiming to have been abducted.  One of the first things we are told in literature supportive of belief is that these persons are free of any psychological conditions or neurosis which may relate to the belief that they have been abducted.

    Yet this seems to be contradicted by some of the very proponents of research which supposedly supports this contention. John. E . Mack in his book "Abductions" clearly states his surprise at the number of abductees he interviewed who came from families with one or more alcoholic parents. He then mentions many of them coming from broken homes and expressing feelings of emotional coldness and deprivation within the family structure. He then states almost offhandedly that some of the abductees feel that aliens are their true parents. The implications this presents seem almost inescapable even to a layman yet he ignores these and instead goes on to speculate upon the possible implications this has for the family. To me, these and other cases such as these provide stark contradiction to the assertions that no psychological pathologies are present that could account for the abduction "experience". It appears as if the implications are ignored in favor of assuming the abduction scenario is real and is a cause to be considered responsible for the stated problems within the patients family relationships. Indeed, no real in depth psychological analysis of the patients is carried out in the cases chronicled in his books.

     It seems to me that more than a simple interview with the patient would be called for. Yet this is all that appears to be done, after which it is decided the patient indeed underwent some sort of unusual trauma possibly involving aliens because they come across as sincere and it "seems" too real to be faked. After this the research begins in earnest following the assumption that these persons are telling the truth and have been abducted by aliens. This is credible psychological methodology? Further, there are mentioned in "Abductions" past histories of sexual abuse, emotional traumas due to death of loved ones, and in one case a history of seizures and attention deficit disorder although Mack goes to great lengths to dismiss the earlier diagnosis of other doctors in this last case and attribute these episodes to the abduction experience. 

    At least in the cases presented in Macks book it appears there are indeed good reasons to believe there are psychological factors involved that could account for the claims of abductions by aliens. Of course these most likely do not account for all reported abductions but I feel they comprise the majority of those where the person relating the experience sincerely feels they are telling the truth as they remember it. I feel this number of sincere cases to be very low. Much lower in fact than the numbers so often cited after the now infamous "Roper Poll" which concluded they number in the millions. I feel this due to the suspicion that the greater number of reports are quite possibly  a result of copycat and "me too" type reports resulting from the sensational and misleading methods of publication the enigma has been perpetuated with and the faulty methods used in researching it.

  The infamous Roper Poll has probably done more to perpetuate belief in the enigma than any other single piece of literature in ufology. Authored ostensibly by supporters of the belief that this is an enigma indicative of alien interaction with human beings ,Hopkins, Jacobs and Westrum's poll is now considered by many in the field to be a seminal work. However, as with just about every other piece of work done in this field numerous problems have been uncovered which strongly suggest the poll is flawed beyond salvage. In reproducing the survey, Ted Goertzel of Rutgers University notes that Hopkins, Jacobs and Westrum did not use methods based on internal consistency and that although his sample rate was high with these in place he noted that while some phenomena was indicated, just what the phenomena is was still unclear. After further work using the same method employed by Hopkins, Jacobs and Westrum and adding further criteria to narrow down the possibilities he concluded that what is actually being indicated was a phenomena known as cryptomnesia. Or, a tendency to fabricate false memories.

   He also further concluded using path analysis which he admits is not a replacement for in depth psychological case studies ,"The path analysis suggests that cryptomnesia is rooted in a lack of trusting relationships. This problem may have its origins in early childhood, but it continues into adult life with a lessened feeling of trust of friends and neighbors. This lack of trust leads to feelings of anomie and anxiety which make the individual more likely to construct false memories out of information stored in the unconscious mind. People who think in this way are susceptible to belief in conspiracy theories since these theories help them to make sense of an otherwise incoherent world."

   The implications of this become even more ominous when coupled with the revelations concerning the use of hypnosis and RM or repressed memory therapy which is used consistently throughout abduction research. Revelations which show that these two items are themselves very capable of fabricating false memories themselves. The theory behind RM therapy is not accepted by the AMA or Britains Royal College of Psychiatry as it has been shown to be severely flawed and capable of causing serious psychological problems. One can only imagine what the results can be if used on those already susceptible to fabrication of false memories. In fact, I believe the abduction phenomena to represent a stark example of this, if it is indicative of anything.

   The Roper Poll has been found to contain a substantial list of problems most prominent of which is a bias of belief on the part of the authors indicated by an unwillingness to consider information negative to their theories. This is suggested as the sole reason a conclusion of alien abduction is put forward when yes is answered to the questions in the poll. "Journal of UFO Studies "Rodeghier," "Stefula, Butler and Hansen" (1993: 20), "Karla Turner" and "Alvin Lawson TRUE BELIEVERS AND BIASED ETH RESEARCH: THE FFUFORI/HOPKINS "FINAL REPORT" ON ABDUCTEES.

   Regarding a conclusion of "alien abduction" being reached due to bias in belief  on the part of  Hopkins, Jacobs and Westrum. No rational reason is evident  to reach such a conclusion yet the assumption is made by the three simply due to those polled answering yes to 4 or more of the questions on the poll and the three "feeling" this indicates a likely abduction experience. The only justification given is their prior work with abductees. This, despite it being shown that while a phenomena is being indicated, just what that phenomena is isn't at all clear. This bias indicates that objectivity is seriously compromised and that the conclusions made by Hopkins, Jacobs and Westrum cannot be considered valid as they have apparently formed a conclusion that fits with their own theories while excluding consideration of entirely plausible alternative possibilities and refusing  to check the validity of the same against their findings.

   Finishing with the focus upon the popular research supportive of abduction claims it appears that their use of these questionable theories is the largest contributing factor to the perpetuation of the enigma. The sensational conclusions made using the Roper Poll and their willingness to use discredited theories such as RM has in my opinion resulted in a steady supply of attention seekers and charlatans all willing to stand forth as victims of alien abduction. The  truth is that this thing sells. And it brings the attention many seeking it wish to find. In this enigma and the methods employed to validate it those dependant personalities who seek sympathy and empathy for their discontents have found an ideal haven. They are not expected to prove anything, and they can expect a warm reception from any abductee group they approach. This is why I feel the actual number of those who are sincere in their beliefs that they have been abducted is much lower than that usually put forth by those such as Mack and Strieber.

   More alarming than the attraction the enigma holds for the emotionally discontent however are some researchers calls for a "new paradigm" and a suspension of current scientific views when addressing this enigma. As a fellow skeptic once mentioned in a discussion forum concerning scientific objectivity and skepticism, "these things simply must go if the belief is to survive." Radically altered views in science whether medical or technological are not without precedent and in truth are welcome if they demonstrate a reliable, independently demonstrable nature. But any time this occurs it is due to more than a simple failure to solve a problem or a plea for suspension of rationality which it appears this call for a new paradigm is. The assertions that we should abandon the current scientific worldview in favor of taking a "spiritual intuitive approach" as Mack put's it is simply without precedent or credible foundation. Claiming this is necessary due to a failure on the part of science to provide answers is absurd. Others have put forth theories supported by replicable research and reliable established precedents such as sleep paralysis yet these are ignored. This appears to be an indicator of the earlier mentioned bias on the part of abduction researchers. Simply because they do not like the answers is a good enough reason to abandon conventional scientific methodology and offhandedly dismiss the work of those who adhere to it? When it is so effective for everything else non paranormal ? The justification is nonexistent.

  This call for a new paradigm based in spirituality and intuition represents little more than a wish to return to the dark ages where an accusation of witchcraft was all that was needed to set the villagers to building up the fire. Fortunately, the progress made towards a rationality based view of the physical world via scientific methodology is not so easily dislodged.  Mack has tried to illustrate his reasoning by stating that those comfortable with an Einsteinian:Newtonian view of physics will not believe due to this not allowing their minds to open to the possibilities of other realities or unknown forces. In this attempt to dismiss current scientific understanding he entirely misses the mark. It is precisely the work of Einstein and others which forms the bedrock of modern physics that  has made it possible to seriously consider states of reality other than our own. Before Relativity and Special Relativity were introduced by Einstein alternate dimensions and states of reality were relegated to pure fantastical speculation.

  Einsteinian:Newtonian views of physics make possible the credible consideration of alternate realities I might add, without the need to resort some "altered states of consciousness" or discarding our current "western scientific worldview", as Mack has put it.

Claiming those who adhere to these tenets of physics are incapable of considering alternate states of reality is a blatant attempt to dismiss credible scientific methodology. Not surprising considering the answers such methodology provides are not conducive to belief.  Not to mention the unfalsifiable nature of the claims the belief surrounds. This call for a new paradigm based in spirituality and intuition is nothing more than a thinly disguised appeal to credulity. They ask for a dismissal of current scientific practice in regards to abduction research because they understand that the phenomena cannot fulfill the requirements of scientific methodology. The bar is set too high. So they seek to lower it. Since this is not possible they must appeal to some other influence to inspire belief, in short, credulity.

So what of the abductees and their stories themselves? Emphasis has been placed heavily upon the fact that abductees recount stories with strong similarities despite any interaction with each other. This has formed the underpinnings of the original assertions that something simply must be happening to these people. Since they all give similar descriptions of alien beings and the procedures used upon them in their abductions then we must give credence to their claims. But should we? It is the stories themselves which provided the information which has led many to reach a wholly different conclusion.

One would expect aliens from a star, galaxy, universe far removed from our own to adhere to wholly different behavioral and cultural patterns and mannerisms. Yet the themes recurring in these accounts are easily paralleled by our own human standards. The many varied descriptions of aliens and their activities mirror concepts popularized in mainstream media. This suggests that what is being seen is not  independently cooborated evidence of alien abductions but a consistency borne of media influence upon credulous personalities.  Studies done recently  have born this out and tied in the connection with media influences unambiguously.

(Susan Blackmore) "Among the adults (though not the children), there was a correlation between the amount of television they watched and their knowledge about aliens and abductions. This suggests that the popular stereotype is obtained more from television programs than from having been abducted by real aliens."

(Glenn G. Sparks, Marianne Pellechia, Chris Irvine)" Because the stories were naturally occurring segments from a network newscast, they also differed in terms of the topic of focus, the people featured, etc. The results revealed that subsequent UFO beliefs were affected by the story manipulation."

The abduction phenomena despite all of it's inherent fallacies and contradictions has become the most controversial and firmly entrenched of the ufological beliefs. The average abductee claimant is not crazy in the normal sense of the word but does indeed display traits which sets him apart from those who do not hold such beliefs. He is found to be a credulous individual favoring highly imaginative and sensationalistic views of the world. His disdain for credible scientific study and instant dismissal of anything negative to the belief reveals to us his underlying irrational personality.

He is participating in a fantasy driven enigma, appealing to those experiencing
feelings of powerlessness, inadequacy, fear of mortality and suffering
psychological delusions. The study of ufos and the ETH has been engaged in for over fifty
years. Yet not a scrap of undeniable proof, irrefutable evidence, or
reliable theory has been produced. Coupled with the available
data gleaned from psychological study and observational reliability
the simple truth is almost inescapable. The alien abduction enigma is a product of human design and origin. And I resent all the mangling of science and facts done only to keep it alive.

 

Further references, "Abduction by Aliens or Sleep Paralysis?"