home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Mutual UFO Network - MUFONET-BBS Network
- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
- John Komar DETERMINATION OF ABDUCTION CASES Copyright
- State Director ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ MUFON
- 1990
-
- In a paper delivered during a MUFON UFO International Symposium,
- researcher Budd Hopkins classified Abduction cases into five types:
-
-
- Type 1: The abductee consciously recalls parts of the full abduction
- scenario:
- The on-board experience, the UFO, it's occupants, it's interior, and
- so on. (In a clearly related sub-group, the abductee's conscious
- recall of this material is delayed.)
-
- Type 2: The abductee recalls the UFO, the circumstances of the encounter, and
- often the appearance of the occupants, but does not remember any of
- the actual on-board experience. That part of the experience
- registers
- only as a perceived gap in time.
-
- Type 3: The abductee recalls only a UFO and/or humanoids, but nothing else.
- He
- or she does not recall a time-lapse or dislocation. (This type may
- include a good many so-called bedroom visitations.)
-
- Type 4: The abductee recalls only a peculiar time-lapse and/or dislocation.
- No UFO is consciously recalled, nor is any other part of the UFO
- scenario.
-
- Type 5: The abductee recalls nothing of the usual abduction scenario.
- Instead, there remain vague indications, ranging from the "feeling
- that something happened to me", to intense, unnatural fears of
- specific locations or sections of highway, to physical wounds or
- marks
- of unknown origin, and includes sometimes recurring dreams of a
- temporally un-anchored abduction experience.
-
-
- Type number five, which Budd Hopkins concentrates upon in his book,
- "MISSING TIME", is believed to be the most common. This type also presents
- the greatest challenge to an investigator. The descriptions above can also
- cover many situations that turn out to not be actual abductions.
-
- How can a researcher determine which reports to pursue and which to
- ignore, taking into account the limited knowledge of the topic by a typical
- researcher, and the time constraints involved. Hypnosis in itself is an
- expensive and time involving endeavor, not to be included with the
- investigation of each case, as a determining factor of the validity of the
- abductee, but only to be used as the extreme avenue after much time and work
- has been expended during the initial investigation of the case.
-
- As a suggestion, we should consider each case in the "quantitative"
- sense, weighing the details as the facts present themselves. The more
- specific and detailed the facts, the higher the priority to be placed on the
- case as a whole.
-
- Asking the witness about any previous experiences or unusual encounters,
- any physical marks or wounds not associated with any known incident the
- witness can recall, possibly a recurring bad dream, could add weight to the
- credibility of the case.
-
- Each fact or detail, by itself, possibly would not provide enough
- substantive justification to actively pursue the case, but coupled together
- could provide enough detail and connecting information to warrant the time
- expenditure required. Other considerations of the case would be:
-
- 1. The volume and content of the information as it pertains to the case.
- 2. The quality of that information.
- 3. Is the person who is citing the experience the only witness to it's
- happening, or are there others.
- 4. The strangeness of the case, whether it be the facts as presented, or
- the witness itself, or the location where the experience is perceived to
- have happened.
-
- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~