Abduction Digest, Number 61 Monday, May 11th 1992 (C) Copyright 1992 Paranet Information Service. All Rights Reserved. Today's Topics: Re: KOA Weird Night appearance Re: Secret Life - Questio Re: Scott Corder Md Koa Program Re: Koa Weird Night Appearance Re: UFO Dream ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Powell@p0.f134.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Powell) Subject: Re: KOA Weird Night appearance Date: 4 May 92 07:46:00 GMT -=> Quoting Peggy Noonan to David Jacobs <=- PN> 1) the missing people really are physically missing, based on PN> searches and family members reporting the missing to police... I think I remember this being a very small percentage of the total cases. If you come across this section in Jacob's book then please correct me if I'm wrong. (I bet it is less than 10%.)) Thanks, John. .. Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence -- John Powell - via ParaNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Powell@p0.f134.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Powell@p0.f134.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Powell) Subject: Re: Secret Life - Questio Date: 4 May 92 07:46:00 GMT -=> Quoting Linda Bird to John Powell <=- LB> I don't know why aliens would be afraid of a mess, unless they have LB> cleaned up a bunch of messes. Well... If (just suppose) it is the mind that is abducted and the unattended body left behind. Then rushing the abductee back to the body prior to them wetting themselves would preserve the continuity of the amnesia (or screen memory, or even actual memory). On the other hand, waking up with missing time is kind of a nothing thing compared to waking up in a puddle! LB> I recall Budd Hopkins talking about mind abductions while I attended LB> the Pensacola MUFON Conference in July 1990. While the aliens may be LB> playing mind games, for some it is all too real, so it seems. I think next year's MUFON Convention is going to be in Virginia! I'll actually be able to attend. The way I'm forcing myself to look at it right now is that it is perfectly and completely real to be abucted in mind only. (I'm assuming, for purposes of debate with myself, that there actually is a 'thing' called 'mind' and that therefore a duality exists with respect to the phenomenon of consciousness and the physical body.) I also think it is safe to say that most people, certainly myself included, are completely unaware of this possible duality, completely unaware of the sensations or perceptions associated with the possible experience of detaching the 'mind entity' from the 'body entity', and therefore (especially if the detaching process was externally initiated) might not even know that all subsequent perceptions and sensations were actually being filtered through a mind-generated template of the physical body and not through the physical central nervous system. (That probably made absolutely no sense... I'm having a hard time articulating these thoughts...) I think my last message was incomplete, think it got grunged in the conversion from XRS to QWK... Anyway, the stigmatic phenomenon [SP] is documented. The phantom limb pain phenomenon [PLPP] is documented. So, with SP we have the mind's ability to cause all number of odd physical effects on the body purely by thought initiation, and with PLPP we have the documented mind-generated template of a body. So... ==> If _something_ is toying with the template, but the mind isn't aware of that, perhaps it would kick in the SP automatically thus creating some odd physical markings... Maybe this helps explain why implants as of yet do not exist... (It would _easily_ explain the floating-thru-window and invisibility problems... Ditto for telepathy...) This would completely change the meaning of the Staring Procedures as described by Jacobs. I don't necessarily believe this but I find it interesting... Thanks, John. .. Absence of Evidence is not Evidence of Absence -- John Powell - via ParaNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Powell@p0.f134.n109.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Peggy.Noonan@p0.f605.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Peggy Noonan) Subject: Re: Scott Corder Md Date: 7 May 92 23:27:01 GMT >anyone know? Anyway, Corder was among the strangest of the >strange. I didn't know you wrote the OMNI article about him, I >would have provided you with my Corder file, which is about an >inch thick with correspondence from him, all showing one man's >gradual descent into total insanity. >The only good segment on that program was the abductions and >the interview with Jacobs. Unfortunately, that was sandwiched >between the Gulf Breeze lights and Corder. The Gulf Breeze >lights are almost surely balloon-borne road flares. A Current >having zero explanation, yet the first thing I thought of was >"road flare." The things burned an incandescent, sparkly red >for a while, then flashed white and winked out - EXACTLY what a >road flare would do. Here's the unfortunate thing: A Current Hi Jim, Sorry to be so long sending a reply -- hubby has taken off work and we've been going bonkers with redecorating (he does the outside, I'm painting the inside ... making covers for furniture, getting rid of about a boxcar load of packrat's junk [I'm the packrat so no one else to blame but me] and so on.) My Omni story on Corder never was published and I'm going to be talking to the ed. about updating it, so I would indeed be very interested in any file info you had on it if you'd still care to share it. May I reimburse you photocopy/postage fees? I did talk to the medical board guy about why they'd jerked his licence but off the top of my head, I don't recall his reply...will have to check the file for you. Thanks for the great info! And on the road flare UFOs, that's a pity. At least they are considering UFOs, but it's more mud on the image than clarity. Thanks, again! ==Peggy -- Peggy Noonan - via ParaNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Peggy.Noonan@p0.f605.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Peggy.Noonan@p0.f605.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Peggy Noonan) Subject: Koa Program Date: 7 May 92 23:29:02 GMT > Peggy, thank you for your kind words about my talk on the >KOA program. As I remember, that show was on at 4:00 a.m. >Denver time. It was hard to imagine that anybody would be >listening at that time. It was difficult enough for me to get >up at 6:00 a.m. to do the show. The best thing about the show >for me was that Barber let me ramble on for much longer >periods of time than do most interviewers. Therefore, I could >pick up a head of steam a little. Anyway, thanks much. > Via SPITFIRE Bulletin Board System - Version 3.1 'ramble on'? Only people who have little substantive to say 'ramble' -- your talk was absolutely fascinating. I thoroughly enjoyed all of it and wished it could last longer. Perhaps Rick can have you on the show again? (BTW, that's one of the things I admire about the way he conducts the program--he actually lets people ANSWER questions and explain their positions, unlike many program hosts.) Thank you, again, for such an enlightening presentation. ==Peggy== -- Peggy Noonan - via ParaNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Peggy.Noonan@p0.f605.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Peggy.Noonan@p0.f605.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Peggy Noonan) Subject: Re: Koa Weird Night Appearance Date: 7 May 92 23:34:03 GMT > -=> Quoting Peggy Noonan to David Jacobs <=- > PN> 1) the missing people really are physically missing, based on > PN> searches and family members reporting the missing to police... > >I think I remember this being a very small percentage of the total >cases. If you come across this section in Jacob's book then please >correct me if I'm wrong. (I bet it is less than 10%.)) You're probably right about the book's contents, John. I haven't read it yet (been tied up this week) and was only speaking from what he'd said on the radio interview. I hope I didn't give an incorrect representation in my enthusiasm, but I meant to convey that this aspect (the missing being actually gone) was something new to me however I recall nothing about the *number* of such cases -- perhaps I discarded that as I heard it or perhaps it wasn't part of that context, I can't say for sure now but could check the tape of that program if it would help. I will be eager to read the book and *if* I find anything to counter what you've mentioned, I'll pass it along, however I'm sure you must be correct about the numbers (you always are!) so I'll take your word for it. It was just the unusual aspect of the validity that intrigued me... Thanks, John! ==Peggy== -- Peggy Noonan - via ParaNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: Peggy.Noonan@p0.f605.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG (John Hicks) Subject: Re: UFO Dream Date: 5 May 92 21:42:00 GMT LB> Did she describe what parts of these creatures she DID see? I don't believe Lynn mentioned anything. I've asked her or her friend to join us here. jbh -- John Hicks - via ParaNet node 1:104/422 UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name INTERNET: John.Hicks@f29.n363.z1.FIDONET.ORG ******************************************************************************** For permission to reproduce or redistribute this digest, contact: DOMAIN Michael.Corbin@paranet.org UUCP scicom!paranet.org!Michael.Corbin ****************A**B**D**U**C**T**I**O**N****D**I**G**E**S**T******************* Submissions UUCP {ncar,isis,csn}!scicom!abduct Submissions DOMAIN abduct@scicom.alphacdc.com Admin Address abduct-request@shemtaia.weeg.uiowa.edu Mail to private Paranet/Fidonet addresses from the newsletters: DOMAIN firstname.lastname@paranet.org UUCP scicom!paranet.org!firstname.lastname ****************A**B**D**U**C**T**I**O**N****D**I**G**E**S**T*******************