Wednesday, November 7, 2012

a generation at the forefront

Dr. John Mack - 1929
Dr. Leo Sprinkle - 1930
Budd Hopkins - 1931
Raymond Fowler - 1933
There are four men who collectively had a huge impact on our definition of the UFO abduction. I realized that these guys were all born within four years of each other. This may mean nothing at all, but they represent a defined generation. It is hard to wrap my mind around what was accomplished by their dedication. Adjectives like pioneers and groundbreaking barely describe what they have done. Who among us will stand on the shoulders of these giants and continue this important work?


Red Pill Junkie said...

John Keel was also born in 1930

Red Pill Junkie said...

James Moseley was born in '31

Mike Clelland! said...

Richard Hall - 1930

But, these guys didn't focus on the abduction phenomenon

Red Pill Junkie said...

Maybe not. But, they were all children of WWII, the 1st generation who knew the fear of nuclear annihilation, and learned of the flying saucers as teenagers, when they were still hooked on Flash Gordon.

Trish said...

Strieber - 1946. Another generation?

Mike Clelland! said...

Birth year 1930 is one generation.

(add 16 years)

Birth year 1946 is a 'second" generation.

(add 16 years)

Birth year 1962 is "third" generation.

(Curiously, I was born in 1962)

Nycjeff said...

I think you've answered the question already in recent posts and podcasts. Those guys made their contribution mainly by bringing the stories of other people to light and finding patterns in them. The current generation, yourself included, is sharing its own experiences directly with the remaining human audience. There is no need to go through someone else any longer.
I think thats the point you are trying to make without saying it directly.

Anonymous said...

I wasn't ever that impressed with the work of the late John Mack. He was naive and a lightweight - not really knowing the subject of abductions or ufology in general. I've seen a youtube video that includes Mack's hypnosis session and was really turned off by his challenging/arguing with a research subject while he had him under hypnosis.

Hopkins knew much more, but was likely hoaxed by Linda Napolitano, which is unfortunate.

Fowler and Sprinkle did excellent investigations. I remember reading about Sprinkle (along with Linda Moulton Howe) investigating a woman who allegedly was taken aboard a craft and saw a cow being mutilated alive in some sort of machine that was removing certain body parts. [This was back in the 1970s] To write about such things required courage at the time.

IMO, Ray Fowler is the best all round ufo and abduction investigator. Concentrating on Massachusetts and some in New Hampshire he was able to methodically flesh out and revisit cases.

In one of his last books before retiring - UFO Testament- he put several cases in from decades earlier and they're absolutely fascinating with peculiar outlier experiences. He discussed earlier close encounter cases tgat he later came to suspect were probably 'abductions' but at the time he wasn't persuing memory losses (missing time) or the extreme PTSD as anything more than a side effect from a close ufo sighting.

Fowler also discussed facing his own memories that he'd suppressed for so many years and that of some family members (including a few born in the 19th century).

I could go on and on about how much Fowler's investigations and books are so fascinating. From his early 'straight' ufo sightings investigations to the Andreasson saga to the later books, which delved heavily into synchronicity. What an investigator and writer!

~ Susan

SteveW said...

Hi mike
This might be old news to you guys,but I recently came across the Paratopia show/podcast.

I think you should listen to episode 55 -

"Dr. Scott Lilienfeld is a professor of psychology at Emory University and editor of Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice. He is also co-author of 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology and a contributing blogger at Psychology Today."

I think it's a good thing you won't let yourself be hypnotized.I think you should consider asking Doc Lillenfield to do a conversation with you.
I'm not at all happy with the work of Mack Hopkins and Jacobs anymore.
If any of you guys are not familiar with Emma Woods then you should listen to 57,60,62 as well.

The hosts can be a bit abrasive,but they've had ufo/alien experiences themselves - they've become disillusioned with the ET hypothesis and they have their knives out for a few people,but there's some really great interviews in that list.

Anonymous said...

Hi SteveW,

Speaking only for me - Been there, done that. One of the hosts, on their original Paratopia Forum (the original forum was deleted by the other host during a temper tantrum) wrote to me that "Hypnosis is a crime against humanity" when he wasn't hurling ad hominems my way. This was around the time our fellow Americans were being beaten in the streets by police during the Occupy protests - which you'd think was truly a "crime against humanity".

The Paratopia hosts admit to eating magic mushrooms to induce hallucinations and one of the hosts is involved in the Krishnamurti cult so lots of that particular eastern philosophy was imbued into their writings and podcasts.

The hosts were completely accepting of Whitley Streiber and Travis Walton - not once questioning their claims. Yet, they had no problem personally attacking certain experiencers as well as abduction researchers and ancient ET writer Zecheria Sitchen (the two went on a filthy-worded rampage against him, when they knew - we all knew- he was dying). They did much the same thing with Budd Hopkins, providing his ex-wife Carol Rainy a forum to publish her attacks on her ex.

BTW, Lillienfeld does not think ufos or aliens (whether et/id/crypto) might exist. He was used as a tool for bashing hypnosis, to further the Paratopia agenda back then. [To be clear - I'm not a devotee of hypnosis and have never undergone it]

A gentleman who was treated horribly by the two Paratopia hosts, on their podcast and on their original forum, wrote and excellent essay about his experience with them. He was banned from their forum through no fault of his own. Make sure to read the comments as well.

~ Susan

SteveW said...

Hi Susan
Wow omg wtf etc!
Thank you so much for the link.Now I understand why their blogs and forums are patchy and lacking in content.They rip into the likes of sprinkle for channeling and others for new age one-ness but cannot see their own hypocrisy.
Dammit.I thought they were smart honest guys.
I should have been suspicious when they talked of conducting meaningful conversations on the AboveTopSecret forums - who the hell manages that in a place like ATS.

Mike Clelland! said...

Hello Steve W and Susan:

Well - I too was one of "those" persons. I was ripped into by Jeremy after appearing on the rival show THE PARACAST.

Their forums, fueled by Jeremy, went berserk. I was called a faker, a lier, a name-dropper, a wanna be, a glorified star fucker (Jeremy coined that one) and lot's more. It was was really mean.

I met Jeremy in person in NYC,and I got along with him well. I connected him with a series of guests for his show (Leo Sprinkle and Chris Knowles) and I even created the poster for his 2008 conference (for free).

I have hinted about my experience with Jeremy's over the top venom in this blog. I usually refer to it as a "shit-storm" and I never really wanted to dwell on it or write a post about it. When I entered this arena I knew full well it was a snake pit, and I feel no need to play their game.

Kim Carlsberg (a friend of mine) was on their show, and after she hung up, Jeff and Jer stayed on-line and made fun of her for admitting she had been raped during the interview.

I listened to them interview the guy who spoke about hypnosis, he was very one sided (fair enough) and he made some good points. Jeremy and Jeff were virulently ANTI-hypnosis as part of UFO abduction research (again, fair enough). I take a different view. I feel that hypnosis is a tool, and I would advocate it's use with caution. I have attempted hypnosis myself several times, and very little has emerged.

I knew Budd Hopkins pretty well, and I feel strongly that he wouldn't have used hypnosis if he sensed it was something inappropriate.

Peace and love to everyone,
Mike C

Suzanne said...

Richard Dolan- 1962

Anonymous said...

Hi Steve,

LOLing about Above Top Secret. One of the hosts is a buddy of sorts of the guy who runs ATS. They've had him on their podcast - of course a softball interview.

Funny thing is when the two Paratopia hosts post at ATS it's usually to go in as a tag team to lay the smack down on someone who they disagree with over something or who's critized them. And a thread war usually ensues. Such silliness!

[ excuse my wrazzlin' references, but my son got me hooked on it years ago!]
;-) ]

~ Susan

Anonymous said...

Mike, I had no idea you felt the wrath of the Paratopia hosts! I must of came to their forum after that time period because I don't recall the two of them going off on you. It's so hypocritical because they use to be on Paracast too!

Amazing about the "glorified star fucker" description - what does that even mean? You date one of the Kardashian sisters? Geesh....

That same host called me "fucking crazy" on one of his podcasts. I wasn't in the listening audience (which the hosts can see and often call out-in a friendly way to interact) as it was during the
'winter' storm of Oct. 2011, when power was out in much of the northeast. My area for 5 days.

For whatever reason that co-host remembered (and seethed over) a comment I'd made two weeks earlier in their podcast chat, questioning his philosophy of oneness. He answered me at the time and I thought that's the end of that. I didn't think anything of it and wouldn't have known the exchange bothered him until I was catching up on that interview I missed and came across him excoriating me, along with the swears of course.

I remember the Kim Carlsberg interview and they were indeed snippy to her and then went to town after she went off the air.
Yet we're to accept that one of them gets massages (ncluding his gums) from an unseen entity and the other receives visitations from Shroudman and a butterflywoman. If you question that,...oops - their forum or facebook guarddogs will attack.

There's alot of people those two have completely burned bridges with.

~ Susan

Red Pill Junkie said...

I never listened to that podcast. I have no beef with those 2, even though I criticized their acceptance of Hopkins's ex-wife and the article she wrote last year, where she used some of Budd's letters. I wrote that such action seemed illegal, since I doubted Budd had agreed on his letters to be published, least of all in an article that attacked him.

Having said that, I listened to a recent podcast with Rich Dolan, in which he had Jeff as a guest explaining his analysis of a very interesting UFO pic taken in Crete. I thought it was a good interview, and the guy was knowledgeable in such things.

And,to be frank, based on what I read of the person who provided a link to his blog above, I find that fractal theory interesting. As unscientific as it might be, even someone like Carl Sagan found the idea of Infinite Regression to be awe inspiring --dare I say, deeply spiritual ;)

Mike Clelland! said...

I was very impressed with the podcast where Jeff shared the "Shroud-man" and fractal stories.

I have a thing about PARATOPIA that I'll post at some point, maybe soon. It involves the number 123.

Mike C

Anonymous said...

Red Pill Junkie wrote: "And,to be frank, based on what I read of the person who provided a link to his blog above, I find that fractal theory interesting." - - -

We're two different people. I provided the link to the blogger John Ratcliff, who questioned the visitation of Shroudman and his/its fractal message (which is not a new idea) to the Paratopia host in question.

If you read John's blog you'll understand he was misrepresented and attacked on the Paratopia podcast; attacked & banned from their forum & facebook group and sent a legalize-type threatening letter.

~ Susan

Red Pill Junkie said...


I did read John's blog. I didn't like the way he was treated @ Paratopia, but neither did I agree with his flat-out rejection of the so-called Shroudman info.

People here know my take on channeled material. I question not only the intentions of the source, but also how unfiltered the end data might end up after passing through the channeler's filter.

But yes, I did realize the idea is not new. And since Cosmos had a huge influence in me --perhaps in Jeff as well?-- I was willing to entertain the notion.

To tell you the truth amigos, all this infighting is as disheartening as it is distracting.