Friday, May 10, 2013

a series of articles on Dr. John Mack

John Mack and Budd Hopkins from a decade ago.

1) A surprisingly even-keeled article on Dr. John Mack and the alien abduction phenomenon in Vanity Fair. (thanks RPJ!)


2) Here is a collection of audio clips and links to a series of other excellent resources on John Mack and his research as well as the the witch hunt at Harvard. (linked HERE). 

3) Dr. John Mack on the transformation of human consciousness (linked HERE).

4) Dr. John Mack and several of his very heartfelt patients on Oprah (below).

the first of a series of youtube clips


Kandinsky said...

Thanks Mike and RPJ, I've been waiting for that article to be published for weeks; they've been promoting it on Mack's site for ages.

It's good to see Robert Redford's involvement in the production of the planned movie. I guess when I first read the movie plans, I expected a low-budget, cheap-feel bio like you get on the worst cable channels. Something that would cheapen the memory rather than ensure the legacy.

The article's a classy piece and doesn't take a position beyond reporting the life of Mack. It's usually typical within ufological topics that folk have to stand on a clear platform and represent a recognisable position. Here we have a writer from 'outside' and they show how it really should be done.

For example, I don't accept the Napolitano story and I do accept the Hills. It's for readers to go and read up and draw their own conclusions rather than for the writer to 'tell' them what to believe.

Anonymous said...

Off topic, but possibly of interest to people who follow this blog: The "Luminosity" blog seems to be back up again in a new incarnation by the same author:

Will Bueche said...

I'm the same way with the Napolitano story - I'd rather it not be mentioned in an article about Mack, since Napolitano was Budd's big downfall, not Mack's - but I felt the article as a whole was a tasty "sampler dish" for people interested in what the alien encounter scene of the 1990s were all about (the 90s being the pinnacle of the alien encounter investigation process after the big revelations of the late 1980s). I know the author of the Vanity Fair piece wants to write a full book, and that is something this article really has be looking forward to.

Mike Clelland! said...

I am less critical of the Napolitano case. I know several people who were working closely with Budd when that case emerged. One friend was there when Linda first walked thru the door to see Budd. Their take on this (and I trust them) is that *something* happened. There were multiple witnesses and it all didn't just come from Linda. Plus her son and husband spoke about their experiences.

My concern is that there are certain things related to governmental agencies. This immediately makes me think that *some* parts of the story might have been planted (and not by Linda).

Mike C

Red Pill Junkie said...

You're welcome. It was our friend Robbie Graham, of Silver Screen Saucers, the one who pointed me out to the VF article :)

happytobe said...

Why is the VF article "surprisingly even-keeled"?

I think the answer may have something to do with good intentions behind the efforts to produce a film about John Mack and the alien abduction phenomenon.

MakeMagic Productions (referenced in the VF article) negotiated four years to obtain the rights to John's story (see Home Page on the link provided at item "2)" of Mike's posting). You can be certain that Sally Mack insisted the film be true to her husband's work.

The VF article is connected to the film production effort, in my view.
Robert Redford is not going to put up the money to make this film. He is a name to attract investors (my speculation), and the VF article is a part of that effort.

Even with a great screenplay, I'm not sure the banks would finance this film. I think Redford and MakeMagic are looking for private investors who believe in the project and won't back down.

Mel Gibson wanted to make a film about the corrupt banking system, but the studio told him they needed the banks to finance their other films. In the same way, I'm not sure the banks would finance a film that pokes big-fat holes in the current paradigm.

FYI, I consulted with MakeMagic Productions last year on a project.

Lucretia Heart said...

Thanks for all these links, Mike! I have seen many of them before-- often when they first came out! But reviewing them again years later is useful in this unexpected way...

I know Linda personally, and I have to agree with your take, Mike. She's not a mastermind of deception by any means, and was a lifeline to me when I could barely hold on to things. She's definitely an abductee-- my husband witnessed things in person as well regarding her and her family that answer that question definitively for him as well.

I think Budd was totally set up to fall using Linda-- but this was done against her will or knowledge. This doesn't mean Linda's motives should be called into question, but rather the other quasi-intelligence agencies that were putting forth so much effort to discredit Budd just as he was starting to be taken much more seriously by a broader audience.