Budd Hopkins has written [Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions]:
All of the evidence?
"Everything I have learned in twenty years of research into the UFO abduction phenomenon leads me to conclude that the aliens' central purpose is not to teach us about taking better care of the environment. Instead, all of the evidence points to their being here to carry out a complex breeding experiment in which they seem to be working to create a hybrid species, a mix of human and alien characteristics."
Memories induced by hypnosis?
I've written about the usefulness of hypnosis as an investigative technique before, particularly when it's done by self-taught amateurs (see: The Abduction Phenomenon and Hypnosis).
Here's the uncomfortable truth - the abductionologists, feted at UFO conference after UFO conference, are the problem, not the solution. It isn't little green / grey men from some other planet that are causing pain to the people "studied" by Hopkins et al - the pain, the damage, is being caused by the "investigators" themselves, feeding questions, and then answers, to people who may have real problems.
Disagree with me? That's your prerogative, of course, but before you start wailing, and crying "foul", do me one small favour - show me the hard evidence that supports the claims made by the abductionologists.
How about a photo? Let's start with that.
I mean, we have UFO photos - most fake, but some, like McMinnville, perhaps authentic - so why not photos of an abduction?
How about witnesses to an abduction - not hypnotically regressed ones, mind you, but independent witnesses who actually saw an abduction happen.
Where are they? I mean, we have myriad UFO cases with multiple independent witnesses.
Why not abductions?
Kevin Randle, Russ Estes and William Cone got it right in The Abduction Enigma when they wrote, at p. 359:
"Here's what it all comes down to. There is not a single shred of physical evidence that alien abductions areaking place other than the tainted testimony of the abductees. The physical evidence to support the claims is nonexistent. What has been offered as proof has been eliminated through testing by objective scientists or additional research by unbiased investigators. The scars, the missing fetus, or the implants do not carry the proper medical documentation to make a strong case, and in fact, suggest something else altogether."
I'll go further than Randle, Estes and Cone, who confined their critique to stating that the abductionologists had simply not proven their case. In my view, this has become an Alien Abduction Cult (of personality), aided and abetted by some in ufology who should know better. The abductionologists themselves are beyond irresponsible - they are dangerous, causing real pain and suffering to people who in at least some cases no doubt need real help.
Perhaps it's high time that the proper authorities take a closer look, not at "alien abductions", but rather at those who claim to be investigating them, because, with one or two notable and courageous exceptions like Kevin, "ufology" has proven itself wholly unwilling to confront the creators and purveyors of the Alien Abduction Cult.
Meanwhile, the ultimate irony for anomalists is that, should there really be a paranormal element to a few of these "abduction" cases, the Alien Abduction Cult has so muddied the waters with their bunk that it will be almost impossible to ever chart a different course.