Tonnies on the Abduction Phenomenon

Now this is interesting stuff from Mac Tonnies, as he speculates on the alien abduction phenomenon and its relationship to the ETH, and the possibility that the "abductors" are home-grown.

An excerpt:

"If we share our planet with indigenous humanoids -- and I think the case for terrestrial origin is at least as robust as the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis -- then it would certainly appear that we're numerically -- if not technically -- superior. The "others" would be forced to live at the periphery of normal human perception, perhaps utilizing techniques analogous to recent breakthroughs with brain-machine interfaces and "mind control."

I find it highly suspicious, for example, that so many encounters with apparent aliens involve exposure to chemicals and needles inserted into the victim's head. Sometimes close encounter witnesses are asked to drink noxious-tasting beverages prior to conversing with the "crew," or subjected to imagery that can be ascribed to psychedelic "conditioning." It would certainly seem that the aliens -- terrestrial or otherwise -- prefer to alter our perceptions prior to establishing contact. Given the selfish motives attributed to UFO occupants by researchers like Hopkins, the most coherent explanation for these techniques is that we're being compelled to participate without the luxury of trusting our senses.

Thus, even discounting the innumerable reports of "missing time," the abduction experience is consummately secretive -- an aspect that fails to concur with the popular image of dispassionate ET scientists (who, presumably, care as little about our earthly affairs as lab workers sympathize with their rats). The mere fact that the "extraterrestrials'" posthypnotic commands to forget the experience can be overridden with such surprising ease suggests we're dealing with something other than extrasolar aliens."

Intriguing stuff, as Mac continues his speculation relating to "Ultraterrestrials".

Still, as I noted in a comment I left at Mac's blog, anyone who wants to discuss any aspect of the abduction phenomenon should read The Abduction Enigma by Kevin Randle, William Cone and Russ Estes first. Kirkus Reviews had this to say about the book, which is rarely, if ever, mentioned by pro-abductionologists:

"A well-written anti-abduction perspective on alien encounters that systematically examines and refutes each argument used by abduction proponents. Although Randle (UFO Crash at Roswell), Estes (who has interviewed scores of people who claim to have been abducted by aliens), and psychologist Cone admit to having had alien encounters and other paranormal experiences, they conclude that every phenomenon they've investigated had a natural explanation. The authors first present the benign visitation accounts from the 1940s and '50s, which evolved into single-event abductions and later into multiple-abduction accounts. They even present the case of an abductee who claims to have come from a family of abductees. Throughout the book, the authors mention news accounts, science fiction books, and movies, part of the common culture, that can account for some of the parallels among various abductee reports. Abduction researchers, some with whole chapters devoted to them, are attacked for creating stories that fit together seamlessly. Not only are these researchers tending to report only the pieces that fit their theories, but they use techniques such as hypnosis and even "the leading question method'' to make the subject highly suggestible and induce memories. The book divides those who have encountered aliens into "contactees'' and "abductees.'' The former tell of getting a ride on the alien ship and perhaps a glimpse of the future. The latter tell of hybrid alien-human fetuses, bodily implants that appear and disappear, and the ubiquitous rectal probe. A whole chapter is devoted to the sexual components of abduction accounts, ranging from cold dispassionate reproductive experiments to sex-starved space travelers who seem to enjoy "sex for the sake of sex.'' These three self-proclaimed believers have actually debunked every paranormal abduction phenomenon with a well-reasoned terrestrial explanation."

As noted in the Kirkus review, the book deals with the sexual component, at pp. 91 -101.

Kevin and his co-authors note that the sexual component of the abduction enigma is often overlooked, ignored or given short-shrift by researchers - a notable exception being Bill Chalker's recent book, Hair of the Alien (at left is a drawing of one of the aliens who allegedly visited Peter Khoury, the subject of Chalker's book - she doesn't look very "alien", as in ET, to me). To Kevin et al, the sexual component is proof that abduction phenomenon is not ET related. They write:

"The sexual component of alien abduction has been vitrually ignored by abduction researchers. If they address it all, it is to deny that it exists. But exist it does, as seen by the simple expedient of reviewing the literature and acknowledging that there is a sexual component to it. And by acknowledging that, we take additional steps to understanding exactly what is happening to those thousands who claim to have been abducted. Once again, the scientific and objective evidence leads down a path that does not end with alien creatures. Instead, it leads us to common human problems that are ignored by the researchers." (p. 101)

Interestingly, both Mac and Kevin, Cone and Estes are in agreement that the sexual angle indicates that the abduction enigma is not an alien event. The difference comes with the conclusions (in Mac's case, more of a theory, to be fair) as to what this means the real answer is. For Kevin et al, the explanation is psychological - alien abductions are no different than the succubus legends (ahh... the good old days), and ar the result of the same psychological processes.

For Mac, it may be the work of ultraterrestrials here on Earth, a hidden race / species that we vastly outnumber, but who have us beat in the technology department.

The rationalist in me favours the explanation offered by Kevin and his co-authors, but, as I said, Mac's speculation is intriguing.

Paul Kimball