Hopkins has also detailed several other previously unnoticed abduction patterns, such as:
1. Alien cooption, the “taking over” of a human to function in an abduction as if he/she was an ally of the aliens, not the other abducted humans.
2. The “Mickey-Baby Ann” phenomenon, in which aliens occasionally abduct children who do not know one another, putting them together from time to time to “bond,” as if the aliens are studying the formation of human romantic relationships. Many such cases have since been reported.
Hopkins lectures widely around the world on his research findings, and—as founder and director of The Intruders Foundation—continues to lead the way in the field of UFOabduction research.
Address:
P.O. Box 30233
New York, N.Y. 10011
U.S.A.
E-mail:
[email protected]
Web site:
www.spacelab.net
Hudson Valley (New York) UFO sightings Spectacular sightings of a triangular or boomerang-shaped UFO that has seemingly haunted the Hudson River Valley (along the border of New York and Connecticut) from 1983 to the present day.
The Hudson Valley of New York is located about thirty miles north of New York City and is one of the most densely populated areas in the country. This area of New York is rich in legend, and tales of unusual happenings date back to colonial times. The home of the infamous headless horseman from Washington Irving’s The Legend of Sleepy Hollow is located in the heart of Hudson Valley. Now, many residents of southern New York report encounters of a different kind—sightings of a giant UFO that they say is not of this Earth.
Artist’s conception of the Hudson Valley UFO
During the evening of March 23, 1983, thousands of people from all walks of life reported that they had seen an object larger than a football field pass over the highways and their homes. Bewildered witnesses said they saw an object that was solid in structure and made up of very dark gray materials. The UFO was described as having rows of multicolored lights attached to a triangular shape, as it moved slowly across the night sky. The sightings continued on a regular basis, and in 1984, at 10:20 P.M., the object was videotaped in Brewster, New York. At this time also the UFO was witnessed by thousands, as it silently drifted over five counties of New York and Connecticut.
Shortly after the object was videotaped, the giant UFO was reported hovering over the Indian Point Nuclear Reactor located on the shore of the Hudson River near Peekskill, New York, at 10:30 P.M. The object was witnessed by State Police and twelve New York State Power Authority Police officers. They reported that the UFO hovered three-hundred feet over reactor Number Three for fifteen minutes. They said it was triangular in shape with a network of grids underneath and was the size of three football fields. The object then slowly moved across the Hudson River to Rockland County, where hundreds of residents and police officers saw it. Later, a spokesman from the Indian Point Reactor Complex confirmed the sightings, but insisted that the object in no way affected plant operations. This was the first time a UFO was officially confirmed as being over or near a nuclear reactor.
One of the official explanations for the sightings made by the FAA and the Air Force was that the UFO was nothing more than a group of prankster pilots flying in close formation. The video tape of the UFO was analyzed twice by imaging scientists at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. Their conclusions were that the lights on the video tape were not individual objects, but rather one large object. The scientists were unable to identify the UFO, however, as a conventional aircraft; and so it remains a genuine “unknown” to this day.
Although much of the UFO activity has died down during the late nineties, many people in the area claim to have close encounters with an alien intelligence that they feel is the intelligence from the UFO. Where the UFO comes from remains a mystery, and without a doubt generations from now it will become part of the area’s local folklore.
As one witness (an IBM executive) said in an interview: “This thing was a city in the sky, it was not from this world and airplanes it was not!”
—PHILIP J. IMBROGNO
NOTE: For more information, see the author’s books: Contact of the Fifth Kind (Llewellyn, 1997) and Night Siege: The Hudson Valley UFO Sightings (Llewellyn, 1998, second edition, expanded and revised).
Humanoids, The (Henry Regnery, 1969). Edited by Charles Bowen. Eleven essayists survey more than 300 reports of spacecraft landing and disgorging alien occupants. These occupants are of every imaginable shape, size, and color—from giants over eight feet tall to tiny dwarfs—leading Bowen, the former editor of Britain’s Flying Saucer Review magazine, to conclude that “UFOs and their occupants are in the eyes of the beholder.”
—RANDALL FITZGERALD
Hynek, J. Allen (1910-1986). Dubbed “The Galileo of UFOlogy” by Newsweek magazine (November 1977), Dr. J. Allen Hynek was considered by his colleagues to be the preeminent authority on UFO phenomena. Hynek became involved with UFOs as Scientific Consultant to the U.S. Air Force from 1948 to 1968. He was the first speaker to present testimony at the 1968 hearing on UFOs held by the House Committee on Science and Astronautics and later appeared before the United Nations to support the proposed establishment of an agency to conduct and coordinate research into UFOs and related phenomena.
In the early 1970s, Hynek coined the phrase “close encounters of the third kind,” and acted as technical advisor to director Steven Spielberg on the movie of the same name. Hynek founded CUFOS (the Center for UFO Studies) in 1973 and served as its director until his death in 1986.
For more than twenty years Dr. Hynek served as astronomical consultant to the U. S. Air Force Projects Sign and Blue Book, which processed and studied UFO sightings reported to Air Force bases. He came to Northwestern University in 1960 from his position as associate director of the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory in Cambridge, Massachusetts, where he was in charge of the U. S. Optical Satellite Tracking Program. He was responsible for the precise tracking of man’s first artificial satellite, as well as for some 270 volunteer “Moonwatch” stations in various countries.
A native of Chicago, Hynek has had many illustrious posts in his scientific career. After receiving his doctorate in astronomy from the University of Chicago, he was, in turn: professor of astronomy and director of the McMillin Observatory at Ohio State University; supervisor of technical reports at the Applied Physics Laboratory of the Johns Hopkins University during World War II; assistant dean of the Graduate School at Ohio State and professor of astronomy after the war; and lecturer in astronomy at Harvard during the four years he was associate director of the Smithsonian’s Observatory in Cambridge; after which he joined Northwestern University as chairman of the Department of Astronomy and director of the Dearborn Observatory, posts he held for fifteen years. During his tenure he was instrumental in the founding of the Lindheimer Astronomical Research Center and served as its first director.
J. Allen Hynek
Dr. Hynek has published numerous technical papers in astrophysics and is the author of several textbooks. He is also the author of The UFO Experience: A Scientific Inquiry (1972), The Hynek Report of UFOs (1977), and coauthor (with Jacques Vallée) of The Edge of Reality (1975).
POSITION STATEMENT: In an interview for Fate magazine (June 1976 issue), Hynek stated his position on the UFO problem as follows:
The conclusion I’ve come to after all these years is that first of all, the subject is much more complex than any of us imagined. It has paranormal aspects but certainly it has very real physical aspects, too. The attitude we’re taking in the Center for UFO Studies is that since we’re going to have scientists involved, we will push the physical approach as hard and far as we can—instrumentation, physical evidence, photographs, radar records. If we are finally forced by the evidence itself to go into the paranormal, then we will.
And in another interview, he expressed these views (from Lumières dans la Nuit, issue N
o. 168 of October 1977):
[The extraterrestrial] theory runs up against a very big difficulty, namely, that we are seeing too many UFOs. The Earth is only a spot of dust in the Universe. Why should it be honored with so many visits?
INTERVIEWER: Then what is your hypothesis?
HYNEK: I am more inclined to think in terms of something metaterrestrial, a sort of parallel reality.
INTERVIEWER: And what then is your personal conviction?
HYNEK: I have the impression that the UFOs are announcing a change that is coming soon in our scientific paradigms. I am very much afraid that UFOs are related to certain psychic phenomena. And if I say “I am very much afraid,” this is because in our Center at Evanston we are trying to study this problem from the angle of the physical sciences.
…But it would be absurd to follow up only one path to the exclusion of all others.
This theory was repeated again, when Hynek was interviewed by Newsweek: “UFO’s, he says, may be psychic phenomena and the ‘aliens’ may not come from outer space but from a ‘parallel reality’.” (November 21, 1977)
In yet another interview (for the April 3, 1978 issue of Today’s Student), Hynek added that:
Certainly the phenomenon has psychic aspects. I don’t talk about them very much because to a general audience the words “psychic” and “occult” have bad overtones. They say, “Aw, it’s all crazy.” But the fact is that there are psychic things; for instance, UFOs seem to materialize and dematerialize. There are people who’ve had UFO experiences who’ve claimed to have developed psychic ability. There have been reported cases of hearings in close encounters and there have been reported cases of precognition, where people had foreknowledge or forewarning that they were going to see something. There has been a change of outlook, a change of philosophy of persons’ lives. Now, you see, those are rather tricky things to talk about openly, but it’s there.
Many people, like Jacques Vallée and I, to some extent, feel that it might be a conditioning process.
Hynek UFO Report, The book (Dell, 1977). Dr. J. Allen Hynek concludes in this book that whatever UFOs are, they want to play games with us and lead us on a confusing chase. He also demonstrates from his own experiences as a consultant to the Air Force’s Project Blue Book that the U.S. Air Force intentionally deceived and lied to the American public about its UFO investigations.
—RANDALL FITZGERALD
hypnosis, use of, in UFO investigations Hypnosis has often been discussed and used as one tool available to the UFO investigator, as well as to the criminal investigator and, of course, the psychological therapist. The history of hypnosis is characterized by trends from physical to physiological to psychological explanations of hypnotic phenomena. Although many theories about the nature of hypnosis have been advanced, no one theory has been accepted by all theorists. Despite many differences in theoretical positions, most researchers describe hypnosis in terms of psychological processes which are related to interpersonal situations and to personal abilities of participants.
Good hypnotic subjects are described as persons who (1) can respond to suggestions for deep relaxation, (2) have vivid imaginations, (3) are able to minimize temporarily their awareness of “external” reality and, (4) can maximize temporarily an alternate or “internal” reality. These persons can learn to alter their perceptions of “pain,” “time,” “memory,” etc. Autohypnosis, or self-hypnosis, seems to be the primary experience, with assistance from a guide or teacher as a possible facilitator in the process. There seems to be no danger inherent in the use of hypnotic processes, but there may be a risk in accepting and following suggestions from an inexperienced or poorly trained hypnotist.
Experimental studies have yielded results which cast doubt on the view that hypnotic timeregression (age regression) procedures can cause a participant to “relive” the experiences of earlier events. On the other hand, these studies have shown that many individuals have the potential to use hypnotic suggestions to increase their recall of “forgotten” memories.
Along with other controversies about the UFO problem, there are disagreements among UFO investigators about the value of hypnotic timeregression procedures in the investigation of UFO experiences. Despite the difficulties in evaluating information which is obtained during hypnotic sessions, most investigators agree that hypnotic procedures may be useful in exploring the available testimony of UFO witnesses.
A list of possible uses of hypnotic procedures in UFO investigations could include the following activities:
1. Assisting UFO witnesses to relax deeply and to reduce any anxiety which may be associated with their UFO experiences.
2. Instructing UFO witnesses to elicit ideomotor responses (by use of the pendulum technique or through finger-and-thumb responses) for communication with the “subconscious mind,” or subconscious processes.
3. Encouraging UFO witnesses to release any repressed memory about an amnesic period, or “loss of time” experience during a UFO sighting, including possible memories of apparent abduction, examination, and/ or experimentation by UFO occupants.
4. Checking the consistency of conscious and subconscious information from the UFO witnesses, and comparing these claims with information about the backgrounds of witnesses and other information about their UFO experiences.
5. Training interested persons to obtain possible “psychic impressions,” e.g., clairvoyant impressions of UFO occupants, telepathic communications with UFO occupants, and precognitive impressions or impressions of future events.
The information that has been obtained from hypnotic sessions with participants who claim UFO experiences, including abduction and communication with UFO occupants, is tentative and inconclusive. At present, there seem to be five general hypotheses to account for these reports:
1. UFO witnesses are lying. Evidence to support this hypothesis might be obtained by conducting background investigations and polygraph examinations.
2. UFO witnesses are experiencing neurotic or psychotic reactions. Evidence for this hypothesis might be obtained by conducting psychiatric evaluations.
3. UFO witnesses are submitting information which stems from fantasies or daydreams. Evidence for this hypothesis might be obtained from psychological evaluation of the witnesses, and from comparisons of their experiences with other information about UFO reports.
4. UFO witnesses are submitting information which is desired by the UFO investigator. Evidence for this hypothesis can be obtained by employing consultants in hypnosis who do not share the same biases about the significance and meaning of UFO experiences.
5. UFO witnesses are submitting reliable and/or valid information Evidence for this hypothesis can be obtained by comparing the testimony of UFO witnesses with the pattern of evidence obtained from other UFO investigations.
In conclusion, hypnotic procedures offer a method for exploring some of the puzzling areas of UFO phenomena. Hypnotic techniques can be used for a variety of tasks, depending upon the needs and the interests of UFO witnesses, UFO investigators, and consultants in hypnosis. Despite the difficulties of evaluating information obtained from hypnotic procedures, the experienced UFO investigator should encourage the UFO witness to consider possible participation in hypnotic sessions for further investigation of his or her UFO experience.
—R.LEO SPRINKLE
ANOTHER VIEW: In France in the 1770s, when Mesmerism was in its heyday, the king appointed two commissions to investigate Mesmer’s activities. The commissions included such eminent men as Benjamin Franklin, Lavoisier, and Jean-Sylvain Bailly, the French astronomer. After months of study the report of the commissioners concluded that it was imagination, not magnetism, that accounted for the swooning, trancelike rigidity of Mesmer’s subjects. Surprisingly enough, this conclusion is still closer to the truth about hypnosis than most of the modern definitions found in today’s textbooks.
So-called authorities still disagree about “hypnosis.” But whether it is or is not a “state,” there
is common and widespread agreement among all the major disputants that “hypnosis” is a situation in which people set aside critical judgment (without abandoning it entirely) and engage in make-believe and fantasy; that is, they use their imagination (Sarbin and Andersen, 1967; Barber, 1969; Gill and Brenman, 1959; Hilgard, 1977).
Josephine Hilgard (1979) refers to hypnosis as “imaginative involvement,” Sarbin and Coe (1972) term it “believed-in imaginings,” Spanos and Barber (1974) call it “involvement in suggestion-related imaginings,” and Sutcliffe (1961) has gone so far as to characterize the hypnotizable individual as someone who is “deluded in a descriptive, nonpejorative sense” and he sees the hypnotic situation as an arena in which people who are skilled at make-believe and fantasy are provided with the opportunity and the means to do what they enjoy doing and what they are able to do especially well. Even more recently Perry, Laurence, Nadon, and Labelle (1986) concluded that “abilities such as imagery/imagination, absorption, disassociation, and selective attention underlie high hypnotic responsivity in yet undetermined combinations.” The same authors, in another context dealing with past-lives regression, also concluded that “it should be expected that any material provided in age regression (which is at the basis of reports of reincarnation) may be fact or fantasy, and it is most likely an admixture of both.” The authors further report that such regression material is colored by issues of confabulation, memory creation, inadvertent cueing, and the regressee’s current psychological needs.
CONFABULATION
Because of its universality, it is quite surprising that the phenomenon of confabulation is not better known. Confabulation, or the tendency of ordinary, sane individuals to confuse fact with fiction and to report fantasized events as actual occurrences, has surfaced in just about every situation in which a person has attempted to remember very specific details from the past. A classical and amusing example occurs in the movie Gigi, in the scene where Maurice Chevalier and Hermione Gingold compare memories of their courtship in the song “I Remember It Well.” We remember things not the way they really were but the way we would have liked them to have been.
The Mammoth Encyclopedia of Extraterrestrial Encounters Page 47
