"Abductions" DO NOT exist :scientists should fight this crap,like Carl Sagan did

Etherman etherman at mdc.net
Thu Apr 23 17:03:55 EST 1998

Love Lies Squealing wrote in message <35412108.15460428 at news.demon.co.uk>...
>On Mon, 20 Apr 1998 19:53:21 -0400, "Etherman" <etherman at mdc.net> wrote:
>>Again, Mr. Pongpa, please provide evidence that the "abduction"
>>phenomena is purely psychological.  How long will my requests
>>to pseudoskeptics be ignored?
>For as long as it takes for the rosy dawn of realisation that people have
>been seeing little faces in dream-like states for quite a few years now.
>Check your copy of the Malleus Maleficarum for a rough overview of things
>a mere five centuries ago (300 years before McDonalds!)

Sure, people have been seeing lots of things for different reasons.
it's because what they see is really there.

>Now, if you're interested in the root cause of 'abductions' start taking a
>really good look at what is peddled out there as truth.  Start with
>foot-doctors and Ceto.

What evidence do you have that the root cause of abductions is related
to media representations of abductions?

>>The problem is that Sagan himself didn't have any reasonable theory
>>about abductions.  It's difficult to educate the public when you're
>>as in the dark as they are.
>Actually he came up with one single interesting item that should be at the
>forefront of anyones investigations into these things;
>Succubi and Incubi.

That's not a theory.  I completely agree that similarities exist.  Not
just with succubi and incubi, but with faeries, angels, demons, etc.
Instead we have the obvious question.  What are succubi and incubi
caused by?


The Internet's sole purpose is to get porn and
bomb making plans into the hands of children.

etherman at mdc.net

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list