You Can Do Better: Break a Ufology Futile Cycle

You Can Do Better: 
Break a Ufology Futile Cycle

by Guest Blogger,

Tyler Kokjohn, Ph.D.

Futile cycleThe host of a radio program covering paranormal topics recently published a newsletter discussing a wide mix of interesting ideas.  One theme will seem familiar because it has been a core complaint for years; mainstream press coverage does not do justice to paranormal topics such as UFOs.  It is about entertainment, trivialization, deliberate misrepresentations, hidden agenda and etc.

The behavior of the mainstream media can be infuriating and outraged stories of journalistic misdeeds play well.  However, this action-reaction process has become so habitual that we may be overlooking something; these complaints are now classic tales of victimization being told over and over again through the years.

After decades of mistreatment by the news media, what facts do we have about its impact?  It certainly seems logical that derisive coverage must hurt ufology by discouraging others to come forward with their experiences.  However, media exposure confirms others have seen or experienced the inexplicable.  Perhaps press coverage creates a social validation that induces people to seek out UFO organizations or encourages them to talk openly about their experiences.  Maybe media exposure actually facilitates interest and unintentionally drives UFO phenomena dynamics.

Unfortunately, ufology has short-circuited the critical thinking processes essential for informed debate because the arguments begin and end at the complaint stage.  Investigators and opinion leaders fail to recognize the research opportunity in front of them and the potential importance of the findings.  However, they have only had about 7 decades to do something productive.

Do your own study and investigate the hypothesis that mainstream media coverage influences UFO experiencers.  Is the impact positive or negative?  Does it influence the dynamics of the event itself?  Ask yourself and acquaintances with an interest in the topic how news stories developed or suppressed their interest in UFOs.  Discover for yourself how mainstream news media coverage influences UFO phenomena dynamics.

Imagine the implications.  Say your information suggests news media coverage discourages others from revealing their experiences.  Visualize being interviewed by the media pundits and turning the tables with a question or two of your own.  How do you justify broadcasting reports that suppress an interesting news story?  How does that serve the public interest?  Perhaps your inquiries will suggest that media attention generally increases follow-on reports.  Then you have learned something important about process dynamics.  The key point is that by taking matters into your own hands you gain a firmer, data-based understanding of the impacts news media reporting exert on UFO phenomena and the public perception of them.

It is often quipped that knowledge is power.  It is also damn good leverage in a debate.  What percentage of the general public believes UFOs might represent more than misidentified aerial phenomena?  What percentage of scientists feel intelligent life is or has been present in our galaxy?  Now do this math – if they are a contemptible joke why do news media report on UFOs at all?  People find UFOs interesting and journalists who belittle experiencers and interfere with serious investigations of events are skating on thin ice.  Get the data to sink them.

Break this futile cycle of victimization.  Empower yourself to improve our understanding of the phenomena and epi-phenomena of UFOs and the paranormal.  You can do a better job than the so-called leaders of ufology.



Is Answering David Jacobs Worth The Effort?

running from hybrids

Artwork Courtesy of John Randall

Once again David M. Jacobs has released his final word on the Emma Woods allegations. Her allegations have stayed consistent for the last what? 9 years? Yet his answers keep evolving. So now we’ve got the FINAL final FINAL word, which he will inevitably edit once she again shows him to be a con artist.

Or is he mentally ill?

Or is it both?

Or does it matter?

Here’s my question: We all know it’s one of the two, right? Sane people can’t take him seriously when he says, “I know this is going to sound crazy, but….” and then launches into an explanation of how he put a number of subjects under hypnosis and told them they had multiple personality disorder, which is what he’s studying, so that alien/human hybrids would read their minds and leave him alone. No, it doesn’t sound crazy, it sounds like bullshit–but it may actually be crazy, if he believes it.

Add to that his further defense that they’re laughing about it as he’s saying it so it’s all okay. Apparently we’re to overlook the lack of internal logic to his story–that alien psychics will read his subjects’ minds and take seriously that he is a multiple personality researcher. The problems with the story–and with what he is actually doing–don’t end there, they begin.

Sane people get that, right?

And when he defends using hypnosis over the phone because other credible hypnotists do it–we all get that no credible hypnotist uses hypnosis for memory retrieval anymore, yes? I mean, do we even need to argue over phone hypnosis when those same credible researchers he’s invoking would never use it for memory retrieval, over the phone or otherwise?

So, his method is an abuse of science, an abuse of subjects, an abuse of power, an abuse of his (now former) trusted title of college professor. Need we revisit the particulars of his evolving excuses in this one woman’s case when these are the facts?

Need we keep reminding interested observers that when he says his friend(s) with psych degrees have diagnosed her as having an obsessive personality disorder that 1.) it’s impossible to diagnose someone you haven’t met and 2.) if they are friends, they’re likely listening to him whine and then saying, “Yeah, David. She sounds obsessive” the way supportive friends would, psych degree or not? But that was almost a decade ago. I wonder what they would say now having heard the audio of not only their hypnosis sessions but their “break up” phone calls  as well. I am certain that anyone with a degree in psychology would–as any regular friend might–recommend he get serious help after hearing him in that context.

David Jacobs is either a con man or mentally disturbed or both. What he is doing is fraud. Talking about his subjects’ cases with each other and then putting them under hypnosis to find out what “really” happened during missing time… or putting them under first, then talking about his other cases, and then retrieving the missing “memory”… is so self-evident that I need not finish this sentence to explain where I’m going with this. But, see, David Jacobs does. He prefaces it with “I know this may sound crazy, but…” and then says not things that sound crazy but things that are. Does he know the difference? Does it matter so long as we know the difference?

I’m done with this. But Emma Woods will probably answer all of the new, completely made-up nonsense Jacobs has released. My question, again, is… need she bother? If you would, kindly answer whether Emma, I, or anyone else need bother answering David M. Jacobs’ final/evolving answers heading into the year 2021.








Project Oculus: Paranormal Windows

Earlier this week on The Experience, Jeff Ritzmann announced a new experiment that we can all partake in to see if we can’t catalog paranormal activity as it happens in his and other experiencers’ homes. He calls it Project Oculus. You can learn more in the video below and by listening to The Experience. (I have given away this week’s show with Jeff and last week’s solo show in their entirety for free to nonsubscribers. You can stream or download them at the link above.) Those are the most entertaining ways to understand the project, but the most direct and most important is to go to Jeff’s GoFundMe page, look it over, and if it sounds like the much-needed shot in the arm of research I believe it is, fund it.

I know that in recent years (and months and days) a number of phonies in ufology have made a mockery out of GoFundMe campaigns–begging for money as if it’s an earned wage. They give you nothing in return. They just… you know… want your money. That is not what this is. This is a real experiment he is really going to do that will yield real results, whatever those may be. Not the promise of something, the delivery of something. And that something may end up being crickets–but they’ll be honest crickets–and even paranormal radio silence yields us a clue.

So let us put on our paranormal detective hats and go all in. Let’s go fund Project Oculus.