Is Supporting David Jacobs A Moral Question?

Joe Gooch has responded eloquently to David Jacobs’ self-destructive website dedicated to exonerating himself of unethical conduct in regards to former research subject “Emma Woods.”

Who is Joe Gooch? He’s an experiencer. He’s a human being. He’s not a talk show host. He’s not a researcher. He’s an observer of this fiasco, an outsider with no agenda. And watching him in the video below–watching how uncomfortable this man gets at speaking about the truly uncomfortable parts–the anger and despair boiling underneath the mature composure of his presentation reminds me why I care so much about this case: because in reality it is a simple moral question with a simple moral answer. It’s not about facts vs. other facts or spinning a story.

The David Jacobs case, as it should now rightly be referred, is about ethics and, beyond that, morals.

And so, anytime I see someone taking up for Dr. Jacobs who otherwise appears to be of sound intelligence, I don’t see a “We agree to disagree” situation, because there are not two sides. There’s right and there’s wrong. It is a black & white situation which reminds us that such still exist.

If you’re still taking up for David Jacobs, still think it’s a matter of disagreement or of critics attacking him, I believe there is something fundamentally wrong with you. There is no middle ground on this one. You’re the problem, too. Why that is, be it for money or a glitch in the brain or your upbringing, I cannot say. I just know there’s something magnetically off in your moral compass. Joe Gooch’s reactions here are real and they are normal and he’s holding back the way I don’t, so perhaps that’s more palatable than my evaluations. If so, give it a watch.

If you’re unfamiliar with the David Jacobs case, this is an excellent primer. If you’re familiar and feel nothing about it, or take Jacobs’ “side,” behold the basic human compassion you’re missing inside of you as exemplified here. That, because everything Joe is saying is factually accurate and it’s from David’s own website. All Joe is doing is listening, reading, explaining, and reacting with the normal amount of emotion such critiques provoke.



After 5 Years, David Jacobs Almost Leaves Me Speechless

“Just the fact that the first sentence is ‘In 1994 I worked with Allison, whose hybrids were forcing her into sexual services’ should disqualify him from having any tangible connection to reality or common sense.”

–Tim Binnall on David Jacobs’ entree “The Chastity Belt Session” from his website,

Above is the link to a page David Jacobs put out to answer some of the charges made by Emma Woods. It’s so thoroughly, awesomely a train wreck that I have no interest in picking it apart for fear that David or his lackey might read the critique and change it accordingly. Then again, he is such an obvious narcissist, probably not an issue.

I know many of you are going to ask me what I think of the site. My answer is, what do you think of it? We’re all reading the same thing, right?

Put it this way: OJ Simpson wrote a book called If I Did It. David Jacobs just released a website that might as well be called, I Did It.

If you want a proper and concise couple of critiques, check out what Jeff Ritzmann has to say here:

And Tyler Kokjohn’s impressions below.


“It is unethical and cowardly to hide in fear behind a research subject.  It is gut-wrenching to recognize his callous indifference to Emma’s situation as he ponders using a chastity belt to anger the abductors.  It is appalling to hear him act like some sort of therapist implanting hypnotic suggestions, not for his patient’s benefit, but to serve HIS needs. It is astonishing that he would basically confirm he contaminated subject testimony because a central tenet of his book is that we should believe what he tells us because it was independently arising information.

“So tell me–because I have trouble with this part–which aspect of any of this is consistent with the activity of only taking oral histories, the defense he used to escape Emma’s charges to Temple University?  David Jacobs has been caught in his own web of lies.”


Again, use your own common sense here. All David Jacobs has done is released longer versions of the hypnosis sessions Jeff and I thoroughly deconstructed years ago, as if to say, “See? I’m exonerated because I’m releasing these this time.”

That’s what delusional narcissists do.

It’s all out there now. And I’m sure Emma Woods will have her say and correct whatever lies and omissions she sees in Jacobs’ site. But really, it doesn’t matter. It’s nit picking and frankly, although Emma is the reason for this and the person he’s trying to keep the focus on, she’s no longer the center of it. To expand on one of Tyler’s points, you have a man in David Jacobs who goes on show after show, writes book after book, claiming that he does not contaminate his subjects with knowledge about hybrids/hubrids/aliens/or each other. And by his own transcripts we see and hear him doing the exact opposite. He is literally creating this Dungeons & Dragons story by blab-blab-blabbing to his subjects about each other and his fears and these hybrids… and then putting them under hypnosis and–like magic–retrieving the scripts of the stories he just told.

Again, he thinks this is his defense. He’s. Not. All. There. Folks.  He wants to make this about Emma, “diagnose” her with mental illness, and claim she took him out of context. You would have to be mentally deranged to buy it, defend it, and not want to get him help.

So again, here it all is for everyone to see. Five years later. Now, are you, the audience, going to put up with this? Even if ufology is just entertainment to you, do you let it go because “hubrids” makes you giggle? Remember that for every laugh you have at David Jacobs’ whacky theories there is quite possibly a human being whose mind he has altered through hypnosis to believe that whacky theory. According to him, there are people who believe they are being attacked and manipulated by hubrids. If so, it is because–by his own demonstration–they now have false memories of this courtesy of the man to whom they turned for help.

It’s not fun and games. Perhaps it’s a crime, we may never know. Certainly, it’s unethical and needs to be stopped.

Boycott this man’s “work” and that of his staunch defenders.

Please spread the message.

No more.

Quick Shoutout to The Paracast Listeners

Back The The Future

Congratulations, listeners of The Paracast! You did it! You dragged Gene Steinberg and that other guy into acknowledging the cases Jeff Ritzmann and I closed on hypnosis and David Jacobs back in 2010!

Gene ends his missive on alien abduction research in the Paracast yesterday’s-news-letter dated October 25, 2015 (which is tomorrow, ironically) on this hopeful note:

“Maybe it’s time to tear down the walls and view the evidence from a fresh perspective.”

Well, you’re all in luck, because while Gene was busily fighting against the change he now tepidly, perhaps begrudgingly, calls for, Jeff and I were hard at work with Paratopia and Project Core, creating the very conversation you’re having now and then moving beyond it. So, if you’d like to see what the future holds for The Paracast’s epic inquiries, why wait? Dive into Paratopia’s past! We’ve got so many episodes of post-Jacobs, post-hypnosis, post-abduction-research conversations all lined up for binge-listening that it will take years of listening to The Paracast one week at a time to get there. And that’s assuming Gene and whichever co-host are even capable of holding the kinds of deep conversations they are baby-stepping toward now.

What do 2016 and 2017 hold for The Paracast’s fresh perspective? No spoilers but … let’s just say there are some big revelations coming regarding Budd Hopkins’ work, too. I, for one, cannot wait for Gene and that other guy to figure out the Linda Cortile Case. And I don’t have to. The answers are all here:


And if you’d like to see what an authentic scientific survey of all things paranormal looks like, well that’s free! And it comes to you courtesy of 2014! Perhaps Gene and what’s-his-name will do their revolutionary version of our survey in 2019. But again, why wait? The future is… a few years ago.




Oh, PS: I see where Gene is now claiming that there is some audio prior to the infamous Emma Woods multiple personality disorder audio clip that, should Jacobs release it, might exonerate him. This is nonsense. I have heard all of the audio recordings and read the follow-up emails between Emma and the good doctor. Probably what he’s talking about is the fact that before the session, Jacobs was talking to her about this in a jokey way so that she thought he was… you know… kidding. And then he put her under and implanted the suggestion.

If his defense is that she agreed to let him tell her under hypnosis that he believes she and all abductees have MPD because alien hybrids–excuse me, hubrids–will read that when they read her mind and leave him alone? Then he is nuts. Even by his own loony logic it couldn’t work, because if she doesn’t believe what he’s implanted in her then neither will mind readers. (Let’s not even get into the intergalactic cowardice of an alleged researcher throwing his subject under the alien bus to save himself.)

As to the question of her recording him illegally, he gave her copies of his recordings of the hypnosis sessions. And he knew she recorded their phone calls as he clearly states during their phone calls. But let’s suppose she did record him without his knowledge. And now let’s put that horrible crime up against David Jacobs offering in all seriousness to buy her a chastity belt with nails at the vaginal opening that he said might slow down the brutal, raping hubrids… but also might not. And if not, would at least anger them. Anger the raping, violent terrorists from space… was his recommendation to a woman seeking his help…  from the raping, violent terrorists from space… who didn’t exist until he yammered on about his other subjects and their alleged hubrid experiences and then hypnotized her.

What are we arguing about again? Christ, is this thing on?!–The man implanted raping alien hubrid memories in his subject and then tried to buy her sex toys to ward them off or piss them off!  As with Bill Cosby, you have to hate women to defend David Jacobs.

The Emma Woods case is a no-brainer and I fully expect Gene to get this and bring the big revelation to his listeners sometime in mid-2021. Then again, maybe not. The Paracast isn’t the “gold standard” of anything and Gene is not, in my opinion, a sharp thinker in this field. It’s just that so many other people are even duller thinkers than he, it makes him look all shiny and sharp. It’s the old joke about a cracker tasting like a 5-star meal to a starving person.

Gene is, if nothing else, a cracker.