Unhelpful Hints: Deflection And Withholding Evidence In The David Jacobs Scandal

Unhelpful Hints:
Deflection And Withholding Evidence In The David Jacobs Scandal

by Guest Blogger,
Tyler A. Kokjohn, Ph. D.

Have You Seen Me Lately?

David Jacobs: MUFON’s 2015 Lifetime Achievement Award Winner

Dr. David Jacobs has been accused of serious wrongdoing involving a former research subject known as Emma Woods.  Some persons have deflected the charges by communicating there are additional factors to consider or they possess information confirming Dr. Jacobs is reliable and trustworthy.  Are these simply opinions regarding the personal attributes of Dr. Jacobs or is it possible that information now apparently limited to a select few persons could dispel the longstanding and specific allegations against him?

Recent sad experiences with Ata the “extraterrestrial” and the Roswell slides remind us initial appearances may be deceiving and to base our conclusions on the complete body of evidence.  If objective facts and rationales absolving Dr. Jacobs of allegations of misconduct against Emma Woods are known it is an extreme disservice to withhold them.  Hinting that such evidence exists is not sufficient and only serves to prolong an already protracted dispute.

Since it is difficult understand how the disturbing allegations against Dr. Jacobs could be effectively countered, it is essential that information be detailed in full and explained completely.  To document her charges Emma Woods published extensive audio recordings of her hypnosis sessions with Dr. Jacobs  (http://ufoalienabductee.com).  Demonstrating she altered these recordings to create false impressions would have immediately cast serious doubt on her version of events.  However, no evidence of tampering has been produced leaving us in a situation where the body of available evidence places Dr. Jacobs in an unfavorable light.  Justifying his own words and deeds appears to present a substantial challenge.

Participation in research programs may sometimes involve risks.  Accordingly, investigators are obligated to respect subject autonomy by providing prospective participants with information regarding the full purposes of the research and any foreseeable hazards before anyone agrees to participate.  In addition, researchers adhere to a general guiding principle of beneficence by preventing any harm to their subjects and ensuring their wellbeing through acting with forethought to maximize benefit and reduce risks (http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/belmont.html).

Dr. Jacobs discussed with Emma Woods the idea of acquiring a chastity belt to frustrate the alien hybrids she reported were terrorizing her.  It is difficult to reconcile this strange banter with either the practices of a rigorous scientific investigation or the core principles of informed consent and beneficence.  First, Dr. Jacobs’s chastity belt discussion plainly served no scientifically valid purposes.  Further, if Emma Woods had followed through with using a chastity belt, the reasonably foreseeable event would have been a vastly increased threat of immediate and direct physical retaliation against her.

Exposing the subject to increased risk without benefit is unethical. It is important to bear in mind that Dr. Jacobs had revealed his personal fears these hybrids terrorizing Emma would find him.  In light of that admission, any discussion that might increase Emma’s anguish and fears would have been scientifically unjustified, ludicrous and utterly callous.  Limited to communicating with Emma by telephone and physically located thousands of miles away from her, it is hard to imagine what protective measures Dr. Jacobs had in place if either his continued investigations or deliberately calculated provocations succeeding in further angering the aliens already reportedly assaulting Emma.

Emma Woods UFO Mag Cover

Emma Woods’ case against Jacobs gets UFO Mag cover story and then buried by his ufological friends/alleged researchers.

Whatever underlying purposes the chastity belt discussion served, the best interests and wellbeing of Emma Woods seem to have been decidedly secondary considerations.  The overall situation leaves an impression that Emma Woods was treated not with the full respect and concern due an autonomous individual, but as a strictly instrumental means to satisfy the personal curiosities and needs of Dr. Jacobs.  Someone will have to explain how this evidence is not what it appears to be.

Perhaps the chastity belt conversation was never intended to propose an experimental protocol for Emma to carry out, but was simply another ‘tactic’ used by Dr. Jacobs to throw the allegedly threatening mind-reading alien hybrids off his track.  Reconciling such actions with the researcher’s explicit obligations to prevent any harm to his subject while acting with beneficence and in accord with the spirit of ethical informed consent principles is impossible.  In no way, shape or form would it ever be acceptable for any researcher to use a subject in such a manner.

Could the chastity belt chat, false memory implantation tactics to safeguard Dr. Jacobs from threatening hybrids and dire intrigues have simply been ploys to keep a highly hypnotizable subject engaged and interested in continuing to feed him juicy copy for a new book?  Somewhere during this strange journey it appears Emma Woods the research subject was converted into an expedient mechanism enabling Dr. Jacobs to ensure his personal security or reach his eccentric goals.  Someone will need to explain how appearances are misleading and his actions were ethical.

When Emma Woods took her complaints to higher authority, Dr. Jacobs maintained he was only engaged in oral history taking and denied conducting research.  Clearly, his actions had no therapeutic intent or benefit, but squaring the deployment of hypnosis-mediated manipulations to implant false memories, requests to collect soiled underwear and additional statements made in an interview conducted several years later (The UFO Trail Blog, http://ufotrail.blogspot.com/2012/04/bizarre-world-of-doctor-david-jacobs.html) with actions customarily associated with oral history taking seems impossible.  Someone needs to explain how that can be done.

Red herring

Appearances may sometimes be deceiving.  If critical, perception-changing objective information relevant to the Emma Woods-David Jacobs dispute exists, withholding it is both a gross disservice to the unjustly maligned and an insult to the entire community.  Those who have hinted or asserted directly they possess superior relevant knowledge have a responsibility to explain why the evidence available to the rest of us is not what it appears to be.

Finally, Some Insight Into Steve Bassett’s Imagination

I AM smiling.

Just read Steve Bassett’s June 26th Paradigm Research Group newsletter. At least once a year–usually more–readers of these updates are treated to the near-promise that this is the year government disclosure of an alien presence on earth shall happen. And each year that does not shall happen. This has been going on for nearly 20 years. You’d think with a track record like that he’d be out of business. Personally, I think the aliens and the human government(s) are waiting for him to go silent before they disclose anything just to mess with him. The evidence of time is on my side.

Bassett normally skips out on the explanation for how he knows this is the year for the biggest reveal since Oprah’s “You get a car! And you get a car!” stunt, but today’s newsletter is exceptional. First, he tantalizes us the old fashioned way with a play right out of Steven Greer’s book:

Based on a number of politically related developments, PRG believes Disclosure is very close. A window has opened that could see the truth embargo ended this year, if not this summer, and a strategy is in place to seize that opportunity.

Here we see the term “politically related developments” with no details forthcoming. We’re being led to believe that PRG, which is short for Paradigm Research Group, which is long for Steve Bassett, has some secret knowledge. Perhaps he’s friends with a Beltway insider. All those years as the country’s only UFO lobbyist finally paid off. Or maybe it comes from a military whistleblower he passes notes with on a park bench in front of the National Mall. We cannot say and he does not disclose.

However, a mere three paragraphs later, Steve finally does the unthinkable: he lays his logic on the table, like cards in a lesser analogy involving poker. He writes:

… [C]onsider this: there is a space station orbiting the Earth. On this station are a number of extremely advanced cameras surveying space (to not have such cameras would be very suspicious and bad NASA PR). These cameras send live video back to Earth (also necessary). The live feed is viewable by people over most of the world on a massive electronic, interactive delivery platform using computers more powerful than those that ran the Apollo Program. Millions in this viewing public own powerful software tools allowing for the editing of these videos. The interactive delivery platform contains massive social networks with collectively several billion participants to which such edited videos can be delivered in seconds, and the delivered videos can be shared and reshared ad infinitum.

None of this technology existed when the extraterrestrial presence truth embargo was planned and initiated between 1947 and 1953, and would not exist for decades.

And then he closes his case with the cherry on top, having answered his critics:

Now, can you understand why a massive government disinformation campaign so successful between 1947 and 1991 could collapse in 2015?

I’m fairly certain he’s asking that rhetorically, it being an update newsletter and all, but it has an answer and isn’t rhetorical after all. The answer is no. No, because that doesn’t make sense in any way, shape, or form. If there are aliens flying around up there for cameras to catch, NASA will not be allowed to film them and show them publicly or on a live feed. That not having cameras would be a bad PR move doesn’t outweigh the need to cover up the greatest secret in human history. Plus, we’ve all seen those heist films  where the thieves switch the bank’s security camera feed to a prerecording so they can sneak past unsuspecting guards who look curiously at their screens going grainy for a second when the switch happens and are like, ‘Hmmm… That’s weird. Oh well. Must have been a solar flare hitting a poorly-shielded satellite, which sometimes causes service interruptions and other electrical anomalies. The hallways look clear. Everything’s fine. Guess I’ll get back to my Ramen Noodles and Sanford & Son.’ Or whatever security guards think.

Plus, what does he mean by “editing”? Maybe he means people can record and play back the live feed. The UFO obsessives can edit clips of Tang drops and dust particles on the window that they think are Galactic Federation of Light ships and harangue their friends and family who just want to see them get help. But of course they’re not the ones who need help–no! It’s the sheeple, man, the sleeping masses. Wake up, humanity! That ice is aliens!

I’ll give him that glitch in the explanation because it doesn’t affect the central point. The point is, the whole thing is stupid. It’s not Occam’s Razor, Bassett’s favorite principle, it’s justification. And it’s… uh… well, dare I say it’s completely lazy. This final glitch is unforgivable. His reasoning that NASA cameras will force disclosure by accidentally picking up space ships isn’t connected to the premise that disclosure is imminent due to political developments so secret even the disclosure movement’s mover who knows them cannot reveal them to us.

Now, can you understand why a massive government disinformation campaign so successful between 1947 and 1991 could collapse in 2015?

No. Now I can understand that you need to hire a continuity person to comb through your scripts. Or better yet, stop writing them. If an alien presence is ever revealed, trust me when I say you will be of no use in the situation. So sayeth your track record. And Occam’s Razor.

Jer’s Plasma Prophesy

Eye See YOUI have a prediction to make. The emerging and next definition of what UFOs and their accompanying entities represent shall be shape-shifting plasma beings from the every-present now. They accidentally created a past that contains us simply by looking for their own origins. In so doing, they redefined themselves as our future, as time-travelers. They’re here because every move we make has ramifications for them. They mutate. They die. Perhaps they disappear into thin air because of our future-defining actions.

Sound convoluted? It is. But let’s face it: tiny gray alien doctors in ships can no longer hold up, same as faeries couldn’t, same as soldiers battling in the sky and Virgin Marys. Same as the airships of the 1800s and the reptilians of now. Robotics aren’t the wave of the future, so out the window with those lock-step animatronic type entities and in with something more fluid. Something vague to mirror our current sense of where quantum theories are bringing us.

The faux mystery of crop circles caved to the weight of the human artists creating them, who, in turn, gave voice to their true mystery: the artists feel compelled to make them by an outside agency, and sometimes they see balls of light in the fields.

Balls of light. Plasmas. We wanted them to be orbs like in all those orb photos, but they couldn’t be. That’s water and insects and dust and the digital camera lens refracting normal things. But still, orbs. ORBS. We love the idea of orbs and we’ll find a place to put ’em in the collective toy box of all things strangeness manifest. In fact, we’ll make them take center stage as the Electric Universe Theory becomes the new it-theory to explain New Age concepts hand in hand with the latest scientific discoveries about plasmas. Perhaps this will spark a deeper ufological interest in Meso-American tales of plasma beings and the UK Ministry of Defense’s plasma explanation for all things UFO. However the change comes about, whatever the tipping point, plasmas are the way to go for the physical component of our enigmatic other and quantum entanglement will be the sensible catch-all for who and where and when and why they are here.

Tick-tock on the reinvigorated demand for that carrot to the horse that is your wallet, disclosure.

But if we’re at a point with these phenomena that we can see this change in facades coming, can we stop it? Can we stop it merely by not believing in another one? What happens then to the great evolver updating its appearance parallel to our cultural interpretations?

Can we see the enigmatic other for what it is? Is this our chance? What leaps out of that mirror when we stop projecting an image onto it? What happens when we decide, “Nah, it’s not plasmas. Try again. On second thought, don’t try again. Ever. We quit.”

What happens? Who do we see then?

Perhaps us. Truly, deeply, us.

Jeff Ritzmann once asked a shrouded entity who claimed he lived in a particle within our universe if we will ever make contact with aliens from another planet. He said it was possible, but… “Don’t be surprised if it’s you.”

Ready?