We have been hesitant to delve into the UFO abduction topic due to the high level of unfactual contamination inherent in this corner of ufology. Abduction cases are subject to large amounts of hoax, alternative causes such as sleep paralysis/night terrors and an absence of physical evidence (analysis of materials removed from the bodies of abductees are not been convincing).
Still, we are not discounting the veracity of the niche as a whole. Thus if any consideration is given to performing analysis we must first establish those cases or materials that contain acceptable degrees of probability.
Note, we are utilizing the Vallee Classification system. We discern CEIII from abduction/CEIV. CEIII (contact w/occupants) is of enthusiastic interest because in virtually all cases the craft occupant(s) is seen entering or exiting the craft. In all cases the ufo craft is in observable proximity to the occupant. Typically there is a mental, physical and visual transaction that occurs within the event. This area is extremely fertile for research into correlated meanings and data pertaining to conditions present during the event.
The abduction scenario, CEIV as it is typically classified, is frequently associated with bedroom scenarios where the abductee is taken in the middle of the night to a different location such as a nearby craft. There are hardly any correlated witnesses to the abduction of the craft, even when some of these events occur in populated suburban or urban municipalities. This is problematic for hard research. Abduction accounts given by the victims can be analyzed at a high level for trend identification and word frequency as can any other corpus of documents.
We are more concerned with the quality of the root events itself. The nature of this type of experience simply does not lend itself well to high degrees of probability the event occurred. That is not to say the realm is filled with mostly liars, though as mentioned quite a few of them exist; it is more so that there lies very little tangible foundational evidence with which to justify the analysis.
However, if we were to focus on this niche of ufology, careful selection of documentation to build the corpus would occur. While we find him extremely interesting, we do not know if Whitley Strieber’s books and interviews/transcripts would make the cut. John Mack’s work, maybe. Betty Andreasson, probably, we found Raymond Fowler’s documentation and investigation to be compelling.
It is food for thought and some abduction scenario overlap can be found in CEIII cases. As such, we expect at some point to delve into this murky portion of ufology proceeding with extra caution.
Copyright 2021 – All right reserverd – Metron Deep Research
MetronDeep 