|
Matthew Favaloro POSSIBILITIES by Matthew Favaloror
Often, in UFO investigations, the logical approach is rarely applied by researchers. There is usually a high risk of false logic, ie, conclusions based on limited facts and known scientific paradigms. Logic or rational answers to phenomena, are usually drawn from the known, not the unknown or what is discovered in an investigation. An example of false logic: "Abductees have scoop marks and implants. The implants must be a tracking device so that the aliens can track, find and abduct. Because the greys use "Mind Scan" the abductees have telepathic communication with the aliens whether he or she is aware of it or not." In the above scenario, the conclusions drawn, although it may seem logical, has no logical reference nor truth. Lets look at it more closely; "Abductees have scoop marks and implants.(not all abductees have scoop marks and implants. Also,a scoop mark does not automatically imply an implant or visa versa) The implants must be a tracking device so that the aliens can track, find and abduct. ( We do not know the structure or reason or application for an implant. Abductees memories on the reason vary greatly. Until we know for sure,... We simply do not know.) Because the greys use "Mind Scan" the abductees have telepathic communication with the aliens whether he or she is aware of it or not." (Not all "Mind Scans are done by the greys nor does it mean a mind scan implies future abduction nor implants or tracking. Drawing the conclusion "because" draws a long bow that may not be accurate) So what do we have???? When exploring or pioneering new arenas, when going into the unknown, be it a researcher / therapist or abductee, we often look to what is familiar, safe and common ground, so as to understand the experience. References are often made by abductees to known phenomena, ie " The table was cold, (this is true for the abductee) like an operating table found in a hospital" ( a reference to a known reality) here we must be careful not to draw conclusions; The reference to an operating table implies a possible operation on the abductee or reason for abduction. This may be true, may not be true. Care has to be taken when researching the phenonema that conclusions are not jumped upon to solve the mystery or pre-empt the conclusion. Otherwise you run a high risk of contaminating the data or experience of an experiencer. This can be fed back to the experiencer giving a false An example of false conclusions; " Oh, if it doesn't bother you now, then forget about it", "You must have had a nightmare and been dreaming", "The greys only take you for your eggs and since you have since had a hysterectomy, you are now safe" Any researcher / therapist should make proper exploration a high priority and steer well away from conclusions that appear to solve the issue and give answers. When exploring the phenomena you must be careful not to influence or lead the abductee, ie put references there, that may not be true to the experience. We aim to video every session we have with abductees as this then is a true account of the session and stops assumptions, theorizing on Is false logic useful? Yes. Collating the data, looking into the experience of the abductee we and the abductee draw upon all our known resources for references to the known, to sort of guide us through the unknown. This is human nature. But all these conclusions remain possibilities until it Another example of false logic is that of the straight line. We use straight lines every day and it is comforting to know that "science has proven" that there is no such thing as a straight line. All straight lines are part of a curve/ circle. Matter appears solid and real to us yet science has proven that solid matter is made up of billions of oscillating atoms and what appears solid is not. Where do we go from here? As researches, an incredible amount of data has come to light from the abduction / experience point of view from abductees. Yet we must sift through the data, draw conclusions, change them, throw them out, reformulate over and over again. The biggest trap is to think you know the answers to what is going on. Exploring the phenomena in an open way is the best value that you can set as a therapist / researcher. What we are starting to see is a new sub structure, new modern myths or a new folklore being set into our world culture. With the event of such shows as "The X Files" "Dark Skies" "Millennium" we are starting to see a standard or "rule of thumb" being set. ie; Aliens are divided into three categories grey, lizard, enlightened beings. (the trap is in disregarding all other possibilities) Come in sizes such as gnome, average or extremely tall, (the trap is in disregarding all other possibilities) wear silver suites, have big almond eyes, or behave and look like androids or the Men In Black. (the trap is in disregarding all other possibilities) The Governments know all and are simply not telling. We could go on and on but you get the point. When the researcher / therapist uses a limited set of references then the truth is forever lost. I was talking to a well respected UFO researcher about an abduction experience. She discounted the Abduction experience completely as it did not fit the known new paradigm, criteria / folklore scenario listed above. As crazy as it appears to be, most researchers are afraid of the unknown and discount it, when it is presented. We should be exploring what we don't know. Not being safe with what we do know. Above all, helping the abductee / experiencer the best that we can. Not judging their experience nor labeling them in any way. It is this foundation of exploring the phenomena, working with and helping the abductee come to terms in understanding their experience that is invaluable for the abductee / experiencer and researcher. This approach can unearth clues that would not normally be apparent and help us all in exploring and understanding the UFO abduction phenomena. END Copyright © Robert Marx and Matthew Favaloro 1997- 1998 |
|||