Aaron Sakulich again.

Aaron Sakulich
did an interview with David M. Jacobs (PhD.) He’s an associate history professor at Temple University. It’s a fascinating piece. True to form Sakulich does something here that’s a bit unorthodox. He doesn’t edit his interview, he allows Jacob to say what he likes.

And so he does, he goes on an on. Blathering if I didn’t know better. There are about sixteen pages, something like seven hundred words per page so it’s a bit to wade through.

For example;

“Now it’s all the rage, books are coming out about it, in Harvard University in print, or, it’s false memory syndrome. The amount of explanations for this is so long it’s literally staggering. Your jaw flies open when you hear all the explanations for this. And there can only be one explanation for this, the correct explanation, because it’s so complicated and so precise, that only one thing will cause this kind of precision. That means that all the explanations for it, that ‘this is not happening’, all the explanations for this except for one will be wrong. But debunkers never, ever question other arguments, they never debate among themselves, it’s a very bizarre group of people who dedicate their lives to trying to disprove this, it’s a strange group, it’s a far stranger group than abductees are, who come from everywhere and everything, who are university professors, I’ll have you know, and physicians, and psychiatrists and psychologists themselves, and attorneys, and elementary school teachers(.)

OK, fine, but; this statement really jumped out at me. .

“But debunkers never, ever question other arguments, they never debate among themselves, it’s a very bizarre group of people who dedicate their lives to trying to disprove this, it’s a strange group, it’s a far stranger group than abductees are,”

Of course I have to take umbrage. In my experience there is far more debate among skeptics than among believers. I look at most believer boards and I see very little debate. He certainly can’t be talking about newsgroups. The only open newsgroups that I’ve experienced are on the skeptical side. Believers don’t often foster debate of any kind.

Says Jacobs ;

I don’t want to get into this, but all debunkers make one or all three of three mistakes: they don’t know the data, they distort the data, or they ignore the data. They all do that. There are no exceptions to that, Aaron. There are no exceptions to this.

No exceptions? All debunkers? Pretty strong words pilgrim!

And Jacob’s entire epistle says, there is only *one* explanation to the abduction phenomena. Only *one?* That’s not very scientific. That’s absurd as a matter of fact. Even if one were to prove the ETH there is no reason to believe *all* abduction stories are caused by this. No more than saying the ETH is impossible, unlikely perhaps. Not evidenced certainly but not impossible.

Is Jacobs a believer than? Is he someone with a strongly held conviction regarding the ETH in regards to abductee’s experiences?

It would seem so.

(Jacobs)
“But they (abductees) are not crazy. Let’s just say that they are not crazy and that everything is normal, and yet they are seeing these things, and this is happening to them at all times. We’ve dealt with hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of people, and they are all saying the same thing. None of them are crazy, none of them have serious mental problems- and this [alien abduction] is not happening. What are you left with, then, if this phenomenon is not happening, and these people are saying it is and they are not suffering from mental delusions?

I guess the only problem I have with this is, it seems extremely prejudicial. By his own words, Jacobs says that he is not a psychologist and that he’s not trained to evaluate mental disorders. The statement “none of them are crazy” and “ yet they are seeing things” smacks of someone who has made up on the subject. He both knows these people are not crazy and know that they are seeing things – real things?

He must know that sane people see things all the time. We have all seen illusions, mirages. I remember having hallucinations once or twice while being awake for long periods of time. The things I saw were just as real and vital as other objects but I would hesitate to call them anything but artifacts from a fatigued mind.

In reading Jacobs words, I also get the sense of someone who tends to oversimplify things. To the point of absurdity. For example, a number of people are researching the so-called sleep paralyses as a possible explanation to some abductee experiences. I see no one saying categorically that *all* abduction events are caused by sleep paralyses, just that it *can* be documented that *some* are.

This is a theory and the mark of a theory is that it must be provable and it also must be falsifiable. Jacob is not talking about theories, he talking about conclusions – his own conclusions. Conclusions which by the way, were not arrived at in a scientific manner.

But how do I know that? Because he is not doing studies- not really, He using a  very weak form of evidence. Actually I think its weaker than even eye witness testimony which is right up there in the wet noodle category as far as evidence goes.

I can say with some assurance that hypnosis or putting people in a more suggestible state does nothing to help support testimony. It does nothing to support UFOs or the ETH.

That’s why psychologists say so. That’s why courts are loath to use such techniques.

Jacobs even says so himself!

So why do all these abduction “researchers” use something tha’s been proven to be unreliable? Why is it that people frequently relate dream-like abduction events only through hypnosis?

Because perhaps, the experts are right?

Anyway; as always, the Odd Emperor urges you read the entire piece before coming to a conclusion.

My dear friend R. Lee who writes UFO Bits says this about the interview;

“That whippersnapper of a skepti-bunkie, Aaron Sakulich, “interviews” Dr. David Jacobs. Sakulich says this is his first interview, but that’s no excuse for this long, rambling, and sloppy piece. Why did Jacobs agree to this? Why is Sakulich, one of the“New Thugs” I wrote about in my previous post, a member of the UFO Collective????!! Just what the hell is the UFO Collective anyway, and by the way, why are they so ageist? (And why do they use the nazi-fascist word “collective?”) (relax everybody, I am mot calling anyone a damn nazi.) “

This is more or less valid criticism. Colorful but valid nevertheless. Sakulich simply typed out his notes and presented them as is, all sixteen pages. It’s kind of silly but I can see what Sakulich is getting at. He’s a skeptic and makes no bones about it. If he did anything but put Jacob’s words up, as is without editing, people like R. Lee would scream foul. If he soft peddled Jacob’s words the skeptical community (those folks who never debate anything) would cry foul. By putting the interview up as is, without editing he is relating to us exactly what was said, how it was said and in what context. I don’t know if it’s just laziness or brilliance.

The piece does end abruptly, Why? Boredom?

I don’t know if this is a good way to approach a “hostile” interview. Sakulich can’t be accused of being unfair. Those are David M. Jacobs’s real words. If they seem foolish than perhaps Jacobs should think about what he’s saying once and a while, and what it sounds like.

Aaron Sakulich summed it up in a way that only he could

–“hey, look at me, I’m on the Astral Plane! Wooo!”

I could not have said it better myself.