<HTML><HEAD>
<META charset=US-ASCII http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2722" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff">
<DIV>It has long been established that alien abductee reportees are not usually psychotic or gullible. The research goes back decades. Even the anti-paranormal publications like Skeptical Inquirer eventually picked up on this, as much as they probably would rather have been able to refer to these people as crackpots or lunatics. It simply isn't true. On the other hand, it also doesn't appear to be true that they are reporting veridical events in most cases. The psychological explanations in the literature have for years been more in terms of fantasy proneness or other forms of imaginative talent rather than pathology or chicanery. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The history of this 'abduction' topic parallels the history of hypnosis in some interesting ways. Hypnosis itself was considered first miraculous, then mysterious, then paranormal, then fakery of various kinds, and finally now a valid way of studying normal if somewhat less well understood and still fascinating psychological processes like dissociation, absorption, fantasy, and role taking. Today, abduction experiences are generally considered by researchers to be real, non-pathological, emotionally intense, imaginative experiences rather than psychotic hallucinations, alcoholic tales, the effluent of a weak mind, or deliberate fakery. The mainstream view is consistent with the author quoted in the NYT articles, and vice versa, from what I understand.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>So it turns out that there is, remarkably, already a fairly good sized scientific literature on the psychology of human exceptional experiences: exploring the relationship between hypnotic responding talent, fantasy proneness talent, dissociation talent, memory, confabulation, expectancy, involuntariness, and so on. There are even scientific explorations of the spiritual side of these experiences, by people like Kenneth Ring. The "spiritual" variations focus on how meaning is attributed in exceptional experiences and how people's lives are changed by them, rather than on how and why the experiences are produced. Overall, there are some pretty reliable findings in the former area, although the latter is somewhat less amenable to study. For an example of the former, talented people don't even need hypnosis or relaxation to produce the characteristic experiences of hypnotic responding. </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT face=Arial>I don't believe in abductions, but I cannot explain their reactions any other way</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV>kind regards,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Todd</DIV></BODY></HTML>