ALIEN
ABDUCTION? JUNK SCIENCE CALLS IT SLEEP PARALYSIS
By Budd Hopkins
This
is the way the New York Times should have headlined their
July 6 science section piece on the poorly understood phenomenon
of sleep paralysis. Unfortunately, however, the headline read
"Alien Abduction? Science Calls It Sleep Paralysis"
[my emphasis], suggesting to the world that the UFO abduction
phenomenon has at last been successfully explained away. Nothing
could be farther from the truth.
Junk
Science is the proper designation for the many outlandish,
irrelevant and unsupported hypotheses debunkers have employed
over the years to dismiss UFO abductions (some of which I
will discuss in future articles). Non-junk Science - the real
thing, based upon the scientific method - begins by amassing
and studying all the accurate, relevant data before any serious
hypothesizing takes place. With this in mind, let's examine
what happened here, in the precincts of the New York Times,
to justify my use of the term "Junk Science." What
data were amassed and studied to support a headline proclaiming
that abductions have now been explained as nothing more than
cases of sleep paralysis? A careful look at the existing data
is enlightening. During the first two decades of research
when the very concept of a UFO abduction was formed, all of
the central cases involved people who were outside their homes
when they were taken. None were lying paralyzed and half asleep
in their bedrooms. Instead they were driving automobiles,
fishing, hunting, making their rounds as police officers,
even, in one famous case, driving a tractor on a farm. So
where do nighttime sleep paralysis experiences come into the
data pool of these crucially important first decades of abduction
research? Nowhere. There are none.
With
that undeniable fact having demolished its thesis, how can
the august New York Times then claim that science has satisfactorily
"explained" the abduction phenomenon? Easily. By
simply abandoning the rigors of science and taking up the
baseless deceptions of Junk Science.
The social
circumstances which allowed the paper to make such a scientifically
worthless judgement bear examination. First, as everyone knows,
most conservative mainstream scientists have long refused,
in public at least, to accept the idea that non-earthly intelligent
beings have ever flown over our planet or interacted with
our people. Prominent, media-savvy scientists like the late
Carl Sagan have constantly assured both the public and the
media that UFOs are nothing more than misidentified natural
phenomena, hoaxes, or whatever. "We would have known
if such things as UFOs or abductions really existed,"
they claim, shamelessly employing ridicule against anyone
who disagrees.
Cowed
journalists have accepted this "official" blanket
denial without a twinge of doubt. In fact, the pressure exerted
by vocal mainstream skeptics and debunkers is so great that
it is now considered unscientific, even unseemly, for journalists
to look into the issue of UFO reality with any degree of objectivity.
And God help them if they should indicate they are skeptical
of the skeptics. The Times writers therefore had no reason
not to give knee-jerk support to the idea that sleep paralysis
is the source of the UFO abduction phenomenon.
In order
to accept the sleep paralysis explanation, any scientist,
journalist or lay person must first suppress any contradictory
data. Thus, the Times article suppressed the fact that for
the first two decades of abduction research, all of the central
cases took place with the abductees fully awake and functioning,
and none involved bedroom paralysis. And as if that alone
weren't enough to sink the Times explanation, in many accounts
- one thinks of the Betty and Barney Hill case, the Hickson-Parker
dual abduction at Pascagoula and the Travis Walton case, among
others - there were two or more individuals simultaneously
involved in the abduction. And none were home, lying paralyzed,
side-by-side, in bed.
Having
established the irrelevancy of sleep paralysis as the cause
of the UFO abduction phenomenon, let us take up a more realistic
issue. In later decades, when bedroom abduction cases began
to be reported, might some of these involve sleep paralysis
and nothing more? Of course. The possibility always exists
that some sleep paralysis experiences might have been misinterpreted
by the individuals reporting them as UFO abductions, particularly
by susceptible people who have been devouring books on UFOs.
To cite a parallel area, has there ever been a situation in
which someone thought he had contracted malaria because he
took his temperature and found he had a high fever? Of course
this possibility exists, particularly if that individual has
been reading medical textbooks or popular accounts of the
disease. Medical students famously imagine themselves to be
suffering from the various diseases they are studying. So
how does a nervous patient tell if he has malaria or just
a high fever?
Experienced
medical professionals are aware of the wide range of malarial
symptoms and are trained to discover, on the basis of a collection
of facts, whether a patient has misdiagnosed himself or might
actually have the disease. Similarly, experienced UFO abduction
researchers have long been aware of the sleep paralysis phenomenon
and would not take seriously an alleged abduction account
which contained nothing more than typical sleep paralysis
symptoms. Nighttime abduction cases often involve other witnesses,
temporary disappearances of the abductee, specific types of
physical marks, scars or bruises - even broken bones - which
appeared during the night, and occasional situations in which
the abductee awakens wearing a stranger's nightclothes. In
many consciously recalled nocturnal abductions, none of the
symptoms of sleep paralysis are recalled. Finally, logic decrees
that out of the tens of thousands of such reports, if a single
case of either malaria or UFO abduction - or even twenty such
cases - should be misdiagnosed, neither the UFO abduction
phenomenon nor the existence of malaria is in jeopardy. Only
Junk Scientists make inferences so absurd and sweeping. We
would do well to remember the opening headline, which might,
in fact, make an interesting bumper sticker:
ALIEN
ABDUCTIONS? JUNK SCIENCE CALLS IT SLEEP PARALYSIS
Copyright © 1999-2004 Intruders Foundation. All rights
reserved.