Biography of John S. Carpenter, MSW, LCSW
John Carpenter obtained a Bachelors of Arts degree in Psychology from DePauw University, Greencastle, Indiana, and a master’s degree in Social Work, from Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri. He has had advanced training in Clinical Hypnosis in order to practice as a psychiatric therapist and hypnotherapist in Branson, Missouri. For over 32 years he has counseled people in Southwest Missouri for every kind of emotional problem imaginable.
His life-long curiosity in UFOs led to his volunteering his services for over 150 cases of possible UFO abduction. Using clever interviewing and thorough hypnotic investigation, he has collected amazing patterns of data which clearly depict a consistent and coherent scenario of extraterrestrial contact. He presented six papers at the prestigious MIT Abduction Study Conference in Boston in 1992. His published papers have brought him international recognition and speaking invitations on five continents. He has presented at conferences from Australia to England, on national and international radio, television, and film documentaries. He has created and produced 10 research DVDs since 1996. Mr. Carpenter also served as MUFON’s Director of Abduction Research from 1991 until 2000 and is a founding member of JAR: Journal For Abduction Encounter Research.
John Carpenter is currently writing a book titled Invaded: Human Contact With Non-Human Beings and is available for Presentations Worldwide.
Investigating the Unexplained
“Science should be the investigation of the unexplained, not the explanation of the uninvestigated.” – George Knapp
The professional health and science journals have been notoriously conservative – practically to the point of avoidance or censorship – in regard to publication of challenging and credible data from UFO research. The same avoidance seems evident in the realm of nationally televised news. We can all note the startling absence [during the 1980s to the early 1990s] of coverage of the British Crop Circle revelations on all the major networks. In four years only a handful of documentaries have brought forth credible data on the mysterious patterns occurring in the fields worldwide. Most of us will not forget the day that the national media suddenly broke their eerie silence on this puzzling mystery to quickly and decisively denounce the phenomenon with the introduction of pub buddies Doug and Dave, who could explain it all by simply claiming they were responsible. It was as if the national media did not want to touch the story until it could be explained in an easy and earthly manner.
However, unknown to 99% of the American public, the Doug and Dave story began disintegrating within 24 hours as British journalists, researchers, and scientists began digging deeper, uncovering many flaws and distortions in the process. But as the mystery returned, so did the media silence; there was no follow-up on the American news networks. The American public was deliberately left to believe that the mystery was dead with the uninvestigated confessions of two English pub buddies. As scientific efforts began to produce a growing list of astounding discoveries in the labs and under the microscopes, the media seems to continue to avoid the hard data that is now perpetuating the mystery rather than explaining it.
Similarly, a local television station prepared a report last winter on the odd cattle mutilations that local ranchers were discovering during a brief but heavy wave of UFO sightings. The report concluded with a veterinarian’s declaration that a disease was the obvious culprit – prior to any lab results or sample analysis! Later, the state’s crime lab could not identify any known cause of death or support for the veterinarian’s explanation. MUFON’s investigative efforts properly placed samples in the competent hands of pathologist Dr. John Altshuler; he found precise incisions made by a form of highly focused energy or heat. When I approached the television station with this medical data, I was informed that they were not interested in any evidence which would perpetuate the mystery. “No more UFO stories.”
What does any of this have to do with research on UFO abductions? Plenty. I have begun to notice that professional journals are beginning to publish “explanations” to their devoted subscribers prior to any proper presentation, description, or consideration of the credible cases, data patterns, or challenging scientific questions. It is human nature to desire to remain in control of our world in order to feel safe and secure in a predictable environment. Does that increase the need to publish explanations for anomalous events before proper data collection and analysis?
A recent letter to the editor of the Journal of Scientific Exploration (Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 291-294, 1992) by James Wilson of Business Technology New Services proposes yet another explanation for many abduction cases: “Recollections of Surgical Experiences.” Wilson proposes that recollections of surgical procedures has created disturbing misperceptions that are interpreted as alien contacts. He suggests that this confusion is a result of the increase in outpatient surgeries which he decries as disorienting to the individual who does not get sufficient time to adjust to being in a hospital setting. He says these shorter stays, along with the effects of anesthesia, create distorted memories. An inpatient hospital stay has many “rituals” and memorable procedure whereas the outpatient process is devoid of these expected activities and “customs.”
“One minute the prospective outpatient is riding in his car on his way to the hospital. Minutes later he is flat on his back under the influence of a powerful tranquilizer that has left him conscious but unresponsive to the strange activities taking place around him. By the time he has fully recovered from the effects of the anesthesia he is in his car or home in bed. Fragments of memories of the operating room become merged with recollections of more mundane activities.”
Wilson unknowingly deals his own theory a serious setback as he claims it is the combination of new surgical procedures, fast-recovery anesthetics, and the dramatic increase in the number of outpatient surgeries – all of these factors occurring after 1980 – which supposedly account for the distortions that mislead people into thinking they were abducted. This would come as a great shock to Betty and Barney Hill, Charles Hickson, Travis Walton, Betty Andreasson, and others who reported experiences long before theses advances of the 1980s.
He also clearly fails to account for multiple witness cases. Even if the Hills had had mutual outpatient surgeries in 1961, how would Wilson explain the simultaneous two-hour periods of “confusion” they experienced while riding in their car? How could he account for any multiple abductee cases in which they report seeing each other aboard an alien craft doing specific things in a particular order and sequence that matches between their independent accounts? What about children and others who have never had surgery? Furthermore, he attempts to explain particular aspects of abduction reports in the following ways:
Abduction Memory: Abductee recalls being levitated by a beam of light.
Explanatory Surgical Event: Tranquilizers are administered to surgical outpatients before they are wheeled into the operating room. These drugs dilate the pupil, making lights appear brighter. The illusion becomes complete as the patient is lifted onto a brilliantly illuminated operative table.
Abduction Memory: Aliens have large eyes and atrophied noses and mouths.
Explanatory Surgical Event: Surgical hoods create the appearance of an enlarged crania. Surgical masks compress the cheeks obscuring the nose and mouth.
Abduction Memory: Female abductees report gynecological examinations.
Explanatory Surgical Event: Two of the more common same-day surgeries are curettage and tubal ligation.
Abduction Memory: Female abductees recall seeing babies.
Explanatory Surgical Event: Women patients awaiting admission often look at newborns in the hospital nursery.
Abduction Memory: A large needle is inserted into the navel.
Part II of this article will be published tomorrow Tuesday, June 3, 2014!