Peter Robbins: Issues in Abduction Research

Peter Robbins makes his third appearance on the program, and on the heels of the untimely death of Budd Hopkins, we talk about his friendship with Hopkins and insights into working with people who claim abduction by non-human entities. We started with an in-depth examination of Robbins’ own sighting and subsequent repression of the troubling memory until he was reminded of it in the mid 1970s by his sister, who was there and had an apparent abduction experience.

While there are certainly many troubling issues in UFO abduction research, I do not personally have all the data and experience of someone like Peter Robbins to be able to come to a solid conclusion about the way it has been conducted in the last 30 years, although I have been occasionally critical of it in the past. Peter addressed some of the charges leveled at Hopkins concerning the treatment of apparent abductees, protocols for interviews and hypnosis sessions and guarding against bias from both the researcher and the subjects.

Peter brought up a new case he’s been working on involving a security guard at a prison in the southwest and his sighting of a massive (100-yard or more) black, disc-shaped object which silently appeared and then disappeared in the night sky. Peter has promised to ask the witness if he would appear on the program for a short interview.

We also discussed the problem of fundamentalist thinking and how it pervades the skeptical community, UFO researchers, religion and politics. This led to a segment about compassion and how we should conduct our lives to do the most good for others and ourselves.

The theme of the program is probably best summed up as: “As much as you can, withhold judgment for as long as possible and keep your emotions in check.”

Robbins’ paper that is referred to during the program, Politics, Religion and Human Nature: Practical Problems and on the Path Toward Official UFO Acknowledgment can be downloaded by clicking on the title.

Photo credit: ICAR.

This entry was posted in abductions, Authors and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

15 comments on “Peter Robbins: Issues in Abduction Research

  1. Listened live last night Greg, really fun and personal interview. Although Peter is quite a charismatic speaker he is genuinely authentic and real. I never felt for an instant he wasn’t being truthful or relating any of his memories or experiences falsely. Greg i really must thank you for being one of the only hosts to allow his guest to speak his mind, uninterrupted. You really are an active listener, and play the contrarian at the right times. An excellent host and guest all ’round. Thanks to Peter for staying up so late on the east coast as well. My review, 10 out of 10.

  2. Mike Clelland on said:

    Wonderful stuff! Thanks so much!

    • Mike,
      Thank you. I was just listening to our talk from your show (again.) It was pretty good! I said a lot of things I don’t get into on my or other people’s shows.

  3. Red Pill Junkie on said:

    I really enjoyed this, so much that I listened to it twice in order to absorb as much of what Peter said as possible.

    And I for one welcomed the off-topic parts of the discussion. Peter’s comments that nowadays right-wing politicians view their reluctance to vary their opinions as a sign of strength and statemanship resonate a lot with me —our President is fond of equating himself to Winston Churchill whenever his strategy to fight the so-called ‘war on organized crime’ comes into question (40,000 casualties and counting). Peter sounds like a man I would like to buy a beer for :)

    • RPJ,
      Thank you for the comment. RM is all about the off-topic conversation!

      Like many people here, I’m afraid our government is falling apart because many politicians and the people who vote for them are short-sighted, egotistic, and selfish. I would be happily surprised if a politician loudly and publicly claimed that he or she did something that was unpopular, but did it with the true feeling that it did the most good for the most people, or maybe even admitted that they were wrong for once.

      You’re probably the only person besides me who listened to the show twice!

  4. Pete Diggens on said:

    Excellent, fascinating show and as the good ones do; it left me buzzing like a great conversation [ even if you\'re only listening-in on it ] is liable to do.

    Yes please keep going off topic, if you can get people to tap into ‘stuff’ they’re passionate about it makes for great listening and P Robbins’s refreshingly sane political views would get an [ in-eligable ] vote from this side of the pond too.

    Can you persuade him to run for President?

  5. Sagacious on said:

    For most of the abduction cases that are not instances of mental illness, I’m inclined to think that they are psychic attacks by beings of some sort. The Hill and Walton cases strike me as ‘physical realm’ abductions. Maybe the Brooklyn Bridge case is also a consensual reality abduction. But it strikes me as implausible that enormous numbers of concrete craft are able to arrive over and over again, repeatedly taking people physically without being detected much more often.

    One last point. When MUFON investigated abductions, I believe that in all cases when an abduction occurred, the client had switched off the monitoring equipment beforehand. Maybe that could be a defense against abductions: have a monitoring set-up that cannot be switched off without going to a remote location to do so.

    • I’d be less inclined to assign any noun like “attack,” but I’m a notorious fence sitter. I’m still not convinced that we’re dealing with a force that “does something” to us. I tend to think that we are discounting our contribution to the expeience, whatever it may be, and whatever varieties of it exist.

      I like your suggestion about the monitoring equipment. Has it been switched off by the participants in every case, or just the MUFON study?

      • Sagacious on said:

        You say, “I tend to think that we are discounting our contribution to the expeience, whatever it may be, and whatever varieties of it exist.”–I find this to be an excellent point. It is noteworthy that Leo Sprinkle’s and John Mack’s clients on one side had a far different pattern of experiences than David Jacob’s and Budd Hopkins’. Maybe the difference lies partly in the subjects themselves not just in the source or cause of the experience.

        I’m not aware of other cases where there was monitoring equipment. But I’m reasonably sure that no one has a tape (video or audio) of an abduction, or we would likely know about it.

        • Is there proof that the individual turned off the equipment themselves? It’s not uncommon in paranormal investigation to discover that recording equipment shut off during the vital moments that something noteworthy occurred — perhaps the same happens in UFO/ET cases. I’d be interested in finding out more about this, and some experiments should be done using controls such as those suggested by Sagacious.

  6. Jason Elsworth on said:

    Great to hear a bit of model agnosticism in ufology.

    I have often wondered what happens when the huge mother ships arrive, the aliens come out to meet us and say ” we are delighted to be here for the first time” and “no we haven’t been abducting anyone, that sound like some crazy s**t”.

    It would be wonderful to see a scientifically rigorous, multi-disciplinary investigation into the abduction phenomena. I know personally that there is something to it. I have recently read Anthony Peake’s book The Daemon and I would recommend it to anyone interested in the abduction phenomena.

  7. dyingsun on said:

    Great interview or rather conversation. Keep on doing it, Greg. :)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

HTML tags are not allowed.