LobeliaOverhill's Abduction Experience

[reversereverb]

Hi all, this is my first post.

Having read the whole thread, I have to say I agree with those who cast a slightly sceptical eye on Lobelia's story. I think that it's always the best policy to look for the most rational and logical explanation first, and if none is forthcoming, then ponder the other possibilities.

In this case, it seems our "abductee" has jumped to (what I would call) the most fanciful explanation possible. There absolutely nothing in her story that, to me, can't be explained far more simply and mundanely, and this has been done over and over again throughout this story.

I think what this comes down to is two different mind-sets...one which looks at so-called unknown phenomena and looks for a rational explanation, and then considers other possibilites, and the other which other posters to this thread belong to, which creates an explanation for such phenomena that caters to their individual beliefs however loopy they may be. And damned if anyone can talk 'em out of it.

I think what it comes down to is Lobelia would probably be desperately disappointed to find that she is just a regular gal, not someone chosen by the "fat tans" for their nefarious inspections.

I guess it relates to a deep-seated need for attention. Her argument falls apart under scrutiny, eg: if any doctor of a professional standard (let alone three) found anything seriously odd about her physical problems, I'm sure they would've referred her to a specialist. They didn't, and it wasn't because she was a medical first and they had no explanation (once again, it's about feeling chosen, or special), just that it was nothing to worry about. Really.

She also states that because no-one can prove that she DIDN'T physically experience the encounter, then it must be true...

Anyway, I think anyone viewing this objectively would come to the same conclusions.

Thanks for the fun read, guys!

 

[dreeness]

Hi, reversereverb! Welcome to the boards!

I don't know Lobelia Overhill, and I don't think I ever talked to her, I don't even know if we ever even posted on the same thread. Just another disembodied voice on the internet, and hey, aren't we all.
A single-witness report is a very "isolated" thing, particularly on an internet posting board, not evidence of anything in itself, just a report, not really anything to investigate by itself, a non starter, no evidence, no basis for opinion, nothing to examine, just an isolated narrative.
I don't know what (if anything) happened to Lobelia Overhill, I don't know if she was sincere or a merry prankster, sane or as mad as a hatful of kittens, for all I know she could be a small team of sociology students, or an accountant named Reinhardt. Just an isolated narrative, on an internet posting board, nothing to go on. Just a narrative on a posting board, just voices on a streetcorner. I don't much like isolated narratives...

But something I do like is argument by denunciation, keep it up!
Everyone that doesn't think like you must be loopy, you show em, tiger!
:yeay:

 

[Anonymous]

...

I guess it relates to a deep-seated need for attention. ...

Why? This is a Fortean Message Board, where people are invited to relate their personal experiences of the unusual. That means that no one should expect the Spanish Inquisition, unless it seems likely they are really trying to pull a fast one, or pull our legs, or promote some dubious venture, or other.

I'm beginning to realize that one thing that marks out Skeptics from Forteans is that they have 'cloth ears' and blinkers on, for a good story. They consistently miss the nuances that indicate whether a story might be truth, or fiction and which make a someone's personal narrative interesting, unusual even unique and insist on finding 'facts' which they say they were expecting to find and which they insist fit some pattern, or other, which they can point to as proof that the once valued IHTM poster is in fact, mad, delusional, lying, or covering up for some terrible childhood trauma of abuse. Or, all of the above, as happened on this very Thread.

Real Forteans should love a good story. We should have an ear and an eye, for one. We should also be smart enough to be able to examine it closely and work out whether it is a good, honest account, or a bad egg, without breaking it, or the Poster storyteller's goodwill, first.

If, you think only the facts matter and that it's best to go for the most 'most rational and logical explanation first', without first taking time to consider the story on its own merits as an honest account, then perhaps you are not really a Fortean?

So, why don't leave your closets, Lube yourselves up and head over to the warmer, waters of the, James Randi Educational Foundation Forum bath house and come out as the blinkered Skeptics that you really are?

:lol:

 

[original_fLeebLe]

Real Forteans should love a good story. We should have an ear and an eye, for one. We should also be smart enough to be able to examine it closely and work out whether it is a good, honest account, or a bad egg, without breaking it, or the Poster storyteller's goodwill, first.

well said.

 

[Anonymous]

Since we are making ex-cathedra statements about what constitutes a 'good' fortean...

Surely a 'good' Fortean avoids making assumptions about someones 'beliefs', unless explicitly stated.

ATM, I'm seeing a pretty balanced attempt to place LO's experience in some conventional context, then a number of people, who should know better, telling a new poster what the aforementioned poster's beliefs are, when actually (s)he hasn't fully stated them, simply pointed up the the possibility of what happened, using a version of Occam.

Invitations to leave, leavened with smilies? Oh please...

Argue the point, not the person. Why is Reversereverb's point 'wrong'?

 

[Timble2]

Real Forteans should love a good story. We should have an ear and an eye, for one. We should also be smart enough to be able to examine it closely and work out whether it is a good, honest account, or a bad egg, without breaking it, or the Poster storyteller's goodwill, first.

I'd like to second fleeble on this one as a pretty good way to handle stories, Andoman.

 

[Anonymous]

...

Argue the point, not the person. Why is Reversereverb's point 'wrong'?

...

In this case, it seems our "abductee" has jumped to (what I would call) the most fanciful explanation possible.

...

I think what this comes down to is two different mind-sets...one which looks at so-called unknown phenomena and looks for a rational explanation, and then considers other possibilites, and the other which other posters to this thread belong to, which creates an explanation for such phenomena that caters to their individual beliefs however loopy they may be. And damned if anyone can talk 'em out of it.
[My emphasis]

I think what it comes down to is Lobelia would probably be desperately disappointed to find that she is just a regular gal, not someone chosen by the "fat tans" for their nefarious inspections.

I guess it relates to a deep-seated need for attention. ...

Have you spotted it yet?

Robust language should call for robust language, in my book. Or, is it only skeptics that are allowed to insult Posters on this MB?




:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Anonymous]

T
I would agree... its just the rest of the post that really screws that point up and throws it to the winds....

As to insulting... well, established users, again who should have known better, had already started the mud slinging. So disingenuous 'he started it' arguments are really the pot accusing the kettle of being an excessively dusky fellow....

 

[Anonymous]

T
I would agree... its just the rest of the post that really screws that point up and throws it to the winds....

As to insulting... well, established users, again who should have known better, had already started the mud slinging. So disingenuous 'he started it' arguments are really the pot accusing the kettle of being an excessively dusky fellow....

I was referring to skeptics in general, although you asked a specific point about one poster.

The fact is that even though Lobelia appears to have got fed up and left the MB entirely, Posters still think they can take insulting potshots at her 'IHTM' story. I believe that's saying something quite important about this MB. The FTMB actively encourages 'It Happened To Me' stories. Why should other Posters feel free to insult and challenge the honesty and sanity of those Posters brave enough to post their stories in good faith, without being challenged themselves?

 

[Anonymous]

In fact, to be quite specific, what I'm objecting to is not the attempts to analyze a Poster's story, or narrative, however much baggage the analysts bring to their attempts, but the attempts to analyze the Poster, as if that's what's up for discussion.

Provided a Poster tells their story in good faith, then it's The Story, Text, or Narrative that's important. Fine if prospective Dime store analysts, keen amateur sleuths and armchair critics want to explore the account and even ask pertinent questions. But, I don't believe it's really the right of FTMB members to go barging in and giving the storyteller the third degree about their mental health. Or, to offer their diagnosis of that Poster, as if they were some sort of patient, or absent third party.

However, Posters who do seem to be attempting to pull a fast one and wasting everybody's time, should be called out on the inconsistencies of their narrative account.

 

[_Lizard23_]

I guess it relates to a deep-seated need for attention.

Actually I think this is an incredibly valid point : not specifically in this case as such, but in reports of 'paranormal' experiences in general.
Because we do all like a good story there are definite benefits in having one to tell, whether they be a feeling of reassurance or awe at there being more to the universe than the current concensus pardigm allows and of being in some way 'special' for having first hand experience of it, or simply the pleasure of having people listen to you talk.

We are all recreationally expressing ourselves here.

On the other hand I happened to hear someone's first hand account of 'seeing a ghost' the other day in the pub and had to fight against a chorus of 'bollocks did you', 'were you pissed' and 'you're a nutter mate' from the various other people present to get the guy to even finish the story, so it is my opinion that upfront scepticism is probably not the most effective way of getting the maximum information out of a witness, and fear of ridicule undoubtedly prevents people from speaking openly about such experiences.

But as 'a fortean' what do I say to the guy in the pub who says he saw a grey lady walk through the wall as he lay in bed at night? I asked interested questions from a phenomenological point of view to get him to talk about it - 'were you scared' etc ..... but do I then begin to explore with him theories about hypnogogic states, the hazy liminal, infrasound and geological fault lines?

As it turned out I couldn't be bothered, but I feel sort of guilty about it.

 

[Anonymous]

I guess it relates to a deep-seated need for attention.

Actually I think this is an incredibly valid point : not specifically in this case as such, but in reports of 'paranormal' experiences in general.
Because we do all like a good story there are definite benefits in having one to tell, whether they be a feeling of reassurance or awe at there being more to the universe than the current concensus pardigm allows and of being in some way 'special' for having first hand experience of it, or simply the pleasure of having people listen to you talk.

We are all recreationally expressing ourselves here.

...

Everybody who Posts on a Message Board is seeking some sort of attention from the other members of that MB. Posters post that others might read their Posts. So, why single out one kind of Post for special attention? The FTMB actively invites and encourages Posters to give their 'First Hand Accounts' of the unusual. But, then some FTMB members accuse those persuaded to give their 'FHA' of having 'a deep-seated need for attention.'

Something has gone slightly skewed somewhere, I think.

 

[Dingo667]

Lobelia's story was interesting less as an abduction case than as an example of how we all reacted to her story. I don't doubt at all that she was totally sincere about it. What started to pee people off was when she wouldn't listen to any logical explanations at all. The more she stuck to the abduction scenario, the more people started to use harsher and to the point remarks to just hear her say only once:"Yes, that is a good point,but I'm still wondering how XYZ fit into all this", then we would have all discussed it with her and not against her. There are many threads were a poster isn't too sure and agrees with the rational beliefs just to find the odd: "Still, COULD have been a ghost/ufo/timeslip".
By being so singular herself, LO didn't give herself this chance, she almost made an unwritten statement that I believe in these circumstances is justified to be addressed, by stating that she would have been disappointed by a "normal" explanation and that she may have enjoyed the attention this story brings her.
After all there are many threads were people recognise certain traits as depression etc and say so, just for the original poster to take this on board. Which can be a real eyeopener for some.

An old saying in German is: "Whatever you shout into the forest is what you'll get back." [in other words she had made up her mind and shouldn't have been too amazed when almost everybody took the same stance as her by sounding as if they made up their minds about the opposite].
We are not AI bots that always answer rationally, we are humans and we react to certain cues in a human way. And just because she's not here anymore shouldn't stop us from still reacting to this thread or her as she is free to come back at any time.

 

[Anonymous]

Lobelia's story was interesting less as an abduction case than as an example of how we all reacted to her story. I don't doubt at all that she was totally sincere about it. What started to pee people off was when she wouldn't listen to any logical explanations at all. ...

But, that's my point.

It was Lobelia's story. She knew it best, so why should other Posters feel they had the right to insist that she was wrong in her interpretation of her story?

This Thread got well out of order at that point.

We had the story and we had Lobelia to answer questions on specific points of that story, which she did, quite generously. Nobody had any right to have a go at Lobelia over her interpretation of that Story.

Well out of order.

 

[_Lizard23_]

Everybody who Posts on a Message Board is seeking some sort of attention from the other members of that MB. Posters post that others might read their Posts. So, why single out one kind of Post for special attention?

Simply because I feel can be a relevant factor in the telling of and believing in first hand accounts, whether consciously or not, in general not just here.

The FTMB actively invites and encourages Posters to give their 'First Hand Accounts' of the unusual.

And presumably also encourages the discussion of them, by the way they are on open threads.
I agree with Wembly and Dingo, and with you too, Andro, that that discussion doesn't prove to be very productive when people have beliefs that they are unwilling to bend, no matter which side of 'the fence' they reside, as this thread demonstrates.

 

[Anonymous]

...

The FTMB actively invites and encourages Posters to give their 'First Hand Accounts' of the unusual.

And presumably also encourages the discussion of them, by the way they are on open threads.
...

Open discussion of the First Hand Account, not usually of it's Poster.

Does anybody else see the difference between the Poster and their Narrative Account? I think there is one and problems start when we confuse the two.

There have been occasions when the alleged First Hand Account has been so unlikely, that the intentions of the Poster have, quite legitimately, been called into question, but that's actually been quite rare.

But, if, quite sincerely, I told people on this MB that I'd been visited by Venusians, it would be one thing for Posters to question my account and even what I believed had happened. It would be quite another if those Posters got annoyed when I insisted that I was not mistaken and they started openly questioning my honesty and sanity. The bottom line is, what I truly believe is not really anybody's business, but my own, unless I tried to force that belief on other people (and that's happened on here a few times as well).

There has to be a methodology to Forteanism that separates it from total credulity at the top of 'the Dreaming Pole' and total skepticism at its bottom. One of the hallmarks of Forteanism, going back to the days of Charles Hoy Fort's shoeboxes full of newspaper clippings, is that the story's the thing. There's something intrinsic in the story itself that is important and that shouldn't be lost by immediately atomizing the story into generic fragments.

 

[BaronVonHoopla]

I think Lizard23 and Androman both have very good points, but I lean closer to Androman in this case. True, Lobelia wasn't exactly open to considering other possibilities, but to a degree she has no reason to be. There is a certain amount of 'under the radar' feelings a person has in situations such as these and these aren't the types of feelings that can be pinned down. I think it is intuition, or something close to that. And if Lobelia has this feeling that something was wrong, despite the fact that doctors haven't been able to find anything wrong with her, well . . . there's nothing anyone is going to be able to say to convince her otherwise.

And if people are going to refer to these posters as loopy and attention seeking I think they will simply choose not to post.

Skeptisism is one thing, close minded is another.



-Fitz

 

[Mighty_Emperor]

Does anybody else see the difference between the Poster and their Narrative Account? I think there is one and problems start when we confuse the two.

Of course there is a difference but you can't really look at the account without also looking at the person. We all bring whole rafts of baggae with us to the table whch will colour our interpretation of events. The narrative can't exist in some kind of bubble.

Some people might interpret events as an alien abduction, demon attack or just a series of unrelated events. How we actually bring the elements together and construct the narrative is all coloured by our experiences, expectations, biases, etc., etc.

----------------
I would suggest that we shut this thread down until Lobellia returns (it doesn't seem fair discussing here in her absence) and, as we are already in a general discussion, we restart this as something like "Approaches to Interpretting Personal Fortean Experiences" over in The Human Condiiton.

Thoughts?

 

[Yithian]

Does anybody else see the difference between the Poster and their Narrative Account? I think there is one and problems start when we confuse the two.

While we can all be polite as possible your dichotomy would amount to analyising the lightning without looking to the storm that caused it. Indeed, that which it is part of. Whilst you can gain some insight analyising the story you'll never get a full picture (as far as one is possible) without looking to the teller as he both constructs and partly constitutes the narrative, however mundane or fantastical.

Don't let any Frenchmen tell you otherwise...

edit: Emps has jumped in with the essence of my point.
edit2: Don't shut it down - any questions can hang in the air without trouble.

 

[BaronVonHoopla]

Yes, nobody has been name calling.

I think more than enough threads have been locked lately, quite frankly.


-Fitz

 

[lopaka]

Agree with Fitz all-around, very good points made. The only thing I would 'tweak', for lack of a better word, about what I think AndroMan comes close to saying**, in part, is that we should seperate the poster from the account. Part of how we interpet/filter things is through our own experience, including our previous experience with that poster. I'm not commenting on Lobelia's experience directly (28 pages in and my fist post to this thread, I bellieve), but if YOU stated, AndroMan, with complete sincerity, that Venusian's had kidnapped you, one of the things I'm going to evaluate that with is my opinion on your credibilty in general. You've posted here for a long time and I've read a lot of what you've written. If, on the other hand, Beckjord were posting here again and starts talking about HIS Venusian abduction, my take on his account will be colored (and very differently, I might add!) by my prior dealings with him. Does that make it prejuducial/not open-minded on my part? I would think that's just another tool in our investigative bag. Which is NOT to say, that anyone should be belittled, demeaned or labled, but I'm not sure how one can completely differentiate between the teller and the tale-told.

**AM, I hope I'm not grossly misrepresenting your point here. If so, apologies.


EDIT: I type excruciatingly slowly. Did not see any post's since Fitz's one after Andro's. I'm all for the discussion continuing, whether in another thread or this one.

 

[Timble2]

I would suggest that we shut this thread down until Lobellia returns (it doesn't seem fair discussing here in her absence) and, as we are already in a general discussion, we restart this as something like "Approaches to Interpretting Personal Fortean Experiences" over in The Human Condiiton.

Thoughts?

IMO don't shut this thread down, but start your suggested thread, so this discussion as to how we individually interpret weird stuff can continue without using Lobelia as a specimen.

 

[Mighty_Emperor]

IMO don't shut this thread down, but start your suggested thread, so this discussion as to how we individually interpret weird stuff can continue without using Lobelia as a specimen.

:yeay:

Righto.

The new thread for general discussion of how we approach personal testimony is here:

www.forteantimes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=21252

A couple of points as we are leaving this thread open:

1. Direct questions to Lobellia about her experiences obviously can't be answered until she returns.

2. If people post in here and you feel it should be moved over to the other thread please use the re-organisaiton thread:
www.forteantimes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4301

Oh and whatever you do play nice and keep the punches above the belt

 

[dreeness]

When Lobelia returns, oh my, wouldn't that be a Fortean event?
Remember in Papillon, when Steve McQueen made a raft of coconuts and floated away from Devil's Island? Just as the closing theme music comes up, he says something. And what he says is definitely not "I won't be back until conditions improve".

...

(The Simpsons. Nelson cross-examining Milhouse.)
...

An anecdote, all by itself, does not rise to the level of evidence. Any commentary much beyond "how about that?" is just typing exercise and/or a pointless exercise.

"I saw a sasquatch once."
-- No you didn't.
"Yes I did."
-- I bet it was a bear.
"No it wasn't."
-- More likely a tall hairy tourist in an ermine thong.
"Nothing of the sort."
-- Are you quite sure you're not a loon?
"Yes, quite sure."
-- Let me put that question another way, or eighty other ways. Does Elvis talk to you? Do you see spots? Does your teapot wander around? And... hey, where are you going? Come back here. Gee, some people, eh? I guess that anecdote didn't hold up to scrutiny, by golly.


Things that even a wildly inadequate journalist will eventually realize:
(a partial list)

1) Press conferences do not go on forever and ever.

2) Sometimes there is only so far you can go, without more to go on.

3) Asking an interviewee if they happen to be a nutbar may often lead to rapidly diminishing returns in many instances.