It appeared that my last post caused a quiet uproar and ruffled some feathers. James Carlson misunderstood my position concerning Paul Kimball's revelation that Robert Salas underwent hypnosis to reclaim memories of the Oscar event. Again, Salas told this to Paul Kimball and Paul had merely had it as an aside of his re-look at the cases presented in the top ten UFO cases listed in a film which he produced.
It's important to add that Paul did not provide the list for the film as he was only the producer. Paul made this clear in other on-line venues. The importance of the last blog posting was Paul's take on the Malmstrom cases and it should be of no surprise that I would find that of interest regardless of Paul's opinion, but I found it gratifying that he seemed to hold the same opinion as I, as well as others.
Paul had left a good comment on the last post, but chose to delete it while I was in the midst of typing out a reply. I don't know the reason why, but that's his prerogative to do so and I'll leave it at that.
Back to the Salas hypnosis angle. Since the psychological angle of UFOs is the main driving force that spurs my interest, the hypnotic angle is of importance for due consideration. It is potential evidence or another potential piece of a puzzle. To discard this puzzle piece without critical examination is intellectual dishonesty in my view. Notice that I use the term "potential" for I've no direct knowledge nor have I seen Kimball's film segment which Salas so states. I believe, from Paul's deleted comment, that this segment was edited out due to time constraints, but Paul has that edited section...as I seem to recall.
Why is the hypnosis angle of importance? It simply goes to show his state of mind at a given point in time. It may also be part of the foundation of confabulatory thinking in which he constructed the UFO scenario and his seeking of validation for his belief. This may explained why he drew others into the mix both real and imaginary.
Should Salas get a free pass from me based on "recovered memories" via hypnosis? No, I'm afraid I can't logically and intellectually do that. The recovery process of regressed memories through hypnosis is highly controversial in its own right, and in some cases, its highly dubious.
Under what conditions was the hypnotic therapy administered to Salas? Who did the therapy and when was this accomplished? These are questions which I've no answer, but are relevant to ask.
I am curious as to which one of the numerous versions that Salas has put forth were the results of hypnosis. There are quite a few to be considered. How does his final version which he sealed as official fact via an affidavit compare to the hypnotic induced version? Lot's of questions regarding that angle.
Regardless of the issue of hypnosis, Salas had researched his case for quite some time even teaming up with researcher Jim Klotz. He, like I and others, would have discovered that no official/unofficial documents existed to support his claim. The only documents that Klotz had secured via FOIA was the Echo Flight shutdown...with no mentioning of an Oscar incident. Further, other missile crew members could not support Salas' claims...missiles off alert and UFO reports. One does not need hypnosis to figure that out.
Eric Carlson and Walter Figel had on countless times stated that no such incident at Oscar took place. Salas' crew commander, Fred Meiwald stated in a personal letter to Salas (1996) that he had different memories that were contrary to Salas' claims.
This should have been a wake-up call, but instead Salas has pressed on furthering the cementing of a disjointed confabulation and selling it as reality. Yet, its reality that should have steered him in the opposite and only logical direction. Why he has chosen to do so only he knows. So while the hypnosis revelation is interesting, it does not change the outcome nor does it redefine the conclusions.