A Complex Mystery With No Easy Answers
By Sean F. Meers
A complex mystery with no easy answers. That is the phrase that comes to mind when best trying to describe the Linda Cortile UFO abduction case. The brazen alien abduction of a New York City woman from her apartment in the presence of multiple firsthand eyewitnesses, and multiple indirect witnesses, is not something that one expects as having a place within the realm of possibility.
Linda’s case is comprised of numerous, separate events dating back to her childhood. Like many cases of alien abduction there is no outright proof. The evidence, however, is significantly extensive and varied. It includes witnesses of varying degrees, documentation, audio recordings, video recordings, X-rays, photographs, drawings, minerals, fabrics, antiques and medical evidence (physical and psychological).
In addition to the multiple witnesses (of varying degrees) to Linda’s witnessed November 30, 1989 UFO abduction, there were also multiple witnesses (of varying degrees) to other events and aspects of her case. These witnesses became apparent, and in some cases came forward publicly, incrementally at random times over the slow, steady course of nearly three decades.
Like all high profile abduction cases it has been repeatedly and vociferously attacked publicly and clumsily labelled a hoax. The foundations of these attacks and accusations have, upon scrutiny, been determined to consist of suggestions, hearsay, double hearsay, false information, unsubstantiated allegations and flat out lies. The attacks and slurs against the case, and those affected by it, have purportedly been done under the honourable guise of legitimate skepticism, but are in fact pseudoskeptical in nature.
Real legitimate skepticism, from real legitimate skeptics, has been limited in regards to Linda’s case but it has been welcome and productive in the rare instances when it has presented itself. The primary reason for this is because some of the questions and points they’ve raised have begun inquiries that led to the identification and acquisition of new evidence in support Linda’s case.
If Not a Hoax, use Power of Suggestion on Naive Public
The most exercised rule of thumb that pseudoskeptics have employed in attacking Linda’s case has been “If the case can’t be proven to be a hoax, then simply suggest the case is a hoax and reflect on those suggestions as if they constitute proof.”
The other most commonly used tactic is oversimplifying specific elements of the case into brief, sensationalised and omission reliant distortions. The purpose behind this tactic is to reduce a case to series of weird sounding claims that appear to sum it up as an easily identified, straight forward hoax.
There is no simple solution to Linda’s case. She’s been repeatedly tested by multiple medical professionals who have determined her to be psychologically and physically sound. She does not possess the financial means to fund a hoax, a hoax that in Linda’s case would require initial and ongoing payments to dozens of people in perpetuity for their co-operation. She does not possess the genius level of intelligence that would be required to concoct, orchestrate and maintain a case as complicated as hers. She also does not possess the required dishonesty necessary to carry out such a task. The same cannot be said about some of her critics.
Not one of the critics of Linda’s case have produced any evidence of impropriety, dishonesty or fraud on Linda’s part. What they have put forward so far has been unable to hold up under scrutiny.
It would be tempting to say that the amount of false information spread about Linda’s abduction case is unprecedented, however it is unfortunately quite typical. The case is not one that can be appraised and understood quickly or casually. It is extremely complicated and the repeated, baseless public smearings from pseudoskeptics have necessitated the creation of numerous, lengthy rebuttals to their fallacious claims. All of which would need to be examined before one could reach an accurate understanding of the matter.
The case, however, is substantial, and for those willing to put the time, energy and resources into researching it objectively it is unquestionably a fascinating and labyrinthine mystery. – Sean F. Meers, November 1, 2014
This article is published with the expressed written permission of Sean F. Meers for publication on The Alien Jigsaw: alienjigsaw.com
Updates to The Linda Cortile Witnessed Case
Critique Rejected: A Consolidated Refutation of the Hansen/Stefula/Butler “Critique” of the Linda Cortile UFO Abduction Case
Critique Rejected (2016): A Consolidated Refutation of the Hansen/Stefula/Butler “Critique” of the Linda Cortile UFO Abduction Case
First published on March 23, 2016
September 3, 2015
Free-For-All: The Assassination of Budd Hopkins and Linda Cortile v1.3 has been released. Paper has been expanded.
“Budd Hopkins and Linda Cortile have recently been subjected to a new and heavy barrage of baseless, and viciously personal, debunking attacks orchestrated by Carol Rainey. Carol’s efforts have been supported and encouraged by Jeremy Vaeni and Jeff Ritzmann of Paratopia, who have dedicated multiple radio shows to sowing doubt, hate and suspicion about Hopkins and Cortile through the use of hearsay, omission, lack of fact checking and ridicule.”
“Budd’s health is extremely fragile, which makes the timing of these baseless attacks all the more sickening. To prove how unfounded these attacks and inaccurate statements are I have constructed a detailed, well referenced, point-by-point analysis and rebuttal of Carol Rainey’s article Priests of high strangeness: co-creation of the “alien abduction” phenomenon; as well as addressing and disproving various other statements that have been made by Carol and others to hurt or discredit Hopkins and Cortile.”
“I hope you appreciate these facts, and most importantly, I hope this information will help you make up your own mind about this unfortunate set of circumstances.”
Also New: Philip Klass’ Inaccuracies and Lies
Top of Page