I don’t think an alien abduction event would yield any scientific evidence, at least not the kind of evidence that can be measured and used to make an inference. We are of course talking about beings that must be way more advanced technologically then we are. What evidence can one expect?
Which only leaves us the testimonies of the alleged abductees. Surely they can’t all be lying. Especially in cases where there is more then one witness and they have willingly taken Lie detector tests. The Travis Walton case is a case in point.
-+ Many abduction stories contain some sort of surgery, yet, no evidence of any surgical procedure has ever been found - even in cases where the individual claims that organs were removed, yet, upon examination, the organs are still in the body where they are supposed to be located.
-+ Many abduction stories contain that some sort of device was implanted; however, no evidence of any such device has ever been found, by CAT, MRI, X-Ray, sonogram, etc… nor has any radio or other magnetic transponder signal ever been detected - even when the subject has been placed within a faraday-cage to isolate any such signal from back ground interferences
in the two above cases, could there be a surgical technique so advanced that we may not be able to detect some sort of deviation in the human body, the possibly is certainly there; however, the probability with today’s modern medicine would be very low
As for not being able to detect some sort of transponder signal from an implant, really? We can pick up and discern signals that have literally traveled billions of light years with energies so small that the biochemical reactions in the average human body create more electro-magnetic energy. In fact, I have an instrument in my lab that uses pico-voltage in the detector (0.000000000001 Volt) and that is still considered to be a huge energy when compared to radio-telescope detection! Once again, possibility, sure I’ll let you have that, probability, no, I will not concede that point as this probability is so small that it is essentially zero.
-+ Lie detectors have been found to be un-reliable, so much so, that under US federal law usually precludes there use in any court of law and many psychologist completely debunk their use for most, if not all, reasons (this article for example (emphasis is mine):
American Psychological Association
(Home// Psychological Science// Research in Action// The Truth About Lie Detectors…(link))
The Truth About Lie Detectors (aka Polygraph Tests)
Most psychologists agree that there is little evidence that polygraph tests can accurately detect lies.
(…)
The accuracy (i.e., validity) of polygraph testing has long been controversial. An underlying problem is theoretical:
There is no evidence that any pattern of physiological reactions is unique to deception. An honest person may be nervous when answering truthfully and a dishonest person may be non-anxious. Also, there are few good studies that validate the ability of polygraph procedures to detect deception. As Dr. Saxe and Israeli psychologist Gershon Ben-Shahar (1999) note, “it may, in fact, be impossible to conduct a proper validity study.” In real-world situations, it’s very difficult to know what the truth is.
A particular problem is that polygraph **research has not separated placebo-like effects **(the subject’s belief in the efficacy of the procedure) from the actual relationship between deception and their physiological responses. One reason that polygraph tests may appear to be accurate is that subjects who believe that the test works and that they can be detected may confess or will be very anxious when questioned. If this view is correct, the lie detector might be better called a fear detector.(…)
as for multiple witnesses, again, even multiple eyewitness testimony has been found to be un-reliable
Scientific America: Why Science Tells Us Not to Rely on Eyewitness Accounts
(I’ll only link to the article here, after reading it, I feel that to pull anything out of context would do the article a dis-service:
scientificamerican.com/article/do-the-eyes-have-it/)
They may really believe what they are saying is true, yet, the idea may have been suggested and grown in their mind.
Therefor, I hold many, if not most, abduction stories to be suspect, not because of my Catholic Faith (indeed, because of my Catholic Faith and my scientific background I hold the position that there is other intelligent life out there - somewhere) but because of my scientific background and understanding of how Chemistry, Physics, and Mathematics works within our universe. - I venture to say that many of the other doubters are in agreement, even if they do not understand the foundation they are using to disbelieve the abduction stories, not because of faith, instead, because of science.
(I hope that reads well, too many distractions tonight!
)
