The point of the data base is that it contains as much detail about a report as possible. Yes, even percipients' names. An undertaking of strict confidentiality is always given -in writing if necessary. But some say "no" and that leaves me in an awkward position.
I have just trawled through one site where what might normally be termed "abductees" or even the "experiencers" all seem to be having the same experience and they seem to almost be full of incidents taken from paranormal and UFO TV series but are termed "Contactees"? I have no idea why since these are supposed to be involuntary seizures from homes -abductions.
"I thought I heard footsteps" -obviously aliens (or creaky floorboards?). "I woke up and had a bruise I could not remember having before" -aliens (or you never noticed the bruise before?). And the claims of abductions from childhood, bedroom visitants, from greys or "shadow figures" to semi transparent "reptileans", "Nordics", "hybrids" -and the "evidence" just does not back claims up.
Using a "Pseudonym to protect the witness" just does not gel when you then pose with the percipient for a photo!
And the claims of "psychic abilities" and mothers who are "mediums" and so on are seemingly straight from TV/movies. If these cases are/were factual then we should now be working under the control of a new humanoid race whose powers exceed those claimed for Uri Geller in his hey-day.
I am not sure whether this is just investigator gullibility or inexperience but each case could just be made up by the investigator -how do we know the man/woman in the photo with them is not cousin John or cousin Jean?
And claims that now adult abductees are in fact "multi-dimensional star children" with psychic abilities smacks of trying to wring more money out of books or just make money.
Yes, in many cases I think that some of those who are experiencers -I use that term since I do not believe aliens nor inter-dimensionals are abducting them- do need support and help because what is happening is not nice and they need to learn how to deal with it (for instance, read Ann Druffel's How To Defend Yourself Against Alien Abduction). However, I think this is distracting investigators and researchers from any real evidence of possible alien activity.
When someone says "I saw the image on Whitley Streiber's book and said 'that's what I saw!'" I bite my tongue and do not say what I think of Streiber's account. Honestly, I think it is made up -but very lucrative.
In fact, if I went by all the personal websites of abductees and UFO groups I really would need to ask myself if I was really human!
Deadline after deadline for disasterous events have come and gone and I think Ufology has spent too much time pandering to the "Grey abduction phenomena" -even if it gets them book deals or TV air time all that does is create more abductees. The Hills -I'll believe. Streiber -no.
We need to get back to the basic data of pre-1985 and see what cases since that time correlate with reports now.