Janet Ossebaard ~ The Evidence
I recently received a copy of Ossebaard’s new book `The Evidence` in which she discusses the evidence behind the crop circles.
Earlier in the year she had written to me saying she had read all my copyright articles on my web site and would like to write up my research. On reflection I wrote saying that I did not feel the time was right and that I would write it up myself when I considered this to be appropriate. I also wrote asking her to send me copy prior to publication of anything she wrote that might relate to my research. She promised to do so.
This never happened.
Ossebaard’s reason for not sending copy as promised: `I was too busy, I was too stressed` is totally inadequate, unprofessional and an abuse of my trust.
On reading the published book, I saw that an entire chapter `Effects on People` (p.66-87) had been devoted to the research I have conducted over the past 20 years. To my dismay the many excerpts from my articles when read in her edited form, do not give an adequate account of proceedings. Taking this problem of context together with the numerous inconsistencies and errors found throughout this chapter, it is clear that Ossebaard is not competent to evaluate my research.
On p 84 she writes: “Could it be that crop circle visitors who suffer from Parkinson’s experience a certain degree of healing due to the increased dopamine production in the brain?” Firstly, to give the impression that any such healing might take place is the worst sort of tabloid sensationalist journalism and gives false hope to desperate people. Secondly I adamantly refute this conclusion, since it is based on an inaccurate analysis of my research: in 20 years there has only been one single case reported where the person experienced a very temporary relief from their condition. There have been NO cases of Parkinson sufferers experiencing any degree of actual healing as a result of visiting a crop circle.
In her chapter `Furher Research’ ((Further?) she discussed the research I organise on a yearly basis. In the piece `ESR-measurements: Electrical Skin Resistance` she gives the false impression that the process is similar to a lie detector test. This is not the case, see the description in `Best system V Lie Detector Tests. http://www.lucypringle.co.uk/articles/passage/ .
As regards any other matter Ossebaard discusses in this book the reader would be well advised to verify the original research material, for while Ossebaard is entitled to her own opinions, her behaviour in my case demonstrates that she knew perfectly well that I would take a dim view of her particular edit of my material and ask for substantial rewrites. Her actions also demonstrate that she does not hold her readership in high regard, since she is apparently happy to supply crop circle researchers with highly selective data. In fact, given her attitude towards my research material, doubt must surely be cast on the validity of the remaining material in this book?