• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Dr Phil promotes "Satanic Ritual Abuse" conspiracy theory

Cool, no worries. Seems like a headache.

I recognize the other names, but who is Debbie Nathan?

Robert you should read Debbie Nathan's book "Sybil Exposed".

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/11034297-sybil-exposed

from Debbie Nathan's book:

But what do we really know about how Sybil came to be? In her news-breaking book Sybil Exposed, journalist Debbie Nathan gives proof that the allegedly true story was largely fabricated. The actual identity of Sybil (Shirley Mason) has been available for some years, as has the idea that the book might have been exaggerated. But in Sybil Exposed, Nathan reveals what really powered the legend: a trio of women—the willing patient, her ambitious shrink, and the imaginative journalist who spun their story into bestseller gold.

From horrendously irresponsible therapeutic practices—Sybil’s psychiatrist often brought an electroshock machine to Sybil’s apartment and climbed into bed with her while administering the treatment— to calculated business decisions (under an entity they named Sybil, Inc., the women signed a contract designating a three-way split of profits from the book and its spin-offs, including board games, tee shirts, and dolls), the story Nathan unfurls is full of over-the-top behavior. Sybil’s psychiatrist, driven by undisciplined idealism and galloping professional ambition, subjected the young woman to years of antipsychotics, psychedelics, uppers, and downers, including an untold number of injections with Pentothal, once known as “truth serum” but now widely recognized to provoke fantasies. It was during these “treatments” that Sybil produced rambling, garbled, and probably “false-memory”–based narratives of the hideous child abuse that her psychiatrist said caused her MPD. Sybil Exposed uses investigative journalism to tell a fascinating tale that reads like fiction but is fact. Nathan has followed an enormous trail of papers, records, photos, and tapes to unearth the lives and passions of these three women. The Sybil archive became available to the public only recently, and Nathan examined all of it and provides proof that the story was an elaborate fraud—albeit one that the perpetrators may have half-believed.
 
Last edited:
I did some catching up with this thread, having not read it for a couple of months...

Doesn't the study discussed in this article by New Scientist give strong evidence that the people with DID indeed have a specific disorder, or has the accuracy of the study in question been refuted?

That study came up earlier in this thread, and was the topic of this thread.
 
Is the psychiatrist Colin Ross?

Thank-you for not putting a Dr. in front of that lunatic's name.

I can't understand why a magazine would call itself "New Scientist" and then edit and gag their writers half to death. However people who are like Ross have a long standing habit of threatening lawsuits and not everyone has the time and money to stand up to him in court.
Look at what happened to Doug Mesner, remember how his story about Neil Brick got pulled down, and Doug owes thousands of dollars in legal fees defending himself in court and everything he wrote was true and he had evidence to support every single word of what he reported.
Well, it just makes me sad to see such a talented, ethical journalist like Doug Mesner so severly slandered and defamed because he was trying to bring something important to the attention of interested people like himself, people like Rosie Waterhouse.
 
Last edited:
The New Scientist magazine edition was in stores today.

I've read the article. I may have more to say on it later, but I just loved the bit in it about "Carol" watching Sesame Street. She was watching Grover and Kermit talk about feelings.

"The puppets would describe a feeling and then explain to viewers how they felt and show how a feeling made them look. It was a light-bulb moment. Carol realised that a person could have a different feeling without changing to a different personality. 'I remembered that I never had to switch personalities when I felt a different feeling before I started therapy.'"

Simply the truth!
 
Is the psychiatrist Colin Ross?

Do you mean the guy who wrote the introduction to the book that this thread is largely about?

The guy who won the JREF Pigasus award with this invention? http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2008/08/colin_ross_has_an_eyebeam_of_e.php

The guy who was laughed out of court for his MPD/DID hogwash? http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...ity-excluded-in-twilight-rapist-insanity-case

The guy who is all over YouTube pumping his MKUltra silliness via new age channels? (In his eyebeam twattle, he talks about "Chi"!)

And still, this guy has a license. Sad.
 
Last edited:
Do you mean the guy who wrote the introduction to the book that this thread is largely about?

The guy who won the JREF Pigasus award with this invention? http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2008/08/colin_ross_has_an_eyebeam_of_e.php

The guy who was laughed out of court for his MPD/DID hogwash? http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...ity-excluded-in-twilight-rapist-insanity-case

The guy who is all over YouTube pumping his MKUltra silliness via new age channels? (In his eyebeam twattle, he talks about "Chi"!)

And still, this guy has a license. Sad.

Yes, that's the one!
 
False memory is in the news today following the release of a new study involving people with highly superior autobiographical memory.

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/emb-3...ecall-tripped-false-memories-study-2D11603596

Some people have an amazing ability to recall specific events, like exactly what happened on a particular day decades ago. For example, when one person with such so-called highly superior autobiographical memory (HSAM) was asked what happened on October 19, 1987, she quickly replied that it was a Monday, “the day of the big stock market crash and the cellist Jacqueline du Pré died that day.”

Yet even people with exceptional recall are as susceptible to being manipulated by false memories as the rest of us, according to new research released today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). The results could have enormous implications for legal proceedings, and any other forum that relies upon the memory of witnesses.

When a University of California Irvine team led by a graduate student Lawrence Patihis tested 20 super-memory people and 38 age- and sex-matched people with normal memory powers on three different tests known to elicit false memories, the HSAM people performed no better than the others.

[...]

In the test, all the people were asked to read about United Flight 93 of Sept, 11, 2001. Part of what they read stated that “video footage of the plane crashing” was taken by somebody on the ground. In fact, no such video exists.

Yet after reading the material, 20 percent of HSAM people and 29 percent of the other group indicated they had indeed seen the video. In a later interview, 10 percent of HSAM people stuck to their stories. Of the total number of fake details about the crash planted in their minds, there was no significant difference in false memory between HSAM and normal memory participants.

Another article discussing the study in more detail here:

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/11/how-many-of-your-memories-are-fake/281558/

So, recovered memory advocates, don't think memories can't be induced, or that people can have an excellent memory that is not able to be misled.

Link to the study: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2013/11/12/1314373110
 
Last edited:
I can't help comparing to this tread. :(

OP:
Well apparently some religious extremist, yes I'm slapping that label on Michael Pearl, has a book on how to deal with difficult children. In a loving way fitting of a believer of Christ.
He's even good enough to tell you what kind of hose to use when beating a child so that it doesn't leave any marks.
Sure three kids have died so far. But think of how many it works for!
http://www.examiner.com/article/anot...ain-up-a-child
Seems like the incident was 2 years ago and the adoptive parents were just sentenced.
 
I think it is worth noting, Orphia, that Fran Keller has just been released from a TX prison after spending 21 years in jail for accusations of Satanic Ritual Abuse.

Of note from the media coverage:

The appeal also attacked a prosecution witness who testified about patterns of ritual abuse at the Fran and Dan Day Care Center, saying time has shown clinical psychologist Randy Noblitt to be a charlatan and a crackpot.

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/local/fran-keller-to-be-freed-in-satanic-abuse-case/nb5S2/


You may recall interacting with his wife Pamela Noblitt - who holds similar views to her husband Randy -on Judy Byington's Amazon review site. She had these choice words for you:

...you are just a mean and bored individual, probably unemployed, who has the time and motivation to criticize things you evidently know little about.

http://amzn.to/1cx5Zky

Well, in the intervening year, it appears Pamela Noblitt has changed her screenname from her legal name to "Anonymous." But in the comments, you can see Judy Byington and others addressing her by her legal name prior to the change.

Byington writes:

Pamela Perskin Noblitt wrote on 12-26-12:

"It is my pleasure to support Ms. Byington's efforts on behalf of survivor "Jenny"

http://www.amazon.com/review/R1UHNZ...e=UTF8&ASIN=B008KOYCFC&linkCode=&nodeID=&tag=

Here Pamela is trying to defend the actions of her her husband in the Austin Chronicle. It looks like from the writers response, Pamela might have been involved in this case as well.

One would hope that Pamela and Randy Noblitt would eventually come to regret their roles in the Fran's Day Care case, as well as their (apparently continuing) amplification of the satanic ritual abuse panic.

http://www.austinchronicle.com/postmarks/2009-03-31/761915/print/

Randy and Pamela Noblitt will not serve a minute in jail for having sent a woman there for 21 years with junk science, dubious therapeutic techniques and, referencing the article, outright charlatanry.

Doug Mesner wrote a rather interesting piece on Randy Noblitt, which includes information on the Keller case, including the names of several professionals who took on Noblitt for his actions.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/...imb-Transplants-and-the-Music-of-Mind-Control

I thought you responded to Ms. Noblitt rather professionally, by the way, Orphia.
 
Last edited:
Thanks very much, dear Altus.

Wait, so Randy Noblitt's PhD was in Astrology?! WTF?!

There are no words to say how stupid and wrong his position of "authority" is.

I'm not surprised his wife is ashamed of her married name.

These people disgust me.
 
Randy and Pamela Noblitt will not serve a minute in jail for having sent a woman there for 21 years with junk science, dubious therapeutic techniques and, referencing the article, outright charlatanry.

Well now wait; it was Randy Noblitt who should be chastised for his role in getting someone wrongly convicted based on junk science. Pamela Noblitt may certainly support her husband all the way, but that's not enough to give her the same kind of liability unless she played some kind of more direct role than that case.
 
Well now wait; it was Randy Noblitt who should be chastised for his role in getting someone wrongly convicted based on junk science. Pamela Noblitt may certainly support her husband all the way, but that's not enough to give her the same kind of liability unless she played some kind of more direct role than that case.

From news accounts, Pam Noblitt was active in supplying the conspiracy stories that showed up in court.

The children also told of being flown on jets to Mexico and taken to military bases like Camp Mabry, home of the Texas National Guard, These reports squared with the satanic checklists and other satanic ritual abuse information the parents were gathering. Carol had discovered the airplane scenario in a book titled The Franklin Cover-Up: Child Abuse, Satanism, and Murder in Nebraska, recommended to her by Pam Noblitt, the wife of Dallas clinical psychologist Randy Noblitt, the president of the Society for the Investigation, Treatment and Prevention of Ritual and Cult Abuse. (Randy was guru and adviser to a number of Austin therapists.)

(The Franklin Scandal has been totally debunked.)

Carol, it appears, was the mother of one of the children whose testimony was used to convict Keller.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/story/innocent-and-damned/page/0/7

Pamela was also Executive Director of the "Society for the Investigation Treatment and Prevention of Ritual Abuse Mind Control and Dissociation," where this junk science was workshopped. This is a pretty damning piece on how state licencing boards and professional organizations are complicit in spreading this harmful junk science. To this day, therapists can get continuing education credits for attending workshops on this stuff.

http://maigret.psy.ohio-state.edu/~...ings/papers/ConspiracyTheoriesandParanoia.pdf

Judy Byington (the author) is currently pushing this mindcontrol/Ritual Abuse/dissociation clap trap to anyone who will listen. She claims to be meeting with senators.

Thanks for calling me out, Checkmite, to provide more evidence.
 
From news accounts, Pam Noblitt was active in supplying the conspiracy stories that showed up in court.

(The Franklin Scandal has been totally debunked.)

Carol, it appears, was the mother of one of the children whose testimony was used to convict Keller.


Well that's a bit more relation to the case; she recommended a book, and this other person was inspired by some claim in that book to manufacture her own further claim (I'm not particularly familiar with this Franklin case, or at least it doesn't ring any bells). However, I still have trouble calling that culpability on the same level as testifying in a trial and directly feeding the jury bad science. If she and this other parent had sat down together for the purpose of fabricating an allegation that'd more rightly be considered culpability.

That's not to say of course that she shouldn't be taken to task fully for any claims she makes on the internet, as a separate matter.
 

Back
Top Bottom