|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Nov 17, 2020 14:27:04 GMT
I wonder whether your sources had the same talent for missing the point as you have? "Her detailed analysis of a number of specific cases" means what number exactly? As far as I remember she looked at as many cases which had been reported as she could discover and, critically, their outcomes. For anyone who is not a self-appointed expert, pages from this book explaining her methodology and range of research can be found here:books.google.co.uk/books/about/Speak_of_the_Devil.html?id=JBxfvDeQdmoC&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false I mention this title specifically as it is fine antidote to the 'survivor memoirs' and more credulous account of the phenomenon, many of which have been critically lacerated by professionals (EG Sinason's Treating Survivors of Satanist Abuse) Yet apparently not here. So what purpose do you serve? Time after time I am struck by the simplicity of your viewpoint. You seem to be aware that there was a flurry of complaints about "satanic" activity or at least your sources seem to be aware. How you dismiss them with a few somewhat questionable examples you cannot possibly approach close enough to judge? That's my methodology. It should be yours.
|
|