UFO Abductions Updated!

[Randall]

I think they already have--in some cases for a long time--all the basic data, including the psychology of those chosen to be witnesses. As the aforementioned work argues, witnesses tend to be credible people. The idea is to help increase acceptance of the alien reality or presence (even if it's far from proven, to laymen, yet).

In some cases like abductions, and in others where ETs are seen collecting rocks etc, study seems to be the purpose. But that's misleading. Even in those cases ETs show themselves to witnesses when this could be avoided. Familiarization is the real goal.

But there have been many reports of communication. It's not surprising that's possible; to my knowledge, researchers wouldn't consider a planet habitable unless its conditions resemble Earth's. That certainly suggests a similar evolutionary outcome and development. ETs definitely appear to represent a civilization, which is based on rationality.

Sure — I imagine some of that is the true in some cases, but I don't think it's safe to assume that it's all true in all cases. Even with something as familiar as our own species, every time I learn more, it just it makes me realize how little I really know. So I can't even begin to imagine being certain about some other highly evolved alien species.

About the only broad brush strokes I feel comfortable with are that they've visited out planet and that their pattern of behavior suggests study. For some of them, that study might be for the purpose you suggest ( familiarization ), while for others, it might be for scientific curiosity, and for others it might be for strategic purposes.

Other possibilities that we haven't mentioned here are that some cases might be purely accidental — like incidents where people experience portals or the Mandela Effect. Maybe it happens to them too sometimes, and they just end-up here as mystified about us as we are about them. If the aliens are a spacefaring race, that's certainly a possibility, because the universe on it's grandest scale is way weirder than spaceships.

 

[Trajanus]

Sure — I imagine some of that is the true in some cases, but I don't think it's safe to assume that it's all true in all cases. Even with something as familiar as our own species, every time I learn more, it just it makes me realize how little I really know. So I can't even begin to imagine being certain about some other highly evolved alien species.

I don't think their real purpose or goals are so difficult to figure out. The phenomenon is very deceptive but it isn't really all that hard to see through it.

About the only broad brush strokes I feel comfortable with are that they've visited out planet and that their pattern of behavior suggests study. For some of them, that study might be for the purpose you suggest ( familiarization ), while for others, it might be for scientific curiosity, and for others it might be for strategic purposes.

In many cases, their purpose looks like study but it's a facade. See e.g. 1973 The Year of the Humanoids.
The "study" facade crumbles under analysis. Aliens really come to be seen or observed.
In one case, aliens were seen picking up leaves or other mundane objects. But why in a backyard, and why, in this case as in so many others, the phenomenon did something (like make a noise) to attract attention? And why were the beings observed (displayed) clearly nonhuman? Why not wear a disguise? If the goal is just study, you don't want to disturb the world you're studying as reports of alien visitors may do. It definitely
looks like aliens, unlike true researchers, definitely want to be observed and recognized for what they are--even if both could easily be avoided.
The goal is familiarization, even if it's a long, slow process.

Other possibilities that we haven't mentioned here are that some cases might be purely accidental — like incidents where people experience portals or the Mandela Effect. Maybe it happens to them too sometimes, and they just end-up here as mystified about us as we are about them. If the aliens are a spacefaring race, that's certainly a possibility, because the universe on it's grandest scale is way weirder than spaceships.

I doubt there are any real accidents, given the level of their civilization and experience. Had there been by now some alien would've been stranded here--in an urban area-- with no means to get back, at least not promptly.

 

[Burnt State]

Just a couple of thoughts regarding these two ideas: witness credibility and familiarity as an objective. Generally speaking the curtain of laughter has always been drawn around witnesses and the majority of witnesses rarely speak out. Most sightings are isolated with inky one or two witnesses present who are rarely believed. Those witnesses in position of authority are routinely mocked and ostracized by their community. For some witnesses the impact is severe and life altering with few rewards and in some cases the deconstruction of their life.

While witnesses are central to paranormality they are marginalized for the most part and only serve to keep the stories alive. Sure, once upon a time the visions of shaman meant something to be us as did the myth of the trickster but not so much anymore.

This also makes the idea of familiarity a little bizarre as the most consistent through line regarding witnesses in the modern era has been mockery and marginalization, not credibility. If you want to familiarize a culture with a more dominant one then I'm not sure if it has been a success. Characteristics of the phenomena are mostly bizarre, absurd, theatrical, nonsensical, inexplicable and mostly alive only in the memory of the minds of those that saw something. The factually concrete cases are few and far between with little merit for a broader population.

The very act of abductions is a threatening, violating and disturbing series of events. The whole ball of wax remains elusive and steeped in lore over evidence.

The only real certainty I can detect from paranormal phenomena is that human beings have always seen and experienced weird and strange things. It's part of our cultural history of story telling the world over. I'm not sure if it adds up to much more than that, or that we can draw any conclusions from it aside from ways of interpreting the natural world and ways of explaining our own personal foibles i.e. in times of famine the little people got blamed for infanticide.

And when we look at the whole history of gods descending from the sky in magic ships.....well that story has been with us right from the start hasn't it?

 

[Trajanus]

Just a couple of thoughts regarding these two ideas: witness credibility and familiarity as an objective. Generally speaking the curtain of laughter has always been drawn around witnesses and the majority of witnesses rarely speak out. ......This also makes the idea of familiarity a little bizarre as the most consistent through line regarding witnesses in the modern era has been mockery and marginalization, not credibility.

That's misleading. Certainly skepticism remains. But since 1947 polls have shown increased acceptance of the idea of ET visitors. It certainly says something that many UFO books have sold well, witnesses have been respected guests on TV talk shows and--most significant perhaps--recent Presidential candidates have promised UFO disclosure if elected. That would've been unthinkable in the early years of the modern UFO era, and attests to gradually increasing belief. Certainly UFOlogy remains a fairly marginalized topic and we're still a long way from general, open acceptance. But I always thought familiarization was a slow process.

And when we look at the whole history of gods descending from the sky in magic ships.....well that story has been with us right from the start hasn't it?

Magic ships? Anyway, any ancient fool could make up stories whereas UFOlogy is backed by educated witnesses and some physical evidence.

 

[Burnt State]

Yes, there are educated and uneducated witnesses .....we've always had that. What you call familiarization assumes intentionality behind the source of witness experiences as opposed to it being a true unknown whose intentions are beyond our ability to ascertain.

What we have is a very strange phenomena that comes in all shapes and sizes and then we have societal interpretation of these things. One dominant interpretation remains E.T., martians etc....that's been a real focus for the modern era. Back in the day they were sky gods. What we see unfolding is the spreading and development of a modern myth in the way that the little people developed over time in locations around the world.

But that cultural myth doesn't mean there are actual aliens from outer space trying to familiarize us with the reality of their existence. That's just an interpretation of witness stories who themselves are interpreting things based on their own histories, strange evidence and the masses that in turn interpret these.

Some people are saying they're demons, others that it's the lizard people and others that they are making human hybrids to take us over. None of that has anything to do with the source of these phenomena - that's just us filling in the paint by numbers kit we are given by the so called "authorities" - that includes ufologists and govt.

The current powers that be seen to be really intent to tell us that they are studying real UFO's and now publishing it in mainstream papers. After decades of denial that should certainly raise your suspicions as to their true intentions. They still only show us what they want to.

 

[Trajanus]

Yes, there are educated and uneducated witnesses .....we've always had that. What you call familiarization assumes intentionality behind the source of witness experiences as opposed to it being a true unknown whose intentions are beyond our ability to ascertain.

Sure.

What we have is a very strange phenomena that comes in all shapes and sizes and then we have societal interpretation of these things. One dominant interpretation remains E.T., martians etc....that's been a real focus for the modern era. Back in the day they were sky gods. What we see unfolding is the spreading and development of a modern myth in the way that the little people developed over time in locations around the world.

IMO there's no valid comparison between irrational concepts like "sky gods" or "demons" and what we ourselves appear to be rapidly advancing toward. And it's not just a subjective exercise. The phenomenon shows up on radar occasionally--not a likely attribute of "sky gods" or "fairies."

Some people are saying they're demons, others that it's the lizard people and others that they are making human hybrids to take us over. None of that has anything to do with the source of these phenomena - that's just us filling in the paint by numbers kit we are given by the so called "authorities" - that includes ufologists and govt.

No, while sightings of "lizard people" and "hybrids" etc probably represent deception on the part of the phenomenon, they don't result from Ufologists or the government.

 

[Burnt State]

Sure.


IMO there's no valid comparison between irrational concepts like "sky gods" or "demons" and what we ourselves appear to be rapidly advancing toward. And it's not just a subjective exercise. The phenomenon shows up on radar occasionally--not a likely attribute of "sky gods" or "fairies."


No, while sightings of "lizard people" and "hybrids" etc probably represent deception on the part of the phenomenon, they don't result from Ufologists or the government.

You are making a lot of assumptions regarding the phenomena and its intentions. The lizard people and alien hybrids are entirely a product of the interpretations of witness stories made by ufolooligists like David Jacobs. The entire alien abduction mythology, as we currently know it, evolved out of the discussions of three men primarily, along with the Betty and Barney Hill abduction, which in retrospect, does have a lot of military psyops surrounding it combined with Betty's UFO obsessions. I think most of that story originates from her more than anywhere else. It is an interpretative history not a factual one.

Re: Radar Traces

Certainly these cases draw the most interest as they point to a materialist explanation of the phenomena, along with all those sightings and photos of what look like solid, and sometimes, metallic craft. However, we know that these examples are very few and far between against the vast collection of sightings, that do not point to a materialist explanation, but are, as Red Pill Junkie would say, "absurd by design". Often radar cases also point to bizarre capacities when they appear and disappear off the screens at random.

Vallee also has thoroughly documented the presentation of alien craft that behave more like immaterial ghosts than structured craft, as they fly through objects, or defy physics in their merging, separating and dissolving in the sky. He's not saying that everything is interdimensional, but just pointing out that we have a phenomena that behaves erratically and appears to be both material and immaterial according to witness testimony and trace evidence. Clark also identifies that we have materialist examples and then the majority of what we have are cases that are only alive in witness testimony, and are experiential in nature.

I guess what I'm saying is don't believe the Elizondo, area 51 scientist, govt disclosure hype. All that stuff is misdirection by the powers that be. We certainly should put no faith in mouthpieces that have long controlled the discourse regarding what the phenomena could be.

What I'm also saying is that the long cultural history of sky gods, demons, little people, airships, ghost rockets, aliens, triangles and tic tacs are part of an ongoing continuum of paranormal phenomena in our skies. These are not separate. They've always been here. The only thing that has changed over time has been our interpretations.

 

[Richard Hawkins]

You are making a lot of assumptions regarding the phenomena and its intentions. The lizard people and alien hybrids are entirely a product of the interpretations of witness stories made by ufolooligists like David Jacobs. The entire alien abduction mythology, as we currently know it, evolved out of the discussions of three men primarily, along with the Betty and Barney Hill abduction, which in retrospect, does have a lot of military psyops surrounding it combined with Betty's UFO obsessions. I think most of that story originates from her more than anywhere else. It is an interpretative history not a factual one.

Re: Radar Traces

Certainly these cases draw the most interest as they point to a materialist explanation of the phenomena, along with all those sightings and photos of what look like solid, and sometimes, metallic craft. However, we know that these examples are very few and far between against the vast collection of sightings, that do not point to a materialist explanation, but are, as Red Pill Junkie would say, "absurd by design". Often radar cases also point to bizarre capacities when they appear and disappear off the screens at random.

Vallee also has thoroughly documented the presentation of alien craft that behave more like immaterial ghosts than structured craft, as they fly through objects, or defy physics in their merging, separating and dissolving in the sky. He's not saying that everything is interdimensional, but just pointing out that we have a phenomena that behaves erratically and appears to be both material and immaterial according to witness testimony and trace evidence. Clark also identifies that we have materialist examples and then the majority of what we have are cases that are only alive in witness testimony, and are experiential in nature.

I guess what I'm saying is don't believe the Elizondo, area 51 scientist, govt disclosure hype. All that stuff is misdirection by the powers that be. We certainly should put no faith in mouthpieces that have long controlled the discourse regarding what the phenomena could be.

What I'm also saying is that the long cultural history of sky gods, demons, little people, airships, ghost rockets, aliens, triangles and tic tacs are part of an ongoing continuum of paranormal phenomena in our skies. These are not separate. They've always been here. The only thing that has changed over time has been our interpretations.

Well said.

 

[Trajanus]

You are making a lot of assumptions regarding the phenomena and its intentions. The lizard people and alien hybrids are entirely a product of the interpretations of witness stories made by ufolooligists like David Jacobs.

I don't buy the takeover scheme notion of Jacobs, but the witnesses clearly had a highly unusual experience and highly suggestive of ETs.

The entire alien abduction mythology, as we currently know it, evolved out of the discussions of three men primarily, along with the Betty and Barney Hill abduction, which in retrospect, does have a lot of military psyops surrounding it combined with Betty's UFO obsessions. I think most of that story originates from her more than anywhere else. It is an interpretative history not a factual one.

Barney spotted the craft through his binocs. If the Hill case was just a military psyops operation, they would've used a copter. Hill would've recognized a conventional craft.

Re: Radar Traces

Certainly these cases draw the most interest as they point to a materialist explanation of the phenomena, along with all those sightings and photos of what look like solid, and sometimes, metallic craft. However, we know that these examples are very few and far between against the vast collection of sightings, that do not point to a materialist explanation, but are, as Red Pill Junkie would say, "absurd by design". Often radar cases also point to bizarre capacities when they appear and disappear off the screens at random.

Vallee also has thoroughly documented the presentation of alien craft that behave more like immaterial ghosts than structured craft, as they fly through objects, or defy physics in their merging, separating and dissolving in the sky. He's not saying that everything is interdimensional, but just pointing out that we have a phenomena that behaves erratically and appears to be both material and immaterial according to witness testimony and trace evidence. Clark also identifies that we have materialist examples and then the majority of what we have are cases that are only alive in witness testimony, and are experiential in nature.

Many sightings could be holographic projections. Just because a sighting appears nonmaterial doesn't mean we have to invoke "ghosts, fairies " or other irrational concepts.

I guess what I'm saying is don't believe the Elizondo, area 51 scientist, govt disclosure hype. All that stuff is misdirection by the powers that be. We certainly should put no faith in mouthpieces that have long controlled the discourse regarding what the phenomena could be.

KDR's research, posted in his blog, demolishes all prosaic explanations for Roswell, including MOGUL. An ET event is reasonable and highly probable--and involved "nuts and bolts." Elizondo is not attempting to promote belief in retrieved craft. Like so many others he is attempting to undermine it, by including patently false info with his tale.

What I'm also saying is that the long cultural history of sky gods, demons, little people, airships, ghost rockets, aliens, triangles and tic tacs are part of an ongoing continuum of paranormal phenomena in our skies. These are not separate. They've always been here. The only thing that has changed over time has been our interpretations.

But the modern interpretation, ET, is the best, because it's rational. Not too many of the best educated people believe in "sky gods, demons" and similar fantasies. (Airships and ghost rockets were empirical, unlike them.) The ETH is by far the most reasonable and parsimonious view. All it requires is that life arose on a similar planet then evolved and progressed as we're doing; it's just farther along than we are. Now it is true the phenomenon can be confusing and bizarre at times. But that can be explained by the slow, careful pace of familiarization. While getting us to accept the reality of ET is the goal, it'll take many years before the bulk of people are really ready. To avoid the adverse consequences of preemature acceptance the phenomenon deliberately confuses our view.

 

[Burnt State]

Witness events are interpreted by their brains first trying to make sense of nonsensical material and then later by ufologists with an agenda. You can't put stock in anything that comes out of an agenda driven approach to the phenomena.

Yes, Barney spotted something in his binocs that scared him combined with the fear being generated inside the vehicle as well. But a light in the sky is a light in the sky. I always stop to pause and consider the roadside block with emergency crews that that they encountered along that drive.

Re: holographic projections - now you're discounting a very well documented history of witness experiences that stretches back into time. If you want bizarre then Aime Michel's documentation of Dr. X and his UFO experiences is enough to tell you about the strangeness of it all.

I don't think Roswell entered into the discussion, but I was pointing out that there's always a mouthpiece out there claiming they've got the goods and is all about misinformation, so we agree on that point. And there are these supposed materials that are actually physical that are being tested.

Sure, at the present moment it often looks like aliens from space. I would put my own UFO experience right up there with that appearance, but it doesn't make it true. I don't think you can discount the entire history of strange sky phenomenon or the direct parallels between fairy folk and UFO's that many a decent and cornerstone ufologist identifies.

What these supposed aliens are doing on the ground are not just confusing but patently ridiculous - again I point at the Broken arrow case and the Dechmont woods case. Who can travel from one solar system to the next but then tries to abduct people with incompetent robots or sea mines?!



That's why you can't ascribe any real intentionality behind the phenomena. It's an ongoing continuum and in its current state it looks like aliens from space, and before that it was fae folk and before thar sky gods etc. you can't sever the phenomenon. It's still just as weird and and bizarre as ever with people seeing flying chandeliers and bathtubs, or the ships from Ontario that couldn't get off the ground and looked like someone's failed physics project.

Like Bigfoot, you can't cherry pick materialist cases that point at an unknown primate in the woods. You have to take all the weird glowing eyes, disappearing in a puff of light at the end of a shotgun blast, crawling around like a spider or appearing alongside UFO's carrying light spheres all together as part of the Bigfoot package.

UFO's are also not a narrow band subject. What can be said of the witness experience beyond the fact that their brains interpreted it like it was aliens from space? What about the Langenburg case where the farmer saw the spinning tic-tacs in the field back in 1974 who at first thought they were some kind of goose blind? And what about all the hitchhiker effects and witnesses who go a little off the deep end following the experience?

I just don't think you can hang your hat on ET because it looks like that and proceed to draw conclusions from it because it's Occam's Razor. I guess I see intentionality to be a very difficult discussion as I've spent a really long time thinking about that and reading about it from Clark and Vallee et. al. and have come to the conclusion that, like them, there's not a lot of conclusions to be drawn just guesses.

But hey, to each their own.

 

[Burnt State]

This is going to repeat earlier Paracast discussions regarding materialism, folklore, UFO's and the human experience, but it's a good solid historical article. And it points at where most of ideas derive from. I'm not saying anything weird or new; it's all steeped in Vallee, Clark, Bullard, Coleman etc.and now being echoed by more recent commentators like Hanks, Bishop, RPJ, Hunter and Cutchin.

There's a throughline in this discussion that really starts with Passport To Magonia, written after Vallee's hardcore position that UFO's are from outer space. When you look at the whole of the phenomena you can't help but notice this sort of stuff has been taking place on planet earth inside human culture pretty much since the start. The more recent developments (the last 150 years) in paranormal aerial phenomena present us with technology always slightly familiar but advanced beyond our capacities. Is that just a function of the cultural front loading of the witness? It's hard to say, but these commonalities persist.

Peter M. Rojcewicz , PhD, "Between One Eye Blink and the Next: Fairies, UFOs, and Problems of Knowledge"

 

[Burnt State]

Synopsis of film

 

[Trajanus]

Witness events are interpreted by their brains first trying to make sense of nonsensical material and then later by ufologists with an agenda. You can't put stock in anything that comes out of an agenda driven approach to the phenomena.

Skeptics and disinfo agents have the agenda driven approach. UFOlogists like KDR accept some cases and reject others based on evidence.

Yes, Barney spotted something in his binocs that scared him combined with the fear being generated inside the vehicle as well. But a light in the sky is a light in the sky.

What he saw was no mere light in the sky. It was a technological craft, of an unknown type, with beings in it.

I always stop to pause and consider the roadside block with emergency crews that that they encountered along that drive.

Lots of times they appear; it needn't mean anything relevant.

I don't think Roswell entered into the discussion, but I was pointing out that there's always a mouthpiece out there claiming they've got the goods and is all about misinformation, so we agree on that point. And there are these supposed materials that are actually physical that are being tested.

There has been a plethora of misinformation pertaining to Roswell and similar claimed cases, but there remains a core of testimony that, combined with lack of any prosaic explanation that has stood up, clearly points to ET. Misinformation serves the same purpose as physical concealment--prevent full acceptance of the case and its ET nature.

Sure, at the present moment it often looks like aliens from space. I would put my own UFO experience right up there with that appearance, but it doesn't make it true. I don't think you can discount the entire history of strange sky phenomenon or the direct parallels between fairy folk and UFO's that many a decent and cornerstone ufologist identifies.

What these supposed aliens are doing on the ground are not just confusing but patently ridiculous - again I point at the Broken arrow case and the Dechmont woods case. Who can travel from one solar system to the next but then tries to abduct people with incompetent robots or sea mines?!

As I've tried to explain before, the phenomenon deliberately confuses us--in ways that cause us to question the ETH--because its still too early for open acceptance of ET visitors. There's no doubt the phenomenon generally wants us to think it's ET, for gradual familiarization--the prerequisite to open interaction. But it doesn't want us to be sure of this yet.
Hence the bizarre appearances and statements--including an apparent parallel with ancient/medieval garbage.

But hey, to each their own.

Lol , yeah.

 

[Burnt State]

Re: Kevin Randle

While I think he's a fantastic credit to the field and admire his Roswellian tenacity he does tend to use the phrase "ETH biased" a lot more often lately. His blog has an ETH flavour to the language but he debunks everything in sight and was once considered on the forum here to be a debunker straight out. Btw he also believes the the answer to the Hills' event is to be found in terrestrial origins and feels the entire abduction thing is a waste of Ufological resources. He's been pro UFO at Roswell and anti-UFO at Roswell. His ideas have also evolved over time as seen in his interviews with skeptic Sheaffer. I think this tells us that talking about the phenomena is a fluid thing and just can't start from a singular theory like it's a proven event to then derive ideas from there. That way lies the madness of alien human hybrids and lizard people living here on our earth eating our babies but masquerading as human beings.

@Trajanus so I guess we draw a line between us. I can understand that one branch of ufology is very rooted in the ETH with great certainty. Hell, even Vallee was once its biggest proponent and look where he went with it all after considering the whole of the phenomenon for as long as he has. Sure, the Trinity thing was a big misstep, but no one has contributed more to the field than him, except maybe Clark, and Vallee is firmly rooted in a "who knows what it could be but I'm very suspicious of the ETH" approach. At the same time he's still trying to analyse metals and do the due diligence to see if we have any real non terrestrial evidence available.

I've noticed in the field that there's a real tendency to sever the UFO discussion, as if it started with Kenneth Arnold and it's all obviously aliens from outer space. It's a bias IMHO that avoids both the history of the phenomena and the fact that most cases present an anti-materialiast vision of the phenomena while very few exist as hardcore radar trace, physical evidence cases. Just ask Randle for what he thinks are his top ten ETH cases...

I can see that you are bent on this ET familiarization campaign, so we really can't talk nuances of the phenomena, nor can we talk about its history, which is really the most fascinating discussion in ufology, as many of the major commentators and contributors to the field have presented over time.

Maybe you can provide what you think are the top ten ET cases? Maybe there's something there we can agree on?

And for the record, I wouldn't describe myself as Anti-ETH so much as I really don't know what the origin is. I'm open to all possibilities still, but I think the ETH is just the beginning of the discussion. Most of what we have based our ideas on in the modern era - Kenneth Arnold onwards, comes from witness testimony. And I think it is there where Jerome Clark has provided the most important way of looking at the phenomena.

We have hardcore materialist cases, or what he calls Event Phenomena and then we have the great bulk of what makes up UFOlogical history which is witness testimony that he calls Experiential Phenomena. When he says this he doesn't mean it's all happening in someone's head as he's repeatedly stated on the Paracast, but that paranormal experiences take place inside of some other reality that is neither imaginary nor concrete. Think Jenny Randles' Oz-factor here. This kind of non-binary thinking always drives @Randall crazy, especially when he interviewed Clark. It's not a simple discussion but it's also the best way we have at looking at unprecedented events that happen to people that defy language. They tell us it looks like aliens from outer space all the time, because what else could it be, what else can we hold onto? Perhaps there's something much stranger going on here, hence paranormal Bigfoot!

 

[Burnt State]

P.S. in a more recent Coast to Coast interview Randle only identifies Levelland (because of his book I suppose) and Shag Harbour as two solid UFO cases. He doesn't say they're aliens but just that those are the two good cases. You would think he would have a barrage of cases to list but he doesn't. Who does?