UFO Conjectures

Sunday, May 21, 2017

KIC 8462852 (Tabby's Star) is "misbehaving" again


[From my Facebook feeds]


ETs hacked Voyager 2?


[Fron my Facebook feeds]


Saturday, May 20, 2017

The 1967 Michalak/Falcon Lake UFO incident (from Google Alerts)


(Zoam Chomsky dismisses this sighting but, as the newspaper article indicates, it's a good one.)


Ufology = Escapism

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.
Because of my psychological background and training, I can’t help being attuned to quirks in the UFO community, not just UFO witnesses but ufologists (UFO buffs, investigators, and wannabes).

And I’m nonplussed by the blatant, over-ripe examples of escapism on the part of ufological practitioners.

“Escapism. In psychoanalytic therapy, this term denotes the tendency to escape from reality functioning to the relative security of childhood, a tendency often manifested by an accentuation of neurotic symptoms. It is a form of resistance.” [Psychiatric Dictionary, Fourth Edition, Hinsie/Campbell, Oxford University Press]

(The neurotic state also applies to physicists, especially those involved with cosmology as I’ve noted in passages here, previously, about the childhood demeanor of such scientists when they’re discussing their work and findings or celebrating a successful result such as a Mars Rover landing.)

In the UFO world, escapism is highlighted by the dominant desire to see UFOs as a contingent of extraterrestrial visitors, coming to save the human race from itself or to aid our species with “extraterrestrial knowledge” and “aid.”

I won’t name names, but in the tangential fringe lore online, one can see a grasping desire by those who suffer economic plight or physical deformity or just plain homeliness. (Ray Palmer was an example of the deformity group, while a few “pals” of mine suffer personal homeliness or economic debilitations of life’s exigencies.

There are few UFO enthusiasts who are endowed with beauty or riches, so one might conclude, and I do, that these aficionados seek the solace and comfort of the UFO ET meme.

They escape into a delusional, fantasy world, based in their childhood dreams, of otherworldly existences, exacerbated by their failure in adulthood to achieve dominance in looks or economic wherewithal.

UFOs offer a cover for their perceived shortcomings, and they milk the idea of “ETism” to assuage their “failures” in life.

(Look at the demeanor of UFO people – their physiognomy, their financial status, their success, or lack of it, their slovenly dress, and their cultural interests or lack of such.)

Ufology is a lousy, deprecated fixture of the social milieu, and the people involved in it are a species representing the welter of persons whom psychiatry use to treat but now, generally, ignore, as does the rest of human society.

Image above from:


Thursday, May 18, 2017

Ufologists miss the point

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.
I notice that some UFO persons I chum around with or use to are ignored in ufological circles (me among them but for different reasons).

Ufology’s buffs, who are ignored, are those who persist in clubbing “archaic” UFO cases, splitting hairs about those cases, ad infinitum, ad eternum, ad nauseum.

They don’t conjure with UFOs per se but bedraggle details that surround the phenomenon or sightings that interest them or, rather, UFO events that they have gathered material about over the years, dishing out that material in a way to try and establish some ufological acumen and/or “fame.”

Detail upon detail is piled up in insensate commentary that doesn’t address the UFO phenomenon but does provide red-herring information that takes readers away from the enigma, slugging them with UFO detritus that is peripheral to what UFOs are, an explanation for them.

It’s the phenomenon that should be addressed, not the niggling, fractious details of what UFO witnesses were wearing, how they reacted, and what happened to them after their observation or incident.

In science, it’s the phenomenon that is researched, not the ambient patina of irrelevancies that surround it.

Yes, I understand that some physical forms (matter, energy, et al.) are considered in the context of other egregious elements that may or my not impact it, but a physical item itself is never shunted away from scrutiny in order to zero in the patinal attributes of an experiment or process.

In ufology, the UFO itself is, generally, smothered by the attention given to outer factors that may, indeed, have some bearing, but usually only becloud aspects of the thing (UFO) itself under examination.

An example that one of my readers likes is the 1952 Desvergers event in Florida where irradiated soil was found underneath where the alleged UFO hovered.

But the Blue Book investigators and latent UFO researchers and hobbyists insisted upon exploring, to the detriment of the phenomenal aspect (that irradiation), the iffy background of the scoutmaster (Sonny Desvergers) who said he had a UFO experience.

Sure the idea that Desvergers seemed like a person who might create a UFO hoax, and subsequent behavior by him obviated that, but that his "hoax" left ground cover that was radiated was set aside in deference to the “bad character” aspects of the witness (Desvergers).

Look at the commentary at some UFO blogs and web-sites. You will see the charney attention to similar peripheral details that choke the life out of an interesting case; the 1964 Lonnie Zamora-Socorro episode is an example.

My pal Kevin Randle has had an exemplary UFO blog for a long time but with it comes his retinue of followers who engulf his prose and ideas with comments that have nothing to do with the UFO event he’s presenting; the comments are self-aggrandizing tributes to the person commenting.

This is the case with other UFO blogs and sites. It’s the commentary that’s killing ufology and the UFO topic.

Like that now banal political slogan of a few years back – “It’s the economy, stupid” – it’s the UFO, people, not the adornments that surround it.


Wednesday, May 17, 2017

UFOs thrive on (need) attention in order to exist?

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.

The quantum bromide that quantum particles in a superposition state, do or do not exist until they are measured (observed), allegorized in the Schrödinger “thought experiment” of the cat in a box, applies to UFOs.

That is, UFOs do not exist until they are observed, but does that observation create the UFO sighting or does the UFO event exist before it is observed?

Sartre’s “existence precedes essence” may apply here, but does it?

In Thomistic philosophy “what a thing is" and "that it is" are completely different.
Do UFOs exist, philosophically, or are they a construct of observation (as quantum mechanics indicates)?

And how does consciousness enter into the equation? Is there a psychological component integral to UFOs, or even a neurological component?

Do any of these things matter to ufology?

We can work with Thomistic (Aquinas’ philosophy/theology) to an extent by agreeing (or not) that UFO exist, and our job is to determine what UFOs are,

Or we can say that UFOs do not exist until they are observed by a witness (an observer).

We are on the horns of many dilemmas: UFOs exist or not, they are what, and do they only exist in the fervid mind of witnesses (observers), as Jung suggested in his Flying Saucer book?

The essence of ufology is to ignore these consequential matters and deal with the superficial aspects of UFOs, their appearance and disappearance, leaving the question of their reality to simmer in the witness reportage, which is an iffy proposition by all accounts.

While the reality of UFOs, their existence and essence, does not have the dynamic importance that the reality of God question imposes upon us, the UFO topic is of a same kind, actually.

Do they exist? What is their essence? And does the human factor (their observation) play a part in either question?

The problem is that ufologists, UFO buffs, do not have the wherewithal to conjure with the philosophy of UFOs (or ufology); that is, persons interested in UFOs are not equipped to deal with the philosophical/psychological/neurological/quantum underpinnings that are intrinsic to a real study of the UFO phenomenon.

You know that. I know that. So here we are, in a quagmire of ignorance imposed on ufology by its practitioners.

That has been the bane of the topic since its catalytic heyday, 1947.


Tuesday, May 16, 2017

Enervated Ufology

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.
What strikes me, more than anything, about UFO buffs and ufologists is how lazy and unenergetic the UFO crowd is.

Seeing UFO personalities on those gagly UFO TV shows, aside from how sloppily dressed and scruffy they look, I notice that there is no spark or sparkle in their presentations. (Well, there’s Giorgio A. Tsoukalos, Ancient Astronaut guru, but that’s it.)

Even visiting UFO web-sites and blogs, one sees a dearth of energy or vibrant creativity; everything is somnambulistic.

The topic and the people immersed in it are old, generally, so they are tired but even the younger set, 50 or so in age, are without youthful vim and vigor.

UFO topics are presented in cob-webby environments, often in black with white text, a sure sign of a depressive patina.

“The bloom is off the rose” as the old saying goes, and it surely is off the gaggle of UFO “celebrities” who show up on those awful television portals.

UFOs and ufology need a spark of energy and dynamic thought, but from where will it come?

Youth (millennials and Gen Z “kids”) have other fish to fry, it seems.

(As you can see by my word use and references that I fall into that aged, cranky category that I’m disparaging here.)

Anyway, let’s see some spirited and vigorous ufology, flush with vibrant personalities, well-scrubbed and refined in dress so that the topic is highlighted by energy, not the muted refrains of the deathly crew now navigating the UFO story into oblivion.


Monday, May 15, 2017

The New Paradigms: Ufologists pay attention!

Copyright 2017. InterAmerica, Inc.
I’ve noticed and posted some profound changes in scientific thinking recently:

The Big Bang is under assault by some physicists who can’t convince themselves or others that there was nothing before the Big Bang happened.

“The most problematic liability of each of the aforementioned Big Bang hypotheses was their inability to ultimately explain the literal origin of the Universe. Each sequence of events started out in medias res (in the middle of things).”

The Big Bang inflation theory has problems.

“A recurrent criticism of inflation is that the invoked inflation field does not correspond to any known physical field, and that its potential energy curve seems to be an ad hoc contrivance to accommodate almost any data obtainable. Paul Steinhardt, one of the founding fathers of inflationary cosmology, has recently become one of its sharpest critics.”

Two programs on he National Geographic channel Monday night [5/15/17] had references to items that I torture you with here:

The idea of Earth’s solitary isolation in the cosmos, with the clarification from Carl Sagan in his original Cosmos TV series, inserted in Neil deGrasse Tyson's new Cosmos series.

And in Year Million, NatGeo presented the concerns and benefits of Artificial Intelligence (Robots), AI being a possible explanation, by me, of UFO probes, a few.
Then there is the creeping idea that there may be a God in place for our universe and reality, below, in a posted link here [May 15, 2017].

How do these things impact the UFO topic (and ufology)?

Well, a paragraph in a review of new books about The Reformation in the May 5, 2017 Times Literary Supplement [Page 28 ff.] by Charlotte Methuen had this:

“MacCulloch’s underlying message [in his book All Things Made New] is the need for ‘the proper study of history” which, he argues, ‘forms a powerful barrier against societies and institutions collectively going insane as a result of telling themselves badly skewed stories about the past.” [Page 29]

So, one needs to know the real history of things – UFO stories, in urtext form as I beleaguered the other day here – in order to place them in the context of new thinking.

And the new thinking is showing up more and more, placing old-dog ideas about the cosmos, advanced species and life, and the rocky foundation of many physical laws that many (or you) hold dear.

Nothing is sacrosanct and the idea that UFOs are ET oriented is skewed history, a biased meme inserting itself in UFO lore by those who have a psychotic need to believe that beings have visited and are visiting here, to save us from ourselves or to offer advanced knowledge that we might use to save ourselves, with outside help.

While a few UFO die-hards and quidnuncs think that the UFO topic needs to be reframed, that is goofy.

The UFO topic, the UFO canon (lore) only needs a decluttering, a removal of false history and “facts.”

The chore seems daunting but it really isn’t. Kevin  Randle has begun the cleansing of Roswell clutter and Nick Redfern is constantly refining old UFO tales with new insights and real facts.

And you can do your part by refusing to continue flogging old, errant UFO broadsides and presenting them as truths, when you know they aren’t: MJ-12 is one.

Don’t continue to be “insane” but try to be intellectual, advanced in thought, just as are those who now see old (and even some new) physics laws as wayward and wrong.


There seems to be a God



Sunday, May 14, 2017

The Platitudes of UFO ETs

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.

When Earthlings allegedly encounter and interact with beings (or humanoids) that supposedly emerge from flying saucers or UFOs (unearthly craft), the colloquy (telepathically or verbally) goes something like this: the visitor says, “We mean you no harm. We are from “Nerfworld” far away in the galaxy (or universe).” The Earthling says, “Can I get you something to drink?”

Now does that seem like an opening that bespeaks advanced intelligence, on either side?

It seems that an advanced, sentient species (from outer space), after all the years of purported UFO sightings and interactions with Earthlings, would provide a profound truth or sensible interplay of some kind.

That is, they (the advanced species) wouldn’t, after all the years of human contact, condescend

The  professed abducted “conversations” with outer space visitors, from Adamski through to Betty Hill and Betty Andreasson almost always include an offer to tour the “ship” to which the abductees have been taken.

The advanced being from elsewhere invariably sounds like the abductee if the abductee were provoking an abduction or friendly kidnapping.

Contact with beings, outside the human reality – God(s), angels, demonic messengers, time-travelers, et al. – seem rather prosaic, mundane when it comes down to examining the being-to-person exchange or interaction.

Even in the Biblical encounters with God, that Entity, cloaks His or Her speech in sophomoric blather, “I am who am” for instance.

This suggests that the adductors may be (and are, as I see it) projections from the unconscious of the abductees, and nothing more.

The paranoid overlay of the abduction experience is palpable and noted by psychiatrists who’ve delved, objectively, into the phenomenon.

This reasonable explanation may account for the dearth in UFO abduction tales lately.

Everyone has caught on, even those who have a proclivity to be abducted, er, I mean paranoid.


Friday, May 12, 2017

The Misuse or Non-use of Urtext in Ufology

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.
Urtext is the definition for an original or earliest text [extant]; that is, a compose's first finished piece of music or a writer's final draft before publication of his or her written work.

In ufology, the first report or interview of a UFO witness sighting would be the urtext of that sighting.

For instance, Kenneth Arnold’s first interview about his iconic sighting would be the urtext version of what he allegedly saw.

Betty Hill’s first account of her purported abduction would be the urtext version of what supposedly happened to her and her husband Barney.

In classical literature, first copies of works, urtext copies, are what academics want to see, the most original work(s) of Homer or Shakespeare for instance.

In Biblical studies, the urtext of the Biblical writings are of primary importance.

For ufologists, the problem has invariably been that original UFO reporting is usually(?) accreted to by UFO buffs who often add extraneous material that favors their bias or inclination – the belief that UFOs are extraterrestrial craft for example.

Just as copies of Biblical manuscripts obtained errors or additions by errant or inept monks in their copying of Biblical books, UFO reports, likewise, are added to by inept or biased UFO aficionados, investigators, researchers.

The 1964 Lonnie Zamora Socorro sighting, a favorite of mine, as you know, was compromised by the initial, governmental investigators and UFO writer Ray Stanford, abetted by J. Allen Hynek who didn’t keep hold of the urtext description of the episode by Officer Zamora, and particularly the symbol or insignia that Officer Zamora said he saw (and drew).

Many UFO cases have become bloated and errant by the addition, inadvertently or mistakenly, of material that never was part of the initial witness account.

This sloppy methodology has been a bane of ufology, but little acknowledged by writers and readers of UFO material who, themselves, accept, blindly what they read in magazines or gather, especially, on the internet.

The disciplines of science and academia are eschewed by UFO enthusiasts for various reasons; i.e., laziness, ignorance, propagandistically inclined biases, et cetera.

Once, UFO followers and devotees adopt a tenor of serious, intellectual, academic demeanor for their ufological hobby, the UFO topic might resurge as a valid interest for science, the media, and the public at large.


Wednesday, May 10, 2017

A UFO Video and newspaper article you might find interesting

Our pal Yvan D provided, in a comment to a 12/31/16 posting here about the 1950 (1952?) Oskar Linke sighting, this video link (about UFOs) wherein Herr Linke appears:


And Yvan D also sent a 1952 newspaper article about the Linke episode:
My 2016 posting about the Linke sighting is HERE.

(The Oskar Linke story was brought back to life by a Kevin Randle article at his blog.)


Tuesday, May 09, 2017

From my Facebook feed(s)


Current Blog Stats for UFO Conjectures


The UFO Stasis (or Death?)

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.
In rummaging around the UFO blogosphere I noticed that a number of people who were active at UFO Updates 10 years ago have either gone underground or left the UFO community altogether.

(I posted some of the names at one of our UFO social sites.)

Contacting a few, I’m told that they were no longer actively interested in UFOs but still follow the topic sub rosa (as a lurker, rather than an overt observer).

No, it’s got nothing to do with ufological trolls or the internecine squabbling.

It’s mostly to do with the soporific, unstimulating nature of ufology and UFOs nowadays.

(I suggest you Google the UFO Update archives to see how wild and rowdy that place used to be. You’ll also see names of people quite active then, but not now.)

I get Google Alerts for Ufology and UFOs, but even they have fallen off precipitously lately, just three today [5/9] for UFOs and one for Ufology.

I know there is a remnant of UFO buffs still hyping UFOs, trying to salvage their investment(s) in the topic, some trying to forge ufological allegiances by various means.

That won’t work, long-range.

UFOs, as I keep harping on here (sorry), are really passé, although there remains a vital contingent on Facebook, where the die-hards have gathered and formed “friendships” whereupon they interact, rather dramatically, with each other.

But I don’t see any of the old UFO notables in those FB arenas, yet I do see vital interactions among UFO aficionados, some trolls, but few newbies; that is, the people working the Facebook UFO areas are the same persons who remain active in ufology even as it dies on the vine.

Being inside the UFO arena one thinks it’s vital and vibrant.

Standing outside the UFO arena, one will only spot a mosquito swarm of activity that has little or nothing to do with the social, political, cultural, scientific, entertaining milieux.

I know most of you don’t like to read these dour messages of mine, but that’s the way of things.

That some of you remain delusional keeps me in the fray. It stimulates my psychological interests. After all, being nuts still offers grist for discussion as the resurgence in Freud and psychoanalysis shows.


The wing-feathered serpent and its UFO connection?

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.
A piece in the May 1975 issue of Official UFO magazine, Aliens among Us: Encounters and Visitations by Nancy Grunthal [Page 44 ff.] has a lengthy tale of a man named Fred Clarke (not his real name) who, in 1974, saw “an emblem of a winged and feathered serpent” on the jackets of a “hippie couple” sitting across from him on a subway train.

Then six months later, while driving home, at 1 a.m. in the morning from a lodge meeting in New Jersey, Clarke’s car stopped functioning and he saw an oblong, hovering form with a tripod-like apparatus settle on the highway from which “two short beings, about four feet five inches” emerged and glided over to his car.

“They sure weren’t walking, I can tell you that,” [said] Clarke. “It was like they were floating, and they were moving much faster than a person could walk … They came over to the car, and I remember I could see the serpent emblem on their silver uniforms.” [ibid, Page 44]

They rubbed their “hands over the hood and sides of the car, like they were scanning it with some kind of device … Then they went over to the edge of the service road and scooped up some rocks and dirt, put it into a sack and floated back to their vehicle.

“As soon as they climbed aboard, the landing gear retracted and a reddish-orange light seemed to illuminate the craft … Clarke heard … a humming and then a buzzing noise as the craft shot vertically up into the sky … [whereupon] his car engine started automatically. [ibid]

Clarke tried to tell his sorry to others, including his wife, but was rebuffed, his wife saying “You’re overworked and it seems to be affecting your mind.” [ibid, Page 46]

Clarke was then reluctant to tell his tale and “might have [been] able to forgeten [sic] the whole thing, except that every so often we would see guys and gals of all ages … with the symbol of a winged, feathered serpent on their jeans, jackets, or pants. It never failed to make him shudder.” [ibid]

Did Fred Clarke pilfer his story from that told by Nebraska police sergeant Hebert Schirmer, who detailed an encounter in 1967 with UFO entities also wearing a winged, serpent emblem?
See Phantoms and Monsters site for that story by clicking HERE.

The winged, feather serpent, and the glorified serpent are integral to mythology and religious texts, as most of you well know:

The Universal Kabbalah by Leonora Leet

And the opening book of The Hebrew Bible (The Old Testament) presents the serpent in a less than glorious light. [Genesis, Chapter 3]
Also the Book of Daniel (referenced above) in The Bible has a serpent (dragon) in Chapter 14:22.

The serpent has also been a part of great literature:

[In] the Eighth Circle of Hell, Virgil and Dante face many dangers. Because of the collapsed bridge, they must navigate treacherous rocks, and Virgil carefully selects a path before helping his mortal companion along. Dante loses his breath for a moment, but Virgil urges him onward, indicating that a long climb still awaits them. They descend the wall into the Seventh Pouch, where teeming masses of serpents chase after naked sinners; coiled snakes bind the sinners’ hands and legs. Dante watches a serpent catch one of the sinners and bite him between the shoulders. He watches in amazement as the soul instantly catches fire and burns up, then rises from the ashes to return to the pit of serpents. [Dante’s (Divine) Comedy, Cantos XVII,  XXIV and XXV]
Jung, in his treatise Flying Saucers: A Modern Myth of Things seen in the Skies [Princeton University Press, 1978, paperback], on Page 20, in the midst of his discussion of the Mandala (which he thought was a psychical projection of UFOs), offers a dream of a six year old girl, that depicted “three snakes [crawling] around [a] fire” representing an archetype, mythic memes in the collective unconscious of all humans.


Peter Kolosimo, in his book, Spaceships in Prehistory [University Books, NJ, 1976], has several serpent themed photos: an Aztec plumed serpent, a Roman reptile on the altar in the Casa dei Vettii at Pompeii, a serpent on a boundary stone of the Kassites epoch, a cup from the valley of the Indus (dated circa 2500 B.C.) showing two serpents held by a human figure, and a Danish “serpent god” from 3000 B.C. [Pages 84-87]
And while some of you have seen depictions of flying serpents in the decorative art of the Meso-American and Oriental cultures, I found no specific cave drawings of serpents from the Neolithic era or early Stone Age but apparently there are some:
I was hoping to suggest that persons seeing winged, serpent images on UFOnaut uniforms were dredging up the image from their Jungian collective unconscious.
(In Freudian psychology, the serpent is a, tenuous, per Brill, symbol of the male genitalia, of course which has no bearing here or in UFO lore.)

I know a few UFO buffs see serpentine humanoids as the ETs piloting UFOs, but that’s a stretch, derived from UFO witnesses who have need of Analytical Psychology as Jung proposes in his Flying Saucer book.

Ancient Astronaut theorists have a field day with the Flying Serpent god of the Aztecs, Quetzalcoatl, saying that Quetzalcoatl was actually an ancient astronaut who visited the Earth and helped the Aztecs develop or evolve.
(While I like the AAT’s speculations – they are imaginative – I think we can insert the word God or gods for the ancient astronaut mantle and be as risible as the AATs are.)

But since there is a vast canon of serpents, flying and not, in all of the Earth’s literature extant, plus a large portfolio of serpents in drawings or etched in ancient sculpture, one has to take the observation of “Fred Clarke” in the Official UFO magazine cited above and the 1967 report by police officer Schirmer somewhat seriously.
Is there a presence showing up, in situ, displaying a winged, feathered serpent as a symbol full of meaning for those who can discern it?

(And remember, that serpent in Eden caused us a lot of grief, which should cause us to try and determine what or who it really was so we can apply payback.)

Monday, May 08, 2017

The UFO Provocateur(s)

Since I've taken to be a little more temperate at this blog, I offer you another blog of ours that deals with UFOs a bit more incendiary:



A reasoned take on ET visitations (or not)

Doug Stewart sent a Literary Hub link that discusses, from a astrobiologist, why it would be unlikely that ETs would visit Earth, delineating the various scenarios that have been proffered by film-makers and others.

I thank Doug for the link.

Click HERE


Saturday, May 06, 2017

Nick Redfern’s new Roswell book – a “review”

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.

I just got Nick’s latest endeavor, The Roswell UFO Conspiracy: Exposing a Shocking and Sinister Secret [Lisa Hagan Books, 2017], a sequel to his 2005 Body Snatchers in the Desert [Simon & Schuster]

His 2005 book, Body Snatchers …, caused a mild uproar among ufologists, not because it dismissed the Roswell incident but because if offered a thoughtful and well-documented alternative to the ET scenario that UFO buffs, especially Roswell addicts, applied to the 1947 alleged crash of a flying disk near Roswell, New Mexico.

Nick’s thesis then, as now, is that what really happened at Roswell was a highly classified government sponsored human experiment that involved birth-defective Japanese children and proto-typical balloons (aircraft).

His argument in the new book is spread out over 23 Chapters and 260 pages in which the whole of the Roswell saga is presented and, as usual with Nick, much that followers of the Roswell story have never heard, details and intrigues that bolster Nick’s premise.

Like many of you and Nick, I came to believe that Roswell didn’t involve an extraterrestrial craft that crashed and disgorged small-framed ETs, all badly disfigured and dead, except for one or sometimes two as the Roswell Johnny-come-latelies had it.

Something happened at (or near) Roswell and Nick provides the various theories and dog-eared “revelations” over the years, all of them.

But in this book he narrows the episode down to one: a military experiment that was sinister and evil that required a real cover-up, even to this day.

(That military and governmental experiments on humans, defective and not, were multiple has been mentioned here and in other places, the book Against Their Will: The Secret History of Medical Experimentation of Children in Cold War America [Palgrave MacMillan, NY, 2013] and others providing documentation that supplements Nick’s theme.)

Names common in the Roswell storyline appear and it seems that Nick has something on (or about) all of them.

I liked, particularly, Nick’s Chapter 18, Body Snatchers – The UFO Community’s Reaction – which is enlightening and sort of hilarious. (I suspect there will be a sequel similar to that with this new book.)

I hope many of you will grab a copy of Nick’s book, at Amazon ($14.49, paperback) or other book outlets.

You will not only be edified in many ways, about more than Roswell or UFOs, but also will become a witness to real down and superb journalism, something Nick Redfern keeps giving readers of his books.

As usual, I’ll have supplements to this “review” off and on as the book deserves more than the cursory romp given here.


The ET Visitation Psychosis

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.
Even The Anomalist’s Chris Savia has become enslaved to the idea that extraterrestrials have been and maybe are on the doorstep of our planet Earth.

His noting of a Daily Grail piece about the possibility of alien visits, long ago, that left artifacts which have been demolished by the corrosive activity of longevity and other Earthian factors that ultimately determine(d) the state of possible alien evidence goes to the desire of UFO buffs and paranormalists to establish that we, humans, are not alone in the Universe.

It’s the classic Freudian mental condition known as “wish fulfillment.”

And it’s the preliminary step to psychosis, if not stemmed by psychoanalysis or some other form of psychiatric manipulation.

Again, in the vast cosmos there surely must be other sentient life, but I quibble with the notion that Earth has been visited or is being visited by that sentient life.

First, there is the belief that Earth is a kind of unique repository of a special creation. It is, but only from a human perspective. Projecting the idea that humankind represents an exceptional incarnation is a leap of non-intellectual faith.

Second, that an alien civilization has discovered this special creation or even seeded it is a desire d’embléé or primordial delusion.

Primitive man believed that he was not alone in the Universe, begotten by a God or gods, and many present day humans believe the same thing.

And the idea that aliens (ancient and contemporary) visit(ed) the Earth is a staple of Ancient Astronaut Theory – an imaginative speculation in which the sobriquet “ancient astronaut” is used as a substitute rubric for the word God.

The jumping off point for sensible persons, such as my pal, Christian Savia, is SETI, which has the patina of a scientific endeavor, and it is, SETI searching for radio signals from alien civilizations, assuming that ancient (ET) civilizations would employ radio signals, having developed them much like Earth’s humans developed them using engineering insight and mathematical formulae specific to human inventiveness.

But SETI is just one more form of the delusional desire to find other species, off Earth, who co-exist with us and desire to find like-beings by scouring the galaxy or cosmos in the hope of finding their sentient brethren.

My beleaguered suggestion that Earth is a non-player in the cosmological scheme of things irks AATs and UFO buffs; that is, the Earth is such a pathetic planet at the outskirt of the Milky Way and hardly prominent by any definition, no advanced species would find us or know about us, unless…..
I’ve conjectured, as have others, that perhaps a probe sent through the galaxy or even the Universe itself might have stumbled upon this planet, and finding life, now persists in re-visiting or visiting here à la carte.

Yes, that’s a real stretch, for this reason: if an advanced civilization sent probes into the cosmological ether, they would do so from a point (or points) omni-directional; that is, they would be probing from a number of points, making it highly improbable that they would luck-out and send a probe or two in a line that leads them to Earth or our slim solar system.

The same holds true for SETI signals.

An advanced species or civilization sending radio signals out for detection would also be flummoxed by the radii points they’d have to use to cover a spectrum of the Universe or galaxy.

There are just too many directions to which a signal or spacecraft could be sent to make it logically feasible for radio or UFOs to get a hit: Earth.

We humans have to accept the idea that we are, for all practical reasons, alone in the cosmos, only noticed by, perhaps, an omniscient thing call God.

And to persist in pushing the “Life is out there” meme bespeaks a psychotic mind-set or an intrinsic ongoing psychotic episode.

Image at top from http://www.tracesonline.org/


Friday, May 05, 2017

A stark example of Ufological schizophrenia!

Click HERE

Thursday, May 04, 2017

Update for Nick Redfern's new Roswell book


UFOs: There’s something to it, but what?

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.

Reading through Michael Swords’ book (pictured) of Center for UFO Studies cases gathered by John Timmerman one can see that there is something profoundly odd that is lumped under the rubric The UFO Phenomenon.

I’d like to instill UFOs as phenomena, rather than a phenomenon, as one can see from all the sightings extant, which the book above lists, that UFOs are not just one thing but many things.

That’s what’s so delicious about Professor Swords’ listing of CUFOS reports: they tell us that UFOs have a reality, not just an ephemeral existence in the minds of people, and that the UFO reality is multi-faceted.

Sure, I’m advocate of a neurological or psychological reality for UFOs but I’m convinced that within the vast canon of UFO accounts lie real observations and experiences that seem to show a phenomenon (or phenomena) worthy of the tagline “actual” or “real.”

The CUFOS gathering, presented by Michael Swords, contains every kind of UFO sighting we UFO buffs are familiar with or have read/heard about: disks, cigar-shaped craft, weird lights, triangle-shaped vehicles, amorphous entities, et cetera.

What intrigues is that the reports cited come from regular, normal folks, not "wackos" or psychotics.

That UFO sightings may be created by something affecting the neurological elements in a human brain is fine but to accept my pal, Bryan Sentes’ call to see trace residue after a UFO event as substantive, one has to agree that mental hallucination or neurological malfeasances can’t account for some documented sightings. And I do. (Grassroots UFOs provides examples.)

UFOs fascinate because they offer a multi-reality much like that with quantum particles: existent corporeality that becomes incorporeal when looked for (at) seriously. (Google Heisenberg)

Some say UFOs don’t exist or that UFO reports are flush with errant accounts, the latter easier to skeptically address as UFOs, defined by sensate persons, obviously exist.

Of course UFO witness testimony is befouled by the clumsy recollection of those who see and were excited to see something that could be called a UFO.

But at the core of UFO reports rests a mystery, one that belies mental illness or criminal intent; people don’t usually lie about what they’ve seen or think they’ve seen.

Even misperception can be set aside. No group of human beings can misperceive within the quantity that UFO sightings supply. The odds are against it.

Get the Swords book – it’s only a few dollars (about $16 when I last mentioned it here) – and indulge yourself in a swelter of UFO sightings that indicate there’s something to UFOs, something real, unknown but tangibly real.

It will bolster your UFO interest, even if the idea that UFOs are ET vehicles isn’t particularly mentioned.


Wednesday, May 03, 2017

Define UFO (rather) specifically and ufology will move forward

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.
UFO: Unidentified (obviously), flying (of course), object (something seemingly tangible)

A UFO should be something with apparent tangibility, an object that is flying above or near the ground, and is blatantly not something familiar to the observer.

A UFO isn’t a light in the sky. Lights in the sky can be anything, meteorological phenomena that is odd, for instance.
Unless a weird light seems to be attached to something equally weird, such sightings should be ignored, dismissed.

Those kinds of sightings have cluttered the UFO data streams, and divert investigators from checking on flying anomalies that appear to be solid craft or something with a substantive corporeality.

Observers, who mistake Venus, for a UFO are not qualified to be named in UFO witness lists. They are stupid people, merely compromising UFO sightings with ignorant sensory data.

UFOs are things flying above, not blobs or lights in water.

Something (un)identified should have proximity to the viewer, the observer. Flicks of light or dark forms seen far off could be anything – an errant cloud, a balloon, a large bird, a kite, anything that gets airborne.

(Here's a photo of a kite but one that also has captured a UFO -- boxed in red -- from snowdeal.org)
A UFO should be close enough to be seen as truly odd.

A UFO designation should only be ascribed to something that moves with purpose, even if that movement is erratic but not deviating from seeming intention, as a balloon in the wind might.

Sticking with a categorical definition of UFO, as the term was intended initially, will eliminate the massive accumulation of sightings that are meaningless for the searcher of odd craft that could be something flown by sentience.

Discarding the term UAP, Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, will winnow the flying saucer litany to that which purports to be something worthwhile to investigate, rather than a catch-all for stuff that is the purview of people attracted to anything that is up, up and away.

UFO: an unknown, flying object.


Many ways to perceive things (UFOs among them)

Click HERE for explication of theme. (It will edify you about how perception has more facets than one.)

Tuesday, May 02, 2017

Who will be remembered in Ufology?

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.
I have a blog based upon a premise in the Sci-Fi novel A Canticle for Leibowitz: what should be saved for posterity if civilization(s) end?

Media friends of mine have been asked to offer that which lies just below the rubric “famous” that should be noted and saved (extolled even), which got me to thinking who in the UFO community (ufology) will be remembered as time goes by.

(Not the sightings but the people who inhabit ufology or once inhabited it.)

Persons attached to iconic flying saucer or UFO events and sightings will be recalled and remembered when their UFO episode is brought forward by those, in the future, who look back at UFO lore, should anyone still find UFOs relevant a few years from now.

But from today’s perspective, who seems likely to be remembered as a major element in the UFO mythos?

Of course, early adopters of the phenomenon, such as Donald Keyhoe and John Keel, will show up in a perusal of the UFO oeuvre (and you know the names of others of their ilk who are tied to the phenomenon because of their efforts on behalf and about the phenomenon).

And I'm not addressing the obviously famous: Hynek, Ruppelt, Vallee, et al., just those who aren't in the well-known category, but strut there way around the UFO landscape as if they are.

So, in the UFO community today, who stands out and seems likely to be a part of the UFO history when it is written by an historian of the future?

Persons I know, who have enough cachet to show up in a UFO historical record, include Stanton Friedman (because of his entrenchment in the literature), Kevin Randle (because of his work on Roswell and his plethora of UFO books and articles), Nick Redfern also, (because of his vast journalistic paranormal output). These fellows won’t be famous but they will be remembered by astute UFO aficionados.

Will Ray Stanford be remembered? As a footnote, because of his silly-named book about the 1964 Socorro incident.

What about Gene Steinberg and his Paracast show? Not so much. Gene has been around for a long time but The Paracast show is not (and has never been) a fount for the UFO phenomenon, engaging peripheral UFO entities to highlight. (And Gene killed any legacy he was trying to muster with his need to panhandle survival monies for a few years now, drowning what little cachet he had or thought he had).

Errol Bruce-Knapp, once a UFO celebrity because of his UFO Update thing, has already been forgotten except by those who were integral to his circle.

What about Jerome Clark? He has a few books that will stand forth on UFO bookshelves but as a UFO notable, he won’t register, even now little known by UFO newbies.

What about persons that most of you don’t know, even now, or care about? Greg Bishop, Jeff Ritzmann, Jeremy Vaeni, Tyler Kokjohn – all at the outer limit of ufology.

Most of you have already forgotten Bruce Duensing.

Whitley Strieber is a future no-show, his output placed in the “remainder bin” of book-shops.

What about Isaac Koi or my pals at The Anomalist? Few will remember them as they are little known even now, much as the reporters at People magazine are subsumed by the celebrities they write about.

Then there are such good writers as Micah Hanks. Micah? Many will ask years from now.

Or Red Pill Junkie? Who?

What about my pal Paul Kimball? He won’t be remembered for his UFO work but will be known for his political aspirations and films.

Jose Caravaca will be alluded to by his Spanish amigos, and French skeptic Gilles Fernandez, likewise, by his French colleagues, but no one else.

The Brits, David Clarke, Andy Roberts, Joe McGonagle, already unknown outside the Empire.

The skeptics, Robert Shaeffer and Tim Printy, are skittles in the great skeptical lexicon, removed from note by such scalawags as Phil Klass.

There are other names, at the rim of ufology, but so despicable that I am loath even to note them as losers.

What about me? I’m not even a footnote to a footnote, sad as that is personally.

And what about you?


From Nick Redfern

The Kindle edition of my new book on the Roswell crash is available on Amazon, as of today [5/2], and the paperback should be up at Amazon some time tomorrow.

This is the sequel to my 2005 book on Roswell, "Body Snatchers in the Desert."

The title of the new book, "The Roswell UFO Conspiracy: Exposing a Shocking and Sinister Secret."

Click HERE

Humanoid Encounters reported, but not to psychiatrists

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.

I have mentioned here, several times, Albert Rosales’ book series, Human Encounters: The Others Among Us [Triangulum publishing].

His 2016 book, providing accounts of said encounters, for the period 1900-1929 is particularly interesting, the stories inside fantastic, to say the least.

Reported encounters include many with strange women (dressed in black or white) seen floating or appearing near witnesses, a number of “wild man” encounters, and many air-ship observations, one, with Martian visitors, stumbled upon by a man (T.T. Timayenis) near Athens, Greece in 1905, derived from a 1910 Indianapolis Star story. [op. cit. Pages 48-49]

It seems that Mr. Timayenis saw two young men looking through a glass, purportedly displaying the cities and inhabitants of the planet Mars, with whom the two men were communicating via their hands and voices. T.T.T., watching, stated that the women and girls seen were “of surpassing beauty, tall and stately, with forms ‘which still haunt his dreams’"

“He also saw birds of beautiful plumage, flitting about and alighting the shoulders of maidens.”

The two men stopped gazing through their “glass” at Mars and the planet then shown in its spot in the night sky.
T.T.T. approached the two men who asked him in “excellent Greek if he could spare a light.”

T.T.T. gave them matches and cigars, and they gave him a cigar they said came from Cuba.

Then the men said they came from Mars and told him of the planet’s continuing “strife between groups” one of their enemies being “Pelasgians” who “were eventually defeated” with their survivors fleeing in airships, ending up on Earth “in the land known today as Albania” from which they became “the first settlers of Greece.”

“They then added that that the civilization on Earth was (in 1905) 100,000 years behind the Martian civilization” and “that there had not been a war on Mars for over 200,000 years” and that inhabitants “had … discovered the secret of immortality.” [ibid, Page 49]

According to the two Martians, electricity was “the secret of perpetual life.”

They told T.T.T. that the Greek “philosophers Socrates and Demosthenes were not dead but were currently alive and well in [sic] Mars.” [ibid]

The two men, named Telemachus and Phidias, then “jumped into the water, which was no less that 60 ft. deep” and wearing “long protruding skates of bright yellow metal, strapped with stout wire” they glided upon the water bringing T.T.T with them to “a  magnificent floating airship [where] they dined.” [ibid]

T.T.T. was informed that [the two Martians] were on a mission to meet Edison “in relation to a recent invention, which could prove fatal to humanity.”

T.T.T. “was brought back to shore and bade farewell to the Martians.” [Page 49]

You can guess what I believe about this imaginative and strange story.

It’s one of many, many more in the Rosales series.

What I find odd, is that such tales abound in newspapers, other accounts, and UFO lore but there is not one like story in the psychiatric literature, in the period noted here, the 1900s or earlier, and certainly only appearing in psychological papers when the UFO abduction scenarios became popular (common) in the modern era.

What causes such tales to spring forth, insanity (psychosis) or temporary, creative dementia praecox?

Or did something happen, in the case of T.T. Timayenis that provoked a scene that for him was real but in real reality was nowhere actual as reported by him.

Since there are countless stories in Mr. Rosales' books similar in telling, with different “humanoids” and circumstances, mostly differing in fantastic detail, one has to come up with a cause.

British UFO buff, Dr. David Clarke, who is an expert in folklore, would attribute such accounts to the fairy tale milieu I think.

And noted psychologist Bruno Bettelheim in his The Uses of Enchantment: The Meaning and Importance of Fairy Tales “argues convincingly that fairy tales provide a unique way for children to come to terms with the dilemmas of their inner lives.” [From The Atlantic as stated at Amazon where his book may be bought].
But T.T.T. was an adult and many of the reports in the Rosales’ series are from adults, although there is a raft of children encounters that I find credible, believing children to be basically truthful when recounting bizarre experiences, accepting the caveat(s) of Dr. Bettelheim of course.

So, do such stories, as related by adults, indicate a regression to (a troubled) childhood?

Perhaps, but there may also be an external cause for such “encounters” – a cause yet to be confirmed although there are the hypotheses of Jacques Vallee with his control agency and Jose Caravaca with his “external agent.”

For me, there is an evolution to such tales, starting in the Middle Ages, when elves, sprites, and other weird entities flooded the minds of the populum pauperem coming to a head (literally) in the UFO era (and before as the 1905 “encounter” above indicates).

It’s a kind of madness, one that isn’t debilitating as schizophrenia but in that mental ball park, either a temporary neurological glitch or a psychological fluke that appears then seemingly disappears … something transitory and inherently harmless.

Whatever the stories are, they have pretty much evaporated. (No or few UFO encounters are currently running in the mainstream of ufology.)

Yet, as fictional artifacts, the tales prove entertaining; there is that.


Sunday, April 30, 2017

UFOs: The Ascent and the Decline

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.
A few of you may be familiar with Oswald Spengler’s magnum opus The Decline of the West, an important book that has lost its cachet in academia but remains pertinent in a number of ways.

And of course you know about Edward Gibbon’s The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.

No, I’m not going to drag you through either book but they, along with a few others, tell us how empires, countries, and cultures rise and fall or decline, to the point of irrelevancy.

The UFO phenomenon is like that: it rose, reached heights of relevancy, but today is in decline, if not dead.

I know that many reading this still maintain that UFOs are integral to societal existence.

They aren’t.

UFOs are at the fringe of relevancy. Advocates say no. The Anomalist gang says no. Some of my UFO pals say no.

But the view or opinion that UFOs remain significant is delusional.

Flying saucers rose to prominence in 1947, as you all know. They peaked in the following two decades of the 50s and 60s, then started a slow but palpable descent.

Today, UFOs are the scum on the pond of civilization.

I maintain an interest because I’m soaked in flying saucer or UFO lore, a drenching that most attuned here are also besotted by.

But lest you misunderstand my stance, let me say (write) that one has to look at the UFO mythos in the same way that Gibbon and Spengler looked at the phenomena that interested them, a dead civilization and a dead cultural milieu: the UFO and its current Weltanschauung.

Nothing more, nothing less.

UFOs are archaeological.

That some try to coat UFOs with an ET patina doesn’t bring them back to life as a viable alternative to things that truly matter, and we all know what those things are, or we should know.

Don’t be put off by my dour position, as stated above and known by regulars who visit this blog, no matter its incarnation.

I’ll try to provide substantive musings, bolstered by artifacts of the UFO mythology as usual, and I hope some of you will continue to tag along for the ride.


Psychedelic trips may open the mind, as some have suggested and created some UFO sightings?

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.
This was from a topic in my Facebook feed:

"A group of tripped out volunteers just helped scientists better understand what’s going on in the brain when people take psychedelic drugs such as LSD, ketamine, or the magic mushroom molecule, psilocybin, The Guardian reports. Brain activity was increased and more sporadic while under the influence, the researchers show in a study published today in Scientific Reports. They suggest that these findings could give a bit of credence to the hippy notion that psychedelics open up “a higher state of consciousness” in the mind. Although what all this extra brain activity means, and whether it is healthy, is still far from resolved."

My pal, Bryan Sentes, who teaches at Dawson College in Canada, is an advocate for psychedelia because many notables (Kant, Coleridge, Freud) have used some form of mind-altering substances that, circumstantially, indicates they have been propitious for them.
But there is no doubt (none) that psychedelics and/or hallucinogenics alter reality. Bryan Sentes thinks this is for the good, I believe.

Me? My contacts with people, under the influence of psychedelics and hallucinogenics (marijuana among them) showed me that they were not operating optimally.

And since psychedelics/hallucinogens, along with alcohol and certain medicines, affect mental function, as neuroscience has shown – click HERE – setting up drug-induced psychoses, can we assume that some UFO related events derive from drug or alcohol use: the Desvergers case in Florida, the Travis Walton, “ordeal,” and several other UFO incidents I’ve noted here?

Such self-induced psychoses (hallucinatory events) are temporary so UFO investigators will, usually, not find them, did not find them, when they investigate(d) a UFO sighting’s witness.

A psychedelic or hallucinogenic episode comes and goes, usually, unless one is addicted to their use, but such addiction would surely show itself to a trained UFO investigator.

UFO researchers are inept pretty much, so catching or seeing psychedelic/hallucinogenic use, or even alcoholic use, would be missed (and has been missed) by them.

Yet, especially nowadays when psychedelics and hallucinogenics are prevalent more than ever, UFO sighting accounts don’t take them into consideration.

And they have never been considered in those cases I’ve noted above and here, such as the Robert Taylor (Scotland) “attack” or the Betty/Barney Hill “abduction” scenario, during and after the “fact.”

Psychedelics/hallucinogens and alcohol may enhance mental acuity – I don’t believe they do – as some say they did for writers such as On the Road Jack Kerouac and his pals William S. Burroughs and Allen Ginsberg.
Psychedelics and mind-altering drugs are a problem, to my way of thinking, even as my buddy, Bryan Sentes, shows me otherwise.

That ufology has ignored psychedelics, hallucinogens, and alcohol is obvious, That such use may have an integral importance in UFO sightings, past and present, should be taken into account when UFO researchers offer a presentation of a UFO event they have studied.

(Cartoon image at top from vice.com)


Saturday, April 29, 2017

Nolite te bastardes carborundorum!

Real pals are ilfakiro (my Italian amico), Kevin Randle, Gilles Fernandez, and Jose Antonio Caravaca.


Tuesday, April 25, 2017

From my Facebook feed

(And many are sending UFOs here?)


Martian Secrets?

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.

FOX news reported that UFO Hunters were gaga over a NASA rover picture of what looks like a petrified tree:
The image does look like a tree, admittedly, but commentary offered that it could also be a rock, like those in the background, a rock that was flipped up by some geological action.

It’s possible, as I see it, that Mars once was verdant and may have contained life, even sentient life.

But we will never know for certain, even after astronauts reach the planet, because I don’t see the government or military sponsoring a Martian expedition proffering what they find to us Earthlings.

Is there some other way to procure Martian information, bypassing NASA or scientists who hold their observations and thoughts close to the vest?