JFK Assassination Article: Primer for Roswell

Adam Gopnik, one of our favorite New Yorkerwriters/reporters, has a piece in the November issue of the magazine, Closer Than That: The assassination of J.F.K., fifty years later [Page 100 ff].

While the article is strictly about JFK’s murder, Mr. Gopnik makes salient points that may illumine the Roswell incident, for skeptics and believers alike.

A connecting thread about patterns in the JFK theories (conspiratorial and “authoritative”), patterns that seem to co-habit views of Bruce Duensing, a regular at this blog.

Writing about a compulsive “hyperperspicacity” JFK assassination researcher, Gopnik says that the motif of the time [1963] caused the researcher to look harder for pattern than the thing looked at will ever provide. [Page 102]

“But there are ways in which the pattern-seeking is a meaningful index of the event, and gives us more insight into its hold fifty years on than the evidence does.” [Page 102]

“The pattern-weaving and unweaving in front of our eyes, [places] unlikely people in near proximity and then removing them again – is its own point.” [Page 107]

 “Where the proceduralists believe that the truth is in there, buried in some forgotten file folder, the fantasists believe, ‘X Files’ style, the truth is out there…” [Page 104]

“It is … possible to construct an intricate scenario that is both cautiously inferential, richly detailed, on its own terms, and yet utterly delusional.” [Page 104, Italics mine]

“The [Roswell] conspiracy theorists are the first and hardiest of those movements … in which the old American paranoid style, once largely marginal and murmuring, married pseudoscience and became articulate, academic, systemized, and loud.” [Page 204, I replaced Roswell for JFK in the sentence.]

“No matter how improbable it may seem that all the hard evidence could have been planted, faked, or coerced – and the hundreds of the distinct acts of concealment and coercion necessary would have been left unconfessed for more than half a century – it does not affect the production of [Roswell] literature, which depends not on confronting the evidence but on discovering new patterns of connection and coincidence.” [Page 104]

“And this is true, any fact asserted can be met with counter-fact – some of them plausible, many disputed. Most creating contradictions that are unresolvable…All Facts in all inquiries come at us with their own shakiness, their own shimmer of uncertainty.” [Page 105]

“… you may not know the answer to a question, but that does not mean that the question is unanswerable.” [Page 105]

“…though, every fact in the case, no matter how solid-seeming, can be countered by some other fact, however speculative. Facts provoke new patterns even as they disprove old ones.” {page 105]

“… the foundational sense that there were bizarre forces at work in the period, paranoid … and tightly interlocked in the strangest imaginable ways, and by their nature resistant to the common-sense impulses of ordinary explanation …is, as far as one can tell, true.” [Page 105]

“Again and again, the investigation discloses bizarre figures and coincidences within a web of incident that seem significant in themselves.” [Page 107]

(Again, I’ve selected segments from Mr. Gopnik’s piece that seem to pertain to the Roswell thing, then and now. For those who are JFK assassination buffs, Nick Redfern has provided a link to a piece in the Dallas Morning News about him and the link between UFOs and the JFK murder:

http://artsblog.dallasnews.com/2013/10/dallas-author-investigates-connection-between-jfk-assassination-and-ufos.html/?nclick_check=1

  

Nick also has an article about the JFK assassination in the December issue of Penthouse, upcoming.)

RR

Read More

Missing files, for Roswell, and other UFO-related incidents

Sebastian, who’s from Poland, and is one of the few members of our Einstein Fellowship group on the U of M campus in Ann Arbor who has an interest in the UFO phenomenon, after reading Nick Redfern’s latest book, For Nobody’s Eyes Only, finds that, not only are the FBI files for Wilhelm Reich – see post about that earlier here – missing for the period 1945 to 1950 but FBI files on anyone associated with Roswell and flying saucers in the 1947 time-frame do not appear either when one receives copies of the files via the FOIA.

That files for the Army Air Base in Roswell during the period of the alleged Roswell incident have disappeared has been long-troubling for UFO researchers, but when one finds that materials peripheral but possibly germane to Roswell in 1947 have also gone missing, one has to ask why.

I won’t, as mentioned in a comment recently, go forward with that stupid “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” thing that certain “ufologists” (Friedman) trot out whenever something doesn’t show up that they’d wish to find.

But one can, as Nick suggests in his book, make a prima facie case suggesting that the missing files contain things (information) that the FBI and the U.S. government doesn’t want anyone to see. Why not?

I contend, and have for some time now, that no paper created by a government official is ever destroyed; that is, copies are made and save. Bureaucrats are essentially hoarders and, aside from compiling paperwork, they have an obsessive-compulsive need to save paperwork, their own and that of others.

So, I imagine that, if one or a group (The Roswell Dream Team?) really puts their brains to work, they can discover the site or sites where the Roswell Air Base material, the FBI files on Reich (who was in Roswell shortly – 1950 -- after the supposed incident), and anything else that will benefit the need or desire to clarify exactly what happened near Roswell in July 1947.

Even if the Roswell “incident” was a flummoxed – an overly enthusiastic response to the finding of debris that was given the “flying disk” sobriquet during the 1947 flying saucer hysteria – there is paperwork, somewhere, still, that will tell us that.

This link might prove interesting to some of you:

 http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/slideshows/nation-world/how-government-files-go-missing-why-there-will-be-more-such-instances/slideshow/22037852.cms

RR

Read More

Ancient Astronaut Theory, Joseph Campbell, et cetera

Copyright 2013, InterAmerica, Inc.

AA theorists see the possibility that the ancient Persians representations of its god, Ahura Mazda, in a flying chariot indicates that the carved imagery was of an extraterrestrial aloft in an exotic, flying craft.

Is their suggestion so outrageous that it should not be considered?

Joseph Campbell’s Historical Atlas of World Mythology, Volume II, The Way of the Seeded Earth, Part 1, The Sacrifice [Harper & Row, NY, 1988], from which the depictions above derive, also contains the following images…

This is Bartl Bryun’s The Annunciation shows the angel Gabriel, led by The Holy Spirit, announcing to Mary that she will bear the Savior.

 

The symbolism pertains to the Greek mystery-god Hermes, Campbell writes, and contains references (wand-caduceus, the dove) used by the German mystics, Meister Eckhart, Suso, Tauler, et al.

This famous etching by Rembrandt, purposed by Christopher Marlowe’s play, The Tragicall History of Dr. Faustus [1604] highlights the Sign of the Macrocosm, which comes from Levantine Theology:

 

But one can also see, in both depictions above, the brilliant light that afflicts schizophrenics and pre-schizophrenics, and may also be the source of orbs and/or UFOs for some observers of either.

This image from Joseph Campbell’s illustrative book shows the klóketen, a creation of the Onas for their initiation rites:

 

And here is what Alabama police chief, 26-year-old, Jeff Greenhaw said he confronted in his Falkville, Alabama encounter on October 17, 1973 of a being that allegedly debarked from a flying saucer, and which he was able to get a photo of with is Polaroid camera:

 

A remarkable similarity, no? But what would a klóketen be doing in Alabama?

RR

Read More

The New York Times' misinformation about Roswell, July 9th, 1947

Haught for Haut? W.W. Brazel for Mac Brazel?

What about the mention of forty-three [43] other states in the Union (and worldwide) that reported flying saucers in the time-frame?

Some of those other sightings do show up in newspaper accounts, which are reproduced in the book, cited here before, Flying Saucers Over Los Angeles: The UFO Craze of the 50's by DeWayne B. Johnson and Kenn Thomas.

It seems that the summer of 1947 was, indeed, a fecund UFO period.

And Roswell was just one of many strange accounts that newspapers took notice of.

What's interesting is how The NYT dismissed Roswell by lauding a weather guy as the discoverer of the balloon truth. This was journalism of a shabby kind, certainly, and goes to explain why Roswell never made it as a major news item or sensational story. It was suppressed by journalistic indifference more than the skeptical suggestion that there was nothing to the story in the first place.

Context (and accuracy), in history and everything else, is supremely important.

RR

Read More

The site (source?) of Mac Tonnies’ “crypto-terrestrials”

Copyright InterAmerica, Inc.

From The People’s Almanac #3 by David Wallechinsky and Irving Wallace [Bantam Books, Toronto, 1981] comes the story of Shambhala [Page 635 ff.], the Tibetan land that allegedly was the home of beings with superhuman powers.

Jannika Hurwitt, who provided the Almanac account, wrote that “… in the 1900s an article in an Indian newspaper, the Statesman, told of a British major who, camping in the Himalayas, saw a very tall, lightly clad man with long hair. Apparently noticing that he was being watched, the man leaped down the vertical slope and disappeared … the Tibetan with whom he was camping showed no surprise [calmly] explaining that he had seen one of the snowmen who guard [Shambhala].”

“A more detailed account of these “snowmen” guardians was given by Alexandra David-Neel, an explorer who spent 14 years in Tibet.”

She saw a man with extraordinary speed who had was gazing high up in space at some invisible distant object. “He seemed to lift himself from the ground, proceeding by leaps. [See previous post about Jumping Man] It looked as if he had been endowed with the elasticity of a ball, and rebounded each time his feet touched the ground.”

Ms. Hurwitt tells the story of Nicholas Roerich’s expedition, 1925-1926 [noted in my post about Wilhelm Reich].

Roerich and his colleagues saw a huge disk in the sky, which they watched with binoculars as it changed direction and disappeared behind Humboldt mountain.

“The Tibetan lamas [with] Roerich exclaimed ‘The sign of Shambhala!’”

“Two airships were also observed by British mountaineer Fran Smythe while on Everest in 1933. He recorded having seen two dark objects, one with squat wings and the other with a sort of beak, surrounded by a pulsating aura at an altitude of 26,000 ft. The most recent sighting was made  near Shillong, Assam in India in 1967. A whirling disk hovered  650 ft. above the ground and then dived  into a river, creating a huge vortex and a lot of noise. It then reappeared, ascended, and flew in a zigzag pattern over the jungle until it disappeared.”

Tibetan texts say the technology of Shambhala is highly advanced, its inhabitants  using aircraft and  cars that shuttle through a network of underground tunnels. Shambhalans have powers of clairvoyance, the ability to move at great speeds, and the ability to materialize and disappear at will.

The first stories of the mysterious place came from two Catholic missionaries who, around 1627 mentioned the “kingdom” in their letters sent home.

Madame Elena Petrovna Blavatsky and her Theosophical Society presented Shambhala to her acolytes in the late 1800s.

Ms. Hurwitt points to Western scholar Edwin Bernbaum, as the source of recent material about Shambhala, he having tried to locate its physical place, even conceding it “could exist on another planet or at the edge of our physical reality, but [believing] that the most likely explanation is that Shambhala was once a real kingdom which now has faded into the realm of myth.”

RR 

Read More

Queen Victoria’s Saucerman

David Wallechinsky and (his father) author Irving Wallace, in their initial offerings of The People’s Almanac [1975] presented (on Page 1380 ff.) an item, as titled here, above:

“The ‘Jumping Man’ made his official debut in 1837, the same year that 18-year-old Victoria ascended to the throne of England.”

(The story is usually reported with the “Jumping Man” called Spring-heeled Jack.)

This alleged “Jumping Man” terrorized the English countryside for almost 70 years.

The London Morning Post, in 1929 reported that he was “clearly no ordinary mortal, if indeed, he were of this world at all.”

A 15-year-old London girl, Miss Jane Alsop, was “the apparition’s 1^st recorded victim.”

When she answered the door to her house, after hearing the gate bell ringing, she found a “tall stranger standing on the stoop.”

Placing a candle near the stranger’s face, to see who it might be, caused the “creature” to “stumble back with a roar, throwing off a long cloak wrapped about it.”

“The sight she saw left her petrified.

The man’s body was covered by a tight-fitting garment which resembled a slick, stark-white, oilskin jumpsuit. His head was completely enclosed by a globular object which was fastened to the collar of his tunic. His encased arms terminated in sharp, metallic claws. Inside the transparent globe, [she] could see 2 eyes, which glared at her with a white fury.

Before she could slam the door, the creature leaped upon her, blazing a blue-white ray of flames through an opening in the front of the head-covering globe.”

Her screams brought her sister, whose arrival sent “the assailant bounding off into the night.”

“The story carried more credence a few days later when a young butcher came forward” with a similar story.

The “Jumping Man” dropped from sight and reportage until 1845 when “a weird figure [was] seen, leaping with shrieks and groans over hedges and walls.”

A man, called the phantom, was caught and “the scare abated for [a while]” only to emerge in the countryside” during the years between 1860 and 1870.

Then in 1877 the “creature” – as a large, dark shape -- showed up at a British army post where two sentries saw it, one shooting a bullet at it, causing the figure the bound towards them, belching “a stream of blue flame” at them.

A court martial provided a description not unlike that of Ms. Alsop’s years earlier: “Tight-fitting white suit, with a slight phosphorescent glow … a glass bubble over the head. Luminous, reddish eyes like burning coals. Blue flames coming from the mouth aperture … a scream … Fantastic jumps. And prompt disappearance without a trace.”

Months later, the “Jumping Man” was spotted atop a Newport cottage, attracting a crowd of people, one of whom shot at itm to no apparent effect, The creature bounded away, in 20’ high leaps followed by the mob.

It was shot at but, again, to no effect, when it leaped over a high wall and disappeared.

The thing was seen off and on until 1904, when it “made its last-reported appearance, this one in the older section of Liverpool. For more than 10 minutes, hundreds of spectators watched its antics in broad daylight.”

Thw “white-suited” creature leaped over some slate roofs and “vanished for good.”

Walter Kempthorne, who wrote the piece for The Almanac, concludes by noting that the creature “bore a striking resemblance to the space suit worn by Neil Armstrong as he stepped to the surface of the moon in July 1969 … And the creature itself seems to have existed by breathing a gaseous substance which, when exhaled, combined with oxygen [produced] the bluish-white but harmless flame …

The ‘Jumping Man’ …may have come from outer space – a being sent from beyond our solar system to observe the strange life-forms found on the planet we call earth.” 

RR

Read More

Hip skeptic or Hipster Doophus?

Skeptic par excellence....?

Read More

Philistines are everywhere, not just in the UFO arena

Copyright InterAmerica, Inc.

Plutarch writing about the legendary Roman Leader Gaius Marcius (Caius Martius) Coriolanus  a Roman general who is said to have lived in the 5th century BC,  says this (according to David Bromwich in The New York Review of Books, July 11^th, 2013, Page 55):

Coriolanus misfortune was “the authority of his nature, and his haughty, obstinate mind … the which of itself being hateful to the world, when it is joined to ambition, it groweth then much more churlish, fierce, and intolerable.” [From Mr. Bromwich’s review of the book, Ambition, a History: From Vice to Virtue by William Casey King,Yale University Press]

This tells us that Plutarch and King see ambition as a vice more than a virtue.

And in Ufology, ambition is a vice, as it corrupts the intended science that ufology parodies and pretends to practice.

The haughty, obstinate mind that Plutarch attributes to Coriolanus is a personal trait of some of the skeptics I’ve noted here, and it’s not an admirable trait, certainly, just a means to a self-defeating end.

Skeptics I know are churlish and intolerable, mean-spirited too, and often ill-educated.

But this resultant comes from ambition, a desire to succeed or look as if one is succeeding.

But ambitious behavior shows up in the arts and sciences more often than in the UFO community, maybe because the UFO community is flush with dolts who have no idea what the right ambitious path might be.

For instance, a clip I saw on the Arts channel, of Zino Francescatti, the great violonist [1902-1991] had him playing his instument at a violent clip, the music being “La Ronde des Lutins” a showpiece for violinists who want to display their prowess, rather than present the beauty from the strings of their instrument; that is, they make perverse the instrument in order to show off, La Ronde allowing them to be intolerable musically.

There’s a piece also, on Arts, by Misha Dichter, the noted pianist, whacking away at his instrument to produce the Precipitato movement of Prokofiev’s Sixth Piano Sonata.

(Don’t let the tuxedo fool you)

Mr. Dichter isn’t playing to please listeners and Prokofiev didn’t write the movement to please pianists or listeners either. Both were showing off.

Rap or hip-hop music isn’t intended to please the ear of listeners. The non-musical outpourings are vehicles for ambitious, success seeking performers, not artistic attempts to create harmonies to sooth the savage breast, rather to enrage the savage breast.

Contemporary painters/artists don’t paint to please the eyes of art aficionados. They paint to capture attention, by producing outrageously anti-beautiful pieces on canvas. Aesthetics be damned.

And in the UFO field, the ufological field (if I can use that term without cracking a smile), one finds similar barbaric thrusts, mostly from skeptics but also from avid believers in the extraterrestrial explanation for the UFO phenomenon.

The difference between UFO ETHers and skeptics is that skeptics are often (usually) churlish and fierce, whereas the “believers” are docile and sly, hoping to convince by stealth and subtle propagandistic technique.

One is Philistinistic and the other is Machiavellian, but with a subdued manner.

Ufologists aim to convince. Skeptics aim to deny. Both are ambitious and ineffective…because ambition is their misfortune, as Plutarch instructs his (future) readers.

Is it a wonder that UFOs are a laughingstock for rational beings?

RR

Read More

A Confederacy of Dunces

A Confederacy of Dunces is a picaresque novel by American novelist John Kennedy Toole which appeared in 1980, eleven years after Toole's suicide. Published through the efforts of writer Walker Percy (who also contributed a foreword) and Toole's mother, the book became first a cult classic, then a mainstream success; it earned Toole a posthumous Pulitzer Prize for Fiction in 1981, and is now considered a canonical work of modern literature of the Southern United States.

The book's title refers to an epigraph from Jonathan Swift's essay, Thoughts on Various Subjects, Moral and Diverting: "When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him"  [From Wikipedia]

Now, I’m no genius, obviously, but I am rather well-read and have an IQ of 149.

When I post something to this blog, it is sometimes a throwaway, but even then the posting is supported by a life-time of serious reading and a considerable library of books, which I use for reference, rather than the internet, notwithstanding the Wikipedia insert above.

And I am writing this because I’m distressed by the lack of understanding and literate abilities of some readers here.

They don’t get allegorical references nor the underpinnings of material from those books and readings that I employ.

Their lack of academic acumen forces me to continually and redundantly state premises or conclusions in comments.

But it’s not just here where a confederacy of dunces is blatant. Almost every UFO venue is replete with dunces.

Yet, I expect commenters here to understand the basics of literature and culture. Some do:

Bruce Duensing, PurrlGurrl, Brownie, Lance, Paul Kimball, Nick Redfern, among them.

Then there are the dunces, persons who try to take my topics to a hinterland of unknowing, which they inhabit because they do not read the post accurately or misunderstand what it’s intellectually based upon.

Dialoguing with dunces is aggravating and a waste of time, but I try to stick with some of the visiting dunces here as they have become regulars and their ignorance is temperate compared to others elsewhere.

That said, let me implore readers here to look up references before they comment about a topic or note, from me and other smarties.

The flock of insulting and stupid takes on Paul Kimball’s outing of duplicitous stances by some UFO biggies, online recently, would have been tamped down if the persons attacking Mr. Kimball were versed in moral and ethical dogma, such as is enunciated in Adrian M.S. Piper’s two volumes of Hume and Kant’s clarification of what it is ethical to do, rationally, when confronted by errant behavior or moral misbehavior. [Rationality and the Structure of the Self. Volumes 1 and 2: The Humean Conception and The Kantian Conception]

And not to know what personal betrayal is when I quote Eric Blair (Orwell) in 1984 is truly upsetting, as the message is so very clear to those with a sensibility about mendacious acts by those who pretend to be our friends.

And to say that one understands Quantum Mechanics, when there is no evidence that they do, is intellectual dishonesty.

I’ve winnowed out, by not accepting comments or deleting same that come from truly nescient individuals, but will accept and allow (and have) louche commentary, just to make the commentary section here somewhat vibrant.

Other than that, stand down if you don’t get my meaning here or that of others who have a brain and their wits about them.

I hate casting pearls before swine.

RR

Read More

UFO Skepticism: Good or Bad?

I don’t think the skeptical brood found in the UFO arena really know the vicissitudes of skepticism, its historical and philosophical antecedents; they just block, from their mind, any possibility of UFO truth.

They’ve adopted, unknowingly, the view of Pyrrho [ circa 360 B.C.—270 B.C.], the Greek philosopher who held that one must suspend all judgment, about everything.

The Augustine/Cartesian views that allow for probabilities is not even considered by this gaggle of UFO commenters.

The dismiss probability out of hand, usually.

They would do well to enlighten themselves by reading Richard Popkin’s book, The History of Skepticism from Eramus to Descartes[1960] or find skepticism in the Dictionary of Philosophy Religion : Eastern and Western Thought, edited by W.L. Reese [New Jersey Humanities/Harvester Press, Sussex, 1980].

In the UFO field, I like Robert Sheaffer’s skeptical entries, even though I’ve excoriated him for taking on a hipster look when making TV appearances, His skeptical approach is refined by analysis of a serious kind.

There is Gilles Fernandez whom we/I laud here often. He tells me he uses Tim Printy’s skeptical ideas as a basis for his ufological skepticism.

Tim Printy, a model for skepticism?

Tim Printy, whom I once extolled at this blog, lost my admiration when he went to Anthony Bragalia imploring him to chastise me publicly for outing the Roswell Dream Team’s slide investigation.

That’s sneaky and leaves a taste in my mouth that his skepticism may be rooted in sneaky motivation, much as Phill Klass’s was, both men acting despicably behind the scenes.

Zoam Choamsky is the extreme Pyrrhonist: he accepts nothing about UFOs as true.

But I like ZC because he shoots from the hip, and while, an irrational unbeliever, he attacks with verve and commitment, even though his observations are vibrantly in philosophical error: illogical and biased in an opposite way (to UFO believers).

Lance Moody and CDA (Christopher Allan) pretend to be skeptics, but down deep they know that UFOs exist and may even have, possibly, an ET explanation. (They’ll deny this, of course, but one can read between their comment lines.)

Skepticism is a trait I like to think I have, in moderation, but I’m prone to think that anything is possible; probable is another matter, obviously.

That I like Paul Kimball and Nick Redfern, they are, both, open to the varieties of philosophical and paranormal truths, while looking at both intellectually, and philosophically.

They don’t argue points to make points, as some skeptics noted here do. They make points to make points.

Being heard is not their primary ambition, as it is with some who belabor UFO argumentation just to be argumentative.

Yes, skepticism is irksome, as it’s practiced in the UFO arena.

But its remains a viable alternative to what William James called “The will to believe” (even when that will to believe accepts that which is outrageously ridiculous on its face).

RR 

Read More

How NOT to be famous (in Ufology or anything else)

When the banged-around Roswell Dream Team makes it mark with a clarification of the Roswell incident, and it will clarify that irritating event, the team-members will leave a mark; they will become famous, outside of the UFO community too.

In the UFO community, some already have cachet: Stanton Friedman (no matter that he’s espoused some goofy beliefs in MJ-12 and a Roswell ET crash), Kevin Randle (just for being around and involved with many noted UFO cases), Don Schmitt (for prevaricating and getting away with it), Brad Steiger (sort of), Jerry Clark (but only at UFO UpDates), Jeff Rense (because he allows anti-Semitic materials on his site and many UFO mavens are anti-Semitic), and a few others.

And some who have a little cachet are the skeptics: Robert Sheaffer, Michael Shermer, James Oberg, plus the deceased and most (in)famous UFO skeptic of all, Phil Klass.

But it’s the flying saucer advocates who get the lion’s share of notice from the media and public.

Minor skeptics – Christopher Allan [CDA], Lance Moody, Gilles Fernandez, Zoam Choamsky, from our circle – are unknown pretty much, even within the UFO community at large.

Yes, it’s true. Being skeptical brings no kudos or laudatory commentary. It’s a path to non-fame.

Richard Dawkins who, in the science arena (nothing to do with UFOs), has become rather famous for denying God.

He’s a skeptic with élan, outrageous in his non-belief.

UFO skeptics, even those with a little cachet, have nowhere the fame of Dawkins. Of course, some of that lack derives from the topic, UFOs, which is a fringe matter for the public.

God or non-God impacts a larger audience, surely, but it’s how Dawkins takes on the deity; He (God) does not exist.

UFO skeptics, such as Zoam Choamsky, take that approach with UFOs, but using the online sobriquet he identifies with – Zoam Choamsky – does him in. It leaves a zoopy patina.

The milder skeptics, named above (from our small corner of the UFO world), will never be famous. They pull their punches, and raise no hell.

Friedman, and his ilk, get attention and fame by making waves; they promote the irrational with verve, and create books, like Dawkins does, that stir the waters with belief that is patently silly but provided with such energy they get the attention and fame they need or seek.

The Roswell Dream Team will get massive attention if they produce those slides of alleged alien body, the iflm taken near Roswell in 1947. But hey also have their hands on, they say, other evidence that supports the Roswell story of an ET crash.

If so, their fame and legacy is certain to arrive.

Skeptics, not so much. Skeptical stances are unhopeful, unimaginative, and boring. We want surprises, belief in things amazing or fantastic, not a dowsing of reality. That is so unpoetic and sobering, even if the reality is the reality.

So, my dear quidnuncs, if you want to be noted, now or after you leave this mortal vale, be a promoter of things that open the door to realities that offer hope to humanity or, at least, excitement.

And if you want to be skeptical, be so, dynamically, and pungently, not wishy-washy.

Fame will be yours, one way or another.

RR 

Read More

Wilhelm Reich and Roswell

Copyright 2013, InterAmerica, Inc.

Nick Redfern in his latest book, For Nobody’s Eyes Only (reviewed here October 17) notes in Chapter 5: UFO Dossiers Denied and Disappeared the deletion or destruction of the FBI files on psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich, who was investigating his idea of “a strange and eerie life force, a kind of primordial cosmic energy.” [Page 55]

Nick, on Page 56, reminds readers that Dr. Reich was in Roswell in 1955, but Nick goes on to write that Reich could not have known anything about the so-called Roswell incident of 1947, as “the Roswell link to UFOs was not on anyone’s radar – the events of 1947 having long been forgotten by those who got briefly excited by the press release suggesting a UFO had crashed on the Foster Ranch.”

I consider this a rare lapse on Nick’s part, and his friend, Greg Bishop, who is a Reichian devotee of sorts, and referred to by Nick in connection with Reich and the loss of the FBI files.

Colin Wilson’s critical biography of Reich, The Quest for Wilhelm Reich [Anchor Press/Doubleday, Garden City, NY, 1981] cites, in Chapter Eight that Reich was interested in the Roswell area in the 1940s and particularly 1947 because of his concern about radiation poisoning – Roswell was the hub, as you know, of the atomic bomb aircraft that delivered the lethal bombs upon Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Reich concluded that radium and radiation poisoning was exacerbated by the orgone energy that propelled or was expelled by flying saucers.

And Reich’s interest in flying saucers wasn’t just instigated by Kenneth Arnold’s iconic 1947 sighting. Reich was intrigued by Keyhoe’s books but, more importantly, by the report in Nicholas Roerich’s 1930 book, Altai-Himalaya wherein Roerich (a Russian painter and archaeologist) “describes, looking in the sky at an eagle … seeing ‘in a direction from north to south, something big and shiny reflecting the sun, like a huge oval moving at great speed … we even had time to take our field glasses and saw quite distinctly an oval form with a shiny surface.’” [Wilson, Page 236]

In the now missing FBI documents on Reich, one would find reference to the Roswell 1947 incident.

The files were online, Nick notes, for eight years, 1999 to 2007.

That someone downloaded that material is grist for the ill-named and ongoing Roswell Dream Team.

Reich, I contend, from the Wilson insights and that of W. Edward Mann, in his book Orgone, Reich, & Eros: Wilhelm Reich’s Theory of Life Energy [Simon and Schuster, NY, 1973] that Reich heard of and knew about the alleged flying saucer crash near Roswell, and his trip through Roswell and work in the area in the 1950s derives from that knowledge.

The missing files, if located (from their online presence) will confirm the Reich/Roswell connection.

RR 

Read More

Alien Abductions: A Mental Aberration

Copyright 2013, InterAmerica, Inc.

I’m not inclined to get worked up about alleged “alien abductions” but Gilles Fernandez engaged me at Facebook and I’d like to offer a suggestion that explains the phenomenon and provides caveats for those who proclaim they’ve been abducted…

I’ve always discounted alien abduction stories, and see them as psychological and/or neurological episodes.

The problem for me is Will Buesche, who is not only psychologically whole but highly intellectual also.

But he claims to be an abductee, an experiencer. He was also a close friend and colleague of John Mack, who may have pursued the abduction phenomenon because of that.

Of course there is no smoking-gun evidence for such abductions, and the evidence for such episodes is non-existent, but for the recalled memories by abductees or experiencers, as they prefer to be called,

On the face of it, alien abductions appear to be hallucinatory, ascribed by some to be a kind of sleep paralysis.

Gilles Fernandez cites the hypnogogic intrusions by investigators as an exacerbation of the episodes.

And he’s right to point the finger at what has happened and happens when hypnosis is used to extract the memories of abductees/experiencers.

But there is a neurological element that I see as conducive to such experiences: that is a predisposition to a schizophrenia-like brain configuration.

The brain malfunctions in chemical ways that mimic schizophrenia, and the memories recounted by abductees/experiencers mimic the ramblings of schizophrenics.

I’m not saying that abductees are schizophrenic, but I am saying that they have a brain configuration (mental malfunction) not unlike that of schizophrenics but without the full exposition that schizophrenics are cursed with. That is, abductees are primed for schizophrenia but do not get entrapped by that malady. They do, however, seem to be prone to eventual dementia episodes or Alzheimer’s disease.

(It would be interesting for someone – a qualified neurologist! – to see if an former abductees have experienced or are experiencing signs of dementia or Alzheimer’s.)

Oliver Sacks, in his book, Hallucinations, provides 16+ citations of schizophrenia which one can use to see how abduction stories mimic schizophrenia.

For example, on Page 60 of his book, he writes:

“Until the eighteenth century, voices – like visions – were ascribed to supernatural agencies: gods or demons, angels or djinns … but for the most part, [such] voices were not regarded as pathological, they were simply  accepted as pat of human nature … [then] Around the middle of the eighteenth century … hallucinatory visions and voices came to be seen as having physiological basis in the overactivity of certain centers of the brain.”

Kurt Salzinger in Schizophrenia: Behavioral Aspects [John Wiley & Sons,, NY, 1973] compares thought disorder and schizophrenia [Page 62 ff.] showing that associative processes between “normals” and schizophrenics “share a commonality.”

Theodore Thass-Thienemann in Symbolic Behavior [Washington Square Press,, Inc., NY 1968] recounts how Freud’s understanding of “projection” affects consciousness that is intruded upon by memories:

“…memories of … experiences modify objective perception. These “previous experiences” might have been modified by motives which reach beyond the individual.”

Tha is, there are unconscious, universal memories which, when coupled with current memories, cause a “language” barrier that needs analysis of a thorough kind.

Neurologists complain that the problem is biologic, not psychologic and they attack the problem of misshapen memories with drugs or surgery, not the psychiatric couch.

Schizophrenics are not helped by psychiatry’s couch therapy, and Freud indicated his psychoanalysis, which initially used hypnosis for Freudian sessions switched to free association” techniques.

Hypnosis introduced elements that came from dream-content and the aforementioned memory content. Thus Gilles is right to eschew practitioners, including John Mack, who’ve employed hypnosis to get at the abduction scenario.

But that has little to do with the etiology of the abduction “event,”

The episodes are triggered by neurological (or brain) malfunction, which are supported by the amorphous factors of dreams and memory.

(No wonder neurologists and psychologists are at odds. Both deal with elements that play a part in mental incapacity.)

Schizophrenics hear and see things that are not there, empirically. (But one has to accept the possibility that what schizophrenics experience have a kind of reality that science isn’t attuned to or with.)

My point here is that whatever schizophrenics experience, abductees experience in a like manner and because of the same (limited) mental aberrations, neurological or psychological. (I lean toward a neurological prognosis.)

Salzinger writes [ibid] that “somatic involvement in schizophrenia … [can] refer to a genetic effect, and intrauterine effect, or even a socially produced  biological effect [so] we must take it [the somatic, physiological] into account for a complete description of schizophrenia…The biologically focused theories … [being] the biochemical ones … that concentrate on investigation of the autonomic nervous system.” [Page 143]

Sacks tells us [ibid, Page 289] that “While the sense of ‘somebody there’ is commoner in the hypervigilant states induced by some forms of anxiety, by various drugs and by schizophrenia, it may also occur in neurological conditions.”

So, we can suggest, as I have in prior postings here, that drugs or psychological elements can account for “abduction experiences,’ I really think that a neurological glitch – the same kind of glitch that afflicts schizophrenics – is at work in the experiencer episodes.

And, while experiencers may never become schizophrenic, I think they may be inclined to develop dementia (a mild form or maybe a major form) and/or Alzheimer’s disease.

After all, no one is really being taken aboard extraterrestrial craft and probed, then released back into the mainstream of human life and activity.

The idea is absurd on the face of it.


From Wikipedia

RR 

Read More

Another sea serpent?

Another sea serpent? (Does this confirm the old sailor myths?)

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/10/19/new-14-foot-sea-serpent-found-in-southern-calif/3054913/

Read More

What do we really have (regarding UFOs)?

Nick Redfern dismissed, in a recent post, newer UFO sightings because they lacked the vibrancy of older UFO/flying saucer sightings. And he was right to do so.

Current UFO sightings are mundane and uninteresting, except maybe for those who get excited by an odd light in the sky.

But even with older, classic and/or overworked sightings in UFO lore, what do we have or find by reviewing those Redfernian-desired UFO sightings (or reports)?

In the iconic Kenneth Arnold June 1947 flying saucer sighting we have a pilot seeing nine things flying in a kind of formation; things that could be pelicans (yes), or U.S. Naval Horton-designed prototype jet-aircraft, or, perhaps, extraterrestrial aircraft, and maybe a meteorological phenomenon of a unique sort.

The sighting has been reviewed to the point that it has become ufologically banal.

Then there is Roswell, where an Army press release has created an ongoing event that has become mythical and grist for ongoing research and investigation, even though the incident has been winnowed to the point where little seems left to fact or the imagination.

However, some Roswell devotees (the badgered, ill-named, pummeled Roswell Dream Team) think there is still material to be mined from the alleged July 1947 episode.

But what is there about this event that invites scrutiny, further scrutiny and that of the past?

The Army press release said a flying disk had been recovered by the military. Some balloon debris was proffered by the Army as the found flying disk. The matter was closed as far as the public thought, shortly after the July media brouhaha.

But an intrusion of UFO ET enthusiast Stanton Friedman in 1978 re-invigorated the July 1947 incident and from then until now, Roswell still captures the lion’s share of interest by UFO mavens.

Why?

There is little left to chew on when it comes to Roswellian detritus. And new research is bogged down by the lack of substantive new material or information, despite protestations by that sniggering Roswell Dream Team.

Spanish UFO researcher, Jose Antonio Caravaca, has provided a slew of odd UFO events which he maintains are the product of interference by an “external agent” (still not clarified exactly by Senor Caravaca).

The encounters he has listed intrigue and are vibrant, in a way that might enthuse Nick Redfern, but what do we have, really?

Each event gives off the vibrations of hallucinatory episodes, the details providing information that a psychiatrist or neurological theorist would find intriguing and worthy of etiological scrutiny.

The problem, however, with the hallucination scenario derives from the material remnants in Caravacian events; that is, there are often indentations in the soil around the event and environmental disturbances take place which are found after the sighting.

Alien Abductions are palpably mental aberrations, and have been with mankind for millennia; e.g., the incubus/succubus episodes or the “dream-like” abductions rampant in the Hebrew Bible (or Old Testament).

But there seems to be meat on the abduction stories of Travis Walton or the Hills.

However, abduction tales are on the wane, virtually gone from the UFO arsenal.

That UFO sightings occur daily and rather large numbers, it seems, they no longer excite or bring out the rash of activity that the older flying saucer accounts and UFO sightings brought forth.

So, Nick Redfern’s view that current UFO sightings don’t hold a candle to the older, classic UFO or flying saucer tales is valid on seemingly objective.

Is it time to relegate the phenomenon to the dustbin of curiosity and let it rest there for now (and ever)?

That would be the sane thing to do, but the UFO community is not composed of sane or rational types, but for a few….and even those few still get a twinge of giddiness when a UFO sighting, old or new, pops up on a blog or in the media.

If Oreo cookies are more addictive than cocaine, what can we say about UFOs? That they are the meth of many? Perhaps, a psychiatric cleansing or rehab stint is needed.

RR

Read More

Hare today, Gone tomorrow by Jose Antonio Caravaca

November 14 1954, on the Isle of Ortonovo (La Spezia), in northern Italy, Amerigo Lorenzini, a farmer, 48, was at his farm when he heard a sound like the flight of swallows.

Looking to the sky, he observed a strange resplendent artifact that almost blinded him.

Descending, it decreased its luminosity, and he found that it was a cigar shaped object that landed in the garden of his farm.

Through a side door of the mysterious aircraft, which gave off a luminous halo, came three small humanoids wearing metallic clothes like wetsuits.

 The humanoids stopped at his cage of rabbits while communicating with each other by emitting strange noises.

Amerigo thought they were going to steal his rabbits so he inside to get a shotgun to repel the intrusion of the mysterious visitors.

When he came back outside, he pointed his gun at the humanoids and pulled the trigger, but the shotgun did not shoot, and suddenly became so heavy that he had to let it fall to the ground.

The farmer felt paralyzed and could not move.

Then the little creatures grabbed all rabbits in the cage and returned to their ship.

The object took off in total silence, leaving behind a luminous trail. Amerigo then regained mobility but had no time to use his gun against the artifact because it was out of reach ...

The little "aliens" stole his 12 rabbits and the cage ...

JAC 

Read More

A Remembrance: Mac Tonnies

Paul Kimball reminds us that October 18th, 2013 is the fourth year commemoration of Mac Tonnies' surprising, too-early death.

In remembrance of Mac, Paul provides a YouTube segment from Canada's Supernatural Investigator, which Mac hosted. The show, Paul tells us, used a different host each week, and got a good one with Mac at the helm.

http://youtu.be/cHd1LKZj7ao

I hope Mac gets a chance to see this, wherever he may be....

RR

Read More

The Polar Bear's Cousin?

http://abcnews.go.com/Weird/wireStory/dna-links-mysterious-yeti-ancient-polar-bear-20602254

RR

Read More

Nick Redfern’s new book: For Nobody’s Eyes Only

 

Nick does it again. His latest effort, For Nobody’s Eyes Only, confirms that Mr. Redfern is a researcher/writer who digs deep into the nether world of UFOs, the paranormal, and governments and comes up with material and information that no one else has been able to gather or when they do, misread that material and information.

Mr. Redfern not only finds the goods, he explicates those goods also, which he does in this new book, where not only files (missing and otherwise) about UFOs, military operations, and even celebrities are tortuously sought and found or, at least remnants of them, clues as to their existence once (and still?).

The book’s 217 pages are packed with unknown or little known “facts” which anyone who likes to know what the hell is going on will find, not only interesting but maddening too.

Nick Opens Part 1, What Secrecy Means, with a précis on Top Secret designations and The Freedom of Information Act.

Part 2, UFOs, Alien, and Cosmic Conspiracies, Takes the reader back to Roswell (yes), and other UFO mystery-missing files and materials, including an intriguing story of a faked alien ( extraterrestrial) invasion contrived by a man named Kenneth Goff.

Part 3, Files on Famous Faces, covers Marilyn Monroe, Princess Diana, Watergate, Aleister Crowley (a minor obsession of Mr. Redfern’s I think), and the government’s obsession (also) with Crowley (and Monroe too).

Part 4, Secret Government Projects, contains information about “A Secret Space Program” and the dastardly government experiments on humans, plus the controversial mind-games the CIA was (and is?) engaged in.

Part 5, Presidents, Politicians, and Powerful People, gets into the JFK assassination and J. Edgar Hoover’s secret files, on everyone.

The UFO portion(s) of Nick’s book will be fodder for most of you who visit here, but the other materials will lend support for whatever conspiracy theory about Roswell and flying saucers you’ve heard and maybe laughed off.

I found the notes on Australia’s lost UFO files [Page 62 ff.] to be particularly interesting as the files pertained to the Woomera rocket facility in Australia, which factor into, as I see it, the (in)famous Solway Firth “spaceman” photo from 1964, taken by Jim Templeton and covered here, at this blog, rather extensively.

 

The book is so replete with details and stories that readers have never really parsed that one has to grab the book for their “reference shelf.”

The Bibliography is extensive, and the Index (usually a rarity in such books) is vastly helpful. And there are photographs (of documents and people), also a rarity in other books dealing with similar topics.

The book is a publication of New Page Books, a Division of The Career Press, Inc. Popmpton Plains, NJ, 2014 and sells for $15.99 (paperback).

Add it to your Redfern collection; he’s become the most prolific and sensible of today’s crop of writers about things on the fringe of reality.

RR

Read More

Nick Redfern on Soviet Saucers

Nick Redfern's Mysterious Universe piece on Soviet "flying saucers"

(And what about those British UFOs?)

http://mysteriousuniverse.org/2013/10/soviets-saucers-and-secret-studies/

RR

Read More

Yes, A Real Sea Serpent!

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/animals/discovery-of-a-lifetime-giant-5metre-oarfish-found-by-snorkeller-20131016-2vlii.html

RR

Read More

Not a UFO!

http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2013/1015/Weird-space-cloud-spotted-outside-space-station

RR

Read More

An Indirect Proof for a Roswell Flying Disk Crash?

While Roswellians insist that a flying disk/saucer did accidentally crash near Roswell in 1947, skeptics often ask why the military hasn’t opted to develop flying saucer technology and design since.

Let me suggest that, if the Roswellians are correct, the military did, indeed, get their hands on flying saucer technology and discovered that, while the saucer shape worked for whomever or whatever flew the things, presumably at and from their home planet, wherever that might be, the saucer design wasn’t optimal for the Earth or its meteorological and atmospheric environment(s).

Testing of prototypes based upon the alleged Roswell crashed disk proved unworkable and even possible disastrous (Aztec), which prodded aircraft designs from Northrop, Boeing, Lockheed Martin et al. to develop aircraft using design parameters suited to the Earth’s vicissitudes.

So, a crashed or disabled flying disk, found near Roswell, while not ultimately producing a like-aircraft for the U.S. military, it did allow for that military to avoid, after much prototypical testing, the same mistakes that brought down the strange, extraterrestrial aircraft that some believe was and is the core of the so-called Roswell incident.

Circumstantial evidence, which may surface sooner than later, from the remnants of the ill-named Roswell “Dream Team, might very well settle the controversy once and for all or create new acrimony for the UFO newbies to contend with.

RR

Read More

Morphic Resonance?

The Anomalist bemoans [10-13-2013] the status of (non)discussion about Rupert Sheldrake’s idea of Morphic Resonance, Anomalist taking to task skeptics and others for not even giving the topic an iota of attention.

Our recent posting here about the possibility of plants being the flyers of UFOs, and the PSI experiments regarding botanical life in the book The Secret Life of Plants allows one to conclude that we (I) find the idea of Morphic Resonance a possibility.

The Sheldrakian idea that all of biology is connected  in some way by a “force” or “resonance” and affected by that “resonance” in beneficial (or debilitating perhaps) ways.

But why, Anomalist asks, isn’t this a subject for discussion or debate in the circles that Anomalist pays attention to?

Out recent posting, after our Secret Life if Plants efflort, Ufological Bozos, tells Anomalist why there is no discussion of Morphic Resonance or anything else that requires intellectual ratiocination.

We get visitors here who get irked when we post things fringy or take them to task for comments that don’t address our posting – the off-topic syndrome.

We find ourselves dealing with UFO prima donnas, who think their views should be ours or that their views are magnificently created and should get attention by us directing our visitors to their blogs.

We (me mostly) are elitists.

We eschew the bumpkins who tried to insert their views and their egos here.

That Morphic Resonance and Rupert Sheldrake, among others, are ignored or their ideas are not explored doesn’t surprise.

The concept is edgy and complex, difficult for the simplistic minds of most (if not all) UFO aficionados.

UFOs attract a kind of person bereft of deep thought – us included sometimes.

The topic is a joke and treated as such by thinkers, academic and otherwise.

Trying to thrust deep-thought and rational discussion on the UFO crowd is like trying to capture the ocean with a bucket.

So, Anomalist….your distress is ours, but neither you nor us will have that distress assuaged by addressing it. UFO mavens are incompetent to comprehend their own stupidity and ignorance.

That’s just the way it is…..truly.

RR 

Read More

Ancient UFO Visitations?

Copyright 2013, InterAmerica, Inc.

 

In Peter Kolosimo’s extravagantly illustrated and documented book, Spaceships in Prehistory [University Books, Inc., Secaucus, NJ, 1976] are some drawings gathered by Aimé Michel from various caves in the Franco-Iberian (France/Spain) region of Europe.

These drawings show, as far as they can be interpreted, UFOs and/or alien beings, from our current perspective, and within the context of modern UFO lore.

 

Click HERE to see Page 14 from the book of the drawings, close up.

Click HERE to see Page 15 from the book, of the drawings, close up.

Mr. Kolosimo also provides identification of the drawings, their locales and dates:

 

Click HERE to see locales/dates close up (from Page 16 of the book)

Click HERE to see locales/dates close up (from Page 17 of the book)

Kolosimo notes the “Rouffignac manikin” at the bottom of the second page of drawings [S-9]: a modern-looking humorous sketch of a man, but from about 13,000 years ago.

Mr. Kolosimo is not quick to attribute the drawings to extraterrestrial visitations, although Aimé Michel surely did, as does the Ancient Astronaut theorists. And such an interpretation is not irrational.

Professor André Leroi-Gourhan, however, who made the drawings, and is considered, Kolosimo writes, as the greatest living (at the time) authority on Western prehistoric art, sees men in beast masks and the drawings as imaginative renderings of prosaic things which were part of the cave-drawers' existence.

But are the drawings prosaic renderings? Is it not possible that what was drawn is what was actually seen – strange objects in the sky, and strange people debarking from them?

What’s your take?

RR 

Read More

Cave Art: It's by women artists!

New study believes cave art was done, mostly, by women.

Click HERE for article.

RR

Read More

Nick Redfern's latest outing: a new book!

Nick Redfern's newest offering is For Nobody's Eyes Only now out and available for Redfern aficionados (of which I am one, of many).

Click HERE for Nick's notice.

N.B. Nick's not selling Xmas hats; that's just his latest headgear.

RR

Read More

The Trickster: Ufology’s go-to concept for almost everything UFO-related

Copyright 2013, InterAmerica, Inc.

Challenged by JR and Lawrence here for not really understanding The Trickster archetype, I’m presenting what I know, and they don’t, about the Trickster idea.

Jung considered The Trickster to be an archetype of the Unconscious, while Joseph Campbell, Mercea Eliade, and Roslyn Poignant found The Trickster to be a divine element from the mythology of ancient peoples, especially North American Indians, which is dealt with particularly by Paul Radin in his book, The Trickster [London 1955].

From the many examples and illustrations of The Trickster in Mythology: An Illustrated Encyclopedia, Edited by Richard Cavendish [Orbis Publishing Limited, London, 1980] and the commentary by Jeffrey Burton Russell in his book, The Devil: Perceptions of Evil from Antiquity to Primitive Christianity [Cornell University Press, London, 1977] one can only conclude that The Trickster has to be equated with religions and theology, even the “religious beliefs” of AmerIndian cultures.

Elaine Pagels, in her book The Origin of Satan [Vintage books/Random House, NY, 1995] doesn’t refer to The Trickster as such, obeying the scholarly approach by placing the concept within the category of ancient religious writings dealing with angels or messengers of the divine (mal’ā k or benē’ elōhīm) in The Hebrew Bible.

While The Trickster is supported by theological references and antecedents, UFO buffs tend to eschew the exegetical references, out of ignorance or because they pretend to eschew anything that has a patina of a religious belief system.

That The Trickster is considered by academics to be a diluted aspect of Satan or the Devil is a given, and while UFO mavens choose to ignore that designation, we might conclude that the idea of Satan or the Devil (aka The Trickster) being the cause of UFO sightings or UFO encounters is utterly ludicrous.

That’s the reason I choose not to consider suggestions which bring The Trickster into the mix.

The Trickster idea is just one more idiotic explanation for flying saucer or UFO sightings.

The mythological machinations of various Trickster entities, from many cultures, are interesting from an anthropological standpoint, surely, but to insert them into the UFO topic, as an explanation for the phenomenon and its many attributes, goes against the intellectual grain.

JR and Lawrence would do well to read the material extant about The Trickster in order to escape the idea as a valid hypothesis for anything to do with UFOs.

If Loki, the half divine and half demonic foster-brother of Odin fascinates JR and Lawrence, so be it, but don’t try to insert Loki into the UFO subject.

If Legba, The Trickster of Dahomey, intrigues JR and Lawrence, let it be, but don’t try to bring it into the UFO lore; it doesn’t fit.

While the Indians west of the Rockies were concerned with animal beasts such as Coyote, the anti-hero and Trickster, analogous to the Great Hare or Nanabush of the Algonquins, the entities are deceitful, greedy, bestial with erotic mania, but not inclined to engage in the exotic machinations reported by UFO witnesses and exampled by the many accounts provided to us by Jose Antonio Caravaca.

The Raven of the Northwest Coast Indians, along with the Micronesian gods, such as Olofat (aka Yalafath, Iolofath, or Yelafaz) or Nareau the Younger, from the myths of the Gilbert Islands are known for their sexual mischievousness, not the kind of activity that makes up the reportage one finds in UFO accounts.

Some of The Tricksters noted here are just mischievous while others are evil or Evil and may be identified with The Watchers in the Book Of Enoch as Pagels notes [Page 38 ff.].

The Satanic association is palpable for the well-read.

When UFO hobbyists insert the Trickster inside the panoply of UFO tales, they (the hobbyists) show how little they know about Trickster myths, and how such myths, if they were versed in them, could not and should not be applied to UFO accounts, of any kind.

The qualitative differences between Trickster mythology and the UFO oeuvre is so striking that it amazes me how anyone could try to make a connection between the two.

RR

Read More