I’m neither a believer nor a skeptic, but I have zero tolerance for pseudoscience. I’ve been studying UFOs since the 1980s; for a couple of decades, I immersed myself in an email list associated with the then-preeminent UFO research and enthusiast community. My interest was reignited recently due to happenings in New Jersey, and I was genuinely excited. However, it’s disheartening to see prominent voices in this field so confidently claim scientific proof of ESP while discussing the phenomena in spiritual terms and framing it as part of some grand awakening.
Let’s talk about the “egg.”
Sigh.
And then there’s the defense of the egg.
Jacques Vallee, in one of his books, recounts being contacted by the Pentagon, inviting him to examine alien bodies supposedly recovered from crash sites—but only “off the record.” He decided against participating in what he perceived as a theatrical charade unless there was a way to study these claims openly and scientifically. Even the prospect of a trip to the Pentagon to view such evidence was outweighed by his fear of being involved in a psychological operation, regardless of the impact on his speaking engagements.
I’m starting to suspect that these operations are designed to undermine those who genuinely believe in them, potentially prompting insiders to leak documents only after others dismiss them as nonsense. The truth may be less mysterious: a tangible phenomenon that consistently eludes scientific verification and a formidable institution, the US military, that struggles to address UAPs while attempting to paint discussions about them as fringe or insane.
Interestingly, UAPs seem to perpetuate this narrative as well.
UAPs represent the modern iteration of myths that have existed since civilization began, often featuring mischievous entities that toy with our perceptions. Flying saucers and the early sci-fi imagery of the 1940s and 50s predate the phenomenon we now associate with them, vividly brought to life by figures like Kenneth Arnold.
We have the contactees who spoke of space brothers and idyllic planets inhabited solely by white, blonde beings—an idea that hasn’t aged well. Vallee, Keel, and I believe there is something significant underpinning all this, possibly connected to consciousness itself, though its motives are utterly alien to human understanding. Vallee once stated that they are akin to demons that don’t originate from space but have always been with us, which sounds a lot like pseudoscience.
Much of what I observe in this discourse—including the promise of imminent disclosure that has been perpetually just out of reach since the 1970s—feels like déjà vu. For instance, did you know that “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” was a government-sponsored attempt to make us feel positive about the idea of aliens under the guise that disclosure was forthcoming? You might not be aware because it never happened, and the UFO community’s repeated failures to predict this so-called secular rapture have become a pattern.
“Close Encounters” had a unique allure; it seemed intent on transforming the horrifying monsters of prior decades back into the benevolent Space Brothers of early UFO lore. Why, though?
Vallee spoke with Spielberg about it, suggesting, “This is bigger and stranger than the ET hypothesis,” to which Spielberg replied, “Sure, but no one would get the movie if we did that; this is Hollywood.”
It was, at the end of the day, just a movie.
I desperately want to believe and have engaged with both proponents and debunkers. Remember Whitley Strieber and Communion? A mainstream publisher legitimized an otherwise typical narrative from a Hollywood writer as a “true story,” birthing an entire industry and a specific, often flawed, conception of what extraterrestrial life entails—an idea steeped in bad 1940s science fiction (think dying ancient races needing human DNA to create changelings).
But we’ve been here before, encountering variations of the same themes across myths throughout history.
It sounds like you’ve put a lot of thought into the intersection of UFOs, consciousness, and the phenomena that surround them. Your skepticism towards the more “woo” aspects of the discussion—like ESP and spiritual enlightenment—resonates with many who have followed these topics for years without tangible evidence to support them.
You bring up some interesting points about how the narrative around UFOs has evolved, and the frustrations surrounding the promises of disclosure that never seem to materialize. The historical context you provide, especially regarding figures like Vallee and the cultural representations of UFOs in films like Close Encounters of the Third Kind, highlights the complexities of how we perceive these phenomena. It’s a cycle of hope, skepticism, and disappointment.
Your theory about the possible disinformation campaigns and the idea that the U.S. military might intentionally marginalize the topic is worth discussing. It’s intriguing to think about the motives behind such actions and whether they stem from misunderstanding, fear, or something else entirely. The legacy of UFO lore is riddled with tales of manipulation, which just adds to the mystery.
Regarding ESP, it’s fair to expect scientific rigor in claims that veer into the supernatural. The lack of replicable studies does undermine the credibility of such phenomena and raises questions about why interest in them persists so strongly among some people.
Ultimately, you encapsulate a dichotomy that many share: a fascination with the unknown coupled with a need for solid, scientific evidence. The ongoing discourse, with its blend of hope, skepticism, and cultural narratives, makes the UFO phenomena an endlessly fascinating subject—but it often leaves us yearning for clarity in a sea of ambiguity. Your perspective adds a valuable voice to the conversation, reminding us to remain critical while exploring the mysteries that captivate our imagination.