UFO Conjectures

Thursday, June 02, 2011

Life, death, life and UFOs: The witness failure(s)


The book, Consciousness Beyond Life: The Science of the Near-Death Experience by Pim van Lommel, M.D. provides extensive data and information about the so-called near death phenomenon or the NDE (near-death experience).

The author covers virtually everything about NDEs, including an extensive account of Quantum Mechanics in relation to the experience.


Most of you have read or heard the accounts of persons who died and “came back.”

What I want to zero in on are a few of the descriptions that the dying or dead witnesses provide; namely, the beautiful music and beautiful flowers they experience, and how this relates to UFO reports, as they has been presented by persons who’ve experienced that phenomenon, also.

Every NDE account that Dr. Lommel provides from the literature and his own accumulated reports, from his practice or that of colleagues, tells of the dead/dying person’s hearing “beautiful music” [sic] and seeing “beautiful flowers” [sic] on their way to a blissful landscape after transitioning that tunnel with a light at the end of it.

But no one, and I mean no one, has reported exactly what kind of music or what kind of flowers they experienced.

Were the flowers gladiolas, petunias, roses, dandelions?


Was the music classical, operatic, chorale, jazz, rock, even hip-hop?


No one has ever provided a definitive account or identification of the music or flowers.

Did no musicologist, opera buff, composer, or musician have a NDE?

Did no horticulturist, avid gardener, or flower enthusiast ever have a NDE?

That is, why does no one provide an exact, precise descriptive of the music or flowers, if the experience is a real one and not a metaphor of the mind?

Now, this also applies to those who witness UFOs, in the sky or up close and personal.

Has ever an aeronautical engineer seen a UFO and can provide a description of the design that corresponds to his or her expertise as an engineer of aircraft?

Has ever a chemical engineer or metallurgist provided a description of the smell or patina of a UFO that has appeared near them?

Has a pilot ever – really – provided an actual account of what a UFO did in the context of its flight; that is, has anyone with flying acumen given an account that explains or shows the proclivities of flight by a UFO, in ways that indicate they actually took in the experience in a way that was or is real – Kenneth Arnold, Gorman, or Lt. Coyne, notwithstanding?


No UFO report by a witness of a UFO has ever provided a forensic description of what was seen or experienced; the details come after the fact by UFO investigators and/or “researchers.”

No UFO report has ever been definitive, in portraying what a UFO or flying saucer was constructed of in essence.

Yes, Scully gives details that resonate in his account of the Aztec crashed flying disks, but that’s second or third-hand information, and concocted as most UFO mavens think.

But no UFO witness, with credentials that count – engineering, chemical, aeronautical – has given a report that provides actuality – no one.

This means, on the face of it, that either NDE’s and UFOs are chimeras, or that witnesses to either are incompetent or without credentials that allow them to be professional in their reportage.



  • This material brings to mind various techniques used as experiential tests to be conducted by observers in a OBE, or vivid dream simulation, which is seldom remarked upon. Read the writing in a book, look for your feet,what shoes are you wearing etc.

    Since we experience nothing directly outside of biologically based simulations, the mind is more than capable of improvising what perhaps amounts to a spectrum of dreams, waking and otherwise.

    This is certainly a complex issue which is seldom given it's due, as well as the context of an experience and what references the observer brings to the table, as well as inference.

    Dr Evan Walker's book was my introduction to this topic, and remains provocative in regard to the quantum states of suspension in the synapses, which never cease and are not prone to sleep cycles, yet can be "yes and no" as a non local effect seen in the very local brain simultaneously.

    All of this seems to deconstruct our models of semiotics as well as language as measuring devices, not to mention spacial relationships.

    Its almost as if the inside is outside and the outside is inside, and the third state is where they are a singularity, poised elsewhere.

    Great post.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Thursday, June 02, 2011  

  • Bruce:

    If you don't have Lommel's book, try to get it.

    You'd like it very much.

    It's full of genuine, gestaltian information about NDEs, and the mind.

    It is a complex issue, I'll give you that.

    But details from persons who've died and come back are sorely lacking in observational detail.

    Although one can appreciate the startling nature of the death episodes, which could preclude anyone from paying attention specifically.

    The same for true UFO sightings.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, June 02, 2011  

  • "What I want to zero in on are a few of the descriptions that the dying or dead witnesses provide...[snip]...and how this relates to UFO reports, as they has been presented by persons who’ve experienced that phenomenon, also."

    Interesting post, Rich. Are you at all familiar with the body of work done by Dr. Kenneth Ring on NDE's?

    You might find it worthwhile, for example, to check out his 1992 book, entitled "The Omega Project: Near-Death Experiences, UFO Encounters, and Mind at Large," for alleged linkages between UFO and NDE experiences.

    See: http://tinyurl.com/3wlnm45
    [Amazon link]

    See: http://tinyurl.com/3eyfo3z
    (Wikipedia article on Ring]

    By Blogger steve sawyer, at Thursday, June 02, 2011  

  • To get the smell, feel and texture of a UFO you would need a sighting lasting an hour or more. Moreover the witness would need to get really close to the object, even inside it or allowed, somehow, to give the object a thorough examination from the outside.

    A few claim to have done that, of course. But these people are deemed unreliable or simply deluded.

    Consequently you will never get the preciseness you require for any UFO sighting. Either it is short-lived and vague in appearance, or it is precise, long-lived but highly unreliable.

    We end up by going back to Hynek's classification again, don't we?

    By Blogger cda, at Friday, June 03, 2011  

  • CDA:

    In a strange, frightening, or bizarre experience the senses are heightened and a reliable, qualified witness would be able to discern, in a UFO episode for instance, smells, grommets, construction, flight parameters and a variety of other pertinent details.

    This has never been done.

    Observers like Lonnie Zamora, for instance, are not qualified to gather details that are relevant.

    Pilots, such as Arnold or Gorman, even Mantell, did not gather details that helped in identifying their UFOs.

    Just as the NDE data is vague, the UFO information has been vague, supplanted by researchers' after the fact interpretations.

    Even in the Roswell incident, no witness, not a welder or chemist or geologist took a look at or provided expertise about the alleged debris.

    Just a bunch of hooples, who gave common, hare-brained descriptions of metal returning to its former shape....no smell, no metallurgic anaysis, nothing that has been helpful.

    My question, and the essence of this posting, is why aren't there any qualified persons in the mix?

    That is, why are UFOs or the NDE laid down by people who can't explain the experience in ways that provide data or details that help make the events clearer?

    It seems that no qualified person goes through the near-death sequence, remembering what kind of music or flowers they heard and saw.

    And no qualified person has a UFO experience wherein they get a handle on some aspect of it that they are equipped to speak to?

    The forensic details are always missing, meaning, for me, the events are something less than real, in the practical, mundane sense.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, June 03, 2011  

  • Another issue is the utilization of evidence for a defined purpose if details are present to be investigated.Then what? Several years ago, I had taken part in OBE research and nothing has come of it.It is of course, one thing to write about it and another to experience these jarring episodes.

    Another is the ability to not believe what one is experiencing at face value, to question it as it is occurring, which is counter-intuitive to most.

    I wrote about an OBE regarding a certain Italian monastery,it's layout, along with a distinctive statue in the courtyard in a distant century. After a long, long search, I found it. Now what? I know no more than I did prior to the experience and am simply more befuddled than I was prior to the experience.

    I have been gifted and cursed with a very functioning memory. My wife can attest to this.

    These OBE's are rare and extremely random for me, which I have shared with her and have written about..yet if I had a forensic artist, I know very small details of facial features of those other folks I encountered, and I have questioned them.

    One was a Catholic Priest who guided me on a tour of an abandoned hotel, and it's occupants, which he felt were his mission, of which I remember all the details. I could provide the layout of this place..his commentary..but then what? One revelation is how "ghost hunting" is a sadistic act. How useful is this to others?

    Lucid dreams, OBE, NDE..all of them in a spectrum are not empirical realities by the orientation of the observer, however they are taken to be, when they are not, at the time of their occurrence. Again the ability to be self skeptical regarding one's certainty.

    Square pegs versus round holes and mistaking one for the other. Did these events actually occur to me? The answer is both yes and no, if there is any sincerity to be found from me.

    As Wright said, the devil is in the details (when they are found)...They have provoked a great deal of introspection but that is all, nothing more, of any utility to others, or myself. They are seen rightly, as a camp fire round of folklore.

    However, it is the provocative question as a metaphor, Don't look at what is my hand, look at where my hand is pointing to.." Perhaps for now...a bridge too far.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Friday, June 03, 2011  

  • @CDA:

    "To get the smell, feel and texture of a UFO you would need a sighting lasting an hour or more."

    Smell, feel, and texture? What?

    Who's arguing those secondary sensory criteria? UFO sightings are primarily a visual experience, and a sighting can be judged credible, after analysis of other human factors, with less than a minute of exposure to anomalous visual stimuli, especially in multiple witness cases where cross-comparisons of reported data from witnesses can be deductively evaluated via cross-reference.

    Your criteria of "an hour or more," CDA, makes no rational sense. How did you come up with this arbitrary factor?

    Project Blue Book investigatory personnel, as per Hynek, suggested in fact that UFO phenomena observed over as little as a 1 to 5 minute time span (again, depending on the credibility of the witness[es] and the description of what was seen), can establish the basis for a quite credible report with sufficient detail for investigation.

    By Blogger steve sawyer, at Friday, June 03, 2011  

  • Anyone who has had a true paranormal experience, especially involving music or colors, knows that there are some experiences that our language cannot adequately describe.

    By Blogger carol, at Friday, June 03, 2011  

  • Carol:

    Everything can be described, badly or well depending upon the acumen of the describer.

    That's what we humans do...


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, June 03, 2011  

  • Steve:
    To decide the composition of a UFO you need more than a visual stimulus. You need to feel, touch and examine it closely. As per RR's posting. As such I placed an hour as a suitable time period to achieve this. It could be less, maybe 10 to 15 minutes.

    It cannot be purely visual, and transient, as the great majority of reports are. That is why we are so lacking in real, useful evidence. It is unfortunate, but that's ufology.

    Arthur Clarke once wrote: "show me a UFO and I'll reconsider my position" [he was a doubter].

    Show me some hardware, real hardware. Show me some bodies (a la Roswell), show me some genuine documentation, something that is precise, to the point and unimpeachable.

    As with NDEs and OBEs we never get it.

    And yes if you can get a music recording from within an ET craft (genuine!) or a real new device, like a metallic piece from the UFO, so much the better.

    By Blogger cda, at Friday, June 03, 2011  

  • "In a strange, frightening, or bizarre experience the senses are heightened and a reliable, qualified witness would be able to discern, in a UFO episode for instance, smells, grommets, construction, flight parameters and a variety of other pertinent details.

    This has never been done."

    I beg to differ sir and i am quite surprised you would make such a claim. No smell, no sound, maneuverability and performance descriptions, hot or cold in temperature and seamless construction with never before seen materials likened somewhat to metal. These are some quite common descriptions of UFO's.

    By Blogger Adam, at Friday, June 03, 2011  

  • P.M.H. Atwater touches on this issue briefly in her book "Beyond the Light" (in the resources section under 'Music'). She says the only 'earth' music which resonates with what she heard on 'the other side' is the Hoomi singing (overtone singing) of Mongolia. No one disputes that NDE's take place in (or generate) an altered state of consciousness - & the issue of cross-state amnesia is well known, & i believe it plays a part in this.

    i finally (25+ years later) found something that approximates what i heard during my 'NDE':


    right after the guy says 'we're okay, we're okay'. it's described pretty well in the tibetan book of the dead. paradoxically, this was an incredibly positive and helpful experience for me.

    of course, if people really DO see into or spend time in an alternate part of reality, why would their descriptions make sense to us? would a helicopter 'make sense' to the average transportation engineer' of the middle ages?


    By Blogger tinyjunco, at Saturday, June 04, 2011  

  • Tinyjunco:

    You make some valid, interesting points.



    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, June 04, 2011  

  • i agree with Carol - trying to describe an NDE to someone who's never had one is like trying to describe color to a blind person.

    then there is the question of focus of attention. most NDErs report that the experience's 'point' is to convey information regarding purpose and meaning of life, connectedness of all life, nature of reality, and so on. in other words, the transfer of big concepts and belief systems to your consciousness. given this 'purpose' of the experience, sights, sounds, etc. are more like 'background noise'. the concepts are the focus, and what you pay attention to. (not that NDErs are that great at 'wording' the concepts, either - but very few on the planet seem to be!)

    a metaphor to hopefully explicate (maybe not, tho!) - when you're learning to drive a car, do you pay attention to how the spark plugs are shaped, how dirty they are, the exact material of the fan belt, placement of the pistons, and so on? no one i know has - the point is to learn to drive, not to learn about the internal combustion engine. i have a stellar driving record and i can tell you zippety-doo-da about any car engines. my focus is on driving.

    add to this the completely unexpected and 'jarring' (excellent word Mr. Duensing) nature of these one-off occurrences. the witness has no notification to prepare mentally or emotionally to be a better observer. and who's to say that in the moment even a prepared observer would not change their priorities and focus on the nature of reality rather than the shape of a bolt? steph

    By Blogger tinyjunco, at Saturday, June 04, 2011  

  • Again, good points, Steph...


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, June 04, 2011  

  • huh. have you ever read any Carlo Ginzburg? i just picked up Ecstasies again, having read it years ago, and ran across this passage, describing battles fought in ecstasy by peasants in Europe: "....only in one village (Soccia) do the contenders employ branches of asphodel, the plant which, according to the ancients, grew in the meadows of the nether world."

    of course, the benandanti of the Friuli fought witches for the fertility of the fields using fennel stalks; the witches used sorghum.after the battles, still in ecstasy, they joined the procession of the dead...so some witnesses bring back names of specific plants/flowers. i've thought for some time that many paranormal experiences (specifically ufo abduction) could be fruitfully compared with these nocturnal journeys....




    By Blogger tinyjunco, at Wednesday, June 08, 2011  

  • Yes, Steph...

    Nocturnal journeys indeed.

    And what is real and what is not?

    Thanks, for the links.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, June 08, 2011  

  • In 'The Night Battles' Ginzburg finds tantalizing instances of corroboration in some of these battle narratives - people who were able to produce information about far away 'real world' places which they had visited in ecstasy, which information was later verified (by their inquisitors).

    'Ecstasies' raises the whole question of how/why people over thousands of miles and thousands of years, keep claiming to participate in this same constellation of experiences. it is, frankly, quite shocking to contemplate and hasn't been honestly addressed in any of the pertinent 'disciplines', in my opinion. in these two books Ginzburg does an excellent job of laying out the vast scope of the material which needs to be addressed by any honest explanation. certain elements of 'myth' have incredible stability over time and place in human endeavors, much more stability than many technological complexes....steph

    By Blogger tinyjunco, at Wednesday, June 08, 2011  

  • If we assume that the UFO and NDE experience is a manifestation of the brain/mind, then what is it about the minds of these experts (ie. horticulturists, aviators, etc.) that seems to preclude them from having the same experiences?

    Even if we assume that the reports are the result of con artists relaying fake stories -- the same question holds. What is it about experts which seems to preclude them from faking such stories as well?

    By Blogger Parakletos, at Thursday, June 09, 2011  

Post a Comment

<< Home