UFO Conjecture(s)

Sunday, September 30, 2012

Is ET nuts or just sloppy?

 Copyright 2012, InterAmerica, Inc.

Inside Max Miller’s 1967 magazine, Flying Saucers, pictured here…
fs67.jpg
is a piece by Bob Grant entitled “George Adamski: First Ambassador to Outer Space?" [Page 61 ff.]

The piece contained many of the (in)famous photos taken by Adamski, allegedly of flying saucers, mother ships, and alien message, like this one:
adamskim.jpg
The caption indicates that Adamski’s alien visitors left this encyrypted of undecipherable message on a roll of film, in place of the photo that was originally there.

It purports to be an explanation of how flying saucers are propelled: their propulsion system.

Of course the message is loony.

All of Adamski’s messages from his Venusian visitors are as loopy and sloppy as this one, including the message imprinted by Orthon’s shoe in the desert:
shoe.jpg

Here are a few examples of other messages, allegedly left by alien visitors:
granchi-1988.jpg
This from a 1988 “visitation”
messages.jpg
Two, one from John Reeves in Brookesville, Florida, 1965 (upper) and one from Sao Paolo in 1959.

(We’ve placed these “symbols” online earlier here)

The question arises: why would anyone see these as messages from a supposedly advanced alien, extraterrestrial race or races?

Of course, no one did or does now.

And why, we’ve asked before, would an extraterrestrial culture leave markings similar to those, sloppy as they are, to Earthian scribblings – particularly scribblings by psychotics and/or schizophrenics?

Either the progenitors of the sightings – Adamski, Granchi, Reeves, et al. – created the scribblings or markings – almost a certitude – or alien visitors are pathologically malformed.

It has to be the progenitors, doesn’t it?

Or are those “beings” that keep showing up in UFO encounters, like those provided by UFO researcher Jose Caravaca, just insane intruders from outer space, time dimensions, parallel universes, or our imaginations?

No matter where they come from, they are messy, sloppy message-leavers.

And what would we human beings get from them that’s worthwhile? They’re nuts.

RR

4 Comments:

  • I agree, they are nuts. Indeed, why not use alleged written symbols or language or things left behind (biscuits) as a marker for "hoax" or hallucination. This allows us to exclude a whole host of alleged contacts that are, presumably, phoney. What remains, however, are a very few interesting cases (Moody, Hickson/Parker, Mona Stafford), some with more than one person, that are troubling and difficult to explain in conventional terms.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Sunday, September 30, 2012  

  • That's one of the problems with such UFO or flying saucer reports, Dominick; some are obviously hoaxed or so goofy as to be psychotic in nature, while others have the patina of authenticity about them.

    Separating the wheat from the chaff is daunting.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, September 30, 2012  

  • They are advanced symbols of retrogressive 1950's pop culture of what an alien language "should" look like.. similar to the loopy but ironic, entertaining movies and comic book stereotypes of that time.. akin to psychotronic spinning pinwheels, ray guns and pop eyed damsels in distress. "Gosh Jenny, he left a message for us in his footprint.."
    "Whatsit say?"
    " Gee as best I can figure it says Red ball Jet"
    "Wow, that's his name?"
    Maybe his space ship's name"
    "Way cool shoes..come on let's tell George.."

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Sunday, September 30, 2012  

  • The alien writing sample is left out of most accounts of the Hill case. No one seems to have asked Betty to make a sample until 2000. And no one talks about that sample. Maybe that's because of what you suggest here, Rich: the embarrassing history of written alien messages.

    Certainly, the characters Betty produced are laughable.

    From p 289 of "Captured!"
    http://www.gizapyramid.com/Betty_Hill_Drawing.jpg

    According to my notes, Marden and Friedman make no comment on the alien writing at all. In fact, they don't even explain how the sample was produced.

    Strange.

    By Blogger Terry the Censor, at Sunday, October 07, 2012  

Post a Comment

<< Home