UFO Conjecture(s)

Saturday, January 14, 2012

Ufology: Ignorance and the concepts of Freud’s Totem and Taboo

Copyright 2012, InterAmerica, Inc.

It is highly disturbing for those who have an intellectual bent to have to cope with the ignorant comments and asides of those who presume to beset blogs and web-sites with their broadsides or to create wholesale pastiches of palaver like mine, this being an example.

But here with are, within the internet world, exposing our biases and stupidities for all to see, most not getting enlightened by anything they read or discover online.

Buying a book and devouring it is passé for the great unwashed, from whom we derive, here, a cursory commentary that is steeped in gatherings from other rabble on the web.

And this rabble is enamored of the paranormal, infusing it with more than it deserves.

Freud tells us in his monumental work from 1912-1913, Totem and Taboo, page 113 of the Vintage paperback, 1960:

“Thus the omnipotence of thought, the over-estimation of psychic processes as opposed to reality, proves to be of unlimited effect in the neurotic’s affective life and in all that emanates from it.”

And the insistence that UFOs and all the ruminations about it are important goes to the heart of this neuroticism.

An example of how I suspect that we are suffused here with neurotics is the avoidance of any discussion about the posting, by me, a few days ago, about an Orgasmic UFO event.

The subject is taboo for UFO aficionados, even though sexual elements are rife in UFO cases, as one will see by reviewing UFO accounts from ancient references right up to and including the contactee era (as delineated by Nick Redfern in his book, Contactees and many of the cases that Kevin Randle investigated or provides in his new book, reviewed here partially, yesterday, 1/13/12).

The sexual aspect of UFO abductions are blatant, obvious. The subtler sexual aspects of UFO sightings, generally, are not obvious, but there nonetheless.

And here is an example of the sexual nature found in UFO iconography from the past, and overlooked by Ancient Astronaut theorists;

This from Peter Kolosimo’s wonderful, pictorial book, Spaceships in Prehistory [University Books, Inc, Secaucus, NJ, 1976, Page 223]:


This is a stele of the Lunigians, preserved in a museum at Spezia, Kolosimo writes.

It is representational of the many statues and images of the Phallic god of ancient times, of which the Hebrew god, Yahweh, was one.

Did the gods of old, the so-called extraterrestrial visitors of the AA crowd, accentuate sexuality, the procreation of humankind, and are still doing so today?

Ah, but the subject matter is taboo. Why? Because UFO mavens are an ignorant, repressed lot, as psychoanalytics would have it, and social historians, like Tocqueville, would also.

One can’t really broach the topic of sexuality in the realm of UFOs, because the field is flush with sexist attitudes (See UFO Updates for example after example) and perverse sexual psychopaths who concentrate on the homosexual insinuation of “probes” while ignoring the generic sexual symbolism that has been substantiated by psychologists and anthropologists for decades.

I agree, it’s not a comfortable topic, but it needs to be addressed, even if only peripherally.

I won’t go further with this here, or generally, at this particular blog.

The topic is for cognoscenti, and a few enlightened individuals, for whom psychology is not an esoteric realm, like alchemy or witchcraft and ghost-hunting.

But, at least, consider the possibility that UFO accounts have a sexual underpinning, psychologically or even extraterrestrially.


Thursday, January 12, 2012

Nick Redfern tackles the Roswell dummies

Nick Redfern continues to look at Roswell, despite Paul Kimball's chagrin about Nick, me, and others continuing to plumb the Roswell effluvia.

Click HERE to access Nick's latest salvo, if Roswell still intrigues you.

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Orgasmic UFO Encounter?

Copyright 2012, InterAmerica, Inc.

In Ronald Story’s Encyclopedia of Extratrerrestrial Encounters (recommended earlier here), on page 120 ff. there is an account of an apparent abduction on the Vermont side of Lake Champlain, north of Burlington, at a girls camp – Buff Ledge – on August 7th, 1968.

A young man (16) and a young girl (17), both workers at Buff Ledge, were alone on a dock, while most of the campers and counselors were away on a two-day break.

A white, cigar-shaped [sic] object appeared over the lake. The object dispersed three small, round objects “which performed acrobatic maneuvers” before two of the objects disappeared.

The one remaining object headed toward the boy and girl, stopping about ten feet from them on the end of the dock.

The boy, recalling the experience, said he saw a “classic ‘flying saucer’ with a transparent dome and revolving, multicolored glowing rim.”


The girl was in a trance-like state.

He then saw two short entities “behind the dome clothed in tight-fitting uniforms. They had large heads, big oval eyes, and a small mouth. They told him, telepathically, that they were from a distant planet and were not about to harm him or the girl.

The entity remembered

The craft moved overhead, bathed them in a beam of light, and the boy and girl were rendered unconscious.

When they came to, it was dark, and the campers had returned, two or them (girls) thought to have seen the object depart, the boy recalled.

The boy and girl felt inordinately tired went to bed in separate quarters.

Ten years later, the young man contacted J. Allen Hynek, and was subjected to hypnotic sessions to recall his alleged “missing time.”

He and the young woman, who reconnected evidently, both remembered, under hypnosis, the craft’s dimly lit interior, the entities (as described) and guides that attended them, she being “probed” and inspected by “strange figures” – while she was told to keep her eyes closed(!).

The young man recalled standing by, with his guide, as his friend was being examined.

Both “abductees” remembered that while two entities conducted the alleged examination, a third entity “monitored a console below an array of screens.”

The young man didn’t recall an examination on him but did remember, under his hypnosis, that he and his guide journeyed to the “mother ship” from which the object came that took him and his friend aboard.

The tour “included riding a tube of light (!) across a giant hangar, the placement of a helmet on his head” which provided the imagery of a park-like landscape, where his (girl) friend joined him.

Three possible supporting witnesses, to the sighting of the object, were found, but there was a discrepancy in their dates.

Walter N. Webb, from whom Ronald Story recreates the story, wrote a book about the event: Encounter at Buff Ledge: A UFO Case History, and the encounter may be found at the J. Allen Hynek Center for UFO Studies, 1994.

How is the “event” delineated above orgasmic in kind?

On page 81 of The Good Life, Sexually Speaking by Sigmund Stephen Miller [Prentice-Hall, NJ, 1972] is this (about orgasms in women and men):

“At that moment she is disconnected from the world, unrelated to anything that happens outside her body. She has lost all awareness of time and space, nor is she even aware of the man who is making love to her. She is totally immersed in herself…”

Havelock Ellis in Psychology of Sex [Mentor Books, 1933, 1938, 1954] in the section on Erotic Dreams in Sleep [Page 87 ff.] has this on page 92:

“…erotic dreams of the hysterical are by no means always, or even usually, of a pleasurable character. In some cases the illusion of sexual intercourse even provokes acute pain….such persons are often quite innocent of any knowledge of the erotic character of the experience.”

Sandra S. Kahn, M.A. and Jean Davis, Ph.D. in The Kahn Report on Sexual Preferences [St. Martin’s Press, NY, 1981] present in Chapter 4, The Sexual Consensus: Results, page 114 particularly, reports that women fantasy about having sex with two men simultaneously.

But let’s start at the beginning of the narrative…

A cigar-shaped object is seen. (Need I refer to Freudian symbolism?)

Then the cigar-shaped object spews three smaller objects. (You understand that, right?)

One of the spewed objects contains uniformed entities, inside the domes carapace (representing the super-ego).

A beam of light washes over them. (Tantric imagery)

You can get an idea of what was going on psychically from the Chapter, How to Lose Your Mind (Page 187 ff.) in Total Orgasm by Jack Lee Rosenberg [Random House/Bookworks, NY/Berkeley, 1973]:

“This takes you away from what’s happening right now – here and now…” [Page 188]

Your unfinished business may just fade…Many unfinished situations cannot be completed in actuality so fantasy is the only method available to you…Sometimes professional help from a competent therapist is required before you can complete a more deeply disturbing unfinished situation.” [Page 189]

The physical examination of the girl is elucidated in Modern Psychoanalysis, Edited by Judd Marmor [Basic Books, Inc., NY/London, 1968, Page 135 ff.]:

“Each person must be passive and aggressive…”

(The biologic aspects, I shall let you find for yourselves; they are too graphic for here, but go to what the young girl experienced, while her male companion watched.)

The homosexual elements within the account as told by the young man – about being with his guide on a trip to the mother-ship involving a tube of light, a helmet, and a hangar is rife with sexual symbolism and reference, so an exegesis seems unnecessary here.

The account is not dissimilar to the Hill abduction, and took place less than a decade after the Hills’ alleged abduction, which was also fraught with sexual overtones.

Do such stories confirm or add to Jose Caravaca’s Distortion hypothesis? Or are we dealing with a psychological archetype that is sexual and basic to humans, in near conscious dream-like states, and rather common, as found in mythical accounts, religious texts, and historical tracts?

Since sexual intimations are taboo or outside the realm of staid ufologists, the matter of sexual innuendo in UFO accounts, especially encounters, is without much literature and investigation.

Even I hesitated to place this event here, as we are suffused by some perverse UFO mavens who will besmirch legitimate research along the lines of psychosexuality.

But there it is…


Tuesday, January 10, 2012

Little man seen by a "little man"

On pages 207 and 208 of Mysteries of Mind, Space & Time, Voume 2 [H.S. Stuttman, Inc., Westport, Conn. 1991] is a story about eight-year-old Tonnlie Barefoot [sic] who, on October 12th, 1976, in Dunn, North Carolina, saw a little man "not much bigger than a Coke bottle" wearing black boots, blue trousers, and a blue top with "the prettiest little white tie you ever saw."

Adults scoffed at the story, upsetting young Tonnlie, until they discovered tiny footprints where the lad said he saw the little man.

What do we have here -- a Vallee-like tale? Or the intrusion of a mini-alien from outer space?

Note the surname of Tonnlie: Barefoot.

And the subsequently found footprints (not bare apparently) but related to feet, obviously.

A Coke bottle, a white tie, black trousers and blue accoutrements -- black and blue.

Are the incidental details important in discovering what young Tonnlie saw?

(And I don't discount what children relate; they invariably are telling the truth, as they perceive it -- their spin is up for grabs, but the essential elements are basically true.)

The story is a minor one, in the context of Magonia-like tales and UFO encounters generally, but it is typical of what Jose Caravaca reports as "distortion" events, provided by observers and caused by the intercession of an ethereal presence.

The strange encounter of young Tonnlie wasn't investigated by anyone, in a thorough manner. Why would it be?

It's what was known in the 1976 time-frame as a human interest tidbit that news media gave a minuscule slot to in the local newspaper(s) or television newscast(s).

My preference for imparting a psychological interpretation might go to an explanation but I think that would be a stretch, as the eight-year-old seems, from the niggardly report, to have been a normal boy without a penchant for making things up or for having neurological mishaps.

Jose Caravaca's and Nick Redfern's intrusion by "others" (causing the imagery and event) is even less likely that my psychological approach.

Why would an extra-human presence create such a small event, with a eight-year-old, in Dunn, North Carolina? It's an absurdity on the face of it.

A Jacques Vallee's Magonia-like event is out of context, for the time-frame, locale, and garb of the little man spotted by Tonnlie Barefoot, but is a possibility, because of the fairy-like ambiance.

But, again, why?

There are a plethora of such accounts as this one.

However, do they impact the UFO question?

Does there need to be a categorical roster, separating UFO reports so that lights in the sky, objects also in the sky, landed craft, with beings interacting with people and/or the environment, or bizarre encounters without UFOs -- a roster that allows a specialistic investigation of such anomalies so we can, eventually, determine what such events mean, if anything, to humankind.

Are some people the butt of jokes by an external, unknown presence?

Are some people neurotically inclined or on a psychotic cusp, and experiencing things totally imagined by a malfunctioning psyche or mind?

Or are we all misperceiving observational quirks, imbuing things with seen or felt cultural encrustations garnered from books, magazines, movies, television, and now the internet?

What's your take? (And stay inside the topic, please....no flights of arcanity.)


Purrlgurrl left a link in a comment below, a link that provides more detail for the account here (above) and attendant material about an AmerIndian "legend" that pertains.

Click HERE for PG's link....it's relevant.


Sunday, January 08, 2012

UFOs: The “Other”

Copyright 2012, InterAmerica, Inc.

The dialogue here, of late, is about the cause of images and activities described by persons who’ve had an encounter with UFOs that goes beyond a mere sighting of a light in the sky or a disk-shaped aircraft flying overhead.

Jose Caravaca has provided, here and at his blog (The Caravaca Files), a slew of cases where a person or persons report remarkable interactions with UFOs and entities from those UFOs.

Señor Caravaca points out that the cases he presents don’t include interactions between humans and exotic animals or Disneyland characters, or any other kind of imagery but only that which is clearly UFO oriented.

That is an important aspect of his developing Distortion Theory.

But I’m going to deal, again, with the prima causa that Señor Caravaca and Nick Redfern say or think is responsible for UFO events.

That prima causa, as Jose and Nick see it, is a psychical influence that has been interacting with humankind since the beginning of sentient life (and maybe even before that).

Now I call that prima causa God or the Universal Sentience: the universal, omnipresent mind.

That mind remains apart and aloof from human beings, unless humans try to make contact with it.

(This is the gist, as I keep writing, of Herman Melville’s epiphanic work, Moby Dick, which you can find an exegesis of by Googling Lewis Mumford, among others.)

God or the Universal Mind intersected with the likes of Moses, Socrates, Joan of Arc, and countless others over the eons of human existence.

But why would my Universal Mind use UFO imagery to make contact with some hapless humans doing nothing but engaging in mundane activities?

Señor Caravaca’s “other” and Nick Redfern’s psychical presence seem more suited to the UFO events they have proffered.

My ubiquitous and totally engaged “divinity” seems a bit too grandiose to take part in the UFO events that have been reported over the years, even that of Ezekiel in the Hebrew Bible.

But in the hierarchal categories of the Gnostics and other esoteric theologies there are minor divinities that one could attribute to the bizarre UFO encounters that have occurred over the years.

So I can accept (and do) the idea that something has interacted with some humans, in former ages as witches or various chimerae, and in (relatively) modern times as elements with the accoutrements of extraterrestrial technology.

But is it possible, and I think it is, that, perhaps, no outside “presence” is involved in UFO activity at all, that psychological or neural machinations may be an integral part of or the prima causa of UFO experience(s).

I think Bruce Duensing agrees with me.

Don Ledger, a peripheral and irrelevant ufologist, mostly in situ at UFO UpDates has been pooh-poohing the psychological etiology for UFOs.

Why do I eschew Don Ledger?

Here’s Mr. Ledger’s recent broadside, at UFO Updates, against Joe McGonagle, a British (skeptical) ufologist with much cachet among UFO cognoscenti about a questionnaire that Joe brought to the attention of UpDate “listers” (as UpDate members like to be known):

From: Don Ledger
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2012 13:45:42 -0400
Subject: Re: Participation In Psychology Dissertation Study

>From: Joe McGonagle
>Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2012 23:12:14 +0000
>Subject: Re: Participation In Psychology Dissertation Study
Any damn fool can find the nut cases out there and lump them in
and poison the whole data pool.

And cut the poor-mouthing Joe; your [sic] not fooling anyone. If I ever see anything positive/upbeat come out of your postings, it will be a day of wonder.

Don Ledger

Note the errant use of “your” for “you’re.”

Mr. Ledger strikes me as a pinhead, so when he eschews the psychological explanation for UFOs, I dismiss his observation.

It is palpable, to me, that neural parameters have much to do with UFO sightings and especially UFO encounters.

One of the reasons that I accent the psychological is that nowhere in the sightings offered by Señor Caravaca is there sheer terror. Yes, some witnesses expressed fear or anxiety but none had indicated terror, like that which some victims of nightmares, night-terrors have reported.

The UFO encounters noted by Caravaca and Redfern are oneiric (dream-like) or similar to a movie or television show.

Now this is for the “modern” era events.

The horrors that humans experienced in the Dark and Middle ages were sparked by the imagery that the Church promulgated, and such enterprises as The Inquisition exacerbated.

The “modern” era allows for a SciFi ambiance, supported by the fecund presence of SciFi imagery in the magazines, movies, TV shows, et cetera that we’ve inserted here in the past few weeks or so.

It doesn’t take an external presence to create UFO events. That indicates a presence that has nothing better to do but play games with a few, insignificant human beings, in lonely places who have no significant societal presence, and only are known by the deep-digging research of such persons as Jose Caravaca (and his Spanish colleagues) or the investigative work of Nick Redfern.

So, where are we in this discussion?

We (my group and some aligned visitors here) have got to find the neural mechanism that could cause he UFO events that occurred in the recent past, but are not taking place now. (And why is that?)

Or Jose Caravaca and Nick Redfern (and even Jacques Vallee) have got to come up with the viable “presence” they say is the instigator of the UFO events or reports that create an awe in some of us.

That’s where we are.