UFO Conjecture(s)

Saturday, November 02, 2013

A Confluence of Reality and Myth

On Page 138 of David Richie’s book, UFO:The Definitive Guide…[noted here several times] under the heading “merger” is this:

"A familiar example of merging, cited by investigator Jacques Vallee, is the so-called Roswell incident, in which alleged incidents at two different locations were merged to produce an account of a single UFO “crash” involving the recovery of an alien spacecraft and the bodies of extraterrestrials."

Is Richie saying that Vallee accepts the two-incident scenario for Roswell, which is what Stanton Friedman believes, as do I and a few other UFO aficionados?

For me, one incident is the balloon scenario of Mac Brazel, a non-UFO event actually and a real event (whose nature is not exactly clear) which is the crux of the UFO story, the Roswell reality.

There is also another “merge” and that is the Roswell/Aztec co-joining, despite the insistence by Frank Warren and Scott Ramsey that Aztec is a bona fide, unique event and Tony Bragalia (and his Dream Team cohorts) that Roswell is not connected to Aztec.

Silas Newton fused what he knew about Roswell into the Aztec saga, for various reasons, enumerated here earlier.

The idea of “merger” applies to many aspects of UFO lore -- movies, book tales, TV shows, magazine articles, et al. combining into a construct that creates what seems to be a singular event but is, in fact, a consolidation of mental configurations that bring forth a singular whole that really consists of an amalgam of individual memories and neurological machinations – the Betty/Barney Hill “abduction” is a prime example.

“Merge” is not the exact word for such constructions. The psychiatric term is mergent; partial or total, “partial mergent” being the more applicable.



  • The "merge" or what you called as "merge" is imho what Roswell myth have aggregated in his narrative construction from 1978 and after to today, due to his mythmakers, from previous crashology myths, aka what Ziegler, Saler (and Moore) labeled "P" in their book (UFO Crash at Roswell: The Genesis of a Modern Myth) p.17 my version:

    ideas that appear in previous crashed-saucer stories + "B" beliefs, that according to Peebles were already common currency withing the UFO
    community before 1979

    And then, the real "stimulus" (conventional aka balloon + radar targets materials) they called "H" - documented events of the Historical Roswell incident -

    Add too "what they labeled "HD" - distorted versions of these historical events - + "V" the new version(s) or specific ideas added to the first version (Berlitz and Moore, 1980)... then V1, V2 etc. because the mytmakers are changing version/scenario and adding new ideas, new witnesses, debunk themselves their old previous stars (Dennis, Kauffman, Ragsdale) or their own team mythmakers mates....

    and you have more or less what IS Roswell: a Modern Myth.



    By Blogger Gilles Fernandez, at Saturday, November 02, 2013  

  • But remember Gilles,

    At the core of myths lie truths.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, November 02, 2013  

  • "At the core of myths lie truths."

    Who's truth? This day and age, truth is relevant to the individual's perception.

    Yet, if you are referring to the archaic version of Truth, then I'm inclined to agree with you.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Saturday, November 02, 2013  

  • Truth, Tim, in the dictionary sense or the philosophical sense; not the psychological or skeptical sense.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, November 02, 2013  

  • Much of postings throughout the internet reflect the lack of reporting on recent sightings and so, they strike somewhat as killing time, a revisiting of old issues that in all likelihood have no pragmatic purpose nor resolution, other than to fire the old neurons along parallel paths toward yesteryear's news, hence the circular route of revisionism which seems to be a popular topic in nearly every blog.
    Essentially all these represent a sort of stereotype,and reweaving of the details in an array of patterns, which dissolve when added to any sense of pragmatism, which of course is more than simply ironic when you consider they are meant to be pragmatic.
    In the end what are considered facts are not applicable to the core mystery inasmuch as they are melded to imagination, much like the brush in an artisan's hand..call it episodic wallpaper of the mind, the re-imagining of what is in reality, a stereotype, a template..a "given"..

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Sunday, November 03, 2013  

  • Continued..
    Much of what I read today everywhere it seems is the revisionism of alternative histories flavored with a conspiratorial bent that presumes a sort of pathological control system that hearkens back to Vallee's earlier theory cast toward "unknown sentience"
    Of course the shadow of these premises is the very lack of it in how the universe evolves and the severe right angles of the erstwhile mental architecture is the basis of myth to make the uncontrollable a sort of understandable banality. I often wonder if this is why history always repeats itself in well worn patterns, where only the characters are exchanged between episodes, and yet the plot lines remain consistent, inasmuch as the projection of anthropomorphism onto inquisitional matters always ends up as a mirrored surface, rather than trying to break free of assumptions as stereotypes as rote commandments or paths.
    All myths are metaphors in the last redoubt of any consideration.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Sunday, November 03, 2013  

Post a Comment

<< Home