Tim Binnall, Brad Steiger, and Trickster

Tim Binnall’s season two finale interview with Brad Steiger was inspiring, reminding me of what I consider to be the crucial points of esoteric research and phenomena. (Including UFOs.)

Steiger stressed that at the core of all these anomalous events (always keeping in mind this includes UFOs) is the Trickster element. (Steiger isn’t the only researcher that believes this; see George P. Hansen’s The Trickster and the Paranormal.)

Another point Steiger made was that no one has the answer, (which should seem obvious) and yet so many come out and insist that that is exactly what they have.

There was also the point made that younger researchers sometimes are ignorant of the older, previous researchers that have gone before and set the way for others; Steiger himself, Keel, Sanderson, Fodor, etc. Young ghost busters tromping through haunted houses with high tech equipment, or UFO “researchers” who read one or two books and think they know it all. I’d add to this that it isn’t just young people, nor all young people, but that this attitude is found among all age groups. There are calls to ignore the history and focus on the now, which is a disservice to all research. (At the same time, you don’t want to get stuck in the past.)

The chronic skeptics, in all their varieties, point to the fact that after so many years -- whether it’s sixty years or a thousand -- we haven't found any answers. That’s true, if one means, by “answer,” the final one size fits all solution to the UFO question. We haven't found “the answer.” The point is, we very likely won’t. That’s unacceptable for some. For others, it’s a non-issue, since we heavily suspect we’ll never find the “answer” and anyway, that’s beside the point.

(Painting: section of Boticelli's Adoration of the Magi 1475)


The persistently skeptical also tell us us that much of UFO and anomalous phenomena seems silly and downright pointless. Conflicting information given by “aliens,” their general behavior, the elusive nature; it’s too uselessly complex and nonsensical.

But that’s what makes it fun; and it’s what the Trickster does; confuse and play cruel jokes. Maybe it makes sense to itself; tough if we can’t get it. Or maybe it knows we can’t get it, and that’s why it delights in doing what it does. Maybe it’s nothing personal at all and we’re personifying; it just is what it is, and we are what we are. No matter, for the Trickster is still at it, regardless of what we think about it.

None of this means there really aren’t Martians living beneath the surface of Mars, or that there are bases on the back side of the Moon. (Maybe.) If any of that is so, that’s only a fraction of the Big Paranormal Picture. A lot more is still to come.

And actually, I suspect that it is really very “simple” in a way: as Steiger called it, we live parallel to a “shadow” world/reality. They do their thing, we do ours. Sometimes, more often than some of us would acknowledge, we meet each other, We find ourselves plunked into their world, or we meet up with “visitors” from theirs. The boundaries between the two aren’t all that firm, as much as some of us like to pretend it is. Indeed, one of the main functions of the Trickster is crossing boundaries.

So thanks to Tim Binnall for all his great work in bringing us (and for free) solid interviews with all kinds of UFO and esoteric researchers, including Brad Steiger.


Resources:
Binnall of America
Brad and Sherry Steiger
The Trickster and the Paranormal

Mating Hedgehogs: New blog

FYI, it's been around awhile, but I hadn't done anything to announce it. Formerly called "ear mouse" until I discovered there's already a lot of things named "ear mouse." Go figure. So now it's
"Mating Hedgehogs," in honor of my favorite debunker theory to explain crop circles. Take a look.

MUFON To Collaborate on Abduction Reporting

The current issue of the MUFON Journal has an item about its “abduction experiencer referral relationship.” MUFON has partnered with OPUS (Organization for Paranormal Understanding and Support,) where calls concerning alien abductions will be directed to Lester Velez. Velez is Vice President of OPUS. He is also the Northern California Assistant State Director of MUFON.

As with MUFON, OPUS is a 501 (c3) nonprofit group.

The MUFON article states that the OPUS mission is:

“To develop a network of people dedicated to a better understanding of the overall nature of unusual/anomalous personal experiences and to support those who have them.”

What kinds of experiences fall into this category?

“. . . extraordinary states of consciousness, fortean, spiritual, or parapsychological phenomenon, close encounters with non-human entities, and/or UFO activity.”

By bringing together people with “opposing and often controversial views” MUFON/OPUS’ intent is to gain a larger understanding (including on the scientific playing field) of the abduction phenomena.

Notes

MUFON Journal, May 2007
OPUS and MUFON to Collaborate on Abduction Reporting

OPUS
http://www.opus-net.org

New Take on the "Owlman"

Another interesting feature today about the Mawnan Owlman. Tulpa? Manifested surrealism? Always a classic Fortean/Crypto story that never gets tiring. At least, not for flying saucer/crypto junkies like myself.

Wild Women and Shape Shifters

Lisa Shiel, author of the Bigfoot Quest Blog and Backyard Bigfoot: The True Story of Stick Signs, UFOs, & the Sasquatch encourages woman to get involved in Bigfoot research. As Shiel points out, there are very few women in Bigfoot research. There’s herself, and Autumn Williams, and that’s about it.

Both women are active researchers: they’re field researchers, actually going out there and doing all the physical “nuts and bolts” research things one does in search of Bigfoot.

But, there’s a difference as well. Both of these women have had no problem at all with making public their views that Bigfoot is more than just a flesh and blood creature.

Shiel believes that Bigfoot is much more than just basically a “giant ape” or some other animal. There’s much more to Bigfoot than the simple idea it’s another animal. It’s a shape shifter, it’s paranormal, it’s no mere big dumb missing link.

Williams has a different take on this, but both agree that it’s vital to include all the data when investigating reports, and that includes the stories of UFOs, floating lights, telepathy, dematerialization, and all the other weirdness often associated with Bigfoot encounters.

I’ve found that the few women who are involved in Bigfoot research in some way very naturally include the high strangeness data. They are more open to the possibilities, more open with their own experiences that many consider far too weird to discuss seriously.

(With all due respect, take a look at what Loren Coleman has said about Mary Green. Not pretty. Mary Green is a Bigfoot experiencer/researcher of the “high strangeness” kind.)

Shiel says that being a woman in a predominantly male field has its share of expected nonsense:

Now I like men. But as a woman—even worse, a single woman—engaged in a testosterone-ridden field of research, I can testify to the fact that most male Bigfoot researchers haven't heard about equal rights or women in the workplace. One man told me women don't want to get involved in Bigfoot research because they're afraid of the woods. Come on!

I remember watching a program on the Sci-Fi channel with Bigfoot researcher Autumn Williams. There were others on the team; I forget who, but she was the leader of the field research team and the only female. She was the bigfoot expert, not them. None of the men were in any way overtly asses, but one guy just had to up and mock her, and do stupid things like make ape calls as loud as he could. and this from an adult, who seemed to be in his fifties. I had to laugh at the way Williams really ripped him a new one.

This is the elephant in the room; I’ve spoken to a lot of female UFO and bigfoot writers, experiencers and researchers, and the things said -- and done -- to them at times is frustratingly astounding. We don’t talk about it for a lot of reasons. Females in any male dominated field experience this, this is not news. It’s so typical, it’s boring to even comment on. Still, it does get to one at times. It’s just a matter of fact aspect of being in this field. I’ve been sent ugly e-mails, and ugly things have been written about me openly on-line, by men. I’ve been called a lesbian (not that’s there anything wrong with that) (but I’m not,) a Jew-bitch, a man-hater. I’ve been “accused” of “wanting to write like a man” and, that I “write like a man.” (that’s either a backhanded compliment or so surreal it’s not worth trying to figure out.) I’ve been told I have a “castration problem” and my husband has been called names (he doesn’t even go on line!) simply because he’s married to me; the implication being he’s a wimp. (Listen, the man’s a double Scorpio, believe me, he’s not afraid of nuttin’, see?!) I’ve maintained for decades that the real last threat to some men from females exists on an intellectual level. (I experienced this in philosophy classes in college.) Men are no exception, we’re all called names and insulted. Take a look around and you’ll find insult fests going on between various male writers and researchers that make you wonder how we’re supposed to take anyone seriously, if they behave so badly? Anyway, this somewhat beside the point; I don’t intend to go off an a tangent here. It's a given, and you move on.


Shiel encourages women who are researching Bigfoot to contact her. Please do:

If you are a women involved in Bigfoot research, please e-mail me at lisa@upbigfoot.com. If you have a blog or website, we can exchange links. Women researches need to help and support each other as much as possible—start our own groups, exchange knowledge and wisdom, provide moral support.

I don’t consider myself a true Bigfoot researcher, since I've never once gone out in the woods to look for Bigfoot. (And it’s not because I’m afraid of the woods.) If anything, I’m an “armchair” scholar on Bigfoot, and that includes all the high strangeness stories concerning Bigfoot, the focus being on the anomalous aspects of encounters.

I don’t know if I personally will ever go out to look for Bigfoot on an expedition, because I’m convinced it’s pretty much pointless. Bigfoot will show itself if and when it wants to, not because you’re out there. Following up on stories would be interesting, however, and clues could be found; but it’s all in the approach. Banging around out there making lots of noise and thinking Bigfoot’s going to appear on cue is ridiculous.

Right now there is a possible Bigfoot case in my area that I’ve been keeping track of. The case includes paranormal activity. If I get involved in this further, I will do physical research as well. This isn’t in hopes of seeing a Bigfoot, but rather to gather any possible evidence of something anomalous.

So if you’re a female researcher of the anomalous, including Bigfoot, know that there are women out there like Lisa Shiel, like myself, and others, who are supportive of your efforts.

---

Valley of the Skookum
I received my copy of In the Valley of the Skookum: Four Years of Encounters With Bigfoot, by Sali Sheppard-Wolford. (Sheppard-Wolford is Autumn Williams’ mother.) I stayed up until 3:30 am reading it. I couldn't put it down. I didn’t finish it, not for lack of trying, but I’m about a chapter away from the end. There’s much to say about this book, including the orange lights seen by many of the witnesses and my own orange orb sighting. But that’ll have to wait for another day.

---

Linda Martin
By way of Lisa Shiel’s blog, I discovered another female Bigfoot researcher; Linda Martin. I’m not familiar with Martin, and followed the link from Lisa’s blog to Martin’s Bigfoot sightings, where I found she had picked up on my little WTF blurb on Technorati, on accepting anomalous Bigfoot data in Bigfoot research. Martin is open to the possibility of a shape shifting BF, but remains skeptical as well. Can’t ask for more than that.

---

Notes
Lisa Shiel: http://bigfootquest.blogspot.com/2007/04/wild-women-of-woods.html
Linda Martin: http://www.bigfootsightings.org/
Regan Lee, WTF Technorati blurb:http://technorati.com/wtf/bigfoot/2007/03/30/bigfoot-a-shapeshifter-1
Sali Sheppard-Wolford: Valley of the Skookum

Acceptability of Faith, Demands for Proof

Many a chronic skeptic will back down from attacking/debating/arguing with a religious person. The accommodation is one they’d never make for a UFO or Bigfoot witness, or anyone who’s encountered the paranormal. But they’re not as quick to practice their irrational rationalism with a person of faith because, they’ll tell us, it’s a matter of faith. (Also, many a skeptic is a person of faith.) If the religious person admits that they belief because they “have faith,” and acknowledge that there isn’t any way to prove such a thing (which is why it’s called faith) everyone’s pleased with such civilized behavior and there is no need for debate.

The degree of acceptably of one’s faith decreases with the type of religion or spiritual system in question. Mainstream religions are usually fine, unless they verge on the cultish. When one strays from the “norm” by claiming to be pagan, or a non-Western religion or system, the marginlization begins.

Faith is what it is, and there’s nothing wrong with having faith. This isn’t about a judgment on the merits of faith. But one can not prove God exists, or Jesus, or the Virgin Mary, or the Holy Spirit, etc. Someone says they believe in these things, they believe because of their experience, and their faith. But what have they offered us? Nothing tangible. Yet we leave them alone.

But in cases of UFOs and anomalous events, as we know, the expectations -- the demands -- for proof are shrill. They’re relentless, and those who make the demands are consumed with the self-righteousness of any zealot who believes -- who knows -- they are right and on a higher moral road.


Meanwhile, people see Bigfoot or other entities, and immediately have their sanity and character questioned if they share their stories. One could argue that in the case of a single witness, all we have is her word. And yet, why would someone want to lie about a thing like that? (True, people have and do -- in all areas. The point isn’t so much about believing another wholeheartedly without any thinking on your part. It’s more of an approach, a mindset, a way of looking at the world that is the issue here.)

In cases of multiple witnesses, we have a lot more than the lone person relating her story of encountering a God. Yet we demand much more from the Bigfoot witness.

The same for UFOs. Hell, we’re still stuck on the inaccurate semantics surrounding UFOs: the inane question “Do you believe in UFOs?,” the “We don’t know what a UFO is, so how will we know one when we see one?” (also used for Bigfoot) and “UFOs really means extraterrestrials” comments.

Even with photographs, video, film, thousands upon thousands of witnesses, anecdotal evidence, the chronic skeptic still swims around the silly language games while demanding proof, proof, and more proof.

It’s not a surprising reality to know, though it is frustrating, that the anomalous -- where something has been encountered, smelled, seen, touched, heard and felt -- is not only dismissed, but violently discarded. Juxtaposed this with the serene acceptance of staid religious “faith” where nothing has been seen, heard or felt, except by the individual. There are no photos , no radar, no plaster casts or interesting DNA results from hair samples, just a person’s “faith” to get them through. And we nod and gladly accept the latter as rational, and the former as irrational.

By accepting some forms of religious belief as valid and rational, those who reject the anomalous in general have set up a buffer for themselves. A little blankie that comforts; yes, faith is a mystery but there you are. No we can move on. The scientist can go to church and go back into the lab, utterly rejecting ghosts, esp, UFOs, Bigfoot and weird creatures that pop into our reality.

And then there's this; the idea that religious experiences and apparitions are paranormal/Fortean, not "religious" though obviously they're framed in that way.

“Be Honest About What You See . . .” Cooper and Symington

Looks like both The OrangeOrb (er, me) and the Heavy Stuff blog were wrong; Anderson Cooper has picked up on the Symington story. Actually, to be specific, the author of Heavy Stuff wrote that Cooper probably won’t ask Symington who ordered him to pull that trivializing stunt with his aide in an alien suit. Good question.
While Cooper does a good job of reporting on Symington’s sighting and what Symington has to say without stopping to mockery or lame little green men jokes, he didn’t ask that question.

The Stories

“Be honest about what you see, get out of the way and let the story reveal itself.” ~ Anderson Cooper

When it comes to UFOs and related experiences (Forteana, etc) this is the starting point for all of us. For many of us it is all we have. It’s all I have, regarding my own experiences. I don’t have bits of a spaceship, a photograph of an alien (assuming those two things were ever part of the events -- who can say?) I don’t have “proof.” (See Stanton Friedman’s articles in the March issues of UFO Magazine and MUFON Journal for his perspective on the demands for proof.)

The more conservative skeptics, who are perennially affronted at the likes of us, basically tell us to just shut up. They have many tactics for doing this, including trotting out the more garish and embarrassing characters in UFOlogy as proof the whole thing is nonsense. They’ve set up a closed system: anecdotal evidence isn’t evidence at all, therefore unless you have bits of a spaceship from Mars, go away.

So while the anti-UFOists, the chronic skeptics, debunkers and the like continue to mock and chide, the rest of us are left with our experiences. Getting no help from them (quite the opposite much of the time) we’re left with a hodge podge of UFO witnesses. Some have mind up their minds, sure, and that’s not good. Some believe they’re been in contact with extraterrestrials, and maybe they have. Maybe the beings have told them as much. That doesn’t mean they’re telling the truth: they could be anything from a mind control black op Dr. Evil government experiment to inner earth entities. Whatever they are, those of us who’ve experienced weird things are trying to figure it out. And all around us are people who feel they have some sort of intellectual -- moral, even -- imperative to insult, mock and harass. Or we have institutionalized science telling us, from afar, what it is we experienced.

The majority of the time, all we have is anecdotal evidence. Intuition. Imagination. Our own inner dance. Perceptions. And while I’m not so naive -- nor ignorant -- to think institutionalized science should suddenly get happy and embrace these feel good concepts, it wouldn’t hurt for the individual humans involved in these projects to check in with themselves from time to time.

UFO witnesses, experiencers of the weird in general, need to tell their stories, and their stories need to be listened to without rancor or ridicule.

Notes:

Lesley, of Debris Field, has written her new column for Binnall of America will be on the Phoenix Lights/Symington revealation, but it wasn’t up last time I checked. Keep checking BOA though.
BOA: http://binnallofamerica.com/
Debris Field: http://thedebrisfield.blogspot.com/

Heavy Stuff blog:http://theheavystuff.com/

“Mock Them As Barflies From Venus and Mars”

Alfred Lehmberg, of An Alien View blog, has written another great piece, this one on the perception by chronic skeptics who spend large units of time sneering at abductees. No understanding, just the lowest and easiest form of attack. I also saw this piece as a metaphor for other issues, including non-UFO ones.

“Forget that the saucers still fly in your skies; forget the abducted, and pretend that their cries... are musings of idiots, cretinous loons who scratch at your wallet then howl at your moon. But it's you, not *abductees*, "out to lunch" here today! It is YOU, and not them, sopped in naiveté!”

What is so often missed in all this craziness and high strangeness, is what it does to all of us, and why. I don’t pretend to know the “why,” and often am unaware of it doing anything at all to me. We need these experiences, whether it’s us that’s having them, or someone else. Among other things, these abductees, and encounters with entities, and all the rest of it, are gifts. Not just for the individual experiencer, but everyone. These “gifts” are not often appreciated, wanted, or even good ones -- give it back! But they are gifts, of a kind, reminding us that it’s not just us solid citizens out here doing the hard core reality thing.

These events have been going on for thousands of years, and we’ve been trying to figure them out -- or suppress them -- for just as long. Doesn’t seem we’ve gotten anywhere, and insisting that those that experience the anomalous are money hungry, emotionally needy, lying fruitcakes with mental diseases is getting a bit tired.

Bigfoot: What Do You Want to Prove?

The discussion continues over on the Cryptomundo blog about so-called “paranormal” Bigfoot. Call it anomalous or Fortean Bigfoot, whatever you choose, the encounters of Bigfoot with UFO and other non-crypto aspects is the issue here. Lisa Sheil, author of Backyard Bigfoot, has put the core issue very well; what I’ve been trying to say. But she said it better, I think, over on the Cryptomundo blog:

”We all need to ask ourselves, what is the goal of Bigfoot research? To prove Bigfoot are apes? Or to discover the truth about their nature and behavior? If you want to prove they’re apes, you must ignore evidence. If you want the truth, you must examine all data, no matter how disturbing to your sensitive psyche, and determine the reasons to accept or reject it. Rejecting data based on personal bias, fear, or arrogance serves no purpose, scientific or otherwise.”

I’ve had many people say that Bigfoot can’t be “both” flesh and blood and “paranormal.” While I’ve stumbled around trying to say why this is wrong; Lisa again says it more clearly:

"Only someone who misunderstands the concept of paranormal would assert that flesh-and-blood and UFO-related cannot both apply to Bigfoot. According to this idea, a human being who has a psychic experience would no longer be a flesh-and-blood human being."

It simply gets down to this. Are we interested in the truth; the actual answer, or in proving what we think is the truth?

Notes:

Lisa Sheil: Backyard Bigfoot and blog.

Lesley's Debris Field blog. (Image shown here boldly borrowed from her blog)

Craig Woolheater's Cryptomundo blog.

Fortean Bigfoot

The discussion continues over on Cryptomundo about weird, UFO, telepathic, anomalous and Fortean Bigfoot.

One of my points, as well as a truly sincere question, involves this information, or data. These stories exist; they're real. The stories, not the question of the experience itself. So, as I asked, do we accept the BF sighting, but not the UFO sighting? Do we include the BF report, but pretend we never heard anything about the witness also communicating with the creature?

I also made the point that including this anomalous data in the research is not the same as accepting it as real,understanding it, or approving it.

Here's what I commented over on Cryptomundo:

Thanks for the facilitation of this intriguing topic Craig.

Lots of interesting comments, as to be expected!

As I said, I realize that cryptozoology and the search for Bigfoot in a quest for its scientific validity has a hard enough time being taken seriously. I am completely sympathetic to that, and any "nonsense" about telepathic communcations, UFOs, or any other Fortean/high strangeness events associated with Bigfoot is to be rejected. BUT...

Having read several dozens of stories about these types of encounters, and knowing, personally, a few people that have had them, what do you do about them?

Are these people lying? I doubt very much the ones I've spoken with personally are. Always possible of course, as with anything. But I doubt it.

One of the issues here, for me, is: when do you decide, as a researcher, to reject something? A legitimate question.

If you're interviewing a BF witness, and they reveal they saw a UFO at the same time, or that they were in some sort of telepathic communication with BF, or some other "weird" event, what do you do?

Leave it out or ignore it? Accept the BF sighting, but not the other stuff? Reject the whole thing, including the BF sighting, because of the other stuff?

While I understand the fact of science needing physical, solid evidence that can be measured, etc. if these other things are present, they're a part of the experience. It isn't the witnesses or researcher's "fault" that they are a part of the experience.

So now what?

These are valid quesitons. As Nick Redfern pointed out in his recent articles on this topic, these stories are, and you can't just reject them because you feel like it. (on his blog UFO Mystic and in this issue of UFO Magazine.)

Keeping the stories as part of the data isn't the same as believing in them, or accepting them. But it's a start towards including all the evidence you find, as part of the research into the phenomena.

Squeaking Alien Eaten: UFOs and High Strangeness in Rostov, Russia

My recent piece for UFO Digest on the "alien" creature eaten by hungry fishermen:

Did It Taste Like Chicken?

Squeaking Alien Eaten: UFOs and High Strangeness in Rostov, Russia
The other night Keith Olbermann aired a bit on a green fishy creature of unknown origin, eaten by (apparently) starving, or at east way hungry, townspeople. I wasn’t paying much attention to Keith ;(though I love him, as Stephanie Miller says, my future husband -- if I weren’t already married) working away on my laptop. But the combined images of mysterious green entity that squeaked, eaten by hungry citizens, in foreign lands, was too much for me to ignore, and I had to find out more. So I searched and found this article: Russian Fisherman Catch Squeaking Alien and Eat It. I couldn't resist a title like that.

You can read the rest of the article on UFO Digest.

---

COLLECTOR OF DATA

Sometimes I am a collector of data, and only a collector, and am likely to be gross and miserly, piling up notes, pleased with merely numerically adding to my stores. Other times I have joys, when unexpectedly coming upon an outrageous story that may not be altogether a lie, or upon a macabre little thing that may make some reviewer of my more or less good works mad. But always there is present a feeling of unexplained relations of events that I note, and it is this far-away, haunting, or often taunt ing, awareness, or suspicion, that keeps me piling on. ~ (Charles Fort, Wild Talents)

I’ve always been fond of this quote. It resonates with why, and what, I’m doing around here. (Or, what I think I’m doing.) I think a lot of UFO writers, bloggers, etc. can relate to this quote.

It’s a nice bit of synchronicity, finding this quote. Trying to tune out Mr. Bush’s speech on MSNBC, yet perversely unable to turn it off; I was idly doing a search for UFO and Fortean quotes. (on my new laptop! yeah for me,) and came across the above quote.

Aside from ignoring/not ignoring Mr. Bush (notice the blue tie he was wearing? It’s all just to lull us more and more into the apathetic acceptance of continued slaughter. . . ) I was wondering what to do with an article I’ve been working on. It’s not an article yet, it’s just a nudging idea right now.

Years ago, I started to collect items about animals. I don’t know why; I just know I found the strange behavior of animals, from the family pet to animals in the urban wild and elsewhere, fascinating. This included odd and unexpected actions of known, mundane animals to OOP (Out of Place) animals. I had no idea what to do with these news clippings and articles, but I kept a huge file. In college, studying folklore, I thought I could do something with this, but never came up with anything substantial. (There was one thing actually, which was going to be my thesis/final project, but “dueling professors’ got to me, and that was that. Two years of grad school and nothing to show for it. Except I really dig folklore. Now it’s working its way to a book.)

I put those aside awhile ago, not sure if I still have those. But like most of us Fortean sloggers, I can’t help myself, and notice these kinds of items all the time.

The past few days, it seems to be calling me again. Maybe this time I’ll do something with it, once I get inspired.

MY CAT’S NAME IS ROSWELL : UFOLOGICAL INTEGRATION

image source: http://www.rion.nu/v5/archive/000371.php
rion.nu v5


Really, it is. We found him ten years ago; he was the most freaked out little thing I’ve ever seen. One night, I heard this awful yowling; it just wouldn’t stop. I couldn’t take it any more. It went on for a couple of hours. I went outside, found that the sound was coming from a house across the street. Looking around, I discovered the sound was coming from underneath the porch. I could see a tiny little black and white kitten (a hell of a noise coming from such a small thing) and I tried to coax it out but no way was he going to leave. Yet he wouldn’t stop yowling.

What surprised me was the complete lack of interest from the neighbors. Already at that time we had a reputation; one neighbor did step out and say to me, “Oh, we wondered when you’d come out and get it.” Some people. (And what of the people who lived in the house? Oblivious. I find that astounding.)

I kept leaving little bits of food, further and further away, until he came out, only to run back under the porch. After a few days he came out and stayed on our porch. While I kept agreeing with my husband, who said, every five minutes, “We are NOT keeping him,” I knew better. So did he. (He’s the one who said, “Where’s our heating pad? Poor little guy shouldn't be out there in the cold.”) Next thing we know, he’s in the house.

The name Roswell fits; he’s a happy though slightly hothouse pampered little thug of a cat, never going outside since his traumatic brief life outdoors. We’ve tried to put him out; he won’t have it.

When I say my cat’s name is Roswell, almost everyone gives a slight, startled, brief little laugh. A few have paused and said, knowingly, “Roswell, eh?” then I realize I’ve entered a dimension, a secret society of people who know. He/she too is “into” UFOs , and so the conversation begins. Others are aware of the name and its place in pop culture, but don’t go further.

Maybe I’m wrong about my firm opinion that the infrastructure will never allow things like full disclosure, scientific respect and investigation, etc. (At the same time, I’ve also always maintained that the lone squeaky voice needs to be heard and maybe, over time, all that nudging will bump the paradigm enough to cause a shift, no matter how slight.)

Maybe I’ve been too harsh. Jeremy Vaeni’s recent piece in this issue of UFO Magazine,: Whose Time Has Come?, suggests that we put it all out there, without expectations, or offense. Yes, the meme of alien probes appears in sit-coms, from the mouths of talk show hosts and comedians. Corporations appropriate abductions; the Energizer bunny shows us how well its batteries work, even while being sucked up into the Mother Ship. While “they” may think they’re diluting the phenomena by trivialization, maybe they're also, inadvertently, helping us all to acknowledge the reality.

Yes, let it be known that 2007 heralds the arrival of the new phase: The complete integration of ufology into normal everyday acceptance by the average person. Gone are the days of paranoia and demanding the truth. Gone are the days of highs and lows, the peaks and valleys of public clamoring.

Vaeni urges us to just put it out there, and not expect everyone to get it, because they won’t. That’s okay Don’t take offense; just put it out there. My cat’s name is Roswell. You get it or you don’t. Some may even snicker. I tell them I have a UFO blog. They can Google me, ignore me, or back away, slowly.

The inspiration for Vaeni’s piece is his review of the book U.F.O., written by four artists “with philosophical and anthropological underpinnings.” (Vaeni.) Part of that inspiration was the search for the identity of a graffiti tagger who calls himself (or herself) UFO. Vaeni describes the graffiti art:

UFO tags the city with bulbous-headed alien and fiery spaceship spray art.”

The artists who wrote the book U.F.O. discovered that this graffiti image has appeared all over the world, including Thailand, and that the image is a replica of the symbols found in Australia, painted by the Wanjina.

Vaeni interviews one of the artists involved in the book, Jack Warren, who told Vaeni:

If you’re going to write an article on this book, I think the story is that we’re bringing this [ufology] to the broader public.”

Vaeni says something very important about UFOlogy and the general public’s interest:

”We’ve been trying to shovel legitimacy down the public’s throats for decades now, haven't we? This is real! This is real! Pay attention! They did; they didn’t; did; didn’t, like a tide. then the tide stopped. We thought the field was dead.”

Vaeni believes that this yo-yo effect is done; now we’re entering a phase of above board acknowledgment of aliens, UFOs, the anomalous.

He may be right.

We’re not quite finished yet.

Discussions about the book U.F.O. continue on graffiti blogs.
The
Razor Apple blog has a very different take on the book, and the author’s (who are also artists themselves) exclusion of U.F.O., the tagger:

Last week, U.F.O. showed up in disguise to chat with Combustive Motor Corporation at the release party they held to push their book. Though no minds were changed, the discussion continues on Suckapants. Intentional or not, we agree this book exploits U.F.O. and his work. Conducting an “urban anthropology” on U.F.O. without involving him is unethical and exploitative research by any definition.

Worth noting. Another layer to the phenomena.

My background is in folklore and, aside from UFOs and related topics, my other favorite area was folk art. Graffiti is certainly folk art. This does bring up questions of appropriation, or maybe just laziness. The issue of the artists being ignored is a personal one with me; being an artist myself, and married to one, I am acutely aware of the treatment of artists in communities. (For example, using the artists art to push/sell institutions to corporate and municipal entities, all the while either ignoring the artist, or treating them like an embarrassing bastard stepchild. They will use our art, but they don’t want to stink up the place with us.)

There’s a parallel here with some of those who study UFO cases, from the chronic skeptic to the UFO researcher, while ignoring the witnesses. At some point, and this is true in the case of anti UFOists, the witness is long forgotten.

I’M BORED WITH THE BORED; BUT HAPPY NEW YEAR ANYWAY

One observation I’ve made while journeying through UFO Land is that there are a handful of active, yet bored, anti-UFOists. Yes, they’re skeptics, but it’s more than that. Some are ex-UFO investigators/researchers themselves. Years ago, they started UFO newsletters, magazines, journals, groups, meetings, presentations. They investigated local UFO sightings. They researched UFO history and became familiar with the UFO cases and participants. Others never were so involved; that was, and is, beneath them. This never stopped them from commenting on UFOs, even writing books about them. While there are differences between these two; the skeptic who sneers at it all, and the ex-wonderer/wanderer who now sneers at it all, they have some things in common. And that’s boredom, with a capitol B. Bored, bored bored. They are so damn bored.

They’re so bored, they have to write about how bored they are, and tell others about how bored they are. They have the need to express their ennui with UFOlogy to others; but that’s not enough, they have to try and get others to come over ot their side. They have no qualms about being insulting to pro-UFOers. They think it’s okay for some reason; probably because, aside from being bored, they’re arrogant. They’re arrogant, because in their mind, they’re right. Their rightness gives them the right (heh) to be obnoxious towards others they deem unworthy. Those that haven’t yet turned toward the UFO side are ripe for picking; aiming their pleas at the neutral, the undecided, the newbie, the Bored ask them to come on over and join them in their anti-UFO, fanatical rationalism.

These bored types respond to anything UFO-ish with a big yawn. They often qualify their bored responses with the typical refrain of many a skeptic: “oh, I wish it would be true. I wish we’d all get the answer that a new study, a new case, a new witness, will tell us what UFOs are, and why, and from where they’ve come.”

Even if they truly did wish that, one wonders why they’re wasting so much time with telling us how bored they are.

A few of the bored blogs: (by no means an inclusive list. They differ slightly in other ways, and, as noted, there are plenty of others that incorporate even more bored bashing, but I’m not here to review them, analyze them, or get into anything. Simply point out the blatant and obvious: they’re bored, and I’m bored with their boredom.)

Aliens Ate My Buick
UFO Reality
UFO Iconoclast
Updates UFO Updates
Magonia


I’m bored with these boring bored bores. Let’s hope the New Year brings us world peace and freedom from poverty. And freedom from boring bored anti-UFO pundits.

Sadly, the chances of the first two becoming a reality are close to none, as is the latter wish.

But as I always point out my dahlings, within my somewhat cynical and pessimist nature (though I prefer to use the word ‘practical’) (and at least I’m not bored) there’s always hope, a glimmering desire stronger than the current reality. And so, I, along with so many others, continue to do the things needed to bring about these changes.

And with that, Happy New Year everyone!

MORE CTH MUSINGS

Mac Tonnies, on his blog Posthuman Blues, has a
new entry on the CTH.

Here’s his succinct summary:

The CTH is a synthesis. In keeping with the "nuts and bolts" tradition, it incorporates what we know about our planet and its biology and arrives at a prospective anthropology of the "other." It eschews interstellar travel in favor of beings that may not be nearly as alien as we've been conditioned to expect -- by the media and (as I argue) by the UFO intelligence itself.

I agree with much of what Tonnies says with his CTH, and appreciate the clarification. For while it shares a lot of similarities with Keel, Vallee, Harpur and others, it isn’t the same idea. For one thing, as Tonnies states, the CTH is based on a biological/anthropological construct, and one where the “alien” may not be all that alien after all. In other words, sharing more with us than we -- or “they” --(you know, them) allow. The Ultraterrestrial theory for example, and its cousins, contain more fantastical elements that I don’t think Tonnies includes, from what I understand so far.

I like the CTH, even though I still hold to the opinion that the Keels, Harpur's, Vallee's of the world have a lot going for their theories as well. And I also hold to the ETH. That’s not the point however -- that I happen to like the CTH and am defending (as if he needs it) Tonnies’ theory -- the point is that the CTH, no matter what you end up thinking about it, is fresh. It offers new thinking about the UFO phenomena, and we can all use that.

Tonnies concluded with this:

Ironically enough, the CTH manages to alienate champions of the ETH and those who support a more esoteric, "interdimensional" explanation. It offers no clearcut reconciliation. It does, however, wield explanatory potential lacking in both camps.

I respectfully disagree that the other camps do not have the “explanatory potential” while the CTH does. All are speculation at this point, including the CTH.

As I
wrote in yesterday’s blog entry,this fierce clinging to the dichotomy stops UFO studies from moving forward. And I happen to think all three are quite possible; the ETH, the CTH, and the more fantastical Ultraterrestrial theory. But that’s me.

Another issue is the response of many a UFO researcher, writer, witness, etc. to the CTH. Many have behaved badly, others have balked, some have said, like myself: “Hey, right on!” Or at least, “Wow, thank you for the intriguing idea on what could be.” Observing the reactions of those in the UFO field to this idea is certainly as interesting -- and revealing -- as the UFO phenomena itself. The UFO subject is a fringe topic with more than its share of denialbility, nay sayers, debunkers, disinfo and distraction artists. One of UFOlology's main problems is getting others to listen, to consider, to open their minds. It seems ironic then that there are those within UFOlogy who react to something new and intriguing with such stubbornness.

THE ETH VS. . . . . WELL, EVERYTHING: WE’RE STILL STUCK

PARANORMALITY

Currently (though not for the first time) on several ufo blogs, like Posthuman Bluesand UFO Mystic, The Other Side of Truth, etc. there’s an lively discussion on the ETH (extraterrestrial hypotheses) vs. other theories and how it compares/contrasts to their UFOlogical ideas. The cause for the most recent collection of discussions is Mac Tonnies, author of the Posthuman Blues blog, new cryptoterrestrail hypothesis (or, ‘CTH.’) Before the CTH, and very likely after the CTH wans a bit, the debate will still go on between the extraterrestrial hypothesis and, well, everything else.

The ETH is often refered to as “paranormal.” I’ve been writing for the past year and a half or so on this blog that extraterrestrials (always assuming they exist of course, which I think they do) are not paranormal, and that the "answer" is more than one thing. Often it appears that way to us; we interpret the effects of their craft, the entities, and what they’re doing as paranormal. Experiences such as psi or esp (as I’ve experienced), and precognitive dreams related to the events,(something I've also experienced) for examples, can be said to be “paranormal.” But if most of UFO events are caused by ETs, it’s doubtful they’re “paranormal.” They’re not any more “paranormal” than one group of humans from one culture encountering another unknown, and very different group of humans from another.

And yet.

How do we explain the so-called "paranormal” aspects of many a UFO encounter? Is the answer mere coincidence? “Magick?” Or stupendous technology? Probably the latter, in the case of ET.

Because ET is not paranormal, does not mean that there is no paranormal aspect to the UFO phenomena.

RELIGION-OSITY

Many critics of the ETH and most all skeptics (or ‘cultural skeptics, to use Colin Bennett’s term) attack so-called ‘believers’ in the ETH as taking on a new form of religion. The argument tells us that “belief” in ET is merely the same thing as believing in Jesus Christ or God and therefore, silly, since none of those exist. (Or if not “silly” then still a non-issue, since there is no proof of either, it’s faith based. In the context of UFOs, since it's "faith based" there's no need for serious investigation.)

We all know there are those who do believe that ET is not only more technology advanced, but also ethically and spiritually advanced. They’ll save us, teach us the way, show us what to do. Once they land and announce themselves openly, it will all get better. No more poverty, wars or global warming. Replace Jesus, God or the promise of glorius ever lasting life with ET and it's still religion. Faith and trust Faith in their existence as "real" and trust in what they tell us is true.

Those people aside, to present an acceptance of the ETH, or acknowledge its likelihood as some sort of new religion is inaccurate. I am of the opinion ET exists, and clearly they’re more technology advanced. It does not follow however that their technological ‘superpowers’ makes them also superior to us ethically, morally or spiritually. And it doesn't mean they’re here to save, heal, or teach us. (If anything, they make me a bit nervous; I don’t trust the spindly things.)

Debates about ET often become stagnant pretty quickly because of this divine/religious/spiritual aspect. Lines have been drawn; they’re magikal-magical-mystical, or they’re none existent. There is a third angle; the nuts and bolts theorists, who usually don’t involve themselves with this aspect, and that’s a good thing. However, the problem sometimes is that the anomalous high strangeness, or ‘Oz' factors (term coined by UFO researcher Jenny Randles) often encountered in UFO events are ignored.

THE ET

Often when discussing ET it’s presented as one, a singular, individual thing. We use ‘ET’ as shorthand, but we often run into problems in doing so. ET becomes almost a cartoon like figure or a comic book hero. One individual, representing all UFO events. Many types of ‘aliens” have been described, there are numerous websites about the different races and forms of extraterrestrials, all kinds of beings have been encountered and assumed to be from space. Still, the semantics used when discussing ET, or the ETH, has a lot to do with what we think of ET.

PARANORMALITY, RELIGOUSITY, THE ET: Uh -Oh

Now we’ve run into trouble. Technology is interpreted as paranormal, expectations, desires and need create a religion, and we have the danger of thinking of ET as a sort of non-human (or possibly part human) comic book hero. (Or villain; I mean, take a look at the Reptilians.) But there is a very weird component to a lot of UFO sightings, in fact, to a lot of UFOlogy itself. From the description of entities, to their behavior, to the characteristics of craft, to what has happened to the witnesses, to those who study UFOs, . . . it all gets very weird very fast, and we can’t find a neat box to put the parts -- technology, behavior, entity -- into.

Which brings us to:

ETH VS. ... EVERYTHING: OR, HI, I’M YOUR DICHOTOMY

I’m always surprised and a little exasperated when I still come across intense debates (often degenerating to name calling, sarcasm and sneering) about which is the ‘answer’ to the UFO enigma. Sides are quickly taken, and little consideration is given to this: that the UFO phenomena is more than one "thing." This has been one of my main points about UFOlogy since I’ve been blogging,longer, actually. With some exceptions, many UFO researchers, witnesses and the mainstream man or woman in the street, take sides. It’s either ET, or it’s either some sort of Trickster, ‘cryptoterrestrail (a la Tonnies) or Ultraterrestrial (as with Vallee), or ‘daemons’ (Harpur) but it seems that there is basic need to take sides, to choose one possibility and stick with it.

The idea that both exist; ETs from space, as well as earth bound, terrestrial entities, and that both are in this dance we call the UFO phenomeana is too often rejected by many interested in UFOs, from the UFO investigator to the UFO witness.

Possibly it has something to do with human psychology; we need to have these rigid lines drawn so we don’t get confused. It’s certainly neater; choose one, and go with it. It’s easier, trying to figure out what’s going in the context of UFOs is difficult enough without having to bring in so-called esoteric theories. It is kind of crazy making in a way. But we can’t continue to ignore or dismiss other ideas simply because it’s easier to handle just one.

BOTHNESS

I’ve wondered if some extraterrestrials are aware of the non-human “ultra’ terrestrials, if one mimics the other at times, and if the ultras, or cryptos -- take your pick -- are aware of various ETs. Whether or not that’s the case, it seems just as likely as any other theory that both exist, and both are active. And, as diverse as the ET population is purported to be, the same could be said for the earth bound entities. And taking off on a tangent from that angle; we can question whether or not all these entities are manifestations of a larger, single force, or just some of them are, or if they’re unique unto themselves. . .

There’s also this idea: is it correct to call ETs strictly “ET,” and/or terrestrial bound entities strictly non-human? Folklore and myth contain a wealth of stories of mortal/immortal beings; of humans that are also more than ‘just’ human.

None of these things are exclusive to one another.

MEANWHILE . . .

I think that the Trickster is an inherent part of the UFO phenomeana. (George P. Hansen makes a brilliant case for this in his book The Trickster and the Paranormal.) Part of this can be seen by the very fact such debates over the ETH vs. Anything Else take place ad naseum. While we’re busily and neatly dissecting sections of the phenomeana and deciding that theses pieces are the only ones that ‘work,’ ignoring all else, the phenomeana continues on its merry way. It’s all at once behaving elusively, bizarrely, illogically. (or what appears to be so to us.) It presents us with solid evidence -- radar, ground evidence, etc. -- while at the same time appearing murky, blurry and blobby on videos and photographs. It takes people to Venus, abducts them from their beds. Or at least, it has some of us believing that that’s what happened, while others debate what “really” happened around us.

THE THEORY TANGLE

Within this debate comes -- often presented as an accusation -- that a theory, idea, or hypothesis doesn’t have any proof. (While the three are not accurately interchangeable, I will use them loosely here to mean the roughly the same thing. ) All we have within UFOlogy and its cousins: Forteana, religions, the paranormal, is speculation. I will amend that to say we have elements of solid evidence sprinkled throughout; documents, for example. But since the phenomeana is so vast and multilayered, we have to ask: what are these proof of? (And do we trust the sources and the information?)

It is all right to speculate. Of course, there’s “wild” speculation, and we run into problems when those who confuse speculation with fact and proof insist they have the truth. But we need speculation; like the often dreaded anecdotal evidence, without either we wouldn't have anything.


EXPECTATIONS

I think that some of us expect a one size fits all answer. We expect that ET, ultraterrestrails, angels, demons, the fairy folk, UFOs, aliens, entities are behaving logically. We expect them to have a reasonable machine, a reasonable technology, a reasonable reason for appearing to us. We expect that there is really only one category: it’s ET, it’s angels/demons, it’s the government. We expect that these beings will heal us, fix us, give us a new kind of magic. We expect full disclosure. We expect that we can trust; that if we see on the news ET just landed,it’s the truth.

Not everyone thinks like this of course, but enough to keep these debates going, even after all this time.

THE BALL

There needs to be a willingless among all who study UFOs to acknowlege -- and use -- the idea that the UFO phenomean is at all times dynamic and ever shifting, full of multiple possibilites. At times various possibilities shift forward while others stay back, only to switch places again.

Without this model constantly in hand, it is difficult to see how much progress can be made within UFOlogy. The stubborn belief that it all can be solved with just a simplistic, narrow nose to the grindstone, purely ‘nuts and bolts’ (or paper trail) approach seems almost willfully ignorant.

This is not to say we don’t need this kind of approach. We absolutely do. The point isn’t that this approach is invalid; it isn’t. The point is this: without holding this ‘ball of possibilites, while utlizing this approach (or any approach) we simply will not get anywhere in UFOlfogy.

POST YULE ROUND-UP

Not much to report; just a post Yuletide note of what I'm working on and some of what will be coming here in the next few days:

Part II of my 'Bubble Model' is coming.

I'm at work on something about Mac Tonnies' CTH (crypto terrestrial hypothesis) -- it'll be a good thing.

Also finishing up the long overdue review of Lisa Shiel's book Backyard Bigfoot: The True Story of Stick Signs, UFOs, and the Sasquatch. (The review will be sent to Lisa first, I'll link to it when I know.)


And looking forward to reading my Yule time books: Body Snatchers in the Desert: The Horrible Truth at the Heart of the Roswell Story, and On the Trial of the Saucer Spies; UFOs and Government Surveillance both by Nick Redfern, and Looking for Orthon: The Story of George Adamski the first flying saucer contactee, and how he changed the world by Colin Bennett.

And a couple of things I'm not ready to share yet, but are pretty exciting for me in the context of UFO World!

If you stumble across another 'Orange Orb' blog in another format somewhere along your wanderings, it's just me, trying out a variety of templates, hosts, etc. I am still searching for the right fit. (If anyone has any input I'd appreciate hearing from you.)

I hope everyone had a safe and good holiday!

THE DANCE WITHIN THE BUBBLE

My UFO Philosophy Bubble Thing, Part I

Theories, ideas, musings, hypotheses, thoughts, anecdotal evidence, we’re all just trying to figure it out. Some are brave and fresh and daring; Nick Redfern’s book on Roswell Body Snatchers in the Desert, (with a review by Stanton Friedman) or the current discussion over Mac Tonnies theory on ‘cryptoterrestrials.’ Others are almost quaint; for example, the idea benevolent Space Brothers who are here to help us vibrate to a higher level, or, something.

Hundreds of theories. There’s no lack of theories on what UFOs are, and there’s a good handful of theories about UFOlogy itself.

So I’m going to jump right in and present little theory; the Bubble Theory. The bubble doesn't mean anything, it was just a quick and convenient way to graphically organize some thoughts. But in thinking about it, I found that the bubble is a good image. It ‘s reminiscent of the bubble in The Wizard of Oz: the one that was small at first, only to grow bigger . . . and bigger . . .until it “landed’ and the Good Witch appeared from within. The bubble is a sphere; many a UFO has been described as being sphere shaped. Planets are sphere shaped. The circle itself is a spiritual and holy symbol. the bubble fits, it’s simple yet elegant.

My little Bubble of UFO Philosophy contains two key points that I think many do not consider when it comes to UFO theories. One, there is an inherent Trickster energy in the paranormal and Fortean realm; and this includes UFOlogy. Two, the Infrastructure -- science, academia, politics/government, society,the media and to a lesser extent, religious institutions -- cannot, will not, treat UFOlogy with “respect” or seriousness. It can’t. Expectations of science taking the subject of UFOs seriously, of embracing the topic with good intent is ridiculous, Expecting any of the ‘departments’ within the Infrastructure to do so is futile. That’s why full disclosure will never happen, etc.

“The Trickster” is not a person, or some sort of comic book character. Rather, it’s an energy, it’s a force. It’s manifestation. “Trickster” simply is an easy to hold, easy to use symbol to express this idea.

The same with ‘Infrastructure.” It’s not an actual building (as one skeptic , in all seriousness, asked me eons ago on a forum) it’s an idea, another manifestation of systems at work. Individual journalists, scientists, academics, religious leaders, politicians, may very well be sincere in their attempts to discover the truth within the UFO phenomeana. But as a whole, and as a force that can be addressed within our culture (and the modern world in general) we can accurately say that this Infrastructure has been diligent in doing what it does; keeping the mundane world mundane, and keeping the anomalous world out. That’s what it does.

I think another thing that is often “wrong’ with UFOlogy is the expectation, or belief, that there is to be one explanation, one kind of witness, one kind of government response, one kind of research approach, etc.

Sometimes it seems that researchers shouldn’t change their minds in regards to theories, or are given the room to safely say they don’t know yet what to think of a thing; they’re still considering.

Surrounding these two key points are the things I think are vital to unraveling the UFO enigma. they’re not in any particular hierarchy, because we need all those things at the same time in order to gain a better insight into the phenomeana. It’s a juggling act all right but it’s necessary. Or, consider it more of a dance. (Hey! The Bubble Dance!) Not just the steps, but the dancers themselves. Some move up to the front, some move to the side or back, some are doing better than others, some, even if not as good as the rest of the troupe, are at least doing some innovative steps.

Also within the Bubble are the folk, the witnesses, the researchers, the skeptics. All of these things make up UFOlogy, and UFOLogy is a part of the UFO puzzle. It’s a symbiotic system. It's not just the 'study of UFOs,' it's also those who study UFOs.


I’ll post Part II at a later date, where I’ll define the terms within the bubble.

And A Merry Alien UFO Christmas to All!

(Updated to include Danile Brenton's "The Twelve Alien Days of Christmas")

"Suppose that the elf in question spends one second per house. This isn't the usual picture--'Ho Ho Ho' and so on--but I imagine he is terribly efficient and very speedy; that would explain why no one sees him very much. With 108 houses he has to spend three years just filling stockings. I've assumed he spends no time at all in going house to house. Even with hyper-relativistic reindeer, the time spent in 108 houses is three years and not eight hours..."~Carl Sagan, on the "Santa Claus Hypothesis"

Yes, but Carl, it's called magick!

Christmas. The time of year when fundamental zealots demonstrate their thuggery and paranoia by lamenting in public forums how “the left stole Christmas.” Time for the the non-religious but vaguely superstitious kind of,sort of,Christians experience vague free floating anxiety. This time of year many Jews and non-Christians experience conflicting emotions. As my husband commented to me the other night, “Only you would be playing Christmas CDs while lighting the Menorah.”

As for myself, I’ll occasionally tweak the incessantly grinning xian who gets in my face about “Merry Christmas” if they’re pulling some passive -aggressive political tactic on me, but otherwise, I’m comfortable with my expression of it all. Being the only Jewish Pagan whatever on the job, I was the one who brought in the Christmas decorations and wore my Santa hat. I do what I do, and I like it. Twinkling lights and home made fudge and gifts, because I want to. Toys for Tots and lots of cheer. I’m not making a statement, or maybe I am, but I’m having a great time this season, Yule, Solstice, Hanukkah, whatever. It’s the season, yes, and what it means and why is different for everyone. I’m not trying to take away anything from anyone, but I'll celebrate, share and observe the way I choose.

It is a magickal time of year. Any way you choose.

UFOs aren’t exempt from the Christmas season either. It’s where the could be reality of ET meets the commercial lore of Santa Claus and the sacred myth of Christmas. Somewhere in between the two is a merging of realities. Aliens turn green as they meet elves. Scientists use Santa Claus to explain science. The market place appropriates it all and repackages it for us in strange blends. It’s just part of the season, and the Trickster energy inherent within UFOlogy and Forteana.

It's interesting, all the greenery. Green aliens, green elves, green Grinches, little green men, The Green Man . . . What it means, many have pondered. Including me. There seems to be an obvious relationship with this and nature energies. Which in turn leads to a terrestrial based hypothesis for alien entities. All just seasonal musings for the moment.

Five Alien Elves, by Gregory Mcguire:

”Tis the night before Christmas, and a strange vehicle appears in the sky above Vermont. Is it Santa's sleigh drawn by reindeer? No, it's five aliens from the planet Fixipuddle, caught in Earth's gravity and plummeting to the ground.

The aliens tune into a broadcast movie, and see Santa Claus forcing enslaved elves to make spies for him, and then sneaking into houses in the middle of the night to plant his spies and steal food and drink. The Fixipuddlians decide to free Earth from this evil tyrant, and set out across the snow, disguised as elves.”

(Just from reading that bit above I get images of MIBS and Black Ops screwing with Christmas . . .)



A Christmas play from 1997:Santa Claus Meets the Christmas Alien, by Sonia Brock. Here’s one little scene:

Santa: Mr. Zongo you are pretty small. Are you strong?

Zongo: Honk, honk! (He lifts Santa as he speaks)

Mrs. Hummingbeak: He’s going to kidnap Santa. It’s a alien abduction. Help! Help!

Zongo: Honk, honk, honk, honk, honk, honk!

T. Kitten: He says Mrs. Hummingbeak should stop watching the X-Files.

Mrs. Hummingbeak: Well, I never....... I’ve been insulted by a little green alien from the planet, Zip.

You can order Alien Christmas scenes from Center Stage Productions. (Really expensive!)

An article musing onChristmas on Mars by Debbie St. Germain.

A campus tour:Christmas Around the Galaxy.

For your Christmas/Holiday music collection, there’s Fountains of Wayne “I Want an Alien for Christmas.”

And Daniel Brenton writes on his blog The Meaning of Existence and All That The Twelve Alien Days of Christmas."

And finally,we can’t forget about The Grinch. He’s big, and he’s green. He’s not an elf, he’s not an alien, or at least, not an ET. He’s something . . . another blending of images and lore. A Christmas classic, and in typical Trickster like expression, written by Dr. Seuss, who was Jewish.

Whatever you celebrate, Happy Holidays! Be safe, be true. . .