Kimball on Redfern

I started to respond to this item by Paul Kimball on his blog The Other Side of Truth about Nick Redfern, Nick Redfern on UFOlogy but it quickly became very long so I’m putting it here.

Kimball has a response to Nick Redfern’s contention that:

I predict that ufology will never be anymore than a subject that attracts a few thousand people on a regular basis (and maybe less now).

Many ufologists confidently think that the world is waiting for them to finally deliver the ET goods and go down in history.

They’re not. Most people outside could not care less about the petty arguments in ufology (and don’t know about it anyway) and unless someone really makes a major breakthrough (along the lines of proving that Roswell was ET, for example), we will not be remembered by science, the media or the public.

I've been saying this for ever: the one, final Answer, The big Answer, about ufos will never come. Never. It just can't, (in my opinion, partly due to the Trickster like aspects of the phenomena.)
Redfern goes on to say that if that answer comes, if it’s shown that ET does exist, science and the general population will forget about UFO researchers, pundits, etc:

In other words, we’ll be viewed as a group of people who looked into some unusual areas in search of the truth about aliens, but never really found any hard evidence that proved ET was visiting.

Ironically, if ET really does land, I personally think that ufology will be swept away in an instant as the public demands answers from the media, who in turn demand answers [sic] from the government and the mainstream scientific community.

(I agree with this, and I think the same would be true in the case of Bigfoot, Nessie, etc. If a dead BF body were found, if it were announced by science BF does indeed, exist, the same attitude towards BF researchers would be present.)

Kimball writes:

So, in the meantime, everyone should focus on the intriguing mystery, and have some fun, because that's what mysteries should be - fun.

This means that there should be room for some of the more "out there" theories (FYI - as far as the mainstream is concerned, that includes the ETH), even to the point of speculation. Where would I draw the line? When people are clearly lying, or when the theories and speculation goes so far as to be preposterous, at which point let 'em have it.

Exactly. some sort of inner journey-process thing going on for some us. And, I agree, if they do land and it's somehow proven UFOs exist (more to the point, that ET exists) UFO researchers will be ignored. They might be trotted out now and then for some entertainment value, but no one's going to really take them seriously; they'll be co-opted and appropriated. Used by the media and institiutions such as science for their own purposes. (The same would happen in the case of Bigfoot or Nessie.)
The public would be interested, as Alfred Lehmberg wrote in his comment to this item on Paul’s blog, and in that sense, the "folk" will jump in, but, being just the folk, no one's going to care. The institutions of science, academia, etc. aren’t going to bother with what will still be considered the fringe element. Even as it’s discovered that ET exists, there will still be areas of ufology that will fascinate, while ignored by the mainstream.

Years ago a professor of folklore told me that if ET were to land tomorrow, “it wouldn’t matter.” I didn’t understand what she meant at the time; what do mean, “It wouldn’t matter??!!” Of course it’d matter! What she meant was, in the context of folklore, it wouldn’t matter. People would still have their stories, the “folk” would continue to be marginalized by the mainstream and the approved institutions, individuals would still have their experiences. Various rituals, beliefs, and processes would evolve surrounding the discovery of ET, and take on their own flavor due to cultures and religious/spiritual beliefs. Even though ET has now been proven as a reality, various and new “realities” would quickly spring up surrouding ET, and it would start all over.

This doesn’t mean, as Kimball writes, we still can’t “have fun,” and for some of us, it’s more than “fun” (though it certainly is that too) it’s very personal on many levels. But that depends on how each of us is wired; we’re all of different temperaments.

It doesn’t matter to me that it will be highly unlikely we’ll ever find “the answer” because that’s not the purpose of this journey. (And, as I said, by definition it can’t happen anyway due to the Trickster aspect.)

So where does all this leave the “nuts and bolts” researchers? Those who work so tirelessly and do their best (most of them) to produce documents, evidence, facts of a case, to show the world? Nothing short of a dead body (be it ET or Bigfoot) that’s been independently verified by a whole slew of scientists will prove anything to the world. And then what? We’ll go on as before, except those of us who, as I mentioned, do this for other reasons other than “proving” something to others. Those diligent researchers will be trotted out as well as entertainment value, footnotes to the big reveal of ET.

That’s okay though, as cynical as it sounds. There’s the outsider element when the truth is concerned in “fringe” topics, and UFOlogy is no different. These same kinds of responses to Ufologists and Ufology apply to the Kennedy assassination and 9/11. If it were somehow proven to the world that the so-called “conspiracy nuts” were right about those things, they’d be briefly mentioned before once again sent back to the fringe while the approved pundits of society argue over minutae on CNN.

That’s just the way things are. It’s okay. After all, I’m having fun.

A Post Script on UFO Magazine Trianlge Article

The new issue of UFO Magazine is out. As usual, lots there, I'm looking forward to reading Farah Yurdozo's article on Adamski and Nazis. Yes! Haven't read the article, but it will prove to be very interesting. I've wondered for years about the Contactee movement and how there is a lot below the dichotomy of "they're nuts-lairs"/"they really did see ET".

My article on Black Triangles and the Trickster is in this issue as well. In the article I asked why the triangle hasn't changed in the many decades they've been present? You'd think that, over time and with their technology, they'd have changed quite a bit.

After the article, someone mentioned to me that there might be a couple of reasons why they haven't changed. We have ships; they really haven't changed much over several decades. If the triangle occupants are ET, time travel is a possibility: what may take a few hours in their life may seem like years in ours. I don't mesh with the idea of time travel; but who knows.

Another possibility: maybe they have changed, but they've changed to such a degree we don't recognize them as being triangles or related to triangles in any way. If that's so however, why use the triangles -- unless, as we do, use of older machines is still done.

All highly speculative of course. But it keeps me off the streets.

Fatima: Oracle Cards and Fernandes

I collect Tarot decks, so I had to get this one, the Fatima Oracle cards. I just ordered it today. I'm not crazy about the artwork, but how could I resist; what with my interest in UFOs and Marian Apparitions?

Here's an interesting item from Joaquim Fernandes on UFO Updates from January, 2000. (Fernandes is author, along with Fina d'Armada, of Extraterrestrial
Intervention in Fatima - the apparitions and the UFO
phenomenon I tried ordering the book this past Christmas but Amazon.com told me it was unaviable. I haven't tried too hard since but I'll get around to it soon. It's a book I'm very interested in reading.

According to the item on Updates, the book says that there there was, at Fatima, a

a "fourth percipient" namely Carolina Carreira, whom
describes a "telephatic type of contact with a fair-headed being
of small stature who instilled into her head a repetitive order

Microwaves, beings from above; all very interesting. Vallee of course has written on the UFO/paranorma connection between events like Fatima and other religious apparitions, as have others.

This subject alone -- the UFO/Marian Apparition phenomenon -- is enough to keep one busy!

The Roswell Onion

Well, most everyone’s been writing on Roswell lately, due to the 60th anniversary of “the crash.” I’ve stayed away from saying anything because I have never delved deeply into Roswell, so therefore don’t have much to say. I don’t have anything of value to say about the particulars of the Roswell event itself. But I’ll go ahead and join everyone else and throw in my observations. Why not? That’s the perk of having your own blog.

Clearly, something huge and weird happened that’s continuing to be covered-up.

There’s that very large rut that’s still there, and not often mentioned. That rut is proof something on the big side crashed there.

Nick Redfern’s book Body Snatchers in the Desert offers new, if not horrific, information on what might have happened. And curiously, like that rut, his theories don’t seem to be considered seriously; or rather, they don’t seem to stick. I’m not saying Redfern is correct, who knows at this point, but he’s offered something new, and something disturbing, and something that should be given consideration other than a cursory “yeah, well. . .” and everyone moves on.

The Roswell, er, “mythos” (excuse the cliché) is in itself highly interesting. Stories of sticky fingered aliens, magic foil, and all the rest. All those people aren’t lying. Maybe they didn’t see aliens, just thought they did, maybe some sort of mass delusion overtook the town. It’s too simplistic to dismiss it all as lying townsfolk. Sure, now there’s circus folk involved (so to speak) and layer upon layer of disinformation and misinformation and okay, sometimes just plain lying, but that’s all part of any UFO event. Roswell’s just bigger.

Oh yes, then there’s those alien ghosts Jim Marrs speaks about. That’s highly interesting as hell!

I agree with those who think we shouldn’t spend too much time on Roswell, while ignoring other cases, particularly current ones. Still , to try to bury it once and for all would be a disservice to UFOlogy as well as the more general world of the weird and anomalous: myths, motivations, deceits, belief, government manipulations and more.

Whether or not one believes ET crashed there, something happened, something so important that the government still believes it needs to cover it up. Obviously the Mogul balloon explanation doesn’t fly, and no one took the crash test dummies seriously. (I don’t think the government took that one seriously either.)


Personally, I don’t think aliens crashed there. I’m not sure why I don’t believe that. I “believe” (hate that word) extraterrestrials are about. Out there, down here, and have been for thousands of years. But that’s just me and my good old ancient astronaut theory.


The point isn’t, almost, whether ET crashed there or not. (Well, now of course it is a huge point, if it could be proven. . .) I mean that, aside from that point, there are other layers to the Roswell onion that can still reveal things about ourselves, each other, and “them.”

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

Trickster's Realm: 'Popcorn Machine Aliens'

Latest Trickster’s Realm: Popcorn Machine Aliens,about memories of aliens, on board craft, and giant insectoid creatures, by moi.

Also on BoA (Binnall of America:) Lesley’s Grey Matters: on Ian Punnett and C2C, Tina Sena’s Estoericana: The Witching Hour, where she writes about 3:00 am being the weird hour (as have many a UFO experiencer; indeed, that does seem to be the hour,)
Wrath of Joe’s Whiter UFOlogy? and Khyron’s The K-Files.

Plus all the great audio interviews Tim Binnall has done over the past two seasons!

Around

On Tim Binnall’s site, BOA (Binnall of America) for my Trickster’s Realm column: Why Did I Lie? about my defensive response to alien abductions.

Be sure to read the other columns: Lesley's Grey Matters, Wrath of Joe, etc. and listen to the great, free, podcasts of Tim's interviews!

On UFO Digest: The Fortean Pinball Machine, about my theories on no theories, or, no theory about all those theories. Or maybe my theory is that it’s all very weird. Which isn’t a theory, it’s a given.

Sign up for the UFO Digest newsletter while you're there; it's free, and it's good.

Mavens and Wags: Terms of Enjeerment

Semantics is not “just semantics” it’s a purposeful method. We use terms and words for specific reasons: to trivialize, to support, to cast aspersions in covert ways, to bring light to ideas. The sometimes subtle, sometimes obvious ways we shade our meaning with words has everything to do with what we’re saying, and why we’re saying it.

I do it. You do it. We all do it. For example, the reason why there are so many terms for the umbrella “skeptic” is that there are dozens of variations of the meta label “skeptic.” A Pelicanist is not always a skeptic, a debunker isn’t always a skeptic. There are chronic skeptics; in the same small ballpark as the pathological skeptics, skeptoids, etc. but they’re not always one and the same. A lot of people who use these terms are aware of these different notes in the music of description, and so, we have fun using them, and know why we use them. But, I’m not here to discuss skeptics. Well, I am, kind of. Those who have all kinds of terms for UFO researchers.

In this context, rarely are the terms “ufo researcher,” UFO investigator,” used with a straightforward intent. Instead, there are terms like “would be UFO investigator,” or “self-styled UFO investigator” which immediately does what it’s intended to do: trivialize the individual researching UFOs. By modifying the term “UFO investigator” or “UFO researcher’ with words that cast doubt, the individual UFO investigator is immediately cast as non-credible, something rather shabby and seedy. Don’t trust him/her, is the message.

Some of those who use these terms have hard ideas about who is, and who isn’t, a valid researcher. They hoard data and keep information to themselves, releasing in secret the holy UFO papers to only those that pass the test. (Assuming they really have what they say they have.) Or, they refuse to make public their years of study and research because it will be “misinterpreted,” and “fought over,” and the “unwashed masses” will get ahold of such sacred data. No doubt. So what? It’s a given in the fields of UFO, crypto, and paranormal studies. As I’ve argued in the past, it’s not only a given, it’s an innate part of what makes Forteana (including UFOs) what it is. It wouldn’t exist otherwise. So let them at it, and the good ones will bring to light the good stuff, and the others will do what they do: provide entertainment, distract, distort and eventually go away. Even if they don’t, it doesn't matter. We can choose to ignore them or spend time arguing about them. Their inevitable presence does not justify the withholding of information.


There’s the term “bona fide” researcher. Exactly what determines a “bona fide” researcher is unclear, other than the obvious: whoever they decide it is. I assume a “bona fide researcher” is someone who’s published books by a “bone fide” publisher, and done extensive clinically inspired investigations into various UFO cases. All the while studiously avoiding any mention of paranormal, supernatural, mystical, or Bigfoot/cryptid phenomena, of course. As soon as you bring up the subject of paranormal Bigfoot, you’re no longer taken seriously. (And that’s from within the small world of UFO/Fortean research. Imagine what it’s like outside this peculiar world of esoteric studies.)

Watching the National Geographic disaster, er, program, on Roswell recently, (The Real Roswell) the narrator mentioned something about a researchers “UFO campaign” as if the researcher was up to no good, out to recruit unsuspecting citizens into a cabal of UFO studies.

There are terms like UFO enthusiasts, as if we’re all rabid NASCAR fans. UFO mavens, which on the surface sounds okay, since “maven” means expert. Maven is also something of a quaint word, invoking an image of something homey and old fashioned; harmless, maybe even sweetly goofy, but not to be taken seriously. Sometimes this is prefaced with “self styled ufo maven,” which of course is patronizing. Like the “self styled UFO researcher” the modifier “self styled” is used to cast doubt on the researcher’s character and credibility.

There’s “UFO devotee” which brings to mind some sort of religious nut, or at least a dopey cult member. It puts the entire UFO phenomena into a religious (therefore, not serious) context, for anyone spending much time at all studying UFOs is a nut. A religious fanatic, a cultist, a kook.

We have “UFO buff,” which is like the “UFO enthusiast.” And vaguely illicit, you can’t help juxtapose buff with nude and naked, no matter how subconsciously the imagery. That’s how it works. So you have sex crazed UFO researchers running around, and that’s no good. This despite the fact UFO lore is rife with tales of sexual unions with strange beings, breeding, kidnapping and capture, nightly bedroom visitations, examinations involving genitals, ova, sperm and other intrusive probings, hybrid babies, and phantom pregnancies.

We have “UFO hobbyists'” which could be put in the same category as “enthusiast,” “maven,” and “wag.” A bit old fashioned, and conjures up images of a harmless, but eccentric individual, tinkering away in their garage or den, spending hours on such silliness as UFOs. Replace UFOs with stamp collecting or cataloging your Star Trek figurine collection and we have an image of a nerdy, slightly antisocial misfit.

There’s “UFO wags” which is a bit like “UFO maven,” bringing to mind some old dotting absent minded eccentric blithering away in his (or her) overstuffed library of ancient UFO books.

Of course there’s ‘UFO believer,” which is worse than the vague ‘UFO devotee,” since it implies that one believes in UFOs.

Sometimes flying saucer is used instead of UFO. I use flying saucer myself a lot but for different reasons. Like Stanton Friedman, who uses the term freely, the use is a political statement; take back the flying saucer! For the smugly skeptical, the term “flying saucer” is used to further trivialize and marginalize. No one uses flying saucer anymore in a serious context, and like “maven,” it’s a bit old fashioned. It paints the UFO, er, flaying saucer researcher as a nut, chasing after little green men in astounding machines from outer space.

Other words are used as well, “woo” is the ever popular favorite to describe everything from a “believer” in UFOs to people who say they’ve seen a Sasquatch. There isn’t much hiding here; woo is self - explanatory; it’s clear the meaning is “you’re an idiot.”

There’s also the “true believer” to denote those who, presumably are fanatical about their experiences -- believing the messengers, or insisting they have the truth. And the even less polite “true ‘bleever.” While there are those individual who’ve had anomalous experiences insist what’s happened to them is “the truth,” and their own interpretation is presented as the truth, there are countless others (like myself) who know two things for sure: 1. Something really damn weird happened, and 2. I have no idea what that damn really weird thing was. The use of the terms “true believer” and “true ‘bleever” as well as “woo,” and “woo woo” etc. don’t address the phenomena; they simply reject the individual and the experience. They’d love for us to shut up and go away. If we can’t, or won’t, accept their explanations, then we’re, at best, “woos” and worse, “true ‘bleevers.” (And “willfully ignorant.” )

The lines blur; you have someone with anomalous experiences, and you have religious fanatics, whether they’re Christian fundies who want creationism taught in schools, or the some other brand of religious fascism. To the “skeptic” however, it’s all the same: crop circles, UFOs, ghosts, Bigfoot, etc. Use of these cute little phrases like “UFO fanatic” only shove the subject into the abyss, which, of course, is the intent.

Recent writings. . .

On UFO Digest, you'll find "Alien" "Abductions" musing on the term: is it an apt term to use or not?

And in the recent issue of UFO Magazine, I write about Joe Nickell, skeptic, and his thing for owls in "Attack of the Owls."

Look for my Trickster Realm column on Tim Binnall's site BOA (Binnall of America,) where I take yet another angle on the Trent Tempest affair in The Trent Trickster Three. The column goes up Monday. While you're there, take a look at the other writers over there: Lesley, author of Grey Matters, Tina Sena's Esortericana, Khyron's The K-Files and Joe Vee's Wrath of Joe.

The Trickster Visits McMinnville

I thought this would be the last of the ‘Trent Tempest’ that recently went on, (see notes below) but I’m inspired to write a bit more on this. One of my observations about this whole thing has been the Trickster aspect in this little affair.

The Trickster is everywhere in UFO and Fortean events, and I think this point is often missed by many researchers. As irritating as the hoaxes and hucksters are, and as bewildering as the surreal moments in UFOlogy are,these elements are a necessary part, an innate part, of the phenomena.

Often both UFOlogists and the pathological skeptics call for some sort of what I call a cry to "cleanse the cultural landscape of woo." Get rid of the hucksters, the embarrassing ones, the harmless pranksters -- all of them. On the pro-UFO side, a rational (usually) call for saner behavior is made. On the rabid, anti UFO side, there are those who want a crusade against anything “woo.”

Personally, I’d like the Raelians to go away, for a long list of reasons. Reluctantly, however, I realize they’re simply a part of the big UFO picture.

The Trickster in Brief
The Trickster is not a person. It’s not an individual, not a human. It’s not a cartoon character, or a comic book icon.

The Trickster is a manifestation of a phenomena, an element, an idea. It’s cross cultural. The Trickster goes by many names, and many guises, and many guises within any one culture.

The Trickster is both a specific character -- say, the Coyote as in many Native American traditions -- or it can be more of a concept. Humans can exhibit Trickster traits and behaviors for a short time.

The idea of ‘The Trickster” is an archetype. It’s an idea, a behavior, that presents itself both in events and in isolated moments within a person’s character.

When the idea of “Trickster” is brought up in UFOlogy, I mean both specific, individual characters, as well as manifestations of a concept. One or both can be present at any time.

One concept is the hoaxer or prankster in UFOlogy. One of the key issues in UFOlogy is proof: is the photograph real or fake? Does that video of a light in the sky really show a light in the sky, or is it a remote controlled, glowing frisbee thrown up in the air? Is that UFO really a triangle of unknown origin, or just Air Force pilots having fun flying in formation? Is that UFO researcher, who speaks at conferences and has published loads of books in reality a disinfo agent? Is that abductee really an abductee, or at least an individual with strange, unexplainable experiences, or an outright lair?

We rarely know. And even when we do, when it comes out that so and so was lying, or the photo was hoaxed, or the video showed pilots flying in formation having a bit of fun and not a flying saucer, we’re often left with endless questions, and the event is not so neatly solved after all.

There’s also a playful element in the Trickster. The Trickster thumbs its nose at society (which certainly UFOlogy and Forteana do), at “the rules,” at convention. Often those who don’t “believe” in this stuff will join in, just for fun. Festivals in towns where UFO events have occurred are an example. (Roswell, Aztec, Hopkinsville Kentucky, Nevada) For a short time, no one takes it seriously and everyone uses the
the event to let loose, to be silly, to meet others, to be anonymous if they wish. Or to come out completely with their experiences and beliefs in a safe place, knowing they can leave and go back to “normal.”

Trent Photos
The Trent photos, taken in 1950 in McMinnville, Oregon of a UFO, have been considered as genuine by many researchers.

On that day in 1950, Paul Trent took two photographs of a UFO. More than fifty years later, according to the bloggers at the UFO Iconoclast blog, a “third, lost” photo of the Trent UFO was found. This photo was sent to the bloggers from an unnamed individual allegedly in Arizona.

It turned out the photo was not a “third, lost” Trent photo at all, but one of a UFO taken in Germany in the 1970s. Meanwhile, a small flurry of comments were made on their blog, the bloggers generated some attention for themselves, and the whole thing seemed to have quickly died down.

I wrote a couple of items on this, and my intuition tells me, as it did then, that the whole thing was a hoax; meaning, there never was a “lost” photo sent to them, it was all a silly exercise. It isn’t necessary to ask what the point was, for the point is: the Trickster is simply at work.

Another way the Trickster has fun with the McMinnville/Trent UFO case is in the annual McMinnville Festival in McMinnville, Oregon. This is the “party” element of the Trickster mentioned earlier. People come from all over Oregon and beyond to have fun. There is even a typical Trickster inversion of the Blessing of the Animals in many religious celebrations with the “alien pet parade” part of the festival.

UFO Researchers on the Trickster
Colin Bennett, George P. Hanse,Jacque Vallee, and John A. Keel, are some of the UFO writers who have written on this Trickster element within UFOlogy.

A recognition of this innate Trickster element in UFO and Fortean phenomeana doesn’t have to exclude a nuts and bolts construct. Both can coexist. In fact, it seems more evident every day that they do. I used to think that the two were exclusive, but the reality seems to be that we can’t afford to be that limited. All this infighting over theories doesn’t take into account that the two can be related, and part of a larger picture.

The next time some irritating and seemingly pointless event occurs surrounding UFOs, it may be some small bit of comfort to remember the Trickster’s role in UFO and Fortean experiences.

Notes
Regan Lee, UFO Digest:
Still a Mystery, and a Big Question: The Trent Farm/McMinnville Oregon Case

One hint that this was all a hoax -- the blog's contention there was a third lost photo, not the Trent photos themselves -- is the timing. My Trent article on UFO Digest appeared right after (was inspired by) another article on the Trent case. Not long after, the idea of a "lost" photo appeared. (I could be wrong, so be it if that's the case. In typical fashion, I doubt we'll ever know.)

UFO Iconoclasts blog:
A Lost Trent Photo?
Regan Lee, UFO Digest:
A New Lost Trent Photo Surfaces? and:
The Trent Tempest

“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.

Marginalization of UFO "Buffs"

Two related blog entries by two blog authors on the marginalization of UFO "believers." Lesley, of the DebrisField blog, has good comments about this. In her essay Ufology: A Cult of Personality she writes:

Beyond that, for ufology to be a cult there would need to be a belief system that everyone followed. Anyone who is a member of ufo updates would quickly realize that ufologists agree on almost nothing. They all have their own theories and personalities and anyone who thinks they would all agree on anything, except that there are strange things in the sky, has never spent any quality time with a ufologist.”

Exactly.

As Lesley points out, sure, there are the “cults” within UFOlogy; the Raelians, etc. To consistently use those groups as an accurate representation of UFOlogy is dishonest, as those who rabidly attack UFO studies know full well.

On the Sanity for Sale blog, there is a good piece:

UFOs: To Believe Or Not To Believe.
The author writes:

”You may have noticed that, in the media, UFO believers are usually referred to as buffs, a term used to diminish and marginalize them by relegating them to the ranks of hobbyists and mere enthusiasts. They are made to seem like kooks and quaint dingbats who have the nerve to believe that, in an observable universe of trillions upon trillions of stars, and most likely many hundreds of billions of potentially inhabitable planets, some of those planets may have produced life-forms capable of doing things that we can’t do.”

In contrast, those who believe in Jesus, God, other forms of mainstream religions are not only acceptable, but considered honorable, trustworthy people. A recent poll (I forget where I read about this) revealed that the majority of voters would not trust an atheists as president. The tension between Upstanding Religious Person and UFO “Believer” is hypocritical, one could say, but it’s a given oppositional juxtaposition in the realm of the Trickster.

As both articles point out, many mega-skeptics and anti-UFOists refer to a “belief” in UFOs, which automatically calls up the memes of: faith, blind faith, miracles, religion, cults, craziness, delusions, and hallucinations. With such labeling, the UFO witness, writer, researcher and investigator are dismissed. People who study UFOs are “buffs” as the author of the Sanity blog says, or they’re “enthusiasts” which some anti UFO skeptics insists on calling those of us who are involved in UFO research (meaning, from a non chronic skeptic perspective) “enthusiasts,” as if we’re all fanatical NASCAR fans. Both terms further trivialize the subject, and more to the point, those who are involved in its study. By consistently using these terms and phrases: buffs, enthusiasts, fans, believers, etc. the topic of UFOs, and those involved with UFOs in whatever way, are presented to the culture as goofy, eccentric, unintelligent, uneducated. Certainly not a topic to be taken seriously, nor the humans involved with the topic. (Unless it’s to debunk, deny, and discredit the topic. Then those people count of course.)

Our culture -- our infrastructure -- has many ways it perpetuates anti-UFOism, along with anything outside of the mainstream. Misdirection, disinformation, appropriation, trivialization, marginalization, outright lying and dishonesty, questioing the patriotism, morality, sanity, intelligence and or honesty of UFO "believers," are among the dozens of ways this populates throughout our culture.

Of Non-Dreams and Aliens: A Personal Tale

Johann Heinrich Fussli
The Nightmare
oil, 1781


This is the kind of stuff that annoys a lot of people (particularly skeptics; but then again, everything annoys them) but I can’t help that. It’s what it is. It’s part of the UFO Gestalt, it’s a part of my story, my experience, my journey. Yeah, I know, it sounds a bit New Agey to me too. Well, so what? It’s true, and there you are.

I’ve always had an active dream life, as I’ve written before. Last night I had a strange dream -- or, “non-dream” -- I’ve never had this experience before.

When I dream, it’s always an active, involved, busy thing: a plot (no matter how surreal or ludicrous) people, creatures maybe, I’m a part of it, I’m out of it watching, point of view always changing; but always I see people. (“I see dream people.”) There’s always a scene, a picture.

Last night, I dreamt, but there was no picture. None. Very weird. The words were active; there were voices, but no picture. Just the swirling colors of utter abstractions; just like when you close your eyes and you don’t see anything except the mish mosh of colors.

The dream story was about aliens; which were everywhere. Invisible, but everywhere. Then a voice was telling me that “much of my whole UFO thing” started with ‘Scott ‘(I’ll call him that, an old boyfriend of mine) and we had an experience together. And the voice said “Remember that blue light and silver craft?” and at the moment the voice said that, I said “Shit!” because it all came back to me. At this same moment the murky non-picture began to turn into something a little bit; on the upper right corner of the ‘screen” part of the UFO began to come through the haze (a silver round craft) and with it, part of an alien. This alien was a tall “gray.” I knew without any hesitation at all that this voice, reminding me of an event with “Scott,” was true.

I didn’t like this one damn bit and woke up, scared, very uncomfortable.

I told my husband about this dream. After a long silence, with him staring off into space (“Great,” I thought. “Here we go again, where this will all go nowhere, or turn into a tension filled morning. . .” which sometimes happens when we try to talk about our experiences) he says “I often wonder if I should find out about regression.” Then he brought up our first missing time experience, once again saying how very odd it all was. “I don’t see how a space ship could be the cause, not in L.A.” he said. Excellent point. Then again, we know better.

I realized too, that none of my dreams involving aliens are good. The aliens are not kindly beings here to help us. At best, they’re coldly detached, and maybe even outright malevolent. This feeling of malevonence could be my own fear at remembering the whole experience, and not an accurate depiction of “them." Or, it could be them, indeed. Of course, none of the this could have a damn thing to do with UFOs or alien beings (extra terrestrial or otherwise.)

My husband said something else this morning; that one weird experience could be chalked up to just one of those things. “But look at the pattern,” he said. “Look at the history here.”

After that first missing time experience in West Hollywood (where we arrived home at 4:00 am, looked at each other and said “Well, that’s weird!” then just went promptly to bed, where we didn’t wake up once until 4:00 pm the next day) I began having all kinds of UFO dreams, including what I call “The Geisha Woman” dream. (tall, white gray face “woman” in a kimono sitting across from me inside a spaceship. I’m very angry but also scared; they took my husband away and “they” are keeping us apart.) This was before Budd Hopkins, Strieber, etc.

He went on: “Then that second time on Lorane Highway, with the silver craft, and the orange orb, and missing time, and your dreams. . .”

Yes.

Well, there it is. What is means, I don’t know. But it seems that, among other things, this connection, or these experiences, go back a long way.

Jeremy Vaeni asked me why I don’t just come out and admit I’m an abductee. After all, look at the history, beginning in childhood, look at the pattern and relationship with my husband, look at my passion here with UFOs. I’m clearly trying to find out something.

And yet, I’m visiting the Nile, apparently.

However, I cannot say “I’m an abductee” and have never said so. (despite the insistence of a few trolls out there who say such things on their website) I have no memory of seeing aliens, or being abducted. Dreams, while exceedingly interesting and useful, aren’t enough to base that conclusion on. And while the sum of my experiences point to something Fortean/paranormal/possibly alien, I can’t make that assumption.

It’s possible there’s been some kind of relationship with these beings/UFOs that doesn’t translate to “abduction.” Maybe some people are “programmed” to remember their relationships as abductions, maybe they are two different things, maybe it’s the government playing mind control games.

So for now, I’ll just continue to do what I’m doing, and see where it takes me.

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.

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. . .