It's official. I can now do holy official things. 

Green Man, Playground Abduction, 'I BELIEVE in Jaysus!'

 Dreams concerning aliens, ETS, the other realm, UFOs . . . some research is on-going concerning a connection between waking experiences involving these things, and the dream world. (Google and all kinds of links to interesting research and studies will pop up.)

So, last night's dream:

After school, on the playground, with another staff member or two, and a group of children, waiting for the bus and parent pick-up. Getting on dusk. Earlier in the day, I had gone to a few bookstores and came across various magazines and books about The Green Man. Met a person with an interest in Green Man and we had quite a conversation. I was thinking about all the Green Man synchronicities as I was waiting with the students. 

It's getting a bit chilly. Things feel . . . odd. Suddenly, large brilliant white lights appear in the sky above us, come down, we're all frightened and these lights are behaving as one, intelligently controlled. The lights form a circle of lights above us and scoop us up. Not only the people, but part of the playground - the black top -- as well. Just scooped out a large circle of ground with us on it and brought us into the ship.

Now we're standing on this large circle of blacktop inside a spaceship. 

We're very scared, and the ship is zooming around, just a few feet above houses. We can see outside, but the craft is cloaked. No one sees us. It's like "they" -- the aliens -- are toying with us. We are so lost! We're pretty sure we're still on earth, but, where? We don't recognize the neighborhoods. I'm afraid we're going to be dropped off in the middle of a strange area and how will we get back, how will I get the children safe?

The aliens are Reptilians. We can't see them, but we just know this. We are very aware of their presence. They're above us in the ship, watching us. Like we're a toy. A game. 

Now we're zooming off into outer space, and this time I am really terrified. But also angry. I start to pray to Jesus, which, even as I'm doing so, is ticking me off, since I am not a Christian and don't believe at all in a divine Jesus. But I'll try anything in order to save us. So I pray like crazy and promise Jesus that I'll believe if only he'll get us out of here.

Then one of the Reptilians calls down to me: "Do you really mean that?"

"Yes!!!!" I say.

"That's all we wanted to know. "

They return us to the playground. By this time parents are there, panicked, naturally. I wonder how in the world are we going to explain this but it doesn't take much, since everyone has seen the ground open up, the ship return us, etc. And one of the men on the ship goes on the news to explain how the Reptilians were showing him how part of him is Reptilian, exposing his lizard face under his real face.

The believe in Jesus part has me interested, if not also annoyed. When I was writing my Orange Orb column for UFO Magazine I wrote a column about Jesus saving me from the aliens. When I lived in my father's house in Northern California, I was having extremely intense dreams of aliens. (I also had a dream where I woke up coughing due to the strong odor of incense, heard chanting and a misty blurry priest during mass; turns out the house belonged to a Catholic priest who died in that room.) Finally, in one of the dreams, I prayed to Jesus to keep the aliens away. It worked. Which confused me. I'm not a Christian. I don't believe in that. However, I did spend eight years in Catholic school. I didn't believe any of it back then either.

Fringe Implosions

Strange things going on in not only UFO Land, but the realm of the fringe as well.

We had the racist, sexist comments from John Ventre, the MUFON state director, as well as the initial apathetic reaction from MUFON itself.

Stan Romanek, UFO alien witness, or, alien gray in the window hoaxer, has been charged with being in possession of child pornography.  

Sean David Morton busted for tax fraud. 

David Paulides, author of the Missing 411 books, has upset many with his prima donna act, as well as, according to some, his research methods. (I had my own little drama with him and I regret being a nice girl and giving into his demands.)

And the latest: New Age angel and tarot writer Doreen Virtue has become born again in the Christian faith, and has turned against the tarot, and other oracles, as sinful occult tools.  (I will write more on Virtue on my tarot blog.)

None of this is really a surprise. This metaphysical field -- and I include UFOs in that term -- has always had its share of the dishonest, child molesters (look at all the would be cult leader guru types; a large percentage are either horny jerks, or pedophiles), frauds and egomaniacs.

Because of this truth, none of these areas, including UFOs, will be taken seriously -- respectfully -- by mainstream culture, including its institutions.

It's up to us to denounce these fools, creeps and cheaters because no one else will. Instead, these fools, creeps and cheaters will be held up to the mainstream as justification for mockery and marginlization.

These sad, cheesy events do not negate the reality of UFOs, angels, the tarot, spirits, remote viewing, or conspiracies and strange disappearances. So we need to keep exposing the dishonest (and not keep fighting amongst ourselves about what's worthy of investigation, and what isn't.) Some of the individuals involved are to be tossed out, obviously --tossed, shown up, exposed, and not tolerated -- but it's important we don't, as the saying goes, throw the baby out with the bathwater.

"Aliens are Real"

We see this often; the statement on social media and throughout the internet that "aliens are real." I agree with that, aliens are real, and I won't argue that with the debunker crowd. (Just like I don't argue my case with them on ghosts, UFOs, etc.)

But, the question is, not are aliens real, but what do we mean by "aliens?"
Exchange the word "alien" for "God" and it's the same idea. I believe in "God" but, as I've discovered through the years, my idea of "God" is very different from the majority's, at least in our culture.  My Christian friends definitely disagree with me on this conception of "God." (Yes, I'm an old hippie flower child, believing that "god" is all, everywhere, within and without, consciousness and star stuff. A bearded man in the sky who sent his son, who was also him, what?! -- no.)

So we throw the words around -- alien, God, -- and assume we're on the same page. Oh dahlings, we are so not!

For that matter, I'll even throw in UFOs, for our definitions of that seeming obvious term has different meanings for different people. (Debunkers and skeptics often like to be cute and insist that when using the term "UFO" 'everyone knows we're really talking about aliens from space.' Bless their disingenuous hearts.)

"Aliens are real," sure. But that belief, that opinion, doesn't stop there with the acknowledgement that "they" exist. We really have two questions -- what are aliens -- and, which ones are talking about -- in what context?

Were the "aliens" listening in on our conversations -- invisible yet very distinct  presence felt by many -- aliens from outer space? Another planet? Or an energy? Something co-existing with us here on earth? Something mystical/spiritual, like angels? Djinn? Even something co-created, even unconsciously, by us via our intense discussions of the subject? A sort of UFO tulpa?

What of the beings seen by landed ships and inside craft?

The list of weird unexplained beings that are non-human but described as "alien" is a long one, as well as a varied. We can't simply put the idea of "alien" into one category, acknowledge its existence, then feel as if we've solved something.

Just trying to define terms is exhausting in the land of the weird, and we realize how complex the "thing" (UFO, alien, er, "God") really is.

Demons and Deer

Thanks to Lesley Gunter at The Debris Field for the following links, both of which are very interesting for their perspectives on UFOs.

"The UFO manifestations seem to be, by and large, merely minor variations of the age-old demonological phenomenon. " (John A. Keel, The Trojan Horse)

Aliens are Demons We start with the following story link at UFO Disclosure blog: Experiences Changes Mind - Aliens Are Demons. Immediately the mind rebels: "demons?" That superstitious Christian fear based crap? But if we think of "demon" as an entity -- akin to Djinn, say -- and strip the label of its religious trappings, we might get somewhere. However, UFO Disclosure does not take any of these ideas seriously, commenting that he and Nick Redfern recently debated the idea of "demonic" forces at work within a UFO context. And the story itself, from "Messina" -- while described in somewhat sexist terms by UFO D. who paraphrases Messina's theory: "...including combining the missed periods of women in the 40's going thru the change of life - into being aborted by the aliens in their spaceship." (I've never interpreted my hot flashes as being alien induced probings, though they sure as hell feel damn supernatural sometimes.) Messina's story, about abductee Camille James Harman and linked to by UFO Disclosure, reports that Harman prayed for clarity regarding her alien encounters as she worked on her book about those encounters:

 "I started to pray, 'God, give me an answer to this whole mystery. I want to have a useful conclusion.' I was then guided to read a couple of books that I hadn't come across in my research. (Later on), a profound feeling of grace came over me. I felt the divine, protected and guided." Harman considers herself a born-again Catholic."

Not just a born again Christian, but a born again Catholic. I find this distinction intriguing for its connection to Marian apparitions and UFOs. I find myself in a betwixt and between place with all this. Fear and religious constraints vs. non-human but not ET alien alien. Meaning, some non-human, intelligent force that's been with us for eons. John Keel is just one of many UFO researchers who long ago came to this conclusion. Really nothing new, yet still a shadowy kind of theory that hangs out on the fringes of UFOlogy. This is not to say other entities also exist, including literal ETs.

---

Deer Men and UFOs
I've been thinking on deer imagery in relation to UFOs for awhile now, as I wrote about not long ago. Besides the deer connection, the account of other animals and their behavior as signals something is definitely not at all right is a subject I've been following for some years. So I found this link at The Debris Field interesting: UFOs and Deer Men in Oklahoma, at Mysterious Universe. Very cool encounters, and scary as hell. Definite high strangeness!

Federal Court Rules Against "Filmaker," For Raelians

Glad to see that would be documentarians Abdulluah Hashem and Joseph McGowen's were found guilty of lying about the Raelians. I've been following this story since 2005 and have written about it through the years. Hashem had an agenda based on his own religious (and political) fanaticism that rivaled the Raelians for sure.My new Trickster's Realm column for Binnall of America, on the court's ruling and the agendas of Abdulluah Hashem and Joseph McGowen, will be up sometime today. 

U.S. Federal Court Rules Filmmakers Lied About Raelians - PR Newswire - sacbee.com

Brazen Hussies Invade Earth! Serious UFO Research Attacked!

 Cigarette Smoking Woman Single-handedly brings down UFO research! In her slip, no less!

Disclosure:  I write for both the on-line 'zine, UFO Digest, as well as the print publication UFO Magazine. 

When Deirdre O'Lavery of Interstellar Housewife and JAR announced she was UFO Magazine's newest columnist, I was thrilled. She shared some of her ideas for her column's title with myself and a few others, including fellow UFO Magazine columnists Lesley Gunter at The Debris Field  and Alfred Lehmberg of Alien View.  The one column title that really said "Deirdre" to me was Saucers, Slips and Cigarettes, which is the one she chose.

A member of the Stuffed Shirt faction of the UFO Police doesn't appreciate Deirdre's cheeky 'tude, the brazen hussy, she.  David P. Kuhlman, FFSc, in his article for UFO Digest (UFO Mag Columnist is an Insult To Readers,) tells us why O'Lavery's column is offensive. Clues to Kuhlman's personal philosophy can be found in comments like the following: 

Do people give in to secular pressures, which can change the outlook and product for everyone? [bold and italics mine]

Indeed, in another article he wrote for UFO Digest; An Alien Reasoning, Kuhlman wrote:

I am a Christian. I was brought up through the years in church and I have strong roots with all Christian beliefs. I believe in God.

The use of the word "secular" in this context is clear: Deirdre O'Lavery has been seduced by the devil and away from the light, and is bringing the rest of us down with her into the roiling pits of hell.

John Collier, Lilith, 1892

Kuhlman goes on for quite awhile discussing what we all know far too well: UFOlogy has a difficult time being taken seriously, hoaxes hurt us all, there are good researchers who are "respectable," but some are not, and they're talking the rest of us down.  One of those who are not respectable, writes Kuhlman, is Deirdre O'Lavery, who should cause us all not only "concern" but "out-rage." Something about slips and cigarettes causes Kuhlman great distress:

Paging through to the seventh one [column] I noticed an unfamiliar face, a columnist. It initially caught my glance simply because I am familiar with the magazines layout since I read it often, and I knew this was a new addition immediately. I was curious and thumbed back to the index page and sure enough, the magazine had added a new columnist to its list, Ms. Deirdre O’ Lavery, Hmmm… never heard of her. Instantly I knew this was the place to start my reading journey through this months issue and quickly paged back to the column titled “Saucers, Slips, and Cigarettes”. That is where my blood began to boil!

I understand not liking a column, but really, his "blood began to boil?"  Sex, -- especially the "wrong" kind of sex, as in, anything you don't approve of between consenting adults -- is clearly the issue here, not UFO research. Women should be demure; we should speak softly and refrain from being sassy. Especially if we're wearing underwear. (Note to Kulhlman: some people prefer that kind of thing.)

The title of the column was strange I thought after reading it, it really didn’t seem to “fit” a serious publication on UFO research, but sometimes the title is to get the attention of the reader and it certainly did its job there and at least one word did correlate with the cigarette hanging out of the side of Ms. O’ Lavery’s clown painted, rose red lips. [italics mine]

Deirdre O'Lavery, get thee to a nunnery! And lest you think I am being overly flip here, Kuhlman himself is serious; of all the things in UFO land to get upset about, he finds O'Lavery's "rose red lips," cigarette smoking, and use of the word "slips" to be the targets of his repressed and misogynistic outrage:

"I have never been more agitated at any other piece of writing on UFOs than I am on this one . . . As I read I was disgusted and nauseated at her attempt to break the ice with the reader. Foul language and an utter sense of ignorance and disrespect to serious readers was her route. She goes on to write her column like a heathen speaks. [italics mine]   

He was nauseated? And "heathen?" "Heathen?" Did he really write that? Yes, yes he did. 

All that mishegas aside, he completely misunderstands O'Lavery's column, focusing instead not only on her lips but her "drunkenness":

Can people really take the UFO phenomenon seriously when it is painted that only sorry drunk people with no life dabble into this subject? Folks, this article is a disgrace to everyone that considers UFOlogy worth of investigation!

Kuhlman borders on the libelous; if it weren't so damn funny, it might be of concern. He not only finds Ms. O'Lavery "drunken," and what not but also believes she should be shunted off to the nut house:

She is certifiable for this piece of worthless paper with all of her slang and ignorant insight.

Her "slang?" Hey Daddyo, you sound like a real square!

Of all the columnists that write for UFO Magazine, this is the one that has caused Kuhlman --- after just one column! -- to stop reading the magazine altogether. If O'Lavery's one column can upset a supposed UFO researcher so much that he writes a rant about it and demands a "formal apology" from the publishers, then Ms. O'Lavery is one hell of a writer!

Painting by James Rich

One last point about Kuhlman's apoplectic response to Deirdre O'Lavery: he includes all of "us" (well, except for O'lavery) in his rant, beginning with his title: UFO Mag Columnist is an Insult to Readers. No, Kuhlman, it's not an insult to all readers; not to me, obviously. Speak for yourself. Clearly it's an insult to you, and possibly, to some others, so be it. But don't include me in your campaign to rid UFO land of Ms. O'Lavery. This is the problem with the UFO Police; they expect everyone to join them in their outrages and edicts about what they perceive to be right.

Congratulations, Ms. Deirdre O'Lavery, for bringing UFOlogy down to such a shameless level with just one column!

A Dream, the Moon, Thoughts and Batsquatch

Strange night last night, odd morning...

Well, there was UFO Hunters (and Monster Quest) and that's always fun. While watching UFO Hunters I was doodling, over and over again, dark, contoured orbs radiating energy type beams, bridges, and more orbs. Hmmm.

Then went to sleep, had a dream of UFOs and aliens (the latter unseen, as usual) and it was very uncomfortable. Not pleasant. I wasn't scared, but it wasn't a good feeling dream in any way. Suddenly at around 3:30 in the morning, I just woke up. Woke up, wide awake, and I looked directly out the bedroom window to see a bright, huge, round white light just beaming into the window. This scared the hell out of me for about two seconds, until I realized it was the moon.

Still, I was feeling creep ed out, and irrationally mad at that moon, as if the whole thing -- whatever "whole thing" it is I mean -- was responsible.

Here's the poem of sorts, a of stream of consciousness, almost automatic writing, which I wouldn't actually do. Just images, memories, coming quick and without thought, throwing out clues or quilt blocks to see what might emerge, if anything. Which would all be terribly subjective and highly interpretative but if it's looked at like art, an abstract work, the artist recedes as the viewer participates, . . .

floating
yellow light
high up in a tree
anticipation
childhood
through walls, through doors
full moon
night
stars
waiting
play
little beings, dancing
invisible
morhping helicopters
pastures
parks
precognition
astral projection
visitations
anger
buzzing
roaring
rushing
chrome colored spheres, spinning, hovering
beams of light hitting grass
orange orb lit from within
following
fright
noise
bright blinding white light
paralyzed
obsession
seeking
floating in space in cold glass domes
black wig headed, tall, chalk-white, female being
slightly insect like
slightly grey-alien like
memories of moving stars intrude
camouflage
disguise
tricks
coincidences
dreams
blue beams
running, hiding in cupboards, empty kitchens
cabins
giant triangles
wedges, chevrons, bright white round lights
family sightings and shared experience
missing time
small silver suited beings
red glowing eyes
nozzles and hoses, guns and wands
disbelief
mocking
defense
risk
abandon

I woke up this morning very tired, mostly it was my body that felt tired, I ached all over and couldn't figure it out, I hadn't been doing anything that would make me so achy. I log on and find an e-mail from someone with a report of a "Batsquatch" in my area, along with his disturbing idea of typing up a live lamb to use a bait in order to capture this creature. You can read about that on Frame 352.

An uneasy bit of synchronicity in this email from the man wanting to use live bait; for Monster Quest annoyed me last night, with it's two fishermen who used live bait to get a look at muskies. The bait they used wasn't a worm, it was a large fish itself. It was the complete lack of respect and gratitude, of awareness, of what they were doing, and the way they were choosing to use that life, that bothered me. MQ had done this before; using the gratuitous killing of animals, in their giant hog episode.

Open Up

I commented in my earlier post about something Stanton Friedman said in the interview with Tim Binnall: that UFOlogists shouldn't be embarrassed, and should stop being apologists for the UFO phenomena, even while studying it. I embrace this idea, even though I've been an apologist myself, and embarrassed, as to my telepathic New Agey side. Oh well, but there it is. It's true, it's me, there you go. I'd be a liar to pretend otherwise, and what do I care about smarmy self-appointed UFO authoritarian stuffed shirts who might make fun? Nothing I can do about the reactions of others. So I'll crunch my crystals all I like, thank you very much.

Meanwhile, all that aside, I understand some of the need to disassociate oneself from some aspects of the UFO phenomena. Under an often well meaning but misguided sense of credibility, many believe they need to slough off the gaudy, the loud, the silly, the weird, the uncomfortable. The logical thinking goes like this: "UFOlogy has enough problems being taken seriously, we can't afford such nonsense." Sounds quite sensible.

Just below the surface we find it isn't sensible at all. The UFO question isn't taken seriously at all by the infrastructure; never has, never will. At least, that's how it appears. It's because it's actually taken extremely seriously that they work very hard at giving the impression the opposite is the case. If that sounds like frustraintg gibberish, I'll agree it's frustrating, but it isn't gibberish. It's to be expected. That Trickster element is the swirling crazy making thing that it is, and yet, there are so many UFO researchers, pundits, investigators, etc. that don't get this. And as long as they continue to ignore the fact this Trickster trait is an innate part of the UFO phenomena, we'll remain stuck.

Not that we'll ever become completely unstuck. But is that the point anyway? To get the Big Question Finally Answered? Narrowly focused on a few minute details, some UFOlogists don't have patience or time to look around. They're missing a lot. Others say "Well, I did look, and it was fun/interesting/weird, but so what. It entertained, but didn't give The Golden Answer to the UFO Problem." Maybe that's part of the problem; seeing it as a "problem." Whether it's seen as a problem or a mystery, it's still full of contradictions, manipulations, high strangeness, and so much more. Expecting to get at the truth by excising the parts not understood or liked is pathological.

Others see themselves as doing some sort of service to "UFOlogy" -- attacking others, insulting, trotting out various witnesses or researchers and ripping them a new one. And these are the ones who accept that UFOs are a reality. With friends like that who needs a Shermer, Mcgaha or Nye? "But we need to be critical!" is the logical response. Yes, but unless one has proof, and I mean solid, real, actual, and legal proof that someone is a fraud, or a liar, it's a dangerous game to play. Libel and slander aren't far off. The rest is just bullying; being a big fat poopy-head simply because you can. Wow, good for you.

Along with all this: the Trickster element, the gaudy, weird, even embarrassing, the uncomfortable, is that "the UFO phenomena" includes us. "UFOlogy" isn't just the thing seen in the sky. We're also a part of the thing we call UFOlogy, or The UFO Phenomena . . . we are not separate from it. We are not objective, we are not immune, we do not stand outside while commenting on what goes on, we're in it. The very moment we decided to get involved, for whatever reason, we became a part of "ufology" just as much as all the rest of it. Some like to parse these things, labeling the various elements and rating them; dividing the players into inside or outside, liars or weirdos. . . doesn't matter. We're still all in it.

Instead of being combative and defensive while at the same time obsequious by whimpering at the infrastructure (government disclosure movement, academia, skeptoids, big science, religious institutions. . .) we need to relax. I don't mean relax standards or critical thinking, but relax so we can think. Think bigger, deeper, more openly. Consider. Open ourselves to more. To other.

We can't do that if we have our dukes up all the time.

BVM, e-books, the dangers of Bigfootry, esoteric women,

On UFO-Mary I have several new posts, including one on the Mexican edition of Playboy magazine, with it's Virgin Mary like model on the cover. Just in time for the pilgrimage to the shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe.

I've been experiencing a few synchroniciites related to the image of Mary, as well as Goddess energy in general. It's not surprising to find that when ones attention is really directed at something; UFOs, what have you, the synchronicities appear!

Chris Holly is a new contributor to Women Of Esoterica. Her first post is a ghost story; visit Women Of Esoterica and read Holly's, as well as entries by Kithra, Richelle Hawks, Lesley Gunter, Karyn Dolan, Farah Yurdozu, and myself.

Snarly Skepticism; also the unofficial JREF Watch, I just decided, has an entry on the dangers of Bigfoot research. Yes, dangers. The harm Bigfoot research, and just a "belief" in Bigfoot, must be told! Beware!

Usually my Trickster's Realm column for Binnall of America goes up on Monday, but recently things have been changed around a bit. So my column won't be up until Thursday. I write about the Darklore, Volume II that just came out. Speaking of, it'll make a great gift! You can find out about ordering information at Amazon.com or the Daily Grail site.

It's been snowy here, which I don't like. It's wet, it's cold, what's the point? Fortunately I don't have to go anywhere these days; I"m off for winter break for three weeks. So I'm cozy in my house, trying to work on various writing projects.

And speaking of writing projects, visit my Lulu.com storefront. I plan to have a few more things available -- some for free -- in a few days.

I was going to be on the X-Zone radio show but still sick with some cold/throat thing. I'm much better but my throat still hurts and I sound like a frog. I'm sure in a few days I'll be fine, and will post the date when I know more.

---

Read about juicy McMinnville UFO-gossip here!

SUNDAY ORB

Not much going on. Sick with Fall crud, low energy, but in spite of that I like the Fall and the crisp air, I've been putting up my Fall season lights, my favorite string being an icicle style string with lights that fade from purple to orange and back. Very nice. And if I hear "Harvest Fest" one more time I'll puke. So we don't offend the Christians or give off negative vibes to the little ones, we don't dare put up witches and say the dreaded word Halloween; we say "Harvest Fest."


Speaking of Halloween: supposedly the building I work in is haunted. I've personally never felt that, but others have. I'll have to pick the brains of someone who's experienced those things and see if I pick up anything. The playground, in one area seems spooky to me, maybe it's just the energy of the space itself. There was a building I worked in that I, and others, thought was haunted; I felt and saw a lot of odd things. Interesting how I'm usually sensitive to those things but every now and then I just don't pick up on it; like my friends home (they've since moved) many others saw and felt things, but me, nothing.

New posts at Vintage U.F.O., UFO Mary, James Rich Studio, Women Of Esoterica, and tëme (an animal blog) and Pulp Jello.

Why did they put The Mentalist against Fringe? And when is Torchwood coming back? I ask you.

Mac Tonnies has a new blog; it's a great idea. Things That Look Like Flying Saucers. I love it. Here's a flying saucer I found in my living room:


Lots of little synchronicities in my life lately. Again lately that is. I notice when you put out the intent, the synchroniciites appear. I've often wondered why they are so trivial much of the time, and many a skeptoid dismisses them for that very reason. But isn't it enough they're there in the first place? Simple nudges from the universe or matrix or whatever; that's all it takes.

Well, while nothing much going on here, there's always things going on in the UFO, Fortean realm on the internet, as a check of the usual will reveal. The Anomalist and other blogs, way too many to mention here, but check out my links lists and do your own searching; you'll find more than enough to keep you busy.

And while there may not be anything I have to say right now that's stunning or interesting or Big Time UFO News, that doesn't mean, as a few others -- and we do know who they are, right class? --- insist, that UFOs are dead, gone, boring, useless, pointless, etc. Far from it!

Catastrophes and UFOs: It's Not a Contest

Recent catastrophes; earthquakes in China, cyclones in Myanmar,tornadoes in the U.S., have caused some to once again demonize UFOs, or at least, those who choose to explore the mystery of UFOs.

Why the two would have anything to do with each other is beyond me, but the supposed thinking of those who use these tragedies to support their peevish anti-UFO stance makes sense to them, obviously.

Skeptics of many varieties (including, paradoxically, those who acknowledge there are UFOs) don’t like most UFO researchers. That aside, they don’t like UFOs much either. They're always pissed off at them, because UFOS aren’t doing anything. The UFO phenomena’s continued behavior of remaining elusive is maddening, torturous in its contradictory, slippery manifestations. And yet, for all the years the UFOs have been around (centuries, really) for all the evidence, they haven't done anything. At least not in a grand, showy way; pulling off some mind blowing trick like turning mountains into ice cream sundaes or finally delivering those flying cars.

They haven’t fixed anything, saved anyone, cured any diseases, solved any of the world’s problems. They didn’t prevent the recent tragedies, or past disasters. They didn’t warn us. They haven’t stopped war. Racism, ageism, sexism, classism still exist, relgious hatreds and wars continue, people live in poverty. The aliens and UFOs haven't fixed any of it.

This makes some people downright mad. Instead of getting mad at a god, God, Jesus - they’re mad at UFOs. And they're madder still at people who study UFOs. The message seems to be that it’s somehow all our fault that tragedies happen. And if it isn’t our fault, exactly, and/or the UFOs, we’re still guilty by association just for seriously thinking about the subject.

I get the feeling these brands of skeptics (and beware; many of them insist they are not skeptics at all and are, in fact, in with the in crowd of UFO researchers) have a whole lot of expectations on what UFOs should do, and what they shouldn’t do. Which is ludicrous. They accuse us of being like children; frivolous children who chase after the fleeting, fragile UFO, when it’s they that are stuck in magical thinking.

Sure, I “believe” in aliens. Rather, I believe they exist. I believe aliens from other planets, as well as other entities, are all around us. I don’t believe in them, however. I don't pray to them or expect them to do anything.

I don’t believe every UFO is from outer space, piloted by ET.
I don’t believe ET, aliens, entities, Mothman, Bigfoot, or Lizard Man are going to save us, cure us, fix us, heal the planet, or teach me how to parallel park.

I don’t think only some should study UFOs, and others shouldn’t, and I don’t think anyone should, or, shouldn't, just because I said so. Or because anyone else said so.

I don’t care who’s who, or why, or what they do in their private life, (naturally there are some boundaries here, Christ people, use your common sense) if they party too much, or not enough, -- they “get to” delve into the mysteries of life as much as anyone. In fact, god knows, we need more people getting deep into this stuff!

Using the very real horrors of this world to bash UFO or Fortean research is dishonest. It’s disingenuous. It’s lazy. It distracts from both the world’s cruel realities, as well as anomalous research.

The two aren’t in a contest with each other; don’t make it one. Don’t pit one phenomena against the other as some sort of moral barometer of any given individual.

The Scientology Meme: Mob Mentality

I’m no fan of Scientology, (had a personal negative experience with them involving a family member when I was young) but I’m no fan of organized religions or organized anythings. Like Groucho Marx once said:

I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.

On many esoteric blogs, as well as the anti-esoteric blogs and forums (otherwise known as “skeptics”) there’s been a lot of self righteous anti-Scientology posts. Well, yeah, okay. Let’s go after the Vatican, various Christian sects, Islamic extremists, the Raelians, Buddhists (just because they’re not American and are suspect you know), Yoga, and Jews. Oh, and Wicca. Let’s go after all religions, spiritual and philosophical systems. Get rid of them!

The reasons why so many all over the world are now going after Scientology have to do with its existence on the fringe. Everyone’s gone after all the above mentioned systems; and many of those systems (Catholics, Jews, Muslims) are accepted by mainstream culture. As soon as you step over that line of what’s accepted, you’re fair game. Scientologists, like Mormons and Wiccans for example. are suspect. Their rights to freedoms, in this country anyway, are swept off the table, because, well, they’re weird. And if we think it’s weird, really weird, then we get to vilify. We’ll leave the Methodists alone but don’t be going around saying you’re a Scientologist or practice Wicca. Then we’ll get you. Get you good.

Another reason for the smug sense of being Very Reasonable, is the fear of criticizing religious Muslim extremists for what they are: fanatics. We don't dare go near there for fear of staring up something, or being “anti Muslim” and vilifying an entire group of people.

The same with Judaism, though less so. Everyone from the Left to the Right and in between gets to insist they’re “not anti-Semitic, just anti-Israel,” before they launch into a long winded, often erroneous, mini history of why Israel is so evil. But that aside, most people leave that alone as well. (Wait, no they don’t, look at Rense.com.)

The point is, no, I don’t like Scientology. (Although, as with all of these systems, don’t be so quick to throw the baby out with the bath water.) But there are issues far bigger than Scientology to focus your wrath on. The occupation (er, “war”) in Iraq. Global warming/climate changes/whatever the hell you want to call it, we’re all gonna die save the earth damnit, alternative energies, child abuse, elder abuse, domestic abuse, animal abuse (Christ, we’re an abusive species!) poverty, education . . .

I’ve noticed that for those who proudly state they’re “skeptics” -- those very same who remain stubbornly ignorant of the facts when it comes to UFOs, who assume all kinds of wild things regarding the paranormal -- are quick to believe the most paranoid, outlandish things about things they want to annihilate.

I suppose one thing that bothers me in particular about this is the idea that those working so hard towards eliminating or “exposing” Scientology feel so damn proud of themselves, as if they’ve brought us a rare gift from another realm. This rare gift is presented as enlightenment from ignorance and superstition. It's an intellectual coup.

Kind of like what they do with UFO and paranormal topics. There are those within and on the fringe (the chronic skeptics looking in) of UFO studies who insist UFOlogy needs some sort of guild, organization, committee -- some kind of official body --- that will once and for all get rid of all that embarrasses and angers, and keep only what is approved. (Who gets to do the approving, and why, well, you see why it's a problem. . .)

Exercising our right to voice our opinions about these things is one thing, and exposing illegal or unethical methods is a good thing. Other than that, ranting on an almost daily basis, hacking into web sites and calling for blood seems over the top.

What disturbs me is the momentum. Worldwide, people have been unquestioningly and happily joining in protests against Scientology. And it’s this crowd gathering/one-mind vibe that has me worried. At some point, the lines blur: who are the ones acting as a mob, as a single unit, as a controlling mass? That’s scary.

Yulish on “Demonic” “Trickster”

A couple of weeks ago I wrote a piece on Mary as a Trickster for UFO Digest.

(Speculation on Mary as a Trickster.) What I pondered was: can we consider Marian apparitions not strictly as a religious figure, (and certainly not literally) but as a female Trickster? Stephen Yulish responded on UFO Digest with a piece of his own; he wrote:

Many Apparitions of Mary may be Tricksters but the Real Mary was not!

He and I seem to agree, kind of sort of, on the Trickster aspect, but for the wrong reasons. For example, Yulish writes:

Regan Lee's August 6 article in UFO Digest, "Speculation on Mary as a Trickster" was most fascinating. I would tend to agree with her that many if not all of the apparitions of Mary whether they are on a barn or on a tortilla or in the skies above Lourdes, are examples of tricksters, or what I would call demonic manifestations.

I have never said or suggested the Trickster is “demonic” and I don’t ever consider the Trickster in that context. Yulish, however does. So in that sense, he has misrepresented what I’ve written. Yes, I think Marian Apparitions are a Trickster like phenomenon, but never “demonic.”

This misrepresentation isn’t personal however. It’s caused by his world view, which is a religious one. Yulish considers UFOs “demonic manifestations of fallen angels sent here to deceive people.”

Yulish is correct when he writes “The Catholic Church in it's exuberance to win over native people's often incorporated pre Christian symbols and practices.” He continues that Mary couldn’t forgive sins, that she wasn’t a “saver of souls.” That may be, that’s religious doctrine, and I’m not concerned with that as much. My focus was on the image of Mary and within a paranormal context.

Yulish thinks that at a certain point later on, he “separates” from my views. I say that he’s “separated” much earlier, given his “demonic” viewpoint:

In my mind, these are examples of Ms.Lee's trickster motif. By "tricking" people into believing that Mary can save people or forgive their sins, they are kept from the truth that only Jesus can do these things. To associate these false apparitional tricksters with UFO sightings makes my case that both manifestations are demonic delusions to lead people from the truth.

He agrees, as I said “kind of sort of,” but I can’t agree, for Yulish is coming from a pronounced religious point of view. I don’t think for two seconds “only Jesus can do these things” for I don’t believe in Jesus as a divine being. Nor do I think the Trickster apparitions are “false” in the sense he means, nor “demonic.”

Yulish separates himself from me here:

Where I seem to separate myself from Ms. Lee is in her statement that Mary was not a virgin and might have been impregnated by an angel etc. Scripture is clear that the real Mary was a nice Jewish, virgin girl who found favor with God (Luke 1:27-35) and was immaculately infused by the Holy Spirit (God) not by an angel. The angel just told her what was happening.

Well, we’re just going around in circles. Scripture makes it clear, yes. Christian scripture. That don’t make it so. And this is the point his entire disagreement hinges on: he’s coming from, at all times, a Christian bias, whereas I am not.

One believes what they believe, and if Yulish believes in his version of a religion, in this case Christianity, fine. But he is in error in believing I think the Trickster is “demonic,” etc. for I do not.

Paranormal Smackdown!

I subscribe to Whitley Strieber's Unknown Country newsletter, and in the current issue, is an item about Coast to Coast guest Daniel Pinchbeck. Pinchbeck is author of 2012: the Return of Quetzalcoatl.

In the newsletter, Strieber writes that he got into it with Pinchbeck:

Wow, mild-mannered Whitley gets into a verbal tussle with a guest, and it is INTENSE! Never happened before, in all of his seven years of doing Dreamland, but this one is a corker, as he argues with Daniel Pinchbeck, author of 2012: the Return of Quetzalcoatl.

The argument starts when Daniel suggests that negative views of the future may actually CAUSE negative things to happen. This leads into a fascinating and revealing battle about whether or not Whitley is in league with aliens who do not have the best interests of mankind at heart.

I haven’t heard the interview, so can’t comment on that. But I’ve often wondered about that point made by Pinchbeck: that our negative thoughts, fears, anxieties, acceptance and apathy -- a sort of resignation of the “dismal” future -- doesn’t in fact influence that future.

I think so. The power of “prayer” (and god knows I don’t mean praying to baby jesus, but you all know what I mean) and intent is not to be dismissed so easily.

On the other hand, there’s a danger to this type of thinking. The flip side of this is the happy go lucky, naive, idiots who can’t see or smell the crap that’s flying all around them, they’re so damn happy go lucky New Age little fluff bunnies. That kind drives me crazy.

Oh, back to the “smack down.” Apparently Pinchbeck accused Whitley of being in cahoots with the evil aliens:

Here's an excerpt from the journal: "He accused me of being in league with dark alien forces that do not have the best interests of the human species at heart. He said that I was spreading a dark view of the human future and that, by doing so, I was helping them make it come true."

Whitley defends his relationship with the beings, and once again gives his reasons for what they do what they do:

I have addressed the reasons for the secrecy in these pages a number of times. There are three main ones: first, the visitors would destroy our free will if they exposed us to their knowledge and technology; second, we—in the form of our governments—have reacted to them by doing what we can to hide their presence, and they have respected that; third, the physics of contact are very, very difficult, and unless it is handled by two species who understand its inherent dangers and can cope with them, there is danger that the less-informed species will, essentially, have its access to reality deranged so badly that it will go mad.

That’s his experience, and I can’t, and won’t, deny what he’s been through. I wouldn’t do that to anyone who so willingly shares their personal journey with all this . . . whatever it is.

But several things occur to me and raise questions: for one thing, the “aliens” Whitley’s encountered, whoever, whatever, they may be, are only one of so many types of entities that play with our heads. Or even one manifestation of One Big Thing that presents several variations to humanity.

That part of “free will,” that may be, I dunno. But it’s uncomfortably close -- too damn close for my tastes -- to religion, and a bit more specifically, Catholicism. (Strieber’s a Catholic; coincidence? One thinks not.) It seems these beings -- and I have no doubt at all that these beings are “real” and have been playing with Strieber for a long time -- are “using” him, as they use all of us.

I realize this is easy for me to say; I’m not Strieber, I haven’t experienced what he’s experienced, and I can only offer my unasked for opinion which is pretty much what we all do, so take it with a grain of salt, or, not.

I also question the idea that we’d “go mad” if we knew the truth, I just don’t think we would. Oh, some of us would, no doubt, but that’s not enough to excuse the spindly little beings’ behavior. They’re messing with us, and they need to take responsibility, or get over themselves. Okay, that last bit was over the top, pretty smug on my part. Like they’re going to listen to me. Besides which, they’ll never do any such thing; they’re of the Trickster, and therefore, they’re only doing what they do.

Whitley says, of Pinchbeck’s criticism:

I say in the program that I believe that mankind is going to experience a dieback, and this makes Pinchbeck furious because he fears that just by saying something like that, it will become true. I don’t want to put words in another man’s mouth, but I had the impression that he sees me as a sort of viral particle of negativism, and that my perspective is designed to bring on the destructions of which I warn—presumably, so that my evil alien masters can inherit the ruined planet, I suppose.

Whitley's last line trivializes what I think Pinchbeck was getting at. The point seems to be this: putting out there, almost gleefully in some cases (Major Ed Dames, etc.) the end of world in 2012, etc. can help create such a scenario. Again, this doesn’t mean we are to ignore the horrific situation we’re in now, let alone the future. Forget the future, think about right goddamn now. And then do something about it.

Strieber continues to explain their (the aliens) intentions:

What is so silly about this is the idea that they would want our planet, our bodies, our souls, our genes or anything we have. Are you ready to run off to the Congo to get their cassava? I don’t think so. But you might be moved to go there to help relieve their suffering, even if they have nothing to give you in return.

Many adepts, esoteric researchers, and so on have suggested that “they” are indeed some type of soul eater, or collector; anyway, how in hell can anyone say what “they” want? Simply because these beings say a thing, doesn’t make it so. Putting that mantle of altruism, no matter how harsh it may seem to us lowly poor ignorant humans, again reeks of the religious, and namely, Catholicism.

But then Whitley goes into denial, or some kind of contradiction (or, maybe it’s me; I’m just not getting quite getting it.)

The history of intelligent life in the universe is not a history of magic. It is not about god-beings and mysterious galactic superminds playing in the lives of their wretched planetary underlings. Our gods are in our minds.

Rather, it is a history of what it is like to live in a place that is by the nature of its structure, damn dangerous.

Many intelligent species have become extinct simply because their planet has taken a hit at the wrong moment, or their star has burped a little too forcefully. Just at random. They’ve gone down, no doubt, calling on their gods and cursing their gods, and begging forgiveness for sins that never mattered at all.

One of the great problems that our present visitors face is that they have attained something close to absolute knowledge, and so they know, in advance, where most of these accidents are going to happen. They also know that they can prevent some of them. They live with a terrific ethical quandary: should they? If a species is ugly and probably going to kill itself off anyway, should they just let some cosmic accident happen, or should they quietly intervene, in the deep of space, and redirect that asteroid, or quiet the turmoil in a star?

I don’t know. Really, I don’t. It just sounds so damn . . . Space Brother- ish, really. More articulate, better presented, but still, much of it is the same old god comes down from above and saves us all story. We're telling the story better, but it seems we need to rewrite the stories entirely, not just retell them.

Whitley speaks of a “bell curve” and this is why he believes what he believes, as far as the end of the world coming:

Pinchbeck is right about me in one respect. I do think that there’s going to be a dieback of the human species, and I do not think that anything can be done to avoid it. Certainly, it can be ameliorated and even, to an extent, controlled, but it is going to happen.

The reason that I’m sure of this could not be more simple. In nature, there is a formation called a bell curve. When the ascending shoulder of a bell curve develops, the descending shoulder follows. Nothing goes up for ever. Entropy always sets in. It must. That’s the way that physics works. I said it on the show—at least, I think I did—and it’s worth repeating here. Nature is numbers. It’s math, pure and simple.

Strieber gets even more religious, and I’m not attacking him for that; I just disagree with the interpretation and what I perceive as an ultimately naive view of things. For example, he discusses Mother Teresa, who, as readers probably know, struggled with the question of “God,” of her faith, etc. I don’t see what the issue is; maybe it’s because, being raised partly in a Jewish tradition, “wrestling with god” is to be expected. Questioning, asking, arguing, debating, wondering, -- it’s only logical. I don’t find it disturbing in the least a religious or spiritual person would “struggle” -- I would hope they would.

In this respect, it doesn't matter I haven’t heard the interview, for the questions and points raised by these juxtapositions of negative thought vs. positive thought, naivety, belief, faith, trust in the messenger, as well as the message, are important ones. They’re vital to our future, as well as our present.