Thursday, January 29, 2009

The Naïve UFO Witness

You never turned around to see the frowns…On the jugglers and the clowns …When they all did tricks for you. --Dylan

I have witnessed the disgust directed at certain types of witnesses and even at people within the UFO community called “dumb” or “naïve” by others in ufology.

What does it mean to have a lower IQ if you’ve witnessed UFO phenomena?

Does it mean you couldn’t recognize a UFO? Or something that shouldn’t be a UFO? Does it mean you couldn’t possibly be capable of calling a spade a spade? Although an individual might not be the brightest, does that mean he or she isn’t capable of telling the truth?

If you look at the history of UFOs and the UFO witnesses most often exploited by media or government disinfo agents as laughingstocks and jokes --hillbillies, farmers, and farmers’ wives-- those witnesses were right. What this group of marginalized witnesses reported about what the craft or strange lights did actually lined up with what the professionals, scientists, and even pilots reported.

There is very strong evidence something is visiting our planet. It does not present Itself with a straightforward nuts and bolts image all the time.

As we progress, some of the ideas laughed at in the 50s have now been accepted. You couldn’t go to the average paleontologist in the 50s and say some dinosaurs evolved from birds. As for the controversial yet popular physics concept Dark Energy, I don’t remember hearing Dark Energy or Dark Matter mentioned, and I had my Criterion Reflector Telescope and years of subscriptions to Astronomy Magazine, in which I was gobbling up every article. I even remember when Marjorie Fish wrote articles about the Barney and Betty Hill star map. But at that time, cosmologists believed missing matter was just neutrinos and that once neutrinos were measured, cosmologists would be able to account for most the matter required for the formation of the galaxies predicted by that era’s physics. But I don’t ever remember any serious talk by mainstream scientists about an energy that repels gravity. I remember hearing that kind of thing was impossible.

What I’m saying is, some of the people made fun of in the media or ridiculed by professional debunkers and even members of the ufology community, are actually a great resource and should be treated as such. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to know you’ve witnessed a UFO craft.

Let’s talk about another group where this class feeling or intellectual elitism is directed: the naïve among us.

Members of this group tend to be involved either in fundamentalist spiritual thinking or they have bought into the idea that critical thinking on any subject is somehow negative, or even that it demonstrates a lack of faith or betrayal of beliefs, and therefore shouldn’t be done.

So why would someone adopt that worldview? I worked with teenagers who bought into extreme religious sects or cults, and for them, it always came down to a feeling of safety and a need to believe in something they felt was concrete [at least to them] and perhaps most importantly, something greater than themselves.

We find a lot of that kind of need in the UFO community. Other groups tend to deal with these naïve folks as a nuisance, rather than as part of a normal human response. When threatened with a possible extreme or deadly unknown like UFOs, or claimed ET contact, some of us will typically seek an explanation that is the most comfortable or the least threatening to our lives.

I know I’ve been angry when someone postulates absolute certainty on UFO/ET motives. Most of us who read extensively in this subject believe there is no evidence for one absolute answer to UFO/ET motives. Yet there are witnesses and researchers advancing the single-motive theory who have worked hard for a minimum of public respect on this subject, only to have this theory reduced to classification as “lunatic fringe”. And I think witnesses and researchers summarily condemned to the fringe are right to be frustrated.

But isn’t it true that many of our own UFO community’s leaders constantly reinforce this, their own version of a kind of absolutism, their own Ultimate Truth? From what I’ve seen, top UFO researchers do not protest about the issue of rejecting any witness out of hand loud enough at the conferences.

Rejecting any theory --or any witness-- out of hand may mean missing important evidence.

I think it’s important to ask how we’re going to handle this message at our conferences.

Like many of you, I get extremely angry when I hear this exclusively spiritual talk about UFOs and the intelligences or forces behind the phenomena. But isn’t it true that some of our nuts and bolts people are just as naïve --call it blindly certain-- about what they believe?

And doesn’t their inaction, based on their own brand of blind certainty, mean missing important ET displays?

How many of our good researchers reject witnesses because they report about communicating with “spiritual” ETs, even when there is supporting evidence something is really happening?

How many of our own good nuts and bolts school UFO researchers went to the Gilliland Ranch to find out what was really happening? At least Above Top Secret went to the Ranch to debunk the phenomena, Gilliland’s claims, and thousands of photos and videos. Yes, ATS failed to debunk, but at least they went there to find out, first-hand.

Of course it may be our most respected ufologists were scared off by the claimed spiritual message and the absolute certainty with which Gilliland espouses that message.

We do not know for certain if ETs do some of this spiritual conditioning intentionally.
If ETs had to appear and communicate with us, a violent species, without completely controlling us, appearing as a kind of loving, spiritual being seems very practical and safe to me.

So how do we handle this? The best way I can think of is to educate ourselves with an honest guide on the subject.

There is no doubt in my mind that we need to address this dogmatic prejudice in our midst that ETs must be inherently of a spiritual, beneficent nature. But the way we have been doing it --just dismissing it and ridiculing the witnesses and researchers who believe it-- doesn’t work.

Ideas, anyone? I’m open to hearing from UFOMM readers how we could best handle this issue in our ufology community.

Joseph Capp
UFO Media Matters
Non-Commercial Blog


  1. Excellent! EXCELLENT!
    Thank you for the post!
    I have Twittered this blog post at
    The latest in UFO News and Views at the speed of Twit!

  2. Way to go Mr. Capp, if I may!

    The left half of the bell curve is inevitable, natural, very 'necessarily' productive, and deserving of more respect, a respect not generally tendered _enough_ by the right half.

    Subject to the destructive scorn and easy derision you highlight they (we?) of the left half become a self-fulfilling prophesy of errant cognition, destructive imagination, and cultural emptiness.

    We _could_ do better, as you suggest.

  3. Dear IQXS,
    Went to your blog, good catch on the Russion Vid. great stuff.
    Joe Capp
    UFO Media Matter
    Non-Commercial Blog

  4. The dogma surrounding the phenomenon will always be there so long as we as a civilization are equipped with insufficient tools to discover just how we came to be here.

    The two popular, accepted bodies to offer an insight are religion and science. The problem: neither is followed by all.

    As you've outlined, we're bound to learn more over time. I have the itch, too. I want to know more now.

  5. Dear Afred,
    One of the prime examples of this pre judging on reports is Betty hill. It was well enough for UFO researchers to accept one contact by Betty but they refused to accept she had continual sightings for years afterward. I really believe some UFO researcher back then were embarrassed by these repeats. Many who had been interested never investigated these sighting because it would have made her look crazy in many eyes even, within the open minded UFO researchers. The reasons for the repeats is everyone's guess. But the debunkers referred to it as a reason not to believe her. Now we have Gulliland Ranch. In this instance the man who is claiming a spiritual connection to harmless ETs. Automatically he is put into the Guru basket and many won't go there. But we know now that for what ever reason the ETs wanted to be presented that way. It is almost as if the UFO researchers want the ETs to be one way and the are not obliging.
    Thanks Again
    Joe Capp
    UFO Media Matters
    Non-Commercial Blog

  6. Joesph,

    Based on the visitors to my own site,which focuses on the soft wired version of theory, individuals in research organization as well as in private industry ( read military contractors, etc) appear to be more open minded to the "naive" speculations than supposed "experts"
    I think the issue of the hard wired versus soft wired camps, is simple. Each camp has a predisposition toward an outcome, while neither has the demonstrative proof.
    If we transfer this bias to the public face of traditional science, we see the same thing, a reluctance to view the evidence simply as what it is.
    The deeper issue is framed by Thomas Pynchon; “If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”
    A simple example of intertwined hard versus soft theories is that it is a hard wired phenomenon that a DVD is a technology that uses static data bits to give the illusion of time and movement.
    Both perception, the nature of consciousness and technology are involved in the effects on the observer. Why no one can see this potential relationship is beyond me. Great post as always.

    Best Wishes

  7. I agree with your viewpoint entirely. But, it seems to be changing, don't you think? I think UFO witnesses are becoming more respected over the last 3 years or so.

    But, I also understand that it depends on who is involved in their initial disclosure, too.

  8. As always stimulating. I firmly believe these visitors have intentionally interwoven themselves into our myth, legends, paranormal, and even our religions. Long term answers for long term study and maybe even survival. There may be some sensitivity there actions also. I think we will learn maybe in a hundred years we should not to go barging in on the natives, because once you do that ... you can never barge out again. Thanks Bruce for all your service.
    Joe Capp
    UFO Media Matters

  9. Dear Teresa,
    I think you are right to some degree. But you should hear the names they call Jaime Maussan and all of his witnesses. If a witness or researcher becomes famous over a UFO case that's when the rats come out...sorry rats. But we have the Internet now and I for one hit them back with the truth every chance I get. Because witnesses have suffered and still suffer over this. Some on the internet media are starting to get this and treat the witness fairly. Thanks to all of us.
    Joe Capp
    UFO Media Matters
    Non-Commercial Blog

  10. Good Posting.

    The spiritual part of the UFO phenomenon is very true to experiencers. For some it just means it has left them with a lasting impression on their lives. I'm usually weary to give credit to most UFO contactees since they can't back up their stories with solid evidence. Not seldom do they also offer therapeutic/counseling sessions on the side (without formal training in the field) which doesn't reflect too well on their credibility for an outsider looking in. They might be right, but how am I to know? They may also be full of bull.

    This said, I'm also aware of science problems with separating the objective experiences with the subjective. Experiments show the subjective mind HAS a link to what's objectively happening so I'm definately open to the possibility that the contactee phenomenon might be real.

    If there are extraterrestrial visitations (and looking into the WHOLE phenomenon there probably are) we MUST grow spiritually to be able to fit in. Though our significant technology leaps are fairly recent, our spirituality is already far behind. While the people responsible for holding the bombs in the world understand the concept of destruction they do not understand the concept of love yet.

    Since other "space-going" civilizations probably are much older than us (in linear time) it's safe to say they probably also have evolved further than us spiritually. In comparison - a lot further, I suspect. So far that it might be hard for us to meet on equal ground. It might be that these contacts are so way beyond most of human spiritual concepts and human emotions that they are forever doomed to be avoided by the leaders and misunderstood by the dumbed down masses. Even I have a hard time understanding ET's motives.

    All the best,
    Daniel Bergh, Sweden

  11. Dear Daniel,
    We are on the same page. But since good and bad, in most cases, are a choice of the sentient being we can expect some that are good and some, which are self serving. If cattle mutilations is an aspect of one species they may be kept in line by other species. I think there are some contactees which are legitimate. What they are being told is another factor. The true or false of motives of any statement will have to really wait to disclosure. Thanks Daniel always nice to here from you.
    UFO Media Matters
    Non-Commercial Blog

  12. Dear Affred,
    We have many people who are not believed, and dismissed out of hand because of the status and education level.
    But who knows what evidence has been passed over becuause of this pre-judgement.
    Thank You
    Joe Capp