This post is about a particular UFO case that should be given much more prominence, and in fact it should be considered as much more important than the Roswell story. It is about one of the better known cases of the “foo fighters” era, the Black Thursday, although the details of that era tend to be poorly known in most ufological circles.
The case
This case first became known publicly through the work of Martin Caidin, an aviation history journalist who wrote a condensed version of the story in Ghosts of the Air: True stories of aerial hauntings (New York: Bantam, 1991). On 14 October 1943 a group of over 300 B-17s were flying on a day bombing mission over Schweinfurt, Germany. During this mission, the American had one of their worst bombing missions of the war, with only 197 planes returning of which many were seriously damaged (hence the name Black Thursday). Many years later, Martin Caidin discovered a strange story while doing interviews for a book about the overall mission. He found several aircrew members confirming what happened. A few years later, the ETH ufologist Andy Roberts was able to find independently the original report about the event, confirming the information that Caidin was able to collect through interviews.
Here is the content of the official report, which is quite self-explanatory:
EKG. TELEGRAM EN CLAIR 4112
Recd. AMCS. 171129a hrs Oct.43
To- OIAWW, OIAJX, OISHL, HBC, AMY.
From - OIPNT
IMPORTANT. CONFIDENTIAL.
8 BC 0-1079-E
Annex to Intelligence Report Mission Schweinfurt 16 October 1943
306 Group report a partially unexploded 20mm shell imbedded above the panel in the cockpit of A/C number 412 bearing the following figures 19K43. The Group Ordnance Officer believes the steel composing the shell is of inferior grade. 348th Group reports a cluster of disks observed in the path of the formation near Schweinfurt, at the time there were no E/A above. Discs were described as silver coloured - one inch thick and three inches in diameter. They were gliding slowly down in very uniform cluster. A/C 026 was unable to avoid them and his right wing went directly through a cluster with absolutely no effect on engines or plane surface. One of the discs was heard striking tail assembly but no explosion was observed. About 20 feet from these discs a mass of black debris of varying sizes in clusters of 3 by 4 feet. Also observed 2 other A/C flying through silver discs with no apparent damage. Observed discs and debris 2 other times but could not determine where it came from.
Copies to:-
P.R. & A.I.6.
D.B.Ops
War Room
D.A.T.
A.I.3. (USA) (Action 2 copies)
An electronic copy of the report is available on this website.
Analysis
We have here a case that meets all of the most rigorous criteria put forward by ETH ufology, with the exception of capturing debris.
1. The sighting was made by several and physically separated witness groups, looking from different angles;
2. The witnesses are reliable, and what they said was confirmed in an official report which can be confirmed as being authentic;
3. We are dealing with UFOs in the shape of flying saucers;
4. There was an observed physical contact between military planes and the UFOs.
Given the spontaneous and non-recurrent nature of UFOs, it can hardly get better than that. Yet, this case was essentially dismissed by ETH ufology.
Here is an excerpt of Andy Roberts’ analysis
“At least we now know Caidin's reference exists! Besides that there is little to say really. The objects reported are intriguing but not completely mystifying. There were many types of flak being used by the Germans in W.W.II and several files in the PRO refer to coloured flak, flak which threw off unusual fragments, and so on. This explanation is made more likely by the fact that the 'F.L.O.' in Caidin's reference stands for 'Flak Liaison Officer', at least suggesting that the Air Ministry were treating it within a flak context.
The objects could also have been some kind of 'window' dropped by the Germans in an attempt to disrupt radar or radio communication among air crew. The explanation as to what the small objects were is now more of a task for the air historian than it is for the ufologist. What is clear from the original account is that the discs, whilst unusual, were clearly not any type of 'craft', under intelligent or purposeful control or dangerous to the air craft or crew.
In my opinion these objects do not belong in the category of sightings referred to as 'foo-fighters', both by their physical description and by their behaviour and characteristics. Although often lumped in with foo-fighter reports they are clearly different. This story has been a staple of UFO writers for the past three-four decades. Now we have further clarification and I believe that this particular mystery is more or less laid to rest.”
Roberts’ analysis is flawed, and profoundly biased, on many counts:
1. If it was flak shells, it would have caused some damaged to the planes. Planes are fragile machines, and in those days airframes were simply covered by plasticized fabric, easy to damage.
2. Coloured shells are for helping aiming anti-aircraft guns, a well-known fact that B-17 aircrews were certainly fully aware of.
3. The fact that it was considered a flak issue was perfectly meaningful in the context of World War II. If it was discussed as an alien spaceship in 1943, it would be a clear sign that it would be most likely a fake document. The fact that military institution did not pursued further the issue, besides the fact that it had a war at hand and no time to waste with oddities, is also further evidence that it was a genuine event. This institutional behaviour was very likely due to the fact that they saw no imminent danger in these things, and no technological knowledge could be extracted out of those objects or through the observation of their behaviour. This was the same logical and sensible military reasoning that lead to the closure of the Project Blue Book. The US Air Force, and the USAAF before, is not a mystery research organization.
4. The overall argument is simply completely lacking any form of intellectual integrity as it implies that if it is not an ET craft, then it is nothing....
What needs to be underlined here is that ETH ufologists are willing to believe tall tales from 3rd hand accounts (i.e., hearsay, and some of them have been proven to be lies in the case of Roswell) supported by bogus documents (i.e, the MJ-12 stuff), while they dismiss a case that is telling us something important about the materiality of UFOs. It just happened that it does not points towards ETs and their spaceships. The ETH is all but a believe system, and this proves it once more.
Forget Roswell and the like
This case is one of the very few available that meets so many criteria for quality, including physical interactions while the witnesses do not appear to have been in an altered state of consciousness. What does it tell us about the material nature of UFOs, and flying saucers in particular?
Well, the UFO behaved like psi-substance (to use the Evans’ expression), and this is line with what is known about UFOs. As well, given that there was an imminent crisis not yet known to the aircrew, we have an important condition to produce a social psi effect (i.e., collective unconscious knowledge of a near future event having a very strong emotional charge). The symbolism of the psi-substance was also perfectly in line with what was to come in the following hours of that terrible day of October 1943 (i.e. the B-17 were to become similar to clay pigeon to the German flak).
It is also important to underline that psi-substance is known to be harmless. For instance, Rogo (1986, p. 75) investigated a rock throwing poltergeist in Tucson in 1983. On one occasion a little girl was hit by a rock weighting several pounds and should have been very seriously injured in normal circumstances, yet she had only a red mark comparable to being hit by a basket-ball on bare skin. Another case, investigated by the German parapsychologist Hans Bender during the famous Rosenheim poltergeist of 1968, was a police officer who was hit by a brick coming out of the house. He too should have been seriously injured in normal circumstances, and yet he described the hurt as equivalent to a mosquito bite.
Given the rarity of quality cases involving physical interactions with a UFO, the Black Thursday case should replace the Roswell one in terms of “best” case pertaining to UFOs, as the Roswell case does not tell us anything about UFOs (although it tells us a lot about ETH ufologists...).
Copyright © 2009 Eric Ouellet
Monday, June 29, 2009
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Reading Notes – Visions, Apparitions and Alien Visitors
This post is reviewing a book from Hilary Evans. Evans is often referred to as author of the Psycho-social Hypothesis (PSH) by ETH ufologists. Once again, it is a label can be misleading as many ETH ufologists use it to describe approaches that assume there is no objective basis to the phenomenon. Evans does not agree with the ETH, but like Bertrand Méheust, he does deny that the phenomenon has an objective basis. Evans is quite clear in his introduction:
“[...] there is really no point in your proceeding [to read the rest of the book] unless you are willing to accept that the majority of these people really did, in some form, have the experience they reported. What form that experience seemed to take, and what its real form was, is another matter—indeed it is the matter of this book. In those cases where the witnesses offered an interpretation of their experience, we shall not necessarily accept that interpretation. But in a very great many cases they did not do so; they simply said what had happened to them, and hoped that someone else would explain it.” (p. 12).
The full notice is: Evans, Hilary. (1984). Visions, Apparitions and Alien Visitors: A comparative study of the entity enigma. London: Book Club Associates.
Entities, society and psi effects
Evans, in his book, proposes an interesting tour of various phenomena linked to the notion of meeting entities in a spontaneous and unexpected way. It covers entities in dreams, in child companions, hauntings, Marian apparitions, Men-in-Black, aliens, etc. He also looks into entities created by humans through shamanistic and magical traditions, experiments with drugs and the ones like in the Philip experiment. Although there are a number of differences between these various experiences, they have some elements in common too. They are all visual experiences, whether the person is awake or not, or using their physical eyes or not; the entities exist as images. The second key consideration is that they cause a conflict between the subjective impression we have of them and the objective evaluation we put into the experience (i.e., it appears impossible or outlandish). These two elements, the first one phenomenological, and the second one socio-cultural (i.e. what is possible/special or not is matter of social conventions), can be described as the core definition of any entity encounter.
If one looks at the content of these experiences, one can find that in dreams, apparitions, and in many hauntings the entities tend to be known persons, or knowable after some search. In the case of hallucinations, hypnagogic dreams (i.e. just before falling asleep) and childhood companions the entities appear to be unknowable strangers. In the case of visions, demonic sightings, Men-in-Black and aliens the entities tend to be stereotypical.
For the alien category specifically, Evans underlines that “UFO entities look and to a large extent behave as though they are as solid as human beings; they have longer and more detailed communication with their percipients than almost any other entity; they are more clearly associated with a particular cultural context than any other categories apart from religious visions [hence their stereotypical nature]; and they are readily identified by percipients as being what they seem to be, in the same strange way that religious visions are for the most part known to be so and not something else.” (p. 156-157).
Evans considers that the stereotypical nature of alien visitations can be better explained by introducing the concept of collective unconscious. “[...] when an individual percipient sees an entity, does he do so as an individual—seeking a solution for his individual problem—or as a member of the community—seeing a symbol of universal significance that expresses the communal angst of his place and time? This is where Jung’s hypothesis works superbly: for it proposes that the percipient undergoes his experience both as an individual and as a child of his time. And the result is that he sees an entity that has a communal significance—the Virgin Mary, an alien visitor—but with specific attributes that relate to his own situation—the Virgin gives a message of personal comfort, the alien shares his preoccupation with ecology or The Bomb.” (p. 252).
However, he concedes that more is needed. One possibility is the idea of an “image-bank”, known to Jungian analysts as the “Absolute Knowledge” and to occultists as the “Akashic Records”. There is information in the entity experience that is transmitted to the percipients without using the normal physical means, which implies that some form of ESP effect has occurred. It is in this context that Evans wrote ”but even if we have to leave open the question of whether the agency was internal or external, this much is certain: either way, access to some external source of information occurred, and something like the image-bank hypothesis is needed to account for it” (p. 256). For instance, when someone sees an apparition of a known person at the very time when that person dies while being physically separated by hundreds or thousands of kilometres, they often see them in the way they were dressed at the time of death. This is information passed along without using normal physical means (and this exactly the definition of ESP). Similarly, when Betty Hill gets her “pregnancy test” through a method to be invented a few years later, information about the future was passed along. In a way, it is possible to speculate that entity apparitions can be construed, at least in part, as an involuntary form of remote-viewing, and where like in remote-viewing raw ESP signals and imagination get mixed up.
Another important hypothesis that Evans looked into is the “psi-substance”, or materialization through psi effects. Many apparitions have some physical effects that can be measured, like in the case of hauntings. Hence, for Evans, “whatever they originate, by whatever means they penetrate to the mind of the percipient, those entities are to some degree material artefacts”. (p. 262). And he adds that “[...] if not a psi-substance, then it will have to be something else equally revolutionary. For somehow we have to account for these entities which appear as a ball of light and slowly grow into full forms; for apparitions that gradually take shape in an empty room; for figures seen by two or more people simultaneously, or by one witness when it leaves the room and by another when it enters another; for entities who bring information, or carry it in the form of identifiable clothing and the like. None of these things can happen without some kind of material dimension; and for that dimension, ‘psi-substance’ is as good a working label as any other.” (p. 263).
In the same spirit as Schwartz’ s (1983) suggestion that some UFO experiences can be some sort of telepathically shared hallucinations, Evans considers that the partial material dimension of the entity experience must complemented by something else. As he wrote, “one of the many puzzling aspects of entity sightings is their ambiguous character, the way they combine elements that seem to indicate an external source with others that seem to refer back to the percipient himself”. (p. 264). Evans notes that in the 1970s (once again!) two noted French ufologists (Pierre Guérin and Michel Monnerie) separately came to the conclusion that the UFO experience appears to combine objective and subjective elements. Although Guérin and Monnerie did not agree on what caused people to see things and yet sincerely report them as true. Building on Claude Rifat’s research on the brain, it appears that various forms of radiation can cause hallucinations (hence an external objective source), but like in the case of dreams it draws from the percipient’s unconscious images (this is also very much in line with Budden’s research). Although Evans agrees that a bio-chemical trigger is likely at play here, it does not explain why two or more people have the same hallucination, nor how can they get information without physical means. The shared telepathic dream hypothesis would explain the above, without invalidating the notion of a bio-chemical trigger. However, more research to validate this hypothesis is required.
Among his other conclusions, Evans states that “Though there are differences in kind between the entities thus seen, these differences can generally be traced to the percipient’s social and cultural background, and do not necessarily imply fundamental differences between the phenomena themselves. It does appear, though, that certain states of mind and/or body are conducive to certain kinds of experience”. (p. 299). Another one is that “while in most cases it is reasonable to suppose that the experience originates within the mind of the percipient himself, there are some cases where the most reasonable assumption is that the sighting is initiated by the apparent [the perceived entity], or by some agent controlling the apparent: that is, by some source external to the percipient” (p. 299).
Evans book is very much in line with the discourse about UFO and entities that was emerging during the 1970s. His approach, however, is interesting as he takes into consideration a wider array of entity experience, the alien in spaceship being only one of them. It is interesting to note that for him the notion of collective unconscious is more applicable to the UFO phenomenon (and the Marian apparitions) because of their stereotypical nature. But like many before and after him, he does not provide an explanation for inner dynamics of the collective unconscious. It is also interesting to note that his key conclusions are quite similar to what has been integrated into the model I developed out of a review of the literature. His research confirms further that the basic structure of the model I developed is in line with what is known about UFOs, alien apparitions and other anomalous phenomena.
Further thoughts
In the light of this review, it is now quite clear that our knowledge of the UFO phenomenon has not made much progress since the late 1970s/early 1980s. Many key ideas and notions were developed then, but were not pursued vigorously afterward. It is probably due in large part to the Roswell/Majestic hysteria, which did provide any room for anything else to be published but entertainment-like books and documentaries about aliens and conspiracies.
The hysteria has now subsided, but the field of ufology is also in serious decline. Key organizations such as APRO disappeared in the early 2000s after the death of the last co-founder; BUFORA is now essentially a minor ufological website on the net; the Belgian SOBEP that became so famous after the 1989-90 UFO wave has been dissolved in 2008, and many other could be listed here. Many active authors are now retired or moved on to other things, among them Jacques Vallée, Richard Hall, Jerome Clark, Jenny Randles, Paul Kimball, and Nick Pope. Another indicator of the decline is that in 2007, no major book was published to celebrate 60 years of ufology, while there were such books in 1987 for the 40th, and for the 50th in 1997. Lastly, there has been no major UFO wave in the North America or Europe since the Belgian one of 1989-1990, hence the phenomenon has not tried to make itself particularly interesting for close to an entire generation.
The task of parasociology is therefore multiple. On one hand, it has to develop further some keys ideas formed in the 1970s, while developing new ones, such as a better understanding of the inner dynamic of the collective unconscious. On the other hand, it is also an important opportunity to fill the void that the contracting ETH is leaving right now. However, the best way to do it remains to encourage a radical paradigm shift rather trying to engage in a “fight” with the remnants of the ETH.
Copyright © 2009 Eric Ouellet
“[...] there is really no point in your proceeding [to read the rest of the book] unless you are willing to accept that the majority of these people really did, in some form, have the experience they reported. What form that experience seemed to take, and what its real form was, is another matter—indeed it is the matter of this book. In those cases where the witnesses offered an interpretation of their experience, we shall not necessarily accept that interpretation. But in a very great many cases they did not do so; they simply said what had happened to them, and hoped that someone else would explain it.” (p. 12).
The full notice is: Evans, Hilary. (1984). Visions, Apparitions and Alien Visitors: A comparative study of the entity enigma. London: Book Club Associates.
Entities, society and psi effects
Evans, in his book, proposes an interesting tour of various phenomena linked to the notion of meeting entities in a spontaneous and unexpected way. It covers entities in dreams, in child companions, hauntings, Marian apparitions, Men-in-Black, aliens, etc. He also looks into entities created by humans through shamanistic and magical traditions, experiments with drugs and the ones like in the Philip experiment. Although there are a number of differences between these various experiences, they have some elements in common too. They are all visual experiences, whether the person is awake or not, or using their physical eyes or not; the entities exist as images. The second key consideration is that they cause a conflict between the subjective impression we have of them and the objective evaluation we put into the experience (i.e., it appears impossible or outlandish). These two elements, the first one phenomenological, and the second one socio-cultural (i.e. what is possible/special or not is matter of social conventions), can be described as the core definition of any entity encounter.
If one looks at the content of these experiences, one can find that in dreams, apparitions, and in many hauntings the entities tend to be known persons, or knowable after some search. In the case of hallucinations, hypnagogic dreams (i.e. just before falling asleep) and childhood companions the entities appear to be unknowable strangers. In the case of visions, demonic sightings, Men-in-Black and aliens the entities tend to be stereotypical.
For the alien category specifically, Evans underlines that “UFO entities look and to a large extent behave as though they are as solid as human beings; they have longer and more detailed communication with their percipients than almost any other entity; they are more clearly associated with a particular cultural context than any other categories apart from religious visions [hence their stereotypical nature]; and they are readily identified by percipients as being what they seem to be, in the same strange way that religious visions are for the most part known to be so and not something else.” (p. 156-157).
Evans considers that the stereotypical nature of alien visitations can be better explained by introducing the concept of collective unconscious. “[...] when an individual percipient sees an entity, does he do so as an individual—seeking a solution for his individual problem—or as a member of the community—seeing a symbol of universal significance that expresses the communal angst of his place and time? This is where Jung’s hypothesis works superbly: for it proposes that the percipient undergoes his experience both as an individual and as a child of his time. And the result is that he sees an entity that has a communal significance—the Virgin Mary, an alien visitor—but with specific attributes that relate to his own situation—the Virgin gives a message of personal comfort, the alien shares his preoccupation with ecology or The Bomb.” (p. 252).
However, he concedes that more is needed. One possibility is the idea of an “image-bank”, known to Jungian analysts as the “Absolute Knowledge” and to occultists as the “Akashic Records”. There is information in the entity experience that is transmitted to the percipients without using the normal physical means, which implies that some form of ESP effect has occurred. It is in this context that Evans wrote ”but even if we have to leave open the question of whether the agency was internal or external, this much is certain: either way, access to some external source of information occurred, and something like the image-bank hypothesis is needed to account for it” (p. 256). For instance, when someone sees an apparition of a known person at the very time when that person dies while being physically separated by hundreds or thousands of kilometres, they often see them in the way they were dressed at the time of death. This is information passed along without using normal physical means (and this exactly the definition of ESP). Similarly, when Betty Hill gets her “pregnancy test” through a method to be invented a few years later, information about the future was passed along. In a way, it is possible to speculate that entity apparitions can be construed, at least in part, as an involuntary form of remote-viewing, and where like in remote-viewing raw ESP signals and imagination get mixed up.
Another important hypothesis that Evans looked into is the “psi-substance”, or materialization through psi effects. Many apparitions have some physical effects that can be measured, like in the case of hauntings. Hence, for Evans, “whatever they originate, by whatever means they penetrate to the mind of the percipient, those entities are to some degree material artefacts”. (p. 262). And he adds that “[...] if not a psi-substance, then it will have to be something else equally revolutionary. For somehow we have to account for these entities which appear as a ball of light and slowly grow into full forms; for apparitions that gradually take shape in an empty room; for figures seen by two or more people simultaneously, or by one witness when it leaves the room and by another when it enters another; for entities who bring information, or carry it in the form of identifiable clothing and the like. None of these things can happen without some kind of material dimension; and for that dimension, ‘psi-substance’ is as good a working label as any other.” (p. 263).
In the same spirit as Schwartz’ s (1983) suggestion that some UFO experiences can be some sort of telepathically shared hallucinations, Evans considers that the partial material dimension of the entity experience must complemented by something else. As he wrote, “one of the many puzzling aspects of entity sightings is their ambiguous character, the way they combine elements that seem to indicate an external source with others that seem to refer back to the percipient himself”. (p. 264). Evans notes that in the 1970s (once again!) two noted French ufologists (Pierre Guérin and Michel Monnerie) separately came to the conclusion that the UFO experience appears to combine objective and subjective elements. Although Guérin and Monnerie did not agree on what caused people to see things and yet sincerely report them as true. Building on Claude Rifat’s research on the brain, it appears that various forms of radiation can cause hallucinations (hence an external objective source), but like in the case of dreams it draws from the percipient’s unconscious images (this is also very much in line with Budden’s research). Although Evans agrees that a bio-chemical trigger is likely at play here, it does not explain why two or more people have the same hallucination, nor how can they get information without physical means. The shared telepathic dream hypothesis would explain the above, without invalidating the notion of a bio-chemical trigger. However, more research to validate this hypothesis is required.
Among his other conclusions, Evans states that “Though there are differences in kind between the entities thus seen, these differences can generally be traced to the percipient’s social and cultural background, and do not necessarily imply fundamental differences between the phenomena themselves. It does appear, though, that certain states of mind and/or body are conducive to certain kinds of experience”. (p. 299). Another one is that “while in most cases it is reasonable to suppose that the experience originates within the mind of the percipient himself, there are some cases where the most reasonable assumption is that the sighting is initiated by the apparent [the perceived entity], or by some agent controlling the apparent: that is, by some source external to the percipient” (p. 299).
Evans book is very much in line with the discourse about UFO and entities that was emerging during the 1970s. His approach, however, is interesting as he takes into consideration a wider array of entity experience, the alien in spaceship being only one of them. It is interesting to note that for him the notion of collective unconscious is more applicable to the UFO phenomenon (and the Marian apparitions) because of their stereotypical nature. But like many before and after him, he does not provide an explanation for inner dynamics of the collective unconscious. It is also interesting to note that his key conclusions are quite similar to what has been integrated into the model I developed out of a review of the literature. His research confirms further that the basic structure of the model I developed is in line with what is known about UFOs, alien apparitions and other anomalous phenomena.
Further thoughts
In the light of this review, it is now quite clear that our knowledge of the UFO phenomenon has not made much progress since the late 1970s/early 1980s. Many key ideas and notions were developed then, but were not pursued vigorously afterward. It is probably due in large part to the Roswell/Majestic hysteria, which did provide any room for anything else to be published but entertainment-like books and documentaries about aliens and conspiracies.
The hysteria has now subsided, but the field of ufology is also in serious decline. Key organizations such as APRO disappeared in the early 2000s after the death of the last co-founder; BUFORA is now essentially a minor ufological website on the net; the Belgian SOBEP that became so famous after the 1989-90 UFO wave has been dissolved in 2008, and many other could be listed here. Many active authors are now retired or moved on to other things, among them Jacques Vallée, Richard Hall, Jerome Clark, Jenny Randles, Paul Kimball, and Nick Pope. Another indicator of the decline is that in 2007, no major book was published to celebrate 60 years of ufology, while there were such books in 1987 for the 40th, and for the 50th in 1997. Lastly, there has been no major UFO wave in the North America or Europe since the Belgian one of 1989-1990, hence the phenomenon has not tried to make itself particularly interesting for close to an entire generation.
The task of parasociology is therefore multiple. On one hand, it has to develop further some keys ideas formed in the 1970s, while developing new ones, such as a better understanding of the inner dynamic of the collective unconscious. On the other hand, it is also an important opportunity to fill the void that the contracting ETH is leaving right now. However, the best way to do it remains to encourage a radical paradigm shift rather trying to engage in a “fight” with the remnants of the ETH.
Copyright © 2009 Eric Ouellet
Friday, June 12, 2009
Reading Notes - The Unidentified
This post is reviewing a book written by Jerome Clark and Loren Coleman, The Unidentified. A fact not that well known in the world of ufology is that Jerome Clark was not, at first, a supporter of the ETH. He considered the phenomenon as a parapsychological one. In the introduction of their book, they wrote that the ETH believer
“has managed to demonstrate only that something is going on, something very strange for which no satisfactory accounting has yet been made. Yet as strange as these UFO sightings undoubtedly are, there is at the same time an oddly mundane, undeniably terrestrial quality to them which makes them all the more mysterious” (p. 10).
These lines were written in 1975, almost 35 years ago, and they are as true now as they were then. Once more, anyone really interested in studying UFOs should skip, with a few exceptions, what was written during the 1980s and 1990s, and most of the little that has been produced in 2000s. Clearly, ufology has remained at a standstill since the 1970s, or worst: it has been seriously declining in quality ever since. The full notice is:
Clark, Jerome and Loren Coleman. (1975). The Unidentified: Notes toward solving the UFO mystery. New York: Warner.
A constant human experience in multiple forms
It is interesting to note that what they wrote was very much in tune with other writings of the same period, particularly Keel (1975), Méheust (1978), Rogo (1977), and Viéroudy (1977).
Clark and Coleman provide a number of stories, many prior to 1945, about strange events that were not construed as UFO incidents, but would certainly be if they were to occur today. In all these cases, the common patterns are not the “flying spacecrafts” but rather how people interacted with the strange phenomenon. In other words, what is constant is not the phenomenon itself but rather how our relationship to the phenomenon is structured (i.e. the narrative or archetype). They see in the UFO experience, therefore, a theme rather than a physical experience per se. This approach is similar to one I took in an older article.
They describe the UFO phenomenon as a myth, and underline that: “Myths, so the banal axiom has it, die hard, but a growing body of scholarship, combining the techniques of anthropology and psychoanalysis, disputes this conventional wisdom and argues instead that myths don’t die at all; they just put on new faces. The familiar world of conscious thought and experience goes its own way, blithely ignoring the needs of the unconscious mind and even disputing its very existence. But the unconscious remains. Its language, which it speaks in myth and symbol, may change, but its meaning remains the same. The old gods and demons and spirits continue to haunt us, ghosts in the machine which were supposed to have supplanted them” (p. 48).
To support their thesis they look into a number of folkloric tales which are showing the same fundamental narrative, but experienced in different guise in different eras, and quote as well Vallée’s book Passport to Magonia. They underline that: “Fairies, like UFO beings, come in all sizes and shapes, but, again like UFO beings, they are usually diminutive. Some are the size of dwarfs; others are Lilliputian in stature. Some are beautiful; others are ugly. Their temperament is at best uncertain, and they are better left alone. But they can be very kind if they wish to be.” (p. 67).
They also bring many examples from anthropologists who studied shamanism, visions of the saints, as well as Marian apparitions, testimonies of travel or abduction to strange places, and they clearly show that these experiences have a lot in common with the UFO experience. Among some of these commonalities with the UFO experience they underline buzzing sounds (p. 76), feelings of unity with the universe (p. 95), paralysis (p. 96), dream-like scenarios (p. 187), and shared telepathic events (p. 189).
Re-inventing the wheel?
Once again, after reading this book of the 1970s, I am left with a feeling that many ideas proposed for the parasociological study of UFOs are simply re-inventing the wheel. Their final chapter is entitled “paraufology”, in an attempt to link parapsychology and ufology, something I am trying to do for sociology and parapsychology. Clark and Coleman conclude their book in making two statements, which describe well the approach I have taken so far. The first one is that “the UFO mystery is primarily subjective and its content is primarily symbolic” (p. 236). The second is that “the ‘objective’ manifestations are psychokinetically generated by products of those unconscious processes which shape a culture’s vision of the otherworld. Existing only temporarily, they are at best only quasiphysical” (p. 242). In support of this second statement, they too refer to Roll’s (1972) poltergeist research and to the notion of tulpas from David-Néel (1973). As well, they also made the connection between the “Men-in-Black” as a modern version of the devil’s archetype (p. 239), as folklorist Peter Rojcewicz proposed later on (1987).
Like many other researchers already mentioned in this blog, Clark and Coleman invoke the effects of the collective unconscious, but contrary to others they have looked a bit more into its internal dynamics for explaining the UFOs dynamics. They rely heavily, but without mentioning him, on Claude Lévy-Strauss (1963) structural anthropology, whose ideas were clearly dominating the field of anthropology in the 1970s.
Lévy-Strauss’ ideas were themselves relying on Jung’s concept of archetype. He proposed that like in the case of individuals, societies have an unconscious, and borrowing from Freud’s idea that dreams are the “royal road” to investigate the unconscious, Lévy-Strauss saw in myths societies’ dreams. Hence, myths function like dreams for individuals in the sense that they provide room for the irrational and the suppressed to be expressed in ways that are not threatening to the existence of a society. If these myths are too much suppressed by an excess of rationalism, then the irrational is likely to come out in destructive ways (e.g. destructive new cults, social unrests, civil wars, etc.).
But dreams are not considered as pure free play in this context. At the individual level, if the details will vary widely from one person to another, they are built on typical “scenarios” understood by Jung as an expression of what he calls the “archetypes”. At the social level, myths are also much diversified in their content, but according to Lévy-Strauss they also have a limited number of basic scenarios that he call structures (hence the notion of “structural” anthropology).
With these ideas in the background, Clark and Coleman proposed that UFOs and many other similar paranormal manifestations are the product of the collective unconscious seeking a way to express itself. It is in this context they wrote: “because the collective unconscious exists outside time and space, it can perceive the direction of events in a manner denied us in ordinary conscious perception. It is attuned to elements in the common psyche of humanity that are unknown and deeply mysterious. Nonetheless it occasionally manifests itself to us in dreams or visions which preview future occurrences. […] When the premonition arises out of the collective unconscious, it may be to alert us to the imminence of some major event of archetypal significance[…]” (p. 233). This approach describes quite well the approach I took in the case study of the Hills’ alleged abduction.
Similarly, they propose that the “Men-in-Black” are an expression of the collective unconscious directed at those who want to dig without due precautions into the unconscious. At the individual level, Jungian and Freudian psychoanalysts tend to see demoniac dreams and visions and the like as one’s unconscious telling his/her consciousness to not open too wide the lid of the unconscious, as we also store there our darkest impulses.
Ultimately, Clark and Coleman consider that the UFO phenomenon is an expression of a repressed collective unconscious that takes the means to be heard. They add that “if this balance is not soon restored, the UFO myth tells us, nature will have its way. The collective unconscious, too long repressed, will burst free, overwhelm the world, and usher in an era of madness, superstition, and terror—with all their socio-political accouterments: war, anarchy, fascism” (p. 241). On this point, I am not sure that their dim predictions have occurred. I think, instead, that the collective unconscious, most of the time, gets heard one way or the other and it is precisely why societies in general do not sink into complete anarchy. In other words, social order is more prevalent than social anarchy.
They also see the UFO phenomenon as a global poltergeist, but unlike John Keel who sees non-human entities as being behind the phenomenon, Clark and Coleman see only humans. They state that “thus we are rather surprise that so far, to our knowledge, no one has considered the UFO phenomenon as a kind of ‘planetary poltergeist’ usually generated by the psychic energy of the collective unconscious and more rarely by the individual unconscious” (p. 244). On this last point, I think that the individual unconscious actually “picks up” on the collective unconscious once mythological theme is established. If in the case of the Barney and Betty Hill story the collective unconscious played an important role in framing the event, most of the subsequent “abduction” accounts to this date were probably generated by individual unconscious processes, feeding from a socially shared narrative content. It is a critical distinction for empirical research that is not found in Clark and Coleman’s book.
As well, they comment that “if the otherworld is really the domain of the collective unconscious imprinted on the ‘psi field’ creating in each cultural frame of reference a dream world that is relatively fixed in the psychic realm, then occasionally—through a process of ‘psychic spillover’—its errant inhabitants may enter our realm. This happens when the PK function of the brain confronts the archetypal contents of the otherworld, and it apparently is a side-effect of only secondary importance” (p. 245). Here again, I think Clark and Coleman are confusing two levels of analysis. PK spillovers from the collective unconscious can describe a number of events where the individual witnesses may not be psi subjects, while in other instances the PK effect is created by the witnesses themselves. It is also another important distinction that has substantial consequences if one is to conduct empirical research.
As it is known, Clark eventually distanced himself from his own book around 1980. The Wikipedia article on him, it states that “In the years since, Clark has championed a sort of open-ended agnosticism, choosing to focus on phenomena that are purported to have some degree of documentable support—whether physical evidence, or reliably reported events. He has argued very cautiously in favor of the extraterrestrial hypothesis, not as proven fact but as a working hypothesis, choosing to focus on the UFO cases he regards as the most promising: multiple witness and/or UFO cases which are said to leave physical evidence”.
It is interesting to note that 35 years later “more objective physical evidences” are still nowhere to be found. Without speculating too much on his reasoning to change his approach, the date of 1980 appears to me as very meaningful, as it was the beginning of the Roswell/Majic hysteria, an era where it was almost impossible to publish (and sell) anything about UFOs without embracing the ETH.
What’s left?
Clark has changed his approach, but it did not help him to provide any further explanations of the UFO phenomenon. From that point of view, his previous researches highlight that parasociology has still its work cut out. First, if Jung and Levy-Strauss approaches are useful to explain why we see UFOs today, while we saw fairies yesterday, they are not very helpful when one needs to go at a lower level of analysis (i.e. why these specific witness, why at that time, why that particular content, etc.). This only reinforces my previous conclusion that a better understanding of the inner dynamics of the collective unconscious is required. It would be helpful for parasociology, but also for sociology, psychology, parapsychology, and for the study of paranormal phenomenon in general. As well, it reinforces the notion that if we are to come closer to solve the UFO mystery, it is by looking around the phenomenon that we will find some components of its inner dynamics, rather than naively looking at a multitude of “naturalistic” descriptions of the phenomenon in the hope that something will emerge.
Copyright © 2009 Eric Ouellet
“has managed to demonstrate only that something is going on, something very strange for which no satisfactory accounting has yet been made. Yet as strange as these UFO sightings undoubtedly are, there is at the same time an oddly mundane, undeniably terrestrial quality to them which makes them all the more mysterious” (p. 10).
These lines were written in 1975, almost 35 years ago, and they are as true now as they were then. Once more, anyone really interested in studying UFOs should skip, with a few exceptions, what was written during the 1980s and 1990s, and most of the little that has been produced in 2000s. Clearly, ufology has remained at a standstill since the 1970s, or worst: it has been seriously declining in quality ever since. The full notice is:
Clark, Jerome and Loren Coleman. (1975). The Unidentified: Notes toward solving the UFO mystery. New York: Warner.
A constant human experience in multiple forms
It is interesting to note that what they wrote was very much in tune with other writings of the same period, particularly Keel (1975), Méheust (1978), Rogo (1977), and Viéroudy (1977).
Clark and Coleman provide a number of stories, many prior to 1945, about strange events that were not construed as UFO incidents, but would certainly be if they were to occur today. In all these cases, the common patterns are not the “flying spacecrafts” but rather how people interacted with the strange phenomenon. In other words, what is constant is not the phenomenon itself but rather how our relationship to the phenomenon is structured (i.e. the narrative or archetype). They see in the UFO experience, therefore, a theme rather than a physical experience per se. This approach is similar to one I took in an older article.
They describe the UFO phenomenon as a myth, and underline that: “Myths, so the banal axiom has it, die hard, but a growing body of scholarship, combining the techniques of anthropology and psychoanalysis, disputes this conventional wisdom and argues instead that myths don’t die at all; they just put on new faces. The familiar world of conscious thought and experience goes its own way, blithely ignoring the needs of the unconscious mind and even disputing its very existence. But the unconscious remains. Its language, which it speaks in myth and symbol, may change, but its meaning remains the same. The old gods and demons and spirits continue to haunt us, ghosts in the machine which were supposed to have supplanted them” (p. 48).
To support their thesis they look into a number of folkloric tales which are showing the same fundamental narrative, but experienced in different guise in different eras, and quote as well Vallée’s book Passport to Magonia. They underline that: “Fairies, like UFO beings, come in all sizes and shapes, but, again like UFO beings, they are usually diminutive. Some are the size of dwarfs; others are Lilliputian in stature. Some are beautiful; others are ugly. Their temperament is at best uncertain, and they are better left alone. But they can be very kind if they wish to be.” (p. 67).
They also bring many examples from anthropologists who studied shamanism, visions of the saints, as well as Marian apparitions, testimonies of travel or abduction to strange places, and they clearly show that these experiences have a lot in common with the UFO experience. Among some of these commonalities with the UFO experience they underline buzzing sounds (p. 76), feelings of unity with the universe (p. 95), paralysis (p. 96), dream-like scenarios (p. 187), and shared telepathic events (p. 189).
Re-inventing the wheel?
Once again, after reading this book of the 1970s, I am left with a feeling that many ideas proposed for the parasociological study of UFOs are simply re-inventing the wheel. Their final chapter is entitled “paraufology”, in an attempt to link parapsychology and ufology, something I am trying to do for sociology and parapsychology. Clark and Coleman conclude their book in making two statements, which describe well the approach I have taken so far. The first one is that “the UFO mystery is primarily subjective and its content is primarily symbolic” (p. 236). The second is that “the ‘objective’ manifestations are psychokinetically generated by products of those unconscious processes which shape a culture’s vision of the otherworld. Existing only temporarily, they are at best only quasiphysical” (p. 242). In support of this second statement, they too refer to Roll’s (1972) poltergeist research and to the notion of tulpas from David-Néel (1973). As well, they also made the connection between the “Men-in-Black” as a modern version of the devil’s archetype (p. 239), as folklorist Peter Rojcewicz proposed later on (1987).
Like many other researchers already mentioned in this blog, Clark and Coleman invoke the effects of the collective unconscious, but contrary to others they have looked a bit more into its internal dynamics for explaining the UFOs dynamics. They rely heavily, but without mentioning him, on Claude Lévy-Strauss (1963) structural anthropology, whose ideas were clearly dominating the field of anthropology in the 1970s.
Lévy-Strauss’ ideas were themselves relying on Jung’s concept of archetype. He proposed that like in the case of individuals, societies have an unconscious, and borrowing from Freud’s idea that dreams are the “royal road” to investigate the unconscious, Lévy-Strauss saw in myths societies’ dreams. Hence, myths function like dreams for individuals in the sense that they provide room for the irrational and the suppressed to be expressed in ways that are not threatening to the existence of a society. If these myths are too much suppressed by an excess of rationalism, then the irrational is likely to come out in destructive ways (e.g. destructive new cults, social unrests, civil wars, etc.).
But dreams are not considered as pure free play in this context. At the individual level, if the details will vary widely from one person to another, they are built on typical “scenarios” understood by Jung as an expression of what he calls the “archetypes”. At the social level, myths are also much diversified in their content, but according to Lévy-Strauss they also have a limited number of basic scenarios that he call structures (hence the notion of “structural” anthropology).
With these ideas in the background, Clark and Coleman proposed that UFOs and many other similar paranormal manifestations are the product of the collective unconscious seeking a way to express itself. It is in this context they wrote: “because the collective unconscious exists outside time and space, it can perceive the direction of events in a manner denied us in ordinary conscious perception. It is attuned to elements in the common psyche of humanity that are unknown and deeply mysterious. Nonetheless it occasionally manifests itself to us in dreams or visions which preview future occurrences. […] When the premonition arises out of the collective unconscious, it may be to alert us to the imminence of some major event of archetypal significance[…]” (p. 233). This approach describes quite well the approach I took in the case study of the Hills’ alleged abduction.
Similarly, they propose that the “Men-in-Black” are an expression of the collective unconscious directed at those who want to dig without due precautions into the unconscious. At the individual level, Jungian and Freudian psychoanalysts tend to see demoniac dreams and visions and the like as one’s unconscious telling his/her consciousness to not open too wide the lid of the unconscious, as we also store there our darkest impulses.
Ultimately, Clark and Coleman consider that the UFO phenomenon is an expression of a repressed collective unconscious that takes the means to be heard. They add that “if this balance is not soon restored, the UFO myth tells us, nature will have its way. The collective unconscious, too long repressed, will burst free, overwhelm the world, and usher in an era of madness, superstition, and terror—with all their socio-political accouterments: war, anarchy, fascism” (p. 241). On this point, I am not sure that their dim predictions have occurred. I think, instead, that the collective unconscious, most of the time, gets heard one way or the other and it is precisely why societies in general do not sink into complete anarchy. In other words, social order is more prevalent than social anarchy.
They also see the UFO phenomenon as a global poltergeist, but unlike John Keel who sees non-human entities as being behind the phenomenon, Clark and Coleman see only humans. They state that “thus we are rather surprise that so far, to our knowledge, no one has considered the UFO phenomenon as a kind of ‘planetary poltergeist’ usually generated by the psychic energy of the collective unconscious and more rarely by the individual unconscious” (p. 244). On this last point, I think that the individual unconscious actually “picks up” on the collective unconscious once mythological theme is established. If in the case of the Barney and Betty Hill story the collective unconscious played an important role in framing the event, most of the subsequent “abduction” accounts to this date were probably generated by individual unconscious processes, feeding from a socially shared narrative content. It is a critical distinction for empirical research that is not found in Clark and Coleman’s book.
As well, they comment that “if the otherworld is really the domain of the collective unconscious imprinted on the ‘psi field’ creating in each cultural frame of reference a dream world that is relatively fixed in the psychic realm, then occasionally—through a process of ‘psychic spillover’—its errant inhabitants may enter our realm. This happens when the PK function of the brain confronts the archetypal contents of the otherworld, and it apparently is a side-effect of only secondary importance” (p. 245). Here again, I think Clark and Coleman are confusing two levels of analysis. PK spillovers from the collective unconscious can describe a number of events where the individual witnesses may not be psi subjects, while in other instances the PK effect is created by the witnesses themselves. It is also another important distinction that has substantial consequences if one is to conduct empirical research.
As it is known, Clark eventually distanced himself from his own book around 1980. The Wikipedia article on him, it states that “In the years since, Clark has championed a sort of open-ended agnosticism, choosing to focus on phenomena that are purported to have some degree of documentable support—whether physical evidence, or reliably reported events. He has argued very cautiously in favor of the extraterrestrial hypothesis, not as proven fact but as a working hypothesis, choosing to focus on the UFO cases he regards as the most promising: multiple witness and/or UFO cases which are said to leave physical evidence”.
It is interesting to note that 35 years later “more objective physical evidences” are still nowhere to be found. Without speculating too much on his reasoning to change his approach, the date of 1980 appears to me as very meaningful, as it was the beginning of the Roswell/Majic hysteria, an era where it was almost impossible to publish (and sell) anything about UFOs without embracing the ETH.
What’s left?
Clark has changed his approach, but it did not help him to provide any further explanations of the UFO phenomenon. From that point of view, his previous researches highlight that parasociology has still its work cut out. First, if Jung and Levy-Strauss approaches are useful to explain why we see UFOs today, while we saw fairies yesterday, they are not very helpful when one needs to go at a lower level of analysis (i.e. why these specific witness, why at that time, why that particular content, etc.). This only reinforces my previous conclusion that a better understanding of the inner dynamics of the collective unconscious is required. It would be helpful for parasociology, but also for sociology, psychology, parapsychology, and for the study of paranormal phenomenon in general. As well, it reinforces the notion that if we are to come closer to solve the UFO mystery, it is by looking around the phenomenon that we will find some components of its inner dynamics, rather than naively looking at a multitude of “naturalistic” descriptions of the phenomenon in the hope that something will emerge.
Copyright © 2009 Eric Ouellet
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
The Barney and Betty Hill Story – Case study in parasociology (Part 3)
This post is the third and last of this case study on the Barney and Betty Hill “alien abduction” story. The model used to understand the psychological and sociological dimensions of PEMIEs is assessed.
The concept of PEMIE
This concept has been useful in many ways. In the context of the case study, the empirical evidence on the material portion of the story fits well with the built-in notion that the UFO experience has a fleeting material basis. The evidence provided by the witnesses point towards a ball of light combined with either or both hallucinations and psi effects. Hence, by “bracketing” the issue of a possible spacecraft involvement, one can start looking seriously into the human and symbolic dimensions of the events. However, such bracketing needs to be resolved, as its content was part of the witnesses’ accounts. In looking in greater depth into the evidence, distorted perceptions due to altered state of consciousness, possible false memory created after the event, and psi effect can actually account for what was put in bracket. The concept of PEMIE can therefore neutralize some ETH preconceptions.
The individual psi effect level
It is not possible to prove that there was psi effects involved, but it is possible to show that the known enabling conditions for psi effects to occur where present during the events described by the witnesses. In this regards, Heath’s (2003) book and concepts were quite useful, and should be fully integrated into a more detailed sub-component of the model. There is little doubt that both Barney and Betty were in a deep altered state of consciousness (ASC) during the events of 21 September 1961. As well, it is clear that Betty had from the onset a very open attitude towards what we call nowadays the ETH. The combination of both deep ASC and beliefs constitute important factors in producing psi effects. Barney’s internal struggle about the interpretation to give to the events is more interesting, and this type of inner struggles has not received a lot of attention from parapsychology in term of how it influences the production psi effects. One clear outcome of this case study is that more research on internal clash of belief systems in the context of producing psi effects is required.
The shared psi effect level
With the evidence available, the possibility of telepathic sharing of images could not be verified. The conditions for such verification appear to be relatively narrow. It requires two or more witnesses who were in deep altered state of consciousness, and who reported the same highly improbable event, but who would not have been in any contact with each others afterward. As well, it would require at least a third observer who had witnessed the same event, but reported something different, and who had no contact with the two other ones. These conditions were not present in the Hill case, and thus it is not possible to determine how useful this element of the model is.
The use of von Lucadou’s concepts has been very effective to understand how the strange events of September 1961 became the archetype “Gray abduction” story. Even if there might not have been any psi effect after the events of 21 September 1961 (although Betty found her lost earrings on their kitchen table surrounded by leafs – a possible poltergeist-like event. These after the fact PK events have been documented in parapsychology as a form of lingering PK effects after the main PK event is over). Mapping the psycho-social dynamics of paranormal events remains of great importance, as the meaning attached to the events is usually developed or firmed up afterward. The main limitation of von Lucadou’s concepts is that it was developed to study recurring psi effects (i.e., RSPKs), while the Hill case was a construed as a single event. Hence, it is not possible to assess if the psycho-social dynamics contributed to the production of any psi effect. Von Lucadou’s concept might be used more extensively in the case of repeat “abduction” scenarios.
The social psi level
It is probably impossible to make any direct inference between a paranormal event and the social conditions that may enable it. This is an inherent limitation of parasociology. However, it is possible to make indirect inferences. In the Hill case, there are a number of symbolic elements that have a strong internal coherence. The conjunction of dates with two major social events (the Berlin crisis and the Freedom ride first victory), the symbolic dimension of the “ship” looking like a bus, the “alien” appearance, and the “alien” behavior in the light of the racial tensions of 1961, the direct involvement of the witnesses with the Civil Rights movement, and Barney’s internal psychological tensions about these social issues, provide a strong case for an event with a socially-based source for the event. Furthermore, the conjunction of psi enabling factors at the individual level, as discussed above, with social level enabling events reinforces the hypothesis that the Hill experience might have a psi event with more than one sources. The proof for this last statement cannot be established just yet, of course, but it can be said that the key hypothesis of parasociology has survived its first test by not being contradicted.
The concept of plausibility structure has been also a useful extension of von Loucadou’s concepts into the sociological realm. It also illustrates what Leledakis and Castoriadis wrote about the non-deterministic nature of social change because charge emerges, first, into the collective unconscious. If this analysis of the Hill story is by and large correct, then it means that a very unusual (or paranormal) event, originally fueled by the racial tensions at a specific time in a specific country, mutated into a new, lasting and now worldwide narrative about alleged alien presence on Earth. No one, no model, and no grand theory could have predicted such an outcome. Ultimately, it can represent another interesting illustration of the “trickster” archetype in action.
Conclusion
The parasociological model to study UFO events and developed based on a review of the literature surveyed so far has survived its first test. However, it is clear that it remains a model with inherent limitations. One of them is that psi effects cannot be measured directly, and can only be inferred by assessing the nature and extent of psi enabling factors linked to a particular event. This limitation would certain be very problematic for those who espouse a positivist epistemological approach, but would be quite acceptable for those who study single events after the fact like historians and political scientists, as a case for a strong internal validity can still be made (if the evidence support it). Given the ontological nature of non-recurrent and spontaneous psi events, espousing a positivist approach is simply inappropriate as determinism in human affairs is relatively limited.
The next step will be to try the model on a UFO wave to assess if it can be useful in such context as well.
Copyright © 2009 Eric Ouellet
The concept of PEMIE
This concept has been useful in many ways. In the context of the case study, the empirical evidence on the material portion of the story fits well with the built-in notion that the UFO experience has a fleeting material basis. The evidence provided by the witnesses point towards a ball of light combined with either or both hallucinations and psi effects. Hence, by “bracketing” the issue of a possible spacecraft involvement, one can start looking seriously into the human and symbolic dimensions of the events. However, such bracketing needs to be resolved, as its content was part of the witnesses’ accounts. In looking in greater depth into the evidence, distorted perceptions due to altered state of consciousness, possible false memory created after the event, and psi effect can actually account for what was put in bracket. The concept of PEMIE can therefore neutralize some ETH preconceptions.
The individual psi effect level
It is not possible to prove that there was psi effects involved, but it is possible to show that the known enabling conditions for psi effects to occur where present during the events described by the witnesses. In this regards, Heath’s (2003) book and concepts were quite useful, and should be fully integrated into a more detailed sub-component of the model. There is little doubt that both Barney and Betty were in a deep altered state of consciousness (ASC) during the events of 21 September 1961. As well, it is clear that Betty had from the onset a very open attitude towards what we call nowadays the ETH. The combination of both deep ASC and beliefs constitute important factors in producing psi effects. Barney’s internal struggle about the interpretation to give to the events is more interesting, and this type of inner struggles has not received a lot of attention from parapsychology in term of how it influences the production psi effects. One clear outcome of this case study is that more research on internal clash of belief systems in the context of producing psi effects is required.
The shared psi effect level
With the evidence available, the possibility of telepathic sharing of images could not be verified. The conditions for such verification appear to be relatively narrow. It requires two or more witnesses who were in deep altered state of consciousness, and who reported the same highly improbable event, but who would not have been in any contact with each others afterward. As well, it would require at least a third observer who had witnessed the same event, but reported something different, and who had no contact with the two other ones. These conditions were not present in the Hill case, and thus it is not possible to determine how useful this element of the model is.
The use of von Lucadou’s concepts has been very effective to understand how the strange events of September 1961 became the archetype “Gray abduction” story. Even if there might not have been any psi effect after the events of 21 September 1961 (although Betty found her lost earrings on their kitchen table surrounded by leafs – a possible poltergeist-like event. These after the fact PK events have been documented in parapsychology as a form of lingering PK effects after the main PK event is over). Mapping the psycho-social dynamics of paranormal events remains of great importance, as the meaning attached to the events is usually developed or firmed up afterward. The main limitation of von Lucadou’s concepts is that it was developed to study recurring psi effects (i.e., RSPKs), while the Hill case was a construed as a single event. Hence, it is not possible to assess if the psycho-social dynamics contributed to the production of any psi effect. Von Lucadou’s concept might be used more extensively in the case of repeat “abduction” scenarios.
The social psi level
It is probably impossible to make any direct inference between a paranormal event and the social conditions that may enable it. This is an inherent limitation of parasociology. However, it is possible to make indirect inferences. In the Hill case, there are a number of symbolic elements that have a strong internal coherence. The conjunction of dates with two major social events (the Berlin crisis and the Freedom ride first victory), the symbolic dimension of the “ship” looking like a bus, the “alien” appearance, and the “alien” behavior in the light of the racial tensions of 1961, the direct involvement of the witnesses with the Civil Rights movement, and Barney’s internal psychological tensions about these social issues, provide a strong case for an event with a socially-based source for the event. Furthermore, the conjunction of psi enabling factors at the individual level, as discussed above, with social level enabling events reinforces the hypothesis that the Hill experience might have a psi event with more than one sources. The proof for this last statement cannot be established just yet, of course, but it can be said that the key hypothesis of parasociology has survived its first test by not being contradicted.
The concept of plausibility structure has been also a useful extension of von Loucadou’s concepts into the sociological realm. It also illustrates what Leledakis and Castoriadis wrote about the non-deterministic nature of social change because charge emerges, first, into the collective unconscious. If this analysis of the Hill story is by and large correct, then it means that a very unusual (or paranormal) event, originally fueled by the racial tensions at a specific time in a specific country, mutated into a new, lasting and now worldwide narrative about alleged alien presence on Earth. No one, no model, and no grand theory could have predicted such an outcome. Ultimately, it can represent another interesting illustration of the “trickster” archetype in action.
Conclusion
The parasociological model to study UFO events and developed based on a review of the literature surveyed so far has survived its first test. However, it is clear that it remains a model with inherent limitations. One of them is that psi effects cannot be measured directly, and can only be inferred by assessing the nature and extent of psi enabling factors linked to a particular event. This limitation would certain be very problematic for those who espouse a positivist epistemological approach, but would be quite acceptable for those who study single events after the fact like historians and political scientists, as a case for a strong internal validity can still be made (if the evidence support it). Given the ontological nature of non-recurrent and spontaneous psi events, espousing a positivist approach is simply inappropriate as determinism in human affairs is relatively limited.
The next step will be to try the model on a UFO wave to assess if it can be useful in such context as well.
Copyright © 2009 Eric Ouellet
Thursday, May 28, 2009
The Barney and Betty Hill Story: Case study in parasociology (Part 2)
This post continues the analysis of the Barney and Betty Hill alleged abduction in September 1961. The remaining dimensions of the analytical model are tested for fitness. The general evaluation of the model and conclusion will be presented in the third and last part of this case study.
Shared psi effect, nurturing the phenomenon, and telepathic sharing
One of the key conclusions of Dr. Benjamin in June 1964 was that the part of the Hill’s story onboard the “spaceship” was most likely a fantasy born out of Betty’s dream and absorbed through osmosis by Barney.[27] A number of elements could be presented to support this thesis. Betty had her dreams a few weeks after the events in the fall of 1961 and wrote them down. The Hill consulted for the first time Dr. Benjamin in December 1963. So there was over two years between these two events, a lot of time for absorption. ETH ufologists claimed that the Hill never discussed her dreams, and that Barney never read her written account of her dreams. It is in fact incorrect. Many details were discussed among them.[28] As well, Betty recounted publicly the content of her dreams before 1964 during a meeting where Barney was in the attendance.
Another possibility is that there was some telepathic sharing of themes and images between them, as Schwartz suggested explaining a number of close encounters. Such telepathy could have occurred during and/or after the events of 1961. However, there is not enough evidence to assess if this could have been the case, and therefore the telepathic sharing is in this case not a useful element.
What has occurred, however, was an active nurturing of the phenomenon. Irrespective of what happen in September 1961, it is clear that the Hill were engaged into a psycho-social dynamics reinforcing the ETH interpretation of their experience. It is important to note that after the events, both Barney and Betty were not sure what to make of what happen to them. In a process similar to Marian apparitions where a beautiful lady becomes the Virgin Mary when other people get involved with the witnesses, the Hill were quickly absorbed by the ETH community and their belief system. From that point of view the Hill story is interesting as it fits the Model of Pragmatic Information (MPI) developed by the German parapsychologist Walter von Lucadou to study Recurrent Spontaneous Psychokinesis (RSPK) or poltergeists.[29]
In the light of Benjamin Simon’s analysis of the Hill’s experience, Barney seems to be the “focus person.” In RSPKs, the focus person tends to be someone with a lot of unresolved inner conflicts with deep roots into the unconscious part of their mind. The events has clearly illustrated that Barney was the one who had the most serious challenges about his own identity, as an African-American man married to a White women in the 1960s. The hypnotic regression showed that issue was a constant preoccupation for him. For instance, when they were driving through Montreal in the afternoon prior to the event, he was worried about how the French-Canadians would react towards him, and was relief to see other Blacks walking in the city streets.[30] He had the same apprehension in the restaurant where they stopped before crossing the borders.[31] When he was looking into the binoculars towards the “spaceship”, his first reaction was that he saw an “Irishman friendly to Blacks”, which was described as a rare thing by Barney.[32] Then the image changed and he saw a Nazi officer, which upset him greatly.[33] If it was clear for Dr. Simon that there was no particular signs of tensions in the couple given the different background [34], being an African-American in White dominated world was affecting Barney. In the 1960s, it was not a rare thing as shown by the famous studies conducted by the psychiatrist Franz Fanon.[35]
Betty, on the other hand could be considered as the key person in what von Lucadou calls the “environment”. Not only she provided an ETH meaning to the events to Barney, but she actively engaged the wider environment in such interpretation of events. The first call Betty made was to her sister who saw a UFO, and her sister provided Betty with information as to how to report their sighting.[36] Betty told the story to their tenants the same day,{37] and some of her friends and co-workers later on.[38] Betty called the local Air Force base to report her sightings. [39] Finally, Betty borrowed Major Keyhoe’s famous book on UFO (an ETH book) at the local library, read it in one sitting, and wrote to the National Investigations of Committee of Aerial Phenomena (NICAP), on 26 September 1961 to report the sighting.[40] All these actions were taken while Barney was reluctant at every turn.
Then, the “naive observers” arrive (to use von Lucadou’s terminology). On 21 October 1961, the Hill agree to meet NICAP’s investigator Walter Webb[41]. After a discussion with Major Keyhoe about the Hill case, Robert Hohman and C.D Jackson decide to interview the Hill as well, which occurred on 25 November 1961. A friend of the Hill, Major MacDonald joins them as well, and it is at that time that they realized there was a missing time period for which they could not account for during the early hours of 20 September 1961[42]. Later on, the Hill presented their story to a few public meetings. In a few months, what was a very odd and bizarre event became an encounter construed as a prime ETH event.
In the Hill case, there were very few critical observers. On 25 March 1962, as Barney’s physical and mental health was deteriorating, the Hill met Dr. Quirke for an interview who suggested a cool off period in the hope that things will get back to normal.[43] Yet, the Hill actually pursued the issue even further by continuing making frequent trips to Indian Head where they thought the event took place.[44] The second critical observer was Dr. Benjamin who considered the “aliens in spaceship” part of the event as a fantasy. It was clear that Betty completely rejected Dr. Benjamin’s assessment. She even said that there were no symbols to interpret in what happened to them.[45]
Finally, society (the last component of von Lucadou’s model) got involved when a Boston journalist published their story after attending a meeting where the Hill told their story, which prompted them to work with Fuller to get the record straight, which eventually led to the publication of Interrupted Journey in October 1966. In the Hill case, the naive observers were able to shield the Hill from the critical observers and from society for quite a long time. This allowed the ETH interpretation to stick, as shown by Betty while being under hypnosis during the 7 March 1964 session. She said that “And I kept wondering why they were following us. And as I would figure that, I was wondering if they were as curious about me as I was about them.” Then Dr. Simon asked “you speak of ‘they’?” Betty replied “ I mean, well, I figured there must be somebody inside of the object, you know, someone directing its flight. And so, whoever was inside, this is ‘they’.”[46] Given the unfolding of events described above between September 1961 and March 1964, such a statement from Betty could be seen as equivocal. Either she was not truthful when she said she had no particular preconceptions about UFOs, or her statement under hypnosis is the product of psycho-social process that occurred after the actual events took place. It appears that both issues were at play, i.e., an original openness about the ETH which was reinforced later on by interacting with the ETH ufological community.
Although the possibility of a shared psi event could not have been confirmed with the existing information, it is clear that the psycho-social dynamics surrounding the event and the witnesses played an important role in defining it. This is an important issue, and the proposed model is fit enough to remove at least some of the ETH noise out of the evidence. This also reinforces the notion that whether psi effects are involved or not, UFO sightings and closer encounters cannot be separated from the large psycho-social context from which they emerged and are interpreted. Focussing solely on the PEMIE and one’s individual mental balance, like most ETH ufologists do, leads to a very limited understanding of the UFO experience.
Social psi, plausibility structure, and tension in the collective unconscious
This part of the proposed analytical model is the most innovative, but also the riskiest one. A more deliberate analysis is therefore proposed.
Plausibility structures
It is incorrect to think that the “Grey” aliens and abductors first appeared with the Hill’s story. There were already pre-existing plausibility structures leaning towards the “new alien narrative.” Hairy and small creatures were reported in 1954 in France and in Venezuela.[47] Dwarf like creatures with big ears and long arms were reported in the American press, in August 1955, in what is now called the Kelly-Hopkinsville story[48]. Then, there is also the famous Brazilian case of Antonio Villas-Boas who was allegedly abducted by alien creatures in October 1957, although the story was only made public in Brazil in the spring of 1962.[49] However, the publication of Behind Flying Saucers by Frank Scully in 1950 is probably the story that had the most impact. Scully told a story that dwarf like creatures were recovered from crash sites in Arizona and New Mexico. He was eventually discredited by the press, but with the publication of the Roswell story in 1980, Scully’s story was resurrected and stuck ever since in the ETH ufological milieus. As Paul Meehan notes in his extensive cinematographic study of alien movies, “Scully’s book help establish the notions of little humanoid aliens and UFOs over the Southwestern desert in the public mind. These themes were to reappear in many of the films of the 50s science fiction cycle.”[50]
In spite of many ETH ufologists rejection of cultural explanations for the UFO phenomenon, by 1961 there were plenty of collective representations of dwarf-like aliens, widely available across the United States. But it is also important to underline that by 1961, the saucer movies and their imagery were less prominent. As Meehan wrote, “by the end of the decade the first wave of the invasion had stalled. After numerous saucer movies releases in 1958 and 1959, the cycle had run its course in Hollywood. It would be many years before the UFOnauts return to invade the celluloid skies above New York and Washington.”[51] It is an important observation, as it is indicative that in 1961 saucer stories and images were leaving the collective consciousness to settle into the collective unconscious.
It is also clear that the Hill story not only benefited from prior plausibility structures, but was also instrumental in creating new ones. For instance, the next “Gray abduction” story that emerged in the United States was the so-called Andreasson affair, described in Raymond Fowler’s book The Andreasson Affair published in the 1970s. Yet, the story took place in January 1967, just a few months after the publication of The Interrupted Journey in October 1966. In the same vein, the television film based on the Hill story, The UFO Incident, was first aired on NBC on 20 October 1975. Two weeks later, the famous “Gray abduction” of Travis Walton occurred (5 November 1975). The sincerity of these witnesses is not in doubt here. What one needs to consider is rather that the introduction in the public realm through the mass media of new plausibility structures can enact new forms of PEMIEs.
Tensions in the collective unconscious
It is always fascinating to see ETH ufologists studying sightings in a complete social and political vacuum, as if nothing important happens around a sighting. The Hill story is certainly one of the most patent cases. In the third week of September 1961, there was a lot of going on in the United States that relates to Hill story. At least two major releases of emotional energy were occurring around the same dates.
As found by Kottmeyer and Viéroudy[52], important ufological events in the United States appear to be linked to national security concerns. In September 1961, the world was in the midst of the Berlin crisis, which brought the world to a very serious confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union. The then secret National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) of 21 September 1961, the day after the Hill’s event, was circulated among senior decision-makers showing that the Soviet Union was bluffing and that they could not back up their claim on West Berlin with a large ICBM force.[53] The preparations for an eventual pre-emptive nuclear strike were not necessary anymore, to the great relief of President Kennedy. This also indicated that America was no more in a catching up mode (perceived as such since the launch of Sputnik in 1957), and in fact America was clearly ahead in the Cold War contest.
Second, the Civil Rights movement was actively engaged into the “Freedom Rides” during the summer and fall of 1961 (which finds its roots in the famous Rosa Parkes incident of 1955), where both White and Black activists were riding coach buses across the southern United States, purposefully transgressing segregation laws in bus seating arrangements. This led to several violent incidents where buses were burnt by racist demonstrators. Many Civil Rights activists were seriously beaten and arrested by the police in states where segregation was enforced. On 22 September 1961 (two days after the Hill’s incident), the Freedom Rides Civil Right activists won their first victory by a ruling of the Federal Interstate Commerce Commission interdicting segregation in trains, buses and transportation terminals across the country.[54] Given the Hill active involvement in the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP), these “interrupted journeys” at the border of segregationist states in the southern United States were certainly known to them.
What is important to remember here is that these key events occurred one and two days after the Hill’s event. This could be seen as a liminal events where the content of the NIE and the decision about ending segregation where certainly known to those who wrote them, but were not public yet. In both cases, such information was certainly known to have a major impact on America’s self identity. On one hand America was no more the underdog in the Cold War competition, and the Civil Rights activists were successful in changing American society. To use Anderson’s analysis,[55] it is clear that deeply shared myths and their unconscious underpinnings about what America is were affected.
Social psi effect
The question whether such liminal event could produce social psi effect remains to be answered and it is one of the central tasks of parasociology. Without proposing what could be considered a proof, it is at least possible to show some indications that may be some social psi effects were in action in the Hill case by looking at the symbolic content of what has been reported by them.
The first interesting link can be made is about the appearance of the “spacecraft” and the Freedom Riders. In a previous post about the Fatima story, it was said that a ladder was seen. But what was really meant was a horizontal series of windows looking like a ladder, as commonly found in buses and trains. Then, could it be possible that what Hill saw was a mixture of flying saucer and coach bus, or a flying bus? The famous drawings made by the Hill looks as follow:
It is interesting to note that they also underlined that there were red lights at each ends of the object. Now let’s consider these coach buses contemporary to the Hill event, and note that they have red lights on top at each ends:
Now take a picture of a similar coach bus taken from the side, print it, take both top ends and join them to make something like a cone, and compare it to Barney’s drawing. The similarity is striking.
Another set of symbolic representations are the eyes of the “aliens” which could be linked to the nuclear war that did not occur given the winding down of the Berlin crisis. If one has a look at contemporary mask and military protective suits, like these ones and then compare it to the typical “Gray” seen by the Hill, interesting similarities can be found.
However, it is possible to have a different set of “eyes”, which in the Hill context of 1961 could have been terrifying, and yet very meaningful. Once the alien is seen upside down, as if he would look over someone lying down, the comparison is striking.
In the part of the Hill event that emerged during the hypnosis regression, the issue of sexual reproduction was clearly at the centre stage. There was the barney’s semen collected issue, and Betty’s pregnancy test through the navel using a technology just about to be discovered, but that is low tech our present-day standards.[56] Then there was the skin test performed on Betty [57], and the “Grey” aliens (and let’s remember that grey is a color produced out of a mixture of black and white). Although Betty could not have children due to a medical condition,[58] the issue of mixed children in the United States of the 1960s was not a light one.
The issue of inter-racial marriages was not just a contested social convention in the United States at the time. This was against the law in many states, and as Civil Right activists, there is no reason to believe the Hill were not aware of this. Furthermore, these laws were in place to avoid producing mixed offspring (known in the racist literature as miscegenation). It was only in 1967 with the landmark judgement of the U.S. Supreme Court in the Loving vs. Virginia case that laws prohibiting inter-racial marriages were formally declared unconstitutional. Although it was not enforced, it was only in 2000 that the last state, Alabama, formal struck down their anti inter-racial marriage law. [59]
The last symbolic element addressed here is the famous map that was first described as a 1960s paper technology (i.e. a regular map)[60]. But was later re-described by Betty as being digital under hypnosis by niece (an ETH ufologist) and after such technology became available on Earth.[61] There are a number of problem with the Zeta Reticuli hypothesis that are well-known: it is based on memory and Betty’s drawing could only be approximate, there are an almost infinite number of possibilities if one expand the possible stars beyond 100 light years, etc. Instead, if one reverses the “stellar” map and compare it with a map showing the Freedom Ride action published in 1962, another set of striking similarities can be found.
Notes
[27] Fuller p. 319.
[28] Fuller, p. 232.
[29] Lucadou, W. and F. Zahradnik. (2004). “Predictions of the Model of Pragmatic Information about RSPK”.
[30] Fuller p. 94.
[31] Fuller p. 97.
[32] Fuller, p. 114.
[33] Fuller, p. 115.
[34] See the “ Introduction,” written in 1966 by Dr. Benjamin Simon, in John Fuller’s The Interrupted Journey (New York: Berkeley Publishing), p. 5.
[35] See in particular his famous book originally published in 1952: Black Skin, White Masks.
[36] Fuller p. 39.
[37] Fuller, p. 39.
[38] Fuller, pp. 49 and 71.
[39] Fuller, p. 41.
[40] Fuller, p. 46.
[41] Fuller p. 50.
[42] Fuller, p. 62-65.
[43] Fuller p. 72.
[44] Fuller, p. 69.
[45] Fuller, p. 335.
[46] Fuller, p. 178.
[47] For more information, please refer to Jacques Vallée. (1969) Passport to Magonia.
[48] Please refer to J. Allen Hynek. (1972). The UFO Experience.
[49] Also reported in Vallée’s Passport to Magonia.
[50] Paul Meehan. (1998). Saucer Movies, p. 34.
[51] Idem., p. 104.
[52] See Kottmeyer, Martin. (1996). “UFO Flaps”. The Anomalist 3 (1995-1996): 64-89; and Viéroudy, Pierre. (1977). Ces ovnis qui annoncent le surhomme. Paris: Tchou.
[53] NIE 11-8/1-61 -- Strength and Deployment of Soviet Long Range Ballistic Missile Forces, 21 September 1961 (29 pages), access on Internet at http://www.milnet.com/cia/nies/1961.htm on 22 December 2008. For more information, please refer to Barry M. Blechman and Stephen S. Kaplan. (1978) Force Without War. Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
[54] For more information on the Freedom Ride please refer to Raymond Arsenault (2006) Freedom Riders: 1961 and the Struggle for Racial Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[55] See Anderson, Benedict. (1983). Imagined Communities—Reflections on the Origins and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso.
[56] See Fuller, p. 196.
[57] See Fuller, pp. 316-317.
[58] Fuller, p. 317-318.
[59] For more information, please see on Internet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia.
[60] Fuller, p. 208-209.
[61] In Friedman and Marden, Captured!.
Copyright © 2009 Eric Ouellet
Shared psi effect, nurturing the phenomenon, and telepathic sharing
One of the key conclusions of Dr. Benjamin in June 1964 was that the part of the Hill’s story onboard the “spaceship” was most likely a fantasy born out of Betty’s dream and absorbed through osmosis by Barney.[27] A number of elements could be presented to support this thesis. Betty had her dreams a few weeks after the events in the fall of 1961 and wrote them down. The Hill consulted for the first time Dr. Benjamin in December 1963. So there was over two years between these two events, a lot of time for absorption. ETH ufologists claimed that the Hill never discussed her dreams, and that Barney never read her written account of her dreams. It is in fact incorrect. Many details were discussed among them.[28] As well, Betty recounted publicly the content of her dreams before 1964 during a meeting where Barney was in the attendance.
Another possibility is that there was some telepathic sharing of themes and images between them, as Schwartz suggested explaining a number of close encounters. Such telepathy could have occurred during and/or after the events of 1961. However, there is not enough evidence to assess if this could have been the case, and therefore the telepathic sharing is in this case not a useful element.
What has occurred, however, was an active nurturing of the phenomenon. Irrespective of what happen in September 1961, it is clear that the Hill were engaged into a psycho-social dynamics reinforcing the ETH interpretation of their experience. It is important to note that after the events, both Barney and Betty were not sure what to make of what happen to them. In a process similar to Marian apparitions where a beautiful lady becomes the Virgin Mary when other people get involved with the witnesses, the Hill were quickly absorbed by the ETH community and their belief system. From that point of view the Hill story is interesting as it fits the Model of Pragmatic Information (MPI) developed by the German parapsychologist Walter von Lucadou to study Recurrent Spontaneous Psychokinesis (RSPK) or poltergeists.[29]
In the light of Benjamin Simon’s analysis of the Hill’s experience, Barney seems to be the “focus person.” In RSPKs, the focus person tends to be someone with a lot of unresolved inner conflicts with deep roots into the unconscious part of their mind. The events has clearly illustrated that Barney was the one who had the most serious challenges about his own identity, as an African-American man married to a White women in the 1960s. The hypnotic regression showed that issue was a constant preoccupation for him. For instance, when they were driving through Montreal in the afternoon prior to the event, he was worried about how the French-Canadians would react towards him, and was relief to see other Blacks walking in the city streets.[30] He had the same apprehension in the restaurant where they stopped before crossing the borders.[31] When he was looking into the binoculars towards the “spaceship”, his first reaction was that he saw an “Irishman friendly to Blacks”, which was described as a rare thing by Barney.[32] Then the image changed and he saw a Nazi officer, which upset him greatly.[33] If it was clear for Dr. Simon that there was no particular signs of tensions in the couple given the different background [34], being an African-American in White dominated world was affecting Barney. In the 1960s, it was not a rare thing as shown by the famous studies conducted by the psychiatrist Franz Fanon.[35]
Betty, on the other hand could be considered as the key person in what von Lucadou calls the “environment”. Not only she provided an ETH meaning to the events to Barney, but she actively engaged the wider environment in such interpretation of events. The first call Betty made was to her sister who saw a UFO, and her sister provided Betty with information as to how to report their sighting.[36] Betty told the story to their tenants the same day,{37] and some of her friends and co-workers later on.[38] Betty called the local Air Force base to report her sightings. [39] Finally, Betty borrowed Major Keyhoe’s famous book on UFO (an ETH book) at the local library, read it in one sitting, and wrote to the National Investigations of Committee of Aerial Phenomena (NICAP), on 26 September 1961 to report the sighting.[40] All these actions were taken while Barney was reluctant at every turn.
Then, the “naive observers” arrive (to use von Lucadou’s terminology). On 21 October 1961, the Hill agree to meet NICAP’s investigator Walter Webb[41]. After a discussion with Major Keyhoe about the Hill case, Robert Hohman and C.D Jackson decide to interview the Hill as well, which occurred on 25 November 1961. A friend of the Hill, Major MacDonald joins them as well, and it is at that time that they realized there was a missing time period for which they could not account for during the early hours of 20 September 1961[42]. Later on, the Hill presented their story to a few public meetings. In a few months, what was a very odd and bizarre event became an encounter construed as a prime ETH event.
In the Hill case, there were very few critical observers. On 25 March 1962, as Barney’s physical and mental health was deteriorating, the Hill met Dr. Quirke for an interview who suggested a cool off period in the hope that things will get back to normal.[43] Yet, the Hill actually pursued the issue even further by continuing making frequent trips to Indian Head where they thought the event took place.[44] The second critical observer was Dr. Benjamin who considered the “aliens in spaceship” part of the event as a fantasy. It was clear that Betty completely rejected Dr. Benjamin’s assessment. She even said that there were no symbols to interpret in what happened to them.[45]
Finally, society (the last component of von Lucadou’s model) got involved when a Boston journalist published their story after attending a meeting where the Hill told their story, which prompted them to work with Fuller to get the record straight, which eventually led to the publication of Interrupted Journey in October 1966. In the Hill case, the naive observers were able to shield the Hill from the critical observers and from society for quite a long time. This allowed the ETH interpretation to stick, as shown by Betty while being under hypnosis during the 7 March 1964 session. She said that “And I kept wondering why they were following us. And as I would figure that, I was wondering if they were as curious about me as I was about them.” Then Dr. Simon asked “you speak of ‘they’?” Betty replied “ I mean, well, I figured there must be somebody inside of the object, you know, someone directing its flight. And so, whoever was inside, this is ‘they’.”[46] Given the unfolding of events described above between September 1961 and March 1964, such a statement from Betty could be seen as equivocal. Either she was not truthful when she said she had no particular preconceptions about UFOs, or her statement under hypnosis is the product of psycho-social process that occurred after the actual events took place. It appears that both issues were at play, i.e., an original openness about the ETH which was reinforced later on by interacting with the ETH ufological community.
Although the possibility of a shared psi event could not have been confirmed with the existing information, it is clear that the psycho-social dynamics surrounding the event and the witnesses played an important role in defining it. This is an important issue, and the proposed model is fit enough to remove at least some of the ETH noise out of the evidence. This also reinforces the notion that whether psi effects are involved or not, UFO sightings and closer encounters cannot be separated from the large psycho-social context from which they emerged and are interpreted. Focussing solely on the PEMIE and one’s individual mental balance, like most ETH ufologists do, leads to a very limited understanding of the UFO experience.
Social psi, plausibility structure, and tension in the collective unconscious
This part of the proposed analytical model is the most innovative, but also the riskiest one. A more deliberate analysis is therefore proposed.
Plausibility structures
It is incorrect to think that the “Grey” aliens and abductors first appeared with the Hill’s story. There were already pre-existing plausibility structures leaning towards the “new alien narrative.” Hairy and small creatures were reported in 1954 in France and in Venezuela.[47] Dwarf like creatures with big ears and long arms were reported in the American press, in August 1955, in what is now called the Kelly-Hopkinsville story[48]. Then, there is also the famous Brazilian case of Antonio Villas-Boas who was allegedly abducted by alien creatures in October 1957, although the story was only made public in Brazil in the spring of 1962.[49] However, the publication of Behind Flying Saucers by Frank Scully in 1950 is probably the story that had the most impact. Scully told a story that dwarf like creatures were recovered from crash sites in Arizona and New Mexico. He was eventually discredited by the press, but with the publication of the Roswell story in 1980, Scully’s story was resurrected and stuck ever since in the ETH ufological milieus. As Paul Meehan notes in his extensive cinematographic study of alien movies, “Scully’s book help establish the notions of little humanoid aliens and UFOs over the Southwestern desert in the public mind. These themes were to reappear in many of the films of the 50s science fiction cycle.”[50]
In spite of many ETH ufologists rejection of cultural explanations for the UFO phenomenon, by 1961 there were plenty of collective representations of dwarf-like aliens, widely available across the United States. But it is also important to underline that by 1961, the saucer movies and their imagery were less prominent. As Meehan wrote, “by the end of the decade the first wave of the invasion had stalled. After numerous saucer movies releases in 1958 and 1959, the cycle had run its course in Hollywood. It would be many years before the UFOnauts return to invade the celluloid skies above New York and Washington.”[51] It is an important observation, as it is indicative that in 1961 saucer stories and images were leaving the collective consciousness to settle into the collective unconscious.
It is also clear that the Hill story not only benefited from prior plausibility structures, but was also instrumental in creating new ones. For instance, the next “Gray abduction” story that emerged in the United States was the so-called Andreasson affair, described in Raymond Fowler’s book The Andreasson Affair published in the 1970s. Yet, the story took place in January 1967, just a few months after the publication of The Interrupted Journey in October 1966. In the same vein, the television film based on the Hill story, The UFO Incident, was first aired on NBC on 20 October 1975. Two weeks later, the famous “Gray abduction” of Travis Walton occurred (5 November 1975). The sincerity of these witnesses is not in doubt here. What one needs to consider is rather that the introduction in the public realm through the mass media of new plausibility structures can enact new forms of PEMIEs.
Tensions in the collective unconscious
It is always fascinating to see ETH ufologists studying sightings in a complete social and political vacuum, as if nothing important happens around a sighting. The Hill story is certainly one of the most patent cases. In the third week of September 1961, there was a lot of going on in the United States that relates to Hill story. At least two major releases of emotional energy were occurring around the same dates.
As found by Kottmeyer and Viéroudy[52], important ufological events in the United States appear to be linked to national security concerns. In September 1961, the world was in the midst of the Berlin crisis, which brought the world to a very serious confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union. The then secret National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) of 21 September 1961, the day after the Hill’s event, was circulated among senior decision-makers showing that the Soviet Union was bluffing and that they could not back up their claim on West Berlin with a large ICBM force.[53] The preparations for an eventual pre-emptive nuclear strike were not necessary anymore, to the great relief of President Kennedy. This also indicated that America was no more in a catching up mode (perceived as such since the launch of Sputnik in 1957), and in fact America was clearly ahead in the Cold War contest.
Second, the Civil Rights movement was actively engaged into the “Freedom Rides” during the summer and fall of 1961 (which finds its roots in the famous Rosa Parkes incident of 1955), where both White and Black activists were riding coach buses across the southern United States, purposefully transgressing segregation laws in bus seating arrangements. This led to several violent incidents where buses were burnt by racist demonstrators. Many Civil Rights activists were seriously beaten and arrested by the police in states where segregation was enforced. On 22 September 1961 (two days after the Hill’s incident), the Freedom Rides Civil Right activists won their first victory by a ruling of the Federal Interstate Commerce Commission interdicting segregation in trains, buses and transportation terminals across the country.[54] Given the Hill active involvement in the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP), these “interrupted journeys” at the border of segregationist states in the southern United States were certainly known to them.
What is important to remember here is that these key events occurred one and two days after the Hill’s event. This could be seen as a liminal events where the content of the NIE and the decision about ending segregation where certainly known to those who wrote them, but were not public yet. In both cases, such information was certainly known to have a major impact on America’s self identity. On one hand America was no more the underdog in the Cold War competition, and the Civil Rights activists were successful in changing American society. To use Anderson’s analysis,[55] it is clear that deeply shared myths and their unconscious underpinnings about what America is were affected.
Social psi effect
The question whether such liminal event could produce social psi effect remains to be answered and it is one of the central tasks of parasociology. Without proposing what could be considered a proof, it is at least possible to show some indications that may be some social psi effects were in action in the Hill case by looking at the symbolic content of what has been reported by them.
The first interesting link can be made is about the appearance of the “spacecraft” and the Freedom Riders. In a previous post about the Fatima story, it was said that a ladder was seen. But what was really meant was a horizontal series of windows looking like a ladder, as commonly found in buses and trains. Then, could it be possible that what Hill saw was a mixture of flying saucer and coach bus, or a flying bus? The famous drawings made by the Hill looks as follow:
It is interesting to note that they also underlined that there were red lights at each ends of the object. Now let’s consider these coach buses contemporary to the Hill event, and note that they have red lights on top at each ends:
Now take a picture of a similar coach bus taken from the side, print it, take both top ends and join them to make something like a cone, and compare it to Barney’s drawing. The similarity is striking.
Another set of symbolic representations are the eyes of the “aliens” which could be linked to the nuclear war that did not occur given the winding down of the Berlin crisis. If one has a look at contemporary mask and military protective suits, like these ones and then compare it to the typical “Gray” seen by the Hill, interesting similarities can be found.
However, it is possible to have a different set of “eyes”, which in the Hill context of 1961 could have been terrifying, and yet very meaningful. Once the alien is seen upside down, as if he would look over someone lying down, the comparison is striking.
In the part of the Hill event that emerged during the hypnosis regression, the issue of sexual reproduction was clearly at the centre stage. There was the barney’s semen collected issue, and Betty’s pregnancy test through the navel using a technology just about to be discovered, but that is low tech our present-day standards.[56] Then there was the skin test performed on Betty [57], and the “Grey” aliens (and let’s remember that grey is a color produced out of a mixture of black and white). Although Betty could not have children due to a medical condition,[58] the issue of mixed children in the United States of the 1960s was not a light one.
The issue of inter-racial marriages was not just a contested social convention in the United States at the time. This was against the law in many states, and as Civil Right activists, there is no reason to believe the Hill were not aware of this. Furthermore, these laws were in place to avoid producing mixed offspring (known in the racist literature as miscegenation). It was only in 1967 with the landmark judgement of the U.S. Supreme Court in the Loving vs. Virginia case that laws prohibiting inter-racial marriages were formally declared unconstitutional. Although it was not enforced, it was only in 2000 that the last state, Alabama, formal struck down their anti inter-racial marriage law. [59]
The last symbolic element addressed here is the famous map that was first described as a 1960s paper technology (i.e. a regular map)[60]. But was later re-described by Betty as being digital under hypnosis by niece (an ETH ufologist) and after such technology became available on Earth.[61] There are a number of problem with the Zeta Reticuli hypothesis that are well-known: it is based on memory and Betty’s drawing could only be approximate, there are an almost infinite number of possibilities if one expand the possible stars beyond 100 light years, etc. Instead, if one reverses the “stellar” map and compare it with a map showing the Freedom Ride action published in 1962, another set of striking similarities can be found.
Notes
[27] Fuller p. 319.
[28] Fuller, p. 232.
[29] Lucadou, W. and F. Zahradnik. (2004). “Predictions of the Model of Pragmatic Information about RSPK”.
[30] Fuller p. 94.
[31] Fuller p. 97.
[32] Fuller, p. 114.
[33] Fuller, p. 115.
[34] See the “ Introduction,” written in 1966 by Dr. Benjamin Simon, in John Fuller’s The Interrupted Journey (New York: Berkeley Publishing), p. 5.
[35] See in particular his famous book originally published in 1952: Black Skin, White Masks.
[36] Fuller p. 39.
[37] Fuller, p. 39.
[38] Fuller, pp. 49 and 71.
[39] Fuller, p. 41.
[40] Fuller, p. 46.
[41] Fuller p. 50.
[42] Fuller, p. 62-65.
[43] Fuller p. 72.
[44] Fuller, p. 69.
[45] Fuller, p. 335.
[46] Fuller, p. 178.
[47] For more information, please refer to Jacques Vallée. (1969) Passport to Magonia.
[48] Please refer to J. Allen Hynek. (1972). The UFO Experience.
[49] Also reported in Vallée’s Passport to Magonia.
[50] Paul Meehan. (1998). Saucer Movies, p. 34.
[51] Idem., p. 104.
[52] See Kottmeyer, Martin. (1996). “UFO Flaps”. The Anomalist 3 (1995-1996): 64-89; and Viéroudy, Pierre. (1977). Ces ovnis qui annoncent le surhomme. Paris: Tchou.
[53] NIE 11-8/1-61 -- Strength and Deployment of Soviet Long Range Ballistic Missile Forces, 21 September 1961 (29 pages), access on Internet at http://www.milnet.com/cia/nies/1961.htm on 22 December 2008. For more information, please refer to Barry M. Blechman and Stephen S. Kaplan. (1978) Force Without War. Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
[54] For more information on the Freedom Ride please refer to Raymond Arsenault (2006) Freedom Riders: 1961 and the Struggle for Racial Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[55] See Anderson, Benedict. (1983). Imagined Communities—Reflections on the Origins and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso.
[56] See Fuller, p. 196.
[57] See Fuller, pp. 316-317.
[58] Fuller, p. 317-318.
[59] For more information, please see on Internet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia.
[60] Fuller, p. 208-209.
[61] In Friedman and Marden, Captured!.
Copyright © 2009 Eric Ouellet
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
The Barney and Betty Hill Story: Case study in parasociology (Part 1)
This post is a first attempt to evaluate the usefulness of the model that emerged from two previous posts: “The materiality of UFOs”, and the “The sociality of UFOs”. The Barney and Betty Hill alleged abduction by extraterrestrial entities (ETs) in the early hours of 20 September 1961 has been selected as a case study to try out the model. There are a number of reasons that justify such a choice. The key one is that large excerpts of the hypnotic regressions conducted by Dr. Benjamin Simon are publicly available through Fuller’s book The Interrupted Journey. Data about the inner state of being of the Hill are thus available, which is rarely the case for most close encounter reports studied by ufologists who espouse the extra-terrestrial hypothesis (ETH). Similarly, this case is quite well-known, and many other aspects have been reported on by a number of authors. Lastly, their story constitutes a landmark case from a sociological standpoint. Contacts with extraterrestrial entities were already reported in the 1950s, particularly during the so-called “contactees era” involving the benevolent “Space Brothers” (notion actively promoted by a number of people after the publication of George Adamski’s Flying Saucers Have Landed in 1953). What makes the Hill case significant is that it introduces innovations in the collective perceptions and narratives about the alleged ETs appearance and behaviour. In particular, the social representations of the ETs slowly started to show certain common physical features (big black eyes, no lips, gray skin, etc), and the ETs’ behaviour as told by witnesses contrasted from previous accounts: the ETs were not that friendly after all.
Analytical Framework
The analytical framework developed in the previous posts is used here to re-assess the events as reported by the Hill. The purpose is not to be predictive, but rather to show that some key variables were present in their experience, many of them completely ignored by the ETH ufologists. Hence, the key criterion is to see if the model can provide new lights to understand what happened to the Hill. As discussed previously, the model can be represented graphically as thus:
The PEMIE
The Hill’s story has been studied by ETH ufologists, and they emphasised the few physical elements involved, in the hope of vindicating their belief. But like in most ufological accounts none of those physical traces can be verified through physical means. For instance, it was believed that there was radar tracking records of a UFO during the night of 19 to 20 September 1961 over central New Hampshire that could prove the Hill story. But after the investigations of David Webb and John Oswald in the 1970s, it became clear that there is no evidence of a link between the radar tracking and the Hill incident.[1]
The object itself was watch by both Barney and Betty while they were conscious with naked eyes and with binoculars, and it was described as something that “appeared to be flashing thin pencils of different colored lights, rotating around an object which at that time appeared cigar shaped. Just a moment before it had changed its speed from slow to fast, then slowed down again as it crossed the face of the moon. The lights were flashing persistently, red amber, green and blue.”[2] This description does not provide a lot of information, and in no way does it prove that the UFO was a manufactured craft. If anything, this description is more in tune with the behaviour of a ball of light made of plasma.[3] Also, it is important to note that at the end of the event, as told under regression, the “spaceship” was actually perceived as an orange ball of fire,[4] which is the hallmark of the most common form of ball of light.
Three other elements are also underlined in the ETH ufology literature[5], the first one being spots on the back of Hill car that appeared to be magnetised. The second one is about the marks on the top of Barney’s shoes. The last one is the issue of marks on Betty’s dress and damages to its zipper. These evidences are also equivocal. The magnetized marks on the car could be caused by the impact of smaller balls of light which could explain the “perfectly” round and magnetized marks. Smaller balls of light are known to accompany larger ones. For the shoes, as it appear that Hill stopped in a forested area, walking in the forest at night could create such effect, and there is no need of being dragged by someone else to produce such an effect. The broken zipper on Betty’s dress could have been damaged while waking in the forest by getting stuck on a branch and the other marks could have been caused by tree resin (which marks were found of being of Earthly biological origin[6]). As one can see, the physical evidences are equivocal at best. Furthermore, the only real evidences left are the accounts of Betty and Barney, both of which are based on recollection of events that occurred mostly while being in altered states of consciousness (either during the event, or after the event during the hypnotic regression sessions with Dr. Simon). With this kind of evidence, a simple materialistic explanation, as proposed by ETH ufologists, is simply impossible to maintain. So, as there is no physical evidence available for physical analysis, an indirect approach is required.
Individual psi effect, belief, and sensitivity to the paranormal
One of the very few approaches that meet that could provide new lights on the physical dimension of the Hill’s story is the one proposed by those who studied psychokinetic events. Pamela Heath, a parapsychologist specialized in the study of psychokinesis (PK), produced in 2003 a substantial compendium about what is known about PK: The PK Zone. Out of her findings, a number of elements about PK present striking similarities to the events told by Betty and Barney Hill.
One of the key findings in Heath’s research is that altered state of consciousness is a pervasive element. Heath found that the key elements of ASC and PK are (1) a feeling of being in another dimension or alternate reality; (2) awareness of discarnate entities, by accessing our spirit; (3) altered sense of time or of being “out” of the time; (4) a sense of vast complexity, difficult for the ordinary mind to understand; (5) a sense of flow, or being in the “zone”; (6) fusion between the conscious and the unconscious; (7) sense of meditation; and (8) subtle shift in the quality of the experience.[7] These elements, of course, cover a wide variety of PK experiences from lab tests on random number generators to poltergeist events. The elements (1) to (3), in particular, describe very well many UFO close encounters, and can be put in direct relations with Jenny Randles’ concept of the “Oz factor”.[8]
When one keeps in mind the factors identified above and links them to Randles’ description of the Oz factor, one can only be struck by the similarities. For instance, she states that "the Oz factor certainly points to consciousness as the focal point of the UFO encounter...Subjective data that override objective reality could be internal [from our subconscious], external [e.g., from some other intelligent agency], or both...The encounter has a visionary component. You might interpret that as meaning it is all in the imagination. But it really means that there is a direct feed, if you like, from the source of the encounter to the consciousness of the witness...Some witnesses report a strange sensation prior to the encounter -- a sort of mental tingling as if they are aware that something is about to happen. They just have to look up and see what is there, as if it had called to them silently...Then time seems to disappear and lose all meaning".[9]
If we use the constitutive elements of ASC found by Heath, the Hill’s experience has many commonalities. On the alternate reality aspect, under hypnosis Barney described during the 22 February 1964 session that he saw the Cheshire cat in Alice in Wonderland disappearing, the eyes of the leader were in his face disconnected from the leader’s body, and that he was “just floating about”.[10] For Betty’s part, the entire episode is about entering into a very strange craft with very strange people.
Both have encountered strange entities that could access their mind directly, which is very similar to the notion of awareness of discarnate entities, by accessing our spirit. On the altered sense of time, it is well-known that the Hill couple was missing a few hours, for which they could not account for. The same occurred under hypnosis. During the 7 March 1964 session, Betty said “We’re driving along … I don’t know where we are … I don’t even know how we got here … Barney and I, we were driving, I don’t know how long…I don’t know how long…”.[11]
Heath found that there is a general sense of knowing among experiencers.[12] Knowing that the event will occur; knowing that the healing is working or not. The sense of knowing also manifests itself through ESP-like experiences. Barney and Betty, at numerous occasions state that they knew that the light in the sky is “interested” in them. For instance, Barney said during the 22 February 1964 session that “the object was still around us. I could feel it around us. I saw it when we passed by the object. When I got in the car, it had swung around so that it was out there. I—I know it was out there”.[13] As well, they knew what the alien entities are saying even when there are no sounds or spoken word uttered.
Other factors that are more commonly found in spontaneous PK are strong emotions and a strong sense of playfulness. Heath notes that “peak levels of emotion can trigger PK, especially for spontaneous events. This seemed to be true for a wide variety of strong emotions, including anger, frustration with others, sadness, excitement, and love”.[14] Heath also quotes an experiencer to illustrate the role of playfulness, “’play is very important in these sorts of things...it’s entertainment at a certain level...it has a thrilling quality”.[15] There are clear links with the UFO experience where emotions can run high, including fear mixed with curiosity, which in a way connects both aspects of emotions in PK, i.e., the strong emotions and the thrilling aspect. Both Barney and Betty showed high degrees of fear of about the aliens and the craft during the hypnosis sessions. But there was also a playful aspect. For instance Betty said during the 21 March 1964 session, “I was more curious and interested. And I had the feeling of being sort of helpless. That something was going to happen, and I didn’t have much control over it. But I wasn’t really afraid. I guess I was looking forward to it.”[16] During the 28 March 1964 session Barney said that he was fascinated while at the same time afraid.[17] It is also interesting to note Barney said that fascination “was being produced by something stronger than me, outside me, that I wasn’t creating this”.[18] Heath found that PK is also associated with what she calls a sense of energy which may be felt as if it is coming from a “higher source”.[19]
Heath describes openness as “both something of a personality style and a lack of rigid beliefs that might prohibit PK. It seems to indicate a flexible worldview, which might allow the performer not only to do PK, but also to recognize and accept their experiences. [But...] belief systems seemed to play far less of a role than the literature would suggest.”[20] This is an interesting distinction, but it can also cause quite a bit of confusion. For instance, studies[21] that identified the belief in the paranormal as an important element of the UFO experience used the concept of belief not meant to mean necessarily “belief system” but rather a positive attitude towards the paranormal in general. The word belief can therefore mean either “belief system” or “openness”.
In her summary, Heath reassesses somewhat her findings in stating that “in a way, openness to an experience is also a willingness to suspend disbelief, and to see what can happen without the interference of the intellect. It also suggests a lack of attachment to a rigid world view. Hence, it is possible that beliefs could act to modify PK performance either through encouraging the performer to be open to the possibility of PK, and/or willingness to open up to that state [...].”[22] The relationship between belief systems and openness can be therefore more subtle than previously understood by parapsychologists.
Betty, although she appears to have no conscious interest in UFOs prior to her September 1961 experience, it was clear that from the onset she established that the light in the sky was a UFO (read here: aliens in a spaceship). She immediately linked that experience with the one of her sister Janet, who saw a UFO during the 1950s. Indeed, Betty called Janet when she arrived home to discuss her UFO experience. As well, a fact rarely underlined by ufologists is that Betty engaged in informal telepathic experiments with Barney before their UFO event,[23] and her family has a history of dealing with paranormal events.[24] Lastly, she had other UFO sightings afterward in 1966-67.[25] Barney, on the other hand, was clearly struggling to not believe it was an “alien spaceship,” and this inner struggle was obviously perceptible in the debate he had with Betty in the car while watching the UFO in the sky in 1961. This struggle was also obvious while he was under hypnosis with Dr. Benjamin.[26] Such a struggle was clearly indicative that he unconsciously accepted the possibility of an “alien spaceships”, but consciously he was trying to resist such “irrational belief”. In the end, they had a different experience. Barney had a more rigid belief in “rationality” while Betty was quite open to have an extraordinary experience. Barney had no visual memories of being on “the ship”. It was Betty who provided the bulk of the story about the “Greys”, the medical experiment, the stellar map, etc. Hence, the Hill’s story also fits well Heath’s findings about openness.
Although it is not possible to prove according to the positivist epistemology that the Hill story was actually a spontaneous PK experience, it is clear that their story has a lot in common with what is known about the psycho-social dynamics of PK. A more in-depth analysis of all the material gathered under hypnosis (as Fuller only published a portion of the transcript in his book) submitted to all of the 14 elements proposed by Heath in her book would probably provide a more comprehensive look at the Hill story. Nevertheless, there are a number of indicators pointing towards something known (i.e., PK effects), which is more useful than trying to speculate about something that is not known (i.e., the ETH).
Footnotes
[1] Hall, Richard. (1979). “Hill Radar-UFO Connection Weak”. MUFON UFO Journal No. 140. Retrieved on Internet at http://www.nicap.org/hillradarweak.htm on 2 January 2009.
[2] Fuller, p. 28.
[3] Heath, P.. (2003). The PK Zone, p. 100; Budden, A. Electric UFOs, pp. 165-196.
[4] Fuller, p. 213.
[5] In particular Freidman, S. and K. Marden. (2007). Captured!.
[6] Freidman, S. and K. Marden, p. 267.
[7] Heath, pp. 220-222.
[8] Randles, J. (1983). UFO Reality.
[9] Randles, J. (2004). “View from Britain”, pp. 18-19.
[10] Fuller, p. 125-127.
[11] Fuller, p. 184.
[12] Heath, pp. 316-320.
[13] Fuller, p. 121.
[14] Heath, p. 256.
[15] Heath, p. 258.
[16] Fuller, p. 253.
[17] Fuller, p. 283.
[18] Idem.
[19] Heath, p. 266.
[20] Heath, p. 307.
[21] See Philips 1993, Spanos et al. 1993, and Basterfield and Thalbourne 2001.
[22] Heath, p. 314.
[23] Fuller, pp. 243-244.
[24] Schwartz, pp. 273-281.
[25] Friedman & Marden, pp. 211-218.
[26] Fuller, pp. 33, 101, and 108.
Copyright © 2009 Eric Ouellet
Analytical Framework
The analytical framework developed in the previous posts is used here to re-assess the events as reported by the Hill. The purpose is not to be predictive, but rather to show that some key variables were present in their experience, many of them completely ignored by the ETH ufologists. Hence, the key criterion is to see if the model can provide new lights to understand what happened to the Hill. As discussed previously, the model can be represented graphically as thus:
The PEMIE
The Hill’s story has been studied by ETH ufologists, and they emphasised the few physical elements involved, in the hope of vindicating their belief. But like in most ufological accounts none of those physical traces can be verified through physical means. For instance, it was believed that there was radar tracking records of a UFO during the night of 19 to 20 September 1961 over central New Hampshire that could prove the Hill story. But after the investigations of David Webb and John Oswald in the 1970s, it became clear that there is no evidence of a link between the radar tracking and the Hill incident.[1]
The object itself was watch by both Barney and Betty while they were conscious with naked eyes and with binoculars, and it was described as something that “appeared to be flashing thin pencils of different colored lights, rotating around an object which at that time appeared cigar shaped. Just a moment before it had changed its speed from slow to fast, then slowed down again as it crossed the face of the moon. The lights were flashing persistently, red amber, green and blue.”[2] This description does not provide a lot of information, and in no way does it prove that the UFO was a manufactured craft. If anything, this description is more in tune with the behaviour of a ball of light made of plasma.[3] Also, it is important to note that at the end of the event, as told under regression, the “spaceship” was actually perceived as an orange ball of fire,[4] which is the hallmark of the most common form of ball of light.
Three other elements are also underlined in the ETH ufology literature[5], the first one being spots on the back of Hill car that appeared to be magnetised. The second one is about the marks on the top of Barney’s shoes. The last one is the issue of marks on Betty’s dress and damages to its zipper. These evidences are also equivocal. The magnetized marks on the car could be caused by the impact of smaller balls of light which could explain the “perfectly” round and magnetized marks. Smaller balls of light are known to accompany larger ones. For the shoes, as it appear that Hill stopped in a forested area, walking in the forest at night could create such effect, and there is no need of being dragged by someone else to produce such an effect. The broken zipper on Betty’s dress could have been damaged while waking in the forest by getting stuck on a branch and the other marks could have been caused by tree resin (which marks were found of being of Earthly biological origin[6]). As one can see, the physical evidences are equivocal at best. Furthermore, the only real evidences left are the accounts of Betty and Barney, both of which are based on recollection of events that occurred mostly while being in altered states of consciousness (either during the event, or after the event during the hypnotic regression sessions with Dr. Simon). With this kind of evidence, a simple materialistic explanation, as proposed by ETH ufologists, is simply impossible to maintain. So, as there is no physical evidence available for physical analysis, an indirect approach is required.
Individual psi effect, belief, and sensitivity to the paranormal
One of the very few approaches that meet that could provide new lights on the physical dimension of the Hill’s story is the one proposed by those who studied psychokinetic events. Pamela Heath, a parapsychologist specialized in the study of psychokinesis (PK), produced in 2003 a substantial compendium about what is known about PK: The PK Zone. Out of her findings, a number of elements about PK present striking similarities to the events told by Betty and Barney Hill.
One of the key findings in Heath’s research is that altered state of consciousness is a pervasive element. Heath found that the key elements of ASC and PK are (1) a feeling of being in another dimension or alternate reality; (2) awareness of discarnate entities, by accessing our spirit; (3) altered sense of time or of being “out” of the time; (4) a sense of vast complexity, difficult for the ordinary mind to understand; (5) a sense of flow, or being in the “zone”; (6) fusion between the conscious and the unconscious; (7) sense of meditation; and (8) subtle shift in the quality of the experience.[7] These elements, of course, cover a wide variety of PK experiences from lab tests on random number generators to poltergeist events. The elements (1) to (3), in particular, describe very well many UFO close encounters, and can be put in direct relations with Jenny Randles’ concept of the “Oz factor”.[8]
When one keeps in mind the factors identified above and links them to Randles’ description of the Oz factor, one can only be struck by the similarities. For instance, she states that "the Oz factor certainly points to consciousness as the focal point of the UFO encounter...Subjective data that override objective reality could be internal [from our subconscious], external [e.g., from some other intelligent agency], or both...The encounter has a visionary component. You might interpret that as meaning it is all in the imagination. But it really means that there is a direct feed, if you like, from the source of the encounter to the consciousness of the witness...Some witnesses report a strange sensation prior to the encounter -- a sort of mental tingling as if they are aware that something is about to happen. They just have to look up and see what is there, as if it had called to them silently...Then time seems to disappear and lose all meaning".[9]
If we use the constitutive elements of ASC found by Heath, the Hill’s experience has many commonalities. On the alternate reality aspect, under hypnosis Barney described during the 22 February 1964 session that he saw the Cheshire cat in Alice in Wonderland disappearing, the eyes of the leader were in his face disconnected from the leader’s body, and that he was “just floating about”.[10] For Betty’s part, the entire episode is about entering into a very strange craft with very strange people.
Both have encountered strange entities that could access their mind directly, which is very similar to the notion of awareness of discarnate entities, by accessing our spirit. On the altered sense of time, it is well-known that the Hill couple was missing a few hours, for which they could not account for. The same occurred under hypnosis. During the 7 March 1964 session, Betty said “We’re driving along … I don’t know where we are … I don’t even know how we got here … Barney and I, we were driving, I don’t know how long…I don’t know how long…”.[11]
Heath found that there is a general sense of knowing among experiencers.[12] Knowing that the event will occur; knowing that the healing is working or not. The sense of knowing also manifests itself through ESP-like experiences. Barney and Betty, at numerous occasions state that they knew that the light in the sky is “interested” in them. For instance, Barney said during the 22 February 1964 session that “the object was still around us. I could feel it around us. I saw it when we passed by the object. When I got in the car, it had swung around so that it was out there. I—I know it was out there”.[13] As well, they knew what the alien entities are saying even when there are no sounds or spoken word uttered.
Other factors that are more commonly found in spontaneous PK are strong emotions and a strong sense of playfulness. Heath notes that “peak levels of emotion can trigger PK, especially for spontaneous events. This seemed to be true for a wide variety of strong emotions, including anger, frustration with others, sadness, excitement, and love”.[14] Heath also quotes an experiencer to illustrate the role of playfulness, “’play is very important in these sorts of things...it’s entertainment at a certain level...it has a thrilling quality”.[15] There are clear links with the UFO experience where emotions can run high, including fear mixed with curiosity, which in a way connects both aspects of emotions in PK, i.e., the strong emotions and the thrilling aspect. Both Barney and Betty showed high degrees of fear of about the aliens and the craft during the hypnosis sessions. But there was also a playful aspect. For instance Betty said during the 21 March 1964 session, “I was more curious and interested. And I had the feeling of being sort of helpless. That something was going to happen, and I didn’t have much control over it. But I wasn’t really afraid. I guess I was looking forward to it.”[16] During the 28 March 1964 session Barney said that he was fascinated while at the same time afraid.[17] It is also interesting to note Barney said that fascination “was being produced by something stronger than me, outside me, that I wasn’t creating this”.[18] Heath found that PK is also associated with what she calls a sense of energy which may be felt as if it is coming from a “higher source”.[19]
Heath describes openness as “both something of a personality style and a lack of rigid beliefs that might prohibit PK. It seems to indicate a flexible worldview, which might allow the performer not only to do PK, but also to recognize and accept their experiences. [But...] belief systems seemed to play far less of a role than the literature would suggest.”[20] This is an interesting distinction, but it can also cause quite a bit of confusion. For instance, studies[21] that identified the belief in the paranormal as an important element of the UFO experience used the concept of belief not meant to mean necessarily “belief system” but rather a positive attitude towards the paranormal in general. The word belief can therefore mean either “belief system” or “openness”.
In her summary, Heath reassesses somewhat her findings in stating that “in a way, openness to an experience is also a willingness to suspend disbelief, and to see what can happen without the interference of the intellect. It also suggests a lack of attachment to a rigid world view. Hence, it is possible that beliefs could act to modify PK performance either through encouraging the performer to be open to the possibility of PK, and/or willingness to open up to that state [...].”[22] The relationship between belief systems and openness can be therefore more subtle than previously understood by parapsychologists.
Betty, although she appears to have no conscious interest in UFOs prior to her September 1961 experience, it was clear that from the onset she established that the light in the sky was a UFO (read here: aliens in a spaceship). She immediately linked that experience with the one of her sister Janet, who saw a UFO during the 1950s. Indeed, Betty called Janet when she arrived home to discuss her UFO experience. As well, a fact rarely underlined by ufologists is that Betty engaged in informal telepathic experiments with Barney before their UFO event,[23] and her family has a history of dealing with paranormal events.[24] Lastly, she had other UFO sightings afterward in 1966-67.[25] Barney, on the other hand, was clearly struggling to not believe it was an “alien spaceship,” and this inner struggle was obviously perceptible in the debate he had with Betty in the car while watching the UFO in the sky in 1961. This struggle was also obvious while he was under hypnosis with Dr. Benjamin.[26] Such a struggle was clearly indicative that he unconsciously accepted the possibility of an “alien spaceships”, but consciously he was trying to resist such “irrational belief”. In the end, they had a different experience. Barney had a more rigid belief in “rationality” while Betty was quite open to have an extraordinary experience. Barney had no visual memories of being on “the ship”. It was Betty who provided the bulk of the story about the “Greys”, the medical experiment, the stellar map, etc. Hence, the Hill’s story also fits well Heath’s findings about openness.
Although it is not possible to prove according to the positivist epistemology that the Hill story was actually a spontaneous PK experience, it is clear that their story has a lot in common with what is known about the psycho-social dynamics of PK. A more in-depth analysis of all the material gathered under hypnosis (as Fuller only published a portion of the transcript in his book) submitted to all of the 14 elements proposed by Heath in her book would probably provide a more comprehensive look at the Hill story. Nevertheless, there are a number of indicators pointing towards something known (i.e., PK effects), which is more useful than trying to speculate about something that is not known (i.e., the ETH).
Footnotes
[1] Hall, Richard. (1979). “Hill Radar-UFO Connection Weak”. MUFON UFO Journal No. 140. Retrieved on Internet at http://www.nicap.org/hillradarweak.htm on 2 January 2009.
[2] Fuller, p. 28.
[3] Heath, P.. (2003). The PK Zone, p. 100; Budden, A. Electric UFOs, pp. 165-196.
[4] Fuller, p. 213.
[5] In particular Freidman, S. and K. Marden. (2007). Captured!.
[6] Freidman, S. and K. Marden, p. 267.
[7] Heath, pp. 220-222.
[8] Randles, J. (1983). UFO Reality.
[9] Randles, J. (2004). “View from Britain”, pp. 18-19.
[10] Fuller, p. 125-127.
[11] Fuller, p. 184.
[12] Heath, pp. 316-320.
[13] Fuller, p. 121.
[14] Heath, p. 256.
[15] Heath, p. 258.
[16] Fuller, p. 253.
[17] Fuller, p. 283.
[18] Idem.
[19] Heath, p. 266.
[20] Heath, p. 307.
[21] See Philips 1993, Spanos et al. 1993, and Basterfield and Thalbourne 2001.
[22] Heath, p. 314.
[23] Fuller, pp. 243-244.
[24] Schwartz, pp. 273-281.
[25] Friedman & Marden, pp. 211-218.
[26] Fuller, pp. 33, 101, and 108.
Copyright © 2009 Eric Ouellet
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Essay on the Sociality of UFOs
This post is proposing a review of the literature surveyed so far on the social dimension of the UFO experience. However, contrary to most sociological research on UFOs, it is not focussing on the socially shared belief in UFO per se. It is not, either, assuming that the debate about the actual reality of the phenomena is to be ignored (or worst, ridiculed). Instead, this review is building on the post on the “Materiality of UFOs”, in which UFOs were described as PEMIEs (Psi/Electro-Magnetic Induced Experiences). In other words, it based on the assumption that the UFO experiences are caused, in part, by factors external to the experiencers that are beyond conventional explanations. It is also based on the assumption that social realities not only provide narrative contents for the experience but also that it might at the source of some of those external factors. The materiality and “sociality” of the phenomenon are therefore understood here as being two interdependent dimensions of the same experience.
The literature that addresses directly the social dimension of the UFO phenomenon is much less developed than the one about its materiality. It is not surprising. Not only the dominant Extra-Terrestrial Hypothesis (ETH) in the ufological literature tends to ignore the social dimension of the phenomenon because it is threatening its core beliefs, but also because many of those who wrote seriously about UFOs tend to have a background in natural sciences or engineering (e.g. Karl Brunstein, Allen Hynek, Jacques Vallée).
This particular literary context presents other challenges. There is also a useful literature that is not directly linked to UFO research. It is the parapsychological research on macro psi effects, which has a lot to offer, and reinforces in many instances the findings found in the limited literature on the social dimension of the UFOs. Hence, wherever it is appropriate, the parapsychological literature is also introduced within this discussion on the sociality of UFOs.
Central role of belief
It is now well established in parapsychology that the belief in the paranormal is an important enabler to produce psi effects. The famous sheep-goat effect identified by Gertrude Schmeidler (1952) is now known for over 50 years. If one believes in paranormal effects (sheep) he/she tends to have higher score in tests, while the disbeliever (goat) tend to have lower scores. It has been replicated numerous times, and it is clear that the cognitive dimension of believing in psi is the key to produce psi effects (Wiseman & Smith 1994). More recently, Heath (2003) also identified that a general positive attitude towards the paranormal is an important enabler for psychokinesis (PK). Batcheldor (1984) and Reihart (1994) also noted that self-convincing through trickery can also be an important way to reinforce beliefs and increase the potential for psi effects to occur. In the same vein, some studies found that a strong proportion of people who saw a UFO had other paranormal experiences before the sighting (Phillips 1993; Spanos et al. 1993; Basterfield & Thalbourne 2001). As well, Rogo (2006) and others have noted that UFO experiencers oftentimes have repeated experiences of sightings. Although more research is needed, it appears that the UFO phenomenon shares the same general characteristics as other psi-related phenomenon with regards to the centrality of belief in the paranormal. According to Spencer (1994), this is correlation is more pronounced in case of people experiencing close encounters. This is an important indicator pointing towards social dimension of the UFO phenomenon.
An interesting empirical illustration of this issue can be found in the Barney and Betty Hill story, as the witnesses provided substantial information about their inner state of being through hypnotherapy. Betty, although she appears to have no conscious interest in UFOs prior to her September 1961 experience, it was clear that from the onset she established that the light in the sky was a UFO (read here: aliens in a spaceship). She immediately linked that experience with the one of her sister Janet, who saw a UFO during the 1950s. Indeed, Betty called Janet on the day she arrived home to discuss her UFO experience. As well, a fact rarely underlined by ufologists is that Betty engaged in informal telepathic experiments with Barney before their UFO event (Fuller 1966: 243-244), and her family has a history of dealing with paranormal events (Schwartz 1983; 273-281). Lastly, she had other UFO sightings afterward in 1966-67 (Friedman & Marden 2007: 211-218). Barney, on the other hand, was clearly struggling to not believe it was an “alien spaceship,” and this inner struggle was obviously perceptible in the debate he had with Betty in the car while watching the UFO in the sky in 1961. This struggle was also obvious while he was under hypnosis with Dr. Benjamin (Fuller 1966: 33, 101, 108). Such a struggle was clearly indicative that he unconsciously accepted the possibility of an “alien spaceships”, but consciously he was trying to resist such “irrational belief”. In the end, they had a different experience. While Betty had a full experience with the aliens and the spaceship, Barney had his eyes closed for most of the event, as they told Dr. Benjamin while being under hypnosis.
The psycho-social dynamics
Another important social dimension of the UFO phenomenon is the actual psycho-social dynamics surrounding the event. Such dynamics has several layers with their own distinct internal logic; as well as showing interdependencies among the various layers.
The shared psi event at the local level
One of the interesting speculations of Berthold Schwartz (1983) is that the context of multiple witnesses of UFO sightings appears to be a telepathically shared psi event. Such event could occur irrespective as whether the UFO is a materialized phenomenon through PK effects or simply a transfer of images and feelings through ESP without having any particular material basis. This phenomenon of telepathically shared psi effects is known for quite some time in parapsychology, and can be traced back to the landmark study of Gurney, Myers and Podmore (1886) Phantasms of the Living. Warcollier (1928, 1962) also noted that images can be communicated to a wider group through telepathic means. Favre (1978) also proposed a similar set of ideas for various types of apparitions, to include UFOs and alien sightings. This notion of telepathically shared psi effect certainly requires further research, but it is an interesting hypothesis to investigate as it highlight that psi induced events are not only related to the individual but it is also a micro social event.
The active nurturing of the phenomenon
Spencer (1995) notes that UFO events, and close encounters in particular, appear to be very strange and hard to describe events, but that witnesses ultimately end up interpreting them as “aliens-in-spaceship” events because it provides a convenient set of notions to describe something that is beyond description. Some authors have found that experiences very similar to the UFO ones have been interpreted in other cultures in different ways (Harvey-Wilson 2001, Vallée 1969). However, it is important to note that for such interpretation to emerge, the social and cultural conditioning existing in Western societies about the ETH is required especially through the diffusion of the science fiction genre. In other words, if a society provides appropriate “plausibility structures (Goode 2000), then we can collectively nurture such conditions to interpret psi events as “aliens-in-spaceship” events. In this regards, it is important to underline that historically witnesses first talked about strange objects in the sky, and it was only after a few years of speculations about the possibility that they might be of extra-terrestrial origin that close encounters with aliens were reported.
In parapsychology, Walter von Lucadou (1995) and von Lucadou & Zahradnik (2004) have develop an interesting model to understand the social dimension of poltergeist events that could be borrowed to study UFO events. Although their model is more akin to social psychology (i.e. small groups), there is a number of links that can be made with the sociological dimension of nurturing the “aliens-in-spaceship” scenario. For them, it is clear that a poltergeist is a psi event that tends to last longer because the focus person and his/her immediate entourage are confirmed in their belief that there is an evil spirit in their house. Among the people who play an important role in reinforcing such particular belief are what they called the “naive observers” (i.e. self-appointed psychics and parapsychologists). The naive observers are in a way shielding the phenomenon from disbelief so that the focus person and his/her entourage continue to maintain the conditions necessary for the poltergeist event to occur. One cannot escape thinking that the ETH ufologists play the same role as the naive observers, but at a societal level. Von Lucadou’s model appears to be even more applicable to the repeat abduction scenario, as individual ufologists who study particular cases only reinforce the belief by the experiencer that they were abducted by aliens.
One could also see some interesting similarities between what Spencer found about the mythmaking process of UFO construed as “aliens-in-spaceship” and the parapsychological experiment of creating from scratch a ghost by Owen and M. Sparrow (1976), as described in their famous book Conjuring up Philip. Nurturing plausibility structures, therefore, can be construed as working both at the small group level, as well as at the societal level. Furthermore, it can be speculated that when the two levels are in line, with respect to their content, then there is a reinforcing effect. The active participation of people, either as individual, circle of believers, or socially shared belief, appears to be key in producing psi effects.
Social anxiety and UFOs
The notion that UFOs represents some sort of reaction to socially shared anxieties constitutes the core of Jung’s (1958) analysis of the UFO phenomenon. However, it appears that this issue can be analyzed from two distinct angles. First, Pierre Viéroudy (1977) and Martin Kottmeyer (1996) found a correlation between national crises and UFO waves. As well, it can also be said that UFO-like events such as the Marian apparitions in Fatima in 1917 were occurring during a national crisis, i.e. the first deployment of Portuguese troops on the Western front (matching almost perfectly the spread of the apparitions), which was completely occulted by ufologists who studied the events (such as Fernandes and D’Armada 2005). Jacques Vallée (1992), who visited the USSR in its last days, speculated that the UFO wave they were experiencing at the time might be caused by the incoming national crisis.
Second, it is also possible to see the UFO phenomenon as the expression of a general anxiety about technology and its impact on our lives (Méheust 1978). In this case, the phenomenon appears to have developed a dynamics of its own, where it is quite difficult to predict sightings, as they may be linked to a multitude of factors hard to measure and monitor.
The macro social dynamic and the collective unconscious
The notion that UFOs would be an objectified expression of the collective unconscious is not a new one, and was contemplated by Jung (1958). A few other authors have made such a suggestion (Freixedo 1977; Viéroudy 1977, 1978a, 1978b, 1983; Méheust 1978; Stupple in Fuller 1980; Rojcewicz 1987), but none of them has pursued it to any significant extent. What these authors imply is that collectively, through shared unconscious processes, we produce macro level PK effects (including materialization) that are partially autonomous from the individual witnesses. As well, our commonly shared frames of reference provide a specific content to these PK effects (i.e., drawing from existing plausibility structures). UFOs and aliens are thus understood as PK effects specific to our technological world dreaming of deep space exploration. To understand how the collective unconscious could be producing PK effects, one has to search into a literature further remote from the study of UFOs and parapsychology.
Collective unconscious and social unconscious
These two terms have been used interchangeably, and in the sociological literature it appears to not cause much problem if one is doing so. However, psychologists do make a distinction between the two. The collective unconscious is a concept directly linked to Carl Jung and his followers. Although there have been some attempts to link his concept to sociological analysis (Staude 1976, Greenwood 1990, Main 2006), it remains essentially a psychological concept. The problem with Jung’s concept is that it is a very rigid one that identifies a number of specific archetypes (deep genetically rooted ways of thinking and feeling) which have failed to be empirically tested when it comes to socially-shared ways of thinking and feeling. Societies have shown instead very wide diversity in this regard. Yet, Jung’s concept is still useful because it opens a door to the study of paranormal effects through the notion of synchronicity (see Main 1997 for a detailed discussion). For Jung, synchronicity is a correlation between two events that are not linked by a cause-and-effect chain, but that are meaningful to each others. Jung proposes that synchronicity is an expression of the collective unconscious “making thing happen”.
Hansen (2001), a parapsychologist, proposed that paranormal events are a particular expression of the collective unconscious under the archetype that Jung named the trickster. The trickster is a metaphorical description of our dealing with ambiguity. As the human mind is not able to comprehend the entire reality, we have to make assumptions, to speculate, and belief in a lot of things to go through life. The net result is that our relationship to reality is always marked by a fair degree of ambiguity. The trickster is therefore this common human experience of having other parts of our mind challenging in unexpected ways the conscious but improvable assumptions we made about reality to deal with its inherent ambiguity. For Hansen, psi effects occur when the trickster archetype is activated because it creates a liminal zone between old certainties and new certainties. Within that liminal zone, for a brief period, everything becomes possible, including psi effects. It is in this context that Hansen considers that UFO events occur when the trickster archetype is activated within the collective unconscious at the social level. Although Hansen provides an interesting analytical approach to the UFO experience, it remains too generic, like all other attempts to link Jungian archetypes to the sociological analysis.
To develop a less generic approach to understand the impact of the collective unconscious, there are a number of avenues that remain to be explored. For instance the work of sociologists like Castoriadis (1975) and Leledakis (1995) on how social innovation occurs through the unconscious and the imaginary, and the work of people involved in group analytics such as Powell (1991), Dalal (2001), Zeddies (2002), and Thygesen (2008), may provide further thought to develop a more comprehensive model as to how the collective unconscious work. Such a model may, in turn, help to understand the processes behind the generation of social psi.
A proto-model
Based on the literature surveyed so far, it is possible to propose a tentative modeling of the social dimension of the UFO phenomenon. It appears that all three usual levels of analysis (i.e. individual, group, and society) have a part to play in various PEMIE events. It is not to say that they always play a role in each case, but they all can potentially play a role. It could be speculated that the most spectacular PEMIE events such as major Marian apparitions would occur only when the three levels are aligned cognitively and emotionally.
The proposed model could construed as a concentric graph moving from the most concrete elements of the experience towards the most subtle and yet most structuring elements. As well, two distinct sets of variables seem at play. One set I would qualify of cognitive, which includes individual beliefs, small group nurturing of the phenomenon, and the societal plausibility structures. The second set is more in line with other enablers to psi effects such as individual sensitivity to the paranormal, telepathic sharing, and social anxiety within the collective unconscious.
This remains, of course, only a tentative first cut at modelling UFO events based on the literature surveyed. However, it appears quite clear that the social dimension of the UFO experience cannot be ignored, and it appears to play a fundamental role in defining the phenomenon.
Copyright © 2009 Eric Ouellet
The literature that addresses directly the social dimension of the UFO phenomenon is much less developed than the one about its materiality. It is not surprising. Not only the dominant Extra-Terrestrial Hypothesis (ETH) in the ufological literature tends to ignore the social dimension of the phenomenon because it is threatening its core beliefs, but also because many of those who wrote seriously about UFOs tend to have a background in natural sciences or engineering (e.g. Karl Brunstein, Allen Hynek, Jacques Vallée).
This particular literary context presents other challenges. There is also a useful literature that is not directly linked to UFO research. It is the parapsychological research on macro psi effects, which has a lot to offer, and reinforces in many instances the findings found in the limited literature on the social dimension of the UFOs. Hence, wherever it is appropriate, the parapsychological literature is also introduced within this discussion on the sociality of UFOs.
Central role of belief
It is now well established in parapsychology that the belief in the paranormal is an important enabler to produce psi effects. The famous sheep-goat effect identified by Gertrude Schmeidler (1952) is now known for over 50 years. If one believes in paranormal effects (sheep) he/she tends to have higher score in tests, while the disbeliever (goat) tend to have lower scores. It has been replicated numerous times, and it is clear that the cognitive dimension of believing in psi is the key to produce psi effects (Wiseman & Smith 1994). More recently, Heath (2003) also identified that a general positive attitude towards the paranormal is an important enabler for psychokinesis (PK). Batcheldor (1984) and Reihart (1994) also noted that self-convincing through trickery can also be an important way to reinforce beliefs and increase the potential for psi effects to occur. In the same vein, some studies found that a strong proportion of people who saw a UFO had other paranormal experiences before the sighting (Phillips 1993; Spanos et al. 1993; Basterfield & Thalbourne 2001). As well, Rogo (2006) and others have noted that UFO experiencers oftentimes have repeated experiences of sightings. Although more research is needed, it appears that the UFO phenomenon shares the same general characteristics as other psi-related phenomenon with regards to the centrality of belief in the paranormal. According to Spencer (1994), this is correlation is more pronounced in case of people experiencing close encounters. This is an important indicator pointing towards social dimension of the UFO phenomenon.
An interesting empirical illustration of this issue can be found in the Barney and Betty Hill story, as the witnesses provided substantial information about their inner state of being through hypnotherapy. Betty, although she appears to have no conscious interest in UFOs prior to her September 1961 experience, it was clear that from the onset she established that the light in the sky was a UFO (read here: aliens in a spaceship). She immediately linked that experience with the one of her sister Janet, who saw a UFO during the 1950s. Indeed, Betty called Janet on the day she arrived home to discuss her UFO experience. As well, a fact rarely underlined by ufologists is that Betty engaged in informal telepathic experiments with Barney before their UFO event (Fuller 1966: 243-244), and her family has a history of dealing with paranormal events (Schwartz 1983; 273-281). Lastly, she had other UFO sightings afterward in 1966-67 (Friedman & Marden 2007: 211-218). Barney, on the other hand, was clearly struggling to not believe it was an “alien spaceship,” and this inner struggle was obviously perceptible in the debate he had with Betty in the car while watching the UFO in the sky in 1961. This struggle was also obvious while he was under hypnosis with Dr. Benjamin (Fuller 1966: 33, 101, 108). Such a struggle was clearly indicative that he unconsciously accepted the possibility of an “alien spaceships”, but consciously he was trying to resist such “irrational belief”. In the end, they had a different experience. While Betty had a full experience with the aliens and the spaceship, Barney had his eyes closed for most of the event, as they told Dr. Benjamin while being under hypnosis.
The psycho-social dynamics
Another important social dimension of the UFO phenomenon is the actual psycho-social dynamics surrounding the event. Such dynamics has several layers with their own distinct internal logic; as well as showing interdependencies among the various layers.
The shared psi event at the local level
One of the interesting speculations of Berthold Schwartz (1983) is that the context of multiple witnesses of UFO sightings appears to be a telepathically shared psi event. Such event could occur irrespective as whether the UFO is a materialized phenomenon through PK effects or simply a transfer of images and feelings through ESP without having any particular material basis. This phenomenon of telepathically shared psi effects is known for quite some time in parapsychology, and can be traced back to the landmark study of Gurney, Myers and Podmore (1886) Phantasms of the Living. Warcollier (1928, 1962) also noted that images can be communicated to a wider group through telepathic means. Favre (1978) also proposed a similar set of ideas for various types of apparitions, to include UFOs and alien sightings. This notion of telepathically shared psi effect certainly requires further research, but it is an interesting hypothesis to investigate as it highlight that psi induced events are not only related to the individual but it is also a micro social event.
The active nurturing of the phenomenon
Spencer (1995) notes that UFO events, and close encounters in particular, appear to be very strange and hard to describe events, but that witnesses ultimately end up interpreting them as “aliens-in-spaceship” events because it provides a convenient set of notions to describe something that is beyond description. Some authors have found that experiences very similar to the UFO ones have been interpreted in other cultures in different ways (Harvey-Wilson 2001, Vallée 1969). However, it is important to note that for such interpretation to emerge, the social and cultural conditioning existing in Western societies about the ETH is required especially through the diffusion of the science fiction genre. In other words, if a society provides appropriate “plausibility structures (Goode 2000), then we can collectively nurture such conditions to interpret psi events as “aliens-in-spaceship” events. In this regards, it is important to underline that historically witnesses first talked about strange objects in the sky, and it was only after a few years of speculations about the possibility that they might be of extra-terrestrial origin that close encounters with aliens were reported.
In parapsychology, Walter von Lucadou (1995) and von Lucadou & Zahradnik (2004) have develop an interesting model to understand the social dimension of poltergeist events that could be borrowed to study UFO events. Although their model is more akin to social psychology (i.e. small groups), there is a number of links that can be made with the sociological dimension of nurturing the “aliens-in-spaceship” scenario. For them, it is clear that a poltergeist is a psi event that tends to last longer because the focus person and his/her immediate entourage are confirmed in their belief that there is an evil spirit in their house. Among the people who play an important role in reinforcing such particular belief are what they called the “naive observers” (i.e. self-appointed psychics and parapsychologists). The naive observers are in a way shielding the phenomenon from disbelief so that the focus person and his/her entourage continue to maintain the conditions necessary for the poltergeist event to occur. One cannot escape thinking that the ETH ufologists play the same role as the naive observers, but at a societal level. Von Lucadou’s model appears to be even more applicable to the repeat abduction scenario, as individual ufologists who study particular cases only reinforce the belief by the experiencer that they were abducted by aliens.
One could also see some interesting similarities between what Spencer found about the mythmaking process of UFO construed as “aliens-in-spaceship” and the parapsychological experiment of creating from scratch a ghost by Owen and M. Sparrow (1976), as described in their famous book Conjuring up Philip. Nurturing plausibility structures, therefore, can be construed as working both at the small group level, as well as at the societal level. Furthermore, it can be speculated that when the two levels are in line, with respect to their content, then there is a reinforcing effect. The active participation of people, either as individual, circle of believers, or socially shared belief, appears to be key in producing psi effects.
Social anxiety and UFOs
The notion that UFOs represents some sort of reaction to socially shared anxieties constitutes the core of Jung’s (1958) analysis of the UFO phenomenon. However, it appears that this issue can be analyzed from two distinct angles. First, Pierre Viéroudy (1977) and Martin Kottmeyer (1996) found a correlation between national crises and UFO waves. As well, it can also be said that UFO-like events such as the Marian apparitions in Fatima in 1917 were occurring during a national crisis, i.e. the first deployment of Portuguese troops on the Western front (matching almost perfectly the spread of the apparitions), which was completely occulted by ufologists who studied the events (such as Fernandes and D’Armada 2005). Jacques Vallée (1992), who visited the USSR in its last days, speculated that the UFO wave they were experiencing at the time might be caused by the incoming national crisis.
Second, it is also possible to see the UFO phenomenon as the expression of a general anxiety about technology and its impact on our lives (Méheust 1978). In this case, the phenomenon appears to have developed a dynamics of its own, where it is quite difficult to predict sightings, as they may be linked to a multitude of factors hard to measure and monitor.
The macro social dynamic and the collective unconscious
The notion that UFOs would be an objectified expression of the collective unconscious is not a new one, and was contemplated by Jung (1958). A few other authors have made such a suggestion (Freixedo 1977; Viéroudy 1977, 1978a, 1978b, 1983; Méheust 1978; Stupple in Fuller 1980; Rojcewicz 1987), but none of them has pursued it to any significant extent. What these authors imply is that collectively, through shared unconscious processes, we produce macro level PK effects (including materialization) that are partially autonomous from the individual witnesses. As well, our commonly shared frames of reference provide a specific content to these PK effects (i.e., drawing from existing plausibility structures). UFOs and aliens are thus understood as PK effects specific to our technological world dreaming of deep space exploration. To understand how the collective unconscious could be producing PK effects, one has to search into a literature further remote from the study of UFOs and parapsychology.
Collective unconscious and social unconscious
These two terms have been used interchangeably, and in the sociological literature it appears to not cause much problem if one is doing so. However, psychologists do make a distinction between the two. The collective unconscious is a concept directly linked to Carl Jung and his followers. Although there have been some attempts to link his concept to sociological analysis (Staude 1976, Greenwood 1990, Main 2006), it remains essentially a psychological concept. The problem with Jung’s concept is that it is a very rigid one that identifies a number of specific archetypes (deep genetically rooted ways of thinking and feeling) which have failed to be empirically tested when it comes to socially-shared ways of thinking and feeling. Societies have shown instead very wide diversity in this regard. Yet, Jung’s concept is still useful because it opens a door to the study of paranormal effects through the notion of synchronicity (see Main 1997 for a detailed discussion). For Jung, synchronicity is a correlation between two events that are not linked by a cause-and-effect chain, but that are meaningful to each others. Jung proposes that synchronicity is an expression of the collective unconscious “making thing happen”.
Hansen (2001), a parapsychologist, proposed that paranormal events are a particular expression of the collective unconscious under the archetype that Jung named the trickster. The trickster is a metaphorical description of our dealing with ambiguity. As the human mind is not able to comprehend the entire reality, we have to make assumptions, to speculate, and belief in a lot of things to go through life. The net result is that our relationship to reality is always marked by a fair degree of ambiguity. The trickster is therefore this common human experience of having other parts of our mind challenging in unexpected ways the conscious but improvable assumptions we made about reality to deal with its inherent ambiguity. For Hansen, psi effects occur when the trickster archetype is activated because it creates a liminal zone between old certainties and new certainties. Within that liminal zone, for a brief period, everything becomes possible, including psi effects. It is in this context that Hansen considers that UFO events occur when the trickster archetype is activated within the collective unconscious at the social level. Although Hansen provides an interesting analytical approach to the UFO experience, it remains too generic, like all other attempts to link Jungian archetypes to the sociological analysis.
To develop a less generic approach to understand the impact of the collective unconscious, there are a number of avenues that remain to be explored. For instance the work of sociologists like Castoriadis (1975) and Leledakis (1995) on how social innovation occurs through the unconscious and the imaginary, and the work of people involved in group analytics such as Powell (1991), Dalal (2001), Zeddies (2002), and Thygesen (2008), may provide further thought to develop a more comprehensive model as to how the collective unconscious work. Such a model may, in turn, help to understand the processes behind the generation of social psi.
A proto-model
Based on the literature surveyed so far, it is possible to propose a tentative modeling of the social dimension of the UFO phenomenon. It appears that all three usual levels of analysis (i.e. individual, group, and society) have a part to play in various PEMIE events. It is not to say that they always play a role in each case, but they all can potentially play a role. It could be speculated that the most spectacular PEMIE events such as major Marian apparitions would occur only when the three levels are aligned cognitively and emotionally.
The proposed model could construed as a concentric graph moving from the most concrete elements of the experience towards the most subtle and yet most structuring elements. As well, two distinct sets of variables seem at play. One set I would qualify of cognitive, which includes individual beliefs, small group nurturing of the phenomenon, and the societal plausibility structures. The second set is more in line with other enablers to psi effects such as individual sensitivity to the paranormal, telepathic sharing, and social anxiety within the collective unconscious.
This remains, of course, only a tentative first cut at modelling UFO events based on the literature surveyed. However, it appears quite clear that the social dimension of the UFO experience cannot be ignored, and it appears to play a fundamental role in defining the phenomenon.
Copyright © 2009 Eric Ouellet
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)