Wednesday, December 3, 2014

A Walk on the Wild Side

Let's take a break from "serious UFOlogy" (like Boyd Bushman's plastic alien, or the Roswell Slides), and take a look at some of the more 'colorful' recent UFO and related claims that you might have missed.

Raised By Aliens

Simon Parkes
We haven't much lately from our friends at Exopolitics, but this one is a doozie. Exopolitician Alfred Lambremont Webre brings us this Important Disclosure Interview: UK Labour Councillor Simon Parkes On Being Brought Up By Aliens.

Now I've heard a lot about children supposedly being raised by wolves. It's a good story, but it's not really true. Wolves - canines - raising a human child? They'd eat it, not suckle it. According to legend, the city of Rome was supposedly founded by the half-divine twin brothers Romulus and Remus, who were suckled by a she-wolf. Over the years, there have been many other similar claims. However, this is the first case I'm aware of where a human infant, just three months old, was allegedly suckled by extraterrestrials.
Romulus and Remus
Parkes relates what he says are memories of being cared for by a mantid (a praying mantis-like alien) when he was a baby of 3 months. He also has memories of the Garden of Eden, from a previous life, of course.

Not surprisingly, it turns out that Parkes is a big fan of David Icke. He says he agrees with about 95% of what Icke says, including the business about the "reptoids." In  fact, Parkes says that the Draconis reptoids are the ones that he has "a relationship" with.

Strolling on Mars

This is not the man who was seen strolling on Mars. But it is the Viking lander.

A woman identified only as "Jackie" claimed to have seen something remarkable while working for NASA:
‘Jackie’ called in to Coast to Coast AM in America this year, and asked the presenter to ‘solve a 27-year-old mystery for me.’

She claimed to have been working for NASA, handling downlink telemetry from the lander – the first vehicle to send back images of Mars’s surface – when she saw two people walking on the surface.

‘That old Viking rover was running around,’ she said, saying that she and six colleagues were watching on multiple screens. ‘Then I saw two men in space suits – not the bulky suits we normally used, but they looked protective. They came over the horizon walking to the Viking Explorer.’
If she had really worked for NASA, she would have known that there was no such thing as a "Viking rover." It was a Lander, not a Rover. It had no wheels, so it was quite incapable of "running around."

Dr. Steven Greer Takes Credit for the Phoenix Lights

Dr. Steven Greer (who apologized for getting the wrong year for the Phoenix Lights)

As noted by UFO researcher Curt Collins on the Facebook page UFO Updates, UFO SuperStar Dr. Steven Greer  took credit for causing the famous Phoenix Lights in one of his interminable "disclosure" talks, back in 2009. "No one knows about this, we have not talked about publicly much," he said, and went on to explain how he had telepathically summoned the aliens. He was flying into Phoenix that night, and his team had made contact with a "huge craft." He telepathically requested the aliens to come into the area, as he was making a video tape to present to the president and the Congress. "We had asked the ETs to cooperate with this effort, to brief Congress, this is what showed up that night." The Phoenix Lights consisted of two separate incidents, the first beginning around 8:00 PM and ending before 9:00, the second beginning after 10:00 PM. He showed images representing both the first and second incidents, conflating the two of them. Both incidents were the result of Air National Guard training flights and exercises from Operation Snowbird, operating out of Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Arizona.

New Classified Fake Footage of Phoenix Lights Released

"PHOENIX, AZ – Never-before-seen video of the Phoenix Lights was leaked online this week, by KWBV News journalist David Collins. The FLIR video depicts military craft on the night of the mass sighting over Phoenix in 1997."

Alejandro Rojas of Open Minds began an investigation:

A new video (seen above) has been posted by KWBV News 6 in Phoenix that alleges to be leaked classified footage of what looks like a dog fight between jets and UFOs. The video purports to be from the same day and in the same area as a famous mass UFO sighting in Phoenix in March of 1997. The problem is there is no KWBV News 6 in Phoenix.

Actually, the problems with the credibility of the video do not stop with the fake news channel. The video was posted on a YouTube channel using the name David Collins. The KWBV news website claims “David Collins is an investigative journalist, living in Phoenix, Arizona. David was embedded with coalition forces in the Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation New Dawn, and has covered human interest stories since 1989.”

However, there doesn’t seem to really be a journalist named David Collins as described. Furthermore, although Collins appears to be the only journalist writing for KWBV, his stories are all about him and written in the third person.
Rojas found that the video appears to be intended as a viral marketing campaign for a forthcoming movie about the Phoenix Lights.

Was The Philae Comet Landing A Fake?

Now we learn that not only were the Apollo moon landings faked, but the recent comet landing was faked, too. Comets, says conspiracy theorist Crrow777 are not where we are told they are (?). "Comet" is derived from "coma," which means not only "hair," but also "sleep," indicating that you are being coma-tized by the misinformation. There is no video footage of the landing! Lots of "shenanigans" going on here, folks!

The shape of the comet Philae is the same as that of its island namesake - proof that the photo is fake!

Aliens wearing ‘human suits’ visited casinos in Las Vegas

The award for the cleverest absurdity surely goes to this one:

Charles Hall, a former US Air Force serviceman claims that the U.S. military have had contact with – and worked alongside – the Tall Whites since the Fifties.

In the Sixties, he claims that the ‘shocking’ aliens liked to unwind by donning disguises, including sunglasses, and hitting casinos such as the Stardust, surrounded by CIA handlers.
The Vietnam veteran first published his detailed accounts of his meetings with the Tall Whites as a series of four sci-fi novels, Millennial Hospitality – but then ‘revealed’ that they were true.
UFO researcher Chris Rutkowski notes that "Charles Hall's casino-hopping aliens were "verified" by none other than Canada's former Defence minister Paul Hellyer, currently the darling of the UFO lecture circuit. "

If there were an extraterrestrial in a Vegas casino, it would probably look like this.


  1. And Charles Hall's casino-hopping aliens were "verified" by none other than Canada's former Defence minister Paul Hellyer, currently the darling of the UFO lecture circuit. To whit:

  2. You refer to "serious ufology". I wonder where the boundaries lie nowadays. In the beginning it was sightings by the military and/or reputable scientists were considered "serious ufology", whereas contactees like Adamski were generally (though not always) regarded as part of "fringe" or "lunatic" ufology. Then there were sub-divisions of each, and so on.

    Soon abductions entered the scene. Which aspect of ufology do these come under? Certainly not the same as contactees. Then there were (and still are) the 'conspiracy brigade', e.g. the disclosure group, etc. But even these are split - e.g. the Roswellites & Rendleshamites who are certainly conspiracists, but less severe than some others in that category.

    We now have those like David Icke, Simon Parkes, Steven Greer and those in your posting. There are also the more 'airy fairy' people who dwell in other dimensions, or who are even hybrid physical beings. Then there is the religious brigade. I could go on.

    The point is that each and every one of these groups of people are absolutely serious over their beliefs, and will consider that they fall into the "serious ufology" category. But it can become difficult for us to classify each group.

    What does a phrase like 'nuts and bolts' ufology mean? Personally I would expect any real ETs have long progressed beyond using nuts and bolts in their craft. But I could be very wrong.

    1. Serious UFOlogists make some attempt to investigate the reports, etc. in a scientific manner. They're not exactly skeptical, but at least they put some effort in.

      The others, while probably sincere, have little use for contrary viewpoints, much less scientific investigation.

  3. Even "seriously ufology" doesn't believe its own line.

    Ufology promotes alien abduction as a terrifying, traumatic experience (presumably because they think strong emotions indicate real experiences). But Thursday I got an email from MUFON promoting their online store, which included Christmas cards featuring those traumatizing, raping, fetus-snatching kidnappers with Santa hats on.

    If MUFON thought for one moment that alien abductions were real, this would be grossly insensitive, like a battered-women's shelter selling "world's greatest dad" coffee mugs.

    Clearly, MUFON thinks aliens are just cute entertainment -- nothing more.

    1. Very valid point, Terry the Censor. We might also choose to consider that the manners some self-described abductees support the alien in the Santa hat platform are indicative of what I have come to think is the most relevant (and least discussed) aspect of alleged alien abduction: emotional trauma. The exploitation thereof makes the situation worse and worse as it progresses through the halls of MUFON, the offices of hypnotists, etc., whatever the actual sources of the trauma may ultimately prove to be.

  4. "They came over the horizon walking to the Viking Explorer."

    As if there was a live video feed from the surface of Mars in the 1970s!

    "Jackie" must have worked on the "secret" Viking program because the two Viking landers we know were equipped with cameras (optical-mechanical scanners) only, so were quite incapable of recording anything "walking" around on Mars.

  5. "Personally I would expect any real ETs have long progressed beyond using nuts and bolts in their craft. But I could be very wrong"

    Could it be, perhaps, that like human associations of class, wealth and intellect, ET's also find use in similar segregation? If a primitive form of human, or another comparable species of bipedal being, existed within our extended environment would we engage them to practice our politics, or further our entrepreneurial goals? The answer invariably is, no.

    The point I'm making, provided that we can entertain the hypothetical, is there could exist a cavalcade of differing ET races. Some of which are perhaps millions of years more advanced (and therefore no longer using nuts and bolts craft as you wondered). Where as, the younger more primitive races to whom we are somewhat comparable, find the planet earth and it's inhabitants as holding relatively similar aims and operations. Therefore, we are probably attracting the ET's to whom we're not so detached. This detachment may only be a few hundred years - hence the reason they seem to use comparable technologies. So it's not so much a coincidence as much as it is the most likely outcome of lore

    I suppose the purpose of that exercise was to demonstrate how a perfectly logical answer can exist, irrespective of whether or not your unimaginative, cynical mind has bothered to consider it

    1. Mark's doing the old "given the vastness of space and time, starfaring ET must exist, so some 'UFO' reports could be sightings of Earth-visiting ET spacecraft."

      I've heard this wishful-thinking "Fermi's premise to flying saucers" illogical argument on the Internet for decades--even from people who should know better. We are here, so "our Galaxy should be populated with advanced civilizations" is a hypothetical.

      It's a "'what if' to concrete fact" rationalization of a false belief (visiting spacecraft) that is contrary to the apparent facts of the world (there are no visiting spacecraft). This is reification combined with the speculative, counterfactual fallacy. You can't argue for real things based on hypotheticals, Mark. There are a dozen or so good reasons why the Galaxy is not populated, we detect no signals and they're not here.

      So there is some fundamental flaw in Fermi's premise--possibly some yet to be discovered fact about the Galaxy, or life of any sort and its ability to travel though space--that makes it a questionable, if sciencey, justification for a demonstrably false belief in ET visitation. This backwards leap of illogic--belief before fact--is complete nonsense. A real scientist faced the facts and asked "Where are they?"

    2. "This detachment may only be a few hundred years"

      As if we might be capable of casual interstellar travel in a few hundred years. I doubt it very much. Off Earth's surface it's pretty inhospitable. The Moon is close but dead and open to space. Venus is a sterile tumultuous inferno with dense violently stormy atmosphere. We'll be lucky to establish a permanent presence on frozen dusty Mars in the next few hundred years. Jupiter--if there's any purpose in humans going anywhere near it when robotic spacecraft already visit its moons just as well--is more likely a thousand years away.

      Beyond the vast disk and cloud of lifeless frozen rubble piles and icy minor planets, the interstellar medium contains grains, dust, gas, molecules, cosmic rays and most probably undescribed matter and dark objects that turn the dream of interstellar travel into a nightmare even at modest speed. Going faster only compounds what is already an impossibility given the distances between stars. Wishful thinking about the magical technologies of hypothetical ET doesn't alter the inherent prohibitions.

      "hence the reason they seem to use comparable technologies"

      "They seem," Mark? Excuse me while I laugh. You've reached this conclusion how exactly? Don't tell me from that mass of hoaxes, lies, fairy tales, and ignorant and entirely predisposed misidentifications of bright planets, stars, meteors, sundogs, aircraft and falling space junk that compose the catalogue of goofy "UFO" reports.

      From which of these utterly inconsequential fairy tales do you conclude a "they" and how "they seem?" This should be good! I can easily think of a much, much more likely "reason they seem to use comparable technologies." Any idea what that is?

      I don't think your view of our Galaxy populated by various star-trekking civilizations is either very imaginative or realistic. Merely existing doesn't mean space traveling or visiting our insignificant Earth. And it has absolutely nothing to do with why people make "UFO" reports.

      The Null hypothesis--the fact that there are no real "UFOs"--requires the PSH; if there were real "UFOs" of any kind, the PSH of reports would not be necessary.

  6. Dear Santa,
    Some say Santa Claus doesn’t exist, but I believe in you.
    Although there’s no real proof you’re actually exist, there’s evidence of your existence everywhere! Kids all over the world believe you’re real so that’s good enough for me.

    Also debunkers say your North Pole workshop is make-believe. I know for a fact that your North Pole workshop is hidden and buried deep underground (I read it online). There’s a government conspiracy to keep the truth of your reality from grown-ups!

    I’ve been good this year (except for one time, I won’t go into details), so here’s my Christmas list:
    1) “Roswell Alien Autopsy” board game
    2) The book “Santa’s Sleigh: Generals, Pilots, and Shopping Mall Officials Go On The Record”
    3) Cash in tens and twenties.


    Skeptics (like my stupid older brother) doesn’t believe in Santa Claus.
    Logically Santa Claus must be real considering how vast and mysterious the universe is. My brother is so unimaginative and cynical.

    1. Well done, Sally. You've managed to communicate the dumbest analogy in the history of UFO skepticism

      Wait, how do I know that it is, in fact, the dumbest analogy in history? Well, because I read it on the Internet, of course!


Keep your comments relevant, and keep them civil! That means no personal attacks will be allowed, by anyone, on anyone. Commenters are welcome to disagree with me, or with other comments, but state your arguments using logic, and with a civil tone. Comments in violation of these rules will be deleted, and offenders banned.

Comments should be in English, although quotes from foreign-language sources are fine as long as they're relevant, and you explain them. Anonymous postings are not permitted. If you don't want to use your real name, then make up a name for yourself, and use it consistently.