sábado, 5 de agosto de 2023


For decades, dozens of researchers believe that the UFO phenomenon hides behind an excellent camouflage to deceive and manipulate witnesses for purposes and purposes that we do not understand. It did it centuries ago with the manifestations of fairies, elves, supernatural creatures, and Marian apparitions, and in the 20th century it managed to camouflage itself under the label of extraterrestrial visitors. But, are we before an intelligent phenomenon that perfectly chooses its role to present itself to humans, or on the contrary, are we before a disconcerting cognitive paradigm that evidently shows itself with socio-cultural "disguises" present in each era of its performance? 

That all the apparitions of strange entities that have interacted with human beings throughout time have been so eximious and "lying" in their communications, and that they have offered so little evidence of their existence, is a very interesting indication, and one to be taken into account, that all these unusual manifestations may have the same and unique origin and above all a direct incidence on the psyche of the witnesses, which would indicate that the paradigm does not exist independently of the observers,  at least it does not exist as we see in the final result of the manifestation. Therefore, it would be necessary to distinguish first of all the phenomenon (in origin), from what is manifested before the witnesses (the incidents), which are probably two very different things, just as the artist of his pictorial work can be.

 The fact that the content of all these manifestations has such a human background (perfectly recognizable), both visually and narratively, is another clue that indicates the covert participation of the psyche of the witnesses in the shaping of the experiences, helping to elaborate them in an unconscious way. Moreover, the fact that it is so difficult to document the existence of these phenomena may well be due to their ambiguous dual existence, between the psychic world and the physical world, so it would be difficult to obtain much evidence of their existence, even if their presence seems totally "real" and unquestionable in our environment. But this does not mean that the phenomenon cannot mediate in our reality in a palpable way and cause all kinds of physical and physiological effects, but simply that it does so in a different way to everything we know, although its results are practically the same as those produced by an ordinary real event. Perhaps that is one of the keys to understanding the UFO paradigm. Are UFOs close encounters a phenomenon whose nature escapes the conventional limits of our cognitive dimension? I am not referring to an interdimensional nature as advocated and conceived by many researchers for years, with entities jumping through portals, but rather that the UFO phenomenon comes from unknown areas that can be accessed by our mind in certain states of consciousness, regardless of whether what is manifested in this exploration of a new "reality" can be made momentarily visible and tangible in our dimension.


And it is because of the participation of our psyche that the content of all encounters with beings and entities have enormous human cultural implications and extremely absurd and chaotic aspects, such as those offered by the universe of dreams or, for example, even mental disorders and feverish states. But this does not mean that UFOs are something strictly mental (understood as something unreal or illusory), but quite the contrary, but it is very likely that their nature may be closer to the "matter" that makes up our dreams or the world of visionaries than to nuts and bolts. This does not detract from the mystery or strangeness of the paradigm, it only draws attention to other aspects that are more unknown and considered unimportant to date. We have always thought that the material, the tangible, the measurable, the quantifiable, only that which we can put in a laboratory test tube or touch, is what is authentically real and unquestionable.But probably the UFO encounters and other Fortean facts point in another direction. Perhaps there is another way to explore the universe away from the scientific methodology that we have chosen as the only adequate tool to decode our environment.

The existence of UFOs and other similar anomalies are very interesting evidence that shows that the human psyche is not a simple biological reflection of our brain, but that it can access much more information from the universe than what the sensory organs transmit through the known ways. In this way, it is capable of interacting with an apparently intelligent cognitive phenomenon, which is presented to us through a highly flexible "scenography" due to our involvement, and which is capable, in turn, of activating latent faculties of our psyche; a manifestation that moves in that psychic/physical duality that makes it so complex, with our methodology, to reach some kind of answer. Only changing our way of facing the phenomenon will help us to understand it. But taking into account that probably its physical facet, very important for some of us, maybe perhaps only a simple epiphenomenon, that is, a mere consequence of its interaction with our psyche in our environment and not an intrinsic characteristic of the phenomenon itself. For UFOs, in short, would be forming portions of a reality "inserted" within another established reality: a reality loaded with information about ourselves and the universe that does not end up reaching us clearly because of the interference created by our mind and which we have called UFOs, daimons, angels, gods, etc.



martes, 9 de mayo de 2023


Despite the assumptions of hundreds of researchers, from the analysis of the testimonies of people who have had close encounters with UFOs, it cannot be inferred that what has been observed is the product of alien technology. Let me explain:

 As far as we know, throughout history, many individuals have reported the presence of strange objects and beings that appear and disappear in a mysterious way. The properties that today ufologists understand as the product of a high extraterrestrial science, in other times have had another type of reading. The ancient stories and folklore of half the world are full of encounters with entities and creatures that floated, levitated, appeared and disappeared, became invisible, passed through objects or traveled aboard luminaries. At the time, all these "miraculous" faculties were attributed to the innate supernatural properties of these creatures that came from invisible realms or from the beyond. They were said to be intermediate beings between angels and humans. But since the middle of the 20th century something very curious has been happening. In the close encounters with UFOs, which are basically identical to the contents exposed in these old chronicles, we find these same extraordinary elements, but this time they get another interpretation more adjusted to our socio-cultural level. Under the prevailing modernity of space travel and science fiction the strange faculties of the ufonauts were reinterpreted as the result of an alien visitation. Sinister bedroom visitors, lights in the night, and wandering beings on roads and highways were translated into astronauts from other planets. However, like our ancestors, we have not been able to show no evidence to prove that what is observed is the equivalent or result of the action of extraterrestrial technology. What witnesses see during their UFO experiences may be a "hollow technology", or in other words a "simulated image" that mimics concepts understandable to observers. For example, the Santa Compaña in the Galician tradition, is a procession of ghosts that carries behind their backs a coffin, but logically it is not a wooden object joined with nails, it is only a representation of something that witnesses interpret as an omen of death.


And to date, these dismal visions have the same degree of reality as those of people who claim that an extraterrestrial told him that he came from the planet Mars. The aesthetic content of this type of experience is the result of the interaction of our psyche with a ancestral phenomenon by attempting a comprehensible decoding of this overwhelming and hypnotic expanded reality. A reality that normally remains veiled to our ordinary senses and that seems to be filtered under ideographic concepts that we can interpret. If the study of these phenomena has shown anything, it is that we cannot take at face value what witnesses tell us. And not because they are lying or confused, but because we simply cannot trust the literalness of the image transmitted by these apparitions. In fact, it has never been possible to confirm that the enlightening image of these apparitionistic phenomena, in any of their modalities, correspond to their true nature. And although the Marian apparitions are very definite visions, and the bigfoot evidently looks like some kind of unknown animal, it has never been confirmed that what these visions appear to be is the core of the problem. Simply because we have not been able to capture or capture any of these entities and guarantee the authenticity of their image. The flying saucers emulate a real spaceship with levers, luminous buttons and a computer screen. Their occupants had scuba suits, boots, ray guns and took ground samples in a crude and unsophisticated manner. Today we know that these visions of past decades are totally vintage, mimicry of an outdated technology, they seem to us even funny, therefore, it was a "hollow" representation -- they were not manufactured artifacts with gears, nuts, wires, integrated circuits, etc. It was only an imitative representation of human technology, distorted and transferred to some hypothetical extraterrestrial scenarios.

 And all this brings me back to the same scenario. Close encounters with UFOs have the same structure as all those stories poured into ancient folklore, of the visions of mystics, of access to a piece of unknown knowledge by unusual means.

 And by this I do not mean that these experiences are totally subjective or the product of some kind of mental disorder or hallucination. Quite the contrary. These phenomena are worthy of study because they reveal that there is a way to access unknown information through supernatural visions and encounters. It is very likely that there is an external agent in all this framework, which, ultimately, is the detonator of the appearance and manifestation of these phenomena. But what is clear is that the human psyche is important in this equation. The phenomena occur within the human psychic frequency. An important clue for further research.



lunes, 23 de enero de 2023



Over the years I have noted, among various amateurs and researchers, that there are two erroneous ways of understanding what the Distortion Theory (DT) is trying to propose. The first of these interpretations has led many enthusiasts to believe that it is an idea that posits a purely psychological origin to explain the UFO phenomenon. This would be tantamount to saying that the ufological episodes would be something like a hallucination or mental disorder that leads witnesses to imagine or project a fictitious UFO encounter under their noses. In short, UFOs do not exist. And that is why many DT detractors continually resort to questions about the materiality of the UFO phenomenon to demolish my arguments. Obviously this assumption can only arise from a hasty and unmeasured reading of my studies. But that is not all. There is another misinterpretation of DT that is even more reckless than the previous one. Some ufologists have stated that what DT outlines is identical to what is offered in the works of Vallée, Keel, Grosso, Clark, Evans, Jung, Casas-Huguet, Harpur or Freixedo, and that, therefore, there are no important differences or novelties with what was previously exposed. However, like their predecessors who contemplate DT as a skeptical proposal, these researchers have not even bothered to read my writings calmly, and the odd researcher has allowed himself to be dragged along by his baser passions to criticize my contributions.

It had been clear for several decades that the UFO phenomenon was somehow using the human psyche to adjust its external appearance.

Let's start at the beginning to clarify what we may or may not find in the Distortion Theory. The first thing is that the DT does not arise to propose an origin of the UFO phenomenon, but its purpose was to study in depth the close encounters with flying saucers and their occupants to try to understand their operation in the hope of finding hidden clues. So the main focus and effort of my research has been on dissecting the episodes of closest proximity to UFOs, and trying to locate common patterns. This is, roughly speaking, the field of action of DT. And all this, starting from the basis of that axiom that assured, for several decades, that the content of the ufological experiences had a high component of human socio-cultural factors that would point to the participation, in some way, of the witnesses in the fabrication of the close encounters. That the UFO witness accounts had some characteristics too close to our civilization to overlook. That the similarity of the extraterrestrials to our science and customs was an imposture, even a theatrics deployed by the ufonauts for superlative or sinister purposes. A papier-mâché scenery.

But this idea, being essentially true, had originated many and varied reasonings that did not end up materializing. At least in something that could be backed up by a study. And it was not a minor issue. Since this aspect had, according to each scholar, a probable interpretation. The same was said that this unviable cultural reflection in a hypothetical alien civilization was the result of the manifestation of the collective unconscious (Jung), as it was attributed to an almighty control system (Vallée) that entangled us in a game of mirrors. There were also those who argued that UFOs were an uncontrolled parapsychological phenomenon (Clark/Viéroudy), a mental projection that solidifies thoughts and beliefs in the sky. The range of possibilities was also open to the existence of a sophisticated camouflage system, whether extraterrestrial, demonic or dimensional (Freixedo/Guérin) or, even other researchers claimed that UFO encounters were the result of a burlesque cosmic theater (Keel/Darnaude), which, like Chinese shadows, interpreted artificial and fallacious roles that we could not unravel. But all these cabals were not perfectly aligned with the literature. They just went to the heart of the problem. Everyone admitted that there was something human about the UFO phenomenon, and the way was open for a brainstorming session. This fact was not analyzed in depth in order to be able to draw more accurate or at least more precise conclusions.

That is why I embarked for several decades on the elaboration of DT.  I wanted to see where the analysis of the sociocultural factor would take us. A detail that was not disputed by any scholar. From the most orthodox to the most dissatisfied with the extraterrestrial hypothesis, everyone was aware that our flying saucers and their crazy occupants had an all-too-human odor. It was neither possible, nor sensible, that aliens coming from some remote part of the galaxy would have ray guns, antennas and aluminum ladders. Or that their conversations incorporate human gestures or bar talks. Let alone that today our technology of 2023 has almost surpassed many of the features noted in the cases of past decades. But there was no unification of criteria to assess this devastating effect. Even the concept itself was not clear. Since it was also said that it could be an error of perception, a cognitive failure in front of the phenomenon or perhaps some problem with our memory when reliving an experience totally out of the range of the known. And of course the skeptics (Monnerie) replied that this "humanizing" effect was a proof that the whole UFO issue was a complete fallacy, a mixture of deception, sensationalism, ufologists' malpractice and even a cultural contagion that made people imagine their encounters awake. But DT aspired to go beyond the first layers and try to locate the source and purpose of this so-called "cultural contagion". Because it had to start somewhere. If it took this step, it could decipher the real "engine" that generates this type of highly anomalous events. And only by being clear about this first and decisive step, we could discard or choose, with certain guarantees, supposed origins for the UFO phenomenon.

The theory of Distortion defends that almost any unconscious content can be used by the phenomenon for the gestation of experiences. Rossa Lotti's encounter was elaborated from something as simple as an oven, fireplace or wood or coal stove.

The similarities between the Normandy landing map and the star chart observed by the famous abductee Betty Hill are obvious.

A ufonaut looking like a Roman soldier was seen "by chance" in Rome (Maltoni Case. 1976).

Some UFO encounters have many similarities to human technology or imagery. On November 2, 1973, Lyndia Morel, was returning to her home near Goffstown when she encountered a UFO that bore similarities to a NASA satellite and the alien spacecraft from a movie Came from Outer Space" (1953).

Science fiction, as Bertrand Méheust and Martin S. Kottmeyer's research has pointed out with numerous examples, anticipated the narrative of UFO encounters in an astonishing way.
In Italy in 1951, in the small town of Voghenza, a close encounter took place with humanoids, with an ape-like appearance, wearing scuba diving suits and self-contained breathing apparatus as backpacks. In addition, these ufonauts were carrying shotguns. The event was disclosed in 1978, but curiously, in an American science fiction magazine published in November 1957 (Amazing Science Fiction Stories. Volume 33, number 11) some beings almost identical to those in the Italian case were reproduced to illustrate the cover. Without having, apparently, a connection between one fact and the other, the similarities are remarkable, which would explain that in the collective imagination would be contained all the "ingredients" of science fiction (ships, scuba tanks, oxygen cylinders, guns, suits, etc.) necessary for this type of encounters to sprout in one way or another, regardless of whether there was an explicit knowledge of certain images. And depending on each witness and his or her imaginary capacity and interaction with the phenomenon, it is likely that we would find this type of coincidences.

On the morning of July 23, 1947, northwest of Pitanga, Brazil, surveyor Jose Higgins had a controversial close encounter with a UFO and its three crew members. The supposed ufonauts, humanoid in appearance, were completely bald and had no facial hair. When the witness asked them where they came from they drew on the ground seven circles with a central point and pointed out that they came from Uranus, although they expressed it with the words "Alamo" and "Orque". Curiously, science fiction had already proposed this simple method of communication in a 1939 work, although in this case it was human astronauts (with a certain resemblance to Brazilian extraterrestrials) who used it to indicate their place of origin to aliens of bizarre shape. More than a transfer of concepts by explicit knowledge of the information, my opinion is that we are talking about the imaginary capacity of the human being who is capable of conceiving fantastic scenarios and characters that are later recreated in close encounters with UFOs.

Many of the aspects presented in close encounters with UFOs are now seen as retro or vintage, clearly indicating that the phenomenon has a strong cultural component (Image from 1947. Amazing Stories).

On December 3, 1967, in Ashland, Nebraska (USA), police sergeant Herbert Schirmer was the protagonist of an incredible UFO encounter that today would seem a bit "theatrical".

Because with the simple admission of that cultural factor we are going nowhere. I repeat. Only its correct interpretation can yield effective results. And that is why DT cannot be the same as that defended by some of the notable researchers cited above, since none of them addressed a comprehensive study of this issue. My starting point was on a different ground, perhaps closer to what Monnerie enunciated in his psychosocial hypothesis than to any other conjecture. But it still has its differences, since the Frenchman's ideascompletely eliminated the exogenous factor from the equation. And although the argumentation to vertebrate the DT is in consonance with some of the theoretical works exposed throughout the years, its arrangement and interpretation is substantially different. And we can verify it in the points defended by the DT that have been established according to the scrutiny of the ufological literature:

1.- Close encounters with UFOs have nothing to do with extraterrestrial visitors who have come to our planet aboard spaceships using an excellent technology. But neither is it the result of a Control System that, through different anomalous manifestations, intends to control, channel, manipulate or interfere with humanity. Any possibility that includes the participation of some kind of spiritual or dimensional entities should also be discarded, as well as that which supports an exclusively parapsychological process or the omniprotective help of Carl Jung's collective unconscious.

2.- Close encounters with UFOs are highly subjective and creative experiences that are related to other types of supernatural visionary experiences that have occurred throughout history, and that have had strange entities, creatures and beings as protagonists. All events are sporadic, unpredictable and random, with nothing recorded in the course of an experience having any real consistency in our world (or yours).

3.- We are facing an unknown parapsychic process whose result is a highly moldable experience, where the human psyche interacts unconsciously with the phenomenon, giving it a certain aesthetic in an attempt to decode its source. . Our socio-cultural stereotypes, especially of the mythological, folkloric, religious, philosophical and supernatural order seem to be the elements used by our unconscious to recompose a scene that tries to order the  visual. And what does this mean? Very simple and easy to understand. That what is observed during a UFO encounter, as well as in other kinds of fortean incidents, would be a simple vehicle of transmission of information that can get lost in the sensory noise created by our psychic interference.

4.-  Therefore, at this point we must clarify that the scenario exposed in the close encounters does not obey to a brilliant resource of the UFO phenomenon to camouflage its true aesthetics (essence) before the observers. Nor is there an intentionality in showing a certain aspect to deceive the witnesses according to the time of the manifestation. The paranormal component is a drift, perhaps the most important one, caused by the involvement of the human psyche in the decoding of this expanded reality accessed by the witnesses during the fleeting contact with an undetermined external agent, which may ultimately be the instigator, detonator or enhancer of these visionary episodes (not hallucinatory or imaginary).

5.-  If this thesis is true, its main conclusion distances us from most of the approaches established so far, since the uniqueness of the phenomenon does not lie in what we see. That would be only a reflection. A process. An automatism. The authentic reality of these manifestations transcends completely the external appearance that we register enthusiastically for the spectacularity of the "special effects", whether they are extraterrestrial ships or spiritual entities. We believe at face value the literalness of the image, both in its most obvious meaning and in the derivations that its procedure incites. But the most feasible thing is that the truly cardinal of the experiences is what we have labeled as epiphenomena or collateral effects (PSI development, clairvoyance, space-time anomalies, etc.). What we have noted down in our field notebooks, however attractive it may be, is still a powerful sociocultural decoding, where the witness contributes most of the content exposed before his eyes in a co-creation that gives rise to a psychic architecture. Therefore, any analysis or hypothesis, even reinterpretations of what is obtained or developed from these superficial layers of the manifestation, are inconclusive, inaccurate and illusory. Neither the image nor most of the information content of these apparitions are caused by the phenomenon per se, therefore we build castles in the air when we try to create typologies or extract patterns from the behaviors of the ufonauts. The process at hand is not the phenomenon itself. Therefore, the shape of the UFOs, the clothing and behavior of the ufonauts, the messages, symbols and other narrative and aesthetic elements that we find embedded in a ufological story are nothing more than mere ideographic screens whose analysis can only lead us to dead ends. The ufological episodes are personalized interactions with the phenomenon that cannot be integrated into a phenomenological whole from a conventional point of view. We can find neither continuity nor coherence, since each psyche will respond, interpret, and develop the manifestation under individual parameters. And this would explain the non-repetition of ships and crews that undergo constant modifications, as if adapting to each individual. 

After analyzing the ufological literature, it is clear that we do not usually find, inexplicably, the same results for the same factors (footprints on the ground, burns from exposure to a beam of light, headaches, vomiting, paralysis, sleep disturbance, etc.) That is, flying saucers per se, do not have certain effects, otherwise there would be uniformity in their actions. Therefore there are some elements that escape us in this equation. And the theory of distortion suggests that the materiality of UFOs, as well as other types of repercussions, are perhaps due to the interaction of each witness with the phenomenon. Bearing in mind that, really, the only thing that always changes in the encounters are the witnesses, and these can determine some aspects of the manifestation.

If Kenneth Arnold in 1947 had commented to the press that he had seen dragons over Mount Rainier, would it have had the same impact on the human imagination of the mid-20th century as the idea of flying saucers from other worlds? Would more dragons have been seen flying in our skies? The Distortion theory stresses that the founding event of modern ufology is independent and has nothing to do with what was subsequently developed by the accounts of close encounters. This sensational news reproduced all over the planet, causing an unusual fascination, activated, at a planetary level, the same psychic springs that in the past (but never in such a massive way) provoked and promoted the appearance of other types of entities and beings.  Kenneth Arnold's sighting was the match that lit the fuse, but it was not the dynamite that caused the explosion. 

As the theory of Distortion states, in the manifestations of the UFO phenomenon, and therefore, in those of any other type of entity, creature or unknown being of the extensive Fortean universe, there is nothing prefixed in advance before the encounter with the witnesses takes place. Neither the aesthetics nor the narrative are known until the contact between the observer and the paradigm is established and the creative process that will give birth to the singular episode begins. And of course it is not defined in any way that the "protagonist" of the apparition will be a flying saucer, the late grandfather Anselmo or the Virgin Mary. Only the force of a specific belief can make that, in a certain epoch, in which the open door towards that other reality is marked by a powerful "myth", a supernatural manifestation is expressed with more resounding force over another one. But there is no reason for the phenomenon to be sheathed in a mask with greater determination or intention. In fact, sometimes, even with certain aesthetic and narrative aspects pre-fixed, Fortean "creeds" are malleable, versatile, adaptive and far from uniform. For example, in many encounters with alleged flying saucers, diverse elements of other types of manifestations (ghosts, Marian apparitions, elemental beings, etc.) intermingle in an admirable and chaotic way, generating a sort of experiences that are in no man's land. Authentic oddities arising from the most delirious nooks and crannies of the creative process that shapes and gives life to these apparitions. And this would demonstrate that we are facing highly interactive episodes, whose interpretations are more undefined and unattainable than many ufologists are willing to admit. Authentic abstract paintings waiting to be named. If Distortion is right and we are facing fortuitous psychic mechanisms and processes, asymmetry and uncontrol must prevail over any other aspect, even over any regulatory attempt on the part of the paradigm.

6.- The investigation of the UFO literature must be carried out case by case, taking into account that each witness will obtain a different result in his or her personal and non-transferable attempt to decode this expanded reality. And even if a large group of witnesses use the same stereotypes to make this reading, the results will never be the same. The stereotypes only work as a filter, they are not a fixed and immovable scheme, so that even if different witnesses use the same concept, in our case the idea of the arrival of extraterrestrials on Earth, they can never obtain the same result, nor of course get a perfect continuation of a process executed previously. This tells us that the phenomenon is incapable of transferring the same concepts from one place to another. Information does not travel from one place to another. To arrive at these deductions, I have had to dissect a good number of close encounters with UFOs to understand how the transfer of information between the subject and the phenomenon can occur.

And to do this I have synthesized the visual and narrative content of these experiences to make comparisons with the material surrounding the witnesses. With the intention of seeing the direction of transmission (witness/phenomenon or phenomenon/witness). This detail is more substantial than it seems. It was necessary to find out where exactly the information that made up the ufological scenography came from. From the unconscious of the witness, from the collective unconscious or if, on the contrary, there was an external source that used this language as a coded message. The paternity of the scenography could give us many clues. It was also necessary to elucidate whether these contents were derived from science fiction or from other media such as publications about flying saucers, since some authors believe that this material would be the "library" from which the personal unconscious, the collective or the external source would be nourished. But this entailed another enigma. It was not the same the incorporation of the information by direct contamination, by contact with these works of science fiction, television, radio or magazines about UFOs or if the contagion was produced by an unknown route. These were not simple nuances.

And the conclusion I came to is that, probably, most of what is visualized in these encounters is distorted information previously stored in the observers themselves without any external input or influence. The concepts extracted from the unconscious are distorted by the construction process of the scenography that embeds them in an extraordinary collage of oneiric characteristics. And one of the most significant data I obtained is that the psychic architecture (not unreal) could take almost any type of content lodged in our psyche to conform its aesthetics, from a map of a battle of the Second World War (CASE HILL. 1961), a wood stove (CASE LOTTI. 1954) or the pyramids of Egypt (CASE MARIBEL. 1997). Therefore, not only the contents related to UFOs, science fiction or astronautics influenced the elaboration of the experiences. Hence, the insolent instability of what was observed. In fact, the study of science fiction (Méheust) showed that human imagery had already delineated many of the ingredients poured by ufological literature before they were deployed by the UFO phenomenon, but it was not clear that this was what was literally copied by the ufonauts in their appearances, since most of the time the witnesses did not have access to this information (visual or narrative). Without direct contact it did not seem that science fiction (books, comics, movies, etc.) could influence the witnesses (unless we admit the existence of an unknown means of knowledge; telepathic, collective unconscious, parapsychic, etc.), but certainly this shattering "precognition" demonstrated a more than interesting aspect, the human mind had the capacity to sketch the embryonic idea of extraterrestrial visitors of light beams, scorpions and contacts in the desert. The imaginary, whether we liked it or not, came to life in UFO encounters. But the influence of the witnesses in the covert composition of the UFO episodes did not only cover the visual spectrum. Apart from giving a personalized aesthetic to the manifestation, I concluded that the observers probably incited part of the ufonauts' behavior as if they were the characters of a dream. So what are close encounters with UFOs?

The most immediate consequence of this transfer of information (for decoding) is the projection of a complex scenography, a sort of virtual (but not imaginary) reality embedded within our habitual reality. Sometimes these visionary experiences can contain "matter" and provoke diverse quantifiable effects on the medium and the observers (although all of them with high strangeness). The procedure that executes the narrative of this psychic architecture has a way of proceeding (scripting) is very similar to the one we experience in a dream state. It must be remembered that our psyche while sleeping, among other things, manages to compose fantastic and complex scenarios, actions and dialogues worthy of a Hollywood movie. But everything is seasoned with a certain air of surrealism and disorder, without a coherent temporal or plot structure. Hence, perhaps, although it is a different process, the enormous load of absurdity of the encounters with UFOs, and the spatial-temporal and sensory anomalies that are pointed out.  And if this is so, it is necessary to eliminate with one stroke of the pen all the approaches that see in this absurd procedure a systematized UFO theater whose function would be to plunge us into a total bewilderment. Nor would it be a superb psychic manipulation (Keel) or even, as the most optimistic point out, an ultra-dimensional training in the form of an ultra-terrestrial Zen teaching (Vallée). I am convinced that both the visual (the general aspect of what is observed) and the informational and behavioral (the actions and conversations of the ufonauts) arise to some extent from the interaction of the witness with the phenomenon, therefore, none of this can offer us reliable clues about the origin and purpose of the manifestations, although it can offer us reliable clues about the process of construction of the experiences. The beings and entities that appear are erected from nothing, as objects created with a psychic "mud", and their function, although different for example to that of the ship from which they descend, have basically the same nature as the rest of the elements that we observe. Therefore the ufonauts are not independent entities, nor the intelligences that are behind the visions, they are only interactive parts with a specific function in this interactive process. And as fascinating and captivating as we may find UFO apparitions, they are merely a sensory lure that cannot distract us or lead us to elaborate complex hypotheses about manipulations or social or evolutionary controls. But we can up the ante...

What if, regardless of the nature of the objects sighted by the American pilot, the gigantic media repercussion caused by his story had unintentionally triggered the same psychic springs that in times past originated certain phenomena and encounters with unknown entities that gave way to supernatural beliefs? What if everything that happened after Kenneth Arnold's incident in 1947 was the chaotic result of a powerful call effect that managed to reactivate a millenary phenomenon of psychodimensional character? What if the numerous publications on flying saucers incited the human imagination and were the appropriate spark that shaped and gave shape to a new and renewed scenario for these manifestations to be channeled in the twentieth century?

It should be remembered that the idea that we were visited by astronauts from other worlds immediately attracted the attention, interest and imagination of millions of people around the world who saw it as a more than real possibility. Almost a fascinating scientific certainty wrapped in an overwhelming mystery. For the first time in the history of mankind, the belief in an anomalous paradigm (in this case UFOs), managed to spread exponentially, achieving wide ramifications that centuries ago would have been inconceivable. It is as if the time periods or "contagion" established to date for the evolution of a phenomenon related to the possible existence of manifestations of unknown beings and entities (Marian apparitions, fairies, demons, deceased, etc.), had been drastically shortened and what for decades were manifestations encompassed in different societies and cultures, almost endemically, took a great leap worldwide sponsored by the media.  Therefore, was Kenneth Arnold's famous sighting a silent instigator, an authentic atomic detonation at the core of the collective mental cosmos that generated a shock wave that affected thousands of potential witnesses?

Did the synchronous generalized belief of millions of people manage to open a fissure in an unexplored cognitive dimension and provoke thousands of experiences filtered under the same prism: the extraterrestrial visitation, or, on the contrary, did this lightning effect make that people of all kinds and conditions could momentarily tune in to the signal emitted from the universe where these manifestations come from, did Kenneth Arnold give origin to the last great folklore of humanity, which in synthesis was an extension of other ancestral arcana? In fact, coldly analyzed, modern encounters with alien beings, with all their absurd cosmic paraphernalia, and despite their pretended technological patina, do not vary too much from the contents exposed by the various folklores that spoke of apparitions of unknown beings and entities behind ghostly mists and strange glows. The middle of the twentieth century offered an unrepeatable breeding ground at the social level, which made a sum of factors sponsored, among other things, by the powerful human imagery, configure and shape a recycled ancestral paradigm. At that time an unparalleled conjunction took place, the ancient world merged with the modern world, superstitions with information technology, and during a certain period of time the beliefs in extraterrestrial life and its supposed arrival on Earth emerged with an unusual force, settling in the unconscious of many people. Imagination, fascination, beliefs, and some states of consciousness are probably the hidden engines of many of these phenomena. And it could not be ruled out that an event not directly related to the manifestation of this overwhelming reality for the senses (for example, the discussion about some mysterious distant sightings), but with sufficient depth in the emotional realm could activate certain psychic springs, causing the manifestation of this paradigm.  If a genuine alien spacecraft, 100% made of nuts and bolts, were to land tomorrow in the middle of the White House gardens before the astonished gaze of the President of the United States, this event could not resolve the welter of chronicles of other times sprinkled with techno-space garnish that the monumental UFO literature has erected. Could the landing of some extraterrestrial travelers from a distant planet in 2021 explain a UFO incident that occurred in 1974 in a small village in Spain, or in a remote Italian region in 1954, or would a meager UFO landing certified by the authorities solve the thousands of ufological incidents recorded worldwide? Or who the hell baked Simonton's cakes in 1961? I'm afraid not. Not by a long shot. Unless the aliens held a months-long press conference explaining these incidents one by one.

UFO experiences could simply be noise and interference caused by our mind penetrating an overwhelming and suggestive expanded reality that has always been there. A moldable dimension that throughout history has given sporadic signs of life to show us that the universe does not end with what we perceive, but that our psyche is probably capable of traveling beyond what we know. To a place that perhaps harbors answers about our existence and becoming... Who knows?





Distortion theory establishes a relationship between the observer and the observed. In our particular examination, we could divide UFO encounters into two complementary parts, the witness and the experience. THE WITNESS: If when investigating a close encounter, we carefully analyze the witness, for example, asking about his hobbies, studies, readings, profession, etc., it is very possible that part of this content is somehow reflected in the aesthetics or narrative of his incident (depending on how complex it is). Therefore, before even listening to the details of the encounter he has starred in, we can intuit or predict some elements that we will find in his account. For example, if the witness is an enthusiast of Egyptian culture, it is very feasible that this hobby oozes somewhere in his sighting (for example, that the UFO observed has the shape of a pyramid or that the occupants were wearing a belt with hieroglyphics). But there is more. The witness's own usual environment can offer unexpected clues. If the observer has a particular building in front of his home, with a very specific and unusual shape, such as a water tower or a repeater antenna, it is quite possible that the flying saucer will acquire a very similar shape (what we would call the visual origin of the aesthetic conformation). And likewise, all the details inherent in the personality of the observer should be noted. If the witness is fearful or cautious, it is very likely that his encounter with the ufonauts will not be very close and the beings will not even bother to talk to him or invite him to come up to the spacecraft for refreshments. In fact, if his fear is exacerbated, he will probably not even have the opportunity to see the occupants of the UFO clearly or he will have a terrifying encounter. However, as we saw earlier, in more curious, extroverted, adventurous or courageous individuals, the crewmembers will be much friendlier and there will be more interaction with the phenomenon (what we would call the origin of the shaping of the narrative). And in the same way, more intellectual observers (not necessarily supported by studies) will elevate the content of the communication with the ufonauts.

PHENOMENON (THE EXPERIENCE): In the same way, if I am correct, the process that makes up close encounters with UFOs is a two-way process.  That is, information from one side of our equation is equal to the opposite. Therefore, if when we carefully read the details of a close encounter, we pay special attention to the shape of the UFO, the behavior of the UFOnauts or the details described by the witnesses, we will be able to draw up an approximate profile of the type of person who would report on that particular type of experience. The study of the aesthetics and narrative of the incidents can provide us with a lot of covert data about the personality of the observer (since everything observed has sprung from his or her psyche). For example, in an event where the witness has described a helicopter-shaped UFO and its occupants as military-like, it is quite possible that this person has some connection with the military or may live or work in the vicinity of a military base (what we would call the origin of the shaping of the aesthetics). Likewise, if the ufonauts looked terrifying and avoided approaching the observer, it is very likely that this person is not very daring or outgoing (what we would call the origin of the shaping of the narrative). If we take into account this way of approaching the cases, we will verify the existence of a series of patterns, both narrative and aesthetic, that seem to be repeated with a certain suspicious frequency in the UFO literature. It is usual, and this is reflected in the literature, that both children (through their games), police, military and people who own or like firearms, have UFO experiences where the UFOnauts carry some kind of object that they identify as a weapon. In addition, to further astonishment, these weapons (supposedly originated by an extraterrestrial civilization), in most cases, are very similar, almost to the detail, of our pistols or rifles, which makes quick and obvious their identification and function by the witnesses. Nor does it seem accidental that most of the cases with ufonauts with the appearance of the famous Michelin doll have occurred in French territory, where the tire brand originates.

lunes, 3 de octubre de 2022


An exhaustive analysis of more than 10,000 close encounters with UFOs that offers surprising and disconcerting conclusions never reached before...

It must be taken into account that one of the most serious mistakes made by ufologists has been to consider that the extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) was the only, as well as evident and logical, solution to the enigma before even having all the data and information on the table to, obviously, be able to form a more accurate idea of the paradigm at hand. Also, to top off this initial failed approach, almost all research has been conducted, oriented and even sweetened to "prove" the validity of the visit of alien beings to our planet over any other proposal that dared to stand up to this seductive idea. Trampling over any clue or element that could call into question this belief.

There are a series of complex questions that have never crossed the minds of most ufologists: how can there be so many different types of crew members; why don't flying saucers leave traces in all landings; why in some incidents the occupant of the UFO can speak our language perfectly and in others he babbles in an incomprehensible language; why do the alleged extraterrestrials repeat certain actions ad nauseam over and over again in front of witnesses? Why do we have such different descriptions of the same apparent phenomenon; why do aliens wear scuba suits in one event and not in others; why are many close encounters absurd and nonsensical; where does this link between paranormal phenomena and flying saucers comes from; why does the ufological paradigm have so many things in common with our human society; why do UFOs have so many colored lights if they want to go unnoticed ?

Andres Gomez Serrano, in his book UFOs: 50 years of research in the Campo de Gibraltar (1997), almost poetically stated that UFOs: Thousands of witnesses (millions of them) have seen them, photographed them, filmed them, chased them (with fighter planes), and they have even been shot from the ground and from the air with all kinds of weapons, including missiles, both day and night. Governments are still silent, do not know, do not respond. The most impenetrable mystery accompanied by a persistent silence hangs over this lurid affair. In spite of the fact that in their possession -we only suppose-, there are ample and voluminous dossiers classifying them as "Top Secret or top secret classified matter".

The researcher Félix Arés de Blas stated that: "The UFO phenomenon is a multiple phenomenon. There is a physical phenomenon. There is a physical phenomenon and there is a mythical phenomenon. They are totally differentiated realities, autonomous worlds with few contacts between them. The UFO myth exists and has a life of its own independent of the physical UFO, or with very little relation to the physical UFO

Do you understand now, dear reader, why one premise prevails over the other, who is going to admit the reality of these encounters 63, and is it logical that a partial and biased reading of the data is preferred? One thing is clear. The more information about the UFO phenomenon we have, the more confusion. The closer the proximity, the more the anarchy in the data . And, therefore, our reason must “leave the ship” before facing the deep study of the case reports.

JOSÉ ANTONIO CARAV@CA First Edition: June 2022

domingo, 1 de mayo de 2022


Could we consider Kenneth Arnold's experience, regard- less of its nature, as an unprecedented trigger within human imagery for the ideo- graphic transference of a modern folklore?

Let me explain. In almost all the cul- tures of the planet there are old chron- icles of encounters with unknown beings and entities that apparently inhabited invisible paradises, celestial realms or the very beyond. These experiences have a singular and indisputable cognitive reality that has led to the elaboration of complex mythologies including religions. No one doubts that these stories were in many cases due to the existence of an unknown phenomenon, but with broad psychic ramifications. In many of these manifestations we have noted that there is an endemic characteristic, which makes that certain apparitions, as in the case of the Santa Compaña in Galicia (Spain) have no repetition in other parts of the planet. But how is this possible?

Do these phenomena not have the capacity to move from one place to another?

Apparently many apparitions with unknown entities have needed cultural sustenance, that is, oral or written transmission, to move from one area to another. This does not mean that these appa- ritions have as origin the "psychic contagion" as the psychosocial theory defines it, since very probably in other places there exist cults or beliefs in very similar things but that nevertheless have a different aesthetic. And here we find an important clue. The majority of apparitions with entities of all kinds have a very similar narrative background (communicative and informative), since they are elusive, elusive beings, or in a few cases very talkative. But in their external form, in their aesthetics, these beings and entities can offer wide divergences, even among what are considered the same enigma with little space for change, such as extraterrestrials or the Virgin Mary (and bigfoot). 

The researchers have noted ad nauseam that the manifestations are usually very unstable in their aesthetic aspect, and surprisingly, the scenography presented to the witnesses offers many changes from one event to another. As if each witness decodes this cognitive reality differently. But I am not referring to a simple cultural bias as psychology defends, product of a natural reaction of our psyche before an unknown stimulus (and that he is trying to put back together as best he can). But rather, the manifestations seem to react differently to each person presented with aesthetic characteristics that we will never encounter again in another event. Until now, scholars have considered that, for example, the approaches of the UFO phenomenon to witnesses (close encounters) caused a good number of collateral effects (epiphenomena); buzzing, trances, sensory isolation, poltergeist phenomena, development of paranormal faculties, etc. Perhaps as a consequence of extraterrestrial technology or the incursion of these manifestations from other dimensions. But nevertheless, what we have to value, is that both the visionaries of the Virgin, as well as the witnesses of other fortean apparitions, very different in appearance (aesthetics) to our flying saucers, have also noted these "secondary" effects. Then we might reconsider our initials approaches to the UFO phenomenon, at least in its facet of close encounters.

And if the aesthetics of these apparitions were actually the least important aspect of the phenomenon?

And if what we see is the result of sensory interference caused by our psyche in trying to shape this cognitive universe? And if the stories of flying saucers and multiple ufonauts were simply "back- ground noise" that prevents us from properly delving into this phenomenon?

We cannot overlook the fact that altered states of consciousness, personalization and subjectivity of the experiences are a hallmark shared by almost all encounters with unknown entities. Therefore, there are two aspects to take into account:

1.- If we are dealing with invented experiences, why do the witnesses not "copy" the aesthetics of the encounters that appear in books or in the press to ensure the credibility of the media and researchers?

2.- If it is a real phenomenon, why is the aesthetics not maintained from one event to the next? Does the paradigm not have a memory of its previous appearances?

The strangest thing is that the only uniformity presented by the close encounters can be found in the so-called epiphenomena, so we could conjecture that we have most probably mistaken our initial approach. Why do the witnesses not agree on the aesthetics of the phenomenon, which is widely publicized and drawn, and for example if they are able to talk about those collateral phenomena that are much less known?

What if the trances, the buzzing, the OZ factor, the paranormal phenomena, the development of PSI faculties, the premonitory dreams were the fundamental axis of the phenomenon we are studying?

What if this is a clear sign that we are dealing with apparitions widely related to the human psyche? It has always been striking that flying saucers and their occupants were in fact a reflection of what our own astronautics or science fiction had previously offered. Levers, ladders, ray guns, self-contained respiratory equipment, luminous button computers, etc. have composed the scenery of a scenography that seemed to us all too human. In fact, any other supernatural or unknown apparition always has been somehow wrapped by socio-cultural factors, indicating that whatever it is, this elusive phenomenon is projected on our reality using the human imaginary, or in other words, the unconscious of the witnesses. Also if we observe these apparitions about a timeline, we will realize that UFOs are nothing more than a modern folklore that draws from older sources, and that they are probably the latest reflection of an ancient phenomenon that has always been present in the history of mankind.

UFOs, at least in their facet of close encounters, are the natural replacement of angels, fairies, elves, and other anomalous creatures. The only difference is that, contrary to other more local folklore, their repercussion in the general media in the middle of the 20th century (unprecedented in the history of humanity) allowed, for the first time, the existence of this cognitive reality to have a wider impact in different countries.

So I wonder what would have happened if in past centuries the encounters with the Santa Compaña in Galicia or Springheel Jack had been publicized with the same means as our modern flying saucers? Would we have found encounters of this retinue of the dead or of the jumping ghost in Mexico, Sweden or Italy?

This would demonstrate that on the one hand the phenomena we study have an origin external to the human being, that it is not a purely psychological phenomenon, but on the other hand, it needs a transmission belt, the expansion of certain supernatural beliefs to probably support its ephemeral life. Without the sum of these factors, the phenomenon would not have the necessary ingredients for its development, demonstrating that on their own initiative, the Fortean apparitions also need of an appropriate environment in society to propagate. UFOs and Fortean apparitions live in a liminal zone, beyond the reach of our ordinary state of consciousness. 


jueves, 3 de marzo de 2022


The Distortion Theory claims that everything observed in the staging orchestrated by the phenomenon, that is, the UFOs and their elusive occupants, follows a very similar development, even if it is something else, to that manifested in dreams. And what would be the main conclusion of this fact? Well, that close encounters have no real and lasting existence (continuity) beyond these ephemeral contacts. There is neither before nor after, we can only quantify and evaluate the during. And this singular fact would explain, from the outset, one of the great questions of the UFO subject: Why are there so many types of flying saucers and extraterrestrials? And the fact is that these manifestations would be the result of a highly "creative" and "malleable" process that would be adapted to the private and non-transferable information of each witness, with hardly any previous information occurred in another ufological case because the phenomenon is incapable of preserving aesthetic contents beyond the most common and foreseeable elements. For this reason, we have been unable to obtain a fixed or coherent photograph of the UFO paradigm or even to extract a shared plot among thousands of events that would clearly indicate that we were before the same craft and the same crew members. Therefore, if UFO incidents are the consequence of an individual parapsychic mechanism to be executed, with unsuspected consequences, it is indisputable that the resulting episodes should be unpredictable, random and chaotic.


jueves, 10 de febrero de 2022


In the decade of the sixties of the last century a substantial fact happened to understand the evolution of ufology, two bastions such as NICAP and Dr. Joseph Allen Hynek did not end up accepting the close encounters with UFOs and their crew members despite the multiple episodes that were occurring worldwide. And all because this type of incidents and their display of absurdity and incoherence endangered the stability of the extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) before the public opinion and especially before the scientific community. A communiqué from the famous group stated: "NICAP neither accepts nor rejects this type of reports". But in the face of the strength of the evidence of such incidents, finally both sides had to admit, however reluctantly, that these cases, however anomalous, were an intrinsic part of the UFO phenomenon. And this made other kinds of theoretical approaches begin to gain strength in the ufological territory, with Jacques Vallée and John Keel at the forefront. From those key years onwards, aliens lost some of their prominence, at least in the eyes of the scholarly community. Subsequently, the contributions of Michel Monnerie, Jerome Clark, Freixedo and others, managed even more to corner the idea that the flying saucers were only ships of sheet metal and screws piloted by excellent scientists arrived from unknown planets. However, after decades of ostracism, and in the heat of the so-called Pentagon's UFOs, the extraterrestrials have come back to life. The history seems to want to restart from scratch, completely ignoring, as in the past, the cases of landings and close experiences with UFOnauts. Nowadays, for some, only pilot sightings and radar detections are important (without assessing whether they could belong to phenomena other than flying saucers). But what many of these HET advocates ignore is that the same promoters of this resurgence of "extraterrestrials" are not convinced of this approach, and openly point out that the UFO phenomenon is related to paranormal and fortean facts of all kinds as well as to the human psyche, leaving the door open to an implicit admission of the same precepts defended by paraufology (a term that agglutinated the most heterodox ideas within the study of UFOs). Therefore, a new turn of the screw is expected soon, which will leave us in the right place in the investigation.