For decades, the UFO phenomenon has been approached mainly from two major explanatory frameworks: the classic extraterrestrial model, which posits that reports point to the clandestine visits of beings from other worlds, and the psychosocial model, which interprets sightings as cultural constructs, perceptual errors, hoaxes, or modern mythologies (substitutes for religion). However, both approaches have shown limitations: one tends toward excessive credulity without conclusive evidence, while the other toward a skeptical reductionism that ignores the richness and complexity of the phenomenon.
In this context, the Distortion Theory would represent a middle path. It does not deny the reality of the phenomenon, but it redefines it beyond its apparent literalness. It does not reject witness testimony but reinterprets it, understanding that what is perceived is not necessarily what one thinks they see.
1. THE CORE OF DISTORTION: AN INDUCED AND PERSONALIZED EXPERIENCE
The Distortion Theory (DT) proposes an idea as simple as it is controversial: close encounters are real—yes—but what we see is not. They are not spaceships or biological beings. What the witness perceives and feels is a kind of immersive projection, a vivid experience that seems to come from outside but actually arises in part from their own mind. Still, it is triggered by an “external agent” that, so far, remains a mystery but operates from what could be considered hidden portions of reality.
We would be facing the same phenomenon that witnesses have interpreted throughout history through specific sociocultural filters. In fact, Kenneth Arnold’s sighting in 1947 offered a new interpretive framework, a worthy successor to fairies, ladies in white, or demons of antiquity. The trigger of these experiences—about which nothing is known except for its ability to interact with the human mind in unimaginable ways—uses the witness’s reservoir of memories, ideas, emotions, and beliefs to build a unique and unrepeatable experience which, in many cases, proves to be profoundly transformative. We would thus be facing a distortion of reality that activates very deep and archaic mental archetypes as a form of communication. Many experiences begin with similar phenomena, such as the observation of lights, strange sensations, voices, sounds, or vague entities. In some encounters, these acquire a more defined appearance, shaped by latent beliefs, though in most cases they remain so ambiguous that they could fit into almost any category of the supernatural or Fortean. It is the filters of investigators that ultimately assign them a label.
2. THE DARK POINTS EXPLAINED BY DISTORTION
NON-REPETITION: The diversity of forms and entities.
From flying cauldrons to humanoids in tight suits with antennas, to figures with animal traits or robotic presences—the sheer variety has long been a headache for classification. DT explains this endless gallery of “space troops” as the outcome of an interaction between the external agent and the psyche of witnesses, a process whose results will never be exactly the same. According to this view, the human mind does not perceive the event as it is but “translates” or symbolically overlays it using elements available in its cultural, emotional, and imaginative environment. This adaptive process acts as a kind of mental filter or earthly coating, necessary to make the experience comprehensible.
This symbolic overlay has a dual purpose: it allows cognitive processing of the experience and integrates it into a framework of personal, social, and cultural meaning. Thus, what might otherwise be an unbearable or alien reality is transformed into an acceptable—if ambiguous—narrative that aligns with the mental coordinates of the witness or society. Importantly, this is not just a cognitive adjustment: the manifestation itself assumes this role, both in how it presents itself and in how it behaves toward witnesses. In this way, the filtering process truly operates on the “substance” of the phenomenon.
THE ABSURD.
Most researchers have never been able to account for the omnipresent absurdity in many UFO events. Many encounters resemble dreams: disconnected actions, contextless symbols, sudden disappearances, spacetime anomalies, and so on. Within DT, this is understood as the result of an experience not subject to ordinary physical laws but to the logic of the unconscious, since the manifestation process occurs through the human channel (even if its origin is external). The setting is a slice of reality that could be considered intermediate between external and internal, physical and psychic.
THE PSYCHIC LOAD.
Witnesses often recall the experience as intensely real, even if it sometimes feels illusory, dreamlike, or imaginal. This aligns with the idea of an experience designed to impact human consciousness, not necessarily to be understood within our usual parameters.
THE LACK OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE.
Although the manifestations can appear physical, they maintain an ambiguous dual existence—external and internal—at a level beyond the reach of our mechanistic understanding.
3. THE WITNESS AS CO-CREATOR
One of the fundamental elements of DT is its conception of the witness as coauthor of the experience. They are not a passive recipient observing an external object but an active participant whose mind, at the critical moment, provides the material with which the phenomenon cloaks itself. This does not mean that everything is subjective or imagined. Quite the contrary: the experience is imposed from outside but built from within.
This model opens new pathways for understanding not only UFO encounters but also extraordinary visionary phenomena such as religious apparitions, experiences of the deceased, shamanic journeys, or even manifestations from ancient folklore. All of these could be cultural variants of the same core of Distortion.
4. BEYOND CONSCIOUSNESS
DT does more than offer an explanatory framework for anomalous encounters; it also raises profound questions about the nature of reality, consciousness, and the limits of the human. Who—or what—is the external agent? To what end is the experience induced? Is this distortion a form of symbolic contact with a non-human intelligence? Or is it a kind of test—a simulation meant to confront us with the unknown within our own psyche?
CONCLUSION: A NEW FRONTIER
DT does not seek to eliminate the unknown component of the phenomenon but to rethink the concepts and ideas present in ufological literature since its beginnings. It does not claim that witnesses are lying, nor does it deny that something real is happening. Instead, it proposes a new way of interpreting the phenomenon: not as a physical intrusion by extraterrestrial entities, but as a symbolic interaction with an as-yet-undefined reality—one capable of expanding human consciousness toward new and revealing cognitive frontiers.
JOSE ANTONIO CARAVACA
