SP9: Regan’s Comments

Government Disclosure Won't Happen
The Disclosure movement means well, and disclosure proponents don’t bother me; however, I happen to think they’re naive. The government will never come clean, simply because it can’t. It’s a system that is its own entity which, regardless of original intents, ends up defending and protecting only itself. That’s the nature of all bureaucracies. It’s naive to think that the government would come forward in complete openness in regards to anything, let alone UFOs. My opinion doesn't not mean -- and it certainly doesn’t prove -- that UFOs don’t  exist, or that the government doesn't know a hell of a lot more than it’s telling. I don’t trust authority; it’s that simple. The government isn't in the truth business, so I don’t expect the government to be forthcoming. If there’s an agenda that will be satisfied by the government’s disclose concerning UFOs then they will give us “the truth” though no doubt that “truth” will be only some of the truth concerning UFOs.  There’s always a back room, which the rest of us in the front room will never get to see. The government doesn’t want to lose control over us, and it doesn’t want to admit it doesn’t know what to do about UFOs. That, and the need for self-protection, ensures that a completely authentic disclosure will never happen.

We need to focus on ourselves in regards to the UFO phenomena.

Definitions, Interpretations, Minutiae, Disclosures
UFOs exist, and that’s that. We need to get over the self-defeating cycle of engaging in the argument of whether they exist or not, and in pointless rounds of  defining “UFO.” UFOs exist; what they are, is something else. For those of us with direct experience with non-human beings and weird objects in the skies, we beg to differ when it comes to these now pointless time wasting arguments about existence. We don’t know with an absolute that the government has information concerning UFOs, although it’s a solid and rational thing to think that the government has plenty to disclose. It’s a safe and a rational assumption to make; that the government knows far more than it pretends when it comes to UFOs. No harm in asking, and for that reason, I just don’t have much of a disagreement with Disclosure people. I don’t think they’ll get anywhere, and I think it borders on the ridiculous to believe the government -- any government -- will reveal all, but it’s nice they’re trying. Little bits get revealed here and there, and that’s something. It all gets added to the vast, complex puzzle.

Even for us that have experienced such things as aliens and flying saucers and all the rest,  I can’t say they’re from outer space. They very well may be; or they could be inner earth dwelling creatures, or... combinations we haven’t even thought of. They are real, they are here. That is the reality. The rest is interpretation.

As Erich pointed out in his post,  many countries did “disclose”, in a sense. But it’s not true Disclosure until the alien is let out of the space ship on CNN. As to Project Bluebook, that was no attempt at disclosure, but a show to placate. Valuable data, thanks to the continued efforts of diligent researchers, but the intent? Appeasement and distraction.

Significance
It’s not a contest; this idea of disclosure concerning UFOs with other types of disclosure. The horrors of this world are real, and the idea that, because one has either experienced UFOs in some way in their life or has an interest in them is then uninvolved or disinterested and non-compassionate is another distraction. Interest in subject A does not negate interest -- or compassion and activism -- in subjects B, C and D. . .

The UFO phenomena is significant; and, if disclosure ever does take place, that will become even more evident. The fact that both myself and my spouse have experienced missing time in connection with UFOs on at least two occasions is very significant. And if the government was responsible for that, (a MILAB type event, for example) that’s damn well significant, because it means the government was doing things, obviously, it had no business doing. If it was aliens, that’s certainly significant.  Other possibilities, sure, but really, far less likely. No thank you very much, we are not mentally ill, or suffering from shared delusions, and I won’t dignify that argument with any more energy than this.

If one holds the view that such things don’t exist, or only exist in one context, how can it then be decided that that thing is significant or not?

It may be the aliens arrive, everyone nods and says, “Yeah, we kind of thought so,” and it’s business as usual. No major cures, wars continue, the human race isn’t saved from ourselves, the aliens don’t seem much to care. They’re here for sight seeing, or resources. They could not care less about us or the planet. Or, maybe they’re benign and loving and things will be groovy forever. I have no idea. That’s assuming  there’s just one race of alien. For all we know, there are several vying for power and control. Or, not. Point is; we don’t know.

Processing and Individuation
I accept that I’ve had experiences, and I’m trying to process them. But before we can get to some kind of individuation, as Erich refers to, we have to complete the processing, and that is different for everyone, including UFO Police, disclosure activists, and everyone else.

Is is so important we have some kind of individuation in UFOlogy? We don't know what we’re dealing with in the first place; labeling our responses to an unknown is expected -- how else do we make it so we can productively work towards understanding unless we break it down somewhat -- but we need to be aware we haven’t solved anything, simply because we stuck a label on it.

The assumption that it has to be aliens in the flying saucers, because what else could it be, is just that: an assumption. But it’s not a ridiculous assumption, nor is it irrational. It’s wrong headed to state, as a fact, that they’re aliens from outer space, but not so wrong headed to seriously consider that speculation.

It could be the UFO phenomena, including its entities, is a “mythic” journey, or some kind of “psi” event. Its responses to us  --  or what we see as in response to us -- ours to it, etc. --- our pursuit of “the answer” a hero’s journey. Into the underworld. Crossing liminal thresholds. Metaphors for an Other.  It could also be that that’s just a part of it, or that it seems that way to us, merely because of technology. As Budd Hopkins and Carol Rainey pointed out in their book Sight Unseen: Science, UFO Invisibility and Transgenic Beings , much of what the UFOs and aliens do seem “magical” to us because their technology is so beyond ours we aren’t able to perceive as simply manifestations of engineering and science. To us, it’s magic, or paranormal.

Levels of Disclosure
There’s personal disclosure, such as the encounters the individual experiences. Murky, confusing, for myself, no real anything other than the life long experiences. Very Zen like. No answers, no cures, just. .. UFOs and vague entities and weird moments over fifty plus years.  That’s pretty cool actually, and yes, significant, but as to answers: not much. Who they are, what they are, where they’re from, what they want.. nope. I can’t tell you. They just . . . are.

Then there’s the Disclosure humans. Activists who push the governments of the world to come clean. As noted, they’re naive and will never get any government to come clean. Even if an alien is shown inside a UFO on the news, and official government pronouncements are made that “they’re here,” -- how could we know they’re telling the truth? How can we be sure, really positive, that the alien isn’t a cleverly created puppet, or worse, some horrible science experiment involving hybrid animals; who knows what Dr. Evil madness lurks?

Finally, there’s the Oh My God Disclosure: “them.” They don’t need -- we don’t, won’t need -- any government to do anything. The aliens themselves have done it for us. They simply arrive in hundreds of mother ships, land, and, there you have it. They’re here. Like an episode of V, except real, a lot less cheesy, and, hopefully, not creepy human flesh eating reptilians.

Interpretations, The Djinn, Angels and Demons. . .
Some cultures accept these things as everyday realities as “normal” and expected as everything else. The mundane and the sacred are not so separate. Researchers Farah Yurdozu, Phillip Imbrogno, Rosemary Ellen Guiley (The Vengeful Djinn Unveiling the Hidden Agenda of Genies) among others, refer us to Turkish perceptions of these UFOs and beings; they call them Djinn, and accept that these entities cross into our dimension. Some Christians in our culture and elsewhere frame these experiences in a demon/angel dichotomy. While I have problems with that dogma the idea isn’t so far off. What came first, the demon/angel/god motif, or the alien from Mars?

Whatever they are, they are, and there are many paths on this very significant journey to discovery.

Regan Responds to Lon’s SP6: The Bigfoot Paradox -- Bigfoot and Fairies

Wow, a fantastic post by Lon. I’ve been fascinated by UFO themed, paranormal or supernatural narratives concerning Bigfoot for years. These tales of high strangeness encounters inspired me a few years ago to start a blog devoted just to this topic [Frame 352: The Stranger Side of Sasquatch.]

Like the Contactee stories of meetings with beings from Venus or Mars, rides aboard spaceships, metaphysical discourse between human and alien, the tales of Bigfoot meetings containing yet further bizarre elements are incredible to believe; certainly if we take them literally. But, these tales do exist, and as Lon and others ask: what about them?

We have to look at these tales, and we have to acknowledge their existence. As Forteans, that’s easy, it’s what we do. Strictly “flesh and blood” Bigfoot researchers often don’t allow themselves that luxury and in fact, (as recent events have proven on a couple of well known Bigfoot message boards) many Bigfoot forums will kick you off if you start up about UFO or inter-dimensional Bigfoot. Some boards and groups have had it in their TOS that they won’t allow such discussions at all. It's an understatement to say that the flesh and blood vs. paranormal Bigfoot discussion is a controversial one.

There was an excellent Bigfoot blog around: The Blogsquatcher. For reasons of his own, the “Blogsquatcher” decided to stop blogging about Bigfoot and his research in the spring of 2010 and the blog is no longer active. But he was one of the few Bigfoot bloggers who gave serious consideration to the paranormal/UFO/anomalous aspects of Sasquatch encounters. Other paranormal Bigfoot blogs include author and researcher Lisa Shiel (Backyard Bigfoot:The True Story of Stick Signs, UFOs and the Sasquatch) who is not only a researcher, but has had her own UFO sightings and high strangeness encounters concerning Bigfoot. Peter Guittilla has been writing about high strangeness Bigfoot for years, and his book Bigfoot Files is a great collection of stories from witnesses about their weird encounters.

Good thoughts posted here on The C-Influence from others on the nature of high strangeness Bigfoot, and I can’t really add anything; it’s already been said, and very well. I will share a bit of my own experience with the “other side” of Bigfoot however.

I remember when I first came across a “weird Bigfoot” story. It was many years ago and for some reason, the article, (I believe written by Jack Lapseritis, who Lon mentions in his post) ticked me off. It made me angry. Now, why is that? That’s an interesting response to something I knew nothing about, isn’t it? I “believed in” Bigfoot; meaning, I accepted that Bigfoot most likely existed. A flesh and blood Bigfoot, and, a “giant ape,” at that. Now of course, I believe no such thing-- oh, I believe Bigfoot exists all right, but Bigfoot is more, far more, than “just a giant ape.”

But, as a Fortean in the making, I couldn’t bring myself to just throw away the article, so I filed it away. Synchronicty came along, and suddenly, I was coming across all kinds of articles about UFOs and Bigfoot, Bigfoot living under ground, dematerializing Bigfoot, etc. I was definitely intrigued. I was hooked, actually, and remain so today.

Then I came upon two Oregon (where I live) weird Bigfoot tales. One is the “monster” in Conser Lake outside of Albany, Oregon,  and the other, the experiences of Stan Johnson in Sutherlin, Oregon.  (Both subjects of a project I’ve been working on for awhile now.) I won't go into details about either here, but both share many similarities (even while differing in many respects; for example, appearance.) Both stories include landed UFOs, Bigfoot or “hairy biped” associated with that UFO, the Bigfoot communicating with humans that it came from outer space, telepathic communications between the Bigfoot creature and humans, strange sounds heard in close proximity to humans but no creature seen, and a lot more.

I met Stan Johnson once at a local UFO conference; he was one of the presenters. He was elderly ; I’d say in his seventies, yet he was very charismatic. As I listened to him speak, I found myself disagreeing with his personal perception on things which were framed within a religious context, but his energy was profoundly strong and, when he shook my hand and we spoke for a few minutes, I could feel this energy -- a heat, and an electrical feeling - - emanating from him. And here’s an interesting tangent: I had less trouble believing his stories of his paranormal encounters with Bigfoot -- it really wasn’t such a stretch for me to accept the possibility he had these experiences -- as I did accepting his personal, religious interpretation of those experiences.

One day around that time, I was speaking with the then owner of a local New Age bookstore, Stargate, who had known Stan, the object of our discussion. As we were talking about Stan, I became aware of a bright white cone of light -- like an upside down ice cream cone-- that had come down through the ceiling and settled on us, sort of covering us or enclosing us. I was inwardly freaked out; was I going crazy, having a migraine, what? Sound became muffled, light was weird; I could still hear and see but it was as if I was looking through a glass brick. As soon as had stopped talking about Stan, the cone of light lifted back up into the ceiling and “out.” The owner gave me a funny look; I thought, “She must think I’m nuts, I probably look panic stricken as all hell” but she said, “You saw what too; that always happens when we talk about Stan.”

So there that is.

Back to the religious aspect of some of this: Stan Johnson considered himself a Christian, and didn’t see any conflict with his beliefs and his experiences. Yet an Oregon Bigfoot researcher not long ago rejected my following her blog -- and her, mine -- because, as this person told me, they considered themselves a Christian, and therefore, could not accept any discussion or link to any blogs that had to do with “the paranormal.” In an authentic and genuine attempt to understand, I responded that, if one puts themselves out there as a Bigfoot researcher, yet rejects accounts that conflict with personal values, well, is that research? Of course this isn’t limited to religious views; there are Bigfoot researchers who may or may not consider themselves religious but their rejection of this high strangeness Bigfoot isn’t based on religious convictions necessarily, but simply the old flesh and blood vs. high strangeness. This is another area of discussion I guess but I find it interesting a researcher can be so involved in a marginalized, and trivialized, area, and yet, have their own buffers that keep them from going completely down the rabbit hole.

Bigfoot researcher Autumn Williams (whose recent book, Enoch, while not dealing with high strangeness Bigfoot, has received a lot of criticism -- and praise -- for focusing on both the protection of Bigfoot, as well as the witness, and the dynamics between witness and researcher) has suggested, along with other researchers (like the Blogsquatcher) that Bigfoot is almost eerily sensitive to physical effects of things like cameras and infrared. We can speculate that it’s possible the creature we call Sasquatch, Bigfoot, etc. has highly developed senses to the point of being supernatural. (Speaking of Autumn Williams, her mother, Sali Sheppard-Wolford, has written her own book-- Valley of the Skookum -- about her highly unusual Bigfoot experiences which include MIBS, UFOs, telepathic communications and other high strangeness.) Or, of course, Bigfoot simply is “supernatural.” Some, like Lisa Shiel, and Patrick Harpur in his excellent book Daemonic Reality, suggest Bigfoot is a fairy. Specifically, as Shiel suggests here, a water fairy. Shiel writes that Bigfoot’s affinity for water (something apes do not share, which is more evidence to support Bigfoot as a non-ape creature) parallels Celtic, Algonquian, and other cultural fairy entities. Bigfoot is a remnant of the fairy realm. This idea explains UFOs, alien beings, the dematerializing, feelings of disorientation reported by witnesses ... like Jacque Vallee’s Passport to Magonia, where comparisons between the fairy realm and UFOs are made to support the idea much of what we call UFOs (and aliens) are earth bound entities, not ETs, Bigfoot could also be thought of as a fairy creature.

Seed Post 4 - Influences - Regan Lee

I’ll start off with a general comment about my overall perspective on approaches to studying paranormal and UFO events. All my life, I’ve had paranormal and UFO experiences, and I continue to experience these things. My activism, I guess you could call it, -- encouraging others to tell their stories, sharing my own -- came about roughly fifteen years ago, when I returned to college.

I studied folklore, and focused on paranormal and UFO narratives. Folklore was one of the few area where I could get away with indulging my fascination with these topics. As soon as it became known I was interested in hearing from to others with supernatural, Fortean and especially UFO experiences, I had all kinds of people contacting me, eager to share their stories. Many of them told me they hadn’t shared their stories, or only with a few others. Often they hadn’t even told their spouses or significant others, or children -- they kept these experiences to themselves. Knowing they had someone who would listen to them without judgment, keep their confidence if they requested that, and had my own strange experiences gave these witnesses the space to share.

I loved the academic realm of folklore as a discipline, but, had a few major problems with it at the same time. I am not an academic, and , when in college, decided to not follow that path. I’m simply not wired that way; can’t deal with authorities, politics, 9 to 5 job milieu. . . but that aside, I found a huge problem in folklore studies -- as an academic pursuit - that seemed ironically contradictory. On the one hand, collecting stories while remaining nonjudgmental was encouraged. At the same time, it seemed to me folklore couldn’t decide what it wanted to be. Professors wanted conclusions, they wanted a psychological analysis. Well, I’d say, I’m not a psychologist, I’m not a psychology student, I’m not even taking any psychology classes. While I could give a sort of every-woman’s, educated take on, say, UFO narratives using psychology (Jung, etc.) it wouldn’t really be worth much. If not psychology, sociology, if not that, science, they wanted something. Pointing out that folklore, while utilizing those areas in some ways, is not those things, -- well, we just went around.

At the same time, self-reflexivity was encouraged, depending on the professor. I liked that; we are not objective beings. In dealing with stories of UFOs, abductions, aliens encounters, hauntings, high strangeness, Bigfoot sightings and all manner of Fortean, supernatural events, the standard, neat little explanations of psychology science etc. do not apply. Especially if the interviewer/researcher herself has had her own experiences.

Because of my own experiences, which caused me to research, which gave me information that I could share with witnesses (or “informants” as we called them which always struck me as an odd term) I asked myself: what am I? Researcher? Experiencer? Witness? Where do I come in, when do I step out?

It’s a dance, a partnership, a journey: “researcher” and witness. Bigfoot researcher Autumn Williams has brought this issue forward with her recent book Enoch. A great book in my opinion; what Williams has to say about Bigfoot research can be applied to all anomalous research. Respect for the witness, certainly. Listening to the witness. Just . . . listening. Respect for the witness, allowing the witness to determine time lines and how things will go, or at least, recognize the researcher/witness relationship is an equal endeavor, not a power one of Researcher vs. witness. Her book has caused quite a controversy within Bigfoot research, but, maybe that’s a good thing. It’s shaken things up, that’s for sure. Maybe her words will cause researchers to take a look at their expectations of what they want from research, from “finding Bigfoot,” to what they expect and want from witnesses.

(Speaking of the roles of witnesses and researchers, I remember a folklore conference I attended years ago. Big time folklorists were present, revered academics, published authors; it was great. And a fist fight almost broke out! There was one well known folklorist, who insisted the wishes of the indigenous culture he had been researching for years be respected -- their stories not told out of season, for example -- while another equally well known folklorist insisted no such consideration should be held; the stories were too important, the research too important, to withhold the stories from the rest of us. I personally found the disregard and lack of respect for the culture being discussed shocking, and amazed that this academic authority could get away with such behavior. I know;I was naive!)

UFO research, for example, sees this; researchers arguing about who controls data and information, release of findings vs. witness confidentiality, etc.

I had many professors tell me that just compiling stories wasn't enough; what about them? I agree with that to a point, after all, anyone can collect a bunch of stories, however, that "so what" is very valuable; that bunch of stories is data. Aside from the usual folklore stuff: tracing cultural origins, comparisons and contrasts with other groups, group dynamics, etc. well, what about them indeed? They’re there; and with, say, UFO stories, I don’t know the answers any more than anyone else does.

My frustration reached its peak when I was working on my final project (akin to a thesis) in folklore. My paper was on UFO narratives that included animals. From the behavior of the family pet in the face of a UFO landing, to animals and creatures appearing as guides to liminal experiences, I had a nifty collection, naturally organized into categories, of animal tales in a UFO context. But what was my analysis? What was my take on all this? What angle was I operating from? A Jungian one? Freudian? etc.

The following is from an article I wrote for the UFO Folklore site a good ten years ago. It was written when I was just beginning to get involved in this field on-line. The article is titled Defining Folklore; I wrote:

There is a common misconception among many people that the term "folklore" implies "something that is not true." Nothing can be further from the truth. Folklore means the "lore" (stories) of the "folk," whatever that lore might be, true or not.
... For some, the fact that a comparison can be made is "proof" that the current UFO stories are "lies." A folklorist merely points out the interesting pattern, but acknowledges it is not "proof" of anything. .. Conspiracy theories, animal behavior and imagery, abduction tales, the role of popular culture, telepathic communications, and more, are all part of the lore that is examined by folklorists. It may be true, it may not be true. It is not the role or objective of a folklorist to make an absolute statement one way or the other.

For myself, I am concerned with the process of UFO stories. How do they change, how are they the same? What are the "extensions" of UFO tales? (conspiracy tales, ancient astronaut theories, etc.) What can we learn about each other, ourselves, and the world -both seen, and unseen?

In exploring the UFO stories in all the complex and varied lore that exists, much can be learned, on several levels, about the human psyche. That's only part of the exploration. We can also come closer to the "truth," whatever that might be.

The folklore of the people is where we will find it.

The main point of all this: as interesting as all these stories, narratives, cross-cultural expressions and so on were, the assumption was that it wasn’t real. Some other explanation is needed: psychological, religious, social, scientific, cultural. Anything but the idea that witnesses were describing exactly what they saw, what they experienced, and anything but exploring those events for what they were, rather than ignoring the elephant in the room; the elephant being the alien, UFO, ghost, etc. reported by the witness.

Influences
I still love folklore, and please don't misunderstand, I have respect for the field and many folklorists. I retain what I see as a core element of a folkloric approach. Which is: listening. Observing. Finding themes, comparisons, contrasts, connections but. . . listening. And allowing myself to be a part of the journey, as opposed to setting myself apart.

A recent Coast to Coast episode had author Jeff Belanger on as a guest, who discussed legend tripping and paranormal, Fortean stories from a folklore perspective. Belanger doesn’t consider himself a folklorist, not in an academic sense, but he really had a grasp of what folklore lore is, and how it operates within paranormal events:

"A legend is a living entity," he declared, noting that such stories are born, grow, 'marry' or merge with other tales, clone themselves, travel, and even die if the story ceases to be told. To that end, he described 'legend tripping' as "getting out there and putting yourself into the story," thus experiencing, first-hand, the locations where sightings of anomalies like Bigfoot, ghosts, and UFOs have occurred.

And our responses to those sites, our own experiences, if we’re lucky to have them, are a part of that research.
Influences
Jacque Vallee, while not a folklorist, used folklore brilliantly in his book Passport to Magonia, a book that remains a huge influence, as does George P. Hansen's The Trickster and the Paranormal, and Patrick Harpur’s Damonic Reality. Thomas Bullard's work, who is a folklorist, was very influential, was just about the only folklorist at the time who openly delved into UFO narratives as a serious area of study.

All this isn’t to suggest there aren’t academic folklorists out there who are so stodgy. And I’ve been away from the academic world for a very long time. As I said, I am not a folklorist or an academic.

I’ll end with this YouTube clip of researcher David Hufford, another influence and author of The Terror That Comes in the Night: An Experience-Centered Study of Supernatural Assault Traditions, speaking about academia’s perspectives on, and responses to anomalous experiences: