Anne's Diary

UFO Info: Not Always What it Seems

People who have had UFO experiences or who have become convinced there is something real about UFOs are confused and dismayed by the recent cloning announcement by the Raelian group. Rael (the former journalist Claude Vorilhon) was supposedly told by aliens during a UFO experience that they began the human race through cloning. This doesn't make scientific sense, so does it mean that all information given to us during UFO experiences is wrong? Or are these experiences all imaginary?

Since I've read literally hundreds of thousands of letters from experiencers over the years, I'm in a good position to answer this question. I'm also objective, in that I haven't had any experiences of my own, so I have no agenda to promote.

First, let's address the cloning issue. It seems obvious that the cloning of human beings is here to stay, so we need to figure out how to address it morally. How we do this will be affected to some extent by whether the Raelian group proves these new births are in fact clones and if they turn out to be normal, healthy infants, since many cloned animals are born with defects. If there is no proof these are really clones, the question will wait until a real human clone appears (as it will eventually). Also, certain types of birth defects, such as the premature aging that affected Dolly, the cloned sheep, may not be immediately obvious. If the clones do turn out to have birth defects, the moral question will be settled against human cloning, at least for now. This will not block the way for the limited clone that produces only stem cells and is destroyed long before it reaches the embryonic stage, except for people who equate this with abortion.

If the Raelian babies are clones and are also healthy--well, it's a brave new world. But does this mean that the human race was started by cloning, as Rael says he was told?

We're learning more about DNA every day, as a daily reading of news reveals. We now know we're closely related to chimps and even to mice. If this is the case, how could our ancestors be alien clones? This would only make sense if our DNA was extremely different from the DNA in the rest of the living creatures on Earth. Vorilhon had his UFO experience in 1973, before much was known about DNA, and he was also not a trained scientist, which is why the idea made sense to him at that time.

Some people have questioned whether or not Vorilhon really had UFO contact. Since this is impossible to prove, all experiencers are in the same frustrating position. Proof that UFO contact--whatever it is--is real comes from circumstantial evidence: the testimony of hundreds of thousands of witnesses over many years. The irony is that the world will convict you of a crime with circumstantial evidence, but it won't believe you're telling the truth about your experience with UFOs, even though the witness statements number in the six figures.

I've been exposed to more circumstantial evidence about UFOs and ETs than anyone else alive, and I've come to the conclusion that the scientific "facts" given to experiencers during contacts and abductions should not be taken literally, because they are often not genuine, or have become distorted in some way by the nature of the experience itself.

There have been cases where people who knew nothing about engineering were given detailed plans of the engines that drive UFOs, which trained engineers later said could be made to work. Witnesses have reproduced what later turned out to be accurate diagrams of the star groups where aliens have claimed to have come from, and have repeated statements made by aliens in what turned out to be obscure languages that the witnesses did not know. But these are the exceptions.

In most cases, when scientific or factual information is received, it turns out not to be true. Often the person receiving the information is not trained enough to know this, and promotes the new information widely, on websites or in books, which leads skeptics to accuse them of making the whole thing up. But it's not as simple as that.

The UFO experience is more likely to be a quantum-style communication between parallel universes or different time periods?or both?than a visit by aliens from another planet. In a quantum-physical sense, reality may be a sort of "assembly" of information about how the world should be and appear. But what happens when two minds that have entirely different ways of looking at the world attempt to assemble their separate realities at the same time out of the same fundamental information? The realities may "clash," and information may not be able to be communicated accurately. In other words, they may "tell" us one thing, but we may "hear" another, based on our own knowledge.

We can see a simple version of this phenomenon right here on Earth, in what are called "cargo cults." When Westerners visit stone-age societies for the first time, bringing their technology with them, they often leave new shamanic legends behind when they depart. For instance, natives may come to believe that if they build a box and paint it white to look like a refrigerator, cold beer will be found inside (if only you know the right magic incantations).

Misinformation may also come from the "searching the skies" phenomenon. People who have a UFO experience and don't understand it often continue to search the skies for UFOs, hoping it will happen again so they'll have a chance to figure it out. Often these people receive garbled or incompletely understood information that they flesh out themselves, trying to make sense of it. This effort to comprehend is not the same as "making it all up."

Also, the visitors seem to be theatrical. I've often noticed they set up tableaus and "act out" scenarios in order to convey information in a metaphorical manner. This would be one way to try to communicate between greatly disparate worlds. However, this information is too often taken literally by humans. This is why less scientific societies, such as the American Indians, may have gotten more from their visitor experiences than the rest of us have. They're used to interpreting legends in order to find the kind of truth that cannot be expressed directly, while we're busy arguing over which verses of the Bible to interpret literally.

So I think that Rael is quite possibly telling the truth when he says he had a contact experience, even about what he believes he was told. However, this doesn't make it true in a larger, scientific sense, and experiencers should feel they can speak up about this, without compromising their own assertions about visitor contact.

NOTE: This Diary entry, previously published on our old site, will have any links removed.

Subscribe to Unknowncountry sign up now