If UFOs use encounters to create belief systems, is the scientific model the best paradigm to investigate the phenomenon?
J. Burkes MD
What if the intelligence behind UFOs is in the "belief business" as described by John Keel and certainly suggested by Dr Vallee? What if they stage interactions with us by using technological illusions to create a belief in ET visitations? If so then probably these strange encounters really don't reflect who and what they are. What if all the research of so-called scientific ufologists focusing on phenomena that they call "sightings" are full of false clues left by a non-human intelligence that is deliberately trying to confound researchers?
Science in my judgment is not an adequate paradigm to deal with these potential obstacles to discovering the truth about flying saucers. Perhaps UFO investigators should approach this mystery like the police investigating a crime or in the ways that an intelligence agency tracks the spy network of an adversary.
As a contact activist my assessment is that the best data comes from well-trained investigators personally interacting with the phenomenon. Under these conditions there is a high premium on being objective as to what is truly being perceived during close encounters. A sober investigator should probably discount the messages experiencers receive from flying saucer intelligence but instead should focus on the mechanisms of contact. In my opinion by taking this approach I have acquired important insights into how what Dr. Vallee describes as a "higher intelligence agency” creates illusions and beliefs.
From many conversations with mainstream UFOlogists my impression is those that are not experiencers and most that are, have a terrible fear of flying saucer intelligence. They have no interest in willfully engaging the so-called aliens. This is something that I have observed contacts do on a regular basis.
For those that cling to the scientific model for investigating the intelligence behind
flying saucers UFOs I ask the following questions. What chemist is afraid of the reagents in her test tubes? How many astronomers are fearful of the stars?