The Search Begins
WHEN I FIRST began researching the origins of human warfare,
certainly the furthest thing from my mind were Unidentified Flying
Objects, better known as “UFOs.” The many flying saucer magazines
which once graced the newsstands were, in my opinion, not worthy of
serious consideration.* I also did not feel that the UFO phenomenon
was terribly important even if it was evidence of an
extraterrestrial race. Solving the down-to-earth problems of war and
human suffering seemed so much more important than arguing over
whether or not “little green men from Mars” might occasionally be
* A recent exception is UFO magazine, which I recommend. It is presently published in Los Angeles, California by Vicki Cooper and
I began researching this book in 1979; however, my desire to see an
end to war arose much earlier in life, at just about the age of
eight. Back then, war movies were
very popular in my circle of friends. Our favorite game was playing
“army.” I usually commanded one squad of kids and my friend David
led the opposition. We filled our imaginary battles with the same
glamour and altruism we saw on television. We had no greater hero
than the late actor Vic Morrow who would gallantly lead his army
squad to victory every week on the television series, Combat!.
One Saturday afternoon I was watching a Hollywood war movie on
television. It was like any other war movie except that it contained
a short piece of numbing realism. For the first time in my life, I
found myself looking at documentary film footage of an actual Nazi
concentration camp. Long after the images vanished off the
television screen, I was haunted by the pictures of skeleton-like
bodies being thrown into large pits. Like so many other people, I had
trouble fathoming the souls of the Nazis who could shove human
into brick ovens like loaves of bread and moments later pulled out
the charred remains. Within a minute, those grainy black-and-white
images presented a true picture of war. Behind the curt salutes and
stirring oratory, war is little but a degraded psychosis. While war
movies and games can sometimes be fun, the real thing is
For centuries, scientists and thinkers have attempted to solve the
riddle of why people go to war. They have observed that nearly all of
Earth’s creatures fight among themselves at one time or another,
usually over food, territory, or mating. Aggression seems to be a
universal behavior related to survival. Other factors also
contribute to the creation of wars. The analyst must take into
consideration such variables as human psychology, sociology,
political leadership, economic conditions, and the natural
Many thinkers, however, have erroneously equated all
human motives with motives found in the animal kingdom. This is a
mistake because intelligence breeds complexity. As creatures rise in
intelligence, then-motivations tend to become more elaborate. It is
easy to understand the mental stimuli in two alley cats squabbling
over a scrap of food, but it would be a mistake to attribute as
simple a state of mind to a terrorist planting a bomb in an airport.
I began this study as the result of a single idea I had encountered.
The concept is certainly not a new one, and at first it seems narrow
in scope. The idea is nevertheless quite important because it
addresses a motivation which can only be formulated by creatures of
War can be its own valuable commodity.
The simple existence of violent conflict between groups of people
can, in itself, be valuable to someone regardless of the issues over
which people are fighting. An obvious example is an armaments
manufacturer selling military hardware to warring nations, or a
lending institution making loans to governments during wartime. Both
can achieve an economic benefit from the mere existence of war as
long as the violence does not directly touch them.
The value of war as a commodity extends well beyond monetary gain:
War can be an effective tool for maintaining social and political
control over a large population.
In the sixteenth century, Italy consisted of numerous independent
principalities which were often at war with one another. When a
prince conquered a neighboring city, he would sometimes breed
internal conflicts among the vanquished citizens. This was an
effective way to maintain political control over the people because
the endless squabbling prevented the vanquished people from engaging
in unified action against the conqueror. It did not greatly matter
over what issues the people bickered so long as they valiantly
struggled against one another and not against the conquering prince.
A state of war can also be used to encourage populations to think in
ways that they would not otherwise do, and to accept the formation of
institutions that they would normally reject. The longer a nation
involves itself in wars, the more entrenched those, institutions and
ways of thinking will become.
Most comprehensive history books contain brief references to this
type of manipulative third party activity. It is no secret, for
example, that prior to the American Revolution, France had sent
intelligence agents to America to stir up colonial discontent against
the British Crown. It is also no
secret that the German military had aided Lenin and the
Bolsheviks in the Russian revolution of 1917. Throughout all
of history, people and nations have benefited from, and have
contributed to, the existence of other people’s conflicts.
Intrigued by these concepts, I resolved to do a study to determine
just how important the third party factor has been in human history.
I wanted to discover what common threads, if any, may have existed
between various third party influences in history. It was my hope
that this study would offer added insights into how and by whom
history has been made.
What resulted from this modest goal was one of the most
extraordinary odysseys I have ever taken. The trail of investigation
wove through a complex labyrinth of remarkable facts, startling
theories and everything in between. As I dug ever deeper, a common
thread did emerge. To my chagrin, it was a thread so bizarre that on
at least two occasions I terminated my research in disgust. As I
pondered my predicament, I realized something important:
Rational minds tend to seek rational causes to explain human
As I probed deeper, however, I was compelled to face the possibility
that some human problems may be rooted in some of the most utterly
bizarre realities imaginable. Because such realities are rarely
acknowledged, let alone understood, they are not dealt with. As a
result, the problems those realities generate are rarely resolved,
and so the world seems to stumble from one calamity to the next.
I will admit that when I began my research I had a bias about what I
was expecting to find: a human profit motive as the common thread
which links various third-party influences in mankind’s violent
history. What I found instead was the UFO.
Nothing could have been more unwelcome.
Back to Contents
Husband to wife:
Look at this, honey. It says here that the Earth
travels 595 million miles around the sun every year at a speed of
66,000 miles per hour. At the same time, the Earth is rotating
around the center of the galaxy. The galaxy is traveling endlessly
through space and is pulling the Earth along with it. Now how can
you say we never go anywhere?
HELLO, AND WELCOME. This is our planet Earth. Before starting our
journey through history, let us take a brief look at our little
space orb from the vantage point of newcomers undergoing a brief
“Spaceship Earth,” as some people like to call it, is a relatively
small celestial body. The American space shuttle can completely
orbit the Earth in only ninety minutes. In modern aircraft, the
crossing of once-formidable oceans has become little more than a
dull routine for many an airborne businessperson plying his or her
trade between continents. By merely picking up a telephone and
one can speak instantly to someone on the opposite side of the globe.
We are all witnesses to the remarkable manner in which high-speed
travel and telecommunications make contact between distant points on
Earth quickly and easily manageable.
Earth is not only small, it is also quite remote. If you and I were
to take a position outside of the Milky Way galaxy, we would see
that Earth is near the galaxy’s outer edge. In addition, the Milky
Way is dwarfed by much larger galaxies. This isolated location
might help explain why Earth has so few contacts with
extraterrestrial civilizations, if such civilizations exist. Earth
is afloat in the distant boondocks of a minor galaxy.
Despite its isolation, Earth is pretty, and it is inhabited. As of
this writing, the human population numbers over five billion people.
Add to that figure all of the other large mammals, and we find that
the lands and waters of Earth are occupied by an enormous population
of intelligent and semi-intelligent creatures.
What kind of animals are human beings? As a student of biology can
quickly tell you, humans constitute that animal species known as Homo
sapiens. The word Homo comes from the Latin word for man, and
sapiens means being wise or sensible. The label
therefore denotes a creature possessed of wisdom or sensibility.
Most Homo sapiens do live up to their title, by and large, although
a small number obviously do not.
When dealing with a human being, are we only confronting an animal?
As it turns out, we are not. It appears that we are faced with
something much more important: as spiritual being.
The idea that there is a spiritual reality to life is ageless. Some
religions have held the belief for millennia that human bodies are
mere puppets animated by spiritual beings. Often accompanying this
tenet are doctrines concerning “reincarnation” or an “afterlife.”
In the Christian religion, the word ”soul” has long been used to
denote a spiritual entity which survives the death of the physical
Some people claim that an ancient wisdom about the spirit had once
existed. If such a wisdom ever did exist, it long
ago became hopelessly be muddled by countless false ideas, strange
mystical beliefs and practices, incomprehensible symbolism, and
erroneous scientific teachings. As a result, the subject of the
spirit is today almost unstudiable. On top of that, many scholars
trained in Western scientific methods reject the idea of a soul
entirely, apparently because they cannot put a spirit under a
microscope and watch its squiggle, or plant electrodes in it and give
it a jolt.
As good fortune would have it, some breakthroughs on the subject have
been made within recent decades. Evidence that every person is a
unique spiritual being is strong indeed. Volumes of fascinating
testimony have been gathered from people who have undergone
so-called “near-death”experiences. During such episodes, many people
undergo the sensation of leaving their bodies, especially as
their bodies approached death. Some psychiatrists argue that
this phenomenon is nothing more than a self-protective illusion of the
mind. It is not as simple as that Many near-death victims are able to
perceive their bodies from an accurate exterior perspective. They
retain their complete self-awareness and personal identity even
though their bodies are unconscious.*
* A short but interesting article entitled, “A Typology of Near-Death
Experiences,” by Dr. Bruce Greyson, is found in the August 1985
issue of the American Journal of Psychiatry. Dr. Greyson presents a
statistical breakdown of the different types of “near-death”
phenomena and notes, “Individuals reporting these three types of
near-death experiences did not differ significantly on demographic
variables.” (p. 968). Dr. Greyson did not speculate as to what
causes the experiences.
In light of such testimony, it is not surprising that a
few religions, such as Buddhism, believe that people are immortal
spiritual beings which become enmeshed in bodies during life.
Buddhists conclude that this is caused, at least impart, by the
spirit’s long-term interaction with the physical universe. In sharp
contrast to psychiatric theory, Buddhists teach that spiritual
separation from the body is the healthiest state for human beings
and Buddhists seek to attain that separation without suffering
physical trauma or death. Their
goal is encouraged by the belief that a spiritual being can operate a
body as well, or better, from outside a body as from within.
The definition of a spiritual being shared by several religions
appears to be the most accurate one: a spiritual being is an entity
possessed of awareness, creativity, and personality. It is not
composed of matter or of any other component of the physical
universe; it appears instead to be an immortal unit of awareness
which cannot perish, although it can become entrapped by physical
matter. The spiritual being is fully capable of understanding
The modern trend, of course, is to view the brain as the center of
awareness and personality. Scientists have been able to electrically
stimulate specific parts of the brain to produce the physiological
manifestations of many human emotions. This, however, reveals the
brain to be nothing more than a sophisticated switchboard capable of
being activated by a variety of external sources, such as by
an experimenter with his electrodes or even perhaps by a spiritual
being with its own energy output. The interaction between a spiritual
entity and the body’s central nervous system appears to be so
intimate that a change in one can often influence the behavior of
From all of this emerges a picture indicating that human beings are
spiritual entities who enjoy a certain spiritual immortality, but
who are usually unaware of it until an unexpected separation occurs.
During life, spiritual beings tend to utilize, almost exclusively,
the perceptions of the physical body. Death, according to this
analysis, is little more than spiritual abandonment of the body
during a time of intense physical, or sometimes even mental, injury.
What does all of this have to do with human warfare?
Almost everything, as we shall see.
That brings us to the third and final topic of our orientation:
UFOs. There are few subjects today as full of false information,
deceit, and madness as “flying saucers.” Many earnest people who
attempt to study the subject are driven around in circles by a
terrific amount of dishonesty from a small number of people who,
for the sake of a fleeting moment of notoriety or with the
intention to obfuscate, have clouded the field with false reports,
untenable “explanations,” and fraudulent evidence.
Suffice it to say
that behind this smokescreen there is ample evidence of
extraterrestrial visitations to Earth. This is too bad. An in-depth
study of the UFO phenomenon reveals that it does not offer a happy
little romp through the titillating unknown. The UFO appears more
and more to be one of the grimmest realities ever confronted by the
human race. Keeping the points of our brief orientation in mind, let
us now begin a deeper probe.
Back to Contents
UFOs: Truth or Fiction?
UFOs: WHAT ARE they? Where do they come from?
Strictly speaking, the term unidentified flying object (UFO) refers
to any aerial object which cannot be positively identified as a
man-made construction or as any known phenomenon of nature. The term
implies a mystery. In common parlance, UFO is often used to denote
any object which might be a spacecraft from an extraterrestrial
The phrase unidentified flying object was coined by U.S. Air Force
Captain Edward J. Ruppelt. Captain Ruppelt led an Air Force
investigation into the phenomenon in 1951.Prior to Ruppelt’s
investigation, UFOs were usually called “flying saucers” because
many eyewitnesses described the objects as disc-shaped. “Flying
saucer” quickly became a term of derision, however, due to the
skepticism expressed by many newspaper and magazine writers.
“Unidentified flying object” was used by Captain Ruppelt to lend his
Air Force study an air of respectability. UFO is also a more
accurate term because not all unidentified flying objects are
Hundreds of UFOs are reported every year, usually to police, to the
news media, or to UFO research groups. These reports represent only
a minority of the total number of UFOs actually seen because most
UFO witnesses do not publicly reveal their encounters.
Roughly 90% to 95% of all reported UFOs prove to be man-made
aircraft or unrecognized natural phenomena. Approximately 1.5% to 2%
are outright hoaxes, often accompanied by spurious photographs.
Although hoaxes constitute such a small percentage of all UFO
reports, they have created a disproportionate amount of trouble.
Hoaxes are, in fact, responsible for almost entirely disgracing
the serious study of UFOs. The more convincing the fraud, the more
damage it will usually do. The remaining 3% to 8.5%of all UFO
sightings are those which appear to be aircraft of nonhuman origin.
Most researchers are concerned with this last group.
Twentieth-century UFOs were rarely reported in the mass media before
1947, and so some people assume that UFOs must be a relatively
modern phenomenon. UFOs are, in fact, quite the opposite. UFOs have
been reported for thousands of years in all parts of the world.
example, writer Julius Obsequens reproduced the following account
from 216 B.C. in his book, Prodigorium liber:
Things like ships were seen in the sky over Italy.... At Arpi [in
Italy] a round shield was seen in the sky.... At Capua, the sky was
all on fire, and one saw figures like ships... . l
In the first century A.D., famed Roman statesman
Cicero recorded a
night during which the sun, accompanied by loud noises, was
reportedly seen in the night sky. The sky appeared to split open and
reveal strange “spheres.” UFOs became so troublesome in the eighth
and ninth centuries that emperor Charlemagne of France was
compelled to issue edicts forbidding them from perturbing the air
and provoking storms. In one episode, some of Charlemagne’s subjects
were taken up in aerial “ships,” shown marvels, and then returned to
Earth, only to be put to death by an angry mob. Those troublesome
ships were even accused of destroying crops.*
* A long and interesting collection of ancient UFO sightings and
unusual natural phenomena from the late B.C. and early A.D. years
can be found in Harold T. Wilkins’ book, Flying Saucers on the
Attack. Despite its sensationalistic title, Mr. Wilkins’ book is
often well-argued and is worth reading as one of the earliest books
of the modem UFO era. An excellent collection of ancient UFO reports
can also be found in
Passport to Magonia.
UFOs have not only been seen, they have also been worshipped
throughout history. The religions of ancient Mesopotamia, Egypt, and
the Americas were dominated by the adoration of humanlike “Gods”
from the heavens. Many of those “Gods” were said to travel about in
flying ”boats” and “globes.” Ancient claims of that kind are today
the basis of the modern “ancient astronauts” theory which postulates
that a space age race had once visited Earth and had involved itself
in human affairs.
Some UFO researchers have gone a step further by
suggesting that such a space age race had either created or
conquered human society many thousands of years ago and that it has
been maintaining a watchful eye on its possession ever since.
To many, such theories seem to be the stuff of science fiction. The
ideas are, however, one outgrowth of an academic debate which has
preoccupied historians for over a century: how did the ancient Old
and New World civilizations, located on opposites of the Earth, come
to so closely resemble one another? Why did the peoples of those
far-flung civilizations develop such remarkably similar religious
One widely-held view is that a land or ice bridge once spanned the
Bering Strait between Siberia and Alaska over which people from the
Old World had migrated into the New. Others point to archaeological
evidence that the ancient Phoenicians had sailed across the Atlantic
centuries before the Scandinavian Vikings or Christopher Columbus.
Some scholars conclude that the Phoenicians had borrowed many
features of the Egyptian civilization and had transplanted them to
the New World. Another hypothesis is that the ancient Egyptians
themselves had sailed across the ocean.
Despite evidence to support all of the above possibilities, none of
the theories fully encompass all of the known facts. This has led to
a fourth theory, well expressed in1910 by Oxford professor and Nobel
Laureate Frederick Soddy:
Some of the beliefs and legends bequeathed to us by Antiquity are so
universally and firmly established that we have become accustomed to
consider them as being almost as ancient as humanity itself.
Nevertheless we are tempted to inquire how far the fact that some of
these beliefs and legends have so many features in common is due to
chance, and whether the similarity between them may not point to the
existence of an ancient, totally unknown and unsuspected
civilization of which all other traces have disappeared.2
When such conjecture is raised, many people think of vanished land
masses or islands, such as the legendary lost continents of
Lemuria. One of Professor Soddy’s contemporaries,
however, took a different approach and speculated that
extraterrestrial societies were involved in Earth’s prehistory. Dr.
Soddy’s controversial contemporary was Charles Hoy Fort (1867-1923).
Charles Fort is perhaps the earliest writer of the twentieth
century to seriously suggest that extraterrestrials have been
involved in human affairs. Fort supported himself on a small
inheritance and spent many years of his adult life amassing reports
of unusual phenomena from scientific journals, newspapers, and
magazines. The stories he collected were of such events as unusual
moving lights in the sky, “rainfalls” of animals, and other
occurrences which seem to defy conventional scientific
explanation. His first two books,
The Book of the Damned (1919) and
New Lands (1923), contain a large assortment of UFO sightings and
related phenomena from the 19th and early 20th centuries. Fort
concluded that Earth skies were hosting an array of extraterrestrial
aircraft, which he called ”superconstructions.”
Fort developed other theories from his research, several of which
have endured and still remain provocative today. In The Book of the
Damned, he wrote:
I think we’re property. I should say we belong to something: That
once upon a time, this earth was No-man’s Land,
that other worlds explored and colonized here, and fought among
themselves for possession, but that now it’s owned by something:
That something owns this earth—all others warned off.3
Fort concluded that the human race does not have a very high status
in relation to Earth’s extraterrestrial owners. In addressing the
puzzle of “why don’t they [Earth’s owners] ever come here, or send
here, openly,” he philosophized:
Would we, if we could, educate and sophisticate pigs, geese, cattle?
Would it be wise to establish diplomatic relation with the hen that
now functions, satisfied with mere sense of achievement by way of
In addition to likening the human race to self-satisfied livestock,
Fort believed that a direct influence over human affairs was being
exerted by Earth’s apparent owners:
I suspect that, after all, we’re useful—that among contesting
claimants, adjustment has occurred, or that something now has a legal
right to us, by force, or by having paid out analogues of beads for
us to former, more primitive, owners of us—that all of this has been
known, perhaps for ages, to certain ones upon this earth, a cult or
order, members of which function like
bellwethers to the rest of us, or as superior slaves or overseers,
directing us in accordance with instructions received—from Somewhere
else—in our mysterious usefulness.5
Fort did not speculate as to what mankind’s “mysterioususefulness”
might be, except to briefly suggest that humans might be slaves.
In a lighter vein, Fort thought that Earth had had a very lively and
But I accept that, in the past, before
established, inhabitants of a host of other worlds have—dropped
here, hopped here, wafted, sailed, flown, motored—walked here, for
all I know—been pulled here, been pushed, have come singly, have
come in enormous numbers; have visited occasionally, have
periodically for hunting, trading, replenishing harems, mining; have
been unable to stay here, have established colonies here, have been
lost here; far-advanced peoples, or things, and primitive peoples
or whatever they were: white ones, black ones, yellow
ones—To understand how all of this applies to the human condition today,
Fort offered no answers, only a formula:
Pigs, geese, and cattle. First find out that they are owned. Then find
out the whyness of it.7
Fort had certainly expressed some daring ideas. They were published
at a time when crude biplanes and dirigible balloons ruled the sky.
Charles Lindberg’s historic flight across the Atlantic Ocean was
still eight years away.
Fort acquired a small and loyal following during his day. It was not
until a third of a century later, however, that the foundation laid
by Fort supported a sudden explosion of nonfiction works speculating
that an extraterrestrial society had been involved in human affairs.
This sudden surge of interest was caused by a media-publicized rash
of UFO sightings in the late 1940’s and 1950’s. One of the first
books of that period to discuss ancient UFO sightings was Flying
Saucers on the Attack by Harold T. Wilkins. It was published in 1954
by Citadel Press of New York. Citadel followed with a host of books,
including The UFO and the Bible (1956) by Morris K. Jessup. Jessup’s
book suggested that many Biblical events were the doings of a space
age race, not of a God. Numerous passages from the Bible were quoted
to support the theory. Similar books with similar titles followed,
such as Flying Saucers in the Bible (1963) by Virginia F. Brasington
and The Bible and Flying Saucers (1967) by Barry H. Downing.
On the other side of the Atlantic, a number of European writers were
also making important contributions to the genre. The French writing
team of Louis Pauwels and Jacques Bergier wrote their intriguing
Morning of the Magicians, which was published in America
in the early 1960’s. Erich von Daniken of Switzerland was also
writing about ancient astronauts during the 1950’s and ‘60’s, and he
achieved great fame by the early ‘70’s after the publication of his
first international bestseller on the subject: Chariots of the Gods?
The powerful success of von Daniken’s book prompted a flood of
similar books and motion pictures in the ‘70’s and early ‘80’s,
bringing the idea of “ancientastronauts” to the attention of
The notion of alien intervention in human affairs is generally
tolerated when it is expressed as a work of science fiction, but it
is often poorly received when suggested as fact. This is
understandable. The very idea of it seems, at first blush, to fly in
the face of everything we have ever been taught. For centuries, there
has been a strong tendency to think of our planet and the human race
in very isolationist terms. Centuries ago, people even believed that
humans were at the center of the universe and that the sun and stars
all revolved around us. It was a flattering notion, but sadly not a
true one. In the bygone days of the Inquisition, however, a person
could be put to death for challenging the idea. The only
“extraterrestrials” people were permitted to believe in were winged
angels in white
robes sent from Heaven by the great
God Jehovah. Although the
sciences have thankfully moved away from that kind of perspective to
a large extent, human-centered concepts of existence are still
Some persuasive-sounding arguments have been advanced to refute the
evidence that one or more extraterrestrial societies have been
visiting the Earth. Some of those arguments are worth addressing:
1. No intelligent life other than mankind has been proven to exist
elsewhere in the universe.
At first glance, this seems to be true. However, one
need only look
right here on Earth to find other intelligent life forms. Studies of
dolphins and other large marine mammals have revealed a high
intelligence in many of those creatures. Analyses of other mammals
have uncovered in some of them a level of intelligence much higher
than previously believed. This reveals that there are a great many
intelligent and semi-intelligent creatures in the universe known to
us; we share a planet with them. The fact that they all
flourish together on this one small planet is an excellent
indication that other intelligent creatures can exist elsewhere under
the right conditions.
2. There has not been a single UFO sighting which could not be
explained as a natural or human phenomenon. There-fore, all UFOs
must be such phenomena.
This argument uses faulty logic. It is possible to “explain” almost
anything as anything. I suppose one could “explain” the sun as
billions of fireflies held in a gigantic glass bowl. This
“explanation,” however, does not fit the evidence as well as the
better theory that the sun is a huge mass of compressed hydrogen
which is undergoing a process of atomic fusion.
UFO sightings are given prosaic explanations
only by ignoring
evidence which clearly reveals that they are not earthly phenomena.
If one is selective enough in choosing which evidence and testimony
to believe, one can invented most any explanation to fit almost any
UFO sighting. The trick is to find the best explanation to fit the
true and complete facts. In many instances, the true and complete
facts indicate that a UFO is indeed best explained as a natural
phenomenon. In other cases, the best explanation is that a UFO is
probably an intelligently-guided craft of nonhuman origin. Many
remarkable sightings do fit this latter category.*
*For a good overview of UFO cases, I recommend
Encyclopedia by Margaret Sachs.
3. There has been no “hard evidence” of UFOs or “ancient
Physical objects constitute “hard” evidence. In UFOlogy, a piece of
hard evidence might be a “crashed saucer” or the body of an
extraterrestrial pilot. It is argued that if alien spacecraft have
been flying in Earth’s skies for thousands of years, we should have
a piece of concrete physical evidence by now. Setting aside
allegations and evidence that some governments may have a crashed
saucer or two secreted away, we cannot logically expect to find too
many alien artifacts. To explain why, I will make an analogy between
UFOs and modern commercial jetliners.
Millions of commercial airline flights take off from U.S. airports
every year. Despite this enormous volume, very few people will ever
stumble upon a crashed jetliner or dead crew member because only a
tiny percentage of all flights end in disaster. Equally few
individuals will ever find any instruments or debris tossed from
jetliners because jetliners are self-contained and the navigators
rarely gouge instruments from the flight panels and heave them out
the cockpit window. If it were not for the fact that most of us can
see commercial jet aircraft and fly in them, the “hard” evidence of
their existence would be surprisingly scant, especially if they were
to be manufactured in, and flown only to and from, remote areas.
Let us translate this into a mathematical formula.
Based upon U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) statistics,
roughly one in every million flights by major U.S. carriers departing
from American airports suffers a serious accident, such as a crash,
a crash landing away from an airport, or the loss of a significant
piece of the plane. This
admirable safety record makes air travel one of the safest modes of
Let us assume that the reported alien spacecraft in our skies have
precisely the same safety record as American commercial jet
aircraft—no better and no worse. Let us guess that 2000 “flying
saucer” flights are made over Earth every year. That amounts to 5 ½
flights every day. We will assume that each hypothetical saucer
flight is made at a low enough altitude that, if a mishap should
occur, the debris would fall to Earth before disintegrating in the
Putting all of the above figures together, we
discover that a “flying
saucer” would crash, or drop a substantial chunk of debris, only once
every five centuries! That would amount to only twelve crashes since
the dawn of mankind’s first recorded civilization! If we cut the
safety factor in half and double the number of hypothetical UFO
flights to 4000per year (11 per day), or leave the safety factor the
same and quadruple the number of low-level saucer flights to 8000 per
year (22 per day), that would still amount to only one crash or
major piece of debris once every one hundred twenty-five years!
We can safely conclude that even if
craft have been
flying in our skies for millennia, we cannot expect to find too much
wreckage or debris. The best evidence of extraterrestrial visitation
that we may reasonably expect to obtain is eyewitness testimony,
which is precisely the evidence we have.
Despite these pessimistic statistics, a few rare UFO crashes have
been reported. Fragments alleged to have come from exploding UFOs
have been found and made public. One such piece was reported by a
Brazilian columnist who said that the item had been recovered by a
fisherman off the coast of Brazil in 1957. The fragment was sent by
Omni magazine to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) for
analysis. It proved to be a piece of pure magnesium. An MIT analyst
guessed that the fragment might have been a piece of weld metal from
either an exploding aircraft or from a reentering satellite.
Because the piece could have been
manufactured on Earth, the test was considered inconclusive.
4. If UFOs are extraterrestrial aircraft, there should be an
undisputed photograph of one by now.
Anything can be disputed. To begin a dispute, all
one needs to do is
open one’s mouth and utter a few words. The mere existence of a
dispute, therefore, does not in itself deny the reality of a thing.
The dispute simply means that someone has chosen to quarrel, whether
for good reasons or bad.
It is true, however, that researchers do face a paucity of decent
UFO photographs. Available UFO snapshots tend to be of two varieties:
either fuzzy and inconclusive (the picture could be of just about
anything), or fraudulent. When a sharp, clear picture of a flying
saucer does surface, it often proves to be a hoax. This happens so
often that a researcher can almost count on a “good” flying saucer
photograph eventually proving “bad.” This is especially true today
when technical advances have made some forms of trick photography
This still leaves the question:
why are there so few conclusive
As noted earlier, apparently genuine extraterrestrial aircraft
account for only a small percentage of the total number of UFOs
reported. Most of those aircraft are seen at night. The majority of
“close encounters” (human encounters with the spacecraft occupants)
take place in rural non-recreational areas where there are very few
people carrying cameras. The already poor chances of getting a good
snapshot under those conditions are worsened by the fact that the
vast majority of camera owners, including dedicated photo buffs, do
not always carry their cameras with them.
At any given moment,
surely fewer than one person in every ten thousand is carrying a
camera. UFOs do not compensate for this by making regular scheduled
appearances over crowded vacation spots where most clicking cameras
would be. Given these factors, we can expect that good genuine
photos of extraterrestrial aircraft would be exceedingly rare
commodities. Remember also that camera ownership has been widespread
for only a short period of time: several decades.
This is not to say that clear photos of apparently genuine alien
aircraft do not exist. A few do, and they can be found in various
books written by responsible UFO researchers.*
* For advice concerning the authenticity of specific UFO
photographs, I recommend contacting the Mutual UFO Network, Inc.
(MUFON), 103 Oldtowne Road, Seguin, Texas, 78155-4099, USA.
5. Eyewitness testimony in UFO cases is inherently unreliable. Such
testimony is therefore insufficient evidence of extraterrestrial
Perhaps the most influential UFO critic as of this writing is
Philip Klass, who has been aptly dubbed the “Sherlock Holmes of UFOlogy”
for his exhaustive investigations. His book,
UFOs Explained, won the
Aviation/Space Writers award for the best book on space in 1974. In
that award-winning book, Mr. Klass developed several principles.
The first was:
UFOlogical Principle #1: Basically honest and intelligent persons
who are suddenly exposed to a brief, unexpected event, especially
one that involves an unfamiliar object, may be grossly inaccurate
in trying to describe precisely what they have seen.8
This principle is sometimes true. It was demonstrated by a
U.S. government-sponsored UFO study conducted between 1966 and 1968
under the direction of Edward U. Condon. Its published findings,
which are usually called
the “Condon Report,”
are a milestone in UFO
In one chapter of the Condon Report, the committee discusses what
occurred after a Russian spacecraft, Zond IV, went awry and began
its re-entry into Earth’s atmosphere on March 3, 1968. As the craft
fell through the atmosphere and burned, it created a spectacular
display for people on the ground. Eyewitnesses perceived the flaming
debris as a majestic procession of fiery objects leaving behind a
golden orange tail. Because of the objects’ great height, it was
impossible to make out from the ground what the broken pieces
actually were. It was only possible to see
them as brilliant and separate points of light. The Zond
IV debris created an effect identical to that of a brilliant
Upon compiling eyewitness testimony of the
Zond IV reentry, it was
discovered that some people “saw” more than there really was. If some
of the erroneous observations had been taken at face value, some
people would have concluded that the Zond IV debris was actually an
intelligently controlled alien spacecraft. For example,
five eyewitnesses reported that the lights were part of a
“cigar-shaped” or rocket-shaped craft: a common UFO
description. Three eyewitnesses said that the “object” had windows.
One observer claimed that the “object” had made a vertical descent.
Because of these blatant errors, Mr. Klass and others have
understandably labeled all “cigar-shaped UFOs with bright windows” as
meteors. The Condon Committee cited the Zond IV testimony as an
example of why eyewitness reports are often inadequate to establish
that a UFO is an extraterrestrial spacecraft.
In his UFOlogical Principle # 1 quoted above,
states that eyewitnesses may be grossly inaccurate in trying to
describe precisely what they have seen. Significantly, he did not
say that eyewitnesses are usually inaccurate. This distinction takes
on importance as we read further into the Condon Report.
The Condon Committee discovered that at least half of the Zond IV
eyewitnesses gave accurate, unembellished reports of the event. The
observations of a “cigar-shapedcraft with windows” came only from a
minority. From the accurate reports, a careful UFO researcher would
have been able to eliminate the erroneous descriptions and correctly
identify the Zond IV re-entry as debris or a meteoric phenomenon. The
Committee also analyzed a wave of UFO reports triggered by several
college students who had released four hot air balloons into the
The balloons were made of plastic dry cleaning bags;
the hot air was generated by birthday candles suspended underneath.
The Committee analyzed the testimony of fourteen
eyewitnesses who did not know what the flying objects were. With
only minor deviations among them, all fourteen observers gave
accurate descriptions of what it was possible for them to actually
The Committee concluded:
In summary, we have a number of reports that are highly consistent
with one another, and those differences that do occur are no
greater than would be expected from situational and perceptual
differences. Many small discrepancies could be pointed out,
especially with regard to estimates of distance and direction, but
these are not great enough to affect the overall impression of the
This demonstrates something very important that we can express in
our own “UFOlogical Principle”:
Basically honest and intelligent persons who are suddenly exposed to
a brief, unexpected event, including one that involves an
unfamiliar object, will, in the majority of cases, be accurate in
trying to describe precisely what they have seen.
That is why eyewitness testimony may be admissible
in courts of law
to convict or free a defendant even when solid physical evidence is
lacking. Eyewitness testimony is a perfectly valid and useful form
6. Sophisticated listening devices have been
pointed toward the
heavens to pick up extraterrestrial communications. So far, no such
communications have been detected. This is further evidence that
there is no intelligent life nearby.
Despite skepticism in many academic circles
regarding extraterrestrial visitation, several well-funded attempts
have been made to detect signals from outer space civilizations
through the use of sophisticated radio antennas pointed toward the
heavens. The fact that these efforts have reportedly not detected
any intelligent signals is viewed as additional proof that there are
no alien civilizations nearby.
The problem with drawing such a conclusion is
that radio antennas
have many limitations. They are only able
to detect radio waves. There are many other bands along the
electromagnetic spectrum* that can carry communication signals,
such as microwave. What is to say that an extraterrestrial society,
if it exists, would necessarily use radio waves for communication?
* The “electromagnetic spectrum” is the range of wavelengths at which
different forms of light may travel. At one end of the known
spectrum are radio waves, which have long wavelengths. (Yes, radio
waves are actually light waves. They become “sound” when translated
by a receiver.) At the other end of the spectrum are gamma rays,
which have short wavelengths. The range of light we can see with our
eyes is limited to a very small band of the spectrum. Instruments
have been invented to pick up and transmit along other wavelengths,
such as infrared, x-ray, and microwave.
We do not even know what lies beyond the two known ends of the
electromagnetic spectrum. How can we be sure that there are not
wavelengths in one of the two uncharted regions which are far
superior for communication to anything we have detected so far? The
reputed failure of radio antennas to pick up intelligent signals
would only tell us that no one within range is using the
electromagnetic wavelengths detectable by those antennas.
7. If so many “flying saucers” are visiting Earth,
why are they not
detected more often on radar?
Many outstanding UFO sightings have been
confirmed on radar. This
excellent radar evidence is usually dismissed by critics as operator
error, as radar malfunction, or as false readings caused by natural
phenomena. We would have even more radar evidence if it were not for
the fact that radar operators are trained to disregard most radar
anomalies because any number of things can create a false read.
Spurious radar signals can be generated by such widely disparate
phenomena as flocks of birds and severe weather conditions.
Operators are taught to focus on those readings that pinpoint the
type of objects they are tracking—usually human aircraft. If
something unusual pops up on the screen and disappears, it will, more
often than not, be ignored. A great many radar UFOs therefore go
Radar detection of UFOs is being further eliminated by advances in
technology. Many modern radar computers now automatically eliminate
anomalous readings so that they are not even displayed on the radar
screen. This makes an operator’s job easier, but at the cost of
eliminating UFO detection. Mr. Klass comments:
Ironically, one of the several criteria used [by radar computers] to
discriminate between real and spurious targets would filter out
potential radar-UFOs even if they were legitimate extraterrestrial
craft flying at hypersonic speeds...10
8. Many people have testified under hypnosis to
being abducted by
UFOs. Such testimony is inherently suspect because people who have
never been abducted can be coached into creating seemingly realistic
abduction “memories” while under hypnosis.
If the UFO phenomenon consisted solely of occasional odd sights in
the sky, it might be easy to dismiss. However, many people have
reported being kidnapped by UFO occupants. The abduction experiences
tend to be remarkably similar: the victim sees a UFO (usually at
night and often in a rural area); he is immobilized and taken aboard
an alien spacecraft; he is given a physical examination lasting an
hour or two by alien creatures; he is then released. Many abductees
do not consciously remember their experiences afterwards. A typical
victim may only see a UFO and then suddenly discover that two hours
have passed with no recollection of what had occurred during the
missing time. Researchers usually break through this amnesia with
It appears that the curious amnesia experienced by
so many UFO
abductees is deliberately induced by the UFO occupants as a method
of preserving the aliens’ anonymity. Such mental tampering can indeed
be done. During its infamous and highly publicized “mind control”
experiments of the 1960’s and ‘70’s, the American CIA had developed
effective techniques to bury memory and induce amnesia. With careful
work, however, the buried memories could
be recovered. As we shall see later, mental tampering with human
victims has been a common activity associated with UFOs throughout
all of history.
To date, an enormous body of fascinating abduction testimony has
been gathered. Aspersions have been cast upon it because of various
experiments, such as those performed in 1977 at the Anaheim Memorial
Hospital in California. It was discovered in Anaheim that
individuals who allegedly had little prior knowledge of UFOs could be
coached into creating seemingly realistic abduction “memories”
while under hypnosis. This discovery has been used to cast doubt on
the validity of all abduction testimony obtained under hypnosis.
The Anaheim experiments, however, miss the point and reveal nothing
about the UFO phenomenon. They only reaffirm what we already know
It is true that a person’s memory can be distorted
while he is under
hypnosis, just as it can when a person is completely conscious. On
the other hand, it has been amply demonstrated that hypnosis can be
effective in recovering completely valid memory: it depends upon the
skill of the hypnotist and the mental state of the subject. A
hypnotist can coach a person who has never been aboard a train into
creating a realistic “memory” of riding a train, but does that mean
that every hypnotic subject who remembers being on a train is guilty
of fabrication? Of course not.
Admittedly, there are genuine problems with hypnosis. Because the
hypnotic subject is in a semiconscious state, he or she may be more
impressionable than normal. For this reason, American courts of law
generally do not admit into evidence testimony obtained under
hypnosis. Another danger with hypnosis is that a subject may
recover a completely valid memory, but if the subject is continuously
pushed during hypnosis to remember more, he may find his mental ”time
track” getting scrambled. When that happens, he will often start to
“remember” additional “episodes” which did not actually occur when
or how remembered. Even so, the original memory remains valid.
Sadly, some UFO abductees have been hypnotized and rehypnotized
beyond all measure of reason. They consequently wind up with
scrambled memories on the already
highly-charged subject of their abductions. For this and other
reasons, I strongly recommend against the use of hypnosis. Heavily
occluded memory can and should be recovered while a subject is in a
fully conscious state. Some UFO abduction experiences have been
recovered unjust that fashion.
9. The mathematical odds of an extraterrestrial race discovering
Earth are too remote for it to be likely.
Several mathematical formulae have been devised to show how unlikely
it is that Earth has been visited by an extraterrestrial society.
Such formulae are usually based upon theories of evolution, the
number of planets which might support life, and the distances
between planets and galaxies.
Such formulae are certainly interesting, but they should never be
considered conclusive. If something exists, it exists. Trying to make
it go away with a math formula will not make it any less real.
Keep in mind that we are unable to see any solid
planets beyond our
own solar system, let alone determine if there is any life on them.
The human situation in this respect may be likened to a colony of
tiny ants whose range of observation may only encompass a few acres.
If that colony is situated on a barren desert, the ants might
conclude that the entire Earth is a desolate wasteland, never
dreaming of the vast metropolis only a hundred miles away.
because we find our own solar system or section of the galaxy barren,
it does not automatically follow that this is the case everywhere.
Another sector of the galaxy may be absolutely teeming with
intelligent life and there would be no way for us out here on the
distant edge of the Milky Way to know except by guessing with
theories that are ever-changing. For this reason, it is not
particularly wise to disregard evidence of extraterrestrial
visitation if it appears.
10. Only people with mental problems believe in UFOs.
One unfortunate method some UFO critics use to attack evidence of
extraterrestrial visitation is with psychological theory. Because
such a critic is absolutely certain that there have been no
extraterrestrial aircraft in our skies, he may resort to using
defamatory psychological labels in an effort
to “explain” why many people will consider a possibility that the
critic rejects. Such labels have run the gamut from a simple need for
religious fulfillment to ambulatory schizophrenia.
psychiatry has become regrettably fashionable in recent years. It
hides the reality that most serious research into UFOs is as clinical
and scientific as one could hope for. The majority of UFO
researchers are as sane and rational as the critics who are so quick
to bandy about the unflattering psychological labels. The true
UFO debate centers around genuine scientific, intellectual,
and historical issues, not emotional ones.
Another problem with using psychological “analysis” to ”explain”
popular and scientific interest in UFOs is that the tables can be
turned. A scholar advocating the possibility of extraterrestrial
visitation can as easily, and as incorrectly, argue that those
people who adamantly adhere only to prosaic explanations for UFO
sightings in the face of contrary evidence are deeply afraid of
something they cannot understand. Between the distinguished sideburns
of a Ph.D., one could argue, may be a frightened child or willful
adolescent desperately trying to handle the often confusing world
around him by forcing everything to conform to what he can
intellectually and emotionally comprehend.
As we can see, psychological mudslinging is very
poor form in a
scientific debate of this kind. It does no one any good, the labels
are usually untrue, and it clouds the real issues. Intelligent and
rational people are easily found on all sides of the UFO controversy.
11. UFO theories are money-making rackets designed
to prey on the
It is a truism that there are two great crimes in our society:
having money and not having money. Both are punished with equal
One of the easiest ways to discredit an idea is to suggest that
someone has gotten money for expressing it. Some UFO critics have
made allusions to charlatans in the past who had duped people with
strange ideas and who had become rich by preying on other people’s
gullibility. Such allusions have been made in an effort to suggest
that people who earn
money from UFO books or motion pictures are engaged in similar
Please keep in mind that money itself has nothing to
do with the
validity of an idea. Money is an unpredictable commodity which goes
to the deserving and undeserving alike. A handful of people have
indeed earned good incomes from books and films dealing with the UFO
phenomenon. The number of people who have done so, however, is very
small compared to the many thousands of teachers, lecturers, and
writers who are paid, sometimes handsomely, to promulgate more
conventional views of the world.
Even when it is clear that a few individuals have
falsely reported or
insincerely discussed UFOs to make money, the UFO phenomenon is not
automatically discredited. Profit-making has been a motive in nearly
all arenas of human endeavor since the earliest days of mankind. If we
were to throw out everything to which someone has ever attached a
profit motive, little would remain of our culture. Fortunately, the
vast majority of UFO witnesses and researchers, rich and poor, are
sincere in what they say and do.
12. UFO behavior does not conform to what we think intelligent
extraterrestrial behavior ought to be.
UFOs are difficult to study due to their often bizarre and
unpredictable natures. UFO behavior seems, on the one hand, to raise
some of the most profound questions about life and existence, while
on the other hand it seems to be the stuff of a Buck Rogers movie.
This duality is difficult to reconcile, yet it is an inescapable
part of the phenomenon. The UFO is both profound and kooky, as we
This factor is often used to discredit UFO reports.
imply that if UFOs are extraterrestrial aircraft, they would
manifest themselves in a more acceptable manner. Why, for example,
have UFOs apparently kidnapped housewives and implanted them with
religious messages, but have never landed on the White House lawn
and spoken to the
In one of his books, Philip Klass offered a $10,000 reward for
conclusive proof of extraterrestrial visitation. To
qualify for the reward, only a crashed spacecraft or other evidence
which the U.S. National Academy of Sciences announces to be an
affirmation of extraterrestrial intelligence would suffice; or, an
extraterrestrial visitor must appear before the United Nations
General Assembly or on a national television program. The fact that
no one has received the reward is viewed by some people as added
proof that Earth is not being visited by an extraterrestrial society.
The problems with the $10,000 reward are quickly obvious. We have
already discussed the poor odds of finding a crashed “saucer” or
major piece of debris. What if the National Academy of Sciences is
prone to argue a terrestrial origin to a smaller piece of hard
evidence before admitting a non-terrestrial source? What if
extraterrestrial pilots are no more inclined to appear on television
or at the United Nations than a human pilot is disposed to address
council of chimpanzees? *
* Another problem with the $10,000 offer was that a person had to
pay Mr. Klass $100.00 per year to qualify. This reduced the UFO
debate to the level of a crap shoot, where it does not belong. Few
serious UFO researchers accepted the offer, much to their credit
We can all certainly wish that
UFOs would be
more cooperative, but
until they are, the UFO phenomenon must be studied on its own terms,
not according to the behavior we think it ought to exhibit.
13. In the past, a few UFO sightings touted as
extraterrestrial visitation by top UFO researchers have proven to be
earthly phenomena or hoaxes. Such errors should cast doubt on all
proclamations by UFO researchers.
Because the UFO phenomenon is so difficult to study, even the finest
researchers will inevitably make errors, sometimes many of them. It
is easy for someone to seize those mistakes and use them to
discredit the entire subject. This tactic is often used by lawyers
in courts of law, by statesmen during political debates, and even by
scientists engaged in academic controversies.
The problem with this tactic is that it does not always lead to
truth, and can even lead away from it. A good example was the “Round
Earth Theory” espoused by
Christopher Columbus in the 15th century.
In an age when many people still believed the world to be flat,
Columbus was part of a movement proclaiming that the Earth was round
or pear-shaped. As correct as Columbus was on this issue, he was wrong
about many others. Columbus thought that he would encounter Asia when
he crossed the Atlantic Ocean, and falsely reported that he had done
so when he returned to Spain. We know today, of course, that
Columbus had not found Asia at all—he had stumbled upon the
North American continent which is nowhere near Asia! Because of this,
we could easily scoff at Columbus’ phony evidence and proclaim his
“Round Earth Theory” a sham. After all, some of Columbus’ other ideas
about the Earth were clearly wrong, some absurdly so.
This type of situation occurs frequently, especially when a science
is young, as UFOlogy is today. False claims and erroneous evidence
are often used to support fundamentally sound ideas. This is not to
say that every new theory that pops along is a valid one, or that bad
evidence is the sign of a good theory. Many new theories prove bad.
The trick is to weigh all of the evidence and to base a decision
on that. In doing so, however, do not be surprised to encounter
disagreement from others. It is a funny thing that two people can
look at identical information and arrive at opposite conclusions.
14. Expressing theories of extraterrestrial visitation and of
“ancient astronauts” is dangerous to society.
This argument is not worth dignifying in societies with traditions of
open discussion and debate. Freedom of expression is one of the
bedrocks of a healthy culture. It allows that society and its people
to grow. A wide diversity of ideas gives people more perspectives to
choose from. Possessing such a choice is preferable to having
intellectual options restricted. In an open society, many
unconventional ideas come and go, but that is a small price to pay
for the enormous benefits of leaving communication lines open and
15. If there are so many UFOs, why have I never seen one?
I have never seen a UFO either. I have also never seen India, but
the circumstantial evidence of its existence tends to make me think
that India probably exists.
In addition to the above arguments, other means have been used to
discredit UFO sightings. One method utilizes semantics. Some UFO
critics say that they seek to find “rational” explanations for UFO
sightings. By “rational” they mean explanations that portray a
sighting as a natural or man-made object. This is an unfortunate use
of the word “rational.” The word “rational” means “sane,” “well
thought out,” or “logical.”
Because sanity and logic must ultimately
be based upon truth, a “rational” explanation of a phenomenon would
be that explanation which most closely approximates the truth,
whatever the truth may be. If a reported UFO is a misperceived
natural phenomenon, then to explain it as such would indeed be
rational. On the other hand, if a UFO is not a natural or man-made
phenomenon, then to say that it is in the face of contrary evidence
would not be rational at all.
Having said all of this, I still understand the reluctance of many
people to take the UFO phenomenon seriously. It is a difficult
booby-trapped subject. Some individuals who were once open-minded
about UFOs have had the unfortunate experience of getting egg in
their faces when they over-speculated about UFOs and were proven
wrong. A good example was the public debacle surrounding the Martian
moon, Phobos. About a decade ago, a number of scientific opinion
leaders had speculated that
Phobos was an artificial satellite placed
in orbit around Mars by extraterrestrials.
When a space probe later
flew close enough to photograph Phobos, the Martian moon was shown
to be little more than a large irregular piece of rock (although some
of its orbital characteristics remain puzzling). Scientists and
astronomers, because they survive on their good reputations, cannot
endure too many speculative blunders of that kind. Many people who
suffer such a tumble do not get back on the horse; instead they
curse and attack
the beast which threw them. Competent researchers today are aware of
these perils and they try to avoid speculating too far from the
Why do I take the possibility of extraterrestrial
visitation seriously, even though I agree with the “natural”
explanation for some UFO sightings still debated today? I do so for
Firstly, the UFO phenomenon has been observed and
reported for centuries. I therefore reject the critics’ contention
that UFOs are merely a bit of modern folklore.
Secondly, the UFO
phenomenon has been surprisingly consistent from location to
location and from era to era. For example, some modern sightings of
rocket or cigar-shaped UFOs mirror a UFO report from
Thirdly, although it is true that some
dubious “ancient astronaut” evidence has been published, so has
some truly outstanding evidence. The critics’ challenge that
“extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof” has, to my mind,
been met by some of that evidence.
Fourthly, the “ancient
astronauts” theory is hardly the “pseudoscientific nonsense” that it
is sometimes accused of being. The “ancient astronauts"
theory is a
surprisingly logical hypothesis for shedding light on previously
inexplicable historical data. I expect that it will one day be
recognized as a true breakthrough even if it meets considerable
opposition today. The fact that the theory arose from grass-roots
research, and not from the ivied halls of a major university, means
little. Anyone with an active and curious mind can make significant
At this stage of my discussion, I may disappoint
some readers by
stating that it is not my purpose to write yet another tome which
analyzes modern UFO sightings or which parades forth an array of
ancient astronauts evidence simply to prove visitation. That has been
adequately done elsewhere. If you remain a UFO skeptic, I recommend
that you study other UFO literature before continuing with this book.
The Gods of Eden is written for those people who already take
seriously the possibility that Earth has been visited by an
This book actually begins where
Charles Fort left off. Mr. Fort
speculated that Earth may be the property of an
extraterrestrial society. He further believed that humans might be
little more than slaves or livestock. As a result of my own
historical research launched from an entirely different starting
point,* I, too, arrived at a similar outrageous theory:
Human beings appear to be a slave race languishing on an isolated
planet in a small galaxy. As such, the human race was once a source
of labor for an extraterrestrial civilization and still remains a
possession today. To keep control over its possession and to maintain
Earth as something of a prison, that other civilization has bred
never-ending conflict between human beings, has promoted human
spiritual decay, and has erected on Earth conditions of unremitting
*I had not read any of Charles Fort’s works until I had already
completed the third draft of this book.
This situation has existed for
thousands of years
and it continues today.
Having now laid myself wide open to ridicule for expressing such a
hypothesis, I will proceed to share with you a very different view
of history than you have probably encountered before.
Because I am risking a great deal by making this book available, I
ask my readers for two favors before they pass judgment on what I
1. Please read the entire book carefully,
2. Please read the chapters in the order in which they appear.
No idea, fact or historical episode I present stands
entirely on its
own. Each becomes significant only when it is seen within the entire
context of history. The importance of what you read early in the
book will not become apparent until you have continued to read much
further. Conversely, the significance of the later material will not
be clear unless you have read the early material first. The first 150
pages or so of this book contain ideas, conclusions, and statements
may seem unscholarly and outrageous. Only by continuing to read
onward will the remarkable historical documentation in support of
those ideas truly take shape.
Hang on to your hat. We will now begin a startling rollercoaster
ride along the underbelly of history.
Back to Contents