The Robertson Panel looked at the same clusterings and was not so sure. Yes, they saw the cluster around Los Alamos. Maybe it had to do with the overalertness of security at such a secret installation. In counterpoint, it was noted that similarly sensitive atomic energy establishments showed no saucer clusters. They also noted that many of the sightings were over areas with no strategic worth whatsoever. They concluded that the evidence of any direct threat from these sightings was wholly lacking. Concern that these sightings might clog emergency channels with false information or be used by the enemy for purposes of psychological warfare led to the recommendation that a program of education be set up “to reduce the current gullibility of the public.” Aimé Michel would also speculate that Keyhoe’s clusters resulted from the atmosphere and hyperalertness present at secret atomic and military facilities. People end up fearful of many things in such establishments. (Michel, 1967 )
Keyhoe’s thesis in these early books was impressionistic and airy speculation. He cites no evidence of downed saucers with TV cameras. He cites no alien informants explaining their missions. We don’t even see talk of glints of sunlight off telescopic lenses. John Janssen was the only person during the 1947 wave who had the impression the saucers were scrutinizing him.
Retrospectively, Loren Gross points to five other cases in 1947 of UFOs making circling motions that he felt could be indicative of spying, but such behavior is also consistent with birds getting navigational bearings or travelling on thermals. (Gross, 1983)
There really wasn’t any evidence to build on. Some of the cases even argue against it. Keyhoe expresses the opinion: “The Mantell case alone proves we’ve been observed from space ships,” yet the object was nonsensically huge from a reconnaissance perspective. Why utilize a thousand-foot craft if they possess speedy, maneuverable devices only 6 to 8 inches wide as supposedly proved by the Gorman case? (Keyhoe, 1950)
Whatever their faults in retrospect, Keyhoe’s writings were seminal in directing the future course of the UFO mythos. Keyhoe was read by many, and heard in the media by many more. UFOlogists adopted his thesis sometimes explicitly, often implicitly.
Albert Bender in the first issue of his fannish publication Space Review (1952) spoke of the Earth being “under observation of some greater power in space”. (Bender, 1962) Harold T. Wilkins wondered aloud if the saucermen had terrestrial spies and spoke of small observation discs sending information to half-mile wide “brain ships”. (Wilkins, 1967) Morris K. Jessup referred to some UFOs as “small, agile observers” which are sent out to exploratory missions from larger vessels dwelling in the “earth-sun-moon gravitational neutral.” (Jessup, 1955) Aimé Michel, despite his doubts over Keyhoe’s clusters, nevertheless believed that aliens had been watching us for some time. (Michel, 1967)
Gavin Gibbons followed Keyhoe, adding more detail. In The Coming of the Space Ships (1958) he reported on a pattern of sightings in his vicinity in England which led him to believe there was little doubt saucers represented a “reconnaissance preparatory to a landing in force.” He offers a fourfold typology of saucers in place of Keyhoe’s threefold typology. His consists of: I) vast metallic discs; II) cigar-shaped craft; III) scout craft; and IV) unmanned scanners, small spheres, remote-controlled, nonmetallic and maybe liquid or vaporous.
One notable feature of this forgotten book is its bringing into play a report that genuinely supports the aliens-are-watching-us concept. A person named Roestenberg witnessed strange men who gazed down at him and his family from a saucer tilted at an angle for detailed viewing. (Gibbons, 1958)
The Lorenzens of APRO added new intensity to the reconnaissance concept as the UFO mythos entered the sixties. They asserted that the saucers adhere to a pattern indicating the Earth is the subject of a geographical, ecological, and biological survey accompanied by military reconnaissance of the whole world’s terrestrial defenses. This pattern, they further claimed, could not be mimicked by psychic projections on the part of thousands of people. They theorized that the saucers represented a flotilla of reconnaissance ships concerned about protecting intelligent beings who as recently as 1877 had migrated to Mars on what are now known as its moons Phobos and Deimos. Comparatively small in number, they would be preoccupied with our future scientific and military developments. Since this pattern showed a progression not only from reconnaissance to surveying, but from surveying to hostility, the Lorenzens believed the saucer problems embodied “an urgency that defies expression.” (Lorenzen, 1966)
Frank Edwards, basing his work on the work of Keyhoe and NICAP, also advanced the idea that the UFO phenomenon was progressing through a series of phases. The foo fighters of World War II, for example, now represented the second phase of the alien plan and represented close-range surveil lance by instrumented probes. The seventh phase was to be the “Overt Landing” and was due, by his reckoning, in 1968 or 1969. (Edwards, 1966)
Frank Edwards
James E. McDonald, another major figure of the sixties, expressed a belief in patterns indicating “something in the nature of surveillance lies at the heart of the UFO problem.” (Sagan and Page, eds., 1972)
The popular books of Brad Steiger suggested the existence of a “steady pervasive program of invasion or antagonistic observation.” (Steiger, 1967) Brinsley le Poer Trench also believed the Earth has been under constant surveillance for a very long time. Rank-and-file UFOlogist Robert Loftin also concurred that UFOs engaged in surveillance. (Loftin, 1968)
Far and away the best argument for the surveillance concept was made by Otto Binder in his 1967 magnum opus What We Really Know About Flying Saucers. In the finest empirical tradition, he cited a series of reports which at least do show aliens engaged in activities suggesting a program of observation. Saucers are shown maneuvering around objects in an inquisitive manner; aliens are shown taking samples of soil, vegetation and animals; aliens are shown to be watching people; and saucers are shown bearing searchlights. With this array of evidence, he concluded with a measure of logical force that a Project Earth Reconnaissance exists, which could mean either future conquest or peaceful scientific exploration. Against the idea of future conquest, Binder noted that 20 years had by then already passed with no concerted hostile move; and so he predicted that no secret takeover was in the offing. (Binder, 1967)
Brad Steiger
In a sequel titled Flying Saucers Are Watching Us, Binder backdates the saucer phenomenon into deep history. The human body’s many mysteries speak to our world being a vast biological laboratory and breeding ground. “A vast, never-ending worldwide game of observing humans under all kinds of conditions and situations” seemed apparent. (Binder, 1968)
Sensible as Binder’s argument is, it is compromised by the fact that Keyhoe’s argument had altered people’s expectations. By 1968, 40 percent of the public believed people had seen space ships that did not come from this planet—a far cry from 1950 when pollsters did not even give the idea a category to itself. (Gillmor, 1969)
The belief was generating experiences that proved it. This is evident in the Interrupted Journey, when Betty Hill read one of Keyhoe’s books, the Flying Saucer Conspiracy, and soon after had a nightmare involving aliens examining her out of neutral curiosity. (Fuller, 1966) While Keyhoe could not accept it 100 percent, he would include an account of the Hill case in a later book as possible evidence of extraterrestrial visitation. (Keyhoe, 1973 and Steinberg, 1989)
Brinsley le Poer Trench
Validation of the concept could be seemingly straightforward, such as when saucers hovered alongside ships or a saucer followed a train “as if inspecting” the crew, or when saucers shadowed people. But it could take on peculiar aspects as in a case reported in Hynek’s The UFO Experience (1972). A 3-foot luminous spheroid “appeared to be examining a tree rather closely” for several minutes. It moved deliberately and purposefully in its inspection of the tree, pausing slightly at apparent points of interest and giving the distinct impression of “intelligent” behavior. Intelli
gent it does sound like, albeit no greater than that of a hummingbird and seemingly less meaningful. Granted, there is no a priori reason why aliens can’t love trees as much as humans, yet it still seems a problematic point of surveillance interest. (Hynek, 1972)
As UFOlogy entered the seventies, doubts about the reconnaissance concept began to grow, even among advocates of the extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH). James McCampbell surveyed cases in Jacques Vallée’s catalogue of Type I UFO events for evidence of reconnaissance and came away puzzled. He saw supportive evidence in aliens gathering flowers, plants, grass, animals, water samples, soil samples, stones, and boulders. There was also an alien observing abandoned oil derricks and a contact where an alien revealed their philanthropic and scientific motives.
He felt, however, that a thorough study of the Earth would require an enormous range of activities, and these cases weren’t even coming close. He concluded: “The idea that the UFO people are conducting any kind of organized and thorough scientific study on Earth is not sustained by the available information. Instead their activities on the ground are strangely haphazard and disorganized….Instead of conducting a comprehensive survey of Earth, the UFO people appear to be snooping around for some natural commodity on Earth, either vegetable or mineral.” (McCampbell, 1973)
In his final book, in 1973, Keyhoe still defended the reconnaissance thesis, but had to concede it was a “strange surveillance.” A group of Keyhoe’s assistants which included anthropologists, educators, psychologists, and communication experts almost unanimously concurred that aliens could not get a true picture of our world by distant observation. The implications were serious. Aliens would be seriously misled by the protocol evident in their study of us. Instead of rejecting the ETH, Keyhoe decided we urgently needed to force contact with the aliens to rectify their procedural error. This prompted Keyhoe’s advocacy of Operation Lure, a fantastic cargo cult scheme to draw UFOs down to Earth. (Keyhoe, 1973)
Longtime critic of UFOlogy Peter Kor took Keyhoe’s book to task as an anachronism. While Keyhoe’s theory may have had a certain plausibility in 1950, the operation had since become inconceivably long. The showdown predicted by so many people inspired by Keyhoe’s concept had never come. (Kor, 1974)
Frank Salisbury echoed that he had problems believing reconnaissance would be extended as long as UFO history suggests. Even granting aliens might survey a planet in a way we would not, Salisbury had a tough time believing aliens would do the things UFOs were reported to do. (Salisbury, 1974)
Skeptic Ian Ridpath reiterated that the purpose of all the scrutiny implied by the volume of reports was unclear. He expressed the surprisingly Fortean skepticism that belief in the reconnaissance theory is built on the basic assumption/fallacy that we are important enough for other people to be deeply interested in us. (Ridpath, 1978)
Leonard Stringfield maintained that we know incontrovertibly that UFOs exist, but agreed it was “disturbing to not know its source, its nature, and the purpose of keeping Earth under constant surveillance.” He cited among many cases an incident which suggested a UFO intended either to spy on a missile base or take some type of provocative or offensive action (Stringfield, 1976)
B. Ann Slate also mentioned that the alien surveillance of key military and research installations, and defense maneuvers was continuing, based on witnesses she had interviewed. (Slate, 1977) Kolman S. VonKeviczky was unabashedly maintaining in 1976 that authorities “must after all seriously assume that the galactic powers operation clearly indicates a centrally conducted ‘interstellar reconnaissance’ with the ultimate objective of a landing operation on earthly soil.” (Hervey, 1976)
Yurko Bondarchuck, in 1979, was surprisingly excited over an intensifying pattern indicative of increased earth occupant surveillance. He can even be seen exclaiming: “UFOs are engaged in data gathering activities!” He felt their behavior suggested a preoccupation with monitoring Earth’s natural habitat, our technological development and our physiological-behavioral make-up. (Bondarchuk, 1979)
Raymond Fowler considered among many ideas the notion that the aloofness of aliens might be a strategy of advanced reconnaissance parties awaiting the main force of a classical invasion. (Fowler, 1974)
The eighties have seen both reticence and devotion to Keyhoe’s concept. The most significant modern devotee to the Keyhoe tradition has been Budd Hopkins. For Hopkins, patterns in the abductions indicate that aliens are conducting a longterm, indepth study of humans, using implants to monitor us. (Hopkins, 1981)
Hilary Evans, in the Evidence for UFOs, allowed the possibility that structured artifacts of extraterrestrial origin were engaged in some kind of surveillance operation, but, if so, it was being conducted in a “remarkably sporadic and unworkmanlike manner.” (Evans, 1983) The authors of Clear Intent were likewise tentative and felt the purpose of UFOs was unknown but “may be related to an extended surveillance of what may be termed a primitive, embryonic society.” (Fawcett and Greenwood, 1984) Whitley Strieber took a mystical tone and asserted that the visitors’ activities go far beyond a mere study of mankind. (Strieber, 1987)
In 1987, Timothy Good felt “surveillance has intensified” since we have endangered our planet and expanded into space. The modern wave began with the development of nuclear weapons and rockets. Activity around nuclear missile sites demonstrated their continuing interest. He also felt Earth held spectacular attractions for tourists. (Good, 1987) This last sentiment is an interesting conceit relative to a fifties notion that Earth was a prison. (Keyhoe, 1960) A tract on abductions by Dr. Edith Fiore has flatly affirmed: “ETs are monitoring and watching people throughout the world.” (Fiore, 1989)
The latest exercise in the Keyhoe tradition was some speculation advanced by Richard Hall about UFO patterns. According to Hall, extraterrestrial intelligences (ETIs) have been watching our technological progress, especially our propulsion capabilities, our actions in warfare, our nuclear technology, and our reaching out into space. His private studies convinced him that interest has focused on atomic energy facilities and petroleum-related activities. Hall makes explicit the corollary Ridpath felt UFOlogists were obliged to make: the persistence of ETIs implies a strong interest in us. (Hall, 1988)
Aimé Michel went further, earlier in the decade, and acclaimed that humans must be something rare and “cosmically precious.” (Story, ed. 1980)
There are no signs that the aliens-are-watching-us idea is going to disappear from the UFO mythos. Despite blows to its credibility in the seventies, it continues to garner adherents. From the standpoint of historical development, it seems that the idea arose less from scientific evidence than from the habit of the intelligence community to regard deception and furtiveness as the natural order of things. No one seems to have questioned whether the aliens would be ideologically and behaviorally diverse. Rather, the most natural state of affairs is presumed to be a universe filled with spies—to the exclusion of curious extraterrestrials imbued with a spirit of open inquiry and mutual exchange.
As Keyhoe was told, a program of scientific inquiry cannot be done from a distance. Face-to-face interaction and participation in affairs of life are the proper ways to conduct anthropological investigation. If covertness is essential to avoid infusion of alien concepts, reconnaissance could be done by bioengineered mimics of humans, dogs, cats, insects or dust mites. Instead of glowing UFOs, an advanced culture would engineer mimics of conventional objects like planes, choppers, balloons, clouds, or the moon. They wouldn’t invite questions by presenting an identifiable alien construct. (Lem, 1936)
The reconnaissance idea never pulled together into a coherent framework more than a minor fraction of Type I cases. As McCampbell found out, no more than 2 percent of the cases implicate the existence of alien investigators. A crashed or captured reconnaissance disk has never been tendered for display at MIT or the Smithsonian. Predictions based on the concept have consistently been proven wrong.
Given the persistence of the idea and the
irrational nature of the arguments that supported it, the question arises: could it be that UFOlogists are telling people something they need to believe?
PARANOID ETS
It is instructive to see how the ideas of UFOlogists were mirrored by the aliens themselves. One of the fist people alleging inside information about aliens was a medium named Mark Probert who was in the service of the Borderland Sciences Research Foundation (BSRF). The group learned through persons on the “other side of life,” having access to the etheric worlds, that the saucers were appearing in order to demonstrate the possibility that there are ways to travel faster and eliminate friction. The sensation was all meant to compel our attention and wake us up.
There is actually something to be said in favor of that view. It was much easier to believe that flying objects passing by Mount Rainier were meant to be seen, rather than secret hardware being tested by the government as Arnold believed.
In 1948 Probert got the word that we were being observed, so that a final record of our civilization could be made for future history. This was reiterated in a 1950 communication which said notes were being taken on our advancement—before our fall.
In 1952 there is an apparent intrusion of Keyhoe’s ideas into messages received by the BSRF group. There is talk of reconnaissance craft and small remote-control craft used to make visual observations without drawing attention to themselves. Note the inversion—they no longer want to wake us up. (Layne, 1972)
Employing a glass tumbler on a Ouija board, George Hunt Williamson eliminated one of the middlemen in extraterrestrial communications. On August 2, 1952, he made direct contact with a being from Mars named “Nah-9.” The Martian revealed that our world had been observed for 75,000 years.
The Mammoth Encyclopedia of Extraterrestrial Encounters Page 83
