Claim: Time-Travelling Humans are Causing Close Encounter Experiences

What function do these Michael P. Masters books serve? They are aimed at an audience. So they serve the psychological needs of that audience. And reality ain't it.

I would say a slightly nerdy lay audience and ufologists / academics who are interested in studying ufology as a cultural phenomenon.
 
What function do these Michael P. Masters books serve? They are aimed at an audience. So they serve the psychological needs of that audience. And reality ain't it.
first sentence, page 4 of The_Extratempestrial_Model
This experience, along with the fact that I’ve always been easily bored by the banality of reality, was the impetus for my deep dive into the UFO phenomenon.
Content from External Source
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/361103244_The_Extratempestrial_Model
 

Attachments

  • TheExtratempestralModel.pdf
    325.9 KB · Views: 106
What function do these Michael P. Masters books serve? They are aimed at an audience. So they serve the psychological needs of that audience. And reality ain't it.
My guess is: if you are convinced that the UFO phenomenon indicates visits from uninvited guests, it's less scary to think they are "us from the future" than to think they are "aliens".
 
General, somewhat related question: has a study in evolutionary biology ever been made to find patterns of evolutionary convergence for intelligent beings capable of space travel?

I can imagine for instance that some kind of eyes are required to become aware of the stars in the first place. This also implies an atmosphere that is not too dense. Limbs that can carry and mount things to create scientific instruments like (radio) telescopes would also be convenient. You'll need at least two of those, plus at least two more to be able to move around. More limbs are possible but these would give a disadvantage in energy requirements.
You should be big enough to build (radio) telescopes but not so heavy that you'll never escape the gravity of your planet.
Etc...

Maybe such lines of reasoning can give a general idea of what an intelligent being capable of space travel could look like. Has such an excercise ever been attempted?
 
My guess is: if you are convinced that the UFO phenomenon indicates visits from uninvited guests, it's less scary to think they are "us from the future" than to think they are "aliens".
Sorry, that's not it at all. Being scared is something they might actively enjoy. The psychological need is to believe in fantastical stories as literally true to escape from the mundane, from analytical thought and so forth... which this Demo finds aversive.

The remarkable thing is that the next book they pick up may have an entirely different and incompatible explanation for Aliens. While they are reading it they will believe this new fantastical story as 100% real. When it comes to belief there is only the eternal now. It's the experience they find rewarding. It's not a search for knowledge.
 
Maybe such lines of reasoning can give a general idea of what an intelligent being capable of space travel could look like. Has such an excercise ever been attempted?
I think it's been tried many times, not least by SF writers.

Without giving examples off the top of my head, I think it was common for (that minority of interested) writers and scientists in the early-to-mid 20th century to assume that, as life would require an Earth-like environment, it would evolve essentially in parallel to life on Earth, resulting in aliens very similar to us.
But just like "the man of the future"-type articles, these imaginings were at best speculative, and were often handicapped by a poor understanding of evolution.

One of my favourite books as a child, Usborne's The World of the Unknown: UFO's (1977, Ted Wilding White) had a few ideas
(I've kept them as thumbnails, click to enlarge)
usborne-ufos-17.jpgusborne-ufos 18.jpg


Limbs... You'll need at least two of those, plus at least two more to be able to move around.

Fred Hoyle, the originator of theories of stellar nucleosynthesis, wrote a novel in 1957, "The Black Cloud"; about an interstellar cloud that drifts into the solar system.
The cloud is revealed to be an alien gaseous superorganism, many times more intelligent than humans, which is surprised to find intelligent life-forms on a solid planet.
Content from External Source
Although the presence of a sentient cloud of gas may seem unlikely, the story is grounded in hard science.[5]
Content from External Source
(Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Cloud). The reference given to support the claim that the sentient cloud is "grounded in hard science" is problematic, the linked paper was written in 2007,
"From plasma crystals and helical structures towards inorganic living matter", Trystovich, Morfill, Fortov et al, New Journal of Physics, August 2007 https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/9/8/263/meta

Molluscs move around without limbs.
Maybe monopods could jump around.
To develop technology you need to be able to physically manipulate objects, but maybe not limbs per se-
-Niven and Pournelle's SF novel "Footfall" had elephant-like aliens with twin "trunks", each dividing into a number of muscular "fingers".
Or maybe a creature could have temporary limbs in the way that some microbes generate pseudopodia.
Many creatures use mouthparts for carrying, cutting, and many other purposes.
Intelligent creatures, who work together toward a common goal more consistently than humans, might get by with less individual ability to hold/ manipulate objects if they cooperated in the use of their limited "dexterity"- A and B hold the flint core in place, C and D bring down the striker, that sort of thing.

Perhaps an alien species might have more specialisation than we do- some individuals with specialised sensory organs, some with effectors of some sort, some that do the planning, all working in symbiosis.

I'm not at all sure about the existence of intelligent extra-terrestrials (much more sceptical than I used to be). If it exists, it exists within the laws of physics.
Member Itsme's conjectures about ETI requiring eyes and manipulators if they are to develop technology would seem sensible
(I could add some cognitive ones: memory, problem-solving, language) but in reality the variables involved are so numerous, with so little information to guide our musings, that I think the nature of any technological ETI is essentially unforecastable.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, that's not it at all.
While they are reading it they will believe this new fantastical story as 100% real.
Z.W. Wolf is right, the one ability that some of the credulous undoubtedly have is to coalesce mutually exclusive "explanations" into an amorphously vague belief system without any cognitive dissonance or feelings of doubt.

They at some level like the narrative- even if it includes the belief that "The Establishment" (or whoever) want to cull the population; or that they might be kidnapped for genetic experiments: They'll be the heroes in their own survival movie. Because they don't trouble themselves with mainstream news (that phrase has become a pejorative to many) they don't have to worry about what really happens, or has happened, to persecuted minorities in the real world.

If an alien craft, or time-machine, appeared on the White House lawn tomorrow and the occupants entered into dialogue, saying "We are your first visitors from elsewhere [or elsewhen], we are totally sure no-one else has visited you in the last 20,000 years",
the UFO enthusiasts won't believe them.
As soon as the "visitors" are closeted away to talk with political leaders, scientists and cultural experts they will be accused of being part of a cover-up. Unwillingness to meet Betty Hill's niece or David Icke will be taken as proof of this.

If the visitors thoughtfully bring information for a cure for Alzheimer's disease and designs for a cheap environmentally-friendly engine as a demonstration of goodwill, conspiracy theorists will say that we've had these things- and much more- all along.

Within a fortnight, the visitors will be receiving a deluge of claims for damages, paternity suits, libel suits and freedom of information requests- and probably threats- from the people who seemed so eager to meet them.
 
Sorry, that's not it at all. Being scared is something they might actively enjoy. The psychological need is to believe in fantastical stories as literally true to escape from the mundane, from analytical thought and so forth... which this Demo finds aversive.

that is one wicked wide paintbrush you are employing.
 
that is one wicked wide paintbrush you are employing.
I don't think Mr. Wolf is saying everyone with an interest, or even a belief in, UFOs as alien craft, time-travelling visitors or whatever is characterised by his criticism, but a minority of such people are as he describes.
I know one! (We're actually on friendly terms, but he knows not to talk to me about how he's read that certain events in WW2 were maybe faked- something I won't listen to politely).
 
I don't think Mr. Wolf is saying everyone with an interest, or even a belief in, UFOs as alien craft, time-travelling visitors or whatever is characterised by his criticism, but a minority of such people are as he describes.
I know one! (We're actually on friendly terms, but he knows not to talk to me about how he's read that certain events in WW2 were maybe faked- something I won't listen to politely).
My long-time friend, an otherwise scientifically-minded person, has embraced ufology to the point that she lectures on the MUFON circuit. Her beliefs are based on an unexplained personal experience of some sort, and she knows I don't share her feelings. That's just a subject we don't discuss, because I know it gives her a purpose in life. As with your friend, she knows not to talk to me about it.
 
I don't think Mr. Wolf is saying everyone with an interest,
then why did he say "that's not it at all."?

Her beliefs are based on an unexplained personal experience of some sort
Masters, in the linked pdf above, said his father had an alleged experience he was told about at age 8. and apparently his dad had a bunch of UFO books around when he was young.

Maybe you can ask your friend if she would feel better if the aliens were future humans vs aliens. I imagine it wouldnt make a difference if you were abducted and probed, ie. it would be equally scary.

But if i saw what i thought was a real UFO, it would make me feel better to tell myself they are just time traveling people.
 
I read quite a lot of the UFO parts of fora I am a member of and the UFO related Reddits and there is a wide slew of beliefs, theories and levels of engagement

Some people are clearly Larping (using the more recently emerged definition) https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Larping

"When someone is pretending to be something they’re not."

There is a lot of mention of alcohol/drug use/psychedelics and some mental illness allusions and the connection with UFOs, other paranormal things are often just casually lumped in, remote viewing, ghosts you name it anything similar is added to the pile. A general sense that anything that distorts your view of reality actually opens you up to the truth.

Some people seem to be along for the fun of it, the tone is playful, egging on the true believers with support and debunks are met with a "stop spoiling the fun" attitude.

However there's a definite prevailing sense of "believe/or pretend to believe anyone with a wacky story" even if the stories present contradictory or multiplicative complicating elements to "the phenomenon" a term that allows for everyone's ideas/stories to fit into the same meta narrative. You are unlikely to see arguments or debates about explanations that place 2 "alien" theories against each other. The closest you might get is "woo" versus "nuts and bolts" but often this is mainly about avoiding mentioning the woo, even though it is true because it puts of the general public.

Most people have some sort of story from the past usually without evidence or from the pre smartphone era etc that was the trigger.

I'm not sure if there is any published work in to the psychology of UFO believers in the post US Navy video/online age it would be interesting.
 
However there's a definite prevailing sense of "believe/or pretend to believe anyone with a wacky story" even if the stories present contradictory or multiplicative complicating elements to "the phenomenon" a term that allows for everyone's ideas/stories to fit into the same meta narrative.
Yes. The main idea of CT groups is to be affirming potential new members' beliefs so that they get the impression they're joining an online community of friends that'll replace those disbelievers in their life.

I feel it's irresponsible to be part of this mechanism because it helps send people down the rabbit hole.
 
Maybe you can ask your friend if she would feel better if the aliens were future humans vs aliens. I imagine it wouldnt make a difference if you were abducted and probed, ie. it would be equally scary
No, she is enough of a scientist to laugh off the notion of time travel, as I do. Alien beings from another planet, even though highly unlikely, are far more probable than that. And I don't think fear plays any part in her beliefs. I think she'd be very excited to get real evidence.
 
Nobody needs to explain a thing until there is evidence that there is a thing to be explained. Masters skipped right over that essential step and jumped right to the "explanation" thing, which makes me wonder if he had a pet explanation in his mind just looking for a topic to which it might be applied, whether or not it was needed there.

Indeed. Trying to explain Greys as future humans assumes that Greys exist as actual entities. The evidence is much more compelling that they are cultural creations. As I noted in post #16 they start out as literary characters around the turn of the 20th century then become more popular as film and TV characters as those industries expanded through the 20th century.

As aliens became more popular on the screen, they are pushed through narrative and budgetary filters. The vast majority of aliens are humanoid because they have to interact with the humans in the story. The protagonist trying to interact with a giant intelligent cloud of space dust, doesn't make for good visuals.

Humanoid aliens are also more budget friendly. Consider the original Star Trek, most of the aliens were humans in silly costumes, humans painted up in green or other colors, or often just humans with pointed ears. The Vulcans, Romulans and Klingons are all pretty similar. It's cost effective and they easily interact with humans in the story.

Even in a big budget film like CE3K, the vast majority of the aliens are just young humans dressed up as Greys with the main one being a stop motion puppet. And the puppet alien is still humanoid so that it can interact with the humans. It has hands to mimic the signals that go along with the song, and it has a humanish face so that it can smile.

Yes, there are exceptions like the Tribbles from Star Trek or the monolith from 2001, but I think Greys are a great general-purpose alien for film and entertainment. They are sufficiently human so that they can interact in the story while being just alien enough to be...aliens.

Using the link form @deirdre I was able to download chapter 1 of the book The Extratempestral Model, as well as the contents and all the end notes. It gives some insight into Dr. Master's theory:

file:///C:/Users/hamli/Downloads/TheExtratempestralModel_TOC_Ch1_ReferencesforResearchgate.pdf

Sticking to notian of Greys being future humans, it appears that Masters uses a series of case studies to build up evidence for the Greys being the typical entity encountered by experiencers. The table of contents:

1683649236196.png

A quick glance at the case studies used is problematic at best. Giving that this is recent book:

1683661540431.png

One need only glance a Wikipedia to see many of the holes in these various cases, and that's just to start.

This is not the place to discuss each case study, but some quick checking can find various sources challenging the accepted stories involved. I'll present just a few examples here. I'm not trying to violate the "no-click policy" but again, this not the place discuss each case. I'm just showing that there is plenty of information out there that at least casts doubt on many of these claims:

#3 Villa-Boas:

Boas didn't even seem to see a real Grey, rather he was first captured by guys in grey coveralls and helmets:

However, he was seized by a 5-foot-tall (150 cm) humanoid, who was wearing grey coveralls and a helmet. Its eyes were small and blue, and instead of speech it made noises like barks or yelps.
Content from External Source
Then he met the non-Grey female:

This one, however, was female, very attractive, and naked. She was the same height as the other beings he had encountered, with a small, pointed chin and large, blue catlike eyes. The hair on her head was long and white (somewhat like platinum blonde) but her underarm and pubic hair were bright red.
Content from External Source
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antônio_Vilas-Boas

This archived post also deals a bit with the Boas case and that it was probable he was trying to sell the story: https://web.archive.org/web/20060427053131/http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk/arc/90/revis01.html

#4 The Hills:

Season 1 of the podcast Strange Arrivals goes in depth on the Hill story, pretty much showing it was a combination of stress, dreams, hypnotic regression a long drive and a light tower on a hill: https://www.iheart.com/podcast/1119-strange-arrivals-59865365/

#6 Travis Walton:

Very likely a hoax with some of the people involved now starting to say as much. @Charlie Wiser does an excellent job of chronicling the case at her website: https://threedollarkit.weebly.com/travis-walton.html


#10 Rendlesham Forest:

Here is Ian Ridpath's webpage on the incident. He uses primary documents to show it was largely a misidentified light house. No UFO, no Greys: http://www.ianridpath.com/ufo/rendlesham.html

Season 2 of Strange Arrivals covers Rendlesham in detail: https://www.iheart.com/podcast/1119-strange-arrivals-59865365/

#13 Areial School:

While I'm sounding repetitive, I'm not trying to promote certain sites or shows, these are just good sources I knew of off the top of my head.

Season 3 of the afore mentioned Strang Arrivals covers the Areial School siting and builds on the excellent work, again by Charlie Wiser at: https://threedollarkit.weebly.com/ariel-school.html

Basically, the original pro-UFOlogy investigator mangled, cherrypicked and hopelessly intermingled whatever testimony the kids had about what they may have seen. Strang Arrivals presents a novel possible explanation, that what the kids saw was life sized puppets. Apparently, puppet shows as a way of warning about AIDS in rural early '90s Africa might have been a thing, including large scale ones that would go around promoting the shows.

All this is to say, if these cases are what the reality of Greys is based on, it' shaky evidence. I don't have the rest of the book, so I can't say for sure that Masters does not address the various issues with the claims he is using, but he does make this statement near the end of Chapter 1 (bold by me):

The aim of the current study is to offer a critical analysis of conventional contactee case studies as they relate to the Extratempestrial Model, the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis, and other interpretations of UFO encounters. Assessing the similarities and differences among these reports could be crucial to our understanding of the phenomenon and potentially reveal much about what is happening now, as well as across countless cases in the human past.
Content from External Source
But how critical is the analysis, if cultural inputs are ignored and many of the cases are dubious to begin with? The next papgraph seems to confirm that these cases are simply taken at face value:

By examining consistent patterns across reliable reports provided by those who have interacted with unusual entities as abductees, contactees, and as part of other contact modalities, we may begin to understand the nature of these experiences, as well as the potential origin of the visitors involve.
Content from External Source
Just a superficial knowledge of many of these cases reveals that the classic Grey alien is only partially represented if at all. If there is no consistent Grey alien to be culled from these cases, there is no need to postulate them coming from the future rather than from the Zeitgeist in which they arose.
 
I've run across this argument before, it seems to me to be based on the misconception that evolution has a goal in mind, a direction it "wants" to go, momentum from past evolution carrying into the future.

Evolution being based on the selection of random mutations and variations, that seems impossible. You can't predict which variations will arise; that makes it a bit tricky to say what future evolution will produce. That is not even taking into account not knowing what environmental facters might arise or change to do the selecting.
I heard about a similar theory a long time ago - a person will be more connected with mental activity, so the skull will increase. Some fingers will also disappear. But it does not even take into account the theory that a person uses computer programs in different spheres of life to help, and it does not take into account that in 1000 years or more implants or neural communication with a computer will be possible. Or it will be possible to edit the genome, of course, if laws and morality could allow. Potentially, humanity could move in this direction. The author of the book could use this excuse - after all, artificial selection, selection and genetic engineering in the conditions of civilization can be more likely and faster than natural evolution, right?
 
There is a school of thought in evolutionary biology which states that the evolutionary paths to an intelligent being are actually very constrained, which causes intelligent aliens to look much like us.
A proponent of this school of thought is prof Simon Conway Morris:

 
I heard about a similar theory a long time ago - a person will be more connected with mental activity, so the skull will increase. Some fingers will also disappear. But it does not even take into account the theory that a person uses computer programs in different spheres of life to help, and it does not take into account that in 1000 years or more implants or neural communication with a computer will be possible. Or it will be possible to edit the genome, of course, if laws and morality could allow. Potentially, humanity could move in this direction. The author of the book could use this excuse - after all, artificial selection, selection and genetic engineering in the conditions of civilization can be more likely and faster than natural evolution, right?
The size of the skull is highly dependent upon the size of the birth canal, so I think your artificially-aided "brain power" is a more likely outcome. Indeed, with the rise in availability of pocket calculators, it appears that the human ability to do simple arithmetic in the head is diminishing, and with the ubiquity of keyboards, there's a corresponding decline in handwriting skills. These are cultural adaptations, not evolutionary changes, but it's a trend that might be expected to continue.

As for the disappearance of fingers, I doubt it. That would seem to give no evolutionary advantage at all, and would require a reworking of the five-fold appendage pattern that has served mammals for millions of years.
 
As for the disappearance of fingers, I doubt it. That would seem to give no evolutionary advantage at all, and would require a reworking of the five-fold appendage pattern that has served mammals for millions of years.

The evolutionary record disagrees with you strongly. Loss of digits from pentadactyly has happened many times for many reasons in all different areas of the tetrapod family tree. Even the mammals cover the full range of oligodactyly. And once they're lost, they almost never increase again. 5 appears like a mostly stable upper bound, that's all; decrease almost seems inevitable unless there's a reason to preserve it. Being a species dependent on manipulation is our historical reason, obviously - but will we always be so dependent on that skill?
 
There is a school of thought in evolutionary biology which states that the evolutionary paths to an intelligent being are actually very constrained, which causes intelligent aliens to look much like us.
A proponent of this school of thought is prof Simon Conway Morris:


Which is why some of the most intelligent species on Earth - octopi, elephants, crows and dolphins - look exactly like us/
 
Which is why some of the most intelligent species on Earth - octopi, elephants, crows and dolphins - look exactly like us/

Agree - and a great set of counter-examples, but...
I have to flag that fake latin plural :) . It was a greek word that was latinised by modern scientists to fit an ad hoc pattern for names in modern scientific discourse, not ever a word in the language of classical latin speakers. Yes, that means we all need to give up on platypi too, alas, which I think is even more common.

Which is in some ways a shame as I'm a great believer in preserving attested latinate forms in english - I can't do without fora, stadia, podia, extrema, etc., the -ums forms make me cringe (I'm sure by deliberate avoidance of capital letters in adjectives formed from proper nouns causes many others to cringe, that's life). But only attested forms, not post-hoc back formations with next to no link to the language they're pretending to be. As we speak, I'm trying to wean myself of the "ph" in sulfur, as there's no "phi" in the origin of that word (the greeks had the thio- base for the sulfur words). It's hard, I still slip up. At least replacing hiccough with hiccup was easy, I have no idea why that misspelling ever caught on. And I've never once said or typed "virii"! (Enjoy.)
 
Which is why some of the most intelligent species on Earth - octopi, elephants, crows and dolphins - look exactly like us/
You mean the octopi, elephants, crows and dolphins who apply math, record their scientific knowledge for future generations, and build rockets & radio telescopes? Yes, they look exactly like us.
 
You mean the octopi, elephants, crows and dolphins who apply math, record their scientific knowledge for future generations, and build rockets & radio telescopes? Yes, they look exactly like us.
Well, with the octopi, it's not for lack of fingers. And to be fair, 4000 and some years ago, homo sapiens did neither of these things, either.

But who's to say the legend of Atlantis isn't our race memory of the octopus civilisation risen and fallen?

For instance, on the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much—the wheel, New York, wars and so on—whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man—for precisely the same reasons.
Content from External Source
Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
 
You mean the octopi, elephants, crows and dolphins who apply math, record their scientific knowledge for future generations, and build rockets & radio telescopes? Yes, they look exactly like us.
This is human chauvinism. Intelligence, being an emergent property, is extremely hard to separate into bands with any precision, but certainly the animals listed above (and squirrels) certainly are highly intelligent, most displaying complexity of thought for abstraction, theory of mind, planning, testing hypotheses and learning from them, etc. Sure, we're at the top of the pile on all matters of intelligence that we're capable of probing, but we can't rule out the existence within other species of heightened mental faculties superior to humans in areas that we're too dumb to work out even exist. Some perception/memory/recall tasks, of course, we know we're being trounced, but we don't view those as being as much a sign of "intelligence" as the ones we win at.
 
And to be fair, 4000 and some years ago, homo sapiens did neither of these things, either.
The Great Pyramid was built 4000 and some years ago, so you'll have to go back in time a little bit further to say we did neither of these things.

If you take Douglas Adams's definition of intelligence, cats, not dolphins, are without any doubt the most intelligent species on the planet. They trained us to clean their toilets, give them massages and work for their food while they go out and have fun every night, then puke on the floor when they come back home and sleep in on our most comfortable furniture..
 
There is a school of thought in evolutionary biology which states that the evolutionary paths to an intelligent being are actually very constrained, which causes intelligent aliens to look much like us.
A proponent of this school of thought is prof Simon Conway Morris:



Just been wondering on a related note: Has this school of thought mostly been advocated for by researchers with a religious background? There's a common theme within ufology of researchers with catholic and mormon backgrounds being drawn to the topic. The former Catholic church has especially been open towards the idea that "god has many children" among the stars....
 
Just been wondering on a related note: Has this school of thought mostly been advocated for by researchers with a religious background? There's a common theme within ufology of researchers with catholic and mormon backgrounds being drawn to the topic. The former Catholic church has especially been open towards the idea that "god has many children" among the stars....
Conway Morris, a Christian, holds to theistic views of biological evolution. He has held the Chair of Evolutionary Palaeobiology in the Department of Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge since 1995.[2]
Content from External Source
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Conway_Morris

The article makes multiple references to his Christian faith.
 
Conway Morris, a Christian, holds to theistic views of biological evolution. He has held the Chair of Evolutionary Palaeobiology in the Department of Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge since 1995.[2]
Content from External Source
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Conway_Morris

The article makes multiple references to his Christian faith.

Call me a cynic, but I wonder if his scientific viewpoint has been guided by Genesis 1:27: "So God created man in his own image". Wouldn't it be just so convenient if the other life forms out there also happened to be in the same image?
 
Just been wondering on a related note: Has this school of thought mostly been advocated for by researchers with a religious background? There's a common theme within ufology of researchers with catholic and mormon backgrounds being drawn to the topic. The former Catholic church has especially been open towards the idea that "god has many children" among the stars....
I think this was merely a 'CYA' statement by the Catholic church, in case alien life would be discovered ;)

I haven't found anything that would indicate prof Simon Conway Morris is into ufology. An interest in alien life does not automatically imply being drawn to ufology.

I just brought this up to indicate that even if there were many ce3 cases where 'humanoids' were seen, this does not have to imply they are humans.
 
Call me a cynic, but I wonder if his scientific viewpoint has been guided by Genesis 1:27: "So God created man in his own image". Wouldn't it be just so convenient if the other life forms out there also happened to be in the same image?
As far as I know, he thinks 'we are alone' might be the right answer to the Fermi Paradox because in his view there is zero evidence so far of intelligent alien life.
His scientific viewpoint has been guided by the idea that the role of convergence in evolution has been underestimated.
 
Call me a cynic, but I wonder if his scientific viewpoint has been guided by Genesis 1:27: "So God created man in his own image". Wouldn't it be just so convenient if the other life forms out there also happened to be in the same image?

There's the common acknowledgement in ufology that most aliens in CE experiences are "humanoids" and as also has been confirmed in the Dr. Edgar Mitchell FREE study for odd reasons. The idea that is then parroted within ufology, is that the humanoid form must be in one way a or another an efficient evolutionary template to which intelligent species converge to.

But so far to going off-topic.
 
Dr. Masters also draws on his expertise in biological anthropology to support his hypothesis. He argues that if humans were to continue to evolve over thousands or millions of years, they would likely develop physical features that resemble the classic "grey alien" archetype commonly associated with UFO sightings.

However, I think it could interesting to consider whether or not Michael Masters has been cherry-picking information. E.g. distorting CE cases such that they fit his hypothesis, misinterpreting and misunderstanding scientific work and concepts he cites to validate his ideas, etc. I also highly question whether his concept of time-travel considers that planets and star systems actually move through space and not just stay fixed...

Hmm... I recall having heard recently that within the Dr. Edgar Mitchell FREE study, which also forms the basis of Dr. Master's hypothesis, it is stated that a majority of CE experiences involving "humanoid aliens" /"grey-alien archetype" were only reported within North American / Anglo-Saxon countries... Certainly, also rather speaks for a cultural explanation rather than "actual future humans".

In any way, it could be considered faulty methdology to cherry pick cases worldwide, when outside of the Anglosphere humanoid encounters are less frequently reported...
 
Last edited:
Which is why some of the most intelligent species on Earth - octopi, elephants, crows and dolphins - look exactly like us/
But they are constrained by their evolutionary inheritance to lack the means to build upon that intelligence. Water-dwellers, for example, could never discover the control of fire, which cuts them off from ceramics and metallurgy, which means that manufactured machinery is beyond their grasp. Crows could not have dreamed of the need for wheeled vehicles. Elephants essentially have only a single "hand" with which to manipulate their environment and create artifacts. And none of them have the means to use the essential method of transmitting complex information, complex speech.
 
Hmm... I recall having heard recently that within the Dr. Edgar Mitchell FREE study, which also forms the basis of Dr. Master's hypothesis, it is stated that a majority of CE experiences involving "humanoid aliens" /"grey-alien archetype" were only reported within North American / Anglo-Saxon countries... Certainly, also rather speaks for a cultural explanation rather than "actual future humans".
Can you provide a link to this study?
Because in this ce3 list I posted earlier, 62 of the 107 cases were outside the US:
https://www.nicap.org/occupants_hall.htm

Add to that the near certainty that not all foreign cases will reach researchers in the US, especially those in foreign languages.
 
Crows could not have dreamed of the need for wheeled vehicles.
What if crows wanted to move something bigger than they can
And none of them have the means to use the essential method of transmitting complex information, complex speech.
Mot human speech. But octopods would be well-suited for sign language, I'd think, and at worst crows could go for Morse Code equivalent, pecking on something or just cawing out dots and dashes...
 
I'd think, and at worst crows could go for Morse Code equivalent, pecking on something or just cawing out dots and dashes...
Some types of crows, and other corvids, have a wide vocal range including mimicry of human speech and other sounds.

Anyway less well developed communication was a feature of our ancestors all the way back to having no communication. Presumably other lineages could evolve complex communication on par with humans given the right selective pressures and mutations.
 
Back
Top