Recent Alien Writing Examples
Doodles, or alien symbols?
A recent post from Dr. Roger Leir (the implant removal specialist) includes images of “alien writing,” something that has been an interest of mine for many years now. Leir says the illustrations were sent to him by “a southern California abductee,” which doesn’t tell us much. Many of the symbols in the post appear to be simple unconscious doodles, but assigning them to the “nothing but” scrapheap may be doing a disservice to both the originator and the phenomenon of “alien” languages.
The question of whether this person has actually experienced a UFO abduction or not is not as interesting as how they were produced. Most UFO researchers don’t actually look at this sort of thing as a window into the whys and hows of the human subconscious, and how some of us might be communicating with something outside of our heads. “Evidence” is almost always looked at as a stepping stone to “proof” for unbelievers, and weird scribbles do not provide that proof. I have heard that some abduction researchers have guarded alien writing examples a simple method to determine if an alleged abductee is “genuine” or not. This could be a grave disservice to something that that might open doors to a better understanding of the human mind and how it copes with inner and/or outer turmoil.
 The language of “angels” or “aliens” has been with us for centuries. One notable example are the symbols of “enochian,” which was channeled by Elizabethan court astrologer John Dee and his assistant Edward Kelley in the late 16th century.
What these symbols may represent is an attempt by the mind to put abstract concepts into a form that is understandable though something that is accessible to us when our earthly language and writing is not up to the task.
I have not gone through Leir’s examples yet, but the first step in deciphering “recieved” (or in the case of supposed UFO abductees) witnessed symbols is to determine if they are simple substitutions for letters. There is some evidence in a few examples of “alien” writing that do not bear a one-to-one relationship to the native speaker’s own language, and it is on these that we should concentrate.
The CARET/ Issac symbols are one example awaiting study. While it is almost certain that these were made up by some earthling, it might be interesting to see if they actually spell out anything. Perhaps you or I should get on it! It might also be compared with the “Klingon” language, which was invented by linguist Marc Okrand on contract from Paramount Pictures.
P.S. There were accusations that the CARET symbols were a “viral marketing campaign” for the (then) upcoming release of the “Halo 3″ video game. This last weekend, I actually participated in playing it, but didn’t see any examples of alien symbols, at least any that even vaguely resembled the CARET writing.
Thanks to Miles Lewis for the heads-up.
This entry was posted
on Monday, October 29th, 2007 at 12:29 pm and is filed under Abductions, Alien Encounters, Breaking News, Eyewitness Accounts, Occult/Esoteric, Psychic Phenomena, UFOlogy, Wake Up Down There. You can follow responses via RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is not allowed.
del.icio.us Digg Reddit BlinkList Google Ma.gnolia StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Help
- Related News Stories:
- Examples Of Alien Writing »
- Jesse Marcel Jr.’s Roswell Alien Symbols »
- Alien Writing - Pt. 2 »
- Alien Writing - Pt. 1 »
- UFO Bits & Pieces »
|
Oct 29 2007 
October 29th, 2007 at 3:31 pm
3 things:
1: Looking at some of these sketches, I conlude that I don’t know if that lady is an abductee, but she certainly can draw!
(As a side note, it’s interesting that in one of the sketches, she puts 6 fingers on a gray alien. The number of digits on these fellows is apparently on wild dispute, some say 3, others 5, the Roswell mannequin on the Santilli abduction had 6…)
2: I’ve been perusing about so-called alien symbols recently too. Namely I’ve been studying about the “UMMO” case, and UFO cases when a symbol resembling a weird H, like this: )+( was observed on the “fuselage” of unidentified objects (the Voronezh case would be one example). The interesting thing here is the complex cultural connotations this symbol, or some varied form of it, has had across different nations and time-frames.
3: Finished Halo 3 on Heroic (I’m trying to fnish in Legendary now), and although the game is not intended to pay much attention to the minutiae of the landscape (or you get your head blown off) I never found anything remotely reseembling CARET.
The same goes for the “Transformers” movie. I think CARET is something more than a mere example of viral marketing. Which is not saying that I believe it to be genuine.
October 29th, 2007 at 4:48 pm
It’s probably someone trying to remember their password to this blog! When you write “genunine” Greg I’m totally with you.
Professor Michael Corballis has an article in the New Scientist a couple issues back stating that what makes humans unique is our ability for recursive language. He used birdsong as a counter-example, stating it was “repetitive.” I emailed him — he’s in New Zealand — stating that I had emailed him previously but he hadn’t responded (after I had read his “the Lop-Sided Ape” book several years ago). My previous email was along similar lines and that he was imposing Western harmonics onto bird-song, thereby rendering it “repetitive.” I pointed out that most of the bird-song is actually in ultrasound.
He responded almost immediately — does ultrasound make it recursive? Well my response was too cranky for him to reply but essentially the definition of recursive relies on symmetrical form whereas natural overtones of bird-song are asymmetrical. Besides the fact that there are several human languages now found to not be recursive — much to the chagrin of Noam Chomsky and his “universal grammar transformation” or whatever. He and I corresponded as well.
Maybe I speak alien after all.
October 29th, 2007 at 6:48 pm
I and Carl Jung have been saying that all along. UFO are not the only place to catch glimpses of the inner workings of the human mind — cosmology and quantum physics also provide windows into the mind. One thing you will find out though, is that the extreme vast majority of people do not want to know how their minds works. It is a scary thing to see what is really deep down inside of oneself.
October 30th, 2007 at 8:31 am
Ok, but what’s the methodology? I’m baffled how any insight at all can be obtained, but I am not a psychologist.
October 30th, 2007 at 9:57 am
RPJ,
How did you find out that the person was female? Did I miss something on the site?
The funny thing about the )+( symbol is that it was all over the UMMO case (which was proven to be an elaborate hoax) then it showed up on the Voronezh robots!
October 30th, 2007 at 10:02 am
Drew,
I guess that this writing, if any of it is “real,” is partially a product of our minds trying to figure out what these “other minds” are saying to us. In other words, it’s a halfway point.
October 30th, 2007 at 10:04 am
Sage,
The way we think about things reveals a lot about us (not an original thought, I know.)
October 30th, 2007 at 10:12 am
disowned,
Well, one thing that “received” scripts do is point up the fact that everything that enters our minds is interpreted to some extent. When we start to posit “others” who are sending these messages, we run into the problem of our preconceptions blocking out the full implications of the original.
We find this just trying to understand each other’s earthly languages, many of which contain concepts that are foreign to us (i.e. “We don’t have a word for that.”)
Everything we experience is sent through a lot of filters that are below our conscious awareness. That’s just one way to look at this. Of course, I’m not a psychologist either, but I learned about this phenomenon (the alien writing) from one. See other posts.
October 30th, 2007 at 10:38 am
Thanks for the reply Greg because I’m forced to finally memorize my password and was successful. More importantly I SAW A UFO while waiting for the library to open. Wasn’t a plane, wasn’t a bird. So whose the superman? ME. haha.
October 30th, 2007 at 10:40 am
Hey Greg.
You know? Honest to God I don’t know why I came up with that (the gender of the abductee). For some reason my brain assumed you had written it was a woman. But in truth is it was a mistake of mine and I can’t back my claim. Then again maybe I was inffluenced by the drawings, somehow they seemed… feminine
Yep, the UMMO case had a lot of bogus and falsified material, commited mostly by a man called José Luis Jordán Peña. But I just read an interesting book by spanish investigator J.J. Benítez,who wrote that people were reportin seeing UFOs with that weird )+( way WAY before the UMMO letters were received in Spain. He writes about a case that happened as far back as 1924, in Alicante, Spain!
Also,it was proved by Benítez that Jordán Peña’s claims cannot be taken at face value. the man is a patological lier, and changed his version plenty of times dring the years Benítez interviewed him. But as a side note, Peña claims he was helped in his little “experiment” by no other than the CIA… whatever it was, Peña must have had an outside help besides the couple of fellows who helped him in his hoaxes. Otherwise how can we explain all the letters that were sent outside Spain, like London and Brazil. Jordán Peña wasn’t that wealthy to travel to all those places. If anything, Benítez book convinced me there’s a lot we yet don’t understand about the UMMO case.
October 30th, 2007 at 10:48 am
Greg — remember when Nick posted the Stuart Miller blog and I went off about how cancer is a fungus and Stuart’s dog could therefore probably talk to aliens?
Well the “blob” reference I made is actually not a fungus but a slime mold (thought previously to be a fungus). Now the slime mold IS being used to create a strange alien language:
This is from New Scientist, last May:
The gates are treated to ensure that mould creeping though one or both of two “input” tubes eventually causes mould to either emerge from a single “output” tube or to not emerge. In an “AND” gate, for example, mould only exits from the output tube when it is fed into both input tubes. Connecting many such tubes together can be used to perform more complex calculations, albeit at a very slow speeds (slime mould’s top speed is 1 centimetre per hour).
As with Zauner’s research, potential applications are not very clear. But one noteworthy benefit is that a mould-based logic gate will naturally repair itself. So biological logic gates could perhaps be used in certain situations as a more resilient alternative to electronic gates.
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:23 pm
Greg:
You might like this quote within a quote as well…
“‘The important thing is what (a man) talks about, not whether he agrees with it or not’ (Vol 5, para 99). That which one passionately hates is sure to represent an aspect of his own fate” (EGO AND ARCHETYPE, Edward F Edinger, pg 76)
Carl Jung speaks of UFOs as being “a modern myth of things seen in the sky”. Mythologizing is a thing which all generations have done in one way or the other since the beginning of time. In Roman and Greek times they had their multitude of Gods. People projected their bad traits onto make believe beings, who, if they were faithful to that God and their God’s dogma, could transform their bad traits into that God’s good traits.
UFOs are a similar story only what aspect of our personalities we are projecting onto UFOs has not been quite figured out yet, which, when that happens, will cause UFOs to cease to exist because projections can only exist as long as they are unconscious. As soon as projections are made conscious, the reason for them to exist goes away, as it did for the Roman and Greek Gods. Seen any Roman or Greek Gods lately?
November 3rd, 2007 at 10:59 pm
RPJ,
Funny, I got the same vibe off of the drawings.
Interesting comments re: the UMMO case. The definitive work appaprently remains to be written.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:03 pm
Sage,
A bold statement, but possible. Also, I’m not sure that UFOs are always unconscious projections, and we’ve been seeing unknown things in the skies for thousands of years.
November 4th, 2007 at 12:12 pm
Greg,
What is the percentage of sightings that do not fit the psychological projection hypothesis versus does that do not? It is a very small percentage from what I read.
While very few have been seeing unknown things in the sky for thousands of years, very many have been seeing flying saucers for the last few hundred years. They are not the same thing, although it might have been the beginning of it.