In the current issue of Paranthropology: The Journal of Anthropological Approaches to the Paranormal (4.2, April 2013), anthropologist Dr. Steven Mizrach of Florida International University has an interesting if unsatisfactory paper on “The Para-Anthropology of UFO Abductions.” Mizrach correctly notes the extreme unlikelihood of UFOs being alien spaceships, and he also correctly looks for anthropological and psychological origins for the Grays, lizard people, etc. However, Mizrach appears to be reading too much into U.S. government UFO reports and the skeptical position on UFOs in order to bolster an unusual conclusion that beings from another dimension are invading our minds, a conclusion he reached, he said, by using the methodology of Sherlock Holmes: eliminating every possibility until only one solution (alien mind invaders) remained.
Mizrach discusses the University of Colorado UFO Project's Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects, better known as the Condon Report of 1969, and the work of Philip Klass, Robert Schaeffer, and CSI (formerly CSICOP), and he complains that the scientific and skeptical view is that UFOs are misidentifications of natural phenomena or hoaxes and therefore do not contribute to scientific knowledge “in any useful way.” This is where he takes issue:
I mean, even if the essential model is correct, science could still learn something from studying UFO reports. Perhaps we could learn more about human misperception of stars and planets, the inability for people to correctly estimate the size or distance of aerial objects, or even the mechanisms behind the confabulation of false stories. Yet, that is the mantra of the 1969 report, that nothing of scientific value can be gained from studying UFO reports, and therefore the Air Force and other branches of government have no need to investigate them.
Let’s back up and look at the exact wording of what the U.S. Air Force-funded Condon Report said, all the more important because Mizrach does not provide this information:
We feel that the reason that there has been very little scientific study of the subject is that those scientists who are most directly concerned, astronomers, atmospheric physicists, chemists, and psychologists, having had ample opportunity to look into the matter, have individually decided that UFO phenomena do not offer a fruitful field in which to look for major scientific discoveries. (p. 2)
It’s interesting that the Condon Report does include psychologists among the hard scientists who have no interest in UFOs. However, I don’t know any skeptics and few scientists who doubt that UFOs can be used to teach us about human nature. Susan A. Clancy’s Abducted: How People Come to Believe They Were Kidnapped by Aliens (2005) is a great example of this, as is Thomas Bullard’s work on the folklore and mythic correlates of UFO abduction narratives.
It’s fairly obvious that the Condon Report was heavily implying that the “major scientific discoveries” were related to “extraterrestrial life,” not human perception of the supernatural. This is confirmed a few pages later when the Report writes:
As the reader of this report will readily judge, we have focussed attention almost entirely on the physical sciences. This was in part a matter of determining priorities and in part because we found rather less than some persons may have expected in the way of psychiatric problems related to belief in the reality of UFOs as craft from remote galactic or intergalactic civilizations. We believe that the rigorous study of the beliefs--unsupported by valid evidence--held by individuals and even by some groups might prove of scientific value to the social and behavioral sciences. There is no implication here that individual or group psychopathology is a principal area of study. Reports of UFOs offer interesting challenges to the student of cognitive processes as they are affected by individual and social variables. By this connection, we conclude that a content-analysis of press and television coverage of UFO reports might yield data of value both to the social scientist and the communications specialist. The lack of such a study in the present report is due to a judgment on our part that other areas of investigation were of much higher priority. We do not suggest, however, that the UFO phenomenon is, by its nature, more amenable to study in these disciplines than in the physical sciences. On the contrary, we conclude that the same specificity in proposed research in these areas is as desirable as it is in the physical sciences. (p. 6)
So, in short, Mizrach is wrong about the Condon Report and about the skeptical position on the value of studying UFOs, alien abductions, and by extension ancient astronauts. I do not know if he simply failed to read the Condon Report and relied instead on secondary summaries or if he purposely misrepresented the material, but either way this is a serious error for a university scholar, especially one who is lending academic authority to an extreme claim about reality.
Since his premise is that “official” science rejects any value in studying UFOs so therefore “alternative” views proposed by ufologists therefore have value, the fact that Mizrach has seriously misread the Condon Report casts doubt on his discussion of ufological theories as a serious attempt to take back the value of UFO studies from an uncaring mainstream science. In other words, if scientists are not rejecting the value of UFO studies, then there is no false dichotomy that forces us to accept extreme views of UFOs as the only acceptable alternative.
This becomes obvious as he moves toward the conclusion of his article, in which he advocates the Ultra-Terrestrial Hypothesis (UTH) whereby we are meant to understand aliens as an expression in this dimension of actual living beings from another plane of existence. Mizrach recognizes that skeptics will see this as “magical thinking,” but he suggests that it is the only way to explain why visions seen in altered states of consciousness are so powerful and convincing. He claims that UFO phenomena and ancient myths and legends are all of a piece, and all of this is related to a controlling intelligence from another dimension. His evidence, however, is extremely shoddy.
We can’t prove the existence of other dimensions or planes of reality. But a growing number of physicists do claim that our scientific models suggest they should exist. Still, those predictions also suggest that movement from one universe to another should be impossible. But, again, is this something we know for certain? The one thing I am sure of, however, is that there is an intelligence behind the phenomenon, and that whatever we are dealing with cannot be visiting us on a regular basis from somewhere in our universe that is thousands of light years away. [...] Perhaps, as Patrick Harpur (2003) has argued, these entities in some way interact and mold themselves to our perceptions and beliefs, in some way crossing the Cartesian divide between physical reality and imagination, and this explains the nature of their manifestations.
This is anthropology?
Mizrach concludes by suggesting that the entities “conform” to our cultural perceptions and that the Condon Report is shackling science from finding these creatures, even four decades later.
I find it very difficult to understand how Mizrach can discuss Carl Jung and shamanism but seems to either be unaware of or is choosing to omit the anthropological and archaeological work of David Lewis-Williams, now more than a decade old, which very clearly lays out the neurological basis for the phenomena Mizrach ascribes to magic beings from another dimension. Briefly, Lewis-Williams found that altered states of consciousness induced by meditation, drugs, or dreaming produce a fixed range of images that are defined by the structure of our brains and that cultural conditioning interprets as various monsters, gods, and objects. He found that this holds true across cultures and through time, from the Paleolithic to today, and can be traced in everything from cave art to religious myths.
As someone who has (rarely) experienced the types of intense dream states that Lewis-Williams identified with the apotheosis of gods or monsters, I can attest that there is nothing in them that cannot be attributed to mental effects. I’ve written before about how when I was sick as a child I experienced a vision of a frog with a Mohawk haircut wearing a leather jacket, and years later I had an “abduction” experience, though more Gothic horror than techno-epiphany. The monster vanished as soon as I realized I was dreaming, but while it was present it was excruciatingly real. I just can’t see why we need to imagine another dimension of reality interacting with this one to explain how our brains work.
At any rate, I found Mizrach’s paper particularly noteworthy because it involves a real scholar amassing a large bibliography in service of creating a false dichotomy based on a misrepresentation in order to lend credence to the idea that monsters from another dimension are invading our brains. Given its scholarly patina, I imagine it will become a staple of ancient astronaut and ufology literature for years to come.
4/14/2013 09:06:50 am
You should stay away from loony academics like Dr.Steven Mizrach. Some establishments of higher learning are nests for unrepentant academic Tartuffes like James Hurtak,Lambert Dolphin,Stanley McDaniel.Mizrach belongs to the Club.Emory University,once, the home of the infamous Courtney Brown,the remote aficionado who played a major role in the events leading up to the Heaven's Gate tragedy.The Stanford Research Institute,who used to promote alternative wacky archaeologists,New Egyptologists,& financed goofball in chief,Richard C Hoagland,the Big mack Daddy of Martian crackpottery.The same SRI who also does contracts for DARPA...These individuals are intellectually confused but are geniuses at marketing dysfunctionality. Smells like psychological warfare.
4/14/2013 09:10:46 am
But didn't Sts. Wolter and Tsoukalos tell us that academics are in a conspiracy to suppress the truth? Yet somehow academics can propose ideas like this!
4/14/2013 05:19:27 pm
In a perfect world, academics & scientists should be immune from irrational thinking but in terms of brain development,we are only + 10,000 years from the Mesolithic mind frame. Still a long way to go.
4/14/2013 05:43:07 pm
PS. Jason.it would be interesting to know what is your take on the UFO phenomena
4/15/2013 08:00:58 am
I don't think there's much to say about my views. I think UFOs are a myth that have been created from a wide range of stimuli, including altered states of consciousness, deliberate hoaxing, and the fact that so many people no longer have a working knowledge of what the sky is supposed to look like or what's in it. The label "UFO" provides a probably spurious cover that makes many different events and phenomena seem related even though the only real relationship is in the human mind.
4/17/2013 05:59:29 am
the aliens are coming to kill you
4/14/2013 01:22:58 pm
Spooky is as spooky does. But does it have to be spooky?
4/8/2022 10:24:28 pm
Ah, you’re just a Christian propagandist. You people are tireless and...annoying.
4/14/2013 04:35:56 pm
Mizrach: "The one thing I am sure of, however, is that there is an intelligence behind the phenomenon, and that whatever we are dealing with cannot be visiting us on a regular basis from somewhere in our universe that is thousands of light years away"
4/15/2013 05:35:36 am
While I frequently have vivid, detailed dreams that I can remember after waking, I'm pretty sure that no matter how real those rat/human/alien hybrids out mowing their lawns and gardening in their yards while being supervised by the Rove/Rumsfeld/Cheney-looking scientists who made them that all it is is the benign antics of a dreaming brain and not a mental invasion from another dimension. Besides, I'm late for my dream bus because I got too distracted with the fleet of snail trailer homes slowly slugging down the street! There were windows in their iridescent shells and I could see there was something happening inside of them just slightly out of view.
4/15/2013 04:12:40 pm
The UFO people irk me because it seems likely that there's other life out there. I just don't think that life visits secretly, anal probes and suggests pyramids.
4/16/2013 01:42:30 pm
I should probably preface my comments with that I have little to no respect for "social scientists" other than the austrian school of economics (human action). My view is you can't apply the basic principle of science (a repeatable experiment to test your hypothsis) with humans. This is why the whole field of macro economics is such a failure-we belive we can mathmathically model the human being/actions and you can't. People's actions are not repeatable and for that matter you can never get enough information that is accurate fast enough to "guide" humans as some keysnians want to do with printing money, keeping interest rates artifically low and offering too much credit to the marketplace.
4/16/2013 01:46:20 pm
Opps..I meant to say "I'm not pushing that we were created by a higher order"...left out the word "not"..typing too fast..ha ha
4/17/2013 05:23:16 pm
Amazing what a difference one word can make!
4/16/2013 10:43:15 pm
If anyone bothers to find a copy and read 'UFOs and UFOLOGY' (1997) by Peter Brookesmith and myself it will be seen that we thoroughly analysed the 'abduction' phenomenon, and much of the alien contactee reports in terms of altered states of consciousness, and went into the nature of those states in some depth. And we also took apart much of the claimed "government conspiracy" beliefs. The book was more or less ignored in America, not being part of the then ufological fashion. This present spasm evinced by Mizrach seems to be following on the coat tails of Graham Hancock's approach, which will doubtless swamp popular debate in this field (linking extra/ultra-terrestrials with ASCs). A parallel effect occurred in 'alternative archaeology', largely drowning out other, authentic research.
4/17/2013 06:04:03 am
if you find an alien corps hide it in a burger king dumpster so the feds dont kill you
4/17/2013 06:07:26 am
sorry i had a lot of purple kush today
Fair point, Jason, on the Condon Report. I agree it does leave some openings for studies in areas other than astronomy or biology. However, saying I think "monsters are invading peoples' brains" is about as unfair to what I was really arguing as that. I mostly argued that we might be dealing with something whose perceptions & descriptions shift with cultural morays. The only way that differs from the Folklore hypothesis is that it might be an objective cause to the varying subjective perceptions. (And I suppose that might be something other than the objective structural unity of human brains.)
4/22/2013 05:45:07 am
Thank you for writing, Steven. I appreciate your comments, and I do recognize that you threw this out there as a hypothesis, albeit one that you said you found to be the best available explanation.
5/5/2013 09:42:29 pm
not to mention, Condon wrote the summary which contradicts much of the data, so quotations from the same same source may differ in opinion completely.
5/5/2015 09:21:53 am
I am one of the extra dimensional aliens many people are concerned about. We are just like you. We eat, digest, and create.
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply.
I am an author and researcher focusing on pop culture, science, and history. Bylines: New Republic, Esquire, Slate, etc. There's more about me in the About Jason tab.
Enter your email below to subscribe to my newsletter for updates on my latest projects, blog posts, and activities, and subscribe to Culture & Curiosities, my Substack newsletter.
Terms & Conditions
Please read all applicable terms and conditions before posting a comment on this blog. Posting a comment constitutes your agreement to abide by the terms and conditions linked herein.