Diana Pasulka is consistently infuriating. The American Cosmic author is persistently half-right in her analysis of UFOs as a quasi-religious movement, correctly understanding how UFO belief systems parallel those of decentralized religious traditions but faltering time and again in showing too much faith in the truth claims this New Age religion passes off as science. A case in point is this week’s essay in Religion Dispatches in which Pasulka alleges that the recent government UFO report has transformed UFO belief through the validating holy baptism of government approval.
The first major problem with Pasulka’s analysis is her facile equation of military pilot “testimony” with the kind of religious testifying you’d see at a tent revival or from the Apostles preaching that they had witnessed the risen Christ. Pasulka goes too far in suggesting that a pilot claiming to see something he or she could not explain is proof of alien life. It is not clear whether she is speaking for herself or for UFO believers when alleging that accounts from pilots function as proof, but either way, they don’t.
Here, though, is Pasulka describing how pilot witnesses become secret windows into the parts of the UFO report that are unavailable to the public, since the public report is silent on aliens:
The unclassified public report is completely neutral on this point, but the public testimonies are not. What remains concealed within classified documents then, is revealed through witness testimonies. The testimonies are unequivocal: we are not alone in the universe.
They are very equivocal. No military testimony demonstrates the existence of aliens or claims to have seen aliens. There is no special holiness attached to military observers that would elevate “I don’t know” into “Aliens are among us.”
Pasulka falsely alleges that there is a “sudden” change in military UFO reports and that government policy has, since 1953, been to “debunk” witness testimony. That isn’t true. While it is true that Air Force tried to discredit alien narratives for a variety of reasons, they did not try to show that witnesses were wrong in describing what they saw. Instead, they tried to show that witnesses were wrong in how they interpreted what they saw. This is not the same thing. (Of course, the Air Force sometimes falsified their analysis to hide things like secret military testing.)
Pasulka’s conspiratorial, credulous UFO beliefs are manifest throughout her piece. She treats as serious and credible Leslie Kean, a longtime UFO reporter with limited critical thinking skills and a belief in ghosts and the paranormal, and John Mack, an ethically dubious researcher who used hypnosis to convince believers that aliens had sexually abused them and believed aliens would ferry his soul to a heaven planet to rejoin his mother.
Further, she alleges a completely made-up conspiracy by Google to use an algorithm designed to warn search engine users when a source may not be credible (i.e. fake news, propaganda, etc.) to suppress non-military UFO “testimony” in order to keep control over UFO narratives ensconced in a limited framework—i.e., no alien anal probes:
This new algorithm will allow regulation of user generated witness testimonies. We’ve had witness testimonies for a long time. Is it really suddenly okay to talk about UAPs? Closer examination of this question reveals that it is only okay to talk about certain sightings—those ensconced within a military framework, and new algorithms will make it easier for internet search providers to vet civilian generated UAP reports.
Pasulka then hardens her speculation, restating “the use of internet algorithms to monitor non-military testimonies” as fact, as though there were any evidence supporting this. (She has previously expressed support for the Collins Elite conspiracy theory, which holds Evangelical Christians in the Pentagon are sabotaging UFO investigations for fear UFOs are operated by demons.) The conclusion she wants us to draw, in line with her close colleagues in the Bigelow circle of psychic/spiritual seekers—she idolizes Jacques Vallée for example—is that the military is trying to tamp down the spiritual side of UFO belief and suppress the religious revelations of the beneficent aliens. This is not a logical analysis of facts but is, as Pasulka might recognize were she to step back from her own fever-dream, a statement of belief.
Of course, Pasulka couches this under just enough academic cover to give herself plausible deniability—she is simply describing what people believe, she will say, not making a truth claim. But in this article, the line between description and belief has become thinner than the membrane separating our dimension from the one her colleagues like Jacques Vallée tell us divides our world from the dimension of the alien space poltergeists.
7/9/2021 01:43:48 pm
You say, "She has previously expressed support for the Collins Elite conspiracy theory, which holds Evangelical Christians in the Pentagon are sabotaging UFO investigations for fear UFOs are operated by demons.". Distinguishing for the sake of clarity between the specific claims regarding "the Collins Elite" and the more general claim that there exist "Evangelical Christians in the Pentagon ... sabotaging UFO investigations for fear UFOs are operated by demons", I am totally baffled by your casual dismissiveness towards the second claim. It does not require particularly deep research to discover:
7/10/2021 04:01:20 pm
"I am totally baffled by your casual dismissiveness towards the second claim."
7/11/2021 09:32:55 pm
Whether or nor there are demons is irrelevant to whether or not there are people who think there are demons and act in ways that are motivated by that belief.
An Over-Educated Grunt
7/14/2021 11:16:47 am
At that point, though, are you saying "there are a bunch of guys who meet for lunch because they have similar beliefs," or "there are a bunch of guys whose similar beliefs are dictating policy?" One of these is trivial, the other one is conspiracy. One of them is also much more likely than the other, despite what one of the onetime regulars here would tell you about Masons controlling the French government because of lunch meetings.
7/14/2021 01:14:56 pm
I'm mystified as to how you get "conspiracy" out of "there are a bunch of guys whose similar beliefs are dictating policy?" How is that different from "government"?
7/11/2021 04:15:44 pm
back in 1963 I was 17 and living in a small village on our coast. One Friday night I decided to go for a walk along two beaches in the early hours, I observed an odd light appearing to travel along coastal contrours, perhaps 500-1000ft up. I thought it interesting, and when some 25 years later I was taken by friends to a meeting of a New Zealand UFO organisation and asked to describe the event, I was assured I had seen a UFO. I snorted. I had seen an odd light, I said. There was nothing whatsoever to suggest it had been other than what UFO actually means, an unidentified flying object. There were energetic attempts to convince me I'd seen 'a flying saucer', I remained obstinate. I'd seen a light, that was it. But after that I could easily understand how a dispassionate observation could be changed to a partisan one. It's a combination of wanting to appear "in" on something strange/unusual, wanting to stand well with people, being easily talked into an adjustment of something seen, and wanting to feel important. But I'm obstinant. I saw a light that APPEARED to be following the coastal contours, and APPEARED to be about 500-1000 ft up. And that's it.
8/3/2021 08:01:07 pm
I had a similar experience - at least the first part. A buddy and I were on a double date and we were driving from a concert to a dance club. I believe we had a few drinks at that point.
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.