Author: Michael Salla

Michael E. Salla, Ph.D.

Extraterrestrial contact where humanity is almost destroyed to protect the ecosystem

There has been a flurry of recent stories by The Guardian and other major world media about the possible benefits or harm that may occur after contact with advanced extraterrestrial civilizations. The stories were sparked by a scientific study published in the June/July edition of Acta Astronautica. Titled, “Would Contact with Extraterrestrials Benefit or Harm Humanity? A Scenario Analysis” the study examines a number of scenarios concerning extraterrestrial contact. It adopts the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) paradigm that intelligent extraterrestrial life has not yet been discovered, and that scientific modalities such as radio signals are among the most feasible ways of establishing communications. The study examines the FERMI paradox, first established by Enrico Fermi, that alien life should be abundant in our galaxy, but he asked “where are they?”

Responses to the Fermi Paradox by the authors leads to three possible scenarios. The last scenario examined is the Zoo hypothesis that Aliens may be studying us remotely or invisibly, reminiscent of the non-interference principle popularized by the Star Trek series as the Prime Directive. They explain: “ETI are treating Earth like a wildlife preserve to be observed but not fully incorporated into the Galactic Club.”

The main purpose of the study (which I’ll abbreviate as “A Scenario Analysis” – full paper is here) is to answer the question: “If contact between humans and ETI is possible, then it is important to consider the capability of ETI to cause us benefit or harm” (p.6) In stressing the importance of the question, they go on to point out: “we do have a compelling reason to believe that ETI would be significantly stronger than us and therefore highly capable of causing our total destruction.”

The authors go on to consider extraterrestrial ethics. They write:

If ETI are significantly more advanced than humanity, then the outcome of contact may depend primarily on ETI desires. However, this leaves open speculation as to the specific desires of ETI and raises the question of what ethical framework they follow. Much can be said about ETI ethics. Here we focus on one key aspect: selfishness vs. universalism (p. 7).

In response, the authors examine three broad motivations or ethics of extraterrestrials. Basically, extraterrestrials would fall into categories of the good, the bad, or the indifferent leading to three broad scenarios. Considerable discussion is given to each scenario, and the benefits or harm to humanity. Of special interest is the possibility that “good extraterrestrials”, may decide to wipe out humanity for a higher good such as preserving the eco-system. This frightening scenario was vividly demonstrated in the 2008 remake of the Sci-Fi Classic, The Day the Earth Stood Still.

“Would Contact with Extraterrestrials Benefit or Harm Humanity? A Scenario Analysis” is a very useful summary of a priori speculations about extraterrestrial life. It is the latest in a series of scientific speculations about contact with extraterrestrial life. Recent scientific discoveries such as exoplanets in habitable regions of solar systems, abundance of water found in our solar system, and the ability of life to flourish in extreme biological conditions has stimulated scientific curiosity about the possibility of extraterrestrial life. This inevitably leads to questions about the motivations of advanced extraterrestrial life after contact with them is made by SETI or other means.

What “A Scenario Analysis” fails to do is to actively engage with the more than abundant evidence that humanity is currently being visited by extraterrestrial life. In the abstract, the authors categorically state: “humanity has not yet observed any extraterrestrial intelligence.” Yet there is an incredible amount of physical evidence concerning sightings of UFOs under intelligent control displaying flight characteristics far above what is known to be possible in conventional or even classified aerospace research. In addition, there are also numerous whistleblower reports concerning crashes of UFOs, and retrievals of extraterrestrial biological entities. Finally, there are also first hand witness reports of contacts, both voluntary and involuntary, with extraterrestrial entities. Rather than acknowledge the existence of such evidence, the scientific study chooses to dismiss it all together adopting the well known SETI perspective that no extraterrestrial contact has yet been made.

In failing to even acknowledge the extensive literature that contact has already been made, and that a successful cover-up has occurred by select government, military, corporate actors, “A Scenario Analysis”is taking an unrealistic stance. Basically, it is ignoring the possibility that UFOlogy and exopolitical literature may contribute substantially to answering the main goal of the authors in answering whether extraterrestrial contact would be more harmful or beneficial to humanity.

For example, an innovative course in the new field of exopolitics titled “The “Science, Spirituality and Politics of Extraterrestrial Civilizations” offers a different conceptual framework for examining how extraterrestrials may benefit or harm humanity during contact. The course, taught in the Exopolitics Institute a examines how a typology of extraterrestrial civilizations based on energy consumption might help us understand how different alien societies behave, and how the available literature helps illustrate this. Another exopolitics course, both of which begin in mid-September, “The Role of Hollywood and the Media in the Disclosure Process,” examines how Hollywood is helping prepare humanity for both the beneficial and harmful aspects of various contact scenarios.

It is encouraging to see an increasing number of scientists openly engage with scientific, social, political and even economic consequences of the discovery of extraterrestrial life. Ongoing scientific discoveries make it clear that the conditions for the life flourish throughout the galaxy. This makes scientific curiosity over the motivations of intelligent extraterrestrial life inevitable. Encouraging scientific speculation on the basis of what can be deduced from NASA and other Space Agency press releases or peer reviewed scientific journals should not require an outright dismissal of the abundant literature from the fields of UFOlogy and exopolitics that extraterrestrial contact has already occurred. It would be basically advocating the very unscientific approach that a priori reasoning on the benefits and harm of extraterrestrial contact should be encouraged, while simultaneously dismissing all a posteriori evidence and arguments concerning the benefits and harm of such contact. If the Zoo Hypothesis is the more accurate answer to the Fermi Paradox, the authors of “A Scenario Analysis” might have to acknowledge that they might be among the majority of Zoo dwellers that have been kept in the dark by their Zoo keepers about who might be watching them

© Copyright 2011. Michael E. Salla. Exopolitics.org

Permission is granted to include extracts of this article on websites and email lists with a link to the original. This article is copyright © and should not be added in its entirety on other websites or email lists without author’s permission. For permission please contact: drsalla@exopolitics.org

First Contact meeting with Italian ETs
Graphic of First Contact: first Friendship case meeting between 8 & 3 foot tall extraterrestrials with thee Italian witnesses.

Ask any UFOlogist about the reality of extraterrestrial life, and you’ll most likely get one of three versions of what is happening. The first is that we have been witnessing UFOs since the mid-1940s that offer abundant physical evidence of other worldly technologies sighted in our skies. This leads to the conclusion that someUFOs are extraterrestrial space vehicles observing our world, especially locations where nuclear weapons were being developed or stored. The second most popular version is that since the early 1960s, short “gray aliens” have been abducting people for genetic experimentation. The thirdis that some UFOs have crashed, and that strange looking “gray aliens” have been recovered along with advanced technologies for study in classified reverse engineering programs.Ufology’s three main versions of what is happening with extraterrestrial life is grounded in abundant empirical data. There are tens of thousands of cases from around the world involving physical sightings, radar trackings, photographs, film and testimony of UFO sightings. Similarly, there are thousands of first hand testimonies revealing the existence of alien abductions, and a genetic program conducted by strange looking extraterrestrials with human subjects. Finally, many hundreds of witnesses have come forward to confirm that some UFOs have crashed, and that the technology and occupants have been removed for highly classified study.

All three versions make up what is today known as scientific UFOlogy, and claims that this is as close as one gets to real science when it comes to the question of extraterrestrial visitation. The problem with all three versions of scientific UFOlogy is that they mask something that has long been officially kept hidden from the public. A secret that many leading UFOlogists have actively conspired to keep, along with government agencies encouraging such a process. Human looking extraterrestrials have been visiting our world and making contact with the general public since the beginning of the modern UFO era.

Stories of human looking extraterrestrials making contact with members of the general public first became known in the early 1950s. Famed contactees such as George Adamski, Howard Menger, Daniel Fry, George Van Tassel, Orfeo Angelucci, and many other “contactees” from around the world thrilled the public with their accounts of meetings with extraterrestrial humans that in some cases where stunningly attractive. In many cases, the early contactees backed up their stories with supporting witness testimonies, photographs, film and other forms of physical evidence. The response from the world’s leading UFOlogists, let alone government authorities, was ridicule, derision, and outright dismissal.

Basically, the world’s leading UFOlogists – concluding that extraterrestrial life was visiting the earth and that select government/military agencies were keeping this secret from the public – were not interested in stories that extraterrestrials had made physical contact. Logically, one would assume that if extraterrestrials made the long journey to Earth from wherever they came from in the galaxy, that they would make contact with members of the public, let alone government authorities – that’s another story. Genuine stories of physical contact would be logical to assume, but UFOlogists employed another form of logic to dismiss such accounts. Yes, extraterrestrials were visiting and there was great public interest, but this unfortunately would lead to many charlatans and frauds deceiving the public with contrived contact stories. UFOlogists had to be on constant guard to filter out the many bogus contact stories if there was any chance that the conventional scientific community would take UFOlogy seriously. UFOlogists used the possibility of fraud to justify an impractically high evidentiary barrier for any claiming to have had physical contact with the occupants of flying saucers.

Consequently, the leading UFOlogists of the 1950s, experts such as Major Donald Keyhoe were quick to dismiss and ridicule the contactee stories. When the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomenon (NICAP) was created in 1956, it quickly become the preeminent UFOlogy organization for almost two decades, its leading officers and investigators were in agreement. Not one of the many contactee stories deserved serious scientific interest. None met the arbitrarily high evidentiary barrier created by UFOlogists such as Keyhoe and NICAP. Unfortunately, whether out of bias, shortsightedness or active collusion with government/military authorities, NICAP and leading UFOlogists led the charge to dismiss from public debate claims that human looking extraterrestrials have made contact.

More importantly, any aspiring UFOlogist quickly learned that if s/he was to be taken seriously by their peers, they should not study contactee accounts, and needed to reaffirm the prevailing orthodoxy that contactee accounts were the realm of outright fraud and deception. Many of Keyhoe’s peers and successors, UFOlogists such as Stanton Friedman, Richard Hall, James McDonald, Jacques Vallee, and many others dismissed contactee accounts as fanciful fabrications. Even UFOlogists such as Budd Hopkins and Dr David Jacobs, sympathetic to accounts of abductions by grey aliens that first emerged in the 1960s, dismissed stories of contact with human looking extraterrestrials as outright hoaxes. Examination of Richard Dolan’s two volume UFOs and the National Security State – the preeminent history of modern day UFOlogy – reveals a similar shortsighted dismissal of contactee accounts with human looking extraterrestrials. Adamski gets barely a mention in his unofficial history of UFOlogy, and other contactee testimonies are ignored altogether. Dolan’s book, aspiring to set the record straight about how the U.S. National Security System has historically dealt with the UFO phenomenon, fails dismally when it comes to examining claims of contact with human looking extraterrestrials and their significance.

Dismissal by the world’s leading UFOlogists of the many contactee accounts with human looking extraterrestrials has not been universal. British researchers such as Timothy Good (author of Alien Base) and the recently deceased Wendelle Stevens did investigate contactee stories and concluded that some, if not many, of the claims were accurate descriptions of real events. More recently, testimony has emerged from Italy concerning a case of contact with human looking extraterrestrials from the 1950s to 1970s that involved hundreds of witnesses, photographs and film. Apparently, a large base of human looking extraterrestrials existed for a twenty two year period from 1956 around the north-eastern coast of Italy, and the aliens worked with humans to supply their base with food and other physical materials. Meanwhile the Italian military, along with other European military authorities and NATO, closely monitored the aliens but did little to interfere with their operations. A book, Mass Contact, was written about the Friendship case by a retired Professor in civil engineering, Stefano Breccia, and published in English in 2009. A documentary featuring Breccia and other witnesses was made about the case and is now available on Youtube.

Anyone drawn to the modern UFO phenomenon will find an abundance of experts and authorities claiming that serious UFOlogy is focused either on sightings of unusual aerial phenomena (UFOs); human abductions by strange grey looking aliens; or secret UFO crash retrieval operations. To this day, many UFOlogists will act as “gate-keepers” dismissing, if not vigorously attacking, any claims of physical contact with human looking extraterrestrials – regardless of any supporting evidence. In this regard, UFOlogy and its leading proponents are perpetrating a grand deception orchestrated, to some degree, by the same military-intelligence-corporate authorities that are keeping the truth about extraterrestrial life from the public. The truth about human looking extraterrestrials directly contacting private individuals, and government/military authorities for that matter, has been UFOlogy’s best kept secret. Thanks to cases like Friendship now emerging that secret is slowly unraveling, and a more comprehensive exopolitical understanding of extraterrestrial life and its real impact on Earth will be reached.

© Copyright 2011. Michael E. Salla. Exopolitics.org

Permission is granted to include extracts of this article on websites and email lists with a link to the original. This article is copyright © and should not be added in its entirety on other websites or email lists without author’s permission. For permission please contact: drsalla@exopolitics.org

Michael E. Salla, Ph.D.

Comet Elenin is an incoming spacecraft or intelligently controlled object according to a number of presenters at a recently completed conference hosted online by the popular whistleblower website – Project Camelot. Several presenters agreed that Elenin will approach its closest points near the Sun and Earth at a time of extraordinary planetary and societal changes coinciding with the end of the Mayan Calendar. A number of anonymous whistleblowers were cited in support of the view that Elenin was an artificially controlled object responsible for widespread planetary changes in the solar system. The conference broke important ground in uncovering some of the mystery surrounding Comet Elenin, and revealing expert opinions and whistleblower testimonies describing its artificial design and the significance of its orbit. In a surprising omission, the conference organizers did not feature ground breaking scientific literature detailing the seismic impact of Elenin on Earth. Combining insights from the overlooked scientific data and the conference proceedings points to an extraordinary conclusion – Comet Elenin is generating powerful gravity disruption technologies indicative of one or more interstellar spacecraft travelling towards Earth.

The Conference: Elenin was hosted by Kerry Cassidy and featured five presenters who discussed their research data and insights on Comet Elenin. Richard Hoagland, Dr Joseph Farrell, Keith Hunter, Dr Carl Johan Calleman, and Andy Lloyd. Hoagland began the conference with a succinct presentation on the significance of Elenin’s orbit, and why this pointed to it being either an artificial object under intelligent control (an ancient spacecraft) or a natural body (a comet) that has been deliberately launched on an artificial orbit. He placed special emphasis on Elenin’s perihelion (closest point to the sun) on September 11, 2011 as evidence that this was a result of artificial design to draw attention to the profound geopolitical events that occurred ten years earlier. Hoagland also pointed out that around the time Elenin would be passing by the Earth’s orbit on its outbound leg, that another celestial object Asteroid 2005YU55 would pass only 200,000 miles from the Earth on November 8. This was ‘coincidentally’ one day before FEMA was scheduling a FEMA Homeland Security Test where many television and radio networks would relinquish air time for some security drill – coincidence or did national security leaders know something of major significance was about to happen?

The next presenter was Keith Hunter who claimed that planets radiate harmonic signatures that influence orbits and seismic activity. Hunter clamed that Elenin is a small mass that could do something unusual if caught up in powerful harmonic configurations. Hunter’s most important contribution was to point out the relationship between seismic activity and planetary configurations. Sadly, he was not aware of the work conducted by Dr Mensur Omerbashich who had put together an exhaustive study of Elenin’s alignments with a number of planetary bodies during powerful seismic events on Earth. Dr Omerbashich claims that since 2006, comet Elenin has had a measurable impact on the Earth’s seismic activity. Dr Omerbashich’s paper was released on April 11, 2011 and is titled “Astronomical Alignments as the cause of ~M6 + seismicity.”His basic idea is that as planetary bodies align with the Earth, seismic activity increases. He provides historic data on large earthquakes, greater than magnitude 6, and how these have occurred during planetary alignments.

The Mayan Calendar according to the next conference presenter, Dr Carl Calleman, operates in 9 distinct levels or waves. The ninth wave, coinciding with the End of the Mayan Calendar, occurs on October 28, 2011. Calleman believes that the world will enter a New Age based on an expanding “unity consciousness.” While the precise ending of the Mayan Calendar is disputed by others advocating a December 21, 2012 end date, Calleman has produced cogent arguments for the October 2011 end date. He noted that the date coincides with Elenin’s crossing of Earth’s orbit suggesting it may have far more significance than generally attributed to it.

The main conference organizer, Kerry Cassidy, revealed that a number of anonymous whistleblowers had revealed that Elenin is a piloted spacecraft, and in fact was being trailed by a fleet of spacecraft. Hoagland claims that he has been confidentially told similarly by other whistleblowers of the artificial nature of Elenin. Dr Joseph Farrell agreed and claimed that Elenin was either an artificial object (controlled spacecraft) or a natural object placed in an artificial orbit. In probably the most significant observation of the conference, Hoagland claimed that Elenin was likely an “active torsion field generator.”

A torsion field describes the influence a spinning object exerts on its environment. In the case of a slowly spinning stationary gyroscope, for example, the torsion field has been observed to be almost zero. However, for moving gyroscopes rotating at velocities above 20,000 RPM, the torsion field has been observed to have a number of interesting properties. Russian scientists have been the leaders in the study of torsion fields. The most revolutionary results so far reveal that torsion fields impact on gravity and travel faster than electromagnetic radiation or radio signals. Professor Nikolai Kozyrev, a Russian pioneer in the study of torsion fields, experimentally confirmed that torsion fields travel at least 109 times the speed of light.

Kozyrev’s observations were experimentally confirmed by numerous other Russian scientists together with a few western colleagues. The work of Kozyrev and other scientists points to torsion fields as a possible means for extraterrestrial civilizations to travel large interstellar and even intergalactic distances. Significantly, the whistleblower, Bob Lazar revealed that extraterrestrial spacecraft used gravity waves for both navigation and propulsion purposes. Torsion field generators could be used to create the necessary gravity waves for spacecraft traveling long distances.

All presenters agreed that Elenin was not a super-large planetary body such as a red dwarf star mentioned by some researchers that was generating some alarm in the general public. As observed in an earlier article by this writer, Elenin’s orbit indicates that it is not a red dwarf star or large planetary body. In short, Elenin has a small mass as most astronomers contend, and indeed emphasized by Andy Lloyd and others in the Elenin conference. Yet, the pronounced seismic influence when it aligned with the Earth and the sun or other planetary body, as observed by Dr Omerbashich, indicated that Elenin was somehow exerting a powerful gravitational influence. If not a large planetary body, then Elenin’s seismic influence could be explained by it generating powerful gravity waves over long distances. Elenin was generating a powerful torsion field effect – something one or more spacecraft could be doing if traveling along Elenin’s orbital path to the inner solar system.

In conclusion, the Project Camelot: Elenin conference provided a number of important insights into Comet Elenin – the most important being its artificiality, the torsion field effects it was exerting, and the possibility that it is some kind of spacecraft. Unfortunately, the omission of Dr Omerbashich’s work in the discussion meant that seismic impact of Elenin through planetary alignments was not adequately covered. If Elenin is generating powerful torsion field effects and seismicity, these can be expected to magnify as it gets closer. This is especially so when Elenin aligns with the Earth and the sun on September 26, 2011. If Elenin, however, is one or more intelligently guided spacecraft, then the torsion fields it is generating may vary as it approaches and passes by the Earth.

It’s now less than four months before Elenin passes by the Earth’s orbit, around October 28, 2011, and its eventual influence is unknown and arousing considerable speculation. The timing of passing by the Earth, the end of the Mayan Calendar according to Dr Calleman, does offer the tantalizing possibility of Elenin being a harbinger of a New Age. Alternatively, Elenin may be a small comet that will have little to no impact as it passes near the Earth as NASA and many astronomers contend. Fortunately, we do not have long to find out what precisely Elenin’s influence will be.

[Correction – 7/8/11] Dr Omerbashich’s name and paper was briefly mentioned at the three hour mark of the video conference by Andy Lloyd. To his credit Lloyd pointed out that Omerbashich’s planetary alignment theory suggested that November 22, 2011 would be a key date to watch which is when Elenin aligns with the Earth and the sun. Hunter also mentioned the November 22 date as important alignment date, without mentioning Omerbashich’s work. Unfortunately, Lloyd’s brief reference to Dr Omerbashich mistakenly refered to November 22 as the “second opposition” where the Sun and Elenin were aligned with the Earth. He referred to the March 2011 Japan EQ as the “first opposition”. This is an incorrect intepretation of Dr Omerbashic’s work which discusses multiple instances where Elenin and the Earth were in alignment and major seismic activity occurred.

Further Reading:

© Copyright 2011. Michael E. Salla. Exopolitics.org

Permission is granted to include extracts of this article on websites and email lists with a link to the original. This article is copyright © and should not be added in its entirety on other websites or email lists without author’s permission. For permission please contact: drsalla@exopolitics.org

Copyright © 2018 Exopolitics Institute News Service. All Rights Reserved.