Evidence of Deep and Pervasive Concealment in Nonhuman Encounters

A Catalogue of Coordinated Methods Preventing our Understanding of Alien Encounters

Concealed Nonhuman UFO hypnosis eye being

The following is a brief but detailed catalogue of coordinated methods, apparently not of human intention, preventing our logical understanding of alien encounters.

In the dim corridors of media coverage as well as international intelligence, tales persist – from seasoned pilots navigating the vast skies to ordinary souls grounded in their everyday lives. Stories of unidentified craft and unfamiliar beings, some etched in the grain of camera film, others whispered hurriedly to eager writers and investigators. What, one wonders, ties these narratives together? Response to these reports has often centered on the “credibility” of the witness of potential errors in the recording equipment itself. The question that skeptics rightfully ask is always the same: why don’t we have better quality images and reports? Why is every image far away and blurry? Why is every eyewitness account so devoid of details, and why are so many elements of these reports non-sensical instead of rational?

All of these elements point to the reporting sources themselves: the equipment or the witnesses. What they rarely explore is the question of why what is observed so elusive? If we take one or two reports, whether narrative-based or presented as photographic evidence, we might dismiss their shortcomings. But if we compiled a list of several hundred photographs and reports, we would find but one factor common to all of them: the elusive nature of what is being reported or captured. From this common attribute, the only thing that is not in dispute is that, whatever is being seen doesn’t want to be seen; certainly not to degree sufficient for human understanding or theorization.

But since this is the only common element to all evidence and stories, then we can either (a) dismiss everything as false or (b) accept everything as true, on the basis of whether this clandestine quality is intentional on the part of the observed phenomena or not. If the concealment quality weren’t present in so many cases, we could accept some and reject others. But as concealment (or if you like similar words, consider elusiveness, invisibility, shiftiness, ephemerality, and deceptiveness) is the archetypal quality common to all sightings and reports, then if we work from this sole shared quality, then we must accept or reject the lot on this universally present criterion alone.

Since we reduce the problem to a single duality (concealment as intentional and central to the working of the phenomena versus concealment as a non-intentional by-product of observations), then let us shift the fulcrum of our speculation by choosing one of these two possibilities.

Let us then assume (only assume) that the phenomena are intentionally hiding from us, and the sheer number of sightings and reports outnumbers the possibility of an urban myth, some government-directed fabrication, or a long-running multi-user shared hallucination. So if we accept the side of the duality, and accept that the phenomena are implementing forms of intentional concealment, then we can group the phenomena together as sentient entities, and organized under certain conditions and principles. It tells us that there is a coordinated effort, but not what the aim of that effort is. But that is enough for now, because that effort is precisely what we could investigate hypotehtically if we turn the tables on the entities carrying out these operations and observations. How do we manage this inversion of perspective, and become them?

Assume that you are a member of an interplanetary “traveler race” moving from solar system to solar system, and that you have arrived at a new planet which contains all of the environmental resources that could sustain your race. This planet, which we will call planet T, already has living animals and plants that have evolved on it, as well as a humanoid race that is somewhat technologically advanced but is highly stratified, with power and resources being held at the top social and political teachers, and economic, educational, and other forms of development being gradually denied to social classes lower and lower on the different socioeconomic strata, as well as along lines dividing the race according to geographical and racial and ethnic differences. The residents of this planet are subject to control by deception on the part of the controlling strata or classes of the planet. There are separate groups and nations which have economic relationships with each other, but there is lateral secrecy between them as well as secrecy between the government and its residents. Owing to greed and selfishness, war is a common activity and different geographical areas a different times throughout the planet.

The aim of our speculation, then, is to imagine why, as an advance visitor race, we (humans) would choose not to interact with the inhabitants of such a planet, even as we may be entering the atmosphere for a host of reasons,. What are our reasons for avoiding being seen?

As a truly advanced interplanetary traveler race, let us recognize that our objectives in exploring new solar systems and planets are rooted in principles of mutual respect, ethical interaction, and the pursuit of knowledge. If we were to discover planet T, there are several reasons why we might choose not to engage with its inhabitants, especially given the sociopolitical conditions described:

  1. Misunderstanding/Concealment: The deep-seated socio-economic stratifications, along with deception at various levels, would mean any interaction with one group might not represent the interest or beliefs of another group. We could inadvertently become embroiled in their internal conflicts. It’s not a question of neutrality, but rather loss of focus in terms of whatever our main mission is (again, I mentioned that we will not speculate as to that mission or intention in this article).
  1. Misrepresentation: Given the deceptive practices and secrecy prevalent across the planet, our presence and intentions could easily be misconstrued, leading to potential misrepresentations of our objectives. This could instill unnecessary fear among the inhabitants AND be used by the ruling strata to further consolidate power. In other words, our visibility would deepen the divisive nature of that world – the powerless would become more helpless and fearful, while those in power would become more powerful by presenting themselves to their citizens as allies, associated, and friends with our race.
  1. Unethicalness: Because of such misrepresentation, we might see how our presence is legitimizing or reinforcing the power structures that maintain inequality on planet T. Even neutral interactions could be exploited by powerful factions to further their own interests at the expense of others. This, in other words, could elevate the risk of war among nations.
  1. Safety: The prevalent wars and conflicts indicate a risk to our own safety. With deception being a commonly used tactic, we would be falsely blamed or targeted in these disputes and unite the planet in false unification against us.
  1. Contamination: As was mentioned in the TV series, Star Trek, violating the “Prime Directive” means that our advanced knowledge and technology could dramatically alter the trajectory of the planet’s civilizations. If not handled carefully, this could lead to negative consequences, such as dependence on our technology or further imbalances in power.
  1. Resource Secrecy: If we were entering the atmosphere for resources, we would ensure that our extraction methods are discreet and sustainable, causing minimal disturbance. We would prioritize uninhabited regions or areas less prone to interference, both to maintain our own safety and to minimize potential impact on the planet’s ecosystem.

If indeed our interest as an advanced visitor race were to promote positive interactions, exchange of knowledge, and mutual growth, then, given the existing conditions on planet T, direct interaction could jeopardize these goals. Instead, we would need to adopt a more cautious approach, prioritizing observation, understanding, and minimal interference until conditions were deemed more conducive for meaningful interaction.


As it happens, given the numerous books that have been written concerning UFO or alien visitation, there are many in which some of aforementioned reasons for intentional concealment of a visitor race have been cited centrally. In the interest of length, I will cover only the first of the above themes through texts addressing aliens’ possible intention of reducing misunderstanding either among the planetary races or of misinterpreting the intentions of us as a visitor race. Subsequent articles may explore future reasons listed above.


Texts Addressing Possible Alien Reduction of Misunderstanding

Several popular books provide in-depth explorations of reason 1 (misunderstanding reduction) listed above. The short selection below will reveal a veritable catalogue of details that we should consider as relevant to the theme of concealment.


One of these is the classic “Communion” by Whitley Strieber. This autobiographical account details Strieber’s purported encounters with non-human entities. The complexity of interactions and potential misunderstandings is a recurrent theme. I often quote the segment where he recalls an incident involving a creature he likened to a “giant rabbit.” This recollection is, of course, part of the broader narrative in which Strieber recounts his experiences of what he believes to be alien abduction and contact. But the “giant rabbit” figure is interesting as it exemplifies the dreamlike, surreal quality of some of his encounters. Such moments in the narrative are often interpreted in various ways: as potential screen memories (where a traumatic memory is masked by a more benign or nonsensical one), as symbolic representations of something else, or as literal events in their own right. Moreover, the figure of a rabbit or hare in folklore and psychology is often tied to themes of transformation, liminality, and the unknown. Whether Strieber’s recollection is of an actual encounter, a symbolic event, or a mixture of the two is open to interpretation, but intention, concealment, and misunderstanding are descriptive lines running through the entire text.


Similarly, John E. Mack’s book “Passport to the Cosmos” (which is a continuation of his exploration into the alien abduction phenomenon, which he began in his earlier book, “Abduction”) is one of my own foundational books on the theme of misunderstanding in the sense I outlined earlier. Mack, a Harvard psychiatrist, approached the subject with a mix of clinical inquiry and open-mindedness while studying individuals who claim to have had encounters with extraterrestrial entities. The motif of misunderstanding-avoidance by some race and the complex dynamics of human-alien interactions that seem to be structured around this motif are key to Mack’s reports. In “Passport to the Cosmos,” Mack delves deeper into the personal and spiritual implications of alien encounters, as reported by the experiencers (people who claim to have been abducted or had encounters with extraterrestrial beings). What emerges consistently from Mack’s reporting is a set of subtexts that suggest that the abducting aliens are trying to avoid visible, open interactions with humans, the principal ones being: the secrecy of abductions, the suppression of memory, the screening of memories with other “cover” memories, the absence of mass witness eventsambiguous physical evidence, and a sense of spiritual and personal transformation. I call them “subtexts” because we don’t know what the true “text” or intention of the alien experiences are.

Supporting the first of these subtexts (secrecy of abductions), it is uncanny to read how many of the abductions described to Mack by witnesses occur at night or in isolated areas. Additionally, the experiences often have a dreamlike or out-of-time quality, making it difficult for abductees to discern the events’ reality or dream status. Further, the subtext of memory suppression is evident when we read that many (most?) abductees do not immediately recall their experiences; they might have fragmented memories or only recover the details under hypnosis, but full recall is practically nonexistent in Mack’s reports. This could imply that the aliens are intentionally suppressing or clouding these memories to keep their interactions hidden. Also, screen memories become a prevalent pattern when we see how many abductees recall seeing animals like owls, deer, or other creatures before or during their abduction experience. These “screen memories” could be interpreted as a way for aliens to mask their presence or make their interactions less overtly traumatic. To all of this, the larger context being one of absence, which I term absence of mass witness events, is also troubling: while many individuals claim to have abduction experiences, there are very few reported cases of mass abductions or events where large groups of unrelated people witness the same detailed encounter. This speaks to a lack of physical evidence in general, which supports the concealment thesis, and where there is some actual evidence from encounters, such as scars or implants, is often ambiguous; the traces left behind are not overtly beyond human technology or understanding, which might suggest a deliberate attempt to maintain ambiguity. Lastly, there is widespread perception or feeling of some spiritual and personal transformations. Following these, Mack notes that many abductees undergo profound personal and spiritual changes following their encounters, and these transformative experiences often emphasize interconnection, environmental awareness, and a broader cosmic perspective. This might suggest that the aliens’ primary interest is not in overt interaction but in influencing human consciousness or evolution on a more subtle level while remaining concealed in controlling these changes.


Equal in importance with the first two books is “The Interrupted Journey” by John G. Fuller, a detailed account of the alleged alien abduction of Betty and Barney Hill in 1961. This incident is one of the most famous and earliest well-documented cases of alien abduction, and through the narrative of the Hills’ experiences, there are several elements that suggest the abducting aliens tried to avoid visible, open interactions with humans. There are several “observables” (to use the phrase from the Pentagon UAP program) that define this encounter and bring it directly in line with our belief that all observed UAP and alien encounters fall under a similar behavior profile of intentional concealment. Some of these will seem familiar:

Nighttime Abduction: The incident took place late at night while the Hills were driving through a rural area. The choice of time and location could suggest an attempt to interact without being seen by a broader audience.

Isolation of Victims: The Hills were alone on a desolate stretch of the road when they noticed the UFO. This isolation meant there were no other witnesses to the event, allowing the aliens to operate without broader human awareness.

Memory Suppression: Initially, neither Betty nor Barney could recall the specifics of their abduction. Their memories of the event were fragmented, and they experienced amnesia for a portion of their journey. This amnesia suggests a possible intentional effort on the aliens’ part to suppress or cloud the memories of their abductees. The detailed account of the abduction only came forth when the Hills underwent hypnotic regression sessions with Dr. Benjamin Simon. If the aliens intended for their interactions to be overt and open, it’s curious that the memories had to be unlocked through hypnosis.

Physical Evidence: While Betty’s dress was reportedly stained with an unidentifiable pink substance and both had inexplicable scuffs and tears on their shoes, the physical evidence of the encounter was subtle. There were no overt signs or clear, undeniable evidence of an alien interaction left behind.

The UFO’s Evasive Maneuvers: During their initial sighting of the UFO, Barney Hill observed it through binoculars and saw figures inside. When he felt that they were looking back at him, the object began to descend rapidly toward him, prompting Barney to flee back to the car in panic. This could suggest the aliens were monitoring their observation and took action when they felt directly observed.

Communication Methods: The aliens reportedly communicated with the Hills through telepathy, which is a discreet form of interaction. There wasn’t an attempt to openly communicate in a more conventional manner.

Betty’s “Star Map”: During one of her regression sessions, Betty recalled being shown a star map by the aliens. This map was later interpreted by some as showing the stars of Zeta Reticuli (which currently is not known to have any exoplanets, so this diagram might have been another intentional deception communicated to Betty). While this might be viewed as a form of open communication, the fact that it was presented in a vague manner and required interpretation indicates a level of discretion.

These books are careful reports on the theme of Misunderstanding/Concealment that we mentioned earlier. The book list is not intended to be comprehensive; it is merely meant as reference for the details supporting this pattern of coordinated concealment and details that support it. In subsequent articles, I should bring to our attention other carefully written books whose investigations support the other reasons in our first list above why we (or any intelligent race) might choose not to engage with its inhabitants, regardless what its primary planetary intentions may be.


We now may need to accept this: facing the widespread evidence of so many forms of coordinated concealment, we should not dismiss any report of potentially alien encounters merely because the witness testimony or the physical or photographic evidence appears to be insufficiently informative – this insufficiency of evidence is not due to weakness in the capture or the memory of the witness; it is a central part of the intention by a nonhuman intervention in our midst to conceal all knowledge, perception, and memory of its actions. The poorness of the reports, and the difficulty we have in believing them is helping their aim of concealment, and so, without knowingly doing so, the biggest skeptics among us turn out to bre the strongest supporters of their work.

The mental exercise I posed for you at the outset is now over; let us return to our helpless, ignorant state as humans experiencing all of this hidden manipulation. Here, among our warlike and primitive people, we can only hope that this secretive interplanetary “traveler race” has come here for some noble reason. What they are doing, we may never fully know, but, regrettably, they are better at hiding their methods than we are at uncovering their motives, especially when we choose not to believe whatever evidence we can scratch together.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *