The CE4 Corner
The Cosmic Bridge, Close Encounters and Human Destiny
by Craig R. Lang, Certified Hypnotherapist
Hypnotic Growth, Exploration and Healing for Mind, Body, Spirit and Beyond
Brooklyn Center, MN 763-257-7334 e-mail: craig@craigrlang.com
May/June, 2005 - There may be more than you think
©2005 by Craig R. Lang MS, CHt
In my conversations with close encounter experiencers one of the most common complaints I hear is that experiencers feel as if they are alone. But a quick look at some numbers suggests that there are far more encounters, and many more experiencers, than one might think. While we may never know the exact numbers, we can make some order-of-magnitude estimates. The numbers we find are surprising.
The Roper Polls of Unexplained Experiences[i] have estimated that from one tenth of a percent to one percent of the population have had enough unexplained events in their life for person to be considered an experiencer[ii]. In a typical metropolitan area of roughly two million people, this suggests that from two thousand to twenty thousand people may have undergone one or more close encounters - a staggering number to think about. For the experiencer it means that you have a lot of company. For UFO hunters, it says that the skies over the metro area should be extremely busy.
The Air Traffic
Control Problem
Any model of the Visitors as a physical “nuts and bolts” presence must deal with this massive scale. This issue is what I call the “Air Traffic Control” problem. If abductions are all entirely physical events then we can see that the phenomenon must truly be massive in scale. Simply put, too many UFOs would be needed to sustain the large number of reported UFO sightings and alien abductions. Let’s examine the scope of this phenomenon and see just how vast it must be - and what some alternative scenarios might exist.
Several contemporary researchers suggest that UFO visitation is a purely “nuts and bolts” phenomenon - using technology which, although advanced, in principle is understandable. Many also suggest that this apparent “program” of UFO abduction has been steadily expanding throughout recorded history, especially in recent times[iii]. Indeed, many experiencers have suggested this to me during interviews and/or hypnotic regressions. So let’s assume for the moment that, for some reason, the Visitors are present, physical in nature, and expanding their operations. Using these assumptions, we can estimate just how huge the scope of this phenomenon must be.
Let’s temporarily accept the estimate that one percent of humanity may be abductees. One researcher claims that for each abductee there are at least 150 abductions in a lifetime. Let’s also assume a typical lifetime to be about 75 years. This results in an average rate of two experiences per year. From these figures alone we can estimate the scale of the phenomenon.
One percent of the population of the
Let's arbitrarily assume that one UFO flight is required to perform 10 abductions. This would reduce the number of UFO flights to 10 per night over a metro area, but still means that our urban skies should be teeming with UFOs. Let’s further assume that this rate of one abduction per 20,000 people per night applies worldwide. We know that there are about 6 billion people in the world, which results in about 300 thousand abductions per night. If we again assume about 10 abductions per UFO flight, we would need 30 thousand UFO flights per night, every night, to sustain such a global UFO abduction program.
What the Numbers Tell Us
The numbers described above, although approximate, clearly reveal what I call the “Air Traffic Control Problem”. They reveal a phenomenon which, if entirely physical in nature, must be truly massive in scale. There are simply too many UFOs and abductions for this to be a small scale nuts-and-bolts phenomenon. In order to coordinate such a massive abduction program - and even to simply prevent UFOs from running into each other – some sort of significant ET infrastructure, including a UFO air traffic control system, would be required. Unless this truly is as massive as we have estimated, something about our model of the UFO abduction as a purely physical event must be incorrect.
Based upon the above calculations, we can draw some further conclusions about such a nuts-and-bolts abduction paradigm. The first thing we note that there would have to be many thousands of UFOs in the air, on the ground, or in near-Earth space at any given time. To estimate just what kind of a support effort this would require, let’s make the (very human) assumption that these UFOs would also need a ground crew to perform maintenance. If we assume a support crew of one to ten ETs per UFO, we end up with tens to hundreds of thousands of ETs. This would require a huge base or mother ship, which would presumably be massive and difficult to conceal. The numbers imply that unless this vast ET infrastructure exists to support the rate of UFO abductions, one or more of the following must be true:
1) Each abductee has one to two orders of magnitude fewer experiences than the highest estimates claim. The number of abductions which occurs in the lifetime of an experiencer is arguable. A few rare abductees have indicated that they have had only one (!) encounter. Others have described a very large number (my estimate is over 100). Based upon what experiencers tell me, my guess is that the number is between 10 to 100 events during a lifetime
2) The number of abductees is far less than the suggested one percent. A conservative interpretation of the Roper poll results might suggest that perhaps the fraction of people who are abductees is only one-tenth of a percent. This implies that instead of twenty-thousand, there are only two-thousand abductees in the Twin Cities metro area. But this still implies that abductees have a lot of company.
3) UFOs are able to escape detection except on very rare occasions. This would imply that they had some visual and radar evasion technology - not an unreasonable speculation if we extrapolate our own stealth technology a century or two into the future.
4)
A
large fraction of abductions are nonphysical.
Thus they may not require a physical UFO visit. This would argue (at least in part) against a
physical nuts-and-bolts nature of UFO abduction, and would imply that it is in
some way less material.
It is not clear which of these possible resolutions to the air traffic control problem is the correct one. Perhaps all of them are to some degree valid. My own view is that an understanding of the resolution to the “Air Traffic Control” problem is one of the “master keys” to our understanding of the UFO/CE4 phenomenon.
In examining the issues of the scale, and thus the nature of the close encounter phenomenon, we begin to get a feel for the magnitude. We can no longer think of such encounters as rare, isolated events and must even begin to question whether we can understand them as physical visitations. Perhaps they are even stranger than we think. We likewise note how common they are within our society. To those who are not experiencers this may be startling. But for those who are and who feel isolated, there may be a degree of comfort in knowing that there are more of you than you might think. You are not alone.
