UFO's and the Many Worlds Interpretation

This is a follow up to my recent thread titled UFO's and Warp Drives. In that thread I briefly mentioned how UFO's seem to be capable of phasing in and out of our reality and I want to dive a bit deeper into that idea. Until recently I dismissed the idea that UFO's could be visiting us from other "dimensions" because that idea sounds pretty outlandish to me and I thought we'd probably know if that were happening.

However it actually isn't an entirely unscientific idea and I continue to find reasons why it's a very strong explanation for UFO's and aliens. Over the last few months I've heard several people who are supposedly "in the know" make the claim that UFO's are inter-dimensional crafts, and I would usually ignore those people because they are often the same people saying there are dozens of alien species visiting us, which I also find hard to believe.

I've studied many abduction cases and the vast majority of them involve the Grey species, the cases which don't often sound made up. I've also written countless threads explaining the many scientific reasons why it's highly unlikely any civilization living in a distant star system has detected our presence in the Milky Way, let alone had time to travel here even if they were using warp drives capable of traveling near the speed of light.

I like to think outside the box, but the idea of all these different alien species visiting us just seemed almost impossible to me. But with all that has been happening in recent times, with the whistleblowers and the alien bodies, it's becoming harder to ignore some of the claims being made and I cannot ignore the fact that the Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics could be the key to understanding the entire UFO phenomena.

There are essentially two main interpretations of Quantum Mechanics but we don't know which one is correct. There is the Copenhagen Interpretation which says the wave collapse is truly random, meaning the future is uncertain and not yet determined. Then there's the Many Worlds Interpretation which says every possible outcome of the wave collapse actually happens, it just looks random to us because we only see one outcome.

Many Worlds tells us there's actually a different reality for every possible outcome, and these alternate universes are all co-existing at the same time as our universe but we are unable to interact with those other universes, at least for now. And what of Pilot Wave Theory you ask? It always struck me as an ad-hoc theory to avoid the spooky nature of Quantum Mechanics. Turns out Pilot Wave theory is probably just a less developed version of Many Worlds:



Personally I prefer the Copenhagen Interpretation because it gives me a sense of free choice instead of implying that my choices are meaningless because there's a universe where I make the opposite choices. However strong arguments can be made for why Many Worlds is most likely to be correct so it's not something we should dismiss just because we don't like what it implies. If it is true, then we have to ask, are UFO's coming from these other universes?

I don't like using the word "dimension" in this case because it suggests we're talking about some other dimension of space and time in our current universe, but we're actually talking about entirely different universes where events took place differently. At every moment in time new universes are splitting off from our universe to form universes with slight differences to our own, but there would also be some which are very different from ours.

This means there are universes where life on Earth took a very different evolutionary path, and "humans" might look very different. Humans would not have even evolved on some versions of Earth. In some universes Earth would be in a very different location or it might not have formed at all. So perhaps it's not really an issue of aliens traveling vast distances to reach us, maybe they just travel to other universes where the Earth is not far away.

This is a good explanation for why aliens typically appear humanoid and why genetic studies of alien beings seem to indicate that they share a common ancestry with us. The fact these beings often appear to have evolved on Earth despite not living on Earth with us now is a problem which has puzzled many ufologists, myself included. I often wondered if they were a break-away civilization or time travelers.

Well if Many Worlds is right and they are from alternate universes then they are break-away civilizations in some sense and they are certainly bending the laws of space and time to their will. It seems fair to assume that it's easier to travel to other universes if they are more similar to ours, it will also be easier to reach other Earth's if they are located in a similar position to our Earth, explaining why almost all reported alien species are humanoid.

There was a recent interview with David Grusch where he makes this interesting statement:

If I was a betting man, some of this non-human intelligence, they're similarly as advanced as us, but they've just made asymmetric evolution, they went a different path. Where we made nuclear weapons and stuff, they ended up making this civil propulsion kind of equivalent discovery where they're able to do this now but they're actually not that much more advanced than you and I.

It explains why some of these "aliens" look virtually identical to us, if they are coming from the universes most similar to us. Other aliens look sort of like us and some look very different, such as insectoid species, but those are rarely reported, suggesting my previous assumption is correct. We no longer need to explain why all these different alien species decided to travel light years to visit Earth, because they didn't travel light years.

It also explains why we constantly hear different numbers given by people claiming to know how many alien species are visiting us. When listening to "insiders" speak I think it's important to keep in mind they are often recalling information they got from some other source, and there's no reason to assume that source really knows the truth either, even if they should know. We have to piece together the small bits of truth we get to form the real picture.

Here's a small collection of old clips where insiders discuss the inter-dimensional aspect of UFO's which I suspect you guys will find interesting:

Who remembers the frantic caller on Art Bell's show who was supposedly working at Area 51?

I found this titled "LEAKED Insider Recording About NASA UFOs"

This video of Robert O. Dean will blow your mind. "Aliens are living among us"

The late US Army Major Robert Dean dropping truth bombs about the UFO reality in this short clip

Correct. You're on the right track.
From within the system, Many Worlds Interpretation is functionally correct,
but once you go far enough into it, you find Delayed Choice Experiment, and you come to the Simulation Hypothesis.

It gets pretty complicated and hard to discern who is inside and who is outside.
At any rate, look, Haim Eshed didn't say there was a Galactic Federation in contact with world leaders
for no reason, and he's a pretty high profile guy. The Canadian Minister of Defense said the same thing too,
and despite what the media begs us to believe, he wasn't just old and senile. There's a reason multiple
high profile people are saying the same thing.

It seems like you already know the truth deep down, but you're waiting for it to be called normal before you
accept it. It's okay dude. It's real.


As for the supposition that they must all be from alternate universes, well, some might be, some not.
Some of them are us from the future. But our area that humans live in is an actual simulation.

In terms of wave particle duality, think of it this way: when you render a videogame world for the player,
you don't render the whole world at once. That would eat up all the RAM and crash the thing. Instead, you just render
whatever the player is accessing. That's why retrocausality is possible.

One or more of these groups could be coming in from outside the simulation.
What if I told you the lizard people are actually real and have deals with governments, but they don't actually shapeshift, but are just really telepathic so they can trick your brain? LMAO.

Ever heard of DUMBs, or "deep underground military bases?" It's a real thing. I know a girl who talked all about having experiences in one of them as a kid. They experiment on people who have AB negative blood type and basically have a fetish for Germanic and Celtic people. That's what's taking people in national parks. Missing 411.

Anyway, I'm kinda high on cough syrup bc I'm sick, so hopefully some of that was coherent.
The truth really is that mad, I assure you.
Cheers.


a reply to: ChaoticOrder

a reply to: TheValeyard

It seems like you already know the truth deep down, but you're waiting for it to be called normal before you
accept it. It's okay dude. It's real.

Nah at this point there's really no doubt in my mind. I was watching the Ariel Phenomenon documentary the other day and the look on some of the kids faces as they told Mack what they saw just hit me suddenly because I could tell they were absolutely telling the truth. Maybe it's just my age, but I no longer have that uncertainty I used to have when listening to someone talk about their UFO or alien experience, I can much more easily tell if they are being truthful.

Yes! That case is such a smoking gun.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
There are essentially two main interpretations of Quantum Mechanics but we don't know which one is correct. There is the Copenhagen Interpretation which says the wave collapse is truly random, meaning the future is uncertain and not yet determined. Then there's the Many Worlds Interpretation which says every possible outcome of the wave collapse actually happens, it just looks random to us because we only see one outcome.

Many Worlds tells us there's actually a different reality for every possible outcome, and these alternate universes are all co-existing at the same time as our universe but we are unable to interact with those other universes, at least for now. And what of Pilot Wave Theory you ask? It always struck me as an ad-hoc theory to avoid the spooky nature of Quantum Mechanics. Turns out Pilot Wave theory is probably just a less developed version of Many Worlds:

Interesting video, but what about Hugh Everett's theory?

Usually I'm in sync with most mainstream physicists but in this case the evidence is that with very few exceptions, they are all wrong (and so are you) to label Everett's theory "many worlds", because Everett himself said that is not the idea behind his theory:

arxiv.org...

It seems clear that DeWitt and Graham consider that the multitude of branching worlds are “real” in the ordinary sense of the word. In this sense, their Many Worlds perspective certainly departs from Everett’s intent.

In a 1976 philosophy paper on the interpretation of quantum mechanics, Levy-Leblond offers critical comments on the many worlds interpretation and compared it to his understanding of Everett’s theory.

Now, my criticism here is exactly symmetrical of the one I directed against the orthodox position: the “many worlds” idea again is a left-over of classical conceptions. The coexisting branches here, as the unique surviving one in the Copenhagen point of view, can only be related to “worlds” described by classical physics. The difference is that, instead of interpreting the quantum “plus” as a classical “or”, De Witt et al. interpret it as a classical “and”. To me, the deep meaning of Everett's ideas is not the coexistence of many worlds, but on the contrary, the existence of a single quantum one. The main drawback of the “many-worlds” terminology is that it leads one to ask the question of “what branch we are on”, since it certainly looks as if our consciousness definitely belonged to only one world at a time: But this question only makes sense from a classical point of view, once more. It becomes entirely irrelevant as soon as one commits oneself to a consistent quantum view.

In a letter to Levy-Leblond (Barrett 2011), Everett indicated that he quite agreed with Levy-Leblond’s argument and emphasized that the many worlds terminology was not his. I’m sympathetic with this view.

I find this highly disturbing that so many refer to "many worlds" when the original author of the theory says ~"nope, I never called it many worlds and that's not the idea behind my theory at all, it's a single quantum world." But apparently people are afraid to argue with DeWitt so they don't challenge him on what Everett apparently says is a misinterpretation of his theory.

originally posted by: TheValeyard
Yes! That case is such a smoking gun.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Yet nobody here bothered to contact the girl who posted her e-mail here and said she was one of the ariel students who made it up. Seems to me like people don't want to know the truth if they didn't even follow up with her. If she said it was real they would have included her in the documentary.

Emily Bolton claims it was a hoax and left her e-mail
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I'm one of the kids in these photo's. I remember this well. We made it up - Sorry. By the way there was a documentary on UFO's the night before, more or less everyone had a TV at that stage and for those who didn't it was still a cool story to get in on
I'm in the last photo. You may email me if you like. [email protected]

I don't know if her claim is true or not but I find it disturbing that nobody seems to want to know if it's true, except Jim Oberg, who seems to be the only one who tried to contact her years after that post.

Something else that occurred to me, if these beings really have been visiting us for hundreds or thousands of years, as the evidence heavily suggests, that would indicate there are other universes where advanced civilizations developed on Earth a long time before they did in our universe. That is assuming time travel into the past is impossible, which seems like a fair assumption, but who really knows what is possible anymore lmao.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Yet nobody here bothered to contact the girl who posted her e-mail here and said she was one of the ariel students who made it up. Seems to me like people don't want to know the truth if they didn't even follow up with her. If she said it was real they would have included her in the documentary.

I don't think a post on ATS proves anything, actually I find it more suspicious than anything else. Especially considering the fact that there was also a recent show on Netflix which covered the Ariel incident and they interviewed one guy who said that him and some other kids made it all up, but back in 2008 he was saying something strange did happen. Everything about him screams that he is untrustworthy, especially in contrast to all the other people they interview, and I think that was the intent. Pretty smart actually.

This guy claimed all the Ariel kids lied..in Netflix' encounters. He himself had said that definitely something did occur there.

The 'denier' guy from Encounters ep2 originally had a completely opposite take on the Ariel case. Paid off?

SPAM

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Although I find this topic and all the possibilities fascinating, I also find the bickering back and forth between mainstream science and the everyday UFO researcher, as well as researcher against researcher tedious and irritating at times. Speculation and theories are great. We most certainly should think outside the box...

...but we are on a spec of dust in an ocean and we see everything from that perspective. At the risk of being redundant, we are like infants in a crib still fascinated by our fingers and our toes. For us to rule out anything based on our understanding of the universe and it's laws is arrogant, and honestly, reductive.

Don't get me wrong, I hope scientists and researchers keep doing what they're doing and keep calling one another on the carpet. It's part of how we learn and advance beyond our infancy, but an openness to considering the absurd will take us a lot further I believe than the almost religious rigidity of thought I so often see displayed.

I have come to think we may have more in common with cargo cults than we might imagine.

Good post ChaoticOrder.

A most excellent write up!

The concept of the multiverse/many worlds aspect of quantum mechanics is a fascinating topic. My personal belief is that the so called "Mandela Effect" is in fact proof of the many worlds theory as well as explaining many aspects of the UAP/UFO activity.

Sort of off topic (maybe) but back in 2011 I interviewed a physicist who worked for a defense contractor on the east coast (redacted due to NDA) who was exploring the entire UFO topic and was looking to use various sensors to determine if in fact we're seeing vehicles from other universes. It was a good interview because he was able to explain quantum mechanics/many worlds/string theory and branes and how they interact with our reality. It's pretty mind blowing. My producer actually quit because it was the "last damned boring topic" she wanted to listen to.

I would invite everyone to explore string theory and the concept of branes - which is, in my opinion, how what we call UFOs move about.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder
I was more interested in your thoughts on the topic of this thread, the so called "many worlds" being a misinterpretation of the original theory by Everett. Hugh Everett says his theory was misinterpreted by some, and it's not a many worlds theory at all, but the theory is instead for a universal wave function for a single quantum world. But only a handful of people seem to be aware of this.

On the Ariel case, I'm not convinced by a single post either, but I do find it interesting that nobody even tried to follow up with her, except Oberg years later. What I do find supporting of it being made up is that if you look at the drawings, they are all different enough to support it being made up. The saucers are different, the number of them is different, the humanoids are not only different in number but have vastly different appearances, the drawings are completely inconsistent so it's certainly no smoking gun.

a reply to: billxam

My personal belief is that the so called "Mandela Effect" is in fact proof of the many worlds theory as well as explaining many aspects of the UAP/UFO activity.

Well, if there's some sort of quantum uncertainty applied to our future, perhaps the same thing applies to our past, meaning the past might not be something which is set in stone. The past could be in a state of quantum super position, like an electron which is in two states at once. But how could the past get into such a state where people remember things two different ways? Interestingly, it always seems to be that people remember things two distinct ways when it comes to the Mandela Effect.

If we all lived through the same events then those same events should be imprinted onto our neural pathways and we shouldn't end up with large numbers of people having a different memory of past events. Yet that seems to be what is happening with the Mandela Effect. It poses an interesting question; what if people from another universe with a slightly different past came to live in our universe, would that impact the quantum state of our past and put it into superposition?

Why bring time into the mix. Imagine, not multiverses but multiworlds. Multiple worlds (well there might only be three, who knows) in the same space AND in the same time frame. Now say, these three worlds started off the same as ours but over time (the same amount of time as ours) the flora and fauna took a different path. But with accidental movement of people and animals. Though the rocks, water, inanimate earth was the same as ours and the other worlds with only minor "erosions", hence when anyone sees "ghosts" they seem to be floating above the ground. Also with stories from the Skinwalker Ranch of voices heard as if they are above them.

As I've put before about Missing 411, these people/beings can see us (realtime) but we can't see them. They can come to our world and take who they want, That means it is not a natural phenomena that just happens, but they can control it. Therefore it must be a machine or a phenomena that can be controlled. That's the holy grail not any reason or why but the HOW, because if we can find the how WE can visit THEM and the reason and the why would follow.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
a reply to: ChaoticOrder
I was more interested in your thoughts on the topic of this thread, the so called "many worlds" being a misinterpretation of the original theory by Everett. Hugh Everett says his theory was misinterpreted by some, and it's not a many worlds theory at all, but the theory is instead for a universal wave function for a single quantum world. But only a handful of people seem to be aware of this.

Yes, Hugh Everett developed the idea of a Universal Wavefunction, the wave function which determines the quantum state of the entire universe. It's at the core of the Many Worlds Interpretation, just because it's a single wave function, or a single quantum world as the paper you quoted puts it, doesn't mean there is only one "universe". All universes exist within the universal wave function but they are out of phase with each other.

The many-worlds interpretation (MWI) is a philosophical position about how the mathematics used in quantum mechanics relates to physical reality. It asserts that the universal wavefunction is objectively real, and that there is no wave function collapse.[1] This implies that all possible outcomes of quantum measurements are physically realized in some "world" or universe.[2]

Many-worlds interpretation

I would also highly recommend watching this PBS Space Time video titled Where Are The Worlds In Many Worlds? because he talks about the universal wavefunction and what the other worlds in many worlds actually are. The most relevant part is when he says the following:

In that sense we can think of the different worlds as separate patterns of ripples on the surface of a pond. They overlap in location but are so hopelessly out of phase that they can never interfere with each other, they just pass straight through. In our pond analogy, it's as though the ripples that make up the other worlds feel all locations with all possible phases and so it's as though those ripples aren't there at all. A ripple pattern, a world, is only there if you share a phase relationship with it.

There's also an older PBS Space Time video where he discusses the Many Worlds Interpretation, and he points out how even the Copenhagen Interpretation requires some form of alternate realities to exist. And now that Pilot Wave seems to be just another form of Many Worlds, it seems hard to escape the conclusion that Many Worlds may be onto something.

The Copenhagen Interpretation itself proposes multiple worlds in the superposition of paths or properties of a quantum system. Both Many Worlds and the Copenhagen Interpretation create alternate realities. It's just that Copenhagen merges them into a single timeline with its wave function collapse. The superposition of states of Many Worlds can be thought of as overlayed histories, slices of a universal wavefunction that diverge from each other as the universe evolves, but none ever vanish. Many Worlds may in fact be the more pure interpretation of the mathematics of quantum mechanics because there's nothing in that math that requires the collapse of the wave function.

I highly doubt you will find a direct quote from Hugh Everett saying he opposes the idea of Many Worlds, that is the fundamental idea behind the theories he developed, whether he likes it or not. The statistical properties of quantum mechanics are directly explained by the fact the wave function continues on in all the other worlds instead of collapsing into a single random outcome as Copenhagen would suggest.

On the Ariel case, I'm not convinced by a single post either, but I do find it interesting that nobody even tried to follow up with her, except Oberg years later. What I do find supporting of it being made up is that if you look at the drawings, they are all different enough to support it being made up. The saucers are different, the number of them is different, the humanoids are not only different in number but have vastly different appearances, the drawings are completely inconsistent so it's certainly no smoking gun.

I actually arrived at the opposite conclusion. The drawings and their stories all seem way too consistent to be fabricated. You have to remember they are children and they aren't going to draw things perfectly. But for the most part they drew exactly the same things. The same saucer type UFO and the same Grey-type aliens wearing black skin-tight suits.

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
I highly doubt you will find a direct quote from Hugh Everett saying he opposes the idea of Many Worlds, that is the fundamental idea behind the theories he developed, whether he likes it or not.

I already posted a reference to that, it doesn't appear Everett likes it, does it? Did you read that? Also citing mainstream sources stating otherwise is not really convincing me since I already stated it doesn't appear most mainstream folks are up to speed on the Everett's interpretation of Everett's theory. You say they "infer" many worlds, but Everett, the author of the theory, apparently "infers" something else, that the the other worlds are "or", not "and". Also there are some notable luminaries who apparently supported Everett's theory and don't favor the use of "many worlds" terminology to describe it, such as Stephen Hawking and Murray Gell-Mann.

Multiple Worlds, One Universal Wave Function

In Everett’s own words, “The aim is not to deny or contradict the conventional formulation of quantum theory, which has demonstrated its usefulness in an overwhelming variety of problems, but rather to supply a new, more general and complete formulation, from which the conventional interpretation can be deduced.”[8] Thus, it is not surprising that Stephen Hawking and Nobel laureate Murray Gell-Mann, supporters of the Everett interpretation, have expressed reservations with the name “multiple worlds interpretation,” and therefore we will continue to refer to the theory simply as the Everett interpretation instead.[16]

I actually arrived at the opposite conclusion. The drawings and their stories all seem way too consistent to be fabricated. You have to remember they are children and they aren't going to draw things perfectly. But for the most part they drew exactly the same things. The same saucer type UFO and the same Grey-type aliens wearing black skin-tight suits.

I think people who think those drawings are consistent are living in a fantasy. I posted some examples that I believe show too much difference to be drawings of a real event. I'll link to them since I already posted them where they are on-topic, in an Ariel thread here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...
The examples shown are one student drawing 5 saucers while another student drew only one saucer. So how many were there, one or five? They may be children, but they can tell the difference between one and five. Similar problems with the number of humanoids, one or two (or more), how many were there? Did they have huge dreadlocks down to their waist that dominated the drawing, or are they practically bald or have short blonde hair instead? Those are just some examples of huge differences in drawings that don't support a real event. I expect modest differences, but the difference between one saucer and five saucers is just too much to explain rationally.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

I already posted a reference to that, it doesn't appear Everett likes it, does it? Did you read that? Also citing mainstream sources stating otherwise is not really convincing me since I already stated it doesn't appear most mainstream folks are up to speed on the Everett's interpretation of Everett's theory.

You posted a paper written by someone who admits "my pragmatic ruminations on the subject might viewed with some suspicion" in the abstract. It was clearly written by someone who doesn't like the implications of Everette's theory and it doesn't seem to contain any direct quotes from Everette which contradict Many Worlds. The best he can provide is "Everett indicated that he quite agreed with Levy-Leblond’s argument and emphasized that the many worlds terminology was not his".

Also, if mainstream science isn't going to impact your view on this matter, then I don't know if there's anything else I can say. It's not that most mainstream folks are not up to date with Everett's theory, they clearly know the theory and its implications. It's that some people like the author of that paper have a hard time accepting the spooky implications of Many Worlds, so they look for ways to get around it, which is a futile endeavor.

The examples shown are one student drawing 5 saucers while another student drew only one saucer. So how many were there, one or five? They may be children, but they can tell the difference between one and five. Similar problems with the number of humanoids, one or two (or more), how many were there? Did they have huge dreadlocks down to their waist that dominated the drawing, or are they practically bald or have short blonde hair instead? Those are just some examples of huge differences in drawings that don't support a real event. I expect modest differences, but the difference between one saucer and five saucers is just too much to explain rationally.

Well pretty much all of the teachers believe the children saw something, even the Headmaster at the time believes they saw something and they weren't all making it up, he just isn't sure what they actually saw. In the Ariel Phenomenon documentary they show an interview where one of the teachers arrived at the same conclusion I did:

You think that the children's imaginations are getting carried away with them, but I became convinced when I saw the drawings, because so many of the drawings were similar, and also when they wrote their stories in their story books. They definitely seem genuine because I mean they all wrote completely different stories but they had seen the same thing, and I think that's what convinced me because I was as skeptical as everybody else.

One of the investigators they interview also makes a statement which is very true:

As an investigator, I've learned that if they tell exactly the same story then there's corroboration, they've got together and they're doing it. But if they tell a similar story, but from different view points, to me that's the truth.

One of those Reddit threads I linked to earlier also has an insightful comment:

What really sold me was they all describe the same event using different terminology.

"It was 4 feet tall."

"It was as big as a 3rd grader."

"It was 1 to 1.5 meters."

"It was a short man."

"It was as tall as my Sheep George."

60 liars would have colluded together and said "if they ask how tall everyone say it was 4 feet.'

Because I can't help myself, I spent the time going through the Ariel Phenomenon documentary and screen-shotting all of the drawings I could find because they show a lot of them in that doco. Now take a careful look at these and tell me if you notice any patterns because I certainly do. I could argue you cherry picked the few drawings which may contradict what the other kids saw, some kids might just draw a few extra UFO's because it looks cool or they are very imaginative.

































I also kept an eye out for any drawing where the aliens had hair, and apart from the one you posted, I also found four more drawings shown below. I'll admit it's a bit peculiar, but as I said, kids often add details that don't exist in reality. However, I don't actually think that's what is happening in this particular case.

If you listen to what the kids actually said, they say there were two aliens and one of them had long hair. Many of them also said that one of the aliens was near the ship and the other alien was over near the trees running through the grass. I assume this is why some children only saw one alien but others saw two, one of them was harder to spot.

Most kids probably only saw the alien which was near the ship and it seems like that alien was the bald guy. But a lot of the kids were probably saying they saw two aliens, which is probably why a small fraction of kids drew two aliens and both were bald or both had hair, because they only saw one of the aliens and assumed the other looked the same.

It's also worth pointing out that many abductees report Grey-type aliens which have hair, they are often referred to as the Nordics or just Hybrids. If the theory I propose here is correct, then it isn't very hard to explain how such beings could evolve on an alternate version of Earth. The fact they depicted typical Grey's is an indicator of truth to me.






One of the kids who is now an adult, Emily Trim, has some really nice paintings depicting what she saw as a child on that day. With so many kids witnessing the event, I think of a lot of them would have admitted they made it up by now. Yet the only guy saying that seems extremely shady, everyone else upholds their story and seems to be deeply impacted by it in a sincere way.

I think it's also interesting that multiple different children say that the alien who was running through the grass appeared to be running in slow motion or as if on the moon. That might tell us something about the nature of the craft and the warp field being generated around it. Perhaps some form of anti-gravity or time dilation at work.