The Phenomenon, a UFO movie

A review by B.Kastrup:

The Phenomenon: A brief review

In the next few hours a new documentary film about unidentified aerial phenomena—a.k.a. UFOs—and close encounters is going to be released. It's called The Phenomenon, by director James Fox. I have had the privilege of watching it a few days before launch, so I could share my views on it with you. What follows are my unbiased opinions. I am under no contractual obligation to issue a review and have no financial stake at all in the film or this review...

...In addition, James has once again proven himself able to dig one layer deeper than the rest, exploring the subject from more telling—albeit non-traditional—angles. His revisitation of the 1966 Westall school incident in Australia, and the 1994 Ariel school event in Zimbabwe, are cases in point. Both are examples of close encounters involving dozens of witnesses. In both cases, the narrative clearly transcends the common storyline of aliens from another solar system dropping by for some kind of research purpose. James has managed to bring back the direct witnesses of these events, decades later, and re-interview them with the insights of today. This was just about what I had wished someone would do; and he did it.

The most significant part of the movie is—without a doubt, in my mind—the examination, at the Stanford School of Medicine, of metal samples collected from alleged UFO visitation sites by respected researcher Dr. Jacques Vallée, over decades of investigation. This is the much hoped-for hard evidence. An analysis of the atomic structure of these samples was conducted with a state-of-the-art ion beam microscope, which yielded surprising results: the isotope ratios in these samples are unlike anything known to occur on Earth. Such a finding may sound too highbrow to be significant—especially in light of the much more incredible claims routinely made in this field by suspicious characters—but it certainly is. In fact, my only criticism against the film is that James—perhaps in a concession to mainstream tastes and expectations—hardly explores the finding in the final cut. The subject was left behind just as I thought we were warming up to it. Perhaps we will read more about it in academic publications, but I confess to have been annoyed at the brevity of the coverage of what was perhaps the one truly new news in this film.

As a matter of fact, although UFO and close encounter cases have obvious scientific significance, I believe they have even more metaphysical significance. I say this because the phenomenon seems to defy not only the limits of our technology, but also the laws of physics and—even more significantly—the laws of logic....

Started this, so far pretty good. As Kastrup says it seems like a tour through credible witnesses.

Might post some supplementary stuff I find, I am curious about certain aspects here....

[Laird]

I've now watched this documentary after not long ago watching the recent Steven Greer documentary about which I started a thread about three days ago.

Rereading Bernardo's review of The Phenomenon after watching it, I find myself in quite close agreement with him, albeit that my research in this field is apparently not as extensive as his.

In comparison to Steven's documentary, this documentary by James Fox is conservative in a positive sense: it does not stray incautiously into conjecture, nor into conspiracy beyond that which it can clearly substantiate with witness accounts. It's a very compelling movie - not just for UFO buffs, but for the general public.

Assuming you guys paid to watch the documentary?  I'm seeing only paid links from their website (which is fine; I'm just not sure I'm interested enough to pay to watch it).

[Laird]

Assuming you guys paid to watch the documentary?  I'm seeing only paid links from their website (which is fine; I'm just not sure I'm interested enough to pay to watch it).

Yep. I "bought" it on Google Play, only to find that "buying" it just means I have permanent streaming access to it, not a downloadable that I can store on my local machine. If I'd known that, I would have "rented" it instead. It's well worth a watch, but it's also understandable that you'd rather not pay.

Really interesting watch and feels infinitely more credible than the Greer conspiracy mess.  Fascinating really.

Why do these aliens always crash land or seek contact in the USA and never anywhere else on earth?  My skeptic alert is aroused.

Why do these aliens always crash land or seek contact in the USA and never anywhere else on earth?  My skeptic alert is aroused.

It's been awhile but they spend time on an Australian case in the film IIRC?

It's been awhile but they spend time on an Australian case in the film IIRC?

I think Brian may be teasing. I expect english speaking filmmakers and even researchers concentrate in their countries of interest. But there are obviously researchers and cases from around the globe.

Why do these aliens always crash land or seek contact in the USA and never anywhere else on earth?  My skeptic alert is aroused.

There are well reported visits in Australia and Zimbabwe. Both schools. Maybe they just crash in the USA.

Reports of visitation are widespread - but not so much 'physical' appearances. Reports of 'contact' via psychic means go back to the 1950s. The you have the abduction phenomenon as well.

Outside the 'conspiracy' stuff - which is all unverifiable claims that are entirely 'rational' the unverifiable experiences are, I think, more credible. I draw distinction between claims of government involvement and reports of contact - which have a deep consistency to them.

I don't know if Greer is on the money or not re the claims he makes. He seems fixated on tech - which is kinda missing the point - if you understand what 'contactees' report. He has a thing about clean energy. Yeah. That would be nice - only some loon will find a way of making weapons with it.

On a broader level the reports of UPA/UFOs is ramping up and backed up by video and photographic evidence. You can push the sceptical line only so far - but to what purpose? Even the recent US govt report was clear that of the numerous sightings and related evidence examined, only one could be explained.

The report did not say "OK its ET" because, quite literally, there is no evidence to make that a true statement. We have only inference. I don't have a problem with a working hypothesis that it is ET because currently that makes more sense than alternative notions. I know Greer thinks what we are dealing with is human engineered ET tech. But that is not consistent with the reported conduct of UAPs in contact with US military forces - mostly Navy. That stuff is messing with them and attention seeking.

The tech is too advanced to be on the standard human development spectrum. It's not likely to be China or Russia, according to those whose business it is to observe developments. Nothing of conventional military tech suggests anything outside what you'd expect. And why invest in conventional next gen military aircraft if you have what pretty much amounts to a UFO? There are excuses, but they are not, in my view, convincing. And if Russia or China has a flash gee whiz super craft why flaunt it in such a pointless way?

ET is actually the best explanation. Leaving the best equipped military on the planet flatfooted sends a message. The US government has been assessing ET as a threat since the 50s, so the recent report is disingenuous at best. It used a very narrow set of criteria to frame the report - recent contact with military forces using the best sensory tech on the planet and the most advanced aircraft - and it is still clueless.

The report recommended widening the gathering of data to include civilian sources and investing more funds to aid research. After nearly 70 years? How much has the US military expended to date?

For me that report is an implicit admission. Explicitly the position is 'we don't know.' But after 70 years of examining evidence and claims that's not an okay answer. The more rational position is "We do know, but we aren't saying because we have still an out we are going to cling to until it doesn't work anymore." The mere fact that the US officially says it does not know who or what is behind the UAPs that outperform their best aircraft speaks volumes. Most folk seem to have their fingers in their ears.

Greer is into disclosure. I am not. I think the 'revelation' has to be very slow because we are very thick and will react very badly if things become evident too quickly. 

Be sceptical by all means, but do please understand that scepticism should always be the companion of inquiry. Strong scepticism requires strong inquiry. The ida that 'remarkable claims' require 'remarkable evidence' is hogwash invented by people who want an out when reasonable evidence comes along. ET is not a 'remarkable' notion.