Posthuman Blues

A central motif of reported alien abductions, as well as folkloric accounts of kidnappings by nonhuman beings, is the goal of producing "hybrid" offspring: humanoid children who are able to straddle the bridge between human society and that of the "others."





Because of its alarming (and peripherally erotic) overtones, the "hybridization program" has become a staple ingredient in many books purporting to explain alien abductions, such as "The Threat" by David Jacobs and Budd Hopkins' "Sight Unseen." Jacobs, Hopkins and their peers believe that the UFO and abduction phenomena are necessarily interlinked: UFOs are exotic vehicles used by the abductors to further their agenda. (In what I've termed the "Silent Invasion Scenario," the ubiquitous Grays are suffering from some sort of genetic malady and must rely on infusions of human DNA to survive -- sometimes with governmental complicity.)

The problems with this interpretation have been noted by eager critics. Geneticists ridicule the notion that humans would be genetically compatible with extraterrestrials, comparing the effort to a person trying to successfully mate with an insect. And although recent discoveries in transgenics allow radically disparate species to reproduce (albeit artificially), the notion that advanced aliens -- presumably thousands of years more advanced than us -- would rely on kidnapping unsuspecting humans to obtain genetic samples seems singularly clumsy.

It's more likely that a civilization capable of traveling between stars (or burrowing through space-time itself) would possess a knowledge of genetic engineering surpassing our own. Indeed, it's tempting to speculate that a civilization only a few hundred years in advance of our own would have mastered the fundamentals of nanotechnology, rendering the need for "punch biopsies" and forcible semen extraction -- let alone craft with portals and landing gear -- obsolete.

This leaves us to consider that the "aliens," instead of hailing from some distant star system, are in fact closely related to us and may originate much closer to home. Their frequent allusions to outer space, such as the celebrated "star map" shown to abductee Betty Hill, may be a subterfuge crafted to further our collective infatuation with "space visitors" -- a fascination set firmly in place by the controversial "contactees" who preceded the emergence of the modern abduction epidemic by at least a decade.





(Former Ministry of Defense UFO investigator Nick Pope deals refreshingly with the contactee movement in his book "The Uninvited," questioning the conventional wisdom that all those claiming benevolent contact with human-looking ETs were hoaxers and cranks. Instead, noting the distinct vein of duplicity that accompanies the history of paranormal visitation, he proposes that at least some of the contactees may have been dealing with genuine "others." That these "others" made their first appearance as space travelers shortly after the creation of nuclear weapons, while typically attributed to social factors, may belie their terrestrial origin: If you lived among savages with increasingly destructive devices at their disposal, it may prove all too tempting to intervene, but in a way than denies your own existence at the same time it propagates your message.)

If we share our planet with indigenous humanoids -- and I think the case for terrestrial origin is at least as robust as the Extraterrestrial Hypothesis -- then it would certainly appear that we're numerically -- if not technically -- superior. The "others" would be forced to live at the periphery of normal human perception, perhaps utilizing techniques analogous to recent breakthroughs with brain-machine interfaces and "mind control."

I find it highly suspicious, for example, that so many encounters with apparent aliens involve exposure to chemicals and needles inserted into the victim's head. Sometimes close encounter witnesses are asked to drink noxious-tasting beverages prior to conversing with the "crew," or subjected to imagery that can be ascribed to psychedelic "conditioning." It would certainly seem that the aliens -- terrestrial or otherwise -- prefer to alter our perceptions prior to establishing contact. Given the selfish motives attributed to UFO occupants by researchers like Hopkins, the most coherent explanation for these techniques is that we're being compelled to participate without the luxury of trusting our senses.

Thus, even discounting the innumerable reports of "missing time," the abduction experience is consummately secretive -- an aspect that fails to concur with the popular image of dispassionate ET scientists (who, presumably, care as little about our earthly affairs as lab workers sympathize with their rats). The mere fact that the "extraterrestrials'" posthypnotic commands to forget the experience can be overridden with such surprising ease suggests we're dealing with something other than extrasolar aliens.

Whoever these others are, their grasp of our psychical vocabulary is nothing short of startling; this enduring human aspect suggests, gently, a long and intimate relationship with our species -- not the quick, pragmatic harvest we might reasonably expect from genuine ETs.

But if the "others'" interest in reproduction can be accepted at face value -- and its ubiquitous nature indicates that it's an integral component of the contact experience by almost any measure -- what does it portend?

Once we finish sifting through esoteric hypotheses, we're left with the troubling prospect that at least one "ultraterrestrial" society in our midst is suffering from a potentially debilitating genetic syndrome -- and they're desperate and savvy enough to harvest our population for a possible long-term fix. I don't think this implies malice; if the situation were reversed, we'd almost certainly do the same thing, taking equally distressing measures to ensure our anonymity.

Needless to say, the anthropological considerations are enormous. Delving further requires a healthy sense of "recreational paranoia" -- as well as the ability to suspend deep-rooted preconceptions.