Are Ufos and Alien Abductions Demonic in origin?

[ALAYMAN]

Corky! I drove by his church a few weeks ago.

Halloween candy time is just around the corner.

 

[DrHuk&Duck]

I believe some people possess a sixth sense and are better in tune to a spiritual portal on earth than others. I am one of those people, although I believe my sixth sense is much weaker than some other people. I also think it could be gene related because only certain individuals have had the ability to see “something that’s not there.”

I have no desire to debate or “prove” my experience. If you don’t possess a sixth sense, you won’t ever understand regardless of how good an argument I make.

 

[Ekklesian]

You trust them. Why should I? What can you offer in support of their stories, that we can both agree is objective evidence of their experiences?

Again, I believe those stories because I know and trust the ones who told them.

I'm not saying you should believe them because I do, and I'm not trying to convince you. But assuming the stories are true, how would you explain them? That's easy enough to answer. Look, I did it right here.

And that's what JesusFan's question is. I know JesusFan well enough to know that he doesn't believe in little green men or faeries or gnomes. (And if I'm remembering correctly, English is not his first language, so his wording doesn't always reflect the gist of his question.) So, assuming people are telling the truth about what they describe as an alien abductions, how would you explain it according to your world view?

But if you're interested in verification, how would one go about investigating them? Take my ghost stories for instance. One would have to conduct a series of interviews with the people who know the witnesses, and would have to research their backgrounds to see if they're credible. Are they known to spin yarns? Are they given to fever dreams? Or are they known to be honest, rational people?

If it's discovered that they're known to be honest, rational people, then no rational justification exists to doubt them. Now what one must do is collect data. Where did you get the Ouija board? Were you about to fall asleep when you heard the footfalls? What time of day? Where were you? What questions did you ask? When the thing moved on its own, were your fingers on it? Was it level? Was it windy? And so on and so forth. But that's your homework, not mine.

 

[Ekklesian]

In the case of an abductee, among other things, I'd want to know if one's reaction to the event...real or imagined...was natural, and what would be expected of one so traumatized? I'd read that the reaction of many were just what would be expected. I don't have time to do the research so I asked Grok:

Has there been much research into alien abduction claims, and have the abductees reacted like genuine victims of abduction, or kidnapping, or rape, or similar violations?​

Here is Grok's response:

In summary, while research debunks literal abductions, it substantiates the trauma as real to experiencers—behaviors and reactions are not fabricated but profoundly human, echoing those of verified violation victims.​

...

Research on Alien Abduction ClaimsYes, there has been a moderate amount of research into alien abduction claims since the phenomenon gained public attention in the mid-20th century, particularly following high-profile cases like the 1961 Betty and Barney Hill abduction. Studies span psychology, neuroscience, and ufology, with hundreds of documented cases analyzed through interviews, physiological testing, and surveys. Estimates suggest thousands worldwide report such experiences, though surveys like one from the Roper Center in the 1990s indicated around 3.7 million Americans believe they've had them. Research peaked in the 1990s–2000s but has waned in mainstream academia, partly due to challenges like reliance on subjective memories and lack of physical evidence. Key figures include Harvard psychiatrist John Mack, who interviewed over 200 "experiencers" and argued for their sincerity, and skeptics like Susan Clancy, who explored psychological origins.Much of the work focuses on non-pathological explanations, such as:​

​

• Sleep paralysis: A common state where REM sleep elements (hallucinations, immobility) intrude on wakefulness, affecting ~25% of people globally. It often involves sensed presences, pressure on the chest, and terror, mirroring abduction narratives of paralysis, probing, and levitation.
• False memories: Often recovered via hypnosis, which can implant or distort recollections. Studies show abductees score higher on suggestibility and absorption (deep immersion in fantasy).
• Cultural and neurological factors: Pre-existing beliefs in the paranormal, temporal lobe sensitivity (linked to vivid hallucinations), or even medical procedures (e.g., surgery under anesthesia) may contribute.

No scientific consensus supports literal extraterrestrial abductions; instead, research frames them as psychosocial phenomena. A 2021 study in the International Journal of Dream Research even emulated abduction-like experiences in 75% of lucid dreamers, suggesting they can arise from REM sleep emulation.​

​

​

Key Studies and Findings	Researchers/Institution	Year	Main Insight
Physiological responses to abduction scripts match those of trauma survivors (e.g., combat vets, sexual abuse victims).	McNally et al., Harvard University	2003–2004	Abductees show elevated heart rate, sweating, and muscle tension when recalling "events," equivalent to real PTSD triggers.
Abductees score higher on dissociation and PTSD symptoms but lower on suggestibility than controls.	Agnès et al., Explore journal	2021	Emotional reactions are genuine, even if memories are implausible; dissociation may explain some cases.
No higher psychopathology rates; higher fantasy-proneness and paranormal beliefs.	Bartholomew & Howard, Professional Psychology	1991	Abductees function normally but are prone to rich inner worlds and false memory formation.
Sleep paralysis as a trigger; hypnosis history and New Age beliefs predispose claims.	Clancy & McNally, Harvard	2005	~5% experience full hallucinations during paralysis, interpretable as abductions.
Neuropsychological profiles link to temporal lobe activity and fantasy-proneness.	Persinger, Perceptual and Motor Skills	1992	Similar to recovered memories of abuse; no evidence of mental illness.

​

​

Reactions of Abductees Compared to Victims of Abduction, Kidnapping, Rape, or Similar ViolationsAbductees often exhibit reactions remarkably similar to genuine trauma survivors, including symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)—such as intrusive memories, nightmares, hypervigilance, avoidance, and emotional numbness. In McNally's 2003 Harvard study, 10 abductees listened to audio scripts of their experiences; six showed subclinical PTSD signs, with physiological responses (e.g., heightened heart rate, sweating) as intense as those in combat veterans or sexual assault survivors. This held even for "false" memories, suggesting belief in the trauma drives the response, not objective reality.Behaviors align closely with violation victims:​

​

• Emotional and psychological: Intense fear, shame, and a sense of violation (e.g., reports of invasive exams or sexual contact evoke rape-like distress). Many describe ongoing anxiety, sleep disturbances, and a fractured sense of self, akin to kidnapping survivors' "missing time" disorientation. Support groups, formed since the 1980s, mirror those for abuse survivors, providing validation and reducing isolation.
• Physiological: During recall, abductees display autonomic arousal (e.g., elevated electromyographic activity) comparable to real trauma. A 2004 Psychological Science study confirmed this reactivity is specific to their narratives, not general stress.
• Long-term: Some report positive reframing (e.g., feeling "chosen"), but most face stigma, relationship strain, and therapy needs, like rape victims. Unlike deliberate hoaxes, sincere abductees show no financial motives and often resist publicity.

However, differences exist: Abductees rarely show severe psychopathology (e.g., schizophrenia) beyond the general population, and their symptoms may stem from misattributed sleep paralysis or cultural scripts rather than external events. A 2021 ScienceDirect review found higher dissociation but emphasized sincere distress, proposing therapies like cognitive-behavioral approaches over dismissal.In summary, while research debunks literal abductions, it substantiates the trauma as real to experiencers—behaviors and reactions are not fabricated but profoundly human, echoing those of verified violation victims. This underscores memory's power: what feels true can wound as deeply as fact.​

​

To the 'abductees,' these things are real. In the cases where these abductions have been halted by people calling on the name of Jesus Christ, how would you explain it?

 

[Ekklesian]

This reminds me of a somewhat creative experiment designed to capture empiracle evidence of the out-of-body awareness described by those with near-death experiences.

Our team of AWARE-II scientists ... concluded, “Although systematic studies have not been able to absolutely prove the reality or meaning of patients’ experiences and claims of awareness in relation to death, it has been impossible to disclaim them either. The recalled experience surrounding death now merits further genuine empirical investigation without prejudice.”​

​

It all appeared like quite a daunting, if not impossible, task then. The subject seemed unsuited to scientific research, and everyone, including me, viewed life and death as separate, or binary, entities based on traditional social notions. Nonetheless, I realized that cardiac arrest would be the closest model for researching what happens with death. This made it challenging because the people we needed to study were the most critically ill patients in hospitals and were heading extremely rapidly, within a matter of minutes, to their death. Then like now, few would come out of this with their lives restored. ​

​

Where would I find enough survivors to make any study meaningful? It wasn’t like I could go to a clinic and recruit patients as doctors normally do. I needed to find people who were actively undergoing a major life-threatening medical emergency. This was a highly unpredictable and relatively infrequent event that could occur without notice at any time of the day or night. It also necessitated timely medical treatments in a very tense situation—sometimes with up to a dozen people cramped into a small room working in unison. Nothing would be allowed to interrupt their emergency efforts. ​

​

Another major challenge was that then, as now, most doctors and scientists wouldn’t go near this subject. It was and still remains somewhat of a taboo subject. I had to think carefully about the possible effects on my career. I was a young doctor just starting out and I didn’t want this to possibly end my career, before I had even started it properly. ​

​

I was burning with enthusiasm, but with no research experience, I had a lot to lose. I persisted, though, and eventually a glimmer of hope emerged after I met Dr. Peter Fenwick, a neuropsychiatrist and neurophysiologist at the University of London. He was the only medical expert on this subject in the United Kingdom at that time and still is after thirty years. This shows you how little interest there had been in this subject then and now. During one of our meetings, he came up with what seemed to be a brilliantly simple yet practical way to get started. He suggested we use hidden images in an attempt to determine whether the people who claim to have seen things from outside their body had really seen those things, or whether they had just imagined seeing them. He demonstrated his idea by picking up a large white envelope from his desk. He drew lines and shapes on only one side of the envelope before standing up and lifting the envelope above his head. The side with the lines and figures faced upward toward the ceiling, and the side that was blank faced downward. ​

​

“If you look from below, what do you see?” he asked. ​

​

“Just a white envelope,” I said. ​

​

“Exactly, and if you could look from above, what would you see?” ​

​

“The image and lines,” I said excitedly. ​

​

This idea seemed so simple yet was so brilliant. We would mount images near the ceiling such that they would only be visible by someone looking down from above, but not when looking from the ground level up. This was important because the only details of people’s recalled experience of death that would be amenable to objective testing were those claims made by people of watching doctors and nurses resuscitating them. It was testable precisely because doctors and nurses could independently verify any claims. But now there would also be an independent test, too. ​

​

...​

​

Finally, as Peter had suggested, we needed to independently test people’s claims of being able to “see” their own resuscitation—the so-called out-of-body experience. ​

​

...​

​

During the one-year period that the study was being conducted I had painstakingly spent my weekends and holidays mounting boards with images that were only visible from the ceiling, while constantly changing and cleaning them. Yet none of the patients in our pilot study experienced the out-of-body phenomenon. So none of the images on the boards were ever able to be used. We learned the experience of separation from the body—the so-called out-of-body phenomenon—was quite rare and a much larger study would be needed to research this properly and put Dr. Peter Fenwick’s idea to the test. ​

​

It took more than ten years to fund, set up, and eventually complete that large-scale study. This was the original AWAreness during REsuscitation (AWARE-I) study, which ran from 2008 to 2012 across fifteen mostly British and American hospitals. Our plan was to use hidden images on a much wider scale and study the testimonies of many more cardiac arrest survivors to better understand them. To test Peter’s idea, we installed images on the tops of metallic fireproof shelves, which were attached to the wall near the ceiling. Because of the size of this project compared with the initial pilot study, we needed to mount some 7,500 shelves, based on the fact that each hospital averaged five hundred beds. We had neither the funds nor the staff to install that many shelves. So we decided to compromise and be tactical by identifying where patients were more likely to have cardiac arrests—such as in the emergency room or the coronary care unit. We estimated that if we covered those critical areas at each hospital, we would capture at least 80 percent of all cardiac arrest events. In all, we installed about 1,000 shelves. ​

​

...​

​

Nonetheless, after installing 1,000 shelves and following 2,060 cardiac arrest cases over ten years—which had yielded just two out-of-body cases—with our luck, both of them had been in areas of the hospital without a shelf! So our research staff were unable to ask if they had “seen” any of the independent objective images; and once more, the images were not able to be used. This is the reality of very low rates of survival after cardiac arrest, combined with the rare recall of the out-of-body phenomenon among survivors.​

​

Parnia, Sam. Lucid Dying (pp. 73-80). Grand Central Publishing. Kindle Edition.​

 

[Ransom]

You question was how I would distinguish a real supernatural event from an imagined one.

You're aware more than one question can exist? Now I'm questioning how you would demonstrate the event's genuineness to me.

 

[Ekklesian]

You're aware more than one question can exist? Now I'm questioning how you would demonstrate the event's genuineness to me.

You're sandbagging.

But, unless one were a witness to it, how would you demonstrate the genuineness of the Resurrection to someone? All we have are testimonies that we happen to believe in. How would you go about demonstrating the reliability of those testimonies?

It's common to appeal to the sheer number of witnesses of the Resurrected Christ, and to the fact that few recanted under circumstances where a rational individual would expect that most, if not all, would abandon an illusion or a hoax.

Your only appeals are to reason, and to the innate knowledge one has of human behavior.

The thing that can't be denied is, there was a unique phenonmenon of some kind in the case of Christ.

In the case of the near death experiences, the testimonies of doctors and nurses were sufficient to convince institutions of science and medicine of a phenomenon that cannot be explained by the usual deflections of skeptics, and so also in the case of presumed alien abductions were the reliability of the testimonies of the victims--so much so that they dropped some serious wampum on it.

That Ransom remains unconvinced by a reasonable amount of evidence has no bearing whatsoever on the established fact of the existence of these phenomena, and demanding to be convinced by an unreasonable standard before one ventures speculation on the best explanation is just avoiding the question.

 

[Ekklesian]

This is a page cited in the movie, Alien Intrusion

Alien Abduction Termination Case Files - CE4 Research Testimonies

 

[Ransom]

That Ransom remains unconvinced by a reasonable amount of anecdotal evidence

Fixed it for you.

 

[Ekklesian]

So, how would one go about gathering empirical evidence of the demonic nature of the alien abduction phenomenon?

Like that of those investigating the claims of awareness during resuscitation would have to focus on locations where resuscitation efforts are concentrated, one would have to focus on those who would be more likely to, at this point in Gospel history, be most likely to be vulnerable to overt demonic activity.

We would have to focus on those who engage in the occult and gross sensuality and sexual perversion. (Baphomet is a transhuman transsexual.)

Already you can see the difficulty...for those who think empirical data is the best data, anyway.

Let me digress a moment...the best data is truthful testimony. The Spirit bears witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God.

That is not empirical evidence. That is testimony and an appeal to authority. Fruits are empirical, sort of, because a moral judgment must be made, but the BEST evidence is the evidence of One Who gives testimony. YOU, despite anything you might see to the contrary, are a child of God.

The predisposition to dismiss testimony as unreliable on the face is first, uncharitable, and second, evidence of an unbelieving heart to start with.

Why do you marginalize those who are tormented as deranged or otherwise demented, unless an evil heart of unbelief beats in your own breasts?

If the Gospel was the answer in the First Century's understanding, it's the answer to the understanding of today.

The only thing that has changed is the nature of the manifestations.

 

[Ekklesian]

Fixed it for you

And for you too.

 

[Ekklesian]

This man receiveth sinners...

Find me some empirical evidence of that.

Morning and Evening - Logos Bible Study

Consult trusted commentaries, devotionals, and Bible dictionaries. Research the original language. Get step-by-step guidance through a passage. Make your Bible study more effective with Logos.

app.logos.com

 

[JesusFan]

Before you can conclude that a haunting was "demonic," you have to establish that there was, in fact, an objectively real haunting.

How do you distinguish a real supernatural occurrence from, say, a mistake, a dream, or a human deception? (On the last, the FFF was once graced by an "actual" ghost hunter. Let's say he wasn't too happy that we could see his videos were clearly faked.)



Or mistaken, or deceived, or part of a social panic, or...

You know why there are flying saucer sightings? Because in 1947, Kenneth Arnold reported seeing unusual aircraft that he described as "saucer-like." But he was misquoted: the newspaper mistook that description for the shape, where he was describing their manner of flying (like someone skipping a saucer across the water).

Even though what he claimed to see was actually crescent-shaped or semicircular (unusual, but more like a conventional aircraft), that misattribution led thousands to report seeing giant flying discs.

Yes, thousands and millions of people do delude themselves into seeing what isn't there.

Think that Satan and demons have been involved with mankind from early on, and that people would see their activities int he light of their current mindset and technology, so would see them as being as Fairies before, and now as grey aliens

 

[JesusFan]

@JesusFan isn't saying anyone was abducted by an alien, or that there are extraterrestrials. He's saying those who really think they have have been abducted or visited or tormented by extraterrestrials are being deceived and tormented by demons. Demons are certainly real. Where's the rule that says their activities must be limited to the Exorcist style of manifestations.

Do you have to have an example of a 'verified' haunting before you would explain paranormal experiences or torments as demonic?



Unless they're all lying,


In the cases where these abductions have been halted by people calling on the name of Jesus Christ, how would you explain it?

True, as I do not see that we have ever had encounters with outer space aliens, but that mankind has had involvement for very long time with demonic entities, who now make themselves to be seen as our space lien brethren , and comes back to me why would Jesus name really bother and hinder them, but no other name seems to be able to do that to them?

 

[JesusFan]

I'd have to see good evidence that UFOs and alien abductions are real, first, before passing judgment on whether they're actually demonic.

Problem is that they seem to be able to become physical , but also can make it appear to be physical within the minds of those observing them

 

[JesusFan]

Before you can conclude that a haunting was "demonic," you have to establish that there was, in fact, an objectively real haunting.

How do you distinguish a real supernatural occurrence from, say, a mistake, a dream, or a human deception? (On the last, the FFF was once graced by an "actual" ghost hunter. Let's say he wasn't too happy that we could see his videos were clearly faked.)



Or mistaken, or deceived, or part of a social panic, or...

You know why there are flying saucer sightings? Because in 1947, Kenneth Arnold reported seeing unusual aircraft that he described as "saucer-like." But he was misquoted: the newspaper mistook that description for the shape, where he was describing their manner of flying (like someone skipping a saucer across the water).

Even though what he claimed to see was actually crescent-shaped or semicircular (unusual, but more like a conventional aircraft), that misattribution led thousands to report seeing giant flying discs.

Yes, thousands and millions of people do delude themselves into seeing what isn't there.

There hve also be radar detections, some valid photos, and since dealing with supernatural, what would constitute proof?

 

[JesusFan]

On November 17, 1896 someone in California reported seeing a mysterious UFO/airship, which resulted in a wave of such sightings in 1896/1897. As many as 100,000 people reported seeing the airships, which were believed to have come from Mars. Eventually, the hysteria over the airships died down, with only a few isolated sightings in later years.

Mystery airship - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Mystery airship illustrated in the San Francisco Call, November 22, 1896

And amny times they met human looking persons who claimed to be from mars or venus, or else were part of a top secret lab, as seems that whatever was behind it was a "cosmic trickster" John Keel and Vallee have the right idea on what it all means, but cannot see it in deminic framework, as neither were/are Christians

 

[JesusFan]

In the case of the occult, like witchcraft or necromancy, one way to examine it would be to experiment with it. That, of course, is forbidden, but the prohibition itself is evidence of the danger.

But the testimony of those who did experiment with those things, is also evidence. People I trust have told me of their experiences.

My father told me of his experience with a Ouija board. The lensed item (I don't know what it's called) moved on its own to answer his question. It scared him and he burned it.

A late pastor of mine told of a visit paid to him and his wife by an invisible intruder. They were young and lived in a basement of the house they were building. They had just gone to bed and they both heard heavy foot falls coming down the stairs, across the floor to the foot of their bed. The foot falls stopped, and they heard the laugh of a woman they knew who had recently passed, as if she were standing right there. They were terrified, of course, and they began to claim the blood of Jesus. And, of course, they knew it wasn't her ghost.

Once I gave a lesson on Samuel's ghost, which, of course, wasn't really Samuel's ghost. A couple I knew, and whose kids I went to school with, told me of their experience seeing the ghost of their son who had died in an automobile accident. He stood at the foot of their bed and assured them he was doing okay. (With good reason, they feared his eternal state.) They believed my lesson about Samuel, that the ghost was an imposter, but asked if I thought God would sometimes send someone back to comfort those in grief.

I simply told them that I was talking about Samuel, and that God would not yield to a witch, but that God is also very merciful. They've both passed on now. So they know whether or not it was the ghost of their son that they saw. If I were to be less tactful, I would have simply answered them, I don't believe so.

My dad was alone in his experience. But I believe him. Those in the two ghost stories were not alone, and unless they were having the same dream (or nightmare) there is the mouth of two or more witnesses, describing the same event.

In the cases of the so-called alien abductions, over four million people, just in the U.S. are describing terrifying experiences, not mere sightings, with common elements. And in the book and the movie, there are those featured who ended the torments by calling upon the name of the Lord.

Testimonies are valid evidence. I believe very few ghost stories. And I tend to believe Christians, especially those who, like the author of the book, are reputable.


Don't you wish film was a thing during the Exodus?

See the author kurt Koch, and see those who have tracked Ufos such as keel and valle, as all of them have sourced this area as being heavy into the occultic/supernatural side, as while keel was weird and not a Christian, he did ackowledge that what passes today as abductions and Ufos would be seen as being demonic and possession from earlier times

 

[JesusFan]

The danger of witchcraft, like idolatry, is in not relying on God for provision or wisdom, but seeking or crediting some false god or supposed occult power for making the sun rise and the crops grow, or giving special insight.

Whether the false god or magical power actually exists is immaterial to the point. I don't need to believe in the existence of Odin to understand that I shouldn't worship him. Paul does credit such things to demons in some places, but he also says that an idol is nothing (1 Cor. 8:4). "Nothing" doesn't mean "a demon." Some--I dare say most--occult entities are simply not real in any sense.



That's simply anecdotal evidence and argumentum ad verecundiam. You trust them. Why should I? What can you offer in support of their stories, that we can both agree is objective evidence of their experiences?



"Of course," you say, as though we hadn't had that argument before and the identity of the ghost is settled beyond dispute. That's just an appeal to your own authority - self-assurance in the correctness of your own opinions.



When I say their ghost videos were clearly faked, I mean they consisted of someone standing off-camera making spooky voices and throwing ordinary objects like cards into view. I don't see how inept special effects are suppose to prove or disprove the Exodus, for which the word of God is itself a sufficiently reliable authority.

satan and demons are real, see Jesus ministry as the Promised messiah

 

[Ransom]

satan and demons are real, see Jesus ministry as the Promised messiah

Yes, Jesus and his Apostles have reliably told us the truth about the reality of Satan and demons, and by definition the word of God is reliable and trustworthy.

But what Ekklesian is saying is that since the Bible reliably informs us about (for example) the parting of the Red Sea, we should treat his friends' anecdotes as reliable accounts of supernatural events as well. That's the exact opposite of an a fortiori argument--it goes from the stronger case to the weaker. Assuming for the sake of argument that his friends are honest, it doesn't follow that they are infallible. They could be wrong.

What might I accept as evidence? With everyone carrying an HD camera in their pocket, how about some pictures from multiple sources/angles that could be verified as not CGI? I noted the fake ghost hunters a while back: they actually had a camera with them for that purpose, but when a ghost appeared, they "failed" even to point it in the right direction. Because there was no supernatural apparition to record, and they knew it.