UFO Conjectures

Thursday, April 10, 2014

Plants Pilot UFOs [Redux]

I bring forward again the thesis that plants may be the species that originates and flies those things we call Unidentified Flying Objects.

This recurrence of mine stems from an article by Oliver Sacks in the April 24th issue New York Review of Books: The Mental life of Plants … [Page 4 ff.]

Sacks delineates Darwin’s idea that plants, while evolving along “two profoundly different paths,: they (plants and animals) are “closer that one might think” as he (Darwin) outlined in his botanical book, The Power of Movement in Plants (1880).

And Daniel Chamovitz writes in his book, What a Plant Knows (2012) “plants are capable of registering what we would call sights, sounds, tactile signals, and much more. Plants know what to do, and they ‘remember.’”

As I noted earlier, this prescient movie:
 Based upon this sci-fi story:
 Had it right: plants pilot flying saucers:
 I conjecture that plants evolved somewhere, over millions of years, into mobile, thinking entities in the same way that mankind evolved here.

That they are the things inside UFOs explains the reported heavy attendance near water of UFOs and the ability of UFOs to make aerodynamic moves that would kill an animal body.

Also, there is the reported witness testimony of telepathic interactions between UFO entities and those observing them, something that plants have been proven to do, as cited in my previous posting about this.

And the plaint by astro-biologists that the alleged gray entities that inundate UFO accounts are top heavy; that is, their heads are too large to be sustained by the slim bodies that witnesses have reported.

But many plants are top heavy and the thrust of that configuration is obvious:


So, for me, the idea that “a carrot” as noted in the movie is the entity flummoxing us is an hypothesis in need of more scrutiny or debate.



  • As I recall, the opening crashed-alien-disk-under-the-ice scenes were both extremely well done AND predictively inspiring of the Kaufmannesque Roswell Crash 'testimony' of the 1990s...

    By Blogger Kurt Peters, at Thursday, April 10, 2014  

  • I think I may have mentioned this before, but Arthur Stansel ("Fritz Werner" as he was presented in UFO books), an alleged witness to the equally alleged UFO crash at Kingman, AZ in May 1953, was interested in ESP in plants.

    By Blogger Nick Redfern, at Thursday, April 10, 2014  

  • Have you consider fungi instead of plants? There are some interesting crossovers - the fungi on the Hills shoes post-abduction, the Delphos ring, entheogen stuff...

    By Blogger Clayton Robertson, at Thursday, April 10, 2014  

  • In the Sacks piece, he does refer to fungi, and elaborates on how fungi differs from animals and plants, and have an existence that is rather interesting.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, April 10, 2014  

  • Rich:

    In one way, your speculation here is not weird enough. It has been pointed out by many great minds (such as Freeman Dyson) that we living today are probably among the last non-GMO humans. The last 30 years or so has seen the discovery and invention of sufficient biotechnology to make almost any organism from here on out "intelligently designed" if we want it to be.

    Presumed occupants of UFOs--if they are as far advanced from us as everyone seems to assume--would surely have this ability as well. As such, they could easily have included genes into their bodies from plants, fungi, or any other source, natural or artificial that might give them some phenotype advantage. The choice is not necessarily plant or animal, it could be "all of the above".

    By Blogger Larry, at Friday, April 11, 2014  

  • Larry:

    ...please be careful - lauding Dyson borders upon a hate-crime against Gaia:


    By Blogger Kurt Peters, at Sunday, April 13, 2014  

  • @Clayton R.
    > the fungi on the Hills shoes post-abduction

    I cannot find any reference to this in the Hill literature. Are you referring to something you've read? Or just lamenting that sample collection wasn't done by the UFO investigators?

    By Blogger Terry the Censor, at Monday, April 14, 2014  

  • In reading your last post, I suppose your theory more formally expressed could be termed bipedal vegetative lifeforms and the difficulty with exobiology in relation to extraterrestrial life is that we can only express comparisons in terms of projection bias. In other words, what we find here on Earth which is a extremely narrow view based on our own ecology.
    Cellular intelligence, a subject I have covered in my own writing, is extremely sophisticated in it’s behavior in relation to it’s environment. We tend to classify intelligence by sentience expressing cross communication by symbols or verbiage as the hallmark of self awareness as well as an awareness of the environment.
    Whereas communication by non human species in relation to varying types of non human species and their equally non human sensory systems are as sophisticated as our own. In some species, by comparison, to say that of cetaceans, even household dogs and cats sensory systems far exceed the capability of our own.
    Further, the necessity of rigid skeletal structures to allow upright mobility are found in trees, which brings to mind, the somewhat infamous stick figures caught on security camera footage in a wave some time ago.
    All of the aforementioned could address the lack of direct communication as a bridge too far to cross in terms of interspecies relations as how many cats talk to dogs?
    Rather than ridicule your concept, I can think of many examples here in our own backyard, that suggest in a strong sense, that any critical assumption that this or that is impossible in regard to lifeforms is in of itself subject to ridicule in light of the hundreds of examples of astonishing lifeforms that science has discovered only in the past two decades.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Tuesday, April 15, 2014  

  • @Terry the Censor

    I'm not sure where I picked it up - the Hill case admittedly isn't my forte. Did they ever figure out what the powder was?

    By Blogger Clayton Robertson, at Wednesday, April 16, 2014  

  • @Clayton R.

    I understand now. I believe you're thinking of Betty's dress.

    According to Captured! by Kathleen Marden: "After the hypnosis [in 1964], she removed the dress from her closet and found that it was blanketed by a mysterious pink powdery substance." According to Marden, Betty also saw that the dress was badly stained too.

    Curiously, none of this is mentioned in Interrupted Journey, published in 1966, or in Walter Webb's 1965 NICAP report, or anywhere in the early literature that I have read so far.

    In fact, in the April 1972 issue of the UFO Investigator there is a picture of Betty holding up the dress. My copy is a black-and-white scan, so I can't see any dress details, but this is the caption:

    "Betty Hill holds dress she wore on night of sighting. Faded and no longer used, it hangs in bedroom closet as mute reminder of events that changed her life. "You are the first person to ask me about it," she told NICAP photographer."

    Just faded -- not discoloured by a powder, not stained, and not torn (another late claim absent from the early literature).

    Sorry, Clayton, I'm getting a bit long-winded! But if anyone knows of early accounts of dress damage, I'd certainly appreciate hearing about it.

    By Blogger Terry the Censor, at Wednesday, April 16, 2014  

  • @Terry

    It may have been in one of the recent Keel collections that got released to Amazon. Lots of stuff in there that I wish I could find more sources on. :(

    I've been trying to dig up sources on Pulharich's StarKids thing he had going on in the Hudson Valley...Unfortunately there seems to be very little information available. :(

    By Blogger Clayton Robertson, at Monday, April 21, 2014  

Post a Comment

<< Home