August 28, 2010
Having read quite a bit of John Keel's works, and coming across other legit sources such as Jacques Vallee, Hynek and others .... I have just read part of a book by a Catholic priest. He refers to these authors, and others, and ties in any reference to demonic/angelic bible passages. All well and good. But I get aggravated when a writer makes an a priori assumption that one part of an argument is FACT and the other arguments somehow "mimic" that fact. For example, this author founds his argument on his belief that all paranormal experience is caused by demons. Whereas I see connections, as John Keel and others have, between REPORTS, LORE, etc., of fairies, ghosts, poltergeists, aliens, demons, angels, bigfoot, etc., this gentleman says that the ONLY truth is demonic activity, and ALL OTHER stories, myths, reports, etc., are caused by demons in disguise. I really believe that it's a mistake to accept one explanation or theme as TRUE over the others. I would say the same thing if someone said that fairies, poltergeists, demons, etc., were actually all "aliens" from outer space. I try to keep an open mind and have a real problem with someone who assumes truths that haven't actually been "proven". Not that I don't believe in possession by negative energies, or in ghosts, etc. But I believe the entire concept of experiences beyond our normal, accepted "reality" is too vast, too ancient, and too multi-cultural, to even THINK of settling on one explanation for all of it. Who agrees?