A Harvest of Fear

Date: Document ID:

The pursuit of truth requires the ability to see beyond the appearance of things to the meaning and
substance behind the forms. In no field of study and research is this more essential than that of
UFOlogy, a field beset by mystery, partial information, misinformation and deliberate disinformation.
And, alas, in no field is there so great a deficiency of this very quality.

Take, for example, the present climate where every rumor, fantasy and observation is given a spin to fit
into the preconceived framework of “alien” sinister designs and manipulations. From abductions to
animal “mutilations” to secret goings-on at US military bases, all are described in the “sinister aliens”
mold. Their pervasive, if unspoken, status quo is to place all such events, real or imaginary, in the same
dark and rather frightening shadows. To depart from this conventional wisdom, this unofficial party line
is to incur the derision of those self-appointed experts who, after all, know best.

It would appear that the UFO hysteria pendulum has swung full cycle: If the 1950s were the era of the
gorgeous Venusians, space gods and saviors from the galactic federation, the past decade has brought
us to the age of sinister “aliens” snatching mother and child alike from their bedrooms, harvesting
cattle, cats, dogs and even fetuses for obviously nefarious purposes, and the collaboration of military
fascists and “aliens” in a plan to dominate the Earth! For the most part, those who claim to be objective
UFO “abduction” researchers, as well as UFO journalists and authors, have been swept up in this
hysteria, this harvest of fear.

Even those who sincerely intend to “just describe the facts” are affected by the dominant milieu of fear,
negativity and hysteria. Words such as victim, abducted, alien, mutilation, rape, sinister, disturbing,
alarming, deception, controlling, manipulative, evil, and so on are accepted as automatic members of
the UFO lexicon at once mandatory and unquestioned. There is an abundance of automatic
interpretations and a real lack of deep analysis, which leaves us with nearly unquestioned – and
unchallenged – conclusions which are uniformly negative. Rather than objectively collecting facts,
analyzing trends and making intelligent plans for future research and UFO-human interactions, there
exists an increasingly powerful machine of hysteria bringing forth a harvest of fear. And facts which do
not fit into this fear and negativity paradigm are either ignored or deliberately debunked as “alien”
screen memories and deception.

The real victim in all this, of course: Truth.

Truth is hard to discern amid the din of hysteria and the clouds of fear currently holding sway over the
UFO community. Events are prone to misinterpretation and even censure in this environment, and those
facts which do survive intact are nonetheless presented with a patina of fear and paranoia. The danger
in all of this is that we may perpetuate a trend which, while initially false, may create its own reality –
and its own future conflicts. We must give serious thought and much reflection to this matter, for to do
otherwise may result in serious and potentially catastrophic consequences for not only humanity as a
whole but for individual observers of the UFO phenomenon as well. Indeed, we do create our own
reality, and we must contemplate deeply what reality may be.
 A Harvest of Fear
Date: Document ID:
Author: Steven M. Greer, MD

Beyond those other sweeping, if not abstract, concerns, there is the more immediate and ethical
question of what all of this hysteria is doing to the numerous innocent percipients of the UFO
phenomenon. Aside from the fact that the trust is being continuously, if not unintentionally distorted,
those individuals who have had close interactions (a.k.a. “abductees” and “contactees”) with UFOs and
their occupants are being forced, at times cruelly, to deny any positive or edifying aspects of their
encounters, and are left to dwell only on the frightening and negative aspects of the experience. Is this
common? Exceedingly so! We have interviewed several individuals who have stated that so called
“abduction researchers” not only enforced a certain negative and fear-engendering interpretation of
their experiences but go further and actually “throw out” any aspects of the experience which do not fit
this preconceived “fear paradigm.” That is, positive, loving, healing and edifying experiences with ET
beings are either ignored or deemed screen memories which only constitute a further sinister deception
by the ETs. Objectively, open–mindedness – and the truth – are cast away so that these experiences may
be fit into a framework of preconceived (if unstated) negative conclusions. On the one hand, these
researchers will go to great lengths to establish the credibility and veracity of their subjects, only to turn
around and ignore or actively debunk those aspects of the experience which do not fit the researchers’
own paradigm.

If we are to pick and choose among the facts of these cases, could we not just as well contend that the
negative experiences are the “screen memories” triggered by the individual’s own internal fears and
insecurities while the edifying and spiritual memories are the “true” ones? If we are to pick and choose
among the facts, why not just take the happy alternative? Indeed, one alternative is just as dishonest
and dangerous as the other, and both should be avoided. It is imperative that we accept – and report –
all the facts and then analyze their meaning in a calm and non-hysterical manner. With the information
and experiences we collectively possess thus far, we can neither proclaim the ET beings to be sinister
Darth Vader space conquerors nor can we assert that they are perfect space gods. Our polarization on
this question is one of the chief manifestations of a collective hysteria which is at once pervasive and
unproductive. And the greatest task facing us is the elimination of this hysteria and the transcendence of
our own fear.

From:

“Extraterrestrial Contact: The Evidence and Implications” by Steven M. Greer, MD