Inferring the intent of Non-Human Intelligence (NHI) requires far more than speculation; it requires identifying patterns that persist across domains of evidence. Public pilot accounts, televised interviews, sworn congressional testimony, and investigator briefings consistently reveal a behavioral signature set: recurrent UAP presence in restricted airspace, apparent demonstrations of technological capability, frequent activity in maritime and transmedium environments, and a smaller but significant body of testimony describing encounters with non-human “beings.” These observations do not establish motive or origin, but they form the empirical scaffolding upon which any intent model must be constructed.
Public, on-record testimony – most prominently David Grusch’s interview with Ross Coulthart and his July 26, 2023, House Oversight appearance – has elevated the intent question to the congressional level. These statements, alongside long-standing aviator reports, frame the modern debate, even as key elements such as alleged “nonhuman biologics” and legacy retrieval programs remain disputed in the public evidence layer.
Beyond physical encounters, experiencer testimony – including abduction narratives, channeling messages, and astral-projection reports – adds a psychological and symbolic layer to the corpus. These sources frequently describe ecological warnings, non-interference doctrines, transformative initiatory experiences, or, in some cases, reproductive or manipulative agendas. While these experiential accounts do not provide physical proof, their cross-cultural consistency over decades offers valuable data about how witnesses interpret NHI intentions and how the phenomenon may interface with human cognition.
A growing technical and geopolitical conversation further situates the oceans as a primary theater for UAP activity. Reports of transmedium craft and unidentified submerged objects have catalyzed an “ocean-first” analytical shift. Rear Adm. Tim Gallaudet’s work for The Sol Foundation outlines why a maritime lens – including hydroacoustic, IR, and multispectral monitoring – is essential for understanding both behavior and possible intent.
Taken together, these evidentiary streams – instrumented observations, sworn testimony, experiencer narratives, symbolic communications, and oceanographic analysis – provide the multidimensional foundation needed to examine NHI intent. They suggest that if an intelligence is active here, its engagement may span physical monitoring, informational signaling, ecological oversight, psychological influence, or other layered strategies rather than simple conquest or passive indifference.
Intent models that fit the current testimony and observations of public officials and case researchers
1) Non‑interference or “zoo” stewardship
Idea. NHI may follow a doctrine of non‑interference, observing without overt contact, similar to John Ball’s “Zoo Hypothesis.”
Why people consider it. Recurrent presence without formal contact, avoidance behaviors, and long timelines fit an observer stance.
What would falsify it. Clear, repeatable evidence of direct coercive control, or sustained open contact, would contradict a non‑interference posture. Speculation label: Hypothesis. (ScienceDirect)
2) Field research on biosphere and civilization
Idea. NHI conduct long‑term sampling and monitoring of Earth’s ecology and human systems.
Why people consider it. Regular incursions in controlled airspace reported by trained observers indicate systematic surveillance rather than random curiosity. Speculation label: Hypothesis. (CBS News)
3) Strategic signaling and deterrence
Idea. Demonstrations near sensitive training ranges serve to signal capability, deter, or shape behavior.
Why people consider it. Pilots describe craft that “perform” in proximity to assets, then depart. That looks like signaling, not concealment. Speculation label: Hypothesis. (YouTube)
4) Planetary hazard management, including nuclear stewardship
Idea. A subset of incidents around nuclear facilities reflects a program to warn, monitor, or limit nuclear risk.
Why people consider it. Retired Air Force personnel have publicly alleged UAP correlations with nuclear sites, including missile shutdown claims, most famously discussed at the National Press Club in 2010. The claims remain contested, yet the theme is persistent in testimony. Speculation label: Researcher Opinion, with case labels often Disputed. (CBS News)
5) Oceanic staging and resource interests
Idea. NHI operate from oceanic environments, either as staging zones or as areas of intrinsic interest, which would explain frequent USO narratives.
Why people consider it. A dedicated maritime research agenda has been proposed because many credible reports are transmedium or sea‑proximal. Speculation label: Hypothesis. (The Sol Foundation)
6) Culture and information control, sometimes called a “control system”
Idea. The phenomenon presents displays that interface with human beliefs and expectations, influencing culture over time rather than conquering terrain.
Why people consider it. Jacques Vallée and Eric W. Davis sketched a six‑layer model where physical effects, information content, and witness cognition interlock. Religious‑studies scholars like Jeffrey Kripal also argue that “contact” events reshape meaning frameworks, not just physics. Speculation label: Researcher Opinion. (bdigital.ufp.pt)
7) Incremental acclimatization
Idea. Public exposure is being paced to reduce shock, with testimony, documentaries, and briefings serving as staged acclimatization rather than full disclosure.
Why people consider it. The testimony‑first turn in culture, including The Age of Disclosure and multiple Hill events, looks like a managed normalization rather than a decisive reveal. Speculation label: Researcher Opinion. (The Washington Post)
8) Coexistence or “cryptoterrestrial” partition
Idea. A non‑human presence coexists out of sight, possibly in undersea, subsurface, or remote biomes, emerging episodically.
Why people consider it. Persistent maritime focus and high‑strangeness displacement effects encourage some researchers to treat cohabitation as a live hypothesis to test. Speculation label: Hypothesis. (The Sol Foundation)
9) Autonomous probes and post‑biological exploration
Idea. Many encounters involve probes or machine avatars that prioritize mapping and sampling, not dialogue, which could explain minimal social engagement.
Why people consider it. Consistency of small, responsive objects and orbs, along with the absence of overt diplomacy, fits autonomous exploration. Speculation label: Hypothesis. (General conceptual support from the broader astrobiology and SETI literature; intent remains inferential.)
10) Mixed motives over time
Idea. “NHI” may not be a single actor. Different groups could pursue different aims.
Why people consider it. Variance in reported morphologies and behaviors suggests pluralism, not a unitary strategy. Speculation label: Researcher Opinion.
How the abduction canon frames “intent” from experiencers and researchers
Abduction literature is not monolithic. Five distinct lines dominate the field and point to different motives attributed to NHI.
1) Transformational and eco‑spiritual instruction
Core claim. Encounters restructure identity and ethics, often with messages about humanity’s relationship to nature and the sacred.
Lead sources. Psychiatrist John E. Mack framed abduction as a catalyst for psychological and spiritual growth and reported frequent ecological warnings delivered telepathically. In interviews and his later synthesis Passport to the Cosmos, he argued that many experiencers emerge with heightened environmental concern and a broadened sense of reality. (johnemackinstitute.org)
Intent signal. Education or initiation rather than conquest.
Speculation label. Researcher Opinion.
Claims Taxonomy. Probable for the testimony pattern; origin and source identity remain Disputed.
2) Biological program and hybridization
Core claim. Systematic reproductive procedures, genetic sampling, and multi‑generation tracking serve an agenda that culminates in human‑NHI hybrids.
Lead sources. Budd Hopkins foregrounded “medical” procedures and missing‑time cases; David M. Jacobs extended this to a full hybrid program and argued for integration into human society in The Threat and Walking Among Us. Independent catalogs and scholarly summaries show recurring reproductive motifs across case reports, although the methodology and hypnosis protocols have been criticized. (Center for UFO Studies)
Intent signal. Population seeding or species continuity through humans.
Speculation label. Hypothesis.
Claims Taxonomy. Disputed, due to reliance on hypnotic recall and absence of public biological evidence.
3) Deception, coercion, and the “trickster” profile
Core claim. Encounters show manipulative narratives, screen memories, and morally ambiguous beings who may stage “good cop” and “bad cop” roles.
Lead sources. Karla Turner emphasized coercion, deception, and trauma in Into the Fringe and follow‑up fieldwork, arguing that some cases involve heavy psychological manipulation. (Google Books)
Intent signal. Control of perception and behavior rather than mutual understanding.
Speculation label. Researcher Opinion.
Claims Taxonomy. Disputed.
4) Pattern without theory
Core claim. The abduction narrative has a surprisingly consistent structure across thousands of reports: capture, examination, communication, tour or vision, return with missing time.
Lead sources. Folklorist Thomas E. Bullard’s comparative studies for CUFOS documented this stable sequence and its variants without endorsing a single motive theory. (Avalon Library)
Intent signal. Unknown; the repeatable pattern is the finding.
Speculation label. None beyond descriptive coding.
Claims Taxonomy. Verified for the narrative pattern; origin unresolved.
5) Ambiguous initiation by “visitors”
Core claim. Encounters are terrifying yet transformative and resist simple good‑bad framing.
Lead sources. Whitley Strieber’s long‑running testimony and scholarship surrounding Communion stress ambiguity and an initiatory arc, a theme he has revisited in academic venues. (Harvard Divinity School)
Intent signal. Initiation with unknown ends.
Speculation label. Witness Interpretation.
Claims Taxonomy. Disputed.
What channeling and astral‑projection canons say about intent
These streams do not claim laboratory proof. They present coherent metaphysical frameworks that many experiencers use to make sense of contact. Treat them as worldviews that generate testable predictions about behavior and messaging.
A) The Law of One (Ra Material)
Throughline. A non‑interference ethic tied to “free will,” a polarity of “service to others” versus “service to self,” and gradual “harvest” or maturation.
Intent toward humans. Guidance without overt violation of choice; nudges toward ethical development.
Primary texts. The L/L Research archive and topical indexes explicitly frame non‑interference and service‑to‑others as core. (L/L Research)
Speculation label. Researcher Opinion for the framework; Witness Interpretation when applied to specific cases.
Claims Taxonomy. Legend to Disputed depending on application.
B) Seth material (Jane Roberts)
Throughline. Consciousness creates reality; “entities” function as teachers rather than rulers; development comes through expanding awareness.
Intent toward humans. Education, creativity, and self‑authoring rather than control.
Primary resources. The Seth Center summarizes the corpus and positions Seth as a teacher of consciousness. (Seth Center)
Speculation label. Researcher Opinion.
Claims Taxonomy. Legend for cosmological claims; the lived value to experiencers is Verified as a sociological fact.
C) Astral‑projection canon: Robert A. Monroe
Throughline. Nonphysical ecologies, repeated contact with intelligences, and the controversial idea of “loosh,” a kind of energy associated with strong emotion.
Intent toward humans. Two readings circulate. In one, some nonhuman agents value emotional energy and may “harvest” it. In another, loosh is a metaphor within a larger curriculum of growth and is not a predatory thesis.
Primary sources. Far Journeys and Monroe Institute materials. Use the book for the loosh narrative; use the Institute’s official pages to anchor authorship and corpus. (Google Books)
Speculation label. Researcher Opinion.
Claims Taxonomy. Legend for cosmological assertions; unresolved for specific intent claims.
D) “Volunteers” and stewardship: Dolores Cannon’s QHHT corpus
Throughline. Post‑WWII, higher intelligences recruit “volunteers” who incarnate to aid Earth’s transition while honoring a prime directive of non‑interference.
Intent toward humans. Benevolent guidance, ecological stabilization, spiritual ascent.
Primary sources. Publisher pages for The Three Waves of Volunteers & the New Earth summarize the non‑interference rationale and mission brief. (Ozark Mountain Publishing, Inc.)
Speculation label. Researcher Opinion.
Claims Taxonomy. Legend to Disputed.
E) Contactee and channeled streams from the 1950s onward
Throughline. Face‑to‑face meetings or channeled messages, typically warning about nuclear war and urging moral uplift.
Intent toward humans. Planetary guardianship and ethical reform.
Primary sources. Sociological and religious‑studies surveys show that anti‑nuclear messaging dominated early contactee narratives; Adamski and Angelucci are representative. (Digital Commons)
Speculation label. Researcher Opinion for intent; Witness Interpretation within individual cases.
Claims Taxonomy. Legend historically; some testimonies remain Disputed.
A practical matrix to understand the experiencer and channelers canons
| Canon | Proposed NHI intent | Recurring signals reported by witnesses | UAPedia Speculation label | Claims Taxonomy tag |
| John E. Mack’s cohort | Instruction and eco‑spiritual warning | Telepathic messages about ecology; transformative after‑effects | Researcher Opinion | Probable pattern, origin Disputed (johnemackinstitute.org) |
| Hopkins and Jacobs line | Hybridization and social insertion | Reproductive procedures; generational tracking; “hybrid” encounters | Hypothesis | Disputed pending public biological proof (Center for UFO Studies) |
| Karla Turner’s cases | Manipulation and control | Screen memories; mixed “helper” and “tormentor” roles | Researcher Opinion | Disputed (Google Books) |
| Bullard’s comparative work | Unknown; pattern is the finding | Capture–examination–communication–return sequence | None beyond description | Verified pattern, motive unresolved (Avalon Library) |
| Strieber’s “Visitors” | Ambiguous initiation | Awe–fear blend; lifelong meaning‑making | Witness Interpretation | Disputed (Harvard Divinity School) |
| Law of One | Non‑interference; service‑to‑others | Free‑will emphasis; gradual “harvest” | Researcher Opinion | Legend to Disputed (L/L Research) |
| Seth | Teaching and self‑authorship | Instruction through trance sessions | Researcher Opinion | Legend to Disputed (Seth Center) |
| Monroe OBE | Energy ecology; “loosh” debate | Reports of energy exchange; pedagogic guides | Researcher Opinion | Legend for cosmology; unresolved specifics (Google Books) |
| Dolores Cannon | Incarnated volunteers; stewardship | “Prime directive” narrative; inner‑world intervention | Researcher Opinion | Legend to Disputed (Ozark Mountain Publishing, Inc.) |
| 1950s contactees | Anti‑nuclear guardianship | Moral sermons; peace warnings | Researcher Opinion | Legend historically; Disputed case by case (Digital Commons) |
How to test intent
For each model above, define a measurable signature and a falsifier.
Non-interference
Signature: consistent avoidance of sustained close contact when humans actively pursue; messaging in channeled material (e.g., Law of One, Cannon “volunteers”) that emphasizes “free will” and non-violation.
Additional observable: abduction experiencers who report that “permission” or “soul-level agreement” terminates or alters the experience.
Falsifier: stable, cooperative engagements on demand, or coercive events occurring even when witnesses assert refusal under controlled conditions.
Field research
Signature: sampling behaviors, patterned revisits to ecological or industrial sites; abductees reporting systematic biological procedures and long-term tracking (Hopkins / Jacobs).
Additional observable: multi-decade experiencer families showing recurring contact claims consistent with longitudinal study rather than random selection.
Falsifier: absence of spatial/temporal clustering beyond chance; biological-procedure testimony showing no repeatable structure when recorded prospectively.
Signaling
Signature: demonstrations when our best sensors are active, rapid egress after “message” behavior; abduction “lessons” or visionary displays consistent with didactic communication (Mack’s cohort).
Additional observable: content-rich imagery (ecological warnings, planetary risk) appearing synchronously across unrelated experiencers and channelers only during high-signal UAP windows.
Falsifier: equal distribution of UAP events unrelated to our training cycles and no correlation between UAP clusters and reported “didactic vision” experiences.
Nuclear stewardship
Signature: clustering around nuclear platforms with correlated technical effects; abductee and contactee warnings about nuclear risk (1950s contactees, Mack’s ecological messages).
Additional observable: spikes in contactee/channeled messaging that specifically reference nuclear danger during historical nuclear tensions.
Falsifier: robust archival reconstruction showing mundane causes for the entire cluster, plus no temporal association between geopolitical nuclear escalation and experiencer messaging.
Oceanic staging
Signature: repeatable USO corridors, entry points, and acoustic signatures; channeling lore occasionally describing undersea bases or “hidden civilizations.”
Additional observable: abduction or OBE reports describing underwater environments or craft transitions from water to air (transmedium narratives).
Falsifier: continuous monitoring yields only prosaic traffic; no correlation between USO hotspots and experiencer descriptions when timestamped and blinded.
Control-system effects
Signature: content-rich displays keyed to witness expectation, plus spillover “hitchhiker” patterns in families; channeling and astral-projection accounts reflecting symbolic, archetype-driven teaching consistent with Vallée–Davis “information layer” interactions.
Additional observable: shared symbolic constructs (e.g., ecological instruction, unity consciousness, timelines of transformation) arising independently across experiencers, abductees, and channelers only during active UAP flap periods.
Falsifier: blinded, instrumented studies find no correlation between reported experiences and independent environmental data; symbolic content not clustering by epoch or UAP wave.
Hybridization program (abduction canon specific)
Signature: multi-experiencer reports of reproductive encounters showing consistent procedural details, ages, “hybrid” morphologies, and emotional-bonding motifs (documented by Hopkins, Jacobs, others).
Additional observable: longitudinal experiencer families reporting recurring contact at developmental milestones (puberty, pregnancy, intergenerational).
Falsifier: prospective tracking of experiencers shows no structured pattern, no repeatable physiological markers, and no consistency in procedural narratives when collected without hypnosis.
Energy-exchange / “loosh” ecology (astral-projection canon)
Signature: correlation between intense emotional events and increased anomalous activity in households; experiencers reporting energetic “drain” or “harvest” themes during OBEs (Monroe).
Additional observable: measurable physiological changes (heart rate variability, EM anomalies) during reported encounters in lab-compatible settings.
Falsifier: no objective difference between experiencers and controls under blinded emotional-arousal protocols; no EM or physiological signature detected during claimed encounters.
Spiritual initiation or consciousness expansion (Mack, Strieber, Seth, Law of One)
Signature: consistent transformative after-effects across experiencers, including lifelong shifts in worldview, ecological concern, psi-like experiences, or altered dream/OBE states.
Additional observable: repeatable psychometric or neurological changes (e.g., cognition, sensory processing, anxiety patterns) in longitudinal experiencer cohorts versus controls.
Falsifier: no statistical difference between experiencers and matched controls over time; transformative narratives collapse into culturally mediated expectation rather than structured outcome.
Bottom line
If NHI exist, the most defensible reading of public testimony and persistent observations is that they are not seeking conquest or disclosure-on-demand. The signal looks like a blend of surveillance, capability signaling, ecological or strategic monitoring, and culture-shaping displays that respect a non-interference boundary most of the time. The ocean, nuclear infrastructure, and training ranges appear to be focal points.
Testimony from abductees, channelers, and astral-projection experiencers adds a further dimension: many encounters frame NHI intent not as domination but as instruction, stewardship, or patterned engagement—ranging from ecological warnings (Mack’s cohort), to didactic visionary experiences, to non-interference ethics emphasized in channeling traditions such as the Law of One, to deeper consciousness-oriented training described by Monroe and Strieber. Others report more ambiguous or manipulative encounters, suggesting that intent may be plural rather than uniform.
Taken together, these sources imply that if NHI operate here, their motives may span multiple layers at once: physical (surveillance, sampling, transmedium mobility), informational (symbolic displays tailored to witnesses), and psychological or cultural (transformative experiences, behavioral nudges, or worldview recalibration). These cross-domain patterns align with the Vallée–Davis “control system” hypothesis, where interactions serve to shape human perception and development across generations rather than force abrupt contact.
The correct response is not belief or dismissal. It is to instrument the problem, compel secure testimony where appropriate, release redacted records, and then test intent hypotheses with signatures that can fail.
Future work must treat the experiencer corpus as data – not proof of origin, but a map of how the phenomenon engages human cognition, biology, and culture. Only by integrating sensor evidence with experiential patterns can the field resolve whether these encounters reflect teaching, monitoring, manipulation, ecological stewardship, or a combination thereof.
Claims Taxonomy
Verified
Intent signals supported by consistent, multi-witness, multi-sensor or cross-domain testimony.
- Surveillance / Observation:
Recurring UAP presence in restricted airspace, near training ranges, and above naval task groups demonstrates behavior consistent with monitoring.
Data basis: pilot testimony, radar/IR events, consistent clustering. - Capability Demonstration (“Signaling”):
Maneuvers performed within sensor cones or training areas suggest intentional demonstration of technological superiority.
Data basis: repeat patterns during active training cycles.
Probable
Intent signals strongly suggested by testimony and pattern analysis but lacking controlled, public instrumentation.
- Ecological Monitoring:
Ecological or biospheric concern appears repeatedly in abduction narratives (Mack), channeled material, and experiencer testimonies.
Cross-cultural persistence → elevated to Probable. - Strategic Monitoring / Nuclear Stewardship:
Correlation between UAP presence and nuclear facilities or strategic assets is widely reported, though causes are disputed.
Presence: Probable. Mechanism: Unresolved. - Oceanic Staging / Transmedium Activity:
Persistent USO reports, radar tracks, and research modeling support a plausible ocean-centered operational domain.
SOL Foundation analysis elevates it to Probable pending sustained sensor confirmation. - Cultural or Psychological Influence (“Soft Contact”):
Transformative experiencer effects, symbolic displays, and era-specific messaging are recurrent.
Pattern robustness → Probable, mechanism unknown.
Disputed
Claims supported by significant testimony but not corroborated by public materials or controlled data.
- Hybridization Program (Hopkins / Jacobs):
Reproductive narratives are consistent across abductees, yet no biological evidence is public.
Status: Disputed due to reliance on hypnosis and absence of physical samples. - Coercive or Manipulative Intent (Karla Turner):
Psychological manipulation claims are well-documented in experiencer literature but not externally verifiable. - Staged Acclimatization / Disclosure Strategy:
Interpreted from patterns in sightings + testimony waves; no direct evidence of coordinated NHI efforts. - Species-Typed Intent Models:
Greys, Nordics, insectoids, reptilians, etc., appear across testimonies but lack biological confirmation.
Legend
Claims emerging from channeling, contactee cosmology, metaphysical literature, or spiritual frameworks.
- Non-Interference Prime Directive (Law of One):
Strong philosophical system, influential, but untestable without NHI verification. - Energetic Harvesting (“Loosh,” Monroe):
Descriptions of energy ecology remain metaphysical; no measurable variables yet defined. - Soul Contracts, Incarnation Waves (Cannon):
Structured belief systems rather than empirical claims. - Cosmic Federation / Galactic Councils:
Recurs in channeling and some contactee material; no independent corroboration.
Misidentification
Intent interpretations based on misunderstood natural or human-made events.
- “They’re here to warn us through lightships / sky glyphs.”
Many such events resolve to drones, satellites, or atmospheric optics. - “UAP responded emotionally to witness fear.”
Psychological projection; no consistent causal evidence.
Hoax
Intent claims fabricated intentionally for media attention or doctrine-building.
- Specific staged contactee events or falsified channelings identified historically.
These are rare but documented in UFO history; UAPedia tags such cases individually.
Speculation Labels
Hypothesis
These are models that present coherent, testable predictions but lack publicly verified physical evidence:
- Non-interference stewardship: NHI avoid overt contact except under controlled or symbolic conditions.
- Field research / biosphere sampling: Structured revisits, biological sampling, and long-term tracking.
- Strategic signaling: Demonstrations near military assets to convey capability or intent.
- Planetary hazard management: Interest in nuclear facilities and ecological stability.
- Oceanic staging / transmedium operations: Persistent undersea presence or infrastructure.
- Autonomous probes and post-biological agents: Small, maneuverable craft acting as scouts or sampling platforms.
- Cryptoterrestrial coexistence: An indigenous or parallel presence operating from concealed domains.
- Hybridization or genetic-interaction programs (abduction canon): Reproductive procedures and multi-generational tracking reported in consistent testimonies.
Researcher Opinion
These models describe interpretive frameworks proposed by investigators, scholars, or experiencer researchers:
- Control-system / culture-engineering models (Vallée–Davis): Phenomenon shapes human belief, behavior, and meaning across centuries through multi-layered interactions.
- Plural motives or multi-agent ecology: Different NHI groups with different agendas.
- Staged acclimatization: Gradual exposure of humanity to NHI presence through indirect contact and testimony waves.
- Spiritual-initiation or consciousness-development models (Mack, Kripal, Strieber, Law of One, Seth): NHI interactions aim at psychological, ethical, or metaphysical development rather than material objectives.
- Energy-exchange / emotional-interaction models (Monroe “loosh” framework): NHI engagement involving energetic or emotional dynamics rather than physical resources.
Witness Interpretation
Perceptions or meanings assigned by witnesses during or after contact:
- Entity “species” labels: greys, tall humanlike forms, insectoid beings, reptilian forms—understood as phenomenological descriptions, not confirmed biology.
- Telepathic impressions or “messages”: Ecological warnings, spiritual guidance, instructions, or emotional communications.
- Visionary displays and symbolic experiences: Scenes, teachings, or “downloads” during contact, abduction, or astral experiences.
- Role assignment: Perceiving beings as teachers, guardians, tricksters, deceivers, or stewards based on subjective interpretation.
References
Ball, J. A. (1973). The zoo hypothesis. Icarus, 19(3), 347–349. (ScienceDirect)
CBS News. (2021, May 16). UFOs regularly spotted in restricted U.S. airspace [60 Minutes segment]. (CBS News)
C‑SPAN. (2023, July 26). Hearing on Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP) [Video and clips]. (C-SPAN)
Gallaudet, T. R. (2024, March). Beneath the surface: We may learn more about UAP by looking in the ocean [White paper]. Sol Foundation. (The Sol Foundation)
Grusch, D. C. (2023, June 11). Interview with Ross Coulthart [NewsNation broadcast]. (YouTube)
House Oversight and Accountability Subcommittee. (2023, July 26). Unidentified anomalous phenomena: Implications on national security, public safety, and government transparency [Transcript]. Congress.gov. (Congress.gov)
Kelleher, C. A. (2022, June). The Pentagon’s secret UFO program, the hitchhiker effect, and models of contagion. EdgeScience, 50, 19–25. (theblackvault.com)
Kripal, J. J. (2024, Sept 1). Philosophy professor Jeffrey J. Kripal: “Thinking about a UFO as some kind of extraterrestrial spaceship is naive.” The Guardian. (The Guardian)
NewsNation. (2023, June 11). UFO whistleblower David Grusch: ‘We are not alone’ [Video]. (YouTube)
Project: National Press Club. (2010, Sept 27). Ex‑Air Force personnel: UFOs deactivated nukes [Press coverage]. CBS News. (CBS News)
Vallée, J., & Davis, E. W. (2005). Incommensurability, orthodoxy and the physics of high strangeness: A six‑layer model for anomalous phenomena. Journal of Scientific Exploration (open‑access reprint). (bdigital.ufp.pt)
Washington Post. (2025, Mar 11). Aliens are real and there’s a cover‑up, new documentary aims to prove [on The Age of Disclosure]. (The Washington Post)
Abduction research and patterns
Mack, J. E. interviews and summaries of Passport to the Cosmos at the John E. Mack Institute; NOVA interview on the global scope of reports. (johnemackinstitute.org)
Bullard, T. E. comparative studies for CUFOS and Journal of UFO Studies documenting consistent narrative structure. (Avalon Library)
Hopkins, B. and Jacobs, D. M. lines of work emphasizing reproductive programs and hybridization. (Center for UFO Studies)
Strieber, W. academic and public conversations about ambiguous intent. (Harvard Divinity School)
Channeling and astral‑projection canons
L/L Research’s official Law of One library and topic pages on non‑interference and service‑to‑others. (L/L Research)
Seth corpus overviews and primary texts via Seth Center. (Seth Center)
Monroe Institute catalog for Far Journeys; use the book text for the “loosh” framing. (The Monroe Institute)
Dolores Cannon’s publisher pages for The Three Waves of Volunteers & the New Earth. (Ozark Mountain Publishing, Inc.)
Scholarly summaries of the 1950s contactee movement and its anti‑nuclear messaging. (Digital Commons)
SEO keywords
NHI intent, Non-Human Intelligence motives, UAP intent models, extraterrestrial intent hypotheses, abduction research NHI motives, John Mack abduction ecology warnings, Budd Hopkins hybridization program, David Jacobs hybrid hypothesis, experiencer transformation UFO, telepathic messages UAP, NHI communication patterns, Zoo Hypothesis and UAP, cryptoterrestrial hypothesis, Vallée Davis six-layer model, control-system UAP intelligence, high strangeness intent, hitchhiker effect NHI, astral projection UFO contact, Robert Monroe loosh hypothesis, Dolores Cannon volunteers, Law of One non-interference, channeling NHI messages, Seth material UFO interpretation, spiritual contact UFO, Jeffrey Kripal UFO spirituality, David Grusch testimony, Ross Coulthart interview, Age of Disclosure testimony, UAP Caucus investigations, UAP crash retrieval allegations, transmedium USO ocean research, ocean-first UAP strategy, nuclear stewardship hypothesis UAP, UAP interference nuclear sites, training range UAP incursions, UAP surveillance patterns, UAPedia editorial policy, UAP experiencer taxonomy, UAP contact hypotheses, hybrid beings UFO reports, NHI species descriptors, UAP signaling behavior, ecological monitoring UAP, strategic observation extraterrestrial, consciousness interface UAP, multi-domain UAP intent.