INVESTIGATIVE FILES JOE NICKELL
Alien Implants: The New 'Hard Evidence'
cience fiction author Whitley and Morpheus, who formed sleepers' nomenon, the abduction guru: a self- Strieber continues to promote the dreams—to superstitious belief in angelic styled alien researcher and often amateur Snotion of extraterrestrial visitations. guidance, demonic possession, Voodoo hypnotist who elicits fantasy abduction His Communion: A True Story (1987) hexes, and zombie slaves. Folklore told of talcs from suitably imaginative individu- told of his own close encounter—actually abductions to fairyland from which peo- als (Baker and Nickell 1992, p. 203). what psychologist Robert A. Baker has ple returned with addled wits or sapped Reports of alien implants may have diagnosed as "a classic, textbook descrip- vitality. Popular literature brought such begun with the alleged abduction tion of a hypnopompic hallucination" (or examples as Bram Stoker's Dracula of a Massachusetts woman, Betty "waking dream") (Baker and Nickell (1891) and the mesmerizing Svengali in Andreasson, which supposedly took 1992). Now, several money-making George du Maurier's Trilby (1894). place in early 1967. However, the case books later, Strieber offers Confirmation: Science fiction helped develop the alien- was not publicized widely until 1979 The Hard Evidence of Aliens Among Us. takeover concept, with such movies as when Raymond E. Fowler published his The evidence is threefold: UFO sightings The Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956). book The Andreasson Affair. Andreasson, (yawn), close encounters (been there, done A 1967 Star Trek TV episode, "Errand of who seems to have had a predisposition that), and—the hard evidence, quite lit- Mercy," featured a "mind-sifter," a device- to fantasize under hypnosis, claimed the erally—alien implants! used by the alien Klingons to probe pris- aliens had removed an apparently Implants are the latest rage in UFO oners' thoughts during interrogations implanted device, in the form of a circles, and Strieber marshals the diag- (Okuda and Okuda 1997). spiked ball, by inserting a needle up her nostic, radiographic, surgical, photo- Meanwhile, Kenneth Arnold's 1947 nose. Fowler speculated that the BB-size graphic, and analytic evidence that sup- "flying saucer" report touched off the implant could have been "a monitoring posedly indicates—but admittedly docs modern era of UFOs and with it an device" (Fowler 1979, p. 191). About not prove—extraterrestrials are implant- evolving mythology. By the 1950s "con¬ this time, the concept of "psychotronic ing devices in human beings. To put tactees" were claiming to receive mes- technology"—i.e., mind control by Strieber's claims into perspective, we sages from the Space People. Then in means of physical devices—entered should first look at the development of 1961 came the first widely publicized UFOlogy (Sachs 1980, pp. 200. 262). the implant concept. abduction case, that of Betty and Barney Andreasson's abduction report was The notion of induced mind/body Hill. (Their psychiatrist concluded the followed by that of a Canadian woman control is pervasive, with paranormal couple had shared their dreams rather named Dorothy Wallis. She described a entities typically having some means of than having had an actual experience similar implant under hypnosis, which monitoring mortals as a prelude to con- [Klass 1974]). seemed to explain an earlier "compul- trol. Examples range from mythological With the publicizing of the Hill sion" to meet with the aliens (Klass beings—like Cupid, whose magical case—notably by John G. Fullers The 1989, p. 122). When we appeared arrows infected men's hearts with love, Interrupted Journey in 1966 and NBC together on the Canadian television talk television's prime-time movie "The UFO show program The Shirley Show (which Joe Nickell is CSICOP's Senior Research Incident" in 1975—claims of alien aired April 15, 1993), I suggested that Fellow and author of numerous books on abductions and "medical" examinations Mrs. Wallis's Story appeared to imitate the paranormal. began to proliferate. So did another phe- Andreasson's. She countered that her
1 8 September/October 1998 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER abduction came first, but I observed that implant scientifically examined, where- surgery on feet). He was accompanied she did not come forward until about upon it proved to be "an utterly ordi- by an unidentified general surgeon (who 1983 and that Andreasson's much earlier nary terrestrial artifact" (Clark 1992). did not want to be associated with UFO publication gave the latter the stronger In contrast to Jacobs's similar-but-gen- abduction claims). The latter performed claim (Nickell 1995; Wray 1993). erally-unavailable brain/nasal implants all of the above — the — ankle surgeries. In time, David Jacobs, a historian- are the current devices. The change in A critic of implant claims, Dr. Virgil turned-abduction-researcher, found the the situation is remarkable. Since 1994 Priscu, a department head in an Israeli Andreasson/Wallis-type implant to be alleged implants have been surgically teaching hospital, observes that a foreign stereotypical among abductee claimants. recovered but they've become notably object can enter the body unnoticed, as diverse: one looks like a shard of glass, during a fall, or while running barefoot The object is as small as or smaller than a BB, and it is usually smooth, another a "triangular" (or possibly "star- in sand or grass—even as a splinter from or has small spikes sticking out of it, shaped") piece of metal, still another a a larger impacting object (Priscu 1998). or has holes in it. The function of this carbon fiber, and so on. None was Such foreign objects may become sur- device is unknown: It might be a loca- located in the brain or nasal cavity, rounded by a membrane, like several of tor so that the targeted individual can be found and abducted; it might serve instead being recovered from such the "implants" removed by Dr. Leir et as a monitor of hormonal changes; it extremities as toe, hand, shin, external al. (Lindemann 1998); depending on might facilitate the molecular changes ear, etc.; some were accompanied by the material, they may also degrade over needed for transport and entrance; it scars while others were not (Linderman time, leaving only a small bit of "reac- might facilitate communication . . . Sometimes nosebleeds occur after this 1998; Strieber 1998, pp. 171-247). tion" tissue in place of the foreign procedure. Both child and adult Indeed, so varied are the implants, object—"No mystery, no 'implants,'" abductees have seen physicians for their sites, and other characteristics that says Dr. Priscu. He challenged Dr. Leir's nosebleed problems, and have discov- they recall a similar craze of yore. associate, a hypnotherapist named ered odd holes inside their noses. (Jacobs 1992, pp. 95-96] During the witch mania of the sixteenth Derrel Sims, to provide specimens, or at and seventeenth centuries, inquisitors least color slides of them, for analysis at identified certain "witch's marks" which a forensic medical institute, but Alas, Jacobs relates, could be almost anything. As one writer reported he received no cooperation. Dr. Several abductees have reported diat a explains, "Papillomas, hemangiomas, Priscu also noted the lack of the scien- ball-shaped object either dropped out blemishes, warts, welts, and common tific peer-review process in the case of of their nose or was expelled when they blew their nose. All of these moles were seized upon as authentic implant claims. Although he is himself expulsions happened before they witch's marks, and these marks invari- an admitted UFO believer, he states, "I knew they had been abducted; in ably determined the destiny of the sus- also firmly believe that meticulous each case they thought they had inex- pect" (Rachleff 1971). research by competent persons is the plicably inhaled something and dis- carded the object or lost it. [p.96] Several disparate implants arc way to the truth" (Priscu 1998). described in the bestselling Abduction: In Confirmation Whitley Strieber Actually, one of these items did sur- Human Encounters with Aliens by describes several of die implants includ- vive and was thoroughly investigated by Harvard psychiatrist John E. Mack. For ing one removed from his own external the Center for UFO Studies (CUFOS) example, two small nodules that ear by a physician. It turned out to be col- in the late 1980s. Possessed by a self- appeared on an abductees wrist were sur- lagen, the substance from which cartilage claimed abductee, the "implant" had gically removed and analyzed in a pathol- is formed (Strieber 1998, p. 228). Strieber supposedly been stuck up the man's nos- ogy laboratory. The lab found the tissue admits that die promised "hard evidence" tril by his extraterrestrial abductors, but unremarkable (Mack 1994, pp. 27-28). provided by implants is not so hard after was later dislodged when he caught a Another implant was supposedly placed all: "I hope this book will not cause a cold and blew his nose. CUFOS investi- at the base of an abductees skull. Under rush to judgement," he writes, "with gator Don Schmitt accompanied UFO hypnosis the man—who believes he haskeptics s trying to prove that evidence so historian Jerome Clark, editor of an alternate identity as a humanoid far retrieved is worthless while UFO CUFOS's journal International UFO named Orion—described a small, pill- believers conclude that it is proof. Both Reporter, to meet the man in an Illinois shaped object with protruding wires that, approaches arc a waste of time, because restaurant. As Clark relates the incident, he said, would make it easier for the the conclusive evidence has not yet been after brief exchanges, the man aliens "to follow me." Astonishingly, gathered" (Strieber 1998, p. 255). unwrapped the object. "Don and I Mack makes no mention of any subse- A similar admission comes from stared at it incredulously. It was a ball quent attempt to locate and remove the UFOlogists David E. Pritchard, an M.I.T. bearing. "Despite the obvious identifica- reported implant (Mack 1994, p. 172). physicist who, with Mack, hosted the tion, the CUFOS team sought the man's Many of the removals have been per- 1992 Abduction Study Conference at X-rays, which "showed nothing out of formed by "California surgeon" Roger M.I.T. (Pritchard emphasized that the the ordinary," Clark states. Nevertheless, Leir. Actually Dr. Leir is not a physician, conference was merely held there; it was CUFOS went on to have the alleged but a podiatrist (licensed to do minor not an M.I. T. conference.) Pritchard gave a
SKEPTICAL INQUIRER September/October 1998 19 presentation on a suspected implant, a popular culture. There have always been Linderman, Debra L. 1998. Surgeon Tells First Results or Implant Analysis. Excerpted from tiny object with a collagen sheen that he individuals—fantasizers as well as para- CNN News vol. 15.8 (February 26. 1996). acknowledged might have grown in the noid schizophrenics—who have heard Mack, John E. 1994. Abduction: Human alleged abductee. (It had supposedly been voices mat directed or controlled diem, Encounters with Aliens. New York: Ballantine. Nickell, Joe. 1995. Entities: Angels. Spirits. implanted in the man's penis, but worked voices tJiat are expressions of hopes and Demons, and Other Alien Beings. Amherst, itself out over time.) Pritchard conceded: fears. Therefore it seems safe to predict N.Y.: Prometheus Books. 211. that, as the millennium draws near, there Okuda. Michael, and Denise Okuda. 1997. The 1 don't have anything conclusive. Star Trek Encyclopedia. New York: Pocket will be further claims of "hard evidence" What I have is just what you usually Books, 141,303. get in this business: it will provide of extraterrestrial visitation. We may also Priscu, Virgil. 1998. Rebuttal to Darrell Sims the more beliefs for the believers and will expect that misperceptions and exaggera- Implant Guy! Internet posting to the UFO Folklore Center. be instantly skeptified by the skeptics, tions of natural phenomena, as well as and it's not very good evidence if it Rachleff, Owen S. 1971. The Occult Conceit. hoaxes, will abound. Chicago: Cowles Book Co., 108. won't move the lines at all. The point Sachs, Margaret. 1980. The UFO Encyclopedia. is to convince the jury . . . (Bryan New York: Perigee Books. 1995. pp. 50-51) References Strieber, Whitley. 1985. Communion: A True Story New York: William Morrow. O f course, it is not skeptics but Baker. Robert A., and Joe Nickell. 1992. Missing . 1998. Confirmation: The Hard Evidence of implant advocates who have the burden Pieces: How to Investigate Ghosts, UFOs. Aliens Among Us. New York: St. Martins press, Psychics, and Other Mysteries. Buffalo, N.Y.: Wray. Shannon. 1993. Notes of interview with of proof—a burden diey have emphati- Prometheus Books, 227. Dorothy Wallis for The Shirley Show. n.d. cally failed to meet. Indeed, the implant Bryan, C. D. B. 1995. Close Encounters of the (faxed to Joe Nickell March 31; show taped concept—like the larger alien abduction Fourth Kind. New York: Knopf. 50-51. April 1). Clark, Jerome. 1992. Abduction Artifact, Fate phenomenon itself—lacks proof that it April, 19-22. has an objective reality. Instead, the evi- Fowler, Raymond E. 1979. The Andreasson Affair. Acknowledgments dence indicates it is simply part of an Englewood Cliffs. N.J.: Prentice-Hall. Jacobs. David. 1992. Secret Life: Firsthand I am grateful to Barry Karr and Tim evolving UFO mythology. Its theme of Documented Accounts of UFO Abductions. New entities exerting influence over humans is York: Simon & Schuster. Binga for research assistance, Ranjit one seen in many variants, ranging from Klass. Philip J. 1974. UFOs Explained. New York: Sandhu for manuscript preparation, and Vintage Books, 299. Ben Radford for reading the manuscript ancient mythical lore to modern science . 1989. UFO Abductions: A Dangerous fiction and persisting in some form in Game. Buffalo, N.Y.: Prometheus Books. and making helpful suggestions.
Zeitschrift fur Wissenschaft und kritisc IlKh nii diuiNiluii Spriuhritiim gflM H on MagBSfo*
i n I nii i .it.liiinr \..i\ I'm .e n.i li ifti n < \ J'».,| 54i,'l «li : | J-JX. . 411,1 =4 M5AJI IV»lUh i: :: D-M^M kofidnrf t.rrmun: CUIUP I: ml"' • L'-up.of? • Inunn-l: htip:"MMM.'^«upure
jSi J wjkh iiMhlr | IMP ho»t«ilcBr»Skrvtiker Prubm.taetMt hjbgn/f i ibvifartdro SkcptikrT abunfurfva. I'rrtv DM 34.- pro tahr 14 Au3«abta). kuadbar 6 Wocbni var .Unaftinn Kjriraderjabm. li-h bioLJ Sirputat liu/uirrr Abonnml uad odur krinril Autprr* far AmlanifcJirlrniPC |tonal DM 6.-.'Jabri.
StranV.Nr.
myori
DafeBKlHcnrkrifl C*u|HMi rtMarbickrn. U\tn mdrr airf ymmr Hmntpmce Iw^lrllrn
2 0 September/October 1998 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER