If You Go Looking

Ebens

XT/5/D

The Serpo exchange

An alleged human exchange programme, released anonymously online.

In 2005, anonymous postings claimed that a dozen American personnel had spent years on an alien world under a 1965 exchange programme. It grafts a Grey-type body onto the crash-retrieval and government-secrecy strand rather than the contactee one, which is what makes it a product of its decade.

If you go looking

Anonymous documents with no provenance and no method of engagement.

Who should be careful

Reading the code

XT/5/D

Extraterrestrial, biological · embodiment 5 of 5, an ordinary biological body · source: disputed documents · key

Dates

Released: 2005

Related

Belongs with the Ummo letters as document-founded rather than encounter-founded.

Terms used on this page

XT: extraterrestrial, biological

Origin code

Claimed to have travelled here from another star system in an ordinary physical body.

Degree of embodiment: 5, an ordinary biological body

Scale, 1 to 5

5 is an ordinary biological body. 4 is physical but manifests oddly. 3 comes and goes. 2 is energetic or subtle. 1 is consciousness with no persistent form. Note that this tends to fall as a tradition ages.

D: disputed documents

Source code

Founded on texts of contested or admitted authorship rather than on witnesses.

Serpo

2005

An anonymous online release describing a 1965 exchange programme that sent American personnel to another world. No chain of custody, and inconsistencies flagged early, including by researchers otherwise sympathetic to the field.

Disputed or admitted authorship

Documented harm

The founding documents have contested authorship, or someone has claimed to have written them. Treat anything built on top as built on sand.

No practice attached

Tradition-side

There is nothing to do here: no inherited method of engagement, whether the tradition is a text, an argument or a set of reports. Anyone offering you one has invented it.

Deliberate contact work

Read this first

The hazard in this subject attaches to the method, not to which name you aim it at. Ouija work, invocation, sustained channelling, induced hypnagogia, deliberate sleep deprivation and hypnotic regression are the practices associated with difficulty, and a session aimed at a benevolent civilisation is not safer than one aimed at something considered lower. What raises risk is doing it alone, doing it repeatedly, doing it while sleep-deprived, and doing it with an existing vulnerability to psychosis, mania or dissociation. People who get into trouble here overwhelmingly got there through practice, not through reading.

Who should be careful

Practice-side

Anyone with a personal or family history of psychosis, bipolar disorder or dissociative conditions, anyone in acute crisis, and anyone isolated from people who would notice a change in them. Intensive contact practice is destabilising by design (that is what it is for), and destabilisation lands hardest on people already close to an edge.

← Back to all 59 entries