Aliens 101 · Paranormal ·

Alien Telepathy Training: A Four-Decade Observer's Guide to Contact Protocols and Evidence

After spending more than four decades on my observation platform outside Sedona, I've seen things that conventional science can't explain. Silent crafts accelerating at impossible speeds. Formations that respond to light signals. Objects that seem to know when they're being watched.

But I've also learned something else: the gap between what people claim happens during contact attempts and what can actually be documented is massive.

Let me be straight with you. I'm not here to sell you a course or promise you'll chat with aliens next Tuesday. What I can do is walk you through what we know about alien telepathy training based on historical claims, current protocols, the scientific evidence (such as it is), and the hard lessons learned from my network of observers across the Southwest.

Where This All Started: The 1950s Contactees

The whole idea of telepathic alien contact didn't pop up overnight. It traces back to the contactee movement of the 1950s, when people started claiming direct mental communication with extraterrestrials.

George Adamski was probably the most famous. Starting in 1952, he said he had conversations with "Venusians" using a mix of hand gestures and mental telepathy. He called it a "unified state of consciousness." Adamski took photographs of what he claimed was a scout ship, though skeptics later pointed out it looked suspiciously like a chicken egg incubator.

Then you had George Van Tassel, who channeled messages from an entity named "Ashtar" in the early 1950s. He held massive public gatherings at Giant Rock, California, and claimed aliens gave him plans for the "Integratron"-a machine that could supposedly reverse aging and enable time travel.

George King founded the Aetherius Society in 1954 after claiming contact with "Aetherius," a Cosmic Master from an Interplanetary Parliament. That organization still exists today, practicing what they call "The Twelve Blessings" to channel spiritual energy.

And there's Billy Meier, who reported ongoing contacts with Plejaren extraterrestrials. He described the communication as "impulse-telepathy," where information gets planted in your mind without you realizing where it came from.

What ties all these early claims together? Messages about spiritual evolution. Warnings about Earth's future. And the insistence that consciousness itself was the communication channel.

The CE-5 Protocols: Modern Contact Methods

Fast forward to 1990. Dr. Steven Greer founded the Center for the Study of Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence (CSETI) and developed what he calls CE-5 protocols-Close Encounters of the Fifth Kind. That's human-initiated, bilateral contact with extraterrestrial intelligence.

The core technique is called Coherent Thought Sequencing (CTS). Here's how it works according to the CSETI training materials:

You start with group meditation to achieve what they call "heart-brain coherence." That means slowing your breathing and heart rate to create a calm, receptive state. Box breathing works well-four-second inhale, four-second hold, four-second exhale, four-second hold. Repeat.

Next comes the actual thought sequencing. The group collectively projects specific mental images. The standard CSETI approach is a "cosmic 911"-you visualize your location from space, then zoom in: Earth, your continent, your country, your region, down to your exact coordinates on the ground.

While you're doing this mental work, you're also using physical signals. High-powered flashlights or lasers trace geometric patterns in the sky. Some groups play specific audio tones-frequencies supposedly recorded during previous UFO sightings or at crop circle sites.

Does it work? That's where things get messy.

The Training Market

If you want to learn these protocols, you've got options ranging from a $10 app to multi-thousand-dollar retreats. Dr. Greer's workshops run about $195-$350 for a couple days, while his intensive expeditions can top $3,000.

The Psychic School offers an "Extraterrestrial Contact" MP3 course focused on developing clairvoyant abilities to connect with "angelic ET guides."

For those wanting something more academic, Ubiquity University has certificate and degree programs in Extraterrestrial Studies that include telepathic training components.

The CE5 Contact app costs $9.99 and includes guided meditations, protocol instructions, and features to find other practitioners near you.

Here's my problem with this landscape: there's zero standardization. No shared competency requirements. No agreed-upon evidence thresholds. Just a lot of anecdotal testimonials and "trust me" claims.

What Does Science Actually Say About Telepathy?

Look, if we're going to talk about training people for telepathic contact, we need to address the elephant in the room: does telepathy even exist?

The most cited evidence comes from Ganzfeld experiments. In these studies, a "receiver" sits in mild sensory deprivation-halved ping-pong balls over the eyes, white noise in headphones. A "sender" in another room focuses on a randomly selected image. The receiver tries to describe what they're picking up.

A 1994 meta-analysis by Bem and Honorton found a hit rate of 32.2% where 25% is chance. That's statistically significant with a p-value of .002. More recent analyses have found similar results.

Sounds promising, right?

Not so fast. Skeptics point to serious methodological flaws. Ray Hyman, a prominent critic, argues that sensory leakage, improper randomization, and flawed judging procedures contaminate the results. A 1999 meta-analysis by Milton and Wiseman failed to replicate the earlier positive findings.

Then there's the STAR GATE program-the government's 20-year, multi-million-dollar investigation into remote viewing. The CIA commissioned an evaluation in 1995. Jessica Utts, a statistician, concluded there was "unequivocal evidence" of a human capacity to access remote information. But Hyman, reviewing the same data, said methodological problems made the results unreliable.

After 40 years watching these debates, here's what I know: the effect sizes are tiny, replication is inconsistent, and no one can produce telepathic results on demand in a controlled setting. That doesn't prove telepathy is impossible. But it means anyone claiming they can train you to reliably communicate telepathically with aliens is way ahead of what the evidence supports.

The Real Risks Nobody Talks About

Let me tell you about something that happened at one of our observation nights three years ago. A young woman-I'll call her Sarah-drove out from Phoenix after watching CE-5 videos online. She'd been practicing solo for weeks, convinced she was making contact.

About an hour into our session, she started hyperventilating. Said she was receiving overwhelming messages from multiple entities. We had to talk her down for nearly an hour. Turns out she had a history of anxiety disorders she hadn't disclosed. The meditation and sensory environment triggered a severe episode.

That incident changed how I run group observations. Now everyone fills out a basic mental health screening. No one with active psychosis, severe PTSD, or recent manic episodes participates in the intensive protocols. Sound paranoid? Research on meditation and altered states shows these practices can trigger psychological distress in vulnerable people.

But the mental health stuff is just one risk.

The Laser Problem

Using lasers for "vectoring" is popular in CE-5 circles. Aim a beam at the sky, trace patterns, signal to potential craft. Sounds harmless.

Except it's a federal crime if you hit an aircraft. The FAA can fine you up to $32,646 per violation. You can face imprisonment under 18 U.S.C. § 39A. And yes, drones count as aircraft under federal law.

My rule for our groups: no lasers above 10 degrees elevation, period. If you see or hear aircraft, all lasers go dark immediately. Use 5mW maximum power. Some people complain this limits their "vectoring" capability. You know what else limits your capability? Federal prison.

The Suggestibility Factor

Here's something that bothers me about group contact sessions. When everyone's in a meditative state, following guided visualizations, expecting contact-people's brains fill in the gaps. Elizabeth Loftus's research on false memory formation shows how easily suggestion can implant memories that feel completely real.

I've seen people in our groups describe "contact experiences" that perfectly match the expectations set by the facilitator's introduction. They're not lying-they genuinely believe they experienced something. But belief isn't data.

If You're Going to Do This, Do It Right

Despite my skepticism about the telepathy claims, I'm not telling you not to try these protocols. Just approach it like actual research, not wishful thinking.

Document Everything

Every session needs synchronized, multi-sensor data collection. At minimum:

Get a GPS time source for UTC synchronization. Your phone's satellite tracking apps-Heavens-Above for satellites, Flightradar24 for aircraft-to rule out conventional objects. An audio recorder running continuously for verbal logging. At least two video cameras on tripods covering different angles.

Better setup: Add a consumer EEG headband to monitor brain activity during meditation. A heart rate variability sensor to track physiological coherence. RF spectrum analyzer to detect unusual radio signals. Magnetometer for local field changes.

Best setup: Research-grade equipment. Multi-channel EEG systems. Thermal cameras. Multiple observation stations for triangulation. The whole nine yards.

Whatever level you're at, the data needs timestamps synchronized to GPS time. No exceptions.

Control for Conventional Explanations

You know how many "UFO" videos I've debunked that turned out to be Starlink satellites? Dozens. How about aircraft landing lights seen through atmospheric distortion? Too many to count.

Before you claim contact, you need to eliminate:

Satellites (there are thousands up there, and they reflect sunlight). Aircraft, including military craft and drones. Meteors and bolides. Atmospheric phenomena like lenticular clouds. Ground-based lights reflecting off clouds. Your own equipment malfunctions or reflections.

Multi-station observation helps. If two groups 20 kilometers apart both see the same object and can triangulate its position, you've got something worth investigating. If only one station sees it, you're probably looking at something local or a misidentification.

Separate Subjective from Objective

Keep two logs. One for sensor data and observations anyone could verify. One for subjective impressions-feelings, intuitions, mental images. Never mix them.

If someone in your group "receives" a telepathic message about where a craft will appear, log it with a timestamp before looking in that direction. Then you've got a testable prediction. If the craft shows up, you've got something interesting. If it doesn't, you've got null data. Both are valuable.

What's not valuable: someone saying after the fact, "I felt like something was about to happen" when you had a sighting. That's called hindsight bias, and it's scientifically worthless.

The Community Problem

The online alien contact community has a serious signal-to-noise problem. Communities like r/Experiencers explicitly state that asking for proof violates their rules. They call it a "safe space" where all experiences are valid.

I get the impulse. People who've had unusual experiences often face ridicule. But when you create spaces where questioning is forbidden, you create echo chambers where misinformation spreads unchecked.

On the flip side, r/UFOs and r/aliens have more stringent evidence standards, though enforcement is inconsistent. You'll find everything from solid technical analysis to wild speculation presented as fact.

Discord servers are popping up too. The official Dr. Greer server is described as being for "like-minded, incredibly positive people"-which sounds nice but effectively means skepticism isn't welcome. Other servers focused on UFO analysis do allow critical thinking.

Facebook hosts hundreds of CE-5 groups. Most are positive, supportive spaces where people share their experiences. They're also hotbeds for misidentifying satellites as alien craft. The number of times I've seen someone post a Starlink train video claiming contact... it's exhausting.

My advice: participate in multiple communities with different moderation philosophies. Get comfortable with disagreement. And develop a thick skin for having your experiences questioned. If something really happened, it'll hold up to scrutiny.

The Technology That Might Change Everything

Here's where things get interesting. We're on the edge of having sensing technology that could actually test these claims properly.

Wearable OPM-MEG systems-optically pumped magnetometers for measuring brain magnetic fields-are hitting the market. By 2025, these things are achieving sensitivities better than 30 femtotesla per root hertz with a dynamic range of ±200 nanotesla. That's 205% better signal-to-noise than conventional EEG in some applications.

What does that mean in plain English? We can now measure brain activity during outdoor fieldwork with precision that used to require million-dollar lab equipment. Imagine correlating real-time neural activity with synchronized sky observations during a contact attempt.

Companies like Synchron and Neuralink are developing brain-computer interfaces that can decode neural signals with increasing accuracy. We're not there yet, but the trajectory is clear.

The experimental setup I'd love to see: Multiple field stations, each equipped with OPM-MEG on practitioners, synchronized with all-sky cameras, RF spectrum analyzers, and magnetometers. Run the CE-5 protocols while logging everything. Look for correlations between group neural coherence and environmental anomalies.

Will it show telepathic communication? I'm skeptical. But I'm also a scientist. Run the experiment properly, and I'll accept whatever the data shows.

A Staged Approach That Actually Makes Sense

If you're serious about this, build your skills systematically. Don't jump straight to multi-day contact expeditions.

Start with basics (8 weeks): Develop attentional control through daily meditation. Twenty minutes, three times a week. Practice heart rate variability training with a basic sensor-a Polar H10 chest strap runs about $90 and provides accurate data. Spend time learning to identify satellites and aircraft using tracking apps. Keep a detailed log of every session with UTC timestamps.

Move to intermediate protocols (16 weeks): Join or form a working group of at least three people with defined roles. Start practicing the full CE-5 sequence-grounding, coherence meditation, thought sequencing, and physical signaling. Add basic sensors to your toolkit. Run at least ten documented field sessions. Learn to differentiate between subjective impressions and objective observations.

Advance to rigorous experimentation: Only after you've logged 20+ quality sessions should you attempt blinded experiments. Have someone external provide sealed targets for your thought sequencing. Coordinate with another group for multi-station triangulation. Pre-register your protocols and hypotheses before running experiments. Contribute your data to a public repository.

Most people skip straight to the fun part-going out under the stars and pointing lasers at the sky. Then they wonder why their "contact" experiences don't hold up to scrutiny.

The Hybrid Future: Testing What Can Actually Be Tested

Pure consciousness-based claims are nearly impossible to verify. But hybrid protocols that combine mental techniques with physical beacons create testable frameworks.

Imagine this setup: Two field stations 15 kilometers apart. Each has full sensor arrays-cameras, radio spectrometers, magnetometers-time-synced via GPS. Station A has a group doing CE-5 protocols while wearing EEG sensors. At a predetermined UTC timestamp, they begin thought sequencing while simultaneously activating a low-power laser that traces a specific geometric pattern and a radio beacon transmitting corresponding tones.

Station B, unaware of the exact protocol timing, monitors the sky in the target area. A third independent observer is told only to watch a specific patch of sky during a 10-minute window.

If anomalous signals appear at both stations during the window, can't be attributed to conventional sources, and triangulate to the target area, you've got data worth investigating. If Station A's neural activity shows unusual patterns correlating with the anomalies, even better.

This is where SETI researchers and consciousness researchers should collaborate. SETI has the technical expertise in signal detection. Consciousness researchers understand protocols for testing subjective claims. Citizen scientists provide the distributed observation network and enthusiasm for field work.

A memorandum of understanding between a university parapsychology department and a major citizen science group could make this happen. Co-design experiments. Share data using FAIR principles-Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable. Give citizen scientists access to research-grade equipment and training. Provide academic oversight on methodology.

That's the path forward that excites me. Not another documentary full of testimonials and blurry lights. Not another guru promising contact for $3,000. A systematic, collaborative effort to test these claims with the best tools available.

What I've Learned From Four Decades of Watching

I've logged over 15,000 hours on my observation platform. I've captured hundreds of anomalous objects. Some turned out to be classified military craft. Some were atmospheric phenomena I didn't initially recognize. Some remain unexplained.

But here's what those four decades taught me: The phenomena are real. Something is going on in our skies that conventional explanations don't cover. But the jump from "unexplained aerial phenomena" to "telepathic communication with extraterrestrials" is enormous. The evidence for the first is solid. The evidence for the second is thin at best.

Does that mean you shouldn't try CE-5 protocols? No. Try them. Document them properly. Be honest about what you observe versus what you feel or believe. Separate correlation from causation. Control for conventional explanations.

And please, for the love of all that's holy, don't aim lasers at aircraft.

The best discoveries in this field will come from people who are both open-minded and rigorously scientific. Believers who never question their assumptions miss important details. Skeptics who dismiss everything without investigation miss potential breakthroughs. The sweet spot is systematic documentation combined with genuine curiosity.

I'll be on my platform tonight, like I am most clear nights, with my cameras rolling and my sensors logging. If you're out there doing the same thing with proper protocols and real documentation, you're contributing to something bigger than any individual experience.

Maybe we'll capture something that changes everything. Or maybe we'll just accumulate more data points that refine our questions. Either way, we're doing it right-one documented observation at a time.