The Truth Is Out There: 5 Things You Need to Know about UFOs for the Upcoming X-Files Revival

“They’re here, aren’t they?” said Fox Mulder to his secret informant, known to viewers only as Deep Throat. 

“Mr. Mulder,” began the old man, in a reprimanding tone, “They have been here for a long, long time.”

As many of you know, the X-Files revival starts soon (the new six episode mini-season picks up, appropriately, 13 years after the X-Files went off the air). Just recently, they had a premiere in Los Angeles of the first episode for the new mini-season, and Fox recently released a 1 minute clip online.

For those of you who don’t know, the X-Files was one of the most popular US TV series in the 1990s, at its height averaging 20 million viewers per episode. The main protagonist Fox Mulder, is an FBI agent whose sister was taken from their room when he was a kid, in what Mulder believed was an alien abduction. This fueled his lifelong obsession with paranormal phenomena and uncovering the truth about UFOs, Aliens, and a global conspiracy. I watched the show religiously with friends, staying in on Friday nights when it first came on, before it got really popular and moved to Sunday nights.

Years later, when I became an executive producer on the documentary Thrive: What On Earth Will It Take, made by Foster Gamble and Kimberly Carter Gamble, (one of the most watched documentaries of all time), I started to do a little research on this subject on my own. I found out that while many Americans believe in UFOs, there tends to be a lot of misunderstanding about the phenomenon and about the people who’ve had these experiences, particularly in the minds of many of my “scientific” oriented friends.

So, just in time for the X-Files revival here are 5 things you may not know about the UFO phenomenon that inspired the X-Files:

1. The X-Files wasn’t purely science fiction, according to Chris Carter.

Like many others fans, I took the X-Files to be “simply” an original work of science fiction, which sprung from the mind of Chris Carter, the show’s creator. While the series is fiction, Carter himself will tell you that that many of the elements are based on real-life accounts.

When I started to investigate on my own, I started to meet people in the UFO community and hearing their accounts. The stories I heard sounded a lot like what I had seen in the X-files. The implants, the eyewitness accounts of triangular craft and bright lights, the cases of missing time, all of these have been reported by numerous witnesses.

 In fact, I was told by a mutual friend that Chris Carter discouraged his actors from attending science fiction conventions because the X-Files wasn’t purely science fiction. In preparation for the upcoming revival, if you watch the very first X-files episode, Pilot, and watch carefully, you’ll see that it says, “The following story is inspired by actual documented accounts” at the beginning of the episode. I actually met Chris Carter last year, before they started filming the new season, at a UFO-related event in San Mateo, and it was clear that he was continuing to research what people had to say on this subject — perhaps some of his new research will show up in the revivial.

2. Myth: Only people who wear tinfoil hats and tabloid reporters take UFOs seriously.

One of the persistent myths about UFOs and people who believe in them is that it is a fringe group of people who “live off the grid” and wear tinfoil hats. After having been to a dozen UFO events and interviewing hundreds of people, I haven’t seen a single tinfoil hat (OK I saw one but that was fro teh benefit of reporters who wanted to take a photo of “weird UFO people”). In fact, I have met intelligent people from all walks of life — scientists, engineers, people who worked for NASA, to independently wealthy businessmen and women, to retirees. The only commonality I could find was confidence in what they’ve seen and experienced, and strong belief that the “truth is out there” and that it should be investigated more seriously.

There are many well-known people who have had UFO sightings, and many who support finding out the truth. . In Los Angeles, Dan Akroyd is a well known proponent of UFO research. John Podesta, who served as an advisor to President Obama and Chief of Staff to Bill Clinton, has been very vocal about his interest in the subject and his desire to get the truth out, a process known to UFO enthusiasts as “Disclosure”. John Podesta tweeted in 2014 that his biggest regret in working for the Obama white house was that he was unable to secure disclosure of top secret UFO files.

In fact, Hillary Clinton, was recently asked about UFOs by a reporter in Conway, New Hampshire while campaigning there. Mrs. Clinton said she believed we might have been visited by aliens in the past, and that if elected president, she would get to the bottom of it.

And UFOs are not just for tabloids. Leslie Kean, a serious investigative reporter, received a copy of a report from retired French generals that said that they believed the UFO phenomena was real and should be investigated seriously (called the “COMETA” report). Kean’s book, UFOs: General, Pilots ,and Government Officials Go On the Record, is a great book for those who know nothing about the phenomenon or are inclined to dismiss it out of hand. There have been many pilots, many members of the military, and many other government officials who have been willing to speak on and off the record and Ms Kean does a great job of presenting finally about this phenomenon. It’s a shame that this myth is so prevalent that many “serious” scientists and engineers won’t even take the time to read books like Ms Kean’s.

3. Myth: There is no evidence of UFOs.

Many skeptics say there is no evidence that UFOs exist. They’re not quite right. First of all, there are tons of photographic evidence of odd “unidentified” objects flying over both rural and urban landscapes. The next argument is that these pictures are all photoshopped — a charge that doesn’t hold up when the photos are from the 60’s and 70’s — I’ve seen some of these older photos, some taken by the members of the military, and they are very convincing. Moreover, when there are multiple witnesses that corroborate the photographical evidence (like in the Phoenix lights incident — more on this one below), the skeptic’s view that they are all doctored doesn’t really hold-up.

And then there are literally thousands of eyewitness reports –ranging from places like O’Hare airport to Rendlesham Forest in the UK (in a famous military sighting).

If that isn’t enough evidence for you, Emeritus Professor of applied physics at Stanford, Peter Sturrock says, “radar evidence” is physical evidence, and there have been multiple sightings where radar evidence was available that corroborated what pilots say they were seeing.

This includes a well-known incident over Alaska in 1986, where a Japan Air Lines pilot, Kenju Terauchi, was flying near Mt. McKinley when he reported seeing a UFO: “Then there was a kind of reverse thrust, and the lights became dazzlingly bright. Our cockpit lit up. The thing was flying as if there was no such thing as gravity. It sped up, then stopped, then flew at our speed, in our direction, so that to us it looked like it was standing still. The next instant it changed course. There’s no way a jumbo could fly like that. If we tried, it’d break apart in mid-air. In other words, the flying object had overcome gravity,” Terauchi said.

John Callahan, the FAA Division Chief of the Accidents and Investigations branch, had the data, which covered more than a half hour. Callahan has testified many times about what he saw, “As far as I’m concerned, I saw a UFO chase a Japanese 747 across the sky for over half an hour on radar.”

If that’s still not enough to convince you that there is “some” evidence, in the abduction area, there have been physical objects (known as “implants”) that have been pulled out of abductees bodies, and X-rays also count as physical evidence. In the cases where doctors surgically extracted them, the metallic objects somehow evaporated, in other cases they were able to preserve them and find that they a unique “anomalous” structure and were meant to be housed inside the human body.

Whether you believe in aliens or not, these implants had to have been placed there by someone. The question is who? It’s unlikely abductees would have the surgical skill to put them there themselves — so the question remains, who put them into their bodies? This question remains unanswered. In the original X-files, implants were a not insubstantial part of the story, and whenever the government got a hold of one, as at the end of the first episode of the X-Files, in a scene reminiscent of Raiders of the Lost Ark or Warehouse 13, they put it away in the midst of a giant government warehouse, to be lost.

4. Myth: Sightings only happen in the countryside, only in the US, and only since we started flying airplanes.

Again, these are myths. There have been anomalous objects reported in the sky well before the modern era of airplanes, going back to the 1500s and beyond. In their wonderful book, “Wonders in the Sky”, Jacque Vallee ad Chris Aubeck have catalogued these sightings. Jacquee Vallee, a long time French UFO researcher, was in part the inspiration for the French scientist in Close Encounters of the Third Kind, made by another UFO believer, Stephen Spielberg. In one of the most famous pre-airplane incidents, in 1561 a number of spheres and disks, which were red, blue, and back, were seen to come out of two vertical cylinders over Nuremberg, Germany. The residents of the town reported that these objects seem to fight each other — there’s even a well-known drawing of this image. 

In recent times, lest you buy the myth that sightings only happen in remote places, one of the most famous sightings was the Phoenix Lights. In 1997, an estimated 10,000 people saw a set of triangularly arranged lights not just hovering but moving over the Phoenix metro area from North to South. There were numerous photographs of the incident, and a great book (along with a documentary) by Lynne Kitei, M.D., called called The Phoenix Lights. 

At first, Arizona Governor Fife Symington III made fun of the sighting and the military tried to dismiss the lights as “military flares”. But this theory didn’t hold water — the lights stayed equidistance apart, as if they were part of a single, large craft. Later, the Governor admitted that he was lying, and that he too had seen some kind of large anomalous craft in the sky that night. You don’t have to take my word for it — you can go interview people who were living in Phoenix in 1997. One witness told me she looked up, and the stars dimmed and then weren’t visible — it was definitely some type of large craft and not individual flares.

There have been other mass sightings, in Mexico City, in Russia, in South America, and elsewhere. UFO sightings are not a modern phenomenon, they are not a US-only phenomenon. UFOs are a global phenomenon, and as his secret informant told Agent Mulder at the end of the second episode of the X-Files, “They have been here … for a long long time”

5. Are UFOs top secret military craft that defy gravity?

In the second episode of the X-Files, Deep Throat, and in many episodes later in the series, witnesses at the edge of military bases see UFOs at night performing maneuvers that seem to defy the laws of inertia and gravity. These scenes are actually based on many eyewitness reports of objects and lights that hold stationary in the sky, have no apparent sound, then “jump” horizontally or vertically to a new position in the blink of an eye. The fact that these sightings have occurred often near military bases has led many, particularly in the skeptic and scientific community, to assert that UFOs are really top secret military craft that the public does not know about.

This of course, begs the question, do we have top secret military craft that defy the known laws of physics and gravity? If so, why doesn’t the so called “scientific community” know about the science between how these craft work, why are they being hidden, and why aren’t they more curious about them?

A respected NASA scientist, Paul Hill, decided to collect reports from eyewitnesses during his 25 years working for the space agency. He wrote a book (which he wasn’t allow to publish while working for NASA, so his daughter published), called “Unconventional Flying Objects” that was published by his daughter, in which he categorized these maneuvers (“sudden reversal of direction”, “acute angel turn”).

If these are top secret military vehicles, where did they get the basic design and aeronautic principles from? The disc-shaped object and its ability to seemingly defy gravity, which have led the UFO community to call these “anit-gravity technology”. Mark McCandlish, an accomplished aerospace illustrator who has illustrated top secret military aircraft based on descriptions for the covers of magazines like Popular Science, was baffled when friends in the military told him they had stumbled into hangers that had round, bell shaped craft that were hovering over the ground. It seemed like a scene out of Independence Day, not just the X-Files. McCandlish drew out the components of the ARV, or Alien Reproduction Vehicle, as it’s been called, and his drawings are readily available on-line. It resembles many reports of UFOs, including rumors of the Nazi Bell — new type of Bell-shaped flying craft that the Nazis were supposedly working on at the end of World War II.

As in the X-Files, many of these facts are unknown to the general public, or they are ridiculed by so-called “experts” who subscribe to some of the myths. In fact, the premise of the show was that a scientist, medical doctor, Dana Scully was brought in to de-bunk Mulder’s “wild” paranormal and UFO-related theories. As she became more involved in the investigations, she came upon more and more items that could only be classified as “unexplained”.

Professor Sturrock of Stanford, who did research on the attitudes of astronomers and members of the American Institute of Aeronautic and Astronautics found that the more time people spent reading this subject, the more they would come to the conclusion that there needs to be more serious scientific study of UFOs. Because it’s not a “fashionable” area for university research to get funding, it’s usually ignored.

Similarly, too many of my friends in the scientific and engineering circles, tend to dismiss UFO lore and stories as simple “crazy stories by crazy people” without having done any research of their own. The less research they’ve done, the more likely they are to dismiss UFOs out of hand. It’s very easy to ridicule or demean a group of people on the internet — but if you take the time to get to know the people that are making these claims, if you, like Dana Scully in the X-Files, you might just find, that the Truth is Out There!

I’ll leave you with another great quote from the second episode of the X-Files to ponder while we ait for the X-Files revival to begin on January 24:

“Mr. Mulder, why are those like yourself, who believe in the existence of extraterrestrial life on this earth, not dissuaded by all the evidence to the contrary?” asked the secret informant.

“Because, ” began Fox Mulder, pausing for a second, “ … all the evidence the contrary … is not entirely dissuasive.” 

The old man nodded to Mulder in acknowledgement, and walked away quietly.

angel investing: top 5 reasons why indie films are like startups

When I tell people that I’ve been an angel investor for five years, they naturally assume I mean investing in tech startups. I do live in Silicon Valley after all, and it is true that since 2007, I have invested in a number of successful (and some not-very-successful) startups. 

But that same year, I also did my very first investment in an independent film, and I’ve learned a lot about that industry in the past five years. I think it’s a good time to reflect back.

Incredibly, the number one question I get asked by people who have no problem with the idea of investing in the latest unproven iPhone app or social gaming company is:  Aren’t independent films really, really risky??

You bet they are. But then again, so are tech startups.  

It’s rumored that 90% of startups and 90% of indie films don’t make any money for their investors.   I don’t know for certain, but my guess is that the failure rate of startups may actually be higher than independent films. 

The main difference is that when a startup fails (and they do, often, trust me – in the press we usually only hear about the successful ones), as an investor you usually end up with nothing less than the clichéd worthless stock certificates that you can use as wallpaper in your bathroom!

At least with a film, even if it’s not a financial success, you have a finished product that you can watch and recommend and enjoy.  And when a film is both an artistic and financial success, it can be rewarding in ways that most tech startups never approach.

In fact, I got involved in film investing for the same reason that I got involved in startup investing – as a way to help entrepreneurs who had an idea that they wanted to bring to the world.  Since then I’ve invested in and become an executive producer of quite a few indie films (see my imdb page for some of them) – starting with smaller budget films like Turqouise Rose and Raspberry Magic, and more recently higher visibility projects like the visually stunning and insightful documentary Thrive: What on Earth Will It Take? and the upcoming horror/fantasy flick Knights of Badassdom.

Unlike startups though, there isn’t really a good eco-system for angel investing in films, and young film-makers usually struggle to get their first film made. Similarly most angel investors are at a loss when navigating the treacherous waters of Hollywood.

That’s how I got involved in my first film, shot on the Navajo reservation in the Four Corners region of Arizona.  Travis Hamilton, a young film-maker fresh out of film school, had a vision for a film about a Navajo girl.  Not only did he not have a track record, but he was in a very un-commercial genre, and most seasoned investors weren’t going to give money to him, (you can read a little bit about this investment in an article in the wall street journal blog which mentioned my first investment, and a group called Film Angels that I’m a part of in Silicon Valley,  here ).

But like startups, when they go right, indie films can be quite lucrative (think My Big Fat Greek Wedding).   So in support of independent film-makers everywhere, and to encourage my fellow Silicon Valley angel investors (of which there are lots) to support film entrepreneurs (of which there are also lots), here are my top 5 reasons why investing in independent films is like investing in tech startups:

1.  It all begins with an entrepreneur and an idea, usually one that nobody will fund because “it’s too risky”.  OK, so not exactly.  In film it usually starts with a script or a book.  In many smaller budget indie films, the scriptwriter is often the director and main producer, meaning that they’re basically a one-man show.  Usually filmmakers who think of themselves as entrepreneurs and not “creative types” are more likely to get their project off the ground.
   
   
2.      You have to pitch to “the big boys”, but usually it’s usually small money that gets a project off the ground. Just like entrepreneurs here in Silicon Valley, who pitch too early and too often to “the big boys”, the venture capital firms on Sand Hill Road, so filmmakers end up pitching to studios.  Like studios, VC firms will turn down most of the pitches they hear and invest in only a few per year.  Like entrepreneurs, filmmakers who have been turned down have to find angels to invest in their projects.  Many big budget films start off as options on literary properties.   A few years ago I met one of the guys who bought the movie rights to Batman in 1980, and it took almost a whole decade before it became a big budget production.   Of course, like entrepreneurs who take too much VC money and lose control of their company, this can happen if you go the standard Hollywood route.   In this case, the original Batman rights holders lost control of the project creatively and financially.   The alternative to studio money is to go the independent route, where filmmakers can keep more creative control and influence their productions.
   
   
3.      Later stage investments are less risky than earlier stage investments.  While most of us in Silicon Valley know about startup investments – seed round, series A, series B, late stage, etc., I didn’t really understand that the same is true for film.  The stages are a bit different – usually the development stage can begin even before the script has been written, then there’s pre-production, production, post-production, and then distribution – which involves p&a funds (print and advertising) for a theatrical release.  It turns out that just like investing in a late stage company is usually less risky than investing in two guys and a business plan, so the later stage investments tend to be less risk - i.e. think DST’s investment in Facebook after it was already successful.  In fact, there are entire funds dedicated to providing finishing funds for a film and p&a monies to films.
4.      It’s all about distribution.  While a few startups succeed because they have a great product, most succeed because of their distribution channels – getting a good product to the target market.  The same is true of indie films – the films which are successful financially are usually the ones who understand the distribution side of the business and have a core audience that they are able to reach.  Not all films gets theatrical distribution – this is a fact of the film industry, but film-makers who understand this are the ones who are prepared for it.  Most profits from most films actually come from DVD releases, not the box office numbers that the press focuses on.  Of course the more anticipated a film is, the easier it is to get the right distribution channels in place.
   
   
5.      Stars are helpful, but not necessary. In the startup world, VC’s love to invest in entrepreneurs who’ve “been there and done that”.  In films, it’s even more pronounced – even a smaller budget indie film can benefit from having a star  - think Bill Murray in Lost in Translation.  But television stars can be a great boon to an indie film too - in my upcoming film Knights of Badassdom, we are lucky enough to have Peter Dinklage, who won an emmy for Game of Thrones, along with Summer Glau, who made fan-boy fame in the Firefly and The Terminator: The Sarah Conner Chronicles and Ryan Kwanten, of True Blood fame.
   The most innovative filmmakers are able to get B or C-list stars to make brief appearances in their films, and that’s enough to get the film going.  But it’s also possible to have a breakout hit with no well known stars – think of Bend It Like Beckham, which launched the careers of Keira Kneightly and Parminder Nagra.   The same is true of startups – while it would be nice to invest in Mark Zuckerburg’s new company (if he ever leaves Facebook), it’s probably more profitable (and likely) to invest in the next Mark Zuckerburg who’s starting the next big thing.
   

Well that’s a very quick overview on what is a pretty complex topic. Of course there are also many reasons why film investing is DIFFERENT like startup investing, and maybe I’ll list those in another post.

In the meantime, if you are thinking about investing in a startup to support a tech entrepreneur, why not think about also investing in an indie film to support a film entrepreneur?