Talk:Nordic aliens

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Opening Paragraph[edit]

In the opening paragraph, there is a phrase that says, "less than 1,000 million years old". Is this correct? The actual article for the star cluster we are speaking of says it is between 75-150 million years old. 1,000 million seems to be quite far from that.Leviathanlover (talk) 17:56, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

-- Its all make believe bro (talk) 04:24, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

There is no way that life could evolve from basic chemicals on a planet that is no more than 150 million years old. Whether there are tall, blond aliens, I don't know, but they certainly didn't originate in the Pleiades cluster.77Mike77 (talk) 18:55, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Sceptic faq[edit]

I do not see the specific information mentioned at the link given. DGG 01:45, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

  • i did a quick search, look at "3.8: Have people been abducted by UFOs?" in the source (:O) -Nima Baghaei talk · cont · email 16:03, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Take me to your editor[edit]

...and tell him/her/it to write up things about George Adamski and other such glaringly-absent topics in this article. Totnesmartin 17:13, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Be bold Totnesmartin! You're pretty familiar with these topics, why not help us out by including the material you feel is pertinent? If you come up with a basic sturcutre and set of facts, I'd be happy to flesh things out. I'm just not sure where you want to take this.LiPollis 20:32, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
I will actually - yesterday I was busy (typing up info from a book I was going to give away), which is why I asked if someone else would do it. Chasing up the blonde venusians will be a welcome change. Totnesmartin 20:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm not entirely sure where I might take this information (or indeed If I should "take it" anywhere). Currently working on finding descriptions, but possibilities for inclusion could be:
  • history of the phenomenon (is there anything pre-Adamski?);
  • impact within ufology;
  • wider cultural impact;
  • psychology of contactees describing nordics compared to other contactees. (This one might be very difficult).

Totnesmartin 22:36, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

RE the last item on your list. It's probably worth including some cites about how the how Americans and Europeans describe encounters with Nordic Alien very differently. In the US they are mostly described as being involved with Greys (either their slaves or allies) and as sexually violating abductees (either forcing them to mate with them, or stealing sperm samples etc for hybrid experiments) while in Europe they are usually described as being knowledge bringers who are concerned that we will blow ourselves up or pollute our world, and as wanting contactees to spread messages of unity etc. - perfectblue 16:01, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

In Religion[edit]

I'm deleting part of the section under the title "In Religion" because Theosophy does not talk about extraterrestrial beings nor encourages belief in them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:08, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I think it's referring to his so-called "New Age Theosophy", so as long as the new age label is there you don't have to worry so much. Anyways, the part is referenced so I'm gonna go ahead and restore it but edit out the link to the Theosophical Society. -- œ 11:26, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Using or as a source or link[edit]

Both sites are registered personally to Michael Salla (via a P.O. box in Hawaii). Based on the site information ( and they exist to promote the existence of ETs and to sell services or raise money to enable others to contact ETs. The sites are self published, have no official affiliations and cannot be considered a reliable source, in any way independent or of academic interest. The sites fail WP:RS as a reference and WP:ELNO as a link. The sites might only be suitable for an article on Michael Salla or his company, the "Exopolitics Institute" based on the guidance of WP:SELFPUB.—Ash (talk) 14:48, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Direct Contact[edit]

Wikipedia poses a real dilemma in respect of this subject. The single most important fact about the matter of UFOlogy and of "aliens" is that none of it can be verified. As a young boy I sat on my Grandfathers knee, and he told me about the "others" he had seen from observation balloons in WW1. I thought him mad until the age of 19 when i saw what our French cousins call an "Ovni" on the south coast of England. Fortunately I was one of several persons to see it. Discussing it subsequently and many years later brought a visit from a "Nordic" man. I confirm the following:

They are indeed human, but not of any type I had ever before come face to face with. The physique is powerful, the neck short and strong and shoulders broad. The head is of a robust size with a very large cranium and high forehead. The eyes are closer together than the average Caucasian and very vivid blue. The hair is quite course and yellowish blond with a tendency to be vertical. He was pleasant but very dominant. He did not need to speak. The experience was most interesting. I do not think we have anything to fear from them save our own misgivings. I conclude having experienced what he was able to do that his people would have no difficulty doing pretty much anything they want, but here we all are alive and well in 2010. I feel the matter requires recognition only, research is pointless since it would appear that we know what they want us to know of them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Contactee80s (talkcontribs) 21:17, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

  • I am tempted to guess that the "real UFO's" were made and flown secretly by humans, and the "Nordic aliens" are white American human crew. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:44, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Travis Walton[edit]

Would the famous abduction claim of Travis Walton be fit to include? He described being first surrounded by a group of diminutive "grey" type beings, but when he resisted they hastily retreated and were replaced by a much less frightening trio of attractive, more human-like aliens (note that the "nordics" were absent from Hollywood's re-imagining of his case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:32, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

The Coming Race[edit]

I've added and reverted changes to the section on Edward Bulwer-Lytton's novel The Coming Race because it provides important links to the historical roots of Pleiadean mythology in Victorian science fiction. Although the terminology has changed, the concept of a super-human master race provides an important historical background to beliefs about Pleiadeans. Bulwer-Lytton suggests that the Vril-ya were descended from Aryans and extremely powerful due to their use of Vril, which itself figures prominently in narratives about Nazi technology and UFOs. While Bulwer-Lytton locates the Vril-ya within a hollow Earth instead of describing them as extraterrestrials, the influence of his work on narratives about Pleiadeans is clear. Hoopes (talk) 15:19, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, is this wikipedia or uncyclopedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:53, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Randles & Clarke[edit]

Appreciate the work done to fix the article thus far. I'd be cautious about mixing the independent academic view with views of fringe promoters like Jenny Randles and Jerome Clarke. The other sources look terrific. - LuckyLouie (talk) 01:22, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

I figured someone would say something like that, but I think the sources are OK for the claims being made. Neither source is being used to provide arguments in favor of the Nordics' existence.
  • Jenny Randles is merely being used for a quote, and that quote itself basically jibes with what is said in the Chambers Dictionary. (Indeed, the entry in the Chambers book looks like it probably used Randles' prior writings as a source.)
  • Jerome Clark is used because he nicely summarizes some basic historical details that can be pieced together from other sources. There's plenty of other information out there on Billy Meier, Howard Menger, George Adamski, etc. (Adamski even has an entry in the American National Biography.)
Also, there is a big difference between someone like Jerome Clark and someone like Prophet Yahweh. Clark is one of the more sensible writers on UFOs, and indeed, his entry on Nordic aliens in his book often reflects a skeptical attitude. Zagalejo^^^ 03:32, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
Actually, I just checked: the American National Biography uses Clark as a source in its Adamski entry, and even says he provides the "best critical treatment" of the topic. If the American National Biography is willing to use Clark as a source, I think we can. Zagalejo^^^ 03:48, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
No worries. In the article we have a number of opinions attributed by academics to contactees, and then suddenly we had Randles, without any context or attribution, writing that (not only do the aliens exist) they're certainly involved in abducting people. So I added a bit of context, which you're welcome to finesse. And I know Clarke is well thought of, yet I've seen him widely misused across WP to support a 50/50 equal validity WP:VALID to both mainstream and fringe views, so I tend to err on the side of caution. - LuckyLouie (talk) 15:29, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
I made a couple of tweaks to your edits, but I think they're basically fine. The single brackets were used on purpose because the quote was slightly altered from the original: in the book, she spells "greys" with an A, and I was just trying for some internal consistency. I agree that it's always good to err on the side of caution when it comes to this stuff. Zagalejo^^^ 17:07, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

This page is BIASED![edit]

Nordic aliens live in Scandanavia, not Europe! LOL *Waiting for someone to call me stupid & correct me* 序名三「Jyonasan」 TalkStalk 19:25, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Many authorities consider Scandinavia to be a sub-region of Europe, residence of aliens not withstanding. Even if you were correct this would, surely, be an "error" rather than "bias". (talk) 16:19, 18 June 2013 (UTC)


Some suspect that many of the real UFO's were secret aircraft made on Earth and flown by humans. If so, 'Nordic aliens' are merely white USA human crew, plus official disinformation. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:22, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

what about cloak and dagger?[edit]

it was on one of the versions, and it is quite accurate.-- (talk) 09:09, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't get it. Wikipedia is a serious publication (isn't it?) but it publishes stories about aliens without any proof and at the same time it denies existence of chemical trails (chemtrails) and also it denies that explosives and thermite were use to take down the 3 skyscrapers in NYC during the 9/11 inside job. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:15, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

I don't get it either, but it is what it is. Give the people want they want; circuses, and gladiators. ScrapIronIV (talk) 14:40, 9 April 2015 (UTC)


Reading through this page, it does seem to be biased. The wording is structured in such a way that it seems to describe a rare being more than a form of extraterrestrial reported by Ufologists. There is also arguably no counter-arguments listed, but I would assume they exist, since sightings have been claimed by multiple people.

I'd imagine that some scientist somewhere would have pointed out how flimsy the claims are. These are reported to be humanoid, and resemble those of Nordic descent, except taller and more muscular. There is no evidence provided beyond pure anecdotal evidence. These reported "extraterrestrials" could simply be rather tall men of Nordic descent who were seen by foreigners with a strong belief in alien visitations, and then misinterpreted.

Claims to have seen these creatures in space ships is even more flimsy than claims to have seen "grays" since these creatures are even more human-like. This could simply be explained as secret military aircraft, or even simply a civilian drone, and again, a witness who strongly believes that aliens visit Earth interpreted what they saw as aliens, and not terrestrial.

In a quick search for an objective analysis from a reputable source, I found nothing, however RationalWiki has them listed as "Pleiadians" and said this of them:

The actual Pleiades is an open star cluster, about 400 light-years from Earth. It consists of 7 stars that are visible to the naked eye and a bunch that are too dim to see without a telescope.

The cluster is very young, no more than 150 million years old. Any planets orbiting the stars of this cluster would also be equally young. In fact, when the Earth was 150 million years old, it was still in the Hadean eon, characterized by regular impacts from asteroids and comets. Its surface was largely molten due to the constant, relentless impacts. It would be another two billion years before oxygen first appeared in its atmosphere.

In other words, if space aliens did evolve on any of the (hypothetical) worlds in the Pleiades cluster, they'd be bacteria.

Obviously RationalWiki is even less trustworthy than Wikipedia is for accurate, scholarly information, but the claims made in the above quote are very falsifiable. Assuming that the numbers check out, this leaves three possibilities: 1. RationalWiki has constructed a "Straw Man" argument 2. The estimated age of said cluster is incorrect by billions of years, or 3. this race did not evolve in this system but instead are immigrants from elsewhere.

For these reasons, I believe this Wikipedia article to be heavily-biased. Trainguyrom (talk) 05:28, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I don't get what you're saying. Biased in what direction? I don't get the distinction you make between "a rare being" and "a form of extraterrestrial reported by Ufologists".
As far as we know, intelligent aliens don't actually exist or at least the evidence is severely lacking -- for this reason we don't really favor some theories (about the origins of these aliens) over others. Basically, in our articles we just write about whatever published sources have said about this "Nordic aliens" concept. Do you think this article is lacking some information? Is that why it's biased? Sorry, I just really can't comprehend your point. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 09:01, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

I have not found any actual discussion from reputable sources, but this article seems more formatted as "here are the facts about this race" rather than "This is a race of aliens whose existence has not been confirmed. Here is what witnesses say". Because the scientific consensus is that we have yet to discover evidence of extraterrestrial life, this article should reflect that, but still provide the existing information in such a tone, because the information exists. I think this page should be formatted more like the pages for Bigfoot or the Loch Ness Monster, or for a much closer comparison, the page on the Men in Black Trainguyrom (talk) 22:48, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Are we reading the same article? Please take a look at it again if you've forgotten meanwhile. This article is all about "reports" and "descriptions", not facts. I'm not really seeing the problem. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 06:35, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Non-Nordics reported by George Adamski and others[edit]

George Adamski described some of his human(oid) contacts in Flying Saucers Have Landed and Inside the Spaceships. Here is a summary of some of his descriptions:

  • Orthon -- Skin: medium-coloured suntan. Hair: sandy. Eyes: grey-green.
  • Firkon -- Skin: fair. Hair: sandy. Eyes: grayish blue.
  • Ramu -- Skin: ruddy. Hair: black. Eyes: dark brown.
  • Kalna -- Skin: very fair. Hair: golden. Eyes: golden.
  • Ilmuth -- Hair: black with reddish-brown highlights. Eyes: black with flashes of brown.

Orthon, Firkon, and Kalna clearly look Nordic, while Ramu and Ilmuth don't.

Some other contactees who have descriptions of their contacts are:

Lpetrich (talk) 22:16, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Some more contactees with descriptions:

Some contactees wih no descriptions that I could find:

  • George van Tassel - Source: The Council of Seven Lights (has his encounter with Solgonda)
  • Buck Nelson - Source: My trip to Mars, the Moon, and Venus

I'm thinking of adding quotes from George Adamski, Howard Menger, and Elizabeth Klarer, but I'd need better sources for the others. Lpetrich (talk) 23:03, 12 December 2015 (UTC)