Putting the new Harvard commentary in perspective

The Internet and Reddit communities are a buzz lately over the recently published study in the journal Philosophy and Cosmology volume 33, 2024. I’ve seen a lot of individuals who are over interpreting this study. First off, it is not a research study. Rather it is a commentary that attempts to take some of the theories and findings and present some potential hypotheses of what they may suggest. It is a wonderful and thought provoking paper that is meant to expand our consideration regarding the nature of NHIs. But it does not prove anything and may not even be correct. However, science needs to consider all the possibilities as it attempts to grapple with the topic of the Phenomenon, so that it is not constrained by limited explanations. Rather than just working within the box, it/we need to think outside the box.

Here’s a very fair and honest explanation of the publication, including that it should not be considered a research study or that it proves anything. It’s simply tries to fit what is known or surmised with as wide a lens for consideration in addition to the typical more limited possibilities.

https://youtu.be/is6OhX-BxYw?si=arOW_3d7ZQtWNWa8

The publication asserts that there could be 4 additional hypotheses that needs to be considered in addition to the simple ET explanation for NHIs. These are:

CTH1: human cryptoterrestrials. A technologically advanced ancient human civilization that was largely destroyed long ago but continued to exist in remnant form.

CTH2: hominid or theropod cryptoterrestrials. A technologically advanced non-human civilization consisting of some terrestrial animal which evolved to live in stealth, perhaps a hominid or alternatively a species much more distantly related to us.

CTH3: former extraterrestrial or extratempestrial cryptoterrestrials. Extraterrestrial aliens or our own intertemporal descendants who arrived on Earth from elsewhere in the cosmos or from the human future, respectively, and concealed themselves in stealth.

Or 4. CTH4: Magical Cryptoterrestrials. Entities which are less like homegrown aliens and more like earthbound angels, relating to the world inhabited by humans in ways that are less technological than magical, who are known in European languages by names like fairies, elves, nymphs, etc.

I’ve not thoroughly read through the entire publication to determine if at any point they suggest that they are living in plain sight among us masquerading as humans under any one of the above possible categories but if they even intimate that possibility, it’s not outwardly contained within any of the 4 hypothetical possibilities for these CTHs.

It’s a brilliant discussion and I highly recommend that you get a copy of it and read it for yourself. I will attempt to find where I was able to locate my copy and post it here.

Here’s the full reference so that you can search for it yourself.

Lomas, T; Case, B. and Masters, MM (2024). The cryptoterrestrial hypothesis: A case for scientific openness to a subterranean earthly explanation for Unidentified Anomalous Phenomenon. Philosophy and Cosmology. Vol 33. https://doi.org/

If this link still works you can download the entire PDF publication here:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381405238_The_cryptoterrestrial_hypothesis_A_case_for_scientific_openness_to_a_concealed_earthly_explanation_for_Unidentified_Anomalous_Phenomena