The second contact occurred while Fry was at his work at Aerojet where he tested rocket motors. One day he suddenly hears Alan´s voice very clear, “as though he was standing at my side”. During this conversation Fry is asked whether he wish to assist the visitors in their work and also what is expected of him. Alan explains: "The time has come when you must make the final decision as to whether you will be that person. It is a free choice on your part, and there is no penalty for refusal. If you do not wish to assist us, you will be permitted to return to your quarters at once. All memory of this meeting and the previous one will be erased from your mind, but everything else will be the same. You will be no worse off than before we came." (p. 88) That his memory of his first contact and this offer is to be erased if he says no to the proposition is a rather unusual claim coming from the 1950s contactees.
Daniel Fry in Sweden 1970
We find the usual ambiguities in the Daniel Fry contact claim. The 16mm film he took in Oregon 1964 is obviously a fake. But the craft that his wife Tahalita Fry photographed in Merlin, Oregon, November 1964 are intriguing. There have been several claims regarding these photos but in a letter to Ms Edith Nicolaisen June 6, 1969 Tahalita gives the background to what happened:
Wishing you all good luck.
All love and good wishes go to you
Sincerely
Tahalita Fry
When Timothy Good, during an interview in 1976, asked about these photos Daniel Fry asserted that Tahalita did not see the craft when she took the pictures. The craft is totally different from the one seen in his 16mm film and looks much more like the classic Adamski type bell shape. So how are we to interpret the contact claims of Daniel Fry? Based upon my own 40+ years of investigations of physical contact experiences I can only conclude that some contact claims are obviously real. The contactees do interact with some type of alien visitors but not necessary space people. I have proposed the esoteric intervention theory as an alternative working hypothesis.
It was with great interest that I discovered a variation of the esoteric intervention theory seriously discussed as a possible explanation for the first wave of spiritualist phenomena during the 19th century. In the academic journal Theosophical History religious scholar Joscelyn Godwin presented a four part series in 1990-91, The Hidden Hand, with an impressive documentation indicating that a secret society created the first wave of very physical materialisations phenomena in the United States: "The suggestion is that the Hydesville phenomena were not a spontaneous manifestation, but something provoked by living persons, acting with no lesser intent than that of changing the worldview of Western civilisation." (Theosophical History, vol. 3:2, April 1990, p. 38.)
The next step of the secret society was to send Helena Blavatsky to the United States with the aim of giving the real explanation to the created phenomena as a basis or starting point for presenting what is usually called The Ancient Wisdom. The result was The Theosophical Society. Blavatsky explained this background to Henry Steel Olcott, first president of the society and in his memoirs Old Diary Leaves, first series, he quotes from Blavatsky´s scrapbook: "Ordered to begin telling the public the truth about the phenomena and their mediums. And now my martyrdom will begin! I shall have all the Spiritualists against me, in addition to the Christians and the Sceptics." (p. 25)
Dr. Joscelyn Godwin has named his theory the Hidden Hand. If we accept this as a working hypothesis, could the same secret society also have created some of the first UFO phenomena and contacts with the same intent - changing our worldview? In my study and documentation of the 1950s contactees I have discovered data and indications confirming some form of "Hidden Hand". This is of course a conspiracy theory but not of the usual variety. Here we have what could be called a benevolent conspiracy. Sufi teacher Idries Shah would call this method education through astonishment.
Joscelyn Godwin is very much aware of the problem of presenting such a theory as an academic scholar. I am pleased to notice that he is not trapped in the reductionist- materialist cage but keeps an open mind to other possibilities. That is real research. In part II of The Hidden Hand he gives this position statement: "My own mind is open to the possibility of events for which materialistic science, and the historical scholarship modeled on it, has no place; consequently, I do not automatically dismiss the idea of immaterial influences, such as were suggested byt many writers on the Hydesville incident... I would suggest that there was another Hierohistorical event in the early 1870s; another move to affect public opinion, mainly by working from within the Spiritualist movement." (Theosophical History, vol. 3:3, July 1990, p. 72-73).
