Pieces on a Cosmic Chessboard: Contact Protocols of Rama and CSETI Briefly Compared Serious

Exploring the Contact Protocols of Rama and CSETI: A Comparative Overview

Recently, I was asked on another social media platform focused on Human Initiated Contact Events (HICE), often referred to as CE5, to explore the differences between the contact protocols of the Peruvian group known as “Mission Rama” and those of the Center for the Study of Extraterrestrial Intelligence (CSETI). A question arose regarding the efficacy of one approach over the other.

Here’s an edited summary of my response:

CSETI’s contact protocols involve guided meditations centered around breath awareness, insights into the nature of consciousness, and a method known as “Coherent Thought Sequencing” (CTS). In its most refined form, CTS resembles a remote viewing exercise. During my time as a volunteer contact worker in the 1990s, very few team members had expertise in remote viewing. Instead, we focused our visualizations in stages: beginning with deep space, moving through our galaxy, solar system, and planet, and finally honing in on our specific location. Additionally, we expressed a collective intention for positive interactions with any extraterrestrial beings capable of receiving our intentions.

Conversely, the more advanced Rama teams conducted prolonged weekend meditation sessions before heading into the field. Participants were either fasting or consuming light meals, and adhered strictly to vegetarian or vegan diets. Select individuals with heightened psychic sensitivity served as “antennas,” utilizing automatic writing to gather messages about the timing and locations for encounters. When several antennas received the same communication, it was considered credible. Fieldwork involved participants forming a circle, holding hands, and chanting “Ohm” for extended periods, often through the night, creating a meditative atmosphere conducive to contact. Such practices could be physically challenging for some members, particularly the elderly. Additionally, there were special ceremonies, including the assignment of “cosmic names” to contact workers.

The Rama team referred to their fieldwork as “encuentros programados,” or programmed encounters, emphasizing the orchestrated nature of human-initiated contact. It’s important to recognize that UFO intelligences largely influence the unfolding of these interactions. Both contact networks, CSETI in the North and Rama in the South, were tailored to reflect the distinct cultural contexts they operated within. For instance, the strong Catholic influence in Latin America led some secular observers in the North to mistakenly categorize Rama as simply another cult, a perception I believe misrepresents their true nature.

In the case of CSETI, a Prime Contactee grounded in Western medical science (Dr. Steven Greer) was recruited to spearhead the project, which I now see as more aligned with an intelligence operation than with rigorous scientific inquiry. While Close Encounters categorizations originated from the work of noted scientists like Drs. Hynek and Vallee, I contend that such scientific models fail to suit proactive human-initiated contact endeavors.

After serving as a Working Group Coordinator and Board member at CSETI, I observed that our activities often resembled an intelligence operation rather than a genuine scientific exploration. Moreover, I critiqued the notion of CSETI engaging in a unique form of “citizen diplomacy.” The “Flying Saucer Central Intelligence” framework we operated under was predominantly under their directive control—dictating the timing and venues for our interactions and significantly influencing team composition through subtle, consciousness-based pre-selection processes.

Ultimately, it became clear to me that individuals we believed we had chosen were often already identified by UFO intelligence based on their prior experiences with sightings or missing time. While CSETI leadership attempted to vet applicants for training and fieldwork, these selection methods and contact protocols appeared to have minimal impact on our limited successes.

In one sense, we operated as chess pieces maneuvered by the often-invisible hand of non-human intelligences, which guided us through telepathic means. This does not imply a loss of autonomy; team members made numerous decisions to position ourselves ideally in