Precisely," said Griffin. "But consider, visibility depends on the action of the visible bodies on light. Either a body absorbs light, or it reflects or refracts it, or does all these things. If it neither reflects nor refracts nor absorbs light, it cannot of itself be visible. You see an opaque red box, for instance, because the colour absorbs some of the light and reflects the rest, all the red part of the light, to you.

If it did not absorb any particular part of the light, but reflected it all, then it would be a shining white box. Silver! A diamond box would neither absorb much of the light nor reflect much from the general surface, but just here and there where the surfaces were favourable the light would be reflected and refracted, so that you would get a brilliant appearance of flashing reflections and translucencies - a sort of skeleton of light. A glass box would not be so brilliant, not so clearly visible, as a diamond box, because there would be less refraction and reflection. See that? From certain points of view you would see quite clearly through it. Some kinds of glass would be more visible than others, a box of flint glass would be brighter than a box of ordinary window glass.

A box of very thin common glass would be hard to see in a bad light, because it would absorb hardly any light and refract and reflect very little. And if you put a sheet of common white glass in water, still more if you put it in some denser liquid than water, it would vanish almost altogether, because light passing from water to glass is only slightly refracted or reflected or indeed affected in any way. It is almost as invisible as a jet of coal gas or hydrogen is in air. And for precisely the same reason! - HG Wells The Invisible Man
Wells fictional account of an invisible man, at least invisible in a empirical sense, brings to mind our own, if you will, invisible nature. If viewed in a mirror..upside down, while our fictional man is invisible from without, we could be said, are invisible from within.
In conversational language and in every-day psychology, even in psychology purporting to be scientific, the word consciousness is often used as a term for the designation of a complex of all psychic functions in general, or for their separate manifestations. ... to the best of my recollection Prof. William James defined thought as "a moment of consciousness."

From my standpoint ... it is necessary to regard consciousness as distinct from the commonly understood psychic functions: thought, feeling and sensation. Over and above all this, consciousness has several exactly definable forms or phases, in each one of which thoughts, feelings and sensations can function, giving in each different results.

Thus consciousness ... is a background upon which thoughts, feelings and sensations reveal themselves. This background can be more or less bright. But as thoughts, feelings and sensations have their own separate life, and can be regarded independently of this background, so can it be regarded and studied independently of them. ... It is important only to establish the fact that thoughts, feelings and sensations, i.e., psychic functions, are not consciousness. - P D Ouspensky
Is there a form of sentient life invisible to us, or more interestingly, a form of life without form, however possessing an upside down mirror image of our ability to animate our arms, legs in a corporeal and sensate form from a non visible location, in other words an ability to make the unseen seen? If so, could this adaptive use of form utilize a capability to mimic other images since it has no image of it's own?

chi- me- ra
Pronunciation: kI-'mir-&, k&-
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin chimaera, from Greek chimaira she-goat, chimera; akin to Old Norse gymbr yearling ewe, Greek cheimOn winter
1 a capitalized : a fire-breathing she-monster in Greek mythology having a lion's head, a goat's body, and a serpent's tail b : an imaginary monster compounded of incongruous parts
2 : an illusion or fabrication of the mind; especially : an unrealizable dream - Webster Dictionary
A fancy, a chimera in my brain, troubles me in my prayer - John Donne
Is the UFO situation and it's occupants, in essence, both a tactical and natural manifestation of an unknown form of sentient life, in reality, a chimera?

Does this explain the many forms of craft, occupants, instantaneous appearances, disappearances, splitting, and reincorporation from several forms of craft back into one?

Why does the mythical creature of the Chimera have the nearly identical appearance as Demiurgic creatures as portrayed in symbolic images? The lions head, the serpent tail, etc seem to cross reference in more than a few once common visual conceptions. Shape shifting? One recalls in The Book of Enoch, the warning concerning the Demiurge, "Beware the shape shifters"

Coincidental imagery and conceptual framing? Perhaps, as philosopher once commented, "Nothing is true, therefore all things are possible."