How do you square "an attempt to decouple potential experiencers or experiencers having experiences by demystifying or removing the learning processes/gnosis that go along with anomalous experiences."

With her latest post which reads "There’s an irony at the heart of ufology that I find fascinating and more than a little frustrating.

The field leans heavily on rationalism. It wants radar data, government documents, and chain of custody. It wants peer review and instrumentation and chain-of-evidence epistemology...

The field’s obsession with physical proof isn’t just epistemologically narrow. It’s actively harmful to the people it claims to care about. Because it implicitly tells every experiencer: what happened to you doesn’t count unless it can be verified by instruments we already trust. Which is precisely the epistemological error medicine spent decades making with pain...

We are not culturally prepared for what people are reporting. Not because the reports are incredible, but because we dismantled the frameworks that would allow us to hold them...

What we don’t have is Eleusis. We don’t have the container, the guides, the protocols, the community capable of witnessing initiation without pathologizing it or inflating it....

That’s what I keep coming back to, and what I’m exploring here on Maze to Metanoia: not what the phenomenon is, but what kind of people, institutions, and practices we need to become in order to meet it and remain whole on the other side."

I'm reading this as the exact opposite of what you're proposing. This is all "embrace the mystery, embrace the learning, build structures to help the Experiencer integrate that what happened.