I agree that the UFO manifestations are deceptive/deceitful. Too often, the official disinformation is stated as the biggest problem preventing when one comes to study them. But it pales as compared to the one originating from the phenomenon itself, confusing issues and discrediting its own existence. It manifests via a great number of ways. It mimics some aspects of science-fiction, for example, but some only. The psycho-social hypothesis can't explain the abduction phenomenon. But superficially, it could look like it was psycho-social in origin. Superficially only, but it is enough to prevent many people to dig further. Those people felling ill-at-ease with the topic, it fits their needs. And there are the military abuctions, creatures peering at windows, faerie-like entities,
Certainly, our brain filters what he sees, and tends to shape it according to cultural expectations. But I don't think it can give a complete explanation of complex and plain perceptions. We must be very careful when dealing with entities we know nothing of, with agendas we couldn't guess at. We could mistake deception with something else entirely. But the entities seem to know very well of the human psychology; suggesting that they know of our reactions. I think that the deception is more probably intended.
L-double:
About prophecies, they are commonly associated with a number of apparitions: supposedly religious, extraterrestrial, sometimes even Bigfoot or hauntings. I remember about a case of ghost hauntings in Souvigny. As a witness was speaking with the ghost of a monk, the spectre suddenly shouted prochecies of incoming doom and great cataclysms for all humanity! It didn't make any sense, but it closely paralleled similar prochecies by the BVM or blonde Venusians.
But any approach from an oriented perspective is problematic. For example, in a Christian way, how can you say which is divine from which is demonic? One time, I had a discussion with fundamentalist Christians. I told them: it is easy to say that the manifestations you don't accept are demonic. But following your own logic, how can you say that your own Bible is not demonic in origin? After all, it is full of similar manifestations. For example, a message given by a "superior being" in a fiery bush. The Bible would be a perfect tool to fool humanity. Of course, as they couldn't cope with their own logic, they quickly ended the discussion. You fell in the classic trap to shoehorn a phenomenon which is ahead of us in one of our preconceptions. It can mimick them, that means it is beyond them. Somebody's "angelic" manifestation is someone else's "demon".