Friday, November 6, 2009

UFOs: What Is Known?

It's often said that we don't know much about UFOs, and that, given their apparent behavior, we are unlikely to ever know much. I don't blame people for saying this; they are feeling the frustration of not being able to solve the mystery. But, whereas it is true that we don't know enough to solve the mystery, and conceivably might never do so, it's not true that we don't know much about UFOs. In fact, we know so much about them, as case incidents, that you can't keep track of it all. The references above are warrior efforts by some guys who have tried to make it a little easier to keep track. Perusing their great masses of information [and there are others as well], one sees that there is, as Hynek once said, an "abundance of riches". The twin facts of this abundance of riches and the unsolvability of the mystery should give us pause for thought. That thought for me is: someone else must be deliberately manipulating how this has occurred so as to KEEP it unsolvable. [and I don't mean the government, which is surely a pip-squeak in this story]. Well, if we know somethings, what are they? [by the way, the pictures to the left aren't in any order, since I had no idea what exactly I was going to say when I started typing this. They illustrate some of the best and most interesting cases--some of which are commented upon below].
We know that the phenomenon is "real" in an objective sense. This stuff goes on in the physical world rather than just the mind. Even the University of Colorado team knew, and stated in internal documents at the early stages of the project, that the external nature of the phenomenon was not an issue of debate, given what we already knew. All the USAF study teams from 1947 through 1952 essentially immediately said the same thing. In the Boianai case, 38 people saw an "impossible" disk silently standing in the sky. It was no "mirage". Entities on the deck waved in response to the humans waving on the ground. Anyone who objects that only one witness was "white", needs to check out their soul. Many of the locally-born witnesses were interviewed several times, including by Hynek himself [a rather amusing tape to listen to, by the way].A year earlier, my brother and I were listening to a guy on the radio, several miles away, describing a UFO, when we looked out and saw our CE1 domed disk. This phenomenon happens, and it happens in an objectively multi-witnessable way. And, it seems clearly technological. There was no doubt in my or my brother's mind that we were looking at a made device. There was no doubt in the Boianai witnesses that they were too. There was no doubt in the minds of Project SIGN nor practically anyone who has really immersed themselves in the case data. These "devices" look both technological and far advanced beyond what WE do. [anyone who thinks that the ETH is a stupid thought to present as a hypothesis has a fundamental prejudice of their own---the ETH may be wrong, but it is not stupid].
The Nash-Fortenberry case is a classic of multi-&-experienced witnesses seeing something that was clearly flying, clearly purposively [it was a FORMATION flying], and clearly out off our league in terms of performance characteristics. These disks not only flew as aircraft might [in stepped-up "echelon" formation] but did a "non-inertial" sudden stop, a reversal of positioning, and racing off to be joined by two other disks which maintained the original formation flown. There was nothing "random" about this. This was structured and intelligent. Desperate debunking morons have floated hypotheses like "there were lightning bugs trapped in the aircraft windshield" or "the pilots couldn't recognize that they were smoking and their cigarettes were shining off the window". The level of denial and simple jerk-ness in these people is astounding. A very large portion of the phenomenon looks intelligently-driven and aimed at the witnesses specifically. Due to an insight by a colleague at CUFOS, I collected a double-handful of cases [it's about twice that now] wherein the UFO made precise motions "around" astronomical objects with respect to the observing angle of the witnesses on the ground. The Lake Ronkonoma case is an outstanding example of this. To pull off this precision, the UFO controller must know exactly where the targeted observer is and fly accordingly. The fact that these "astronomical alignments" most often are flown for the benefit of astronomers makes this a bit freaky. [I have a friend who said that this was the most disturbing feature of the phenomenon that he'd encountered]. Just to help our paranoia, I've nick-named this "we know where you live". Astro-alignments are just a small part of a vast set of cases which seem to be "displays". This then is another of the quintessential features of the UFOs--they are extremely OVERT to the witnesses, while remaining diabolically-cleverly COVERT to the consensus reality. Again, this should give one some moments of thought about the seeming truth that this whole show operates according to a plan.
The phenomenon is operating within our physical universe. Many times it may just be in the form of projections of light [ beams, holograms, various elements of the spectrum], but there are several categories of cases which seem to involve a real spatial presence. UFOs may register on instruments--photography, radar, rarely geiger counters. While doing so, some cases have the UFO moving around just as if it were "flying" in normal 3-space. Admittedly, one can imagine elaborate projection simulations with consequent beaming of light energies of various kinds, and this may be true. But it is just as possible that these sorts of cases indicate real physical presence. Even if the "craft" is not here, the lightbeam technology projections are. Sometimes it seems that the case demands such a non-mass projection or hologram display or whatever. A major example is the tremendous [in both size and investigative quality] encounter researched by Martin Jasik--the "Yukon Giant". This widely-experienced and many-witnessed incident featured an object so large that when it began to move it should have sucked the air out of a large area in central Yukon, but it did not. One supposes that with extremely advanced technology anything is possible, but the simplest hypothesis is that the "Giant" was a projection. Nevertheless, Close Encounters of the Second Kind, like electromagnetic and machine-interference effects, as well as trace effects on plants/crops [of which there are hundreds] would more easily suggest physical presence. I opt for physical presence in these latter cases due to one "odd" element in them. You can take a couple dozen of the best CE2 electromagnetics cases and compare the appearances of the crafts. There's no uniformity. The minds behind the "agenda" can stop a car using the presence of a sphere, a disk, a domed disk, a BOL colored one way, a BOL colored another, a disk which beams, a disk which does not, a beam which narrows, a beam which spreads---etc as far as you want to go. The Appearance of the craft makes no difference. You can stop a car regardless of how you make your UFO look and behave. It's all the show put on by the "magician" so that you never see any pattern [as firm patterns could lead to a requirement that consensus reality admit that the phenomenon is real]. It is because of this effort to disguise any regularity behind the crafts that I feel that the informationally-useless crafts are probably actually here. They would be a convenient focus for whatever the agenda-ists are doing without giving anything away. The great Mansfield case, where a National Guard Helicopter was "tractor-beam-pulled" up in the air, is an unusual but spectacular case of what looks like physical presence. It is also one one the solidest cases on record, with the appropriately moronically-desperate "solutions" by the debunkers.
There are quite a few more things that the UFO research community could mention that are known, but my one-fingered typing is getting tired. Taken as a whole, the great pile of UFO experiences acts like a huge display agenda which is trying to impact individuals without markedly impacting the consensus knowledge of the established guardians and determiners of what is real. What this agenda is, is not at all known, in my opinion. My friends in the CE4 community have their hypotheses--but they are not convincing [at all] to me--regardless of how much I like the guys. Comments that the agenda is seeping into the majority culture through all the science-fiction awareness, is also non-obvious to me--I see nothing there that I would rate as significant. That is why my preferred hypothesis right now [yes, I will change tomorrow] is that these characters have had no need to be incredibly patient, but have been getting done what they've wanted to do all along. I've mentioned my concept of three types of Uber-advanced cultures in an earlier post, and none of them would need a long time to get into what they were separately interested in. And none of them would be consensus-reality interfering but would like to be either passive observers or overt exciters of individuals. Yeh, it's way speculative at that point. I don't claim anything for it--other than it deals with the "60" years as I know them.
Let's sign off with these three last neat cases. Cotile Lake was a case where a family friend and two daughters were returning to the truck with camping gear and a big UFO came overhead, shot blue beams down on them, paralyzing them temporarily. When the beams went off the three were able to move again. Allen Hynek investigated this case himself. Amarante is the nickname that the French government investigative office, GEPAN, gave this encounter, wherein a mini-UFO flew into an urban garden and posed for a while for the witness [a scientist]. They took samples of the plants nearby and the labs found that the plants showed the effects of some type of radiation on their pigments. This effect was inversely proportional to the distance of the plants from the object--that is, it obeyed normal 1/r-squared laws of radiant energy. The last case is one of my favorites. A wife is driving her sleeping husband home from an accident on a job a distance away. Near their home she sees that all the security lights are out. Then she sees that a weird cone-shaped object is heading her way. Her car quits. Then the thing seems to be picking up her car as the front end leaves the ground. Understandably panicky, her hollering wakes up her husband and he sees the the car's front is off the ground, too. The object retreats and they come back to Earth with a thud. Their landlord noticed odd light effects and electrical interference at the time, as well. Hmmm. Sounds pretty physical to me...and not at all like the CIA, no matter how much they might like to be able to do any of this.

15 comments:

  1. Thanks again for your thoughts.
    I've always asked myself "why do we see these things anyway?". Assuming that we are indeed dealing with a physical presence, and we seem to have supporting evidence for this-as you point out-why do we see anything at all? Since there is an abundance of solid reporting of UFOs "turning off" and becoming invisible to the naked eye, why drive around with the "lights on"?
    I have suspected for a long time that we see what we are intended to see and know about as much as this intelligence intends for us to know.

    A lot of people stop at the most superficial layers of this enigma, asking questions about what is apparently physical data (and I think we should continue to do this) but then fail to go the several steps beyond.

    Good hunting.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with your insight. I'd love to rip away the Great OZ's curtain and see the manipulator pure, but I believe that most of this is a game set by powerful cowards. Thank the Maker, as C3PO would say, their game seems to make small difference to our timeline into the future, at least for now.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think it is inarguable that this is a real phenomena. The fact that the appearance of the phenomena varies (discs, BOLS, etc) yet the behaviors seem to display certain common operating characteristics is not that odd: look at how automobile designs vary yet all cars operate in essentially the same way. However, ascribing motives, agendas or intent to this phenomena is highly problematic as the data trail at this point becomes harder to quantify and more open to human bias and interpretation.
    It is not at all unusual for scientific study to yield a detailed, cogent description of a phenomenon yet fail to answer "why." Just read the product insert that comes with many medications that concludes "The method of action of this drug is unknown." In a way the real problem is not with the UFO phenomena itself, but with the human response to it: disbelief, denial, mockery and marginalization.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Excellent article!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Agree with all your wisdom. And it's nice that blogs allow us to say what we think with a bit less hassling among ourselves.

    ReplyDelete
  6. We're at a point where we can assess that the phenomena are interacting directly with our "physical reality" whatever you agree with what "physical reality" is.

    That there is a hidden "agenda" becomes clear.
    Could it be that other forces, residing in other "dimensions", need to push our parameters a little?

    Seems like some kind of "experiment" where we will see how the "rats" respond to this or that. Perhaps the "man behind the curtain" is an "agent provocateur" with a mission to stimulate us to another level of mental activity, possibility.

    Perhaps the "culture" needs to be stirred a bit.

    ReplyDelete
  7. You could be right. The logic of things is that there are three classes of theories: 1). the phenomenon is happening with our interests primarily in mind; this is an "altruistic" hypothesis class; 2). the phenomenon is happening with "their" interests primarily in mind; this is a "self-interest" hypothesis class; and 3). the phenomenon is happening intentionally with both our interests in mind; this is a "serendipity" hypothesis class. The fourth logical alternative, an accidental, non-intentional, purposeless interaction, I reject because this has gone on too long for "accident" to be maintained as a driver. I'd like to believe in the altruistic hypotheses types, but they don't feel like they fit the case pile to me. Everyone is of course welcome to see it differently. To me, with a VERY foggy crystal ball, the action seems self-motivated and we can only hope, and 60 years gives us reason to hope, that "their" self-motivations are relatively harmless, both to ourselves as individuals and to our cultural development. So, I honor your optimism that somehow these agents are operating to subtly push us usefully along--hope you're right. My hopes are less, but still mildly upbeat in at least they are not going to get significantly in the road, at least for now.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Interaction with our physical reality can reasonably encompass: sightings, radar / sonar returns, "trace" cases. Interactions such as abductions or other claims of experience pose more interpretative pitfalls for a variety of obvious reasons. Likewise photographic evidence. Taking the best evidence available, it is still hard to infer an agenda - hidden or overt - on the part of the phenomenon. I always found it interesting that when the Air Force ostensibly ceased investigation, it closed the book by stating (paraphrase)that UFOs were determined to pose no threat. It totally circumvented the question of their existence. Danged if they knew much of anything either, or if they did they certainly had no reason at all to divulge it and every reason not to. I think it can reasonably be said that a sighting leaves an indelible impression on the viewer as well as perhaps an expanded way of looking at things, maybe even a willingness to "think out of the box" that wasn't there before.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Thanks Professor...

    I think it's Haisch who discusses the "leaky embargo" hypothesis in the 'Inflation Theory" paper by him, Deardorff, Maccabee and Puthoff. Very similar observations to yours. Also of interest is the commonly described presentations of Earthly calamity given to many abductees and the warnings given telepathically in broad daylight to several of the the Ariel schoolchildren that "we musn't become too techknowledged" and that "we're causing harm to the Earth". Combine that with the interest shown in all things Nuclear and one can surmise a sort of cosmic 'systems dynamics' analysis performed by them on Earth that doesn't seem to look very promising. In essence, they are warning us through the Abduction phenomenon and showing up when and where they please to semi-reinforce the whole project. The commonly described 'hybrid' effort may simply be a backup of sorts. Of course, if they have been with us awhile and "hypothetically" may have had a transgenic hand in our development, could it be they're simply feeling somewhat guilty at this point?

    ReplyDelete
  10. I'm tolerant of all these open questions. We're all doing our best to imagine something that seems to REALLY fit all the data we have. My take at the moment though is different from Bernie's and extremely different from Budd and Dave's. Although I believe that the scaring-the-hell-out-of-people with calamitous scenes is significant, I believe that the reason for it is not benign cultural programming, but rather a nasty sort of vicarious thrill creating and "entertainment" for the civilization type of amoralist indefinite lifespanners that I described in an earlier post. The hybrid business is in fact exactly what led me to consider this, as the "program" makes no sense from any line of science you take. I have tried to talk my CE4 buddies out of this feature of their theory, but it has instead become the whole of their theory. I don't know if you read the last of the posts labelled "what will they be like?" but that gives some of my reasons for this. Having said all that, what makes sense to one colleague does not satisfy another at this stage of our understanding. I feel no anxiety about other theories, they are afterall only words. I simply say what makes a little sense to me and am ready to abandon it. Some of my colleagues have that orientation too, thankfully, and conversation is possible. 60 years of stand-off display tactics and 30 of intense awareness by us of claimed abductions show me no movement towards anything that I would call an optimistic outcome of a developing plan and no sense of guilt by anyone "up there" . Wish I could see that.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I value your take Professor and agree that openness to all ideas is critical at this juncture. That said, although we have been intensely aware of the Abduction phenomenon for some 30 years now, I believe it's been ongoing for at least some 350 years. If your into "Out Proctor", I suggest you take a look at my case study over at the Paracast Forums, posted under the section "UFO Contactees". It involves infant presentations, UAP sightings, transport's to "Scenes of another world", telepathy, paralysis, Magia Schools, sexual advances from dead husbands, etc etc., all from the late 17th century.

    http://theparacast.com/forum/case-study-jane-leade-1624-1704-t5398.html

    The timeline for the "project", whatever it may be, may need to be re-evaluated to be unfolding over centuries rather than decades. Only since the use of Atomics by humans on humans, has it seemed to intensify. Add in the potential of climate change, anoxic oceans and the potential for ozone layer depletion (and all that that implies) and one doesn't need cosmic systems analysis to see we may not be long for this place (again, measured in centuries rather than decades).

    I don't think "they" are very optimistic either...

    ReplyDelete
  12. Thanks. Hope this old man finds time to give the reading of your work the responsible time that it deserves--straight-up comment by the way; I DO respect my colleagues.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Outside of the work of John Mack, I'm unaware of anyone who's attempted a scholarly approach towards understanding the abduction phenomenon. That it exists is clear but the sources of it, not so much. Independent research is all over the map and therefore hard to evaluate. This is regrettable, since whatever the source of the phenomenon, it certainly it worthy of more systematic study. Assertions as to what "they" are thinking, planning and doing are pure speculation as "they" remain unidentified (perhaps unidentifiable?) and even if "they" were known, think of how hard oftentimes it is to accurately discern what members of one's own family, friends or colleagues are thinking. Extrapolations made by archeologists about ancient human civilizations are frequently hotly debated as well. The critical global problems we are facing are far from obscure and have been under public discussion for at least 40 years, so it would seem warnings sent telepathically or by other extranormal means to selected individuals is of dubious use. I guess what I am saying is until these kind of phenomena are systematically scrutinized,something that won't happen until they are considered "legitimate" topics of study, we will remain in the present frustrating labyrinthine hall of mirrors.

    ReplyDelete
  14. good, reasonable, open-minded viewpoint.

    ReplyDelete

Followers

Blog Archive