UFOLOGY HAS BEEN A BIG SCAM: WHAT THEY NEVER WANTED TO TELL YOU ABOUT UFOS by Jose Antonio Caravaca
Copyright 2018, Jose Antonio Caravaca
The obsessive and omnipresent concern of ufologists to show that UFO sightings are produced by the visit to our planet of extraterrestrial beings, has given rise to one of the greatest frauds ever seen in the investigation of a paradigm. It is inadmissible that none of the classical researchers has revealed, or at least pointed out, in some of their numerous writings, some of the main factors or elements of the phenomenon that invalidate, from the outset, extraterrestrial theory, and a posteriori, many of the approaches put forward by other ufologists, even the most avant-garde hypotheses. The majority of researchers have completed their postulates, at best, with only 40% of the case studies on the table.
Ignoring for decades that the UFO phenomenon seems to be the result of a psychic interaction between the witnesses and an unknown external agent, which is capable of creating a projection that contains a lot of unconscious (ideographic) material of the witnesses themselves.
The following aspects that we are going to list appear in almost every classic book you have read about UFOs, but obviously no researcher has pointed out their obvious disparity and counterpoint to extraterrestrial theses:
1.- From the first to the last page of many ufological books, it is clear that there are infinite different types of flying saucers and occupants. As diverse and picturesque as they are different, they are witnesses to each other. Have you looked at the number of different aliens that appear on the pages of these books? Why didn't any researcher distrust this issue? Is it possible we were being visited by a legion of alien races? Why so many kinds of UFOs, different in size and shape?
2.- Before the study of the same facts; proximity of a UFO, landing on a soft ground, impact of a light on the witness, etc., the same effects, tracks, traces or injuries were not recorded, why? That is, sometimes UFOs leave traces and sometimes they do not (even if it is the same type of terrain). Sometimes they cause electromagnetic interference in cars and electrical appliances and sometimes they do not (even though the distance to the UFO is the same for vehicles). Sometimes they cause harm to people and sometimes they do not (even if they are exposed to the same factors).
Therefore, it is very obvious that the effects caused by the interaction with the phenomenon are produced by causes other than the simple presence sine qua non of the paradigm in front of the witness. Otherwise, these different consequences would occur as long as we had the same factors in play.
3.- Another circumstance that is very clear, after reading dozens of books, is that UFO cases are not connected to each other. We cannot follow or weave a plot that leads us to a single great common history. The only thing UFO events share is their basic structure. The witness will report: 1. that he has seen a "thing" flying in the sky, 2. later, that this "thing" has landed, and 3. from this "thing" some beings have descended. But, incomprehensibly, these aspects, which should have greater homogeneity, are highly malleable and in each case, the elements "thing" and "beings" will be surprisingly different in size, shape and colors. And this has been noted in an overwhelming and revealing way, why has this particular fact not given rise to more debate?
4.- The behaviour of the occupants of the flying saucers is absurd and lacking in logic. And this does not happen because, as most scholars explain, we are incapable of interpreting or elucidating the actions of an advanced civilization in millions of years of evolution. Let's not be fooled. Simply put, the actions of the ufonauts are a set of nonsense, one after the other. The actions developed by extraterrestrials are very similar to those recorded in dream experiences. Therefore, all the gratuitous and unsubstantiated speculation about the absurd factor, an important key for many researchers of something sublime and extraordinary inserted inside the UFO encounters, is wrong. These circumstances are due to an effect caused by the interaction/communication of the witness's unconscious with an unknown external agent, which creates a projection following similar processes of creativity to that displayed by our psyche during the sleep phases. And we all know that dream experiences are signified by their absurd character...
5.- The information obtained from the "extraterrestrials" is a compendium of nonsense and, at best, the witness's own knowledge, "distorted" by the paradigm (the external agent). After decades of analyzing the communications of the alleged aliens, there has been no evidence of any truly novel knowledge, either at the scientific, philosophical, social or religious level.
6.- UFO crews do not influence or manipulate large sectors of society. Although it is insisted that the ufonauts interfere with our belief systems and act as a sort of spiritual catalyst, all of this takes place in a very small setting, and has more to do with how witnesses, let alone everyone else, react to these phenomena than in other circumstances.
7.- The UFO phenomenon does not adapt to society by changing its external appearance over time. It does not use any kind of sublime psychic camouflage. Simply put, the staging we observe has to be synchronous with the advances, thoughts, beliefs or myths of the time.
Conclusion:
All these factors indicated, practically since the late 1950s, that the witness was a vital and substantial part of understanding and decoding the meaning and nature of close encounters with UFOs. However, most researchers have chosen to ignore all of these signals and continue to speculate free of charge, far removed from the casuistry they had in their hands. It should be borne in mind that in subsequent years the incidents only corroborated these initial assessments of the first reports recorded by the UFO pioneers research.
JAC
36 Comments:
I want to take this opportunity to congratulate Jose for an excellent article. Jose pretty much sums up the ufology situation.
His highlighting of the "absurdities" of the UFO/ET characteristic absurdities is spot on.
Rich, I know that you have been proposing a "new" approach to studying the subject, but one must ask..."Where do you begin?"
How do you study a myth that is fraught with confabulations, mental distortions and wishful thinking?
By
Tim Hebert, at Sunday, May 27, 2018
Well, I would agree with practically every point made, almost all of which have previously been made by Vallee.
The key crux of the matter is of course - who or what this 'External Agent' is, where it comes from and what motivates its apparently deliberate absurdity & deception.
Again, these are aspects Vallee and others argue are elements of a 'non-human' but nevertheless 'terrestrial' intelligence previously ascribed to the 'mischievous'/'trickster' entities of folk belief (faeries, goblins, demons etc.)and to which many humanoid 'aliens' would seem to bear an uncanny resemblance as well as displaying similar 'interests' in abduction, sexuality & reproduction and making/performing seemingly 'absurd' actions or pronouncements (in folk tales usually as a means of deliberately 'tricking' their hapless victims into performing or providing some task or service.)
'Ufology' as a study of 'Extra-terrestrials' & their 'craft' has long been dismissed by Valee, Hynek and others as an 'inadequate explanation' for such phenomena - the fact nothing as 'weird' as an octupus ever seems to be encountered, all 'occupants' semmingly possessing a head, two arms, two legs and an inexplicable ability to breathe our atmosphere is a particular stumbling block when asserting these beings have evolved in some distant star-system.
As Vallee & Hynek came to agree - the 'High Strangeness' encounters, often dismissed by 'serious' ufologists may well hold the key to the phenomenon and should perhaps be studied more closely, particulalry in the light of Bigelow Aerospace's claim that the phenomenon is indeed largely based on 'deception' and often exhibits elements of other supposedly unrelated 'paranormal' activity.
THIS 'absurdity' is exactly what Ufology should concern itself with but the desire for 'scientific respectability' and the demand of skeptics that it conform to strict and established 'rational' criteria perpetually obstruct this.
UFOs are Paranormal NOT Extraterrestrial.
By
DrDee, at Sunday, May 27, 2018
Assume, for argument sake only, that the recent Navy/Pentagon gun-camera film and incident are real, i.e., that the film, radar, and eye-witness testimony of the pilots is accurate. In what sense is that UFO "paranormal."? The UFO was radar identified at over 60,000 feet; the UFO was radar identified to have descended to less than 1,000 feet in seconds; the UFO descended and then hovered in place over the water; the UFO was observed to have "disturbed" the water over which it hovered; the UFO was filmed by the Navy pilot and shows up as a solid object of some sort; the UFOs size was determined by sophisticated radar technology to be 46 feet; when the Navy jet approached the UFO, it flew off in an "evasive" manner; the UFO filmed and observed was only one of many seen in the 2 week Navy battleship exercises in 2004.
Now it what sense is any of that paranormal or psychic?
By
Dominick, at Sunday, May 27, 2018
Thanks Tim for your words.... the study has to start practically from the beginning...
Dr. Dee Although Vallee, Clark, Keel and others have shown the way.... I think they too have been fascinated by the phenomenon, giving it properties and characteristics that not are attributable to the enigma we study.
I believe that this external agent conceals a mental process that stands as a projection that can be observed from the outside by more people and leave traces.
The absurd factor, in my view, has a simple origin. This mental process, which projects a "psychic architecture", uses the same mechanisms as our dream universe. And that is why we find these crazy and absurd components embedded in the close encounters,
Moreover, my approaches are far removed from the manipulation of Vallee's control system, as well as from the "psychic camouflages" presented by these apparitions over the years, under different names (goblins, Marian apparitions, etc.). Since the phenomenon does not present us with anything really original or unknown to human beings, And that is why we cannot find anything in anomalous apparitions that does not fully enter the human imagination. The apparitions of the external agent always have to be synchronized with the epoch.
Thaks for you interesting comentary...
By
jacarav@ca, at Sunday, May 27, 2018
This might be all well & good in some respect, but don't "WE" have as many different types of motor-vehicles on our roads, as UFOs seen in our sky? OR Trains, Ships, Boats, Yachts, Planes, list goes on. And how do we account for imprints in the ground, after an alleged UFO landing? or the Radiation reading, being higher than the normal background!? OR different species of ETs would be no different than a different nation of people here on Earth, and dress differently.
How for goodness sake, do we explain; "Huge Crop Circles" made in the dark, overnight? The smaller ones made by man, all the Doug & Dave's, as the saying goes.
If its just something in the mind of witnesses, by some "External Agent" from God knows where, then how do we explain the legitimate photos of UFO??? if there are no UFOs:) How can Nuces be closed down in the US. & Russia by an " External Agent"? Somethings not right here.....
By
Daniel, at Sunday, May 27, 2018
Daniel:
I think you haven't read Senor Caravaca's Theory, or not read it well.
You are way off point.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Sunday, May 27, 2018
Can you tell us Rich, what this; " unknown external agent" is, or means?
I didn't think so. I probable haven't understood it that well because of this, but gave it a shot anyway......
By
Daniel, at Monday, May 28, 2018
Daniel:
I have elaborated on Jose's "external agent" many, many times here and Jose has provided reams of clarification also.
you have not been paying attention.
The concept is an interesting one.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Monday, May 28, 2018
My reply to Dominick is:
1. Where is this alleged gun-camera film and why cannot it be shown to the public and interested scientists?
2. How do we know this 46-ft length is in any way accurate? Again, where is the original witness statement and the follow-up (if any)?
3. Where are the radar measurements of this object documented, and who made them?
4. The "evasive manner" adopted by the UFO when approached by the Navy jet is purely a subjective impression. Moreover, this sort of thing was often alleged way back in Keyhoe's day so is nothing new or impressive. It is purely a personal interpretation of the witness.
I repeat what I said in the earlier post. How do we know any of this happened at all? Where are the original documents, witnesses, photographs, etc for the public to see?
Until then, why should we assume such reports are accurate (as implied by Dominick)?
By the way, "paranormal" surely means something that is not normal. Or is a bit abnormal. So the term would apply even if the UFOs were ET craft.
Daniel:
Do you still think crop circles were made by ETs? I thought these had been debunked long ago. There is not a single one that could not have been constructed by humans here on earth. If you think otherwise, please give date, place and preferably a photo thereof.
By
cda, at Monday, May 28, 2018
OK, but it doesn't go well with me, and is not tangible. Everything around us is tangible in reality, if its not, you will have a hard time proving it.
A concept is only something thought or imagined, as interesting as it might be, to you and some others, but not a reality that can be seen & able to be touched, that's what I pay attention to, my five senses, yeah? The rest is just what you say, a "concept"......
By
Daniel, at Monday, May 28, 2018
I want to add to the conversation regarding Jose's conclusions based on those cases that I've extensively looked at and is available on my blog site.
1967-wave sightings of UFOs throughout the state of Montana which includes one event at Malmstrom and culminating with an event on or about March 24th near Belt, Montana.
Plenty of witnesses as far as visible observation, but upon further investigation no tangible evidence to substantiate. Malmstrom AFB had no verifiable eye witnesses, but rumors and innuendos aplenty. Tangible and verifiable evidence of a system malfunction that was easily traced to peculiar weapon system command and control.
I'll post on my blog a listing and description of the civilian sightings leading up to the Malmstrom affair which are interesting on their own based on subjective vs objective criteria. These, I believe, have characteristics of Jose's proposed theory.
By
Tim Hebert, at Monday, May 28, 2018
Hi Jose,
As much as I find your reasoning interesting and I see some similarities with Keel, Vallee et al. you still have not explained in a coherent and very simple manner what you mean with your 'external agent'. Or, to phrase it differently - I still do not understand what you mean. Call me stupid if you like, but anytime I stumble upon that one, crucial element of your theory, you lose me.
I get that you claim there's 'a something' that reaches inside of us to grab in the potpourri of our cultural make-up to snatch elements to create a theatre-play with it. We are just toy boxes for the 'external agent' to construct elaborate and bizarre scenario's with. Why it would do so I don't read in your ideas. Why it would select some for such an ordeal and others not, I don't read in your theory. Perhaps I missed those details? But where I really fail to understand you and throw my hand in the air is with sentences you write like this:
"I believe that this external agent conceals a mental process that stands as a projection that can be observed from the outside by more people and leave traces."
For instance, where is that mental process located that your external agent conceals? A mental process suggests something occurring in the mind of a witness. So how does the external agent conceal that, if in fact that mental process occurs simultaneously?
How can a mental process - something of and in the mind - be observed by those residing outside that mind? And how does it 'stand as a projection' that can be observed 'from the outside'? Do you mean that this mental process - inside one mind I presume you mean - that is hidden by the 'external agent' is capable of sending out a 'something' or some other inexplainable force that is able to manipulate perception, matter and sense of time in others?
I would not be asking these questions if I would not honestly be trying to understand what you are saying, since I find it interesting what you are saying. But as of now, I have no idea in what way your external agent significantly differs from the 19th century spiritualist theories on materialization, bilocation and teleportation, Keel's famous 'ultraterrestrials' , Vallee's 'control mechanism', Fort's supersargasso sea, Steiner's Akasha chronicles, the Astral Light of Eliphas Levi and the theosophists or any other... external agent.
Looking forward to your reply if and when you get the time.
Dour and fastidious regards,
Theo Paijmans
Paijmans, Rich!
:)
By
theo paijmans, at Monday, May 28, 2018
In short ET phenomena is largely a by-product of the imagination. You are correct except for the assumption that there are external agents. The inconsistencies in reporting and lack of objective evidence can most readily be explained by our capacity to hallucinate, dream, imagine and otherwise have powerful subjective experiences.
By
Shamus, at Monday, May 28, 2018
I vote for a version of this "These circumstances are due to an effect caused by the interaction/communication of the witness's unconscious with an unknown external agent, which creates a projection following similar processes of creativity to that displayed by our psyche during the sleep phases."
But I don't think there's actual intelligent communication, per se. Rather there's an interaction with a currently unknown (but natural) electro-magnetic phenomenon that scrambles a nearby witness' brain. The description of the encounter (whether it's called a ghost, fairy, Bigfoot, or a UFO) is the result of the brain attempting to interpret and categorize the event into a pre-existing framework.
Let's not forget, people misidentify, misinterpret, or don't have adequate knowledge to correctly identify what was seen, and for myriad personal reasons exaggerate, embellish, and lie.
By
purrlgurrl, at Monday, May 28, 2018
@jacarav@ca
Hmm - I don't really buy how a supposed 'mental process' projects or leaves 'physical' traces.
Similarly Vallee notes historical cases where details we would be more likely to interpret today as 'space helmets' and 'space suits' were NOT interpreted as such at the time.
Alternatively the 1954 'Cennina Landing' would seem to display very little that could be construed as an encounter with 'extra-terrestrials' and their supposed 'space-craft' yet was singularly interpreted as such.
So again, I don't entirely accept the 'apparitions of the external agent' are always in synch with contemporary culture.
By
DrDee, at Tuesday, May 29, 2018
Dr Dee...
You (and others) don't have access to Jose's book -- in Spanish, but you can access his web-site (or Facebook page) via Google to get the full explication of the "external agent" and Distortion Theory.
The problem may be, as I have often indicated to Jose, that the "mechanism" providing the UFO scenarios, noted as external is actually a mental activity (psychological process, maybe a neurological function) that appears to operate (or actually operates) outside the psyche.
It's not unlike Jung's archetypes or Freud's id, I think, a mischievous psychical process that you's call The Trickster.
Defining it "external" is what confuses ufologists.
The "process" is not much different than the voices and images that schizophrenic persons experience, but within a context of normalcy; that is, the persons afflicted appear normal, at least after their experience which is transitory, not permanent as such mental defects that assault persons said to be mad or insane.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Tuesday, May 29, 2018
Theo, I don't know if you've been able to read my opinion on the absurd factor that differs absolutely from Vallee's approach. Nor do I agree with the existence of a system of control that attempts to manipulate society with its appearances. I do not even share the idea that this paradigm is hidden (camouflaged) behind skillful disguises. My external agent express/communicate himself at the exclusive level of each witness. Almost everything happens on a mental level.
Neither the entities, nor the strange creatures, nor the UFO occupants have a real existence, as independent beings, are just one more part of the projection. In fact, one of the main features of close encounters with UFOs is that these episodes restart with each incident. They start from scratch every time they meet.
Probably, none of the physical aspects or actions exposed by the external agent in his multiple and erratic manifestations before human beings (Marian apparitions, ghosts, apparitions, cryptozoological beings, UFOs, etc.) is a reflection of his true purpose or appearance. Therefore, all these observed entities do not correlate with "living" and independent beings, they have the same origin as the whole projection that embraces them. The interaction, communication or contact with these beings (UFO occupants, Marian apparitions, ghosts, etc.) is the result, exclusively, of the unconscious participation of the witnesses in the composition of these episodes. The phenomenon contributes almost nothing to the formation of the meetings. All the content of the projection (behaviour and accessories) is recreated at the exact moment when the external agent contacts the witness's psyche. Nothing exists before this contact (neither the shape of the UFO, nor the appearance of humanoids, nor their behaviour, etc.).
I hope your brilliant mind will enlighten us.... when you have clear time... thank you for your interest...
By
jacarav@ca, at Tuesday, May 29, 2018
Dr. Dee http://caravaca102.blogspot.com/2014/02/a-new-perspective-cennina-incident.html
By
jacarav@ca, at Tuesday, May 29, 2018
With all due respect, fellas, this "theory" explains everything and so it explains nothing. As Bentham put it with respect to the theory of natural rights, it's "nonsense on stilts."
By
Dominick, at Tuesday, May 29, 2018
"4.- The behaviour of the occupants of the flying saucers is absurd and lacking in logic."
I concur with this one, case in point being the Socorro landing. Two aliens in a smallish craft have traveled tens or hundreds of light-years*, clearly must have observed (human) activity during their 'descent', land, and yet apparently get totally spooked by Zamora getting within a hundred yards, scramble back in the craft and end their mission after 60 seconds. As Spock would say: "illogical".
* to me this is the issue that nobody addresses. The nearest star is 4 LIGHT YEARS away, and as we all learned in physics class, even getting to .9 the speed of light would take incomprehensible amounts of energy. So ET proponents wisely scrap that idea and introduce 'wormholes' or slipping from a parallel universe into ours, or other 'neat' theoretical solutions. It's always nice when you can replace an impossibility with something even more fantastical, and do it in all seriousness. Getting from 'there' to 'here' should end discussion of ET visitation, yet doesn't.
By
jamesrav, at Tuesday, May 29, 2018
I do agree that many UFO “sightings” are likely to be ideographic, unconscious projections, and therefore distortions of reality. I would lean more towards the mind of the witness as the direct cause of the projection in most cases, as Rich suggested, but the idea of an external agent as a “triggering event” might fit right in with that line of thought, as well.
If the “external agent” is something like a squirrel which the observer misconstrues as a bear, then perhaps the phenomena is simply a catalog of misunderstood natural occurrences. If the “external agent” is something created by or manipulated by an outside intelligence, then that fits in with trickster/ high strangeness elements of a deception being perpetrated.
I once sat in my car on the shoulder of a highway, watching in astonishment for several minutes, at what I believed to be an extremely strange craft in the sky, surrounded by a swarm of smaller objects darting about it. The occupants of another dozen or so cars also were pulled over, watching this totally unexpected manifestation.
As strange and completely alien as it appeared to be, I never doubted that we were watching an actual object, or, more accurately, actual objects. If this was indeed an example of some external agent, simultaneously interacting with the unconscious mind of all of the observers, I’d say that was even stranger than if it was “simply” an inter-planetary AI drone. Also, that would give rise to even more questions, such as what type of external agent would want to fool all of us into thinking we were seeing this thing? And why would they want that?
RR/ Jose, correct me if I’ve misconstrued the distortion theory. I’m still a little unclear of what might be constituted by an “external agent.” But I am interested in the concept.
Jamesrav, I also am very skeptical about the Socorro sighting for the reasons you listed (among others). But I am disappointed to hear your comment on the impossibility of supra-luminal travel, based on our present knowledge of physics— specifically what I am convinced are misassumptions of what the Lorentz relativistic velocity transformations represent. Those misassumptions are at the heart of the book I wrote on the subject. I don’t believe the universe fundamentally limits velocity, at all.
Thanks, Kevin G
By
Unknown, at Tuesday, May 29, 2018
Question to any of the non-eth theorists. In regards to your thinking about the "external agent", I wonder if any of you have considered how another theory may relate to your own ideas, namely the concept that we are just a simulation in some very advanced computer system?
Your "external agent' could simply be the programmers introducing simulated "paranormal" occurrences into our realm for various unknown reasons (to study our reactions, boredom with the experiment, creating mischief for fun, hackers introducing rogue code to cause chaos, or even just glitches or errors in the code causing what appear to us to be anomalous events, etc.).
Basically if we aren't real, and none of this is real, then there are no laws of nature or physics to be violated by so-called "high strangeness", and anything is essentially possible (as long as it can be imagined by our programmers or their AI).
Apologies if this drags things off topic or has been discussed ad nauseum, I am new here.
By
lurkeranon, at Tuesday, May 29, 2018
Kevin:
Jose's "theory" is complex. more so because of his designation of the mechanism at "play" is an external agent, not an internal agent.
I understand the external agent to be produced by psychological means (like the Freudian constructs of id or super-ego, or Jung's archetypes perhaps) by operating from "afar" as if outside the being(s) being seduced by the UFO imagery Jose catalogs in his many examples.
The psyche is fractured, like that with schizophrenics but not to the same degree, so the UFO witness isn't considered insane, mad, or institutional-ready.
I'll present more on this upcoming, as I just received a lengthy comment about the matter from a "friend" at Facebook who posts to Gilles Fernandez' interesting page; the comment making erudite suggestions for what is happening within the Caravaca construct.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Tuesday, May 29, 2018
If one was to look objectively at a "ufo wave" of sightings, as I mentioned in an above comment, some peculiar data stands out.
1967 Montana sightings/reportings show that the object in question is always a different shape or merely a "bright" light. The object lands and upon further investigation the object is never discovered, nor is there trace evidence that such a landing had occurred. Some landings were over snow packed terrain yet there was no evidence that the snow and surrounding area was disturbed.
Most of the sightings were at or around 2100 which one would critically have to wonder if a stellar component was the actual culprit.
These sightings were visual observations with no close interactions of the object itself or any perceived occupant of said object.
The by product of the sightings could be summed up by the Biblical phrase: "They were amazed."
But that's it, nothing more, and long forgotten by most.
By
Tim Hebert, at Tuesday, May 29, 2018
lurkeranon...
You're fine.....the "we are a computer simulation" is occurring all over the place and is an idea welcome here, and has been "discussed" often, to no avail.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Wednesday, May 30, 2018
>> With all due respect, fellas, this "theory" explains everything and so it explains nothing. As Bentham put it with respect to the theory of natural rights, it's "nonsense on stilts."<<
Well said, Dom! Couldn't agree more. As much as I respect Jose, and he makes very good points, I cannot consider his conclusion seriously because:
There's no way to determine its truth value or even whether it is plausible or implausible. It's only an informed but fanciful speculation, based only on the "UFO" reports themselves--NOT "UFO" reports in a whole-world context. It's merely a "what if?"
Bottom line--as you suggest--the "Distortion theory" is nonfalsifiable, so not scientific. It's just another flimsy idea inside of the failed pseudoscience of ufxlogy; and as such, a rationalization for continued belief in the "UFO" myth.
By
zoamchomsky, at Wednesday, May 30, 2018
I have the feeling that most have missed the salient points proffered by Jose. Most appear to be wrapped up by his "external" agent and by way of artifact missed the whole crux of his article which is the absurd notions regarding UFO sightings, characteristics and witness observations.
By
Tim Hebert, at Wednesday, May 30, 2018
Jose's "mistake" may have been to identify the protagonist of his theory as external.
One can make the case for using external but it requires some manipulation of the concept.
He's really on to something, I think, and his "theory" is more extensive than Vallee's and those that Gilles brought up at his Facebook page.
RR
By
RRRGroup, at Wednesday, May 30, 2018
Tim is right, we must analyze the points made that invalidate many concepts and ideas about UFOs...
thanks Tim
By
jacarav@ca, at Thursday, May 31, 2018
My external agent is an interesting concept that can give many answers from the psychic point of view.... I still think that the elusiveness of the phenomenon, the common internal structure that supports close encounters with UFOs and the existence of physical traces after sightings, may be indicative of the presence of an unknown and extern X factor.
Although we have to bear in mind that practically all the information we obtain from UFO incidents, at an aesthetic and informative level, is the product of psychic feedback between the external agent and the unconscious of the witnesses...
I very much agree with Rich's arguments ... although I still think that the UFO paradigm hides an yet unidentified "element". But probably not as extraordinary and controlling as other researchers defend...
By
jacarav@ca, at Thursday, May 31, 2018
Hello,
"He's really on to something, I think, and his "theory" is more extensive than Vallee's and those that Gilles brought up at his Facebook page."
lol
A contrario: RCT/HSP proposes to explain IFO and UFO cases. We dont only focuse on some cases, à la José, but all. The only "extensive" or global theory then is not the ones proposed by José, Vallée or dunno who, but the one proposed by "skeptics".
None here have been able to refute our Null Hypothesis. Only ruminating or philosophying.
Regards,
Gilles
By
Gilles Fernandez, at Thursday, May 31, 2018
Gilles; Mon Grand! Grand Homme!
Toujours et pour toujours, zoam
By
zoamchomsky, at Friday, June 01, 2018
Jose,
Ufology isn't a scam at all. Yes, there are in fact MANY scammers within what is Ufology. Can you name me a single area, or topic of collective interest, that does not have it's all too ample share of scammers? Simply put, I cannot.
So, what is Ufology? Ufology is first and foremost a reflection of the human condition. It's most accurate institutional comparison would be that of a religion. Within the scope of this religion without question the church of the ETH is predominant.
With respect to the human condition's instinctively derived need to parse out the truth for survival's sake, with respect to Ufology, we all make the choice along the way to align ourselves with a particular religious sect.
Many choose to believe that because their choice either lays claim to denial, or the ever popular agnostic front, that they are in fact excluded from such a debasing "belief system" due to their willfully aloof superior intelligence. Still in yet they hang around the UFO dinner table like hopeful indulgent orphans, despite their secure proclamations of some well tempered intellectual self control. These are the Ufological animals that have evolved beyond a need to travel with the pack, just as long as said pack are kept at arms length.
Ufology cannot be summed up as either a philosophy, nor as some fashion rich psychological tagline.
For what really is this Ufology relevant external agency, other than by any and all other names, a God?
No matter what framework we choose to surround such a deity, no matter in which church of Ufology such a masterwork hangs, we must agree to whom real worship and credential is due.
At the end of the day, or the ages, it's always you and I.
By
Anonymous, at Sunday, June 03, 2018
The Ill-Begotten Curio
Ufology is a scam, in that many of its premises accepted by ufologists are wrong and full of biased data. Ufology is a scam because most published books and articles are more focused on defending the reality of the extraterrestrial hypothesis than on actually documenting what we find in UFO reports... it's that simple, because of ineptitude and commercial interests, ufology is a big scam.
Although obviously, here is an interesting phenomenon that we must study....
saludos
By
jacarav@ca, at Sunday, June 03, 2018
#5 is waaaaaaay off.
There are several contactee accounts that have extremely coherent and logical information, we just dont hear about them in popular culture.
Defending Sacred Ground is a direct account from Alex Collier who has paid dearly for his disclosure.
Alien Interview by L Spencer is known by very few, but gives an amazing account of the nurse who "interviewed" the Roswell alien. Of course this sounds completely outlandish...but when I saw the "information", I was astonished and grateful to read it. This account includes much yearned for clues on Earth history as well.
Even Enrique Barrious account, Ami...Child of the Stars gives more clues as to actual Earth history than the general comment that was written about this genre.
None should be used as "Bibles"...nothing should, but they at least give a larger perspective on the UFO question than most will give you from a few sources. They are great places to start.
And they are all online for free as well.
Its not as "dark" as #5 tries to paint it...not by a long shot. But one might have to read more than a few paragraphs to see that!
By
jimisroom, at Tuesday, January 15, 2019
It's turtles all the way down!
By
jim, at Thursday, November 21, 2019
Post a Comment
<< Home