The so-called greys [ETs]

Copyright 2020, InterAmerica, Inc.

This ‘piece has to do with the “evolution” of the extraterrestrial “greys” ET meme, already touched upon in my previous “Movie ETs” piece the other day.

Matty presented, in his defense of “the Greys are ET visitors in those UFOs” we are contending with here and in Ufology generally, the Aleister Crowley “entity” called Lam, Matty showing “Lam” alongside a rendition of what Ufology keeps presenting as a version of the supposed ET UFO visitors:

Here’s a piece about the Crowley Lam, nonsense as I see it, by Daniel V. Boudillion:

http://www.boudillion.com/lam/lam.htm

And his comparative version of Lam and UFO’s alien visitors, the “greys”:

The whole Aleister Crowley oeuvre, while mired in some interesting thought and reference material, is a side-show that mars the Ufological landscape, because it takes the UFO phenomenon from a researchable arena into a subjective venue where Satanic and goofy occult practices and beliefs prevail.

The picture of Crowley’s Lam represents, as I see it, a represen- tation of an encephalopathic being, not a perceived “grey” alien, noted before its appearance in UFO lore.

The “grey ET” meme or visage has creeped up on UFO buffs and the public because of its dominance in extraterrestrial stories and UFO accounts, even when those accounts are void of any such ET visitation that could remotely be of frail, grey-hued entities.

The Grey alien representation may be ascribed to Jung’s Collective Unconscious, if pushed hard enough or, more seriously, if it comes from a saturation of the Grey ET meme that has taken hold of the popular desire to see extraterrestrials as something humans might be able to cope with they show up to conquer Earth.

Either way, I’m sick to death of seeing Crowley’s Lam as a comparative with the Grey ET representation.

Both are flawed and sidetracking images that reasonable (sensible) UFO researchers and investigators would be smart (wise) to eschew.

RR

Grammatical correctness

A few people keep sending grammatical correcting notes for some content here, mine and that from others.

First off, I’m not about to correct anything submitted here from others. Their material is sacrosanct as far as I’m concerned, and will be presented verbatim.

As for me, I have a Grammarly oversight program that “corrects” any grammar faux pas I commit, which are many sometimes, especially singular verbs for multi-subjects and the reverse of that.

But those irritating sleuths who think they are teachers of grammar will not be acknowledged. Their pretentious efforts go right to the delete or spam areas of Blogger.

I seek correcting material for content here, for the topic, if necessary. Readers here will have to, and often do, overlook my grammatical errors, some from the auto-correcting aspects of the computers or phones I’m using for input.

So, you asses who think your grammar is better than mine or Grammarly’s can forget about getting your grammatical whims online, especially for those pieces that others are kind enough to provide to this blog.

RR