Bryan Sentes' ongoing recap of that Liminas stuff (Like heartburn, will it ever end?)
posted by RRRGroup at
Sunday, March 19, 2023
|
0 comments
Sunday, March 19, 2023
UFO subtexts
Copyright 2023, InterAmerica, Inc.
That the UFOs which fly and are spotted by witnesses and
pilots enthuses most of you visitors here does not go unnoticed.
And until my hope that a “crashed” UFO – unlikely – or one that is “shot down” (captured), tells us what reality we are subject to, comes to fruition, the phenomenon will continue to get play in this spot.
But the UFO encounters collected by Alert Rosales, José Caravaca, and Preston Dennett et al. are as interesting, maybe more so, for their psychological (and neurological) meaning and more perhaps.
That there are so many tales of entities and their appearances in the context of flying saucers (contemporarily) and via other means previously in historical accounts goes to another aspect of our reality, one that holds little interest for most UFO enthusiasts steeped in the extraterrestrial explanation for the phenomenon.
This is where most of you stand – interested in the ET version of UFOs and it’s where the academic newbies’ interest lies, despite the overlay of prattle about the philosophical approach to the topic, now housed in its UAP overcoat.
The underlying element of interest is in the ET (cosmological alien) version of the UFO phenomenon, with otherwise analytical pretense fooling no one who’s paying attention.
I’ve always seen the subliminal favoritism of the ET preference for UFOs, with an ET nod to other subtexts – such as “abductions” or crop circle renditions, military scrutiny (over nuclear facilities), and other assorted explanations for the apparent visitations of the phenomenon.
Lip service to non-ET UFO explanations is what John Mack dealt with, or tried to, and then along comes Avi Loeb offering decency to the UFO ET idea, causing palpitations in the heart of UFO fanatics.
But the ET explanation for UFOs is almost maniacal, insensible, irrational in the context of what is known about interstellar space and its distances (mixed with time and other exigencies encased in physical laws as we know them).
This means that the subtext of the UFO encounter accounts means more than most flying saucer fans give them credit for.
Attributing the movements and sudden appearances and disappearances of UFOs or the alleged clot of apparent hotspots to an ET explanation for UFOs is shortsighted or a pathology, held by some normally sensible person, now encased in a mind-warp from which they cannot escape.
Apparently time is not going to tell us what UFOs are, and “disclosure” will not be forthcoming as even those allegedly holding UFO evidence have no idea what UFOs are or mean, the ET explanation not explaining what governments supposedly have.
The subtext – material, tangible visits by entities from somewhere – is the clue to what UFOs are or mean.
As hard as that is for some to accept, it’s where the UFO riddle may be opened up or resolved.
And until my hope that a “crashed” UFO – unlikely – or one that is “shot down” (captured), tells us what reality we are subject to, comes to fruition, the phenomenon will continue to get play in this spot.
But the UFO encounters collected by Alert Rosales, José Caravaca, and Preston Dennett et al. are as interesting, maybe more so, for their psychological (and neurological) meaning and more perhaps.
That there are so many tales of entities and their appearances in the context of flying saucers (contemporarily) and via other means previously in historical accounts goes to another aspect of our reality, one that holds little interest for most UFO enthusiasts steeped in the extraterrestrial explanation for the phenomenon.
This is where most of you stand – interested in the ET version of UFOs and it’s where the academic newbies’ interest lies, despite the overlay of prattle about the philosophical approach to the topic, now housed in its UAP overcoat.
The underlying element of interest is in the ET (cosmological alien) version of the UFO phenomenon, with otherwise analytical pretense fooling no one who’s paying attention.
I’ve always seen the subliminal favoritism of the ET preference for UFOs, with an ET nod to other subtexts – such as “abductions” or crop circle renditions, military scrutiny (over nuclear facilities), and other assorted explanations for the apparent visitations of the phenomenon.
Lip service to non-ET UFO explanations is what John Mack dealt with, or tried to, and then along comes Avi Loeb offering decency to the UFO ET idea, causing palpitations in the heart of UFO fanatics.
But the ET explanation for UFOs is almost maniacal, insensible, irrational in the context of what is known about interstellar space and its distances (mixed with time and other exigencies encased in physical laws as we know them).
This means that the subtext of the UFO encounter accounts means more than most flying saucer fans give them credit for.
Attributing the movements and sudden appearances and disappearances of UFOs or the alleged clot of apparent hotspots to an ET explanation for UFOs is shortsighted or a pathology, held by some normally sensible person, now encased in a mind-warp from which they cannot escape.
Apparently time is not going to tell us what UFOs are, and “disclosure” will not be forthcoming as even those allegedly holding UFO evidence have no idea what UFOs are or mean, the ET explanation not explaining what governments supposedly have.
The subtext – material, tangible visits by entities from somewhere – is the clue to what UFOs are or mean.
As hard as that is for some to accept, it’s where the UFO riddle may be opened up or resolved.
Images atop from the vast collection of humanoid encounters in Albert Rosales' files
RR
RR
posted by RRRGroup at
Sunday, March 19, 2023
|
0 comments
A strange UFO-cow story, from a credible, homey couple. (interesting)
posted by RRRGroup at
Sunday, March 19, 2023
|
0 comments
