• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

A Troubling Observation About UFO Reality

Free episodes:

Here's an Aeon essay just linked in the C&P thread by @smcder that is also highly relevant and timely for the current discussion in this thread:

Extract:

"The information processing (IP) metaphor of human intelligence now dominates human thinking, both on the street and in the sciences. There is virtually no form of discourse about intelligent human behaviour that proceeds without employing this metaphor, just as no form of discourse about intelligent human behaviour could proceed in certain eras and cultures without reference to a spirit or deity. The validity of the IP metaphor in today’s world is generally assumed without question.

But the IP metaphor is, after all, just another metaphor – a story we tell to make sense of something we don’t actually understand. And like all the metaphors that preceded it, it will certainly be cast aside at some point – either replaced by another metaphor or, in the end, replaced by actual knowledge."

Your brain does not process information and it is not a computer | Aeon Essays
 
Because if they're trying to confuse us, it's a spectacular failure. At least to the general population that thinks it's nonsense.

Polls have shown much of the general population accepts the phenomenon as real, but HS hinders any definite conclusion as to its nature which I think is its intent.
 
Multiple UFO witness cases state their car affected by witness of the UFO....such as motors stop running or being lifted.

The atmosphere, changed by scientific conversion of Earth's nuclear which belongs to a cold sun fusion. Earth sun became hotter after last conversion incident that incinerated Earth millions of years ago as archaeological evidence.....human artifacts found inside of sink holes inside of coal.

The UFO condition interaction as I witnessed.....causes heated interaction and then I witnessed the burning of the atmosphere and the manifestation of fixed images/bodies as the atmosphere cooled......the manifestation of a many varied condition including human images. Why wouldn't an alien condition cause a recording of the body that interacts with? The UFO condition seems to have interacted with planes (metallic bodies) and car bodies.
I hope you are joking with that video of the van hitting a cable that the utility workers were working on. I hope to god that you don't think that it's some mysterious force from a flying saucer (or elsewhere) that caused that. If you are joking - ok cool. If you are serious, then you must be a fan of thirdphaseofmoon.
 
Which debate? The one concerning the nature of consciousness, mind, and reality? Or the one about the materiality of some ufos?
Wasn't burnt saying that since the mind simulates reality, that anything we see paranormal wise is just an illusion?
 
Like I said.

Either communication is not their intent or they suck at it.

I think they're great at confusing us. HS must be a kind of communication to achieve this end, and it's working brilliantly. This board is just one example of many. There's no consensus as to what we're dealing with. The ETH may be true but lots of people feel we just can't be sure of it, or reject it altogether.
 
I think they're great at confusing us. HS must be a kind of communication to achieve this end, and it's working brilliantly. This board is just one example of many. There's no consensus as to what we're dealing with. The ETH may be true but lots of people feel we just can't be sure of it, or reject it altogether.
Again, I don't think they're confusing many people.

Even with me, a guy who's seen a few things and knows that something is afoot, merely scratches his chin and moves on with his life.

If they're trying to confuse a few scattered individuals, they're expending a lot of energy doing so, with little effect.
 
Wasn't burnt saying that since the mind simulates reality, that anything we see paranormal wise is just an illusion?

I'm not sure what Burnt has been saying (haven't been for a long time). Perhaps he can clarify how 'the mind simulates reality', if that is his primary claim.
 
I'm not sure what Burnt has been saying (haven't been for a long time). Perhaps he can clarify how 'the mind simulates reality', if that is his primary claim.

It appears that Burnt is following @Soupie's claims and references in the C&P thread concerning an IP-based 'interface' theory [apparently to support a theory of 'predictive processing' in brain activity, which provides only an 'illusion' of consciousness and world]. This line of thought is an outcome of information theory as applied to consciousness, largely imo a reductive hypothesis concerning consciousness. The best place to start to follow this line of thinking seems to be the C&P post linked below (in a recent post by Burnt here in this thread). In this linked C&P post Soupie begins with, links to, an Aeon article by Anil Seth which we need to read to begin to grok the approach Soupie and Burnt support. I've also been reading the extensive and informed comments following the Seth article, which I highly recommend for an overview of the complexity of the philosophical and scientific issues embedded in this neuro-techno 'interface' theory.

Consciousness and the Paranormal — Part 7
 
1.) Well technicially according to leading consciousness research we are always hallucinating. 2.) But you keep placing the ufo in the container of the ordinary. It's not just something new.....it's something unique that is beyond our sensory capacity. This is not like seeing a new kind of fish....we've been down that road before. I'm arguing the the ufo is such a strange and bizarre stimulus that it results in the up close high strange witness reports as we know them.

And giving them agency is wrong think as well. 3.) We have to start first with how the human perceives a unique stimulus before we get into all that magical alien mind control thing that people look to. We need to stop inventing realities for the ufo and start with understanding human perceptual reality first.

Forgive me please for responding to two different posts, but both seemed very much in the same context. One post just more or less adding complimentary weight and perspective to the other.

1.) Why forum members here that are seriously into the UFO phenomenon don't "get" what your stating, is truly puzzling. It's not like what you are contending or expressing is given to, or synonymous with, witness delusion, diminished veracity in reporting, or personal credibility, or even that it cancels out the ETH altogether. It's merely the manner in which we process the fundamental nature of consciousness and information. With respect to a solid theoretical neuroscientific approach to a theoretically proposed understanding of reality, information theory is very near the top. In fact it *is* the top with respect to solid theories represent of fundamental consciousness. When combined, or perceived in conjunction with, Hoffman's cognitive science models, the matter in question practically takes on a prolifically mainstream attribute. This being for what are comprehensively proposed perceptual aptitudes regarding consciousness and the base manner in which we experience reality. There is a great deal of substance there and denying as much would seem illogical with respect to examining all the phenomenal evidence possible.

5 Thought-Provoking Quantum Experiments Showing That Reality Is an Illusion

The Evolutionary Argument Against Reality | Quanta Magazine

Odds are we're living in a simulation, says Elon Musk

Are We Living in a Computer Simulation?

2.) I used to term this as being a form of outright personification or projecting. Then I started referring to it, with respect to investigative approaches, as being "left brained ufology" vs. "right brained ufology". In ontological terms the former IMO is a science fiction based methodology vs. the latter being IMO, more of a metaphysically relevant conceptualization for witness experiential responsibility. Both place humankind at the center of their respective orientations in terms of responsible hypothetical equations, and both do in fact bear out real merit and possibility. It's just that the former depends on what there has been no real correlative evidence in support of, even considering the very real possibility that the MIC is in possession of phenomena relevant technology, that certainly doesn't mean it's spacefaring technology. The latter, we have seen a good deal of correlational supportive evidence for. Both in scientifically founded parapsychological circles, as well as in demonstrated quantum mechanical scientific principles.

3.) Presently, this is ultimately a very tough issue to reconcile, because we don't have a clue what that unique stimulus consists of. Is the responsible agent for the stimulus solely our brains? Is it consciousness? Or is the stimulus some element within nature itself the excites a temporary modification or mutation of the reality signal between or within our brains and consciousness? Could the stimulus be due to a form of nonhuman, or future human technology, that we simply have no known reference for? So truly, there is both the mystery of the stimulus, as well as that which the stimulus' effect is contingent upon in order to specifically elicit, or simply allow for, the experience.

Personally, I suspect that reality/consciousness, or information itself, or specific gradient parts thereof, is the medium upon whichever relevant technological orientation (nonhuman/future human) is actuating.



what I'm saying is both the BLT crop circle researchers and Roger Leir have made specific scientific claims about their evidence that in their minds, and those who believe in them, feel that they in fact have scientific evidence of ET. what i'm saying is that if they had real science of ET implants and extraordinary effects on crops and soil then the broader scientific community would be all over it. as they are not it tells us something of their quality of science.

Leir's claims about isotope ratios belonging to the stars are bogus as the type of machine he used can not actually substantiate that level of finding. He needed to go up to the next level which is super expensive so he was happy enough to dazzle people with his "science" graphs and spectrosopy charts etc. when in fact the only thing he really proved about his implants is that they were made of the same stuff that human bodies are and no more than that.

4.) Ufology does a lot of hoop jumping to try to prove its version of reality, which is most often clouded by its ETH lens instead of assessing the actual evidence they have
.

A lot of the photography discussion cuts the same way. While the images are fascinating and often come with unique narratives, no one can definitively say it's a spaceship, just that it's something really curious.

5.) My other theme is about proximity to the spaceship. ...why is it the closer people get to one the more bizarre and weird it looks and behaves. This tells me that perhaps when the fovea centralis is involved up close and personal the brain appears to have to do some back flips to take into consideration what it's actually seeing. Ships seem to morph or are made of strange materials. This makes me wonder if it's even possible to take a picture of a ufo that would resemble the kind of simple metal structured craft seen in popular photos. Like you, I think there is something much more strange going on.

4.a.) But ufology often prefers to shave off
these outlying cases and intense experiences in favour of the simple and more direct ETH narrative of spaceships from the stars even though that just doesn't match up at all. With apologies to Ted Phillips, but if he also had some great science going on then certainly trace evidence would be not only abundant on planet earth but our science would be all over it. Even the conservative Jerome Clark believes that you would never be able to hide from history an event as substantial as ET landing and making contact with the people of earth. His assessment is that we don't even have a language for what's taking place.

6.) So if people are going to dismiss Clark and Vallee, arguably the two leading thinkers in the field, because even after all their deep concerted efforts that tallies up much more than what all of us have done in the field, then maybe the real issue at play here is believerdom and an inability to see past an ETH bias.

4.) IMO, this *is* the personified and projected nature of the "fit in order to build" assembly of the ETH story line.

4.a.) The "hoops" represent the forced and unnatural way the mind can be self consensus trained to repeatedly go out of it's way to pick and choose data selectively, while disregarding the obvious height and fire induced dangers of sloppy incomplete research, all in the comfortably habitual name of an nonthreatening and attractive ETH treat at the end of the show.

5.) This is a fascinating observation, and I have a tendency to want to lump it into witness relevant high strangeness. Is that what you're stating here to the effect that the closer the object is to the witness, the more so the witness is influenced or effected by the stimulus of what it is they are witness to?

6.) To dismiss any prominent UFO researcher is unwise IMO. Let alone, as you clearly elude to, two of the greatest minds to ever engage and study the phenomenon. To do so almost assuredly means a willful exercise in irrational prejudice. I truly feel bad for those that treat the ETH as a zealot would their religion of choice. The have denied themselves so much intrigue, and so much potential understanding. Ultimately, they have denied themselves the most fundamentally important attribute that the well disciplined scientific process can ever yield. Certain knowledge of the the truth.
 
I'm a little bit frightened to post this photo since there's a good chance that Trajanus will think it's real/authentic. It comes from my UFO book that I got on xmas day, l1979. It says that the photo was taken in France.

upload_2016-11-7_19-42-16.png
 
I hope you are joking with that video of the van hitting a cable that the utility workers were working on. I hope to god that you don't think that it's some mysterious force from a flying saucer (or elsewhere) that caused that. If you are joking - ok cool. If you are serious, then you must be a fan of thirdphaseofmoon.
An example that obviously cannot be filmed or photographed, yet spoken about as witness accounts.

Why is it that the human psyche, aware of atmospheric fed back advice gives movie themes as some form of Earth attack with cars flying in the air in the explosive attacks?
 
Being that I used to be an inflight photographer in the U.S. Navy, I can tell you that nothing would have appeared on any film taken at night time anyway. But if the military released the photo and it showed structure and/or showed an elliptical shaped craft with no wings or horizontal/vertical stabilizers - then no, I would not say the military was hoaxing the photo.

On the other hand, when a farmer from Orygun miraculously has the worlds only "real" flying saucer photo that happens to look exactly like a truck mirror that is also miraculously below telephone wires - then yeah, I don't believe that.

Once again;

Trent1b.jpg
mir7lgcu.jpg

If you question the human mind.....how did it gain intelligence, then obviously you would review a consideration......for to want a situation-ownership as advice, is to have viewed a situation in imagery and advice.

The human mind states in its conscious self evaluation....I am innocent of all knowledge/wisdom and am indoctrinated via the conditions of being taught both aspects.....yet we have a review, why and who were our parents to have sexual procreation as ownership of the species to then cause innocence to be born and indoctrinated.

Where did information about technology come from?

We advised ourselves that it came from ET or AI, and we never stated that it came from GOD.

If you also review the image, it could be factored to be a transmitter disc, as a design concept.

The spiritual aware advice of being irradiated (crown of thorns/shroud evidence) stated that enlargement as a relayed/transmitted condition of the Ark of the Beast was Japeth, stating witnessed advice that images are formed by the atmospheric attack and then enlarged and transmitted back as evidence.

We know by witness accounts that metallic objects are affected by the UFO manifestation, therefore it would not be unusual for a transmitted fed back attack to be witnessed as an image of the interacting signal.
 
Again, I don't think they're confusing many people.

Even with me, a guy who's seen a few things and knows that something is afoot, merely scratches his chin and moves on with his life.

If they're trying to confuse a few scattered individuals, they're expending a lot of energy doing so, with little effect.

But they've confused just about the whole UFO community, in that few people are certain of just what it represents. As long as people can't even agree what it is, there won't be any concerted action. A state of limbo and inaction is probably what the phenomenon sought to achieve.
 
I'm a little bit frightened to post this photo since there's a good chance that Trajanus will think it's real/authentic. It comes from my UFO book that I got on xmas day, l1979. It says that the photo was taken in France.

upload_2016-11-7_19-42-16.png

That's a real old pic, but I thought an Italian took it. Of course it was denounced as a hoax; it LOOKS phony.
 
But they've confused just about the whole UFO community, in that few people are certain of just what it represents. As long as people can't even agree what it is, there won't be any concerted action. A state of limbo and inaction is probably what the phenomenon sought to achieve.
Again, logically, that doesn't make sense.

If they wanted that, all they would need to do is to do nothing. Don't be seen at all.

That's a perfect state of limbo.
 
Again, logically, that doesn't make sense.

If they wanted that, all they would need to do is to do nothing. Don't be seen at all.

But what if they have an important mission that requires they come here or appear often. I suppose they could just cloak themselves entirely somehow. But it may not be necessary to go through the trouble of that. If the essential goal is to carry out some mission without humanity interfering, just sow some occasional confusion with HS. If that is the purpose of HS, it's working brilliantly. After several DECADES, we're still arguing the same old stuff over and over again, because there's no consensus as to what we're dealing with--FAR from it. As long as we can't even agree what the phenomenon represents, we're hardly in a position to formulate an effective, coherent response. And that IMO is exactly what the phenomenon wants--to see us immobilized while it carries out its mission.
Btw the insistence on keeping us in the dark is grounds for some concern about the nature of mission...
 
But what if they have an important mission that requires they come here or appear often. I suppose they could just cloak themselves entirely somehow. But it may not be necessary to go through the trouble of that. If the essential goal is to carry out some mission without humanity interfering, just sow some occasional confusion with HS. If that is the purpose of HS, it's working brilliantly. After several DECADES, we're still arguing the same old stuff over and over again, because there's no consensus as to what we're dealing with--FAR from it. As long as we can't even agree what the phenomenon represents, we're hardly in a position to formulate an effective, coherent response. And that IMO is exactly what the phenomenon wants--to see us immobilized while it carries out its mission.
Btw the insistence on keeping us in the dark is grounds for some concern about the nature of mission...

I agree that we can't infer what their motives are.

But I think we can infer what their motives aren't. That is, unless they're just terrible at execution.

Their motives are not:
  1. Large-scale communication with the human species. Reason: they don't do it.
  2. Large-scale manipulation of our culture. Reason: our cultural trajectory has been unambiguously going in the opposite direction than they seem to tell individuals.
  3. Large-scale manipulation of our biology. Reason: our DNA does not appear to have been tampered with in any way that does not seem to be natural selection in action.
  4. Individual communication. Reason: they frequently tell people to do things that are unreasonable, or cannot be achieved, or do not even make sense. Examples include propulsion mechanisms that don't work, prophecies that are bunk, or math that is provably wrong.
  5. Individual growth. Reason: contactee/abductees don't improve their lot in life after the event. They're not really different than anybody else, but frequently have their worldview shattered, relationships undergo stress, and PTSD is commonly cited.
  6. Genetic sampling. Reason: the entire genome of the human species could be stored comfortably in a mid-range corporate data center. Once you get a small sample size, it would be a relatively simple math problem to extrapolate genetic variation and their subsequent prototypes. For example, if they take a sperm sample once, they should never have to come again -- they have trillions of haploid copies of your DNA. Yet they come back.
  7. Hybridization. Reason: the only way they could hybridize with us is if they were at least hominids derived from this planet. Basically, unless we're kissing cousins, it wouldn't work. Yet, we see no other advanced hominid populations here on earth.
  8. To advance our technology so we can join the space brothers: Reason: they haven't publicly given us warp drive or antigravity or free energy.
  9. To cut a deal with our government. Reason: our governments remain profoundly stupid, myopic, and it would be... against human nature to sit on such technology or knowledge for long. Individuals would have far more incentive to sell it off than keep it in a government stockpile somewhere. Besides, there has not been one piece of human technology ever hit the market that wasn't a derivation of what came before.
That's where I'm at.
 
The discussions surrounding the issue are involved, but it still boils down to those two issues. The rest are belief based, e.g. involving religious factors which ultimately break down and therefore can be discarded. I've seen nothing coherent other than the idea that free will doesn't have to depend on conscious choices, but only the ability to act as agents ( as independent systems ). One of the counterpoints I'm frequently presented with is the idea that our ability to change our decisions nullifies the idea that we're not making conscious choices. That however changes nothing, because in reality the decision to change a previous decision is also being made subconsciously.

That highlighted claim is questionable. In fact, Libet did not see it that way but rather as an expression of a subconscious preparation for response subsequently vetoed by a conscious choice. What the experiment reveals is the existence of a subconscious mind influencing the conscious mind -- as aware as the conscious mind of an immediate situation calling for response but lacking the latter's capacity for reflection and decision-making. The subconscious mind indeed seems, in these rapid-fire experiments, to be engaged first, ready to respond but incapable of 'thinking about' its response. The subconscious mind thus prompts the subject toward action -- demonstrating action potentials that can be carried to completion or not depending on the degree to which, and the speed with which, 'higher-order' interventions of the conscious mind are awakened. Libet's experiment thus provided evidence of deeper complexity in consciousness and mind given the evident participation of a subconscious form of limited 'mentation' existing within consciousness/mind as a whole.

If consciousness and mind in visiting ETs are similar to ours, it could be that the inconsistency and contradiction we think we perceive in ufo/alien behavior might be understood as demonstrations of both subconscious impulses sometimes acted upon and conscious deliberation leading to the checking, or overriding, of such impulses.

It seems possible that some of the ET species visiting earth are similar to our species in our present state of evolution, including the current state of the evolution of consciousness and mind that motivates and guides, enables, our behaviors. It also seems possible, perhaps likely, that some alien 'beings' encountered by humans on earth are actually robots functioning on the basis of advanced AI, in which case they might well not be susceptible to 'subconscious' mentation or impulses.






 
I agree that we can't infer what their motives are.

But I think we can infer what their motives aren't. That is, unless they're just terrible at execution.

Their motives are not:
  1. Large-scale communication with the human species. Reason: they don't do it.
  2. Large-scale manipulation of our culture. Reason: our cultural trajectory has been unambiguously going in the opposite direction than they seem to tell individuals.
  3. Large-scale manipulation of our biology. Reason: our DNA does not appear to have been tampered with in any way that does not seem to be natural selection in action.
  4. Individual communication. Reason: they frequently tell people to do things that are unreasonable, or cannot be achieved, or do not even make sense. Examples include propulsion mechanisms that don't work, prophecies that are bunk, or math that is provably wrong.
  5. Individual growth. Reason: contactee/abductees don't improve their lot in life after the event. They're not really different than anybody else, but frequently have their worldview shattered, relationships undergo stress, and PTSD is commonly cited.
  6. Genetic sampling. Reason: the entire genome of the human species could be stored comfortably in a mid-range corporate data center. Once you get a small sample size, it would be a relatively simple math problem to extrapolate genetic variation and their subsequent prototypes. For example, if they take a sperm sample once, they should never have to come again -- they have trillions of haploid copies of your DNA. Yet they come back.
  7. Hybridization. Reason: the only way they could hybridize with us is if they were at least hominids derived from this planet. Basically, unless we're kissing cousins, it wouldn't work. Yet, we see no other advanced hominid populations here on earth.
  8. To advance our technology so we can join the space brothers: Reason: they haven't publicly given us warp drive or antigravity or free energy.
  9. To cut a deal with our government. Reason: our governments remain profoundly stupid, myopic, and it would be... against human nature to sit on such technology or knowledge for long. Individuals would have far more incentive to sell it off than keep it in a government stockpile somewhere. Besides, there has not been one piece of human technology ever hit the market that wasn't a derivation of what came before.
That's where I'm at.

Well-reasoned, Marduk. I'd be interested in knowing more about cases referred to in your point 4, and also in seeing a discussion of what we actually know about 'DNA' and the possibilities for hybridization of species originating on different planets.

Regarding the possibility of parallel developments of intelligent species on different planets, I recommend the Edge presentation by Dimitar Sasselov linked here:

Dimitar Sasselov—LIFE: WHAT A CONCEPT! | Edge.org
 
Back
Top