• 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!

Care for a nice, warm cup of crazy?

Schuyler said:
Uhh, what????

The translation goes something like "If I speak cryptically, they'll think I'm smart."

knichol5 tell me, do you pose these questions only to us or do you ask them of yourself first? Do so. Then present your reasoning fully for your answers.

(Don't worry, you don't actually have to and I fully expect you won't, I just like to turn things on their heads to illustrate their absurdity).
 
dorkbot said:
I actually meant "atypical" in the sense of expecting a human face and being confronted by a grey instead.

I find this to be a very interesting account specifically because there is no claim that it happened in a direct physical sense. You are very clear that this was an inner vision experience yet one that you were not overtly seeking. That is not to say that a quasi-mystical inner vision experience is unimportant and unrelated to the larger picture.

I personally try to maintain as large a number of running speculations about the phenomena as I can manage. I'm comfortable keeping the ETH, EDH, CTH, TTH and about a dozen other bizarre possibilities around to think about as they all have their good and bad points. I mention this because I think it is useful to have at least a basic overview in mind of the historical esoteric literature that deals with contacting non-human intelligence.

What interests me here is that on one hand elements of this telepathy-like account seem strikingly similar to, for example, accounts I have heard of telepathy-like interaction with Enochian entities. What seems different to me is that the Enochian interactions were something that had to be specifically sought out in a meticulous, methodical and laborious manner through very precise ritual work and that they seem to modify their appearance somewhat in accordance to a particular person's expectations. On the other hand, the greys seem to barge in uninvited in most cases and the image of their appearance seems relatively static.

And this is one of my running questions to people like Greenfield who are quick to draw the comparison to the denizens of the occult. That is to say, even if I accept this comparison there needs to be some addressing of the question on how they seem to be able to sort of forcefully manifest and protrude into our reality with little or no prompting when, traditionally, contact with entities like this are supposed to have involved a large amount of focused ritual effort.

Most authorities I have read on such topics state that "magical" effects in the physical world are like water in that they will always tend to take the path of least resistance as it were. Pots of gold do not materialize in a puff of smoke, rather somebody forgets to cash a check you wrote them. Yet the greys seem to be riding into Pleasantville's business district in a motorcycle gang, snatching purses from grandma and breaking shop windows as it were.

So what's up with that?

Understand that I don't practice channeling, ritual magic(k), mediumship or anything similar, I'm just somewhat familiar with the literature.

I find it remarkable that you appear to have quite a good understanding of "channeling, ritual magic(k), mediumship or anything similar", although you say you don't practise any of it. These kinds of experiences are very difficult to put into words, yet everyone who experiments with channelling and the like knows how they feel. They are, in a way, easier experienced than talked about. (This is particularly true for genuine spiritual healing, which is nigh impossible to rationalise).

Yes, I agree with you, it is a good idea to keep an open mind as to the true nature of the phenomena. I do think that that they ultimately all tie in, although this can be difficult to imagine at times. We are dealing with extremely complex issues here.

Kim323 started a thread called "Bernard Haisch Articles: MUST READS!". Let me quote from Haisch's home page. He proposes a greater reality, in which "the natural and the supernatural are just the red and the violet ends of a vastly rich spectrum". With regard to alien encounters, it occurred to me a while ago that this must be the reason as to why many accounts are reminiscent of daydreams, lucid dreams, OBEs, or even drug-induced experiences. Also, the well documented physical effects, such as UFOs blinking in an out of our reality, or executing seemingly impossible manoeuvres, tracked by radar, form part of this puzzle.

All alien races that visit Earth seem to have in common advanced psychic capabilities. Even our best psychics and mediums (and I have worked with a few) are mere first-graders, so to speak, by comparison. Telepathy is the only way greys communicate. It is entirely natural, even vital to them. To draw a comparison, humans are about as talented in the use of telepathy, as monkeys are in the use of mechanical tools: They both can do it, but the results aren't going to be too impressive.

To humans, telepathy and psychism belong to the realm of the paranormal, ethereal, and mystical. We like to attach terms such as "irrational" or "unscientific" to them. However, to the ETs all of this is just another aspect of nature, and the greater reality. It has been said elsewhere that ETs don't discriminate between what we term religion, and science. To them, religion and science are different aspects of one and the same reality: "Just the red and the violet ends of a vastly rich spectrum".

Coming back to the grey, in this experience, it became clear to me that greys project their ethereal, or astral, body with the greatest of ease. It is like second nature to them. For this reason, they appear to occupy the astral realms just as much as the physical realm. They are at home, and totally competent, in either.
You ask: "The greys seem to be riding into Pleasantville's business district in a motorcycle gang, snatching purses from grandma and breaking shop windows as it were. So what's up with that?" Well, speaking from my own experience, I guess I was accidentally attuned to their frequency, and this brought me to their attention. I felt as if I had appeared on their "radar screen", so to speak, and they were simply checking out who I was, and also perhaps if I could be useful to them. Again, I would compare their general behaviour with that of ants: Most of the time, they don't bother with the goings on in the vicinity of their colony. However, if you happen to step right into their colony, they soon are all over you, and deal to you. They seem to alternate between giving something no attention, or all of it.

In total, I believe I had at least three encounters with greys, although there might have been one more: I once had a missing time experience, where I couldn't account for about 5 hours. I was not intoxicated in any way.

My first encounter was when I was about 16. I was with a group of musician friends. We had finished a rehearsal and then went to a local pizza place in the middle of town (Germany). This town has a strong military presence, there are two US air bases nearby. It was about 10 PM, and a clear night. We left the restaurant, and walked up a passageway in between two large department stores. Suddenly, one of my friends stopped and pointed at the sky. We all looked up, and saw an orange glowing object, like a fireball, slowly approaching the town from the horizon. It was not possible to determine its size, since the actual object was obscured by the glow. I could, however, work out that the glow was not static, but seemed to revolve around the object, which almost gave it a pulsating appearance. As we were discussing the nature of the object - satellites were mentioned, which sometimes can be seen at night - the object suddenly stood still, in mid-air, several kilometres above ground (I couldn't give a more precise estimate than perhaps 3-4 km).

Up until this point, I had been curious, but little bothered by the sighting. However, as the object stopped advancing, something most peculiar happened: Suddenly, I had the sensation of the distance between the object and myself collapsing to zero, as if I - or at least my mind - was right there with them. Them - because for some inexplicable reason, I could see small, very slender creatures with large heads standing upright inside a craft, all facing each other, and I knew they were telepathically discussing what to do next. I knew that they knew they had been discovered, and that they were unsure about their next move. Please understand that, at that age, I had no conception of UFOs, aliens, telepathy, or any of that sort. None whatsoever. UFOs and aliens were not part of my reality. I may have watched Star Trek on telly, but that was about it.

This sense of collapsing distance between myself and the UFO lasted for a few moments, and as I was observing the creatures inside the craft, I also felt scanned and quite powerless. Something was happening to me, but I could not work out what. However, this condition only lasted for a few seconds, since the UFO suddenly, abruptly, without any phase of acceleration, leapt back and towards where it had come from, and disappeared. It moved so fast, it was quite unbelievable. I have seen rockets fly on TV, but by comparison, a rocket would have seemed to move at a snail's pace. UNBELIEVABLE!

Afterwards, me and my friends briefly discussed the experience, and we all agreed that this must have been a UFO. I did not mention the psychological effects that I had felt, consequently I am not sure if I was the only one who had felt them.
 
knichol5 said:
A. LeClair and others,

Granted, without faith one can't approach God (or understand life).

What assumptions do you live by?

What do you base judgments of truth or reality on?

Truth is physical and spiritual (mind / creative vitality).

Your computer proves intelligent design.

If Aliens are real then they're created beings - not a big deal....

Truth is always expressed in a physical reality and verifiable.

I use reason in my approach. Faith is for those too lazy or impatient to use reason to reach conclusions. Or for those who can't simply say, "I don't know yet".

If I live by any assumptions, I'm blind to them.

I base truth on reason and evidence. All the while realizing the fine details of truth and it's meaning can vary depending on the observer.

As for, "Truth is always expressed in a physical reality and verifiable". I see no reason to think that. For me to conclude that I would have to rule out the possibility that non physical realities can have their own exclusive truths, which do not need physical counterparts.
 
A.LeClair said:
Faith is for those too lazy or impatient to use reason to reach conclusions. Or for those who can't simply say, "I don't know yet".

That's actually a really good definition of faith - or shall we say, blind faith, since faith has several connotations.

"I don't know *yet*."

It is the realisation that the truth is out there, but that one hasn't found it yet - although one may in the future. Admitting one's ignorance requires personal strength and confidence.

However, a person who has blind faith in something, or somebody, reveals his insecurity. He won't allow himself, or others, to question his premise. He is afraid of living with "I don't know", but requires certainty and constant reassurance. When confronted with lack of certainty, he gets scared and reacts defensively.
 
A.LeClair said:
I use reason in my approach. Faith is for those too lazy or impatient to use reason to reach conclusions. Or for those who can't simply say, "I don't know yet".

Reminds me of a comment by Lewis Black about religion: "I would LOVE to have the faith to believe like that... but unfortunately... I have thoughts. And that can really screw up the whole "faith" thing... just ask any Catholic priest."
 
CapnG said:
Reminds me of a comment by Lewis Black about religion: "I would LOVE to have the faith to believe like that... but unfortunately... I have thoughts. And that can really screw up the whole "faith" thing... just ask any Catholic priest."

I like Lewis. The quote doesn't ring any bells. Good. Means there's more material by him to explore. Thanks for mentioning it.
 
musictomyears said:
That's actually a really good definition of faith - or shall we say, blind faith, since faith has several connotations.

"I don't know *yet*."

It is the realisation that the truth is out there, but that one hasn't found it yet - although one may in the future. Admitting one's ignorance requires personal strength and confidence.

However, a person who has blind faith in something, or somebody, reveals his insecurity. He won't allow himself, or others, to question his premise. He is afraid of living with "I don't know", but requires certainty and constant reassurance. When confronted with lack of certainty, he gets scared and reacts defensively.

I actually didn't understand much of what the person was talking about. I had taken meds that made me more loopy than usual and gave it a shot anyway, for fun:)

Yes. Blind faith is the kind of faith I was speaking of. Un blind faith can be called a inner knowing, or sometimes hope or trust. At least that is the words I use instead of faith. I'm not wild about the word. That cheesy George Michaels song comes to mind sometimes when I hear or see the word faith. Blehck.
 
A.LeClair said:
I like Lewis. The quote doesn't ring any bells. Good. Means there's more material by him to explore. Thanks for mentioning it.

It's from his new routine... um... "Red, White and Screwed" I believe. There's clips of it on Youtube.
 
A.LeClair said:
Yes, talking snakes and Noah's Ark isn't anywhere near as far fecthed as alien visitation..

Wouldn't it be 'hilarious' if the bible stories were an interpretation of real alien visitations...

'Talking Snakes' == 'Anunnaki'
'Noahs Ark' == 'Inter-planetary Colonisation Vessel'

...they could be two sides of the same coin, so where does the argument of 'Ufology vs Religion' go then? :confused:
 
A. LeClair et al.,

Sorry for the late response - started a new job at Ford Brownstown PRC.

Real faith is always based on evidence - God commands man to use reason.
Blind faith leads men to destruction.

Start with creation (intelligent design), next man's conscience (knowledge of good and evil), then spiritual relationships (human to human, and human to God) to see that God instructs man to use his mind to know truth.

The story of Genesis (your talking snake) is an description of Satan's nature (cunning and deceptive) not a literal talking snake.

Whether the flood was world wide or regional is also debatable.
The flood story is held by many cultures (though Genesis points to Christ's judgment and redemption).

The Bible is full of literary tools and should be read with such discernment when descriptions of God's or Satan's (non physical beings) nature is being described versus a wooden literal interpretation.

Truth is not subject to feelings, opinions, or even faith or lack there of.
Truth is reality and has a physical expression. How would we (physical / spiritual beings) know truth without time and space?
How would we have alien contact without time and space even if it is bypassed via dimensional manipulations (laws are still followed)?

It is a failure to always be learning and never come to the truth.
Truth is spiritual and physical and works through faith since man can not know all things about all things.

Every one deals with doubt and fear - death is not our friend.
 
my problem with the bible, is the inconsistancy.
it can be shown the "people" writing it did so claimimg facts that are at odds with geoligical reality, and obviously based on limited experience. the australian aborigine has been kicking around this continent for over 40 thousand years, but the bible dates the earth itself as considerably younger.
as the word of man, this error makes sense, as the word of god it doesnt.
also the sub sects within the story are often opposed.
to christians jesus is the son of god, to jews (with the exception of the messianic jews) the worship of jesus is idolitry and a sin
to them the messiah hasnt yet arrived and wont until the temple gets rebuilt (which means knocking down one of islams most important mosques)

im sorry but for me the bible is an interesting archeoligical snap shot of the time and place it was written, nothing more.

analogies such as god "creating" man from the "clay of the earth" and aliens uplifting indigenous ape stock to sapiency are always fascinating, but as a book i find its unlikely to be the "word of god"

some examples

god says to abraham "though shall offer up thy 1st born to the fire, that thou shall know i am lord"

talk about insecure, men do this, warlords and mafiaoso threaten ppls familys in order to assert their mastery over them.

"and the lord sent two she bears, who did rend the 40 boys to bits"
all because they called one of the lords preists a baldy, they pointed out albiet rudely he had no hair, and shades of columbine high theres dead kids everywhere.

lot who is described as a just and righteous man, offers his two virgin daugters (who have known no man) to the mob (to do with as you will) ie rape if only the mob would go away and give him peace.

surely the creator of the universe doesnt need some poor sod to offer up his first born to the BBQ, in order to feel assured "he is lord"

to me the bible is all too clearly the word of man and his motivations, not that of a gods
 
Back
Top