• 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!

Does the 'contactee' setup make any sense?

Free episodes:

Does the 'contactee' setup make any sense?

Why would an ETI bother teaching a 'contactee' anything?

I can only answer this from my perspective.

Let's keep this simple - we're ET. We have our lives to live in the galaxy and / or beyond, and part of our particular picture is finding new life out there, and seemingly dealing with catastrophic events that are watchable and measurable - AKA, the superwave (I'm just dealing with this one scenario for simplicity sake).

How many planets with young developing life do you think there are in one galaxy? How big of a job do you think this could be? Regarding this ONE event, how many planets with developing intelligent life were closer to the galactic center where the event begins? If that were the case, what would you do with them? Move them outward from the center to a "better place" where the event takes longer to get to? Who would you take - the best and brightest? I'm just babbling here, but you get the idea.

What would you do to make your job easier? Find a point where the dominant species was intelligent enough to learn the base picture, keep said picture in memory, and pass said picture out to others as well as their children over time? It's a plausible plan, makes your job SO much easier, as all you would have to do is show up and the species would at least have an idea who you were from the tribal picture that was preserved.

Those who didn't / wouldn't / couldn't learn - oh well - the species is still intact, and the more intelligent survived ... a plus really.

This would make the preservation of the picture the responsibility of the individual species on whatever planet, not our responsibility. We were coming to help, the species was responsible for the data involved, the event is coming, we show up and do whatever we were going to do, end of story.

I say this is what has been going on here for at LEAST 40,000 years. There is an anomaly that says over 200,000 years, but data is inconclusive. If it's true, it was an epic failure as most of the population it seems was wiped out in the Toba event C 73,000 BC. There's no way to say what happened, this picture goes round and round in circles - who knows.

The simple picture here on earth shows that from 40,000 BC the above picture is definitely plausible, it continued on until the next event which was somewhere around the 13,000 BC marker, when it was over the symbol involved was upgraded (personally I believe it was upgraded for us today - but, who knows) and everything went on as usual here until the minor event C 3300 BC, where in one spot on the globe panic hit, a decision was made, the information was changed, history as WE know it today began, and we lost everything.

So what are we dealing with regarding "contactees"? This picture hit hard in the '50s, with some of the stupidest stories I have ever heard, and the picture has gone on from there. If there can be only ONE truth ... why are there so many versions? (Take a guess.) ET shows up and we ain't ready for anything - we have totally screwed this picture up. In my experiences, this one line says it all: PEOPLE ALWAYS FOLLOW DEAD END ROADS AND NEVER REALIZE THEY ARE INDEED, DEAD ENDS. IT IS COMING. YOU, AND EVERYONE ELSE NEED TO TAKE ALL OF YOUR BELIEFS, PUT THEM IN A PILE IN FRONT OF YOU, AND BACK AWAY. PUT THEM IN A PILE IN FRONT OF YOU AND BACK AWAY.

I was included in that because that experience was the biggest epic failure of my life. I was set up - they knew exactly what I was going to do - and I did it. Lesson learned.

The idea of following dead end roads is simply a connection to poor thinking. We have the resources ... we just use them incorrectly.
 
Are they creatively probing for a response? In that sense they don't have to be truthful so long as the contactee believes it is true--I think that's the important part--that the contactee believes. I think in many cases it resembles some sort of test--like a critical thinking test. And for everyone else, how we treat someone who genuinely has had an experience but an experience that does not conform itself to a model of reality that is readily accepted.
 
Why would an ETI bother teaching a 'contactee' anything?
To share their knowledge and culture, of course.
Here, howard Menger plays a tune he learned from our space brothers.
 
Adamski3.jpg

"MUST.. HAVE... MORE.........SOIL"
 
I'd say it looks more like he's asking for directions from a mormon, given the terrain he's probably somewhere outside Provo
 
The original post is pretty old but since there's a bunch of new posts and all, I figure I'll add in my opinion. The way the contactee ideas seem to be reminds me of something like a student experiment. Instead of training mice to run through a maze, they're training humans to do things.
 
If they were being trained, then what was the objective? What was the net effect of these events, presuming that they were genuine and not fabricated.

I think some of the absurdity in these types of events are a form of dissonance that makes the observer remember the event--it almost forces one to have an opinion about them.
 
Has any contactee returned with evidence either physical or in the form of clear verifiable data that can confirm that an encounter with aliens has actually happened? Not to my knowledge. Does that mean no contact has ever taken place? No. It just means we need to be careful about what we choose to believe and to examine the content and context as objectively as possible.
 
Back
Top