Vallee Article - Raises interesting questions...

[superjudge]

I was just reading this interview with Dr. Jaques Vallee (Fate Magazine, 1979) that really opened some more insights for me. First I have to relay two pieces of information from the interview. Dr. Vallee believes the most important aspect of the UFO enigma, besides the physical and perceptual phenomena, is the social phenomenon, which he says is "what happens when the reports are submitted to society and enter the cultural arena".

Second, Dr. Vallee argues, "If the UFO phenomenon had no physical cause at all, there would be no way for us to perceive it because human beings are physical entities. So it has to make an impression on our senses somehow. For that to take place, it has to be physical at some time."

Both of these statements made me think about cases such as Billy Meier and what are the implications of the above statements when they are applied to the Billy Meier case? First I think we must accept the notion that UFOs are part of a cultural myth, as Dr. Valle does, whose meanings and manifestations change over time. When looking at the above statements by Dr. Vallee, is the argument over the 'authenticity' of the Meier material (or van den Broeke) really relevant? Whether the source of this material has been contrived or not, there is no doubt that the Meier material has become a large part of the UFO enigma and myth, and as such has greatly influenced the social aspect of this enigma; it is part of the cultural arena.

The statement above by Dr. Valle about the physicality (or lack thereof) of this phenomenon is another important part of this argument. If we are dealing with a phenomenon that is not physical, and as Dr. Valle argues, if "it has to make an impression on our senses somehow...[and for] that to take place, it has to be physical at some time", how would it do this?

Is it possible that in some instances, those of us in the physical realm are utilized in some extent to help make this enigma manifest in our physical realm, even if we may not be consciously aware of it? Do we need to adjust our notions of 'authenticity' with regards to this phenomenon? Even if cases such as Meier are deemed to be 'inauthentic' due to the possible and likely manipulation and creation of images, is it 'authentic' to the overall scope and program of this phenomenon and whatever (or whoever) its source may be?

In the interview, Dr. Vallee also argues that "a strange kind of deception may be involved" with this phenomenon, attempting to make it more absurd, perplexing and inconceivable. I think the Meier material fits this standard as well. So regardless of whether the Meier material is 'authentic', it has had a large effect on the social aspect and is part of the cultural arena, there is 'physical' manifestation involved (photos that are 'authentic' or not), and it is quite deceptive and absurd. If the UFO phenomenon is part of what Dr. Valle posits is a "control system" and "are the means through which [hu]man's concepts are being rearranged" it is possible we may need to adjust our idea of what is 'authentic', especially when we don't even know what the phenomenon really is.

Of course it is easy to argue over a photo or video and deem it to be 'authentic' or not, but that 'authenticity' is superficial and only scratches the surface of that particular document and doesn't place it within the grand narrative of the phenomenon. No matter the source of the Meier material (and others like it), it is possible that it is fulfilling its role in the grand narrative and mythmaking capacity of whatever this phenomenon may be. In that sense, can we deem it to be authentic material or is authenticity solely judged by the means utilized to create a document?

 

[111uminate]

The statement above by Dr. Valle about the physicality (or lack thereof) of this phenomenon is another important part of this argument. If we are dealing with a phenomenon that is not physical, and as Dr. Valle argues, if "it has to make an impression on our senses somehow...[and for] that to take place, it has to be physical at some time", how would it do this?

Is it possible that in some instances, those of us in the physical realm are utilized in some extent to help make this enigma manifest in our physical realm, even if we may not be consciously aware of it? Do we need to adjust our notions of 'authenticity' with regards to this phenomenon? Even if cases such as Meier are deemed to be 'inauthentic' due to the possible and likely manipulation and creation of images, is it 'authentic' to the overall scope and program of this phenomenon and whatever (or whoever) its source may be?

One possibility I tend to ponder from time to time is the concept of a tulpa. Taken from the wiki page: "In mysticism a tulpa is the concept of a being or object which is created through sheer willpower alone. It is a materialized thought that has taken physical form and is usually regarded as synonymous to a thoughtform." Of course, the entire precept of what a tulpa encapsulates can't be defined in a mere sentence or two, so I strongly recommend reading the entirety of the wiki entry to get a better grasp. By no means am I advocating it to be an answer, or perhaps "the" answer, but surely there is something to glean from it being a possible solution. Inner-space is just as important as outer-space, after all.

I've never disagreed with Vallee's theories, and looking at the phenomena through his point of view certainly seems to hint at some form of symbiotic relationship, whether it be purely established on our own with ourselves, or in fact with another form of intelligence. Like you mentioned, the relationship of accounts and their eventual reporting and inoculation into the populace is a symbiotic relationship itself. At the premise you have the phenomena as it is observed, whatever that may be, and then it is reported and becomes widely known. One could argue that the two are completely different entities. I'll taper off of this with a quote from Jung regarding the phenomena:

"In the threatening situation of the world today, when people are beginning to see that everything is at stake, the projection-creating fantasy soars beyond the realm of earthly organizations and powers into the heavens, into interstellar space, where the rulers of human fate, the gods, once had their abode in the planets.... Even people who would never have thought that a religious problem could be a serious matter that concerned them personally are beginning to ask themselves fundamental questions. Under these circumstances it would not be at all surprising if those sections of the community who ask themselves nothing were visited by `visions,' by a widespread myth seriously believed in by some and rejected as absurd by others."

 

[Schuyler]

Yes, Vallee is a deep thinker and has interesting ideas, but I don't think the Meier stuff qualifies:

​

This is Meier Ray Gun picture. You can find the parts for this on E-Bay. I don't think any deep thinking about 'control mechanisms' is necessary with Meier. He's been caught many times fabricating evidence, making UFOs out of garbage can lids, etc. His photos have been thoroughly discredited by expert image analysts many, many times. He has stolen pictures directly from books and even directly off the Dean Martin show.

I think a discussion of Vallee's ideas is always fascinating, but the Billy Meier cult has nothing to do with Vallee and is one of Ufology's most embarrassing episodes ever recorded. Search through the archives for information on him.

I am, however, possessed of psychic talent, and I predict that any more discussion of Meier will result in thread closure, if not outright removal.
​

 

[Gene Steinberg]

I sure think that any talk about Meier ought to banned anywhere on the planet.

 

[jkoci]

I sure think that any talk about Meier ought to banned anywhere on the planet.

I thought he was basically off limits as far as these forums go.

 

[Red]

Is it possible that in some instances, those of us in the physical realm are utilized in some extent to help make this enigma manifest in our physical realm, even if we may not be consciously aware of it? Do we need to adjust our notions of 'authenticity' with regards to this phenomenon? Even if cases such as Meier are deemed to be 'inauthentic' due to the possible and likely manipulation and creation of images, is it 'authentic' to the overall scope and program of this phenomenon and whatever (or whoever) its source may be?

I am inclined to think that we project our belief systems onto the phenomena causing even more confusion as to the true nature and source of these interactions. Jung has said on the subject, "Such an object provokes, like nothing else, conscious and unconscious fantasies, the former giving rise to speculative conjectures and pure fabrications, and the latter supplying mythological background inseperable from these provocative observations."
Billy Meier may genuinely believe that he has had contact with the space brothers, but I think he is projecting his need for spiritual growth onto a phenomena when he probably would have been better served to look inward within himself instead of looking outward at the stars.
As to whether we will ever know the "overall scope and program of this phenomenom...and its source...", I would be very surprised if it happened in my lifetime.