Strieber's next book, due for publication on 12th April, looks intruguing: http://www.amazon.com/Hybrids-Whitl...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1297321727&sr=8-1 Here's a snippet from "Unknown Country": Hybrids is about what happens when advanced hybridization technology falls into the wrong hands, and hybrids with a difference are created: they are smarter than their creators...us. Machines that are smarter than us are right around the corner, which makes this novel, like all of Whitley's books, incredibly timely and probably equally prophetic. Read the original source: http://www.unknowncountry.com/special/hybrids-chapter-one#ixzz1DXQL99yL Anyone know any more about this, or have the book on advance order?
Well so far and for the foreseeable future, machines are only as "smart" as their designers and programmers. Artificial Intelligence of any sort only mimics human intelligence and lacks any facility for "consciousness" as we experience it as human beings. Machines can do the same thing many times very quickly. That is the core of the illusion of machines being "smart." It requires the cleverness of a human programmer to utilize this to manipulate data in an intelligent fashion. Human beings could at some point in the future, if ethics and technology ever allow, design and manufacture living organic artificial human brains through genetic engineering perhaps, which could actually be conscious entities. However, I just don't think we'll get there any time soon. I could be wrong but here's hoping I"m not.
The ultimate machine intelligence horror isn't Terminator in my view. The worst case machine intelligence scenario ever imagined are Jack Williamson's Humanoids IMHO. The Humanoids were machines designed to protect mankind from itself and did so regardless of humanities wishes to the contrary.
Whitley is an abductee (or as he prefers "experiencer"). He's problematic for sure, but he still reports the same experiences all his life as do so many others. For many years abductees all over the world have quietly, discretely report they are sometimes dealt with by beings which are part-human, or mostly human, and part-alien. Abductees in Europe with complete or at least substantial conscious recall describe these beings to me as "not quite like us and not quite like them, but sort of a mix." One describes them as "the human-looking ones." In the USA, Dave Jacobs has had many such interactions described to him over the years and has been one of the few writers brave enough to put the narratives into print, and refers to them as "hybrids." In "Sight Unseen", Carol Rainey described reports of daytime, fully-awake interactions with similar beings made to Budd Hopkins and her as "transgenic beings" rather than "hybrids" because this term she felt to be technically more accurate. Peter Khoury's famous hair may have originated from such a being, if the polymerase chain reaction analysis of the DNA is to be believed (and why should the lab staff make it up?). From what I know of Whitley, it's this phenomenon which is the subject of his forthcoming book, rather than machine-intelligence which would be something quite different. These hybrids will be beings with a spirit-soul complex, like us, because they're virtually indistinguishable from us anyway - save in a few very important respects not immediately obvious. So in brief, it's difficult to know without reading the book which we can't do before April, but it doesn't look like its subject is about "machine intelligence."
What is a spirit-soul complex? This is one thing that confuses me a great deal. If a species were to genetically engineer a hybrid of itself and some other species it would be creating a third distinct species. Even if this were possible I don't see how this benefits either of the originating species in any way. What is the point? The attempt to absorb or inject competing DNA into an unsuspecting populace though mating between hybrids and genetically normal humans? To what end and for whose benefit?
Not get off topic but here is a link that seems to kind of address the question of spirt-soul complex. I enjoyed this interview allthough it's a few years old. It cleared up some questions I had about Fred Allan Wolf. He distances himself from some of the more new agey aspects of the "What the Bleep" movies while expanding some on his own thoughts Quantum Physicist Fred Alan Wolf on Consciousness The Afterlife
In simple terms, that which animates the chunk of meat. When it permanently separates from the chunk of meat, we call that "death". No longer anumated by the spirit, the chunk of meat is just a chunk of meat. ---------- Post added at 03:09 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:01 AM ---------- It puzzles everyone, because against our current paradigms it doesn't seem to make sense. I do find Jacques Vallee's observation in "Passport to Magonia" useful: "The behavior of non-human visitors to our planet would not necessarily appear purposeful to a human observer. Scientists who brush aside reports because 'obviously intelligent visitors would not behave like that' simply have given no serious thought to the problem of non-human intelligence." As Vallee observes, the way to approach the issue is to examine the evidence without prejudice, listen to what witnesses report and proceed from there - rather than dismiss a-priori the reports because they don't fit in our mental box of what might be possible.
The existence of an ethereal animating spirit is unproven and a matter of faith. I have never heard anyone use the term spirit-soul complex before. Many people often use the terms spirit and soul to mean the same thing making it appear a bit redundant. Personally, I don't think there is enough evidence to validate the popular concept of a spirit which survives death containing the personality and memories of the dead individual. I agree about the problems of trying to suss out the motivations of a non-human intelligence. However, as a program which supposedly incorporates human beings, some human logic and motivation must necessarily apply don't you think? Nevertheless, we are undoubtedly only aware of what we are intended to be aware of, the true nature of any of it would by necessity be hidden from the participants of the program.
According to this weeks dreamland IIRC he is also set to publish his first non fiction book about the vistors in a while soon.
For context, please just keep in mind that Whitley saw one of Linda Howe's "Drones" out of his window. lulz.
I agree i cant see any evidence for the "transport" required to take conciousness/soul/experience set past the breakdown of the bioform platforms that support it. I dont see any supernatural "mechanism" for doing so. i do think there is the possibility there might be a technological mechanism as per this research http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/by-2040-you-will-be-able-to-upload-your-brain-1792555.html Of course in order to do this........ He'd likely need a time machine. Ive often wondered if the vistors are in fact us, using this technology to perpetuate their post biological population base, using earth as a linear time conciousness hatchery oddly enough anne streiber has had similar thoughts
My father was killed by a "Professor" of surgery in a botched, simple keyhole surgery procedure. Myself and my family were present when the hospital staff advised my mother that they should turn off the machines that were keeping him alive. That is to say the machines that were keeping his heart beating and his lungs breathing. I looked at him at that point and i knew that he was dead. He just didn't even look like my father as i knew him. The body i saw there was virtually unrecognizable to me. I thought at the time that if their is such a thing as a spirit or a soul it had surely departed his body as what i saw could only be described, as Archie has said, a slab of meat, no life or such there at all. I didn't need "science" or scientists or doctors to tell me or confirm to me of the existence of a soul. Look at any dead body (and i have seen a few) and you will see that to be true.
Maybe not. But we have laws against murder. Why bother, if it's just a chunk of meat moving about? ---------- Post added at 10:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:39 AM ---------- By "supposedly incorporates human beings" you mean what exactly, Ricky? I just want to understand your point properly. If we're dealing with non-human entities, then we would not not necessarily see human logic: that's the whole point. Some intelligent motives, obviously, but these may be very hard to understand, and appear not at all logical to us. As an example, if the life-span of the entities concerned is several centuries, and if they think and plan in terms of a project lasting several thousand years or even as little as several human generations, then because of the way our current societal paradigms encourage us to frame our critical thinking their motives might in fact be very obscure to us, even if they could be uncovered. ---------- Post added at 10:57 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:51 AM ---------- Probably true, at least in that secrecy must be used for a reason. Hybrids (if we are to accept the persistent reports of these beings over the past 40 years or so, from all over the world, might have some substance) must be aware at some level of the primary goals, but probably not the whole picture.
Oh good grief. I am not going to have that conversation ...again. I'm really surprised that it is coming from you. Unbelievable as it may seem to some, ethics, morality, and the will the live are not exclusively held by people with supernatural beliefs or beliefs in the afterlife. Ugggh. Human beings appear to be the point of alien abductions. The interior of the vehicles are designed for human proportions. The hybrid program is supposed to incorporate human material and utilizes humans in the presentation events and so forth. There is an undeniably large human component to the whole thing as it is presented.
No we are not meatbots. There is something going on but I'm not convinced by the nuts and bolts saucer argument. I do keep an open mind and I don't think Strieber is trying to be dishonest. I do think he may be caught up in the need to write and at least make enough to live on which might color some of his perceptions. But, I also think he has some real expereinces. I have Communion (talk about late to the party) on my reading list. I actually was first exposed to his writing through his fiction. The Wolfen and The Hunger before he came out with Communion. I think that may be part of the problem some have with him. Is he able to seperate his fiction from his fact?
Yeah agreed, Ricky. However, it appears they/we have little or no control of whatever it is being done. I do get your original point. ---------- Post added at 11:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:39 PM ---------- It's the ONE book of his that's actually good, and worth reading. Much of it is accurate, and matches the experience as reported by thousands of others. A couple of minor details (like the famous anal probe) are unique to Strieber (?). ---------- Post added at 11:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:46 PM ---------- Some say no, including him.
It appears so, however people like Steven Jones and Jim Sparks for example, prefer to call themselves participators. They see themselves as having agreed to whatever is happening and having an active role in it. I'm finishing up An Invitation to the Dance by Jones right now and he definitely views himself as a active participant. While I have the ability to suspend disbelief and view the abduction experience with as an open mind as I can muster I find it so incredible and incongruous that I am forced again and again to return to the conclusion that it is not what it presents itself to be. It doesn't seem logical or reasonable that it is actually ETs (or ancient non-human terrestrials) mucking about with DNA and producing Hybrids to spur the next jump in human evolution and/or in preparation for some vague Doomsday event no more than it is demonic beings sucking the soul energy from dead human beings. It's something else of an entirely different nature or so is the inclination of my thinking at this point. That could change though. I think it's important for a serious study to be made of the whole business. I think to do so properly would almost be impossible given the present runaway nature of the amateur research community.
Not really. I very much doubt lab rats understand why the men in the white coats keep sticking pins in them and changing their food.
Yeah they do. What do you make of Sparks? The thing about him which worries me the most is that his narrative is substantially at odds with those of thousands of others, and this is usually a red flag. Few others speak of regular contact in the kind of (rather obsessive, narcissistic and self-important?) way he does. He's usually considered to be a hoaxer, or at least an embelisher/fantasist. I was introduced to Steven Jones by a mutual friend of ours, Bridget Grant. She and Steven are both serial abductees with substantial conscious recall (in Bridget's case almost total) and they both have a very positive spin on the whole experience. I know her better than him, and she is pretty level-headed, with the troubled uncertainty and insistence on complete anonymity almost universally characteristic of abductees in her case markedly absent. I have not read Steven's book yet, and may not get arund to it for a few months. "Participant" is an interesting choice of noun, technically accurate but with implicit choice and freedom of action, which in reality is not part of this experience for most. ---------- Post added at 05:47 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:41 AM ---------- So what do you think it is then? We all think it's important for a serious study to be made of the whole business. The most optimistic period for this to become a reality was probably following the MIT Conference in 1992, chaired by David Pritchard and John Mack. In reality, not much consensus has been reached since then, though I would argue that progress has been made, here and there. Would you like to elaborate on "the present runaway nature of the amateur research community"? - not inviting you to veer off-topic, you understand - just interested.
