April 25th, O'Brien, Mott, Greenfield, Clelland, Bosley

[Hoffmeister]

All in all an interesting show... although I have to say I disagreed with most of the points of view.

Just to address a few points: Greenfield said that they are most likely from here, because that is where we see them. - Well that just isnt true, as people have seen UFO's out in space, perhaps on the moon, and perhaps even orbiting mars (phobos). Plus the fact is, of course we would see them mostly on earth, because that is where we are! We arent in the andromeda galaxy so we cant see them there.

Bosley said that we see these beings on earth all through history e.g. the Egyptian gods etc... but that is NOT history, that is legend, and there is a big difference.

Just 2 final points from me, as I could go on about this all day:
1. To make craft such as the ones we see, they would need materials and space to make them, and we don't see many Crypto terrestrial miners anywhere (a silly example but you get the idea) so they must either be from the future or another dimension, but not from this earth and this time period imo

2. We see the craft doing insane manoeuvres or flying around in space, then surely that shows that they are capable of interstellar travel. If this is true, then is it not more 'likely' that they have come from one of the billions of other planets rather than earth since there is a lot more real estate outside of earth than there is on it.

The guests were right in that there is no more evidence that the crafts are from elsewhere rather than from earth.... however, there IS evidence that they are indeed 'structured craft' (radar,photo's, video's, witnesses)... and if they are structured craft with extremely high performance, then as per point 2 above, and the fact that there is nowhere to build them on earth, there is atleast circumstantial evidence that they came from other planets, or times.

Now i have had a long day at work so i know that doesnt exactly read well and will probably be shot to pieces but hey, its better than nothing.

Great show guys, just throw in a couple of people to look at it from the other perspective to give it a more balanced discussion next time IMO

 

[King Cheetah]

1. To make craft such as the ones we see, they would need materials and space to make them, and we don't see many Crypto terrestrial miners anywhere (a silly example but you get the idea) so they must either be from the future or another dimension, but not from this earth and this time period imo

2. We see the craft doing insane manoeuvres or flying around in space, then surely that shows that they are capable of interstellar travel. If this is true, then is it not more 'likely' that they have come from one of the billions of other planets rather than earth since there is a lot more real estate outside of earth than there is on it.

But you're working on the ASSUMPTION that these are physical craft, thus your argument lacks weight

 

[Hoffmeister]

But you're working on the ASSUMPTION that these are physical craft, thus your argument lacks weight

How did you get to that idea? I'm not assuming anything, I gave examples above of how evidence lends weight to them being physical craft, e.g. the fact that they can be tracked on radar.
What is your assumption? that they arent physical craft? What are they then, figments of our imagination? Visions? Holograms?
There is less evidence for any of those options in my eyes so your criticism 'lacks weight'

I dont know whether they are ET's, from the future, or from inside the earth..... all I am saying is that when we have had jets chase these things, radar signals not only bouncing off them but being sent out by them (RB47), then that lends itself towards actual craft, and that 'in my view' lends itself towards ET's or people from the future.
I just can't get my head around why people say that because of the high strangeness cases, or legends from the humanities past (which are all the least believable aspect of the phenomena) that it MUST be something based on this earth.... and thats what it seemed to me people were getting at in this episode.
For all we know (and likely IMO) that the really good cases like RB47, and the Belgian wave are ET's, and all the high strangeness cases are just delusional people, or confused, or making stuff up

 

[trainedobserver]

But you're working on the ASSUMPTION that these are physical craft, thus your argument lacks weight

What is a physical? What is non-physical?

 

[Hoffmeister]

Indeed....
I guess I just think the show was a little one sided, it might have been nice to have someone coming at it from the other side.

Nontheless though, it was interesting and informative.

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

Indeed....
I guess I just think the show was a little one sided, it might have been nice to have someone coming at it from the other side….

One-sided? Huh? After 60 years of spinning the ETH/ETA/ETR wheels with nothing to show? And those who "believe"—for decades—shouting down creative thinkers who simply point out the obvious ? I salute Gene in his guest selection: its good and healthy to present a show that covers various closed-system theories, for a change...

BTW: Show me one shred of unequivocal evidence that we are being visited by ETs and then we can have a real debate...

 

[Experiencer7]

I love the "roundtable" episodes. The nuts and bolts theory has been beaten to death., though it may be true. I don't think the episode was intended to be a debate. Just a friendly, mental exploration of alternative possibilities. I thoroughly enjoyed it. One of the guest tended to ramble somewhat., failed to get his point across effectively, (nerves maybe). That aside., great show.​

 

[CapnG]

Interesting show. I can't recall who brought up time travel but I'm glad someone mentioned the binary reality of the idea, ie time travel is either real or it's not, there's no "maybe" option. If time travel is possible then it's happening RIGHT NOW, all around us, all the time because it doesn't matter if someone invents time travel tomorrow, in ten years or in ten million years, once you have the technology the very notion of causality becomes irrelevant.

That means the timestream is either immutable so you can do whatever you like and no matter what Kennedy always dies OR it updates instantaneously, thereby giving us the impression that everything is as it's ever been no matter what's been altered. I'm guessing it's the former but if the latter was true I would naturally think that...

 

[marduk]

I'm 5 minutes in and a little worried. Our esteemed hosts seemed to indicate that all abductions are purely mental phenomena -- I hope I misunderstood and what was meant was that some abductions are purely mental phenomena. 'Cause I can tell you some of the strange crap my family and I have been through were a little more than mental. Although I wouldn't classify any of them as abductions, and I've never been hypnotized.

 

[Gareth]

Walter Bosley deserves his own interview. With just him.

Greg Bishop should co-host with Gene.

 

[Apocalypto]

One of the concepts that I rarely hear discussed is whereby these visitors might be working from a hybrid (pun intended) standpoint. That is, the craft are actually from another star system, from millions of light years away etc., the craft are very much nuts and bolts, but they manage to transport these craft via some sort of portal which we cannot physically see. In other words, they live very close to Earth, even if do they live millions of light years away... if only we could see the slot in space through which they calmly fly.

At any rate, to Christopher:

You stated "After 60 years of spinning the ETH/ETA/ETR wheels with nothing to show?"

I'll have to call you out on that. It's a bold and misguided statement. To proclaim that there it nothing to show for all of the ETH research is laughable and shows hubris and naivete. There have been dozens of great books and studies written over the past few decades supportive of the ETH, written and produced by excellent, accomplished and highly accredited researchers. One of those individuals happens to be the fellow who I respect most in ufology, and who's photo I use as an avatar: James E. McDonald.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_E._McDonaldHe's one of many extremely accomplished researchers I could name who supported an ETH-esque theory.

Come on, Christopher. Let's not throw out the baby with the bath water.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Yes to Bosley and Bishop.

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

Come on, Christopher. Let's not throw out the baby with the bath water.

OK. I agree that there have been researchers (like MacDonald, Stanford, Sturrock, Philips etc), that have done some amazing work over the course of the last 60 years, but are we truly any closer to answers than we were when Ken Arnold took off in his plane to search around Mt Ranier? NO
We all agree there is "something" going on here in and around this closed system/biosphere, but where is the unequivocal irrefutable evidence that these beings are from off planet? THERE IS NONE!
If saying that is throwing out the baby, so be it. Perhaps the baby needs some fresh air and a new perspective (?)

 

[Hoffmeister]

Chris, my point was not 'poo poo' the crypto's (or whatever you want to call them) debate, it was just it would have made a more interesting discussion if you had someone perhaps representing the ETH side of the argument here so we could weigh up the pro's and cons of each theory. There were a lot of big assumptions being thrown around in this debate, with Gene even declaring at one point something to the effect of "so, we know they have been around since the beginning of humanity, and that they are taking different forms to fit in wih what we know".... it wasnt exactly that but i heard it last night and can't remember the words used.... but i was like WHAT!? We don't know that at all, for all we 'know' they could have arrived here in 1947 and been coming here since, or that they have been government craft all along.
I don't mean this as an offense at all, but what you call 'creative thinking', sounded to me like a bunch of guys talking about things like portals, and ancient legends, non of which has even a grain of evidence. and as for unequivocal irrefutable evidence, there is none, but then there is non for many things today, including most of science.

Don't get me wrong though, I think it was a good show, and i've always been a fan of yours I just can't wrap my head around this topic.

Oh by the way YES!!! to a Walter Bosley show with Bishop!! I'd like to hear more about the ley lines he was talking about on Binnalls show

 

[Kieran]

Chris, my point was not 'poo poo' the crypto's (or whatever you want to call them) debate, it was just it would have made a more interesting discussion if you had someone perhaps representing the ETH side of the argument here so we could weigh up the pro's and cons of each theory. There were a lot of big assumptions being thrown around in this debate, with Gene even declaring at one point something to the effect of "so, we know they have been around since the beginning of humanity, and that they are taking different forms to fit in wih what we know".... it wasnt exactly that but i heard it last night and can't remember the words used.... but i was like WHAT!? We don't know that at all, for all we 'know' they could have arrived here in 1947 and been coming here since, or that they have been government craft all along.
I don't mean this as an offense at all, but what you call 'creative thinking', sounded to me like a bunch of guys talking about things like portals, and ancient legends, non of which has even a grain of evidence. and as for unequivocal irrefutable evidence, there is none, but then there is non for many things today, including most of science.

Don't get me wrong though, I think it was a good show, and i've always been a fan of yours I just can't wrap my head around this topic.

Oh by the way YES!!! to a Walter Bosley show with Bishop!! I'd like to hear more about the ley lines he was talking about on Binnalls show

I dispute that Hoff, there is plenty of evidence to suggest ancient tales and legends might contain certain content that might be true? Ok i question marked that end sentence but logically is there any reason to believe that? Me, you and everyone here and elsewhere are discussing a topic that our ancestors spoke of hundreds of years ago. Most of us have accepted at least the fact there is a Real genuine phenomenon here; have we not?
There is many reasons for why we have got little reward from our endeavours since 1947 and the biggest reason for me personally is that 'Some' people just can't see the bigger picture here and what it all means. I think this field needs a kick up the backside.

Shaver and Palmer just to name a few researchers; there ideas are not new whatever people might think. There particular line of thinking in fact was well- documented and written about hundreds of years ago long before they were even born.

I discussed a Book a famous book "Book Of Invasions" in Irish it was called "Lebor Gabála Érenn" written over six hundred years ago( think logically about the time period here people and view the information in light of what we know today ie UFO phenomenon).
This book and there was a number of other books that had similar content ( Book of Ballymote 12th century AD as an example) discussed beings that were not entirely human, and until the 17th lot of historians believed this book was a true account of Ireland's history.

Hoff there is legends within this book that speak of a underground Kingdom and there is also accounts within the book that claim that this beings live beside us in another world close to us a Parallel world of some kind. Shaver and palmer are only picking up on themes that were spoken and written about eight hundred years ago at least in Ireland. So i ain't hearing anything new or extraordinary that was not discussed long ago!! It up to you if you want to believe or not believe here, but the fact is these legends and myths do in fact back up lot of what we are seeing today, but in a different light Maybe for the observer but in essence the Phenomenon is the same entity or entities.

 

[Gareth]

Yes to Bosley and Bishop.

Yay.

Bosley has some real interesting stories for sure.

 

[Kieran]

OK. I agree that there have been researchers (like MacDonald, Stanford, Sturrock, Philips etc), that have done some amazing work over the course of the last 60 years, but are we truly any closer to answers than we were when Ken Arnold took off in his plane to search around Mt Ranier? NO
We all agree there is "something" going on here in and around this closed system/biosphere, but where is the unequivocal irrefutable evidence that these beings are from off planet? THERE IS NONE!
If saying that is throwing out the baby, so be it. Perhaps the baby needs some fresh air and a new perspective (?)

Some of these entities "Might" be piloting craft that could have the ability to fly to distant worlds out there in the universe (Space faring races) but that doesn't mean they are from another World. The Celt and Vedic Hindu legends especially point to a earthly origin and a Interdimensional orgin for the UFO phenomenon. I would'd rule out the possibility of John Keel being right also.

 

[Hoffmeister]

Yes but legends and accounts from the 1700's (not far from when they believed in dragons, and the world being flat) do not account to evidence.... nowhere near.
I completely agree that it is interesting, and interlectually stimulating to discuss accounts from both the present and the past to discuss how much basis they have in reality... thats what the subject is all about. However, I felt that people are now taking things perhaps too far and saying 'oh the ETH is outdated and people need to start thinking of bigger ideas'.
I think its a bizarre idea to* shoot down the ETH so much and say that its much more likely to be crypto's when there is atleast 'some'* albeit a small amount of actual evidence for ET's.
*
And just to quickly address the Nuke thing, where people say why would Aliens give a damn about whether we blow ourseelves up.
In the garden the other day, i saw a bird, and as I looked behind it there was a cat lurking in the bushes ready to pounce. Now at the end of the day it wouldnt have effected me if the bird had died, but I scared the thing anyway so it flew away and didnt get nailed by the cat. I did it because it was easy for me and I might as well have done.
Why couldnt the Aliens be the same?

 

[Paul Kimball]

OK. I agree that there have been researchers (like MacDonald, Stanford, Sturrock, Philips etc), that have done some amazing work over the course of the last 60 years, but are we truly any closer to answers than we were when Ken Arnold took off in his plane to search around Mt Ranier? NO
We all agree there is "something" going on here in and around this closed system/biosphere, but where is the unequivocal irrefutable evidence that these beings are from off planet? THERE IS NONE!
If saying that is throwing out the baby, so be it. Perhaps the baby needs some fresh air and a new perspective (?)

Hi Chris,

I disagree. We have a vast body of information now, which is more than we had 60 years ago. That puts us closer to finding an answer.

In terms of the ETH, in my opinion it remains the most plausible non-prosaic explanation based upon the evidence that is available. That's different than asserting that it has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, but there is no answer that has been proved to anything even remotely close to that answer. I actually think Mac's original idea, before the CTH (which he certainly didn't accept as even remotely proven), that we were being visited by a machine or artificial intelligence from another world, is the most likely non-human / prosaic answer, given the way our own technology is developing.

Finally, I don't agree that there is "something" going on, at least in the paranormal sense. That is a possibility, but, again, it can't be demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt, or asserted as a proven fact, anymore than the ETH itself can.

Paul

 

[Kieran]

Yes but legends and accounts from the 1700's (not far from when they believed in dragons, and the world being flat) do not account to evidence.... nowhere near.
I completely agree that it is interesting, and interlectually stimulating to discuss accounts from both the present and the past to discuss how much basis they have in reality... thats what the subject is all about. However, I felt that people are now taking things perhaps too far and saying 'oh the ETH is outdated and people need to start thinking of bigger ideas'.
I think its a bizarre idea to* shoot down the ETH so much and say that its much more likely to be crypto's when there is atleast 'some'* albeit a small amount of actual evidence for ET's.
*
And just to quickly address the Nuke thing, where people say why would Aliens give a damn about whether we blow ourseelves up.
In the garden the other day, i saw a bird, and as I looked behind it there was a cat lurking in the bushes ready to pounce. Now at the end of the day it wouldnt have effected me if the bird had died, but I scared the thing anyway so it flew away and didnt get nailed by the cat. I did it because it was easy for me and I might as well have done.
Why couldnt the Aliens be the same?

Hoff believe in Dragons? Well there is no evidence for that really in today's world.
"The UFO phenomenon however does indeed have long and well written documented history Hoff

The World being Flat wasn't a common held view Hoff. It was a view held by the churches and this view was reinforced by a churches through force during the medieval times. Most of the books i stated were wrote three to four hundred years before the 1700's date.

Hoff think like this, These monks were talking about the very same ideas and theories we are looking at today to explain the UFO phenomenon. And these monks who wrote these Books were doing all this around eight hundred years ago.

So explain to me why monks were even taking the time to do this? If they believed there was nothing to any of these legends or myths. The legendary city of Troy was considered only to be a myth but in the 19th century this city or town was discovered. Behind every myth there is some truth, a myth only comes about because there was information there to back up the myth in the first place.

---------- Post added at 01:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:33 PM ----------

Hoff i don't dismiss the ETH hypothesis that would be foolish to do, but the fact is the data and evidence suggests that maybe the UFO phenomenon and other Phenomenon Might be connected in some way. So that Suggests other possibilities here then the the phenomenon having only one sourcing ie ETH