Chris Aubeck, October 5 2014

[Wade]

Hierarchy was a poor choice of words on my part. I did hit a stone wall after a time as far as where to look next and I suppose if i did my research more I would know where to look more (think flaps wade) but I sort of hoped I would get thrown a bone.

It is a very worthy project and this forum certainly doesn't need any input from me to determine that themselves. In the end I acknowledge I'm not analytically (?) driven, I tend to be more imaginative and speculative and thus was a poor fit but I think I made that known in my op, it just wasn't what I expected. What should be mentioned is when I did come across a report that I received while on the list instead of compelling me to look harder for other cases I instead sought to try to access other group postings to find patterns and similarities and in failing that would look for other mentions of the cases I found intriguing elsewhere. I was not misled I just failed to fully appreciate what was being done and considering the works of list members jerry clark and jacques vallee I had a reason to think that there would be more back and forth discussions on the perceptions of such cases.

At any rate @caubeck thank's for appearing on the show and for dropping in on the forum to advise us of your current projects.

 

[Polterwurst]

Regarding the interview itself, I enjoyed the freedom to chat about whatever I saw relevant. I live in Spain and hardly speak English at all these days, let alone on the radio, so I'm not a very fluent public speaker. I tend to shy away from broadcasting but am happy to "practice" if I'm invited back. ;-)

I actually thought you were speaking very eloquently. There weren't more "ers" and "ums" than with other guests, and those weren't "offputting" , but only natural. @juinius: I hereby nominate you as a future guest. Let's see if you manage without.

I'm writing this from a hotel in Ohio, where I've come to do some research into six 19th century cases. It is important to gather details about the witnesses and locations at the places themselves (whenever possible). In three days I've visited five libraries and historical societies, gone through rolls of microfilm, taken photos and spoken to local residents. Theres no excuse to leave any stone unturned if you want to do things right. On Friday I was tramping around a muddy cemetery in the rain with a friend and fellow researcher. Great times!!

That's the spirit. You seem to be dedicating quite a lot of money, time and effort on this research. Do you see this as a hobby, a fascination or a scientific endeavour?

Speaking of spirits , I was the guy who asked about ball-of-light phenomena and Reverend Cumming's story. I think I've had some evidence that "disincarnate consciousness" might be a reality, and I'm asking myself if at least some of the ball-of-light type UFOs might be caused by something of that kind, because lights zipping around feature not only in UFO reports, but also in some haunting and poltergeist type stories, although much smaller. They have been reported by credible witnesses in the Scole experiments, for example. What do you think (if you have the time, I opened a thread about them here.)?

Do you really think that Cummings was interpreting his sighting religiously? I was actually amazed by the lack of religious language in his report. Seemed to me that he was saying he saw the apparation of a woman, not the Virgin Mary or some martyr or saint. Had there been that many Virgin Mary apparitions prior to 1806 (not including medievial visions, but only alleged apparitions)? I only know of Lourdes (1850s) and Fatima (1917)?

About your own experience when you were around 13 years old: was there a reason you thought this could not have been "only" your subconscious, or like an overheard conversation etc.? Did this occur only once or did the voice phenomena happen several times over a certain period and then stop?
Some psychics say that they get their "messages" clairaudiently (although that seems to be the exception I guess). What do you think about that possibility?

While I would agree that there is probably not one single explanation for all the "paranormal phenomena" (including UFOs), I still think we shouldn't ignore similarities. If you're only talking about foo fighters, Marfa Lights, Hessdalen phenomena respectively (all have been reported to maneuver intelligently, the first always, the latter sometimes), you might miss the fact that there are commonalities.
It's like talking about mythological creatures like the djinn, faeries, elves, trolls etc. and not seeing that they all share aspects with ghost sightings.

Thanks a lot for agreeing to be on the show (which was very entertaining and informative) and joining the forums (which is great) and offering to answer more questions (which is awesome). I hope there will be another show, and if you don't have the time to answer all my questions here, I'd be happy if they get adressed there.

 

[Burnt State]

I didn't explain properly why I don't believe the phenomenon itself mutates over time. My main argument is this: most ufologists love to point out instances of saucer-shaped craft in historical texts and artwork. They get excited about any folkloric creatures with oversized heads and eyes, especially abductions. They look into old books for reports that strongly resemble modern sightings. This includes physical objects, situations and patterns in colors, behavior, size, etc. In other words, ufologists look for direct matches between the past and the present, and often find them. This does not imply that the phenomenon evolves over time, it suggests that the phenomenon has remained the same. If anything has changed it's the interpretation we give it.

If I understand you clearly, between this explanation, and what you said on the show, there is a specific continuous phenomenon that appears the same in situation and descriptions across time. But we also can not always know the circumstance, cuture or perspective of artistic & folkloric representations across time which most likely have nothing to do with the UFO phenomenon. I'm assuming that "excitement" of the too eager ufologist is about their confirmation bias and not the phenomenon itself. So is what is most constant the creation of the phenomenon based on our desire for the repetition of certain stories concerned with the rites of passage to unknown lands to visit with the starnge creatures of our collaborative construction of culture? Can we sort out the clothes from the body it is dressed in, as how much is the core phenomenon and how much is concerned with the interpretation of the times - it's difficult to tell.

Of course outside of that appears these very unique and bizarre stories like those of a medieval crash retrieval army, with aliens in chains and their saucer being dragged through the muck - how embarrassing for them and a rich moment of schadenfreude for us. Some of the very, very rich details of such anomalous tales are also all about perspectivism as well, no? While the patterns are interesting, what is the history of the written word but a series of patterns. What, if anything, is objective in all of these tales?

 

[SRL+]

As lobbying since 2010 for Mr. Aubeck’s appearance here, I’m truly appreciative.., thanks. Also, I’m appreciative of the fact that Chris plans on addressing questions asked of him on this thread.

 

[caubeck]

If I understand you clearly, between this explanation, and what you said on the show, there is a specific continuous phenomenon that appears the same in situation and descriptions across time. But we also can not always know the circumstance, cuture or perspective of artistic & folkloric representations across time which most likely have nothing to do with the UFO phenomenon. I'm assuming that "excitement" of the too eager ufologist is about their confirmation bias and not the phenomenon itself. So is what is most constant the creation of the phenomenon based on our desire for the repetition of certain stories concerned with the rites of passage to unknown lands to visit with the starnge creatures of our collaborative construction of culture? Can we sort out the clothes from the body it is dressed in, as how much is the core phenomenon and how much is concerned with the interpretation of the times - it's difficult to tell.

Of course outside of that appears these very unique and bizarre stories like those of a medieval crash retrieval army, with aliens in chains and their saucer being dragged through the muck - how embarrassing for them and a rich moment of schadenfreude for us. Some of the very, very rich details of such anomalous tales are also all about perspectivism as well, no? While the patterns are interesting, what is the history of the written word but a series of patterns. What, if anything, is objective in all of these tales?

In religious art, the meaning of celestial manifestations is generally known and their evolution traceable. If one in ten depictions of the same eye of God or an angel is smudged or blurry, it's usually the one ufologists pick as most likely to be a representation of a UFO. This shows bias and a complete lack of interest/understanding of the art in question. See ART and UFO - Intro

I have no great difficulty in separating complex character-driven folklore from UFO phenomena. There may be some gray areas but I see no reason to suppose that, say, a man who is taken to the sky in a copper kettle is "probably an abductee" or that an encounter with a dwarf of any color is "probably about a Gray." Any resemblance may be entirely superficial. Just because someone met a 68-year old woman in Lomdon who wore red spectacles it doesn't mean they probably met my mother, or just because someone in the 19th century fled from a light in the sky that there was any persecution involved (people do run from astronomical phenomena surprisingly often!). I think it's easy to get caught up in the seductive words and metaphors we use to talk about UFO theories and not look enough at the data.

I look for patterns but I often think that patterns, if old and discoverable in folklore to the same degree, are more indicative of a psychosocial solution.

None of this implies that UFO phenomena are not real but it does suggest to me we might be looking at it wrong.

 

[Wade]

None of this implies that UFO phenomena are not real but it does suggest to me we might be looking at it wrong

By this do you suggest we should concentrate at looking at the ufo phenomena from a historical social/cultural lens than from any attempt at gathering scientific data?

I've been contemplating such a scenario over the past week or so but short of printing out billions of rorschach tests, I wouldn't have any idea on how to go about it.

 

[Burnt State]

...See ART and UFO - Intro...

I think it's easy to get caught up in the seductive words and metaphors we use to talk about UFO theories and not look enough at the data.

I look for patterns but I often think that patterns, if old and discoverable in folklore to the same degree, are more indicative of a psychosocial solution.

None of this implies that UFO phenomena are not real but it does suggest to me we might be looking at it wrong.

What I can never get a handle on is our desire to make specific assumptions about cave paintings and petroglyphs. Why is there such a penchant to claim alien creature, ancient astronaut, rocket ship etc. when really, the context of such time periods is really quite outside us beyond anthropological guess work? As for the medieval and renaissance art pieces, that link is one I cite myself as it helps us to peel away some very specifc assumptions around continuity of the phenomenon and supposed confirmation of it in such public displays. If anything, we are creatures of metaphor and crave it daily. For the metaphor is a kind of magic when we say that 'this' is suddenly equal to 'that.' There's also a transformative quality inside the story of metaphor that must switch literary brain triggers to produce narrative inspired releases of dopamine. These narrative elements are at the heart of folklore and myths. We just can't get enough of such tales.

Of course I'm very interested in your psychosocial interpretations. Do you see a continuity of a unique phenomenon with all the elaborate and detailed new lenses you are bringing to the folklore? As you were talking about your new partnerships in your investigations I was struck by the parallel to work on Stonehenge done during the early era of the computer which was able to plot out specific astronomical phenomenon across history proving the true elaborate nature of this unique site, and the advanced science of its creators. While you are not using a fixed ancient site of worship I wonder if you will make some new discoveries yourself along the way of your multifaceted investigations.

So, if you had a larger team working at your behest, what would be the perspectives you would be asking your team to consider?

I'm also quite curious to know if in all your historical research whether or not you have found any documentation of an ongoing series of unique phenomena as opposed to these unique, anomalous stories recorded. Have you ever run into a series of stories that are connected together, or appear to be documenting ongoing, specific events in a singular location over a specific period of time - something akin to the Hessdalen lights for example?