I'm not a big ETH guy in general, but I don't know how it can be ruled out.
The main problem that I have with this perspective is the absence of a plausible alternative explanation. Every non-ETH explanation depends on facts not in evidence, like alternate realities or supernatural entities or some kind of magic – those are all serious problems for an alternative hypothesis.
But, neither do I believe that radar hits or even physical craft prove ETH at all.
Of course radar hits indicate a physical craft, especially with radar-visual cases where a sighting of a solid object is confirmed by the radar evidence. Radar is physical evidence, just as particle collider traces are physical evidence.
These craft simply often disappear, turn into tiny balls of light and disappear (or fly off like at Rendelshem).
Most sightings involve either a solid craft, or simply a source of illumination seen at some distance (which is probably a solid glowing object, because light doesn’t just radiate from nothing), moving across the sky.
More exotic behavior has been reported, like transformations from a luminous object into a solid object, and seeming disappearances, but that’s not an indication of anything supernatural, imo, but rather very advanced technological capabilities. For example, a sufficiently hot object (or one simply surrounded by a glowing plasma) would appear to be a radiant volume of light. Even more exotic behavior could be very highly advanced technology. For example, technologically generated spacetime distortion could make an object appear to change in size, and accelerate too quickly for the human eye to see, like a bullet. Also, the latest advancements in materials science are opening up exotic new physical properties by engineering the quantum wavefunction of matter. As Isaac Asimov said, “any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” But it’s not magic – it’s applied physics. And if various civilizations are entering our airspace from time to time, we know that their technology is substantially beyond our own, because we ourselves can’t yet traverse the stars. Capabilities like cloaking of various kinds, and false images aka camouflage, would be likely applications for an advanced technology operating covertly in our airspace.
In studying the work of Dr John Mack (the Harvard Psychiatrist who worked with hundreds of experiencers and abductees), he states that many abduction cases go like this. A craft hovers outside the bedroom, then people are transported through the wall OR, they are transported through the wall or window to the ship while their physical body remains in the bed. What do we make out of all of this?
We have plenty of reports of out-of-body experiences; perhaps some advanced civilizations can artificially induce such an experience, and convey a person’s consciousness or etheric body or whatever to their ship for study and/or experimentation.
Who knows really. But none of this means these are definitely beings from outer space.
It’s not definite, but it is by far more likely than any other explanation I’ve encountered. So I think it’s a fine working hypothesis.
Whats the biggest thing we know about UFOs and these "aliens." They are tricksters on a level that we cannot comprehend. They frequently do absurd and trickster like things.
I prefer to think of this kind of behavior as PsyOps. Whatever intelligence is behind these devices and encounters, they’re clearly operating in a covert manner. Many of our own intelligence agencies engage in this kind of behavior all the time: deception, misdirection, false flags, etc. It shouldn’t surprise us to find that even more technologically advanced civilizations would engage in similar kinds of operations.
People see lights in the sky while driving South, suddenly they, and a car full of other people are now driving North and missing 3 hours of time. They constantly manipulate electronic devices.
Both of these can be explained as superior technological capabilities. We stun deer at night with floodlights, for example. Apparently similar things can be done to disrupt human cognition and memory formation, with a sufficiently advanced technology.
The late 1890s had the bizzare airship sightings. This is well documented in several Newspapers (ill provide a link below to a great video on the story. These airships flew around, would land, state they were from ridiculous sounding lands which did not exist, and make absurd requests to those they encountered. Where these airships from a different planet? Or were they the same conscious beings which are manipulating and playing with us now?
The airship wave is interesting. It may be totally unrelated. The airship concept was born in 1874, and the first patent issued in 1895, so I think it’s possible that a covert US military program could’ve built airships by 1896-1897.
The problem that I have with the theory that both are examples of the same phenomenon, where we’re being shown aerial devices just ahead of our own level of technology, is this: the airships appeared four years before the first known historical flight of an airship, and seven years before the first flight at Kittyhawk. The ufo phenomenon started at least seventy years ago, and we still don’t have a viable design plan for building such a thing, and it may be hundreds of years before we can replicate the maneuvers that are widely reported and confirmed by radar. So that puts them in two different classes, imo.
The spiritual like effects on experiencers can be quite profound. People, after these experiences, experience extraordinary (often) paranormal events such as poltergiests etc.
Any dramatic and/or unexpected event can have a profound spiritual impact. People who have near-death experiences, for example, also report dramatic changes in perception and perspective and even personality.
Ive heard some state that it is a logical fallacy to try and include all of these things into one category. Again, Im not arguing that these phenomena are all the same. But, I feel the logical fallacy lies in attempting to apply our material world logic to a phenomena that seems extraordinarily illogical and beyond our means of understanding and seems to be in the business of fooling us. I think that in itself is a logical fallacy.
So what’s the alternative – to abandon logic altogether? That’s what you seem to be suggesting.
Everything is logical. There’s logic behind PsyOps, for example. The path forward isn’t to abandon logic, but rather to acquire a deeper understanding of the phenomenon until the underlying logic is revealed and understood.
And to do that, we need to design and build custom observational devices and systems to get more and better data from such events
as they occur. We’ve failed to do that. That’s why I think we’ve made no significant progress in understanding this phenomenon. Eyewitness accounts and the occasional radar data, just isn’t sufficient – we need to tackle this mystery with the same rigor and advanced engineering that we apply to every other area of inquiry from astronomy to particle physics. I’m confident that once we do that, we’ll make substantial strides forward, and ultimately understand exactly what’s going on in our skies. Because anything observable with the human eye and radar systems is physical in nature, and proper investigative scientific methodology can quantify and qualify anything of a physical nature, even if it represents a technology far beyond our own.