Dear Mike
What superstition do I subscribe to? I did six months inside a top Wiccan Group associated with Worldwide Vampire/Dragons. I did this after the High Priestess interviewed me for over two weeks and said "Why join us, you already know so much?" Later she said I "was sent to overturn her Temple."
I have in fact done my best to expose their petty and dangerous side which you refer to.
If you are referring to science (alchemy) as a superstition you are a subscriber to things the Wiccans taught about it - not what it is, or ever was. Yes, in many eras there were people encouraged by greedy Nobles to call themselves that which they were not.
If you are referring to what I say about Ascended Masters (Yogis and a few people every century.) I do think science has proven enough of what the mystics say to think there is that possible World Mind collective. Of course, I have done a lot more than you have, and studied it more than anyone I know or have met, or even heard about.
But I accept whatever opinion you have based on reading something for a couple of weeks, while engaging your massive ego and need to appear as the cult of alien NONsense leader. How much I do not know - judging by other comments - I would say less than one tenth of what I have posted links to. Do you consider yourself expert on the Jungian or Qabalistic disciplines? I dabble in the latter and am pretty fair at the former. Did you read the Meru Project link? Maybe you know more than I think - but so far I say you are a poser.
To flesh this out a little, my opinion isnt based on "a few weeks of reading". I was directly involved for an extended period of time with both the Order and an active wiccan coven. Initiated into both traditions, was in fact the youngest initiate ever admitted. It was a very long time ago.
My experience and i want to qualify that it was just
my experience, was in both cases that they were just new variations on the more traditional formalised superstitions. The trappings were different, but the human and social motivations were the same.
The allegation that my interest in UFO's is no different is a common mistake to make, but mistake it is
UFOs as experiential phenomenon and UFOs as popular cultural myth entangle in a knot of confusion. I suspect that this entanglement stands as one of the greatest impediments to understanding the nature of UFOs, and scientific acceptance as a subject worthy of serious attention. A historical perspective offers a grip on the end of the string, a chance to untangle the mess to some degree.
The genre has two faces as per the quote above, i only subscribe to one facet
I'm not a
Raëlian, i dont subscribe to channels who peddle Ashtar of the galactic command.
My heros are the scientists and other academics who go out into the field and look for and assess the evidence using the scientific method.
Who use scientific tools like chemical analysis to investigate trace evidence, and photographic analysis.
My modus operandi is to seperate the wheat from the chaff, in the hope that if a scientific quantifiable reality is behind some of the reports , that we can identify that and add it to our body of knowledge
My view is that scientific and technological parity is our best way of getting to the bottom of this.
There once was a time when it was believed disease was caused by "humours" and that bacteria were a myth
Science got to the bottom of this and now we know better
Science is built on failures.
If you don't learn from your failures, you're doing it wrong.
If you never have failures, you're not doing it at all