Redfern, Ritzman, and Tonnies Show

[David Biedny]

...but if he was left to his own devices I'm not sure how scary it might get on the program.

You should hear some of what happens before Gene hits the record button.

YOWZA

Someday, I'll fall over that proverbial edge and do a political show, and then you can feel free to call the guys with the nice tight white jacket.

But I think our on-air chemistry is a large part of what makes the show work. I'm happy playing Lewis to Gene's Martin.

(Gee, that reference definitely dates me...)

 

[sk4p]

Let me inject a thought about the extraterrestrial hypothesis, and apologize if it's been stated here already (there's a lot of forum to catch up on!).

I understand when David, for example, takes Stan to task for resisting data which violates the ETH.

However, I fear it might become all-too-fashionable to bash the ETH. There's a resistance to the ETH because there are truly "weird" encounters, as in a lot of the ones which interested Dr. Vallee. And there's no question that the ETH doesn't explain every case.

But the ETH has this going for it: it is a hypothesis, which is a critical part of the scientific method. It's not just throwing up our hands and saying "I have no frigging clue what's going on." It's saying "I'm brave enough to make a guess; let's see if it holds up."

An important part of any hypothesis is that it provides testable predictions. For example, General Relativity predicted a displacement in starlight due to the sun's gravity, and that prediction was tested and confirmed.

Now what testable predictions arise from the ETH?

- It is likely that ET civilizations might be found in the universe, since they must exist out there in order to come here from out there.

This is an argument for continuing SETI (leaving aside for now the flaws in how that's been done so far!)

- If they've come here, they may have left traces, artifacts, or even bodies. ETH is equated with "nuts and bolts and pilots", so maybe some or all of the above are still on Earth.

This is the argument for continuing "classic" investigations a la APRO/NICAP of the good old days, and for stepping up pressure for disclosure from governments around the world.

Now, like I said, for one thing I don't think ETH explains all "UFOesque" phenomena, and for another I don't think many of the people who advocate ETH have done a great job of fairly and scientifically advocating the hypothesis and advancing the testing thereof. But all I'm saying is, hey, at least ETH gives us a scientific angle to grab hold of and make some progress with. So let's keep that in mind when we bash it.

--Shawn

 

[Brian Now]

I liked this show in that I agreed with most, if not all, of what was said. Nobody had an agenda or gimmick, they were all pretty open people.

I guess a round table discussion is just a discussion by nature, with no new information given about anything.

Hey, didn't Gene give an experience this time? Not that I don't like David, I do a lot, but I am always wanting Gene to talk more.

 

[jritzmann]

But all I'm saying is, hey, at least ETH gives us a scientific angle to grab hold of and make some progress with. So let's keep that in mind when we bash it.

"Bash" is rather a strong word. I agree it's still on the table. However, after so many years of UFO research by all parties involved, I see no "nuts and bolts" to examine if that were the case. No physical evidence, no skin samples, no solid...well...anything.

Yet it seems the majority of the field still looks to the ETH as the single most plausible answer - or at least the trail to follow.

I think it's high time people seriously - very seriously - consider looking in new and interesting directions. (Many of which Mac has suggested)

Stan Friedman (whom I have alot of respect for) has for many years clung to the ETH for reasons of his own and due to the suppositions he's made and stands by. However I recall him saying once, that "Progress doesnt come from doing the same thing over and over, it comes from doing things in different and unexpected ways" or something to that effect. He's right, but in the case of the ETH, he hasnt really followed his landmap of progress.

I'd say putting just as much effort into other theories as the ETH might yield *something* we hadnt thought of while being essentially glued to little green men from planet X.

I personally dont think *any* theory is going to pan out to an ultimate end. This is just one of those enigmas that with our current knowledge just wont be solved...I dont think we can ever get our heads around it. Not yet anyway. We have alot of preconcieved notions to deal with first.

Certainly doesnt mean we cant look for small morsels were we can find them though.

 

[CapnG]

I think the reason the ETH remains popular is because it gives us something to work with and because more and more, it's something people can at least wrap their brains around.

It's fine to suggest that "they" might come from other dimensions but that's kinda like suggesting "they" are made of chocolate pudding: it's an interesting idea but it also basically kills the discussion because we can't go any further.

With the ETH you have a bevvy of follow up questions: Where in space do they hail from? How long have they been visiting us? Why are they here? What do they use for fuel? How many toilets does their ship have? And so on. In other words, it gives you something to do.

 

[sk4p]

Exactly what I was trying to get at, CapnG. I don't disagree with anything Jeff said; it's just that of all the options out there, ETH is the only one which gives us much to do, and that's the problem.

The challenge I would put before people who want to move on from the ETH is to suggest how we might test any alternate theories. Otherwise all we can do is continue to simply make observations - and while there's nothing wrong with that, in fact I think it's essential - it would be nice to at least try to refine our hypotheses in the rare instances when we can.

The Hollow Earth hypothesis actually gives us something to look at in its standard "nuts and bolts" form, also. Seismology and various earth-sounding technologies do exist and could be applied.

Time travelers? Well, if we knew that a UFO event was going to happen, we might have electromagnetic or gravimetric devices around for detecting disturbances in the continuum. You may recall a few years ago that experiments were being done to see if Relativity's predictions about "frame dragging" were true. If Relativity is correct, time travel would involve similarly odd disturbances in the curvature of spacetime, and we might at least be able to say "hey look!" when a UFO appeared or disappeared ... but only if we had our equipment set up and calibrated when the event occurred.

Parallel dimensions? Very hard, if possible at all, to test with current scientific theory and equipment. I'm not too proud to confess I have no clue how this might be done.

The point being, we can admit none of our hypotheses are both testable and worth testing, and just continue making observations in the hope that they will suggest some heretofore unconsidered hypothesis, or we can make what inroads we can on our current ideas. I'm not even saying the latter is the right approach; our resources in time, energy, money, willpower, etc. are limited. Just trying to spark some discussion on the problem ... and Jeff, thank you for correcting me on the word "bash".

--Shawn

 

[jritzmann]

With the ETH you have a bevvy of follow up questions: Where in space do they hail from? How long have they been visiting us? Why are they here? What do they use for fuel? How many toilets does their ship have? And so on. In other words, it gives you something to do.

I agree with both of you that it occupies the subject and gives ya stuff to consider and discuss. But I'd put forth that it's run it's course, and after these many years just about every angle has been covered. It's like the X-Files in syndication...I just keep channel surfing.

I dont believe for a second that other angles dont provide other follow up questions. Theyre just more complex, and would require actual work and study to attain at least a feeling of progress.

For example is the "dimensional" (which covers alot of ground)hypothesis a dead end? Hardly. But very few want to look in that direction and study the nature of perception, quantum physics, and our possible place in creating or altering reality.

Thats deep stuff (and it's only one avenue), but doesnt have the appeal I suppose, of sifting through star systems and trying to calculate propulsion devices. Everyone wants the easy answer and instant gratification. And spacemen is the easy way out of the question, at least in my opinion.

Then again, as I've suggested to David before, what if it's not one "answer". What if it's ETs in rare instances, but the majority of the activity is something far more fantastical putting on a mask of ETs?

I dunno, my view of this all has been that people want to stick with the tried and true. I've always gotten a little guff when I've put forth deeper theories that people cant easily prove out and get their instant grats. I think if we let go of little green men and start looking alot harder at ourselves we might go alot deeper and find something very interesting that we could possibly connect to the enigma and why/how we percieve it at all.

That'd be a starting point anyway.

edit: Have a listen to the T. Allen Greenfield Paracast episode. While people might find it "out there", it's highly interesting. While I dont agree with all of it, it poses a really interesting core question. Check it out.

 

[sk4p]

Oh, I'm all for exploring the "out there" stuff, believe me. I'm just a science major, and my toolbox is limited when it comes to hypotheses I feel I could actually work on. I don't know how to explore dimensional hypotheses, but that doesn't mean that (say) Michio Kaku wouldn't know how, right?

Loved the Allen Greenfield Paracast. I corresponded with Allen a few years ago when he was publishing a book on magick and even got a special thanks in the book for helping proofread it. </namedrop> So I was delighted when that episode happened. There's a guy with a big brain and a lot of great ideas to explore.

--Shawn

 

[SnakeOil]

For example is the "dimensional" (which covers alot of ground)hypothesis a dead end? Hardly. But very few want to look in that direction and study the nature of perception, quantum physics, and our possible place in creating or altering reality.

...

Then again, as I've suggested to David before, what if it's not one "answer". What if it's ETs in rare instances, but the majority of the activity is something far more fantastical putting on a mask of ETs?

And I was just about to bring this stuff up...

JR, do you remember the show you did when you told the story about the presentation that you had to do, and just prior to that you'd come to the conclusion that this was demonic? I'm way-paraphrasing...you'd seen a symbol that got onto, what , your bathroom mirror or something?

The gist of what I'm getting at is that we may be looking at 2 sides of the same coin, and it only looks like 2 coins because we don't understand what we're looking at yet. And I'm not just saying this because of the example you gave. Not that I don't trust you, but in the end it's just hearsay. OK, a symbol mysteriously appeared for you. How did it get there? Who or what was responsible? And what was their motive? It's not like they sat down with you in the morning over coffee for a chat, "Look, Jeff, it's like this..."

Do I have any evidence? Nope. But I do find the idea somewhat compelling. One solution is certainly more elegant than two, and there are natural precedents that would support a union (unified field, double slit).

GHAAAAA....I need more coffee.

 

[SnakeOil]

Sorry, Shawn. I didn't mean to steamroller your post.

 

[sk4p]

No worries

 

[Brian Now]

When talking about the "interdimensional" theory I never hear anyone talk about the fact that the Earth is always moving, it has no fixed location. This is not such a big deal if you are a physical being on another star (ETH) because your star is moving also, relative to ours. But it seems like it would be a problem if you are in another dimension. The earth revolves on its axis, orbits sun, sun orbits galactic core, the galaxy itself is moving through space too! We're never at the same point more than a blink of an eye.

So I wonder how they could...
1. jump from their dimension to ours
2. know where to find us when they get here, as you can only fix a point in space relative to something else (assuming space is infinite)...and if they aren't from our space how would they know where to enter with everything in constant motion?

The answer might be that they can see perceive our dimension from theirs and so always have reference points...like a hypothetical 4D being can see everything in a 3D world, but we 3D beings can't turn our eyes to the 4th dimension. But that's only spatial dimension talk...there might be another kind of "dimension".

 

[BrandonD]

When talking about the "interdimensional" theory I never hear anyone talk about the fact that the Earth is always moving, it has no fixed location. This is not such a big deal if you are a physical being on another star (ETH) because your star is moving also, relative to ours. But it seems like it would be a problem if you are in another dimension. The earth revolves on its axis, orbits sun, sun orbits galactic core, the galaxy itself is moving through space too! We're never at the same point more than a blink of an eye.

So I wonder how they could...
1. jump from their dimension to ours
2. know where to find us when they get here, as you can only fix a point in space relative to something else (assuming space is infinite)...and if they aren't from our space how would they know where to enter with everything in constant motion?

The answer might be that they can see perceive our dimension from theirs and so always have reference points...like a hypothetical 4D being can see everything in a 3D world, but we 3D beings can't turn our eyes to the 4th dimension. But that's only spatial dimension talk...there might be another kind of "dimension".

I don't think it's exactly common understanding what "another dimension" actually means. It could mean a number of different things. So I think that you are possibly interjecting assumptions into what the nature of another dimension might be.

An example. As I understand it, our senses are just various receiving apparatus which pick up waves (sound, light, etc) of different types which are being transmitted and reflected from the "external world". Our senses are able to register only an extremely narrow range of these waves. It makes sense to me that a being who only transmits/reflects waves which are beyond the capacity of our sensors to receive is equivalent to a being who exists in "another dimension".

Considered from that perspective, there is no reason why this being has a problem with a rotating earth. This being exists right here on the earth, but outside of our narrow band of perception.

And further, if this being is capable of altering the frequency of the waves which it transmits or reflects, then it can conceivably make itself perceivable by humans and invisible to humans at will.

So there's a healthy dose of wacky speculation.

 

[SnakeOil]

An example. As I understand it, our senses are just various receiving apparatus which pick up waves (sound, light, etc) of different types which are being transmitted and reflected from the "external world". Our senses are able to register only an extremely narrow range of these waves. It makes sense to me that a being who only transmits/reflects waves which are beyond the capacity of our sensors to receive is equivalent to a being who exists in "another dimension".

Equivalent, perhaps, but not another dimension. I feel like that term gets thrown around a lot when maybe it shouldn't. The reason I say that is because I'm accustomed to a dimension being length, width, height, time. We don't exist in a specific "dimension", we have dimensions and we exist within all of them. I have dimensions, horizontal now closing in on vertical. I don't live in "a" dimension. Saying that some other intelligence exists in some other dimension always seems to imply that they exist in some other version of reality that somehow isn't intrinsicly attached to our own. I think that's just chocked full of assumptions we shouldn't be making.

Yeah. Nobody around here's making any assumptions, are they? Meh.

 

[BrandonD]

Equivalent, perhaps, but not another dimension. I feel like that term gets thrown around a lot when maybe it shouldn't. The reason I say that is because I'm accustomed to a dimension being length, width, height, time. We don't exist in a specific "dimension", we have dimensions and we exist within all of them. I have dimensions, horizontal now closing in on vertical. I don't live in "a" dimension. Saying that some other intelligence exists in some other dimension always seems to imply that they exist in some other version of reality that somehow isn't intrinsicly attached to our own. I think that's just chocked full of assumptions we shouldn't be making.

Yeah. Nobody around here's making any assumptions, are they? Meh.
[/quote]

Yeah, I personally don't know what another dimension really means. It's like the word "god" or something, it's just supposed to invoke the idea of some magical thing that we don't understand.

But I can't resist pushing this subject a little further out there. To extrapolate on the stuff I mentioned above, I see no reason to assume that the beings associated with ufos have the same range of perception that we do. Which means that these hypothetical beings might be capable of moving themselves outside of our range of perception, while still being able to perceive us.

If one accepts such a possibility, that there might exist beings who are just as "real" as we are, but transmit/reflect only waves outside of our range of perception, then this leads to a load of other interesting inferences.

If other beings do exist outside of our range of perception, then there is no reason to assume that the amalgamation that I consider "me" consists of only what is perceivable by my poor-quality receivers. Parts of me that are just as much "me" as my arms or legs might exist beyond my capacities of perception. In addition, these other beings might be able to perceive these unseen parts, and perhaps manipulate them in various ways, affecting our moods or behavior in ways that would seem totally random to us.

Something to consider when we wonder why humanity and life on earth always seems to be going in a direction diametrically opposite to the direction most people want.

 

[SnakeOil]

Now we're getting juicy...

Yeah, I personally don't know what another dimension really means. It's like the word "god" or something, it's just supposed to invoke the idea of some magical thing that we don't understand.

But I can't resist pushing this subject a little further out there. To extrapolate on the stuff I mentioned above, I see no reason to assume that the beings associated with ufos have the same range of perception that we do. Which means that these hypothetical beings might be capable of moving themselves outside of our range of perception, while still being able to perceive us.

OK, first lets define our terms, as it were. We're way out in the boonies now. Way beyond observation, Hypothetical town. OK, let's go...

I quite agree. No reason to assume anything of the sort. One could go further and say that some other being on some other planet may have indeed evolved entirely differently based upon a different environment. But the only life forms we have as a baseline are all essentially the same in that regard. Or are they? The cats and dead people thread comes to mind. I had a friend once tell me that his dog, his cat and his autistic brother all watched some unseen thing come down a flight of stairs and go out a door. Hmm...

If one accepts such a possibility, that there might exist beings who are just as "real" as we are, but transmit/reflect only waves outside of our range of perception, then this leads to a load of other interesting inferences.

If other beings do exist outside of our range of perception, then there is no reason to assume that the amalgamation that I consider "me" consists of only what is perceivable by my poor-quality receivers. Parts of me that are just as much "me" as my arms or legs might exist beyond my capacities of perception. In addition, these other beings might be able to perceive these unseen parts, and perhaps manipulate them in various ways, affecting our moods or behavior in ways that would seem totally random to us.

The pan-dimensional intersection theory! I love this one! Interesting take, though. I may have heard something like this before.... Our spiritual selves are larger entities than our physical selves, existing in more dimensions and intersecting with the physical planes. But manipulation by outside and unseen forces? Again, hmm....

Something to consider when we wonder why humanity and life on earth always seems to be going in a direction diametrically opposite to the direction most people want.

My cynicism is going to cling to "it's our own damn fault" for that one. Point taken, though.

 

[BrandonD]

I quite agree. No reason to assume anything of the sort. One could go further and say that some other being on some other planet may have indeed evolved entirely differently based upon a different environment. But the only life forms we have as a baseline are all essentially the same in that regard. Or are they? The cats and dead people thread comes to mind. I had a friend once tell me that his dog, his cat and his autistic brother all watched some unseen thing come down a flight of stairs and go out a door. Hmm...

Yes my answer would be similar. If I brought up the subject of other colors to a color-blind man, he might say "Sounds great as a concept, but everyting we have as a comparison is black and white." My perception may not accurately reflect all that is there in the space in front of me.

The pan-dimensional intersection theory! I love this one! Interesting take, though. I may have heard something like this before.... Our spiritual selves are larger entities than our physical selves, existing in more dimensions and intersecting with the physical planes. But manipulation by outside and unseen forces? Again, hmm....

It goes along with the idea that all the parts of a human interact and have some sort of a communication whether it is perceptible (hand picking up mug) or not perceptible (brain telling heart to beat). So if there is an appendage of mine that exists outside of my perception and another being can, for example, apply some sort of pain or pleasure to it, then I might suddenly and inexplicably become happy or angry and that will affect how I handle the present situation I'm in. For me, this really brings to mind our own behavior experiments with rats and things like that.

My cynicism is going to cling to "it's our own damn fault" for that one. Point taken, though.

Maybe it's both. As in, if we weren't so identified with our physical bodies then perhaps this hypothetical manipulation taking place would have no effect on us.

One question for you: What do you think is meant by "another dimension"? I'm curious because I really don't know what this phrase means.

 

[CapnG]

I agree with both of you that it occupies the subject and gives ya stuff to consider and discuss. But I'd put forth that it's run it's course, and after these many years just about every angle has been covered. It's like the X-Files in syndication...I just keep channel surfing.

I dunno Jeff, I mean isn't that like saying (and admittedly it's an extreme but I'm making a point here) "Cancer research has run it's course" simply because we've found no cure? As far as I'm concerned, this option stays on the table until we've explored the entire universe and found it vacant.

I dont believe for a second that other angles dont provide other follow up questions. Theyre just more complex, and would require actual work and study to attain at least a feeling of progress.

For example is the "dimensional" (which covers alot of ground)hypothesis a dead end? Hardly. But very few want to look in that direction and study the nature of perception, quantum physics, and our possible place in creating or altering reality.

But you can't test any of that because it's all theoretical, which basically means it's useless to us. This is what I meant by my earlier "pudding" comment. What's the point of positing an alternate dimensional explanation if we can't even agree on what an "alternate dimension" actually is (let alone test for one)?

Then again, as I've suggested to David before, what if it's not one "answer". What if it's ETs in rare instances, but the majority of the activity is something far more fantastical putting on a mask of ETs?

I would certainly agree with that. And all things being equal, Mac's crypto theory probably counts for some cases too as does Gene's PSYOP preference. It could ALL be happening! Unfortunately we still can't prove any of it.

I think if we let go of little green men and start looking alot harder at ourselves we might go alot deeper and find something very interesting that we could possibly connect to the enigma and why/how we percieve it at all.

This reminds me of many of the conversations I had and overheard in college. It was an arts college, with all the attendant stereotypes that entales (in spades!). Existential meanderings down what-if lane are all well and good but they don't actually get us anywhere. Lately I'm beginning to think it's not that we aren't asking the right questions but rather that we're incapable of asking them, that we simply lack the intellectual vocabulary.

 

[Brian Now]

I don't think it's exactly common understanding what "another dimension" actually means. It could mean a number of different things. So I think that you are possibly interjecting assumptions into what the nature of another dimension might be.

I agree with you completely, see the last line of my post.

 

[jritzmann]

JR, do you remember the show you did when you told the story about the presentation that you had to do, and just prior to that you'd come to the conclusion that this was demonic? I'm way-paraphrasing...you'd seen a symbol that got onto, what , your bathroom mirror or something?

The gist of what I'm getting at is that we may be looking at 2 sides of the same coin, and it only looks like 2 coins because we don't understand what we're looking at yet. And I'm not just saying this because of the example you gave. Not that I don't trust you, but in the end it's just hearsay. OK, a symbol mysteriously appeared for you. How did it get there? Who or what was responsible? And what was their motive? It's not like they sat down with you in the morning over coffee for a chat, "Look, Jeff, it's like this..."

Bedroom mirror. That instance was essentially at a pivotal moment in my UFO "career" if ya want to call it that. I'd done alot of investigations, interviews with witnesses, facilitated experiencer groups (no kidding, almost full-time)...but was becoming frustrated with not getting anywhere research-wise after, I think around 14 or more years of being pretty hardcore about it.

Thats the point where I went thru a lot of files and testimonies I had amassed and began looking at not so much the events, and "nuts and bolts" but began making calls and going over papers looking for effects to the people (rather then the UFO) after their experience.

What I found was an extremely toxic effect, one I had known myself. Particular phrases and patterns began to emerge that I found to be indicative of what many would call "demonic". However, that word or term carried with it all sorts of baggage, and I knew full well that the vast majority of the UFO community didnt want to view the UFO engima as "demonic" or even "toxic"...and worse yet, those who did say these kinds of things were ignored as "Jesus freaks" or paranoid throwbacks to the 50's sci-fi movies about invasion.

So, knowing full well I had to give a lecture about my own experiences at a seminar in D.C. the following week, I was in a pickle. Did I recount my experiences, and keep my mouth shut about my theory...or not (and risk being ostrasized or labeled a nutjob bible thumper which anyone can tell ya I'm about as far as you can get from). I mean I really languished over the question, and the wife and I had a couple we were friends with over one night and we all talked about it. The bedroom door was locked all night and no one was getting in, (the bedroom was a mess).

The company left about 3 am, and we went right to bed, and I still had no idea what kind of talk I was going to give.

The next morning my wife asked me if someone else had stopped by after our guests left. She said she recalled someone coming in when she was barely asleep and talking quietly to me in the foyer of the house. I had no memory of that, only the fleeting feeling that someone had been there after we'd gone to bed, but I'd no idea who.

The symbol on the mirror was large and we saw it was we were putting on coats to go out (I checked my hair). I called Dr. Mario Pazzaglini who I'd heard had written a book called "Cryptic Writings" or something to that effect and I think he was in Delaware. I told him nothing about my speech troubles, nor anything other then I was an experiencer and this showed up on my mirror overnight. I faxed him a drawing of it and he called me within a few days.

He said it was an ancient form of whats been deemed angelic writing, but it was arranged in a way he'd never seen before, which he said essentially made it seem a rather "in your face" statement. When I asked what kind of challenge, he said verbatim: "Well, there's no direct translation, but it conveys 'Now you know. Do you have the courage to stand up for what you believe', thats the jist of it, but with alot of urgency or importance".

Well, I nearly passed out, thanked him, and hung up the phone. From that point I had no doubt what kind of talk I'd be giving, and I gave it. The response was *anything* but what I expected. Very positive, and alot of questions. The organizer of the event after my talk, made a half assed apology for anyone I offended (I think she was a "space brother" kinda gal) and the crowd more or less gave her the raspberries for that.

That was the last time I lectured and I quit the field for almost 10 years. I perfer to study the phenomena on my own now, and gather findings maybe some might not think to look at. Maybe one day it will be worth looking at.

I dont pretend to know what it's all about, and I'm as in the dark as everyone else. But that instance really made the step back (and away) from looking at this enigma like everyone else. I go at it from an angle I've witnessed myself, and thats really all I got.

So in answer to your questions:
"How did it (symbol) get there?"

It appears to the made with some kind of white substance that is semi wax like. It's still on the mirror which has been in storage for years. The mirror is incredibly dirty from moisture, but the symbol is very much there. How it got there, I have no idea. I will say it's drawn in such a way that would be hard for anyone to duplicate very easily.

"Who or what was responsible?"

I dont know. I have guesses which I keep to myself. It all depends on who you ask when they read the little account of it I've written above. Some say "angles", some say the "aliens opposite" some say whatever guided me to start looking into this to begin with. Who knows, your guess is a good as mine. I can tell ya it sure as hell wasnt me, or my family or our company. I'll swear that on whatever ya want.

"And what was their motive?"

I guess to make me tell the crowd what I was so torn over saying to start with. The bottom line was I believed I'd found something truly toxic. But did I keep it to myself and not warn people of potential harm.

The motive (if correct) would say it was something or someone else, possibly as some have suggested, the opposite/positive of the "alien" negative.

All I know is I've never seen anyone else talk about that symbol, or post a pic of it. And I've looked. I've never released it into the public, and it's more or less become the icon to me of my involvement in this stuff.