• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

some thoughts


Bergen

Paranormal Maven
( my main language isnt english so there might be some typos )

I havent been on the forum in a while but i have been listening to the show. During the the time that I have been absent ive been doing some thinking on the UFO topic and I decided to share them just out of boredom working nightshift. There are a variety of topics mentioned in the following text but I am too lazy to make multiple threads J
First, ive read the first and half the second of Richard Dolans UFOs and the national security state books. I have heard them hailed as the definitive study and even proof of UFOs. This is my , sort of , short review of the first book.
After reading the book it was the title I have the largest problem with ; “ cover up exposed “ and “ chronology of a cover up “. See, even though the books do prove without a doubt that the military do have an interest in UFOs even after BlueBook , it does not in my opinion prove that they know anything about them. The book seems to lead me into this state of mind where a ton of half proven stuff equal a big wholly proven case for the goverments intricate knowledge of ufos.
An example of this is the higly secret “ assessment of the situation “ document where the members of this study , on behalf of the military , come to the conclution that UFOs are most likely of e.t. origin . That sure is interesting , but it only shows that the military scientists don’t have any idea what they are. But mr. Dolan imo wraps the whole incident in a certain tone , as to say “ this is proof of what we want it to be proof of, That’s only one of many examples but I think this example will suffice as the other examples are pretty much of the same type. Dolan does howerer provide us with a huge insight into what the military was doing about the UFO problem , but as mentioned earlier I don’t think he proves any military knowledge.
Also the other problem I have with the book is the James E. McDonald incident. Why on earth would anyone trying to make a scientificly sound book on the UFO phenomenon end it with an insane “what if” story of the government using psychic powers to kill Mr.McDonald,

E.T. origin vs. Extra Dimentional

First of, I don’t claim to know anything about the origins of UFOs , but I do get a bit fed up with people throwing around the E.D. hypothesis without any follow up. To my knowledge there isn’t even any proof that there are extra dimentions , especially not in the way put forward by people putting aliens there. From wiki :

In physicsand mathematics, the dimension of a spaceor objectis informally defined as the minimum number of coordinatesneeded to specify any pointwithin it.[1][2]Thus a linehas a dimension of one because only one coordinate is needed to specify a point on it (for example, the point at 5 on a number line). A surfacesuch as a planeor the surface of a cylinderor spherehas a dimension of two because two coordinates are needed to specify a point on it (for example, to locate a point on the surface of a sphere you need both its latitudeand itslongitude). The inside of a cube, a cylinder or a sphere is three-dimensional because three coordinates are needed to locate a point within these spaces.”

In other words, extra dimentions isn’t parallel worlds superimposed on already existing worlds.

The E.T. hypothesis is however backed up by multiple factors ;

-We know life can evolve on a planet
-We know intelligence can evolve in species to the point where a species can think abstractly and construct devises used for space travel
-We know the will to explore can develop in a species
-We know there are other planets beyond our solar system
-We know technology evolves
-We know there are hypothetically sound theories on how to achieve space travel over great distances,

In my opinion the E.D. hypothesis guys should back up their belief with some reasoning outside “ they appear and disappear out of nothing” , especially if this is all they base their E.D.H. > E.T.H. belief on, Back it up goddammit :-D

Another thing I have been thinking about is the notion that the visitors have to be “ thousands, even millions of years ahead of us on an evolutionary scale” . Why ? We went from horse and carriage to the space shuttle over the span of a few years. Is it not plausible that we can achieve space travel in another “few years” ? Also, this theory also has to impy that “aliens” whoever they might be , took the same evolutionary path as us, something I find hard to believe.

Last topic, why do “aliens” have to be a lot more intelligent than humans ? The sole reason for this claim is that a higher intelligence is needed to construct the sort of devices that are UFOs. Back to the last topic, does anybody claim that Plato or Aristotle was less intelligent than the people who invented jet propultion ?
Or that Leonardo DaVinci was less intelligent than Mike Zuckerberg ? . The only difference is knowledge , not the ability to reach high numbers on an IQ test. That is not to say “aliens” aren’t more intelligent than we are , but to say that they have to be is imo just a false statement.


The end ;-)
 
Great write up

I prefer the ETH over the EDH for all the same reasons you cite.

And even if their propulsion systems employ some sort of ED mechanism, Its akin to watching a 747 jet come in and land and assuming the passgengers all live in and come from the sky.
 
... Last topic, why do “aliens” have to be a lot more intelligent than humans ? The sole reason for this claim is that a higher intelligence is needed to construct the sort of devices that are UFOs. Back to the last topic, does anybody claim that Plato or Aristotle was less intelligent than the people who invented jet propultion ?
Or that Leonardo DaVinci was less intelligent than Mike Zuckerberg ? . The only difference is knowledge , not the ability to reach high numbers on an IQ test. That is not to say “aliens” aren’t more intelligent than we are , but to say that they have to be is imo just a false statement ...
An excellent post, and I just wanted to compliment you one your last point above. I mentioned something similar in a post not long ago after I ran across and article that said biological brains like ours are the maximum effective size. Beyond it, biological brains get too complex, bogged down, and prone to problems. Plus there is no end in sight regarding the technology that we're creating with the tools and brains we have at our disposal right now. At some point I can see something like Kurzweil's Singularity happening that will lead to a merging of mind and machine as part of our evolution, but in the strictest sense, that's not necessary to get the job done, and besides that, if we can do it, then what would be stopping some other race of doing it too? Even if they've gone through their own version of evolution to the next level, we're not necessarily that far behind.

I also suspect that there is some kind of cosmic intelligence limit. After all, there are only so many rules and so many elements to work with. Therefore there is a limited number of possibilities on how they can be combined. It's little wonder we see so much duplication in the universe. Because of this, concepts like "infinite intelligence" are nonsensical. Unfortunately we still find the presumption of some superior and unproven intellectual authority, whether they be Gods or aliens used to validate arguments. Grant it however, the idea of aliens who are not vastly more intelligent than us, but still beyond our own capability, is a reasonable idea to consider.

BTW, I also agree that it's a leap in logic to presume the government has all the intimate details regarding UFOs. However I do think it's reasonable to assume that they know a lot more than has been disclosed to the public at large.
 
An excellent post, and I just wanted to compliment you one your last point above. I mentioned something similar in a post not long ago after I ran across and article that said biological brains like ours are the maximum effective size. Beyond it, biological brains get too complex, bogged down, and prone to problems. Plus there is no end in sight regarding the technology that we're creating with the tools and brains we have at our disposal right now. At some point I can see something like Kurzweil's Singularity happening that will lead to a merging of mind and machine as part of our evolution, but in the strictest sense, that's not necessary to get the job done, and besides that, if we c
an do it, then what would be stopping some other race of doing it too? Even if they've gone through their own version of evolution to the next level, we're not necessarily that far behind.


I also suspect that there is some kind of cosmic intelligence limit. After all, there are only so many rules and so many elements to work with. Therefore there is a limited number of possibilities on how they can be combined. It's little wonder we see so much duplication in the universe. Because of this, concepts like "infinite intelligence" are nonsensical. Unfortunately we still find the presumption of some ultimate and unproven authority, whether it's Gods or aliens used to validate arguments.

BTW, I also agree that it's a leap in logic to presume the government has all the intimate details regarding UFOs. However I do think it's reasonable to assume that they know a lot more than has been disclosed to the public at large.

thank you for the compliments.
I think you misunderstood me in regards to gov. kbowledge. I simply ment that i didnt think mr.dolan proved it in his book. I think it is obvious that the goverment knows more than we do. They have the satelites and the radars etc. but even though i suspext the goverment kbows a great deal im simply saying it has yet to be proven. I think the closest we get to sone sort of indication that they know more than they are letting on can be seen in the way they react to mass sightings i.e. the pheonix lights incident. Why did they happen to drop flares in the same exact pattern as the lights that were seen on a craft by several people earlier ?
If i had to guess they learned about the event , picked it up on radar and tried to imitate it with an explainable event. This imo is the closest we get to sone proof that they know more
 
I think you misunderstood me in regards to gov. kbowledge. I simply ment that i didnt think mr.dolan proved it in his book. I think it is obvious that the goverment knows more than we do ...

I got it. That's why I said, "I also agree that it's a leap in logic to presume the government has all the intimate details regarding UFOs." Perhaps in the future we might find that governments do have such knowledge, but I doubt that even if that is true, that it's going to happen any time soon.
 
Edit: Bergen, (I apologize as I just edited this not knowing your screen name was different than your avatar)
Personally, I prefer not having to pretend that there is a need to adhere to a "preferred hypothetical origin" for UFOs. To me, that is illogical. The multidimensional hypothesis complaint in your post bears out little reason IMO. There are seemingly just as many theoretical studies and books with respect for what may be parallel universes or alternate dimensions that can indeed hold life as we understand it (and more likely how we don't) outside those we ourselves occupy as there are those on interstellar travel. Neither is one bit anymore plausible than the other no matter how many star trek reruns you've watched. It's just an abstract preference at this point and nothing more.

No one, just because they are a fan of the Fortean, should be obligated to explain their origin suspicions or guesses in technical terms just because you're not too sure yourself of what to believe.

No one has ever explained successful IT apart from the strictly theoretical.

I do agree with you that it's very helpful to delve as deep as you like into multiple present theoretical considerations, but don't you think that should be up to the individual?

Edit: The bottom line is that we all need to encourage diversity and do very little to discourage it. The past 60 years has gotten us no where with respect for Ufology. A broader vista would not only be a good and prudent idea, it would seem at this point more so a requirement.
 
@Jeff Davis : I see now that my original post came out a bit brute and even slightly offensive to some. I apoligize . I do however stand by my points. Ill write a "rebuttal" as soon as im in front of a computer. ( using phone atm ) regardless tho , im happy a discussion on ETH vs EDH that goes a bit deeper and is a bit more technical is brewing :)
 
@Jeff Davis : I see now that my original post came out a bit brute and even slightly offensive to some. I apoligize . I do however stand by my points. Ill write a "rebuttal" as soon as im in front of a computer. ( using phone atm ) regardless tho , im happy a discussion on ETH vs EDH that goes a bit deeper and is a bit more technical is brewing :)

And I apologize if I seemed impulsive or emotionally defensive in my initial response to your post. IMHO, it is imperative at this point in Ufology to encourage a very broad vista of sincere, scientifically considered/theorized hypothetical parallels with respect to UFO origin and environmental means that support their technical facilitation. That is to clearly state that the underlying refinement that seems to be most required is best exemplified by the the immediate rebuttal of our collective admission in that UFOs may not be "Technology" requiring facilitation at all. There are simply too many legitimate schools of consideration with respect to plausible theorized parallel support for what may be the origin and identity of UFOs for this exploratory refinement to support in process.

Thank You Bergen, I appreciate your intelligent considerations and indeed your thread here because of the convictions it sparked within me, peace, Jeff :)
 
Another thing I have been thinking about is the notion that the visitors have to be “ thousands, even millions of years ahead of us on an evolutionary scale” . Why ? We went from horse and carriage to the space shuttle over the span of a few years. Is it not plausible that we can achieve space travel in another “few years” ? Also, this theory also has to impy that “aliens” whoever they might be , took the same evolutionary path as us, something I find hard to believe.

Last topic, why do “aliens” have to be a lot more intelligent than humans ? The sole reason for this claim is that a higher intelligence is needed to construct the sort of devices that are UFOs. Back to the last topic, does anybody claim that Plato or Aristotle was less intelligent than the people who invented jet propultion ?
Or that Leonardo DaVinci was less intelligent than Mike Zuckerberg ? . The only difference is knowledge , not the ability to reach high numbers on an IQ test. That is not to say “aliens” aren’t more intelligent than we are , but to say that they have to be is imo just a false statement.

The higher intelligence/superiority angle exists purely because we have no other explanation for how these devices do what they do in terms of manoeuvrability, malleability, invisibility. Then there's all the various familiar human laws of physics they seem to break, expand upon and disrupt in the process of their flitting in and out of our atmosphere with the grace of a hummingbird and the high end special effects of ships shifting shapes, joining together and dissolving into thin air. These visual reports all confuse us humans to great degrees; consequently, in our attempt to define the technology that is responsible for such mysteries we opt for "higher intelligence" as the best possible solution to that which we don't understand.

While philosophers may be exceptional at reasoning and other humans have been visionaries when it comes to creative and conceptual thought, we still have not been able to practically and effortlessly do what the space ships do. This produces a very strong sense of distance between us and them, in the same way that the traditions, technology, communication systems and practices of remote tribes with limited contact with civilization appear to be "primitive" to our western gaze.

A brief techno timeline:

1450 Printing Press
1632 The Slide Rule
1765 Steam Engine
1885 Combustion Engine in automobile
1923 TV Camera
1944 Liquid Fueled Rocket and Mark 1 Computer
1957 Satellites
1971 Microprocessor
1995 20 million users are online
1997 Deep Blue computer beats human in chess
2000 Map of the Human Genome & ISS starts what will be the longest continuous human presence in space

When I look at our timeline there is the sense of our ability to radically alter our mechanical capacity when combined with our computing power in a very fast manner. However, we have been on a long slow steady progress meter that has only altered pace with our recent ability to share information and technology with an increasingly larger human population. You have to figure that with our population spike over the last 100 years and our increased access to info that we will definitely be making some major leaps this century - certainly we live in a time when only the imagination is the limit for much seems to be possible or within our grasp. Perhaps it has always seemed this way, but those two shifting variables, i predict, will lead us to creating a civilization virtually unrecognizable to ours in its ability to shift and change with sudden and frequent bursts of creation.

So, you might be right regarding what could be just around the corner for us earthlings.
 
... The past 60 years has gotten us no where with respect for Ufology ...

I hear the above statement a little too often for comfort. A lot has been learned and recorded, in 60 years of ufology, enough to conclude with reasonable certainty that alien visitation is a reality. IMO that is a significant achievement on its own, even if we still don't have all the details.
 
I hear the above statement a little too often for comfort. A lot has been learned and recorded, in 60 years of ufology, enough to conclude with reasonable certainty that alien visitation is a reality. IMO that is a significant achievement on its own, even if we still don't have all the details.

I'm with Jeff. We have had lots of interesting speculation and some nifty thinking about different possible models for what it could be, followed by decades of arguing and lots of fluff. While I suspect the ETH has a lot of potential there is still a grab bag of options, not to mention the possibilities we have yet to imagine.
 
I'm with Jeff. We have had lots of interesting speculation and some nifty thinking about different possible models for what it could be, followed by decades of arguing and lots of fluff. While I suspect the ETH has a lot of potential there is still a grab bag of options, not to mention the possibilities we have yet to imagine.
Well ... I guess that means I'm with both you and Jeff, at least to some degree. I think we can safely rule out the EDH ( extradimensional hypothesis ) and the other ETH ( extratemporal hypothesis ), on the grounds of logical implausibility. The STS ( Secret Terrestrial Hypothesis ) is at least plausible, but unlikely. Everything else besides the ETH seems to be the "fluff" you mentioned.
 
Back
Top