UFOs: Reframing the Debate: Ask Robbie Graham and Robert Brandstetter

[Gene Steinberg]

Continuing a discussion that more or less started with the June 4th appearance of Greg Bishop on The Paracast, we invited two of the people responsible for a fascinating and insightful book, "UFOs: Reframing the Debate."

So you'll be hearing from the editor, Robbie Graham, and one of the authors, our own Robert Brandstter, won in the forums as Burnt State.

We may even have a surprise guest.

From the description of the book:

"If ever we are to further our understanding of the UFO enigma, we must fundamentally reframe our debate. We must wipe the board clean and fill it with new ideas, new theories, even new language. We must be willing to start from scratch when the field stagnates. We must be critical, sober, and free of dogma—ready to rinse away the residue of our own beliefs."

This episode will be recorded Monday, June 5th, from Noon until 2 PM Pacific time.

 

[William Strathmann]

I bought the book a few days ago and have started reading. Well done!

Robbie:

How did you come up with the idea to ask for essays from this wide variety of contributors?

Did you have a clear idea in mind of the variety of people you wanted to ask for an essay?

Did any other people you ask turn down your request for an essay?

Can you give an overall summary of the message of your book?​

Robert:

Is unresolved human trauma the main source for the UFO experience?

Is every paranormal experience, or UFO experience, traumatic?

Are UFO experiences internally generated by the human experiencer?
Or is there an external agency that affects the person's perceptions?​

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Thanks for the great questions.

We had hoped that Red Pill Junkie, another contributor to the book, would join us, but his work schedule intervened. But he'll be here for the upcoming episode of After The Paracast.

 

[mike]

"If ever we are to further our understanding of the UFO enigma, we must fundamentally reframe our debate. We must wipe the board clean and fill it with new ideas, new theories, even new language. We must be willing to start from scratch when the field stagnates. We must be critical, sober, and free of dogma—ready to rinse away the residue of our own beliefs."

Something i think we do rather well here at the Paracast.

 

[EricTheRed]

Observation: There may be a psychological temptation in UFOlogy and other areas of paranormal research to “re-weird” or upgrade overly familiar subject matter into the ever more inscrutable and fantastic, possibly to meet a psychological need for the mysterious transcendent. For example, UFOs are removed from what _might_ be their most rational explanation, visiting ETs, and re-imagined as inter-dimensional beings (whatever that means). Do you think this is a valid concern? What are your thoughts?

Thank you Gene and Chris!

-Eric

 

[marduk]

Reading the book, mulling my thoughts. Love the quotes at the beginning, and loving Robert's essay so far at the end.

How did you connect 'Ultima Thule' with the liminal state? It roughly means 'beyond the known world' or as Shakespeare put it, 'the Unknown Country.'

It has a semiotic feel to it. A slippery vibe that is quite contextual.

No questions so far, except about how the book actually came together - can you describe the process and the thinking?

 

[mike]

As as example just 50 years ago the idea ET might be synthetic not biological wouldn't have occurred to most people.

If and when we finally encounter aliens, they probably won’t look like little green men, or spiny insectoids. It’s likely they won’t be biological creatures at all, but rather, advanced robots that outstrip our intelligence in every conceivable way. While scores of philosophers, scientists and futurists have prophesied the rise of artificial intelligence and the impending singularity, most have restricted their predictions to Earth. Fewer thinkers—outside the realm of science fiction, that is—have considered the notion that artificial intelligence is already out there, and has been for eons.


Susan Schneider, a professor of philosophy at the University of Connecticut, is one who has. She joins a handful of astronomers, including Seth Shostak, director of NASA’s Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, or SETI, program, NASA Astrobiologist Paul Davies, and Library of Congress Chair in Astrobiology Stephen Dick in espousing the view that the dominant intelligence in the cosmos is probably artificial. In her paper “Alien Minds,” written for a forthcoming NASA publication, Schneider describes why alien life forms are likely to be synthetic, and how such creatures might think.


“Most people have an iconic idea of aliens as these biological creatures, but that doesn’t make any sense from a timescale argument,” Shostak told me. “I’ve bet dozens of astronomers coffee that if we pick up an alien signal, it’ll be artificial life.”

“As soon as a civilization invents radio, they’re within fifty years of computers, then, probably, only another fifty to a hundred years from inventing AI,” Shostak said. “At that point, soft, squishy brains become an outdated model.”

Schneider points to the nascent but rapidly expanding world of brain computer interface technology, including DARPA’s latest ElectRX neural implant program, as evidence that our own singularity is close. Eventually, Schneider predicts, we’ll not only upgrade our minds with technology, we’ll make a wholesale switch to synthetic hardware.

The Dominant Life Form in the Cosmos is Probably Super intelligent Robots

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Long and short, we haven't a clue what form extraterrestrial life might take. Period.

Even though we have reports of grays and other alleged aliens, we have no idea if we are seeing them in their true shape, or if there is anything there at all beyond what is perceived by the experiencer.

 

[marduk]

Long and short, we haven't a clue what form extraterrestrial life might take. Period.

Even though we have reports of grays and other alleged aliens, we have no idea if we are seeing them in their true shape, or if there is anything there at all beyond what is perceived by the experiencer.

If they're post-biological, they may not have a shape at all.

They may just take one now and again for convenience.

 

[mike]

If they're post-biological, they may not have a shape at all.

They may just take one now and again for convenience.

And it may explain the taking of tissue samples that seem to be a part of the narrative.

It makes sense that if you are going to build yourself a biological waldo, you would use bio material from the location you are at. It would have natural evolutionary adaptation to the environment you want to study.

 

[Thomas R Morrison]

And it may explain the taking of tissue samples that seem to be a part of the narrative.

It makes sense that if you are going to build yourself a biological waldo, you would use bio material from the location you are at. It would have natural evolutionary adaptation to the environment you want to study.

You’re making a good point: biological life represents a significantly more advanced technology than anything humankind can presently create. Things like computers and cars cannot repair themselves, adapt to changing environments, etc. A simple leaf uses quantum mechanical effects to transfer energy (https://phys.org/news/2014-01-quantum-mechanics-efficiency-photosynthesis.html) and every living cell is a marvel of nanotechnology. Organic life is vastly more sophisticated than any human hardware.

We’re only now learning how to “hack” biological technology via gene splicing and gene therapy, and by creating things like customized T-cells in the lab. I would think that any civilization significantly more advanced than ours would have mastered biotech to produce living devices of all kinds, and certainly autonomous biological beings would be a huge asset for various kinds of exploration and research projects, obviating the need to send astronauts.

And for exploring planets in our temperature range, carbon-based biotech makes a lot of sense. So it would probably require an examination of the molecular/genetic composition of such devices to even recognize that they were artificially created. And we tend to assume that biological life forms don’t live for very long simply because we don’t live for very long, but a sufficiently advanced civilization should have little trouble perfecting biological systems to last indefinitely – if not by design then through routine maintenance procedures beyond our present understanding, involving nanotech and so forth.

Imagine the benefits of a living sentient bipedal automaton that runs on photosynthesis rather than organic digestion, for example – a light source and a moisture supply on the transportation craft could keep your bots running for years, with none of pesky problems associated with digesting mutagens, waste disposal, or organic caloric intake...and none of the catastrophic failures of a metal and plastic machine.

All too often people overlook the fact that even now biological life is the most advanced form of technology on the planet. An alien research program would find more value in a nematode or a hair follicle, than a Telsa car or an IBM microprocessor.

 

[mike]

Imagine the benefits of a living sentient bipedal automaton that runs on photosynthesis rather than organic digestion, for example

While i can't vouch for these reports they make interesting reading.

The fluid removed from the body was analyzed under the microscope and found to be a vegetable substance, chlorophyll-based. It is possible that photosynthesis was the means of obtaining energy.

The cranium was dissected and it was observed that a ridge of cartilage separated the brain into two completely isolated components. The brain was severely deteriorated, but appeared to be extensively fissured and divided into numerous lobes. Because of the deterioration the degree of bilateralism of the two halves could not be determined with any accuracy.

This cadaver exuded an unusually foul odor.

3. Conclusion

This is not a cadaver of a kind previously observed by or known to this pathologist. It appears to be a form of creature utilizing elements of both the animal and vegetable.

Roswell: Autopsy Reports

If these reports are factual, and i say IF. They would not be inconsistent with the ideas we are discussing.

Now i know the provenance of this data has multiple red flags on multiple levels.

Roswell

Streibers book Majestic where these first were published. Given he claims , to him by a Govt source.

A picture of Santilli's alien on the top of the page.

But i showed these reports to an actual pathologist at a hospital where i worked, and while he thought the subject matter very weird, did say the language and descriptions were consistent with a real autopsy report. Milage will vary.

 

[marduk]

While i can't vouch for these reports they make interesting reading.



Roswell: Autopsy Reports

If these reports are factual, and i say IF. They would not be inconsistent with the ideas we are discussing.

Now i know the provenance of this data has multiple red flags on multiple levels.

Roswell

Streibers book Majestic where these first were published. Given he claims , to him by a Govt source.

A picture of Santilli's alien on the top of the page.

But i showed these reports to an actual pathologist at a hospital where i worked, and while he thought the subject matter very weird, did say the language and descriptions were consistent with a real autopsy report. Milage will vary.

I doubt photosynthesis could drive a 100 lb moving creature. It works for small things (surface area:volume) and things that don't move (low energy requirements). Even lizards don't use photosynthesis.

Besides, they aren't generally seen scampering around in the daylight, sunning themselves.

However, one could envision a craft being the entity, or multiples of them. Think a flying computer core running a few billion individual AIs as processes. One gets interested in spooking some meat natives, so they fabricate a meat-like substrate for one or more of the AIs to run on, and it runs off to scare somebody in their bedroom.

 

[Waller]

Long and short, we haven't a clue what form extraterrestrial life might take. Period.

Even though we have reports of grays and other alleged aliens, we have no idea if we are seeing them in their true shape, or if there is anything there at all beyond what is perceived by the experiencer.

Haven't a clue? Period? "No idea"?

As you wish, it's your path.

 

[mike]

I doubt photosynthesis could drive a 100 lb moving creature. It works for small things (surface area:volume) and things that don't move (low energy requirements). Even lizards don't use photosynthesis.

Besides, they aren't generally seen scampering around in the daylight, sunning themselves.

However, one could envision a craft being the entity, or multiples of them. Think a flying computer core running a few billion individual AIs as processes. One gets interested in spooking some meat natives, so they fabricate a meat-like substrate for one or more of the AIs to run on, and it runs off to scare somebody in their bedroom.

I'm a bit time poor atm so i cant do the math, but.

In reality, the efficiency of photosynthesis is much lower and is usually below 1%, with some exceptions such as sugarcane in tropical climate.[80] In contrast, the highest reported efficiency for artificial photosynthesis lab prototypes is 22.4%

Artificial photosynthesis - Wikipedia

Photosynthesis: A new source of electrical energy? Biofuel cell works in cactus

Human body generates enough electricity to fuel an iPhone in 70 hours | Daily Mail Online

So if this is an artificial bioform, using tweaked photosynthesis, it seems possible just looking at the data. But as i said i haven't got time to really dig down and make a solid case.

 

[marduk]

I'm a bit time poor atm so i cant do the math, but.

In reality, the efficiency of photosynthesis is much lower and is usually below 1%, with some exceptions such as sugarcane in tropical climate.[80] In contrast, the highest reported efficiency for artificial photosynthesis lab prototypes is 22.4%

Artificial photosynthesis - Wikipedia

Photosynthesis: A new source of electrical energy? Biofuel cell works in cactus

Human body generates enough electricity to fuel an iPhone in 70 hours | Daily Mail Online

So if this is an artificial bioform, using tweaked photosynthesis, it seems possible just looking at the data. But as i said i haven't got time to really dig down and make a solid case.

How would they be active after dark?

Why aren't they often seen in daylight?

Why wouldn't they be green?

 

[mike]

How would they be active after dark?

Why aren't they often seen in daylight?

Why wouldn't they be green?

All speculation of course, but perhaps they have been tweaked to function at very low light levels, ie starlight in space.
Also that report says they were possibly part plant based It appears to be a form of creature utilizing elements of both the animal and vegetable.
Parasitic plants are often not green since they use other sources of energy.
And perhaps they are designed for different light

Most of the plants you see on a daily basis are green, but every so often you might happen upon the odd purple-leafed tree or shrub. Why do some plants have these purple parts?

The answer lies with another "P" word: pigment. Green plants contain a lot of the pigment chlorophyll. Because chlorophyll molecules are very good at soaking up blue and red light — but not so good at absorbing green light — plants containing a lot of chlorophyll appear green to the human eye.

https://baynature.org/article/photosynthesis-in-leaves-that-arent-green/

So if the bioform is artificial its possible that its simply had its pigmentation set to a colour other than green.

It would be a purpose designed optimized bioform. It could utilize elements of the natural world like photosynthesis but not necessary conform to the same expressions we see in the natural world.

 

[mike]

http://newscenter.lbl.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2015/04/Peidong-Yang-figure-2.jpg

Cross-sectional SEM image of the nanowire/bacteria hybrid array used in a revolutionary new artificial photosynthesis system.

http://newscenter.lbl.gov/2015/04/16/major-advance-in-artificial-photosynthesis/

 

[Thomas R Morrison]

I'm a bit time poor atm so i cant do the math, but.

In reality, the efficiency of photosynthesis is much lower and is usually below 1%, with some exceptions such as sugarcane in tropical climate.[80] In contrast, the highest reported efficiency for artificial photosynthesis lab prototypes is 22.4%

Artificial photosynthesis - Wikipedia

Photosynthesis: A new source of electrical energy? Biofuel cell works in cactus

Human body generates enough electricity to fuel an iPhone in 70 hours | Daily Mail Online

So if this is an artificial bioform, using tweaked photosynthesis, it seems possible just looking at the data. But as i said i haven't got time to really dig down and make a solid case.

That’s good stuff Mike.

The math is pretty simple actually: a typical human runs on about 100 Watts of energy…it’s pretty amazing that we only require the energy of a single household light bulb. And for a creature with roughly half our mass, the energy requirements could be significantly lower. The irradiance of the Sun at noon near the equator is about 1000 Watts/m^2, and the surface area of one side of the typically described grey is probably about one meter squared. So if the conversion efficiency is only about 20%, then a light source on board the craft equivalent to the mid-day Sun would provide about 200 Watts to the creature; twice the energy it requires, so the extra 100 Watts could be converted and stored organically as sugar to be used when operating in dark conditions.

I wonder what kinds of biotechnological tricks a civilization might discover after visiting 1000 planets that support life. I’d be surprised if an interstellar civilization didn’t get photosynthetic energy conversion rates up to 70-80% or better. And you could probably design a synthetic life form to go into “sleep mode” en route to conserve energy.

This is fun stuff to think about. I think it’s useful to demystify this subject with discussions like this. Nothing that we witness is “magic,” and I think it’s a mistake to shroud this subject in metaphysical/paranormal/parapsychological thinking, because that’s not how humans learn, benefit from, and make scientific progress via our observations. Through sober, analytical reasoning, we will sooner or later be able to emulate anything that any advanced civilization has achieved, whether that means interstellar field propulsion or creating custom biological creatures to facilitate our exploration of the cosmos.

 

[marduk]

All speculation of course, but perhaps they have been tweaked to function at very low light levels, ie starlight in space.
Also that report says they were possibly part plant based It appears to be a form of creature utilizing elements of both the animal and vegetable.
Parasitic plants are often not green since they use other sources of energy.
And perhaps they are designed for different light





https://baynature.org/article/photosynthesis-in-leaves-that-arent-green/

So if the bioform is artificial its possible that its simply had its pigmentation set to a colour other than green.

It would be a purpose designed optimized bioform. It could utilize elements of the natural world like photosynthesis but not necessary conform to the same expressions we see in the natural world.

At night there would be little energy to harvest.

And plants are green because green is one of the few optimal colours to harvest energy from light.