What is the nature of the Saucer menace?

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

You-foes are:

Nuts and bolts craft from another world.
7
20%
Nuts and bolts craft from inside the hollow earth, or antarctic Nazis.
2
6%
Nuts and bolts military prototypes or modified helicopters.
4
11%
Time machines, possibly from humanity in the future.
1
3%
Vimanas, spirit-craft.
2
6%
Screen memories for MK experiments and SRA.
2
6%
Elves or other blue-and-orange morality non/semi-corporeal beings.
10
29%
Demons. Evil non-corporeal beings.
2
6%
Earth lights, geomagnetic doo-dahs, ball lighting, plasma vortexes, etc..
2
6%
Created by the media and intelligence services as a disinfo psy-op.
3
9%
 
Total votes : 35

Re: What is the nature of the Saucer menace?

Postby barracuda » Mon Jul 05, 2010 12:20 pm

Stephen Morgan wrote:Thoughtography. The human mind can imprint images on film. Possibly also whatever light sensitive cell is used in digital photo cameras. If they can make you see it with your eyes, they can make your camera record what isn't there.


Of course. But is this any less outrageous a conjecture than the idea that space vehicles, put together in ways very much like advanced aircraft we already have, are in flight over our heads? Not really. In fact it seems a much more complex series of justifications just in order to avoid coming to terms with the notion that the saucer pilots might own rivet guns and wrenches. There must be a logical razor somewhere in the shaving kit for that. One might as well concede that that nothing we perceive is in any manner truely analgous to what we think we perceive. Which, come to think of it, it pretty much the general take that I get from the quotes of the Misters Shavers and Fort you've provided.

Essentially, we are retarded animals, backwater rubes in fancy, ill-fitting hats, living under the misapprehension that anything we do or say has any sense or purpose to it at all. The finest symphony is actually the mere reflexive, drooling yowl of a one-eyed teratomic carp. And this is a notion which I am perfectly willing to entertain, solving, as it does, many nagging questions, such as why we persist in killing each other and destroying our planet for victorious outcomes which boil down in real terms to the luxury of private air travel, beach time, and well tailored clothing, as well as how anyone ever accepted George W. as a leader.

But behind all those asumptions is the "before". So, was there a time in which the lives of men ever fit more properly into the environment of our planet? There seem to be any number of stories and evidences that things weren't always this way. Was it, then, the entrance onto the world stage of otherworld entities which at once changed men's relationship to themselves and their world, and gave them conceptual abilities far beyond that of, say Homo erectus, finally allowing them to make cave paintings and atom bombs? Can we shuffle responsibility for these travesties onto another race from another world, as Fort has, or blame some clouding force separating ourselves from our ancient wisdom as originating off world, like Shaver puts forth? Because to me, that's all these theories are in the end - procrastination and bleak avoidance of our own responsibilities. Our world is shit - it must be the hidden alien's fault. It seems more likely to me that the mysterious absences and lurking distance of the saucer menace is a safety mechanism on their part. They probably learned better than to venture too close during some period of our history when we were overly hungry. Some people will try eating almost anything, you know. Especially fish.

Image
The most dangerous traps are the ones you set for yourself. - Phillip Marlowe
User avatar
barracuda
 
Posts: 12890
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:58 pm
Location: Niles, California
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What is the nature of the Saucer menace?

Postby Penguin » Mon Jul 05, 2010 12:49 pm

82_28 wrote:Dude. Remember one of my first posts I made here? It was about just this! It's strange how much you and I have in common. I don't mean that in a creepy way. Here, I found it. Didn't feel like typing it up again.

82_28 wrote:Oh man. INDEED!

A couple of years ago I was camping near the base of Mt. Rainier in old growth forest. (Yes I had gotten stoned). But the trees, yes the trees, spoke to me. Literally spoke to me. Or maybe, communed with my psyche in some way. But I couldn't believe how much sense they made.

The trees are essentially a global intelligence that has existed for eons and eons and eons. . . . Intensely more intelligent and simple than any form of technology we have.

They felt sorry for us humans that we must destroy them for our temporary needs. But they do not care. For when we kill them, we will finally kill ourselves. The pinecones, seeds, blossoms are always to be safely buried. They go on, they are more intelligent and patient . It takes many years for a thought to emerge from the global forest, but when it is finally thought it is a thought some humans can detect.

They also "gaze" at the stars every night. Don't know a thing about our technology and don't care. Every night, for sometimes thousands of years, the same vastness of the universe.

They don't mind if we cut them down. We're only killing ourselves. This they understand.


Yep. We should listen a lot better to what they tell.
(I have plants in every room in my home, in the balcony, and outside - and most of what I see from the windows is trees)
There is nothing more calming to me than an old forest that has been undisturbed by the axe, saw or the harvester or a bulldozer of human enterprise.

I also find I agree with much of what barracuda opines. Especially the thought form projection and shared creation of emergent reality. It does bend.
Penguin
 
Posts: 5089
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 5:56 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What is the nature of the Saucer menace?

Postby Cosmic Cowbell » Mon Jul 05, 2010 2:21 pm

Nuts and bolts craft from another world.


I go with this for several reasons, the most compelling of which is this. Science, over the last 50 years or so, has only affirmed the possibility that life, rather than the exception, tends to be the rule of at least this part of the universe. Hypothesis such as Panspermia (now somewhat proven), the confirmed existence of other planets orbiting far distant stars and so on have only acted to confirm/strengthen the idea of life elsewhere, rather than detract from it or disprove it. What shape or form life takes, the level of it's sentience and so on is probably as varied throughout the galaxies as life is on earth, only more so. Advance intelligences may not even be fathomable to us, their motivations a mystery. I am often mystified when those who would dismiss what IMO is the most obvious explanation with anthropocentric "why make the trip" rationalities, then turn around and proceed off what is often the deeper end of the pool with hyper dimensional/Time traveling/ blue-and-orange morality non/semi-corporeal beings or "Elves". While it may be a great mental exercise or the tre-cool position to take of the day/week/month/year (OMG Vallee/Keel/Fort) etc., every thing other than Nuts & Bolts from a distant world, based on the gathered data - with UFO's often demonstrating a mastery of physics beyond our wildest dreams - magic for all intents and purposes, demonstrations of thought/body control, etc etc., remains the weaker arguments. And the bottom line is this, science is not the friend of those who take and hold such positions, at least as much it is seems to be the friend of the nuts/bolts "life elsewhere" advocate.

Nuts and bolts craft from inside the hollow earth, or antarctic Nazis.


While they may not be "from" inside the Earth or "from" under it's seas, this does not preclude the high likelihood that Off World Nuts & Bolts UFO's and their pilots would not take advantage of whatever shelter may shield them from eyes in the skies, the curious etc. This would be true as well for our nearest orbiting celestial bodies. Whatever they are/do, they seem to enjoy their privacy.

Nuts and bolts military prototypes or modified helicopters.


A given and not really deserving of a serious vote.

Time machines, possibly from humanity in the future.


A remote possibility but unlikely as we, given our current ecological path, don't have much "time". "Time is running out - Now do you understand?"

Vimanas, spirit-craft.


There is really no good reason that these shouldn't be synonymous with N&B's alien craft/entities. Simply interpreted within the scope of the times at which they were observed.

Screen memories for MK experiments and SRA.


To much pre-MK history to be seriously considered. This idea also lends itself more to modern day Abduction stories than to the UFO phenomenon in general.

Elves or other blue-and-orange morality non/semi-corporeal beings.


There is really no good reason that these shouldn't be synonymous with N&B's alien craft/entities. Simply interpreted within the scope of the times at which they were observed.

Demons. Evil non-corporeal beings.


There is really no good reason that these shouldn't be synonymous with N&B's alien craft/entities. Simply interpreted within the scope of the times at which they were observed.

Earth lights, geomagnetic doo-dahs, ball lighting, plasma vortexes, etc.


Ah yes, the old swamp gas explanation. If you voted for this, you don't belong here.

Created by the media and intelligence services as a disinfo psy-op.


Again, too much pre-history to be seriously considered, and yet a given in modern age Ufology. No one should be surprised here, given the truth that is "Nuts and bolts craft from another world." I think that both the truth of this fact along with the truth that those who perpetrate the disinfo/psy-op's have nary a clue is somehwat explanatory when hypothesizing motive. Fear (possibly abject terror) can be quite motivational.

If you're willing to concede to the possibility that life exist elsewhere, and then concede that it's evolutionary path is unknown to us, then the ideas above can easily fit under the influence of the Magic of Advanced Technologies that we might have yet to imagine. And -if-, through this Magic, they can manipulate space/time and your mind, then all of the above can be made ti fit neatly into a lager holistic view. Because it can't be "Elves/Fairies" -AND- "Demons/Angels" -AND- "Hyper/Ultra Dimensional's" -AND "Cryptoterrestrials" -AND- "Aliens" -AND- etc, etc.

Can it?

~C
"There are no whole truths: all truths are half-truths. It is trying to treat them as whole truths that plays the devil." ~ A.N. Whitehead
User avatar
Cosmic Cowbell
 
Posts: 1774
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:20 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What is the nature of the Saucer menace?

Postby Simulist » Mon Jul 05, 2010 2:41 pm

Cosmic Cowbell wrote:
Earth lights, geomagnetic doo-dahs, ball lighting, plasma vortexes, etc.


Ah yes, the old swamp gas explanation. If you voted for this, you don't belong here.

I hadn't even bothered to vote in this poll until now, but you just inspired me: so I voted for "Earth lights" — not because I really think they're "the answer" (I don't), but because of your silly remark.

"UFOs" might be many of the things suggested in the poll, including (from time to time) "Earth lights" — and quite a few other things, besides.
"The most strongly enforced of all known taboos is the taboo against knowing who or what you really are behind the mask of your apparently separate, independent, and isolated ego."
    — Alan Watts
User avatar
Simulist
 
Posts: 4713
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:13 pm
Location: Here, and now.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What is the nature of the Saucer menace?

Postby Cosmic Cowbell » Mon Jul 05, 2010 2:59 pm

Simulist wrote:I hadn't even bothered to vote in this poll until now, but you just inspired me: so I voted for "Earth lights" — not because I really think they're "the answer" (I don't), but because of your silly remark.


Although I'm somewhat flattered that I may have "inspired" you, I not sure what I find sillier, the notion that my comment was "silly" or the fact you took the time to vote simply out of spite because of that and then had to post about it.

Simulist wrote:"UFOs" might be many of the things suggested in the poll, including (from time to time) "Earth lights" — and quite a few other things, besides.


Sorry, I didn't see the "all of the above" option - not that I would have chosen it, but suspect you would have. I answered in the spirit of the poll, rather than not at all (as ill conceived as the options were). Sorry you didn't appreciate my comments (but not much).
"There are no whole truths: all truths are half-truths. It is trying to treat them as whole truths that plays the devil." ~ A.N. Whitehead
User avatar
Cosmic Cowbell
 
Posts: 1774
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:20 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What is the nature of the Saucer menace?

Postby Simulist » Mon Jul 05, 2010 3:37 pm

I would not have chosen the "All of the Above" option, even if one been available. At the same time, "UFO" certainly can include several of the options available — and several others besides, as I've already stated.

That is why, until now, I had not chosen just one option: several of the options available are valid. "Earth lights" is at least as valid a choice as yours.

As far as "spite" on my part for you is concerned, that's a projection from inside your own head; however, I will admit to finding evangelists for particular points of view to be sometimes mildly annoying — especially when they state that others, who do not share their point of view, "don't belong here."

And yeah — that's just silly.
"The most strongly enforced of all known taboos is the taboo against knowing who or what you really are behind the mask of your apparently separate, independent, and isolated ego."
    — Alan Watts
User avatar
Simulist
 
Posts: 4713
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:13 pm
Location: Here, and now.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What is the nature of the Saucer menace?

Postby Cosmic Cowbell » Mon Jul 05, 2010 3:58 pm

Simulist wrote:I would not have chosen the "All of the Above" option, even if one been available. At the same time, "UFO" can certainly include several of the options available — and several others besides, as I've already stated.
.

I suppose we could say that UFO's could be be garbage can lids too. Right? How bout Chinese Lanterns? They are those too, right? Like I said, I answered the poll in the spirit with which it was proffered. Can you say the same?

Simulist wrote:And that is why, until now, I had not chosen just one option: several of the options available are valid. "Earth lights" is at least as valid a choice as yours.


Ah yes, I remember it well. "Earth Lights" Buzz Capitol" (1952), "Earth Lights" Affect Nukes (Malmstom 1967), "Earth Lights" Manifest as Saucer Shaped craft w/Visible Portholes", "Earth Lights" Caught on Radar, Circle Jetliner". No, I don't think so. I'm starting to think I should thank you for proving my point. You did vote for Earth Lights", right?

Simulist wrote:As far as "spite" on my part for you is concerned, that's a projection from inside your own head; however, I will admit to finding evangelists for exclusive points of view to be mildly annoying from time to time.


Did I say spite...hmm...I guess I meant "inspiration"...LOL....sorry (again). I' do find it most interesting that I'm now an "evangelist". At least ya didn't pull out the ole 'true believer" ad hom. And I now know what annoys you (like anyone cares). Thanks for the heads up.
"There are no whole truths: all truths are half-truths. It is trying to treat them as whole truths that plays the devil." ~ A.N. Whitehead
User avatar
Cosmic Cowbell
 
Posts: 1774
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:20 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What is the nature of the Saucer menace?

Postby Simulist » Mon Jul 05, 2010 4:01 pm

You "believe" so strongly that you say that some others with opposing points of view "don't belong here."

If that isn't a True Believer, then what is?
"The most strongly enforced of all known taboos is the taboo against knowing who or what you really are behind the mask of your apparently separate, independent, and isolated ego."
    — Alan Watts
User avatar
Simulist
 
Posts: 4713
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:13 pm
Location: Here, and now.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What is the nature of the Saucer menace?

Postby Cosmic Cowbell » Mon Jul 05, 2010 4:19 pm

Simulist wrote:You "believe" so strongly that you say that some others with opposing points of view "don't belong here."

If that isn't a True Believer, then what is?


I welcome all viewpoints Simulist. As I'm sure you do as well. My point was, if one can still cling to the Earth Lights\Swamp Gas\Venus hypothesis as the leading explanation for what is behind "The You-Foes" after all these years, then "Rigorous Intuition" is not what is being practiced by said "Earth Light" adherent. That said, personally, I simply ignore simpletons whenever possible - that's just me. But hey, feel free to pick the nits all day long my friend. They are, after all, valid too....

Hey...wait a minute...Hyper Dimensional Earth Lights...yeah, that's the ticket...

Image
"There are no whole truths: all truths are half-truths. It is trying to treat them as whole truths that plays the devil." ~ A.N. Whitehead
User avatar
Cosmic Cowbell
 
Posts: 1774
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:20 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What is the nature of the Saucer menace?

Postby Simulist » Mon Jul 05, 2010 4:23 pm

Cosmic Cowbell wrote:I welcome all viewpoints Simulist. As I'm sure you do as well. My point was, if one can still cling to the Earth\Lights\Swamp Gas\Venus as the leading explanation for what is behind "The You-Foes" after all these years, then "Rigorous Intuition" is not what is being practiced by said "Earth Light" adherent.

And my point is that ALL the "leading explanations" for UFOs fall short.
"The most strongly enforced of all known taboos is the taboo against knowing who or what you really are behind the mask of your apparently separate, independent, and isolated ego."
    — Alan Watts
User avatar
Simulist
 
Posts: 4713
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:13 pm
Location: Here, and now.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What is the nature of the Saucer menace?

Postby Cosmic Cowbell » Mon Jul 05, 2010 4:36 pm

Simulist wrote:
Cosmic Cowbell wrote:I welcome all viewpoints Simulist. As I'm sure you do as well. My point was, if one can still cling to the Earth\Lights\Swamp Gas\Venus as the leading explanation for what is behind "The You-Foes" after all these years, then "Rigorous Intuition" is not what is being practiced by said "Earth Light" adherent.

And my point is that ALL the "leading explanations" for UFOs fall short.


You sure go the roundabout way of making a point... but OK. Is the "Earth Light" hypothesis considered a "leading explanation". If so, why?

Are there degree's in which hypothesis fall short or do they all fall short equally? In what way does the "Nuts & Bolts From Another Planet" scenario "fall short"...specifically and how far?
"There are no whole truths: all truths are half-truths. It is trying to treat them as whole truths that plays the devil." ~ A.N. Whitehead
User avatar
Cosmic Cowbell
 
Posts: 1774
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:20 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What is the nature of the Saucer menace?

Postby Simulist » Mon Jul 05, 2010 4:58 pm

Cosmic Cowbell wrote:
Simulist wrote:
Cosmic Cowbell wrote:I welcome all viewpoints Simulist. As I'm sure you do as well. My point was, if one can still cling to the Earth\Lights\Swamp Gas\Venus as the leading explanation for what is behind "The You-Foes" after all these years, then "Rigorous Intuition" is not what is being practiced by said "Earth Light" adherent.

And my point is that ALL the "leading explanations" for UFOs fall short.


You sure go the roundabout way of making a point... but OK. Is the "Earth Light" hypothesis considered a "leading explanation". If so, why?

Good question — here's another one: "Why is 'Nuts and bolts craft from another world' considered a 'leading explanation'?'

Neither of these alternatives seems a convincing explanation for the totality of what is commonly referred to as the "UFO phenomenon," which is actually a blending together of various — and often diverse — phenomena.

Frankly, I see little reason why either of these ideas should really be considered a "leading explanation" in such an arena.

Cosmic Cowbell wrote:Are there degree's in which hypothesis fall short or do they all fall short equally?

Since there is absolutely no hard, physical evidence proving "nuts and bolts craft from another world," no, these incomplete explanations do not appear equal.

Cosmic Cowbell wrote:In what way does the "Nuts & Bolts From Another Planet" scenario "fall short"...specifically and how far?

This is not an interrogation.

Until someone can show me the hard, physical evidence proving "nuts and bolts craft from another world," this seems as likely a possibility as some others — and as unlikely as many others.
"The most strongly enforced of all known taboos is the taboo against knowing who or what you really are behind the mask of your apparently separate, independent, and isolated ego."
    — Alan Watts
User avatar
Simulist
 
Posts: 4713
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:13 pm
Location: Here, and now.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What is the nature of the Saucer menace?

Postby Cosmic Cowbell » Mon Jul 05, 2010 5:19 pm

I see...

So you're a "hard physical evidence" guy now....gotcha. Who needs Rig Int, right?

Apologies for the "interrogation". I thought that since you:

..see little reason why either of these ideas should really be considered a "leading explanation" in such an arena.


You might elaborate a bit as to how you acquired your vision (or lack thereof).

Nevermind.
"There are no whole truths: all truths are half-truths. It is trying to treat them as whole truths that plays the devil." ~ A.N. Whitehead
User avatar
Cosmic Cowbell
 
Posts: 1774
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 5:20 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What is the nature of the Saucer menace?

Postby barracuda » Mon Jul 05, 2010 5:29 pm

Cosmic Cowbell wrote:Science, over the last 50 years or so, has only affirmed the possibility that life, rather than the exception, tends to be the rule of at least this part of the universe. Hypothesis such as Panspermia (now somewhat proven), the confirmed existence of other planets orbiting far distant stars and so on have only acted to confirm/strengthen the idea of life elsewhere, rather than detract from it or disprove it. What shape or form life takes, the level of it's sentience and so on is probably as varied throughout the galaxies as life is on earth, only more so. Advance intelligences may not even be fathomable to us, their motivations a mystery. I am often mystified when those who would dismiss what IMO is the most obvious explanation with anthropocentric "why make the trip" rationalities, then turn around and proceed off what is often the deeper end of the pool with hyper dimensional/Time traveling/ blue-and-orange morality non/semi-corporeal beings or "Elves". While it may be a great mental exercise or the tre-cool position to take of the day/week/month/year (OMG Vallee/Keel/Fort) etc., every thing other than Nuts & Bolts from a distant world, based on the gathered data - with UFO's often demonstrating a mastery of physics beyond our wildest dreams - magic for all intents and purposes, demonstrations of thought/body control, etc etc., remains the weaker arguments. And the bottom line is this, science is not the friend of those who take and hold such positions, at least as much it is seems to be the friend of the nuts/bolts "life elsewhere" advocate.


I have no real problem with this, with a few exceptions, mostly because I cannot comprehend the existence of a universe in which we are the sole conscious evloved biological life-form. Others are around, but are they here? The Drake equation can be solved a number of ways, some of which point to abundant life, others, not so much. But my main issue here is why the nuts and bolts ships we encounter are clearly made by and for a race that is very similar to ours in appearance and abilities. They almost never manifest as tendrilised root ball creatures or amoebic psudeopodular exo-clams, or even gaseous Jovian butt-nuggets. It's always people. They may be strange looking people with big heads and fish eyes, or elvish people with dwarfish appendages, or tall blondes wirhout noses, but they are people nonetheless. Two arms, twp legs, binocular vision, fingers, bipedal, clothing etc. And that says "earth origin" to me, by default.
The most dangerous traps are the ones you set for yourself. - Phillip Marlowe
User avatar
barracuda
 
Posts: 12890
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:58 pm
Location: Niles, California
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: What is the nature of the Saucer menace?

Postby Simulist » Mon Jul 05, 2010 6:04 pm

Cosmic Cowbell wrote:I see...

So you're a "hard physical evidence" guy now....

Not usually. But when someone such as yourself continues to make the incredible claim that UFOs are hard, physical objects "from another world" — and insists that this claim is not only supportable, but that it is also to be respected over other ideas which are at least as likely — then, yeah, I'll probably ask to see the hard, physical proof.
Last edited by Simulist on Mon Jul 05, 2010 6:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"The most strongly enforced of all known taboos is the taboo against knowing who or what you really are behind the mask of your apparently separate, independent, and isolated ego."
    — Alan Watts
User avatar
Simulist
 
Posts: 4713
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:13 pm
Location: Here, and now.
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 161 guests