Dr. J. Allen Hynek, Rosicrucianism, and UFOs

a reply to: The GUT

good point here GUT, I think it highlights that people that have already reached a conclusion as to "what" something is, will ignore anything that brings their belief into question. This is why this was ignored...

Plasma entities....that's interesting, again another pattern that emerges all the time too. I am starting to think that maybe I and possibly a few others were far to quick to knock KellyPrettyBear back in the day, alot of things that we seem to start thinking about now, he was talking about a long time ago....


!!

a reply to: pigsy2400

I've considered doing one more mega-thread and have collated some plasma science materials but I'm not sure I could justify the time...and the readership here ain't what it used to be. Breaking the science down into bite-size and fairly easy-digestible chunks would take some work. Me understanding it enough to do that an even bigger chore ha-ha.

However, I know you are much more science-minded and I'll drop some links I found helpful later. For now I'll drop these below as food for thought. A disclaimer: I don't think that any one person has it figured out, but I do personally think that some, even most, of the answers to the phenomena as well as the holes in modern physics are in this line of study.

The first from SecretSun is just fun and he hits on an interesting aspect that I haven't seen covered elsewhere while pondering some of the issues. He also mentions synchronicity just a bit and I myself had a BIG one when reading this:

Wizards, Workings and Walk-Ins: The Ultimate Lifeform

Not much meat in this one, but he does mention something you've been pursuing: Magnetite:

UK Ministry of Defence Confirms UFOs as Plasmas: Confirms Theories Presented in Alternate Perceptions by Dr. Greg Little

Looking beyond anyone's personal theories about plasma/electromagnetism as it relates to phenomenology what I found is that the science is very supportive of those theories. Much moreso than any other theory.

a reply to: The GUT

some good food for thought there GUT and thanks for the links

I agree, there are sections within the scientific community that do look at some topics, that you could apply to phenomenology / Ufolgoy etc. The inherent issue with that however, is that we could apply a scientific basis and or theories to a base of understanding that isn't understood. ie; phenomenology.

But its a better place to start that many do...

I am not being throw away to your point either, I am agreeing with you, the point I guess I am making is that applying such models to something that little is understood of is difficult.

Magnetite; well I have been keeping going on that in the background, its mostly DARPA and Brain-Computer interface stuff. Elon Musk and his Neuralink stuff announced not that long ago seems his attempt at this area too. Many don't look at the synthetic biology parts as its not that exciting on the surface and isn't twinkly colored flying breath mints

Elon Musk on Merging Humans with AI

There might be an E.T. power level on a plasma technological scale...based on a rating, of say...1 through 10; with 10 being the highest power level. And a possible '1' being capable of having enough energy for use in laser holographic plasma imagery --- and a '10' rating...being the highest power level for starships, when plasma power is being used for propulusion and weapons of mass destruction.

originally posted by: pigsy2400
Plasma entities....that's interesting, again another pattern that emerges all the time too. I am starting to think that maybe I and possibly a few others were far to quick to knock KellyPrettyBear back in the day, alot of things that we seem to start thinking about now, he was talking about a long time ago....

Zorgon definitely gave fair consideration to the living sky critters notion, at least as an explanation for some sightings. Living things that could look like flying saucers or other UFOs. Who knows? It's unlikely that there is just one simple explanation.

originally posted by: The GUT


I also seem to remember Hynek helping fund and plan another interesting study with very compatible-type sightings, some of the details of which can be found in an excellent thread (one of my very favorites in the UFO forum) by member easynow. Enjoy!

The Yakima UFO Sightings

I'm off to revisit that thread now to refresh and check dates between Project Piedmont and the Yakima study. Seems like Yakima was after Rutledge's---but either way it could explain some of Hynek's frostiness.

Yakima, it should be noted, is in the same general area as Kenneth Arnold's sighting and the anomaly-ubiquitous Mt. Shasta too if memory serves. Very fascinating hot spot for generations.

Good 'ole Karl recommended that I read that very thread about Yakima whilst posting in my own thread about Piedmont. I meant to get stuck into it yesterday, so I'll snuggle up with it tonight.


Which also reminds me of my recent Arnold thread - in addition to theorising that they were living plasma-like organisms within our atmosphere (which is entirely plausible to some extent), his later-life conclusions upgraded his nine 'craft' to the manifestation of human spirits in transition - which does require a couple of stiff drinks to digest, but fascinating all the same.

Whether the latter theory correlates with a hopeful, rather more spiritual man at the end of his life, is open to debate of course.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Maybe it's the biological effects of encountering plasmas that give off certain radiation that cause the tissue damage and why so many Neuroscience fans get interested in the subject.



????

Apologies also, feel I am derailing this thread from its original op

originally posted by: pigsy2400
a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Maybe it's the biological effects of encountering plasmas that give off certain radiation that cause the tissue damage and why so many Neuroscience fans get interested in the subject.

***slaps own head***





I know I can be a bit slow on the uptake sometimes, but the penny finally dropped there, mate!

originally posted by: ConfusedBrit

Which also reminds me of my recent Arnold thread - in addition to theorising that they were living plasma-like organisms within our atmosphere (which is entirely plausible to some extent), his later-life conclusions upgraded his nine 'craft' to the manifestation of human spirits in transition - which does require a couple of stiff drinks to digest, but fascinating all the same.

Whether the latter theory correlates with a hopeful, rather more spiritual man at the end of his life, is open to debate of course.

Which reinforces a point I made earlier and will expand on at some point: When looking at this theoretical aspect there's a wide-range of personal interpretations of the base assertion. However, these interpretations are mixed with a lot of fascinating and suggestive evidentiary items and even some superbly documented case studies. To dismiss them out of hand means to miss some real nuggets contained within.

I sometimes hesitate to suggest books and various online articles because I don't want to seem to be suggesting the author's ultimate conclusions while at the same time I've found them either very helpful or otherwise intellectually stimulating in many ways. I was kind of surprised to see one of those books turn up in the Secret Sun blog post I linked to earlier.

I'm sure you've seen a few of those suggestions (I think I even recommended one them to you in a pm) I've made here and there on the boards but I'll put a list together at some point and post them here if anyone is interested.

originally posted by: pigsy2400
a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Maybe it's the biological effects of encountering plasmas that give off certain radiation that cause the tissue damage and why so many Neuroscience fans get interested in the subject.

????

Apologies also, feel I am derailing this thread from its original op

Nah, I think it's related. If we are dealing with beings along these lines then electromagnetism and all of it's implications are part & parcel to include mind/body effects. And the Rosicrucians felt they were in contact with something.

Vallee, as we know, states that whatever it is it represents a lot of EM in a relatively small space. When his Rosicrucian office mate stated that Spencer "couldn't hold the circle" I wondered about EM effects right away. I mean it reportedly physically stressed him and knowing how our bodies work along a system of electrical impulses it makes some sense.

originally posted by: pigsy2400

Plasma entities....that's interesting, again another pattern that emerges all the time too. I am starting to think that maybe I and possibly a few others were far to quick to knock KellyPrettyBear back in the day, alot of things that we seem to start thinking about now, he was talking about a long time ago....

I'm guessing you've come across his thread at some point but if not:

The "Jinn" and Electromagnetic Pollution

Some of you are already familiar with Jay Alfred. He's a "mystic" too but attempts to bring some science into the equation and is quite the good read:

Dark Plasma and the Origin of Angels, Aliens, Deities and Ghosts

Life-Like Qualities of Plasma: Bohm, a leading expert in twentieth century plasma physics, observed in amazement that once electrons were in plasma, they stopped behaving like individuals and started behaving as if they were a part of a larger and interconnected whole. Although the individual movements of each electron appeared to be random, vast numbers of electrons were able to produce collective effects that were surprisingly well organized and appeared to behave like a life form.

The plasma constantly regenerated itself and enclosed impurities in a wall in the same way that a biological organism, like the unicellular amoeba, might encase a foreign substance in a cyst. So amazed was Bohm by these life-like qualities that he later remarked that he frequently had the impression that the electron sea was "alive" and that plasma possessed some of the traits of living things. The debate on the existence of plasma-based life forms has been going on for more than 20 years ever since some models showed that plasma can mimic the functions of a primitive cell.

link

The following "open letter" is fascinating and highlights some points where traditional physics and cosmology fail. I further believe that "hidden science"--that is to say highly classified science--does understand and is looking at the plasma model.

It's in this area that you start to find a number of classified projects that are closely guarded and/or are traditionally ignored by "ufologists" focused on E.T. but suggest a more fruitful avenue of approach. One small example of how EM is more of a "holy grail" in the M.I.C. than is commonly known is the fact that much of Persinger's work was back classified. Meaning that when they finally realized he was on to something they went back and pulled certain of his studies.

I know I just jumped from plasma to EM but as we know they are cosmic soulmates so to speak.

An Open Letter to the Scientific Community

Bucking the big bang

Published in New Scientist, May 22, 2004

The big bang today relies on a growing number of hypothetical entities, things that we have never observed– inflation, dark matter and dark energy are the most prominent examples. Without them, there would be a fatal contradiction between the observations made by astronomers and the predictions of the big bang theory. In no other field of physics would this continual recourse to new hypothetical objects be accepted as a way of bridging the gap between theory and observation. It would, at the least, raise serious questions about the validity of the underlying theory.

But the big bang theory can’t survive without these fudge factors. Without the hypothetical inflation field, the big bang does not predict the smooth, isotropic cosmic background radiation that is observed, because there would be no way for parts of the universe that are now more than a few degrees away in the sky to come to the same temperature and thus emit the same amount of microwave radiation.

Without some kind of dark matter, unlike any that we have observed on Earth despite 20 years of experiments, big-bang theory makes contradictory predictions for the density of matter in the universe. Inflation requires a density 20 times larger than that implied by big bang nucleosynthesis, the theory’s explanation of the origin of the light elements. And without dark energy, the theory predicts that the universe is only about 8 billion years old, which is billions of years younger than the age of many stars in our galaxy.

What is more, the big bang theory can boast of no quantitative predictions that have subsequently been validated by observation. The successes claimed by the theory’s supporters consist of its ability to retrospectively fit observations with a steadily increasing array of adjustable parameters, just as the old Earth-centered cosmology of Ptolemy needed layer upon layer of epicycles.

Yet the big bang is not the only framework available for understanding the history of the universe. Plasma cosmology and the steady-state model both hypothesize an evolving universe without beginning or end. These and other alternative approaches can also explain the basic phenomena of the cosmos, including the abundances of light elements, the generation of large-scale structure, the cosmic background radiation, and how the redshift of far-away galaxies increases with distance. They have even predicted new phenomena that were subsequently observed, something the big bang has failed to do.

Supporters of the big bang theory may retort that these theories do not explain every cosmological observation. But that is scarcely surprising, as their development has been severely hampered by a complete lack of funding. Indeed, such questions and alternatives cannot even now be freely discussed and examined. An open exchange of ideas is lacking in most mainstream conferences. Whereas Richard Feynman could say that “science is the culture of doubt”, in cosmology today doubt and dissent are not tolerated, and young scientists learn to remain silent if they have something negative to say about the standard big bang model. Those who doubt the big bang fear that saying so will cost them their funding.

Even observations are now interpreted through this biased filter, judged right or wrong depending on whether or not they support the big bang. So discordant data on red shifts, lithium and helium abundances, and galaxy distribution, among other topics, are ignored or ridiculed. This reflects a growing dogmatic mindset that is alien to the spirit of free scientific inquiry.

Today, virtually all financial and experimental resources in cosmology are devoted to big bang studies. Funding comes from only a few sources, and all the peer-review committees that control them are dominated by supporters of the big bang. As a result, the dominance of the big bang within the field has become self-sustaining, irrespective of the scientific validity of the theory.

Giving support only to projects within the big bang framework undermines a fundamental element of the scientific method — the constant testing of theory against observation. Such a restriction makes unbiased discussion and research impossible. To redress this, we urge those agencies that fund work in cosmology to set aside a significant fraction of their funding for investigations into alternative theories and observational contradictions of the big bang. To avoid bias, the peer review committee that allocates such funds could be composed of astronomers and physicists from outside the field of cosmology.

Allocating funding to investigations into the big bang’s validity, and its alternatives, would allow the scientific process to determine our most accurate model of the history of the universe.

Signed:
(Institutions for identification only)
Halton Arp, Max-Planck-Institute Fur Astrophysik (Germany)
Andre Koch Torres Assis, State University of Campinas (Brazil)
Yuri Baryshev, Astronomical Institute, St. Petersburg State University (Russia)
Ari Brynjolfsson, Applied Radiation Industries (USA)
Hermann Bondi, Churchill College, University of Cambridge (UK)
Timothy Eastman, Plasmas International (USA)
Chuck Gallo, Superconix, Inc.(USA)
Thomas Gold, Cornell University (emeritus) (USA)....

You can see who all signed it at the link, I only included a few.



The Plasma-Universe

Plasma Universe

originally posted by: The GUT

Which reinforces a point I made earlier and will expand on at some point: When looking at this theoretical aspect there's a wide-range of personal interpretations of the base assertion. However, these interpretations are mixed with a lot of fascinating and suggestive evidentiary items and even some superbly documented case studies. To dismiss them out of hand means to miss some real nuggets contained within.

Indeed. Collecting and comparing such bread crumbs over time could help to re-build a full loaf that provides clearer answers to the mystery.

(PS: And if that's not the worst metaphor in the history of ufology, I don't know what is! Sorry about that.)

I sometimes hesitate to suggest books and various online articles because I don't want to seem to be suggesting the author's ultimate conclusions while at the same time I've found them either very helpful or otherwise intellectually stimulating in many ways.

Over time, the ability to admire such conclusions and mentally log them for future reference (and use them to potentially solve other related riddles) rather than taking them to heart, is a slow process compared to decades ago when I'd suck up whatever was fed to me in the pre-internet era. I think we've all been there.

It's also a learning process that continues in other ways today - such as not dismissing more extravagant theories out of hand, calming my hot-headedness (it's that damn Spanish blood) and learning the art of patience with a healthy dose of "wait and see". Gradually I've come to see ufology as such an untamed, multi-tentacled creature that it's arguably crucial to adopt that approach.

Pigsy's post about the effects of plasma radiation, is one of the most striking theories I have yet read - hence the penny dropping - suddenly those jigsaw pieces start shifting again and coming together gradually... and even if ultimately hard to prove definitively (like the IDH), it provides endless food for thought within the full network of ideas and the search for that ultimate Answer.

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Yep, a piece here, a piece there, and you'll at least come to a framework--an overlay--that gives a perspective of how it could work and one's personal search doesn't feel as frantic and scattered and totally dumbfounding.

That doesn't mean "solve it" of course. Not even sure I was clear heh, but I know what I mean and I have a gratitude for it.

I'm sorry to say my stars aren't sticking again.
I would like to show my appreciation for the links provided on this page.
Thanks.

originally posted by: UKWO1Phot
I'm sorry to say my stars aren't sticking again.

Yeah, mine were on the blink again. Working now, though.


Meanwhile, having submerged myself in the Yakima Lights mystery, there is a treasure-trove of tantalising accounts, the following a prime example from the investigation instigated by Hynek:

"The object appeared as a pair of lights moving in a definite, periodic pattern. The color of the light emitted by the object was reddish-orange. Because of the repetitive nature of the light pattern and the fixed relationship of the lights to one another, the observers felt that the lights must have been attached to a body or fuselage of some sort and spinning around this body.

The structure would have been about the size of an F-27 airliner, according to the estimate of one observer. Figure 1. shows schematically the pattern traced by the lights. The object was at an elevation of about 0ø relative to the observers, since the observation point is on a hill overlooking Granger. The lights of Granger were also clearly visible under the object."

The similarities to Piedmont are palpable, making me wonder if Hynek's swift dismissal of Piedmont was a case of him suspecting that the residents were jumping on a bandwagon, not helped by the 'Welcome' signs they'd put up. Rutledge's extensive work obviously disproved that.

So we have ready-to-use open laboratories such as Yakima, Piedmont and Hessdalen (Norway). The latter two regions remain active, so why media coverage remains so scant is a mystery in itself - almost as if it's possible to get 'bored' of a wealth of genuinely strange activity, even when under rigorous scientific study. So when some cheesy TV presenter is ubiquitously joking about UFOs and how only tin-foil-hatters see them, they should at least have those three cases shoved between their glitzy white teeth.

(I'm hesitant to include the Skinwalker Ranch region as an example until someone can demonstrate that UFO activity was rife before the Shermans bought the ranch in 1994 and NIDS came a-knocking in '96 - ie, ATS colleagues have tried, but finding ANY such reports is apparently a job and a half.)

Double post

a reply to: ConfusedBrit

Sorry to butt in here. I usually just lurk around and digest all the good discussions going on. In response to Hessdalen, I did a quick google search about it (I haven't seen any recent reports about it in the papers here for a good while). I'll translate a few chunks, the rest can be be google translated. Or I can help if needed/wanted.

li nk

Picture

Bjørn Gitle Hauge: "In 2016 we took a new photo of the phenomenon in the same place at the same time (as a year before), and we also did the same this winter. We may have found a spot where this phenomenon originates.."

"..exposure time is four seconds with a five second self-timer (?)"

"..We're looking at a, somewhat compressed(?), glowing sphere which is about 1,5 meters in diameter. It's about 100 meters away from the camera and has a volume of a bit of more than a cubic meter."

Further, it reads that the phenomenon does illuminate the ground somewhat, and that the rainbow areas seen in the picture can be due to the spectral filters in the camera. His own theory is that this could be some sort of cloud composed of a charged aerosol. He notes that "..it illuminates like an old 100 watt light bulb".

He does say that the locals have been ridiculed by reporting what they have seen, and that this picture vindicates them 100% percent, regardless of what its origins may be.

Just thought I'd add this for what it's worth.

a reply to: Skeletonized

Thanks, fascinating information and an equally fascinating pic - I'll reproduce it here for all to see instantly: