Why the Golden Age of "UFOs" Ended

originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Personally its my unsubstantiated belief that the "real" "UFOs" are not composed of "normal matter", so I agree with you---I've never seen a photo or video that I believe to be genuine.

Kev

That belief is as valid as any other.

And it may not be too far from the truth. Who knows...the reality of things tends to be far stranger than presumed.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

On the subject of "UFO entertainers", I agree with you completely.

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear
Those who Chase after it destroy themselves.

That is exactly how I saw it years ago, and still agree. I could have pursued more psychic experiences and chased after more and more proof and conformation, but realized that path led to madness. I decided I had enough to run on and have with no more need. An occasional hint now and then, that I am still in concert with the woo and leave it at that.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

That's very similar to my situation.

"Woo" is my last resort.

I prefer happiness, and in this current world, "woo" does not tend to enhance happiness.

Humans are at war within themselves and with the entire world, and "woo" is part of this big mess.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

No argument from me there. Great posts and insights, as usual, from you on this one, KPB!

What kind of social engineering are we talking about here?

I don't think Ancient Aliens warrants this description. Where are all the powerful institutions supporting, uhm.. Ufology? I don't know of a single one, and don't say MUFON.

I haven't noticed any social hysteria either. Have you? I mean, I'm kind of a hermit but I never hear people talking about UFO's, I'm the only one I know of and I mostly blabber incessantly about it to my mother.. Nazis this, Nordics that. I'm kind of boorish about it.

I'd be kind of excited if there were any social hysteria.

It's an interesting theory and I think you might be on to something, The GUT made some interesting threads I remember. There were a lot of talk about electromagnetic fields in them. I don't doubt that there's a connection here, but as you mentioned yourself, there's a lot of cases with trace evidence so I don't think we're dealing with illusions or strictly non physical phenomena here.

But personally I come from a spiritual perspective so I already think we're dealing with an illusionary reality at a fundamental level. I like the idea of densities of physicality. Physical matter isn't that "physical".. it's mostly empty space as far as I understand.

a reply to: mirageman

How did scientific knowledge of the expansion of the universe contribute to a lack of UFO sightings?

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

I know why I became less interested in the subject, there are way too many charlatans to shift through and in an age when everyone can produce a decent quality vid or pic backed up by creative writings, I look at it as interesting fiction and mostly stay clear of the subject, another is predictions that never pan out, over and over again we have heard stuff about disclosure almost like waiting for the second coming of Christ that never happened , artifacts that scientist can poke and say wow! this ain't us, I cannot believe that hundreds of scientist and technical ppl from all over the globe agree to remain mum and involve themselves in a cover-up.

a reply to: Spider879

Me either..there is no disclosure set to happen about nuts and bolts UFOs---because apparently none have ever come here.

Now there is some "paranormal seeming stuff", which once appeared as gods/demons/devils/angels/faeries etc, that sometimes takes on the form of "UFOs" because that's what people now want to see...

But that doesn't make them UFOs..

Kev

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

The social engineering of vibrant personalities such as on ATS, various top minds, and a certain percentage of people all over the place.

Most people who "believe in UFOs" don't admit to it in person I've noticed.

Kev

a reply to: 0zzymand0s

I appreciate that.

I do "swim against the current" of society quite a bit.

So I rarely hear encouragement.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

I don't think that constitutes social engineering.

Social engineering on a large scale can only be done by incredibly powerful institutions, preferably several of them. Enough to actively change the national zeitgeist of a nation in a major way. You need governments, corporations, think tanks, media and education. That's effective social engineering, lone "nutjobs" talking about Greys and Nordics doesn't really measure up in comparison.

The fact that people are so embarrassed to even admit they believe in UFO's says it all, it's a subject that is so ridiculed and so taboo that people avoid discussing it. There's been social engineering alright, but it has been all about ridiculing the subject.

What did you mean by social hysteria then?

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

Sir,

We use different definitions when it comes to "social engineering" and "social hysteria It would seem.

Since these terms are subjective and arbitrary, I don't see anything to disagree about.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

I don't find them that subjective but fair enough sir.

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

I can't connect any dots with part 2, but as MirageMan pointed out, some of those cell phone bandwidths were in previous use before cell tower adoption. Maybe there's something to include in trying to separate the wheat from the chaff. Good luck!

a reply to: BeefNoMeat

I think that heavy clusters everywhere of cell towers probably would have more effect than infrequently spaced TV stations using some of the same spectrum, so I don't see much reason to investigate old TV spectrum with any urgency. But that's just me.

Thanks

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

As a baseline; a benchmark to investigate the cell phone tower adoption correlation. Maybe that's not MM's inclination, but it does provide a priori 'proof' of that possible correlation. But that's just me, attempting to further the discussion with scientific inquiry.

I am not convinced the Golden Age of UFO's is over. What I will say is our collective innocence has moved into a more mature stance. Much like a new job where everything is new and exciting then a year into it you are much more jaded. Where we are now with UFO's is in the jaded area.

Plus so far two distinct thing are being lumped in together.

Proof (pictures)
Sightings

Add in there a preliminary assertion that UFO sightings are lessening due to cell phones and the host of additional factors associated that's three things.

Looking into just sightings the numbers are way up.
For the purpose of discussion I will move forward with the numbers we have seen used in the past that something like 97% are misidentifications, hoaxes ect....but 3% may be "something".IIRC

So the 3% is now a much larger number because the entire totals are increased.

Aside from being jaded there is also the idea that more than one kind of UFO visits are occurring. So theoretically there would be an ebb and flow to how many were available to be seen. We may be in the Lull part of the cycle. Fortunately time will tell either way. If I'm not mistaken there was a lull period in the 70's - 80's and another uptick in the 90's.

Lots of great ideas so far in the thread and some I need more time to consider.

a reply to: Caver78

I often wonder if people aren't making a report because...well, what's the point?

There doesn't ever seem to be a satisfactory conclusion to any of these things even if you do report them.

I'm guessing that a fair percentage of witnesses do something like shake their heads, say "well I'll be blown! These things really do exist." And then just carry on as normal. That's not a criticism from me because its probably quite a normal reaction.

I also think the phone camera thing is a bit of an exaggeration. I've got a pretty good camera on my phone (apparently) but can I use it?
Maybe I could figure it out if you gave me a few minutes.
I use my phone as a phone or to post on ATS and there's got to be others like me.

When I saw my "strange aircraft" I had gone outside for a cigarette.
If I'd gone inside to get my phone then mucked about trying to find the camera I wouldn't have seen it at all! Gone. It wasn't even going any faster than a normal jet liner but at best I would've got a picture of a distant white light against a dark sky...

And I know how welcome they are these days!

a reply to: BeefNoMeat

Yup. That's always welcome.

a reply to: Tulpa

Well the high strangeness ones anyway, seem to know the future, so it's impossible to get a photo of one unless that's what they want. Not to mention, as i stated before, that these things aren't primarily physical, so that' another reason they won't appear in a photo, unless the phenomenon wants to be photo'ed.

The way you can tell if a photo is a fake, is if it exists.

Kev