Bigelow, UFOs, MUFON and ‘DeLonge’ Road to AATIP

a reply to: Whatsthisthen

One person's parasite is another person's valued symbiote.
One person's freedom fighter, is another person's war criminal.

As for spaceships.. humans are obsessed with them.. but I find it very unlikely
that others species, if any, in other solar systems would be so obsessed.

IMHO (and i wrote a paper on this for peer review), I have a thought experiment
that one species rose to ascendancy many billions of years ago. Once they
were organic, but eventually they became more like a hive-mind AI, and at the
last they ditched organic bodies entirely, and then spread out and colonized
most of the observable universe.

Who needs ships, when you are nearly immortal, in self-repairing nannite-like
bodies, and can travel the Universe at relativistic speeds, all the while
running ancestor simulations on your own internal network, while whiling
away the billions of years of travel time.

Polite nanotechnological ooze meets the Universe.

Any relatively sane species would be loathe to travel the spaceways, unless
they were nearly unkillable/immortal or didn't value their lives (not likely
for highly evolved and successful species)... at a minimum they'd be
more likely to link their "brains" up to probe fleets, if they could come up
with FTL communication. Communication would be much less exotic
than finding negative mass (unobtanium) for warp ships.

I'd rather be sitting in my lawn chair sipping umbrella drinks, with the
option to live through a remote body (ala Avatar), rather than have
space trash, black holes, microwave bursters, etc. etc try to kill
me out there.

Ships?

Bah.

Even a tiny amount of thought should lead one (IMHO) to laugh out
loud, at aliens who use "ships" as we envision them.

The golden age UFO (entities) would seem to agree.. their "ships"
had no engines, life support or anything like that. They weren't
really "ships" at all, apparently.

Just in a very thoughtful mode tonight..

Kev

originally posted by: zeroPointOneQ
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

The inverse psyop is 'genious' isn't it. Many people use this principle in their daily jobs as well.

Well lazy managers often use it too. At least in science and IT.

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

That was exactly what I was implying!

a reply to: zeroPointOneQ

In that kind of a scenario I would rather think it would 'suffice' to make the ship an extension of our sensory awareness, hence consiousness. It would make sense if the ship would need part of 'our hardware' as well to operate (not just being directed), but currently I can't really see an advantage. Interesting thought experiment material!

I just think in simple terms of say; organic machinery. The slice, dice and splice and grow your own approach.

Why build a metal machine that needs a mechanic and spare parts when a designer body is self repairing? Just feed it. Add sex and you don't even have to build new ones. In that scenario the womb is a factory.

No complicated software needed, the machinery is conscious, just get the older ones to teach the little ones. A whole city could be grown like that.

Such a thing could be an extension of our awareness, but that suggests that our motor nervous system gets spliced into the system in order to move and so on. But that would be like a technology layer control system and not the controller.

I would think such a machine would just have to know what it's job is and take orders.

Multiple pilots? Why not.

But one could suggest the pilot's function could be like an ignition key. No pilot and it does not work. Security. If you can do that sort of technology the top level controller does not have to leave it's home.

Lot's of things a civilisation could do if it went down that path.

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

That was unexpected and I had to laugh out loud. I like your thinking.

Similar home grown conclusion here, and I'm certain they did it too.

I'm fond of the idea that the technology layer will eventually free itself from the control layer. My reasoning is that the control layer has to keep it's distance from it's creations or the control layer will get hurt and be vulnerable.

Now what if paranoia were to set into the control layer?

originally posted by: The GUT
a reply to: Iridomyrmex

I think you're right about the vids and I've been one of the few starring your posts.

But you are very naive and quite haughty in your ignorance of the games the IC play in ufology and how it relates here maybe? Or do you understand that?

The woo comes baked into this cast of characters. Bigelow case in point. Deal with it or not.

Please, do elaborate GUT, even though the irony is that 'naivety and ignorance'' are at the front and center of the point I'm making: The naivety and haughty ignorance of Bob Bigelow!

I'll spell it out again quickly for you: The videos are almost certainly false, and they come from Elizondo, under direction from Bigelow, who DEFINITELY should have known they were false. These videos are backed by all involved. All of the woo in the world makes no change to the situation here: These guys are either naive and ignorant, or they are lying to their investors who have given them $2 million+ based on their trust in them, and to the American public through major national media.

See, there is no woo necessary. The videos they provided, the EVIDENCE they provided of ET aerial threats, the veracity to which two ex fighter pilots involved in its capture falsely testified, show COMPLETELY BANAL, ORDINARY CRAFT and camera issues.
**Any "otherworldly" qualities cannot be inferred. AT ALL!**

No woo involved, see? Just a scam, not even a clever one, which needs to be fully acknowledged and adressed before any meaningful insight can be really gleaned from this case.

Whatever Bigelow's history in Ufology, it does not inform this scenario in any important way. He's either naive/ignorant or lying. The same for everyone else backing these videos. *This is nothing like Bennewitz, this is nothing like any previous situation in Ufology* - this concerns the people we trust with our national security and our space program pushing a giant, bald-faced lie on the evening news about ET threats in our skies, and the possible consequences involved here are much more dire and far-reaching.

Do you understand what I'm saying? It's not complex, but obvious!

If you do, then please tell me how exploring woo reveals anything of any significance about the moronic crime that's been perpetrated here.

Unlikely that a billionaire would be orchestrating such a crazy and complicated scheme just to scam a few million dollars...or several even.

1. Everything starts as unexpressed possibility "ein sof".
2. A "quantum blip" causes an instability
3. You get space/time as an emergent property.
4. You get biology as an emergent property.
5. You get expressed possibility as an emergent property (consciousness)
5. You get technology as an emergent property.
6. You get technological ascension as an emergent property.
7. You get ascension rooted in the laws of physics themselves.
8. The Universe dies.
9. Rinse & Repeat.

a reply to: Whatsthisthen


You mean like consciousness creating ghost and ghouls and goblins and UFOs
and making itself go insane?

Welcome to planet Earth!

a reply to: Whatsthisthen

I always had the idea that, when you would be able to do that, you might as well 'grow things mechanically' in stead of the organic way, but perhaps that because I'm more into tech. Short after this you might as well not need this tech anymore and sort of merge with what is (and become a layer on top of 'nature').

Lots of similar concepts though and I do like the idea to be honest. It broadened my view.

It also reminded me of Farscape. Have you seen it?

originally posted by: zeroPointOneQ
a reply to: Whatsthisthen

I always had the idea that, when you would be able to do that, you might as well 'grow things mechanically' in stead of the organic way, but perhaps that because I'm more into tech. Short after this you might as well not need this tech anymore and sort of merge with what is (and become a layer on top of 'nature').

Lots of similar concepts though and I do like the idea to be honest. It broadened my view.

It also reminded me of Farscape. Have you seen it?

Hydrocarbon-based machines are no more special than any other kind of machine.
the point is moot.

There is a false "holiness" attributed to Life, as it has had more time to evolve complexity
than our own tech creations.

Kev

originally posted by: Iridomyrmex
I'll spell it out again quickly for you: The videos are almost certainly false, and they come from Elizondo, under direction from Bigelow, who DEFINITELY should have known they were false. These videos are backed by all involved. All of the woo in the world makes no change to the situation here: These guys are either naive and ignorant, or they are lying to their investors who have given them $2 million+ based on their trust in them, and to the American public through major national media.

Bravo, Irid! I think you've made a great office case. Even more, I sincerely think you make a great RICO "office case." I believe you, Counselor, but if you took it to the DOJ do you think they'd run with it? The Woo? For now let's just say HUMINT if nothing else---and surely you understand that if you're of investigative snuff and I would say that you are showing some real promise in that regard. The kinds of details that suggest motive, make roles clear, etc. Look it up!

That you're a bulldog with lazer focus is admirable, but a little widening of your peripheral vision is my friendly suggestion. That's when an investigator--pro or armchair like us--go from tough to formidable. At least in our own minds but theoretically true nonetheless. The question becomes: Are you enlarging the body of research through collation and observation or have you become stasis?

It takes some discipline and research, but if one applies themselves you'd be surprised by the difference and clarity of view when you go from, say, 1-D (Investor Scam) to 3-D (Government-Blessed Intelligence Operation w/ Multiple Objectives and Partial Self-Funding Business Cover.) I'm just a dude on the internet, I have no illusions that what I'm doing here is gonna bust this thing wide open. Collectively, however, who knows? Go Internet! (thank you DARPA the Tech Magician Formerly Known As ARPA??) They own the battlefield. We are in it.

I think there's a lot more to this than some simple money grab/con, actually I'm quite sure there is based on a growing list of evidentiary items, and would like to add to your damning indictment, a deeper investigation into the fact that a lot of them are the type that are expert at giving shots, get off on hardcore science study, and are very familiar with human-use experimentation!

That's what scares me. I'm writing and sharing a lot on human-use experimentation because I happen to know for fact that in the pursuit of national security objectives--perceived or hallucinated--some wicked things have been done. And history and human psychology tell us that these things don't change. These concerns are much more important to me than woo, but whachoo gonna do when the woo comes down on you? I could HUMINT you a few bars of that, but I have the vid:

Whatever Bigelow's history in Ufology, it does not inform this scenario in any important way. He's either naive/ignorant or lying. The same for everyone else backing these videos. *This is nothing like Bennewitz, this is nothing like any previous situation in Ufology* - this concerns the people we trust with our national security and our space program pushing a giant, bald-faced lie on the evening news about ET threats in our skies, and the possible consequences involved here are much more dire and far-reaching.

Sure it does. And we're already back to why "Woo HUMINT" might provide insight. We've already established that your RICO case, while strong, is nowhere near being prosecutable as of yet. Case in point: I personally believe, and have been adding to the evidentiary hand-basket here, that Bigelow might be being led around by his woo-woo so to speak. To what degree I'm not prepared to make a guess at this time. And I could be wrong, but I think I'm on to something. Maybe you, Irid, are trying to charge the patsy--or useful "tool"--and miss the crime lords.

And while it's very true that I myself wish we wouldn't be hearing the same mystical interpretations over and over (it does get off topic and I'm guilty too) or even if aliens or interdimensionals exist, that's not really why I'm here, though it is a part of the question because TTS is making some big claims as you passionately and correctly state yourself.

Finally, I submit once more, having explained myself better because you asked me to (even though Kandinsky explained it sufficiently and covering everyone's POV I should think) that the Woo is part of this. Is it misdirection? Is it used as control? Do we have mad scientists that dabble in shamanism & mysticism and think they can engineer gods and/or weapons and are looking for guinea pigs? They're even stating as much. Until your case has them all put in jail or has otherwise solved the mystery, I would beg you allow me, and others, to follow whatever crumbs we might?

Now, my friend, a little more inspiration for expanding your peripherals! Seriously, check it out! Peace, Dude, Most of us yakking here at length are on your side!

a reply to: Iridomyrmex

Thanks for this. The navel gazing, esoteric conjecture and anecdotal tangents are getting heavy handed.

Yes, many researchers, departments, projects, and investigators have dipped their toes in the mystical. Yes, some of the individual BELIEF systems have informed their perspectives and focus. It’s true that you can’t explore our modern space and rocket technology without tripping over an occasional Jack Parsons or Lt. Col. Jim Channon, but 9+ pages of mystical chatter and self-aggrandizement are heavily distracting from the real data: The character and history of our latest “disclosure” group.

I think we are capable of discussing the players and maybe how their belief systems have influenced their research and/or results without the need of delving into the merits of proper spirit banishing before attempting interstellar communication. I would personally like to venture more into the verifiable; statements, documents and money. In other words, how about we interpret the signal before contributing to the static.

a reply to: ParticleNode

Well-stated. Looking forward to your contributions and welcome to ATS.

originally posted by: ParticleNode
a reply to: Iridomyrmex

I would personally like to venture more into the verifiable; statements, documents and money.

So would we all.

But to find that needle in the haystack, to overturn the one thing someone missed,
takes an all-out effort.

That's why there is enormous pressure for some physicists/researchers to go to the volume
on Isaac Newton's bookshelf AFTER Principia.

All the people we are talking about in this thread apparently did that.

That's why certain lay-people do that too.

What to you is "noise" is substance to others.

What is "substance" to you, frankly, is tedious noise to others.

Now granted, the "woo" gets pretty heavy sometimes.. I'm well aware.

But it's hard to stay away from it.. people who study "woo" seldom
get to have a good conversation about it.. only the rebels can be semi-honest
about it.. the cool-aid drinkers are in their little cults.

I'd suggest that if an OP doesn't want "woo" in their threads, that they state so
at the start of it. But then again, that would remove 90% of all threads
on ATS .. even some about Trump, etc.

Most of the observable facts are the COVER.. only by understanding
what woo may be involved, on the part of the "group" or others
interacting with the group.. at least in the case of known and verified
"arcane scientists" - there is no point to even having this thread.

What you dislike the most, is the very meat of the subject in this case.

IMHO.

a reply to: ParticleNode

I would personally like to venture more into the verifiable; statements, documents and money. In other words, how about we interpret the signal before contributing to the static.

The invitation is open for you and others to help direct the conversation in the way you want it to go.

Have you picked up on anything yourself? We sure can discuss it.

I'm unsubscribing from this thread, as a courtesy to others. However feel free to shoot me IM's if you like..

a reply to: ParticleNode

My friend, I got news for you, what spiritual detractors call pejoratively woo, is in most peoples minds the very essence of Ufology.

In this fine OP, the subject you complain hasn’t been dealt with enough has been beaten to death and resurrected as many times one could count.

Another interesting point I want to bring up is that I think the gubment wants to keep Ufology in a certain, what I call: crevice of the ridiculous.

In other words, any scholarly person advocating alien/Ufo stuff may get some flack, not only from their own scientific venue, but the government controllers also may get involved.

As long as EVD, Sitchin and the AA theorists espouse this bizarre Ufology and the traditional set of known Ufologists, who btw are rarely scholars of any sort, then everything is fine.


When Robert Temple, a certified, well-known, and recognized scholar, published The Sirius Mystery, he wondered why he got so much flack from the CIA. They stole his notes and did all sorts of dirty stuff to him during and after the publication of The Sirius Mystery.


Bottom line, they don’t want mainstream scholars in Ufology. They are hovering around it to keep it avantgarde.

The alien UFO phenomenon we have to understand does not have a huge following, outside of Star Trek and Star Wars popular entertainment venues.

Of course, that’s why TDL has his entertainment division alongside all this esoteric scientific woo stuff, because he knows that other than entertainment it doesn’t garner much revenue.

a reply to: KenTodd

Agree!