Jacques Vallée Still Doesn’t Know What UFOs Are

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Mr. Vallee is rather a liminal fellow.

He broke the news on the Pentacle Memorandum, etc. playing
very straight and honest.

He flat out said that BL was trying to pass off industrial hand
cleaner as element 115.

There's a lot to respect about JV.

But then, it all seems to be walked back in other incidents.

I think to some degree, if one of his friends (like HP), who
is thought to be an 'expert' on some claim, that he bows
before the more educated person in his view.

Now, mind you, we could use more of that in UFOlogy..
but only IF the authority is truly an authority and their
claims hold up.

Kev

originally posted by: mysterioustranger
a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Mysterious Valley...another good one.

I think Jacques and Bigelow...if they don't know by now...nobody does.

Thx O...best, MS

Some people know more...but you ain't heard of them. Until you will...

originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Mr. Vallee is rather a liminal fellow.

He flat out said that BL was trying to pass off industrial hand
cleaner as element 115.

There's a lot to respect about JV.

Vallee said Lazar tried to pass off an industrial emulsifier as element 115. It was extremely light.

That didn't make any sense because heavy elements like lead and uranium, are heavy, not light. 115 would be even heavier if it wasn't so unstable that we can't make more than an atom here and there for a fraction of a second.

Then George Knapp interviewed Bob Bigelow and asked if that's really what happened, but Knapp referred to a more specific description of a substance known as aerogel. That seems to fit what Vallee described as far as it being one of the lowest density materials known, but again I can't believe the stupidity of the claim that one of the lightest substances known (aerogel) is one of the heaviest substances known (element 115). Not that Bob Lazar didn't make other very stupid claims in the course of pretending to be a physicist, but that would be a whopper of a blunder even for him.

I don't remember Bigelow's exact words, but he didn't really confirm Vallee's account, which I found rather disappointing. Seems like he said maybe the light stuff might have actually some packing material for the 115 and not the 115 itself or something along those lines. I can't say I trust either Vallee or Bigelow, but of the two, I think I trust Bigelow even less, and he had some very annoying tells when he talked about Lazar which were suggestive of a lack of truthfulness...tells which were absent in his discussions of other topics. Bigelow also waffled a lot on Lazar without really giving clear answers.

So we have two different accounts on that aerogel/industrial emulsifier subject where Vallee was apparently working as a consultant for Bigelow so he might have been in a position to know the truth, but, because Vallee and Bigelow tell two stories which don't agree, even in that example, we still have muddy water and I can't say for sure whose account is more inaccurate, Bigelow's or Vallee's. But they can't both be right since their stories are somewhat in contradiction (which may be the kind of muddy water they want to convey, or their that their handlers want to convey).

a reply to: Arbitrageur

I understand your perspective completely.

But at least Vallee, Gary Nolan and a few others will admit
when something is a 'howler' (like Gary Nolan and the
Atacama skeleton).

I keep thnking that there must be ENORMOUS peer
pressure from all sorts of flakey people.. in government
and out of government to 'play ball'.

PS: I heard 'hand cleanser" in one of the conversations
that's why I said that. But yes, you are quoting what was
written in Forbidden Science.

I have no idea which non-magical, mundane substance
was actually the one used for the sham.

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Don't feel bad, when I met Vallee at the United Nations in 1978 he didn't know what they were either. But his bank account proves that you don't need to know anything and still be famous and rich. If only I had known!

I always liked Vallee and respected him but thought his knowledge of metaphysics, which he pretended to know, was very weak. John Keel was much more erudite on that matter.

Also, unfortunately, his closeness to the IC boys and girls elicits mistrust.
That's unfair but that's life in 21st century America.

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Lol, great post. Enjoyed reading that.

originally posted by: peaceinoutz
I always liked Vallee and respected him but thought his knowledge of metaphysics, which he pretended to know, was very weak. John Keel was much more erudite on that matter.

Also, unfortunately, his closeness to the IC boys and girls elicits mistrust.
That's unfair but that's life in 21st century America.

you know those ads for the Rosicrucian lessons in the back
of old magazines? I haven't seen them since I was 12.

Those are what Mr. Vallee got monthly, for a while.

It was right in his oral history interview.

The 'real deal' is the work of a lifetime, and not
available via mailorder.

Kev

originally posted by: idusmartias
a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Don't feel bad, when I met Vallee at the United Nations in 1978 he didn't know what they were either. But his bank account proves that you don't need to know anything and still be famous and rich. If only I had known!

Though I give him a hard time sometimes, I don't believe I have ever
been unfair. Mr. Vallee has been part of an Angel funding investment
group for years and years.. he has made his money honestly and the
normal way. He never got rich off his books..

This man worked to map the surface of Mars, and helped develop
Arpanet, the precursor to the Internet.

He has had his successes and his not sterling moments, but he's
living history..

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Since I met him in 1978 he was just started getting recognized so I found myself in front of an emerging personality/celebrity. I, of course, read his original books but I was not impressed 'cause my interest in ufology dates from the late 1950s and Vallee had a lot of catching up to me. I watched him get successful but it's my opinion that he should have never gotten into UFOlogy. He's not a contributor. And if you look at the back pages of this forum, 15-20 years ago, he had supporters and detrlactors. I went from the former to the latter. No love lost.

a reply to: idusmartias

Fair enough.

I was just making the point that he's not just some Ufotainer
type of person, but has a long list of real-world, impressive
accomplishments.

What people think of his 'UFO research' is up to them.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

Happy to converse with you.

originally posted by: idusmartias
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

He's not a contributor.

Really, then who on earth is ?

a reply to: dontneedaname

I am 1,000% sure Bigelow know what's up.

Because he picked up n split. Million-guad zillionaires....don't just give up, pick up.

He found out. Annd somewhat or how...he will make $$$$ off of whatever he found.

You know he found something...because he split.

a reply to: mysterioustranger

Yup. I quit researching both UFOlogy and spirituality a few years
back, and it wasn't due to failing, or hitting barriers that could
not be penetrated. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

On the other hand, Mr. Bigelow is still trying to prove life after
death, with his contest, so presumably he hasn't finished with
that topic yet.

KPB, the trickster might use our “feelings” from the gut, for its own purposes right? It depends on our “feelings” more than we know, if so, is there a way to use that to benefit us, use it to our advantage. Or is my thoughts bunk.

originally posted by: chunder

originally posted by: idusmartias
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

He's not a contributor.

Really, then who on earth is ?

No human. No one knows anything about the mystery. No one including Vallee has had any interaction with alleged "craft occupants" regardless of what has been claimed by anyone. I have never lowered my standards for irrefutable evidence. So claims by abductees get ignored. This is my private opinion to which I'm entitled.

Short but Interesting White Paper read…..by JV and Eric W. Davis (year authored about 2002)


Source: Incommensurability, Orthodoxy and the Physics of High Strangeness: A 6-layer Model for Anomalous Phenomena

(For some reason…the Summary was written in Spanish, so I Google translated it to English)

Summary: ……”The main argument presented in this work proposes that the continued study of two unidentified aerial phenomena (“UAP-Unidentified Aerial Phenomena”), including “appearances” of a religious or spiritual nature, can offer a theorem for the existence of new models of reality. physical. The current SETI paradigm and its “assumption of mediocrity” places restrictions on forms of non-human intelligence that can be investigated in our environment. A similar preconception exists in the frequent declarations of two ufologists, second that UAPs are real, therefore they must be associated with space visitors. Observing that both models suffer from anthropomorphism, the authors try to clarify the questions that are placed around the “high strangeness” observations, distinguishing six levels of information that could be extracted from two anomalous events.”…..

Conclusion: ….”Modern engineering has made us familiar with display technologies that produce three-dimensional images with color, motion and perspective through physical devices. We speculate that UAP are analogous to these display technologies but utilize a wider range of variables to operate on the percipients and, through them, on human culture. The long time scale and the global nature of the effects make it difficult to test hypotheses involving such cultural effects.

Science fiction has familiarized us with the concept of machines or beings projecting an image of themselves that systematically confuses observers. One could imagine that UAP represent physical craft equipped with the means to interact both with the surrounding atmosphere and with the senses of observers in such a way as to convey a false image of their real nature. One could argue that such an object could use microwave devices to create perceptual hallucinations in the witnesses (including messages that are heard or seen by a single individual in a group).

Even such a complex scheme, however, fails to explain all the reported effects and the subsequent behavior changes in close-range witnesses. We must assume something more, the triggering of deep-seated processes within their personality. The question then becomes: to what extent are these effects evidence of a purposeful action of the operators? To answer this question, and to test more fully the hypothesis that UAP phenomena are both physical and psychic in nature, we need much better investigations, a great upgrading of data quality, and a more informed analysis not only of the object being described, but of the impact of the observation on the witnesses and their social environment. In other words, we need to develop a multidisciplinary methodology that encompasses all six of the layers we have identified, and can be applied to SETI as well as to UFO phenomena and close encounters with the entities associated with them. Such a method- ology would open the way to the rational testing of hypotheses in an important domain that has been sorely neglected by mainstream science for too long.”…..

👽🛸🍸

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Yawn

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

to what extent are these effects evidence of a purposeful action of the operators? To answer this question, and to test more fully the hypothesis that UAP phenomena are both physical and psychic in nature, we need much better investigations, a great upgrading of data quality, and a more informed analysis not only of the object being described, but of the impact of the observation on the witnesses and their social environment. In other words, we need to develop a multidisciplinary methodology that encompasses all six of the layers we have identified, and can be applied to SETI as well as to UFO phenomena and close encounters with the entities associated with them. Such a method- ology would open the way to the rational testing of hypotheses in an important domain that has been sorely neglected by mainstream science for too long.”…

That sounds like something Vallee would write.
A wordy piece which he needs to just say WE DON’T KNOW WHAT THE HELL IT IS and don't have the data to determine remotely what it is and it's motive.