Do you think there was any merit to the accounts of contactees in the 1940s/50s?

I'm not talking about proven frauds such as Cedric Allingham but instead George Adamski, George Van Tassel and George King (who founded his own religion based on his experiences called the Aetherius Society)? There was scores of other obscure contactees on both sides of the pond during this era. Were they all charlatans? A common theme or thread running through most of these contactee accounts is that there is or was a hidden Nordic humanoid civilisation on the planet Venus.

a reply to: clearbluewater

The ET's should not be considered as a solidary group of one type. As their many, many variously configured craft have demonstrated--purposely, over the decades, there are many different types and kinds of cosmic entities inside with their own directives and concepts of how to interact with the totally ignorant, denying reality, population below them. So that would be the square from where to start any conversation about them.

If you then want to discuss when did they start any form of communication with us, you need to accept everything from Jesus, Ten Commandments, gold plates buried in the ground, up through direct communications into human brains as in abduction accounts, channeling, etc.

Basically, there are no limits. Some will be pushed as the only way, of course, as when Disclosure in its most minimalist form is decreed as the only way, but that will be done to protect the activities of our governments acting on the behave of the guiding ETs, and what they deem we should know about our existence (for our own good).

Sorry to rain on your parade, but it may get some people to thinking outside of the boxes on their heads.

originally posted by: CosmicFocus
a reply to: clearbluewater
The ET's should not be considered as a solidary group of one type.

I think you mean solitary? No matter. I'm very much a sceptic about UFOs being intelligently piloted extraterrestrial craft. Prima facia you can dismiss anecdotal evidence such as that furnished by contactees as elaborate hoaxes perpetrated by frauds such as the notorious Billy Meier. The alternative is the contactees are telling the truth or what they think is the truth. There is a third slightly pitch shifted perspective which says they are being honest but were part of clandestine manipulation using hallucinogenic drugs for what end, who knows.

I do believe they have merit.

But it was not Aliens, it was the Government.

The UFO/UAP/Abductee thing is just smoke....Disclosure is a psyop to control the population.

Maybe there are aliens, but they are not here, nor have they been. IMO.

It kills me that those who railed against gov cover ups for the last 100 years, now believes they are telling the truth.

Useful tools and nothing more?

originally posted by: clearbluewater
I'm not talking about proven frauds such as Cedric Allingham but instead George Adamski, George Van Tassel and George King (who founded his own religion based on his experiences called the Aetherius Society)? There was scores of other obscure contactees on both sides of the pond during this era. Were they all charlatans? A common theme or thread running through most of these contactee accounts is that there is or was a hidden Nordic humanoid civilisation on the planet Venus.

You've mentioned two of the greatest legends of modern ufology: 1) George Adamski 2) George Van Tassel

There could be some merits in the contactee stories of the 40s and the 50s. But the phenomenon could be more complex than it is thought and not just spacecraft from alien worlds.

a reply to: clearbluewater
In 1952, when George Adamski claims to have met with Orthon, an alien from Venus, I don't think either scientists nor the general public realized how inhospitable both Mars and Venus are. Back then Venus may have been seen as sort of a twin of earth, about the same size, and it wasn't hard to imagine Mars or Venus being inhabited by intelligent life forms in 1952. Disney even made some animations in the 1950s about theoretical intelligent life on Venus, Mars, and other planets in our solar system. It's still very fun to watch those, here's one of them:

Disneyland - Mars and Beyond

7:19
-Venus is a planet of passion people do not cook because they live on air music and love
-(Saturn) the men of saturn are very cold and miserable they never move from this spot where they are born
-Jupiter is so big that people never see or meet other people
-Mars is very populated with luminous birds who do not fly
-(Mercury) in sweden a philosopher's conception of life in our solar system revealed that the people of mercury are very thin they have tremendous memory their cattle are extremely small
-(Jupiter) the natives of Jupiter are pretty they do not lie or steal but they are terrified in the sight of their giant Jupiter type horses
-(Venus) there are two kinds of people on Venus mild people and fierce people
-(Mars) inhabitants of Mars are clothed in fibres they converse by means of thought transferrence.

But what we now know from probes sent to both worlds is that the likelihood they harbor intelligent life is so close to zero the difference isn't worth mentioning. Mars may harbor some kind of primitive life in the soil or underground, and Venus has been speculated to possibly have some kind of primitive life living high in the atmosphere where the temperatures aren't high enough to kill life like ours, but the surface of Venus temperature is hot enough to melt lead, so I feel certain that Orthon wasn't from Venus. This is why I'm a little surprised you ask, you know that Venus surface temperatures are hot enough to melt lead, right? So how could there be an Orthon from Venus, meeting with Adamski?

Whether Adamski and others were "charlatans" which implies intentional deception, or perhaps experienced delusions or hallucinations and thought they saw these beings, could also be another discussion, I don't have any thoughts on that other than to say such episodes are not as rare as I once thought. Maybe some were charlatans and some were instead just delusional, I can't say.

a reply to: clearbluewater
In 1952, when George Adamski claims to have met with Orthon, an alien from Venus, I don't think either scientists nor the general public realized how inhospitable both Mars and Venus are. Back then Venus may have been seen as sort of a twin of earth, about the same size, and it wasn't hard to imagine Mars or Venus being inhabited by intelligent life forms in 1952. Disney even made some animations in the 1950s about theoretical intelligent life on Venus, Mars, and other planets in our solar system. It's still very fun to watch those, here's one of them:

Disneyland - Mars and Beyond

7:19
-Venus is a planet of passion people do not cook because they live on air music and love
-(Saturn) the men of saturn are very cold and miserable they never move from this spot where they are born
-Jupiter is so big that people never see or meet other people
-Mars is very populated with luminous birds who do not fly
-(Mercury) in sweden a philosopher's conception of life in our solar system revealed that the people of mercury are very thin they have tremendous memory their cattle are extremely small
-(Jupiter) the natives of Jupiter are pretty they do not lie or steal but they are terrified in the sight of their giant Jupiter type horses
-(Venus) there are two kinds of people on Venus mild people and fierce people
-(Mars) inhabitants of Mars are clothed in fibres they converse by means of thought transferrence.

But what we now know from probes sent to both worlds is that the likelihood they harbor intelligent life is so close to zero the difference isn't worth mentioning. Mars may harbor some kind of primitive life in the soil or underground, and Venus has been speculated to possibly have some kind of primitive life living high in the atmosphere where the temperatures aren't high enough to kill life like ours, but the surface of Venus temperature is hot enough to melt lead, so I feel certain that Orthon wasn't from Venus. This is why I'm a little surprised you ask, you know that Venus surface temperatures are hot enough to melt lead, right? So how could there be an Orthon from Venus, meeting with Adamski?

Whether Adamski and others were "charlatans" which implies intentional deception, or perhaps experienced delusions or hallucinations and thought they saw these beings, could also be another discussion, I don't have any thoughts on that other than to say such episodes are not as rare as I once thought. Maybe some were charlatans and some were instead just delusional, I can't say.

originally posted by: clearbluewater
I'm not talking about proven frauds such as Cedric Allingham but instead George Adamski, George Van Tassel and George King (who founded his own religion based on his experiences called the Aetherius Society)? There was scores of other obscure contactees on both sides of the pond during this era. Were they all charlatans? A common theme or thread running through most of these contactee accounts is that there is or was a hidden Nordic humanoid civilisation on the planet Venus.

It's difficult to figure out what may be a trick of the mind or what is really real without proper investigation for each person because so many different factors come into play.

I can tell you once you have a contact experience you will swear that it is absolute reality.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: clearbluewater
I'm not talking about proven frauds such as Cedric Allingham but instead George Adamski, George Van Tassel and George King (who founded his own religion based on his experiences called the Aetherius Society)? There was scores of other obscure contactees on both sides of the pond during this era. Were they all charlatans? A common theme or thread running through most of these contactee accounts is that there is or was a hidden Nordic humanoid civilisation on the planet Venus.

It's difficult to figure out what may be a trick of the mind or what is really real without proper investigation for each person because so many different factors come into play.

I can tell you once you have a contact experience you will swear that it is absolute reality.

The experience you have could be so real to you but yet not real at all in physical terms. You may remember Harvard Psychiatrist John Mack who became famous for investigating the alien abduction phenomenon. In his professional opinion the people he examined were saying the truth.

originally posted by: Rosby123

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: clearbluewater
I'm not talking about proven frauds such as Cedric Allingham but instead George Adamski, George Van Tassel and George King (who founded his own religion based on his experiences called the Aetherius Society)? There was scores of other obscure contactees on both sides of the pond during this era. Were they all charlatans? A common theme or thread running through most of these contactee accounts is that there is or was a hidden Nordic humanoid civilisation on the planet Venus.

It's difficult to figure out what may be a trick of the mind or what is really real without proper investigation for each person because so many different factors come into play.

I can tell you once you have a contact experience you will swear that it is absolute reality.

The experience you have could be so real to you but yet not real at all in physical terms. You may remember Harvard Psychiatrist John Mack who became famous for investigating the alien abduction phenomenon. In his professional opinion the people he examined were saying the truth.

See now of course the people who actually believe it was real would present to a professional psychiatrist as believing and saying what they felt was actual reality. So the psychiatrist's assessment can only confirm that they believe what they believe. I would not be surprised if they passed a lie detector test too.

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
a reply to: clearbluewater
In 1952, when George Adamski claims to have met with Orthon, an alien from Venus, I don't think either scientists nor the general public realized how inhospitable both Mars and Venus are. Back then Venus may have been seen as sort of a twin of earth, about the same size, and it wasn't hard to imagine Mars or Venus being inhabited by intelligent life forms in 1952. Disney even made some animations in the 1950s about theoretical intelligent life on Venus, Mars, and other planets in our solar system. It's still very fun to watch those, here's one of them:

Disneyland - Mars and Beyond

7:19
-Venus is a planet of passion people do not cook because they live on air music and love
-(Saturn) the men of saturn are very cold and miserable they never move from this spot where they are born
-Jupiter is so big that people never see or meet other people
-Mars is very populated with luminous birds who do not fly
-(Mercury) in sweden a philosopher's conception of life in our solar system revealed that the people of mercury are very thin they have tremendous memory their cattle are extremely small
-(Jupiter) the natives of Jupiter are pretty they do not lie or steal but they are terrified in the sight of their giant Jupiter type horses
-(Venus) there are two kinds of people on Venus mild people and fierce people
-(Mars) inhabitants of Mars are clothed in fibres they converse by means of thought transferrence.

But what we now know from probes sent to both worlds is that the likelihood they harbor intelligent life is so close to zero the difference isn't worth mentioning. Mars may harbor some kind of primitive life in the soil or underground, and Venus has been speculated to possibly have some kind of primitive life living high in the atmosphere where the temperatures aren't high enough to kill life like ours, but the surface of Venus temperature is hot enough to melt lead, so I feel certain that Orthon wasn't from Venus. This is why I'm a little surprised you ask, you know that Venus surface temperatures are hot enough to melt lead, right? So how could there be an Orthon from Venus, meeting with Adamski?

Whether Adamski and others were "charlatans" which implies intentional deception, or perhaps experienced delusions or hallucinations and thought they saw these beings, could also be another discussion, I don't have any thoughts on that other than to say such episodes are not as rare as I once thought. Maybe some were charlatans and some were instead just delusional, I can't say.

There is another scenario.
The beings were just lying and were deceptive for some reason. If we assume they did really exist and had contact with Adamski.

I am inclined to think this phenomenon is more complex than we think and it may appear different to different people.

originally posted by: Rosby123
There is another scenario.
The beings were just lying and were deceptive for some reason. If we assume they did really exist and had contact with Adamski.

If Adamski was otherwise credible, that possibility might be worth entertaining. However, not only was his visitor obviously not from a planet hot enough to melt lead, but his fake UFO photo was made with the top of a lantern available in Sears Catalog:

Adamski's "Scout Ship" identified

originally posted by: torsion

So he's faking UFO photos too, do you still think it's worth entertaining that other scenario? Not with the fake UFO photo, it's not.

I am inclined to think this phenomenon is more complex than we think and it may appear different to different people.

People's minds are definitely complex. But scientifically there's an objective reality, which can be independently recorded with things like video cameras that aren't subject to the same faults as human observation. This doesn't mean that different people don't experience different things, I'm sure they do, but we now know from research which of those experiences are more objectively real than others. If you give the different perceptions equal weight, I would say you're not paying enough attention to the research.

For example, look at all the different perceptions of the UFO over Kiev in 1963. Some perceptions were more accurate, some used the brain's interpretive power to "connect the dots" people were seeing, a perfectly natural thing to do, but if it's a "phenomenon" you seek, that's probably the best place to start looking. Why do some people connect dots in their perception, when the dots aren't really connected, while other people perceive dots that aren't connected, as they actually are? It's not because the dots are imposing mind control on one subgroup or the other.

Fifty-year old Russian Report May Explain 'Giant Mothership

We have seen this phenomenon repeatedly over the years, most recently in the event over Hawaii:
The Great Hawaii “UFO Mothership” of October 24, 2020

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: Rosby123
There is another scenario.
The beings were just lying and were deceptive for some reason. If we assume they did really exist and had contact with Adamski.

If Adamski was otherwise credible, that possibility might be worth entertaining. However, not only was his visitor obviously not from a planet hot enough to melt lead, but his fake UFO photo was made with the top of a lantern available in Sears Catalog:

Adamski's "Scout Ship" identified

originally posted by: torsion

So he's faking UFO photos too, do you still think it's worth entertaining that other scenario? Not with the fake UFO photo, it's not.

I am inclined to think this phenomenon is more complex than we think and it may appear different to different people.

People's minds are definitely complex. But scientifically there's an objective reality, which can be independently recorded with things like video cameras that aren't subject to the same faults as human observation. This doesn't mean that different people don't experience different things, I'm sure they do, but we now know from research which of those experiences are more objectively real than others. If you give the different perceptions equal weight, I would say you're not paying enough attention to the research.

For example, look at all the different perceptions of the UFO over Kiev in 1963. Some perceptions were more accurate, some used the brain's interpretive power to "connect the dots" people were seeing, a perfectly natural thing to do, but if it's a "phenomenon" you seek, that's probably the best place to start looking. Why do people connect dots in their perception, when the dots aren't really connected?

Fifty-year old Russian Report May Explain 'Giant Mothership

I don't know whether Adamski faked his photos. He may did but I just don't know and can't say because of the apparent resemblance with something else given in the article which is linked in the other thread. The alien from Venus is a story that anyone who knows how Venus and Mars are at the moment, will find it difficult to believe.

With the national security implications around this topic, no one gets out with some mud. I don't know much about Adamski, heard the name before, George Van Tassel and George King are new here. Betty and Barny Hill is one case from that era that has withstood the test of time with the star maps.

Michael Salla is one that considers Adamski. For anyone into the topic, looking at the history makes a good start. Is Valiant Thor from Venus sitting at the Pentagon legit? Could the actual reality be a lot more complex than most human comprehension, so Venus is used as a similar comprehension marker?

Who really knows what exactly is going on with Venus with its cloud cover? One Russian drone there a few years ago lasted enough to touchdown, a spongy ground. As for what kinds of consciousness might exist there and how it could make it here?

For those that don't want to rock the boat on the status quo, iceberg ahead.

originally posted by: kwaka
With the national security implications around this topic, no one gets out with some mud. I don't know much about Adamski, heard the name before, George Van Tassel and George King are new here. Betty and Barny Hill is one case from that era that has withstood the test of time with the star maps.

Michael Salla is one that considers Adamski. For anyone into the topic, looking at the history makes a good start. Is Valiant Thor from Venus sitting at the Pentagon legit? Could the actual reality be a lot more complex than most human comprehension, so Venus is used as a similar comprehension marker?

Who really knows what exactly is going on with Venus with its cloud cover? One Russian drone there a few years ago lasted enough to touchdown, a spongy ground. As for what kinds of consciousness might exist there and how it could make it here?

For those that don't want to rock the boat on the status quo, iceberg ahead.

George Van Tassel is a legend of ufology.
Perhaps he needs a bit more attention and I encourage you to read about him and his visions for the future. You don't have to agree with everything he said.