Your "Ufology" Is Lacking. Can You Handle the Truth (Evidence)?

reply to post by HairlessApe


Thanks for your kind reply. Much appreciated your tone and meaty reply.

Let's change the parameters slightly.

1. The loss in population is now up to 20%

2. One of your cabinet officers has been lost

3. One of your top surgeons has been lost

4. One of your top engineers has been lost.

5. The proportion of claimed vs truly mysterious sightings has changed from 95% conventional to 85% conventional and 15% truly mysterious.

Would you change your response?

At what point would you feel compelled to mount whatever kind of more or less objective but still phenomenological study to try and ferret out what was going on?

To push the envelope a bit more . . . let's say you did NOT alter your approach.

The parameters changed to half your cabinet was thereby dead. All but 45% of your best medical personnel were gone. And only 50% of your engineers etc were left.

Would you change your approach or comments then?

At what point would the citizens rise up and replace you?

Let's say that things muddled along as first described but slowly worsened by 5% a year for 5-10 years. . . or say 1% for 50 years. Then SUDDENLY, the mysterious entities came flooding onto the scene in very tangible craft and very visible bodies and wiped out the whole colony--all but 10% . . . who they proceeded to breed . . . for food . . . served at special buffet banquets . . . where bits of diced flesh were carved off unannesthetized bodies--from which the vocal cords had been removed. [No, I don't think that's all THAT different from the recorded human mutilations which match identically the cattle mutilations]

Would you THEN feel you'd been a BIT derelict in your duties?

. .

reply to post by JayinAR


Thanks for your kind reply.

If you wish, I'm willing to gift you with a Kindle book of mine. Just send me a U2U

I think the phenomena are very very complex.

And, with biases, emotions, assumptions, preconceived tidy little boxes and denial . . . ragingly high, intense . . . story may well be one of the less brittle and prickly ways to approach a discussion about the factors involved.

When the fact of the degree of evil enters the discussion . . . then it gets even MORE difficult to manage in a meaningful, productive and civil way.

Originally posted by BO XIAN
reply to post by HairlessApe

 

Thanks for your kind reply. Much appreciated your tone and meaty reply.

Let's change the parameters slightly.

1. The loss in population is now up to 20%

2. One of your cabinet officers has been lost

3. One of your top surgeons has been lost

4. One of your top engineers has been lost.

5. The proportion of claimed vs truly mysterious sightings has changed from 95% conventional to 85% conventional and 15% truly mysterious.

Sure, if this was happening I'd change my mind. But this isn't happening on Earth. I'm aware there are some people out there who believe that it is, but there's no evidence. And without any evidence, why would we act?

reply to post by edfred9


It's an oft repeated . . . conjecture . . . fantasy.

We have no authentic, reliable, verified evidence it's true.

Sure, humans have been taken aboard craft. At least that much is certainly convincing to the humans involved; to the military officers involved in handling such things . . . etc.

The craft go SOMEWHERE. AT least they APPEAR to GO SOMEWHERE. Certainly celestial sights whiz by the eyes of the humans aboard the craft.

At least . . . the humans' brains register sights whizzing by that one might expect traversing through space at a great speed.

Trouble is, we have absolutely NO INDEPENDENT WAY to "get there" from here to verify any such thing--IF--that is the sort of thing happening.

Given [color=6699FF]...the degree to which humans can already successfully cause sound and pictures to intrude into the brains of subjects AS THOUGH THE SUBJECTS WERE OBSERVING OBJECTIVE "REALITY," is it not exceedingly plausible that such critters--whether fallen angels or truly advanced ET's--COULD MORE EASILY cause all manner of sensations and observations to pass through our brains and purportedly our senses . . . while we were in a little cubby hole under say . . . Pike's Peak . . . or a craft on the back side of the moon . . . or a craft in some evil spiritual DIMENSION or wherever?

Originally posted by olaru12
I think our governments know alot more about the UFO/paranormal connection than we give them credit for. I also think there are some members on this thread, know about what the governments knows but for some reason feel the need to "keep us in the dark". The military has research facilities dedicated to exploring "high strangeness" but the information the military gleans isn't for the consumption of us ordinary folk.

I also think that private investigation into ufo/paranormal realms is discredited and discouraged by tptb, either thru intimidation or labels of wacko nut bars.

They sure spent a lot of time, money, and effort on the occult & paranormal aspects didn't they? I'll have to dig some of that stuff out of that"other thread." Maybe you can help me with this angle too, olaru 12?

So much time, effort, and money that surely they were getting something out of it. At least as far back as MK-ULTRA predecessor Project Bluebird, the esoteric arts were a pointed interest.

I think our intel boys just might have made contact after all...but with what?!

reply to post by HairlessApe


I hope it does NOT change that none such is happening to your beloved family and friends. I hope your loved ones continue to be truly free of such--if they are now.

However . . . given the evidence that the abductions now number in the 3+ MILLIONs . . . it is plausible that someone you know has already been abducted or will be in the foreseeable future.

Now whether they'd be brave enough to be candid with you about it . . . or show you the scars on their skin . . . or talk about the baby removed at the end of the first trimester . . . those are a whole 'nother set of issues.

One of the objectives of my poor narrative that it evidently did NOT achieve well or at all was

to try and give some . . . perspective . . .

Your stance currently sets you up for a horrendous BITE from a TYPE II error. You are bending over so far backwards to AVOID a TYPE I ERROR that--SCIENTIFICALLY--you horrifically increase the odds of being victimized by a TYPE II ERROR.

For those unaware . . . a TYPE I ERROR believes the null hypothesis to be false when it is true.

That is, they believe that SOMETHING IS THERE when there is NOTHING there.

A TYPE II ERROR believes that there is NOTHING THERE when there REALLY IS SOMETHING there.

Science has shown that in life, in science . . . the two types of error seem to function in a kind of balance. WHEN one leans over toooo far backwards to avoid one type of error, they increase the odds enormously to the point of virtual certainty that they WILL BE VICTIMIZED by the opposite type error.

In a way, it's a kind of illustration of the hazards of deep rooted bias and willful blindness of every type.

imho, most naysayers have set themselves up inexorably to be bitten hard in the rear and other tender places by a TYPE II ERROR.

The nature [color=6699FF]of the UFO phenomena is such--particularly given the government ridicule disinformation program to keep as much secret as possible--the . . . nature of the phenomena [color=6699FF]is such that NOTHING WILL BE CONCLUSIVELY PROVEN to the satisfaction of the hyper objectivists--until it is all over but the shouting. That's very sad to me. That's like the Eloi being led into the caverns of the Morlachs without a thought or a care until they are about to be served for dinner. I'd like to try and prevent such late-date waking up, as much as possible.

All the objectivists on the planet can stamp their feet 24/7 and march en mass in all the capitals of the world DEMANDING "SCIENTIFIC" PROOF. It wouldn't change a thing. The program is obviously going to be overtly displayed for the whole world WHEN AND ONLY WHEN it serves the critters and their globalist cohorts best, most effectively, most dramatically, most manipulatively . . . to do so.
.

reply to post by BO XIAN


Before I truly became a skeptic, I was an avid follower of ancient astronaut theory. I broadcasted this to family members, friends, and co-workers alike. If anyone I know had been abducted, rest assured, they would have told me. No one ever did.

reply to post by HairlessApe


BTW, I haven't seen stats proving it . . . it's my personal gestalt sort of conjecture and impression . . .

I think the "only 5% of sightings" statistic is out of date.

I'd bet that now, it's more like 20-30% more of seriously claimed, (particularly multiple witness) sightings are authentic. It might even be as high as 70-80%.

= = =

BTW, a more personal related question to the phenomena . . .

Doesn't the TYPE II ERROR thing give you some . . . genuine concern? I think it would cause me to break out in a cold sweat about this phenomenon.

If it doesn't, that would seem like an outrageously smug set of assumptions must be at work in your thinking.

Originally posted by HairlessApe
reply to post by BO XIAN

 

Before I truly became a skeptic, I was an avid follower of ancient astronaut theory. I broadcasted this to family members, friends, and co-workers alike. If anyone I know had been abducted, rest assured, they would have told me. No one ever did.

Thanks for sharing that.

Interesting.

HOWEVER, PLEASE avoid underestimating the incredibly intense power of even slightly possible ridicule IN OUR AND MOST CULTURES to cultivate silence in the face of otherwise strong needs to share or tell.

I would not be at all surprised if that changes in the next several years. Perhaps not abducted but seriously impacted by some very serious observations, if not experiences--possibly up to and including abductions.

Though some experts say the abduction phase of their operations have mostly wound down . . . others disagree.
.
.

Originally posted by HairlessApe

Unlike most of these folks who are offering forward what they feel is legitimate evidence, skeptics require evidence that doesn't necessarily need to be peer-reviewed or published in a scientific journal, but must at least stand up to the scrutiny of scientific method. I'm well aware my mind can play some pretty vivid tricks on me, and I can't believe everything I think I heard or saw. That's the difference, Bo.

I greatly appreciate your sharing that distinction. I believe you and take you at your word on that.

BTW, I assume you know something of the farce that peer reviewed journals are! LOL. They are designed to insure that no one escapes the control mechanism and starts to declare the world to not be flat. LOL.

I just hate to see such fine minds as yours set yourselves up for a horrendous TYPE II ERROR . . . virtual certainty.

Originally posted by BO XIAN

Originally posted by HairlessApe
reply to post by BO XIAN

 

Before I truly became a skeptic, I was an avid follower of ancient astronaut theory. I broadcasted this to family members, friends, and co-workers alike. If anyone I know had been abducted, rest assured, they would have told me. No one ever did.

Thanks for sharing that.

Interesting.

HOWEVER, PLEASE avoid underestimating the incredibly intense power of even slightly possible ridicule IN OUR AND MOST CULTURES to cultivate silence in the face of otherwise strong needs to share or tell.

I would not be at all surprised if that changes in the next several years. Perhaps not abducted but seriously impacted by some very serious observations, if not experiences--possibly up to and including abductions.

Though some experts say the abduction phase of their operations have mostly wound down . . . others disagree.
.
.

edit on 7/7/2013 by BO XIAN because: addition

Bah.. "Experts." After I found out what Daniken, Zitchen, Tsoukolos, Burnes, Greer, and Leir told me were all lies I stopped having faith in "experts" on ufology.

Originally posted by BO XIAN

BTW, a more personal related question to the phenomena . . .

Doesn't the TYPE II ERROR thing give you some . . . genuine concern? I think it would cause me to break out in a cold sweat about this phenomenon.

If it doesn't, that would seem like an outrageously smug set of assumptions must be at work in your thinking.

edit on 7/7/2013 by BO XIAN because: addition

I'm not too worried. I'd say I was the reverse of what you described earlier: believing at first only to be gradually "bitten in the ass" by the premise that maybe there is nothing there after all; at least not what I thought was there.

The prediction that the phenomenon is escalating and we'll all be affected soon is another one I've been hearing for years and years that has no traction for me know.

Also, again I really am interested in the embryos vanishing from the womb material. Could you give me a link?

Originally posted by BO XIAN

Originally posted by HairlessApe

Unlike most of these folks who are offering forward what they feel is legitimate evidence, skeptics require evidence that doesn't necessarily need to be peer-reviewed or published in a scientific journal, but must at least stand up to the scrutiny of scientific method. I'm well aware my mind can play some pretty vivid tricks on me, and I can't believe everything I think I heard or saw. That's the difference, Bo.

I greatly appreciate your sharing that distinction. I believe you and take you at your word on that.

BTW, I assume you know something of the farce that peer reviewed journals are! LOL. They are designed to insure that no one escapes the control mechanism and starts to declare the world to not be flat. LOL.

I just hate to see such fine minds as yours set yourselves up for a horrendous TYPE II ERROR . . . virtual certainty.

I realize that some legitimate science is rejected by peer review journals, but that's not the scientific community's fault. The reason they've been able to remain so accepted by the intellectual community IS that level of scrutiny, which to some, may seem unfair.

While science is slow to change, there is one thing you should keep in mind... It is WILLING to change, which is something all previous authorities (religion) were unable to do. And compared to all of those authorities of old, it moves at interstellar speeds.

Originally posted by FireMoon


I will have a stab at a very basic explanation of, in part, what we may be dealing with here. Virtually every Earth culture has stories of "special places" where our world and the world of spirits/afterlife/faerie folk intersect. The nomenclature given to them is really not important. I'm North Western European so "Faerie Folk" sits easiest with me.

. . .

Please understand, neither am I totally dismissing the possibility of us having been visited by "beings or probes" from other civilisations in our Universe. However, my current best fit for a large number of sightings and reports seems to suggest to me, an outside intelligence that "lives along side us. One that can "crossover almost at will whereas we humans, as yet, can mostly only ever achieve interaction by luck, by being in the right place, literally at the right time or. for a small cadre of people, by choice. There again, I could just be singing songs to my cat.

THANKS ENORMOUSLY for your additional very excellent narrative.

That helps me tremendously to understand better your perspective and you.

It seems to me that you are quite right . . . about the crossing over . . .

Personally . . .

I no longer have great patience with folks who construe it as all a phenomena of mental mastications of the human mind.

Nor the "earth lights" a la quake phenomena.

None of those explanations fit the complex data to the least degree.

Originally posted by DelMarvel

What's your source on the Noah's flood angle? I don't think there is even a scriptural basis for that but I'm certainly open to correction. However, unlike the rest of what we're discussing here there is irrefutable scientific evidence that Noah's flood did not happen as described. I'd say that any definition of "demons" that incorporates that tale falls firmly in the category of folklore.

Cris Putnam and Tom Horn in Exo-Vaticana cover that well enough.

www.logosapologia.com...

Guy Malone's content dense DVD from his scientific panel of scholars examining what the critters are covers it fairly extensively.

www.alienresistance.org...

Jacques Vallee may even get into it some.

Yes, the Bible does indicate that. However, it may be that one has to get into root word meanings and include a lot of cultural understanding of the words, phrases and idioms to really get the picture very clearly from the Bible alone. I can see it plainly enough but many might not. I'd have to look up the verses. May try to do that later. I need to go check on Dad.

Certainly the Book of Enoch sheds a lot of light on the whole thing. Many Christians are haughty against the Book of Enoch. However The Bible quotes it maybe 30? times or so and it is mentioned by name a few times in the Bible.

reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf


Of course my PhD program in Clinical Psych covered "psychosomatic."

LOL.

Please explain to me how does psychosomatic

account for

The woman going to her gynecologist Tuesday morning. The baby at the end of the first trimester is doing wonderfully. The ultra sound is clear; heartbeat strong etc.

The woman has an abduction experience Tuesday night. She remembers it WITHOUT hypnosis. Hubby may have even awakened and found her missing out of the house and the usual "that feeling" when he searched.

The woman is convinced that the baby was taken. She no longer feels any sensations of having a baby within. She makes an emergency appointment Wed with the same gynecologist who is shocked to discover that the baby is gone--total gone--no incision--no explanation.

How does psychosomatic account for that?

For that matter, how does psychosomatic account for triangles and other consistent designs appearing on people's BACKS where they are difficult to see even with a mirror--consistent designs across 100's of people and all cultures? How does THAT KIND of "psychosomatic" work?

And, how does psychosomatic arrange to have an extremely sophisticated super high tech MANUFACTURED CHIP to be implanted . . . ???

Originally posted by HairlessApe
I realize that some legitimate science is rejected by peer review journals, but that's not the scientific community's fault. The reason they've been able to remain so accepted by the intellectual community IS that level of scrutiny, which to some, may seem unfair.

While science is slow to change, there is one thing you should keep in mind... It is WILLING to change, which is something all previous authorities (religion) were unable to do. And compared to all of those authorities of old, it moves at interstellar speeds.

Hard to argue with most of that (you are growing on me btw) but it might just mean that science is moving at interstellar speeds towards that which the theologian/mystic has known all along. The whole quantum bidness seems to evermore inch towards a radical rethinking of everything

Originally posted by BO XIAN
For that matter, how does psychosomatic account for triangles and other consistent designs appearing on people's BACKS where they are difficult to see even with a mirror--consistent designs across 100's of people and all cultures? How does THAT KIND of "psychosomatic" work?

Vallee highlights a particular case reminiscent of that...I'll see if I can find it. It was a little stranger and seemingly more documented than most if my memory serves me correctly...

Originally posted by HairlessApe

Bah.. "Experts." After I found out what Daniken, Zitchen, Tsoukolos, Burnes, Greer, and Leir told me were all lies I stopped having faith in "experts" on ufology.

Welllllllllll, somehow, I never did put much stock in Stichen. He just always seemed like a charlatan or a stooge to me.

Von Daniken . . . I thought it was also an interesting story but . . . trumped up overmuch. And what was his motive? Money or a NWO stooge or what. BTW, he's since become a Christian, interestingly.

I don't recall Tsoukolos enough to comment . . . nor Burnes. Greer. . . . a friend of mine used to work with him in ER. Said he was a top flight person of high skills and high integrity with a big heart. However, she saw a kind of transformation the more he got into the UFO stuff. Almost like he became a different person.

Personally, I've wondered if they didn't haul him off to some MKULTRA room and mess his mind over real good and somehow end up much more in control of his whole schmere.

Leir? Which one?

Originally posted by The GUT

Originally posted by HairlessApe
I realize that some legitimate science is rejected by peer review journals, but that's not the scientific community's fault. The reason they've been able to remain so accepted by the intellectual community IS that level of scrutiny, which to some, may seem unfair.

While science is slow to change, there is one thing you should keep in mind... It is WILLING to change, which is something all previous authorities (religion) were unable to do. And compared to all of those authorities of old, it moves at interstellar speeds.

Hard to argue with most of that (you are growing on me btw) but it might just mean that science is moving at interstellar speeds towards that which the theologian/mystic has known all along. The whole quantum bidness seems to evermore inch towards a radical rethinking of everything

Hey, anything is possible! But I would put my whole life savings on the idea that, if science ever discovered what religion always "knew" it would offer us more insight to that "sacred knowledge" than our old ways were ever capable of. Thanks, this thread has grown on me as well.

I almost forgot that I used to be an avid proponent of ancient astronaut theory before coming here, actually. It's like a suppressed memor--- OH MY GOD, THEY'RE HERE!!!! Just kidding. But seriously, it was a nice refresher.