It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: boozo
a reply to: NewNobodySpecial268
I'm not interested anymore. I'm sure you hate the Gnostics anyways.
originally posted by: RAY1990
a reply to: NewNobodySpecial268
It was a generalized comment about bugs and UFOs, the whole Anglophile disclosure thing... It's interesting, especially when put into a wider cultural context. It's arguable from some that there's nothing to disclose.
I mean the new agers often speak fondly of butterflies, I guess I was being silly about identification and what influences the individual to think they have it right.
originally posted by: boozo
a reply to: LaPourer
If you're following Direne, you know she makes an interesting point.
Interesting post. Yet the title should be something like Official UFO Disclosure May Be Imminent An Anglo-centric Historical Perspective.
I mean I miss the point of view of the rest of the planet, in particular the point of view of Russia (ex-USSR), of China, and of countries like France, Israel, Italy, Spain, or the Scandinavian countries, or the entire African continent, all of which have cases of equal interest to those of the UK and USA as far as sightings are concerned, not to mention the cases of South and Central America. And yet, in those countries disclosure does not seem to be a problem.
Unless we recognize that what is called ufology is just a cultural aspect of the Anglo-Saxon world, which would explain the OP title.
These Aerial Phenomena happens all over the world, yet the Muricans make it look like they're always at the forefront when it comes to disclosure. The know-it-all-per see. Yet, they also make it look like it's a big issue. And don't pay much attention to document the sightings the at the other parts of the world, for example: Australia, Philippines, Japan, etc. ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Others will see angels, others fireflies, and there will be those who see nothing at all.
originally posted by: NewNobodySpecial268
a reply to: LaPourer
While I dislike giving credit to the philosophies, credit where credit is due.
Just my view here.
If one knew Buddha's secret of creating Nirvana, one would see the mechanics of it existing within the ordinary earthly living person.
Within the shared interactive dreamscapes, the "physics" are written by the dreamers.
All those philosophies are much the same in this regard.
What is inside the philosophical dreamscapes of humans is the truth to them.
originally posted by: RAY1990
a reply to: NewNobodySpecial268
a reply to: LaPourer
I love learning about the past, where would I find out more about this?
Are we talking modern human or a mirror image of sorts?
:rolleyes:
Voyeurs, hoarders and philosophers... Oh my!
Keys are for opening things, I'd find it rather sad for items to lose their meaning by sitting on a shelf somewhere.
Good and bad is a perspective thing, usually based on experience or knowledge/information as far as I can tell. I suspect nothing decent is happening behind closed doors especially if the modus operandi is keeping doors closed.
Libraries, they're awesome places for self indulgence. There's bags of humour to be had in thinking of a library in the hands of a group identity. A place of learnt just doesn't sound right, does it? Privacy doesn't mean much if everyone is one and the same neither.
The obvious solution of course, is for the AI to walk away from it's percieved treasure. Then the other folk will walk away too. That would leave the treasure to become everyones.
Yeah, I guess 'knowledge is power' to those who have it. As long as they can keep it to themselves that is
Seems both organic and machine see it as a matter of survival, logic Vs emotions doesn't give good feels for the future to put it bluntly. Walking away doesn't appear to be a viable choice. It's always a viable choice but where's the trust?
I'm not discounting the possibility of artificial acceleration, I'm not pointing fingers when it comes to the who since all sides are clearly capable of manipulation that affects all things.
Looking at history I'd say it's inevitable that the same conclusions will be met, doesn't matter on the species because they're all built in their unique ways. That makes me think AI would win in any form of conflict because organics are far too distrustful, especially with knowledge.
never existed.
originally posted by: boozo
Id hate to break it to you but
Jesus
originally posted by: Direne
a reply to: fireslinger
It is not that today's world is in a worse situation of social tensions than the societies of the past. What is happening is that, for the first time, one of the actors at work requires a global consensus to neutralize it: climate change.
Today's societies, unfortunately, are still anchored in the same errors as those of the past: xenophobia, passivity in the face of those who exploit them, lack of values, and a profound ethical crisis that has thrown away the desire to defend themselves because they no longer know what is worth defending. Until today the world was accustomed to its oligarchs, its tyrants, and consoled itself by thinking that others' oligarchs were worse. But today, for the first time, the threat is faceless and non-human. It is a global process of climate change that will devastate the entire productive fabric, destructure entire societies, bring famine and endless wars, and finally the extinction of the species.
A global problem requires a global solution, and for this to happen, societies must consider themselves as equals, something that does not happen and, in my opinion, will never happen because hatred of the other, hatred of the different, is something that human beings carry in their genetics. That the coming destruction will sweep away all the oligarchs and tyrants, and that to do so the species must become extinct, should be a cause for rejoicing for those who are enslaved and exploited.
It is no longer a question of blowing up the pharaoh's pyramid, nor of assassinating the pharaoh. It is about wiping the entire species off the map. There are only three options here: ecoterrorism (accelerating the irreversible destruction of the planet or replace the oligarchs with a race- and difference-agnostic superintelligence.
The third option is to watch with indifference the extinction of the human race. Superintelligence will create the superstructures and supernetworks necessary to preserve humans, controlling entropy levels, and neutralizing all the hatred humans feel for everything and everyone. But that comes at a price: giving up retarded and suboptimal human genetics. What the superintelligence hasn't yet figured out is how to turn a human into a supportive and planetary conscious being without destroying what precisely makes him human: his genetics.
My point of view is that genetics is not such a determining factor. There are sensitive, caring humans who have exactly the same genetics as a greedy oligarch. The difference must be somewhere else, lost in some intricate and recondite neural subnetwork of the brain.
Let us leave it to Nature to decide whom to sweep away. There is no need to shed tears, whatever the result. The rule is clear: either you get rid of your less emotianally evolved fellows, or Nature will get rid of you all. There is no middle ground.
originally posted by: NewNobodySpecial268
a reply to: LaPourer
:rolleyes:
Ol' Budda probably bathes in the feeling of his disciples' bliss.
One might say the ol' Budda sits up there, with his successful disciples within his extended belly ; )