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.
corsair00
reply to post by The GUT
Very fascinating sighting. I always fantasize about seeing UFOs up in the mountains, but it has not happened yet.
Was the craft anything like the Carlos Diaz sighting from Mexico?
reply to post by The GUT
So, with all of the above in mind, what do we make of folk like Col. Alexander and Kit Green? Folk who have achieved some of the highest levels in government, folk who have had a lifelong interest in both ufology and phenomenology, and folk who, like Persinger, have a true scientific interest in all things EM---the scientist-shaman, the modern alchemist if you will. What might they know--or suspect--about the nature of these things? How close to them have they become?
Eidolon23
Regardless of origin, a plasma-based organism would definitely do what it could do dissuade us from using tech that could potentially crash the entire extra-planetary ecosystem.
But how do neural firings lead to thoughts and feelings? Conventional ("functionalist") approaches fall short on the mind's enigmatic features. These include: 1) the nature of subjective experience, or qualia, our "inner life" (e.g. Nagel, 1974; Chalmers, 1996) 2) "binding" of spatially distributed brain activities into unitary objects in vision and a coherent sense of "self," 3) transition from pre-conscious processing to consciousness, 4) non-computability (Penrose, 1989; 1994; 1997), and 5) free will.
Functionalist approaches generally assume that conscious experience appears as a novel property at a critical level of computational complexity. On the surface this would seem to deal with issues 1 and 3, however a conscious threshold has neither been identified nor predicted, and there are no apparent differences in electrophysiological activities between non-conscious and conscious activity. Regarding the nature of experience (why we are not unfeeling "zombies") functionalism offers no testable predictions. Problem 2) of 'binding' in vision and self is often attributed by functionalists to temporal correlation (e.g. coherent 40 Hz), but it is unclear why temporal correlation per se should bind experience without an explanation of experience. As functionalism is based on deterministic computation, it is also unable to account for Penrose's proposed noncomputability (4), or free will (5). Something may be missing.
www.quantumconsciousness.org...
JayinAR
I feel that in the past this wasn't the case. What did people do with their lives before electronics of any sort entered the scene?
If there is a sort of collective consciousness surrounding this planet that is "intelligent", it is going to reflect the nature of man's thought process on the whole. Which is to say it will be chaotic. Sometimes sacred, other times sinister.
JayinAR
reply to post by Eidolon23
I'm not so sure though. I mean, they don't seem too interested in what we are doing to the oceans. Things like massive oil spills could also crash the system.
The link to nuclear weapons is undeniable though. I think it points POSSIBLY to an extra dimensional link. Atomic weaponry may be felt throughout parallel realms for
what they do to the actual fabric of space itself. Dunno though, I'm just spitballing, as you say.
If it were as simple as protecting our ecosystem, I would think they would also be concerned with the fact all of our honeybees are dying off as well.edit on 23-10-2013 by JayinAR because: (no reason given)
Post was written before your edit. Wasn't clear on your point.edit on 23-10-2013 by JayinAR because: (no reason given)