Dr. Jacques Vallee ~ The Control System

Bybyots

It is fun storming the castle! Screw the control system! I note that the Stanton Friedman AMA has "closed" and, as such, doesn't reflect the "stars" of the harder questions. Coincedence? Maybe. Of note, however, as relates to our greater ufological questions. At least not to be ignored. Did you notice?

The GUT
Some here are claiming to have an "open mind" while at the same time cherry-picking their sources and totally ignoring the "paradoxes."

Those that shy away from "consciousness" probably don't even realize that they are one chopstick shy of a pair as far as true intellectual deliniation is concerned. Nor the fact that Persinger, while brilliant and possibly important, is legitamately contradicted. Even the brilliant Bybyots dissed him earlier and now attempts to use him to make some shaky point!

A historical step back suggests an age-old competition. Whether a subconscious "fight," within our human nature or something more cosmic...it's there and undeniable. The so-called "science" and cherry-picked "history" being quoted by some is fairly laughable and fails to address the total matrix of questions.

My biggest concern with these arguments is the unwillingness to trust that a mature intellect can come to it's own stated conclusions, rather than the attempt to hide behind a few self-satisfying quotations.

Didn't want this 'lost' at the bottom of the page...You da !

reply to post by The GUT

It is fun storming the castle! Screw the control system! I note that the Stanton Friedman AMA has "closed" and, as such, doesn't reflect the "stars" of the harder questions. Coincedence? Maybe. Of note, however, as relates to our greater ufological questions. At least not to be ignored. Did you notice?

heh. What an amazing Ask Me Anything! No one said he was going to answer anything! I thought it was funny that he actually acknowledged the questions about Reptilians but completely ignored my very softball questions about the lack of input from psych fields! His only purpose was to feed the ETH to the people that needed a little reassurance and promote the "evil debunker" straw man . "my dear boy, aliens are indeed here". He finally responded to me but didnt answer my question. I got the "rules of the debunker" shtick. I find him offensive.

The GUT

Bybyots

It is fun storming the castle! Screw the control system! I note that the Stanton Friedman AMA has "closed" and, as such, doesn't reflect the "stars" of the harder questions. Coincedence? Maybe. Of note, however, as relates to our greater ufological questions. At least not to be ignored. Did you notice?

Yeah, it was kinda hard not to notice.

ZetaRediculian
...I thought it was funny that he actually acknowledged the questions about Reptilians but completely ignored my very softball questions about the lack of input from psych fields! His only purpose was to feed the ETH to the people that needed a little reassurance and promote the "evil debunker" straw man . "my dear boy, aliens are indeed here". He finally responded to me but didnt answer my question. I got the "rules of the debunker" shtick. I find him offensive.

Yeah, I noticed your questions were of the good ones that were sidestepped. ALL the best ones, imo, were sidestepped no matter which corner of the playing field they came from.

What did he actually say that held any import? Nothing as far as I can tell. He does--or so he says--believe in some kind of "galactic federation" however. Him and Blossom Goodchild.

I'm about to critique him in response to posts on SecretKnowledge's thread and I'll copy it here when done. Would be good to see some of y'all there, too.

Your question wasnt answered? Here's why...

Sadly, Ufology is as prone to selective deaf and blind syndrome as any other field of research. One can;t help save see people on both sides of the fence standing, fingers in their ear,s shouting "lah lah lah" as those who aren't really representing anything other than their own constituency, question the veracity of their arguments and theories.

The Pelicanists such as Ridpath and Schaeffer, are every bit as guilty as Stanton and co at being wholly selective to promote their own personal belief system at the expense of studying data that threatens to make them actually shift their position. Ufology and religions are similar, not because they both have inherent belief systems in fact, Ufology if anything, has to have an innate non belief system. They are similar because, once people have their feet under the table, they ain't letting go without putting up a struggle.

This is my particular corner of the genre and I'm the font of all knowledge, no more knowledge may be added or redacted from my given body of information without my say so, seems to be about how it rolls.

There is a huge road block at times with discussing UFOs and that is, we seem to be unable to freely discuss our experiences under the influence of certain substances without having "You're promoting this or that illegal activity" chucked at us. That's a shame cos, in the end, there are those of us who do recognise things and we feel we have to bite our tongues and keep schtum lest we break some form of censorship.

You can argue all you like, there is a fundamental truth that is ignored. Life is nothing bar one long "drug trip", everything you do or don't do, affects the chemical balance of the brain. In the end, all we are is a walking bag of chemical reactions that continue on their merry way even after, the conciousness has left us for the final time.

Some people are undoubtedly prone to feeling a particular way and even seeing certain visualisations when exposed to certain circumstances or certain electrical or magnetic fields. Others are not and here's the kicker, those that are less prone also seem to have a greater sense of "self awareness" or "pure blind ego" about them. I believe for instance, Dawkins saw nothing and felt nothing whilst wearing the Persinger "God helmet". Only science has this problem, it likes general rules that are then extrapolated, often in legislation, as absolutes. Therein lies a huge problem, humans aren't absolutes, some people can drink a litre of Vodka and remain pretty damned coherent, others are dead on a quarter that amount. The problem with life is, you simply don't know and cannot extrapolate with any certainty human reactions in any given situation under any particular influence, no matter what the shrinks might try to claim.

As it stands, the human interface with UFOs is still not truly understood with any sort of meaningful certainty. Is it us? Is it them? is it a mixture of the two and just who are "they"? As yet we don't know and simply stuffing your head in the sand and saying... "No no, I refuse to accept any data my own particular outlook on life cannot accept" is not science, it's religious dogma. To that end, in my book the like of Stanton and Ridpath are exactly the same as each other.

You can read all you like about the likes of Crowley, in the end what he actually was saying was simple. "Thanks for buying my books now, quit following me you idiots and find your own path, your own "truth" which, in the final analysis, is philosophically, almost diametrically the opposite of the likes of Stanton and Ridpath.

Where to begin, where to begin? Firstly, I'd like to hear from folk who feel they learned something new--or profound--from the AMA?

From there, I guess I'll have to question Stan's reliance on his "science" background as "credentials" and ask what science has he done as a ufologist? I did ask him that actually...to no avail.

Then I would note that Stanton repeatedly claimed he doesn't like to "speculate," while noting that he did when it suits his position. For example: He seems to believe pretty strongly in some form of a "galactic federation." Him and Blossom Goodchild, ahem. Not that that couldn't be the case, but I think my point is clear.

Ol' Stan certainly didn't seem to want to address some to-the-point questions about MJ-12 and the alleged documents relation to Bill Moore and by extension Rick Doty and intelligence operations psyops, if anyone noticed.

Ectoplasm8 hit him pretty hard, too, on the earliest and most reliable first-hand descriptions of the Roswell wreckage being very earthly indeed. Again: No reply at all.

Is Stanton a shill? I never said that, although he's either, imo, a man too proud to reassess his early mistakes or towing someone's party line. Or rather thick. None of those options complimentary I realize.

That Stanton is the sort of ufologist that leaves out any details of "high-strangeness" tells me, personally, that he's as unreliable as some of the folk he himself puts down.

That's starters. I have more. Before we forget the initial question: What did anyone here learn from Stan? He did point to a document or two that some aren't familiar with, but the onus is on those who haven't researched the field to any degree. Other than that…what?

Too bad the thread is now "closed" and the stars garnered by some of the better questions aren't evident...

From: Your question wasnt answered? Here's why...

In my short sojourn on ATS I have only once participated in these AMA’s, a question I asked John Alexander about Puharich in which he answered suitably. I dare say I was surprised he answered it. My point is that these AMA’s seem to appear a bit too much for the visiting celebrities, in terms of the barrage of questions thrown at them…it may be too much to handle, imo.

It may actually defeat the purpose of any possibility of deep conversations to have all those questions thrown at these guys.

As far as Stanton goes...well he's not a spooky, spiritual, or mystic type UFOer…indeed he’s no Allan Greenfield.
That’s all right with me, that’s his scientific secular training.

At least we won't see him going around trying to steal secrets from lost mystics.

they won't get anything btw cause...
as the secret protects itself-- pearls are not cast at the feet of swine!

The GUT
Haha...yeah, you're right. Some here are claiming to have an "open mind" while at the same time cherry-picking their sources and totally ignoring the "paradoxes."

Those that shy away from "consciousness" probably don't even realize that they are one chopstick shy of a pair as far as true intellectual deliniation is concerned. Nor the fact that Persinger, while brilliant and possibly important, is legitamately contradicted. Even the brilliant Bybyots dissed him earlier and now attempts to use him to make some shaky point!

A historical step back suggests an age-old competition. Whether a subconscious "fight," within our human nature or something more cosmic...it's there and undeniable. The so-called "science" and cherry-picked "history" being quoted by some is fairly laughable and fails to address the total matrix of questions.

My biggest concern with these arguments is the unwillingness to trust that a mature intellect can come to it's own stated conclusions, rather than the attempt to hide behind a few self-satisfying quotations.

I take it that that 'mature intellect' is not your own? I would expect a 'mature intellect' to do more than simply stick out their bottom lip and wave a finger willy-nilly accompanied by general accusations that could equally be levelled at their own contributions to the discussion. Surely a 'mature intellect' would address such discrepencies in the discussion directly with those concerned rather than flounce their skirts and stomp their feet in a display of spoilt hypocrisy.

Bybyots

'"Sir Do-Well" said Intelligence, "lives less that day's journey from here, in a castle made by Nature from four elements, a mixture of earth and air with wind and water. And there also, subtly enclosed by him in the castle, dwells his mistress, one whom he loves as himself, and her name is Anima or the soul. But envy, a proud French knight known as the Prince of this world, cannot abide her, and tries to entice her away from Nature by trickery..."

...The warden of the castle and commander of the Guard is a wise knight, Good Sense, who has five sons...Sir See-Well, Sir Say-Well...Sir Hear-Well, Sir Work-Well-With-Your-Hands...and Sir Godfrey Go-Well - all of them mighty lords...employed to protect Lady Anima until Nature sends for her, to keep her safe for ever...

...For the love of Lady Anima, who is life itself, Good Sense and all the other faculties are enclosed in this castle. And although she is free to wander through the whole of man's body, her chief resting-place and home is in the heart. Good sense, who watches over his heart, lives in the head, and Anima must obtain his consent in all that she seeks and avoids. For next to the Grace of God, sense is the greatest among guardians of the soul.'

From Book IX, Piers the Ploughman, by William Langland.

reply to post by KilgoreTrout

I'd give you a "touche" were it more than a mere scratch.

With you, dear braniac, I get frustrated with your many critiques minus much in the way of anything empirical, while showing much reticence to actually state where you are coming from. I beg you; state your philosophy simply, clearly, and then feel free to wax as philosophically critical--and arcanely--as though wouldst, mi lady.

With Bybyots--I love him too--but blaming everything on temporal lobe epilepsy while refusing to address "consciousness," and vacillating on whether Persinger is a sham, or a scientific stalwart, is equally a "Doh!"

My remarks were a premeditated challenge…and a counter-reply was anticipated. I didn't think Bybyots would bail that easily, however. I've actually given his proffering a lot of consideration, but the "materialism" keeps sticking in my craw when all is said and done. I'm not through considering it, but until we deal with consciousness, it's a bird flying into a clear--but substantial--window

Hypocrite? I may play coy for a bit, but I always state my bottom line. Thou?

A Spanking!

reply to post by ZetaRediculian


Reminds me of the fact that I have but ONE rule in the bedroom: If anyone is gonna get a spanking--and/or restrained--it ain't gonna be me. Usually works out pretty good.

reply to post by The GUT


So this is weird, I saw a thread pop up basically summarizing the Friedman CF thread. Titled "Stan Friedman AMA aggregation" It was a nicely done organized 2 post summery of the AMA so you didn't have to fumble through 18 pages to hear his take on the galactic counsel.

I replied with my usual gripes and it was 404ed instantly. The whole thread. gone. No explanation. Nothing. I took a screen shot of my history to make sure I wasn't hallucinating.

I am at a loss.

reply to post by ZetaRediculian


I suspect because it could have been summarized in one word

reply to post by ZetaRediculian


Was that thread posted before or after the AMA thread was closed?

The reason I ask is that I had a similar thread trashed during the AMA because:

We don't want a thread about the thread nor do we want a thread competing with this one. Tomorrow night (U.S. time or Wednesday, after this is over, I'm fine with someone starting a thread about this AMA.

Springer's response to sheepslayer247

And then no response when I asked if my trashed thread could be revived after the AMA...

reply to post by jadedANDcynical


Happened within the hour. Today, Thursday, March 13, 2014 around 1PM eastern time.

Thursday is the day after Wednesday. Just checking.

Kantzveldt
reply to post by ZetaRediculian

 

I suspect because it could have been summarized in one word

ZetaRidiculous?

reply to post by The GUT


Hey Gut may I ask if you have gained any new insight about the control system from this thread? Personally for me when it comes to ATS whenever something interesting is presented something happens along the way and everything in terms of making headway turns to ash so to speak and it becomes a pissing match of smart people burying others into links, conversations never happen this way and much of what I know and have learned has been a combination of conversation and practical application and time to reflect, I find learning on ATS withing topics such as these to be alot mind numbing because of the pissing contest and link burying crushing burden it takes to read it all. Sometimes I will read it all and wonder why did I read this and what the hell does this got to do with why the poster posted under this topic then go back to the original posted commentary and then say oh I get it they used a paragraph out of a 3 hour read and then I go back to regression looking into other things. Anyways...

You had posted above earlier looking for something empirical, I made a post Here in regards to a topic that involves the claim/ question of lack of reports of UFOs. I used search data from google and have found that using different parameters the data reflects different phenomenon relating to users online looking up material about UFOs the actual data under the different parameters i chose which you will see in the post I made there actually closely match trends in hollywood, news, and other culturally shared events. I found this particularly interesting I don't think the op there understood what I was showing there and think that the op thought I agreed with his opening post but none the less think that you will find it relevant. I want to also add that do you remember an interview with Vallee when he said something along the lines of " I listen to what they say, I do not interfere..." (paraphrased) it is amazingly easy to just read along and literally write down the oddities especially if you have software to compile trends and see what the witnesses first hand, and more importantly second hand have to say, there is importance in looking at the data from the people that watch the youtube video and comment or twitch video or ATS threads at times and really look at what happens. I think that you would learn a great deal there if you attempted it and if you have attempted this then please share what you thought about what you were looking at. Much love Bruddah!

Bman-

reply to post by Brotherman


Excerpts from 'Messengers of Deception' by Jacques Vallee

The social, political, and religious consequences of the experience are enormous if they are considered, not in the days or weeks following the sighting, but over the time span of a generation. Could it be that such effects are actually intended, through some process of social conditioning? Could it be that both the believers and the skeptics are being manipulated? Is the public being deceived and led to false conclusions by someone who is using the UFO witnesses to propagate revolutionary new ideas?

I believe there is a machinery of mass manipulation behind the UFO phenomenon. It aims at social and political goals by diverting attention from some human problems and by providing a potential release for tensions caused by others. The contactees are a part of that machinery. They are helping to create a new form of belief: an expectation of actual contact among large parts of the public. In turn this expectation makes millions of people hope for the imminent realization of that age-old dream: salvation from above, surrender to the greater power of some wise navigators of the cosmos.

With the release of popular UFO movies, many people who previously were skeptics have begun to jump on this bandwagon from outer space. I wish them bon voyage. However, if you take the trouble to join me in the analysis of the modern UFO myths, you will see that human beings under the control of of a strange force that is bending them in absurd ways, forcing them to play in a bizarre game of deception. This role may be very important if changing social conditions make it desirable to focus the attention of the public on the distant stars while obsolete human institutions are wiped out and rebuilt in new ways. Are the manipulators, in the final analysis, nothing more than a group of humans who have mastered a very advanced form of power?

Let me summarize my conclusions thus far. UFOs are real. They are physical devices used to affect human consciousness. They may not be from outer space. Their purpose may be to achieve social changes on this planet, through a belief system that uses systematic manipulation of witnesses and contactees; covert use of various sects and cults; control of the channels through which the alleged “space messages” can make an impact on the public.