ATECH ( Alien Technology ) May Explain Paranormal Phenomena

[Randall]

Ufology - you mentioned you were writing a book. Any chance of a few little details about what you are aiming to have once finished?

It will be a non-fiction attempt to put the field of ufology in perspective through rational thinking and examples. It isn't so much about sightings and case histories as about straightening out the foundation, summing up what we have learned so far, and where we're headed in the future, regardless of governmental disclosure or alien contact. The title is simply "Ufology" and I'm about one-third done. If it is successful, I have a plan for a follow up that will include details on practical ufology with an emphasis on investigation. So this one is more about "what" and "why" while the follow up will be more about the "who" an "how". If you have any suggestions please feel free to drop me an email or post them up here. I'll probably be using a few quotes from the forum and giving the show a plug someplace too.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Great idea. I mean, if you think you've the material then why the hell not?

I have one suggestion for any book including instructions for investigating. Today I looked at the BUFORA site to look at the line-up for their conference in London this year. Anyway, one speaker is the very well known paranormal researcher/author, Jenny Randles. I am sure she wrote instructions for those intending to learn how to investigate on behalf of the organisation.

Obviously I don't know personally how much you do or don't know about investigation, I've never done any (cos you can't see the sky here much) but I was going to suggest that it could never hurt to see the guidelines various UFO groups have written down about investigating in the field.


Also, I'd really like to see a decent essay on how some people in the field start off with good intentions and maybe do some good work, only to spoil it all later by knowingly getting behind absolute bunk. We see it all the time and it's really sad. Anyway, whatever you call this downfall or fall from grace etc, It might be nice to really explore this aspect to people in the field?

That's all that comes off top of my head right now (it's late here and it's beddy bye bye's).

 

[Randall]

Great idea. I mean, if you think you've the material then why the hell not?

I have one suggestion for any book including instructions for investigating. Today I looked at the BUFORA site to look at the line-up for their conference in London this year. Anyway, one speaker is the very well known paranormal researcher/author, Jenny Randles. I am sure she wrote instructions for those intending to learn how to investigate on behalf of the organisation.

Obviously I don't know personally how much you do or don't know about investigation, I've never done any (cos you can't see the sky here much) but I was going to suggest that it could never hurt to see the guidelines various UFO groups have written down about investigating in the field.

Also, I'd really like to see a decent essay on how some people in the field start off with good intentions and maybe do some good work, only to spoil it all later by knowingly getting behind absolute bunk. We see it all the time and it's really sad. Anyway, whatever you call this downfall or fall from grace etc, It might be nice to really explore this aspect to people in the field?

That's all that comes off top of my head right now (it's late here and it's beddy bye bye's).

Thanks for the input Goggs. Regarding material, I don't plan to introduce a lot of new material so much as to put existing material into perspective. There's little in the way of a solid foundation and what's there is steadily being eroded. The old guard is ... well just getting old, and they are disappearing. The sources coming in to replace them are often filled with misinformation, disinformation and polarized opinions. So those who want to take the subject seriously have no contemporary baseline. You could say that it's my own personal attempt to "separate the signal from the noise" and that's a large part of the reason for me sticking with the Paracast. Somewhat ironically, until fairly recently I was of a similar opinion to Nick Redfern that sifting through a myriad number of case files wasn't going to produce much of anything useful. Only as I've gotten into middle age myself have I come to recognize the importance of preserving sighting reports. Consequently I don't have a stack of detailed case files, but I have talked informally with hundreds of people, many of them eyewitnesses. So there will be some minor review of sighting reports for the purpose of illustration, but not for the sake of filler.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Sounds good. Well hopefully I will one day see something in print.

 

[mike]

Screen Memory Brain Hacks: I agree that this is a powerful possibility and I'm going to include it in my book. But who or what is doing the hacking? It's safe to say that 50 years ago ATECH was the only rational explanation. But nowadays it is conceivable that human technology ( perhaps we should call it HUMTECH ? ) ... may have become sophisticated enough to account for some phenomena. However something like a Bigfoot sighting ( a creature that is moving through a background in an uncontrolled environment ) would seem to be much harder to produce than a static image. I'm reluctant to think we've come that far yet. Opinion?

I dont see any real difference in difficulty, the background environment is already being input via the normal inputs, adding a moving element is no harder than the computer rendering of gollum in LOTR.

As to who is doing the hacking.

Personally given the number of stars in our galaxy and the number of galaxys in view from here, the numbers (imo) point to a non terrestrial possibility.
But as i have also made mention of many times, i personally think biological sentience is a phase that naturally progresses to a level above that, and thus i think we may be dealing with a species or group of species of this next order of evolution.
Possibly with individual groups of hive mind, or even a supercluster of hive minds comprising multiple species.

Of course given that humans are developing this read write brain hack tech at a steady clip, the time traveller scenario is also on the cards.

And of course outside of linear time, we may even be looking at a supercluster of post biological sentience which includes humans from the "future" as well as other species of the same level of evolution.

 

[Randall]

I dont see any real difference in difficulty, the background environment is already being input via the normal inputs, adding a moving element is no harder than the computer rendering of gollum in LOTR.

A bit of clarification there. What I meant by "moving through a background environment" isn't simply analogous to an object or character in front of a green screen. So for example the "through" part of the background would be like a creature moving through a forest where it appears both in front of and/or behind many objects in rapid succession in an uncontrolled environment ( not like a movie set ). Accomplishing this with a mind control device would require latency free transmission and feedback from and to the brain on a minimum 10MS loop that perfectly erases the creature ( or parts of the creature ) as it moves behind things in a changing 3D landscape. This would be much more complex than making a flying disk appear against a near black sky at night, which would only require a one way transmission into the brain.

As to who is doing the hacking.

Personally given the number of stars in our galaxy and the number of galaxys in view from here, the numbers (imo) point to a non terrestrial possibility. But as i have also made mention of many times, i personally think biological sentience is a phase that naturally progresses to a level above that, and thus i think we may be dealing with a species or group of species of this next order of evolution. Possibly with individual groups of hive mind, or even a supercluster of hive minds comprising multiple species.

Of course given that humans are developing this read write brain hack tech at a steady clip, the time traveller scenario is also on the cards. And of course outside of linear time, we may even be looking at a supercluster of post biological sentience which includes humans from the "future" as well as other species of the same level of evolution.

I tend to agree with that sort of Kurzweilian vision of evolution. It seems like a logical and rational progression. Not really sure how it relates to time travel though. Can you elaborate a bit more on that?

 

[mike]

A bit of clarification there. What I meant by "moving through a background environment" isn't simply analogous to an object or character in front of a green screen. So for example the "through" part of the background would be like a creature moving through a forest where it appears both in front of and/or behind many objects in rapid succession in an uncontrolled environment ( not like a movie set ). Accomplishing this with a mind control device would require latency free transmission and feedback from and to the brain on a minimum 10MS loop that perfectly erases the creature ( or parts of the creature ) as it moves behind things in a changing 3D landscape. This would be much more complex than making a flying disk appear against a near black sky at night, which would only require a one way transmission into the brain.



I tend to agree with that sort of Kurzweilian vision of evolution. It seems like a logical and rational progression. Not really sure how it relates to time travel though. Can you elaborate a bit more on that?

Only in terms of a real time feed, One doesnt require a real time feed of data if one can simply insert an entire screen memory of the event at a time of choosing.

For example i walk through the woods one night and see nothing, a week later my memories are hacked and a screen memory of bigfoot is inserted. From my pov, i saw bigfoot that night.
I see no problem with the complexity of creating such a sequence, its a matter or processing power nothing more.

Time travel, well lets say a 1000 years from now (as we would reckon it from a linear time pov) the human species has the ability to perform seamless brain hack screen memorys, and also the ability to time travel.
These brain hacks are the perfect way to cover your tracks as a downtime traveller.

iBrain: Scientists to 'hack' Stephen Hawkings brain | Space, Military and Medicine | News.com.au

Ive lost the link, but i read an article allegedly quoting a US general saying DARPA was developing brain hack tech that could read and "write" to the human brain

Scientists at Boston University and ATR Computational Neuroscience Laboratories in Kyoto, Japan, believe that in the future learning a new skill might involve nothing more than sitting in front of a computer screen and waiting for it to ‘upload’.
They have been studying how a functional magnetic resonance machine (FMRI) can ‘induce’ knowledge in someone through their visual cortex by sending signals that change their brain activity pattern.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2072177/Learning-skills-like-characters-The-Matrix-set-reality-say-scientists.html#ixzz27FTqPtXM

 

[Randall]

Only in terms of a real time feed, One doesnt require a real time feed of data if one can simply insert an entire screen memory of the event at a time of choosing. For example i walk through the woods one night and see nothing, a week later my memories are hacked and a screen memory of bigfoot is inserted.

Good point. That could conceivably be done, but that brings up other problems, like the delay in reacting to it at the time. Something amazing like that would normally evoke an immediate reaction that would involve others nearby or in the near future. As soon as you add a significant time delay we get into the area of repressed memories, hypnotically implanted memories, missing time and all that stuff, which seems possible with the technology and techniques we have now ( at least to some extent ).

 

[Michael Allen]

Its the closest thing to a unifying perspective of the so-called "paranormal" that I can think of, although I am a bit cautious about taking this route. However its tempting to speculate....

(1) We need to make sure we aren't just filtering the same phenomena of the past in earlier guises through our own technological lens. We'd possibly be making the same mistake as others in the past.
(2) Again for the sake of argument, assuming the phenomena is singular (not a multiplicity of unrelated events) and it represents some kind of intentional visceral communication, we might expect an evolution of forms to continue as our own understanding changes. There are marked differences in some of the reports when looking at the past that seem to correlate to expectations of the time period. There are also forms appearing in all that are invariant. As such I propose analysis of the invariant vs variant forms these anomalous phenomena take from a combined database of all sightings. If this is something beyond human understanding and our own natural intuition, which I wager most of you will agree, then perhaps a mechanized method is called for.
(3) This is an insane idea: perhaps the very question regarding this phenomena sets it off due to our own attempts to understand it -- I can see where my point (2) above might actually lead to this if we set an AI in motion to determine the source of the behavior and over the ages of time is only able to understand it by creating it. This combines AI nanotechnology, time-travel, omega point, and biology--where atomic and molecular replicators take form in us through billions of years and the very edge of our own understanding is "programmed in our DNA" to recreate the same problem we are trying to solve
(4) Ok (3) was insane, now this: to facilitate this visceral form of communication (i.e. "brain hacking") I have often heard that these beings can control space and time -- if that's the case, perhaps this "holographic" generator sits on another star system far away and is their form of SETI. (some kind of gravimetric transmitter thingy).

 

[Jeff Davis]

ugg, I am at a loss for words. I've sat here for over an hour and the same thing just rolls around upstairs. Our reality is a small portion of a much larger environment. Micro/Macro. UFOs, and the types of humanoid bi-pedal entities associated with close encounters do not seem to be space travelers as much as they do environmental reality navigators. They interface the witness to facilitate their own means to access and leave this native entrainment we call reality. They are navigating Quantum Consciousness without being natively integral to it. Space, Time, Distance is a relationship between two points in a given field of reference attributable to our synchronized entrainment. That entrainment is our native temporal leash so to speak. Quantum consciousness is the field wherein our brains electrically cycle and feedback resulting in our constant sentient synchronized relationship to it whereby we create measurements relevant only to us and those points of reference. If what we call QC could be interfaced and further modulated via AI, or even multiple host environment intelligences we know relatively nothing of, comprehensively speaking, those beings may be eliminating time and distance by means of our very defining limitations within whatever native construct they are navigating. They may have to access and decipher our sentient orientation just to experience temporal reality. Such AI navigation means would still require points of cartographic reference to orientate entry, movement and departure or transition. I think they use us as that means. I think this may somehow be the key to the paranormal with the only real unifying factor being our sentience.

I'm thinking that our sentient reality may be ultimately facilitative in terms of what they navigate. Not just what we alone perceive as space and time, but rather our sentient relationship to that native construct. Without us, the space and time that their adaptive AI technologies access, via our sentience as it's driver, my not exist at all. This might explain why they are often times reported as just disappearing, and then seconds later being several miles away. Sometimes described as "hopping" or skipping repeatedly over relatively short discernible distances. Or how UFOs seem to signal back as if reading the observer's mind. Maybe they are, in the sense that the observer's sentience is providing their immediate navigational guidance system's point of reference.

Can you imagine a technology so advanced that it literally deciphers and utilizes a host variety of native sentient reality boundaries to navigate? Holy outta bounds Indrid Cold!

 

[Burnt State]

This discussion is just such a great example of human imagination at work. But so much of it seems to stem fom the notion that we are biological as opposed to already being part of a post biological construct to begin with. If we're in the ancestor simulation already then Philip K. Dick was right long ago and the key to all of this is jst using deep hallucinogens to better see the design.

 

[5tomidnite]

In my study of ghosts and haunting phenomenon I've acknowledged what I call the 3 to 5 percent rule, which is typically mirrored in UFO research. The rule basically states that out of 100 reports of paranormal phenomena, 3 to 5 of them cannot be attributed to; mis-interpreted (or exaggeration of) natural occurrences; hallucinations; falsification, fabrication, or hoaxing. These 3 to 5 (or 3 to 5 percent) events may still not be genuinely paranormal; perhaps we simply do not have enough (normal) information to debunk them, but normally it's assumed that somewhere within this 3 to 5 percent margin something truly paranormal can be found.

I trying to recall specifically where I heard this (maybe Mysterious Universe but don't quote me on that) but apparently 14% to 35% of UFO sightings are unexplained. The reason for the numbers being so high is apparently because after reviewing the cases of at least some debunked sightings weren't really debunked. The explanations given for the sightings didn't match the details of the sighting.

I can't find the reference for it sorry about that. I mention Mysterious Universe because I remember they did an episode where they went through a list of sightings from documents released by the Australian Air Force and some of the explanations for sightings failed to match the reported details. As to who actually stated the numbers being between 14% to 35% is lost to me at the moment.

 

[boomerang]

Jeff D: Your take on the phenomenon using our consciousness as a kind of portal to access a spacetime to which we are unavoidably limited is a slightly new thought for me. I am picturing someone jumping on and off of a carousel by clasping hands with one of the riders whose lives are confined to the merry go round. Is that a halfway decent analogy?

 

[Jeff Davis]

Jeff D: Your take on the phenomenon using our consciousness as a kind of portal to access a spacetime to which we are unavoidably limited is a slightly new thought for me. I am picturing someone jumping on and off of a carousel by clasping hands with one of the riders whose lives are confined to the merry go round. Is that a halfway decent analogy?

Possibly something like that, except it's facility wouldn't in premise rely on the witness's specific orientation unless there is an actual close encounter where in effect what people have referred to as everything from the Oz Effect to sheer High Strangeness takes place. And in that type of encounter I am thinking something similar in terms of a near field effect takes place but it's specific to the witness rather than that which is enviromentally navigation centered. What it hinges on is the possibility that the concept of space/time is the derivative result of our sentient interface with pure and non specific consciousness. It's my hypothetical opinion that there are intelligent forces able to manipulate pure consciousness as an overall environment by a technology that allows for an adaptive interfacing to it much like humanity might use a submarine under water or plane in the air to adjust our relationship to as much. That's why I believe that some UFOs are in fact pure AI, or at least the technological representation that their navigation demonstrates seems to point to as much. In this sense the UFO would modulate it's own consciousness interface relationship to varying degrees within specific native fields of reality (in our case that would be the space/time construct) to facilitate their "break the rules" navigation within as much. Thereby attuning to relationship extremes much like we would use a shark cage in the ocean depths to our advantage.

Human beings at this point in time, as far as I know, exist within the infancy of sentient non temporal consciousness navigation. Such actions like those demonstrated by Ingo Swann in the early 70s are one of many examples that have been demonstrably verified in result based on scientific comparative measurement and investigation.

I try and not get too conspiratorial, but I seriously have a hard time believing that we have not actually progressed far beyond the realm of public awareness in terms of scientific achievement.