NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

Reply to thread

Message

Nice question on the lung gunk issue. Alas, abduction would be much less mysterious these "beings" succumbed to rules of evidence we use in American court rooms. It doesn't seem to do that. But if they - ET - has been around for a while, as many forms of mythology seems to suggest, they are good at hiding in plain sight.

Most abduction research has to focus on the character of the witness, and similarities of abduction elements between abductees - there's no other way, unless you want to speculate about what seems sensible and reasonable behavior on the part of aliens or their subjects from our own sensible and reasonable perspectives. Who the Hell would know but another alien? On the other hand, does Jim seem like a cult leader...eh...not really - not to me. Is he out to make money on this? It doesn't seem that way. Does he want personal fame and glory. That doesn't seem to be the case either.

Abduction stories pretty much are what they are. I think it's the time, as in all types of research on topics we know little about, we just record the stories. We're writing the cosmic literature review.

What bothers me about Spark's story is his ability not just to record huge amounts of detail (unlike nearly every other abductee), but to deeply 'understand' _why_ they do what they do. He has a screen, and understands immediately it is, indeed, a screen. He is intimately involved with the experience and at the same time has the objectivity to understand it and alien motives. Who can do that - even if you're retrospectively describing an experience with other human beings - at a party, for instance? Who can argue with the logic of alien actions - they're alien, after all. I do suspect Jim's understanding of their motives, however. When you start filling in the blanks from your own, human understanding, I think you begin having internal problems with the story. I think if Sparks did create his story, this is the evidence of it.

<blockquote data-quote="whw" data-source="post: 8484" data-attributes="member: 313">Nice question on the lung gunk issue.&nbsp; Alas, abduction would be much less mysterious these &quot;beings&quot; succumbed to rules of evidence we use in American court rooms.&nbsp; It doesn&#039;t seem to do that.&nbsp; But if they - ET - has been around for a while, as many forms of mythology seems to suggest, they are good at hiding in plain sight.Most abduction research has to focus on the character of the witness, and similarities of abduction elements between abductees - there&#039;s no other way, unless you want to speculate about what seems sensible and reasonable behavior on the part of aliens or their subjects from our own sensible and reasonable perspectives.&nbsp; Who the Hell would know but another alien?&nbsp; On the other hand, does Jim seem like a cult leader...eh...not really - not to me.&nbsp; Is he out to make money on this?&nbsp; It doesn&#039;t seem that way.&nbsp; Does he want personal fame and glory.&nbsp; That doesn&#039;t seem to be the case either.Abduction stories pretty much are what they are.&nbsp; I think it&#039;s the time, as in all types of research on topics we know little about, we just record the stories.&nbsp;&nbsp; We&#039;re writing the cosmic literature review.What bothers me about Spark&#039;s story is his ability not just to record huge amounts of detail (unlike nearly every other abductee), but to deeply &#039;understand&#039; _why_ they do what they do.&nbsp; He has a screen, and understands immediately it is, indeed, a screen.&nbsp; He is intimately involved with the experience and at the same time has the objectivity to understand it and alien motives.&nbsp; Who can do that - even if you&#039;re retrospectively describing an experience with other human beings - at a party, for instance?&nbsp; Who can argue with the logic of alien actions - they&#039;re alien, after all.&nbsp; I do suspect Jim&#039;s understanding of their motives, however.&nbsp; When you start filling in the blanks from your own, human understanding, I think you begin having internal problems with the story.&nbsp; I think if Sparks did create his story, this is the evidence of it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="whw, post: 8484, member: 313"] Nice question on the lung gunk issue. Alas, abduction would be much less mysterious these "beings" succumbed to rules of evidence we use in American court rooms. It doesn't seem to do that. But if they - ET - has been around for a while, as many forms of mythology seems to suggest, they are good at hiding in plain sight. Most abduction research has to focus on the character of the witness, and similarities of abduction elements between abductees - there's no other way, unless you want to speculate about what seems sensible and reasonable behavior on the part of aliens or their subjects from our own sensible and reasonable perspectives. Who the Hell would know but another alien? On the other hand, does Jim seem like a cult leader...eh...not really - not to me. Is he out to make money on this? It doesn't seem that way. Does he want personal fame and glory. That doesn't seem to be the case either. Abduction stories pretty much are what they are. I think it's the time, as in all types of research on topics we know little about, we just record the stories. We're writing the cosmic literature review. What bothers me about Spark's story is his ability not just to record huge amounts of detail (unlike nearly every other abductee), but to deeply 'understand' _why_ they do what they do. He has a screen, and understands immediately it is, indeed, a screen. He is intimately involved with the experience and at the same time has the objectivity to understand it and alien motives. Who can do that - even if you're retrospectively describing an experience with other human beings - at a party, for instance? Who can argue with the logic of alien actions - they're alien, after all. I do suspect Jim's understanding of their motives, however. When you start filling in the blanks from your own, human understanding, I think you begin having internal problems with the story. I think if Sparks did create his story, this is the evidence of it. [/QUOTE]

Verification