Micah Hanks and "The UFO Singularity"

[Gene Steinberg]

Paranormal author and broadcaster Micah Hanks returns to The Paracast for our first episode of 2013 to discuss his new book, The UFO Singularity.

Says the back cover, "The Ufo Singularity finally reveals what UFO phenomena call tell us about greater-than-human intelligence, and offers provocative theories of where such intelligence might originate. You'll explore the most challenging metaphysical questions and the latest scientific thoughts about them."

That opens a wide range of subject matter for your questions. We'll be recording this session on January 3, starting at 11:00 AM Mountain Time.

 

[stonehart]

Micah is always fun to listen to, so good choice for the start of the year Gene I look forward to the show.

 

[Konrad Hartmann]

If UFOs may be traveling from the future, may we not today create the UFOs that we encounter? Does this imply that we have a choice in what we may begin to see?
Might we view abduction phenomena as the nefarious outcomes of human actions today?

 

[marduk]

If one were to think about it, if UFOs are from the future, it may not be from OUR future, if you get my drift. Let's say I went back in time and gave Columbus a globe of the earth. He may not have gone west to get to the Indes, and accidentally discovered America. So I wouldn't be there to give him the globe...
I guess my question would be -- if they are here to alter the timeline or give us "hints" to progress us then they'd be undoing their own timeline. So what would the motivation be?

 

[Wade]

Micah is always fun to listen to, so good choice for the start of the year Gene I look forward to the show.

Micah is the john keel of our time.

 

[Randall]

Seems to me that the Romulan's use a Quantum Singularity as their main power source on​

their Warbirds, so maybe he's onto something there ... ​

 

[Konrad Hartmann]

If one were to think about it, if UFOs are from the future, it may not be from OUR future, if you get my drift. Let's say I went back in time and gave Columbus a globe of the earth. He may not have gone west to get to the Indes, and accidentally discovered America. So I wouldn't be there to give him the globe...
I guess my question would be -- if they are here to alter the timeline or give us "hints" to progress us then they'd be undoing their own timeline. So what would the motivation be?

Good question. And would there even be a timeline?

And what does all this mean in relation to the tendency for witnesses to describe beings using technology that is just slightly ahead of their own?

 

[Randall]

Good show! Better sound too ... and that echo on "Attack of the Internet" sounded almost like it was planned !

 

[stonehart]

Good question. And would there even be a timeline?

And what does all this mean in relation to the tendency for witnesses to describe beings using technology that is just slightly ahead of their own?

If one were to think about it, if UFOs are from the future, it may not be from OUR future, if you get my drift. Let's say I went back in time and gave Columbus a globe of the earth. He may not have gone west to get to the Indes, and accidentally discovered America. So I wouldn't be there to give him the globe...
I guess my question would be -- if they are here to alter the timeline or give us "hints" to progress us then they'd be undoing their own timeline. So what would the motivation be?

What you would end up with is divergent possibility's.

By this I mean that in all probability the lines of causality would split into multiple futures with all of them having an origin in the point in space time that was changed.
The past is fixed but the future is not so if you go and change an event you do not stop the original time line at all, all you do is create alternate future's that continue to diverge to a point that they no longer resemble each other, but the original time line is still intact as it has became one of many possibility's.

You guys get what I am getting at right?

Let me put it this way If you were to give the globe to Columbus you would still be there to give it to him even if he decided not to go in the direction that the original time line had him going in.
What you have done is create I divergent future, and what is more one in which you would have to exist for it to exist in the first place.

This thinking along the lines of causality can really mess with your head .... am I right?

 

[Randall]

Chris ... Can you please give us more details on the vanishing cargo plane you saw?

NOTE: The most promising approach to terrestrial cloaking technology is active camouflage using Phased array optics (PAO). The concept involves the use of computational holography to produce a three-dimensional hologram of background scenery on the object to be camouflaged that is accurate regardless of viewer's distance or angle.

NOTE: I found these comments on Yahoo Answers.

Question: What does blue lights on an aircraft mean? Back in September 08, I was driving home one night and saw bright blue lights in the sky. As I drove closer to it, I saw it was an airplane; big and black with bright blue lights. It was really close to the ground, just above the trees. I moved right underneath it, I realized it was just hovering, I don't believe it was moving at all. Can anyone tell me what this was?​

Best Answer: Yes I have seen this before too! It's a huge black plane, bright blue lights on it. It made no sound at all and was just hovering very closely to the ground. It was a little bit above the trees, but was enough to stop the car in front of me while passing a light. it was kind of jet-like, but hugeeeeee.​

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Seems to me that the Romulan's use a Quantum Singularity as their main power source on​

their Warbirds, so maybe he's onto something there ... ​

​

Oh a Romulan Warbird is sooooo my fav spaceship from Star Trek. The best spaceship ever is of course, The Millenium Falcon! I dare anyone to say otherwise!

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

Chris ... Can you please give us more details on the vanishing cargo plane you saw?

(From my second book Enter The Valley (1999 St Martins Press) page 259
San Luis Valley resident Roger LaBorde is one of the more compelling individuals I have ever known, and I am honored to count him among my friends. His quiet, centered nature and even-keeled demeanor are matched by his easy sense humor and a remarkable wealth of life experience. A very low-key individual, Roger is a man of many talents. Since 1992, one of those talents has been helping dozens of people who are comatose pass over, or come back. His successes are truly remarkable and include several high-profile cases that have been featured on the NBC television program The Other Side and the Paramount show Sightings .

Roger and, and his wife, Pam have lived in the San Luis Valley for over ten years. I met them in 1991 and have gotten to know Pam and Roger and their two daughters Angela and Jennifer--who is Isadora's daughter, Brisa's best friend. 1 It was quite some time before Roger's work became a topic of discussion. He is very humble about his abilities, and doesn't usually to talk about himself. I was pleasantly surprised and grateful when he agreed to an interview.

The LaBordes have known for quite awhile that they would "live on Blanca," and I visited their newly acquired dream house, with it's stunning front-row seat view of Little Bear and Blanca Peak, for the first time, on August 15, 1997.

I arrived with Brisa, who was spending the night with the LaBorde girls, and Roger was showing a Colorado State Forest worker an area he and Pam were considering turning into a small wetland. I leaned against my truck and scanned the breathtaking view of the Blanca Massif with my binoculars while Brisa visited with her friends.

A low airplane engine caught my attention, and I looked up to see what appeared to be a C-131 flying over the mountain about 3500 to 4000 feet up. I brought the binoculars up to my eyes and located the plane. At that instant, it shimmered and disappeared! I quickly looked around the cloudless sky as a couple of seconds went by and the sound abruptly ceased. Nothing! I realized it was strange to see a bright aluminum-colored C-131. And it was very weird the way the plane vanished. Roger came walking up the driveway. I told him what I had just witnessed, and he said, "Oh, I've seen that a couple, three times since we moved here." We went inside and sat down at the kitchen table, with me scratching my head, still trying to figure of what I had just seen. (end of excerpt)

The plane disappeared w/ a shimmer that was accompanied by a flash of light. The plane's engine sound abruptly ceased 2 or 3 seconds later like a CD being abruptly shut off or paused. Go figure.

 

[Randall]

I leaned against my truck and scanned the breathtaking view of the Blanca Massif with my binoculars while Brisa visited with her friends ... A low airplane engine caught my attention, and I looked up to see what appeared to be a C-131 flying over the mountain about 3500 to 4000 feet up. I brought the binoculars up to my eyes and located the plane. At that instant, it shimmered and disappeared! I quickly looked around the cloudless sky as a couple of seconds went by and the sound abruptly ceased. Nothing! I realized it was strange to see a bright aluminum-colored C-131. And it was very weird the way the plane vanished. Roger came walking up the driveway. I told him what I had just witnessed, and he said, "Oh, I've seen that a couple, three times since we moved here." We went inside and sat down at the kitchen table, with me scratching my head, still trying to figure of what I had just seen ... The plane disappeared w/ a shimmer that was accompanied by a flash of light. The plane's engine sound abruptly ceased 2 or 3 seconds later like a CD being abruptly shut off or paused. Go figure.

Thanks Chris, that is really interesting. Please bear with me on these questions. I'll try not to drag it out much beyond them.

• How far would you say from a purely visual estimate would you say the C-131 was from you?
• What were the specs of your binoculars ( e.g. 10 X 50 )?
• How much field of view did the plane ( if that's what it was ) take up in your binoculars?

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

Thanks Chris, that is really interesting. Please bear with me on these questions. I'll try not to drag it out much beyond them.

• How far would you say from a purely visual estimate would you say the C-131 was from you?
• What were the specs of your binoculars ( e.g. 10 X 50 )?
• How much field of view did the plane ( if that's what it was ) take up in your binoculars?

It appeared to be about a mile away laterally north from my location and was headed west to east (I was at about 8,700 above sea-level) and the plane was flying just above the mountain tops at around 13,000' to 13,500'.
The binocs were 50X power and the plane took up about 3/4s of the field of view. It was shiny aluminum colored--like it was brand new and hadn't been painted. I've never seen a cargo plane before or since that was shiny aluminum colored and/or unpainted. It had the distinctive low throb of the four prop cargo planes that we routinely saw fly down the MTR, usually north-to-south. It instantaneously disappeared with a flashing shimmer. The engine noise continued for several seconds then ceased abruptly.

 

[Randall]

It appeared to be about a mile away laterally north from my location and was headed west to east (I was at about 8,700 above sea-level) and the plane was flying just above the mountain tops at around 13,000' to 13,500'.
The binocs were 50X power and the plane took up about 3/4s of the field of view. It was shiny aluminum colored--like it was brand new and hadn't been painted. I've never seen a cargo plane before or since that was shiny aluminum colored and/or unpainted. It had the distinctive low throb of the four prop cargo planes that we routinely saw fly down the MTR, usually north-to-south. It instantaneously disappeared with a flashing shimmer. The engine noise continued for several seconds then ceased abruptly.

Thanks Chris ... The 50 would typically not be the power but the lens diameter. The power is the first number. So for example a pair of 10 X 50s makes an object appear 10 times closer through a 50mm lens. Can you please provide both numbers and the field of view? The field of view is the most important and may be in one or all of three forms as indicated on the housing next to the eyepiece(s) e.g. 36ft/1000yards | 122m/1000m | 4.4º

C-131 ( Is this the type of plane you saw? )

Or did you mean a C-130 ( below )

Please verify.

Once I have the info above, I can extrapolate some figures and see if they yield any further clues. For example, if it was one of those airplanes, we can determine if its apparent size as seen through your binoculars matches the specifications. If the numbers are way off and you're still sure about what you saw, then the aircraft that you saw may not have been what you thought it was. On the other hand if the numbers match reasonably well, we may be looking at some other explanation e.g. camouflage or something else again. I've got a couple of theories, but there's no point in mentioning them until we can eliminate as many known variables as is possible.

NOTE: Preliminary calculations suggest that your field of view through your binoculars at the estimated range of the aircraft was over 200 meters. At .75 of that, we're looking at an aircraft that took up 150 meters of your view. A 747 is only 70 meters long, so it would seem that either the aircraft was actually a fair bit closer ,or a fair bit larger, or your estimate of how much field of view it actually took up is larger than it actually was. You might want to reflect on that a bit ... maybe make a couple of rough diagrams.

If we assume a 3 second delay for the engine sound to stop. Given the speed of sound, the distance to the aircraft would have only been about a kilometer ( direct line of sight ) and this would bring its size down to within tolerance levels for our largest aircraft, but still too large to have been a C-131.

All this being said, my calculations could also be off. We still need the field of view numbers and I need to re-check my calculations. Are there any math nerds in the forum who can add their 2 cents worth in?

 

[Polterwurst]

Sorry, no math nerd here... all I wanted to say is if the internet was sentient, it would have found a way to wipe us out by now, if only to prevent further comments on Youtube.

Listening to the show now, lots of food for thought. Thumbs up.

 

[Konrad Hartmann]

What you would end up with is divergent possibility's.

By this I mean that in all probability the lines of causality would split into multiple futures with all of them having an origin in the point in space time that was changed.
The past is fixed but the future is not so if you go and change an event you do not stop the original time line at all, all you do is create alternate future's that continue to diverge to a point that they no longer resemble each other, but the original time line is still intact as it has became one of many possibility's.

You guys get what I am getting at right?

Let me put it this way If you were to give the globe to Columbus you would still be there to give it to him even if he decided not to go in the direction that the original time line had him going in.
What you have done is create I divergent future, and what is more one in which you would have to exist for it to exist in the first place.

This thinking along the lines of causality can really mess with your head .... am I right?

But the divergent possibilities could not interact or intersect with each other, right?

 

[Randall]

But the divergent possibilities could not interact or intersect with each other, right?

The concept of time is IMO much simpler to to grasp than it is often made out to be. For example it's not something dependent on consciousness. That is only our subjective experience of the consequences of time. So what is time then? Most simply, time is change. If there were no change at all, time would stand still. Perhaps the easiest way to imagine this is to visualize an old Bohr model of an atom with its electrons spinning around the nucleus and that atom in turn moving in relation to other atoms, and then to imagine every atom and subatomic particle in the universe slowing to a dead stop. At that point all time would stop within our universe. We would also never know it happened. For example if there were another universe beyond this one where the inhabitants could look in and see our unchanging universe, a thousand years could go by for them and we'd be none the wiser.

Where people tend to get confused is when the rules seem to change within this universe. So for example, when we're dealing with the relative time between something near a supermassive object and one that isn't, or between something moving near the speed of light and something that isn't, what we're really saying is that the forces at work near a supermassive object affect the rate of change taking place in the objects near to it all the way down to the subatomic level. So returning to our old Bohr model we might visualize some ultra powerful gravitational pull working on all the particles that cause them to become sluggish and slow down, the result being a slower rate of change ( slower time ). Personally I look at it from the perspective of the computational model of cosmology whereby calculating the spacetime coordinates of things at the extreme limits of our universe's computational power takes longer, resulting in the illusion of slowed time. This would be analogous to the relative times a computer takes to render an image. Simple scenes with little change render very quickly while complex scenes with a lot of change are slower. But what does this mean for time travel?

In the model of time described above, there are two main possibilities regarding time travel and both possibilities involve memory; not our own memory, but a universal memory bank. If the universe has no long term memory bank ( archive ), then what we are experiencing now is a real time existence within a thin slice of memory ( buffer ) sufficient for processing only the required changes from moment to moment with no archived past present or future. However if the universe has a large capacity memory bank, changes could theoretically be stored and therefore the past would also exist. The future however would require an even more sophisticated setup, and it also gets a bit philosophical. Technically the future can only exist if it has already happened ( been archived ), hence the phrase Back to the Future makes complete sense. However such a future wouldn't really be the same future you might otherwise have in the absence of any archive ...

... Universe permitting, I'll post more later on request ( if anyone is actually interested ).

 

[Goggs Mackay]

Chris - a thought - can mirages appear at that height or are they always just over the horizon kind of deals?

I am often hearing that people who have seen UFOs often seem to feel that the UFO or it's occupants is sort of reading their minds, or they actually felt a compulsion to look out of a window or something and then saw a UFO. If it is the case that these things often happen because we want them to or we are open to such possibilities, then my 'transmitter' aint working cos I am constantly looking up hoping to see what seems to happen to others on a semi-regular basis!

It's just not fair!

Living somewhere that is cloud-covered more than not doesn't help either. I often wonder how many UFOs may go over my city but no-one sees them due to the weather.

 

[stonehart]

But the divergent possibilities could not interact or intersect with each other, right?

No they could not once the line of causality is set I guess, unless some one knows how to jump between worlds and then hell the whole thing is open to speculation any way.