Refuting the ETH: Angels/Aliens/Archetypes

[Constance]

Ufology wrote:

"IMO alien visitation ( ET or otherwise ) is not a "myth" as in fictitious or purely symbolic, and I appreciate what you're saying to some extent, but let's not forget that there have been studies by reputable people in the past. The Project Sign people didn't start out with any assumptions about where UFOs originate, yet they ultimately came to the conclusion that UFOs are probably ET. It's also no secret that their conclusion was rejected. So that proves that even in the early days of ufology, the ETH hasn't always been embraced."

Burnt replied:

"no it hasn't and has been refuted time and time and time again"

You mean in specific cases in which a prosaic explanation has been demonstrated, right? As your sentence stands it is a misleading generalization signifying that the extraterrestrial hypothesis itself has been 'refuted', which means 'proved to be invalid or untrue' for any and all ufo cases.

 

[DissectionStalker]

And the "storytellers" couldn't possibly have caused all the thousands of UFO reports worldwide over the past several decades.

Correct! The MIC, News Reporting, and the Entertainment Matrix gave Humans the blueprint to report such sightings. It's mostly misidentification and hoaxing, though it is also ALL in the mind too. Truly, the mind is a real frontier unexplored about ET and UFO's, etc.

And Humans, as I have clearly pointed out, have a long history of believing in such Mythological and Religious ideas for thousands of years having similar "outreach" "longings" and beliefs in the ET and seeing such sightings in the sky. Go debate Jacques Vallee if you don't believe me.

 

[DissectionStalker]

I've had two ufo sightings that I've described here. I have never said I've had a sighting of an ET. You have a stubborn habit of putting words in other people's mouths and claiming that you know what other people think and believe. You should break that habit.

You need to read again what I wrote. I did not say you saw ET. You should break your habit suggesting I say things I did not say.

You have clearly stated elsewhere that you believe the UFO's you saw were NOT of Human origin. You clearly believe these are of ET origin, though I wish you would share fully about your experiences too. For example, why can't you at least tell us what State you were in, when you saw these UFO's? Why keep that a secret?

 

[Constance]

You need to read again what I wrote. I did not say you saw ET. You should break your habit suggesting I say things I did not say.

You have clearly stated elsewhere that you believe the UFO's you saw were NOT of Human origin. You clearly believe these are of ET origin, though I wish you would share fully about your experiences too. For example, why can't you at least tell us what State you were in, when you saw these UFO's? Why keep that a secret?

Yes, these objects were anomalous, evidently nonterrestrial technology, likely not of human origin. While I agree with many career ufologists that the ETH is the 'best available hypothesis' regarding such sightings, other hypotheses are potentially equally promising: the interdimensional hypothesis is one; another is the hypothesis that we share the planet with another, more technologically advanced, species living in regions apart from us such as the depths of the oceans. These hypotheses should all be explored.

Re the state in which my second sighting occurred, it's not relevant and it is none of your business.

 

[DissectionStalker]

I have no intrinsic problem with the notion of UFOs as sequestered technology of human origin. Its just that this "breakaway civilization" line of reasoning leads to a larger paradigm that is as almost as esoteric and fraught with "woo" as any ETH or extra dimensional model might be.

We can clearly state as FACT that the MIC UFO technology is hidden behind the Mythology of ET, and that has been a DIRECT manipulation used by the MIC "to cover" for this technology.

That has nothing to do with breakaway civilization woo. It has everything to do with how susceptible the Human mind is to believe in ET-UFO's. It's obviously easy to do when we have a SyFy based Entertainment Matrix that dominates and drives our technology and futuristic fantasies. Who needs a real breakaway civilization flying UFO's to where, why that woo, when "the fantasy" mythology is already ingrained through these other channels?

Like it or not, we are run by a Master Race. The concentration of wealth proves that. Yes, they have escape plans too. The chosen will be protected underground if our planet is under threat of some catastrophic disaster. Right now, there is no breakaway location for our Master Race to go anywhere off planet, so that is just more SyFy BS to distract you from the present Master Race that controls Humanity now! Wealth cannot be so concentrated into so few hands for long, because these people gain too much power to literally annihilate our planet.

I don't pretend to be the knowledgeable sociologist about how to solve this problem, but the ET-UFO is part of the problem and mystique of how the PTB control the blueprints about what we think and believe.

So, do we really need to fantasize about breakaway civilization woo going off-planet anytime soon to explain the UFO phenomenon? No! IMO.

 

[Randall]

We can clearly state as FACT that the MIC UFO technology is hidden behind the Mythology of ET, and that has been a DIRECT manipulation used by the MIC "to cover" for this technology. That has nothing to do with breakaway civilization woo. It has everything to do with how susceptible the Human mind is to believe in ET-UFO's. It's obviously easy to do when we have a SyFy based Entertainment Matrix that dominates and drives our technology and futuristic fantasies. Who needs a real breakaway civilization flying UFO's to where, why that woo, when "the fantasy" mythology is already ingrained through these other channels? ...

OK without blundering into the quagmire of high-powered Illuminati global domination conspiracies, I think it's reasonable to assume that some technology engineered by the MIC has given rise to UFO reports, and that in some cases those reports were not explained to the public as MIC projects. I've run across statements by military people that the Skyhook balloons and hypersonic aircraft like the Oxcart/YF-12a/SR-71 and stealth aircraft like the B2 have been responsible for UFO reports. That seems perfectly reasonable to me. But it doesn't seem reasonable that all sightings can be explained by invoking the MIC. The performance characteristics described in some UFO reports are simply too radical to attribute to human engineering at the time, and for that matter probably even now.

 

[Trajanus]

Correct! The MIC, News Reporting, and the Entertainment Matrix gave Humans the blueprint to report such sightings.

Strange that a disproportionate number of sightings are from people out in the boonies i.e. least exposed to media stuff. Even aborigines have reported a landed saucer with humanoids-see Edwards.

It's mostly misidentification and hoaxing, though it is also ALL in the mind too.

No way. Many cases like Socorro have physical evidence, and aren't hoaxes.

 

[DissectionStalker]

I don't believe Ancient Aliens came to Earth, unless we are the distant relatives that were seeded here. In that case, there was no need to hide inside the asteroid belt or behind the moon or be here now on Earth as ET-UFO watchers. The only reason to do that would be for some type of covert reasons, and that's just fantastic Trillion dollar business for the MIC and ET Entertainment Matrix. Don't fall for that BS. That's the way of War and conflict. It is not peace but Star Wars. Don't you understand the Alien Mythology that Ronald Reagan continued in the 1980's was already manifested in 1947 with the UFO wave.

Think logically as follows: Ancient Aliens would likely have discovered or seeded life on Earth Billions of years ago. Our galaxy is estimated to be about 10 Billion years old, so IF intelligent life forms will typically do what Humans do we would have long since been seeded or occupied long before Humans existed here.

If we were seeded, then our Genetic codes could contain the keys to unlock how we were seeded and possibly why. Maybe that is where the real bible is located. Our God(s) are already in there and here now. Our "Alien" Off Planet God is an unfolding process that we ourselves are a part of its realization. I love the possibility that our creator God is in the code, and that we could find the answers perhaps in the genetic codes that life depends on. Isn't that the key to life itself?

Of course, that assumes we are nearing the actual fundamental level of understanding that will unlock the genetic code, but there may be more complicated mechanisms beneath that layer that must be understood too. The Human genome was found to be much smaller than expected, so there are more complicated interaction "layers" that have not been found-out or learned to get to the fundamental understanding. At least that is my limited understanding at this point.

Then again, Genesis of life may be Earth based strictly dependent on our Solar System and unique placement within our Galaxy. In that case, Humans are likely to be very unique and extremely rare as Space Exploration life forms, though I believe many intelligent life forms will exist elsewhere in the Universe. Most intelligent life, by that I mean with brains, will never explore Space. IMO. That's very easy to believe that despite Star Trek, because we are the only life form of billions or millions with brains that ever began to explore Space. We are nothing but a blink of time on our planet and will certainly wink-out soon if we don't find a peaceful means of ending war and living in peace and harmony with our planet. I don't think our greed based and consumer based societies can succeed at doing this. Do you?

 

[smcder]

To quote:

"The Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique and the Foundation for Critical Thinking — two sister educational non-profit organizations — work closely together to promote educational reform. We seek to promote essential change in education and society through the cultivation of fair-minded critical thinking."
​

IMO that's just fine. Groups have to meet certain requirements before being granted non-profit status, and I don't have a problem with them going around doing seminars and charging for them. If they can make a go of it while cultivating fair-minded critical thinking, I wish them all the success in the world.

Based on my research, I can't promote or endorse this particular company.

And I think you can get the information free.

I haven't looked recently to see if their research section is updated ... but at the time I looked much of it was published by members of the organization itself and there didn't seem to be a lot of references in outside papers to their work ... there didn't seem to be strong empirical evidence that their organization and presentation of the material was more effective .... so without that, I am cautious to spend $1,000 per course for online training.

As I said, caveat emptor, and I feel like I have a responsibility to look into an organization and share my findings. If you have other information, please let us know.

The concept of critical thinking, I don't have a problem with - as long as people understand that it has its limits - you can't live by it (as the lawsuit proves, IF true)

 

[Randall]

Based on my research, I can't promote or endorse this particular company.

And I think you can get the information free.

I haven't looked recently to see if their research section is updated ... but at the time I looked much of it was published by members of the organization itself and there didn't seem to be a lot of references in outside papers to their work ... there didn't seem to be strong empirical evidence that their organization and presentation of the material was more effective .... so without that, I am cautious to spend $1,000 per course for online training.

As I said, caveat emptor, and I feel like I have a responsibility to look into an organization and share my findings. If you have other information, please let us know.

The concept of critical thinking, I don't have a problem with - as long as people understand that it has its limits - you can't live by it (as the lawsuit proves, IF true)

The issue of the politics of the FFCT is of peripheral concern to me. I post the link to their chart of the basic elements and standards of critical thinking because IMO it's one of the better ones among the many out there. I'm neither endorsing nor criticizing their work as a non-profit organization, and my wishes for their success are simply a reflection of my support for their efforts. I would wish others who make similar efforts all the success in the world too, and if you would like to post up some other sources, by all means please do so. The more we are exposed to it, the more likely it is that some of it will rub off .

 

[smcder]

The issue of the politics of the FFCT is of peripheral concern to me. I post the link to their chart of the basic elements and standards of critical thinking because IMO it's one of the better ones among the many out there. I'm neither endorsing nor criticizing their work as a non-profit organization, and my wishes for their success are simply a reflection of my support for their efforts. I would wish others who make similar efforts all the success in the world too, and if you would like to post up some other sources, by all means please do so. The more we are exposed to it, the more likely it is that some of it will rub off .

I agree with that position and that it does appear to be a good collection of resources - my recommendation would be that people use the free resources on this site and then compare them critically to other sources before purchasing anything - the courses runs about a $1,000 a piece for online learning and may be worth it - but I personally would need more evidence to be convinced.

I also don't want to lose the point of the allegations, the alleged sexual harrassment in the work place, as being relevant.

If there is a claim, even implicit, that critical thinking can lead to better decisions and to a better life (and I think that's the general background in a "self improvement" society against which any such training is offered) and if one of the foremost exponents of that is involved in a sexual harrassment case then we need to consider if critical thinking was used in coming to the decisions that lead to those (IF TRUE ) allegations or if critical thinking is ineffective in preventing humans from doing stupid things ... I suspect the latter, which doesn't downgrade critical thinking in the least as we have numerous historical examples of smart people doing stupid things, arguably accomplishing more in this area than their average counterparts ... and so we have to see a bigger picture in evaluating the world against critical thinking.

I've thought about how wisdom shades inevitably into foolishness ... as it seems many things (all things?) shade into their opposites and back again. So the general principle may be simple moderation - use the tools of critical thinking but also allow time for unstructured thinking ... certainly daydreaming in its place is as healthy as analytical intelligence and there is probably no scientific way to assess the proper ratio - it's done by feel, I suspect.

Anyway, one very interesting topic might be "mind training and the paranoral" - I would certainly be interested in seeing a thread on this.

And now back to our regular schedule of programming.

 

[Trajanus]

Our galaxy is estimated to be about 10 Billion years old, so IF intelligent life forms will typically do what Humans do we would have long since been seeded or occupied long before Humans existed here.

Depends on how long ago they arose, acquired space travel and what their policy is. Sagan opposed colonization of Mars even if the only Martians are microbes.

Then again, Genesis of life may be Earth based strictly dependent on our Solar System and unique placement within our Galaxy.

Earthly life and intelligence are almost certainly indigenous.

In that case, Humans are likely to be very unique and extremely rare as Space Exploration life forms, though I believe many intelligent life forms will exist elsewhere in the Universe. Most intelligent life, by that I mean with brains, will never explore Space. IMO. That's very easy to believe that despite Star Trek, because we are the only life form of billions or millions with brains that ever began to explore Space.

I and others think ETs have long been at it and UFOs are the evidence. If intelligence can be equated with space exploration capability, "many intelligent life forms" means many spacefarers. There's nothing holding them back, and they're here.

We are nothing but a blink of time on our planet and will certainly wink-out soon if we don't find a peaceful means of ending war and living in peace and harmony with our planet. I don't think our greed based and consumer based societies can succeed at doing this. Do you?

I doubt we'll destroy ourselves. I think humanity will endure but from the standpoint of the political/ideological status quo it won't be pleasant. An authoritarian system can overcome environmental problems with relative ease. Unlike ours it can force people to have fewer kids and stop consuming so much, to ease the strain on the environment. In the likely event present government doesn't address serious problems, it'll fall and be replaced with one that can. It won't be easy or pleasant but IMO a more likely outcome than the demise of humanity or civilization.