Refuting the ETH: Angels/Aliens/Archetypes

[Randall]

That's exactly it - these are theories... there's no proof for any of it that's anything more than anecdotal. For now, I don't think any of it is anything supernatural or paranormal. It's all things that we either misidentify or something we may not have figured out yet. Probably not aliens though.

When it comes to UFOs, I share your opinion that they're not supernatural or paranormal because the W5 of UFOs is just a knowledge gap, and if we had that knowledge, there'd be no need to invoke gods or demons or whatever else the case may be. At the same time, because we've looked everywhere we can within the boundaries of our global civilization for the answers, and found nothing substantial here to explain them, the logical conclusion is that the answers are outside those boundaries, and by definition that makes them alien. That doesn't necessitate them being extraterrestrial, just from someplace else. If they weren't, then we'd have found them and know all about them. But the fact is: We don't. So they're still alien. The answers are still literally "out there" someplace. The only other option is to deny they exist at all, which given the evidence, and my own personal experience, I don't think is a reasonable conclusion.

 

[Constance]

When it comes to UFOs, I share your opinion that they're not supernatural or paranormal because the W5 of UFOs is just a knowledge gap, and if we had that knowledge, there'd be no need to invoke gods or demons or whatever else the case may be.

The question is how immense is our 'knowledge gap' concerning the nature of the reality we experience, which is both 'physical' and in the case of humans and many other evolved species 'mental'. The reason why I am interested in 'the paranormal' is that it is in paranormal experiences and information exchange occurring in conscious human experience that we have some hope of comprehending the deeper nature of the reality we live in -- touching aspects of reality that cannot be accounted for mechanistically and reductively by materialist/physicalist science.

As you know, I consider the ETH adequate to account for the percentage of ufo cases that have demonstrated physical effects (on the ground, on the mechanical and electronic systems of terrestrial aircraft sent in pursuit of them, and on radar systems for the past 65 years). As @Trajanus observed earlier in this thread, the ETH is the most logical and parsimonious hypothesis to account for those cases. I also second his comment in post #143 above:

"I think the ETH is inherently more probable than other views. WE are "spacefaring aliens" to the rest of the Universe. There's no clear indication if any at all, that other dimensions or spirit realms even exist."

At the same time, because we've looked everywhere we can within the boundaries of our global civilization for the answers, and found nothing substantial here to explain them, the logical conclusion is that

the answers are outside those boundaries, and by definition that make them alien. That doesn't necessitate them being extraterrestrial, just from someplace else.

I gather that you are referring strictly to the boundaries of our objectively measureable knowledge concerning what is 'real' in the universe (extrapolated these days to theories of a possible multiverse). I see far too many theories and hypotheses put forward in ufo blogs and forums these days that begin with presuppositions concerning a 'multiverse' or the existence of a 'dimension' of reality populated by minds that attempt to control our minds and/or experiences here in our local earthworld. We have no objective evidence whatever that such other dimensions exist and that other minds more powerful than our own exist and manipulate us. I cannot take speculations based on those presuppositions seriously, and they certainly cannot and do not rule out the ETH as the most parsimonious hypothesis that exists for ufos demonstrating physical influences on our species and others and on our machinery. People who gravitate to those other-dimensional hypotheses should pursue their interests and see what they can find out thereby, but they should not claim that their speculative thinking undermines the ETH in cases where it is the best available hypothesis.

The answers are still literally "out there" someplace. The only other option is to deny they exist at all, which given the evidence, and my own personal experience, I don't think is a reasonable conclusion.

I agree. To deny that ufos exist at all is absurd, and that claim can only be made by people who have not read deeply enough in ufo history and investigations.

 

[mike]

Bill Chalker has written a good book review that delves into this

theozfiles: "How UFOs conquered the world" - "In the eye of the beholder" UFO reality or UFO theatre

"The UFO syndrome fulfils the role of the supernatural 'other.'"The argument that this “fulfils a deep emotional need” is a “cop out.” It could be argued that its nothing new. The technological ETH model could be viewed as a western imperative.“Sky being” lore is very widespread in ancient and native cultures.So it could be argued the ETH’s growth and diffusion around the world is not a triumph of western imperialism, but rather a shift (or technological upgrade) of existing beliefs in worldwide indigenous cultures. A “modern myth”- perhaps not.It could be just as easily argued for a complete inversion of that perspective.The modern US rendering of the “UFO myth” is just an inevitable technological reframing of an existing worldwide “myth” system with very deep roots.Perhaps a reframing might have western culture catching up, belatedly reframing an existing long held belief system.
7. "The extra-terrestrial hypothesis and other exotic theories cannot explain UFOs."
The ETH in its simplest form suggests that a technologically advanced based phenomenon is visiting Earth.What is disprovable (and hence potentially scientific)? Well the hypothesis that there is no advanced technology is evident in UFO reports?Science and sceptics have been arguing that for years (e.g. The flawed Condon report) – that there is no evidence for advanced technology.
In fact the contrary view may very well be provable .There are lots of potential discoveries and useful insights in UFO data, none of which can be found in David Clarke’s book.

 

[Orville]

I'm sorry to throw my hat in the ring on this one considering it is a really long post, but I do think that it is a very important question to ask. considering over 60 years of research into the UFO topic has gotten us no closer to any sort of inkling as to what we are dealing with, the best thing I can say about what we have learned in all this research is not to be so focused on any one possibility of what this phenomenon is. I mean to say that over the past few year I do believe that maybe we are becoming more aware of the fact that the nuts and bolts ETH does not even come close to giving us an explanation for the way this phenomenon has consistently changed from one decade to the next. I am in no way any sort of authority on quantum mechanics or physics by any means, but I do find the theory that there exists an infinite amount of universes very interesting. This is just a theory but if it were somehow to be proven true, we would have no way of understanding what reality we exist in except to compare everything to our own experience. I say this to say that just maybe we exist in a reality where all paranormal phenomenon we experience is somehow just out of our reach. there could also exist another where all this is accepted and exist physically for those who experience it. Maybe just Maybe we exist in the wrong reality for us to ever fully grasp what this all means.

 

[Robert Baird]

Dear Orville

Well said, but don't believe for an instant that any person telling you they are expert and have proof has a better handle on it than you appear to have.

I think there are answers in Dimensional travel but this is a topic people here prefer to ridicule because they are deluded by visions they do not know the origin of, and those origins have long standing aspects easily proven in religion.

 

[Angel of Ioren]

When it comes to UFOs, I share your opinion that they're not supernatural or paranormal because the W5 of UFOs is just a knowledge gap, and if we had that knowledge, there'd be no need to invoke gods or demons or whatever else the case may be. At the same time, because we've looked everywhere we can within the boundaries of our global civilization for the answers, and found nothing substantial here to explain them, the logical conclusion is that the answers are outside those boundaries, and by definition that make them alien. That doesn't necessitate them being extraterrestrial, just from someplace else. If they weren't, then we'd have found them and know all about them. But the fact is: We don't. So they're still alien. The answers are still literally "out there" someplace. The only other option is to deny they exist at all, which given the evidence, and my own personal experience, I don't think is a reasonable conclusion.

I agree - they exist... people are seeing flying objects they haven't identified. I just can't say that they're alien or inter-demensional or angels or whatever. I don't know. If I'm asked to guess, I look towards what we know exists, not to something that has yet to be proven. That's where I tend to disagree with most people in this forum. I look towards the more mundane and because of that I'm lumped into the "evil" skeptic group. Keep in mind, I won't deny that I am firmly in the skeptical camp... I'll side with Neil Degrase Tyson way before I do with any "ufologist."

Please watch the video and it's EXACTLY how I feel:

 

[Orville]

Dear Orville

Well said, but don't believe for an instant that any person telling you they are expert and have proof has a better handle on it than you appear to have.

I think there are answers in Dimensional travel but this is a topic people here prefer to ridicule because they are deluded by visions they do not know the origin of, and those origins have long standing aspects easily proven in religion.

Im sorry I don't quite understand if you are serious or being sarcastic could you please elaborate?

 

[Robert Baird]

Dear Orville

I only do sarcasm when warranted and I seldom do set-ups. I was sincere. You nailed it in a few words which I quote from you.

"the UFO topic has gotten us no closer to any sort of inkling as to what we are dealing with, the best thing I can say about what we have learned in all this research is not to be so focused on any one possibility of what this phenomenon is. I mean to say that over the past few year I do believe that maybe we are becoming more aware of the fact that the nuts and bolts ETH does not even come close to giving us an explanation for the way this phenomenon has consistently changed from one decade to the next. I am in no way any sort of authority on quantum mechanics or physics by any means, but I do find the theory that there exists an infinite amount of universes very interesting."

Dimensions or universes - may be the same thing. There is a long history of time viewing and learning which I have initiated an openness to discuss but those who NEED to believe their projected visions are not interested in physics or facts.

 

[Orville]

I agree - they exist... people are seeing flying objects they haven't identified. I just can't say that they're alien or inter-demensional or angels or whatever. I don't know. If I'm asked to guess, I look towards what we know exists, not to something that has yet to be proven. That's where I tend to disagree with most people in this forum. I look towards the more mundane and because of that I'm lumped into the "evil" skeptic group. Keep in mind, I won't deny that I am firmly in the skeptical camp... I'll side with Neil Degrase Tyson way before I do with any "ufologist."

Please watch the video and it's EXACTLY how I feel:

Hahaha I do enjoy Mr Tysons opinions and the way he conveys them, and would also be very interested as to what he would have to say about the whole range of different encounters. I mean you cant simply say that sun shining through the clouds at a specific angle and the cloud being disk shape can even account for what makes up half of the known misidentified sightings. I would have very much liked to see a debate between J Allen Hynek and Neil Degrase Tyson. I am by no means a "for Certain" ETH guy. and I think that Mr Tyson himself would concede that what we have even recently learn from quantum mechanics on how the observer itself effects reality itself could totally discount more credible accounts than just the simple light in the sky.

btw we don't all think that skeptics are "evil" I actually enjoy what skeptic have to say, they make us all take a good hard look at our own theories sometimes shredding them to bits and making us start over again. I think that's what its all about, and I by no means think that I will convert anyone but maybe get them to think a little differently.

 

[Orville]

ok thank you very much then, im sorry I was just thinking that me being very new to the forum I might make a good target haha. so when you say

those who NEED to believe their projected visions are not interested in physics or facts.

do you mean how some who support the ETH are just simply ignoring what is suggested about the nature of reality by the very same "science" that they use to support their own theories?

 

[Robert Baird]

Dear Orville

You would have to read many threads to see the extent that people cling to visions or archetypes rather than science. They also will be found speaking out of both sides of every orifice as you suggest in this remark.

"ETH are just simply ignoring what is suggested about the nature of reality by the very same "science" that they use" (I add and abuse.)

Just so you know, I believe All UFOs can be explained - and we also might get valid visions or dimensional knowledge which adepts in many disciplines have done for millennia. But I have yet to see anything material such as a craft, and there is nothing on Earth which humans did not develop themself - that I surely prove!

 

[Randall]

I agree - they exist... people are seeing flying objects they haven't identified. I just can't say that they're alien or inter-demensional or angels or whatever. I don't know. If I'm asked to guess, I look towards what we know exists, not to something that has yet to be proven. That's where I tend to disagree with most people in this forum. I look towards the more mundane and because of that I'm lumped into the "evil" skeptic group. Keep in mind, I won't deny that I am firmly in the skeptical camp... I'll side with Neil Degrase Tyson way before I do with any "ufologist."

Please watch the video and it's EXACTLY how I feel ...

I've seen that video many times before. It's a classic that I first saw used by the skeptics over at the JREF, and we've actually discussed it before here: "It's faked!" Something that burns my tail - a discussion about skepticism. | The Paracast Community Forums

For your convenience I'll also briefly restate my position:

The problem with what Tyson does in the video is that he equates unknown vague objects or light's in the sky with the definition of UFO, when in fact the USAF, which defined the term, made it clear in AFR 200-2 that virtually all mundane natural and manmade objects are excluded from the definition. So vague lights off in the distance aren't UFOs, they're just vague lights off in the distance. Furthermore, the object must be detected either visually or by other means with sufficient clarity to make that determination with reasonable certainty. Otherwise the report was relegated to the "Insufficient Information" bin. NDT probably wasn't aware of these facts, and therefore, although his logic is internally coherent, he is in fact misleading the audience.

Given the above, I suggest that we both agree that not all objects that are the subject of UFO reports are in fact UFOs.

 

[DissectionStalker]

As you know, I consider the ETH adequate to account for the percentage of ufo cases that have demonstrated physical effects (on the ground, on the mechanical and electronic systems of terrestrial aircraft sent in pursuit of them, and on radar systems for the past 65 years). As @Trajanus observed earlier in this thread, the ETH is the most logical and parsimonious hypothesis to account for those cases. I also second his comment in post #143 above:

"I think the ETH is inherently more probable than other views. WE are "spacefaring aliens" to the rest of the Universe. There's no clear indication if any at all, that other dimensions or spirit realms even exist."

The only location we are certain UFO's exist is in some people's minds such as yours claiming you've seen ET-UFO's yourself. Millions of people experience dimension and spirit realms inside their minds EVERY DAY. You see, Constance, it's definitely ALL in your mind.

BTW, the ridiculous assertion that we can trust military accounts that prove ET-UFO's exist is truly UNBELIEVABLY FOOLISH. It's ALL NEED TO KNOW. When you talk so boldly about historical accounts that go back to any decade you are willfully ignoring the primitive nature of radar and its capabilities. Military radar is NEED TO KNOW about what it can do, and as any recent war has PROVEN Americans can easily defeat any radar system using a variety of means. Do you not understand there IS electronic warfare weapons that not only can jam but can also send all kinds of false tracks that can create the appearance of a UFO. There are all kinds of weapons of war that confuse radar.

Give one trace evidence case that proves ANYTHING is of ET origin. ZERO.

The Iran sighting was nothing more than using an ally to propagate a psyops test using UFO Mythology. This only goes to show how gullible people are "to believe" what is only proven true inside their minds. These tests are conducted a few times every decade it seems to continue the ET-UFO BS. Note the Military and Black Ops was busy since 2001 with warfare, so their ET-UFO games went to near zero. But Bigelow's entertainment UFO media took charge. LOL.

1947 UFO Wave BS
1950's Multiple UFO Chase Sightings BS
1960's Soccoro LOL
1970's Iran Chase and Brazil Psyops
1980's JAL Alaska
1990's Phoenix Triangle
2000's Bigelow Distractions
2010's What's Next? I've got a MUFON one that will blow the Military's Cover on Black Triangles & ET Fakery

 

[Randall]

The only location we are certain UFO's exist is in some people's minds such as yours claiming you've seen ET-UFO's yourself ...

The mind is the only place anyone is ever certain of anything, so add me to that list along with thousands of other witnesses.

 

[Orville]

Dear Orville

You would have to read many threads to see the extent that people cling to visions or archetypes rather than science. They also will be found speaking out of both sides of every orifice as you suggest in this remark.

"ETH are just simply ignoring what is suggested about the nature of reality by the very same "science" that they use" (I add and abuse.)

Just so you know, I believe All UFOs can be explained - and we also might get valid visions or dimensional knowledge which adepts in many disciplines have done for millennia. But I have yet to see anything material such as a craft, and there is nothing on Earth which humans did not develop themself - that I surely prove!

So are you suggesting that there is potentially a scientific explanation for UFO's but not the widely believed ETH, meaning that instead of looking to the star we should really be looking into our own perception? maybe something like the tulpas that the eastern religions talk about? also out of curiosity, how do you feel about the Crypto-terrestrial hypothesis?

 

[DissectionStalker]

The mind is the only place anyone is ever certain of anything, so add me to that list along with thousands of other witnesses.

I can guarantee you that the UFO I saw that most people standing with me to see it at the same time would believe it was ET. That IS the power of belief. Since 1947 or Orwell's Mars invasion, Americans have become super saturated with ET-UFO BS that it is now a trillion dollar industry with Entertainment Media alone. Add-in the military psyops and hardware and it's a huge percentage of profits and the economy that are dependent on and continuously propagate these beliefs. Prime Time TV is full of it now, and has been for decades. ET-UFO SyFy RULES.

Is it any wonder people will believe?

 

[Randall]

I can guarantee you that the UFO I saw that most people standing with me to see it at the same time would believe it was ET.

Can you please link to the post that describes your sighting ( if there is one ).

That IS the power of belief. Since 1947 or Orwell's Mars invasion, Americans have become super saturated with ET-UFO BS that it is now a trillion dollar industry with Entertainment Media alone.

So? What's your point?

Add-in the military psyops and hardware and it's a huge percentage of profits and the economy that are dependent on and continuously propagate these beliefs. Prime Time TV is full of it now, and has been for decades. ET-UFO SyFy RULES.
Is it any wonder people will believe?

Maybe the entertainment industry makes it easier for people who have a UFO experience talk about it, and there's little doubt that it contributes to hoaxes, but IMO, it's not reasonable to think that every unexplained case is the result of the entertainment industry or M.I.C. playing on the minds of the gullible.

 

[Randall]

The question is how immense is our 'knowledge gap' concerning the nature of the reality we experience, which is both 'physical' and in the case of humans and many other evolved species 'mental'. The reason why I am interested in 'the paranormal' is that it is in paranormal experiences and information exchange occurring in conscious human experience that we have some hope of comprehending the deeper nature of the reality we live in -- touching aspects of reality that cannot be accounted for mechanistically and reductively by materialist/physicalist science.

Great points. I would only add that I suspect that the answer to the question of how wide our knowledge gap is concerning the nature of reality, may well go far beyond the answer to alien visitation.

As you know, I consider the ETH adequate to account for the percentage of ufo cases that have demonstrated physical effects (on the ground, on the mechanical and electronic systems of terrestrial aircraft sent in pursuit of them, and on radar systems for the past 65 years). As @Trajanus observed earlier in this thread, the ETH is the most logical and parsimonious hypothesis to account for those cases. I also second his comment in post #143 above:

"I think the ETH is inherently more probable than other views. WE are "spacefaring aliens" to the rest of the Universe. There's no clear indication if any at all, that other dimensions or spirit realms even exist."

More great points. But at the same time, I still commend @Christopher O'Brien and @Gene Steinberg for making us think about other possibilities ( not that my commendations mean anything to them ... LOL ). As insignificant as I may be I choose to commend them anyway .

I gather that you are referring strictly to the boundaries of our objectively measureable knowledge concerning what is 'real' in the universe (extrapolated these days to theories of a possible multiverse). I see far too many theories and hypotheses put forward in ufo blogs and forums these days that begin with presuppositions concerning a 'multiverse' or the existence of a 'dimension' of reality populated by minds that attempt to control our minds and/or experiences here in our local earthworld. We have no objective evidence whatever that such other dimensions exist and that other minds more powerful than our own exist and manipulate us. I cannot take speculations based on those presuppositions seriously, and they certainly cannot and do not rule out the ETH as the most parsimonious hypothesis that exists for ufos demonstrating physical influences on our species and others and on our machinery. People who gravitate to those other-dimensional hypotheses should pursue their interests and see what they can find out thereby, but they should not claim that their speculative thinking undermines the ETH in cases where it is the best available hypothesis.

Chalk up 3 stars for more great points! To clarify what I mean by the boundaries and constructs of our global civilization: By boundaries, I literally mean the lines on the map you might draw that divide our civilization from areas both on and off the planet that we don't inhabit and don't have much firsthand knowledge about. By constructs, I literally mean structures, like factories, mines, refineries, assembly plants and all the other infrastructure needed to support the manufacture of the kind of craft reported.

 

[DissectionStalker]

So? What's your point?

Maybe the entertainment industry makes it easier for people who have a UFO experience talk about it, and there's little doubt that it contributes to hoaxes, but IMO, it's not reasonable to think that every unexplained case is the result of the entertainment industry or M.I.C. playing on the minds of the gullible.

The point is this really is a religion. We worship in the temples of Media Entertainment and come here to sing praises to our beliefs. Yes, Humans have seen objects in the sky that are religious or signs meant to prove whatever belief or objective is at hand. The ET-UFO is just the current rendition of this phenomenon. What complicates this even more is the fact Humans can now fly or hoax ET-Concept UFO's in the sky too. There is too much noise to filter out for a sighting to be a real ET anymore. Like Walter said on the recent Paracast "the ink" just has to be injected to create the Mythology. It takes on a life of its own. Now it only has to be tweaked at the edges.

Until we study the mind and brain and psychology and "the collective" mind in relation to UFO's and other paranormal visions seen, then we really don't know whether this is just all in our head as the point of manifestation. Some people can manifest these objects when others cannot see it. Maybe it's just that some humans have this ability, but we really don't understand how reality is shaped. Two witnesses often don't see the same thing, so there is very little confirmation of anything. Yes, there is a mystery to this, but the present SyFy Religion is a belief system to shape your reality. You can't escape that fact, imo.

 

[Trajanus]

That's the thing though. You can't just say there's no proof that laymen know of and call it a day.

I was alluding to the coverup. Not that the best evidence, confiscated, is the only physical evidence.

There is no proof of it like there is for say bio-luminescent fish that no one would have thought existed before. Just a few years ago that sounded nut and I would have never believed it, but then we got proof and not it's a fact. Once we have proof like that, that aliens are visiting Earth, I'm in.

Lol, apples and oranges. Proof of bioluminescene won't hurt the stock market or cause panic. The government has an incentive to conceal proof of ET because of its unpredictable consequences. Credible witnesses recalled handling highly exotic material at the very start of the modern UFO era, but not for long.