Skeptics...a philosophical discussion

[red_pill_junkie]

I have never looked at Vallee in that light but he has shown some small characteristics of a man having been involved with this a little too long to stay objective. That is my opinion of course and it is true that I don't know him so I am ill qualified to really dissect his nature. That said, when other researchers have begun to embrace the odder aspects of the phenomenon and start to endorse odd explanations it is usually a sign that they are treading down the path of the lunatic fringe. To me embracing the odd later in a career can be a sign of one struggling to come to a conclusion before death. Or it can just be enlightenment. Who knows.

Well, UFOs is not the only thing Vallee is involved with. He's a venture capitalist so he doesn't need to write books or do the conference circuits in order to make a living. And he abandoned the ETH very early in his career, so the odd thing would be for him if he embraced it all of the sudden

But the main problem here is trying to define "odd". When it comes to the UFO phenomenon, just who in the world is qualified to determine what is odder and what is oddest?

Maybe we should all listen to the advice of Jack Kirby:

I'm a guy that lives with a lot of questions. I say "What's out there?", and I try to resolve that. And I never can. I don't think anybody can. Who's got the answers? I sure would like to hear the ultimate one. But I haven't yet. And so I live with a lot of questions.

And I find that entertaining... If my life were to end tomorrow, it would be fulfilled in that manner. I would say, "The questions have been terrific."​

​

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

The following is a modified excerpt from Jeffrey Kipal's Authors of the Impossible, from the chapter devoted to Jacques Vallee, a recent guest at the Paracast:

[...]Vallee sees meaning in the absurdity of the narratives, a meaning he will call the meta-logic of the encounter stories. Such a meta-logic, which appears as absurdity from the outside, more or less guarantees that the encounters will be rejected by the elite members of the target society (that is, by professional academics and scientists), even as the symbols conveyed through the encounters are absorbed at a very deep and much more lasting unconscious level [emphasis mine]. The absurdity of the extraterrestrial explanation, in other words, is a kind of intentional ruse or cloaking technique that allows the phenomenon to accomplish its real work, which is symbolic and mythological. So, viewed in this manner, the UFO seeks to deliberately be rejected and bypassed by the Status Quo (politics, science, religion) while at the same time slowly but surely molding the belief systems of societies, from the bottom up. Kind of like a back-door trojan, in hacker terms.
​

I know, I know already, you can't use a "trickster" analogy to explain EVERYTHING weird in our reality, however, RPJ's post brings up an important point: The UFO phenomenon, when viewed in a sociological context, appears to be self-negating to the status quo i.e., science, academia, politics & religion and their institutions. If we are indeed dealing with a form of "tricksterish" energy (or agenda), then it would stand to reason the the "tricksters" would want to operate under the status quo's radar so as not to be compromised or circumvented from their goal or role. Remember: the trickster's role is to topple the status quo. Perhaps this "absurdity" factor has been programmed into the scenario by design--formulated to render it's presence to the status quo null & void. Sounds like a pretty clandestine and tricksterish way to operate to me! Give the mucky-mucks enough to poo-poo the whole deal, and game on! Of course, this begs the question... what IS the agenda behind the UFO phenomenon, be they tricksters or something else (?)

 

[Thabtos]

I know, I know already, you can't use a "trickster" analogy to explain EVERYTHING weird in our reality, however, RPJ's post brings up an important point: The UFO phenomenon, when viewed in a sociological context, appears to be self-negating to the status quo i.e., science, academia, politics & religion and their institutions.

I think just the opposite.

Interest in UFO phenom wouldn't be as strong as it has been for so long if it was just us nuts who perpetuated the interest.

The interest gets perpetuated because occasionally people from the spheres of science, academia, politics, and religion, contribute information.

Devoutly religious people see a "vision" that coincides with what we see as UFO phenomena, which gives more weight to the discussion from a religious angle.

A politician makes a public statement about UFO's, giving it weight from that area, scientists makes statements about the probability of life elsewhere...etc. etc.

I think in such cases that the phenomenon is never negated by the status quo, perhaps the credibility of the person making the statement is negated by them, but not the phenomenon itself.


I don't know though, it is perhaps I'm surer on my ideas of what constitutes UFO phenomena than what constitutes the status quo.

 

[red_pill_junkie]

I think just the opposite.

Interest in UFO phenom wouldn't be as strong as it has been for so long if it was just us nuts who perpetuated the interest.

The interest gets perpetuated because occasionally people from the spheres of science, academia, politics, and religion, contribute information.

Devoutly religious people see a "vision" that coincides with what we see as UFO phenomena, which gives more weight to the discussion from a religious angle.

A politician makes a public statement about UFO's, giving it weight from that area, scientists makes statements about the probability of life elsewhere...etc. etc.

I think in such cases that the phenomenon is never negated by the status quo, perhaps the credibility of the person making the statement is negated by them, but not the phenomenon itself.


I don't know though, it is perhaps I'm surer on my ideas of what constitutes UFO phenomena than what constitutes the status quo.

Sometimes an idea doesn't need to be endorsed by Science in order to affect the course of history.


Sometimes, the more Science and the establishment oppose those radical ideas, their efforts backfire and the opposite happens —Wikileaks anyone?

Personally, I think the UFO is such a disruptive tool of social change, because it resonates with some of the most deeper and primitive elements of the human psyche. Some people might see that as proof that such disruptions must be eradicated —like the biological need to believe in a higher power.

But the more you try to subdue and repress those needs, the more you try to dismiss them, the more powerful —and violent— the disruption becomes.

It's like Jung's theories of the "shadow" in every one of us. The more you turn your back on the shadow aspect of your personality, the more powerful it becomes, and you're in risk of being overwhelmed by it. It's only when you accept it, and integrate it into your self that you become whole.

Perhaps that's what these entities seek. Hence the suggestion "they" made to Whitley Strieber for the title of his book "Communion".

"The unconscious mind is like the universe out beyond the quasars. Its a place we want to go to find out what's there." (Whitley Strieber)

 

[imjohn]

The facts are pretty clear, humans have been documenting visits from extraterrestrials for thousands of years, all around the world, right up to today.

Really?

Can you provide me with an example of documentation of an extraterrestrial visit from thousands of years ago?

 

[Frank Stalter]

Really?

Can you provide me with an example of documentation of an extraterrestrial visit from thousands of years ago?

"If extra-terrestrial beings do visit the Earth, they must have done so in the past also. are there any indication of possible ancient visits by extra-terrestrial beings on Earth? The answer is, surprisingly: ancient legends say so."

Lots of ancient legends say so . . . Google is your friend.

 

[trainedobserver]

Lots of ancient legends say so ...

Which is actually pretty meaningless with legends, myths, and the like being what they are. I think we're hamstringing ourselves by assuming an extra-terrestrial origin to these stories. Vallee's Wonders in the Sky documents UFO and Abduction-like phenomena in ancient history however I haven't seen anything that provides conclusive evidence for the origin of any of it. I understand the desire and inclination to interpret these things as extra-terrestrial in nature. I just think it is a mistake to do so. In reality these things must have various sources and causes and while extra-terrestrials traveling light-years to get here may be part of it, that certainly cannot explain it all.

 

[tyder001]

Although I'm not a skeptic and certainly not a debunker (I'm a fan of the paranormal.) I have to honestly say that I highly doubt that we have E.T. among us. Still, the alien abduction experience is interesting to me for my own reasons. But, I'm one of those "Doubting Thomas" folks. I have to see it or experience it myself and if I don't I might believe you have but I still can't quite cross over to full blown belief or unbelief. Sorry, I know that's a luke warm statement but I am willing to keep an open mind. Within my own reason and experience.

 

[imjohn]

"If extra-terrestrial beings do visit the Earth, they must have done so in the past also. are there any indication of possible ancient visits by extra-terrestrial beings on Earth? The answer is, surprisingly: ancient legends say so."

Lots of ancient legends say so . . . Google is your friend.

Sorry, Frank. Neither of those stories is a documented example of extraterrestrial visitors. They are legends or folktales that have been interpreted by modern ufologists as referring to ET.

Not the same thing at all.

---------- Post added at 04:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:31 PM ----------

Which is actually pretty meaningless with legends, myths, and the like being what they are. I think we're hamstringing ourselves by assuming an extra-terrestrial origin to these stories. Vallee's Wonders in the Sky documents UFO and Abduction-like phenomena in ancient history however I haven't seen anything that provides conclusive evidence for the origin of any of it. I understand the desire and inclination to interpret these things as extra-terrestrial in nature. I just think it is a mistake to do so. In reality these things must have various sources and causes and while extra-terrestrials traveling light-years to get here may be part of it, that certainly cannot explain it all.

I agree entirely with you. Ancient sky people stories MIGHT refer to ET or they might refer to the product of someone's imagination. Whatever the case may be they don't provide any revealed truth.

 

[trainedobserver]

Ancient sky people stories MIGHT refer to ET or they might refer to the product of someone's imagination.

I don't think those are the only two choices by any means. It isn't just the Extra-terrestrial Hypothesis vs. the Null Hypothesis.

Here is Table 2, from page 151 of The UFO Phenomena: Fact, Fantasy, and Disinformation by John Micheal Greer.

UFOs are either ...1
I. Material objects, and are either …
A. Artificial, and are either …
1. Made by human beings ….
a. On the earth …
1. At the present time--anthropogenic hypothesis.
2. In the far future--time travel hypthesis.
b. Or somewhere else--intraterrestrial hypothesis.
2. Or made by nonhuman beings …
a. On the earth--cryptoterrestrial hypothesis.
b. Or somewhere else--extraterrestrial hypothesis.
B. Or natural, and are either …
1. Living things--zoological hypothesis.
2. Nonliving natural phenomena--geophysical hypothesis.
II. Or apparitions, and are either …
A. Objectively real, and are either...
1. Best understood via Christian theology--demonic hypothesis.
2. Or best understood via alternative faiths--ascended masters hypothesis.
3. Or best understood outside either option--ultra-terrestrial hypothesis.
B. Or only subjectively real, and are either …
1. Produced by the nervous system--neurological hypothesis.
2. Or produced by perceptual and psychological factors --null hypothesis.

Sorry about the formatting, tried to make it look right and failed twice.

 

[imjohn]

No worries about the formatting. Using a code tag might help with that. I agree that there are always more than 2 options. In the case of examining ancient legends things are a little less complex than that full table though.
More like:

A. Imaginary
B. Genuine supernatural experience
C. Real experience changed by oral tradition

When dealing with any experience that occurred in the distant, possibly prehistoric past it is almost impossible to interpret as any kind of real experience.

 

[Facius_Cardan]

When dealing with any experience that occurred in the distant, possibly prehistoric past it is almost impossible to interpret as any kind of real experience.

And the same applies to contemporary UFO reports. Even with possible physical traces and radar data associated to the sighting report, the thruth (or truths) of the matter still elude us. The fact remains: there are reports of anomalous occurrences, dating from the 19th century backwards, that share some striking similarities with some of the characteristics associated with the UFO phenomenon (as we see it today). What can be extracted from there? That humans have had anomalous experiences for a long time and described them for as long as they developed the ability to write (some may also have been transmited through oral tradition). To me that implies that the Human being itself should be the starting point to an investigation about these manifestations because, in essence, we are the main common point between everything around us that seems anomalous (even beyond the UFO phenomenon). We're still far from understanding the width an depth of our conscience and even the basic mechanisms behind the human mind are still very cloudy (the way the brain interprets the wide ranging variety of stimuli that reach it, the sheer concept of reality, etc). Further investigation will certainly lead us to important and amazing discoveries. Does this mean that the UFO phenomenon is solely inside our minds? I don't think so (how could pictures and radar tracking be taken from that?). Nevertheless, we have to start our inquiries somewhere.

 

[Frank Stalter]

Which is actually pretty meaningless with legends, myths, and the like being what they are.

Sorry, Frank. Neither of those stories is a documented example of extraterrestrial visitors. They are legends or folktales that have been interpreted by modern ufologists as referring to ET.

Not the same thing at all.

"We're just a myth until some scientist proves we're real."

 

[Facius_Cardan]

"We're just a myth until some scientist proves we're real."

If only the UFO problem could be solved by going through the deep jungle in an African mountain...

 

[Kandinsky]

If only the UFO problem could be solved by going through the deep jungle in an African mountain...

Funnily enough a few a guys think they've solved it by listening to deep jungle and smoking African Mountain.

 

[imjohn]

"We're just a myth until some scientist proves we're real."

So your argument is that the existence of gorillas is proof of the existence of ancient ET visitation? That doesn't really work.

 

[Frank Stalter]

So your argument is that the existence of gorillas is proof of the existence of ancient ET visitation? That doesn't really work.

It's pretty clear you don't know much about the discovery of the gorilla . . . . in the mid-19th century. Its' status as a "myth," "folklore" and "legend" before its' existence was proved lasted far longer than its' current status as a known species. You aren't understanding my points, clearly aren't well versed in the facts I'm basing my points on and don't know the difference between the definitions of the words proof and evidence. You're qualifications as a D-bunker are exemplary. Keep it up!

 

[imjohn]

Sadly, subtle sarcasm is wasted on some people.

In fact I knew about the discovery of the gorilla. I do understand your point, such as it is, and understand that you were endulging in a logical fallacy (in fact a classic strawman argument).

Now you have advanced to ad hominem attack. Well done!

 

[plumbbob12]

Ok guys, this debate is sliding into the realm of belief, and not science. Of course, science is rife with belief, due to the difficulty of having humans do science. Just read a paper on “Violation of local realism with freedom of choice” by Thomas-Scheidl, et al. The comparison I am attempting to make with this paper on quantum entanglement, and the UFO question is the length one must go to in order to prove an unpopular hypothesis. The Bell test for local realism, along with Einstein and Schrodinger has been around for longer than the UFO question, but we are still trying to get around the idea that everything in the universe is connected, (or entangled). Even with the huge amount of reproducible experiments that show conclusively that the universe does not survive in a nice little place where external reality exist and has definite properties whether or not they are observed by someone just does not sit right with most folks, and hence is still being examined. Now take a question like the idea we are visited by other creatures from another star, where the scientific community refuses to even look in the direction of evidence, and it is little wonder that UFO research is still in the realm of pseudo-science.