Technical Jargon

[mike]

ive made mention already that i think that our understanding of the phenomena is only possible if we have the technical jargon to understand it. how do you explain an ipod to a caveman.

ive also explored our use of brain implants as a way of using machines with the mind.and im of the mind thats just the crude begining, that eventually you would be able to engineer the very bio material itself to perform the same function as implants.

descriptions like being able to cross from one dimension to another, may simply be a case of a being using "equipment" to do so, possibly equipment thats in its own head so to speak

but as a human i need those technical terms of reference .

i can understand that a being evolved on such and such a planet exactly X number of light years away and did develop technology which operates in such and such a way to do this.

but words like "spritual" and "angel" are lacking in reference points for me. they are "gap" fillers with nothing behind them to give me clarity.

it may well be that "angels" as depicted on stained glass windows and described as being from "god" another gap filler, may in fact represent a description of the same event. some of the icons suggest so ie "wings" they float or fly "halo" they glow. but if what we are really talking about is ET intellect from zeta whatsee, using an invisable relay to "psyco creatively" (mentally manipulate local molecules like a bubblejet printer does ink dots) manifest at a given location here, then "angel" as a description is patently worthless.


i think a big part of the problem is that what we call "spiritual" is not . its just technology beyond our current understanding.

words like god and spiritual and angel, just dont have the technical substance i need for them to work in any of my reality equations.

and reckon thats why the "nuts and bolts" side of the issue is so important.
we havent that long had "nuts and bolts" ourselves, but now that we do there is no doubt that we are understanding the UFO question better than we did before we invented nuts and bolts

 

[Ron Collins]

One mans science is another mans magic. The "nuts and bolts" hypothesis holds more interest to me because I, looking through a more technicaly savvy eye, can see technology in mysticism. It really boils down to perception.

In some ways, faith can be a barrier to understanding. Marking some unknowns as "Angels" and "Miracles" or "Signs" then assigning vague values to their meaning, we can immediatley make sense of them. At least in a "don't worry, just get back to your life" sort of way.

 

[Koji K.]

I'll take a different view here. After many years of reading up and generally being interested in things like UFOs, the paranormal, and so on, I've come full circle and I think the old terms are best in many cases. "Demons" or "angels" are no less valid terms for the entities they refer to than any other I've heard... I actually prefer them because they are rooted in and imply many hundreds of years of human experience, as opposed to something like "alien" or ET, because these terms are, IMO, misleading and used incorrectly half the time they are used.

You could say the same perhaps about the terms "demons" and "angels," but I think the vagueness of those terms, their implication of something unquantifiable, makes them much more honest terms than the scientific terms-of-the-month, which half the time are meaningless in this field. The whole idea is that we don't know if the things we are dealing with are "X from Zeta Reticuli," all we know is they've been here a long time and we've called them different names throughout history. So why not fall back on the old favorites? It seems more "honest" somehow.

I also see mysticism in science more easily than science in mysticism (although I can understand the science in mysticism viewpoint.)

To each their own, though- this is my preference, nothing more. The most important thing regardless of terms I think would be that we at least are familiar with them all and can communicate.

I will also add that I think the "naming" issue is separate from the issue of using science as a tool to understand phenomenon around us, in which case I say by all means use everything we have to understand it.

 

[mike]

on demons, its true that for hundreds of years this peice of jargon fit
but thats because an abductee of 200 years ago only had 3 choices as to where the entity came from.
earth heaven and hell..............
the technical notebook of the time only allowed for these 3 locations, no more exisisted according to the book
the same could be said of the flat earth theory
today weve watched our own astronaughts navigate the voids of space, seen pictures of the surface of mars. today we have an extra option , what to my mind is a more accurate description of the reality.
and if the B hill case is to to gven credence then the entities use of star charts would indicate this is a more likely scenario.

i used the zoo rhino as an example in another thread, hes simply incapable of ascertaining the true nature of his visitors within the context of his contact
as one of the hosts said in the recent episode ive yet to see a single nut or bolt from one of these things , but for a large percentage of the population they've yet to see a ufo.........

 

[TClaeys]

i used the zoo rhino as an example in another thread, hes simply incapable of ascertaining the true nature of his visitors within the context of his contact

I think this example may be true for us as well, even considering we can now throw in ET into the bucket. And, as in the first post, we may be the caveman, regardless of how much we think we know. We know nothing of this so-called alien world. We know they are aliens no more than we know they are demons. We don't know either even exist.

It may even be more likely that they are neither. But perhaps they are projections of a cluttered, unorganized, and confused mind. In this case what do we call "them". Blobs? Unfounded invading phenomenon? I don't know that technical jargon gets us any closer because that jargon comes with a presumption that we have an idea of what is going on. And we only seem to take this from popular culture of the time. Why do the craft and "beings" form so differently from decade to decade? Why did no one ever see a grey hundreds of years ago? I suppose there are numbers of reasons for this, but not one taking relative realistic dominance over the other.

I think that however we look at it we are still in the dark. It certainly shouldn't stop or prohibit the discussion. I'm not a B Hill proponent, in fact I don't care much about it. But lets say that the star map is actually something that is conveyed to Betty Hill. Who's to say that they are from Zeta Reticuli just because she was told so or assumed this from the map? Seems to fit a "trickster" profile if not, but there is no true way of finding out. And what is a trickster but a disguise. It doesn't further anything as far as fitting a reality. And as we tend to want to categorize what this phenomenon is about the jargon gets broader. And I think this is because all the possibilities should be entertained, as archaic as some may seem.

 

[mike]

i dont discount the "high strangeness" associated with the ufo mystery. i once had a psychic dog, or so it seemed. if i decided his table begging was over he "knew" without being told and would leave the area and face away from the table, he would also wag his tail in response to the thought he was a magnificent animal even if his head was facing away from me and his ears ,eyes ,nose were not directed at me. this was non verbal and he was a fully grown dog, when i rescued him from the pound. i dont know what mechanism was responsible, but not understanding the mechanism isnt helped if i use the word psychic in the equation. the mechanism remains unexplained, i dont have the technical jargon to explain it.

as a human being regardless of the phenomena, which is another word for unexplained, i need the technical details to change my state from one of ignorance to one of understanding
who knows, maybe we will one day see a manned mission to heaven, perhaps we will send the marines to storm the pearly gates and teach this god thing the true meaning of the word potential

but i think we should go to mars first

personally i thnk a lot of "jargon" will come out of this project.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Hadron_Collider

antimatter............. mini black holes............

this baby has been described as the most complex piece of equipment ever built by man.
when its running its mathematically likely its the coldest place the entire universe has ever experienced

i think the recent paracasts idea of forming a cabal of scientific minds to unravel the mystery is a great idea