"Wonders in the Sky" - New Jacques Vallée/Chris Aubeck book coming in October

[Trajanus]

There are many factors to consider when saying that the amount of UFO sightings increased after the 40's. Firstly there was a much larger media interest on the subject during the 40's, 50's and 60's, particularly due to some famous cases (Kenneth Arnold's observation for instance) and the US Air Force involvment through Project Blue Book. The popularization of science fiction as a literary and cinematographical genre certainly contributed to that too.

But previous decades had their share of sci fi like Flash Gordon, the WOW novel and the '38 broadcast.

Regarding older sightings we must say that the rate of literacy on most countries was quite low before the 20th century. That reduces the possibility of making a sighting known by your own means.

Not by very much. They can tell others and word spreads until some literate person writes it down.

Only chroniclers (often official ones) had the power and opportunity to write about any subject.

But that didn't by any means prevent stories from illiterates from being disseminated via them. AFAIK, all of the disciples of christ were illiterate.

The advent of printed media during the latter section of the 19th century contributed to an easier access to anomalous occurences around the country and the world.

But there still wasn't much of a UFO phenomenon. It didn't really take off until well after newspapers, telegraph, radio, telephone made their debut.

The permanently shifting media attention towards the phenomenon can also influence our perception about the frequency of UFO observations. Also important is the wilingness of witnesses to report what they saw. The last 20/30 years certainly haven't established the correct environment to allow people to come out and speak frankly about their experiences.

Sure, many times one doesn't hear about these things in mainstream media. But they are still reported, and recorded. I don't think reports have diminished in the past 20-30 years.

---------- Post added at 07:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:09 PM ----------

Culture has everything to do with how these things are interpreted. Modern humanity is programmed at this point to interpret lights in the sky and other unrelated phenomena as evidence of extraterrestrials. Not that long ago they would have immediately been seen as witches, spirits, demons, dragons, gods, angels, or what have you.

Assuming the phenomenon has a definite objective nature, I'd assume we'll finally come up with the right interpretation. It may seem rash to some to assume we have now, but the ETH reflects an infinitely higher level of understanding and rationality than past views; moreover this interpretation anticipates our own likely future. Ergo, I think it's here to stay.

We are pretty much guaranteed that no progress or serious scientific investigation of the UFO phenomena will occur as long as those insisting on this undertaking also insist that the conclusion be extraterrestrial.

I doubt there is a superior competing hypothesis, nor one as tenth as good. I think it was Archie who said the EDH was a waste of time. I agree.

That is why the "Disclosure Movement" is doomed and serves as a counter-productive force in Ufology. They have a preconceived conclusion that they insist the government support regardless of what the facts may or may not turn out to be.

By now, enough facts point to the ETH. The "disclosure movement" is doomed because it's premature.

 

[trainedobserver]

It may seem rash to some to assume we have now, but the ETH reflects an infinitely higher level of understanding and rationality than past views; moreover this interpretation anticipates our own likely future. Ergo, I think it's here to stay.

This very fact, that the ETH is an extension of the myth of infinite progress where we start out in caves and wind up exploring the stars, is one of the major problems with it.

I doubt there is a superior competing hypothesis, nor one as tenth as good. I think it was Archie who said the EDH was a waste of time. I agree.

I used to think the same thing. I'm more inclined to think not at this point. I think there is something to this whole cultural programming business coloring our thinking about these experiences. The stories we tell ourselves do shape how we interpret the world and events in it.

By now, enough facts point to the ETH. The "disclosure movement" is doomed because it's premature.

I think its doomed because it is presumptuous and disingenuous. It demands of the government the answer it already presumes to be true while putting on the airs that it the champion of truth.

 

[Facius_Cardan]

"But previous decades had their share of sci fi like Flash Gordon, the WOW novel and the '38 broadcast."
Sure! But the following decades were the ones that really defined science fiction as a widespread and worldwide phenomenon. The 50's were particularly rich on that aspect with films such as "The day the earth stood still" and "Earth vs the flying saucers" (just 2 examples from the top of my mind). That doesn't mean that UFO sightings and the subsequent reports are strictly influenced by sci-fi, but the popular (including the media) veer towards such subjects is certainly influenced by that.

"Not by very much. They can tell others and word spreads until some literate person writes it down."
Today anyone can write a letter or e-mail and make his sighting known to a group or investigator. 300 years ago that would be virtually impossible. First you had to know how to write. If not, you had to know someone who could write (writing was usually restricted to higher classes, so a farmer would find it difficult to contact someone of that social status to write about a light he saw in the sky).

"But that didn't by any means prevent stories from illiterates from being disseminated via them. AFAIK, all of the disciples of christ were illiterate. "
The biblical example is an exception. Besides, the bible spans thousands of years and reports just a few events that were considered significant by the authors. Also Christ's disciples weren't all illiterate. After all His message wasn't writen by Him but by apostles and subsequent followers.
Taking as an example civilizations such as the egyptians, sumerians and the romans, writing was reserved to scribes and they only used their skills to record themes deemed as relevant by state/church structures. It was improbable that a strange sighting by a common citizen or even a slave would get put down in writing by such official structures. The only interesting cases we can read about today occured with relevant members of the social structure (priests, politicians, soldiers, etc) that were certainly a mall minority of population.

"But there still wasn't much of a UFO phenomenon. It didn't really take off until well after newspapers, telegraph, radio, telephone made their debut."
I think it's almost impossible to confirm such affirmation. We can only use published reports to build a picture of that. A statistic approach would turn out to be fruitless. What could we use as a basis for such study? Sightings published in the media? Books written with mentions to the subject? There was no one compiling the reports as we have had since the late 40's. From then onwards we can use the files created by the air force (the ones they let us see), UFO groups and individual investigators. Before the 40's there were no such efforts to compile sightings. In my opinion this may create a false illusion of increase in sightings when all we have is a dramatic increase in interest for the phenomenon and the following efforts to group and archive the sightings.

"Sure, many times one doesn't hear about these things in mainstream media. But they are still reported, and recorded. I don't think reports have diminished in the past 20-30 years."
I don't think so too. The main question remains nevertheless: can we make a serious statistical study of the total number of UFO manifestations based on the published sightings reports? Wouldn't that amount of reports be affected by factors such as public interest towards the phenomenon and a higher/lower will from witnesses to report what they saw? Such study should be made, if possible, on a worldwide basis and not just within the US borders. A certain year might have generated less UFO reports in the USA, leading one to think that the phenomenon's activity was reduced in that period. Meanwhile, ww could have an increase in South America or Africa. It all depends on the scope of the assessment we make.

 

[Trajanus]

This very fact, that the ETH is an extension of the myth of infinite progress where we start out in caves and wind up exploring the stars, is one of the major problems with it.

Myth?? Definitely seems true as we're starting to explore space now. Progress may not be "infinite" in the sense of continuing forever. But the ETH is well supported by knowledge e.g. our own advances, the existence of many extrasolar planets etc. I doubt any other theory has a tenth the factual basis.

I used to think the same thing. I'm more inclined to think not at this point. I think there is something to this whole cultural programming business coloring our thinking about these experiences. The stories we tell ourselves do shape how we interpret the world and events in it.

Is there a better specific hypothesis? Doubtful IMO. I think the problem is that the phenomenon, and many of those into it, are so deceptive that many people just can't take it anymore and despair of any familiar, rational paradigm. IMO that's not good. Despite all the muck, the phenomenon still gives the general impression of space visitors. That notion reflects reality not mere conditioning.

I think its doomed because it is presumptuous and disingenuous. It demands of the government the answer it already presumes to be true while putting on the airs that it the champion of truth.

The disclosure movement may be far from perfect. But there are good reasons for thinking the government has physical proof, which would rule out a "spiritual" hypothesis or claims the phenomenon is a projection of our consciousness. Considering all the evidence, the assumptions made by the disclosure people seem pretty good.

---------- Post added at 12:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:42 AM ----------

The 50's were particularly rich on that aspect with films such as "The day the earth stood still" and "Earth vs the flying saucers" (just 2 examples from the top of my mind). That doesn't mean that UFO sightings and the subsequent reports are strictly influenced by sci-fi,

Of course not; the truth is the other way around. UFO reports were the obvious inspiration for those films.

Also Christ's disciples weren't all illiterate.

Ehrman says they were.

After all His message wasn't writen by Him but by apostles and subsequent followers.

The latter. None of the original apostles wrote the gospels.

Taking as an example civilizations such as the egyptians, sumerians and the romans, writing was reserved to scribes and they only used their skills to record themes deemed as relevant by state/church structures. It was improbable that a strange sighting by a common citizen or even a slave would get put down in writing by such official structures. The only interesting cases we can read about today occured with relevant members of the social structure (priests, politicians, soldiers, etc) that were certainly a mall minority of population.

The early church shows that even a despised underground movement can record plenty for posterity. Writing was not limited to scribes in Greece and Rome. Even if only sightings by the higher classes were recorded, there would be ample evidence of UFO waves like those of modern times, had they occurred. Thousands saw UFOs over Mexico city, the american west in '65 etc.

I think it's almost impossible to confirm such affirmation. We can only use published reports to build a picture of that. A statistic approach would turn out to be fruitless. What could we use as a basis for such study? Sightings published in the media? Books written with mentions to the subject? There was no one compiling the reports as we have had since the late 40's. From then onwards we can use the files created by the air force (the ones they let us see), UFO groups and individual investigators. Before the 40's there were no such efforts to compile sightings.

Nevertheless there could've been diaries or memories--first or second hand-- revealed when the subject became more in the open.

 

[Facius_Cardan]

Is there a better specific hypothesis? Doubtful IMO. I think the problem is that the phenomenon, and many of those into it, are so deceptive that many people just can't take it anymore and despair of any familiar, rational paradigm. IMO that's not good. Despite all the muck, the phenomenon still gives the general impression of space visitors. That notion reflects reality not mere conditioning.

From what you've wrote in the posts published in this thread, I can infer that your analysis of the UFO phenomenon led you to conclude that it has an extraterrestrial origin. I don't criticize that per se and I hate when people put all "ETH proponents" in the same bag, labeling them as idiots. That is intelectually unfair and shameful.
Personally I have no pet hypothesis or theory. After more than a decade thinking about the UFO problem I see that we're practically in the same place we were 20, 50 or 100 years ago. Firstly, the term ETH is completely wrong. It may be an hypothesis in layman's terms, but scientifically it can't qualify as such (extraterrestrial speculation looks like a better way of putting it). Regarding this phenomenon, and taking the scientific method as a basis for its study, we're nowhere near establishing any valid hypothesis (extraterrestrial, terrestrial, interdimensional or any other). To my knowledge, no serious organized effort has ever been made to collect and catalogue the observations, work the data, inspect the patterns and cross-reference the witnesses' sightings with measurable factors (physical traces, physiological impact on the witnesses, radar data, etc). This should be the first effort made towards a better comprehension of the problem. If we don't have a valid, filtered and verifiable lot of observations we can't jump ahead and formulate a hypothesis.
Other important questions come to mind: What is the UFO phenomena? Is it lights in the sky? Shining disks crossing the horizon? Humanoids crossing the fields? People being abducted from their bedrooms? Is it all that or just part? The phenomenon itself has never been properly defined (and probably will never be). To reach a conclusion what should we focus on? Without a proper categorization of the object of study no effective, rational and reasonable investigation can be started, much less concluded. We have a saying here in Portugal that applies perfectly to this situation: "don't put the carriage in front of the horses". That's the same as saying, don't jump to conclusions before you even Know the subject you're talking about.

 

[Trajanus]

From what you've wrote in the posts published in this thread, I can infer that your analysis of the UFO phenomenon led you to conclude that it has an extraterrestrial origin. I don't criticize that per se and I hate when people put all "ETH proponents" in the same bag, labeling them as idiots. That is intelectually unfair and shameful.

Stupid. The overwhelming general impression is space visitors.

Personally I have no pet hypothesis or theory. After more than a decade thinking about the UFO problem I see that we're practically in the same place we were 20, 50 or 100 years ago. Firstly, the term ETH is completely wrong. It may be an hypothesis in layman's terms, but scientifically it can't qualify as such (extraterrestrial speculation looks like a better way of putting it). Regarding this phenomenon, and taking the scientific method as a basis for its study, we're nowhere near establishing any valid hypothesis (extraterrestrial, terrestrial, interdimensional or any other). To my knowledge, no serious organized effort has ever been made to collect and catalogue the observations, work the data, inspect the patterns and cross-reference the witnesses' sightings with measurable factors (physical traces, physiological impact on the witnesses, radar data, etc). This should be the first effort made towards a better comprehension of the problem. If we don't have a valid, filtered and verifiable lot of observations we can't jump ahead and formulate a hypothesis.

There have been all kinds of studies for many years. The problem isn't lack of effort; it's the highly deceptive nature of the phenomenon itself. Sure, we're stuck where we were essentially, at the start, because that's the way the phenomenon wants it. While it basically looks like ET visits, there is, besides lack lack of open contact, so much bizarre and screwy stuff the case for ET is virtually impossible to clinch. One can only speculate why they do this--probably to keep us guessing forever, unable to reach a definite conclusion, and hence unable to act decisively based on it--while they proceed with some nefarious agenda.

Other important questions come to mind: What is the UFO phenomena? Is it lights in the sky? Shining disks crossing the horizon? Humanoids crossing the fields? People being abducted from their bedrooms? Is it all that or just part?

IMO it's everything--from sightings of strange craft exceeding ours in performance to animals mutilated in ways we can't duplicate--suggestive of a power, or civilization, greater than ours.

 

[trainedobserver]

The overwhelming general impression is space visitors.

And I would say we should be cautious about accepting the general impression being presented to us.

 

[Sean Elifritz]

And I would say we should be cautious about accepting the general impression being presented to us.

True, but one should also be cautious about overthinking things to the point of distorting them. Sometimes a duck is just a duck.

Was reading over Kelly Cahill's account again earlier today and I can't even decide what the answer for that one case is let alone the entire phenomenon. There are aspects of it that seem to argue for ETs and ones that seem to point in the direction of something as bonkers as demons. Why would angels or demons cavort around in a flying saucer of all things? And why might ETs drop clues insinuating they are something spiritual? Beats me. This subject is infinitely confusing. The only thing I feel fairly certain about is that the phenomenon gets a kick out of keeping us guessing.

 

[trainedobserver]

True, but one should also be cautious about overthinking things to the point of distorting them. Sometimes a duck is just a duck.

Sometimes a duck is a decoy. I don't think human concepts like angels/demons/fairies/djinn or what have you really apply either. These may be concepts and names originally meant to explain some paranormal phenomena or they may just be products of the human imagination. In any case accepting what they are presented as being is just as big a mistake as accepting images of "Greys" as interstellar scientists IMHO.

It does look like sometimes things from somewhere else pop in and do the unintelligible and leave. Beyond that what do we really know?

 

[Sean Elifritz]

Sometimes a duck is a decoy. I don't think human concepts like angels/demons/fairies/djinn or what have you really apply either. These may be concepts and names originally meant to explain some paranormal phenomena or they may just be products of the human imagination. In any case accepting what they are presented as being is just as big a mistake as accepting images of "Greys" as interstellar scientists IMHO.

It does look like sometimes things from somewhere else pop in and do the unintelligible and leave. Beyond that what do we really know?

Again: Yes, but sometimes it isn't.

 

[trainedobserver]

Again: Yes, but sometimes it isn't.

I think a person could argue that it doesn't matter. Non-humans from Venus or Zeta-Wheresit present no less a problem or even different problems than those presented by non-humans from astral realms or from a hollow-earth do they? I don't think so. If we lack the ability to travel to their point of origin so that we can return all the favors they've been allegedly doing us, what difference does it make where they may be from? Are they real? What do they want? How can we get the upper hand? Those are the real important questions in my mind.

 

[Xzorter]

Thank you all,
I think I have learned more on this thread about the thought, theory, speculation process of of the possibility of aliens than any other discussion I have read.Rapid fire thoughts and responses is a great way for me to learn. I guess I am thoughtfully undecided.

 

[Sean Elifritz]

I think a person could argue that it doesn't matter. Non-humans from Venus or Zeta-Wheresit present no less a problem or even different problems than those presented by non-humans from astral realms or from a hollow-earth do they? I don't think so. If we lack the ability to travel to their point of origin so that we can return all the favors they've been allegedly doing us, what difference does it make where they may be from? Are they real? What do they want? How can we get the upper hand? Those are the real important questions in my mind.

I think it makes a difference. Aliens from outer space, particularly ones that distort and lie and are secretive, seem to pack quite a bit of potential for hostility. But something that is connected to the Earth and has been around forever seems less threatening to me. After all, if something like that has been playing tricks on humanity for thousands of years then it seems likely that they will continue to do so for thousands more with no sort of endgame in sight. But I think that with actual ETs the potential to reach some sort of conclusion is higher, and that could be bad or good. Then you've got the spiritual angle. Some people think these are angels or demons. Either would be evidence for a possible afterlife of some sort and I think just about everybody is hopeful something like that exists. But plain ol' aliens from space offers no such comfort.

 

[Kieran]

True, but one should also be cautious about overthinking things to the point of distorting them. Sometimes a duck is just a duck.

Was reading over Kelly Cahill's account again earlier today and I can't even decide what the answer for that one case is let alone the entire phenomenon. There are aspects of it that seem to argue for ETs and ones that seem to point in the direction of something as bonkers as demons. Why would angels or demons cavort around in a flying saucer of all things? And why might ETs drop clues insinuating they are something spiritual? Beats me. This subject is infinitely confusing. The only thing I feel fairly certain about is that the phenomenon gets a kick out of keeping us guessing.

I only saw a short Clip that was posted of Kelly Cahill's experience. I got an impression that the eyes of the Aliens were not eyes, but something the entities were wearing over their eyes, as they came out of the alleged craft, maybe if she is around she can confirm that conclusion. I only saw a drawing of one of the entities so I could be wrong!

Demons is not bonkers, there is demons in Human society, it just something evil not good, and there plenty of those people around the place here on Earth. There is no reason yet to have a believe the UFO phenomenon is harmful, and wants to destroy us, if wanted to harm abductees and contactees, the better ways to do it then just take them, and return them safely afterwards.

The damage been done to these people, if such cases do happen regularly is one of emotional distress, it not difficult one to understand, having contact with something that different to you, in every way, with more or the same intelligence as you, and not given any answers by that other intelligence, to why you have been taken, for me, I would have a believe and be surprised if that is not the case, each person taken will mostly have got a dose of (depression Anxiety or panic attacks) somewhere down along the line of their life, after having had interactions with something perhaps uniquely different to us as a species.

Angels and Demons are todays Aliens, craft were flying around in times people claim they'd seen Angels and Demons, so if craft are seen back in the past before 1947, it mostly just an intelligence from another place or from here, maybe the intelligence doesn't like or company enough to live with us!
The sourcing is more important, the tags we humans give at the moment is not important, you find the location from this intelligence comes from, you learn alot more about the intelligence from knowing the origins of that location. I never really ever described to the notion a certain culture expects to see a particular type of Alien and I don't really get it, the Fairy people looked human and were tall and the wee people were small, personally I believe peoples in the British Isles were describing what the legends told and what they experienced and don't think they wanted to see wee-small people, infact the lepreachaun is not an accurate tale it actually silly, most of the older legends describe small people or beings have been seen, almost no description of what the small-people look like in the older legends is handed down only there stature.

 

[Sean Elifritz]

I only saw a short Clip that was posted of Kelly Cahill's experience. I got an impression that the eyes of the Aliens were not eyes, but something the entities were wearing over their eyes, as they came out of the alleged craft, maybe if she is around she can confirm that conclusion. I only saw a drawing of one of the entities so I could be wrong!

Demons is not bonkers, there is demons in Human society, it just something evil not good, and there plenty of those people around the place here on Earth. There is no reason yet to have a believe the UFO phenomenon is harmful, and wants to destroy us, if wanted to harm abductees and contactees, the better ways to do it then just take them, and return them safely afterwards.

The damage been done to these people, if such cases do happen regularly is one of emotional distress, it not difficult one to understand, having contact with something that different to you, in every way, with more or the same intelligence as you, and not given any answers by that other intelligence, to why you have been taken, for me, I would have a believe and be surprised if that is not the case, each person taken will mostly have got a dose of (depression Anxiety or panic attacks) somewhere down along the line of their life, after having had interactions with something perhaps uniquely different to us as a species.

Angels and Demons are todays Aliens, craft were flying around in times people claim they'd seen Angels and Demons, so if craft are seen back in the past before 1947, it mostly just an intelligence from another place or from here, maybe the intelligence doesn't like or company enough to live with us!
The sourcing is more important, the tags we humans give at the moment is not important, you find the location from this intelligence comes from, you learn alot more about the intelligence from knowing the origins of that location. I never really ever described to the notion a certain culture expects to see a particular type of Alien and I don't really get it, the Fairy people looked human and were tall and the wee people were small, personally I believe peoples in the British Isles were describing what the legends told and what they experienced and don't think they wanted to see wee-small people, infact the lepreachaun is not an accurate tale it actually silly, most of the older legends describe small people or beings have been seen, almost no description of what the small-people look like in the older legends is handed down only there stature.

I edited my first reply in the Cahill thread to include urls to a few MUFON Journal articles I read this morning. I figured since I'm checking them out why not go ahead and edit the post to let others know where they are as well. The third url in the list is the best one imo.

The interesting thing about the glowing, red eyes is that only Kelly saw them that way. The other witnesses saw them as black eyes. So either Kelly was able to perceive some element of them the others could not or the entities deliberately projected that impression to Kelly and not the others for whatever reason.

 

[Kieran]

I edited my first reply in the Cahill thread to include urls to a few MUFON Journal articles I read this morning. I figured since I'm checking them out why not go ahead and edit the post to let others know where they are as well. The third url in the list is the best one imo.

The interesting thing about the glowing, red eyes is that only Kelly saw them that way. The other witnesses saw them as black eyes. So either Kelly was able to perceive some element of them the others could not or the entities deliberately projected that impression to Kelly and not the others for whatever reason.

Ok Thanks, look at the image at 7.37 the video Tyder posted, you'll understand what I Mean then more, to me it looks the Alien is wearing something over the eyes.

Also it was at night strange Kelly only saw Red, but maybe if I am correct, the aliens was wearing a night-vision device to see in the dark, as strange as that sounds!

 

[trainedobserver]

I think it makes a difference.

The things you bring up are only valid if the human generated stories about those things are true. There is no reason to believe that they are. Humans wrote those stories and created those concepts of after-lives populated by demons and angels and interstellar scientists based on their imaginations and an incomplete understanding of themselves much less things the things they wrote about. "There is an invisible world and I've seen it!" Yeah, sure you have buddy. See what I'm getting at? Remaining agnostic as to the what/where/who of the whole business seems prudent. Whatever the answer is I'm willing to bet that it isn't going to fit any of our preconceptions. I fear that it will, or has, sought to conform to our expectations and desires to mask its true nature though.

 

[Sean Elifritz]

The things you bring up are only valid if the human generated stories about those things are true. There is no reason to believe that they are. Humans wrote those stories and created those concepts of after-lives populated by demons and angels and interstellar scientists based on their imaginations and an incomplete understanding of themselves much less things the things they wrote about. "There is an invisible world and I've seen it!" Yeah, sure you have buddy. See what I'm getting at? Remaining agnostic as to the what/where/who of the whole business seems prudent. Whatever the answer is I'm willing to bet that it isn't going to fit any of our preconceptions. I fear that it will, or has, sought to conform to our expectations and desires to mask its true nature though.

Which is why I said an afterlife of some sort.

Ok Thanks, look at the image at 7.37 the video Tyder posted, you'll understand what I Mean then more, to me it looks the Alien is wearing something over the eyes.

Also it was at night strange Kelly only saw Red, but maybe if I am correct, the aliens was wearing a night-vision device to see in the dark, as strange as that sounds!

I've seen that video a dozen times or more. I've got the entire program on disc and in an .avi on my computer. Those images are just a recreation, of course.

 

[trainedobserver]

I've seen that video a dozen times or more. I've got the entire program on disc and in an .avi on my computer. Those images are just a recreation, of course.

What video? Did I accidentally quote someone? I thought I made that up. I was proud of "There is an invisible world and I've seen it." I thought it was funny as all get out. Hrrummph.

 

[Sean Elifritz]

What video? Did I accidentally quote someone? I thought I made that up. I was proud of "There is an invisible world and I've seen it." I thought it was funny as all get out. Hrrummph.

Doh! I quoted the wrong thing. Gonna' fix it.