Don't be an ass! If you have something then post it here for everyone to see.
Some things are just a little too personal for a public forum, that little community draws in a little tourism trying to be Roswell north, It doesn't effect me personally. if they want to gain from this story so good for them but in the end it's still hogwash.
Speaking of Roswell, do you believe that was a flying saucer from outer space?
What a crackpot. Seems like a really silly demand to make just to explain away flares and weather balloons. He's gotta hang around with smarter people! Amiright?
That was interesting. Thank you for sharing that. There is a lot of truth in what was said there, but also some changes the author of the referenced book would likely update as our understanding of psychology has evolved over the past 50 years. What Vallee was stating was we use our personal content to reason and explain those things we are trying to understand. This is a long held belief and has plenty of research to back it the claim. It is also how we interpret data and share information. What we use the context of our experiences to frame not only our understanding of events, but how we communicate those events. It is why you can have an artist and an engineer witness the same event, but get very different observations, very different data collections, and very different narratives about the event itself.
The concept of the collective consciousness is also interesting, but different from what Vallee was expressing IMO, especially when used to try and explain away this phenomena. Collective consciousness is a sociological concept, used to explain how we develop the constructs of social groups, the creation of shared norms, and the establishment of society itself. It is a theory that attempts to explain the larger function of human collectives and why they function they way they do. It is theorized that without a collective consciousness that societies would fall apart. You can see why sociologists and psychologists have some of the best and most lively discussions when it comes to explaining behaviors.
I'm not sure you can rely on the idea of the collective consciousness explaining anything in this regard, as the collective consciousness varies from society to society - collective consciousness being the foundations for the beliefs a society shares, and how others vary. The idea of the collective consciousness preparing us for a potential future is pretty far fetched, as that consciousness is only defined by what we know and what norms we have accepted into our catalogue of experiences. They're treading into the space of a collective imagination, which is an interesting concept but not having much support or research behind the idea. Our imagination is bore out of memory and feelings rather than experiences, but experience (shared or not) are still part of the creation of memory, and context acts as a limiter to the imagination. For these things to be a projection of our future, we would all have to share the memories and feelings, which we clearly do not do. It's an interesting thought, but was more a Jeanine Pirro approach (just asking questions) than considering the larger statement first.
That was interesting. Thank you for sharing that. There is a lot of truth in what was said there, but also some changes the author of the referenced book would likely update as our understanding of psychology has evolved over the past 50 years. What Vallee was stating was we use our personal content to reason and explain those things we are trying to understand. This is a long held belief and has plenty of research to back it the claim. It is also how we interpret data and share information. What we use the context of our experiences to frame not only our understanding of events, but how we communicate those events. It is why you can have an artist and an engineer witness the same event, but get very different observations, very different data collections, and very different narratives about the event itself.
The concept of the collective consciousness is also interesting, but different from what Vallee was expressing IMO, especially when used to try and explain away this phenomena. Collective consciousness is a sociological concept, used to explain how we develop the constructs of social groups, the creation of shared norms, and the establishment of society itself. It is a theory that attempts to explain the larger function of human collectives and why they function they way they do. It is theorized that without a collective consciousness that societies would fall apart. You can see why sociologists and psychologists have some of the best and most lively discussions when it comes to explaining behaviors.
I'm not sure you can rely on the idea of the collective consciousness explaining anything in this regard, as the collective consciousness varies from society to society - collective consciousness being the foundations for the beliefs a society shares, and how others vary. The idea of the collective consciousness preparing us for a potential future is pretty far fetched, as that consciousness is only defined by what we know and what norms we have accepted into our catalogue of experiences. They're treading into the space of a collective imagination, which is an interesting concept but not having much support or research behind the idea. Our imagination is bore out of memory and feelings rather than experiences, but experience (shared or not) are still part of the creation of memory, and context acts as a limiter to the imagination. For these things to be a projection of our future, we would all have to share the memories and feelings, which we clearly do not do. It's an interesting thought, but was more a Jeanine Pirro approach (just asking questions) than considering the larger statement first.
I think they're putting fourth the idea that a collective consciousness, or even consciousness itself, is maybe more than what we consider to be a collection of memories and experiences, traditions and/or "culture". Also more than byproducts such as ones imagination or how people see what we want to believe. Maybe our consciousness and reality itself is accessible or vulnerable to outside manipulation in some inconceivable way. Like everyone and everything has an invisible usb port to implant whatever.
A recent post about the Zimbabwe thing talked about how different children saw different things viewing basically the same extraordinary event, but with some very stark differences, such as the appearance of the creature itself. The phenomena or whatever is causing it knows everything about you so it purposely presents itself a certain way to each individual in a way they can make sense of when it's necessary to be visible to humans?
I might be missing the entire hypothesis too, it seems pretty obscure.
This is an interesting read. Catalina Island (off the coast of Malibu, California) has been a hot spot for weird sightings. Hard to imagine a foreign adversary operating so close to the U.S. coastline (if not extraordinary U.S. tech on display, although that's also a stretch).
The Navy has a perplexing mystery on its hands. For several weeks in 2019, unknown objects stalked U.S. warships off the coast of southern California. While the bizarre “drone” encounters remain unsolved, the incidents occurred in an area with a long history of UFO sightings, including two of the most credible encounters on record.
According to documents reviewed by The Drive, the first reports of unidentified objects hovering and flying near Navy vessels sparked a sweeping, high-level investigation. The Navy, working with the FBI and Coast Guard, now appears to have ruled out civilian activity or U.S. military operations as plausible explanations for the encounters. This leaves two possibilities, each with extraordinary implications.
Either a foreign adversary is spying on Navy ships around the Channel Islands (which lie just west of Los Angeles and San Diego), or devices of truly unknown origin are operating with impunity around U.S. (and allied) vessels.
This is an interesting read. Catalina Island (off the coast of Malibu, California) has been a hot spot for weird sightings. Hard to imagine a foreign adversary operating so close to the U.S. coastline (if not extraordinary U.S. tech on display, although that's also a stretch).
The Navy has a perplexing mystery on its hands. For several weeks in 2019, unknown objects stalked U.S. warships off the coast of southern California. While the bizarre “drone” encounters remain unsolved, the incidents occurred in an area with a long history of UFO sightings, including two of the most credible encounters on record.
According to documents reviewed by The Drive, the first reports of unidentified objects hovering and flying near Navy vessels sparked a sweeping, high-level investigation. The Navy, working with the FBI and Coast Guard, now appears to have ruled out civilian activity or U.S. military operations as plausible explanations for the encounters. This leaves two possibilities, each with extraordinary implications.
Either a foreign adversary is spying on Navy ships around the Channel Islands (which lie just west of Los Angeles and San Diego), or devices of truly unknown origin are operating with impunity around U.S. (and allied) vessels.
Why? If you want to spy on the US Navy, that's where you'd do it.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
Do you know how heavily militarized that area is, particularly with the Navy, and with the scale of operations from San Clemente Island? It's a freaking sonar base, a major training facility for Navy SEALs, as well as facilities for the USAF and the USCG - among other things.
You're crazy if you think there's any way China or Russia, given the sophistication of their own fleets - can hide out undetected in the channel between Catalina/U.S. coastline. And if they can and not be picked up on radar - the the U.S. is truly in trouble.
Of course, to make a suggestion that China or Russia can penetrate that area would imply that you have more information on the subject, and I invite you to explain how a Yasen-class or Jin-class submarine (or lesser models) could operate in the area undetected.
It doesn't rule out secret US military operations at all. If a branch wants to keep it secret, they aren't going to say "ya, that's us". Testing how secret and open to detection your platforms are in a place where you know there are all sorts of advanced sensors watching you would be a good strategy, and no risk of the tech falling into enemy hands by testing it against their equipment.
No one is saying its "aliens". It's UAP occurrences that have a relatively high frequency around Catalina Island and proximate U.S. naval positions. And if you read the article, the Navy has ruled out "civilian activity" or U.S. military operations as plausible explanations for the encounters. These things are unexplained, and it's a good thing the Defense Authorization Act has been signed into law so that money and resources can go into looking at these affairs.
So if you're implying that U.S. dark projects and/or private aerospace engineering companies are involved, then say it. Don't dance around it. And if not that, then please - enlighten me as to what you think it may be, because the chances of foreign-controlled drones, craft, or transmedium vehicles are far less in that area than the U.S. war machine would have in play.
I'm not dancing around anything, I'm suggesting their is a 3rd explanation that the article attempts to rule out. I don't believe you can rule it out, because if you are running a top secret military project, and someone comes around asking if it was you, the answer is obviously "no, not us" if you want to keep it secret more than 3 seconds. Why is that hard to comprehend?
It doesn't rule out secret US military operations at all. If a branch wants to keep it secret, they aren't going to say "ya, that's us". Testing how secret and open to detection your platforms are in a place where you know there are all sorts of advanced sensors watching you would be a good strategy, and no risk of the tech falling into enemy hands by testing it against their equipment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz
I'm not claiming anything, I'm providing another option. One I'd consider more likely than aliens.
Actually, the United States has been very careful to manage their black projects and keep them as far away from all prying eyes, civilian and military. It would be incongruent with their past behaviors to "testing" advanced technology around active military installations who were not part of the program itself.
If the concept of "aliens" and intelligent extraterrestrial life is such an incredible stretch, then why does the government and science communities continue to invest so much money and energy into attempting to discover their existence?
If the concept of "aliens" and intelligent extraterrestrial life is such an incredible stretch, then why does the government and science communities continue to invest so much money and energy into attempting to discover their existence?
Agreed. The last 12 months have been extraordinary in that:
1. The U.S. Government has admitted UAP (UFOs) are real.
2. Have formalized channels for military personnel to report such events.
3. Have committed millions of dollars to study this further and get to the bottom of it.
And the best part, is that funding this is a bipartisan effort. This isn't the Dems or GOP doing it to stick it to the other.
Actually, the United States has been very careful to manage their black projects and keep them as far away from all prying eyes, civilian and military. It would be incongruent with their past behaviors to "testing" advanced technology around active military installations who were not part of the program itself.
If the concept of "aliens" and intelligent extraterrestrial life is such an incredible stretch, then why does the government and science communities continue to invest so much money and energy into attempting to discover their existence?
Because it's a profound question. I don't 100% doubt alien lifeforms exist of some sort. I just have trouble believing they've been visiting for decades, buzzing military planes, and just generally being evasive but obvious at the same time. There is no logic to it. I think if aliens(or their drones) are actually going to come here, we'd know, because they would make it known. And if they didn't want us to know? Well, we wouldn't be seeing evidence like this for decades. They'd be a lot more stealthy.
