Secret Intelligence Service
With regard to US national security interests, what, if anything at all, resides at the core of information propounded on the topic of ET phenomena?
“It is dangerous to let people peek behind the curtains of illusions. People get easily
disillusioned and then they get angry, because it was the illusions they loved.”
W. Somerset Maugham. (1874 – 1965)
(C-I) OR. (C-V) Admin/Liaison Officer
“The Hollywood illusion, seized upon, that there is somehow ‘a more advanced civilisation’ – ‘out there,’ is as stupid as it is human fabrication – worse, regarding the expectation of a potential ‘greeting’. There is no cognitive update to be tendered and shared, such, based upon some kind of overlapping attributes, as is assumed and seemingly, cannot be let go because it makes entertainment for the morass of adults fixed in a pre-pubescent stage of development. Who/what is the focus would have to be a human being in the current experiential moment and given that implausible scenario, what precisely would be “understood”? That there is here, this fleeting civilisation, one whose collective cause is that of genocide and / or fulfilling the means of maniacal freaks so to engage, via ever more effective machines of killing, of war and these, by massive excess subsuming all else achieved to the contrary? That human beings cannot exist together at all and never have been able, and turmoil is the normal status, which is putting it mildly? That the preposterous idea there is something to be learned from human beings, that human beings collectively own a condition of worth, is utter sanctimonious rubbish of the nth. extreme. The countries appearing top of the list of the living in fantasy culprits, if their output messages regarding themselves are to be taken seriously, which they seem to be demanding given the extent of their self-exaltation, – they display supposed justifications for what they do illustrative of the most heinous tendencies any organism could own. We have to concoct a whole new psychopathology – of inability to deal, and we have been for quite some time.”
(C-I) In many ways, this is a ‘lead balloon’ topic, so I suggest we stay with the rational.
Therefore, I want to posit the question ; How is it possible to claim understanding of what no one knows anything at all about? By implication, that security agencies such as the CIA (and NASA), I mention them because we (MoD) have given up on it, but they own experiential knowledge denied the global populace, this on the basis of US national security . . . Of course, this latter most often scripted assertion is preposterous because no one owns anything of the sort and those who tender any claim whatsoever do so to cajole ‘other sides / enemies’ into thinking that possibly, just possibly there is alien sharing of ‘advancement’ for ‘defence’ purpose.
If nothing whatsoever is known, how can there be a claim to the latter?Well language offers the facility so to do and I will say more regarding that.
So, what precisely is it that resides at the core of not just theirs, but the plethora of claims to supposed knowledge? What conclusions we arrive at will have implications for the aforesaid national security statement assumption.
So, let’s just talk around the issue of ‘pretension’, I mean the assuming of certainties by virtue of appeal to what is not even knowledge, nor experience. Let’s look at what the experience hypotheses are suggestive of.
This is a subject fraught with problems constitutive of assumed knowledge. As we’ve already said, knowledge is a construct and its constituents are what the human kit bag of tools (at whatever level of complexity, and/or era) is able to make. The first thing that springs to the mind is what is assumed to be the case, and this is so for all of what is human reality. You can’t blame people because asking someone to dispense of what they’ve been told is difficult, especially when it doesn’t include them. This latter point (of including) is worthy of note, because the tenets created by humans beings are about human beings, they are not about anything else at all. What I mean is much of what constitutes belief and/or assumed fact not only holds human beings as central; it also holds power, control and enslavement as its core agenda. If you tell someone something and whatever it is that you tell and however you dress it up promises, for example, that they are going to live forever, then it has a seductive gleam and after that, you have the stage for concocting any and all scenarios. Worse still, enforcing them.
You have to remember that where human beings reside is infinitesimal in the scheme of things, the four dimensional, fragile and fleeting reality that cannot be left, and yet there are stories written mere centuries gone that encapsulate even cosmological intentions that cognise as did they, and of course, as a consequence, as do modern-day human beings. It is not remarkable, because human beings are not remarkable, rather, very predictable in their susceptibility.
In this altogether predictable – evolved condition, is now the ingenuity harnessed to destroy what is not respected at all, but which neither is ‘owned’ by human beings in the perpetuity assumed. The destruction of all of human civilisation and of equal importance, all living creatures is the flight of an intercontinental ballistic missile away, and one has to remember that human inclination, warfare funded ingenuity, the conflicts caused by whatever dichotomy, now holds within its firm grasp, the weapons hitherto kept from public speculation. There are those in the military machines and others who influence geopolitical events and who speak of nuclear exchange as though an ‘acceptable progression and / or consequence’ – become inevitable. In a conflict the escalation would be so very dramatic and brought on by the use of inconceivable to most, highly destructive tactical weapons that cannot be defended against no matter what the argument, and which all major powers own, therefore the sure fire way to react is appeal to the ultimate weapon.
What has this brief and inadequate assessment got to do with the topic? This scenario is what has emerged from human ingenuity and therefore it is not remarkable that what is not known about but suspected and is attired accordingly – with ‘certainty, falls within this paradigm and which is why we referred to national security. We can point the finger at various mediums, such as the film industry or at the commercial exploitation of ideas in literary form, but really I posit they aren’t worthy of discussion. We can talk about what has now become unclassified – dumped because it’s pointless (here in the UK, by the MoD), and to an extent is the case elsewhere. What I mean is that there can be no classification, there is no facility so to do, other than one made and inflated in imagination. The US has no significance such that any institution thereof can hold claim to ‘something kept secret’ in this particular respect, despite vociferous arguments, theirs and others, to the contrary.
Let’s begin with what people think they understand; what is created in minds is somehow ‘certain.’ What I mean and simply, is the analogous facets that are called upon so to make something relatable (the process of appealing to familiar things in the world of senses and applying these things/facets to ‘something else’). This has a bearing on the way people colour particular notions too, that somehow if there is an ‘intelligent life form’ ‘out there’ then it has such and such attributes – because human beings have these attributes, human made reality contains these. If you step away from any kind of preconception what are you left with? Impossibility? Perhaps with a residual strand of DNA floating through? There is water so therefore there is life, as life applies to us? What if the ‘situation’ is such that there is simply nothing whatsoever at the disposal of human capacity? Of course, there would be those searching, theorising, predicting, but still held within the frame of human capacity so to do, appealing to their kit bag of concepts and associated mind-states and this, in relation to the ‘situation’ is not adequate at all. What situation?
There is what is outside human evolved status which bears no parallel whatsoever, and it is not a concocted god-idea come to life that ‘thinks and looks like humans’, has some kind of input into affairs of the day. The latter is utterly ridiculous. The fact that such appeals to most of the planet’s population in some form or other, often competing versions, is directly related to emotional states, susceptibility to fear of existential aloneness, insecurity, power and control, and so on and so forth.
What is there? Where?
Asking ‘what’ does not herald an answer, though it does and unfortunately beckon unequivocal support to the fears of certain powerfully placed people whose desire is to ‘keep secret certain facts.’ Asking ‘where’ tends to assume geometric, geo-special coordinates based on how human beings relate to relativity. But we are not talking about human beings, nor what is the case for human beings, nor what holds human beings, ie. biologically based life. However, suggestions of the phenomenal which are readily presented, which do not have to be termed ‘partially declassified’, do allow the literally fantastic to display, and there, the evaluation must end, because it has to end. The ramifications are myriad, but at the top of the list sits one, which is; that human beings are not alone, nor have human beings ever been alone in the hypothetically construed sense that what humans are, this evolving status, remains separate and by this, I do not refer to fears of somehow aliens / ET’s arriving and controlling, or intervening, as is the propaganda and movie diatribe. As I said, ET’s would have to be as humans for this to be the case.
It is interesting, or not, to see how human traits are projected into where literally nothing is known of, to the extent that what is invented as ‘being there, or here’ has these (human) traits too, can have them.
The subtle and not too subtle characteristics, of being green and with bug eyes, adds to the comedy.
Are you interested in this topic? Where is ***** **** by the way?
(C-V) Yes, I’m here. He didn’t want to take part, I think – that he thinks it’s not worthy of discussion. And why we chose to is a good question. Anyway, I have a few questions:
What is the connection between who rules, their decision making (likely to provoke a war) and declassified material on ETs?
Does the declassified material read like you have introduced?
Who are the powers that be that control what NASA states, generally what the US President does, and so on? Might the ones in question be the highest echelons of the US intelligence community and who are termed, billionaire elites?
Are they terrified of chaos and have made the connection between ET’s in their minds being close, yet not obvious and the likelihood they would be both (chaos and ET’s being close – manifest) in the event of a possible nuclear exchange? Perhaps something else, such as by imprisoning an alien, they can filch advanced ingenuity and so remain a ‘step ahead’ in the application of war?
(C-I) Interesting questions. Powerlessness and enslavement are central – an interesting scenario coming from this world, don’t you think? We appear experts at both.
The thing about harnessing ingenious abilities (of ET’s) and subsequent advancements in war – the enemy not knowing what hit them, is unworthy of the excitation of a single brain cell. Zilch.
(C-V) OK. The drone / experimental flight programme the USAF were heavily into at Nellis, mainly – new Mexico / Nevada were responsible for the ‘sightings’ and all the silly ideas attached by tale tellers thereafter. The nature of the ideas says everything regarding those having and propounding them.
(C-I) I agree. Dumb. But there is a caveat, which is that many can now record phenomena on the cell phone, in addition many can do so in tandem. This holds the phenomenal as an empirical case, but NOT anything known about it.
What people say, their emotional attachment to the creative (made up) says everything about them.
Phemomena present what human capacity makes of it, can make of it, something that ‘flies’, as a ‘saucer shaped object’, an ‘orb’, something that appears and disappears, has no dimensional constraint and so on. Remember we are into refuelling advanced fighter aircraft in flight with gasoline and mentally trying to contain the phenomenal that has cosmological significances no one can even begin to comprehend.
Anyway, what do you think to this article, it was in regard to the visitation in Russia in 1977. I have lots of photos too, have a listen while I read it :
A fundamental question one has to examine is; what is reality? We live in a shared sense world, which contains what the human mind creates and subsequently via the use of language maintains the agreed upon rules for naming and defining things / bestowing attributes. Basically, if one deviates from the laws we have established, there will be little to no interpretation.
In this and in addition, there are pictures with emotional states attached, in varying degrees, to the agreed upon definitions of things that supposedly are ‘out of our reality’, yet they contain the same attributes. While engaging in this, the contents of the everyday are transported, are cast into a fantasy made ‘elsewhere’ and which basically is an extension of here, nothing else. – in ‘outer space,’ in ‘heaven,’ in ‘the universe’ ‘in other universes,’ et cetera. Human beings looking for themselves is the constituent of religious conviction, a forceful assertion to reconcile with insecurity, with aloneness in the vastness which, when encountered as thought, cannot be tolerated other than by the aforesaid process of story-making, charming and ridiculous, sometimes if not more often with control instruments thrown in (as I said earlier). To achieve transcendence by virtue of appeal to what has no basis in anything other than creativity, is constitutive of an affliction.
(C-V). Yes. The process of searching with an end result already in mind engages the search for ET’s.
Human beings do not understand where they are, the container that is this world, of manifest content. Whether there is something wrong with the evolutionary process and which has resulted in the afflicted collective condition as it now displays itself is a question to consider. This is because bound up with what has been achieved is a conviction, a convoluted certainty, that there is a justification in not engaging with (respecting) what is the only reality, the planet, rather. . . in the dire need to try and destroy it.
I introduced the discussion this way because there are those (many) who accept (and die for) the conviction that there is nothing, no matter where, that cannot be embraced for what it is. This is not an argument.
What exists out of the container of human subjective experience and whatever is ‘seen’ to be the case, I mean ‘appears’ – as do phenomena, does attract the same appeal to meanings and which have no meaning at all, other than to human beings existing in the made-world of associations and the physics that supports these. Something that ‘arrives and leaves’, that ‘travels’ would be the case if it was human, of human ingenuity, of what is the case here, whereas there is nothing to posit that such applies. Nothing can be said regarding flight patterns for example as they pertain to fuel engine rockets and aircraft, and especially pointing these requirements at what has no form of behaviour that embraces our sense. To assume some kind of craft with aliens that are biological beings is ridiculous, as ridiculous as assuming a god with cognitive ability and apparent thought transference skills as per millions of human beings very eager to ‘listen’.
A further question is bound with where something is that appears when it is perceived. Partially within our frame which allows the senses to register and while there is something more and in this ‘something more’ resides complete unknowability and negation of any implying the time taken to travel, of being more advanced than are we, of having some kind of intention – as per human experience of the condition, and so on.
Any assessment is doomed to fail and for reasons that are myriad. Human beings have their fabricated certainties to lose, especially while what we are referring to would not include them, could not include them, would not exalt them because it is not akin to them – ‘not an only begotten son’ ‘not a saviour’ ‘not a prophet,’ et cetera.
Let me just read this :
PHENOMENON Petrozavodsk (Petrozavodsk divo) – anomaly that occurred at about 4 am. Sept. 20, 1977 and was accompanied by a mass of UFO sightings in the northern regions of the USSR and Finland. Do excuse my translation:
The most impressive observations were made in Petrozavodsk, where a huge object reportedly caught the attention of random passers at night, while “it” was hanging over the city. Initially, witnesses saw the emergence of a bright light that was slowly traveling from west to east.
The apparent diameter of “jellyfish” is rated more than 100 m, and the height of hovering in the 5-7 km. She (a better attribute than ‘it’) passed strictly along Lenin Street, the main street, then stopped, increased in size and took the form of a glowing jellyfish, showering at the same time the city a lot of thin ray of red “hollow jets”, which gave the impression of heavy rain. Probably because of the actions of these “jets” in the morning in the glass of the upper floors of houses were found round holes. Fused glass “lepeshechkah” laying on the window sills. *>>>Physicists have not been able to identify the cleavage, was unclear and the physical nature of these rays, such as smooth, without cracks, cleavage does not even give a powerful laser.<<<
*note the reference to physical nature of rays…..
>>> denotes appeal to the banal
>>>Rare in this early morning motor vehicle under the influence of this “something” stayed “because of stalled engines” (?) <<< After hovering above the main street of the UFO moved into the port area on Lake Onega, hovered over the freighter “Volgobalt” and repeated exposure for 10-12 minutes. Then she was gone up over the lake. Reports of these observations were leaked to the press before and after not to publish information on UFO sightings. In addition to this facility in the neighboring localities eyewitnesses saw and dozens of other unidentified objects. [“News”, “The Truth”, “Soviet Russia”
(C-I) Oddly enough, information regarding this phenomenon was widely spread in the newspapers of the Soviet Union, which in turn influenced the beginning of mass interest by the Soviet people to the issues of the UFO.
(C-V) Hi. I would like to discuss the question; ‘what is it that provides this compulsion with life, to make relatable, in the primitive and the simple, such that it can be read subsequently and examined.
(C-I) This subject is fraught with issues and we can discuss most of them but firstly; this is a topic that can sink the writer in the fashion of a lead balloon, as I said.
(C-V) I was reading how a certain Russian cosmonaut was describing his experiences in space and how NASA compelled the government over there to make classified the same experiences brought home by American astronauts. We can’t disclose what is classified by the US, because we don’t have it, but there are ways and means of approaching the topic and the Russians aren’t too bothered about classifying the un-classifiable.
(C-I). Yes, as you know, the Russian Cosmonaut you mentioned took back to Russia what his equipment aboard the space station Mir allowed him to record. I use the word ‘equipment’ because this includes both the capacity of the human being and the capacity of what the human being engineers. The issue that follows is, as said before, bound in what we have no facility to comprehend because there is no recourse to anything we have, either within ourselves/our evolution, or what we make to enhance our capacity to discover. The space station is a product of the most advanced and most fabulously conceived. Anyone reading this does need to consider what the research is intended for and what part of human ingenuity it is required to enhance. The new Russian Space Force –military, currently in construction phase / state of the art missile systems and so on.
What human beings do and which is all that can be done, is cast in what they are and what they know as it applies to them – into what they name ‘the universe’. In this casting ‘yonder’, this projecting outwards is the expectation there is what is like them, has their status as biological beings, thus of the same limitation. Bound up in this expectation made into ‘certainty’ for most is the notion that over the past millennia of human recorded history, what exists does so because there is a reason bound up with human significance. This is just a convolution of wants, fears and desires that human instinct seizes and uses whatever creative mode of expression, whatever vehicle it can find. These agendas exist today and reflect only the thoughts and articulations of those responsible and who felt the requirement to coral the minds of whomever around theirs. This is here, in human paradigm and nowhere else and will cease when human beings cease.
To point a finger at convoluted certainties; in other words, human beings knowing nothing only what their status allows them and supports their time. In the reality in which human beings exist is ‘difference of extremity’ and to try and apply convoluted certainties where there is no point in doing so is a waste of resources better applied closer to home. The latter which will not transpire because as I said, human instinct manifest seeks whatever it can harness as a means to wield power, dominate, enslave and destroy. It is interesting but not remarkable to see how in films/movies supposed aliens / ET’s own these traits.
We can peruse the physics, how it does work, in human paradigm, but cannot be expected to when applied to what has no similarity whatsoever – though still there is the inclination to apply it and this being mere analogy at best, at worst a picture of human beings conflicted in ‘space’. (Captain Kirk, Doctor Spock, et al).
Why be in space where it is inhabitable to humans beyond any conceivable extreme? Why spend billions of tax dollars on such insane ideas as traveling to *Mars? (current cost estimate per supposed passenger is ten billion dollars – US currency). You might well be faced with accusations of sentimentality while up against those rampant warring heroics, by adopting the stance that such things as health care, student loans, education, infrastructure development, patronage of the arts – all that is intended to achieve quality human time is far more useful.
If it is possible to make a case for a collective who is free of poverty and suffering, is enlightened and their future security and happiness assured, then astronomical amounts of money on ‘space research’ is arguably justified.
*note that ‘Mars’ is a name given the planet, not one bestowed upon itself, likewise any area and description thereupon.
Why do NASA and the CIA not allow the dissemination of experiences that are so obvious to those (astronauts and cosmonauts) who witness and document them? Well, the answer really is bound up with keeping the collective on track and this, in its complexity is sufficient as a reason. Anything that could have the effect of causing civil unrest has to be avoided. Geo-politically, things are pretty insecure to say the least and there is sufficient human threat to contend with, what might be seen as aiding dissent would only add to already stretched resources and a rocking of the boat, as it were. Better that people live with thoughts and expectations belonging to the fifteenth century and before, because that maintains a sense of peace, however misled and downright wrong it is. Whether it is wrong or right is only significant in its achieving this state.
Yes, I am in full agreement especially on issues of national security, which all relating to such phenomena are. Of course, those appearing on one’s own doorstep, crop circles and so on and which one can’t help but see own no explanation, so are open to any interpretation. They are not deemed a threat, unless there was their creator/s in some kind of evidence too (as far as we are capable of discerning, which we are not – out of sight, out of mind), then it would be a different matter altogether. Though to state again, holding to the assertion that any governmental agency could covet and protect such a phenomenon is ridiculous.
This is a topic fraught with commercialism because of those who claim to have some stake, I mean use their imaginations to make something up and which has no substantiation whatsoever.
Have those who were raving about craft over Nellis AFB gone away now the drone programme is in full swing? I have a photograph of a Russian drone designed around the circular arrangement of a crop circle, I will see if I can find it.
When you think what the planet we inhabit is suspended within, why would the entirely remarkable be a surprise? Though on this point, the remarkable to us is part and parcel of how we might respond, in varying levels of excitation. What is causing the effect is not remarkable.
Hi. I need to recap:
There are a great many issues. The most central I think, is, what experience actually is – in that making sense of something can only emerge by appeal to experience and for the person involved, appeal to the content of a particular set of experiences. Much of what happens in reality is beyond what we have to both see it fully, if at all for what it is, and so making sense of it is awkward. This sounds simple but it’s not when you consider where the human being is, the place in the continuum. We can model what we can’t see and try and use our ingenuity to grapple with what we see only partially, but there is still the human biological apparatus and this defines, is the final appeal. When we cognise we make analogies, ‘something has these properties so we can attribute these properties to other things and in doing so make it conform, make it understandable’. But when faced with something where this cannot be applied, or doing so does not reveal it, even partially, as is the case with matter on a microcosmic scale and what exists to infinity in space. Theories work for us, they work for the contents of the world (part of reality) we inhabit, such as while observing the speed of light (and gravity) and computing how bodies (with mass) do behave given distance as distance applies to us. If what Astronauts/Cosmonauts are able to *observe has none of the properties we own, it’s not easy to imagine what it is. We can infer this or that, very basically speaking, but this is all we can do. We use words which have meanings associated with them and their use makes for sense and predictability, but away from our reality there is none of this and facts are mere hypothetical statements. The only fact really is that something is there, does not conform to our laws of physics and whether in the years to come we will make headway with new, altogether novel discoveries and applications of these discoveries allowing some kind of insight is open to debate. But at the end of the day, does it matter? People have to negotiate within the emerged social fabric that envelops them, do the things they have to do. Being focused on matters of this nature is not a requirement because it leads absolutely nowhere. What it ought to do is provoke the thinking that time as it applies to us, and the dimension to which we conform, is limited and in this, there is a natural splendour to enjoy. Beyond this can only be make-believe, make it however one wants, which constitutes a turning away from the nature we are given, we have evolved upon and all that lives upon it. ie. shares the limited ‘time’ with us.
Hi, about keeping something under wraps with regard to this topic, as you say, – governments, specifically the US. But this is only certain responses to information supplied them, what they think about it. It would be impossible to ‘keep captive’ anything other than that. There are those who disagree because of the provocation of supposed mystery involved with the idea of governments doing this is. The major concern is threat, but how is this quantifiable with regard to what cannot be understood at all?
You are correct about how the search for ‘life in space’ is really being about human beings looking for themselves. There is a preexisting idea already here. This idea is based on the understanding that such and such has to be the case to qualify as ‘life’. I mean as are biological requirements and this being fixed in place there comes all manner of fanciful distortions that appeal to the film industry’s imagination. Further, that because these requirements are assumed the case then the opportunities and constraints are manipulated such that ‘travel to there from here or vice-versa’ is a function of these.
I said the main concern is ‘threat evaluation’ which is an understandable tendency because this is the nature of human collective. Whether it is a useful attribute to project, or one better left at home is a the question that answers itself, or should.
With this topic – ET phenomena, the thread really is wrapped around two questions and really one should state that asking questions at all erroneously wraps the unanswered in what it can be answered with.
The question can’t be asked let alone answered and therefore all that is left is make believe.
The ideas of similarities / parallels is wishful thinking and the attributes assumed to be the case equally wishful.
I know that almost all of the people of the planet ‘believe,’ but they have to be aware of who was the instigator and not just how, but why. The answers and the reasons for them are very close to home, as you say.
I agree. Everything is not just close to home, it’s at home. The use of language, its potential to spin fanciful scenarios lives here, this is the world, the limits of the language.
Making a case for intuitions attired in descriptive prose is what human beings have done ever since it became possible. The subsequent emotional ties with assumed certainties are all a part of human evolved state. It’s not remarkable that the emotions and whatever they are attired in find themselves in conflict with what either does not accord (ie. other beliefs) or contravenes entirely (ie. no such beliefs, a stand away and see it for what it really is – junk).
For example, every single day the media reports on supposed intellectual content regarding this particular topic and which illustrates exactly this point, that ‘it’ ‘them’ ‘he’ is certain to be this way or that way, because this is how it is assumed. Assumptions are scenarios that the human brain enables, NOT ‘connections’ that reach into the ‘cosmos’.
The worst examples are those that have begun via hopes and fears that a story might help dispel. The emotionality grasps for feelings of security, and it’s not long before certainty is the case. How often do you see this happening? In some cases the result is positive because it contains a respect for the planet and all of what dwells upon it, but….the extent of the differences that are perceived and the justifications for conflict that ‘assumed certainties’ provoke is the stuff of human history. (C-I)
A present history that wields the worst possible events, as now inevitable, we are not referring to anything but human instinct, whatever this instinct conjures in this respect.
It is interesting to see how the owning of the cosmos and all that is assumed about it (what is contained ‘within’) transpires while most of human resource is being allocated to threat and counter-threat scenarios. (C-I)
If you consider self-interests, collective self-interests – what these are and why, the actions performed by virtue of them are not remarkable. Self-interests are what is perceived to be at stake and this is not confined to the economic, the ideological, – more the sureties that assumed certainties human instinct seizes as a vehicle for its outward manifestation.
Human beings do not get along with each other and such assumed certainties are resulting in potential or, as my colleagues argue, the likelihood of catastrophe. Catastrophe meaning thermo-nuclear, biological and / or chemical weapons deployment – in part, or in full.
Apart from which it’s a lovely day.
(c) 2016. Courtesy. NASA
OK. Maybe a few questions:
When you say ‘assumed certainties’, to what extent are these used as justifications for gender stereotyping and within, role expectations?
It is assumed that certain ‘heavenly folk’ are male gender, not female. I suppose there is only one or the other, but it isn’t surprising when the ones writing such stuff not that long ago were men. Consequently and still, role expectations are rigidly enforced, in certain collectives. Rather obvious, I say.
Light pattern over the Pacific Ocean, between Hawaii and the United States – where the US Navy recently made a no-fly zone :
(C-V) I have more questions for our discussion.I think you addressed the first one, which is on assumed certainties, ie. by virtue of some ‘cosmological’ attribution;
Within these stereotypical roles, and with regard to women; do you think the way women are often perceived is so by virtue of these assumed certainties that dictate?
In that dictating, what is it that particularly offends the instigators? Is it some perceived offense against the assumed certainties? This, with regard to a requirement to control, enslave others, ie. by doctrinal means which are really, psychological, political, economic means and which live at the heart of it all?
Do you think it offends what we are about, here upon our stage, within our voice? It is a relevant question.
I was just reading a report, kind of bothersome to me, because of what you referred to as the reality of spending untold amounts of money searching for ‘mystery attired as ourselves’ in other ‘galaxies’ is tendered as being of scientific process. What is it, if not that, one might wonder. It’s not the means that are engaged, it is the reason for engaging them and these reports have no access to the fullness of where we are in this. By ‘we’ I am referring to ***********. Yes, it is understood that there could be whatever ‘out there’ and/or ‘here’, but truth be told this isn’t the main concern, the main concern is something else. You have to bear in mind that ‘here’ or ‘there’ has meaning to us because in our physical system we are subject to constraints and moving from A to B is seen to be the case. In addition, we understand that our lives are bound in a biological/evolutionary process we also see to be the case. There are more complexities I have to ignore while stating the latter, obviously. The main point is not that there are programmes in operation to investigate certain hypotheses we have concerning possibilities in space, there are, as I said, but that we have no conception at all of what these possibilities should be. Rather, that we as a ‘collective of earthlings’ have a very different justification in view of ‘something else’ and the programmes that I mentioned are merely to propaganda certain ideas/intentions to the world regarding the status of US scientific hegemony in this. What is the reality if it is not comprehended? The reality is interesting to consider because its core emotions are fear and fascination. The movie conception regarding ‘ET phenomena’ (along with much else on the ‘topic’) is one of intent to enslave and destroy, or vice versa. Obviously and we’ve said this before, that when human beings project themselves into mystery they come up with what is just as they are. This is acceptable because it engages the thoughts of the masses, just as does much else, but the reality is that something altogether different is the concern of certain people and it has been for a while.
(C-I) I’m here, if there are national security issues up the wazoo, why are you talking about it?
(C-V) The most important issues are maintaining the economy and maintaining peace and in this, a continuation of stability and confidence. There is no confirming or denying because everything to do with this dwells in a secrecy best described as ‘non-existence’. We can say this or that and it will be seen as creativity. That’s the beauty of it. Yes? What time is it there? Actually I know!
What you said is suggestive of a very broad topic and one awkward to structure. It would be fascinating to examine facets of yourself and why these facets are at odds to the degree they are. The world is as it is, its ebb and flow is about what makes money. In this money machine and its sustaining, there is a deluge of hype which successfully forms the experience of the world people live within. Things seeming to be shifting forward is felt and understood to be how these things are presented via whatever means there are; TV, cellphones, advertising, internet media, films and so forth. What do you think?
(C-V) Is the expectation of responses irksome because of your discord?
What is your opinion of this person’s ‘story’?
(C-I) I stand by the axiom, trust no one, especially conspiracy theorists and / or conspiracy creators, especially supposedly tied to US national security, in his case. I’m unsure what this person’s motivation really is, because it would be all too easy for who he is referring to, to find out where he is so why risk being a supposed whistle blower? You could ask other agencies, for example the Russians, to substantiate this, I sure they wouldn’t bother.
(C-V) I’m not sure what resides at the core of such statement making. Perhaps to justify the huge expenditure on programs such as SETI, which in my opinion has questionable relevance to society, a society whose demands for social security and welfare are overlooked?
(C-I) It’s the same old thing, searching for a construction based upon the human experience of life, as we’ve said. That what they are saying they know shows they own the ingenuity so to do. The implications are not difficult to envisage. Supposed (invented then exaggerated, legitimized) threat cloaked in ‘mystery’ > Defence > Justifying budget allocation, and so on. Dealing with liars and their reason is what we are good at, because we have to be.
When launching from the Baikonur East, on board camera launcher documented UFO (video)
28-04/2016 From the Cosmodrome “East”, the first launch of the carrier rocket “Soyuz-2.1a”. The footage from cameras on board the rocket, clearly seen as close to the Russian rocket is flying a UFO.
(C-V) One question; Have we more insight on this issue than the Americans?
(C-I) What do you think? And it depends what you mean by “insight”. As we said earlier, this is a lead balloon topic and any and all statements are colored with the delusion attribute, but then and again; it is not that delusion is a psychosis, more that those who are not delusional and in comparison, very few in number, are the abnormal. The majority are the rampant loony tunes but which is human nature.
(C-V) Another question : Given that there is what is impossible to know; to what extent does that condition of not knowing negate the argument that conversely, ET’s are able to know human sense by usurping the human capacity for thought?
The ability to ‘phase into’ human paradigm, brings the capacity to usurp human ingenuity and its application real-time, to sense and to understand human world. I’m thinking of the claims by US military personnel in this, that ‘something appearing’ has more than once interrupted the command and control systems of ICBMs. That this occurence could only be the case if the threat these missiles were / are presenting were able to be judged accordingly (as humans do, ie. threat) and importantly; usurp the technological capability that controls them. Remember that the classification of such is top secret so spouting off about such occurences after the fact does warrant the asking the question why they are doing it.
(C-I) Gee whiz, I was just going to have a break outside and a cigarette. That’s not a question, it’s a statement and I know why. I suspect those over there (NASA, et al) who try keeping secret what cannot be kept secret would dearly love to own that, so they knew demonstrably that it was the case, and could by implication communicate with ET’s. What were you asking earlier about why we just gave up on the whole idea of cataloguing UFO sightings? Like I said though, this topic is fraught with accusatory stuff, dancing together with the others in cloud cuckoo land. Perhaps it should there, remain? Hmmm?
NASA Footage : Alien Spaceship Taking Energy from the Sun
Alien enthusiasts have criticized NASA for what in their opinion is the attempt to cover up the proliferation of living space vessels which are gathering energy from the sun to ‘multiply’. Cameras on board the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory captured an image that alien enthusiasts argue is a huge four-armed UFO glimmering around the sun in order to capture energy from the colossal star, a theory which apparently has left NASA “uncomfortable”. The image was detected in 2011, 2012 and 2016.
There has been no comment on what the image is suggestive of, it may be an irregularity in the image, or a load of space junk catching the interest of alien enthusiasts. However, the four-armed illuminated ‘flying object’ has been repeatedly captured by SOHO cameras with similar images captured several different times over the past five years. The point is; IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW WHAT IT IS.
The UFO captured by the SOHO camera was posted on YouTube by a UFO hunter who asked the question, “Why has NASA continually released these photos without any explanation of these anomalies?”Why indeed.
Other alien enthusiasts of the footage say it shows three long appendages protruding from a main object. It also shows a fourth arm. That is more than two time long as the higher arms. All four arms are solid objects, not trails.
UFO hunters who have debated the footage believe that “the image is of a living alien space ship entering the sun’s orbit to capture energy by from the star in order to capture the strength needed to multiply.” The theory is reminiscent of former theories in which is argued that “alien spaceships are nursing from ‘Saturn’s rings’ in order to capture the energy needed to replicate.” Here is the video:
It is now over 100 years since physicist Albert Einstein published the Theory of General Relativity (1915), which predicted that gravitational waves would one day be detected from Earth. Closer to the present time (2016), physicists using the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) have achieved this.
Einstein’s theory potulates that large objects can alter the fabric of space and time, as a rock causes ripples when dropped into a pool of water. Gravitational waves, or the ripples in spacetime, would be created when two massive objects, such as black holes or neutron stars, come into contact.
The LIGO scientists detected the gravitational waves while monitoring the emergence of two black holes 1.3 billion light years away, with a combined mass 62 times that of the Earth’s sun.
To observe gravitational waves, because they are extremely weak, very frail, extremely sensitive detectors such as the ones at LIGO are needed.
Until 2016, the very existence of gravitational waves was based merely on indirect evidence and theory but now there is direct evidence. Since 1972 there has been efforts to detect gravitational waves, by virtue of the application of an optical interferometer developed at MIT.
Whenever one talks about astronomy, one talks about observing the universe with light – visible light, with x-rays or radiowaves, but now there is a whole new way of studying the universe, allowing parts of the systems or physical phenomena that does not emit light.
It is possible to assess how many black holes there are in the universe, in this, our local universe, how often the systems coalesce and how vigorous the systems are.
Note and to reiterate : The interesting issue here (above) is that the documentary hits at the heart of what is regarded in the US as being one of the penultimate national security issues. Not only so (as if that is not sufficient for debate), but there are further considerations and we have touched on these above :
If ET phenomena can cause purposeful changes in physical systems designed and operated by human beings
(I) Can they also interfere with (commandeer and or take) human thoughts, such that the capacity to view the world’s content as experienced by human beings is achieved?
(II) Who would the human beings be?
(III) Would those human beings ever become aware?
(IV) Based on (III), would a crossover ever be achieved and what would it allow? The latter question, ‘what would it achieve’ is one many want the answer to. ** Actually have been seeking it since the end of WWII, and with regard to various Projects, ongoing (classified) and directed by who the person that created the documentary refers to as ‘the elite’, i.e. ourselves.
Obviously it is somewhat far-fetched consideration to many and understandably, but in order for an ‘alien civilisation’ to intermingle in human affairs and cognize these affairs for what they actually are for humans (all humans in the case of nuclear weapons), what they mean for humans responding (emotion), they would have to become human beings, likely very temporarily, perhaps, so to understand what is the nature of the threat to…them? To the planet? There are no answers to this because if processes are occurring and human beings are neither aware of them, nor have any authority whatsoever over those processes, there is nowhere to go with this line of reasoning . . . unless ‘someone’ comes forward to prove unequivocally that it is the case.
Much that certain scholars agree upon regarding antiquity; writings, drawings, artefects, architectural feats of construction of which there are myriad – has the capacity to conflict with and deny current era religious ideas. If ideas were ever to become shattered, it is difficult to envisage the consequence, but then and again, human time is so miniscule as to be nothing, why would it matter? The answer is more related to the nature of evolved humans in this era and as we began this discussion. We share the capacity to end civilisation, the Sumarians did not.
Secret Intelligence Service
Adversitate. Custodi. Per Verum