UFO Conjecture(s)

Thursday, January 19, 2017

What happened to my Russian visitors this January, all sent to Siberia?


Wednesday, January 18, 2017

Seeing Things

That human beings have seen odd things, since time immemorial, is evidenced by their noting (recording) their observations, sometimes, even providing proof” of their observations by drawing or painting what they saw or think they saw.

There are countless examples in the lore that has accumulated within the “literature” of ufology. (I needn’t remind you of that literature, I hope.)

But what about the examples of odd things seen and notated in the psychiatric and psychological literature, and lately in the annals of neurology?

Even the pastiche of journalistic examples is large, although too dispersed to be helpful to those wishing to cite the reportage.

My point is that we have, at our disposal, a quantity of records that indicate a lot of people have seen and reported observations of things that are outside the normal reality.

Skeptics, such as Zoam Chomsky, Gilles Fernandez, Robert Sheaffer, and Tim Printy, scoff at the tales of odd sightings that people have related to others.

And while some of those sightings may well be hallucinatory or neurological glitches, all cannot surely be set aside as malfunctions of sight or brain.

Or tales told by idiots.

As Sean Carroll, a theoretical physicist at Cal Tech, writes in his book The Big Picture [Dutton/Penguin Random House, NY, 2016], “ … an eliminativist will say ‘and therefore they are illusions,’ while the poetic naturalist says, ‘but they are no less real for all of that.’” [Page 20]
(I shall have much more to say about physicist Carroll’s book upcoming. He differentiates the Big Bang from the Big Bang Model, the former, the Big Bang, an enigma to science, the Model explaining what happened after the Big Bang.)

I looked through Aubeck/Vallee’s Wonders in the Sky for sightings similar or like that noted in my January 14th posting about the event reported by Micah Hanks, involving a military man, Steven, who, with others, were encompassed by a huge, black something-or-other that encompassed the island he and others were on, but faded from view when sunrise occurred.
The incident appears to be unique. While here were a few early recorded sightings with similar meteorological attributes, I found none that had the intensity recalled by Steven from his 1988 sighting.

Then there are sightings and weird episodes listed by Albert Rosales in his new 1900-1929 Humanoid Encounters book, many remembered rather than appearing originally in their time-frame.
The Rosales’ accounts have to be digested with the memory caveats intrinsic to recalled events, but the tales intrigue, whether bungled or confabulated because of their distance from the time they allegedly occurred to the time of their (re)telling, but not discounted out-of-hand.

(You know I believe that people report what they see rather accurately, even taking into account the vicissitudes of observational malfunction, the core of their observations intact pretty much.)

Odd things occur outside the normal scheme of things – ghosts, obtuse entities, UFOs, et al. – and we have to accept them as actual or part and parcel of what is known as the paranormal environment.

The world is fraught with odd incidents and oblique happenings, observations, and queer events. It always has been, as indicated by religious texts, mythical tales, and recorded history.

People see things….normal people, not just psychotics.

To discount their recollections and reportage is not scientific, or sensible.

RR

Tuesday, January 17, 2017

The UFO Gospel and its Ministers

A piece on Kirk Franklin, a noted gospel performer, in The New Yorker for January 16, 2017 [Making God Famous by Vinson Cunningham, Page 26 ff.] caught my attention when Franklin was quoted saying (from an NPR interview) “My job on earth, the reason why Kirk is created, is to make God famous. I just want God to be well known. …

“Christianity, and the framework of religion, makes us a subculture.” [Page 31]

If I substitute “UFOs”” for God and ufology” for Christianity in those quotes, I have the raison d’être of some significant people (and lesser lights) in the UFO community.

I’m talking about the proselytizers, Stanton Friedman, for instance, and the slew of UFO buffs who hawk UFOs as if the phenomenon is divine or near divine, and I’m not just talking about the ETH crowd.
(Even my lame agnostic views about UFOs could be lumped into the desire to make UFOs “famous” – sort of like a left-handed compliment.)

Franklin, the performer, is advocating his belief system by staging concerts and hobnobbing with rappers and hip-hoppers.

Ufologists hobnob with fellow ufologists, at conferences, by using web-sites, blogs, and writing books.

The desire is self-gratifying. If UFOs (or God) is made to be important, then the person(s) advocating them are important too.

But it’s not just that.

It’s a need, a desire, to raise UFOs (or God) to the top of the societal zeitgeist, to give precedence to something that needs elevation in some of humanities’ quarters.

Now, God, not so much, but UFOs? Certainly.

The UFO topic (and “reality”) are abased by sane, sensible members of society and some wish those who think lowly of UFOs to like them (worship them) as much as ufologists do.

The task is daunting, like Sisyphus and his eternal plight, but nonetheless it is as necessary as it is for Franklin and other God-believers, to deliver their Gospel.

UFOs are an intellectual blight, just as God is a blight to atheists.

Someone has to take up and throw down the gauntlet for both God and UFOs.

In the UFO community, we have many trying to do so. That they are inept is not the fault of the phenomenon, but the laissez faire of those pushing the belief in UFOs; they are unskilled and sloppy, inarticulate, and too ready to foist nonsense on their hoped-for audience.

Let them take a lesson from God-believers like Kirk Franklin, who said “that he always craved attention and approval …”:

Be evangelical but judicious, and spread the word about UFOs with cunning and truths.

That will make UFOs famous, at least for a while.

RR

The great internet maw: the loss of your UFO material

Pretty much everyone thinks stuff showing up on the web, the internet, is here eternally, and will be accessible well into the future.

It won't be.

When Blogger is eliminated by Google, and it will be, rather soon some media outlets have reported, this blog and everyone else’s will be gone.

Why? Blogger is on Google’s servers and when those servers are put out of service or destroyed in a catastrophe, what is on them (what was on them) will be gone.

In Facebook’s case, material is deleted from FB’s servers when a member deletes their account, as noted in this link HERE.

But beyond an individual’s account, like Google, if Facebook’s servers go down or disappear, and they will one day, all that is on them, all that was on them, will go into an internet black hole.

And the great maw will occur eventually, as the internet, itself, disappears one day, taking its content  with it, as speculated in the black hole information paradox.

Try capturing something once touted on MySpace. It’s no longer available.

For some of us, what we’ve transposed via Blogger will appear somewhere on the internet, during the internet’s life, but what we’ve all added to Facebook or Instagram or Tumblr, Wix, Wordpress et al. will be gone much sooner than that.

UFO books and material on paper will last longer, even after an nuclear attack, as in the Twilight Zone episode Time Enough at Last with Burgess Meredith:
However, that will disappear, too, one day.

For now, inserting one’s memorial UFO writings on Facebook is much iffier that putting them forth via a web-site or a blog, but nothing is forever, is it?

RR

From my Facebook feed


Monday, January 16, 2017

Hokey, but it made me laugh

From my Facebook feed...

RR

Ponce de León, The Second Coming, Wish Fulfillment, and UFOs

As you know:

“According to a popular legend, Ponce de León discovered Florida while searching for the Fountain of Youth. Though stories of vitality-restoring waters were known on both sides of the Atlantic long before Ponce de León, …” [From Wikipedia]
“The Second Coming is when Jesus Christ will return to earth in fulfillment of His promises and to fulfill the prophecies made about Him.” [From http://www.allaboutgod.com/the-second-coming.htm]
“Wish fulfillment is the satisfaction of a desire through an involuntary thought process.

Wish fulfillment can occur in dreams or in daydreams, in the symptoms of neurosis, or in the hallucinations of psychosis.” [From Wikipedia]
What have these to do with UFOs?

The desire for something “magical” to happen to we humans seems endemic, and the hope that UFOs are vanguards from an advanced extraterrestrial species is akin to such wishes.

It seems to me that many, if not most, UFO buffs have a deep-rooted need (wish) for salvation from our Earthly woes, much like those who hate aging and death and those who are suffused by Earthly sufferings, seeing a returning Jesus Christ as a savior, despite the fact [sic] that His second coming is long overdue.

And many UFO buffs think that the world’s governments are privy to information that confirms their wishes.

But the folly of the youth fountain and Jesus’ return are pathological memes, just as the UFO ETH is.

Jesus is not coming back, there is no Fountain of Youth and UFOs do not contain beings who will bring answers to this Earth’s problems.

N.B. Exquisite Fountain of Youth image, above, from http://joeboruchow.blogspot.com/2012/05/fountain-of-youth.html

RR

Saturday, January 14, 2017

UFOs from the Nook and Cranny File(s)

I have a number of UFO books that I scan for posting material here, as you know.

What surprises me, even at this late stage of my UFO interest, is how many different and unique flying saucer and UFO tales have been recorded, from the past and into the modern era, 1945 onward.

How can this be, if UFOs don’t exist, or are hallucinatory, or Earth-made, or are an unnatural phenomenon?

(I rule out the ET explanation, as you know. It’s absurd, even though I accept the possibility that some UFO sightings might be of AI machines probing the Universe and occasionally [sic] showing up here.)

And what about all those alleged and recorded encounters with creatures, beings, or humanoids, that I find fascinating. Can they all be the product of psychopathology, all of them?

Comparing the episodes of little people, fairies, angels, and the like, UFOs with accompanying entities come out ahead, in the literature, by a super abundant number.

How to deal with such a remarkable, unbelievable extension of reality?

Are all witnesses to such phenomena demented, or neurologically deficient?

The odds for that, even in a world smacking of a pathological subset, are too large to accommodate the insane or madness hypothesis.

Likewise, hoaxing can be ruled out, along with errant observation: people see and report things rather accurately.

Here’s a fascinating “story” related by Micah Hanks in UFOs & Aliens: Is There Anybody Out There? A group of essays by ufologists, edited by Michael Pye and Kirsten Dalley [New Page Books/Career Press, Pomptom Plains, NJ, 2011, Page 107 ff.]:

While co-hosting a radio show, Speaking of Strange with Joshua P. Warren, a caller named Steven provided details of an incident that he (Steven) experienced in 1988 while on military duty at Johnston Atoll in the north Pacific.

The island housed a variety of aging, biological chemicals.

Coming back from a 24-hour shift, Steven and his company, “one of the officers noticed what looked like a small, dark, metallic ball hovering the sky above.

“Whatever it was, nobody could identify it.” [Page 110]

The island radar station could not get a “paint” (radar image) of the "metallic ball."

The base commander was hosting a two-star retired general and both “were looking at it also” (as was heard on the base radio).

“ … the mystery object … stopped directly over the middle of the island and seemed to begin a slow descent, the metallic ball [appearing] to grow larger … the thing – whatever it was – kept getting closer and filled more and more of the sky.

“The object got bigger, and bigger, and bigger,” Steven said.

“ …this object dwarfed even the largest known aircraft used by the Air Force at the time …the object’s circumference could easily have been the length of the island, though [Steven] still couldn’t tell for certain whether it was round or flat, because it seemed to be absorbing light.” [Page 111]

“As the [daylight] got brighter, this thing got blacker and bigger.” [Page 112]

Personnel on the island were watching the “silent behemoth” and “As the black void loomed above … the water and the air … became charged with electricity …

“Then … the moment the sun cracked the horizon, this thing vanished. And I [Steven] don’t mean it flew away; I don’t mean it went left or right. This thing just wasn’t there anymore!

“The shadow that had been over the island was no longer there … It just went – it disappeared. [Page 112]

Steven provided his assessment to Hanks and his radio partner”

“… I think all technology – no matter how advanced  -- that is built by any being, entity, or anything with some degree of intelligence, has its limitations and the potential for failure. And I think that whatever this thing was – whatever ‘they’ were --I think we witnessed a malfunction. I think something went wrong with this thing’s technology … I think we actually witnessed a [technological] malfunction …They are out there, and they are huge. Some of these things are enormous.” [ibid, Page 113, italics in book]

How do we explain or understand the above account?

Was Steven lying? I don’t believe Hanks thinks so. The tale doesn’t read as fictive.

But was the “thing” an unusual meteorological or atmospheric phenomenon? Perhaps.

The conclusion of Steven is imposed upon the event, that event not definitive in any way that allows an ET determination.

And yet the incident is strange and odd in ways that incur further examination. Did Micah Hanks or anyone else follow up to see if there were other “witnesses” to the sighting?

Did anyone check meteorological records to see if there were atmospherics that might account for the “thing” and its ephemeral disappearance?

Are there other similar sightings in UFO lore? I’m looking, and will use Aubeck’s and Vallee’s Wonders in the Sky and his Return to Magonia (with Shough), covered here below.

My subsidiary point here is that there are rafts of UFO tales with enough credibility to invite further explanation or exegesis.

The perusal of such tales should offer imaginative grist for those inclined to keep pursuing UFOs.

After all, what else if there for us, who are existentially comfortable, to do?

RR

Friday, January 13, 2017

Return to Magonia (and The Anomalist)

I want to thank my pals at Patrick Huyghe’s Anomalist, especially WM, who regularly provides notices of my ramblings and offers correctives as needed.

This one’s for them….

I haven’t mentioned, in a while, Chris Aubeck’s and Martin Shough’s book Return to Magonia: Investigating UFOs in History. [Anomalist Books, TX, 2015]

While re-reading the book – I’m a Chris Aubeck fan – I was struck by the passages inside the discourse on the Airship phenomenon of the late 1800s. [Chapter 15, Strange Mid-air Ships, Page219 ff.], particularly the passages about the alleged “sightings” and incidents recorded in Medieval church documents [Page 231 ff.].

My “critical review” appeared here a year ago:


Most of you, I presume, recall the often mentioned (in UFO literature) the account of Archbishop Agobard [779-840] in the 9th Century that supposedly related an encounter by parishioners with “people” who descended from a craft floating in the air like a ship at sea:

“ … many people [were] exhibiting four captives, three men and a woman, [who] had fallen from these very ships. [The four] were chained up for some days [and being prepared to be stoned by their captures]” which Archbishop halted.

A Chinese writing from June 1523 by Qiu Fuzuo is interesting:

“Two ships suddenly came out of a cloud and landed in front of Lu Yu’s school. The five or six pilots of two flying boats were just two feet tall and wore red hats and held long poles. The students came out of the school to see the ships. The beings stretched out their hands and the students’ noses and mouths turned black. They found they were unable to speak and fled in fright.

“The ships remained on the ground for a while. Several people came out … Shortly both ships took off … and flew over a mile away. They landed in a cemetery … the students’ [sic] regained the ability to speak … Five days later, Lu Yu died suddenly.” [ibid; Page 234]

Other accounts (from the period] tell of ships from which “beings” descend from floating ships, many grabbed by people only to be released when they (the beings) professed to be “drowning” or unable to breathe, suffocating in the air in which they were sailing.

Many of the church registered episodes tell of “anchors” being caught on spires or other protuberances and cut away by the crew members in the ships (to escape) and then saved by church members to adorn some facet of the church, like a door.

(I haven’t heard or read, anywhere, that some UFO researcher has checked out the churches mentioned to see if an “anchor” is installed as part of the church façade. The book glosses over the matter.)

These accounts by Aubeck and Shough supplement their elaborate renditions of Airship sightings, which provoked a yawn from me, as noted in my 2016 “review.”

Yet, the tales told (and recorded by church fathers) fascinate.

Why? Are they true or apocryphal or, perhaps, “deliberate inventions with a political message” [Page 234], the “water” meant to be read figuratively, the authors write. [Page 233]

 Sociology and Science (at the University of California. San Diego, Andrew Schull, writes in his book Madness in Civilization: A Cultural History of Insanity from the Bible to Freud, from the Madhouse to Modern Medicine [Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2015] this:

“In Europe, medieval societies in the centuries that followed the breakdown of the Rona imperium were riven by the twin scourges of poverty and disease, heir depredations exacerbated by endemic violence and insecurity. This was a world of malnutrition and famine with mass starvation … And to those largely helpless and dependent victims of misfortune, we may add the mad – epileptic, frenzied, melancholic, hallucinating, demented. [Pages 69-70]

Would that account for the “sightings” and incidents as recorded by monks and bishops of the Church?

Even Abogard challenges the mind-set of his parishioners:

“Among those so blinded with profound stupidity … they believe these things … “ [Aubeck /Shough, Page 231]

Michel Foucault in Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason [Vintage Books/Random House, NY, 1965] writes:

“Something new appears in the imaginary landscape of the Renaissance; soon it will occupy a privileged place there: the Ship of Fools, a strange ‘drunken boat’ …Page 7]

“It is possible that these ships of fools … haunted the imagination of the entire early Renaissance …”  [Page 9]

“But if the navigation of madmen is linked in the Western mind with so many immemorial motifs, why, so abruptly, in the [middle ages] is the theme suddenly formulated in literature and iconography?” [Page 13]

Foucault equates “madness” with “folly,” an innocuous mind-set that seems more likely to be the “affliction” of those church members who thought they had seen “ships” and caught some of their crew, “swimming” down toward them.

But why so many tales from different times and different locales, some outside Europe as the China account?

No real research or investigation taken by UFO enthusiasts, as noted in the lack of search for those “anchors” supposedly collected and added to church facilities.

And is there a kind of collective mind-set that pairs these early airships to the 1896 Airships, the reports of which are debunked by UFO skeptics?

Or did some phenomenon show up, created by Vallee’s “control system” or Caravaca’s “external agent”?

Like Grimm’s fairy tales, the stories may have been generated for any number of reasons --  liturgical metaphor, political purpose, or entertainment – and changed by geographic context or existential context.

Or are the stories actual accounts, a journalistic reprise of real events?

Madness prevails either way: in a real context or an hallucinatory context.

RR

Artificial Intelligent "aliens" -- I'm not alone in believing that

Click HERE

RR

Thursday, January 12, 2017

Those UFO Lights

When I get Google UFO Alerts (notices and links) to UFO articles found in media and the internet, the preponderance of “sightings’ are headlined as lights [sic].

And all of you know that lights, often blue or green, have been part of the reports or vocalized sightings in the UFO record (lore).

But as I’ve noted before, here and elsewhere, this seems odd to me.

How is it that an alleged alien (extraterrestrial) species would be using lights, and in color spectrums, like that which we humans use and which were developed by inventors here, starting with Ptolemy and other earlier “scientists/philosophers, and inventors (listed by Wikipedia: Humphry Davy, James Bowman Lindsay, Moses G. Farmer, William E. Sawyer, Joseph Swan and Heinrich Göbel ) ending with the likes of Edison and  his incandescent bulbs, and LEDS today, among newer analogs?

Evolution, not only of our species, but in human invention and discovery, is unique to the many factors that make up the Earth, as I’ve often noted – geologic development and transition, geographic placement, daily existence and its vicissitudes, meteorological elements, and human interactions, among other things.

No sentient species in the Universe would evolve as humans have, nor would their “invented artifacts” (such as lights) mimic ours.

This, alone, puts the so-called Extraterrestrial Hypothesis, not only in doubt, but outside commonsense and intelligent discourse.

No extraterrestrial craft, if there were ever such a thing, would have lights like those that adorn human aircraft or human facilities.

The idea is ludicrous.

RR

Tuesday, January 10, 2017

Madness and madness: the state of ufology (an update or clarification)

Two comments received for this blog. This first (received just a few days ago) for a 2011 posting about Howard Hughes and Socorro”

and speaking about area 51 Texas findings on spying on area 51 Texas black box on the moratos labs wok for the arm force most wanted information for the first time area 51 Texas galaxy head quarters arrest on these word for spying on empty alien buildings the person most wanted is chato son i'm sure is on Elvis Presley orphan work for world vision these person is a north tiger recorded to be busted for driving the united states and area 51 texas to ask why they are doing that questions from are 51 tecas to the busted on the federal government for causing the great dipreshien 2 times one end it by 1971 started on the 1960's i'm sure they also call the united states arm force maybe the moratos to visit utah for secret work. some work can be found on the confession on the limp by-skit for attacking means to be on the security pro strode unit on salt also city Utah there is more information on the federal government or utah government or on the arm force maybe they are also security pro morato an for sure they are north tiger morato also these is aliens record to merry binladen to stop all attacks against them and because they have problems maybe try them also because it ws a war then also only that these north tigers are no good and no one know the real look binladen cam it be only by attacks we can tell because is recorded on the moratos also these store unit was also biography or maybe or 99 story.

these aliens are know to have Utah attack each other arm force recordings they do it a lot. like hundred of Utah population attacking each other or attacking the general population each pother just utah.the arm force is different 

we have report they do these and when is reason the only one why they have phone codes and more. Utah population is busted.” 

And this for a 2016  posting by me about the state of ufology; one of my ongoing rants about the condition of the UFO topic:

I am always amused when 21st century American observers offers their viewpoints on 19th century European culture. As always, these observations tend to show the limits of the percipient more than offering a concise view of what 19th century European culture exactly was in all its richness and diversity.

There are so many vectors that need to be included - details the first generations of enthusiastic ufologists missed for a number of reasons. Jung, for instance, was a mere dilettante, one of those countless dreaming souls spawn forth from a dying Vienna, a city I once visited. Through the American counterculture Jung won stature - but we, the Europeans, have not forgotten his dances with fire - his Aryan abyss of yore. As we have not forgotten that Vienna gave birth to Freud, Klimt, but also Hitler.

Connect to that the stupor and laziness of the US hobby-ufologist who hasn't conducted any original research into the old waves since they were first discovered and formulated by the hard work of the 1960's ufologists, and we can see where the whole debate quickly becomes derailed. Old models, old data, old combinations, creating erroneous theories.

Contradictio in terminis: these theories are moulded to suit preferred preconceptions and are not driven by any original investigation to clear the way. 

A simple observation: the still clinging to the dogma of the canonical waves of old, i.e. 1896-1897, 1930's, 1946. These so-called waves - if they were that - were formulated in the 1960's. No update since then has reached the debate - where researchers have done so much to correct these old-fashioned viewpoints.”

Now I ask you, what is the first commentary about? You tell me.

And the second from a brilliant fellow who dislikes my approach, mostly the accent on old cases without any new “research” I presume.

Yes, but has the commentator, himself, done any new “research” into the UFO phenomenon?

I don’t think so. I haven’t seen any. But he points his finger at my admittedly limp speculations while offering nothing of substance himself about UFOs, past or present.

That’s what I’m complaining about: the madness in the first example and the florid apathy of the second, disguising itself as substantive, yet nowhere near so.

This is the state of “ufology” and the overwhelming UFO milieu nowadays, mad (in the insane sense) and mad (in the angry sense).

I have seen no responses, here or anywhere in the UFO universe, that are worthy of erudite rejoinder(s).

Even my pal Kevin Randle’s blog is sidelined by inane commentary that is so vapid as to be profoundly evanescent.

And look at the commentary at other popular UFO blogs or web-sites . They are replete with banality and worthless dialectic.

That’s the state of “ufology” nowadays, befuddled by fools and betrayed by deserters to Facebook, where everyone has a voice but no one has a sensible thought in his or her head.

RR

Facing reality: the UFO dilemma

There comes a time when delusion (and madness) must be set aside.

And the delusional madness of which I write is the UFO madness.

Once it was “cute” to be interested in UFOs and flying saucers, but those days and that “cuteness” are long gone.

The mysterious “phenomenon” – whether a figment of the imagination, a real phenomenon, a contrived hoax, or any other kind of “reality” – has reached the nadir of its value to human society.

UFOs don’t factor in to human existence, and never really did. UFOs and flying disks have always been a fringe topic and a trivial aspect of human history.

One can see the riven condition of ufology, that pseudo-practice that has smothered the enigmatic appearance of odd “somethings” seen in the sky and often on the ground.

UFOs are now only the haven for nostalgic geezers who became attuned to the Sci-Fi patina of the observed “somethings” while in their youth and now do not have the gumption to see that they and their wistful adolescent fixation no longer matters.

Many of my “friends” in the UFO community have actually abandoned their obsession for UFOs, deriving attention and belonging within the confines of Facebook and Twitter.

They rarely contribute within a ufological venue, opting to be adorned by fawning sycophants who slobber over their mundane activities that have nothing to do with UFOs or anything of substance.

Then there are the absolutely “mad” ravings of those who still harbor a hope that UFOs are the vanguard of an advanced extraterrestrial civilization, a fantasy that is so blatantly irrational that it borders on psychopathology.

Yes, there are some niggling elements within UFO lore that intrigue (even to me) but to set aside one’s existent and necessary proclivities to pursue UFOs to the detriment of normal behavioral life is sheer madness. And not to recognize that as madness is a folly that belies common sense; that obtrudes on intelligent wherewithal.

Some of you reading this will depart as visitors here, but that is no great loss, as most of you do not contribute or participate in any meaningful way, here or anywhere else for that matter.

UFOs are as dead as the hula hoop or any other fad that sprouted in the last decades of the Twentieth Century.

N.B. Graphic a top from WebFuel.ca

RR 

Monday, January 09, 2017

Planet 9 (not Plan 9 from Outer Space)

The CBS 60 Minutes hour Sunday, January 8, 2017, noted in my posting below, had a segment on the search for the 9th planet in our Solar System, a huge planet (supposedly) that would replace dwarf planet Pluto in the pantheon of planets astronomers find interesting.

I hope that UFO buffs stay tuned to information coming forth about the "new" planet and its importance, perhaps, to the UFO topic, meaning that Alien Astronaut theorists should be prevented from kidnapping the planet to further their extraterrestrial hypotheses, derailed now that Zecharia Sitchin's 12th Planet tale is pretty much dismissed by sane, sensible ufologists (if there are such people).

RR

60 Minutes and Artificial Intelligent Drones

I hope some of you, here in the States, saw CBS' 60 Minutes segment Sunday night [1/8/17] that provided an in-depth look at MIT's creation of AI drones for the U.S. military.

The clips above show the drones surrounding military aircraft, without human intervention, and a clip of the drones in the air that mock the 1952 Newhouse/Tremonton , Utah "things' filmed by Warrart Officer Newhouse.

Now I'm not implying that Newhouse filmed U.S. drones but I am implying that maybe Newhouse filmed drones from "elsewhere" that intruded upon American airspace, and have for many years, even doing so now.

The other point I'm making is that the U.S. military admits that its drones have the ability to kill humans without human direction: the drones make the decision to kill on their own using AI algorithms. And those algorithms are already in place.

The "warnings" about AI, offered by various tech and scientific gurus [Elon Musk, Ray Kurzweil. Stephen Hawking, Bill Gates, Nick Bostrom, et al.], seem particularly prescient.

RR

Sunday, January 08, 2017

The UFO skeptic’s Bible (or it should be)

The book pictured here, by Paul Devereux and Peter Brookesmith, was published in 1997 by Blandford a Cassell, London:
It is a compendium of all the iconic (significant) stories and reports that have enthralled UFO buffs, and many that still do.

But the authors, along with Montague Keen and familiar UFO critic Nigel Watson, emasculate most (all?) of the UFO tales that UFO aficionados take for granted, including Roswell, which can be discarded by this one newspaper clip about Mac Brazel, who claimed to have found “flying disk debris” on his farm in June [sic] 1947. (I’ve left the piece fully scanned so you can read it. It appears on page 123 of the book.):
[Mouse over image and click to enlarge

The concluding Epilogue by Mr. Devereux provides a succinct appreciation of the psychology that afflicts Ufology and the UFO myth itself. [Page 179 ff.]

If you are a UFO believer and/or an ETH proponent of the mysterious phenomenon, this is a must-have/must read book, one that skeptics can use to bolster their anti-UFO views.

It surely must be available from a variety of sources (Amazon, Powells, et al.) and at a bargain price since it has been around for 20 years now.

RR

UFOs not UAP

I’m a “UFO theorist” (in my mind).

And I’m agnostic about the phenomenon, but you know that.

But, for me, the UFOs I’m interested in are Unidentified Flying Objects not Unidentified Aerial Phenomena.

The latter consists of atmospheric anomalies or other amorphous entities of a non-intelligent kind.

Then there are the things that are hallucinogenic in nature; that is, they are products of the mind, real in that sense, and worthy of neurological and/or psychological study, which I also find fascinating.

Yet, it’s those seemingly tangible artifacts that have shown up often and sometimes eject “creatures” or beings who act with apparent intent.

Many of those “sightings” or incidents are psychologically produced also, but there are a few which, from an evidence standpoint, aren’t, such as the 1967 Stephan Michalak/Falcon Lake episode, dismissed by Zoam Chomsky, [http://www.theironskeptic.com/articles/michalak/michalak.htm] or the 1979 Robert Taylor “assault” in Scotland set aside by the Wikipedia account as “an isolated attack of temporal lobe epilepsy.” [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Taylor_incident]
Of course the 1964 Socorro sighting by Police Officer Lonnie Zamora was not an hallucinatory episode or a UAP product.
There are others, which I see as intrusions of AI machines or insertions from another dimension or time.

These are the sightings, among a few others, that intrigue (me).

They can be “explained away” as UFO buffs used to say but that is disingenuous and a superficial approach to such UFO events.

The sloth and apathy of “ufologists” have marginalized intriguing cases that seem to involve tangible (material), intelligently operated “things” that fly or land on Earth.

One can play around with such sightings but that is not “scientific” or imaginative.

One can debunk or be skeptical about such sightings or events but that would be stupid, until such efforts erase all possibilities of tangibility or apparent intelligence on the part of the “things” experienced.

Spanish UFO researcher Jose Antonio Caravaca’s “Distortion Theory” like Jacques Vallee’s “Control System” theory could answer some of the sightings I’ve noted here, except of the fact that there are remnants of reality (hard evidence) that something solid was involved, something palpable and corporeal.

Yes, some UFOs are “objects.” They are not Unidentified Phenomena.

RR

Friday, January 06, 2017

Our follower/reader Daniel’s view of reality

A Letter to the Editor in the January 19th, 2017 New York Review of Books, which I cited in a recent piece on quantum mechanics, from Clinton James about a review of Anthony Gottlieb’s The Dream of Enlightenment [NYB, 9/29/16] by Thomas Nagel strikes at the ontological status of quantum mechanics.

Mr. James writes, “ … an ontology of the reality of different perspectives or the infinity of different realities, along the lines of Spinoza and Leibniz may continue to survive in the very heart of physical theory.” [Page 66]

Earlier in his letter Mr. James noted “that modern physics, specifically quantum mechanics, can only be interpreted as a theory of a materialistic, Hobbesian naturalism.”

Thomas Nagel replied, ending his missive with this:

“ … there is no more to reality than our observations (a form of idealism) and with the view that, although there is an underlying physical reality that actually explains the observations, a different or extended theory is needed to explain it.” [ibid, Page 66]

Daniel insists that reality consists of what we experience and observe, which is a sensible view but only a patina of reality, as evidenced by the reports and tales of Nick Redfern, The Anomalist, et al.

RR

Thursday, January 05, 2017

More on Quantum Mechanics

Click HERE for article on strangeness of Quantum.

RR

Radio signals from a galaxy far, far away?

From my Facebook feed, a Smithsonian piece on signals being emitted by (from) a small, obscure galaxy.

Click HERE to read.

RR