UFO Conjecture(s)

Saturday, January 07, 2012

Jose Caravaca provides more "evidence" for his Distortion Theory


Jose Antonio Caravaca insists that UFO events are a product of "distortion" by something or someone co-creating with UFO witnesses a scenario that is different from a psychologically induced mental configuration, which is what the RRRGroup feels is the sine qua non of UFO experiences.

To read Senor Caravaca's latest thrust for his developing "theory," click HERE to access his Reynolds Group blog.

JS

6 Comments:

  • My counter theory is here which I have expanded this afternoon.

    http://materialintangible.blogspot.com/2012/01/part-one-third-state-of-information.html

    Best Wishes
    Bruce

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Saturday, January 07, 2012  

  • Here are some ( not all) of the issues I have with this theory. Hopefully, perhaps a dialog could ensue since no one has bitten so far..

    1.If ET was using to distortion to mask their presence, why don't they blend into the scenery instead of going through an elaborate ruse that suggests by circularity, an ET presence? Example: In the U.S when the meme of Greys was circulating ( which is a consistent representation of an ET), it had no effect on mundane matters, except as a theatrical, fringe melodrama.

    2, Why are ET close encounters very similar to NDE reports that do not have a ET ?

    3. If this were a term of a sociological experiment and distortion was a methodology to measure cognition, what was the control group? Was this a random sampling or one that sampled more methodically by culture, etc? Why not simply extrapolate effects by monitoring communications? If you are tampering, you have to be consistent to measure results. What are the consistencies between reported events?

    4. How does abduction scenarios fit into this theory? ( Allagash, Walton, etc)

    5. What specifically is distorted biologically to produce the distortion as it requires a cause before an effect?

    6. If appearances cannot be trusted, why select what it appears to be, as the cause? (Recall the errors of "spontaneous generation")

    Bruce

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Saturday, January 07, 2012  

  • Dear Bruce...

    I think I explained in one comment and some report, that the theory of distortion has nothing to do with extraterrestrial visitors. It is a mental phenomenon (caused by an external agent) but whose origin we have not yet discovered.
    I do not think there is a civilization extraterretre using camouflage mechanisms, nor do I think of a Control System (understood as something organized and deliberate).
    The distortion is more subtle, a phenomenon linked to the human psyche and the collective unconscious.
    I do not think it's a great thing. Or more intelligent than us or more technologically advanced.
    It's more subtle. More intimate, and more ethereal.
    But above all, what most interests us is that this unknown factor interacts with the human mind so wonderful, beautiful, exciting, and some would say until the artistic.

    thank Bruce...

    By Blogger jacarav@ca, at Sunday, January 08, 2012  

  • It seems that I have either misinterpreted your theory or you have changed your theory or both.
    "I think I explained in one comment and some report, that the theory of distortion has nothing to do with extraterrestrial visitors."
    I missed that somehow.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Sunday, January 08, 2012  

  • If extraterrestrials do not exist in your theory versus inter-dimensional entities that do exist, as in

    "It is an "intelligent" phenomenon (entities) that exists outside of us. "

    What is the fundamental demarcation between these categories? This is where you lose me. Are you saying spacetime is the synthetic conveyance rather than a physical craft?
    I think then my original questions still apply to your theory. Or, how do they not apply?
    I am confused Jose..I am not attempting to nitpick, but I don't understand the basis of parsing between vehicles for "aliens" as fundamentally much of a distinction as the results are the same.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Sunday, January 08, 2012  

  • Bruce..

    Probably due to my bad English, I can not explain clearly enough...
    I have never spoken extraterrestrial or mention the word "intelligence" normally, I use the term "external factor or external agent."
    With my reports and ideas only pretend to give my hypothesis. NOT intend to convince anyone (besides not my intention).
    If you disagree with my thesis, is that you believe that his ideas are more successful, and I am delighted that so be it.
    I still have doubts and continue investigating.

    I hope in my next report more specific my hypothesis, with the valuable assistance of Rich ...

    thank you for your comment...

    ABRAZOS

    Jose...

    By Blogger jacarav@ca, at Sunday, January 08, 2012  

Post a Comment

<< Home