UFO Conjecture(s)

Wednesday, October 09, 2013

The Roswell Saucer, before its crash

muroc2.jpg
The Project Saucer Report of April 1949 gave its explanation for saucers seen by Army Air Force pilots and ground officers over Muroc Air Base in California (now Edwards Air Force Base) on July 8th, 1947: Research Balloons.

This is from Project 1947's account, taken from Richard Hall's The UFO Evidence:

At Muroc AFB (now Edwards AFB) and adjacent Rogers Dry Lake, scientists and engineers test and develop the latest aircraft, including secret projects. Althoroughly [sic] familiar with anything that flies, the base technical personnel had no explanation for the UFOs which maneuvered over the area July 8, 1947. Twice that morning, disc-shaped objects were observed cavorting overhead. Then about 11:50 AM, a crew of technicians at Rogers saw a round white, apparently metallic object descending, moving west nortwest [sic] against the wind. They observed thick projections on top which crossed each other at intervals, suggesting either rotation or oscillation.

One of the Muroc saucers is that which crashed near Roswell, and from which slides of the recovered bodies exist.

Click HERE for the Project 1947 documents about the Muroc sighting.

RR

The [UFO] Intelligence

Copyright 2013, InterAmerica, Inc.

eye.jpg
My friend, Paul Kimball, an intellectual of the highest order, allows that UFOs may not contain alien/extraterrestrial intruders and, furthermore, such observations, including those of ghosts, weird entities (Big Foot, Loch Ness monsters, et al.) are actually an interaction with humans by an intelligent agent – almost like the “external agent” that Jose Antonio Caravaca proffers as the interference reported in UFO encounters.

(Mr. Kimball will clarify my simplistic presentation of his views, I hope; his views plumped out by the considerations of his departed buddy, Mac Tonnies, I think.)

Brownie/Susan would interject “The Trickster” here perhaps.

I hate the Trickster concept; it smacks of the theological Devil or Satan idea, when we all know that Satan is the fourth element of the God-head – Jung’s Quaternity, wherein the Trinity is fleshed out with another segment, Evil, as the Gnostic maintained as part of God’s inherent nature. Therefore the Trickster doesn’t work for me, and here’s why, as a counter to Paul’s suggestion and those of The Trickster devotees:

An interference of the kind or nature suggested by Paul, Brownie, and even Mac Tonnies, disregards the ineffability of the God-head or God, as described, brilliantly, by the Cabalists (or Kabbalists).

tetragram.jpg
The idea of God – which you can find in numerable books, and one I like is God and the Unconscious by Victor White, O.P. (A Jungian) [Meridian Books, A division of The World Publishing Company, Cleveland/NY, 1961, reprinted from Harvill Press, 1952] – is considered by serious thinkers as contained within the restrictive parameter of Ineffability (beyond expression, indescribable, unspeakable, unknown).

Theologically, and intellectually, God (whether dead now, which I believe, or alive) is beyond comprehension, unknowable or hidden, as authors Richard Elliott Friedman and Gerald L. Schroeder (mentioned earlier here) have it.

Thus, the Fourth “face” of God – Evil (Satan) is also ineffable or hidden, far from interacting with humankind.

Is there a sub-set of God or The Trickster – an angelic minion, as it were – interacting with humans?

Perhaps, but isn’t the idea of flying saucers/UFOs with pilots and crew just as possible or reasonable as the idea of a “divine” or paranormal presence?

An intelligence that has been playing, allegedly, with humans, since time immemorial, in ways that are as bizarre as recorded, has to be psychotic in nature, if one can ascribe a psychiatric overlay to such behavior by this unknown presence.

The pattern of UFO sightings and encounters, and theologically oriented encounters, such as that of Jeanne d’Arc or the Fatima and Lourdes children are nutty, insane as anything anyone can imagine.

To call such behavior or activity as intelligent is oxymoronic.

To not go further astray here, let me conclude by saying that an intelligence interacting with humans is best described by Jose Caravaca as an “external agent” – one that is part of the Earth’s environment (physically or non-pysically) – the Mac Tonnies, Jacques Vallee view almost – is possible but not any more acceptable than the idea UFOs are intruders from other worlds, a view that PG and some other visitors here eschew, but one that David Rudiak champions, along with many others in the UFO arena.

Whether an external agent, The Trickster, an aspect of God, a non-delineated intelligence, or even extraterrestrial visitors from worlds far away, the interactions have been, by human standards, crazy and without meaning of any kind.

UFOs as observational forays is a possibility, but ongoing, for millennia?

UFOs as particles of intelligent manipulation by someone or something, without any kind of sensible or rational patina, as far as we can discern?

No, UFOs are just UFOs – phenomenological entities of a mysterious but rather prosaic kind; phenomena that eludes us because we are inclined to provide explanations that are as irrational as those cited above.

RR