UFO Conjecture(s)

Thursday, March 09, 2017

Is there a paranormal reality (and are UFOs part of it)?

Copyright 2017, InterAmerica, Inc.

Many of you believe, I think, that there are such things as ghosts and monsters and things that go bump in the night.

Film-maker Paul Kimball believes in ghosts; he goes looking for them.

My pal, Nick Redfern, writes about the paranormal as if it’s real.

And my friend, Eric Wargo defends the idea of the paranormal at his resplendent site, thenightshirt.com.

My Spanish colleague, Jose Antonio Caravaca, who’s gotten some promotion here and elsewhere for his intriguing “Distortion Theory” (for UFO encounter events), thinks there is a psychical reality for his “external agent? (the thing that interacts with humans when they think they are having a brush with beings from flying saucers).

One of my Facebook feeds convinced me that I’ve seen my “guardian angel” and I have seen what could be called ghosts (or, at least, things of an evanescent nature that seem to have had form and substance, for a brief moment).

But UFOs?

I have a fascination with those UFO encounters that also intrigue Jose Caravaca.

But I also think some people have seen nuts and bolts things that they call UFOs (or flying saucers in the old parlance).

And I believe some people have seen odd lights that had the appearance of maneuverability and intelligence.

But are all these “witnessed” things tangible? Or are they figments of our imagination, figments understood by various psychological etiologies?

Jacques Vallee has conjured up a control agent or mechanism to explain UFOs, somewhat similar to Jose Caravaca’s “external agent” both resorting to something outside our normal, humdrum reality, a process in Vallee’s exposition and an actual entity in Caravaca’s.

Others posit the (debilitating, for me) mythical meme, The Trickster.

Freud gave us the “id” to explain the mischief making mechanism that causes us grief but he restricted that mischief to sexual misbehavior.

Jung has proffered archetypes (the Trickster is one) that aggrieve us. And he gave us the evil nature of God (the devil, Satan) in his idea of the Divine Quaternity as the component that assaults humans.

But those psychological concepts, are they real?

When dealing with the so-called paranormal, one has to bring into play the nature of consciousness, but is consciousness real? (My previous post here about philosopher Dennett indicated that there is thought in some academic, scientific circles that consciousness is illusory.)

That is matter for discussion elsewhere, I’m afraid. Most of you can barely handle the rather mundane idiosyncratic aspects of a few UFO tales related here.

For me, the paranormal (ghosts, Big Foot, Nessie, et al.)  are neurologically or psychologically induced, “real” to the percipient but not real in the debatable sense of reality as we know it or think we know it.

And Jose Caravaca’s “external agent” or Jacques Vallee’s “control system” and Paul Kimball’s elusive ghosts or Nick Redfern’s chupacabras along with most UFO stories are merely intrusions of a non-sexual “id” or an archetypal memory accumulated over a life-time of personal neuroses (or pathologies).

The paranormal is a fairy tale lying atop one’s otherwise boring life, waiting to break out when existential things get too quiescent for someone who thinks he or she should be experiencing more than they are.

Under the cover of night, the paranormal comes “alive” but only in the mind, not in the actual reality to which we seem tethered.

Image used (above) comes from http://consciouslifenews.com/

RR

11 Comments:

  • Well, I have more than a few cases where people have claimed to have seen MIB after dabbling with Ouija Boards. Also, there is the Aleister Crowley LAM figure, which is somewhat alien-like. Mothman turned up in the same time frame as UFOs in and around Point Pleasant in 1966/7. Jack Parsons had connections to Crowley and UFOs. So, yeah I would say that UFOs and the paranormal are part of the same thing. Of course, the list above is a very small series of examples. There are many more.

    By Blogger Nick Redfern, at Thursday, March 09, 2017  

  • Yep, Nick...

    You have accumulated, more than anyone I know, an extensive record or seeming paranormal events, which are real to the persons impacted by them, and thus your recording of the events (and things) gives them (or creates) a reality, yes?

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, March 09, 2017  

  • Yeah, I would say so. But, I'm quite open to the Tulpa/thought-form angle, so maybe in some cases we unconsciously create these things and their links to other phenomena.

    By Blogger Nick Redfern, at Thursday, March 09, 2017  

  • Tulpas and chupacabras make me crazy, but you know that.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, March 09, 2017  

  • yep! lol

    By Blogger Nick Redfern, at Thursday, March 09, 2017  

  • I once read a comment on a popular Ghost/Paranormal website where the commenter lamented that he never was able to see or make contact with ghosts. The proprietor of the site (a well known New England ghost hunter) replied that ghost do not appear or make contact with those who do not believe in them.

    Yes, very amusing but very succinct to the UFO lore. It seems that you have to believe in them in order see them or interact with them.

    Yes, as I've stated numerous times here (and on my mothballed blog), people see things in the sky for which they have no rational means to explain at that given time, and by definition, these are "unidentified flying objects" but most are easy to decipher at a later date when objective data fills in the subjective gaps.

    My monthly mortgage scares me more than things that go bump in the night.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Thursday, March 09, 2017  

  • The theologian says you'll see it when you believe it. The scientist says he'll believe it when he sees it. Wish they'd get their acts together. LOL

    By Blogger Ron, at Friday, March 10, 2017  

  • I am convinced that the main key of the manifestations of that paranormal reality is the human implication, that is, the witness. Although for decades we have believed in "control systems", ultra-terrestrial beings, etc., when in fact it is a phenomenon of intimate nature linked to the mind of a single witness. Although the experiences share some points in common, the total content of the experience (encounter UFO, ghost, chupacabras, etc.) is personal, private and of unique characteristics (Untransferable). A kind of mental contagion, but that does not obey a superintelligence. Although I believe in the existence of a factor external to the human being, as a promoter of these facts.

    By Blogger jacarav@ca, at Friday, March 10, 2017  

  • There is a great difference, in my opinion, between the paranormal with all its diversity and the UFO/UAP enigma in its own diversity. Sure there psychological issues that relate to UFO observations but so much less so in comparison to the paranormal spookisms.

    The UAP questions are "What was that I have seen?" while the paranormal questions is one of belief, like religion,and the nonsense of ghosts, goblins, big foot, and the like.

    In the paranormal, as Tim said, “ It seems that you have to believe in them in order see them or interact with them,” and the power of suggestion is surely strong.

    The “external agent,” “trickster,” and others, along with the occasional reported sightings of cloaked UAPs takes me to a different place of consideration of the there but unseen where our limited senses and incomplete physics define missing dimensional perspectives.

    All of these could find explanation with the dark matter and dark energy pronouncements that we only perceive 10% of what is out there -or even here.

    As Dirty Harry said, “A man’s got to know his limitations.”

    BD

    By Blogger Bryan Daum, at Saturday, March 11, 2017  

  • Dirty Harry?

    Millennials have no idea who that is....

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, March 11, 2017  

  • Minor detail, but I wanted to opine that "Nessie" probably doesn't justly belong in the monster group along with Bigfoot. With recent revelations that the idea of Nessie was purposely planted in the early 30's, the famed Surgeon's photo being an admitted fake, the Dinsdale film definitely a small boat, and the Rines photos being radically 'photo-shopped' long before the term became part of the lexicon, there's really nothing to hang ones hat on when it comes to the Loch Ness Monster ... other than some extraordinarily brazen British tabloid papers and a need to pump tourist dollars into the Loch Ness area. Nessie didn't/doesn't serve a legit purpose such as ghosts do (life after death), UFO's (we are not alone), Bigfoot (a connection with our early bi-pedal ancestors). Pure invention of the press, which fueled 'sightings' that have any of a dozen possible explanations.

    By Blogger jamesrav, at Monday, March 20, 2017  

Post a Comment

<< Home