Tuesday, May 07, 2013

ETs, Germs, and Oxygen

What do you think about the Citizen Hearing on Disclosure, that took place last week in Washington?

It revealed a lot of information that showed beyond all reasonable doubt that flying craft Not From Here have visited Earth, and continue to. Sensational news, you’d think. However, the Popular Press (otherwise known as the Mainstream Media) treated the hearings as a joke. But then, should you be surprised?

You talk of flying craft Not From Here. But, someone must fly them. Is it not likely, then, that the pilots would also be Not From Here?

You shouldn’t assume pilots fly these craft. They could be unmanned and remotely controlled from other planets. Think of the unmanned Mars Rover that is remotely controlled from Earth. If, though, pilots do fly these craft, why should they be biological entities? Why shouldn’t they be robots?

Think of our own robotic technology. Quite human-looking robots are already being produced, that can speak and act intelligently. Before too long, we’ll be producing robots that look so human, and will speak, think and act so much like a human, that if you meet one, you won’t know it’s a robot.

If you saw the film, “Blade Runner”, you’ll remember the Androids - completely human in appearance, speech and demeanor, only they are even more intelligent, better-looking and athletic than the average human. Because of these qualities, female Androids were much sought-after by human males.

At the Citizen Hearing on Disclosure, evidence came forth that suggested Extraterrestrial beings were retrieved from crashed flying craft, like at Roswell. *This video* is fascinating. It shows an elderly former CIA man in obviously very bad health, talking about when, as part of his official CIA duties, he had seen ETs held captive at the famous and mysterious Area 51.

It’s indeed a fascinating interview. Assuming this man is telling the truth (and why shouldn’t he be?) it’s possible that what he saw were ET-built humanoid-looking robots that had piloted the crashed flying saucers from which they’d been retrieved.

Had they been sentient, they would have needed to breathe, and it seems unlikely they could breathe the earth’s atmosphere. The Human, after all, can’t breathe the moon’s or Mars’ atmosphere. So he must, when visiting the moon or Mars, bring oxygen.

Then there’s germs. How likely is it that sentient ETs would be immune to the Earth’s germs? Only if they had developed the appropriate vaccines, which, come to think of it, isn’t impossible if their medical science is far in advance of ours.

(To be continued.........)


  1. I watched the video carefully and can't tell whether the victim is bogus, deluded or reliable. That he is terminally ill is irrelevant. What he says is familiar ground and seems rehearsed.

    The change in the official attitude is the most interesting aspect. Did it become rational rather than credulous or was there duress? I prefer the former explanation as involving fewer assumptions. The same sort of illusion and disillusion occur on All Fools' Day. The story has all the trappings of a hoax perpetrated by an idle farm boy.

    Still, it could be true. Have you heard of the strange happenings in the Namibian Desert? Also, aliens are stopping me from posting comments here on my iPad: the profile box merges with the attempted comment and won't accept data.

  2. I, too, have doubts as to the veracity of what this man said.

    The UFO milieu is, alas, awash in charlatanry.

    Before I post next, here are links to two items for you to consider:




  3. As to the document:
    Do we know anything about the members of Operation Majestic-12.they seem to be on a nice little earner.
    The whole document smacks of being over-plausible, or a report of the over-plausible.
    A number of attachments are referred to but only President Truman's response appears, the authenticity of which, I suppose, most people assume.
    All most interesting, not perhaps as to the subject matter, for there are no limits to speculation, but as to authenticity.

    As to the video:
    I must find the opportunity to watch the whole of the feature-length video before expressing an opinion.

    I'd love it if there were really visitations, whatever the dangers. That's why I keep telling myself to be sceptical and await evidence that can be tested. Perhaps the video will convince me.

  4. I have now watched the entirety of Nick Cook's report for Channel 4. His conclusions begin at 1:36 and I am happy with them.

    In essence, he says that the reports of extra-terrestrial activity emanate from past and current aeronautical development and an official campaign of disinformation exploiting gullibility, proneness to delusion and wishful thinking.

    Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive

    He does, though, leave room for a smidgeon of doubt ...

  5. While Nick Cook says some flying objects identified as flying saucers are likely man-made, he doesn't say they're all man-made.

    So he leaves it open that some are not of this world. I think this too. I would add that at least some flying disks not of this world are likely from parallel worlds.

    You said in order to be convinced of the reality of extra-terrestrial flying saucers, you would want "....evidence that can be tested....". What form should this evidence be?

  6. Given the opportunity for hoax and a general and natural susceptibility on this issue, I would wish exhibits brought to a judicial enquiry and informed scientific opinion adduced.

    Not ideal, I know, but I am in the habit of it and, I would add, such evidence might well be inadequate to convince me.

    Remember we have only the most speculative biology and mathematical theory to render travel from distant star sytems possible at all, coupled, it is true, with some remarkable recent astronomical observations which have yet to reveal anything substantial to support the suggestion of even rudimentary life there.

    At present we have only statistical evidence to support advanced life elsewhere in the universe, which, though compelling and indicating a need for research, does not amount to proof.

    Lack of conviction does not, however, prevent me from enjoying leaps of imagination and an excited anticipation that it could all be true, or, had I the power, prevent me from ruling that investigation should continue or indeed be promoted - with reasonable public funds, in view of the importance to the human race.

    And may the best writers of science fiction be inspired to write many prophetic volumes to entertain us and fill us with wonder.

    But I sit on a jury and it is still out.

  7. You imply that if there was an official judicial inquiry which concluded that flying saucers are real, and that they come from elsewhere, you would accept these conclusions.

    While, for obvious reasons, there's almost no chance of such an official inquiry being set up, there was a week-long unofficial public inquiry that was held in Washington just recently, which concluded that evidence supporting the reality of flying saucers was so overwhelming that the UN should look into whether they're from extra-terrestrial civilisations that bode us earthlings ill.

    Airline pilots have had to take evasive action to avoid flying saucers flying too close; air force pilots have shot at them; they have been caught on photo and film; they have been picked up on radar; there have been mass sightings of them; they have caused airports to close; they have hovered over missile sites and incapacitated their electrical firing systems. There's lots more, but I'm sure you get the picture.

    What more evidence should you reasonably need that flying saucers are real?

    The only sensible questions now are: where are they from, and why are they here?

  8. May I trespass upon your time and indulgence and ask you to re-read my comment ? I hope you will see that I do not imply that I would necessarly accept the findings of a judicial inquiry. That would apply to any public enquiry, official or unofficial. There are too many wrong conclusions from such bodies for me to have absolute faith in them and in any event it is impossible for them to examine all the evidence.

    Thus I remain sceptical on the present state of my knowledge. That does not make me averse to an energetic pursuit of convincing proof.

    Jung's Flying Saucers has made me over-cautious, perhaps.

  9. It's a long time since I read Jung's essay about flying saucers. He thought, if memory serves me correctly, that they were psychic projections.

    I'm not averse to this explanation, for reality is absolutely mysterious. Who knows, we may all be psychic projections of each other, but it doesn't make us any less real.

  10. If you read *this piece*, you'll see that CG Jung appeared to accept the physical reality of at least some flying saucers, and that they may be from extra-terrestrial civilisations.

    Jung didn't talk about this in his book, “Flying Saucers: A Modern Myth”, because:

    “.......to write about UFOs as such was not his business; he would always leave this to the experts in physics or astronomy, respectively. He himself would not want them to meddle with his own branch of science. 'I took care not to meddle with theirs and this is why I did not disclose in my book my private research and interest in the physical nature of the UFOs'.........”

  11. It seems we may be looking in the wrong places:


  12. I read the piece by Dr Whitehouse with interest.

    Red Dwarfs being, indeed, so much older than our sun and the other suns out there, it's very possible that if civilisations have developed on planets that orbit a Red Dwarf, these civilisations, being likely much older than ours, could be thousands, if not millions of years more technologically advanced than ours is.

    I wonder if Dr Whitehouse has stopped to think that the flying saucers which visit us so often, could be from planets that orbit Red Dwarfs.

    I note that he appears uncritical of radio signals as the means to contact these Red Dwarf civilisations.

    It's likely, then, that he approves the methodology of SETI project, that has been sending radio signals into outer space over the last sixty years, and is still awaiting a reply.

    So I wonder how Dr Whitehouse, as a presumed approver of the SETI radio-signal methodology, might respond to *this article* by Stanton Friedman.

  13. A very thought-provoking assessment by Stanton Friedman, Christopher.

    When time and space are recognised for the human fantasies that they are, it will, of course, all fall into place.

    We know nothing.