It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear
You come across as a skeptic, but not a mindless and cruel debunker... and that's fine... I'm a skeptic too.. I don't believe in UFOs or the flawed human concept of 'god'.
Now strange stuff in the sky? sure. Amazing laws of nature that include a psychoactive component? Sure. But humans don't understand either one very well, and much more research is required.
originally posted by: wtbengineer
There are without a doubt strange things in the sky, and that strange stuff displaying a psychoactive component as well, absolutely. I don't know how we do much more meaningful research on it though. We collect data, but Vallee has already done more of that work than I can imagine would need to be done to start getting some kind of meaningful analysis but I have yet to hear about that.
It feels on a gut level that we should be able to get closer to it, close enough to peer through, but I just think that if it were possible to get a look at anything beyond smoke and mirrors we'd have seen it by now.
originally posted by: lostgirl
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear
Okay, I could google "Lawrence Livermore Lab incident", but if you have a link - I'd rather get the 'story' from a source that someone I trust considers trustworthy...
originally posted by: Tangerine
UFOlogy is becoming a religion. At least the literalists are turning it into a religion.
originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear
originally posted by: Tangerine
UFOlogy is becoming a religion. At least the literalists are turning it into a religion.
Definitely.
But it's a NEW type of religion; and it's nailed to the hip with
the confusion over black aircraft projects and all sorts of
yummy stuff. It's much more enjoyable than the prior
variants.
originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear
So a 'deep dive' into 'novelty' would produce far better effects.
Kev
1/2 of the work needs to be SUBJECTIVE;
incredibly subjective. ..that's why I highly
dislike the crusade against 'subjective'.
Everyone would have to follow exhaustive protocols for years
beforehand, and I'm not aware
of any organization that would
fund such an experiment again.
I think we need to turn the focus toward the people seeing these "things' and having these strange experiences. Even if there is something "out there", it's somehow connected to us. I don't think it's smoke and mirrors in that it doesn't exist in any sense. I think it's smoke and mirrors in the sense that it's trickster phenomena. We've been talking about trickster phenomena for awhile. Have you gotten a handle on that which we mean by it? What's your sense about it?
originally posted by: lostgirl
originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear
So a 'deep dive' into 'novelty' would produce far better effects.
Kev
So then, why doesn't it do something 'new'?
Does it need humans to 'make the first move' or something?
If an individual human took a "deep dive into novelty", would the trickster be attracted to that person and start manifesting along the lines of said 'novelty'?
- Actually I can tell you that in one particular case at least (one I'm personally familiar with), the answer to the third question is 'no'...
originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear
Another seems to be this type of 'man in black' - the ones which
have almond eyes. They seem to be an independent form of life
catching a ride on 'our' 'local' 'Trickster'.
Kev
originally posted by: lostgirl
originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear
Another seems to be this type of 'man in black' - the ones which
have almond eyes. They seem to be an independent form of life
catching a ride on 'our' 'local' 'Trickster'.
Kev
What do you mean, "an independent form of life"?