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.

 

Disclosure by DeLonge & Levenda, Sekret Machines: Gods (Volume 1 of Gods, Man & War)

page: 14
30
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 02:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: AboveBoard
Ok. I give up.

Everyone here knows everything and so I will stop trying to talk about it and move on.

I will keep what I learn to myself. Apparently I am the only dunce in the class who sees this as a valuable contribution with some interesting top level confirmations.

It is very disheartening.




Excuse me but... Where is the new top level info? All of this is old news. You can find it all here on ATS. Some are better researched imho.




posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 03:23 PM
link   
Wait a minute here, its nothing wrong with information updated for the new generation.


And Levenda, though yet to bring anything out novel here, is putting a slightly different perspective that is valuable.


There’s an old aphorism that may apply here that says:


Ignore my appearance and take what is in my hand

edit on 11-3-2017 by Willtell because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard

Hey! There is no need to be disheartened. Enjoy the book!

Maybe you get it, and the rest of class don't... Anyway, it doesn't need to be the truth, because the truth will probably come out some way in any case. It tends too, in my experience.

We will all get to know the truth, eventually at any rate, in this life or the next, so this is just us being impatient.

Head high, shoulders down. Drink up!


Cheers! :-D

BT



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 04:00 PM
link   
a reply to: beetee

Thanks. I was just excited to talk about it. Silly me.


edit on 11-3-2017 by AboveBoard because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 04:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: AboveBoard
Apparently I am the only dunce in the class who sees this as a valuable contribution with some interesting top level confirmations.

It is very disheartening.




A bit slow on this mate.
I figured that one out about 10 years ago.
Hahaha



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 04:17 PM
link   
After almost completing the book the biggest issue I have with it is, all 3 parts should have been summarised into one book no bigger than a total of 400 pages.
"Non-fiction" is pretty bloody boring when you're reading something you've heard before a million times. If you're going to do "non-fiction" on this subject then cut to the bloody chase.
Once all 3 non-fiction books are complete maybe they should do a summarised version. They really are dragging this out too slowly.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 04:18 PM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard

Hey if I stopped posting on things people disagreed with me on, I wouldn't have lasted a day on ATS
.

Talk with me on this, I'll listen. Can't promise to agree it's new, but it IS interesting to talk about you are absolutely right.



edit on 11-3-2017 by zazzafrazz because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 04:59 PM
link   
a reply to: BullwinkleKicksButt

I've recently replied in another thread about this whole project (Zazz I'm not stalking you honest!) . But if anyone really knows anything then why is everything kept at arm's length from us (and has been for nearly 70 years?). I don't think the upper echelons of the US DoD have much more information than we do to be honest.

But hey! The answers are always just a new book away. These are the tactics employed by a certain organisation that purports to be a religion.

Jacques Vallee says in his book 'Revelations' relating to a specific incident at the very end of the Cold War.


....Should we conclude that U.S. military... may have been compromised by one or more cults with extreme beliefs and with the willingness to exploit the naiveté of the ufologists to further their own goals?


I think he was spot on. The infiltration has happened inside the ufo community as well as the US military and gone on for a very, very long time. It has created a plethora of false stories to prevent real research into what might be genuine 'unknowns'. The wider target is actually psychological manipulation and social engineering. It may be because we have found 'something' just once and no one understands what it is. But this lack of understanding has been exploited by the 'cults with extreme belief' providing false answers.
edit on 11/3/17 by mirageman because: typo



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 05:21 PM
link   
a reply to: mirageman

You could be right.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 08:02 PM
link   
You might be referring to this Redfern dealt with in this book

FINAL EVENTS and the Secret Government Group on Demonic UFOs and the Afterlife

www.amazon.com...



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 11:05 PM
link   
AboveBoard, don't be disheartened. You've always been a good contributor here. And I find the book interesting. Can't say it's 100% true. But no one can. It's always good to have an open mind. Too much knee jerk negativity spilling over from politics.
edit on 3/11/2017 by vlawde because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2017 @ 01:14 AM
link   
One thing is for certain. As readers of this kind of material, we hold no standards for ourselves.
One standard that I would like to see, from anyone attempting to "Enlighten" us about such controversial content, is a voluntary and impartial lie detector test. A test monitored by a third party, randomly selected from a list of professionals in the field. Sure, risky on both ends, but it is something. It could be bad for the subject, but I would consider it a worthy risk if one really had something astounding to reveal, for real.

Especially, if that person was contemplating a career in the subject, and getting paid for appearances. They would require that chip, to be in the game, in my opinion.
edit on 12-3-2017 by charlyv because: content



posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 12:17 AM
link   
I recently saw these comments on the DeLonge project and thought I would put my two cents in.

First let me say, in response to some observers, that we are not cultists and are not trying to start a cult. We are not believers in the “space brothers” or anything like that. (I would not be involved in this project if it was an attempt to start a religion or a cult.)

Those who read Sekret Machines: Gods and came away thinking it was just another “ancient astronauts” thesis did not read it very carefully. We address the issue of “ancient astronauts”, of course, but only in order to show in what way we differ from that set of beliefs.

We don’t want to take anything away from Von Dӓniken, or Sitchin, or anyone else who has tried to demonstrate an alien “origin” for some of humanity’s oldest mysteries. At the same time, we believe that focusing on trying to prove the direct involvement of alien astronauts in the design or creation of the pyramids, the Nazca lines, etc. is not helpful to those who put forward the hypothesis that there has been contact in the past. Think about it: aside from some professional debunkers and skeptics there has not been a serious academic approach to this subject. The hypothesis that there was contact in the past between human beings and “aliens” has never been seriously entertained, unless it was to insist that no such contact had occurred, and debunkers frequently use the sometimes shaky propositions of the ancient astronaut theorists as proof that there is no merit in the idea of contact.

What we are doing in Gods is a re-evaluation of the hypothesis that there was contact in the past and to suggest that it was not in the form that has been widely propagandized in the media. We wish to put forward the suggestion that focusing on the physical evidence of “ancient astronauts” is doomed to failure for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that much of what is claimed to be “alien technology” can be shown to be of human origin and design. This is not as disappointing for “ancient alien theorists” as it may appear, however, as we try to show in Gods. In fact, if we analyze the scriptural texts from many different and diverse cultures from around the world, we discover that there is a recurrent theme involving the very idea of contact. We suggest that it is necessary to look for common denominators, and then to see how each culture had a slightly different reaction to this contact and to mine those differences for more data.

As an example of what we mean: Consider for a moment what we know of psychological trauma. A traumatic event in the past can have enormous consequences for the present. Traumatic events can influence action and reaction in the future. There have been suggestions that “triggers” can instigate an emotional response way out of proportion to the stimulus it represents: a word, a phrase, a symbol, an image, some kind of reference that may seem innocuous to an outside observer would induce a violent emotional response in the subject based on that trigger’s association with a traumatic event in the past.

Consider that the human race in general may have experienced a traumatic event in its remote past. What if – aside from political, economic, and ideological conflicts which could just as easily be solved through peaceful means – our wars are really what is left of this initial, ancient trauma? A psychological or emotional reaction that keeps getting played out, over and over, because we have not been able to consciously address that initial trauma? Wouldn’t it explain the (largely emotional) reactions of various experts, debunkers and skeptics as a form of denial? And what if our religions are essentially flawed attempts at psychotherapy? And do our religions contain evidence of what this initial trauma was composed? And is it possible -- one theory among many -- that these flawed attempts at psychotherapy can be exploited by other influences (much the way that unscrupulous therapists have been accused of planting memories, etc.)?

If you go back and re-read Gods I think you will begin to see what we are driving at and why it is difficult to describe our thesis with any great degree of clarity without resorting to three volumes (in excess of the single volume of 400 pages suggested by another reader). What we are attempting is a complete restatement of the problem by approaching it from many different angles at once, and it requires us to lay out a lot of detailed argument as we go along.

Also, we are not designing this project for one specific group. If we were going to present material that was for the UFO community only we probably would have done this differently. Since we are more ambitious in trying to reach people who would never ordinarily have been interested in the subject, we had to cover a lot of ground (some of which would seem very familiar to those who had been involved for awhile).

Then, there is the problem that even the UFO community itself has become “balkanized” over the past few decades with different alliances and allegiances being formed and groups sniping at each other. This is either the result of normal human interaction or it is possibly manipulated in order to keep the community disorganized so that it does not become a threat to the status quo. We realize that by appearing in the middle of this situation with new input from “suspect” sources (i.e., government, military and industrial) that we would attract a lot of ire and suspicion from almost everyone. We knew all this going in, and had a lot of very long discussions about the anticipated pushback from those who had spent their lives and careers reading about, discussing and promoting this subject, but had to take the chance that eventually people would see that our intentions are honorable and our motives sincere, and that we have something new to contribute.

One thing is certain: the type of discussions, arguments, and controversy that this project seems to elicit from the UFO community can only contribute to greater understanding in the long run. As for us, we are immersed in this project and I personally am deeply involved in preparing the second volume for publication: a volume that will address the Phenomenon from an entirely different perspective than was presented in Gods. By the third and final volume, I hope you will begin to see the themes and evidence of the first two volumes dovetail to the point that our project becomes quite clear.

Thanks for all your commentary on this project, even the snarky ones! I apologize in advance if I cannot be more responsive, or respond more quickly to your questions. I will do the best I can from time to time as things start to take shape and time becomes less of an obstacle.



posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 01:25 AM
link   
a reply to: levenda

From the man himself

Thanks for your detailed reply.

I can only speak for myself, but I don't think you are trying to create a cult. You perhaps took the wrong meaning away from the reference. I'm not sure the referencing to UFO cults by some posters (some are prolific UFO researchers) was directed at you, more so the factions that have formed in UFOlogy that you yourself have pointed out perhaps orchestrated by the upper echelons of the US military.
Reading the quote above by Mirageman (an exemplary UFOlogist) from Jaques Valle highlights this point:


....Should we conclude that U.S. military... may have been compromised by one or more cults with extreme beliefs and with the willingness to exploit the naiveté of the ufologists to further their own goals?



Couple of points I understand you many not be at leisure to reply to.



Then, there is the problem that even the UFO community itself has become “balkanized” over the past few decades with different alliances and allegiances being formed and groups sniping at each other.
....

We realize that by appearing in the middle of this situation with new input from “suspect” sources (i.e., government, military and industrial) that we would attract a lot of ire and suspicion from almost everyone. We knew all this going in, and had a lot of very long discussions about the anticipated pushback from those who had spent their lives and careers reading about, discussing and promoting this subject, but had to take the chance that eventually people would see that our intentions are honorable and our motives sincere, and that we have something new to contribute.



I agree with your point regarding the "balkanization" of UFOlogy, the part I want to address is your sources and your discussions on blow back.
Did it come up in discussion that perhaps disclosure should be free and open.
not written and woven into media and movies ( I realize that is a ridiculous statement to make to the man who is writing the book).

We all have our big girl bloomers on and prefer open disclosure with evidence that we are free to research and discuss.

I suspect they don't have all the answers themselves.

I think the following point may be where the frustration towards your disclosure method is stemming from:
For the first time we are told "we have advisors from the military etc to back us up" That places TDL in a different and unique position of responsibility for open disclosure,
where other authors have never had this same opportunity so were left with theorizing in books.

Was there a Push for evidence to be released, much like wikileaks (bad word for you guys I know) without editorial and without drip feeds.
This may not be in your scope to do, but I would hope it was a priority in your discussions with the military and the release of books series and movies the secondary recourse.



As an example of what we mean: Consider for a moment what we know of psychological trauma. A traumatic event in the past can have enormous consequences for the present. Traumatic events can influence action and reaction in the future. There have been suggestions that “triggers” can instigate an emotional response way out of proportion to the stimulus it represents: a word, a phrase, a symbol, an image, some kind of reference that may seem innocuous to an outside observer would induce a violent emotional response in the subject based on that trigger’s association with a traumatic event in the past.



I agree wholeheartedly.
To answer your statement, we need to go back further than simply the human experience. I think we are repeating a creative function of the universe, not so much a trauma.

Why do humans ask questions all the time?
Is our yearning just a natural extension of universal order? Is questioning/possibilities the very thing that propels the universe and our part in it from being static. Planets, cells replication and matter are all in response to a condition. All are 'answers/outcomes' in simplistic terms.

As an example, space is not empty. Scientists have successfully found quarks popping in and out of existence in a vacuum. There is on the quantum level the possibility of endless opportunities that can even come from the empty part of space, i.e. a vacuum.

I hypothesize (note hypotheses are a belief so therefore possibly or likely wrong ) that there is/was a creation FUNCTION but that creation function has been mistaken for god. The creation function is infinite possibilities/opportunities and it's outcomes. Human life by being a component of the universe are also just outcomes of 'opportunities /possibilities' that keep it from being static.
This trauma loop you mention is us as outcomes to these possibilities, just repeating the outcome in a loop. Simplistically, emotions are an outcome. Our emotional reactions are part of the creative function and you are correct we are currently stuck in this outcome (trauma). Our training wheels are on, we are in training how to UP the creative function that is perpetuated through infinity. We may fail.

In millions of years to come if we are still here, we will be manipulating the opportunity/outcome creation functions that impact and grow the universe. Politics, religion etc will be irrelevant then, but for now our collective is learning (poorly and slowly) how to perpetuate the opportunity/outcome creative function.

The connection of my ramblings to 'visiting aliens'? They may have their role in their dimension, being governed by different laws of physics, but we exist in a non static creative dimension that perpetuates possibilities/outcomes for infinity. There is much power in that 'gift'.

You say we are perpetuating a trauma loop, but I think it is more we are replicating A function of the universe, but just got caught in a loop. We may come out of it in time. Or not. The universe doesn't care.

Anyway metaphysics from Zazz is done, thanks for dropping by.



edit on 14-3-2017 by zazzafrazz because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 05:21 AM
link   
a reply to: levenda

Thank you so much for dropping in to communicate with us here.

I am thoroughly enjoying the work you've presented in Gods! I've read completely unrelated materials to UFOs that are sparking interesting connections.

( for example: The Cosmic Serpent - DNA by Frank Narby) while researching the Australian concept of the Rainbow Serpent, and the universality of the serpent symbology throughout cultures, including its transformation into dragon and thunderbird myths, etc. as well as South American indigenous shaman experiences... well, you get the point. It is everywhere.)

I am writing notes all over my copy of the book. Lol!

The collective trauma approach is quite interesting. It is exciting to see you comb through the past with a related but still unique perspective.

Thanks again. I was really hoping you would address the comments here and on Amazon.


edit on 14-3-2017 by AboveBoard because: (no reason given)


PS: one weird thought occurred to me while looking at the new evidence for the holographic theory of the universe (3D projection onto 2D surface) that the UAP/UFO I saw seemed to "skim" more that "fly" as if moving like an air hockey puck over a table. In other words, it behaved like it was riding along on its own invisible 2D surface of some kind rather than "through the sky" of our physics. ? Just a weird thought, like I said.
edit on 14-3-2017 by AboveBoard because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-3-2017 by AboveBoard because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 06:04 AM
link   
a reply to: zazzafrazz

From what I can gather from past posts regarding the desire for "free disclosure" is that:

1. TD is putting way more money into the entirety of the project than he can expect to recoup - he can because he is wealthy,

2. If you want "the masses" to join in on disclosure or anything else you market it in ways they will consume it: you entertain them. This takes money. People make their livelihoods as writers, and to make movies is massively expensive and people respond to marketing techniques which is why they are marketing techniques (lol!)

3. Just like everything these days, if we want the info upfront we pay for it, as folks like Levenda shouldn't have to work for free, but it will no doubt become more freely available over time, with cheaper or free copies available online years from now.

4. The Government or some black budget group could have fronted all the money to make it free but that would also come with control issues and even greater lack of trust.

In a perfect world it would be free. So would my healthcare and my education, possibly. Heck, I wish we had a Star Trek economy!! Lol. We do not have a perfect world though and so we have money and marketing.

That's just how I see it.






posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 11:02 AM
link   
originally posted by: AboveBoard
a reply to: zazzafrazz



1. TD is putting way more money into the entirety of the project than he can expect to recoup - he can because he is wealthy


That's his choice and doesn't answer my question to Levanda about editorializing and drip feeding.


2. If you want "the masses" to join in on disclosure or anything else you market it in ways they will consume it: you entertain them. This takes money. People make their livelihoods as writers, and to make movies is massively expensive and people respond to marketing techniques which is why they are marketing techniques (lol!)


Entertaining?...Now that is a little insulting
I have no desire to be entertained in this subject. Why do the masses have to receive anything? Release to a scientific journal/s, like scientists do their ground breaking research papers, leave it to be reviewed and discussed and further experimented and researched.
Why the heck anyone thinks this needs to be disseminated to masses as entertainment in a first step to 'disclosure' is beyond me, can you not see this very technique you describe is designed to not be taken seriously?


3. Just like everything these days, if we want the info upfront we pay for it, as folks like Levenda shouldn't have to work for free, but it will no doubt become more freely available over time, with cheaper or free copies available online years from now.

I'm the last person to begrudge anyone success and wealth. That is not my concern, it goes back further to the disclosure technique that I have problem with, if I was an author and had an opportunity to make income I would have likely taken it also when approached, but the option was there for TDL to not do UFOtainment as his disclosure technique. At the end of the day it needs to be treated as scientific content, and not UFOlogy. There is no peer review for ufology, but there is a global established system to peer review scientific papers. Take out the woo woo, give facts only.


4. The Government or some black budget group could have fronted all the money to make it free but that would also come with control issues and even greater lack of trust.


I'm afraid my dear the minute there is highly editorialized, drip fed commentary and not released through scientific channels for research there is always going to be lack of trust. Do you think that professor blah blah will take his work seriously? No this technique of multi media exposure is keeping it all mythology and not scientific and open to research.


In a perfect world it would be free. So would my healthcare and my education, possibly. Heck, I wish we had a Star Trek economy!! Lol. We do not have a perfect world though and so we have money and marketing.

What I mean by free is, I'd rather read it in something like the scientific AMERICAN along with recent discoveries Time crystals, the Higgs Boson, Quarks in vacuum, all which seriously challenge the accepted reality of our existence, but guess what, we coped and are doing just fine.

At the end of the day, The advisors, Levanda and Delonge made a choice. Control and editorialize the release of information. I don't think the intent was dastardly from the authors, rather they are doing the best they think they can.
Best intentions from them aside, the release should have been through science channels and subject to peer review. If that could not be done, then I have to make the assumption there is no testable evidence but a belief system being sold.


edit on 14-3-2017 by zazzafrazz because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 11:38 AM
link   
a reply to: levenda

Thank you for your contribution to this discussion, Mr Levenda. It is always exciting when authors show up to discussions like this.

As one of the people who have perhaps been a bit sceptical, I thought I should at least respond to your remarks.

For my own part my scepticism stems mainly from two things.

The highly unconventional approach of delivery you have chosen and a lack of trust in the forthrightness and honesty of the group of advisors who are influencing the project.

Let me adress the first concern first.

Blending factual and fictional works in the presention of a theory is perhaps not unheard of, but it is cerainly unconventional compared to the standard scientific process. Why do you feel that such an approach will benefit the project, rather than confuse the readers? And would you not say that it might be detrimental to the larger community taking this issue seriously? I mean, we all enjoy Star Trek, but you would be hard pressed to make anyone think it was real. When the fiction books treat the whole subject as fantasy, how will this benefit serious reaearch and engagement with this field?

The second problem I pointed to above is the credibility of the "insiders" that are advising you. As you are probably aware, the US military has a less than sterling track record of interaction with researchers into this phenomenon. Certain parts of the Intelligence community have even abused and twisted this subject to fit less than pure motives. So, why should it be any different this time? Why this susden change of heart? Given the absence of any discernible motivation for such a change of tactics, is it not prudent for you to be more than wary of the directions they point you in? And why cannot these advisors come forward and shore up the version of reality they seem to be advocating?

For my part these are the two main obstacles. The chosen mode of presentation and the credibility of - not you or Mr Delonge - but these advisors, who cannot themselves come forward.

I am in the process of reading your book again, and I am sure we will discuss it for a while in this forum no matter how it reads the second time :-)

I truly believe your intentions are honourable, both you and Tom, but I am less sure about the intentions of others involved in your project.

Cheers!

BT

edit on 14-3-2017 by beetee because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-3-2017 by beetee because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Anybody who knows anything about Peter Levenda, or read the book closely knows he wouldn’t be involved in any cult.


Also, Levenda here is definitely putting the “god” or metaphysical perspective forward in terms of any relationship with this phenomenon unlike anything I’ve ever read.


This is beyond the somewhat pedestrian Ancient Alien perspective in that it digs deep into the ancient mythology to offer analogues of the phenomenon and metaphysics, not superficially, as the AA theory does.


I have studied intensely Taoism, Vedanta, Buddhism, shamanism, and of course Western esoterism and Sufism and know Levenda has some valuable points here that need further study.

I’m looking forward to the other volumes in this series.

edit on 14-3-2017 by Willtell because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2017 @ 03:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: zazzafrazz

At the end of the day it needs to be treated as scientific content, and not UFOlogy. There is no peer review for ufology, but there is a global established system to peer review scientific papers. Take out the woo woo, give facts only.



But what if the "woo woo" are the "facts"?

--Just to play devil's advocate for a moment...

What if there really are aspects to actual reality that do in fact 'exist', that simply are not 'scientifically' testable, therefore cannot be treated as "scientific content" and yet are every bit as real as the person you face in the mirror every morning?

Are you, your'self', scientifically quantifiable?

Could you provide peer reviewable scientific evidence of the real existence of who you truly 'are' as a person?

How would you go about presenting the vast amount of information that would be needed in order for any other person to arrive at the conclusion that the 'you' inside your head really exists as the person you are experiencing yourself to be?

What if the existence of 'the phenomena' can only be shown in the same way - by being extrapolated from huge amounts of information, none of which qualifies as 'scientific evidence'?



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join