Why do People See What They See?

a reply to: mirageman

This is an example:

ufoscoop.com...

"Vallee: Not necessarily. We have evidence that the phenomenon has the ability to create a distortion of the sense of reality or to substitute artificial sensations for the real ones. Look at some of the more bizarre close encounter cases – for example the incident from South America in which one man believed he had been abducted by a UFO while his companion thought he had boarded a bus which had suddenly appeared on the road behind then."

I remember this case from one of his books.. there are others
like this in his books.

It one mind racking questions, where it tomato or tomatoe, all the while comparing apples an oranges. It too abstract to make sense off, all the while reveled with symbols an meaings to easter eggs.

The above video kind of what in leaning too, aliens abduct an alien robot, scan his datatracks(memories), and took on a form from it, as their dark god, as a symbol of auhority.

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear
I'm glad to see you started some threads. I didn't believe you when you said nobody would participate in your thread if you started one, and see, you are getting participation here!

I don't have to agree with someone 100% to discuss a topic with them, in fact I often learn more from other people who see it differently, I get a different point of view instead of an echo chamber. Though I'm probably closer to 100% agreement with mirageman's post than your 90% agreement, but I'm up for discussing the other 10%.

originally posted by: mirageman
TLDR - There is no single UFO phenomenon. Every case is a separate event. People are the problem because because they tell lies, make mistakes and will often pursue a truth that may not exist.

That's one of the best posts on UFOlogy I've ever read!

originally posted by: mirageman
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear
What cases are there where people do not actually see the same things?

Some specific examples with witness reports to compare would help here.

The Kiev UFO case has been documented well by Jim Oberg, where people standing side by side looking at the same thing, don't see the same thing.
www.jamesoberg.com...


Some people saw structured craft, apparently because their brains "connected the dots" of lights, while other people saw the lights, but for whatever reason their brains didn't "connect the dots" to see structured craft, which was the more accurate interpretation, since the dots were parts of a craft that used to be connected, but were no longer connected.


It's an understandable illusion how the brain can connect those dots, which is likely what happened in the Phoenix Lights case where 2 people stood side by side, one person saw something high and distant, the other saw something large and low.

The Phoenix Lights explained (again)

it became obvious that the hundreds of people who saw the vee pass overhead had many different ideas about it — some said it was just over their heads, other said it was high in the sky

Typically those saying the lights were high in the sky thought they might be planes, those who thought it was a giant vee or triangle thought it was low. By the way, there's an interesting conspiracy story about that, we often hear the truth is being suppressed by the government, but in this case it was the government employee Barwood who was calling for an investigation, yet she ignored the one witness who saw the UFO through a powerful telescope who could identify it. Maybe the truth was covered up in sort of a reverse conspiracy by people who didn't want a rational explanation.

The Great UFO Cover-up

Barwood continues to press for more investigation. But New Times has learned that Barwood herself ignored the claims of a witness who might be the most important of all...

When Barwood made her appeal and the story began to appear in local newspapers, Jones attempted to let people know of Stanley's sighting. He called Richard de Uriarte, reader advocate at the Arizona Republic, as well as Barwood, directly. To both, Jones said that a local amateur astronomer had examined the lights through a large telescope and had seen that they were airplanes.

Jones says both promised to have someone call back who would take down his story and contact Mitch Stanley.

Neither one did.
"They really don't want to know," Linda Stanley says.

Another example that people can't tell how big or far away some unidentified light or lights in the sky are, is this "UFO" model. Some people thought it was higher than it was and over a football field in diameter, others perceived it more accurately.

originally posted by: SecretKnowledge
Its interesting that a bunch of schoolkids all saw the same thing i.e. Westall. Craft and occupants. Kids havnt had much life experience yet so their ideas of reality are basically all the same. I wonder if a lot of teachers had been there would they all have seen the same craft? The kids would not have thought about ufo's and aliens before yet they all drew basically the same craft. So what they saw was not skewed by pre-conceived notions of ufo's.

Your view of the Westall incident is pretty far detached from reality based on my research. First, they didn't all see the same thing, it wasn't a single UFO event, there were two, completely different UFOs, and that's just for starters. There's a whole lot of mythmaking which happened in that case. Yes there were some UFOs, but one myth is about a landing, I don't believe the people who say it landed or that they saw it land. One of the teachers who was there explains the alleged landing site was too far away for the students to have gone there during their break, it kind of reminds me of the mythmaking of the alleged landing site at rendlesham forest which the forester and the police said looked like squirrel diggings and weren't in a perfect triangle like the mythmakers tried to claim.

Another problem with mythmaking is people believing accounts that have been distorted by decades rather than reading source documents when the event happened, but the mythmaking started pretty quickly with Westall. I'm not saying there were no UFOs, just that a lot of stories surrounding the case appear to be completely false, made up myths. Like the documentary maker who interviews a student saying a female teacher took pictures with her camera and the camera was confiscated by the authorities. What the documentary producer didn't put in the documentary was that he tracked down the female teacher and asked her about that and she said she doesn't remember any such incident with her camera being confiscated. Not only that, the documentary maker said other witnesses (former students) said it wasn't the woman, it was the science master, who was taking pictures. He asked the science master, who said no it definitely wasn't him taking pictures, but none of that was mentioned in the documentary. He also found other students who said it wasn't the woman or the science master, it was a different teacher, and so there is really no confirmation of the story he put in the documentary, and the teacher who's camera was supposedly confiscated says she doesn't remember that. Yes people watch the documentary and think her camera was confiscated and there was a big government cover-up, again, more myths, I couldn't confirm any of that and the primary eyewitness said it wasn't a government coverup, it was the headmaster.

An informative accidental experiment in eyewitness perception has been offered by recent missile tests and rocket launches and the consistently erroneous interpretations of them by MANY witnesses.


MISSILE FREAK-OUT IN CALIFORNIA [NOV 7, 2015]
satobs.org...
Nov 07, 2015 Trident SLBM launch off California
satobs.org...

Public misinterpretations of the SpaceX launch on October 7, 2018:
satobs.org...

I have wondered myself how someone will see something different from someone nearby and looking in the same direction. This distinguishing difference plays out often in court case trials. Witnesses to the same event or incident will differ in what they have witnessed.

It seems to me that a possible reason may be that our eyes not only receive but also transmit and project an instance of a difference.

If our eyes can project imagery whether static or in motion, then what we see in our projection may not be a solid object. It would be a solid object only when the sense of touch occurs on the object with any part of our bodies ... skin to skin...skin to materials like clothing. Our mind tells us that it is solid and that’s what we feel.

I’m not versed in all things eyes.....and so I tried to come up with a experiment, to see if eyes can project.

Prefaced info....Point a camera at any object, and you will view through the lens with your eyes the same object in the frame of the camera. Then when you point that camera a few degrees right or left....as expected you have changed what you was previously pointing to and are now looking at something different with your eyes through the lens in the frame of the camera. Normal right?

This experiment you can try yourself. Consider your eyes are the lenses. Choose an object in front of you to focus (frame up) on with your eyes. Without moving your head ...take one finger tip from your right hand and place it on the top right over your eyelid on your right eyeball, then gently press to move the direction of your eye towards your nose. That’s it!

If you were a camera, by pointing your eye (lens) in different direction, you should have viewed away from your initial object you were focused on.....but as you actually noticed.....the object you were initially focused (framed up) on moved with the change in the direction of your eye (lens) towards your nose.

Why? Why did your eye not see a different something,in the new direction it was newly pointing to, like a lens on an actual camera would have done!

Perhaps there is some optometric reason I’m definitely not aware of....
or can eyes project solid holograms for lack of better ideas that become real when the brain tells the senses to make it reality as we know it?

Try it again except this time also cover your left eye with your left hand, or just close your left eye..pretty wild...it’s like your reality can move in different directions.

Doesn’t matter which eye to use for the experiment.

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

I meant to say the Ariel encounter Zimbabwe.

All the kids drew the same craft same occupants.

Does that case interest you? I think something phenomenal happened there. The kids drew the pictures within a short space of time from the event. I cant recall how long after. They pretty much all drew the same thing, a craft behind tree's with alien occupants. They even described their "big black eyes" and orbs zipping around.

Heres a video i havnt seen before today its a group interview with all the kids a year after the event. Interesting that one girl says she dreams about being "taken out of my bed at night away in a ufo". The first 45 seconds are in German after that its English. The sound quality isnt great but its well worth the watch, 10 minutes long.

People on hill: "Look! 'tis a mystical brass irb from the outer shpheres of the heavens!"

Modern ATS members: "It's obviously a starship."

Woman in foreground: "What big circle in the sky? Look, buddy, you want a lottery ticket, you gotta pay like everyone else. You think you can trick me into peering into the sky then grab a ticket when I'm not looking; oldest one in the book. Think I was born yesterday?"

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Hey man thanks for the explanation but i meant to say the Ariel encounter.

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

"Vallee: Not necessarily. We have evidence that the phenomenon has the ability to create a distortion of the sense of reality or to substitute artificial sensations for the real ones.

To play Kevin's advocate here...maybe he's just wasted decades of his life on the subject and got nowhere? Unable to substantiate anything that stands up to scientific scrutiny.

I've not been able to find much in the way of reports from people standing shoulder to shoulder and seeing wildly differing things.

That link provided says...

.....for example the incident from South America in which one man believed he had been abducted by a UFO while his companion thought he had boarded a bus which had suddenly appeared on the road behind then.

Not a lot of information there. One which can easily be dismissed as lacking data.

What I am aware of amongst those who want there to be something mysterious is the deeply ingrained reluctance to accept a "null hypothesis" explained earlier. There is no singular "UFO Phenomenon" and thus no single explanation for all cases.

So perhaps Mr. V saw it as better to avoid defeat than admit to it and replaced one mystery by proposing another unfalsifiable one as the answer to it?

a reply to: mirageman

I concur that certain personality types want there to be
a mystery so badly, that if one mystery is debunked,
they run to another one. I've seen it very often.

For some years, I traveled between various cults of
mentally disturbed people, looking for evidence, and
saw plenty of that. I also found things approaching
evidence.

There's actually a '# ton' of such cases documented,
not just written by Vallee.

Anything written on the topic of the Distortion Hypothesis
for example, has numerous examples.

Let me also say, that even IF let's say the 10% I study is not
pure crap, it lays at the bottom of a well of pure mental
illness to get to the data. I don't recommend anyone follow
in my footsteps.

And in fact, it would be better for the human race to never
learn the true facts of their existence.. it would be like
"Arthur C Clarks" "Childhood's End". Everyone would get so
depressed, they'd commit global suicide like in that movie.

Now.. do I think that eventually science will uncover the
3 main (or so) things that i spent 50 years or so learning?
Yes, I do think that likely.

And by that time, humans will probably be more machine
than man, and able to 'take it'.

Do I feel 'special' and want to maintain that I have 'special'
knowledge, just to justify my 50 years of not being a
productive human being?

Not at all.

I lived my life chasing after things that turned out, to either
be not true, or if true, its' better left unknown for the time
being.

So, not some hero. Not some sage worth a crap.

Now, I did become a dot.com millionaire, I did fight against
Iran in a secret war, did become qualified to command 90
nuclear engineers.. I've done so many mundane things too..
but don't consider any of those as having any value.

I'm *always* happy to discuss the sad sack nature of pseudo
scientists and 'nutjobs'.

But even after all of that, there's things worth investigating..
very much so.

Airplanes, everyone know what those are, yet Two people side by side, one sees a small puddle jumper with propellers the other sees a large jet aircraft.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

I will address any and all points you've made. A bit later.
But I invite you to discuss 'Paperclip Maximizer' with me.
it's so thought provoking.

a reply to: 38181

Yes, there's at least two major aspects to this topic;
'regular misperception' and the purported (let's call it)
'mind-controlled perception'.

I READILY admit to how flawed human perception is.

It's like with 'tic tacs'.

One person wants to see a 'UFO'.

Another person realizes it's just a blurred image.

That sort of thing.

I guess I took it for granted, that everyone in the
thread had seen the dozens of cases of point blank
'weird perception'.

But that was a bad assumption on my part.

Kev

It's almost as if the phenom transcends scientific explanation...

Therefore, if science is your only acceptable lens of truth, you will likely dismiss it altogether with a shrug, or cherry pick data to force the hypercube into an image of a circular hole, at best.

It's almost as if one can't apperceive a thing if some elements of that thing do not already "reside within" the perceiver...

Know thy selves!

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear
I’m interested, can you post the link?

Thanks!

originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear
a reply to: 38181


I guess I took it for granted, that everyone in the
thread had seen the dozens of cases of point blank
'weird perception'.

But that was a bad assumption on my part.

Kev

Ah! Kinda like the JAL incident in Alaska?
That type of “weird perception”?

a reply to: JimOberg

Quite a number of separate, similar reports here Jim of a very strange egg-shaped object 'with no wings, tail, or fuselage'.

Short timeframe and localised area - thought you'd be interested as one flew over the runway of Kirtland Air Force base where you used to work.

Reports

originally posted by: karl 12

.... egg-shaped object 'with no wings, tail, or fuselage'.

Egg Shape?

Of course there is the well known .....

...“In 1964, police officer Lonnie Zamora saw an egg-shaped UFO in Socorro, New Mexico -- and the pilots. Read more about the 1964 Socorro UFO encounter”....


A curiosity consensus.... taking all things considered about what we may or may not know about aerodynamics.....
Below a multiple choice question. If the four egg shapes are flying in the same horizontal direction (red arrows) and in the different orientations....which egg shape orientation would you think an alien would position the craft in flight? And possibly the reasoning.

A, B, C, or D

I choose B, less resistance and perhaps Bernoulli’s principle...

a reply to: 38181

There's many links and references.
But they have not been collected all in one place
that I know of.

a reply to: SecretKnowledge

No the case doesn't interest me, as what I research
did not seem to be present there.

There seem to be two different types of cases:

1. Purposeful deception or misperception about physical
nuts and bolts craft.

2. 'Quantum Mechanics like weird cases'.

In the history of the field, nothing has ever become of cases in
category 1)

Now that's also true of cases in category 2) but they haven't
been researched properly yet.. and those cases seem to
always have consistent properties and provide real hope
to cracking this puzzle.

So I leave cases in category 1) for those who are into that
sort of (generally) 'modern mythology'.

But of course, there might be something there every so often..
just not my thing.