Why do People See What They See?

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

I'm the opposite to excitable and highly skeptical - if my mind created a triangle of lights it also created the event from start to finish, a possibility as I mentioned but strange that it should happen numerous times in relation to anomalous events but never in any other circumstances.

In relation to high strangeness then sure, no time dilation, thoughts implanted, magnetic effects or dwarfs with ray guns but nor is there with many sightings, as there aren't with most false plane reports and the ones in the book I mentioned but personally, from what people tell me is a cold, logical viewpoint, I felt from the first instant of seeing the lights something was up.

I call it extraordinary from my viewpoint, there have been occasions where I have been given what I will call a sign in instant response to a question, this took a bit longer and I accept that to some it may appear hum drum and / or totally explainable. It is representative of the phenomenon as a whole that all events in isolation are that way and all bar the experiencer(s) able to be convinced of a mundane explanation.

Whether it means by some measure I'm considered mad then fair enough, my belief is simply that and I believe this event gives a brief, tiny insight into the workings of a phenomenon that is fundamental to existence.

a reply to: chunder

I gave you a star for honesty and mental poise.

The thing about these sorts of things, is that even
if one has a "Close Encounter of the 5th Kind" like
I had,

it doesn't mean anything.

I have no physical proof, and indeed I couldn't
have physical proof, as for all intents and purposes
even if there is a bit of EM damage to something
or a moments 'angel hair' or something like that,
it will always be inconclusive and/or fade away.

It's a stage production, so there are only props.

So I'm in the exact same situation you are..

I'm not demeaning your experience.

The only reason my 'experinece' got so much
fuss, is that I knew a couple world-famous
people due to my past (former) wealth
and notoriety status, so that got JV out to
interview me and that caused my entry
into so-called 'ufology'.

But that doesn't mean what I 'experienced'
was any truer, or better from a public
evidentiary standard than what you
'experienced'.

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

I understand what you are saying.

For me I have had a number of experiences that have caused me to question the accepted reality of my, our existence, several of them shared with others who proceeded to rationalise the events to something mundane that didn't trouble them.

I am happy to accept each experience at face value and ponder the dilemma that follows. Surely there must be a common purpose that links the thousands or millions of experiences of different facets of the phenomenon - it may appear the show was written from childish whimsey but I'll wager that couldn't be further from the answer, which is what directs my thoughts and reading.

a reply to: chunder

I have 80% of all the answers I spent my life
looking for... the meaning of life, the purpose
of human beings (or lack of it), good, evil, god,
not god, ufos, the 'paranormal'. I got 80% of
all those answers and more, to my own full
satisfaction. Subject to verification and further
review of new facts.

But it only works for me.. it won't work for anyone
else.

That's how such things go.

One mans treasure is another mans trash.

People want to go on their own journey of
discovery and they should... really it doens't
matter what they discover.. it won't be true
anyway.. nothing is ultimately true
(Godel's Incompleteness Theorum).

But they get to take their own journey and
enjoy it.

If i had all facts, all completely 'objective'
and could force it down everyone's throats,
I WOULD NOT DO IT.

IMHO 'god' won't do that either. That's why
all religion is false and toxic, except maybe
early shamanism and early Buddhism IMHO.

Any 'god' that would reveal 'ultimate truth'
is a complete asshole, and doing so would
be destructive and pointless.

("The Childhood's End effect).

Kev

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

I don't always fully understand all of your posts on this board but get that one.

a reply to: chunder

Good!

originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear

They wouldn't see humans offering them a pancake,
asking for a drink of water in return, would they?

When aliens ask for 'ridiculous' things it is to throw people off the scent. They insert idiotic things, red herrings, like pancakes and yoghurt so people won't believe the witness. Aliens don't just appear as they are and present an honest appearance, they manipulate the witness's experience to make people think what they want them to think. They are not stupid.

If 'ships' have been visiting us for thousands of years,
then why in one age do people see horses and riders
in the sky.. flying sheep.. faries.. demons.. and now
people see 'ships'.

One explanation is that people fill in what they can't understand. That is, in medieval times for example, they would see wooden ships because that is the only way they can understand what they are seeing. Stock imagery from their culture illustrates their subjective experience.

a reply to: EnPassant

Conversely,

the thing that hardly ANYONE wants to be true,
is that it's the 'ships' which are the ridiculous
thing, used to throw off the scent.

I'ts a superb bit of the magician's art,
those 'ships'.

Superb both in what is projecting 'the ships'
and the USG intelligence services using the
'phenomenon' to their benefit as well.

It's brilliant deception.

the real deception is the permanent skeptic destruction of the field , the agencies want to know... really...

why people see what... because it is so, a long agenda , very long one with stages

ufology are in disgrace in 2020 but there are still real ufologists around with serious research

so some continue to see things that others don't even see or know

a reply to: anakinnEo

Some folks are too pseudo-sciency for their own good.
MANY are too 'overly reductionist' for their own good.

When a field is 'new' you HAVE to dabble with
'pseudoscience' at first --- it's how science works.

But staying in an alternate reality bubble of pseudo
science is the problem.. most people never pop that
bubble, or attempt to pop that bubble.. they are
more interested in comforting themselves, than
discovering what is true.

That applies EQUALLY to the fringe-heads and the
scared-overly-reductionist-heads.

So yes...

a reply to: EnPassant

So many potential contradictions there.

On what basis do you use "aliens", if they can manipulate the experience in any way they want then "they" could be anything.

"Idiotic things" or actions of deep symbolic meaning - could be either or in between.

If they are manipulating the experience to an end then are you saying it is purely for the benefit of only the experiencer(s), or is the message meant for a wider audience, in which case why insert a red herring to damage credibility (unless it is a double bluff) ?

Although logic fails most when it comes to credibility anyway. Is a story of a flying saucer landing and contact with beings less credible because they offered pancakes; isn't it already fairly incredible ?

Regarding the difference in what people describe through the ages then if as you say the experience can be manipulated, surely the simplest answer is that whatever is manipulating the experience has altered it to suit the era / situation ?

originally posted by: chunder
a reply to: EnPassant

On what basis do you use "aliens", if they can manipulate the experience in any way they want then "they" could be anything.

There are all kinds of arguments as to why they are aliens. But you probably have heard them all before. A thought occurred to me concerning these beings; if they are so intent on secrecy why does so much information about them get out through, for example, the work of Budd Hopkins? It may be because that is what God wants. Through Hopkins' work and the work of others the world has been alerted to the fact that these beings may be bad for us.

If they are manipulating the experience to an end then are you saying it is purely for the benefit of only the experiencer(s), or is the message meant for a wider audience, in which case why insert a red herring to damage credibility (unless it is a double bluff) ?

It is for the benefit of the aliens. They want their contactees to be ridiculed so that 'intelligent, educated' people will be driven away. This may be why they told Adamski there were cows on the moon. Likewise with Meier, his credibility was destroyed. These beings are not passive subjects that can be studied according our wishes. They can easily manipulate any attempt to study them.

Is a story of a flying saucer landing and contact with beings less credible because they offered pancakes; isn't it already fairly incredible ?

To some yes, to others, no. They attract many people and then used basic propaganda devices to sift out those they can use and send the rest away, incredulous... They want ridicule, so their secrecy will be protected. Like I say, they are not stupid. These beings are very intelligent, they know how to play the game. They know how to manipulate our perception of them. (They have been seen 'studying' plants and people jump to the conclusion that they are scientists studying nature. No, this is a ruse, a pretense to mislead us.)

Regarding the difference in what people describe through the ages then if as you say the experience can be manipulated, surely the simplest answer is that whatever is manipulating the experience has altered it to suit the era / situation ?

Seemingly people 'fill in' what they can't comprehend, with stock imagery in their minds, according to their cultural imagery. But yes, all kinds of manipulations can happen.

a reply to: EnPassant

Ok, one thing - if they want secrecy why pretend to study plants, is it as you say to sift out those they can use ?

Either way please explain.

originally posted by: chunder
a reply to: EnPassant

Ok, one thing - if they want secrecy why pretend to study plants, is it as you say to sift out those they can use ?

Either way please explain.

They are not really studying plants. This is a ruse to mislead people about their true intentions. Another ruse is the broken down flying saucer/dirigible at the side of the road - just when the hapless witness is arriving. Why do they always break down on the side of the road instead of in the woods or in a field? They are not broken down. It is a trick to lure the witness in or placate the witness or give them time to hypnotize the witness. There could be any number of reasons but it is very suspicious that they always 'break down' in such a convenient place at such a convenient time.

Does NDE (near death experience) fit in with this discussion or is it too way out there? I never had it but reading some of people’s experiences to me it’s similar.

a reply to: EnPassant

as JV says, "It's all theater".

a reply to: 38181

Some people say, that when you die, your 'EM Energy'
goes to a cloud of hungry Tulpas, which then consume you
slowly over time. The Christian Heaven, the Hungry Ghosts
of Buddhism, the "UFO friends" being some of the more
common ones.

Some of these same people say, that these 'hungry entities'
try to get their hooks into you before death, so that there
is no disruption to their feeding.

You know, Christians get converted, UFO people believe
in UFOs, etc.

I don't generally talk bout whether this is true or not..
it's 'too much'.

originally posted by: KellyPrettyBear
a reply to: EnPassant

as JV says, "It's all theater".

Yes, we should not forget that these beings are sentient and are able to play the mind game and manipulate our perception of them. In human warfare, for example, there are many easy ways to confuse the enemy. Many stories have emerged from WW2 about this.

To answer one part of this complicated thread, two people caught up together in an event of high strangeness seeing different images.

Alrighty!
Can only speak to my experience with it. On a hike with a family member of which I was an unwilling participant my family member insisted I follow them a couple of hills over because "something was important". I was pretty sure nothing was important enough to walk that far as dark was coming on an just, ahem....no. But because said family member is still learning decernment I pretty much didn't have a choice.

About 1/2 way into this hike the light gradient changed,folliage appeared unusual, triggering me to stop & grab family member keeping them from going farther. My reasoning being it's best to stand an wait for things to either progress or stop. Family member had a hissy fit, immediately could not tell east from west despite knowing the terrain, and completely panicked.

Despite us both seeing the same thing, hearing the same things to this day my family member cannot get a solid lock on what exactly happened, in what chronological order or get the time/duration of that experience correct. Because I'd been doing yard work prior to this misadventure I had a pair of pruners in my pocket. As my family member panicked trying to find the trail back I'd nip off a bush or tree branch to "prove" we'd already gone that way already. That it was the WRONG trail.

Even with the physical proof in family members face they couldn't get oriented.

So...long story shortened, I attribute FM's lack of experience with altered fields to play a major part in this. What kind of field it was I have no clue. However FM did do their best to come to conclusions. Hence their messed up memory of the event. I believe faired better because I don't need hard answers being more interested in observing whatever bag of tricks is being deployed.

I can only surmise not being any kind of special snowflake this happens to other people as well. The people who drop any expectations probably get weird events more correct than people who need them to be one thing or another. Also accepting that oddness is just oddness without links to anything else frees up the brainpower needed for observation.
JMO

What high strangeness is observed is less important than the fact conditions were apparently right for it to manifest. Brownies aren't more or less than seeing a craft, or an alien. I would also guess what you see is what's easiest, determined by what's manifesting for the observer to accept.

What I have noticed is that whatever "field changes" occur that's pretty much a baseline. A constant. Which lead me to an idea that by using a conflicting field things just might fall apart. Pulling back the curtain so to speak and leaving the witness with more of what's actually there.
Just an idea tho....

a reply to: Caver78

thanks for sharing and nicely said!