It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The interdimensional hypothesis (IDH or IH), also called the extradimensional hypothesis (EDH), is a theory advanced by Jacques Vallée that unidentified flying objects (UFOs) and related events involve visitations from other "realities" or "dimensions" that coexist separately alongside our own. It is an alternative to the extraterrestrial hypothesis...]
...The development of IDH as an alternative to ETH increased in the 1970s and 1980s with the publication of books by Vallée and J. Allen Hynek. In 1975, Vallée and Hynek advocated the hypothesis in The Edge of Reality: A Progress Report on Unidentified Flying Objects and further, in Vallée's 1979 book Messengers of Deception: UFO Contacts and Cults... en.wikipedia.org...
Originally posted by rumor21
reply to post by corsair00
Please help me understand the connection between Theosophy and the Ufo phenomenon.
I really don't see the connection, am I missing something?
Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by corsair00
It's probably not really a question of liking LMH or not. She's peed in her own pool for so many years that her opinion and judgement is considered by serious researchers as meaningless. She's backed the Santilli 'alien autopsy' film after it was admitted as a hoax. She's always backing the Exopolitics claims. Her Project Camelot interviews are a baffling demonstration of someone lying through their teeth or making the wildest claims while she nods and agrees with them. Has there been a hoax that she didn't like? And when was the last solid case she supported? She consistently points towards the BS and the hoaxes.
Rather than this being an attack on LMH, I'm trying to point out that, as a source, she's unreliable. Maybe Hynek arranged a secret meeting with her...maybe he didn't?
The 'boy who cried wolf' only did so a couple of times before people stopped believing him...how often does it take before folk start ignoring LMH?
According to Steiner, a tremendous and crucial round in the battle was fought out in the last thirty years of the 19th century and on the Inner Planes, between the Forces of AHRIMAN (the term he took over from Zarathustra) and the FORCES OF LIGHT.
These latter are conventionally known to Western (Christian) tradition as the Cohorts of Michael. Steiner said that the fight ended in a complete victory for the LIGHT, but that, as a result of it, a great many of the powerful demonic beings had been actually cast down upon the planet Earth, with the consequence that their presence and their influence now impinge more than ever upon the prospects and the destiny of mankind.
STEINER TAUGHT THAT THE COMING YEARS WILL SEE INCREDIBLE UPHEAVALS, IN THE COURSE OF WHICH THIS GREAT BATTLE WILL BE CARRIED FORWARD, TO ITS CONCLUSION, INSIDE EVERY HUMAN HEART. See Rudolf Steiner: DER STURZ DER GEISTER DER FINSTERNIS: (THE OVERTHROW OF THE SPIRITS OF DARKNESS), Series of Lectures, 1917. (Available only in German)
The objective of the Forces of Darkness is to take over the stream of human evolution, to merge with it, and to divert mankind from the evolutionary development "planned" for it. ["hybrids," anyone? -d4] The end result of this would be new creatures in which those qualities that represent the highest that we know would have been eliminated.
In 1994, the Strategic Studies Institute (SSI) of the US Army War College (Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania) produced a paper entitled, ‘The Revolution in Military Affairs and Conflict Short of War’1. In the paper, the authors propose that, ‘Many American strategic thinkers believe that we are in the beginning stages of a (sic) historical revolution in military affairs (RMA). This will not only change the nature of warfare, but also alter the global geopolitical balance.
The authors recognise that, ‘The use of new technology may also run counter to basic American values’, and that, ‘Deception, while frequently of great military or political value, is thought of as somehow "un-American".’
Due to this fact, and also that the majority of Americans may find the use of many of the emerging technologies ‘morally difficult’, the authors conclude that the military might consider that American values and attitudes thus form significant constraints on full use of emerging technology, at least in anything short of a perceived war for national survival.
The central premise of the paper is that:
‘In its purest sense, revolution brings change that is permanent, fundamental, and rapid. The basic premise of the revolution in military affairs (RMA) is simple: throughout history, warfare usually developed in an evolutionary fashion, but occasionally ideas and inventions combined to propel dramatic and decisive change. This not only affected the application of military force, but often altered the geopolitical balance in favour of those who mastered the new form of warfare. The stakes of military revolution are thus immense…’