Survey: How Many Have Switched from Extraterrestrial Hypothesis to Interdimensional?

reply to post by The GUT


I thank you for the challenge to my opinion. Since I posted some circumstantial evidence to support my assumptions, perhaps you would do us the honor of presenting some counter points of your own, if can think of any.

Its one thing to have an opinion founded on evidence. But if you are using the forum to evoke emotional responses through condescending remarks that are off topic, where's the benefit?

Its time to man-up and show us the facts.

Originally posted by The GUT

…nor do I preclude some sort of Jungian explanation that its all derived somewhere in our psyche/subconscious.

Since all of "reality" is derived from our psyche/subconscious, then other dimensions are actually altered states of consciousness, and aliens are autonomous, living patterns in the collective unconscious (archetypes) in symbolic form. As are angels and demons. The difference is the cultural lens they are viewed through.

[...]

“Space-Age myth” does not imply that UFO sightings or encounters with angels, aliens, fairies, sprites, elves, or demons are fantasies. Rather, it suggests that some of these experiences may literally be psychophysical, blurring conventional boundaries between objective and subjective realities. Some may object that this proposal doesn’t account for the physical traces associated with some UFO reports, but this misinterprets what Jung and others have proposed. They suggest that the manifest world emerges from mind, that is, that mind shapes matter. Where have we heard this before?

In his book Global Mind Change, former IONS President Willis Harman discussed three basic ways of looking at the world. He called the current Western scientific worldview “materialistic monism,” or “M1.” Within M1, verything—both matter and energy— is made of a single substance. From matter emerges everything, including the brain-generated illusion called mind. In M1, angels and aliens walking through walls are fine plot points for an episode of The Twilight Zone, but they are impossible in the real world. In M1, UFOs are conceivable, but only in terms of hard, physical spacecraft with humanoid pilots. Most of the modern technological world was created based on M1 assumptions, so it carries enormous persuasive power.

But the whole panoply of noetic experiences defy materialistic explanations, suggesting that M1 is an incomplete worldview. Detailed taxonomies of these anomalies are described by all cultures; they include, among others, the Hindu siddhis, the Catholic charisms, Sufi attainments, and, in indigenous societies, shamanic magic.

Harman’s second worldview, M2, represents dualism, which assumes two fundamentally different kinds of substances in the universe, matter and mind. Many scientists today reject dualism because it begs the problem of how two deeply different substances could interact at all. In addition, it seems lavish to require the universe to maintain (at least) two distinct essences, when it would be far simpler to have only one.

The third worldview, M3, is transcendental or mental monism, which Harman argued is the source of both the perennial wisdom and the emerging worldview of the twenty-first century. In M3, consciousness is primary, and matter and energy are emergent properties of consciousness. M3 accommodates everything that M1 and M2 allow for, as well as rogue phenomena like telepathic ETs, observation-shy UFOs, and collective mind–manifested UFOs. Evidence in favor of M3 has been slowly amassing for over a century. Such recent books as Irreducible Mind, Entangled Minds, and Measuring the Immeasurable (see review 0n page 41) discuss the empirical evidence in detail, ranging from psychic phenomena to creative genius to mind-body interactions to evidence suggestive of reincarnation.

A Persistent Taboo

If Willis Harman was right and as a species we are evolving toward an M3 worldview, then our future understanding of the UFO enigma will probably be a radical departure from anything we are able to imagine today.

[...]

www.paradigmresearchgroup.org...

Originally posted by g2v12
reply to post by The GUT

 

The disposition of the extraterrestrial question from the physical, nuts and bolts conception to one of mere ethereal dimensions, represents a common human thought filtering process that goes back to ancient religion and superstitions.

Amazingly, two physicists, Dr Allen J. Hynek and Jacques Fabrice Vallée were the progenitors of this modern form seemingly conceived of human religious doctrine, through which evidence has been laundered and adulterated.

The two actually worked together, even during Hyneks' tenure as head of Project Blue Book.

I honestly suspect their motives in producing such a fallacious connection with ambiguous human thought paradigms such as religion, mysticism and folklore.

But if its purpose was to misinform the general public, it certainly has done so, obviously at the behest of a government that holds certain hard evidence of extraterrestrial presence.

edit on 15-7-2012 by g2v12 because: grammer

g2v12 --- Some very good viewpoints, I can't agree with you more. You have brought some fresh air to ATS.

Gut --- Hynek has been a debunker from the start. He ruined his credibility on the subject of UFO's so much that everything he and Jacque Vallee said, will have to be taken with a grain of salt. As you probably know... I'm a nuts and bolts flying saucer believer from way back. A plasma shielded starship should be enough evidence that they do exist in our dimension, according to my own plasma shielded starship sighting --- and other's as well; including your own.

The feasability of interstellar travel in other dimensions is beyond my current comprehension at this moment. I have to believe in the quatum mechanics process of an interstellar starship, that should achieve super-luminal speeds in a photon powered saucer, that should make the human race strive for that design --- so we can reach the stars as well; besides our other-worldly friends.

Originally posted by g2v12
reply to post by The GUT

 

I thank you for the the challenge to my opinion. Since I posted some circumstantial evidence to support my assumptions, perhaps you would do us the honor of presenting some counter points of your own, if can think of any.

Its one thing to have an opinion founded on evidence. But if you are using the forum to evoke emotional responses through condescending remarks that are off topic, where's the benefit?

Its time to man-up and show us the facts.

The word "Hypothesis" should clue you in that none of us are talking about empirical evidence, but rather, well...hypothesizing.

However, that's not to say that empiricism is the be-all-end-all nor without it's own aspect of the experiential. We are free, are we not, to come to some form of personal conclusion--if we see fit--based upon what we personally perceive to be evidence?

Having said that; What literature are you familiar with in regards to the IDH?

Originally posted by CardDown
My biggest complaint against the extraterrestrial hypothesis is that it preceded the sightings of flying saucers. There was talk about life on other worlds, a lot of which centered on Mars (about which there was this book and radio play of some notoriety). When saucers were seen and could not be explained, vehicles from other planets were considered as possible explanations. As secret terrestrial military vehicles were eliminated as suspects, some Air Force investigators were left thinking ET was the answer, but not because of supporting evidence.

The inter-dimensional origin also precedes UFOs. There was a lot of mystic beliefs about otherworldly intelligences from across different dimensions, and like space travel, there was plenty of fiction about it. George Adamski and the Borderland Sciences Research group are among those that happily made the transition from spirits to saucers.

Both explanations are of equal scientific validity (near zero). There is more anecdotal evidence and witness testimony supporting the ET brand, but then, it is the one most covered in the media and fiction and familiar to the public. Whatever your pet theory is on UFOs, you should study them in such a way that you are not discounting data just because it doesn't seem to fit the package. Whatever the phenomenon is, it may be so complex that it is alien to our present understanding of reality. It might also be far closer to nothing at all.

Very interesting observations and comments.

I have been into this subject for many years and have found that some of the evidence supports both the ETH and EDH (Vallée terminology).

One of the pitfalls of any theory lies in how the data is received and interpreted.Vallée and Hynek (and every other investigator) received information from observers and other witnesses, some of whom experienced dramtic events. The interpretive nuances begin at the level of the witness.

Even the mind of a scientist, no matter how objective his discipline is, will fall victim to the limited scope of his reasoning framed in an earthly, prejudicial human culture.

Based on some idea of quantum physics, it is entirely possible that what has been interpreted as an EDH phenomenon, could actually be a misnomer in miscalculating the effects of a science and technology based in quantum forces.

The effects of cloaking technology for example might produce visual effects that could be explained by an EDH (non-physical) element.

Just for the record, Vallée never said that the EDH was strictly a non-physical theory. In one of his books, he describes the possibility of non-physical beings having the ability to take form in semi-solid states for the benefits of an apparent illusory effect. He also claimed that they were simply attempting to present themselves as physical, non-native humanoids for some unknown purpose or that they were physical, inter-dimensional and native to our planet.

Stop the propaganda, keep your beliefs to yourself. What's going on here is some who are believers and have a religion try to convert people to their beliefs. Stop it. Now.

Paraphrased:

'How many believe like me? I want more people to belive like me!'

Should we not first prove that other intelligent life exists before we begin to guess where they are are from??

Why do we want to speculate where they are from without even knowing if they truly exist??

Why make assumptions about an assumption?? Your gut feeling or your belief does not count as proof for ET life or interdimensional life.

this is just silly

reply to post by Imtor


I don't think you're being fair to The GUT. He's shown a willingness to entertain other viewpoints in this thread and has fostered debate rather than hectoring those with a different opinion. From the OP it's clear that far from being a dyed-in-the-wool believer he has the ability to alter his views based on experience, not something that suggests fundamentalism in any way.

reply to post by Erno86
Hi Erno, great to see you mate!

Yes, I've considered that my experience was some form of "plasma shielding" of someone's nuts & bolt craft. Either ours or "theirs." I know we've discussed this before.

And I've also considered that it's within the realm of feasibility that it is a seldom seen & scientifically unexplained but freekin' PHENOMENAL natural phenomena of the totally mind-blowing sort.

But, I don't base my leanings towards the IDH on my own personal sighting....and I still believe it looked & acted more "alive" than anything else.

Some have skimmed or even jumped directly to the end of this thread as I have stated previously that I don't necessarily preclude intelligent life on other planets nor do I preclude that the truly anomalous cases are all "in our heads."

My favorite hypothesis these days, however, remains some form of the IDH. I personally believe it makes the most sense and admit that my acceptance leans heavily on the historical precedents followed by the high-strangeness aspects.

Again: Good to see you, amigo!

I have to say, having had a strange year, that my opinion about this subject has changed and the OP has it right. Without saying too much, I have seen evidence that I think substantiates the theory.

I have made stunning EVP's, the content of which, to me, further proves the premise.

In my opinion there are many forms of life visiting this planet and 1 or 2 extra-dimensional entities visiting us. Some have called these beings " dis-incorporated beings" able to pass through this reality and move through others. Far fetched, maybe, however the current theoretical physics explains as many as 11 dimensions superimposed on our current 3. There are also super-positional geometric equations that can elegantly explain how those dimensions might be right on top of us with out use ever knowing. These physics are getting better with time but only get more dense with complexity. This Leeds me to believe that there might be science to back that theory up as well. We live in a time where nothing is fully understood, possibility are so numerous it hard to understand. What we do know though is that there is a compelling body of evidence that there is a phenomena that is occurring that has generated so much evidence that it is still in the realm of scientific study, by: PHD, Doctors of medicine and, psychology psychiatrists and other professionals. The evidence is out there, however that gives a new question? If we can prove that others in the universe are out there, by default would it not logical to say that extra-dimensional beings would also be almost a certainty. If the universe is teaming with life (which I say it is) it is not so hard to think that life in other dimensions could also exist?

Yup, I had to face this from the multidimensional after the last four years. In fact, when something happens now on another level, we mention it to one another, wonder at times what it was about and what and where we were, then on again with life here on earth. An example, "Hon, I was taken out last night by the others and shown my soul, it was a light body and diamond shaped, then I was told it was a sacred thing". "Oh that's nice, what do you want for breakfast?"

In the last years, I have dealt with a mature grandson whom watched a being manifest in front of him, seven of my friends dealing with shadow people as well as orbs. My wife telling me of some takings which were not in the physical as well as myself. This last winter we dealt with an orb which came from her and affected the both us as well as a tall female being standing beside my bed and putting me down with an order to just relax and bam, I was out.

In the early years, there was more the physical with her and this seems to have transitioned into what I experience on a higher level where I find myself now and then out of body. Twice, I have been told to stay on the earth and once encountered a barrier. This barrier was also seen by my grandson while out and he was allowed past it and found another world beside this one, one which I have seen in visions and also was taken there according to my wife for lessons. I only mention this as I questioned the young man and he was right on with what my wife told me.

Damn, I left out a lot, but yup, so much is on a higher level and a transitioning from one to another, don't want to bore anyone but we always know when we are used, trained or whatever as we wake up completely exhausted now and then.

reply to post by g2v12

Science, these days, always forgets--to it's egg on the face chagrin--that it has a "Daddy." Philosophy that is, It's the Father of Science.

When one separates those two it really accounts to nothing more than throwing in the towel and admitting you--and perceiving that others--can never form any kind of personal conclusion beyond what little that science perceives itself to know. Ever-changing-it's-mind science that is. IMO, you don't become an adult until you are able to take the risk and finally form some personal conclusions.

What Science has virtually no answer for: Paradox, Infinity, and Consciousness. I think those are not only big issues, they are big clues to the nature of reality.

Science is, I admit, meagerly adept at some technological issues. But those generally turn into monetary profit, get co-opted by the gubmints, and are followed by death and destruction. Big deal and ho-hum.

So, maybe you shouldn't be so proud of your ignorance and wait for science to tell you what the truth is. You'll be waiting a long time. An Infinity's worth.

You are obviously hyper-intelligent. And I'm enjoying reading your posts. But, so far, you're not telling me anything new. Maybe, I'm not either, but remember; paradox, infinity, consciousness...and philosophy.

reply to post by Annee

I believe it is Inter-dimensional! My research and info I have looked at going back to the mid seventies made me to believe this....even tough it was not popular at the time.
If look at alot of UFO cases and have a open mine you can see this. Just my opinion.

The Universe is an extremely massive place, with many many possibilities, the question shouldn't be who has switched from Extraterrestrial to Interdimensional, the question should be what are the limits, if any, of a conscience being of any level in this Universe? Look at the whole picture and not parts of the picture. Chances are they both exist with others we haven't even dreamed to hypothesize yet.

Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl12
The Universe is an extremely massive place, with many many possibilities, the question shouldn't be who has switched from Extraterrestrial to Interdimensional, the question should be what are the limits, if any, of a conscience being of any level in this Universe? Look at the whole picture and not parts of the picture. Chances are they both exist with others we haven't even dreamed to hypothesize yet.

With all those infinite possiblilities in this massive universe, we have not had one ET or Interdimensional being make itself known to us! Nor have we detect any of the unlimited lifeforms that could exist in this universe.

And for the sake of conversation lets say there are lifefroms and you cannot perceive them with your senses how do you even know they exist?? Is it based on faith alone or the assumption that because the universise is huge and probability says so there must be other intelligent life.

At the end of the day no matter how much you hypothesize it is not reality.

This is a very good and relevant to this thread vid featuring Joseph P. Farrell, one of my newly found favorite authors: They discuss the various aspects to this phenomena including psyops/interdimensional.....

My own view is completely self-contradictory, leaving me between a rock and a hard place. I don't make sense even to myself. Yes, I have switched, but it may have more to do with the evolving and changing culture we live in than anything else. In other words, our beliefs about UFOs reflect our understanding of the world and existence at the time.

I consider myself fairly well-read in the UFO literature. I have a large collection of UFO books (over 250) dating back into the early fifties. I say that not intending to try to impress anyone. I may have no better insight or comprehension than someone who has read nothing in the literature at all. It’s just that I have read this stuff, and I see a pattern.

The early UFO literature is, in a word, naïve. It projected human civilizations on Venus and Mars. It assumed life on these planets was pretty much like Earth. It projected space travel between stars is spaceships propelled by fire emitting from the stern of the vessel. The films of the time such as “Rocky Jones, Space Ranger” told tales of a Wild West in space.

The abduction literature of the fifties was similar. People like Truman Bethurum talked about taking rides on flying saucers from the planet Clarion, which was hidden behind the Moon, and later on the exact opposite orbit as Earth, hidden by the Sun. The Captain of the saucer, Aura Rhanes, was a pert brunette who dressed in scarlet and jet with a beret worn at a jaunty angle.

Today we are somewhat more sophisticated. Now we know Venus has a surface temperature of 800 degrees and Mars is a desert with a light atmosphere. Human life, as we know it, is impossible on either planet. Einstein’s theory of relativity, though formulated early in the last century, has penetrated into popular culture. According to it, faster than light speed travel is impossible and slower than light speed travel takes a really long time.

As a result the ET hypothesis has suffered. It’s not the case that there aren’t ETs living on planets in other star systems. Nearly anyone will point out the probability of that, usually with a superior tone and a rolling of the eyes against anyone who thinks differently, regardless that finding someone who thinks we are unique is extremely difficult. It’s a straw man argument. The problem is not the likelihood of their existence, but the physics of this built-in speed limit. They can’t get here.

Well, what about Warp Drive? That may be. It might be possible. But right now Warp Drive is a theatrical way to keep our fantasies alive. It is the stuff of screenplays, not science. Warp drive has no solid scientific basis. From what we think we know today, it does not exist. And here’s the necessity. We absolutely must accommodate the science we know today. It may be superseded in the future by a grander theory, but we can’t dismiss it. If we do, we enter the world of abject speculation. Now some of us will dismiss science outright with some sort of “Science doesn’t know everything” statement, but I would submit that is not a particularly useful approach. It doesn’t help us explain anything.

Of course we can make other stuff up to accommodate the ET Theory. We can say there are wormholes through which ET can travel so that Getting from “A” to “C” is possible by bypassing “B,” not traveling the distance through it. We can draw diagrams showing the point. Yet all these are speculations. They aren’t based on current scientific theory. We just made this stuff up to get around the limitations we have to face.

Yet we have the sightings, and though over 90% of them can be dismissed as fakery and mis-identification, we still have the sightings, so how do we explain them?

The Interdimensional Theory is not much of a theory, really. It’s completely speculative, but it is likely on the table because advances in science, particularly String Theory, have brought extra dimensions into play in popular culture. The problem with this is that even a beginner level understanding of String Theory tells you that THESE dimensions, the ones discussed in String Theory, are very tiny. They aren’t the kind of dimensions that can hold planets and civilizations. To invoke String Theory dimensions as an explanation for UFOs is not credible at all. From a scientific standpoint it simply doesn’t work.

So here we are without a credible ET Theory. Relativity stands in the way of it. And we don’t have a decent Interdimensional Theory either. String Theory doesn’t cut it. To make either of these theories work within our current level of understanding, you have to enter the realm of fiction and make stuff up.

Yet we have the sightings.

So I’m going with Interdimensional, but I have no idea what it means.

Originally posted by The GUT

Originally posted by g2v12
reply to post by The GUT

 

I thank you for the the challenge to my opinion. Since I posted some circumstantial evidence to support my assumptions, perhaps you would do us the honor of presenting some counter points of your own, if can think of any.

Its one thing to have an opinion founded on evidence. But if you are using the forum to evoke emotional responses through condescending remarks that are off topic, where's the benefit?

Its time to man-up and show us the facts.

The word "Hypothesis" should clue you in that none of us are talking about empirical evidence, but rather, well...hypothesizing.

However, that's not to say that empiricism is the be-all-end-all nor without it's own aspect of the experiential. We are free, are we not, to come to some form of personal conclusion--if we see fit--based upon what we personally perceive to be evidence?

Having said that; What literature are you familiar with in regards to the IDH?

Of the Vallée regime, I have read Dimensions and Messengers of Deception. I found them interesting as a reader and somewhat stretched as far as data interpretation (or interpolation). The later book was in my opinion a cynical view that focused on negative data, when there is a plethora of opposing information and as much physical evidence to show otherwise. His entire EDH (ultra-dimensional) theorem rests upon a very narrow data grouping of what is referred to as 'High Strangeness' events. Using only this data as a foundation to interpret cases that would otherwise be physical events, would tragically turn scientific ufology into a mythological heresy.

When scientists get involved in the UFO/ET genre it evolves into a virtual media circus, because they lose credibility in their chosen field and thus are predisposed to publish to a wide interest grouping to make money. Vallée has published quite a few books in the past forty years and has made a decent sum of money by pandering to the cult factions.

If you are offended in some way by this assertion, I can only offer my apology, short of withdrawing my opinion.

I've also studied what many term the classic cases that are not explained away by logic or the EDH, such as the Hill case and probably a half dozen others like it.

One of Vallée's latest releases, Wonders in the Sky, goes into well recorded ancient accounts of UFO and abduction events without the strain of bias analytics. Its probably one of the most interesting works of research ever done on the subject.

He wrote this book due to the frustration of having seen the rift caused by his conclusions.

As for your statement regarding 'empirical evidence', I would need a succinct definition to have any idea about your reference points. My reservation in our discussion thus far is tied to such terms, which too often stereotype people as strict debunkers, posing as scientifically minded individuals. Obviously, I don't know you in the least, and of course hope to avoid false or preconceived judgements.

I enjoy basking in the light of positive, intelligent reasoning, without semantics or pseudo intellectual meandering. Hard core skeptics and debunkers are fanatics intimidated by their own ignorance and the confidence of others whose opinions are developed. Instead of thinking, debunkers like to push emotional buttons via negative critiques and never offer anything based on scientific protocol.

The process of Hypothesizing (whether good or not) is in fact based on all kinds of evidence, empirical or simply circumstantial or possibly little to none. There is no research or science based squarely on the word 'empirical'. So, I have no interest in semantics over word definitions.

reply to post by schuyler

schuyler, a masterpiece! Outstanding enough to read more than once, mind-boggling enough to take a masochist to do so.

Thanks, man.