Dr. Jacques Vallee ~ The Control System

JayinAR
You must identify them as something they have not shown themselves to be and insist that is what they are. At that point, a correction must be made. If I am misinterpreting all this someone please let me know.

I obviously don't speak for Vallée, and I would humorously say that not even Vallée speaks for Vallée on this, but that is the interpretation I make as well, and assumed in my post.

If that interpretation is correct, however, I don't think it's something that would bear fruit on a small timescale. To make the sort of 'corrections' necessary for the system to show itself would require a critical situation (for the system). But if the system is flexible enough to make smaller corrections (patches), then why would it allow to reach a point where it had to make such a major correction that revealing itself would be the only option?

I think these are fun discussions, but I don't see any more evidence to support this sort of hypothesis and "plan of attack" than the standard hypothesis. I think these alternative hypotheses, in fact, require more assumptions than the ETH. That of course, by itself, doesn't mean they are wrong.

Here's a story about Jacques Vallee that you almost never hear because I made it up. Jacques Vallee and Morrisey were just returning from the Jai alai court and Jacques was being quiet and sullen because he had had a poor game. Morrissey's chula had been too much for Jacques and he had been beaten badly.

"C'mon Jack!" said Morrissey, cracking Vallee on the ass with his xistera, "You can't let me catch you in a running game like that!", "It keeps you trapped by the wall and then you're easy to pick off" But Jacques was still pouting and trudging sullenly and Gallicly towards the showers.

Shortly thereafter, as they were washing off the sweat in the steamy shower, Morrisey thought to ask, "So, Jack, how is it going with the whole development of your idea of the Control System?"

"Merde.", said Jacques, his voice sounding like a lumpy bowl of ennui in his chest, "I feel that I am on to something good, but as far as settling on a working model so that we can understand how to alter our feedback so as to get a response from the system, I am stumped". Morrissey had been standing there under the spray like a contented shower-buddha, listening to Jacques, when he had finished, Morrisey made a sudden and exaggerated show of dropping the soap.

"Moz". said Vallee, hardly changing his expression, "I thought you wanted to help me with this".

Morrissey just laughed and scooped up the soap, "Right!, Jack, I have been thinking about it", the diminutive rock star started rubbing the soap between his hands working up a lather, "And you know I am a great lover of cats." he wasn't really asking, it was more like a statement.

"And if there's one thing I've found that'll get Pussy interested..."

"And what's that Moz?" Vallee was tired of feeling like everyone was in on the same joke.

"Ignore it, Jack." Morrisey started to turn towards the shower head, lathering and chuckling, "Just ignore it".

Jacques Vallee and Morrissey parted company soon thereafter, and though their lives would take them in new and sudden directions which would never allow them to meet on the Jai alai court again, Morrissey later wrote this song.

reply to post by JayinAR


I like this direction. So, does it particularly matter what we peg 'them' as, other than ET or one of their many other covers through the ages? Antediluvian human remnants? Prehistoric sentient dinosaurs? Native dark plasma lifeforms co-evolving over eons on this planet?

The concept is clever though - one of the best ways to get someone to reveal their position is to accuse them of holding an opposite position.

In the earlier part of the 20th century we had many books, radio shows, television shows and movies that portrayed mean, scary UFO occupants and their evil plans for humanity. Since that time most encounters with UFOs have been entirely benign. We also typically portrayed the UFO phenomenon as operated by outer space aliens, and this viewpoint has even been propagated to official military policy (at the public/enlisted level, to be sure). Yet we have had nothing but local encounters: reports of our spacecraft being buzzed seem to always turn out to have a mundane explanation.

So it seems that loudly and publicly accusing the UFO operators of being "menacing ET from outer space" has resulted in nothing but evidence to the contrary.

Perhaps it is time to loudly promote the idea that the UFO operators are native, local and 'from here', and have a great interest in the constructive activity and general welfare of humanity. We saw the second idea emerge in the New Age movement, but sadly this was mixed up with the 'exopolitics' movement very early on. Perhaps we should take the useful part of their approach (the idea that the visitors are mainly friendly in their intentions) and put it out there with a new companion idea: that they aren't visitors at all.

Autograf
I like this direction. So, does it particularly matter what we peg 'them' as, other than ET or one of their many other covers through the ages? Antediluvian human remnants? Prehistoric sentient dinosaurs? Native dark plasma lifeforms co-evolving over eons on this planet?

Ideally we'd make up a word that intentionally means "identity" -- nothing else. Since we have no idea what else is going on and every other detail creates an assumption from the start.

Since that time most encounters with UFOs have been entirely benign.

Not so at all, IMO. However the overall public presentation seems to skew it that way. Apparently for some it worked.

UFOlogy is a control system of its own because it's a bit of a social cult and it tends to have its own 'exclusions.' People don't want to hear about negative experiences, about overlaps with the occult, or about fey type experiences and their overlaps. So those things tend to be greatly suppressed, filtered out, or ignored as unrelated and intentionally marginalized as it's feared they will somehow make UFOlogy less credible (heh). That does not mean there aren't lots of the above. It just means 'popular lore' (much like if UFOlogy was a radio station or magazine) doesn't tend to feature them.

Sometimes it does. Walton's experience is extremely famous and his was freaking horrible.

We also typically portrayed the UFO phenomenon as operated by outer space aliens, and this viewpoint has even been propagated to official military policy (at the public/enlisted level, to be sure).

That is still constant. "Visitors" as a term is itself disinformation. And outer-space-aliens is an almost laughable model held mostly by people who are trying to debunk ufology -- who are really just debunking their own belief system -- most people I know who have experiences in that genre don't hold that model.

Yet we have had nothing but local encounters: reports of our spacecraft being buzzed seem to always turn out to have a mundane explanation.

You believe that? There are plenty of good "spacecraft buzzing" video/audio clips that still have no explanation. Here's a couple, probably not the best but I just happened to be given a link to them recently:

www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

So it seems that loudly and publicly accusing the UFO operators of being "menacing ET from outer space" has resulted in nothing but evidence to the contrary.

I think your post actually evidences that what has come across to the public as a whole is that they are in fact local encounters with positive experiences. Except that you think this is what you believe "as contrary to" the modern lore.

Perhaps it is time to loudly promote the idea that the UFO operators are native, local and 'from here'

Well the complication is that there is more than one source of so-called UFOs (and so-called abductions). Some probably really ARE native, local and from here. That doesn't mean others aren't, though, and any assumption leads us astray and makes us easy to lead in any direction someone wants.

and have a great interest in the constructive activity and general welfare of humanity.

Some probably do. I think the others would benefit from our assuming they all do.

Everything we assume, creates ripples of assumption about other things. The stuff that is easiest to tease out, especially retrospectively, is the obvious stuff. It is the subtle assumptions, the things that we never even thought to ask about, because how we looked at something or the words we used for it simply precluded our brains bringing it up, those are the things that probably most trip us up in the end.

reply to post by Autograf


Do you mean to say that the 'Annunaki' and 'Nephilim', etc. were the original inhabitants of earth - who never left, but went into hiding?
That their technology continues to advance beyond our comprehension, and they are ruling from 'behind the veil'?

That a very advanced set of beings cohabitated with man certainly seems plausible...

KellyPrettyBear
reply to post by nitro67

 

Childhood's end is one of my all time favorites.
It really influence my mind as a child.

On that theme..

A lot of people who write about our 'little problem with apparently evil entities'
correctly point out, that these entities act as a gating/initiatory function..
and that without a 'worthy adversary' humans couldn't evolve properly.

I'm willing to take that as legitimate up to a point..

But if the 'worthy adversary' wipes out the entire species.. well... that's one option..
but I'd prefer a better outcome than that..
KPB

Excellent point…

When my daughter was about 8 we were watching a movie in which the question of why evil exists came up. Ever on the alert for a teaching (or for me, a learning 'from the mouths of babes') moment, I asked her,

"Why do you think there's evil in the world?", she thought for a moment and said, "Well, if there was no evil, how would we ever have any heroes?"

And along those lines, what many people fail to realize is that free will cannot truly exist unless we have choices. In order to have choices, you have to have comparative opposites…

I think I've said this before: Evil is not the problem - insanity (which is really the perversion of evil) is the problem, because it utterly destroys free will and nulls rationality…and at the most foundational levels, the world is falling due to the irrational behavior of 'leaders' who cannot see reason…

The question is, what is the driving 'force' behind the insanity? I believe it is something that was 'done to' us…

…which brings us back to Vallee's Control System, begging the question - why, to what purpose? Or could it be that the Control System itself is insane?

reply to post by RedCairo


You're missing some of my context because you've been holding a side conversation in the thread, I think (as has most of the thread, not trying to fault you here).

First of all I definitely acknowledge the 'negative' experiences associated with UFO phenomena. That is why I used the word "most". I also acknowledge the stuff that's too weird to even get commentary most of the time.

Regardless, I want to clarify that my post is specifically about finding ways to manipulate JV's control system, along with speculating about the effect of past manipulations on the phenomenon - possibly through dogma. I'm not trying to come up with new dogma for dogma's sake.

To understand possible hooks or manipulation angles, we might wish to look at the changing face of the phenomenon itself, and attempt to correlate it with contemporary human society, actions and behavior. It may be possible to determine some sort of "algebra of apparitions" such that if people behave as X, the trickster will appear as Y. Of course, this brings us right back to the occult, ritual magic and Persinger's helmet (one of the sidetracks we've been exploring).

Your point about communication and definitions is very important. Until we can compare notes with true understanding as a species, we'll not get far in figuring out a large number of problems and questions, not just this one. Gurdjieff talked about this a century ago, in Views From the Real World.

nugget1
reply to post by Autograf

 

Do you mean to say that the 'Annunaki' and 'Nephilim', etc. were the original inhabitants of earth - who never left, but went into hiding?
That their technology continues to advance beyond our comprehension, and they are ruling from 'behind the veil'?

That a very advanced set of beings cohabitated with man certainly seems plausible...

This is one accusation we could hurl at the UFOs and see if it got a rise out of them, yes.

Again, I am not trying to put these forth as explanations - simply exploring the use of assumptions or dogma as manipulation of the phenomena itself - the idea that the best way to get a person to reveal their position is accuse them of holding the opposite position. If the UFO operators happen to really hate the idea of being considered dinosaurs, they might show some evidence to the contrary.

Autograf

Was this part of JV's reluctance to expand more on the possible routes to feedback, this sense that the only way to effect it was by great evil?

Excellent food for thought...

reply to post by Bybyots



The thread in itself is a perfect example of control systems in operation, marginalize and discourage, reward and encourage...that's just the way that it goes and it's what nobody knows.




3rd strike now i'm out.

reply to post by The GUT


Great post, GUT!

My current model indicates that Vallee was referring to techniques one would call magical or occult. He hesitates being more specific because he fears being completely ousted from the fringes of academia and having his entire body of work tainted by admitting that magicks is how to deal with UFOs and space critters.

A magician manipulates invisible (occult) forces. A non-magician is manipulated by occult forces. The UFO phenom represents an occult force that has been manipulating human culture for hundreds of thousands of years, if not since the beginning.

Many contactees have been involved with occult/esoteric/spiritual groups. George Adamski was involved with British occultist Desmond Leslie. George Hunt Williamson was a contactee and a channeler. Most of the early contactees were involved in channeling, spiritualism, the occult and magick.

Occult lore in a shell nut: there are human groups representing good guys and bad guys. These humans take orders from non-humans. The two sides have been waging an epic battle for ages.

All this second-hand info fits in with my personal experiences. I am an abductee/contactee(?) and a student of the occult and a practicing magician. I've encountered the grey-type beings and banished them using standard ceremonial magick techniques. Is this why the mainstream religions paint the occult as being a doorway to hell? Is it coz the bad aliens done infiltrated them to keep us from figuring out how to make them find my lost car keys?!?

Also, the occult is rife with passwords, codes, cyphers, secret handshakes and codenames. Heavy security for heavy info. Sound familiar?

Has the control system theory been tested? I think so. All these alien channelers seem to be getting the same messages. Is it because that's what they want to hear? Why is Ashtar in The Sacred Book of Abra-melin the Mage? WHy do I have such a hard time organizing my thought here on ATS?

Read all the books you can get on magick. Become an occultist at least. Compare the info with UFOs. Then, if you're real curious, do some Enochian calls or an elemental evocation or astral projection. The proof is in the doin'. All else is hearsay and speculation.


Aleister Crowley contacted this being while scrying some aethyrs I believe:
Crowley's LAM

Crowley's Book of the Law was dictated to him by what I believe to be a human agent.

Dr. George Hunt Williamson

Meade Layne

Kantzveldt
The thread in itself is a perfect example of control systems in operation, marginalize and discourage, reward and encourage...that's just the way that it goes and it's what nobody knows.

Hey there, beautiful ninja! It's the octagon of discovery. No different than some of your threads. It's play or be played. I'm just surprised that you and Kilgore have chosen not to engage this go around.

ultimafule
reply to post by The GUT

 

My current model indicates that Vallee was referring to techniques one would call magical or occult. He hesitates being more specific because he fears being completely ousted from the fringes of academia and having his entire body of work tainted by admitting that magicks is how to deal with UFOs and space critters.

A magician manipulates invisible (occult) forces. A non-magician is manipulated by occult forces. The UFO phenom represents an occult force that has been manipulating human culture for hundreds of thousands of years, if not since the beginning.

This is certainly another good possibility for interpreting JV's reticence to expand on techniques. We've also seen broad hints dropped (references to the Golden Bough, etc). Most people would certainly take him for a cretin, not understanding that ritual and even belief can be merely tools.

Combining your thought and mine, it occurs to me that a black magic ritual of great evil might be a genuine attempt to provoke the 'overseers'. Just look at any of the rabid conspiracy forums here to discover potential candidates in modern history - pretty much all bad actors in nation states and international groups have been accused of being evil occultists performing rituals. Third Reich, 9/11, Bohemian Grove, the list goes on. Obviously JV doesn't wish to Godwin the discussion!

ultimafule
My current model indicates that Vallee was referring to techniques one would call magical or occult. He hesitates being more specific because he fears being completely ousted from the fringes of academia and having his entire body of work tainted by admitting that magicks is how to deal with UFOs and space critters.

Basically concurred--that seems to be an aspect of Vallee's often carefully-chosen words and hypotheses. Good to see you, Ultima. Intriguing post.

It's also an aspect that both supports and somewhat contradicts vbstrvct's awesome theory at the same time. Red Cairo has written some very interesting stuff on the rest of what you address. I might seek permission to post some of that here.

vbstrvct
If that interpretation is correct, however, I don't think it's something that would bear fruit on a small timescale. To make the sort of 'corrections' necessary for the system to show itself would require a critical situation (for the system). But if the system is flexible enough to make smaller corrections (patches), then why would it allow to reach a point where it had to make such a major correction that revealing itself would be the only option?

That could be exactly what Vallee has in mind; to create a critical situation for the system. As you say, if the system can make small patches then perhaps it can also anticipate the major correction it will need in the near future, and gradually implement the major correction through small and smart patches. I guess Vallee's strategy is to create such an intensely critical situation, over a short period of time, that the system cannot patch fast and smart enough.

Maybe the proponents of Vallee, with the esoteric theories posted previously, had the right idea all along. Rather than portray UFOs as something real and external, with theories like the ET hypothesis or hollow earth theory or indeed anything tangible, instead portray them as figments of our collective imagination.

In that way, the tricksters are consigned to oblivion. They don't even have an independent existence anymore, they are just the excess of human imagination, they are forgotten like a puff of smoke, they are nothing.

That might cause the critical situation necessary to confuse the system and reveal the trickster.

reply to post by Bybyots


Funny story, excellent point, and perhaps the reason Vallee hash't written anything new in the past 20 + years?

reply to post by ultimafule

Any deep discussion of Vallee must needs include mysticism. But mysticism needn't be confused with "abracadabra" so to speak. It's psychology, philosophy, "science," and human nature and the power of myth and "archetype" first…and maybe the "paranormal" after that it seems to me.

Let's look at the following bit referencing Crowley's definition of "magic(k)."

Magick, in the context of Aleister Crowley's Thelema, is a term used to differentiate the occult from stage magic and is defined as "the Science and Art of causing Change to occur in conformity with Will", including both "mundane" acts of will as well as ritual magic. Crowley wrote that "it is theoretically possible to cause in any object any change of which that object is capable by nature".

en.wikipedia.org...(Thelema)

You can "conjure" wealth or attractive sexual partners for example--and if deep enough to care, wisdom--but you'll never make an orange an apple on the shelf at Walmart is my take and current belief.

How deeply reality can actually be affected by one's will is up for debate, but the rudiments--in their simple context--aren't seemingly that mysterious.

I'm a big fan of the way this discussion is going now. My only problem is when someone paints themselves as a guru and is constantly telling everyone how right they themselves are and how misguided the rest of us are and yet fails--or doesn't even try--to come to some common terms as Ms. Cairo pointed out.

This thread isn't about healing the ignorant (Physician heal thyself) but, in my small mind, about consciousness, philosophy, mythology, are we alone(?), memes, corruption, and what all that might infer.

Autograf
You're missing some of my context because you've been holding a side conversation in the thread, I think (as has most of the thread, not trying to fault you here).

I don't know you so have to judge your words literally and without larger context of course... sorry about that. I am only here at ATS in occasional bursts and makes me poorly familiar with locals.

I came back here after thinking about it more -- after you and then me, I had a better thought...

I want to clarify that my post is specifically about finding ways to manipulate JV's control system ... I'm not trying to come up with new dogma for dogma's sake.

It occurred to me later that actually, we have "social microclimates" (I think I just made that up. But I think there is a better term for that I'm just not thinking of) for the negative, the positive, the spiritual, the nuts&bolts -- everything. Already.

I realized maybe we were both a little wrong and right both: there probably isn't any one overall way that UFOs or contact (separate topics) have been presented "to everyone" -- there is, in fact (curiously, much like I once observed about remote viewing which had a nicely planned spectrum of former intell people to offer every-likely-social-doorway for it. Practical; spiritual; ufological vs. not; planetary doomed; government paranoid...). Probably right now, every general groupthink -- from Greer's dayglo optimism to Jacobs' shifty-eyed paranoia -- is its own handy microclimate and mini-control system.

So whatever we were to try and establish as a 'new' paradigm (which was ... not what they wanted? not what it is? [good luck with that since it's many things and we don't know] not what has so-far been easy to control?) would need to be something that we don't already have. And we already have all of those things.

Thinking out loud here:

To understand possible hooks or manipulation angles, we might wish to look at the changing face of the phenomenon itself,

Does it really change? Or does only society's communication and paradigms about it change?

and attempt to correlate it with contemporary human society, actions and behavior.

Except that those may be the only part of the iceberg we 'see.' Whatever lies underneath that it "IS" may be the part we don't see in which case, we cannot look at its changing face. We can only look at the secondary or third element of society's changing reporting, interpreting, hyping, etc.

It may be possible to determine some sort of "algebra of apparitions" such that if people behave as X, the trickster will appear as Y. Of course, this brings us right back to the occult, ritual magic and Persinger's helmet (one of the sidetracks we've been exploring).

Yeah sorry for the sidetrack but I wanted to make the point about communication/definition, and that helmet is such a perfect example of a way to interject something completely artificial, and made up eons down the road, and then get people to start calling 'that thing' by the same terms as the original experience and then lose all track of what was ever real in the first place.

I think there is probably some algebra there. I said in a case study once that it didn't seem like coincidence that the MUFON crowd was getting probed while the Pleiadian channeler crowd was talking to light beings; and made the point that it really did seem that my individual focus had something to do with following personal experiences. Now, how much it has to do with it is really the big question. Some would just say it's all hallucination/dream, I don't obviously or I wouldn't bother with this topic to begin with.

I suspect though, that there may be certain frequency states (nervous system side effects) which certain topical focuses make more dominant. A little more subtle than alpha-beta-delta stuff but along the same lines, at least -- that is to say, being excited for the potential of your 12-strand DNA may lead to some slightly different nervous system details than being paranoid about the aliens that will kidnap and rape you. A very "broad range or spectrum" -- nothing detailed -- but it might actually make a difference in, so to speak, the doorways you open, what you can perceive and interact with, if the human nervous system relates to that (I believe it does, but this is bias).

UFOs are another story. I get a little fuzzy on the alleged overlap. I grant that archetypes can be physically real (and can pop in and out of reality, that's just so horribly, mind-crunchingly confusing) but I suspect most nuts&bolts stuff our jet fighters are chasing, or the giant white wormy looking things all over south america for example, are pretty physically objective and measurable, at least they certainly aren't hiding from camera techs.

Obviously, the giant white wormy things are a completely different topic than 'alien abduction' -- even if they are indirectly related in some way we don't understand -- so it becomes rather difficult to choose any one "way" to "interpret or present" the "UFOlogy" phenomenon. There's just so damn much stuff IN the genre. How to break it down?

KellyPrettyBear
reply to post by nugget1

 

Humans. .. All of them have an innate ability to access pure awareness and 'soul ride' any living being and many other types of existence.

This is the art of the shaman.

but most humans clog up the pipes with pain and confusion so they forget what they knew as an infant.

The whole point of the world is to keep us in a state of existential terror...This is ALL that separates us from who we really are. .

Yes the rabbit hole goes deep.

Easy on you? I'm fond of you.

I wonder, if pushed to shove, how much of this you could explain is more banal terminology or would want to. A lot of what you have stated in this thread has been dressed into a certain psycho-linguistic pattern for control purposes of your own. I attach no value judgement to that observation, merely commenting on it. However, it is somewhat deceptive, or alternately, deluded, dependent of the whys, but I suspect, though I am reading carefully for confirmation one way or another, that you are riding the fence, but for what purpose?

The Shaman is of course, by very nature, a Trickster, so all this should go without saying, you are admitting as much yourself by that assuming that appendage.

You're certainly an interesting specimen.

reply to post by KilgoreTrout