FWD: [UFORMilitary] CHANNELING & OTHER UFO SILLINESS *Reader discretion advised*
From: Francisco Lopez <d005734c@...>
From: Michael Estes <mestes@...>
Via: firstname.lastname@example.org <email@example.com>
Let's stir up the pot!
Do not read if you are overly sensitive to certain vibrational sound
The Gateway to Intelligent Infinity
* * *
CHANNELING & OTHER UFO SILLINESS
by John Shirley
You want to talk about UFOs? We can talk about UFOs. But you want to talk
about CHANNELING UFOs? For a minute or two, sure.
I can't make a whole lot of time for horseshit.
Here's what I want to know: why can't ufology eliminate, at least, the
obviously silly? The stuff that makes rational people turn away from
ufology muttering, "Get a clue!" Stuff like channeling, and people who
tell stories about visits aboard UFOs in which the aliens act just like
the ones the experiencer saw in movies when they were little; abduction
experiences that are silly in their resemblance to bad science fiction
movies. Billy Meier videos of "dinosaurs" and his photos of the pretty
alien lady "Asket". Or videos of airplanes and helicopter lights, of
really, really obvious stunt kites. I mean, stuff that doesn't even fool
my kids -- who laughed at an Ed Walters' "UFO" video I was screening;
howled at its silliness without any prompting from me. Why can't we, at
least, turn away from sheer silliness?
Sure, lots of ufologists ridicule Meier, for example, now, but some take
him seriously and for a long time many more did. The German UFO magazine
UFO-Kurier reports that a Meier photo of Asket, a pretty lady from "the
Pleides", was actually taken from a videotape of The Dean Martin Show!
"Asket" was some woman dancing or singing on The Dean Martin Show -- and
she had an exotic face so Billy Hubcaps took a picture of the screen and
said it was a blurry photo taken aboard a spaceship. UFO-Kurier shows both
pictures for comparison. It's her all right. But why did we have to go
that far to prove anything? Show me a picture of a pretty lady with
straight flaxen hair and a 70s look, a blurry background, tell me it was
taken on a spaceship, and I'll laugh, and I'll say, "That's silly." I
didn't need the Kurier's proof. (Maybe they're just providing it for
amusement). Meier was patently silly from the start.
I was briefly a member of MUFON. I my membership lapse because they would
insist on booking charlatans who projected slides of Sumerian gods they
passed off as "ancient astronauts," and CHANNELERS who were in "contact"
with "aliens," for the MUFON lecture series. Listen to a channeler do his
or her thing -- just be a little objective, put aside the desire to
believe-in-advance -- and you shrivel from embarrassment, or you
laugh...because it's SILLY. These people are living, breathing Saturday
Night Live sketches.
Channeling as a concept, even...Just give me one solid reason, just one,
just one little tiny reason, a microscopically tiny reason, to believe in
channelers. No channeler has ever obtained from their alien correspondents
any scientifically testable information; no asteroids or comets they know
about that we don't, that they could point out; and certainly no landing
sites to visit where they'll be waiting (occasionally some were offered -
but the aliens invariably failed to show up). Judging from the disparity
between types of aliens described by the various channelers, there are
apparently many, many races swarming round our planet. These aliens, we're
told, are REALLY CONCERNED for our well being, but they all uniformly
refuse, evidently, to give us any really useful information -- like the
FUCKING CURE FOR CANCER for God's sake. YES: How about a cure for cancer,
you bandy legged eggheaded , greyblue, noseless little bastards? How about
an antigravity formula? How about ONE SINGLE PIECE OF SCIENTIFIC
INFORMATION, confirmable, that we don't have? Nothing's forthcoming. Hey,
they don't want to spoil us, right?
I'm a pretty good performer; been on stage as singer, put across many
other media, and I know I could channel like a motherfucker. Just set me
up at a MUFON meeting, I'll go into a very believable looking trance, I'll
come up with a very believable alien-voice, which will spout comfortingly
exotic platitudes. I could be cleaning up on this shit. All you need is
imagination and some acting ability. And you need to be reasonably
articulate...Um, come to think of it, slightly articulate will do. It's a
self-starter's industry, man. No overhead.
I'm ranting about this because there are a surprising number of people who
still take saucer-channelers seriously -- otherwise intelligent people
like Michael Lindenmann who does the quite valuable CNI newsletter. The
people at LA MUFON. The CSETI people...
No one seems to have learned anything from Heaven's Gate.
And I put so-called "vectoring" and "remote sensing" in the same category.
There do seem to have been some military intelligence experiments with
"remote sensing." Jimmy Carter says there was, and he's almost the only
politician I trust. (Hey, this guy has done more good in the world since
being president than all of the presidents who've presided since then.)
And in fact I happen to know that some psychic phenomena is real. It's
almost as rare as hen's teeth; and if there are 1,000,000 psychics,
999,999 of them are liars or self-deluded -- but it exists. And maybe
there have been some more-than-lucky remote sensing hits in the military
intelligence context. I doubt if any of the self-promoting remote sensors
claiming to have been working for the government really did; and if they
did I doubt they had any success. But they don't have to have been
successful; with the UFO field in its current state, they only have to SAY
they were successful.
That's the wonderful thing about remote sensing -- since it has a
technical sound to it (like the even-more-questionable "reverse speech
analysis"), and the apparent, hearsay validation of military intelligence
involvement...man, that's good enough for ufology. I have never seen one
clear-cut piece of evidence (something that appears on a Web site is not a
piece of evidence, it's something that appears on a Web site) that any of
the field's notorious remote sensors participated in any kind of
successful remote sensing program. I can't count how many flying saucer
experts and witnesses supposedly used to work for the CIA or Naval
Intelligence -- or something similar, so long as it confers spurious
credibility. (Derrel Sims, for example. I can prove that I worked for the
CIA -- as much as Derrel Sims did. I didn't -- and neither did he.)
Documentation apparently isn't necessary in the UFO field; not real
documentation. We'll believe anything as long as they tell a good story,
the way Stephen Greer used to. But Greer's losing it: Recently he
"remotely sensed" that U.S. military forces attacked an "underground alien
base"; nerve gas was involved; many casualties. All hushed up of course.
Well, he used to tell a good story. But give it time and the best liar
will start leaking at the seams. Underground alien bases...Lord...
Greer has failed to "remotely vector in" (psychically summon) any UFOs
where anyone outside his cronies in CSETI can see them. He has failed to
give us any videotaped evidence of the saucer visits he's reported (there
are a couple of ludicrous videos of small, fuzzy, distant lights moving
about -- airplanes, stars taped with wobbling cameras, etc.)...But of
course, as in all such encounters, the saucers, I assume, reach out and
blot out the cameras...or make the cameramen forget them. Greer, in his
lectures, shows us photos of spacecraft in the sky, the familiar photos
you can see in the usual UFO books -- including some proven hoaxes; but we
are to believe that cameras which evidently work for the people who took
the pictures in his slide-show, won't work for him, for some reason. Why
don't cameras work for Greer, in filming UFOs. when they supposedly work
for others? What -- don't the aliens like the guy?
The lady who sees the Grey Dudes regularly appear in her bathroom -- the
lady with a book to sell -- can't, of course, set up a video cam to catch
the little guy and his various weird alien pals who show up with him at
times, because, naturally, the aliens emanate a field, or something, which
blots those cameras, too. People all over the world have video cameras;
people all over the world have face to face encounters with aliens and
chupacabras and yet those particular people are always without their video
cameras and their Nikons. Every damn time.
When UFOs are videotaped, it's always in the far distance -- though there
are many reports of people seeing them up close. Somehow the people who
see them up close never have video cameras or even Polaroid cameras with
them (or it just happens to be a dark night). The UFOs only appear to
people who have no video cameras, or are far away. But of course,
naturally, the greys are psychically arranging all this. That particular
Sheer Silliness -- The Silly Excuse -- is fundamental to Ufology Today.
There's that new video from Mexico City -- the one they showed on UPN in
April. How about that? It comes to us via Jaime Maussan, the guy who gave
us the Masters of the Stars video, along with the Elders, the people who
used to tout Billy Meier, and it's been clearly demonstrated that key
saucer footage in Masters of the Stars is hoaxed. But giving the guy the
benefit of the doubt anyway, we look at the new video, and it looks damned
good, just like a special effect should. It's so very obviously digital.
No, you can't trust images of things flying about in the sky, not in 1998,
if you ever could. Too easy to fake. But a close up of an alien, that
might be a little more convincing...walking, talking, breathing. Not that
shitty, fake looking one supposedly smuggled out of Area 51, that one
doesn't make it. Not the rubbery bodies repudiated by special effects
experts in the alien autopsy film; the ones with the guts I recognize from
cleaning fish. Not that photo of the little kid in the grey alien mask
that was anonymously sent to Whitley Streiber. I mean something that isn't
obvious bullshit. Show me that.
Show me something. But don't parade channelers and remote viewers and
ludicrous cult leaders like Rael and blurry messages from Grey Dudes, and
bad science fiction scenes -- farcical material from people who ask us for
more faith than Billy Graham does...Turn away from the silly, as a reflex.
Eliminate it out of hand. Get serious.
You want to do some serious research? Recently, Sightings on the Radio's
Web site [UFOR Editor's Note: the same that insisted in showing an
allegued UFO crash in Lajas, Puerto Rico, actually a hoax, as real and
silenced the the field researchers that uncovered it] had a wonderful UFO
report from a Canadian naval officer. During the Korean War, the guy --
and some others on his naval ship -- saw a flying saucer up pretty damn
close, hovering nearby. He's just coming out with the story now. He gives
definite information about himself. So how about finding this guy, how
about confirming his military rank and record, how about confirming he was
on that ship, how about tracking down the other witnesses, how about
getting affidavits from a group of strongly reputable military men who saw
something alien up close? Or how about really doggedly pursuing that
tantalizing 1942 Battle of L.A. case? Then you might have something.
The point is, those cases, the ones with real evidence to them, are out
there. But just reporting them as hearsay doesn't make it. We're told
about the "Russian Roswell" at "Gj coordinates -- between 42 degrees 10
minutes-42 degrees 2 minutes of northern latitude, and between 70 degrees
40 minutes-79 degrees 42 minutes of east longitude. Kirghizia, to the east
of lake Isyk-Kul, 100 km. exact on east from Przehalks town..." Those are
pretty exact coordinates. How about if one of those Interested
millionaires giving grants to ufological investigators sends an expedition
there, to that exact spot, where supposedly physical evidence resides,
instead of just talking about it?
How about if we get serious?
FreeShop is the #1 place for free and trial offers and great deals!
Try something new and discover more ways to save!
eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/ufolist
http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications