UFOs /UAPs a question of national defence? No

12 Replies, 956 Views

(2022-08-14, 02:31 AM)Aussie Mike Wrote: From other sources this appears to be the case to a fair degree. However, we cannot assume that any imagined takeover is inherently a threat to 'national' security. Since the late 1940s there has been abundant evidence that ET is so far ahead technologically [and still is] that if a military threat was interpreted merely by presence and activity it would have the character of paranoia. The mere presence of vastly superior force may cause concern until conduct and intend has been determined. Intent may or may not be known by governments. Conduct seems to be more about taking the piss and being a nuisance than actual intimidation.

If we go into myth, it might be argued that we humans constitute an attempt to takeover the Earth. There have been arguments that ET/human hybrids are an attempt to replace [upgrade?] current humans - and hence ET will prevail. But how is this any different to what has been possibly happening for a very long time?

A takeover isn't necessarily a threat. It could be, but we can't assume it is. We need to distinguish between a natural apprehension because of what we don't know and our unfortunate habit of assuming what is unknown is inherently a threat and attacking it. In the instance of UFOs, attacking them has proven to be futile.

There are, in addition to governments, there are individuals who claim to have been in contact with ET since the 1950s [in the sense that ET has been perceived to be an operator of a UFO - as opposed to human contact with other beings]. These contacts have not resulted in any messages of threat being conveyed. It is certainly true that some encounters have been terrifying - but that has not been because of intentional harm being caused.

The impression I get is that ET stands in relation to humans and humans stand in relation to dogs. Whether this is uniformly the case, I don't know. They certainly are not just slightly more technologically advanced folk of comparable intelligence. Dogs have flourished under human evolution and domination. Other critters haven't of course.

I think anticipation that blends excitement with a dash of anxiety is far more appropriate. Although I am no fan of Greer and his demand for disclosure.

Certainly the paucity of definitely known evidence of any active hostile acts against us by the intelligences during the 75 years or so since their apparent large-scale investigation and probing began, indicates that they are not hell-bent on rapid violent domination or extermination. However, the only actual examples we have of overt large-scale contacts beween cultures of radically different developmental levels is the sorry history of the first contacts of Western European explorers and colonists with the indigenous populations of the New World, Pacific islands, and Australia (and also Africa). The indigenous cultures were rapidly decimated by disease, robbed of their lands, variously exploited for labor, and brainwashed into new and alien to them spiritual belief systems, all ultimately because they had very inferior technology and couldn't effectively fight back.

I think it is very understandable that the military industrial and scientific academic elite of our society might have a little paranoid fear in face of the UFO or UAP technology.
[-] The following 1 user Likes nbtruthman's post:
  • Ninshub
(2022-08-14, 03:39 PM)nbtruthman Wrote: Certainly the paucity of definitely known evidence of any active hostile acts against us by the intelligences during the 75 years or so since their apparent large-scale investigation and probing began, indicates that they are not hell-bent on rapid violent domination or extermination.

And we have evidence of them checking out and shutting down human nuclear reactors, and that can be interpreted as them looking out for us (and for consequences beyond us). (Not the only intepretation possible, but it's a possible one.)
[-] The following 1 user Likes Ninshub's post:
  • Sciborg_S_Patel
(2022-08-14, 03:39 PM)nbtruthman Wrote: Certainly the paucity of definitely known evidence of any active hostile acts against us by the intelligences during the 75 years or so since their apparent large-scale investigation and probing began, indicates that they are not hell-bent on rapid violent domination or extermination. However, the only actual examples we have of overt large-scale contacts beween cultures of radically different developmental levels is the sorry history of the first contacts of Western European explorers and colonists with the indigenous populations of the New World, Pacific islands, and Australia (and also Africa). The indigenous cultures were rapidly decimated by disease, robbed of their lands, variously exploited for labor, and brainwashed into new and alien to them spiritual belief systems, all ultimately because they had very inferior technology and couldn't effectively fight back.

I think it is very understandable that the military industrial and scientific academic elite of our society might have a little paranoid fear in face of the UFO or UAP technology.

I agree the paranoia is grounded in what we expect. However I disagree that you can draw an equivalence with colonisation - other than the extent of the disconnect between invaders and those invaded, though the gulf of disconnect is greater between ET and human.  We humans are not mere 'savages' or 'primitives' in comparison. The gulf is greater.

There is no clear evidence ET comes from a material culture. More likely not. There are a bunch of resources that suggest that material reality is not the bee's knees we think it is. Check out Robert Monroe's last 2 books for eg.  

There is also nothing in the conduct of ET that suggests any intent to 'take over' beyond the speculations of those who think that a hybridisation program is part of a 'takeover' strategy. But takeover from whom? It's not like humans are in charge - though our adverse impact seems dominant. But that dominance is only in terms of negative outcomes in many respects - and unbalanced favouring of lifeforms that serve our needs. Wheat, corn, carrots, potatoes, dogs, cattle, pigs, grasses etc have done well under our influence. But what does that mean for an ecosystem can a whole?

I can't find an argument against an ET takeover that has any essential detrimental impact other than to diminish human impact - and that's necessarily a bad thing beyond human ego?

I think we need a perspective here. Compared to even what we know about ET on a basic level, we are not peers. On a technological level, as demonstrated by military evidence, we are still at flintlock level compared to 5th Gen hardware. On an intellectual, moral and spiritual level we have no basis for comparison. I have followed the ET/UFO conversation for decades, and there is no evidence of deep insight being publicly provided - beyond gentle moral hints.

I am not suggesting I know anything special. I have a memory of being abducted, but that just traumatised me and fucked me up badly. Maybe that made me more inclined to doubt that standard explanations.  All I can say is that the matter is complex, and is being intentionally obscured - but that's what you get when those who desire power get interrupted. It is knitted into our cultural history.

It is worth observing that ET has no interest at all in acknowledging governments as the supreme authority behalf of humanity. Some ET work with governments for their own purposes, but that does not mean it is a universal or uniform matter. We need to understand that for ET government has the same standing as a formal religion. Here, maybe we move into the area of exopolitics - not something I have bothered with - because the earlier expression was just idiotic. Time to update? Maybe.

I see no evidence that ET is invading in the same manner the UK invaded Australia under the happy flag of 'settlement'. We don't see ET planting flags, and claiming territory with that breathless arrogance of Europeans we are familiar with. In fact I detect a deep sympathy to avoid the catastrophic impact of colonial invasion, with the devastating impact it has had upon the indigenous psyche.

We anglos invaded Australia over 200 years ago, and the trauma and shame persists in catastrophic fashion to this day. I see the hint of deep sensitivity and insight - expressed over 70+ years in modern terms. Would I want to be invaded by folk with such a deep empathic awareness of the existential crisis of an invasion/takeover?

You have a better option? The best we humans can propose is Putin's sensitive humanitarian 'surgical' incursion into Ukraine.
[-] The following 2 users Like Aussie Mike's post:
  • nbtruthman, Ninshub

  • View a Printable Version
Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)