Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Better late than never: aboutSETI.com has posted my latest ufological what-if.
Posted by at
Labels:

27 comments:

Anonymous said...

Pointless and unwanted speculation.

Your 'ideas' aren't even unique but seems to be a rip off of what Phil Corso spoke about, about the 'black eyes' of the aliens being nothing more than a highly advanced contact lense that allows them to see in the dark.

12:51 PM
Tristan Eldritch said...

The origin of the iconic, minimalist alien visage is a facinating subject. I'm not so sure it can be written off as a media caricature, though. I thought the media more or less got that image from artist impressions, abductee reports, ect., with previous Hollywood representations of the alien being far more florid and detailed. The alien face is weirdly simplified, a little like primitive art. It also kind've reminds me of Edward Munch's The Scream. Anyways, your guess is as good as mine!

2:21 PM
Anonymous said...

"Pointless and unwanted speculation."

Hmmm. I sense here an interloper using the familiar anon non-identity of late. I'll bite: don't you mean pointless and unwarranted?

And, if not, maybe you should note your objections in a more coherent manner--I kind of doubt Mac is either ripping off or channeling Corso--wouldn't "black eye" contacts shade incoming light, not allow one to see better at night? Well, unless they're the deluxe variety that functions in both day and night: alien "adjustalenses."

Further, most reports, from both day and night sightings or encounters note a continuity of very dark or black eyes, regardless of light conditions. While I personally consider such "gray alien" incidents rather dubious in their particulars, the overall idea Mac was expressing, which does have validity, is how oddly stereotypical or almost too blandly, overly "smooth" the facial appearance of these "beings" are--this would indeed suggest a form of either "hallucinatory" or perhaps projected image meant as a form of both possible disguise and for some greater degree of synthesized "familiarity" than what may lie behind the "mask."

While "alien encounters" and especially "alien abductions" have many deeply problematical elements that relate to human psychology, in some cases of alleged contact, where more than one witness is involved, the uniformity and nearly archetypal "sleekness" combined with a humanoid appearance to some degree must be a postmodern confabulation or synthesis of being exposed within the culture to so many similar accounts over time, or, if "real," the use of such mechanisms to tap into human psychology for somewhat less of a "shock effect." Any way you look at it, it's pretty damn strange.

One thing I'm interested in are accounts where some have had some kind of encounter, but the "entities" perceived are completely unlike the "standard model" gray noted above. Talk about weird, and even more inexplicable--makes me wonder if sometimes the "mask" is dropped, and if so, why?

3:25 PM
Anonymous said...

'Intense' :

Mac isn't an abductee and doesn't work with abductees.

Enough said.

I'm pretty sure the same applies to you as well.

5:31 PM
Anonymous said...

"...about the 'black eyes' of the aliens being nothing more than a highly advanced contact lense..."

"Mac isn't an abductee and doesn't work with abductees.

"Enough said.

"I'm pretty sure the same applies to you as well."

Um, OK. No, I don't work with and am not an abductee, as far as I know. Are you suggesting that since I'm not, and I would guess the same is true for Mac, that this somehow disqualifies from comment, as noted above?

In other words, what are you actually saying? What do you think the "big black eyes" in some encounter or abduction accounts mean or refer to? Just curious.

c: "nueriest"

7:21 PM
Bruce Duensing said...

In this culture, experience has been homogenized by edict courtesy of the psychiatric culture.You are only allowed to experience what the majority does, otherwise you are stereotyped, classified and disconfirmed. No one knows what this experience represents in terms of terms we have yet to establish as there is no measurability we can apply, whether it is "advanced contact lenses" or an induced non local experience. What is clear we have recurring, patterned scenarios of an experience lodged between a lucid dream and a empirical reality. Anyone's guess if fair game.

9:04 AM
Anonymous said...

I reread anon's comments above today, and realized the implication of the speaker is that, unlike apparently me or Mac, who do not claim either personal or direct "alien contact," nor, I assume, any extensive dealings with self-identified "abductees," that the comments of anon might be based on his (or her) own experience or knowledge of the subject. While I don't claim my comments are inclusive, and that such an objectified "alien appearance" is wholly cultural or psychological in nature, I do believe in large part it may very well be.

Regardless, since it's just my current opinion, based on my own research, objectively I would also say I'm open to new or substantiated data that may contradict my point of view, which is why I was asking anon to be somewhat more forthcoming, and less obliquely dismissive.

If so, it would be interesting, as I had requested, for anon to say at least something, preferably in some comfortable level of detail, just what his objections to either my or Mac's comments are in regard to the "big black eyes" being potentially memetic or cultural in origin or nature--and I would also note such opinion does not disqualify either of us, or our take, from comment on the issue.

I should also add I appreciate Bruce Duensing's usually erudite comments, although I sometimes have difficulty following the complexity of his language and related extrapolations on his recommended blog, "Intangible Materiality" which is at:

www.materialintangible.blogspot.com

Bruce often has valuable and insightful things to say that touch upon the ufo phenomena from a very interesting and somewhat esoteric point of view, and that also weave historical traditions and philosophical perspectives into the mix of his posts.

From his blog overview:

"The purpose of this blog is inseparable from my fascination with conceptual models of reality in terms of the relationships between experiential paranormality and the systemization of
of the context from which they appear. As an autistic, these equations of reality are frames by which I explore facets of an unknown nature that is more of a potentiality than an objectified certainty."

4:52 PM
Anonymous said...

Intense:

Mac and yourself are nothing more than arm-chair theorists.

You spout 'opinions' and mistake them for proven facts and then pat each other on the back.

Have fun with your little 'circle-jerk'.

Otherwise, if you aren't truly investigating the phenomena, let alone an experiencer of the phenomena, then your opinion isn't worth jack.

11:19 PM
Anonymous said...

OK, "anonymous." Let's play.

First, can I assume that you are not, yourself, an "arm-chair theorist"?

That you know what the "proven facts" are in regard to why the most common, archetypal visage shown to witnesses in the largest proportion of close encounter cases of the third kind, using Vallee's revised Hynek scale, are of a short, grey alien with very large, ovoid, black eyes?

That you have either personally investigated the phenomena, and/or may be either an "alien abductee" or witness to an "alien entity" of the type noted above? If so, please educate us with either your knowledge, experience, or wealth of facts in any case you have personally been involved in.

I really would like to know, and learn, if you are willing and able to provide relevant, pertinent information in these regards.

If so, and you do, then I will inform you, in turn, of my own experience, research, and long-term investigative background, which you incorrectly presume is somehow either absent or inadequate to even comment on the matter at issue.

So, now it's your turn. Play fair, and well. Or, if not, simply shut up and go away if you have nothing substantive and informative to say or offer.

The ball is now in your court.

2:58 AM
Bruce Duensing said...

I tend to think everything is a red herring. My own inclination is that these hobgoblins are synthetic. The experiments are not "real", they are perhaps staged tests of a psychological nature using human subjects to test how threat (on various levels) is processed and integrated (or not). The "genetic " or "physical" experiments are non nonsensical in of themselves. Then again, I could be seeing faces in the tree bark. Without some self skepticism all this is a twice told tale.

11:57 AM
Anonymous said...

Absurd Intense:

"That ball is now in your court"

LOL...

Pseudo-intellectual arm-chair theorists are funny, even more so when they begin to believe their own b.s.

12:39 PM
Bruce Duensing said...

Anonymous,

Do you have a theory or one you are inclined toward? Or do you believe this is all a fantasy? Outside of aggressive and defensive insults, I have yet to read anything vaguely approaching a productive opinion, unless you are inferring that "name calling" is an intellectual expression of a opinion, which is rather funny in of itself as a measurement of coherency.

1:01 PM
Anonymous said...

Dear anon...

Good and well meaning people are reaching out to you. By all means, please participate in any all discussions or comments, the more the merrier as they say. But at the same time, please put some meat on 'dem bones, give the rest of us some substance to chew on and identify yourself at least with an alias. It's after all, the right thing to do. Otherwise I think you run the risk of diminishing your position as a minor irritant into becoming totally and transparently irrelevant to any future conversation.

Come and go in peace my brother, or sister as the case may be.

Michael

3:47 PM
Anonymous said...

Bruce & Michael:

I believe it is pointless to sit in a chair and create 'opinions' about what the phenomena may or may not be, especialy if one isn't involved in the phenomena as in being an abductee, or involved in researching it.

So what we have here is one arm-chair theorist being stroked by a few other arm-chair theorists, never mind that said opinion is useless and does nothing to add to our knowledge of the phenomena.

Thus: Have fun with your circle jerk, boys.

6:25 PM
Anonymous said...

Anon...

Then please help enlighten us by sharing your knowledge of the phenomena of which you speak.

"never mind that said opinion is useless and does nothing to add to our knowledge of the phenomena."

...or is that just your opinion? If you have more than an opinion to offer, but instead have hard information/proof concerning the phenomena please bring it to the table.

Otherwise if you have nothing further to actually add, I'm afraid your opinion about the opinions of others is pointless, and at least in this instance, vulgar and rude.

Of course, that's just my opinion.

Michael

8:39 PM
Anonymous said...

Michael:

Useless.

"nothing further to add"????

You mean to criticize my critique of you guys 'blowing smoke rings'?

LOL...

You're a ghost Mike. From what I've read on this blog, there is nothing here to warrent the attention it is getting. Nor is there any indication you have anything useful to add to our understanding of the UFO and Alien Abduction Phenomena.

I'm sorry Mike, Tonnies, and others. Unless you are willing to get your hands dirty (actually investigate the phenomena), then your so-called 'opinions' are nothing more than will-o'-the-wisps. And just like the mysterious lights that lead travelers astray, that's the outcme you will have, -mesmirizing people with your fake errie glow while at the same time making them become hopelessly lost and mired down in the muck.

I think it's time for you, and the others, to crawl out of the swamp.

12:08 PM
Anonymous said...

Anonymous’ comments would be slightly amusing or perhaps more annoying if they weren’t so sad, in a self-reflective kind of way.

Even after repeated invitations to provide any counter-point or argument based on some kind of logic, or content, he is seemingly either unable or unwilling to do so. He’s now become tedious, and repetitious, in his continued feeble assault on others here, via ad hominems and sleazy, self-revealing, onanistic references to “circle jerks,” muck, and our supposed need to “crawl out of the swamp.” What a pity, for him.

Even after I suggested, as noted above, “I really would like to know, and learn, if you are willing and able to provide relevant, pertinent information in these regards.

”If so, and you do, then I will inform you, in turn, of my own experience, research, and long-term investigative background, which you incorrectly presume is somehow either absent or inadequate to even comment on the matter at issue,” he can’t bring himself to engage in any kind of civil discourse, obtusely resorting again to juvenile comments that have no place here.

Slightly fascinating were his repeated comments that “if you aren't truly investigating the phenomena, let alone an experiencer of the phenomena, then your opinion isn't worth jack” and “it is pointless to sit in a chair and create 'opinions' about what the phenomena may or may not be, especialy if one isn't involved in the phenomena as in being an abductee, or involved in researching it.”

This strange little mantra of anon’s, of course, ignores what I said earlier, and suggests arrogantly that, at least in my case, that I (or presumably others here) have no basis for an opinion, since anon falsely assumes I have no background as a field investigator, researcher, or experiencer. He is wrong on all three counts.

But, I have no need to document my credentials to an obvious fool—he was given more than sufficient chance to respond intelligently, and has failed miserably.

Since he can only continue to spew silly, absurd insults, and has nothing concrete or informational to offer, he shows, by his own loutish behavior, that he is just another typical, although more amateurish and immature than most, kind of stupid internet troll who seeks some sick self-aggrandizing egoboost or pathological thrill by inadequately attempting to put down others, claiming some transparently grandiose authority without any evidence for same, and thus ends up impugning and evaporating any potential credibility he might have otherwise offered.

His primary intent, it seems, is to try and make people angry, and draw them out in some manner to refute his idiotic, puerile statements. How boring, and almost criminally, repetitiously obvious that is. Been there, done that. Yawn. He can't even spell correctly. So, he’s not only wrong, self-incriminating, and simply a dumb netjerk, he doesn’t have anything to say to back up his oh-so-mysterious and confused point of view. There’s no there, there. A mental, ethical, moral, and emotional void, or black hole. And that really is tragic, but unfortunately all too common.

So, anon, I think I'm done with you. You've so effectively undermined and contradicted yourself by your own words that no one could make you look like any bigger a fool than you already have. And if anyone is lost, or mired in muck within their own swampy "mind" or soul, it is, indeed, you.

I advise you to seek therapy, and the proper prescriptions, as needed. I'd avoid any regressive hypnosis, though--that would only make you believe your own bullshit even more than you do now. Look into cognitive behavioral therapy--it's all about correcting your kind of dysfunctional rage. Get some help, please.

Next?

5:52 PM
Mac said...

Fortunately I don't get too many trolls here (knock wood). Trying to engage one in actual discourse is, of course, about as promising as having a friendly chat with a spambot.

6:00 PM
Anonymous said...

Mac:

Nice try. Unfortunately, you can't dismiss criticism as coming from a 'troll'. That play don't fly in the world of publishing, nor should it in the world of blogging.

Feel free to continue with what you call 'blogging', posting one or two sentences and then providing a link to articles that other people have written, as well as occasionaly throwing out a pointless 'opinion'.

7:51 PM
Anonymous said...

Michael:

11 paragraphs of b.s. doens't make it stink less (Your responce above).

The criticism still stands. This particular blog is nothing but pointless speculation that does nothing to further the knowledge of the UFO or Alien Abduction phenomena.

Enough said. You can't counter because this particular blog is built on quick-sand. You are acting like throwing a handfull of hay in a puddle is going to prevent your feet from getting wet when you step in it. -POINTLESS.

Challenge: Get out of the mud.

7:56 PM
Anonymous said...

Mac:

You need to step up your game because your blog lists you as being a futurist, among other self-given titles.

I frequent blogs of true futurists, artists & individuals who do not cram their blogs with multiple and meaningless posts, especialy posts that do not express one's own voice.

My advice:

1.) Write articles and post them to your blog. This should be the 'main course' and not the tooth-pick and napkin that you now serve.

2.) If you don't feel like blogging, then don't. Some of the most genius of blog-owners often go a month or so without any new material. This is more desirable than trying to cram your blogs with pointless material.

The advice above is what is called 'criticism' and you should be lucky that you are getting it.

Apparantly you are surrounded by people who constantly pat you on the back, which only serves to keep you at the mediocre level.

Step up your game.

8:05 PM
Anonymous said...

One gentle aside (not that you deserve it), anon: if you're going to take the time to count the number of paragraphs (incorrectly, btw) of a response to your droolery, at least address your complaint to the right person--that was me, not Michael. He's much more polite than I am. You dumb bozoid troll.8^}

And you also expect us to take you seriously on subjects like blogging, criticism, publishing, etc., when you seem to have a hard time even constructing a syntactically and grammatically correct sentence? Bwa. Ha. Ha.

Hey, finally, get a clue: a blog is whatever the owner wants it to be, not what some dull interloper like you says it should be. Start your own damn blog, if you can figure out how to. Loser.

10:17 PM
Anonymous said...

Intesne:

This is pointless. It's like trying to sign to a gorrila, but you ain't Koko.

Advice: Class...get some.

[Intese will then reply with a half-ass attempt at trollish put-downs and then I will have to put him in his place again. Repeat to infinity.]

11:42 PM
Anonymous said...

Final comment:

Hilarious. Almost. You are the very thing of which you attempt to speak. Try looking in any mirrors, lately?

You couldn't put a children's spelling block in it's proper place, let alone me, no matter how hard you tried: see, for example, how twice in one comment you spelled "intense," boy wonder.

Just remember how this all started, you presumptuous "circle jerk." I think you're done here. I know I am, as far as you're concerned. You had your chance, and you blew it, repeatedly. Get a life. Elsewhere.

I know there must be a metaphorical hovel under a net "troll bridge" to nowhere, somewhere, just waiting for you. Go find it, and leave others here alone. You will be ignored from now on.

7:01 AM
Clover said...

This is really a great read for me. Thank you for publishing articles having a great insight stimulates me to check more often for new write ups. Keep posting!

Clover
www.n8fan.net

11:34 PM
Clover said...

This is really a great read for me. Thank you for publishing articles having a great insight stimulates me to check more often for new write ups. Keep posting!

Clover
www.n8fan.net

11:38 PM
c2 said...

Nice post.Thank you for taking the time to publish this information. great written!

www.joeydavila.net

8:48 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)