On all of my blogs - I've done the best to feature the `Chemtrail' issue - and I would hope that I wouldn't have to explain the term to UDCC readers. In today's post - I'm going to share multiple `chemtrail' videos from YouTube.
Personally, I've been quite aware of the contrail-chemtrail phenomena since about 1998 or so (some say it began about 1996) - as I suddenly realized that `the skies no longer looked the same' - as they always had. Suddenly, more and more `planes' were seemingly spewing out `something' that didn't dissipate the way the `old' contrails did from jets.
More and more often, on a perfectly clear day with NO marks in the sky, one could see `almost simultaneously' in different parts of the sky `multi planes' suddenly `becoming seen' and `spewing' the familiar concoction that we all have been `inhaling' for almost 15 years now. And, frankly, that is simply IMPOSSIBLE for three or four planes to simultaneously come into view doing the same nefarious thing. (It's just as scary when they start up right next to each other and run a parallel course - OR - when not only two contrails cross, but three or even more (I've seen 3 before).)
Not only that - generally, the MSM (local news) just ignores it - as does the radio news and local newspaper. AND, the local weatherman - weatherwoman --- who with me no longer has ANY trust, as this sky phenomena is way out of normal and should be part of their reporting.
AND, because of that - and because some folks have NO capacity to question ANYTHING - those NOT aware of the phenomena tend to look at those who mention it as being the ones who are NUTS. (A common reaction as why would someone want to be told how UNaware they are.)
So, with that as a backdrop - I will present and comment on a few YouTube Chemtrail videos.
TYPE ONE - THE - `WHERE'S THE CRAFT/PLANE' - CHEMTRAIL
TYPE TWO - THE ORANGE SPRAY `PLANES' (I've seen these and type one too.)
`Theory' Three - The `Planes' Aren't Even Planes (the slippery slope)
Type Four - `Orbs' Near Chemtrails (I've seen this once.)
Finally, the simpleton explanation for the difference between real contrails and real chemtrails.
Now, if you are new to all this stuff - if you search deeper onto the internet - you will find bits and pieces that speak of a government program to do this spraying. I will let that digging to you. ----------- You will also find all kinds of very nefarious reasons for the spraying - from population control to prepping for an alien takeover to preventing the effects of an EMP event to weather control.
And, if you ask me - the most likely are the last two reasons (at least I hope so) - as global warming has plateaued since the start of the chemtrails. And, an EMP event would be the ultimate nightmare for the developed world.
Make sure to vote in the sidebar poll on the top of the page - thanks. If you want to read some great internet sites - visit my blogroll.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Sunday, June 27, 2010
A Respectful Reply To Nick Redfern's `Contactees and the Absurdities of Ufology' Post
This post, originally from Feb. 2010, and on my main Squidoo.com page, - is a copy and paste. I thought I'd bring it today to my UDCC readers as I am removing it from my Squidoo page:
Very recently, Nick Redfern, one of UFO's most respected and thoughtful writers and commentator - wrote a blog piece for a Fortean based website called `Contactees and the Absurdities Of Ufology' (I will have that link at the bottom of this page) - to which I'd like to offer my reply as another UFO and esoteric thought blogger - who also loves the Fortean side of things. And, as my readers know, when dealing with `contactees' and `UFO's' - one can indeed find the type of experiences that fall into what is commonly called `High Strangeness'.
Now, Nick makes several points in his serious post about the UFO devotees of today being `TOO SERIOUS' about the UFO subject matter that first person observation reports include. (Today's devotees wanting to edit out the high strangeness in the past or present reports associated with UFO's.) And that the `contactees' of yesterday were so much more colorful than today's sour-dour abductees by UFO's. Nick makes points about how the whole `contact' with aliens has changed, in his opinion, from 50 or so years ago in the early days of the UFO phenomena, and how a lot of the contactees of yesteryear had links to California and the craziness there by the late 1960's. And, Redfern also points out that the lack of seriousness attitude about UFO's and contactees could at one time attract 1000's - and yet today - with full marketing - today's UFO gatherings, (with alien abductees/contactees) draw 250 persons or so at most. (I have to think that some of this lack of motivational interest to attend these events is our societies desensitization to `alien information' over the last decades via movies and such - and the internet froth about UFO's - and the general wariness of `strange people' - ie:contactees.)
Then, finally, Mr. Redfern tells us of the fact that these `contacts' of men from Venus and such - NEVER occurred (of course?) and that they are similar to the contacts with goblins, gods, angels and fairies of yesterdays by-gone era -- and that these same archetype's will, in Nicks opinion, continue to change from the ones of abduction today - into who knows what in the future.
All in all, the post is a very good review of one of the mind approaches that must be taken - if one is to understand a part of high strangeness - and the possible reality structure in which we reside - which might indeed produce it's own phenomena in relation to mankind's cultural and consciousness level. Heavy Stuff indeed.
To nearly all of which I concur and say - here here.
But, now, I'd like to at least reply to the article directly with my take on various nuances that might be missed or glossed over in Nicks sweeping article about high strangeness - and even comment on a thing or two of his observations in his posting.
And, I guess the first thing I'd like to point out is that nearly the same absurdities are still happening today - with many still receiving messages from the space brothers - either in their brains, in person, or on crafts. (And more than in California or any hot spot and certainly with less LSD in circulation than yesteryear.) And, as is kinda implied in Redferns article, I also think that 99.99 to 100.00% of these encounters are at best `real subjective realities' with probably no real `solidness' in our reality structure. These `rescuers' of humanity - like angels, or men from Venus --- may indeed be some sort of archetype or meme. That said, unlike Nick, I tend to think they are not random in appearance but probably directed by human intentionality's in some manner.
OR, as my regular readers know - I've speculated that BILLION year old beings/entities - that may be biological, (but most likely not) machine, (most probably) or possibly billion year old dimensional entities - who have nothing better to do than interact with `supreme consciousnesses' on a living planet - may be the source of events like these high strangeness contacts.
And, of course, it is also possible, to probable, that our consciousness is part of a `living matrix' of intentionality's, beliefs, and actualizations - that while normally in `common consensus' (where we see normal, everyday, solid objects) -- can indeed be `switched' to a special consensus -- at least FOR PERCEPTION. Or, it is also about equally possible that this matrix we may exist within is not living - is artificial - and we humans may be nothing more than conscious objects/spaces in a `program'. For some reason, humans wish this to not be the case (but would it matter) - clinging to a hopeful sense of freewill in what appears to be a determined world.
So, I count at least 4 ways above that `high strangeness' - has possible `causes' . And, of course, we already know that high strangeness is NOT confined to UFO's in any way. For example, poltergeists could be `ghosts' in high strangeness mode - doppelgangers could be another `high strangeness' form of ghosts too. OR, Bigfoot's tulpas - a temporal shaping of consciousness itself.
I'd also like to challenge an assumption I see often when dredging up the `archetype' ideas (even while I support them in principle) - First, I think that the `seeing' of `hidden playmates' `fairies' goblins and such may not have been at any higher level than that of children today - which often may be a projection of fears or the lack of understanding ones situation. A creation of a reality for coping more or less - and nothing esoteric or even real perception that needs serious study. Indeed, while these things are mentioned - they certainly didn't seem to have the `meaning' ascribed (IMO) that today's seem to suggest. Today's archetypes seem to be talking to humanity via the individuals nowadays as opposed to more of a focused individual lesson in the past. That is - if `high strangeness is attributed to archetypes.
Frankly, overall, Nick and I have been talking about only one kind of high strangeness too - and IT - may have nothing to do with `our reality' at all. By that I mean - all these goblins and such - men from Venus and such - are seemingly coming from OUTSIDE of the timecone we reside within. And, only for a temporal period - when they are perceivable. And, frankly, it's a mixing of apple and oranges - because - what folks really want to talk about and believe in - when thinking about aliens and such - are aliens that are within the timecone and exist as real solid bodies with space and individuals like you and I. NOT as a meme, temporal character or tulpa.
So, part of my point is that we do not throw out the baby with the bath water. Yes, UFO's - and Bigfoot's - and Ghosts - and Goblins - and Angels - And Demons - And even concepts like Evil and perhaps Love - do seemingly exist and influence humans from beyond the timecone.
But, I plead the case that we do not throw out the potential for real phenomenological aliens, within a craft, that is not hyper-dimensional in any way - and simply end up ascribing all phenomena to temporary `non-realish' phenomena. Not when potential `living locations' may exist within our solar system if not Earth itself (and actually, any location could be developed by an advanced universe traveling group with superior technology) - for example under the oceans or underground or in very remote locations. Or, aliens able to simply employ `invisibleness' when needed.
Lets also not throw out UFO's being more real than archetypes for this reason -- if we are to believe that the `Skinwalker Ranch' had portals to another dimension - and that `portals' exist -- then we certainly do NOT need Archetypes for any significant explanation of UFO's specifically. And, indeed, if we looked more closely at the physics of `portals' - as opposed to the legends of antiquity or meme's of modern-day - we might be closer to the aliens that really matter to humans on Earth.
Here's that link for Nicks post - http://www.forteanswest.com/lowfiguesteditorial-NickRedfern0210.html
My main page on Squidoo.com - www.squidoo.com/anomalyman
The Many Forms Of High Strangeness
Very recently, Nick Redfern, one of UFO's most respected and thoughtful writers and commentator - wrote a blog piece for a Fortean based website called `Contactees and the Absurdities Of Ufology' (I will have that link at the bottom of this page) - to which I'd like to offer my reply as another UFO and esoteric thought blogger - who also loves the Fortean side of things. And, as my readers know, when dealing with `contactees' and `UFO's' - one can indeed find the type of experiences that fall into what is commonly called `High Strangeness'.
Now, Nick makes several points in his serious post about the UFO devotees of today being `TOO SERIOUS' about the UFO subject matter that first person observation reports include. (Today's devotees wanting to edit out the high strangeness in the past or present reports associated with UFO's.) And that the `contactees' of yesterday were so much more colorful than today's sour-dour abductees by UFO's. Nick makes points about how the whole `contact' with aliens has changed, in his opinion, from 50 or so years ago in the early days of the UFO phenomena, and how a lot of the contactees of yesteryear had links to California and the craziness there by the late 1960's. And, Redfern also points out that the lack of seriousness attitude about UFO's and contactees could at one time attract 1000's - and yet today - with full marketing - today's UFO gatherings, (with alien abductees/contactees) draw 250 persons or so at most. (I have to think that some of this lack of motivational interest to attend these events is our societies desensitization to `alien information' over the last decades via movies and such - and the internet froth about UFO's - and the general wariness of `strange people' - ie:contactees.)
Then, finally, Mr. Redfern tells us of the fact that these `contacts' of men from Venus and such - NEVER occurred (of course?) and that they are similar to the contacts with goblins, gods, angels and fairies of yesterdays by-gone era -- and that these same archetype's will, in Nicks opinion, continue to change from the ones of abduction today - into who knows what in the future.
All in all, the post is a very good review of one of the mind approaches that must be taken - if one is to understand a part of high strangeness - and the possible reality structure in which we reside - which might indeed produce it's own phenomena in relation to mankind's cultural and consciousness level. Heavy Stuff indeed.
To nearly all of which I concur and say - here here.
But, now, I'd like to at least reply to the article directly with my take on various nuances that might be missed or glossed over in Nicks sweeping article about high strangeness - and even comment on a thing or two of his observations in his posting.
And, I guess the first thing I'd like to point out is that nearly the same absurdities are still happening today - with many still receiving messages from the space brothers - either in their brains, in person, or on crafts. (And more than in California or any hot spot and certainly with less LSD in circulation than yesteryear.) And, as is kinda implied in Redferns article, I also think that 99.99 to 100.00% of these encounters are at best `real subjective realities' with probably no real `solidness' in our reality structure. These `rescuers' of humanity - like angels, or men from Venus --- may indeed be some sort of archetype or meme. That said, unlike Nick, I tend to think they are not random in appearance but probably directed by human intentionality's in some manner.
OR, as my regular readers know - I've speculated that BILLION year old beings/entities - that may be biological, (but most likely not) machine, (most probably) or possibly billion year old dimensional entities - who have nothing better to do than interact with `supreme consciousnesses' on a living planet - may be the source of events like these high strangeness contacts.
And, of course, it is also possible, to probable, that our consciousness is part of a `living matrix' of intentionality's, beliefs, and actualizations - that while normally in `common consensus' (where we see normal, everyday, solid objects) -- can indeed be `switched' to a special consensus -- at least FOR PERCEPTION. Or, it is also about equally possible that this matrix we may exist within is not living - is artificial - and we humans may be nothing more than conscious objects/spaces in a `program'. For some reason, humans wish this to not be the case (but would it matter) - clinging to a hopeful sense of freewill in what appears to be a determined world.
So, I count at least 4 ways above that `high strangeness' - has possible `causes' . And, of course, we already know that high strangeness is NOT confined to UFO's in any way. For example, poltergeists could be `ghosts' in high strangeness mode - doppelgangers could be another `high strangeness' form of ghosts too. OR, Bigfoot's tulpas - a temporal shaping of consciousness itself.
I'd also like to challenge an assumption I see often when dredging up the `archetype' ideas (even while I support them in principle) - First, I think that the `seeing' of `hidden playmates' `fairies' goblins and such may not have been at any higher level than that of children today - which often may be a projection of fears or the lack of understanding ones situation. A creation of a reality for coping more or less - and nothing esoteric or even real perception that needs serious study. Indeed, while these things are mentioned - they certainly didn't seem to have the `meaning' ascribed (IMO) that today's seem to suggest. Today's archetypes seem to be talking to humanity via the individuals nowadays as opposed to more of a focused individual lesson in the past. That is - if `high strangeness is attributed to archetypes.
Frankly, overall, Nick and I have been talking about only one kind of high strangeness too - and IT - may have nothing to do with `our reality' at all. By that I mean - all these goblins and such - men from Venus and such - are seemingly coming from OUTSIDE of the timecone we reside within. And, only for a temporal period - when they are perceivable. And, frankly, it's a mixing of apple and oranges - because - what folks really want to talk about and believe in - when thinking about aliens and such - are aliens that are within the timecone and exist as real solid bodies with space and individuals like you and I. NOT as a meme, temporal character or tulpa.
So, part of my point is that we do not throw out the baby with the bath water. Yes, UFO's - and Bigfoot's - and Ghosts - and Goblins - and Angels - And Demons - And even concepts like Evil and perhaps Love - do seemingly exist and influence humans from beyond the timecone.
But, I plead the case that we do not throw out the potential for real phenomenological aliens, within a craft, that is not hyper-dimensional in any way - and simply end up ascribing all phenomena to temporary `non-realish' phenomena. Not when potential `living locations' may exist within our solar system if not Earth itself (and actually, any location could be developed by an advanced universe traveling group with superior technology) - for example under the oceans or underground or in very remote locations. Or, aliens able to simply employ `invisibleness' when needed.
Lets also not throw out UFO's being more real than archetypes for this reason -- if we are to believe that the `Skinwalker Ranch' had portals to another dimension - and that `portals' exist -- then we certainly do NOT need Archetypes for any significant explanation of UFO's specifically. And, indeed, if we looked more closely at the physics of `portals' - as opposed to the legends of antiquity or meme's of modern-day - we might be closer to the aliens that really matter to humans on Earth.
Here's that link for Nicks post - http://www.forteanswest.com/lowfiguesteditorial-NickRedfern0210.html
My main page on Squidoo.com - www.squidoo.com/anomalyman
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
A Great UFO Read - And, Jupiter For Your Desk
AMAZON PRODUCTS THAT SUPPORT THIS WEBSITE - A FLOATING ORB BLUETOOTH SPEAKER - AND MORE
