Comments on: The Song of the Greys http://www.ufomystic.com/2007/12/17/the-song-of-the-greys/ UFO News, Views, and More Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:41:21 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: crispy http://www.ufomystic.com/2007/12/17/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4903 crispy Sun, 10 Feb 2008 02:55:58 +0000 http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4903 Hi! I just joined and hope I am not too late to add a comment. The idea that Greys may be creations of our own is very interesting, and I never considered that. It does relate in many ways to other entities that we have created and give life to through emotion and mass-consciousness (thought + emotion = creation),. Whether it applies to Greys I don't know. To say that because they come from our (logical)mind they have no power is incorrect, I think. We are creative beings and we create without realizing it much of the time. When we create, however we create, we give real life and energy to these creations and so they do have the ability to impact ourselves and our world. Even if what we create exists in a different dimension, one which we may interact with but cannot see regularly, a creation will still have positive or negative impacts on us because once they are created they exist just as a new-born child exists. All they require is more belief in them (thought is energy) and they may even harvest energy from our auras, our bodies and our world to exist. If nothing else, life covets life and will do whatever it needs to (in most cases) to maintain and secure itself. So if these Greys are really our projections then they are real, and being spawned by us will look to us to advance and secure their future. Just a thought. Not sure how it helps but it's fun to discuss and share ideas. Hi! I just joined and hope I am not too late to add a comment. The idea that Greys may be creations of our own is very interesting, and I never considered that. It does relate in many ways to other entities that we have created and give life to through emotion and mass-consciousness (thought + emotion = creation),. Whether it applies to Greys I don’t know. To say that because they come from our (logical)mind they have no power is incorrect, I think. We are creative beings and we create without realizing it much of the time. When we create, however we create, we give real life and energy to these creations and so they do have the ability to impact ourselves and our world. Even if what we create exists in a different dimension, one which we may interact with but cannot see regularly, a creation will still have positive or negative impacts on us because once they are created they exist just as a new-born child exists. All they require is more belief in them (thought is energy) and they may even harvest energy from our auras, our bodies and our world to exist. If nothing else, life covets life and will do whatever it needs to (in most cases) to maintain and secure itself. So if these Greys are really our projections then they are real, and being spawned by us will look to us to advance and secure their future.

Just a thought. Not sure how it helps but it’s fun to discuss and share ideas.

]]> By: The_Sage http://www.ufomystic.com/2007/12/17/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4390 The_Sage Tue, 01 Jan 2008 01:55:59 +0000 http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4390 "To assert that a new abduction story or two is going to prove your case beggars belief" In other words, you were unable to find any examples of any new abduction stories from Nigel that we have not heard before. Thank you for proving my point. “To assert that a new abduction story or two is going to prove your case beggars belief”

In other words, you were unable to find any examples of any new abduction stories from Nigel that we have not heard before. Thank you for proving my point.

]]> By: MikeT http://www.ufomystic.com/2007/12/17/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4379 MikeT Mon, 31 Dec 2007 15:44:29 +0000 http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4379 Really sage. How does one take you seriously. To assert that a new abduction story or two is going to prove your case beggars belief. I gave your intellect the benefit of the doubt up to now but I’m afraid I seem to have given it too much attention. You don’t seem to be able to address the point I am making. I say again, READ THE BOOK. You will see it is NOT only about abduction stories or people who want to be abducted or people who seem to be hung up on them. It simply views the overwhelming numbers of consistencies that interlace so many abduction stories and examines what it might all refer to in consequence. The book is far far more than abduction stories. It is a comprehensive and radically different insight into what has given rise to everything that is around us all. If you do finally get round to actually reading the book as Nick Redfern has done with such perspicacity you too might be able to bring out insights that might just take us all a bit further in trying to understand and explain the UFO/Abduction phenomenon better. Kerner never claims he’s the final and definite version of all truth. Quite the opposite. He lays down the options brilliantly and asks you to be the judge while offering his own preferred view. Something we are all entitled to do. I have to admit to being a bit piqued at seemingly defending this work. But with respect ‘sage’ your answers point you to being a rather recalcitrant schoolboy/girl rather than a sagacious and informed source. You seem to want to believe a great deal to be able to doubt so much, especially as you doubt so much by grabbing the wrong end of the stick. Having said this I wish you well for the coming year. Perhaps it might include a few dollars spent on this book!!! Really sage. How does one take you seriously. To assert that a new abduction story or two is going to prove your case beggars belief. I gave your intellect the benefit of the doubt up to now but I’m afraid I seem to have given it too much attention. You don’t seem to be able to address the point I am making. I say again, READ THE BOOK. You will see it is NOT only about abduction stories or people who want to be abducted or people who seem to be hung up on them. It simply views the overwhelming numbers of consistencies that interlace so many abduction stories and examines what it might all refer to in consequence. The book is far far more than abduction stories. It is a comprehensive and radically different insight into what has given rise to everything that is around us all. If you do finally get round to actually reading the book as Nick Redfern has done with such perspicacity you too might be able to bring out insights that might just take us all a bit further in trying to understand and explain the UFO/Abduction phenomenon better. Kerner never claims he’s the final and definite version of all truth. Quite the opposite. He lays down the options brilliantly and asks you to be the judge while offering his own preferred view. Something we are all entitled to do. I have to admit to being a bit piqued at seemingly defending this work. But with respect ‘sage’ your answers point you to being a rather recalcitrant schoolboy/girl rather than a sagacious and informed source. You seem to want to believe a great deal to be able to doubt so much, especially as you doubt so much by grabbing the wrong end of the stick. Having said this I wish you well for the coming year. Perhaps it might include a few dollars spent on this book!!!

]]> By: The_Sage http://www.ufomystic.com/2007/12/17/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4377 The_Sage Mon, 31 Dec 2007 02:02:27 +0000 http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4377 If all the old abduction stories -- which number in the hundreds of thousands -- are not enough for Nigel to make a case to stand on, how is one or two allegedly new stories going to change all that past history? It cannot change past history and that is not clairvoyance, that is common logical sense. Please feel free to point out any "new" and never-before-released-to-the-public abduction stories then, and prove me wrong. Now is your chance. Your inability to do so will be enough to prove your argument to be flawed. If all the old abduction stories — which number in the hundreds of thousands — are not enough for Nigel to make a case to stand on, how is one or two allegedly new stories going to change all that past history? It cannot change past history and that is not clairvoyance, that is common logical sense.

Please feel free to point out any “new” and never-before-released-to-the-public abduction stories then, and prove me wrong. Now is your chance. Your inability to do so will be enough to prove your argument to be flawed.

]]> By: MikeT http://www.ufomystic.com/2007/12/17/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4372 MikeT Sat, 29 Dec 2007 21:27:29 +0000 http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4372 I don't want to get into defending a particular book or author but hey, how do you do this clairvoyant bit where you can know that there’s nothing new in a book without having read it? Is it all part of being a Sage? I had to use the old-fashioned approach and read the actual pages of the book. I don’t want to get into defending a particular book or author but hey, how do you do this clairvoyant bit where you can know that there’s nothing new in a book without having read it? Is it all part of being a Sage? I had to use the old-fashioned approach and read the actual pages of the book.

]]> By: The_Sage http://www.ufomystic.com/2007/12/17/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4364 The_Sage Sat, 29 Dec 2007 06:51:45 +0000 http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4364 I can make judgments without reading the book because Nigel Kerner does not have any original information that we have not already heard before. It is the same ol' stories -- everyone of them. None of the information we or Nigel have has ever been verified or conclusive, so Nigel's book also cannot be verified or conclusive. Like I said before, if there is any chance the visitors are real, I would rather keep my mind fresh and open to interacting with them as guests to our planet, rather than have my mind already falsely made up to what they are like, and either have to undo all that I have poisoned my mind with, or miss out on what could have potentially been a great relationship due to ingrained prejudice. I am glad you made it clear that the visitors are not necessarily evil but could simply be ignorant of what pain and suffering are. Still, the problem with that interpretation is, as David M. Jacobs states, that the visitors have always followed up to any and all pain and suffering with a mind scan to anesthetize the pain and suffering, and then they erase the memory of the event altogether. The pain and suffering have been addressed so thoroughly, that it can only be very rarely known in hindsight via hypnosis or as a distant and unreal memory. If the visitors actually existed outside of our imaginations and they were like the vast majority of descriptions told of them, I would not be afraid of the visitors performing any kind of "operation" on me since anyone who has ever reported an abduction has never been subjected to any lasting physical or psychological trauma or harm, unlike what real physical trauma or harm would do. I can make judgments without reading the book because Nigel Kerner does not have any original information that we have not already heard before. It is the same ol’ stories — everyone of them. None of the information we or Nigel have has ever been verified or conclusive, so Nigel’s book also cannot be verified or conclusive. Like I said before, if there is any chance the visitors are real, I would rather keep my mind fresh and open to interacting with them as guests to our planet, rather than have my mind already falsely made up to what they are like, and either have to undo all that I have poisoned my mind with, or miss out on what could have potentially been a great relationship due to ingrained prejudice.

I am glad you made it clear that the visitors are not necessarily evil but could simply be ignorant of what pain and suffering are. Still, the problem with that interpretation is, as David M. Jacobs states, that the visitors have always followed up to any and all pain and suffering with a mind scan to anesthetize the pain and suffering, and then they erase the memory of the event altogether. The pain and suffering have been addressed so thoroughly, that it can only be very rarely known in hindsight via hypnosis or as a distant and unreal memory. If the visitors actually existed outside of our imaginations and they were like the vast majority of descriptions told of them, I would not be afraid of the visitors performing any kind of “operation” on me since anyone who has ever reported an abduction has never been subjected to any lasting physical or psychological trauma or harm, unlike what real physical trauma or harm would do.

]]> By: MikeT http://www.ufomystic.com/2007/12/17/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4352 MikeT Fri, 28 Dec 2007 16:22:51 +0000 http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4352 Sage, rather than going on second hand reports I think you’d actually have to read the book to be able to make the comments you are making because as you say: “if we don’t know something then it is irrelevant to state anything at all about it”!!!!!! But seriously, I did not get the impression that Kerner was filtering the evidence. His standpoint was simply that if there is any truth at all to the thousands of reports given by abductees of the Greys’ callous disregard for human discomfort then if they ARE capable of this in so many reports many of which come from reliable down-to-earth witnesses, then there is cause for concern. Even if there are cases of apparent benevolence from the Greys this need not be inconsistent with an agenda to use human beings as experimental subjects i.e. It is in the interests of the lab technician to take good care of his rats. Before the horror of the Nazi holocaust became startlingly apparent many people ignored the ‘rumours’ and nothing was done, same in Rwanda. As far as I can see all Kerner is saying is look at the evidence thus far and consider it. Hatemongering doesn’t come into it as he certainly does not make the Greys out to be comic book ‘baddies’. He suggests that any apparent evil they show is not really a malicious intent it’s just that as robotic machines they don’t and can’t know any better. You really can’t make any judgments without reading the book. My girlfriend recommended it to me and to be honest I was pretty cynical before I read it. Since then my now dog-eared copy has been lent out three times and, from the feedback I’ve got, did not disappoint. Sage, rather than going on second hand reports I think you’d actually have to read the book to be able to make the comments you are making because as you say: “if we don’t know something then it is irrelevant to state anything at all about it”!!!!!!
But seriously, I did not get the impression that Kerner was filtering the evidence. His standpoint was simply that if there is any truth at all to the thousands of reports given by abductees of the Greys’ callous disregard for human discomfort then if they ARE capable of this in so many reports many of which come from reliable down-to-earth witnesses, then there is cause for concern. Even if there are cases of apparent benevolence from the Greys this need not be inconsistent with an agenda to use human beings as experimental subjects i.e. It is in the interests of the lab technician to take good care of his rats.
Before the horror of the Nazi holocaust became startlingly apparent many people ignored the ‘rumours’ and nothing was done, same in Rwanda. As far as I can see all Kerner is saying is look at the evidence thus far and consider it. Hatemongering doesn’t come into it as he certainly does not make the Greys out to be comic book ‘baddies’. He suggests that any apparent evil they show is not really a malicious intent it’s just that as robotic machines they don’t and can’t know any better.
You really can’t make any judgments without reading the book. My girlfriend recommended it to me and to be honest I was pretty cynical before I read it. Since then my now dog-eared copy has been lent out three times and, from the feedback I’ve got, did not disappoint.

]]> By: The_Sage http://www.ufomystic.com/2007/12/17/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4331 The_Sage Sun, 23 Dec 2007 18:26:27 +0000 http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4331 Why are these kind of discussions always about something that is "in a book" and never in real life? A book is not evidence of the topic discussed anymore than a report is evidence of the thing reported. Just because a storytale is compelling is not evidence the storytale is true or factual. One thing you need to look for when reading any book or report is, did the author filter the evidence? In the case of Nigel, the answer is yes. There *are* just as many storytales of aliens doing benevolent things for people as there are evil ones. There are storytales of aliens healing people or saving them and their pets from certain disasters. Leaving these storytales out is intellectually dishonest because it amounts to what you do not know we will not tell you or of picking and choosing only the facts that support your opinions and ignoring all others. The fact that there are just as many tales of benevolence as there are of harm is evidence that the subject is in dispute and has insufficient data to reach any logical conclusions. Just because we don't know something is no license to let one's imagination run amuck. If we don't know something then it is irrelevant to state *anything* at all about the phenomenon because logically and factually there is nothing one can say about something no one knows anything about. But that isn't happening in the UFO Community now, is it? UFO believers are running around like chickens with their heads cut off, speaking with great authority of things they know absolutely nothing about. How can you judge a person you have not even met yet? All you really have are rumors and opinions about these visitors, and those are unreliable since they contradict one another. All it will prove to a visiting race is that we are hate-mongers looking for another victim. "The surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that it has never tried to contact us" -- Calvin and Hobbes Why are these kind of discussions always about something that is “in a book” and never in real life? A book is not evidence of the topic discussed anymore than a report is evidence of the thing reported. Just because a storytale is compelling is not evidence the storytale is true or factual.

One thing you need to look for when reading any book or report is, did the author filter the evidence? In the case of Nigel, the answer is yes. There *are* just as many storytales of aliens doing benevolent things for people as there are evil ones. There are storytales of aliens healing people or saving them and their pets from certain disasters. Leaving these storytales out is intellectually dishonest because it amounts to what you do not know we will not tell you or of picking and choosing only the facts that support your opinions and ignoring all others.

The fact that there are just as many tales of benevolence as there are of harm is evidence that the subject is in dispute and has insufficient data to reach any logical conclusions. Just because we don’t know something is no license to let one’s imagination run amuck. If we don’t know something then it is irrelevant to state *anything* at all about the phenomenon because logically and factually there is nothing one can say about something no one knows anything about. But that isn’t happening in the UFO Community now, is it? UFO believers are running around like chickens with their heads cut off, speaking with great authority of things they know absolutely nothing about.

How can you judge a person you have not even met yet? All you really have are rumors and opinions about these visitors, and those are unreliable since they contradict one another. All it will prove to a visiting race is that we are hate-mongers looking for another victim.

“The surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that it has never tried to contact us” — Calvin and Hobbes

]]> By: MikeT http://www.ufomystic.com/2007/12/17/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4326 MikeT Sat, 22 Dec 2007 21:53:10 +0000 http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4326 I first read “The Song of the Greys” when it was reprinted two or t.hree years ago Believe me you really have to read the book itself before you can make any judgments about it. I have since read it again a couple of times, I wish this guy would write more. In fact I was just trawling the net to see if he’d written anything new when I came across this blog. As far as I understand the book, Nick’s summary of the main ideas is spot on. But these would seem like speculations until you read the book and see how well Kerner justifies and evidences his points. I have an extreme allergy to the weird and wonderful new age nonsense that the whole UFO/alien debate seems to be riddled with. So Kerner’s book was a breath of fresh air me. I must admit I first read it in a sense of denial as he paints such a frightening picture but the more I read the more I was convinced. Far from being a guy who tells you what to think Kerner strikes me as someone who really cares compassionately and is looking for an objective path through the wild and colourful jungle of speculation that has taken over this subject. Bendover says ‘If the visitors were evil, we would know it by now. The “evil visitors” do absolutely nothing in human affairs.’ But how can we know they are not involved in human affairs? How do we know they aren’t influencing our psychologies. Look how something as mundane and familiar as advertising can subliminally affect us without our conscious control. If these beings are super intelligent they would not show us their intentions explicitly. From the sounds of nearly all the abduction reports I’ve read they show a complete lack of understanding of human pain or suffering. They carry out procedures that inflict intense pain on the abductees and are oblivious to the reaction. That’s one of the reasons why Kerner’s idea that they are a form of roboid is convincing to me. I wouldn’t call abduction reports ‘unsubstantiated rumours’ when many of them have come from down to earth individuals, doctors, housewives, military personnel etc who would never normally even think about the alien subject. Richelle says that Kerner proposes that ‘the aliens are our brains personified’. Actually he doesn’t say this at all. As far as I can see he believes they are physically real entities not creations of our minds. Kerner’s theory is that despite all their intelligence and all their superior technology human beings have the one thing these alien visitors do not have – a Soul. That is what they are looking for, that is why they are exploring and interfering with our genetic make-up. It is the way he justifies and explains what a soul might be that blew my mind. That explanation was unique, remarkable and as far as I’m concerned it was alone enough to justify buying the book. Everything else then fell into place. As purely physical roboidal beings the Greys are not actual life forms in our biological sense they work to a programme that subsumes artificial intelligence, as such the Greys can’t understand something that is not of this physical universe. But really you’d have to read the book to see the full context. Believe me it makes a huge amount of sense when you’ve read it. In a way I wish it didn’t. I have to say I found the conclusions convincing and compelling to the extent that for me at least they were life changing. I first read “The Song of the Greys” when it was reprinted two or t.hree years ago Believe me you really have to read the book itself before you can make any judgments about it. I have since read it again a couple of times, I wish this guy would write more. In fact I was just trawling the net to see if he’d written anything new when I came across this blog.

As far as I understand the book, Nick’s summary of the main ideas is spot on. But these would seem like speculations until you read the book and see how well Kerner justifies and evidences his points. I have an extreme allergy to the weird and wonderful new age nonsense that the whole UFO/alien debate seems to be riddled with. So Kerner’s book was a breath of fresh air me. I must admit I first read it in a sense of denial as he paints such a frightening picture but the more I read the more I was convinced.

Far from being a guy who tells you what to think Kerner strikes me as someone who really cares compassionately and is looking for an objective path through the wild and colourful jungle of speculation that has taken over this subject.

Bendover says ‘If the visitors were evil, we would know it by now. The “evil visitors” do absolutely nothing in human affairs.’ But how can we know they are not involved in human affairs? How do we know they aren’t influencing our psychologies. Look how something as mundane and familiar as advertising can subliminally affect us without our conscious control. If these beings are super intelligent they would not show us their intentions explicitly. From the sounds of nearly all the abduction reports I’ve read they show a complete lack of understanding of human pain or suffering. They carry out procedures that inflict intense pain on the abductees and are oblivious to the reaction. That’s one of the reasons why Kerner’s idea that they are a form of roboid is convincing to me. I wouldn’t call abduction reports ‘unsubstantiated rumours’ when many of them have come from down to earth individuals, doctors, housewives, military personnel etc who would never normally even think about the alien subject.

Richelle says that Kerner proposes that ‘the aliens are our brains personified’. Actually he doesn’t say this at all. As far as I can see he believes they are physically real entities not creations of our minds. Kerner’s theory is that despite all their intelligence and all their superior technology human beings have the one thing these alien visitors do not have – a Soul. That is what they are looking for, that is why they are exploring and interfering with our genetic make-up. It is the way he justifies and explains what a soul might be that blew my mind. That explanation was unique, remarkable and as far as I’m concerned it was alone enough to justify buying the book. Everything else then fell into place.

As purely physical roboidal beings the Greys are not actual life forms in our biological sense they work to a programme that subsumes artificial intelligence, as such the Greys can’t understand something that is not of this physical universe. But really you’d have to read the book to see the full context. Believe me it makes a huge amount of sense when you’ve read it. In a way I wish it didn’t.
I have to say I found the conclusions convincing and compelling to the extent that for me at least they were life changing.

]]> By: red pill junkie http://www.ufomystic.com/2007/12/17/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4309 red pill junkie Fri, 21 Dec 2007 03:14:59 +0000 http://www.ufomystic.com/the-redfern-files/the-song-of-the-greys/#comment-4309 <i>"In my wildest dreams, the visitors are as over-sexed as homo sapiens sapiens are. Hopefully a young female visitor will come along and find me interesting enough to want to get freaky with me. Then we live happily ever after. Amen."</i> LOL! You WILL let me know if she has a sister, won't you? :-) Thanks for humoring me (or yourself). “In my wildest dreams, the visitors are as over-sexed as homo sapiens sapiens are. Hopefully a young female visitor will come along and find me interesting enough to want to get freaky with me. Then we live happily ever after. Amen.”

LOL! You WILL let me know if she has a sister, won’t you? :-)

Thanks for humoring me (or yourself).

]]>