Jan 02 2008
|
|
New Brazilian “Drone” Video and Whitley Strieber
The latest entry on Whitley Strieber’s Unknown Country site is a link and short commentary about a relatively new entry in the youtube UFO hit parade, supposedly showing what looks like one of those “drones” that have been dogging us for the last year. Strieber (or whoever writes the entires for the site) are cautious about the authenticity of the images. There is also an essay by Strieber about his own sighting of a drone-type object early in December (Pearl Harbor Day to be precise.) While the description of his night-long experience would be maddening to most observers, I find it fascinating and consistent with his self-described history with things paranormal.
Although almost anyone who considers themselves scientifically serious about the UFO issue will have nothing to do with him, I still have a lot of respect for Strieber. I believe that he is honest about what he experiences, even if a lot of the situations would (could?) never be confirmed by independent witnesses, and many of them are so personal that they call into question what is “real” and “not real,” what we should believe and what we should throw out, or even what supposed laws of physics and psychology apply to his singular situation. This goes way beyond “is he nuts?” type of questioning, because I have seen and talked to a lot of nuts. Strieber doesn’t seem to fit into any category. I have talked to him personally at length on one occasion, and he didn’t change my opinion of him then.
While many have long ago pronounced Strieber gullible and fantasy-prone (and worse) a careful reading of his public output reveals someone who is generally cautious about making definitive statements.
It is also interesting to consider how the strangeness which has touched his life in some way would be described by others who were exposed to the same events. While it is highly probable that Strieber’s fertile imagination has colored and confabulated the core experiences, we are still left with a large amount of high strangeness, that if even partially “true,” points to a radically revised view of what we don’t know yet, and how we might be able to process it in the future.
Also: Best wishes to all for a happy, rewarding, and prosperous New Year!
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, January 2nd, 2008 at 12:24 am and is filed under Breaking News, Eyewitness Accounts, Government Projects, UFO Sightings, UFOlogy, Videos, Wake Up Down There. You can follow responses via RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is not allowed.
del.icio.us Digg Reddit BlinkList Google Ma.gnolia StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Help
- Related News Stories:
- Pretty Funny (And Good) UFO “Drone” Video »
- The CARET Phenomenon, Continued »
- More UK UFO Drones »
- Private Eyes Investigate UFO Drone Story »
- Two Videos of Aliens (?) »
- UFO Footage? »
- Best UFO Pictures of 2007 »
- Sugar Cane Crop Circle »
- UFOs in Brazil »
- UFO Talk on Culture of Contact »
|
January 2nd, 2008 at 8:16 am
“Although almost anyone who considers themselves scientifically serious about the UFO issue will have nothing to do with him”
This may be so (I do not know), but is it anything ‘you’ should be reporting? Fantasy prone is an underlying cause of a psychological disorder. You said, “While many have long pronounced Streiber gullible and fantasy-prone” while not including yourself, you reported it just the same.
So, what is this article of yours about? Is it about the drone, Streiber or his possible psychological disorders? The title speaks for itself even though the majority do not know yet about this new drone from Sao Paolo, Brazil. Why didn’t you just do an article on the new drone instead?
There are many that read UFO Mystic articles and they happen to fall into Google search, so with that said, how could you say, “I still have a lot of respect for Whitley Strieber” when you’ve reported the contrary to your readers.
Such things are not for anyone to report because if you have any kind of influence with your readers, which you do, they’ve just now formed a new opinion about Whitley Streiber. Is that something you really intended to do? Hey, at least you didn’t use the words “triumphantly claiming”, that’s a plus.
I don’t believe a fair amount of what I read in Unknown Country either, but I dismiss it in my mind and I go on.
So how do you feel now? Are you angry, has your body temp climbed, were your feelings hurt? Good, because you needed to feel that so that you would know how such things said can cut like a knife. Hence, some things are better left unsaid.
And Greg, best wishes for a happy, rewarding, and prosperous New Year!
January 2nd, 2008 at 11:43 am
hmmm. “if you have any kind of influence with your readers, which you do, they’ve just now formed a new opinion about Whitley Streiber.”
the entire comment is fairly laughable. I’d say the only possible ‘new opinion’ formed after reading greg’s ‘article’ here is that Streiber may be seen in a more tolerant, less dismissive light. This is a blog anyway–if you’re not looking for personal opinions, you may want to consult other sources. Although within the UFO realm, that will be a tall order.
January 2nd, 2008 at 12:00 pm
“So how do you feel now? Are you angry, has your body temp climbed, were your feelings hurt? Good, because you needed to feel that so that you would know how such things said can cut like a knife. Hence, some things are better left unsaid.
And Greg, best wishes for a happy, rewarding, and prosperous New Year!”
LOL! Of all the unusual replies I’ve read on UFOMystic (and there have been plenty) this passive/aggressive response by blueyeswise might take the cake.
Anyway, thanks for the links. Fascinating video. I think we’re going to be seeing a lot more of these drone videos- and they will be real, even if this all started as a hoax with the first ones being fake. I think it’s the nature of the ufo phenomena. How it appears to us seems to change as a result of our consciousness. And I agree with what you said about Whitley- he’s absolutely sincere.
January 2nd, 2008 at 12:06 pm
“Although almost anyone who considers themselves scientifically serious about the UFO issue will have nothing to do with him, I still have a lot of respect for Strieber”
Exactly who are you talking about? Who are all these “scientific” UFO researchers?
I think what seems to upset people is that he takes on the more esoteric side of the experience and how he understands it, with the scientific. Nothing wrong with that, in fact as most “scientific” ufo researcher should know, many of the stranger aspects of the UFO/contact experience were left out for fear the “scientific” community would not take it seriously.
January 2nd, 2008 at 1:01 pm
“Exactly who are you talking about? Who are all these “scientific” UFO researchers?”
The last sentence in your response to Greg implies you know precisely the sorts of folks (I think) he is talking about- the folks who cannot take seriously sightings that involve “stranger aspects”. In general (and this is a broad generalization, certainly not a hard and fast rule), I think most of those in ufology who want nothing to do with Whitley are the nuts and bolts crowd- the folks who are convinced UFOs (if they even exist) are structured craft from out there that travel great distances to get here, piloted by aliens from another planet, end of story. Most of the folks who look to SETI for meaningful results would probably fall into this crowd. Folks who claim science as their mantle and wield it like a weapon, much like fundamentalist Christians claim Christianity as theirs. They see Whitley as being either a nut or conman, just another in a long line of fraudulent/mentally ill contactees, a modern day Adamski. Of course there are plenty of other people who see Whitley this way as well. But not me- I think the guy is sincere.
January 2nd, 2008 at 3:33 pm
Thanks to the ufomystic posse for reading the post carefully and completely!
In fairness to “blueyes,” he or she pointed out that I was unclear about if the post was concerning Strieber or the drone video. I switched order of the first two paragraphs and retitled the piece (probably before most of you read it) to make this more apparent. I appreciate it when people point out things that are unclear or even factually wrong (which this was not) and no, it did not make me angry.
The original post was titled “Strieber Cautious About New ‘Drone’ Video” and was subtitled “Surprised?”
January 2nd, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Blueyes,
Thanks for pointing out the unclear nature of the original post. Since I didn’t change any of the language, I stand by my original statements, and I am not angry or annoyed, since you completely missed the point.
It appears that you want me to either be for or against Strieber. If that is your impression, you are not reading the piece in the way I intended it, or are deliberately ignoring a lot of what was written.
What I am trying to do is point out that a lot of UFO researchers who may take themselves too seriously and are caught up in one kind of viewpoint long ago dropped Strieber like a hot brick. That, I propose, is to their ultimate peril, since he throws light on some aspects of the phenomenon that should be included in the discussion right alongside such things as sighting reports and landing trace cases.
Strieber himself has acknowledged that some of what he reports may either be illusion (by himself or the “visitors”) or arriving unawares from his subconscious. The only thing that should be “cut[ting] like a knife” are the minds of people who read the post, in order to understand the subtleties. I assume most readers here are open-minded and well-versed in aspects of the UFO phenomenon. Even if they are not, both Nick and I try to explain what were are referring to.
I don’t know if your homily at the end is intended sincerely or sarcastically, but I’ll accept it with a positive spin for now.
January 3rd, 2008 at 2:47 am
Is there an email-adres by wich I can contact you?
Can’t find one on your website….
January 3rd, 2008 at 10:25 am
I am intrigued by BenDoverEsq’s comment:
“I think we’re going to be seeing a lot more of these drone videos- and they will be real, even if this all started as a hoax with the first ones being fake. I think it’s the nature of the ufo phenomena. How it appears to us seems to change as a result of our consciousness.”
I believe there is something fundamentally true to this idea and would love to see deeper exploration of it.