Dec 17 2007
|
|
The Song of the Greys
This article, from yesterday’s issue of Britain’s Sunday Times newspaper, is quite timely. Its subject matter: the possibility that by searching for alien life we may actually cross paths with hostile ETs who may ultimately prove to be our downfall.
Coincidentally, I have, over the past few weeks, intended bringing to your attention a book titled The Song of the Greys, which was written back in 1997 by Nigel Kerner. A copy of the book was sent to me some time ago by Danielle Silverman, who worked on the project.
I say “coincidentally” because, as with the Sunday Times’ article, The Song of the Greys offers a distinctly disturbing intent, and warning, behind the agenda of the ubiquitous Greys of UFO lore.
Indeed, this is not a book that will sit well with those who are of a mindset suggesting that those pesky little Grey chaps are here to help us, to save the rain-forests, to cure cancer and/or to invite us to join some everlasting Cosmic Brotherhood where all is eternally well and everyone is blissfully happy. Nope, not at all.
Rather, The Song of the Greys is the stuff of nightmares.
I will not give away the whole story for those that haven’t read the book and who, after reading this post, may want to. But I will say this:
The reader will find certain things within the pages of The Song of the Greys that echo the words of Whitley Strieber in his abduction-related books: such as the claims that the Greys appear to have some understanding (and a deep one, too) of the afterlife, they seem to be very interested in the nature of the human soul, they have been with us for a very long time, they have possibly manipulated our affairs and development for countless centuries, and the image of them simply being alien scientists on a scouting mission from some far off world is completely and utterly wrong.
Yet, whereas Strieber’s books chiefly place the visitor phenomenon in a positive light, The Song of the Greys is, as the book’s cover blurb states: “The dark side of alien visitation.”
The essential thrust of the book is that the Greys are cold, ancient creatures: clone-like entities who, more than anything else, seek to understand and harness for their own ends the human soul. And, needless to say, none of this is good news for us, as a species.
Quite literally, the Greys are soul-less, in Nigel Kerner’s hypothesis. However, they realize that the Human Race does possess a soul and that life goes on after physical death. As a result, they are seeking to use us and to manipulate us (genetically, emotionally, physically and much more) in an effort to provide them with the one thing they lack: souls of their own. Precisely what motivates them, I will let you discover for yourselves…
The book delves deeply into the issue of how such soul-stealing, or manipulation at least, may occur. It reveals a great deal about sinister creatures with equally sinister agendas that many within the UFO community will find unsettling (but, hey, there’s nothing wrong with that - the subject needs shaking up).
And it delves into areas of profound interest: (a) ancient texts, beliefs and religions; (b) the possible nature of an afterlife and how and why the Greys came to infiltrate, manipulate and ultimately farm our civilization for nefarious purposes; (c) how the UFO community has been utterly deceived by these devious beings; and (d) the way in which certain people in the official world, deeply aware of the truth behind “alien visitations,” have sought to keep the unsettling facts from us.
Has Nigel Kerner cracked the secret of the Greys? Frankly, I don’t know. I do know, however, that his views are most definitely shared by certain persons who worked in the Pentagon, the US Air Force and the Defense Intelligence Agency and who suspected as much as far back as the 1970s.
I also know that in our search for the truth about the Greys we should not ignore those possibilities that some might see as frightening and/or controversial.
The Song of the Greys may very well radically shift your perspective on the UFO presence, the nature of alien abduction, and the Grey intent.
Charles Fort’s famous words, “We are property,” may have been closer to the truth than he could ever have imagined…
This entry was posted
on Monday, December 17th, 2007 at 1:01 pm and is filed under Abductions, Alien Encounters, Beliefs, Books, Breaking News, Close Encounters, Conspiracies, Evidence, Eyewitness Accounts, Occult/Esoteric, Reviews, Strange Creatures, The Redfern Files, UFO Sightings, UFOlogists, UFOlogy. 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:
- Flying Saucer Music #19 »
- Flying Saucer Music #33 »
- Flying Saucer Music #15 »
- Red-Eyed Mysteries »
- Fortean Crowley »
|
December 17th, 2007 at 2:35 pm
Nick, my Amazon’s wish list is going to need a whole server for itself!
That seems like an interesting book. BTW, have you read Strieber’s “The Grays”? And if so, what’s your opinion?
December 17th, 2007 at 3:04 pm
1) Yes this book is correct. 2) the Greys are US — projecting our own destructive energy, as Stan Gooch details, literally the greys are the cerebellum. 3) There is a way out — beyond any astral realm is what I call “female formless awareness” — but it’s only accessed through complimentary opposite, nonwestern harmonics without one-to-one correspondence of letter and number. The only real clear text on this is “Taoist Yoga: Alchemy and Immortality” trans. by Charles Luk. 4) This way out is to go against the direction of modern society but it does protect a person against “the Greys” which are just a projection of the increasingly weak spirit of modern people (rife with psychological diseases like depression, schizophrenia, etc.)
December 17th, 2007 at 4:29 pm
Hi Nick,
WOW! You know … I have this book but have never read it. I picked it up when I was in London for Paul Devereaux’s OTHERWORLD REALITY CONFERENCE in 1999.
Yep, shades of what you and Craig and I talked about last Thursday night PreCognitive Dissonance.
Very interesting indeed.
SMiles
December 17th, 2007 at 6:28 pm
drat, it’s out of print.
December 17th, 2007 at 6:55 pm
Cool. Another book for my book hunting wish list. Personally, I’ve always thought that most of the aliens that are out there aren’t really beings that one would actually want to get to know. No doubt there’s some “good” ones out there just like there’s “good” humans and “bad” humans, but I think its a given that there’s going to be alot of hostile encounters.
December 17th, 2007 at 7:32 pm
Richelle:
You may want to try Arcturus Books in Florida, as they have a great catalogue of out-of-print books.
December 17th, 2007 at 9:19 pm
How can we speculate in extreme detail about someone we have never met? The problem with these speculations is they are based on the assumption that alien psychology would be exactly like ours, and that we can predict the behavior of other alien species based upon our (immature and barbaric) natures.
“I would like to share a revelation that I’ve had, during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species and I realized that you’re not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet, instinctively develops an equilibrium with it’s surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply, until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet; you are a plague and we are the cure” (Agent Smith, THE MATRIX, Warner Brothers, 1999)
“An organism that thinks only in themes of its own survival will invariably destroy its environment and, as we are learning from bitter experience, will thus destroy itself” (Source?)
Obviously, a species intelligent enough to be around long enough to learn to traverse light years of space would be a species that learned to not destroy itself and it’s environment; a species that would not want to spread to another part of the galaxy like a plague — those are things WE humans would do if we could travel through space, but thankfully that doesn’t imply everyone else in the universe thinks like we do.
December 17th, 2007 at 10:25 pm
Sage, you get double points for quoting “The Matrix”
December 17th, 2007 at 10:59 pm
But sage, from what I gathered from the spoiler in Drew Hempel’s post is that the greys are projections of ourselves, specifically our cerebellum. So, it would seem we have met these guys. I’m not sure I’m following it correctly though, I read the crappy amazon reviews and book info, and it seems this isn’t necessarily interdimensional stuff, or illusory, but based in the second law of thermodynamics, however the *&@^#% that would relate.
Thanks for the store info Nick. Unfortunately, the book is not only out of print, but apparently rare. I can’t find it for under $90. There’s no way it’s worth that, but it theorizes about the afterlife, and says greys are brains, so dammit, I’ll check with the library, and otherwise try to find it.
December 18th, 2007 at 7:34 am
RPJ:
Yeah, I did read Strieber’s book. As an interesting piece of fiction, I enjoyed it. I think it’s clear that some of Strieber’s own personal beliefs vector in too, specifically as they relate to the agendas at work in the story.
December 18th, 2007 at 8:30 am
Good news:
Danielle Silverman, who worked on The Song of the Greys, has sent me a new link at the book’s website where you can purchase the book via Paypal at a very good price.
Here’s the link:
http://www.songofthegreys.com/cntct/order.html
December 18th, 2007 at 8:43 am
I am such a pain in the butt. Can anyone open that link on that page and give me the email address to write? It won’t open for me. I’m all paypal.
December 18th, 2007 at 8:51 am
Richelle
No problem; the email is:
denabel@hotmail.co.uk
December 18th, 2007 at 9:04 am
Thank you so much Nick.
December 18th, 2007 at 11:57 am
Nick, the book sounds interesting but I think I’ll stick to the work of folks like you and Greg.
On the website I just skimmed over a “very rare interview given by Nigel Kerner through one of his collaborators.” Huh?! It’s basically an interview with one of his pals explaining Kerner’s ideas- not a interview with Kerner at all. (I wonder if this Kerner really exists?) He doesn’t give interviews because “Mr Kerner has received four plausible affirmed death threats as a result of his book already and you will understand he is cautious not to give too many details about himself.” Riiiiiight.
His friend seems to have no doubt as to the legitimacy of the ideas in the book. At one point he says, “He (the Biblical Ezekiel) was also shown cloning procedures. The examples of alien technology at the time of Moses, as you will have seen from the book, are numerous - a ‘pillar of fire’ (a laser beam) that accompanied the children of Israel wherever they went, references to Moses’ abduction in a spaceship etc” OH BROTHER!
Reading that interview does not instill confidence. That doesn’t mean everything he says is a load of crap- but I think most of it probably is.
Later, “when one of their craft was examined by a Physicist called Bob Lazaar.” That does it. Bob Lazar?! If they kept it somewhat simple, and acknowledged the highly speculative nature of everything they were saying, without adding all the hocus pocus, mumbo jumbo, I might be interested. But that interview strikes me as little more than a distillation of many of the delusions of people (psychotics?) on the fringes of ufology. The book is speculative fiction presented as THE TRUTH- it seems obvious there are few if any doubts in the mind of the guy making these far out claims.
I think it would make a decent foundation for a new money making cult- what with the mysterious man behind the scenes and some of the catchy terms they’ve created like “GODVERSE”. Add in something about 2012 and they have a guaranteed winner.
December 18th, 2007 at 12:10 pm
I do find this interesting in his biography. “His paternal family line can be traced back to the German philosopher and poet Justinus Kerner.” Besides being one of the greatest German poets ever, Justinus Kerner was also a occultist. He created some fascinating ink-blot pictures which he felt would bring him into closer contact with the spirit world. Justinus Kerner is a extremely interesting guy, a Spiritualist before they were called Spiritualists.
December 18th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
And while I don’t find this guy all that credible (just based on the interview, perhaps the book would be more convincing) I do think there is a chance he is onto something. I just really hate when folks like this are filled with certainty about life’s great mysteries- his views, while highly speculative, are interesting. But I’m annoyed when people say this is the way things are, this is how it works, I’m sure of it. This guy has read some books, thought about the issue, and come to some interesting and unique conclusions, some of which might be more valid than others.
But I tend to find Strieber sincere and a lot of folks think he’s out there so….
December 18th, 2007 at 3:21 pm
You’re welcome Richelle. Hope you enjoy it!
December 18th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
Ben:
Cheers for the thoughts and comments. I think with a subject like this, and where we are lacking in definitive proof, any study of what the “Grays” might be up to is going to be speculative to a degree.
I think what Nigel Kerner has done (he is indeed a real person!) is to study the data and try and formulate a conclusion based on what we know, or appear to know.
Of course, that’s really any of us can do. But I would say that the book is very thought-provoking and he presents his argument in a way that is well-written, insightful and reasoned.
It is of course up to the reader to determine if that means he’s on the right path or not.
I agree with kerner that the Grays are not our friends and that there is major deception at work on their part.
I think how far the bigger picture extends from there is a question that we still need to address.
But certainly Nigel Kerner has produced a highly thought provoking and readable book.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:53 pm
Richelle Hawks:
“From what I gathered from the spoiler in Drew Hempel’s post is that the greys are projections of ourselves, specifically our cerebellum. So, it would seem we have met these guys”
I have not met these guys so they are not from my cerebellum. Clearly these guys are not of US, they are of MAKE BELIEVE. They will only “exist” if we want to believe they exist. Since these guys are only imaginary, what would any of us have to fear of imaginary beings, especially if it is someone else who is doing the imagining, and not me?
The point is, you cannot say much about someone you have only heard unsubstantiated rumors about, much less give a vastly detailed psychology about them as Nigel does. Making them out to also be evil is alarmist and phony.
On average, there is about 10,000 UFO sightings a year and these sightings have been occurring for hundreds of years. If the visitors were evil, we would know it by now. The “evil visitors” do absolutely nothing in human affairs. These guys want to keep their distance from us and have indicated that they want no substantial interaction with humans. It is clearly a hands off policy. So even if we were to pretend that they were evil, and they do such an excellent job hiding all that evil, that even if we were to pretend they were evil, we have nothing to fear from them because they continually show restraint, maturity, and intelligence. Is restraint, maturity, and intelligence, evil? I think not. I think we could learn a thing or two from these guys.
December 18th, 2007 at 7:52 pm
On average, there is about 10,000 UFO sightings a year and these sightings have been occurring for hundreds of years. If the visitors were evil, we would know it by now.
A valid assumption, I think. Then again, as you yourself have stated, perhaps trying to understand the reasons behind the conduct of an alien intelligence would be more difficult that trying to understand the feelings of a honey bee or a grasshopper.
Ok, Sage, indulging ourselves in a little speculation, and based on the fact that these things have been with us at least for hundreds of years (if not much more longer than that), what are your thoughts on the reason why they are here?
December 18th, 2007 at 9:19 pm
My point was only that if Kerner is proposing the aliens are our brains personified, then saying we ‘haven’t met them’ isn’t quite true. I am in no way defending this guy or the theory, I was simply making an observation of logic.
And I agree that speculation is about the only way to the subject. I’m a little tired of the whole “the grays are us” blah blah, but at least this is a new, specific idea to ruminate upon, and to include in the panorama of theories & ideas, that may at some point lead us to some understanding. I’m not sure if it matters how it’s presented. I’m just working on a book with my own strange theory, and trying to maintain somewhat of a distance with judgement or dismissal, but I do agree with you about the silliness of the whole detailed biography (much like the whole galactic brotherhood stuff of the reptilians)based upon a speculation.
December 19th, 2007 at 5:45 pm
RPJ:
“Perhaps trying to understand the reasons behind the conduct of an alien intelligence would be more difficult that trying to understand the feelings of a honey bee or a grasshopper”
Just because any visitors would be more advanced than us would not mean they would ever do illogical or stupid things. If they did act illogically or stupid, we would immediately know it was a hoax and not the real thing. Just because something is incomprehensible does not mean it would appear illogical or stupid, only that it would appear to be like magic. Rationally and logically speaking, no matter how advanced the visitors are, they clearly are not evil.
“Based on the fact that these things have been with us at least for hundreds of years (if not much more longer than that), what are your thoughts on the reason why they are here?”
1) It is not a fact, and
2) Even if we pretend it is a fact, it would be illogical to speculate about this when there is obviously insufficient data to make any kind of educated guess. I certainly cannot read minds — especially any mind of a visitor — so anything you or I can imagine about their motive for being here could be “the reason”. But while imagination is unlimited, reality has limits and reality is about what is, not what coulda, woulda, shoulda been.
Richelle Hawks:
“If Kerner is proposing the aliens are our brains personified, then saying we ‘haven’t met them’ isn’t quite true”
Let me rephrase my answer then: I have not met my brain in the personified form of the visitors, therefore I can say quite correctly, that not everyone has met them and they are not of my cerebellum but of someone else’s.
“At least this is a new, specific idea to ruminate upon, and to include in the panorama of theories & ideas, that may at some point lead us to some understanding”
The problem with wild and crazy speculation on things that are unknown is, what if the visitors are real? Then all that speculation will mean absolutely nothing because then you will see what they are really like. If there is any chance the visitors are real, I would rather keep my mind fresh and open to interacting with them as guest to our planet and civilization, 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.
December 19th, 2007 at 7:06 pm
“Just because any visitors would be more advanced than us would not mean they would ever do illogical or stupid things.”
Yes, of course not illogical, but they wouldn’t necessarilly be COMPREHENSIBLE to us, that’s what I tried to say.
The dancing of a honey bee is perfectly logical ONLY after we understand the biological processes of their conduct and the way their senses process the information of their enviroment. But to an untrained observer it would seem like a willy-nilly behavior.
C’mon Sage! You mean to tell me than in all your life you haven’t never fantasized about WHY they are here? Take a walk on the wild side dude!
(Yes, the answer you provide might be as far away from the actual truth than any we others can come up with, and utterly pointless, but if anything it may help me understand your points of view regarding this topic)
December 20th, 2007 at 7:12 pm
I suppose I see the greys=cerebellum as a metaphor, similar perhaps the to Jungian UFOs=mandalas. Of course, this guy may have Kerner may mean it literally, and he may mean that we each have a little alien to meet, I’ve no idea since I have not read the book. I guess my only original point was that we are familiar with the subject matter of the cerebellum. Believe me, I don’t *believe* it.
I don’t see the harm in wild and crazy speculation, as it all must spring from our sub or unconscious, and/or creative inner source, and I think there’s always something to be learned there. But, I agree that it might become misleading or ‘dangerous’, but only if we start developing hard beliefs and investments around it, as anything would.
December 20th, 2007 at 8:05 pm
Just remember RPJ, incomprehensible behavior is not the same thing as illogical behavior. The visitors do not act illogical, just incomprehensible, therefore there is no rational justification for asserting that the visitors are evil.
Okay, RPJ, I will humor you…or is that I will humor myself? Anyway, first, let me state that wherever the visitors may be from, they will be somewhat familiar to us because in evolution, form follows function and life specifically adapts to imposed demands, therefore it would be quite reasonable for evolution to parallel itself in other worlds and converge on the same form for the same functions — such as an upright walking being having hands with opposable thumbs and a big head. And now for the walk…
The visitors definitely are not here to save us or kill us…they would have done so already and they would not have been so extremely passive and evasive if any of that were their intentions. Furthermore, as I already mentioned, a species intelligent enough to be around long enough to learn to traverse light years of space would be a species that learned to not destroy itself and it’s environment; a species that would not want to spread to another part of the galaxy like a plague or wage war on anyone they found or put a 7-11 on every corner of every planet in the galaxy. Humans would do that if given the chance, but fortunately we are not intelligent enough as a species to know how to do that.
The visitors would not be here to harvest our genetic material. They are too advanced to stoop to that level of low tech biology. I am sure they already have their genes and ours mapped out anyway.
The visitors could be here for our water. While water is one the Universe’s more abundant resources, vast oceans of liquid water are not. But an advanced civilization that makes long trips away from home would know the value of conservation, recycling, and leaving a minimal impact on the environment — especially a pristine environment that was not native to them. They would be completely self-sufficient.
The visitors could be here for research. It might be that we make for a popular thesis of the plight of a barbaric species hell bent on destruction or as a recent plague upon the Earth. But this cannot be likely since the visitors are far more intelligent than we are and they could learn as much about us in one day as we could in 20,000 years. So there would be nothing new left to study after the first visit.
The visitors could be here for vacation, except there is beauty everywhere in the Universe, not just here on Earth, so it would be no problem to abandon this God-forsaken planet for different one where conditions are more pleasant and the atmosphere not so negative.
The visitors could be here to mock us. They might want to just muck with our minds. Of course, that is projecting immature and barbaric human nature onto a people that would have had to outgrow that kind of childish nonsense to have been around long enough to reach the stars.
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.
December 20th, 2007 at 8:14 pm
“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).
December 22nd, 2007 at 2:53 pm
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.
December 23rd, 2007 at 11:26 am
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
December 28th, 2007 at 9:22 am
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.
December 28th, 2007 at 11:51 pm
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.
December 29th, 2007 at 2:27 pm
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.
December 30th, 2007 at 7:02 pm
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.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:44 am
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!!!
December 31st, 2007 at 6:55 pm
“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.
February 9th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
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.