May 07 2008
|
|
Tonnies on UFOs
Another good, thought-provoking post from Mac Tonnies:
“While I’m agnostic as to the ultimate nature of UFOs, I’m comfortable asserting that the phenomenon is both physically real and under intelligent control. Too brash a deductive leap? Given the available evidence, I don’t think so. Indeed, my position isn’t nearly as hard-set as that of most speculators among the loosely knit UFO ‘community.’ So what are we dealing with? Does intelligence imply an extraterrestrial origin? And is my agnosticism simply a mask with which to deter meandering conspiracy theories and hoary notions of human-ET treaties?
“I think the answer is ‘no’ on both counts. The data suggests an enigma of enduring complexity and bewildering scope. While possibly ET, there’s no clear link; more often than not, credible reports of ‘ufonauts’ indicate beings with all-too-human mannerisms and motives. If the UFO phenomenon has a purpose, perhaps it’s to challenge entrenched ideas about our role as sentient observers. The ever-colorful ’space visitors’ encountered since 1947 could be the vanguards of an unknown manifestation of consciousness. (Far from invalidating the UFO inquiry, such a discovery would likely propel a new era of scientific understanding. If so, would our collective unconscious adopt some new disguise and cease to provide us with novel visitors and resplendent ‘craft’?).
Here’s the rest of Mac’s post.
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, May 7th, 2008 at 8:16 am and is filed under The Redfern Files, Breaking News, Eyewitness Accounts, Alien Encounters, UFO Sightings, Close Encounters, Evidence, UFOlogists, UFOlogy, Beliefs, Guest Column, Astronomy/Space. 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 Ma.gnolia Technorati Help
- Related News Stories:
- “Human UFOs” »
- Nick’s Pic Of The Day »
- The Mac Zone »
- SETI Gets A Kick In The Butt »
- UFOs: Why No Open Contact? »
|
May 7th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
“While I’m agnostic as to the ultimate nature of UFOs, I’m comfortable asserting that the phenomenon is both physically real…”
Then you are not an agnostic. Physical reality is what ultimate nature is all about — you cannot get anymore real than physical reality.
“Given the available evidence…”
There is no available evidence. All we have are available storytales consisting of meresay and hearsay.
“The data suggests an enigma of enduring complexity and bewildering scope”
Which indicates that it is purely a psychological phenomenon, as the psychology of humans is often described as complex and bewildering.
“Credible reports…”
is not a synonym for “factual reports” or “honest reporting”.
“If the UFO phenomenon has a purpose, perhaps it’s to challenge entrenched ideas about our role as sentient observers”
The vast majority of people have failed then, since one cannot “observe” a storytale.
“The ever-colorful ’space visitors’ encountered since 1947 could be the vanguards of an unknown manifestation of consciousness”
If it is unknown, how did you come to know of it? There is no such thing as a “manifestation of consciousness”. On the other hand, there are known consciously conducted self-delusions and hoaxes.
May 7th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
Sage:
I will email Mac and tell him you commented on his post.
May 8th, 2008 at 10:32 am
” There is no such thing as a “manifestation of consciousness”.”
Then what should we call the appearance of words intelligently arranged to form a coherent message, that is your comment posted above my dear Sage? A natural phenomenon, or a figment of our imagination?
May 8th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
“Then what should we call the appearance of words intelligently arranged to form a
coherent message, that is your comment posted above my dear Sage? A natural phenomenon, or a figment of our imagination?”
Call it an obvious typo. What I clearly meant to say was, “UNKNOWN manifestation of consciousness”. By definition, the conscious is what is known; it is the unconscious that is not known.
May 8th, 2008 at 6:40 pm
But you do admit that the unconscious can often be manifested in several ways? strange impulses, violent reactions, etc. At that moment those elements become part of the conscious.
And maybe what Tonnies really meant was that the “space visitors” are a not-well understood manifestation of an unknown conscious.
But I that, as there are degrees of knowledge, there are also degrees of “unknowledge”. We may not know a lot about the consciousness that manifests itself in the form of aliens and UFOs, but that doesn’t mean we don’t know some things. For instance, that they behave in a trickster fashion, just like Vallee and others have posited.
I think you tend to see things in terms of absolutes way to often Sage. Life is not all black & white you know. You should embrace the grays once in a while
May 9th, 2008 at 6:19 pm
“But you do admit that the unconscious can often be manifested in several ways? strange impulses, violent reactions, etc”
I haven’t admitted anything other then the conscious does not “manifest itself” under any conditions and consciousness logically cannot be associated with what is unknown, but what is known.
“At that moment those elements become part of the conscious”
No, the unconscious, by definition, is not-conscious. It is unperceivable, unknowable, and cannot be put into words. If you can perceive it, know it, or put it into words, it isn’t the unconscious you are talking about, but the conscious.
“And maybe what Tonnies really meant was that the ’space visitors’ are a not-well understood manifestation of an unknown conscious”
Maybe but how would you know what Tonnies meant unless you ask him for yourself? Why second guess someone whose mind you cannot read?
“We may not know a lot about the consciousness that manifests itself in the form of aliens and UFOs, but that doesn’t mean we don’t know some things”
But what little we know, we know very well and, like I said, we know very well that what you are describing does not exist in actual reality.
“For instance, that they behave in a trickster fashion, just like Vallee and others have posited”
‘They’ are just storytales, not physically real objects.
“I think you tend to see things in terms of absolutes way to often Sage”
Think again.
May 9th, 2008 at 7:31 pm
“But what little we know, we know very well and, like I said, we know very well that what you are describing does not exist in actual reality.”
That’s a fact,not a belief right? I get confused sometimes
“‘They’ are just storytales, not physically real objects.”
And what triggers the storytales then, Sage?
““I think you tend to see things in terms of absolutes way to often Sage”
Think again.”
Mmmm….Yeah, I think on second thought you are the most moderate person I’ve ever met
Have a good weekend.
May 10th, 2008 at 10:58 am
SAGE. But what little we know, we know very well and, like I said, we know very well that what you are describing does not exist in actual reality
RP. That’s a fact,not a belief right? I get confused sometimes
Let me help ease your confusion. A fact is something that can be “demonstrated to exist”. What you are describing cannot be demonstrated to exist.
SAGE. “They are just storytales, not physically real objects”
RP. And what triggers the storytales then, Sage?
Anything can trigger the imagination — even other imaginary things.
RP. I think you tend to see things in terms of absolutes way to often Sage
SAGE. Think again
RP. Mmmm….Yeah, I think on second thought you are the most moderate person I’ve ever met
Haha! Yes I am also very humble and modest about how wonderful I always have been…seriously though, I think you misinterpret what I say when you conclude that I tend to see things in terms of absolutes. I do believe in absolutes but I also believe not everything is absolute. The trick is being able to distinguish between the two.
“Have a good weekend”
You too.