UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2005 > Oct > Oct 1

Re: Pandora's Box - Miller

From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 20:37:55 +0100 (BST)
Fwd Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 14:59:16 -0400
Subject: Re: Pandora's Box - Miller


>From: Rob Kritkausky <robkrit.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 11:46:07 -0700 (PDT)
>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box - Kritkausky

>>From: Stuart Miller <stuart.miller4.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2005 15:49:24 +0100 (BST)
>>Subject: Re: Pandora's Box

>>>From: Joe Faccenda uforth.nul
>>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>>Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 22:5 6:09 EDT
>>>Subject: Pandora's Box

><snip>

>Stuart/Joe:

>I don't think there is much debate as to whether such a
>revelation would cause a disruption, the difference of opinion
>rests in the extent of the disruption and ultimately its net
>effect on the current human paradigm. So when push comes to
>shove, we are really talking about a question of whether or
>not to introduce a change component to a system without being
>able to accurately predict the positive and negative effects
>that change will have on the system.

Absolutely correct. But what is a little bothersome is what I
consider to be the unrealistic attitude of, it seems, many here
who don't seem accept that they're going to be much disturbed.

The other problem, as Stan mentioned in another reply, is
"context". How it happens and why will largely determine Human
response. Even the way ET looks will have an impact. For
example, humanoids descending from a craft, while less scary,
would likely make a more profound spiritual impact than a
reptoid with 5 heads.

If you were to ask people what institutions might be affected,
one of the first words out of their mouths is "religion". I used
to think that religion might be crushed but now I'm not so sure.
I think mainstream religion will take it in its stride and those
that are a little "further out" will adapt it to suit their own
needs.

But... what if it is revealed, after contact, that Jesus was an
ET? Then we move into a completely different scenario
altogether.

>I think there is an important aspect to this that you are not
>considering, or at least you did not address it. That missing
>aspect comes in the form of an assessment. What is the current
>health of the system that will be changed?

>I think we would all agree that such a public disclosure would
>not be akin to tossing an apple into Eden. I am a advocate for
>the practice of "not messing with a good thing". In fact, I
>would have misgivings about disturbing a functional system,
>even if it was operating at mediocrity. Neither of these is
>synonymous with our current situation. Human population is
>increasing at an unhealthy rate and the social dysfunction
>within that population is increasing as well. The growing
>demands for limited resources is resulting in an escalation of
>tension between counties and cultures. Add to that, religious
>fundamentalism seems to be in vogue. Finally, where "mutually
>assured destruction" used to serve as a deterrent to war, we
>now have a movement that has it as a goal. There is a big
>difference between introducing change(as an uncertainty) into
>a system that is operating at a level of imbalance or
>dysfunction, then there is in incorporating it into a
>balanced functioning system.

You are arguably too much in the immediacy. Since when have we
ever been a balanced system? It just seems worse now but pro
rata, it was just as bad 200 years ago or 1,000 years ago.
Coupled with that were different mindsets which would have made
the acceptance of ET reality an even more difficult hurdle to
clamber over than it would be now.

You express a nervousness about ET contact and the effect it
will have, given our current situation as you see it. It would
be asinine to disagree with you. Intuitively, I feel the
reaction will not be clear cut and will be weighed with both
positives and negatives. For instance, I think it is feasible
that we might start to kill each other in smaller numbers but I
also feel that there will be multifarious personal responses
which, if they became commonly assumed, could lead to anarchy.

>One could say that humanity's biggest problem is its inability
>to see itself as humanity. Instead, we choose to view
>ourselves as members of social groups like Christians,
>Democrats or Jews.

You are teetering here on the Conspiracy/New Age border. On the
one hand the "Illuminati" will keep us like this in order to
hang on to political power and on the other, if we could all
live as one big family, life would be a lot more... etc. If you
removed all political systems and national borders, there would
still be immense differences. You cannot remove religion or skin
colour and while these factors should be irrelevant, we'd still
group together. Remove Human Nature and you might crack it. Good
luck!

>My friend Howard Bloom wrote, "Nothing can unite a
>people quite like the threat of an outside force on that
>people". I see this with my son and daughter who are more
>than willing to hit,scratch and fight with each other, but if
>someone from outside the family threatens to do such a thing >
to one of them, they unite rather quickly to protect each
>other. If contact has been made, it would probably not pose
>such a threat, but it may prompt us to have an epiphany in
>which we realize we are individual humans that make up that
>which is humanity. We will know others are watching our
>interactions, advances, atrocities and achievements. This may
>be beneficial or perhaps it causes us to have a melt down. I >
think you roll the dice.

I am a pessimist when it comes to the concept of self-generated
human salvation. We simply cannot turn ourselves, by ourselves,
into a socially cohesive unit that respects others and looks to
other means to resolve disputes instead of killing. Our only
hope would be some major international catastrophe and even
then, it may come down to every man for himself.

But then I'm making assumptions here; that ET is disinterested
in us because we're savages. That is a very commonly held belief
but it's not a sequitor - unless you subscribe to the "Space
Brothers" scenario.

It is fairly obvious that this is a subject that needs a working
model, allowing for all the possible different permutations. I
bet there's one somewhere in the Pentagon. At this stage I think
we have to abandon the specifics and talk in generalities and I
think that means even forgetting about whether contact is
aggressive or peaceful as the reactions are likely to be similar
but with different consequences.

On that basis, while I think we'll be scared witless, it's one
challenge I'd like to take on, even allowing for the gamble. If
we get it right, we will have achieved salvation and if we get
it wrong, well, damnation might be a better option than the
present. At least we'd have answers even if we didn't have a
planet. A fair exchange, I'm sure!


Stuart Miller




[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com