UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2012 > Aug > Aug 13

Re: Bluff And Double-Bluff?

From: Ray Dickenson <r.dickenson.nul>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 15:04:56 +0100
Archived: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 10:55:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Bluff And Double-Bluff?

>From: Gerald O'Connell <goc.nul>
>To: <post.nul>
>Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 12:21:18 +0100
>Subject: Re: Bluff And Double-Bluff?

>From: Ray Dickenson <r.dickenson.nul>
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <post.nul>
>Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 11:44:07 +0100
>Subject: Bluff And Double-Bluff?

>>Should we be suspicious of the extremely simplistic and even
>>childish interpretations of the actions and motives of beings
>>perceived in some sightings and probably all C.E. situations?


>Ray, there's a hidden assumption in your line of thinking that
>seems to be present in nearly all discussion of this and related
>issues. We know for sure that if ET (or extra-dimensional, or
>whatever - it makes little difference) entities are involved,
>then they must possess a technology far in advance of our own.
>We then extrapolate from this, quite unjustifiably, that this
>must mean that this technology is somehow fault-free or


>So, my suggestion is that what we may be experiencing is the
>outline of a typical Kilgore Trout scenario: the autopilot is
>broken, the machine is still flying, the flight path is absurdly
>and repetitively erratic, and we are reduced to the condition of
>headless chickens in our pathetic attempts to interpret it.

Gerald, your point is a nice one, which I didn't include for
brevity's sake, and is covered by James P Hogan in his book.
Although he never expresses a personal opinion, several of the
debates or controversies in 'Kicking The Sacred Cow' - origin of
life on earth/what really drives evolutio/has Earth life been
manipulated by external forces/are there signs of 'intervention'
in the wider universe/and can statistical analysis give a
definitive answer to that question - all contain that question
or perceived dichotomy, some as a central point.

That is, should we expect 'perfection' in _any_ examples of life
or even mechanisms. On that point Hogan asks "Do you think our
computers or jet planes are actually 'perfect'? Or even
perfectible?" (paraphrased).

Saving the best for last (or nearly last) Hogan features the
work of William Dembski in analyzing universal evidence to find
sure-fire evidence of 'intervention', most likely from alien
intelligences (but seen as an open door for creationists). It's
outlined here:


The Design Inference: Eliminating Chance through Small

As always Hogan gives the opposing views, and, as almost always
in our modern 'consensus' driven sciences (the consensus has
always been wrong in the past - but no-one seems to recall that
fact), it takes the form of misrepresentation, corrupt pressures
(amounting to blackmail) and downright lies and threats. Summed
up here:


The Lynching Of Bill Dembski.

[Deja vu: that hypocrisy of mainstream science is eerily a repeat
of the Velikovsky affair - where luminaries like Sagan indulged
in fake statistics and wild misrepresentation to try to discredit
Velikovsky, and the establishment went so far as getting honest
editors fired by threatening publishers with withdrawal of future
business. Maybe see www.perceptions.couk.com/subindex.html#hubris
for details of Sagan's over-reaching.]

Did Dembski find the evidence he was seeking? I.e. has there
been 'intervention' here on Earth or in the wider universe?
Well, that depends on the weighting you give to his 'signs of
intelligence' or the 'unlikelihood threshold' adopted to
classify such signs. (I tend to think he has - but that's only a
personal impression.)

Again from a personal perspective - i.e not a ufologist, just an
arm's-length observer - and considering all the data (that is,
stuff that Dembski couldn't consider because it hasn't been
published in the journals) such as the NASA and Russian near-
space photos and films, I think there's overwhelming evidence of
a panoply of external life, and that we see (are usually allowed
to see) only the simplest - such as the 'test probes' and
'electricity feeders' seen below the atmosphere, and the
'intelligent transport vehicles' seen above the atmosphere,
arriving and departing from and to outer space.

Those we only glimpse - the 1/60th of a second superfast entities
discovered by Martyn Stubbs - might be a sign of the 'slips' or
imperfections of (some of) the real intelligences at work. And
that might change Dembski's tentative conclusion into a rock-firm

Repeat: I think that all appearances are deceptive and that
_any_ C.E event (and many a sighting) is a double - or even
treble - bluff (or higher).


Ray D

Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast



These contents above are copyright of the author and
UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced
without the express permission of both parties and
are intended for educational use only.

[ 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