Re: Alien abductions and supertechnology

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• [ Next ]In reply to: phil osborn

>From: Peter Lakbar <peter.lakbar@swipnet.se>
>Reply-To: extropians@extropy.com
>To: extropians@extropy.com
>Subject: Re: Alien abductions and supertechnology
>Date: Sun, 04 Jul 1999 05:11:29 +0200
>
>At 21:50 1999-07-03 -0400, you wrote:
> >This isn't meant as an endorsement of any particular interpretation of
> >so-called "alien abduction," so please don't inundate me with allegations
>of
> >pseudoscience!
>
>Crank! Occultist! Heretic! Supersti......sorry, force of habit. :)
>
> >I _do_ think that the abduction phenomenon deserves scientific
> >study; also, I would be surprised if we found out the perpetrators were
> >"extraterrestrials" in the classic sense.
>
>I agree on both points.
>
> >But what I read on the subject sometimes strikes me as descriptions of
> >extropian technologies. Witnesses describe the aliens' uncanny ability
>to
> >levitate and walk through walls: sounds like utility fog to me. And I
> >remember a description of a levitation "ray" used by an apparent craft
>that
> >looked "grainy": possible refraction caused by the presence of copious
> >nanomachines?
>
>This is a definite possibillity, and unfortunatly, as far as I'm aware, not
>one that have been mentioned in any book on the subject. (UFO's, that is,
>not nanotech.)
>
> >Also, most of the saucers sighted by witnesses are sleek and seamless.
> >Interior lighting is apparently sourceless. This sort of thing is right
>out
> >of "Engines of Creation." One witness said the inside of the craft
>looked
> >"poured from a single mold," which is exactly what we would expect from a
> >vehicle sculpted by nanomachines.
> >
> >Maybe the so-called alien presence is some form of projection showing us
> >what's ahead on our technological horizon; remember that the UFO
>phenomenon,
> >in its earliest modern form, took the appearance of "ghost rockets" over
> >Scandinavia during a period when rocket research was in its infancy. And
>do
> >I even need to mention the phantom airships of the late 1800s?
> >
> >Maybe this is a form of quantum mentation in action. (Or maybe it's
>really
> >aliens--transtemporal, ET or otherwise. But that's not the focus of this
> >post.)
>
>*whimsical speculation mode on*
>
>One 'transhuman possibillity', put forward by John Keel and others, are
>that we are being not-so-subtly tested/influenced by a Power. Perhaps the
>Singularity has already occured and we're the descendants of the neophobes
>who refused to take part.....
>
>
>Peter Lakbar
>
> >Mac Tonnies
> >alintelbot@aol.com
>
>
>
Two observations:

1. A lot of the UFO "sightings" bear a remarkable similarity to holographic projections. What kind of real, solid spaceship, no matter (a pun, I suppose) how advanced, can change velocity virtually instantaneously without at least a massive shock wave - sonic boom, etc.? Why would they fly that way? On the other hand, suppose you spotted a primitive intelligence at radio stage and decided to spend a little cash letting them know you were there. Perhaps the saucers, etc., are in fact very long range holographic projections. I can very easilly fool a naive observer that I have an FTL just by swinging a beam across a wide enough arc.
2. The abductions, however, can more easilly be explained another way entirely. You are familiar with roofies - rohypnol, and the other "date-rape" drugs. The CIA did several decades worth of research on mind control using selective memory erasing drugs, starting immediately after WWII and possibly (very likely) still continuing. In some S. American countries, kidnappers routinely use native scopalomine to kidnap the wealthy and steal them blind. I suggest that to whatever extent these are not mere fantasies or publicity stunts, they are probably along the same lines. The Orange County Register once reported that 40,000 people in Orange County alone claimed to have been abducted by aliens. That seems outrageously high, but even 1% of that would make one wonder if some of them were not telling a true story of what they thought they remembered, given that the technology does exist to achieve that result.

   ---

• [ Next ] In reply to: phil osborn