Alexis Brooks, The Intersection of Consciousness and UFO Journalism |416|

#21
There has never been a fully informed democracy and there never will be.
There you go. Eric knows what's what so don't trouble yourselves questioning it. Whence comes such certitude? In this instance, from someone on the "right" of the spectrum I mentioned earlier. In other instances, from people on the "left" of it. Alexis has it right: wherever we are on the spectrum, it behoves us to have a little humility...
 
#22
Endless people who were mocked for reporting UFO phenomena. Nobody would have mocked them if it had been public knowledge that these phenomena occurred.

I rather liked Alexis' suggestion that some non-human entity may be forcing their hand.

David
People that suggest a man in a dress is not a woman and can't have a menstrual cycle are also belittled by the govt these days. The govt is people who are subject to popular delusions, stupid politics and madness just like the rest of us. The belittling isn't part of some conspiracy to alter your reality about spiritual matters. It's just the usual BS designed to control their own neurosis/defend their lazy paradigm. You can find the same in the school system, or the local old ladies knitting circle, the comments section of any blog or news outlet, basically anywhere humans congregate. The Kodak board belittled anyone who suggested that digital photography was going to be the future.
 
#23
There you go. Eric knows what's what so don't trouble yourselves questioning it. Whence comes such certitude? In this instance, from someone on the "right" of the spectrum I mentioned earlier. In other instances, from people on the "left" of it. Alexis has it right: wherever we are on the spectrum, it behoves us to have a little humility...
No. I'm saying that there is no evidence for the claim that we were once an informed democracy and that now we are not. Make a case. I say it's the opposite given literacy rates increasing, social media, etc.

You/David are the ones just tossing out assertions about reality that you, as part of the group think here, accept, but I do not.
 
#24
No. I'm saying that there is no evidence for the claim that we were once an informed democracy and that now we are not. Make a case. I say it's the opposite given literacy rates increasing, social media, etc.

You/David are the ones just tossing out assertions about reality that you, as part of the group think here, accept, but I do not.
If you'll read my posts carefully, you'll find that I'm mostly circumspect and diffident rather than assertive. You seem so aggressive most of the time, even in this attempted rejoinder. One day you might be able to hold a level-headed discussion and might even learn something -- you never know -- but I'm not holding my breath. How can one have a decent discussion with people who label others as victims of "groupthink"? Look in the mirror sometime and see whether you can detect your own groupthink...
 
#25
Alex have you read this transcript of Hal Puthoff’s speech to the SSE 1 year ago?
https://paradigmresearchgroup.org/2...se-irva-conference-las-vegas-nv-15-june-2018/

You’re saying the TTSA is obviously a psyop and I haven’t known what to make of it, but after reading Puthoff’s speech and also perusing the recently leaked documents (Eric Davis’ notes on a meeting he had with Adm Wilson), I am feeling more confident in this narrative:

  1. We’ve recovered alien spacecraft that still work.
  2. Perhaps more craft are being recovered from the ice in Antarctica. It’s the perfect place to look for meteorites so why not fallen spacecraft too?
  3. The alien watchers were very concerned with the atomic tests so interactions increased.
  4. The technology that powers the craft (with vacuum energy or antimatter) is many orders of magnitude more powerful than atomic energy and is thus more dangerous.
  5. To prevent the universe from being blown up from within or to prevent the balance of power from being too concentrated, there is a universal hierarchy of order to control this power. So some of the alien interaction is a result of the “watchers” (Universal UN Blue Helmet’s) keeping us safely away from this tech unless we can prove we can handle it. (I don’t see how it could be intrinsically safe)
  6. There is also the human hierarchy of military and competition between governments and corporations and individuals.
  7. All the main world powers are racing to reverse engineer these recovered craft, but they’ve spent decades with no results partly because these craft are so far beyond our current comprehension and partly because the extreme secrecy is extremely restrictive. There is no free flow of information and they can’t get the best minds to work in the conditions necessary for secrecy and they kill many who threaten to leave and they can’t attract others because nobody can put this on their resume as a marketable skill without being laughed out the door because of the social taboo.
  8. So after many decades our secret compartmentalized projects still haven’t figured these things out.
  9. Many decent people (such as Hal Puthoff) in the power structure are frustrated by this sluggish progress and want to open this up to public discussion and perhaps the free exchange of information without taboos will allow us to crack this egg and make some progress on the various areas of scientific advancement necessary to reverse engineer.
  10. Some secret SAPs do still posses a number of flying craft and are looking for more in Antarctica and they are currently playing with them (thus the creation of the Space Force).
Edit: I realize I completely left out the consciousness aspect... well I am one of those engineers that’s more fascinated by the nuts and bolts aspect I guess :)

But the power to warp space-time or tunnel through wormholes implies a great many things which bleed into the realm of consciousness. So I’m not discounting that aspect of it one bit.

But we do have something physical going on and there is a pattern... so parts of it that repeat can be studied with science and brought under the domain of physics and physics will in turn expand to encompass the mental as well.
 
Last edited:
#28
There you go. Eric knows what's what so don't trouble yourselves questioning it. Whence comes such certitude? In this instance, from someone on the "right" of the spectrum I mentioned earlier. In other instances, from people on the "left" of it. Alexis has it right: wherever we are on the spectrum, it behoves us to have a little humility...
I think that is an exaggeration, like most terms, my term "informed democracy" is not black and white. However, I think if we effectively lose the media, democracy will be in a bad place.

Most of us don't preface what we say with "I suspect", or "I think", or "I wonder if" as often as we might.

David
 
#29
People that suggest a man in a dress is not a woman and can't have a menstrual cycle are also belittled by the govt these days. The govt is people who are subject to popular delusions, stupid politics and madness just like the rest of us. The belittling isn't part of some conspiracy to alter your reality about spiritual matters. It's just the usual BS designed to control their own neurosis/defend their lazy paradigm. You can find the same in the school system, or the local old ladies knitting circle, the comments section of any blog or news outlet, basically anywhere humans congregate. The Kodak board belittled anyone who suggested that digital photography was going to be the future.
The trouble is that the government takes too much notice of the media, and you yourself acknowledge what a mess they are in right now.

David
 
#30
i'm of the belief there is really only one Gamemaster. This great entity is conscious of all occurrences and thoughts and wishes of It's creations in It's Universe. If any person, like all persons has a tiny bit of this Great Entity within them then for him or her to communicate by thought as in prayer seems logical. So any person who may have a wish to see a UFO may quite magically get to see one. If friends happen to be near such person at the time they may become witness to this. If the Gamemaster is like us then It enjoys those who believe It exists and will more readily accommodate such people's wants and needs. Such a believer will be fascinated by what is revealed to him or her. I believe also that should certain bull headed, insane members of mankind ever decide to try to destroy the Earth through conflict that a fleet of UFO's will intervene for humanity's sake. The Gamemaster is proud of those souls who after lifetimes at last qualify to graduate and will permanently reside in the bliss of It's company. Therefore the game must continue until such time as IT decides it shall be over.
 
#32
I've put more thought into all of that since encountering it so frequently here.

1. I think that strong, idealistic, independent, bright people vastly underestimate the ability of the dull witted masses to get things wrong and to screw up their lives. They also underestimate the desire - the need - of the masses to be led by others. The bright and independent just can't imagine people being otherwise and even think it's cruel and evil to think of others as needing to be led and spoon-fed and controlled. Their own talents and attitudes/idealism blind them to the reality of humanity.
Probably a lot of truth in this!
2. This same personality type downplays the importance of the material because they have been steeped in it since day 1. Everywhere on earth, now and in the past, people have desired the best tech and material comfort available. If they don't have it, when they encounter it, they want it. They may not like some cultural concepts that come with the tech, like a different God/no God, open homosexuality or rock and roll, but they still want the 5G, the air conditioning, the modern medicine, the cars, the guns, you name it. All of them. You can kill a lot Tatonka and wipe out a lot of enemies with those fire sticks. Gotta get me some. Islamic fundamentalists living in mud huts in distant mountains eschew modern culture, but they all have cell phones, want better guns, want antibiotics, Toyotas, etc.
I have no wish for 5G - my internet is perfectly OK as it is!
3. Telling people that material comfort is meaningless and that they should just follow - what? Their hearts? Meditate the day away? Start believing in any idea, thought or perception that enters their heads? That is going to seriously lead to mass chaos of proportions that would result in societal breakdown and mass suffering and death beyond the wildest imaginings of the hardcore global warming crowd. Most people want and need to be a part of a tangible culture with clear rules and beliefs.
Agreed!
4. Not everyone has direct experiences. Even if those that do could make some helpful meaning out of experiences (and they won't - observe cults, etc), someone has to disseminate knowledge to those who don't have direct experience. So we are back to someone(s) telling the masses what's real. The message would have to be dumbed down so the <=90 IQs can digest it. Who's got a big enough ego to do that? How has that helped people? Look at what Jesus is supposed to have said and look at Church dogmas. If they can't even get that right, how is this knowledge revolution supposed to work? It's empty idealism, poorly thought out and lacking viable implementation process.
LOL!
5. Assuming "the government" knows anything substantial about all of this, beyond what we do, how do you know that it hasn't decided that not all of this stuff is benign? Since paranoia is part of the intellectual currency here, how does anyone know that the government hasn't determined that people would strengthen extra dimensional malevolent forces by lending attention and energy to them? That's just one hypothetical.
We both know there are elements in the US and UK governments that lust after war - so it is naive to suggest that our governments are benign.
6. Again, if not the govt controlling this information, who? You? Well, then you'd be the new govt - or a cult leader/guru. -
7. Is the problem here that some are taking what they think is a scientific approach to their lives and feel that they can't decide how to live because the govt is holding back critical data that would allow them to perform a full analysis and arrive at conclusions?
8. If the answer to 7 is "yes", I think that some people should prepare themselves to be perpetually disappointed. I don't think the government knows as much as you do.
Not long ago, the Church decided what we should know, and scientists fought against it, and some lost their heads or were burned at the stake, probably many more had sleepless nights or nightmares. Now we seem to be back in a situation where there is 'science' that is kept secret.

David
 
#33
The trouble is that the government takes too much notice of the media, and you yourself acknowledge what a mess they are in right now.

David
Agree. I think our 24/7 media capabilities - including social media - have outpaced our ability to mentally/psychologically adapt. It's an out-of-control rampage at this point. The medium is the message.
 
#34
If you'll read my posts carefully, you'll find that I'm mostly circumspect and diffident rather than assertive. You seem so aggressive most of the time, even in this attempted rejoinder. One day you might be able to hold a level-headed discussion and might even learn something -- you never know -- but I'm not holding my breath. How can one have a decent discussion with people who label others as victims of "groupthink"? Look in the mirror sometime and see whether you can detect your own groupthink...
You know - I could do with less of this kind of post.
 
Last edited:
#35
Agree. I think our 24/7 media capabilities - including social media - have outpaced our ability to mentally/psychologically adapt. It's an out-of-control rampage at this point. The medium is the message.
I agree in part Eric, but would add - I am not sure that our media nor government models have matured to the point where they were ready for the 'feedback' aspect of social media. The public was, but the media and foundations which craft our directional thought, were not. They took the medium as a new means of deploying 'grassroots influence' out to the masses. But sadly, in many subjects, it appears there was no real backing to the 'truth' they sought to impress - or the targeted masses either dissented or were better prepared on the data and inference than were the propaganda crafters themselves.

This is part of the reason why the robust set of data behind some subjects we discourse freely here, irritatingly will just not go away - as they thought they would attain through the teaching of 'skepticism'. In fact, social media only turned out to fan the flames. It truly angers these people, who overestimated their bootstrap strength. Michael Shermer, as it turns out - is not that smart, nor talented at countering the acumen of his critics. Twenty years ago, one would have never known this. He was the King with No Clothes, merrily publishing away in Scientific American - wholly clueless as to any kind of feedback, and the growing distaste on the part of the public (and science and engineering community for that matter) for he and his Cabal.

The Dunning-Kruger study's final key projection related that:

Prediction 4. The incompetent can gain insight about their shortcomings, but this comes (paradoxically) by making them more competent, thus providing them the metacognitive skills necessary to be able to realize that they have performed poorly.²
When they sought to undertake this final step - of 'educating' the public through social media - it backfired. It turned out that our social message crafters and science communicators did not have the grasp on key topics they had presumed; and they performed poorly. Google/Facebook/Twitter et. al. are scrambling furiously now to try and remedy this.

A gigantic irony in Dunning-Kruger.
 
Last edited:
#36
I agree in part Eric, but would add - I am not sure that our media nor government models have matured to the point where they were ready for the 'feedback' aspect of social media. The public was, but the media and foundations which craft our directional thought, were not. They took the medium as a new means of deploying 'grassroots influence' out to the masses. But sadly, in many subjects, it appears there was no real backing to the 'truth' they sought to impress - or the targeted masses either dissented or were better prepared on the data and inference than were the propaganda crafters themselves.

This is part of the reason why the robust set of data behind some subjects we discourse freely here, irritatingly will just not go away - as they thought they would attain through the teaching of 'skepticism'. In fact, social media only turned out to fan the flames. It truly angers these people, who overestimated their bootstrap strength. Michael Shermer, as it turns out - is not that smart, nor talented at countering the acumen of his critics. Twenty years ago, one would have never known this. He was the King with No Clothes, merrily publishing away in Scientific American - wholly clueless as to any kind of feedback, and the growing distaste on the part of the public (and science and engineering community for that matter) for he and his Cabal.

The Dunning-Kruger study's final key projection related that:

Prediction 4. The incompetent can gain insight about their shortcomings, but this comes (paradoxically) by making them more competent, thus providing them the metacognitive skills necessary to be able to realize that they have performed poorly.²
When they sought to undertake this final step - of 'educating' the public through social media - it backfired. It turned out that our social message crafters and science communicators did not have the grasp on key topics they had presumed; and they performed poorly. Google/Facebook/Twitter et. al. are scrambling furiously now to try and remedy this.

A gigantic irony in Dunning-Kruger.
TES,
I agree. You call out another aspect of the social media phenomenon and it's a key one.

There's always going to be a tension between reality + desired reality experienced by the masses and reality + desired reality experienced by the elite/ruling class. In a relatively free society, this makes for a nice system of checks and balances. The elites can't consolidate too much power, but neither can the mob. The Romans recognized this and gave the masses bread and circus. The masses liked it. I am not favorable to the masses any more than I am to the elites. Neither are noble or good. They are all humans given to the 7 deadly sins. They need to check each others' power or hell will break loose. The best we can hope for, given human nature, is a relatively calm purgatory.

IMO, right now we are in flux re; adaptation of social media as a replacement for radio, TV and Hollyweird. The propaganda/ reality perception molding power is has shifted toward the mob for the time being - or at least a noisy subset of it. However, the mob is also fragmenting along world view lines due to social media providing an avenue of expression and contention.

Politicians and news outlets are greatly fearing the mob. Those craven shills, with fingers in the wind, do not wish to become the target of a twitter smear campaign, boycott, etc.

So they cave to the mob and the mob grows into a bigger monster. An unsavory feedback loop develops.

Yet at the end of the day, I think the power structures of society will all balance out; albeit maintain their uneasy peace at the mind melting hypersonic speed and ear shattering decibel levels that the megaphone of social media permits.

One of the monkey wrenches in all of this evolving social machinery is that social media lends itself to all kinds of hacking, bots, etc. So we have no way of really knowing who or how many actually hold the beliefs we see blasted all over social media. Also, I know for a fact from colleagues that have worked in or with Sillycon Valley that all of the social media/entertainment/smart tech/gaming industry builds in algorithms designed to torque human emotions and, in their words, alter your very brain chemistry. Of course your reactions can be tracked via several proxies and all of your other info is collected, packaged and sold.

I don't have a smart phone and refuse to get one.

Again, I don't think humans are able to usefully process this much info at such a fast pace and divorced from normal social cues (like body language, tonal inflection) and normal social responsibilities and consequences (e.g. normally wouldn't say that because might get a broken jaw). I think there is a fundamental bio/social/spiritual/evolutionary gap between our human abilities and what the tech can do (and is doing).
 
Last edited:
#39
One of the monkey wrenches in all of this evolving social machinery is that social media lends itself to all kinds of hacking, bots, etc. So we have no way of really knowing who or how many actually hold the beliefs we see blasted all over social media. Also, I know for a fact from colleagues that have worked in or with Sillycon Valley that all of the social media/entertainment/smart tech/gaming industry builds in algorithms designed to torque human emotions and, in their words, alter your very brain chemistry. Of course your reactions can be tracked via several proxies and all of your other info is collected, packaged and sold.
I love conducting the Twitter test: wherein I engage with a celebrity skeptic on some issue. He or she will have "450 K" followers. My tweets with them will have like 180 impressions and 25 engagements. Then I tweet with some unknown but sincere individual with like 450 followers. I will get 100+ impressions/20+ engagements with them as well. Celebrity is a charade. But of course we have known this all along.

I think the dispelling of what has been fake all along - is good, regardless of where power is consolidated, within reason.

I think there is a fundamental bio/social/spiritual/evolutionary gap between our human abilities and what the tech can do (and is doing).
Perhaps it is not tech doing this. Perhaps part of our society possesses the ability to tolerate changes to its ontology, but the majority do not. Forbidden ideas have escaped from their cage and are roaming about freely. There are members of our society which this spectre frightens enormously. I suspect the tech adoption drag has more to do with this, than the ability to process a technologically aided speed of information.
 
#40
I’ve followed Alexis for a while on Facebook and have listened to all of her podcasts which I thought would hold my interest. She does a good job and I think makes several good points. Her discussions with Mary Rodwell are fantastic. I like how she takes the middle ground on many of these topics and reminds herself that we can’t be sure of much regarding these topics. That’s something everybody needs to do. Sometimes I wonder if I question my own beliefs enough. There are people like Roberta Grimes (who I do like and think has done some good research) who sound way to sure of themselves and their interpretations of all this bizarre data.

I’ve aired out many of my beliefs regarding extended consciousness realms a lot in the past two threads. But I’m happy to change my views if so inclined by good reason and evidence.
 
Top