Bruce Fenton on UFO/ET Contact 780,000 Years Ago |458|

Alex

Administrator
#1
Bruce Fenton on UFO/ET Contact 780,000 Years Ago |458|
by Alex Tsakiris | Jul 28 | Others
Share
Tweet
0SHARES

Bruce Fenton’s shamanic experience sent him looking for scientific proof of ancient alien contact… and he found it.
fina
photo by: Skeptiko
[Clip 00:00:00 – 00:00:53]
That’s a clip from a little Skeptiko movie project episode, kind of experiment that I put together with Bruce Fenton, who you’ll hear from today, and Sean Fahey who was the guy who really did all the work behind it. Although Bruce and Danny did a lot of the work too. Anyways, I am so excited about Bruce’s work and always have been, and the last interview we did, I thought was just terrific.
And then I ran into The Snake Brothers, Russ and Kyle Allen of Brothers of the Serpent podcast, and I kind of got them interested in it, and they’re interested in doing a series of interviews on this topic.
So as kind of a way of launching that little project, I invited everybody here on Skeptiko and here’s what we came up with.
 
Last edited:
#3
Bruce Fenton's ideas are really intriguing. Re the tektites: I think the possibility that they're solar flare related should be seriously considered before it's dismissed. (And i'm writing this as a Suspicious Observers audience member)
 
#4
I found this podcast interesting, but unfortunately it isn't an area of science that I know much about - so it is very hard to evaluate just how plausible it all is.

Certainly I think the idea of two objects colliding just outside the atmosphere in such a way as to cancel out each other's momentum, isn't feasible - as your guests agreed.

Is it claimed that the other, older, tektite fields have been created in a similar way?

Maybe it would help if someone wrote out the new timetable that this represents.

Will we get to see the movie here on Skeptiko?

David
 
#5
Bruce Fenton's ideas are really intriguing. Re the tektites: I think the possibility that they're solar flare related should be seriously considered before it's dismissed. (And i'm writing this as a Suspicious Observers audience member)
As I said above, this isn't an area of science that I know much about, but on the face of it, a solar flare strong enough to melt something in orbit, would have done something pretty drastic to life on earth! Also there is still the problem of accounting for something arriving in orbit around the earth.

Incidentally, low earth orbital velocity is about 5 miles per second - spacecraft still need a heat shield to make it back to ground from orbit.

@Alex I think this is a very interesting subject, but perhaps a lot of people here are like me (is that possible!), and lack the background to evaluate this properly?

The subject is written up here:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/tektite

This doesn't seem to report them as a mystery, but that doesn't prove anything!

David
 
#6
Just like it was described in Fenton's first interview, his research findings sound like something out of Star Wars. This doesn't invalidate it by any means. However, I am coming from the angle of the various spiritual traditions & masters who report that humankind has been in physical bodies for any extremely long time, certainly beyond anything that can be confirmed by science. One Buddhist website said the Buddha became aware upon his enlightenment of memories of past lives that extended to 91 aeons. If we choose a definition of an aeon as being a time period of a billion years. then human beings were here long, long before 780,000 years ago. This extremely long time frame is supported by Le Hongzhi's claim that homo sapiens's civilizations have been annihilated 81 times, with a few ragged survivors left to start everything over again. Hindu spiritual figures talk about the Yugas, which are cyclical periods of human existence that are repeated over & over, apparently w/o any end in sight. What is really cool about Fenton's ideas is the influence that ET has had on our evolution this time around.
 
#7
Just like it was described in Fenton's first interview, his research findings sound like something out of Star Wars. This doesn't invalidate it by any means. However, I am coming from the angle of the various spiritual traditions & masters who report that humankind has been in physical bodies for any extremely long time, certainly beyond anything that can be confirmed by science. One Buddhist website said the Buddha became aware upon his enlightenment of memories of past lives that extended to 91 aeons. If we choose a definition of an aeon as being a time period of a billion years. then human beings were here long, long before 780,000 years ago. This extremely long time frame is supported by Le Hongzhi's claim that homo sapiens's civilizations have been annihilated 81 times, with a few ragged survivors left to start everything over again. Hindu spiritual figures talk about the Yugas, which are cyclical periods of human existence that are repeated over & over, apparently w/o any end in sight. What is really cool about Fenton's ideas is the influence that ET has had on our evolution this time around.
That would be long before the big bang - but again, that depends on conventional science.

More to the point, does the figure of 1 billion years come from anywhere. Why not take 1 aeon=8131 years?

David
 
Last edited:

Alex

Administrator
#8
Bruce Fenton's ideas are really intriguing. Re the tektites: I think the possibility that they're solar flare related should be seriously considered before it's dismissed. (And i'm writing this as a Suspicious Observers audience member)
IDK Bruce is pretty tight re these kind of technical details. tell me if you find anything.
 

Alex

Administrator
#9
I found this podcast interesting, but unfortunately it isn't an area of science that I know much about - so it is very hard to evaluate just how plausible it all is.

Certainly I think the idea of two objects colliding just outside the atmosphere in such a way as to cancel out each other's momentum, isn't feasible - as your guests agreed.

Is it claimed that the other, older, tektite fields have been created in a similar way?

Maybe it would help if someone wrote out the new timetable that this represents.

Will we get to see the movie here on Skeptiko?

David
 
#10
Alex,

That is a really good film, perhaps leaving aside the music :) What does being an executive producer actually do? How long did it take?

It clarified the subject a lot, and of course, those Human Accelerated Regions were something T.E.S was talking about.

So we had the entities in blue suits arriving at the planet, getting into orbit, and their craft being destroyed (or could it have been an accident of some sort). However, I am not quite sure whether it was the original group that changed our genome, or the group that came in and blasted the first lot - that is still obscure to me.

I wasn't aware that a chromosome fusion had taken place in our near past.

I wonder if Bruce is in touch with anyone in the DI.

David
 
#11
Le Hongzhi's claim that homo sapiens's civilizations have been annihilated 81 times, with a few ragged survivors left to start everything over again. Hindu spiritual figures talk about the Yugas, which are cyclical periods of human existence that are repeated over & over, apparently w/o any end in sight. What is really cool about Fenton's ideas is the influence that ET has had on our evolution this time around.
It is apparent to me that we are not merely in “earth school” but we are in a large scale feedback loop aimed at progress... progress towards what? I don’t know... just better in every way.

Life review during NDEs: feedback loop. Juxtapose your goals with outcomes to gain insight that allows you to hit the mark closer next time around.

How do we train an AI agent (neural net)? We challenge it and the versions that don’t make it are killed off and new skills are strengthened and carried on into future iterations/generations.

Reality has a nested structure. Just as we run simulations to build a better AI:

Something in the nested layer of reality above us is running a “simulation” and we are being cyclically allowed to diversify, then we are culled through catastrophe.
 
#12
It is apparent to me that we are not merely in “earth school” but we are in a large scale feedback loop aimed at progress... progress towards what? I don’t know... just better in every way.

Life review during NDEs: feedback loop. Juxtapose your goals with outcomes to gain insight that allows you to hit the mark closer next time around.

How do we train an AI agent (neural net)? We challenge it and the versions that don’t make it are killed off and new skills are strengthened and carried on into future iterations/generations.

Reality has a nested structure. Just as we run simulations to build a better AI:

Something in the nested layer of reality above us is running a “simulation” and we are being cyclically allowed to diversify, then we are culled through catastrophe.
I think you would do well to read Michael Behe's book about the limits of evolution by natural selection:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B079L6RTNT/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

What he shows - pretty rigorously - is that NS can find optimise a system by making small changes, but that evolution on a larger scale comes unstuck.
GOOGLE has also been known to put out somewhat misleading AI information before now.

It must clearly have immediate relevance to the neural net type of AI, where nets learn by endless failures.

We really prize GOOGLE for its search engine, but that has been constructed by vast numbers of human inputs by domain specialists . The framework that coordinates all that is still obviously impressive - but it was all built by humans.

Remember also that Donald Hoffman's team claim to have a theorem that shows that if our perception evolved by NS, then its output bears no resemblance to actual reality. I think that is better turned around - our perception did not evolve by NS!

This podcast and video certainly fits into that idea, although if I understand Behe correctly, intelligent design is needed fairly frequently to keep things going.

David
 
Last edited:
#13
https://www.walmart.com/ip/Alcherin...=sem&msclkid=40b75da282bc1772dca80284a134dd00
BTW... check out:






See all 3 images

Follow the Author

Valerie Barrow

+ Follow
ALCHERINGA - When the first ancestors were created. Paperback – August 29, 2014
by Valerie Barrow (Author), Bill Oliver (Author)
4.5 out of 5 stars 16 ratings







See all formats and editions
I just picked up a paperback copy for $24. It seems that the are re-printing it again. Coincidence? *grin*

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Alcherin...=sem&msclkid=40b75da282bc1772dca80284a134dd00
 

Alex

Administrator
#14
Alex,

That is a really good film, perhaps leaving aside the music :) What does being an executive producer actually do? How long did it take?

It clarified the subject a lot, and of course, those Human Accelerated Regions were something T.E.S was talking about.

So we had the entities in blue suits arriving at the planet, getting into orbit, and their craft being destroyed (or could it have been an accident of some sort). However, I am not quite sure whether it was the original group that changed our genome, or the group that came in and blasted the first lot - that is still obscure to me.

I wasn't aware that a chromosome fusion had taken place in our near past.

I wonder if Bruce is in touch with anyone in the DI.

David
it was a lot of work. I learned a lot :)
 

Alex

Administrator
#15
It is apparent to me that we are not merely in “earth school” but we are in a large scale feedback loop aimed at progress... progress towards what? I don’t know... just better in every way.

Life review during NDEs: feedback loop. Juxtapose your goals with outcomes to gain insight that allows you to hit the mark closer next time around.

How do we train an AI agent (neural net)? We challenge it and the versions that don’t make it are killed off and new skills are strengthened and carried on into future iterations/generations.

Reality has a nested structure. Just as we run simulations to build a better AI:

Something in the nested layer of reality above us is running a “simulation” and we are being cyclically allowed to diversify, then we are culled through catastrophe.
maybe... but I see something different in the near-death experience science literature... then again, maybe I'm just a romantic idealist :)
 
#16
How do we train an AI agent (neural net)? We challenge it and the versions that don’t make it are killed off and new skills are strengthened and carried on into future iterations/generations.
Let's face it, a lot of human ingenuity (design) has gone into those AI robots - even if they are exactly as portrayed.

Suppose the AI neural net had been presented with a couple of pots of resin and some electronic and mechanical components - just how far do you think the net would go - I'd guess nowhere at all.

Those jumping machines (whether simulated or not) were designed and made before the ANN got to even look at the data!

AI is a strange con. People spend immense effort building something just close enough to being already functional, and them marvel that the statistical methods of ANN's (because that is all they are) have finally finished the job off!

To understand consciousness, I think we need to focus on the emotions - the qualia - without which life would be utterly pointless.

The idea that machines can think is actually rather old, as this fascinating book illustrates:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Restless-C.../ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

David
 
#17
It's a small issue in the scheme of things presented by Bruce, but there is alternative theory that would support what Bruce has to say about the 'bombardment' of Earth by the aliens at war.

He suggests that asteroids coming from different directions was used by the aliens, but electromagnetic scarring could be a better explanation.

For circular craters to form, asteroid impact would have to be perfectly perpendicular. The craters formed by electric scarring are always circular, and shallow.

If aliens can somehow throw lightening bolts at a planet, and there is plenty of evidence that Earth has been scarred electrically, like the whole Grand Canyon, then that might be related to the magnetic pole shifts as well. Magnetic fields are affected by electric currents.

https://www.thunderbolts.info/webnews/120707electriccraters.htm

https://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060131crater.htm
 
#18
Let's face it, a lot of human ingenuity (design) has gone into those AI robots - even if they are exactly as portrayed.

Suppose the AI neural net had been presented with a couple of pots of resin and some electronic and mechanical components - just how far do you think the net would go - I'd guess nowhere at all.

Those jumping machines (whether simulated or not) were designed and made before the ANN got to even look at the data!

AI is a strange con. People spend immense effort building something just close enough to being already functional, and them marvel that the statistical methods of ANN's (because that is all they are) have finally finished the job off!

To understand consciousness, I think we need to focus on the emotions - the qualia - without which life would be utterly pointless.

The idea that machines can think is actually rather old, as this fascinating book illustrates:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Restless-C.../ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

David
A gentleman on one of those TED Talks said he wasn't worried about machines developing consciousness b/c only living things are sentient. So are we dealing w/ thinking is different from consciousness? Apparently so. Of course, some of the people I know seem to think w/o being conscious, but that's a whole other area. At any rate, thinking to me doesn't require consciousness. Various spiritual masters say the Absolute is beyond the realm of mind. The Almighty is best investigated by feelings & looking at yourself w/ desireless clarity. So if mind is not necessary for the Absolute, then it's not necessarily required for all of Its creations. For instance, Le Hongzhi says as you reach higher levels of consciousness, the rocks & doors will greet you. My mother had the habit of naming her automobiles & she could often get them to start by gently talking to them in a certain familiar way. This often happened more often than not after my father would try all of his tricks to get her car started. Finally, a yogi farmer I know in California told me he tore down his front-end loader's diesel engine & put it back together in an effort to get it to start. Then he paid a diesel mechanic to try, but no soap there either. Lastly, he used a Yogananda healing prayer on it & it fired right up!
 
#19
A gentleman on one of those TED Talks said he wasn't worried about machines developing consciousness b/c only living things are sentient. So are we dealing w/ thinking is different from consciousness? Apparently so. Of course, some of the people I know seem to think w/o being conscious, but that's a whole other area. At any rate, thinking to me doesn't require consciousness.
I think this is a tricky question. The earliest computers filled a room and were called "giant electronic brains" because they could add up a column of figures in a second! After the novelty was over, people thought a computer needed to do something more impressive - like do a piece of algebra, or translate some text into a foreign language in order to be called intelligent/conscious. The distinction between Artificial Intelligence and Artificial Consciousness is extremely murky.

The book I mentioned above is something of an eye-opener because it shows how people such as Liebnitz were considering whether simple automatons driven by water power were conscious! The book isn't at all technical, and it illustrates just how easily people start assuming machines can think.

I tend to think that if indeed objects have personalities, this is utterly different from acrtuaky thinkingg- except perhapsas regards the progrmmer him/herself.

David
 
#20
Thanks for the link about the book, The Restless Clock. At over 14 pounds for the Kindle edition, I will have to wait a while to read it, but it certainly promises to show how the sweeping assumption that living things are passive, not active agents is not the complete picture & leaves scientists & others w/ a warped picture of living things as well as the non-living. This makes me think of the objection I ran across early in my biology education: that science can't even adequately define what makes something a living thing. For example, one of the characteristics of living things is the ability to reproduce. The offspring of a horse & donkey is a mule, which is sterile (actually I learned not too long ago that mules sometimes have young, but it is considered in the Middle East as an evil omen). So, is a mule not living since it can't produce offspring, but then when it does, it's alive but it portends evil? How about viruses? They reproduce themselves, but don't engage in respiration, so what are they exactly? So, the American Indians may have had a really deep insight into western or white man consciousness: an Indian said that, "our people see everything as alive, but the white man sees everything as dead."
Let's face it, a lot of human ingenuity (design) has gone into those AI robots - even if they are exactly as portrayed.

Suppose the AI neural net had been presented with a couple of pots of resin and some electronic and mechanical components - just how far do you think the net would go - I'd guess nowhere at all.

Those jumping machines (whether simulated or not) were designed and made before the ANN got to even look at the data!

AI is a strange con. People spend immense effort building something just close enough to being already functional, and them marvel that the statistical methods of ANN's (because that is all they are) have finally finished the job off!

To understand consciousness, I think we need to focus on the emotions - the qualia - without which life would be utterly pointless.

The idea that machines can think is actually rather old, as this fascinating book illustrates:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Restless-C.../ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

David
 
Top