Alien?

[James R]

Gustav:

Please stop baiting Ophiolite.

 

[Ophiolite]

James R, I have not been reading reading Gustav's infantile ramblings for some time. Please allow him to continue them. They may provide passing amusement for other posters and will certainly acquaint new members with the depth (used in the loosest sense) of his character (used in the very loosest sense).

I do ask others, should they notice some point made by Gustav that by a statistical freak has some validity, please duplicate it here, so that I may respond to it.

 

[duendy]

Very sporting of you Ophiolite

 

[Gustav]

Gustav:

Please stop baiting Ophiolite.

please show me how the points i raised are not valid
what you are asking me to do is to allow his pronouncements to go unchallenged

you characterize as bait
i characterize as a rebuttal
please just show me the errors in my interpretation of his statements
i will then acknowledge with a clarification or admission of error if you do so to my satisfaction

if i have an opinion on just what type of individual would raise such points, i do not see why i cannot mention it.

i do not see your role as a nanny in this forum so please stop babysitting adults. allow me to demonstrate the type of individual you protect......

Conjecture. Idle speculation. Brain vomit. These are the main contenders.

If you can't be bothered to write in structured manner, why the **** should I be bothered to read it. Edit the bloody thing.

Don't talk crap. If you are going to be a rude, inconsiderate asshole, who can't take a moment or to to properly formulate their thoughts, I rather doubt those thoughts are of much particular value.

In fact, I just spent ten minutes wading through your prose, correcting the spelling, amending the grammar, and giving it some structure. I just came back to post it from Word and found the above waiting me. So, go fly a kite, sonny, and hang your philosophy off the end of it.

Your answers with ambiguous, illogical, inconsistent and either hypocritical or foolish. I thought you would appreciate a second chance.

If you can't be bothered to write in structured manner, why the **** should I be bothered to read it. Edit the bloody thing.

Differences between people, between individuals, not differences between races. You are a fixated moron JB. TofR has clearly stated and demonstrated this is what she means, but you are so hung up on there being significant differences between these so called races that you imagine everyone else is obsessed with them and is talking about them.

Have you actually contributed anything of value to any of these forums ever? Give us a list. It shouldn't take very long to compile.

You do know that it's people like you who give assholes a bad name, right?

Detailed citations, or retract, please.

You fail to take into account that a flawed, vulnerable personality such as Gustav, gifted with some native intellect and animal deviousness, is quite capable of creating a superficially antithetical character.
The similarities and inter-relationships between Gustav and c7 are so obvious, and have been so for some time, yet no one has commented on them before. This makes me half suspect that Gustav has prompted Gia to 'blow the whistle' because nobody was reacting. This would be wholly consistent with Gustav's modus operandi of using people.

all but the last addressed to others

i am at a loss why you would protect this kind of obvious hypocrisy. it actually kinda blows my mind cos i thought i had at least a little measure of your smarts and integrity. you disappoint, james. and i am saddened

 

[Gustav]

I do ask others, should they notice some point made by Gustav that by a statistical freak has some validity, please duplicate it here, so that I may respond to it.

do not fucking buy into this crap. i have moved in and out of oafy's ignore list.
he is obsessed and has to eventually read. it is a compulsion and more fool you all if you actually believe that he has not read my posts

go on
look into the history
see him vow to ignore
then promply post a reply

trust me
he clicks to expand

 

[Gustav]

now jamesr

lets compare oafys quoted text to the post in question...

*you lie.

*an assumption that could only be made in the fog of confusion and mindless arrogance

*the height of idiocy.

*garbage spouted out in a excellent example of pseudoscientific quackery. muddled verbiage that could only result from a mediocre and addled thought process aka random firings of neurons being put into words

*my ass!

*i recommend death

*i suppose stating the obvious is one way to pretend intellect
pathetic tho

*is it too much of an effort to even spell correctly?

fairly similar, ja? intent? vein?
i merely speak in a language ophiolite is familiar with
ja, i am nice that way

 

[Ophiolite]

Very sporting of you Ophiolite

Think nothing of it.

 

[Gustav]

..........will certainly acquaint new members with the depth (used in the loosest sense) of his character (used in the very loosest sense).

i am familiar with the rabid attitude shown by this joker towards posters in general
look at some members comment on the oafys methods and character.........

if we are going to be the grammar police, ill be watching closely from now on to deride anyone that doesnt write the way i prefer.

if you are so concerned with religious people not living up to your standards of interests....why dont you take on the job of educating them in a fashion other than "you are stupid. i am smart." i mean...if its that important to someone to take time from their life to make negative statements about people that dont share their interest, it must really bother that person.......why not educate, instead of ridicule?

im sure we can learn alot from your "all knowing" position.

Well honed rhetorical devices? i think youre setting new standards in self-delusion. You could have made a far better better post by discussing the body of work itself and your opinions on it rather than wasting your own time on thinly-veiled inflammatory remarks.
Im pretty sure at this point youre just trolling, if you believe debating is a two way battle in which people put each other 'in their place' then i think our ideas of debating probably arnt compatible.

 

[Gustav]

where were you, jamesr?
pointedly looking the other way?

 

[Gustav]

I do ask others, should they notice some point made by Gustav that by a statistical freak has some validity, please duplicate it here, so that I may respond to it.

this request is blindingly pathological
it totally defeats the point of the ignore list

it reminds me of a scene in stern's movie, private parts

*listeners who liked him tuned for an average of 2 hrs, reason was ..."i wanna see what he is going to say next"
*listeners who hated him tuned for an average of 4 hrs, reason was ..."i wanna see what he is going to say next"

so predictable
like an animal

 

[duendy]

RIGhT ON Gustav.....i also dont know why you was previously picked on and banned, and why you have gin been singled out. cnsidering how everyone else seems o be able to say more or less what they like in debate---specially the pathological skeptics whose middle name seems to by frothing ad hom.....riiiiight oooooon!

you see Gustav, I know cause i can see. you have a way andmeans of deflating pompus arses. exposing their rhetoric, an pretensions.....haha, i LOVE it----
this is EXACTLY why you piss em off!!!!!!!!!----- and i really value your contributions here

 

[Ophiolite]

I love you too.

 

[duendy]

I love you too.

not about love nd hate...jest tellin it like it iss bubuu

 

[Gustav]

Both in terms of popular culture and extensively throughout UFO Belief the concept of Extraterrestrials, Aliens if you will, paints a picture of beings humanoid in aspect, perceived as been driven by motives understandable to humans in human terms - Then there's the other side of the coin. Stanley Kubrick in the film 2001 depicts ETI as singularly undefinable - a presence only disclosing nothing whatsoever regarding its actual nature except that in being present, for want of a better word, apparently it does stuff - even though theirs no real way of understanding anything at all regarding how, what, when and how.

It's a startlingly different portrayal of what the term Alien actually means - So, if you feel prompted to ever use the term at all, what you consider terms such as Aliens, Extraterrestrials, ETI, etc to actually mean?

pardon, but i do not see an avoidance to define as a "..startlingly different portrayal.." if someone has an opinion on xyz, another says "no comment," how is the latter, a "..startlingly different portrayal..?"

nothing is being said according to you, yet you allege an alternate viewpoint has been presented

why?

 

[Gustav]

An alien life form would be one that cannot be fitted in the current 'tree of life'. That is that no connection of ancestry can be made with any lifeform on earth which are all connected.

i believe this is the best definition of alien offered up so far. it is a strict interpretation of the term.

my verdict? spurious is decisive, the rest of us fumble

 

[duendy]

An alien life form would be one that cannot be fitted in the current 'tree of life'. That is that no connection of ancestry can be made with any lifeform on earth which are all connected.

dont know what you mean by the 'CURRENT' tree of life?
the ancient motif of the Tree of Life includes, Underworld, this Earth, and Cosmos......ALL connected!

 

[Mr Anonymous]

pardon, but i do not see an avoidance to define as a "..startlingly different portrayal.." if someone has an opinion on xyz, another says "no comment," how is the latter, a "..startlingly different portrayal..?"

nothing is being said according to you, yet you allege an alternate viewpoint has been presented

why?

Simply because I don't in the slightest in describing the Black Monolith in 2001 as "singularly undefinable - a presence only disclosing nothing whatsoever regarding its actual nature except that in being present, for want of a better word, apparently it does stuff - even though theirs no real way of understanding anything at all regarding how, what, when and how." in so stating state at all that that "nothing is being said" about the concept of ETI or Aliens on the part of either myself, Stanley Kubrick or indeed Arthur C Clarke.

Terms such as "no comment" and "nothing is being said" are your conclusions here exclusively Gustav, not in the slightest mine.

In portraying the ETI presence in 2001 as being discernible as Black Monoliths only actually both Clarke and Kubrick are speaking volumes when it comes to the concept of what the word Alien (in the context of the portrayal of extraterrestrial life) actually means - simply put they're telling you, if it's genuinely Alien, y'can't tell exactly what it is or anything much else about it at all simply by looking at the thing and going on either what it reminds you of, or what you can aliken the thing too, based on your experience.

When it comes to the term alien you have no previous point of refference. You actually have no actual context to put the thing in other than whatever the thing is it didn't originate on this world and this, in 2001, Kubrick rather cleverly imparts not by anything either stated or particularly done on the part of the Monoliths themselves, but where we (the audience), mankind in the movie and the creatures that precursed mankind at the very beginning of the film first encounter these.....

What, exactly? Throughout the entire course of the film we're never left any the wiser regarding what these things actually are. They remain alien throughout, not just merely as a description (they have a description, Black Monoliths) but the concept of what it is alien actually means:

I. Don't. Know. What. It. Actually. Is.

And this is conveyed in 2001 visually with a degree of economy few if any in popular culture have ever managed to achieve either before or since. It's the complete antithesis of how the idea of aliens are portrayed throughout the rest of that, from Close Encounters of the Third Kind to Attack of The Saucermen! and to me, personally, when I think of what the term Alien means to me: I think of the Monolith from 2001.

Not the form, but the concept.

Of course, I had rather thought simply by terming 2001 as "the other side of the coin" when juxtaposed with the previous "Both in terms of popular culture and extensively throughout UFO Belief the concept of Extraterrestrials, Aliens if you will, paints a picture of beings humanoid in aspect, perceived as been driven by motives understandable to humans in human terms" that I had managed to impart something of all that over - however, should any misunderstanding remain regarding that, thank you for giving me the opportunity of clearing that up.

All the best,

A

 

[Gustav]

bah, i just nitpicked
apologies for putting you thru that tho the clarification was an excellent read

/lost in admiration

ps: the monolith subsequently did turn out to be a whole lotta stuff tho, ja?

 

[Mr Anonymous]

.... Somewhat, yes. I've never really been all that much of a fan of Arthur C Clarke's, consequently I'm only able to go at it from what I've read of other novels he's written along similar lines of ETI Contact and what happened in in 2010, but I gather the Monoliths themselves transpire to be more the emissaries and custodians of some distant alien intelligence rather than actual lifeforms themselves - the big Monolith discovered orbiting Jupiter turns out to contain an artificial wormhole of sorts facilitating two way travel and the Monoliths themselves appear en mass during the denumont of 2010 and transform Jupiter itself from the failed pro-star it actually is into the actual thing itself, thus facilitating habitable living conditions on one of Jupiter's moons Ganymede for something the Monoliths have seeded there....

Thus the tendency of viewing the things leans towards mechanisms of some description or other but that only comes about through hindsight after the fact, 2001, as it were.

Personally, for me, the subsequent developments in the plot only render the series of novels just another sci-fi story - aliens doing things for discernible reasons understandable as such in human terms - kind of takes away the whole set-up Clarke and Kubrick established with collaborating together so fully on 2001 - but ultimately Clarke's just another human being speculating on the greater mystery and all that...

The God of Horses turns out to be just a really, really big Horse after all, just like the rest of us. Hey, who knew?

But up until that point either one or the other of them, Kubrick or Clarke, managed to hit upon both visually and conceptually that whole idea of what the word Alien in terms of ETI actually means - I actually haven't the first fuck, frankly, what it is.

And for that alone you've got to give that movie its props, while it lasts.

Even though its own author forgets his own basic tenant not so much as half a book later, ultimately that forgetting or else just simply ignoring in itself turns out to inform us in quite a lot about the sorts of concepts we as a species remain somewhat prone too - on the one hand we have the intelligence to be able to perceive the possibilities of life alien completely to this our own world - but we can't get an adequate purchase intellectually speaking on what we don't have any form of personal reference to thus our speculations remain those of what we can speculate upon.

Ourselves, what we might do were positions actually reversed.

In essence, we banish the possibility of anything actually alien existing in our concept of ETI - we envision it as being different only and term it alien as a consequence of that perceived difference, not necessarily at all actually what the term alien itself actually means.

Just what we tend to think. Or believe. Or possibly both.

PS: No worries about putting me through the clarification thing G, just sorry I never shut the fuck up once someone gets me started....

A

 

[Gustav]

hmm
"there are stranger things in life that could be ever imagined in your dreams." (i cannot nail down the similar quote)

so far, the term alien has been mostly(?) negatively characterized aka what it is not. is it fair on us humans to keep an actual definition out of reach. for instance at the moment of conceptualization, it ceases to be alien? perhaps fallacious reasoning here? a trap of our own making?

is that what is going on?