is there evidence for alien abductions etc.?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ah. I'm glad you brought up the filming industry. SW brought it up a couple of times complaining that people are prone to mimic what they see on screen, hence, he proclaimed, the surge of UFO/abduction "events" following the advent of the entertainment industry, and I'll admit there's a certain merit to that observation -- psychological instances and all that jazz, that are self-explanatory, so I won't bother getting into that -- but as I was saying, there are a couple of other explanations as well regarding such depictions in films (or books), and the ramifications involved -- one of which I remember bringing up with SW but got no reaction (or anyone else, of course), and that involves, quite simply, the stimulation of buried, dormant memories from "under the sea" -- as a matter of fact, the same triggering procedure can be had by recalling certain details of one's dreams -- however, there's another angle to this whole "fantasy" depiction thing, and that involves a preliminary step that will result in "hitting" on the right "symbols" by the entertainment industry, only to depict what people will "recognize" as "valid", and that is the plagiarizing of peoples' "raw" experiences. Hasn't anyone ever heard of scouting around for "stories"?
 
Last edited:
Perhaps I'm reading that all wrong Meanwhile, but are you suggesting that the Mass media sublliminally programs the sleeping public to be awakened on certain "symbolised" commands within film and literature so as to bolster their sales?
 
Stryder
-Howard Huges didn't know that voices in his head are from God that's why he got sick. He spoke about things and inventions that are not actually here, unrealizable in that time.
--As a teenager, Hughes declared that his goals in life were to become the world's best golfer, the world's best pilot, and the world's best movie producer. Despite attending many good schools, he never earned a diploma.
http://en.wikipedia.org/Vikki/Howard_Hughes#Education

Old saying;
What you speak like a youngster that what you do like a grown up.
-How could Howard and many other people predict their own future? Where the talent is coming from? Isn't this a mystery just like balls moving perfectly in our solar system. I don't wanna speak about a ring around Saturn.

phlogistician
-How is it possible that God give us languages?
Take a long look on our solar system, than give me an answer.
http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/index.html
God spin for us and put as in here just like dolls.
 
Thats very ungrateful to God, Qorl. He gave us the whole universe to understand yet you shun the quest to understand it, instead choosing to merely say "God did it", but ignore how He did it.
 
Stryder said:
Perhaps I'm reading that all wrong Meanwhile, but are you suggesting that the Mass media sublliminally programs the sleeping public to be awakened on certain "symbolised" commands within film and literature so as to bolster their sales?
Click to expand...

There's a huge gap in seductiveness between the mass media and the silver screen, just as there's a huge gap between subliminal programming and plain artistic production. One is disguised, like the Bush White House, the other occasional, like Paramount Pictures. One is manipulative, the other a dispassionate observer. Well, more or less. Granted, not all depicted scenarios in a production are fact-based. But occasionally, stuff gets past, stuff gets conveyed.

I wasn't referring to a "sleeping public", but individuals who might have lived through certain ordeals, and whose memories of those ordeals would have been blocked, then ruffled, then aroused. Key symbols casually portrayed in a production are not necessarily "placed" there by crafty intent, but seem rather to "fit" because of the story line. SW, for example, brought up the famous graphics of the grey alien depicted on the cover of Communion. His assumption, if I remember correctly, was that some sinister artist somehow contrived the concept of a black-eyed alien out of thin air, and that people's imaginations began to roll, drinking it all up like soda pop, then using it to bolster their own fictitious claims to fame. That scenario is undoubtedly true (I admitted as much in my above post: "psychological instances that are self-explanatory, so I won't get into that"), but SW's assumption is not entirely true -- suppressed memories can resurface, and it is those individuals, not the sleeping public, I am concerned about.

Now, where could these "key symbols" come from? A graphics' studio, perhaps? Or, if the designer is thorough, he might scout around for genuine material, do a bit of researching, interview people, get all chummy -- just as Hollywood is fond of depicting stories "based on" reality. Which brings me to a little incident that happened to me a couple of years ago. I use to frequent an alien abduction board that eventually went under, but not before establishing a rapport with a few of its members. Eventually some of these people formed a private group and invited a few of us in. Upon arriving I found myself in the middle of an angry row. Apparently, one of the member's story was lifted and inserted in a book -- accusations were flying. Then I discovered that many of the members in the group were writers, using the rest of us as bouncing boards, brain storming, and material! Talk about sleeze. What is it that Mulder use to say? Trust no one? But surely, upright individuals are capable of trusting their own acumen? Or -- not necessarily you, Stryder -- or do pathetic skeptics aim to rob us of that too? Like the Bush White House?
 
Meanwhile said:
There's a huge gap in seductiveness between the mass media and the silver screen, just as there's a huge gap between subliminal programming and plain artistic production. One is disguised, like the Bush White House, the other occasional, like Paramount Pictures. One is manipulative, the other a dispassionate observer. Well, more or less. Granted, not all depicted scenarios in a production are fact-based. But occasionally, stuff gets past, stuff gets conveyed.

I wasn't referring to a "sleeping public", but individuals who might have lived through certain ordeals, and whose memories of those ordeals would have been blocked, then ruffled, then aroused. Key symbols casually portrayed in a production are not necessarily "placed" there by crafty intent, but seem rather to "fit" because of the story line. SW, for example, brought up the famous graphics of the grey alien depicted on the cover of Communion. His assumption, if I remember correctly, was that some sinister artist somehow contrived the concept of a black-eyed alien out of thin air, and that people's imaginations began to roll, drinking it all up like soda pop, then using it to bolster their own fictitious claims to fame. That scenario is undoubtedly true (I admitted as much in my above post: "psychological instances that are self-explanatory, so I won't get into that"), but SW's assumption is not entirely true -- suppressed memories can resurface, and it is those individuals, not the sleeping public, I am concerned about.

Now, where could these "key symbols" come from? A graphics' studio, perhaps? Or, if the designer is thorough, he might scout around for genuine material, do a bit of researching, interview people, get all chummy -- just as Hollywood is fond of depicting stories "based on" reality. Which brings me to a little incident that happened to me a couple of years ago. I use to frequent an alien abduction board that eventually went under, but not before establishing a rapport with a few of its members. Eventually some of these people formed a private group and invited a few of us in. Upon arriving I found myself in the middle of an angry row. Apparently, one of the member's story was lifted and inserted in a book -- accusations were flying. Then I discovered that many of the members in the group were writers, using the rest of us as bouncing boards, brain storming, and material! Talk about sleeze. What is it that Mulder use to say? Trust no one? But surely, upright individuals are capable of trusting their own acumen? Or -- not necessarily you, Stryder -- or do pathetic skeptics aim to rob us of that too? Like the Bush White House?
Click to expand...

As a general rule, there is almost NO research done for the purpose of producing a fictional movie. Why bother? That's the realm of the imagination of the writers.

Certainly, they will often use real and familiar locations for their plots - NYC and LA are always popular ones - and many times they'll use some completely unrecognizable landscape supposedly in the middle of Kansas or Arizona. But doing research in order to more accurately depict (and trigger memories?) of aliens or spacecraft? No way. Anything like that that may appear familiar is simply the result of repeated stories and other similar things in the popular media and the various nut-case sites on the Internet.

A fair example of that is the recent remake of The War of The Worlds. It pretty much followed the precise descriptions of everything in the original novel.

Anything beyond accepting all the things presented in movies, TV series, whatever, as just fictional intertainment are just the results of buying into yet another silly conspiracy theory.
 
Meanwhile said:
suppressed memories can resurface, and it is those individuals, not the sleeping public, I am concerned about.
Click to expand...

A number of years ago, myself, my oldest contemporary friend and my younger brother were stuck in front of the telly over the Christmas holidays - The Great Escape, something of a British institution in itself, was playing. As a kid growing up both me and my friend both vividly recall every Christmas this same damn film being shown year after year. There was nothing else on, nothing else to do, neither of us had actually sat down to watch the thing since we were around my brothers age (as it was back then) and so that is what we elected to do - we sat down in front of the telly watching The Great Escape.

There's a famous scene where Steve McQueen makes a break for it by motorbike - if I've seen it once I've seen it a dozen times. He's cornered by the Germans in a field, there's a barbed wire fence and the only way out is over it.

We watched it as McQueen ran the fence on the bike, made a jump for it and straight over the top and away - and as we watched that happen both me and my friend went "Wha?!" :bugeye:

In my recollection of how that scene went, as I remembered it from seeing it the last time many, many years previously - McQueen never got away. His body is left plastered all over this high barbed wire fence and I vividly recall the palpable impact that scene made on me watching it as a kid.

My friends memory of it is exactly the same - both of us thought McQueen's character died in that film instead, it transpires, actually he's one of the few that actually gets away.

Suppressed memory can indeed be triggered and resurface. False memory, equally, is something which happens also.

Now, because what we were both watching was a film, something fixed, external, re-viewable, it was very easy for us to figure out what had happened (at some other point previously McQueen's cellmate, a tiny Scottish fellow, gets stir crazy, runs at the camp fence and dies in a hail of bullets hanging from the barbed wire) - the fundamental images and impressions of what we both recalled happening were there, it's just that with the barbed wire fence being the predominant feature in both separate scenes our mutual recollection of what we both originally thought we'd seen came about as part and parcel of the fact that memory works by association.

Two independent instances of false memory precursed from a fixed, relatively unchanging source, ie - that of a movie. An example not lifted from dry academic sources or off-the-cuff-by-the-numbers septic response.

Subjective experience. Life. Mine.

The point is, if I can experience a false memory associated with the events of a film - it doesn't diminish the actual fact of the memory but with a film at least I can rent the thing from Blockbusters and review it until I'm satisfied that the memory I appear to have is actually false - but when such recollection is associated with events in life, moments in the past experienced once and only accessed again via recollection - how exactly does one make a clear, concise delineation between actual suppressed memory and simple, straight forward false memory?

I'm one of those people who possess a visually eidetic memory, what they used to call a Photographic Memory in the good old days of black and white B-movie spy flicks, and technically I'm supposed to be incapable of forgetting visual stimuli - and technically I don't. But that doesn't necessarily follow that what I do recall visually actually is what I actually saw - things do get muddled up together. This is simply my experience, sod the neurological studies.

If I can have a false memory all that means is that every single other person that's ever lived both can, and on occasion, will experience instances of the same also. Often times they won't be as simple, straightforward or as clear cut as my experience, but the process itself remains the same.

And I can't help but ponder, what consistently remains the common link between people who come to realise they've experienced abduction?

Their experiences? Their actual memories of events? Or, some shit head "expert" on the subject of alien abduction who has their whacked out little pet theories regarding Extraterrestrials and is perfectly prepared to use people to support their "research" - because, in the experience I relay, two people independently are described recalling similar events which never actually happened - if a dozen people respond to my description of having an equally similar memory of the way Steve McQueen's character "died" in that movie, it still wouldn't be changing the fact that actually, the memory of the event is simply wrong to begin with.

Because, curiously enough, the one abiding link between all so-called Abductee's and their experiences remains the clinical practice used to study this so-called phenomena and the practitioners directly of it. Well, that and the well documented reporting of such practises and their alleged "finding" in both print and on the net.

If we're seriously to entertain the idea of external sources "awakening" memories of experiences, would not the best place to start the investigation be really those individuals whom practice the act of hypnotic regression and group therapy encounter sessions on the victims first?

And I don't put the word victims there in quote marks at all - I suspect these people really are victims and its not would-be Hollywood sci-fi writers or anally fixated aliens they should be worried about.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jean-Philippe Rameau
Jean-Jacques Rousseau
Jaqcues Yves Cousteau
Oh?
Eau!

That is the PROOF!
 
A french composer, a french surealist painter and the inventor of the Aqualung - You do know who I work for don't you? Mr Bronco still wants his money....
 
Mr Anonymous said:
A french composer, a french surealist painter and the inventor of the Aqualung - You do know who I work for don't you? Mr Bronco still wants his money....
Click to expand...

rousseau3.gif


Does this look like a surrealist? Are you sure you have the same Jean-Jacques?

Perhaps you will enlighten me about something I know nothing of?

Jean-Philippe Rameau. He wrote some very excellent music. You like him?
 
Oh! Eau! Jean Philippe!

Oh. And well, what do we know??? Anything?
 
Last edited:
Giambattista said:
Does this look like a surrealist? Are you sure you have the same Jean-Jacques?

Perhaps you will enlighten me about something I know nothing of?
Click to expand...

:) ... Okay, okay.... Gimmie a break. I was only going off the top of m'head -Rousseau to me means the French surrealist painter first, 18th Century philosopher second... Sheesh! - shoot me for getting two out of three straight off the bat, why doncha?! :rolleyes:

Jean-Philippe Rameau. He wrote some very excellent music. You like him?
Click to expand...

Truth be told I prefer Supergrass. Frankly Bowie's about as far into classical music as I'm likely to ever get - what can I say, I'm a child of m'times...

Quite what any of the above actually has to do with the subject to hand, on the other paw, perhaps you'd care to enlighten us all regarding that, since y'brought up the subject of enlightenment.... ;)
 
Light said:
As a general rule, there is almost NO research done for the purpose of producing a fictional movie. Why bother? That's the realm of the imagination of the writers.
Click to expand...

I wasn't specifically talking about the peculiarities of producing films, especially not in general, although I certainly think you went out on a limb with your assumption.

I was simply pointing to a distinction between the mass media and the wide screen -- that both have different dynamics, that the cinema or novel are better capable of handling specifics, important specifics; to dramatize the obscure, to focus on a single moment, to breath value into the discredited, to venture where no witness may follow, to suggest credence to a separate vision -- to propose a forbidden evidence.

Now don't suppose I had Mary Poppins in mind.
 
Meanwhile said:
I wasn't specifically talking about the peculiarities of producing films, especially not in general, although I certainly think you went out on a limb with your assumption.

I was simply pointing to a distinction between the mass media and the wide screen -- that both have different dynamics, that the cinema or novel are better capable of handling specifics, important specifics; to dramatize the obscure, to focus on a single moment, to breath value into the discredited, to venture where no witness may follow, to suggest credence to a separate vision -- to propose a forbidden evidence.

Now don't suppose I had Mary Poppins in mind.
Click to expand...
Actually, it was difficult to make any assumption or form a concrete conclusion from what you said. Sorry, but your writing style is particularly convoluted - unnecessarily so, in my opinion. You could state things in a much clearer fashion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top