Posted on 05/02/2013 6:04:40 AM PDT by Fennie
WASHINGTON - In the midst of the Cold War on several occasions, nuclear missiles at US Air Force bases were mysteriously shut down, according to US servicemen who said they witnessed the failure of the heavily guarded missile systems.
But they don't blame America's Cold War enemy, the Soviet Union; they say aliens from space did it.
"This was something Russia could have developed, but it turns out they didn't develop this and we don't have it either - to be able to shut down nuclear weapons with a beam of light," David Scott, a former sergeant in the US Air Force, told RIA Novosti at a conference in Washington on encounters with extraterrestrials.
(Excerpt) Read more at en.rian.ru ...
Have to dig the literature out of the shelves, but it’s all written by former airforce people. I think Don Keyhoe was one of them.
Very shortly, they claimed there were several examples of “saucers” attacking things like Nike batteries and in some cases melting them right down to the ground, with loss of life to boot.
I think that's true, dear brother, as far as it goes. I guess I'm just looking for an even "deeper" level of understanding. After all, hydrogen and carbon are just two of many species populating the periodic table.... Where do all these many elements "come from?" Do they have a common basis? If so, what is it? And how does that basis work?
If it is true, as it has been observed over the millennia, that the Universe is "One" — the Latin root of the word universe is "one turn" — then it seems to me its basis must finally be "one" — a "one" I imagine likely to be of elegant "simplicity."
And I do confess, I, like TXnMA, am taking my "clues" from the Holy Scriptures. And that being the case, many thinkers today might say that my "clues" are "factually" baseless.
But I'm not a scientist, so am not thinking as a scientist would. I'm thinking more like Plato, who declared that the Kosmos (i.e., universe) is One single living Being that possesses "nous," or intelligence. Of course, that is a philosophical statement, not a scientific one.
Sigh.... We do the best we can do with what little we know about the great scheme of things.... There may be things about our world which the human mind is incapable of understanding in principle.
We are, after all, not God, but only images of Him....
Thank you so very much for sharing your observations!
Forgive me, Marv!
Agreed, dear brother!
With a teensy qualification: Thinking it through, Information would be (like Light) a proximate cause, but it seems to me not the sufficient cause (which would be their common Origin). For it seems to me Intelligence must be prior to information. IOW, information itself must have a cause, just as Light must have a cause.
IOW, Light and Information are both God's creatures, dependent on His Intelligence and Will. (Thus I amend my first statement.)
If that makes any sense at all....
What a fascinating subject! Thank you dear brother for sharing your insights!
Thanks for the ping on this fascinating topic, sister in Christ!
For it seems to me Intelligence must be prior to information. IOW, information itself must have a cause, just as Light must have a cause.
***I look at it as a building project that God generated. Just as an architect would have the information for a building in his head in terms of how many walls, how many electrical outlets, how many exits, how many windows, etc. He puts that information down and then the builders build to it. From the perspective of an observer, the activity proceeds according to a plan. But that observer would never see the plan, only the outcome of it. The information existed before this little mini-universe ever got started.
In a similar fashion, the Master Architect spoke the heavens into place according to His plan. He knew from the beginning that spiral galaxies needed to spin a certain way and that it would baffle modern scientists so much that they would need to postulate the existence of dark matter. The INFORMation of the galaxy existed before those galaxies ever began to spin. The information is an aspect of creation that is outside of TIME. Some information is independent of time.
On a separate note, it’s interesting to see you and Alamo Girl on a topic such as this. I have such high doubts that ‘aliens’ were involved that I consider it an impossibility. This is basic cold war military oneupmanship. The US had some secret capability, tested it first on our own nuke sites and then tested it on Soviet sites. They used an alien back story to frustrate any real investigation.
Such a theory obeys Ockham’s Razor, especially contrasted to the gigantic hurdles that interstellar travel presents, and that such a civilization would even find us remotely interesting — talk about an inflated self view!
1- Mounting evidence indicates there are interstellar visitors; some of the visitors may not be interstellar (see Tom van Flandern's exploding planet hypothesis)2- Since humankind do not have the 'final set of equations' incorporating a better understanding of Time, and our attained level of Physics understanding and application may yet be rather primitive to a civilization whose technology is a couple of thousand years ahead of our own, it is an oblique assertion to claim there are hurdles for interstellar travel to such more advanced beings; at our present publicly held level of Physics conceptualization the hurdles for us are insurmountable ... for now.
Wonderful insights, dear Kevmo!
Here we are again, back to that puzzling crittur, TIME. It has been suggested that TIME as experienced by human beings — that is, irreversible, linear time inexorably moving from past to present to future — is merely a sort of convention that we humans use to order events that take place in our experience. It has subjective reality for us; but (arguably) has questionable objective reality.
Upon further reflection, it should be obvious that a "plan" which orders "events" does not and cannot "sit" on the same timeline as the "events." Or as you note, the "observer would never see the plan, only the outcome of it."
The way I imagine this problem is to view the linear conventional time of human experience as a horizontal line; the "plan" resides on a vertical time-like extension that supervenes WRT events on the horizontal.
And the same is true a fortiori with respect to universal laws. Or as you say, "Some information is independent of time," and thus can never be directly observable. Entities (for lack of a better word) along the vertical time-like extension are only known and knowable by their effects — which we can directly observe.
I suggested in an earlier post that C — the speed of light — is a time-dependent measure associated with the "horizontal" timeline. Yet Alamo-Girl has noted that photons "travel" along a null path — which is to say they do not "travel" at all. So how can they really have speed, velocity?
And you observed that "C" pops up in a vast number of mathematical equations describing the laws of universe (which to my way of thinking — right or wrong — disport themselves along the vertical time-like extension whose "entities" we never directly observe.
'Tis quite a conundrum!!! HELP!!!
Regarding "aliens" having anything to do with the creation/evolution of our little "mini-universe" and the lifeforms within it, I totally agree with your statement: "I have such high doubts that ‘aliens’ were involved that I consider it an impossibility." Indeed. So much for "panspermia theory," which I regard as just nuts (on Occam's Razor grounds). This theory begs the question of the origin of the space aliens — so where does it really get you???
But then such folks as propose such patent nonsense are the sort that will propose ANY theory, just as long as it obviates the need of a Creator God — in their own imagination. They would turn themselves into pretzels if their "theory" needed it.
It's just NUTZ, or — not to put too fine a point on it — psychotic.
Thank you, dear Kevmo, for your enormously thought-provokative essay/post!
The way I imagine this problem is to view the linear conventional time of human experience as a horizontal line; the “plan” resides on a vertical time-like extension that supervenes WRT events on the horizontal....
I suggested in an earlier post that C — the speed of light — is a time-dependent measure associated with the “horizontal” timeline. Yet Alamo-Girl has noted that photons “travel” along a null path — which is to say they do not “travel” at all. So how can they really have speed, velocity?
And you observed that “C” pops up in a vast number of mathematical equations describing the laws of universe (which to my way of thinking — right or wrong — disport themselves along the vertical time-like extension whose “entities” we never directly observe.
‘Tis quite a conundrum!!! HELP!!!
***The conundrum is addressed by supposing that ‘C’ is not a constant. It is a function of (not only time) but perhaps something else, such as INFORMation that, as you suggest, cannot be ‘seen’ on the horizontal scale of time, because the INFORMation existed before time and time laps upon the boundaries like the sea on the seashore.
My impression is that there are precious few islands of information that poke their heads above the seashore of time, but Columbus thought there was just a few islands between him and China when he embarked on his 2nd voyage.
Since C is a function of (not only time) but perhaps something else, such as INFORMation, then Einstein’s E=MC^2 is more like E=MC(Information)^2
1- Mounting evidence indicates there are interstellar visitors; some of the visitors may not be interstellar
***As my anti-LENR adversaries are so fond of pointing out, where is the peer-reviewed evidence? Where’s the alien body I can examine for myself?
- Since humankind do not have the ‘final set of equations’ incorporating a better understanding of Time, and our attained level of Physics understanding and application may yet be rather primitive to a civilization whose technology is a couple of thousand years ahead of our own
***And it may not be at all. You have no idea, because there is no evidence of such a technologically advanced civilization. It is an invalid argument from silence. It also violates Ockham’s Razor.
"... there is no evidence of such a technologically advanced civilization. It is an invalid argument from silence. It also violates Ockham’s Razor."
Humankind technology could not in the late forties have an object flying at over 2000 mph make a right turn and stop on a dime. At the recent Citizen Hearing on Disclosure, Mr Callahan who ran the FAA Air Traffic Controller force for a time has radar tracking which indicate just such action.
Now, you can call him and several dozen other MILITARY and CIA people who have testified of such motion/action liars, but it says more about you that you would try to do that to serve some agenda than have an open mind to their honest testimony, world-wide.
In the early fifties, humankind did not have flying objects a mile long, cigar shaped, without external wings. Such craft have been sighted world-wide since the fifties. The witnesses are not all lying.
When the Shah of Iran was still our friend, two of his Phantom jets encountered a very large flying disc over Tehran, which was tracked on airport radar and which was visually sighted by the air traffic controller at the same ariport. When one of the jets was ordered to fire upon the invader of Tehran air space, the plane's electronic gear suddenly shut down.
These are but two incidents of technology beyond humankind abilities at the time which contradict your specious assertion. To deny the reality of something beyond our technological abilities operating in Earth skies since 1947 is to enjoin magic thinking and outright denial. But for what agenda? Trying to squelch reality by using ridicule will no longer work. But you can continue to try it, for whomever you serve.
Your going to upset the talking chimps for posting this. Their little heads will explode if they find out they aren’t really at the top of the food chain on this world, or any other.
“You’re”...hate when that happens.
Humankind technology could not in the late forties have an object flying at over 2000 mph make a right turn and stop on a dime.
***Yes we could. The Harrier had an engine based upon 1940’s technology, and it made a right turn and stopped on a dime.
Why would someone who pretends to be science minded make such a fuss trying to ridicule eyewitnesses? Why would you try to make specious assertions? ... Because you're sold out to the pre-ordained lie which you've tried to support.
I believe some of the witness testimonies coming in from all over the world. They indicate things flying around this planet that don't use petroleum products for their propulsion. Since I believe these craft are flying in and out of our atmosphere, if these were ONLY of terrestrial origin, what does that say about the primitive rocketry used to put crews on the Moon and return them to Earth? Do you really want to go there?
The Harrier is built upon the Wibault engine which first flew in Nazi Germany in 1944.
Have you ever read “Intercept UFO” by Renato Vesco? I didn’t think so.
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=intercept+ufo
Since you aren’t aware of the technology available to the victors of WWII at the time, not only is your stance in violation of Ockham’s Rule, but you’ve proven yourself to be ignorant of the evidence available. What is it you say? You are such a hollow shill for your own cause!
efforts to ridicule.
Why would someone who pretends to be science minded make such a fuss trying to ridicule eyewitnesses?
***When did I ridicule you? You’re simply unaware of intermediate evidence which brings your conclusions to a rapid demise.
Why would someone who pretends to be science minded make such a fuss trying to ridicule eyewitnesses?
***I don’t ridicule eyewitnesses. THey saw what they saw, which was terrestrial aircraft based upon boundary-layer control principles laid down by Ludwig Prandtl in the 1920s, picked up by the NAZIs, and at the end of the war appropriated by the winning side in WWII.
Since I believe these craft are flying in and out of our atmosphere, if these were ONLY of terrestrial origin, what does that say about the primitive rocketry used to put crews on the Moon and return them to Earth?
***You tell me. Would it take hundreds of $billions to send someone up there and back? Probably not. Much of that money was diverted into special secret weapons programs.
Perhaps, being the self-absorbed psuedo-genius you present, you will differentiate for me gravitational mass from inertial mass. Then you could educate us on why there is interia (no, not 'bodies in motion tend to stay in motion').
UFOs as described defy our concepts of inertia. A human technology piloted craft from 1947 stopping on a dime from 2000 mph would crush a typical pilot by G forces, but the occupants of the UFOs being observed do not seem effected by such G forces. And yes, there are credible witness sightings of beings inside the objects which have made astonishing flight maneuvers.
Prior to 'avrocar' can you cite a single wingless piloted human aircraft? Of course you can't, yet you continue to play disinformationa nd misdirection games.
Regarding “aliens” having anything to do with the creation/evolution of our little “mini-universe” and the lifeforms within it, I totally agree with your statement: “I have such high doubts that ‘aliens’ were involved that I consider it an impossibility.” Indeed. So much for “panspermia theory,” which I regard as just nuts (on Occam’s Razor grounds). This theory begs the question of the origin of the space aliens — so where does it really get you???
But then such folks as propose such patent nonsense are the sort that will propose ANY theory, just as long as it obviates the need of a Creator God — in their own imagination. They would turn themselves into pretzels if their “theory” needed it.
It’s just NUTZ, or — not to put too fine a point on it — psychotic.
***Well, I don’t think of MHginTN to be psychotic, just mislead by folks such as Erik Von Dhanikan who completely ignored the available archaeological evidence, plus other things.
What are your recommendations in terms of continued debate with him, since he’s becoming so shrill?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.