• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Alien agenda

Maximuz

Alfrescian
Loyal
I've been following material on the alien agenda for a really, really long time. Unfortunately, I get to discuss these matters with only like, two or three friends and I thought what a shame -- decades of reading books and listening to radio shows without getting the pleasure of sharing and discussing.

So, I have decided to post write-ups (I'll try to keep it short) on relevant topics and see how this plays out. If nothing, maybe this'll serve as some kind of record-keeping for my own benefit.

NB: Do not believe in anything without doing your own research. Keep an open mind but do not throw logic out of the window. Most of what is written here can't be proven, but they can't be disproven either. Matters of a religious nature will not and shall not be discussed. It is inevitable that some material will be connected to the Illuminati but this thread is focused on aliens, and their agenda. Expect future posts to be infrequent and irregular.
 

Maximuz

Alfrescian
Loyal
Fake moon landing

There is a lot of confusion on this issue so I shall step in and clarify: Yes, we have been to the moon (various sources). But no, the televised landing was fake, and staged. To quote two examples, Neil Armstrong refused to swear on the Bible that he has been to the moon, while Buzz Aldrin (second man on the moon), when asked how he felt when he took his first moon steps, said he couldn't remember (how is that possible?)

However, to conplicate the issue, Armstrong left a cryptic message in the following White House address: ''There are [sic] breakthroughs available to those who can remove one of the truth's protective layers. There are places to go beyond belief", while Aldrin gave us something along these lines: "There are no UFOs. Do you understand me? There are NO UFOs" (meaning to say they have all been identified).

I was also listening to a show that had Edgar Mitchell, the sixth man on the moon on, but when the host tried asking him if there were UFOs following the lunar module, Mitchell abruptly and uncomfortably said he had to go and cut his interview short (very short). The irony is that Mitchell is now a UFO activist, who should feel comfortable addressing that question.

Simon Parkes (a source I will be citing very frequently) also has a lot to say about the fake moon landing, but I will leave you to listen to his many videos on youtube. This is very special source because he is a Labour city councillor in the UK (something like a second-tier Member of Parliament) who, despite coming out with his ET experiences, was re-elected and currently serving his third overall term as a councillor (he served one term many years ago in another city), while also being elected as the chair of the most important committee within the Labour Party. Credibility like this is very difficult to come by, and he's the only one I currently rate in the A List.

Anyway, to bring a close to the moon landing, I leave you with some words from Ben Rich, the former head of Lockheed Skunk Works -- "We now have the technology to bring ET home."

Lists

B List (most things seem to check out): Whitley Strieber, Linda Moulton Howe, Victor (alien interview), Jim Sparks, Jonathan Reed, Bill Cooper (D list for alien intel, B for everything else), Roger Leir
C List (unconvincing): Bob Lazar, John Lear, Timothy Good, Richard Hoagland, work by Zecharia Sitchin, David Icke, Alex Collier, Richard Doolan, Laura Eisenhower (great grand-daugther of President Eisenhower)
D List (discredited): Steven Greer, Alex Jones, Andrew Basiago, Billy Meier, Seth Shostak, work by Erik von Daniken
 
Last edited:

Maximuz

Alfrescian
Loyal
Alien factions

There are talks that there are at least 70 races identified, and they have been zipping about and bumping into each other since the first nuclear detonation in New Mexico 1945. But from the sources listed above, I can only reliably mention five, who are:

Reptilians
Firstly, a lot of the aliens are fourth dimensional beings, which complicates the issue of dimensionality (i.e, how we think of spirits and such as extra-dimensional too). As a quick word on dimensions, physics, in its quest for the Theory of Everything have confirmed and validated seven dimensions, but found that none of their mathematical models work in any number of dimensions other than 11. One part of the Supercollider projects (i.e, Large Hadron Collider) is to verify dimensions past the seventh (see Brian Greene's TEDTalk on String Theory).

Beings from the fifth, sixth, and so on dimensions do not meddle with human affairs, but beings from the fourth like the Reptilians do, and they have been doing so for a very long time. This is also the strongest single faction, and also the least benevolent of the five.

Short Greys
The short greys are genetic automatons enslaved and engineered by the Reptilians. Most of them are clones without souls (i.e, in a craft of three Greys, only one of them has a soul). They are servants doing most of the legwork for the Reptilians and Mantids (they are who abductees usually see) and are essentially unimportant.

Tall Greys
Very little is known about them other than they're similar to humans in some measure of emotional capacity. It is also unknown how related they are to the Short Greys and similarly, they don't seem to hold much influence.

Mantids
The Mantids are 4D beings who work with the Reptilians. They are more compassionate than the Reptilians, but not as strong, so they're in a sort of unequal partnership. Their agenda is reportedly benevolent.

Nordics (Tall Whites)
The Nordics, so-called because they look like Scandinavians, are 3D in the sense that they came to Earth through more conventional means (the 4Ds use portals), and the word is that although they're not as technologically advanced, they are a good fighting force.

The Rest
The five above are singled out because there are just SO many reports about contact experiences with those groups, while the same cannot be said of the rest, such as Insectoids, Annunaki, etc. And while there are many Pleiadian contact stories, they are usually stories about love and peace and saving the planet, which does not lend a lot to its credibility (inversely, stories about the above five contain a lot of 'hard' material of a who when where what how nature).

So what do they want?
The Reptilians want the Earth. The Mantids and Nordics wants us to advance. The Greys are workers/spectators.

Short answers right? That's because maybe up to 90% of the speculative data I've come across have been omitted, but short as they are, it leaves more questions unanswered. Maybe I'll explore those areas in the next post.
 

Songkham

Alfrescian
Loyal
This will be something interesting for you to know

[video=youtube;N-nwqpw5l_0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-nwqpw5l_0[/video]
 

Maximuz

Alfrescian
Loyal
Watched the video. Not interested in replying to the content, sorry -- because please, don't waste my time with one video when I've watched hundreds. The vid was well-researched, yes, but it avoids all of the important questions -- one being, the Pyramids predating Egyptian culture. What turns me off more than a religious zealot is a "scientific" zealot, and the Pyramids (lots of verifiable info online) is a good place to start with. I am not here to waste your time so please don't waste mine.
 

Maximuz

Alfrescian
Loyal
Clarification

So far I've only mentioned reputable sources (i.e, astronauts, a Lockheed director, and a UK city councillor). I intend to keep it that way and omit speculative data so in this sense, this is a very 'hard' thread containing things which are very difficult to disprove -- my point is to dent Ockham's razor with hard facts, and even though it may include 'contact' or 'experience' types of information, I personally make sure that there is at least a triangulation of three unconnected sources saying the same thing, or reference cases that withstood rigorous medical and scientific investigation, like the Barney and Betty Hill abduction -- some of you guys from the 80's might even remember this from our English textbooks.

The triangulation is so much more difficult now though, because before the Internet, sources are somewhat reliably unconnected. Now, I hear so many people saying the exact same things that you wonder if these are disinformation.

And that's why I'm here. And that's also precisely why I'm having a lot of difficulty putting up the next post when the hard data that I have are unfortunately scattered across various minor topics like, why are cats the only mammal on earth to have reptilian-type eyes? Why are they also, on a kills-per-attempt-ratio, the best killers on earth?

I'm talking about house cats here. And if you are a cat owner like I was, haven't you undergone at LEAST one or two times when you've tried to find your cat in your apartment and couldn't find it?

In any case, let me go away and think of the next Ockham-denting post.

:smile:
 
Last edited:

Maximuz

Alfrescian
Loyal
Minor Update: Psychopathic Psyche

Some people must achieve what they want at any cost. In medical science, this is a branch known as psychopathic behaviour. You guys have surely met these people in your workplace -- either your boss or your boss's bosses, an ambitious colleague, or a cold-hearted lover -- all of whom usually look more animal than human (they tend to look like tigers in my experience -- though I can't discount lizards).

I'm a little to drawn to this topic because when reseachers say 'the reptilian mind', nobody listens. But if they say the 'psychopathic mind', people perk up more -- mainly because it is something they can relate to.

I'm not really talking about physical appearances here, though it does translate to one's face, and even one's limbs. I'm really talking about a state of mind that is not innately human (think about the human genome consisting of 91.8% junk DNA), and it is this particular state of mind which defines the kind of 3D reality we're living in, by the 0.01% ruling us*.

Source: Thomas Sheridan (very interesting stuff about the brain, worth a view or three (esp. 'How To Identify And Protect Yourself From Psychopaths')

*Sociologists: see Manuel Castell's Network Theory of Power -- Programmers, Switchers, and the rest. I think 0.01% Programmers is a wild underestimation.
 
Last edited:

Physiocrat

Alfrescian
Loyal
Have seen UFO before while doing guard duty during my NSF era. No evidence to back this up as there isn't any camera phone during that time.
Its clearly a typical saucer hovering in mid-air.Stationary did not move. Was not really far from the ground as can see the small specks of red lights flickering. No aliens though. What I am not sure if the saucer is related to alien or some military technology. The UfO was there for a good 10 min. Did not see it move away or disappear. Its gone after I return for my 2nd round of prowl. My buddy,sentry and the 2IC all witnessed it. Nee Soon camp
 

Physiocrat

Alfrescian
Loyal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_Hancock#Drug_use_and_advocacy

This guy researches ancient civilizations.
He has made some interesting observations.


"JVM: Is there one, particular discovery you came across in your work that forever changed your perspective about this planet; about our origin?

Graham Hancock: Again, it has been a process more than a single moment. It has been years of inquiry and investigation that have led me to this point of view. There are a number of key issues. One is ancient knowledge of astronomy and the phenomenon of copying the patterns of constellations on the ground, which we find for example at Giza, and we find at Angkor in Cambodia, in a number of Mayan sites, some of the stone circles in Britain – it’s all over the world. And it feels like a shared idea; it doesn’t feel like sort of accidentally all these different cultures are doing this. Because there’s an idea behind it: “as above, so below,” the marriage of heaven and earth. And that idea is also expressed in religious and spiritual traditions all around the world, in cultures that are not supposed to have had any connection with one another. They have a shared spiritual idea and they express it in the same types of monuments all around the world, which suggests to me very strongly that we are looking at a remote common influence, at an ancestor civilization which passed down an influence to all these later civilizations. That for me is one of the most compelling pieces of evidence for a lost civilization, a global civilization, that we find the same idea and the same kinds of monuments all around the world, and those monuments are expressing that very idea.
 

Physiocrat

Alfrescian
Loyal
He has also observed pictures of spaceships/saucers from ancient pictures/drawings. The natives/locals explanation/interpretation of the spaceship drawings is that they do not represent the star wars kind of vehicles but rather portals to the parallel world or the so called other dimension which is shared by all.
Posted the below interview. Not really 100% on aliens but I do feel maybe related.

Interview:

Sub Rosa: Supernatural has a very wide and eclectic scope - from cave art and shamanism, to the alien abduction phenomenon, fairy folklore and even the origins of DNA. I'm interested in how you came to research all these subjects within one book - was there a concept right from the start, or was it a slow unveiling of these various correspondences between the topics?

Graham Hancock: There was a concept from the start. I'd had in mind, for some time, to write a book about human origins. I always felt there was a mystery in there somewhere, but when I started to look at human origins, I found a very large part of the story to be frankly very boring, which was really the period from the last common ancestor with the chimpanzee (which could be as much as 7 million years ago), down to about 40,000 years ago - it seemed to be a rather dull tale, with very slow gradual anatomical changes taking place, and glacially slow behavioural changes taking place. Full anatomical modernity was reached at least 200,000 years ago – still with no sign of the behaviour that we today would regard as quintessentially human. And then long after that – really just 40,000 years ago – the archaeological record suddenly starts to attest to a dramatic change. In my opinion, that dramatic change in behaviour 40,000 years ago is the really big issue in the human career, even bigger in terms of its impact than our much-vaunted evolutionary adaptation of standing upright on two legs.

It's just amazing the way the archaeological record 'lights up' after 40,000 years ago with incredible symbolism, the appearance of the first art, evidence across a whole spectrum of activities of exactly what we would recognise as completely modern human behaviour, and it seems to switch on very suddenly. I realised that this is where the mystery lies, this is the mystery that I want to explore. Whatever it was, this process that made us human, right there at the very beginning was art, and incredible symbolism...the art of the painted caves of Europe for example, going back 35,000 years.

When I started to look around in this field, I found that cave art specialists had been squabbling for the best part of a century, but since the 1980s one very powerful and increasingly well accepted theory has been put forward, which suggests that this amazing adventure of art and religion at the beginning of modern behaviour was inspired by taking plant hallucinogens, by inducing altered states of consciousness, and painting the visions that our ancestors saw in those states. Once I realised that was a real possibility, then it opened the door to all the other areas of inquiry in Supernatural.

SR: You're talking there about David Lewis-Williams' neuropsychological model...

GH: Yes, David Lewis-Williams' remarkable work. David Lewis-Williams is an archaeology Professor who founded the Rock Art Institute at the University of Witwatersrand in South Africa. He’s recognised as one of the world's leading researchers of rock and cave art. After years of field-work, David came out with a theory which explains all the extraordinary common features that we find in the cave art of upper Paleolithic Europe, and the rock art of South Africa. These cultures were separated by vast geographical distance, and in fact separated chronologically as well. The explanation is that they were all depicting the same extraordinary mental events, experienced in altered states of consciousness.

Thanks to modern scientific work with volunteers who are given hallucinogens and whose experiences are studied, we know the typical visionary sequence begins with patterns and geometrical forms - dots, dashes, zig-zag lines - and gradually begins to turn into a fuller sense of altered reality in which the individual may very often see human beings partially transformed into animals. And this is exactly what we see in the cave art in Europe and in the rock art of the Bushmen in South Africa, this mixture of geometric and strange visionary forms showing transformed beings. We don’t have the space to go into it here but I set out the evidence at length in Supernatural. The bottom line is there’s very little doubt that the explanation that David Lewis-Williams has come to, that this is the art of altered states of consciousness, is the correct one.

SR: Going on with that idea of people seeing archetypal elements like snakes and jaguars under ayahuasca: with this being a high-profile book, do you think there is a risk that you could ‘pollute the integrity’, so to speak, all of subsequent reports? For example, a lot of people say we see ‘DMT elves’ now only because of Terence McKenna's description.

GH: Yes, or do people see elves because under the influence of the same chemicals, they go to the same places that Terence McKenna went to? This is the question, and it's a little bit difficult to answer, but I think I'm fairly clear on it. I think the source of these experiences is in the visionary world - they get into the culture, but they start in the visionary world. And so, in a way, it's a pointless argument to say "ah but you're influenced by what you've picked up from the culture", because the culture itself is influenced by what people have injected into it from their visionary experiences.

A very good example of this is the so-called alien abduction experience, which can be reliably reproduced in the lab by giving subjects injections of dimethyltryptamine, DMT - they see small beings with large dark eyes who cluster around them and perform painful and unpleasant experiments upon them. I’m referring here to the ground-breaking work done with DMT and human volunteers in the 1990’s by Dr Rick Strassman at the University of New Mexico. Now, we might say that those lab subjects were simply spitting out from their own minds what they'd already picked up about so-called alien abductions from the tabloid press, and from the culture surrounding them. Well one might say that, except that experiments with exactly the same drug were done in the 1950s - before any publicity surrounding alien abductions had ever got out into the media - and in those experiments too the subjects reported these encounters with small beings, who abducted them and did nasty things to them. So, you know, of course human beings talk to one another, and share their experiences, and the experiences we share with one another do affect the future experiences we will have, I'm not denying that. We impose interpretation on every act of perception – and at the end of the day hallucinations are perceptions too. But I'm saying that experiences of this peculiar kind are too widespread and too universal, and too long distributed in time, to be explained that way.

SR: And this is another big mystery that you explore in Supernatural – the mystery of certain very surprising and complex ingredients in supposedly non-real experiences that appear to be shared universally by all humans?

GH: Yes, that’s right. The first mystery to grab me, which we’ve already touched on, was that sudden extraordinary appearance of modern human behaviour less than 40,000 years ago, which was completely tied up with the emergence of art and religious ideas and the first-ever representations, painted on the walls of caves and rock shelters all around the world, of beings who we can instantly recognize as “supernatural” – for example hybrid beings mixing both animal and human characteristics. In other words these are the oldest representations to have survived in human culture of “spirit worlds” and their inhabitants. Once I had established that this imagery is best explained by David Lewis-Williams neuropsychological model - that is, that it is imagery which attempts to depict what shamans saw in visionary, hallucinatory states - then I was ready for the next mystery. Which is, why do people from all over the world, and at entirely different periods of history, keep on reporting more or less identical “hallucinations”? How are we to account for these astonishing similarities in what are supposed to be “non-real” experiences?”

If we look at the mainstream model of what hallucinations are, we find scientists explaining them as merely the brain in a disturbed state releasing items from memory, and from culture, reconstructing them in novel ways to create the bizarre non-real imagery that we call hallucinations. But this individualistic approach can't possibly be the explanation, because it doesn't account for the incredible universality of these images, reported by people from completely different cultures with no shared memories at all. So we have a huge mystery here, in my view. Why is it that 'non-real' experiences from all parts of the globe and all periods of history, have so many clearly-identifiable common features?

SR: And what conclusions do you come to?

GH: I conclude that “coincidence” – that much over-used longstop of materialist arguments – cannot explain the massive universality of many supposedly “non-real” human experiences. To cut a long story very short, I think there are two possibilities – both extraordinary – which could provide us with fruitful answers to this mystery.

One is that the brain is fundamentally a receiver of consciousness, not simply a generator of consciousness. To function in the everyday world, our brains have to be set at a certain wavelength, and have to stay pretty much tuned in to that wavelength, like a TV set tuned into a channel. But a variety of means exist (most of them long ago harnessed and exploited by shamans) by which we can change the receiver wavelength of our brains and pick up other realities which are not normally present in our daily perceptions, but are in fact there. So we can reach other dimensions that way, not through some sort of mechanistic fantasy of 21st century technology, but simply through retuning our consciousness - and perhaps that's what these shamanic hallucinogens do.

The second extraordinary possibility, which I also look into in some depth, goes back to the thinking of Francis Crick. It's not a widely known fact that Crick was under the influence of LSD when he discovered the double-helix structure of DNA and that this supreme achievement of scientific rationalism, for which he won the Nobel Prize, came to him in an altered, even mystical state of consciousness.

Until his death in 2004 Crick remained an atheist, deeply committed to the materialist (i.e. non-spiritual) view of reality. Nevertheless he was unable to accept that the DNA molecule could have assembled itself by accident. So he came to the idea that perhaps life originated on Earth this way: perhaps billions of years ago on the other side of the galaxy, doomed by a supernova, some ancient alien civilization sought to preserve its DNA, and he suggests that bacteria - perhaps with genetically engineered DNA inside them - were sent out into the Universe in spaceships. Eventually one of those ships crashed into the early Earth, and the bacteria containing that DNA began to reproduce, and the whole story of evolution as our scientists tell it started there. Once we have the DNA, evolution becomes plausible. Until we have the DNA, it's difficult to explain.

But if his explanation has anything to it, then it may be the case that DNA carries more than just genetic instructions. 97% of DNA we don't know what it does - scientists call it 'junk DNA'. It may be that there's some kind of message, or even a vast archive of messages, inscribed on these supposedly redundant stretches of DNA. I present strong evidence for this in the book – solid scientific evidence that reveals an intriguing linguistic structure in junk DNA. It may also be that we can only access these messages in altered states of consciousness. So these are the elements of the second possibility I pursue: that we may see these universal images because they are stored in the stretches of DNA that all humans share, and that they are in a sense messages to us from our creator - whoever our creator was. Once again, common sense and logic suggests the very least we can do is enquire further into this and see. We have the means, the hallucinogens - this technology to enquire into these secret chambers inside our own minds...Or parallel universes, if that's what they are.

SR: The fascinating thing I find with Crick's idea of Panspermia, is that it is basically the definition of Intelligent Design, and yet we have scientists today really rubbishing the idea of Intelligent Design, because they see it as the 'new Creationism'.

GH: Exactly, there's a huge propaganda war that has been unleashed on Intelligent Design. First of all, I think it's important to put on record that arch-evolutionists such as Richard Dawkins of Oxford University are themselves men and women who are practicing a religion. The belief that life assembled itself accidentally out of the collision of molecules in the primeval soup is just that: a belief. There's no evidence for it whatsoever. It’s a metaphysical position...

SR: The 'Hurricane in the Junkyard' belief...

GH: Yes. The scenario favoured by materialists that the DNA molecule could have assembled itself by accident out of any imaginable “primeval soup” has been rightly described as about as likely as a Boeing 767 being assembled in perfect working order by a hurricane in a junkyard. And this is what bothered Crick – this amazing statistical improbability - not because he came to it from a religious point of view, but because he came to it from a scientific point of view. He simply could not see how the DNA molecule could have self-assembled just by chance, and if he couldn't see it, then it's difficult to understand why anybody else should see it.

I don't think Crick would have been pleased to have be associated with the Intelligent Design movement, but the fact is, that the process of “guided panspermia” that he proposed to explain the origins of DNA was, by definition, Intelligent Design.

SR: Crick’s use of LSD as a ‘thinking tool’ didn't really come out until after his death - however, in your case, you've come forward in this book saying you have taken these substances. Do you think more public figures should be more outspoken on behalf of their positive aspects?

GH: Yes I do. I think it's time there was a real debate in our society about the plant hallucinogens, used by shamanic cultures for thousands of years. At the moment our society just lumps everything together under the category of 'drugs', and says 'these are drugs'. And 'drugs' has become such a loaded word - the word ‘drug’ and the word ‘abuse’ are constantly linked together in the propaganda war that goes on. In a way it's rather Orwellian, the language itself has been subverted and corrupted...people speak constantly of “drug abuse”, as if there is no other way to relate to consciousness-altering substances except by abusing them. When we use such language long enough it becomes impossible to think of these substances in anything other than a negative light.

Yet, the fact is that people all over the world have an innate, deeply rooted drive to alter their consciousness, and we do this in all kinds of ways. Some of those ways, like alcohol, are socially-sanctioned and some of those ways are not. But whether or not they're socially sanctioned, all the statistics show that the consumption of mind-altering drugs is increasing, not decreasing, despite the cruelties and vast expense of the official “war on drugs”.

SR: I think if people were more aware of the history of how these substances became banned in the first place, it would be quite eye-opening to them.

GH: I think it would be eye-opening indeed - the absolutely flimsy evidence, and the poor reasoning, on the basis of which they were banned. Recently for example, fresh psilocybin mushrooms were made illegal in Britain. If you look at the justification for this extra layer of bureaucracy, this extra crime which has been introduced to our statute books, of eating fresh mushrooms that grow wild and free in the fields - why should it be a crime? The government officials who speak out on these matters say it's because it might make some people crazy. This is a completely illogical position on which to make these substances illegal. Firstly, making them illegal does not make them unavailable. Secondly, the evidence that they make anybody crazy is extremely slim and flimsy, and absolutely unpersuasive to the millions of people around the world who have eaten psychedelic mushrooms, often repeating the experience many times, and kept their sanity perfectly intact.

It’s true that some individuals - for example if they are already schizophrenic or if they are borderline schizophrenics – may by precipitated into psychotic episodes by these substances. But that is an argument for more careful controls and excellent advice, not an argument for criminalizing the use of hallucinogens by responsible, mentally-balanced adults. There are many substances and objects in our society that are much more dangerous in the hands of schizophrenics than they are in the hands of people in good mental health – for example alcohol, paracetamol, fires and cars – but the fact that mentally-unstable people may misuse them is never wheeled out as a pathetic excuse to criminalize the general use of alcohol, paracetamol, fires and cars.

We're talking about our own individual consciousness - the root, the very heart of what each of us is. And these ancient hallucinogenic plants allow a method for the targeted exploration of our consciousness. It's absurd and crazy, in countries which call themselves advanced and democratic, that there should exist medieval laws that will send people to prison for years, simply for exploring their own consciousness through the “gratuituous graces” that nature has provided. If we are not sovereign over our own consciousness, then what are we sovereign over? What kind of game is our society playing when it stuffs its bureaucracies full of public money to spend on tracking down and punishing us for “consciousness crimes”?

SR: These negative connotations of 'drugs' extend into the field of cave art as well. In Supernatural you point out that the cave art experts debating David Lewis-Williams' neuropsychological model are unwilling to take the substances themselves to ‘get inside the heads of the artists’, so to speak.

GH: Well yes, there's two aspects to this. Firstly, there's a huge debate, because a group of cave art academics very much object to the idea that our ancestors discovered art and religion through hallucinogens. It's clear that a number of archaeologists object to this on principle, and really tremendously unpleasant and underhanded attacks have been made on the neuropsychological model, precisely because it does affront the basic sensibilities of archaeologists reared in the Western logical positivist tradition. The very idea that hallucinations could be the source of art and religion is an extremely threatening one to them.

But then beyond that, yes you're right: most of the people studying this subject do not want to take hallucinogens themselves. Approaching it from the point of view of reason, they can work out how visionary experiences could have underlain the art that we see on the cave walls, and they have the benefit of the huge number of reports done by scientists in labs with volunteers. But to take the substances themselves is still a no-no.

I think it's perfectly legitimate to theorise on these things, but one should not then make authoritative statements about the reality-status of hallucinations if one has never taken hallucinogens oneself. One can certainly enquire into this area, but to even begin to be qualified to talk about the reality-status of these mysterious visions, one has to have had the visions oneself.

SR: You begin the book with the personal story of your father's death and how it affected you, and how you then took ibogaine at your home and had an experience parallel to the common ibogaine experience of talking to the dead. Ayahuasca is said to have a similar 'ability'. Do you think hallucinogens may offer a means of research into the possibility of an afterlife?

GH: Yes. I think every experience that we describe as the 'supernatural' - encounters with non-physical beings, whether they're the spirits of the dead, or whether we call them fairies or elves or angels or aliens - I think that enquiry into all of those areas will be, and can be, aided by the use of hallucinogens. Right now nobody has exploring the paranormal with hallucinogens at the top of their research priorities. But I would say that could be one of the most fruitful areas of research to be able to take on.

SR: Well, Terence McKenna pointed out a few times that he felt he had a telepathic connection when he was on mushrooms.

GH: Yes, there are extraordinary accounts of this sort, and also of remote viewing – accurately reporting on things happening in distant places. We have a great deal of anecdotal information about this, and then also very specific information of people getting practical knowledge from their hallucinations - whether it's Francis Crick seeing the structure of DNA under the influence of LSD, or whether it's a shaman in the Amazon learning which plants to mix together to produce a certain medicine. This information appears to be available to us in the hallucinatory state, and I think this is something that needs to be taken very seriously – because it seems to have been connected with the mysterious, radical process that made us human in the first place, the biggest evolutionary event in the story of our species. It might even be that we are missing out on our next important evolutionary leap forward because certain factions within our society have succeeded in demonizing, stigmatizing and suppressing visionary states of consciousness.

SR: One of the great parts of the book - and maybe this is just my personal interest – is that it really felt like a continuation of Jacques Vallee's Passport to Magonia, where he equated the UFO experience with all fairy folklore. Do you think Vallee was on to something here?

GH: Yes, very much so. This aspect of the inquiry, for me, spanned three different issues. The beings that are called spirits in shamanic societies, the beings that were called fairies and elves in medieval Europe, and the beings that are called aliens today. I was inevitably drawn to this because in taking ayahuasca I had something like an alien abduction experience myself. It led me to look at comparisons between the spirits that shamans have spoken of down the ages, and aliens that modern so-called UFO abductees speak of today. I realised there were astonishingly close, really eerie spine-tingling comparisons, between these two supposedly very different categories of beings.

When I learnt of Vallee's work, which was conducted in the 1960s, and compared fairies with aliens, I realised that the similarities spread even further, and I decided to update and extend Vallee's investigation, looking at the huge body of evidence that's become available on alien abductions since the end of the 1960s, and comparing that with folklore about fairies and elves. I think the comparison is absolutely watertight - what we are dealing with here is one phenomenon, which has been with the human race since we first became human, and which we have interpreted in slightly different ways at different periods of history. We see this phenomenon through our cultural spectacles, but when you allow for that you realise that it's the same phenomenon all the time - whether we call them spirits, whether we call them fairies, or whether we call them aliens.

I’m quite confident now that the key to all such experiences is to be found in altered states of consciousness. But I also want to re-emphasise that when I speak of experiences stemming from altered states of consciousness, I absolutely do NOT mean to imply that those experiences are necessarily “unreal”. On the contrary, I think there's a very good chance that many so-called supernatural encounters, including those we call "alien abductions" today, are 100 per cent real but are difficult to demonstrate scientifically precisely because they are only accessible to us in altered states of consciousness. I also accept that there are paradoxical physical elements often associated with visionary experiences, from the implants that shamans and alien-abductees find in their bodies, to mysterious healings, to objects and other traces, even books sometimes, left behind by “spirits”, “fairies” and “aliens”. It’s a huge mystery and it has haunted our ancestors for at least 35,000 years.

SR: You talked to John Mack before his death?

GH: I’d been acquainted with John Mack for many years and met him twice. He and I had an email exchange in 2004, planning to meet up again and conduct an extensive interview. I wanted to compare his work with the work of Dr Rick Strassman at the University of New Mexico, the DMT studies – I mentioned earlier – but unfortunately John Mack was killed in a car crash in London before we could meet. John was a great man in my view, a good, warm-hearted human-being, a top-notch scientist, and a fearless investigator of the unorthodox conclusions his science led him to.

I did talk to Rick Strassman and my interview with him appears in an appendix of the book. He confirmed that John saw many similarities between abductee reports and the reports of DMT volunteers.

SR: Many proponents of materialist philosophy quote Dr Michael Persinger's research on the 'sensed presence' as the way of explaining a lot of these apparitions. Do you agree with Persinger's approach?

GH: What’s interesting here is that it depends on our understanding of the brain. Persinger is also talking about altered states of consciousness - it’s just that his particular approach is to induce them through the use of electromagnetic fields, instead of inducing them through the use of chemical hallucinogens. But the end effect is the same. Now, Persinger might be a reductionist, and he might say “the brain changes I observe when I fire this electromagnetic field at my subject’s head have caused his experiences of small beings standing beside him.” But that causal connection is not at all clear – it may be that the electromagnetic fields simply retuned the receiver wavelength of the brain, and allowed it to pick up another “reality”, that is only accessible in altered states.

For me, Persinger just provides us with another way by which human beings can enter altered states of consciousness, but he doesn’t prove that what we see can be reduced to the brain activity associated with it. We would naturally expect there to be brain activity mediating any human experience, but the fact that there is activity alone, does not reduce the experience to that activity.

SR: It’s whether it’s causative or not…

GH: Yes, or is it – again we come back to this receiver model of the brain, which I think is enormously useful – that we would see activity if the brain is a receiver, as it retunes itself, just as we would see a telescope changing its focal length. That would be activity, but it wouldn’t be causing the experience. The telescope would be seeing a further off star, or our brain would be seeing another level of reality.

I think where Persinger is interesting, is that he provides this notion of a connection to earth energies – that earth energies generate electromagnetic fields – which could explain why crowds of tens of thousands of people standing in one place all suddenly start to see visions at once: because they’re all subjected to the same altered state of consciousness.

SR: You’re talking about events such as the Fatima and Lourdes apparitions?

GH: Like Fatima for example. There’s no doubt that what they were seeing was absolutely typical of altered states of consciousness. Now how do we explain that a crowd of 70,000 people all go into an altered state at once? I think Persinger may have provided us with the answer.

One point I make in the book is about the cave of Lourdes, where we have modern miracles, and healing and pilgrimage. Nearby was a Stone Age cave containing huge numbers of pieces of portable Upper Palaeolithic art. Maybe certain places have been sacred for tens of thousands of years, because they have an effect on our consciousness, and that effect on our consciousness in turn allows some healing process to occur.

SR: To finish: Supernatural covers a number of fascinating subjects, and you argue the case very intelligently, with mounds of evidence. Having said that, there’s a lot of very strange material – hallucinogens, sex with aliens, fairies and elves. Do you worry about the reception the book is going to get, critics saying “Graham’s gone and fried his brain on drugs and now look what he’s writing about”?

GH: Yes, I’m sure that cheap tactic will be used to attack me and to try and ridicule me. It’s such an obvious one for my critics to go for - I’m sure they won’t be able to resist it. However, I have expressed considered views that are the result of a great deal of work. I don’t think any critic is qualified to express any view whatsoever on the reality-status of hallucinations, unless they themselves have had those experiences, unless they’ve been prepared to take the shamanic plant hallucinogens, and face up to the experiences that they unleash.

If they’ve been done that, then they’re at least qualified to talk about this, but if they haven’t done that then it’s just empty air really. So I shall try to ignore it.

Audio excerpts (from passages edited out of interview text) also available on Sub Rosa:

Graham Hancock speaks:

* On the shocking case of the Altamira cave, where an amateur researcher was pilloried by academia because of his discovery (which was eventually proven as genuine):

GH: Yes, this was Sautuola. He was a Spanish nobleman - a small-time nobleman - who owned land in northern Spain. One of his employees on his land discovered the cave of Altamira, and Sautuola made several visits there. It wasn't until his third visit, I believe, with his daughter, that he recognised that painted on the ceiling was this extraordinary bestiary of animals, featuring a number of large bison painted over knobs in the ceiling...really the most beautiful and extraordinary thing. And because he already had considerable experience of what was known of the art of the cave period - up till then, this was all portable art, nobody had ever discovered any art painted on the walls of caves before - the portable art showed exactly the same Ice Age animals that were painted on the ceiling at Altamira. Sautuola very quickly put two and two together and said "Gosh, this must be the work of Stone Age artists."

But because the work was so good, all of the academics of the time refused to accept that it could be the work of Stone Age artists. So this huge, horrible campaign was mounted against Sautuola, to say he had hired an artist to fake all of these paintings. He was accused of fraud, of deception, or of being a fool. That they were some kind of graffiti left by Roman soldiers...anything other than accept that these amazing works of art could have been actually produced by our ancestors 14 or 15 thousand years ago.

Sautuola, eventually gave way - his personality collapsed under this onslaught of this bitter, ascerbic, really violent attack on his integrity, and he died before his time, a disillusioned and a broken man, and the tragedy is he was absolutely, one hundred percent right. And those academics who had destroyed his life, within ten years of his death, were going into Altamira and declaring it to be a wonderful work of prehistoric art.

SR: Do you feel a certain sympathy?

GH: I do, I do feel a certain sympathy simply because - I've never felt it as badly as he did, I've not been punished in the way he was punished - but I've also been subject to this bitter, ongoing, unrelenting attack of academics upon ideas they don't like. So yes, I do feel some identification and sympathy with Sautuola.

* On whether his witnessing of a man’s death during a shamanic initiation made him question whether he should be researching this topic:

GH: No, it didn't, but it did make me realise how there can be real crossovers between the so-called non-physical or spirit world, and this world. That these are not necessarily isolated domains. That there is a to-and-fro between them, and in a sense that just made it seem all the more important to me, to investigate this and to learn more about it. But with caution and with care - I do think it's good advice not to be too eager with the use of hallucinogens, but to explore it with reason and with care. But nevertheless, with that proviso, this is something that's very important for us to know about. For shamans, it's been clear all along - our world is in a relationship, whether it likes it or not, with other non-physical realms. And those other realms affect what happens in our world, and therefore we need to know about them. But this is so alien to the contemporary western mindset that very few people are thinking about it at the moment. Everything I've learned while researching this book has made me feel this is what we need to be doing.

* On ‘Shamanic Tourism’, and whether it is becoming too accessible to the general public:

GH: No, I think it's good that it should be accessible to the general public, under the guidance of experienced shamans. An experienced shaman doesn't have to be somebody who grew up within a particular culture. Shamanism is less about cultural transmission, and more about the direct experience of altered states of consciousness that particular individuals have, and what they learn in those altered states of consciousness - particularly what they learn about how to manage those altered states of consciousness. So what's useful about having an experienced shaman present when taking these substances is that he, or she, will help you to manage what can otherwise be a very alarming experience...until you get to the point where you can manage it yourself.

So, that's the first point, is that this may be the only way that Westerners may safely gain access to these experiences, and reliably gain access to these experiences. And it's far preferable that they should do that than that they should buy the ingredients on the internet and try to mix up ayahuasca in their living rooms. So no, I don't think that it's a bad thing.

Another aspect of this, which all shamans in the Amazon will tell you, and which experienced Western users of ayahuasca like Benny Shannon - who's the professor of psychology at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem - will also say, is that ayahuasca is itself the teacher. The teacher is not the shaman, the shaman is there to help guide your journey. But the teacher is the plant. And the plant itself has lessons to unfold to you, and it will unfold those lessons according to its own timetable.

So it's getting into direct communication with this mysterious plant that is the important thing, and secondly to do so in the best possible setting. I have no objection to so-called ayahuasca tourism. I think it's a way that these ancient shamanic plants are finding to spread their influence into the wider world, and I think that's a good thing.

SR: And when you look at it, it's not exactly a 'fun trip' the ayahuasca, so I think it's something that people really need to want to undergo, before they commit to it.

GH: People very much have to want to explore their own consciousness, and they will know before they begin to do so that they're going to be in for an extremely uncomfortable, and physically and even psychically, unpleasant time. Ayahuasca is not easy...it is physically very demanding, it causes severe diaorrhea, severe vomiting. So it's not something that anybody would even begin to dream of doing for fun. But it's a profoundly moving experience, which changes the way you think about reality. It certainly changed the way I think about reality.
 
Last edited:

Physiocrat

Alfrescian
Loyal
http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/john-lennon-ufo-link-north-9490684

John Lennon who is said to have claimed he had seen a UFO from his balcony in New York in 1974

He claimed he was standing on the balcony of his apartment on August 23 1974, with former girlfriend May Pang.

The pair claimed to have seen a flying saucer hovering silently over them.

In Lennon’s song Nobody Told Me he appears to refer to the incident with the lyric “There’s a UFO over New York and I ain’t too surprised.”
 
Top