UFO in Kansas still Unsolved

Many stories of UFO's and apparent entities exist throughout the literature of ufology. But of all the stories about UFO's, many of them, certainly a majority, exhibit no evidence other than the recounting of the event by the witnesses. While this can still be interesting and can still be indicative of something anomalous, there is nothing like physical evidence. Physical evidence is something that can be collected, tested, and analyzed. Even so, much of the physical evidence doesn't shed much light on the provenance of UFO's. This is likely due, in part, that UFO's are of various unrelated phenomenon. Perhaps some are Earth energies such as ball lightning. Some of crashed meteorites. Some of military experiments. Some of hoaxers attempts to confuse and/or entertain. And on and on.

But one such case with substantial physical evidence is the case in Delphos, Kansas in the early 1970's. You may not have heard of this case, but the aftermath and the soil samples taken, along with testimony, pictures, and investigation leave this case one of the still few that are not only unsolved, but not even adequately explained.



While UFO cases are probably more interesting if they contain notions of alien beings and crafts that have manuevered great distances, this case is quite anomalous nonetheless. But it doesn't contain messages to save our planet or stop using nukes. It is pretty simple. An apparently metallic UFO was seen by Ronald Johnson. The UFO was encompassed by numerous lights so bright that they temporarily impaired his vision. It sounded like "an old washing machine" in Ronalds words. The UFO left marks, or residue, on the ground and disturbed the nearby trees by breaking branches. The whole family viewed the "craft" at one time or another. The ring that was left still exists today and is still hydrophillic. It was said to "glow" when it first happened.

Mrs Johnson touched the glowing ring left by the UFO and her hand went numb as if she had been anesthetized. Rubbing it off on her leg prompted her leg to go numb as well. The encounter was first investigated by the Delphos Republican, a local newspaper. Subsequently it was investigated by Sherriff Enlow and another Highway Patrolman from the State. Later it was investigated by Ted Phillips. All indications are that the encounter happened the way it was described. Debunkers have attempted to explain it by saying the ring is a fairy ring left by certain phosphorescent mushrooms. While this phenomenon is a real one, it is a dismal explanation for the Delphos ring.

So, .. what was it?? A hoax seems very unlikely. If it were a hoax, I think we would have known by now. But the family didn't want fame or money or a cult following. They reported it, they experienced it, and one was affected by it physically. It still remains today a mystery. The fact that it isn't accompanied by the usual alien overtones probably keeps it away from the mainstream "wanto-to-believe" crowd. But I would submit that this case is as good as it gets. Reliable witnesses with nothing to gain, physical evidence that remains to this day, heavily investigated, physical reponses to the leftover remains of the craft. We really do have a genuine mystery on our hands here in Kansas.

Are We Building the Saucers??

http://www.space.com/common/media/video/player.php?videoRef=SP_090729_LightCraft

A lot of this future technology looks very familiar. Disc like craft. Metallic. Emitting light from the bottom. Sometimes spinning on its axis. Creating a bubble of space in front of the craft. Enough to just puch right through the atmosphere (think O'Hare).

"This is all based on real physics, not imagination".

I'm not throwing out any type of blanket here dismissing UFO's. I'm just wondering what the limits of out own ingenuity and technology actually are. Might I be amazed at what we have already developed?? Might a lot of UFO's become IFO's if we were aware of these technologies?? Might the intermingling of UFO's and military witnesses be an orchestrated effort to use UFO's as a cover for their own projects?? Is sensitive leaking and disinformation a tactic used by the government to garner favor for "alien" UFO's?? Because this would take the emphasis off of the miltary's involvement in making these if everyone else thought they were unknowns. All right, I'm getting ahead of myself.

Let me just ask then. Are we making saucers(at least some of them)??

Crop Circles and UFO's : At least One Example

While I've been quite entertained by the repeated claims of UFO's making crop circles, I am at the same time intrigued by a report from 1974 in Canada. And it seems to serve as, so far as I can tell, a genuine UFO encounter that left behind,.. you guessed it, crop circles. Not an intricate fancy one of the DNA molecule, but just a plain circle. Well, .. actually 5 of them.

Edwin Fuhr, a farmer in Saskatchewan, was out working his rapeseed fields. He saw an object from his swather and got closer to take a look. Thinking it was some junk deposited there or some kind of joke, he was astounded to encounter a metallic looking object hovering and spinning in front of him. He dismounted to get closer. He got within 15 feet of the thing before a realization of something very odd indeed turned to fear. Scared of what he was witnessing he backed away towards his swather. He noticed that the spinning of the thing was also affecting the grass beneath it. As he retreated, still facing the object, he noticed to his side that there were four more objects nearby doing the same thing.

Ted Phillips later became involved and in an interview Edwin described what happened:

They were all revolving, all four of them. I sat there like I was frozen, I couldn't move nothing....I sat there for, it could have been fifteen or twenty minutes, I don't know. From one of them, something was probing around the grass....It was like, oh, I would say, the size of a fifty-cent piece, it looked like a probe, and the grass was all twisted and you could see marks like something had jumped here and there, all over. Then, they all went up, straight up, to I would say about two hundred feet and they stopped at that distance. When they hit the two hundred foot mark, they stopped spinning and a vapour floated out, an exhaust. The exhaust was only about six feet long, like a vapour, it was two ports at the bottom of it.

You could see they were about twelve-inch diameter ports and they were all like that. They were in a step-like formation, the lower was the last to go up... And after that, I would say only a second, there was a downward wind, a pressure that flattened the rape that was standing and I thought, "Oh, here goes my crop." It just took seconds to get to that height (two hundred feet) and then they were just standing and after that, into the clouds and they were gone.

Constable Morier mas the first on the scene to hear the story, see the circles left behind, and talk with Fuhr. He was convinced Fuhr was not lying.

He says : There is no way that this is a hoax...I think that there is no way that anything was wheeled in and out of that field because there had to be some trace...whatever was in there, it came out of the air and departed the same way, as far as I could tell.

Once I saw the rings, and how genuinely scared Mr. Fuhr was, it was most definite something had landed. Nothing could have been brought into that area. There were no tracks. It came out of the sky and went back to the sky.

"Mr. Fuhr is very sincere and a responsible member of the community that members of the force have known for the past four years."

I have seen this episode depicted on a television show at one time. I believe it was UFO Files featuring Ted Phillips and some of the cases he had been involved with. I haven't been able to find that video, but will post it if and when I encounter it. A few posts ago I embedded a video that contains some pictures of the rings that were left from the apparent UFO's. Check it out.

And while I usually dismiss the UFO / Crop Circle connection, well, ..... it has happened at least once if this case is legit.

Aha!! I found the video I was looking for. First it features this case in Saskatchewan.

Original Newspaper Account

More Information -

Elongated Nodes in Crop Circles: Explained??

I have, in the past, been quite intrigued by the crop circle phenomenon for no other reason than the depth and originality of the "art". Is it a crypted depiction from other intelligences?? Is it ET's calling card?? Are they the result of terrestrial physics that are poorly understood or not understood at all??

Many questions remain about the circles, but one piece of evidence cited often times, particularly by BLT Research, is the presence of abnormalities in the apical nodes of the bent crops. The apical nodes are the plant nodes near the top of the plant but below the newest growth at the very tippy top.











And while this evidence of elongated nodes certainly seems strange and physically present, I've wondered why no one has commented on such evidence. BLT Research seems to have substantial data representing these elongated and sometimes bent nodes. What could be the reason for such an anomaly?? BLT says that these elongated nodes are the most evident and consistent piece of data supporting the formation of non-human made crop circles.( I have paraphrased this and will look for the supporting quotations)

So, whats up with this?? Here is a picture of the type of bent and elongated nodes (not from BLT). And here is another. And another. You can clearly see the difference between normal grains and those that are elongated and/or bent.

I've recently noticed the position and growth of sunflowers in my backyard. Some of the flowers have drooped greatly down to the ground and are continuing to grow towards the sun. This natural tropism of sunflowers prompted me to think about how these nodes in crop circles might form. And I have a hunch they might be formed by negative gravitropism. Plants naturally have certain predisposed tropisms towards or away from gravitational forces (postive and negative).

Now lets see. A person bends down some crops. The crops, depending on what stage they are in, will either die, continue to grow, or a mixture of both. It has occured to me that if the crops are still growing, they would continue their natural tropism, bending up away from gravity and towards sunlight. It may lend some explanatory power to the nature of these apparent "abnormalities". Whats is abnormal is for the crops to get bent over. I don't know that certain "energies" are responsible for such elongating and bending. It may just be a natural way for plants to stretch themselves back into position for optimal growth.

I'm certainly not on any debunker trip, just trying to offer explanations for such behaviors in these plants. But in doing this, I need more data. I have some questions that might be useful in helping to see if what I have just offered up has any merit. These plant "abnormalities"are not present all the time. And that makes me wonder if the conditions of the plants, the growth cycle, the type of plant, and so on have anything to do with this. And I think they might.

A chemical (auxin) called indoleacetic acid (IAA) is responsible for the regulation of many plant activities. As far as tropism is concerned:

"IAA is produced in the meristems of the stem. The auxin diffuses down the shady side of a stem and not the sunny side. As a result, the cells on the shady side elongate more than the sunny side and the stem bends toward the sun. " (http://leavingbio.net/Plant%20Responses.htm)

So,.... elongation is possible when factors present themselves to a plant that needs to stretch out to the sun for growth. Now I would be remiss if I didn't point out that most of this elongation is apparent in the internode, and not the node proper. However, I have read some reports that state node elongation has occured, usually involving the upper node as opposed to the lower nodes. So while this isn't often occuring, it does occur. And quite simply, I doubt if sufficient testing has been done simulating crop circles and their apparent anomalies.

How fast this elongation can happen depends on plant specifics and environmental conditions, but I have read that it can happen in a matter of hours (ever seen how some plants grow before your eyes??). I speculate it could fit the bill for some of these crop circles. Alas, more data (and testing) is needed in order to confirm it. But this phenomenon leaves us with some questions.

So one question I'd like to see answered is:
How long has it taken from the "formation" to the collection and analysis of the grains?? If ample time has passed, we might expect some growth from the plants. And this growth from a sideways position up towards the sun might leave such an effect. If the grains are collected in a timely manner then potentially such effects might be absent. Again it depends on the type of plant, growth stage, susceptibility to node elongation, angle of crops in relation to angle of the sun, and so on. But to put it in a nutshell, perhaps this node elongation and bending is a natural result of a plant that has been pushed down which is trying desparately to regain it's "feet", not some unknown "energy" pulling the plant apart. But, ... I could be wrong.

As far as the other anomalies, well..... that's another post. One possibility at a time. And while some may think I am offering up the "truth" behind these crop circle anomalies, I'll say I'm just offering a possibility. Physical testing and verification will decide what is truth and what is fantasy.

The Way, Way Back Machine

I'll have more to say about a particular case in Canada where a photo is briefly shown. As I was doing some researching on this particular case though, I found this little clip. Wow. Ted Phillips looks pretty darn young, but amazingly he sounds exactly the same. I've lstened to him a few times and I think that he is one of the most level-headed, objective researchers that I've seen. He doesn't rush to drastic "the sky is falling" conclusions, but collects the hard data in an effort to show that something weird indeed is happening. What it is exactly is another story entirely.

Tehran, Iran 1976

One of the classic cases in ufology. I find it interesting for a number of reasons. It is one of those cases that is outside of the US. It is very well documented. As far as I can tell, the events that transpired seem to have actually happened (as opposed to "may" have happened). There is much corroboration from radar, multiple witnesses, and credible military witnesses all first hand.

The CIA took an immediate interest in this case. Now as some ufologists would say, the CIA involvement in this particular case is proof that the United States was still tracking and studying UFO's well after the offical close of Project Blue Book. But it may not have been such an interest in ET/UFO's so much as an interest in foreign weaponry and the potential for attacks against our country. They are after all an organization designed to collect and interpret sensitive information. It is understandible that the CIA had an interest in this case even apart from any UFO connection. If the events are indeed true and accurate then it was a strange and awesome moment in time in Iran.

Anyway,.. here is some more about it.



Official CIA Memo ala John Greenwald

The lowdown on this case

UFO Experience versus Evidence

The skeptical arguments against intelligently controlled UFO's, wherever they may be from, are quite valid. Nothing in all the evidence available is sure to verify the existence of aliens. It is possible that such undeniable material exists I suppose, but the skeptical argument is sound enough. There are any number of reasons why scuff marks (landing marks) may be left on the ground. Or why and how radiation has affected people. And how the desert ground and surrounding scrub brush was burnt. Again, evidence is available.

But as we get further down the rabbit hole to the so-called experiencers or contactees there is even less evidence, much less. In fact there is nothing except the accounts of the people with these claims. So it is an unusually easy task to dismiss them as sad delusions or hoaxes of the claimants. But, in all fairness, a few distinctions need to be made.

As far as evidential cases go, there is evidence. There is some physicality to some of these cases. Soccoro did have burnt marks. Delphos did leave a strange and long lasting ring for decades. Cash Landrum did appear to include physical human harm . And so on. While skeptics like to announce the lack of evidence, this is contrary to what we actually see after some sightings. Were the "landing marks" in Rendlesham just that, or were they the result of a scratching hare? The skeptics say that the evidence is not all that compelling regarding the potential non-human intelligent visitation. Fair enough, but this is far cry from saying there is NO evidence. Evidence exists as Ted Phillips would convincingly tell you. What that evidence means may be another story altogether.

So what about the high strangeness?? Of course there is no evidence in these types of cases. So it may be even simpler to debunk if that is the objective. But I am puzzled by a few things in regards to these types of claims. And while I can certainly write off many of these due to glaring lies or perhaps even delusions, some of them are puzzling. Whether everything that happens in human experience is a result of physical activity is debateable. Human experience encompasses more than a reductionist can account for. Can it actually be known in a reductionist way what a dream entails?? At this point in the course of history I would say absolutely not. Yet dreams can and do have a significant impact on individuals. Religion does have an impact on the experience of being a conscious human whether it is "real" or not. The question might be what is real to human beings?

So, now to the experiencers. I cannot dismiss all claims based on the lack of evidence, which sounds rather unwilling to investigate the truth of the matter. But what I have noticed is that experience is a reality, if even only in the brain. The fact remains that people have these experiences whether we choose to believe them or not. Normal, non-deluded, rational people have had these strange experiences. And while the experience is drastically different then anything with evidential leftovers, they still remain real to the person.

And the fact that these experiences are real in some sense leads me to believe that discovering the truth to these experiences is worthwhile. But to dismiss these rational people because of their experience is doing a great disservice to the spectrum of human possibility and the pursuit of understanding them. Is something actually happening whereby contact with other intelligences is being made?? Or is there some middle ground between experience and dreamland that accounts for these?? Or, as skeptics might add, is the whole thing a complete neurological misfire mixed with cultural viruses that conjures up alien figures?? I would submit that it doesn't matter. Any of them is of scientific and/or psychological importance.

We like to adorn, or at least scientists and skeptics like to, ourselves with the veil of knowledge and self pride. But that veil is thin and represents, in my opinion, a very shell of true understanding. Human vanity may be an integral deterrant into discovering what is going on here. If we can let go of our prejudices and biases and admit our ignorance then perhaps we can begin to unravel this mystery. At least this would be a start as I don't know what kind of methodology would be sufficient at this point to get at any part of the truth. And if we can be justly confident that these people are not lying then we should be able to at least attempt to comprehend what the limits of human experience are and more importantly, why they are.

A Global Solution for Humanity

I wonder if, sometime in the not-so-distant future, our species might face a challenge that required worldwide support and cooperation. A challenge that without the proper action, or inaction, would result in an unprecedented and unforeseen catastrophic reality. Something that might result in human beings becoming but a memory. Perhaps even life altogether on Earth.



It's is difficult to imagine such devastating scenarios, but surely something might be at least plausible. . Something is happening to our atmosphere. Our ozone and ability to deflect radiation is quickly diminishing. A giant, deadly cosmic nebula-like cloud of goo is approaching Earth in the following years. Supergravity has accelerated and the sun is drawing us in much faster than than expected. An easily transmitted mutated virus has made it's way into Europe. A supervolcano has disrupted much of the world in many different ways. All species of bees have gone exinct. ET has told us they want the planet and we are to evacuate in the next 25 years. Something along these lines. The point is : Some time might come where we, as earthlings, might have to make decisions together for the continuation of the human species.



This is very possible. I know my examples are far fetching, but with the history of our solar system and the changing condition of our planet, the potential for abrupt non-beneficial environments to arise is a question of when not if. Would it happen in our lifetime or our childrens?? Or hundreds or thousands of years?? It seems inevitable. The timeline of humanity's existence is but a blip on the radar.



But if we are ever to change from a Type 0 civilization to a Type I, as Kaku and others descibe, we will not only have to find magnificent ways to harness energy, we will undoubtedly, at some point in our future, need to escape some cosmic or earthbound threat. If we are to "save" humanity as long as possible, we will need to find a way to cooperate together as a planet. And we could never be further from that reality. As ideological humans, we may be our own worst enemy. We cannot agree on the most basic premises, much less an agenda to protect and extend our species. Even so, a global agreement, a global intent, is the only way for us to advance as a species beyond our expected and certain demise.

We must recognize the frailty of our kind and work together to plan for two things: protecting those that live here from various kinds of threats, and sending off humans to colonize other worlds or areas of space. If a humans expect a long future then these must be addressed successfully.

However, I question whether this is ever going to be possible. We can look to certain nations doing some of this, but it will take substantially longer, cost loads of more money, and increase the risk. Basic research and development is a long process and takes lots of money and effort. One nation undertaking the entire gamut of protecting people from natural or cosmic disaster and being responsible for a space program designed to get people off the planet and into new homes elsewhere in the galaxy is simply too much. It may be too much for the planet. Without some change in consciousness or a single new world order I'm not sure how we overcome our future needs to do these very things.

And BTW, I'm not advocating some tryanical evil New World Order. I'm just merely observing that if we do not come to some general realizations about us as human beings and our place in the universe, then we stand a great deal to lose.

I just found this Kaku video and it pretty much sums everything up.

Spaceman Photo

I remembered this photo as the "Spaceman Photo". I don't know much about this episode, other than the photo. And that it is a rather perplexing photo. Strange enough to be true??
http://www.ufologie.net/indexe.htm

The Universe and the Need for Life

We live in a day and age where theoretical physics is indistinguishible from nonsense. Wormholes, alternative universes, string theory, M-Brane theory, quantum theory, etc. It seems the world around us at the simplest levels is quite simply beyond reason. Beyond comprehension, beyond even basic logic. We keep searching for, and have done for decades, particles that we don't know exist. We don't even understand light, gravity, and the birth of the universe in any satisfying way.

Perhaps I'm being too critical. These problems are quite complex and we have basically only begun. I admire the scientific endeavors. Maybe it is surprising to some, the amount of bizzare diversity we find when looking for explanations to seemingly simplistic problems. One question I have internally pondered recently is the existence of life. And I suppose I'm assuming there is life throughout the universe, but it doesn't matter much in the consideration.

What is it about the universe that life needed to develop?? Would it not be a functional universe if life had not developed?? Did life need to develop?? It seems the only answer is yes, because it indeed did manifest. So while we look at possible reasons how life sprouted: RNA configurations to DNA molecules, evolution, primordal soup, simple to complex, it doesn't answer the why. WHY??

Why is it that mass (atoms, physical stuff) developed into something that could move around, look for sustenence, replicate, observe and adapt?? The whole idea of non-living stuff somehow turning into useful, living stuff is spellbinding. It seems to me that there is a reason why this came to be. Randomness doesn't answer the why question. Is there, at the most basic level, any difference between life and non-life?? Quite possibly they are the same thing. But people distinguish the two because they appear and act quite differently. Rocks are not alive. People are. Plants are. Crystals are not.

Some new agers like to say how the universe is becoming aware of itself. I am decidedly not a crystal rubber, but they may actually be on to something. Because the thought also occurs to me that a universe where observations are made are among the aspects we find. We make plenty of experimental observations. Light changes depending on what an observer is doing. Time changes based on observer speed. Perhaps the whole point of the universe is that self awareness is a pervasive growing spectrum through space and time. A sort of seed, dormant in some areas and firmly rooted in others. Maybe the universe is one big organism that has become transformed. And is continually growing, .. and learning.

And while we recently find that observations may indicate a holographic nature to the universe, however ridiculous that might sound, those observations might be clues into the true working of what we experience. Call it randomness, call it god, but the apparent NEED for life among the cosmos is more than we can comprehend at this time.

What did Lonnie Zamora see??

There are a few things about this case that don't seem to be in question.
1. Lonnie Zamora is of the highest caliber of witness. He was a police officer, rather quiet, and performed his job well. To nearly all investigators, his credibility is impeccable.
2. Lonnie Zamora saw something. Taking into account his credibility and the evidence left behind, it has become increasinly clear that, indeed, the incident did happen as Zamora described.

The first two videos give a synopsis of the case.

Zamora Part 1

Zamora Part 2

This last video has three parts. One attempts to explain what might have been seen by looking into technologies that were being tested at the time the sighting occurred. The next part of the video shows clips from principal investigators including Hynek. And some classic Rod Serling as well. The last part includes excerps from Unsolved Mysteries seen in the above two videos.


I can't say what he might have seen. A lunar module seems unlikely given the morphology of craft described and sketched. A very interesting case indeed. Especially interesting is the sound and propulsion. At least when the craft lifted off the ground. After that, Zamora describes the sound stopping. Apparently complete silence. So, while I look further into this, my questions:

1. If it were a lunar lander wouldn't the sound be continuous??
2. By this time, couldn't we measure the dimensions of lunar landers or other known craft being tested and compare them with the landing feet dimensions of the Zamora craft?
3. Was such known craft operated with and tested with two people??
3.

Japan Airlines UFO and Related Alaskan Sightings

I do solemly swear that I acknowledge that this film was produced by the History Channel. The programs purpose is to get people to watch. I know a little about this caes as I post this. I'll look into it some more. Interesting if true.

In the meantime here is the NICAP Report by Bruce Maccabee

Several points in this case seem to be in dispute.

1. Weather Radar- from the aircraft, weather radar was used and verified a target. However the target was faint. Present, .. but faint. It was almost as if the target was rain, but there was no rain. Speculation on this point posits that the target may have been ice crystals, but this seems unlikely.

2. Ground radar confirmation. Conversations during the sighting revealed that ground radar had identified a target. Apparently, after the FAA investigation, this target was confirmed to be uninvolved with the sighting. I have no verification of this, but was allegedly in the FAA report. I haven't been able to locate this report anywhere online and don't know where to look. Any help would be appreciated either pointing me to the report or confirming this discrepency.

It is still an interesting sighting. Apparently also the pilot has had numerous "UFO" sightings after this initial one. And he even said that one of them was likely refraction from frozen ice crystals. Skeptics like to point out these numerous sightings, one of misidentification, to squash out any credibility on his observation skills. But other co-pilots saw the UFO in question albeit at a different, less visible, vantage point. And something WAS caught on weather radar. And it is not the only sighting we have seen in Alaska.

Father William Gills UFO Account

I find this to quite an interesting account that many people have never heard of.

Is the Singularity Possible??

I can't say that I'm any type of expert on this singularity business, but I'll give it a go. The singularity is a point we may or may not reach where technology and computing power becomes so sophisticated that the machines themselves might not be distinguishable from man. And, in fact, man and machine may merge into a cyborg type of creature. We may basically render ourselves immortal in that a consciousness may survive and live in the empty computing world or may be planted into any number of forms as so desired.

There are many different configurations of what the singularity may entail. And while I do deem some of it wishful scientific fiction, I can't say that we would not see at least some of the singularity unfold. Even as soo as the current generation. Computing power is still building fast. Genetics and bioengineering is becoming big business. We are learning and revising the way we look at living organisms on nearly a daily basis. Cosmology has taken giant steps to uncovering the mysteries of the universe. Physics is in the same boat and perhaps in the giant cruise ship to the land of barely detectable pieces of fundamental matter. LHC for short. Science is just plain busy.

I recently listend to a Scientific American podcast about this issue. They claim that the singularity is plain old fiction. It just won't and apparently cannot happen. They say that the mind and consciousness is too complex to ever foresee it on DVD any time soon. Then they go on to say that they really know NOTHING about the mind-body relationship. They have no clues why consciousness exists or even HOW it exists. But for some reason they are determined to undermine the notion of a singularity. In a nutshell they posit, "We know nothing about consciousness, but we know it CAN NOT go on indefinitely and will never become part of some technology". So, ... they know nothing, but they know something. Got it.

They might be right. But the fact that they acknowledge their ignorance then reject possibilities doesn't make sense to me. The mind is complex. Perhaps the mind cannot exist without the body. But maybe it can. Either way we have an extravagant, lovely, poetic arrangement of elements, compounds, molecules, organs, and so forth that make up us. Living, breathing, thinking, self aware, intelligent humans. So, if this complex configuration of molecules is the natural substances that make up our consciousness, then why couldn't it be theoretically be copied?? We are basically copying a database of points. An unbelievable one, but still a natural set of data points. With the advancement of already intricate technologies, is it beyond comprehension that we might be able to do this someday?? Perhaps not in Kurzweils lifetime, but maybe his grandsons son??

I don't find reason to reject this idea. If it is theoretically possible, then science should meet the challenges that the question poses. Science is about answering questions, but sometimes it seems as if the scientific community by in large has it's mind already made up. I think science should embrace this idea. It is one way to try and study what consciousness really is. Is it a complex arrangement of molecules?? Because if it isn't, then that opens another avenue. Consciousness comes from elsewhere and is not indicitive and local to the physical body. That type of conclusion might have creationists hopping for joy and scientists leaping from ivory towers. And for the Buddhists, the song will remain the same.

Layers of Perceptual Reality

I was out for a walk with my kids. We were at a nearby state park ambly making our way around a small lake. Stooping to pick up various autumn leaves and anything else that seemed of interest. Enjoying the sunshine and the coolness the shadows provided on this October mid day. What I saw and heard next was surprising, out of the ordinary, and left me to ponder what reality really is.

From my periphery I sensed movement down the concrete walkway towards myself and kids. My back, or rather my sdie was faced towards the oncoming party. I then heard some low growling like that from an unsure dog. Not expecting nor desiring an experience where my daughter, in a zombie like trance, is immediately involutarily drawn to this dog, I wheeled around. I was surprised, not to see a dog, but a lady running down a slope of the trail making these sounds.

She was carrying a bag and in tattered clothes, presumably homeless. Running. Feet flopping. Head straight, Growling. Something was going on inside her head, I could but guess what it might be. Another younger girl walked behind her. And I thought maybe this was a mental patient out for a walk with her "gaurdian" or something. But the young girl paced up in front of the other and walked by without any type of aknowledgement. As if she wanted to get in front and be gone. I think the growling lady was by herself. And seeing something like that is ....

Hard to describe I guess. You feel bad for the lady and even sad for her. And as I'm enjoying the warmth of the periodic shafts of sunlight I am thrown into the uncomfortable position of pondering her reality. In each case, while our perception of her is becoming of sadness or helplessness, her perception is decidedly different. But probably no less important. As the subjectiveness of our own percieved realities are the only basis for the scaffolding of discovery and inquiry to our world, we must admit and realize that a part of this, perhaps a large part, is chemically induced. Hormones, drugs, and other environmental conditions can and do affect the reality of those surrounding. And reality is in the mind of the beholder.

And when we try to strip away the onion layers of perceptual reality we might find that no layer is unimportant. And if we strip away all the layers, is there an ultimate reality or is it contingent on an observer?? And as this post is a mess of fragmented thoughts from my perspective, I almost envy those with a more distinct vivid sense of what I determine to be lunacy. Life may be much simpler if you succumb easily to grand ideas, religions, philosophies, and ideologies. And life may be quite subjectively skewed with the presence of altering molecules. While the question of behavior and perception is usually a nature or nurture answer, the fact seems to be both of these play significant parts with neither one playing less of a role.

Yea, my most non-sensical post yet.

Is Peace Possible???

We understand the concept of peace. We also understand that it is a fallacy. Or do we??

Our evolution, or really evolution in general, has it's basis on defining adaptations that allow a species to survive within a habitat. In so many words, evolution is about finding resources as effectively as possible in order to propogate a species own existence. And as determined by nature apparently, our bodies and the protiens associated can change over time as needed for successful generational livelihood.

In spite of the need to utilize certain resources, we are unique in the fact that we have defined this abstract idea called peace. Peace: a place or philosphy where all humans can get along without destroying each other or hording neccessary resources. A place where we can share the fruits of the planet. Where everyone has adequate shelter, food, medicine, and happiness. But is thes utopian ideology a realistic future?? And why would we have even defined such a philosophy if it were not possible??

I don't know that peace is a genuine probability. I think that embedded in our DNA is the code for aggressive behavior. We all need to eat. We all would like somewhere to live. We would all like to be happy. But in the pursuit of this comes competition. We can't all eat lobster. We can't all live on the beach in mutli-million dollar homes. The need and desire for certain resources is the death of possible peace. Until we can become a society that values equality across all resource needs we will never become a global peaceful civilization.

But the one thing I find interesting is the deep implications of DNA. We are on the verge of changing ourselves, perhaps in drastic ways. Can we find the aggressiveness gene? The one that neccessarily inhibits and snuffs out peace. It is beyond our control to try and become peaceful on our own (so to speak). That is, perhaps it IS within our grasp to become peaceful. But only by internal DNA manipulation. And this would create such a uniqueness to whatever species we might call it, that it would certainly be a one-of-a-kind. An organism that doesn't seek vital resources for itself only, but calmly and deliberately looks out for the good of everyone.

My thoughts are a bit mixed on this, because if we were to change ourselves into a non-aggressive entity, would it also change and undermine our individualism?? Our indivdual values, morals, and beliefs. As it would seem, this is the nature of being a conscious intelligent human. So, in a sense, perhaps peace is not all it is cracked up to be even if it were possible. So long as there are desireable things, peace will not exist. And without desireable things, what worth is life?? It seems to be quite paradoxical although superficially we attempt to look at peace as the ultimate rung of theoretical society. Hmmmm.

The Provenance of UFO's

One thing we find with UFO sightings is that they still don't seem to shed any light on the issue of provenance. Where do they come from?? What are they?? What is their origin?? This problem makes for unrealistic scientific inquiries. Science is based on observation, experiments, testable hypotheses and so forth. Usually, when presented with a scientific problem, observations help. In this case observations of UFO's hurts

The collection of sightings and continued observations is supposed to make the science better. It doesn't. And this is why UFO's, at this point, are not a scientific problem. Science as we know it cannot solve the UFO question until more verifiable data is unveiled. So what is the problem??

One of the problems is that UFO's are an evolving phenomena. Sure they tend to be discs, lights in the sky, triangles or boomerangs, or even weirdly constructed craft, but they continue to get mixed with all sorts of prosiac phenomenon as well. And that prosaic stuff is changing.

We have been in a technological age that builds new, many times secret, aircraft. And these aircraft have to be tested. We now have true drone craft. Unmanned craft that can pull off manuevers that human pilots cannot withstand. Again they need to be flown many times to test their construction. We also have satellites that can become highly visible from the ground. The Internation Space Station has been the culprit of many UFO encounters. So has the development and subsequent testing of American spy planes.

We also have many gadgets and toys that are airborn. We haven't always had all the different spectrum of flying objects in our sky. So as we are unfamiliar with many of these objects, they become the source for many UFO sightings. Then we also have even more complex hoaxers out ther as well. Lanterns in the sky. Balloons that carry timed LED flashing lights. More and more of this has been happening. All the while these hoaxes are observed by unsuspecting people and are reported.

Meanwhile if there are some real intelligently controlled non-human craft, it often or always, will be carried with the muddy array of the above mentioned. This is why, or at least one reason why, we cannot source UFO's. There is simply too much and more to come. I can't really propose a way aroud this. Ufologists have to be careful and perhaps try to classify better these sightings. Perhaps with responsible and detailed classification we can begin to recognize the lanterns, the ballons, the flares, and so forth. Not to mention the meteors, space junk, lenticular clouds, Venus, ordinary planes, flaming oil wells, and frisbees.

The subjectivity of humans seeing these phenomenon doesn't help either. Because what we may find is that people don't really describe what they actually objectively saw. They mix this in and distort the sighting with what they want to see. They may want to unconsciously be a part of something greater than themselves. And this feeling may seep into their descriptions of "something not from this world". When in truth it could have been something much simpler.

Newly developed aircraft, toys, satellites, and hoaxers all present us without a source for true UFO's. While I don't discount real UFO's, I tend to think that there is less in the numerous observations than more. It is up to the intelligences to reveal themselves if they so desire to be known. And that hasn't happened. I doubt it will happen any time soon. Until then, expect observations to weaken even the validity and acceptance of the UFO reality.

The Evidence Buildup on Mars

I'm just saying that we're certainly going to find life before it finds us. Or should I say that we will find life before any intelligent non-human life reveals itself to us??

Perhaps in the billions of years of our universes evolution there have been intelligent beings (besides ourselves, if we can count ourselves among the intelligent). Perhaps these beings have traversed space and maybe even time. Heck, thats what we are doing. At least the travel through space part. But I wouldn't bet the unveiling of intelligent hidden enigmatic beings precedes our exploration and curious will to hunt life down.

The one tipping point that might thrust a paradigm reality shift is the discovery of something alive. Or even evidence of something that used to be alive. And I think this is what the Mars research is building to. The evidence is starting to pile up. We think there was water. No wait, there seems to have been water. No wait again, there was a lot of water. Actually there was so much water that it formed deltas and large lakes as seen from the MRO.

So the elusive, while seemingly closer, remains elusive. Where is it?? Where is the life?? We're getting closer and I still hold out the probability that we find it in my lifetime. I say the odds are good. Wait and see.

The Next 1000 Years or So

Two months before I was born Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin walked on the moon. As I've recently recounted these Apollo missions lately with programs like "When we left Earth" and other History Channel episodes devoted to the brave deeds of these men I can only wonder what lay ahead.

I think that we will discover the ways around bone mass loss in space. The ingenuity of the human spirit has no limits. We will, if we survive long enough, stare at the face of God. We get glimpses periodically. The coding of the Human Genome was one such glimpse. We can indeed see the language of the original force. Quantum physics gives us an, at present, unreconcilable vision of the difficulty involved in unravelling the basic forces and pieces of matter. The basic particles are so mysterious that wondering how we sprung out of the primitive, non-consciousness world, is secondary to understanding what these immeasurable theoretical tinker toys acually are. But all we have is time.

And time has shown us unimaginable feats of creativity and engineering. One hundred years ago, we stood no chance of communicating long distances without great voyages. We were very excited to see an "engine" that propels a four wheeled vehicle around much larger distances. Seventy years later, we were walking on the moon. We had actually found the avenue to look back on our own planet. What is next??

If I live out my life completely, without major sudden death, I envision myself watching a man walk on the red planet. This feat would be so awe-inspiring and sublime that I don't know that I can accurately describe the type of emotion I might have. Hold no doubt about this reality. We will travel in a spaceship, unless we find ourselves able to be beamed there, to Mars and beyond. In a cliche way, it is our destiny.

And as we find our way to Mars we will find that much of our society and technological innovations have racheted up exponentially. It's certainly difficult to predict that of which you cannot imagine. As we discover and attempt to control nature, we will certainly run into many obstacles. But if we perservere perhaps we come closer to Kaku's Type 1 civilization. Perhaps we get on the map.

The one problem I see is aggresion and undying desire for control. If Type 1 civilizations exist, I wonder if and how they have moved past this. Either this society would be controlled by a supreme power or the society has lost it's selfish sense of aggression. It is possible that in the next 1000 years that we learn vast amounts about aggression, desire for control, and other apparent built in genes that control these mechanisms. And a question might be asked: Is it the best pursuit of our species to continue to carry these selfish, uncompromising genes. Absolutly there would be severe opposition and debate. But as a society becomes more advanced, more enlightened, perhaps there are unwanted characteristics that may be bred out. And perhaps that reults in a split. A manually forced evolutionary split from Homo Sapien. It could happen, or I should say that in 1000 years we may be able to do just that.

Despite the condition of society in 1000 years, whatever species is left (assuming it is increasingly more intelligent) we will be forced with the epiphany that space is our home. We will caryy the seed of humanity throughout the galaxy because it is the essence of our inner condition: to survive. And as an advanced civilization we will realize that our planet will not make the long haul and the best bet is to spread ourselves throughout habitable space.

The problems will be great. They will seem unsurmountable as many seem today. But they will be conquered. Perhaps the Large Hadron Collider unveils the mysteries or at least A mystery of the nature of matter. Perhaps NASA peels the onion layers of dark matter and energy. Could we provide solutions in the event of natural disaster?? Can we control the climate?? Can we become immortal or even reverse aging?? Can we breed out deviancy and build a scaffold of love and compassion and unity throughout our planet?? Can we smash out evil and replace it with cooperation or is evil a neccessary, well, evil??

There are many questions surrounding the future. We know how the past has played out. And although we tend to repeatedly replay this skipping record of control and conquer, I'd like to think that a better future society is possible. This overly optimistic view may be naive and it may even contain many ethical questions that remain to be thought out. But I do know that if it CAN be done, it WILL be done. This is why we will go to Mars and beyond. This is why we will clone people someday (if it hasn't been done already). This is why we will change ourselves into another species. This is how we develop new energy sources. We will do these things. Hopefully we don't destroy ourselves in the process.

Religion, UFO's, and the Media

It is such a dichotomy that we live in the US. At least for the most part. Religion plays a ridicuously huge role throughout our culture. And while I don't knock religion for everything, it has it's moments. In fact it has a lot of moments. The dichotomy that exists is that we can openly plug Jesus via numerous avenues, but should we even mention UFO's or aliens break out the tin foil hats and commence hearty laughter.

We embrace Christianity (sorry to omit everyone else here, but it IS the majority. Go ahead consider yourself a part of the cultural embrace, it's fine.) with such a ferver. We print license plates with "In God We Trust". We print giant billboards with slogans like "Repent or Go To Hell". We wear crosses, tattoo crosses, erect crosses in our yards. We build exquisite architectural shrines to the Lord our Savior. A presidential candidate has virtually NO chance of being considered without this religious baggage, whether they believe it or not. But UFO's? Please, get a freaking life you moron.

The media has always had a field day with this topic, but for some reason they never seem to attack that invisible all knowing man in the sky. Why?? Is there some evidence that Christ actually lived and presumably died willingly so that humanity may be relieved of all its sins for all the ages to come?? Ummmm, no. Yet the media treats this topic quite differently don't you think??

UFO's have been seen by thousands of credible sane people. Of course they have also been the fosterer of countless hucksters trying to make a buck. They have also been the lair of many a delusion. Make no mistake about it, UFO's bring all types from highly credible miltary to insane utterly discombobulated bobbleheads. But the fact remains that this phenomenon has affected normal people, yet you might not know this due to the media ignorant take on it. Are they being cattle prodded to tell a side of the story or are they just not very good at reporting the facts?

I can certainly understand the discourse when certain "ufologists" try to tell their story. When Jeff Peckman tells of direct evidence that of course he can't actually show. When hoaxers and liars make a complete embarrassing mockery of the topic at hand. When people make up stuff they become targets and it seems that these targets are the only ones that end up on the news. They have a way of polarizing and marginalizing the topic greatly. But is this not equally true in the religious realm as well?? Why don't we have the religious wackos exposed in the same manner as the UFO wackos?? Perhaps they are too afraid to upset the masses with something that is closer to a consensus type pseudo-truth than the UFO one.

Despite the unequal and unsatisfying reporting on UFO's over religion it will certainly not change anytime soon. I don't even know that most of the media even thinks or knows that the subject is worhty of serious discussion. These are the same masses that are grudgingly corraled in churches on Sunday. Should UFO's be a real concern it may upset the divine order.

I've recently heard a CNN reporter say that people that believe in UFO's were just lunatics. I've heard Stephen Hawking profess that UFO's only appear to cranks and wackos. I've heard a radio program crank call Peter Davenport. Imagine that. This is nothing new and I could fill this page with countless examples of the media behaving this way.

If people really knew anything about the topic they might act differently. They might. The reality of unknown intelligent life is scary and unnerving to people so it is better to bury and ridicule than to be informed. The Bible has a better story and outcome. People can deal with this, but probably they are just fooling themselves. Ignorance is bliss in this case. No aliens, only heaven. Einstein once said " the most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious". But the mysterious contains just that, an unknown. Perhaps it is just better that people deal with a worldview based on the supposedly known than actually thinking and dealing with a high probability that what they have learned about God and Jesus and heaven and a cushy afterlife is just, well, wrong.