UFO Religions

A “New” Spirituality Inspired by UFOs?

You’ll be interested in this recent post by UFO Digest (authored by Michael Cohen). Cohen’s observations range from the “insightful, but it’s obvious” to the propagandistic level of “sweeping generalization.”  Some examples:

In the “insightful but it’s obvious” category are his criticisms of mainstream Christianity, specifically the health and wealth consumeristic nonsense you see on TV:

Much of what passes off as religion in current Western civilization is not designed to provide any fulfilment.

These religions are not antidotes or islands of respite from materialist life outside the church or the temple. They are in fact merely there to egg on western consumer society and further push the interests of empty materialism. Plastic religions for plastic societies.

Since this disdainful slice of Christianty seems to be the level of Mr. Cohen’s exposure, what he says is understandable (and I think accurate, since I don’t consider this hucksterism to be authentic Christianity in any way, and a large percentage of Christians would be with me there).  But therein is the problem as well — under-exposure makes some of his other comments little more than sweeping generalizations. Cohen dopily equates the Protestant work ethic with the Prosperity Gospel nonsense.  Sorry, but I can’t see Martin Luther or John Calvin as televangelists.  We are also treated to such profundities as this:

Spiritually satisfied people are not economically productive: Angry, disappointed ones are. Making people disillusioned is the very purpose of these faiths and those genuinely seeking answers or meaning in life beyond the newest flat screen television might be advised to shop elsewhere.

It’s hard to describe how far from reality this description is in terms of the vast majority of Christian endeavor. Has Mr. Cohen ever heard of charitable work?  Missions? Hospitals?  Christians are behind a large percentage of these things. Economically unproductive Christians? Uh, how could you be following a WORK ethic and be unproductive?

But maybe Mr. Cohen didn’t know where to look as he busied himself doing research for his article. Here’s a short list of well known Christian business people that took about thirty seconds to find:

Truett Cathy – founder Chick-Fil-A
Cecil Day – founder Day’s Inn
Arthur DeMoss – businessman and author, founder, DeMoss Foundation
H.G. Heinz – founder, Heinz ketchup
Norm Miller- Chairman of the Board, Interstate Batteries James Cash Penney (1875-1971) – founder, J.C. Penney department stores
Dave Thomas – founder, Wendy’s

Sam Walton – founder, Wal-Mart

But we all know it isn’t the large businesses that make the economy go. It’s small businesses. Maybe there are some Christians there, too.  If I were doing any research for an article where I’d be making statements about non-productive Christians, I might spend another thirty seconds on Google and find sites like Christian Businessmen Connection, or the International Fellowship fo Christian Businessmen. Heck, I might even check the Internet for whether there’s a “Best Places to Work” site that focuses on Christian businesses.

Putting all that exhaustive research and analysis aside, anyone who reads UFO material with an eye to its belief systems knows that there is nothing *new* to the “spirituality” being put forth by the UFO sub-culture of today.  It’s simply an amalgamation of ancient paganism (and I’m not using that term pejoratively; I’m using it academically) and “eastern” spirituality modified for a technological culture. It’s easy to find essays on this (cf. Christopher Partridge’s book, UFO Religions, or his other volume, The Re-enchantment Of The West: Alternative Spiritualities, Sacralization, Popular Culture, and Occulture, which includes more discussion of UFO spirituality).

I also have to wonder what’s spiritually fulfilling about a belief system centered on conjecture and anecdote. Until we actually have hard *science* for intelligent ETs, that’s what you’ve got, Mr. Cohen.

Nothing new here, but you might be interested anyway.

Share on Facebook

Having Blog Trouble

I’m having trouble with my blog software. It won’t let me insert links.  I’m a bit nervous about upgrading the system, too, since it looks quite complicated.  I’ll try and get this resolved this weekend some time.

Share on Facebook

More Logic Lessons and UFOs: Russia De-Classifies its UFO Sightings Records

Several people have emailed me about the news that the Russians have de-classified their UFO records (we actually do NOT know how many, yet the claims make it sound like all of them or the motherlode–a logic lesson in itself).

I’ve read a few different blog posts on the announcement, and it came as no surprise that at least two leaps of logic were made (read: two examples of bad logic).

First, bloggers breathlessly relate how the Russian records have eyewitnesses saying the craft traveled at “incredible speeds”. Yeah — let’s have the numbers. So far I’ve read the records say anywhere from 400 mph to 1000 mph. So what?  Again, those of you who haven’t done so need to read Joseph Farrell’s research here. Those numbers are NOT outside the patented physics he supports with documentation that the Nazis had (and we and … lo and behold … the RUSSIANS had after WWII as a result of the scramble to get Nazi scientists over here or behind the iron curtain).  Nothing new or non-human at all. But here’s the biggest logic blunder.  Let’s ask ourselves a simple question: how many mph are needed to interplanetary / interstellar space travel?  Hmmmm.  Well, the Space Shuttle’s orbital speed is 17,500 mph, FAR in excess of UFO reports (here or from the Russians).  That would mean that these “incredible speeds” are NOT capable of interplanetary or interstellar space travel. In case you don’t get the point, our Space Shuttle isn’t slated to be our solution for a journey to Mars, for example.  And since the aliens are supposed to come from places like Zeta Reticuli, the speed of these eye-witnessed craft ain’t even close.  ”But Mike,” you might object, “maybe the eyewitnesses saw only a low speed; maybe they can go much faster.” True–maybe they can. Maybe chocolate pudding is like kryptonite to them, too. If THAT “maybe” is your defense of the extraterrestrial hypothesis here, then your argument isn’t based on what has been observed, it’s based on what HASN’T been observed (which is another way of saying “nothing” or “speculation” — same goes for the chocolate pudding). This points to a true, oft-repeated logically incoherent point of argumentation for the ET view. Logic lesson one for this post.

Second, I’m SURE that the Russian de-classified files would NEVER contain any disinformation.  Right.  Like ours don’t!  This is in fact a time-honored technique for classified material.  You mix in bogus information with real information, so that double agents or moles get caught or misdirected. Those in the know on the originator’s end know what is real and what isn’t.  It’s also a technique for passing on information WITHIN a classified community to people who are an inner circle. Any reading in intelligence materials / espionage will remind you that this IS done.  Joseph Farrell has something to say in that regard as well.  For instance, he goes through several Majestic documents and finds something very curious: alongside information that points to aliens (and that material is always biological – mention of bodies or EBEs) you have other material IN THE SAME DOCUMENTS at times that point very clearly to HUMAN-created craft (mentions of GEARS in wrecked saucers, citations of specific technological components traceable via documentation back to Nazi black programs, etc.). You have both sides in the same material.   A genuine ET craft capable of interstellar travels is ruled out by the technology described, contrary to what UFO “researchers” (i.e., very biased reporters) say. So what are the explanations that are possible for ALL the information components?

1. Human craft, bodies of what witnesses thought were not humans are actually humans (after all, body witnesses only saw the remains for literally a few seconds).

2. Misidentified bodies could be human unfortunates (Redfern, The Facade) or Japanese (Redfern), or perhaps chimps (see here as well).  And as for the Russian account of pursuing “humanoid” creatures under water–on what basis are we to believe they KNEW they weren’t human?  Just because they were unexpected? Or because someone had seen a disk craft before the event? When it comes right down to it, the Russian eyewitnesses were GUESSING. Their statement wasn’t based on scientific analysis of what they were chasing.  Or maybe that was excluded in this “disclosure” dump.

3. Classified documents that our Air Force was mystified by UFOs (while other documents have military people saying they were military) and by an alien presence served to influence Russian spies (and British spies) that what they were seeing in their skies may not have been American–and this was useful for Cold War posturing.  Same for the Russians; they aren’t stupid.

So, like all the other items, the Russian “disclosure” actually proves nothing. Again.

Lest I be misunderstood on this and the previous logic post. I have no problem with the idea that there could be ETs and that they might be visiting earth.  In principle, there is nothing incoherent (or in my case, theologically alarming) about that. But I want REAL PROOF, not speculation, and not “evidence” that is propped up only by very poor logic.  UFO researchers OWE IT to those who follow their work to put up something of value, not something that is made to fit the hypothesis articualted with inept thinking.

Share on Facebook

Technorati Tags: de-classified, Farrell, files, MJ12 documents, Nazis, Paperclip, records, Russians, UFOs

The Psychology of the Rendelsham Revelation

Well, a couple days ago the world was told that a high-ranking UK military officer “admitted” that the famous Rendlesham event involved extraterrestrials.  This story and “admission” is actually a wonderful example of the disappointing level of “proof” works in the UFO investigative community. In short, we have only more piece of “evidence” driven by the psychological predisposition to attribute what we’ve never seen to aliens.  Here’s the story:

London, Jul 9 (ANI): For years, Britain’s biggest UFO mystery had been kept under wraps, but now an Air Force official has admitted that an “extra-terrestrial” craft did visit the air base at Rendlesham Forest in 1980.

Former Deputy Base Commander Col Charles Halt claimed that even though the incident was later covered up, “extra-terrestrials” had been the cause of the close encounter in Suffolk.

Halt had led a group of airmen who reported seeing a triangular UFO taking off into the air, leaving traces of radiation behind.

“The UFOs I saw were structured machines moving under intelligent control and operating beyond the realm of anything I have ever seen before or since,” the Daily Star quoted Col Halt, now retired, as telling investigator Gary Heseltine.

“I believe the objects that I saw at close quarters were extra-terrestrial in origin,” he said.

He added that the Air Force later issued “dis-information” to throw the public off the scent.

His comments were hailed as “sensational” by former Ministry of Defence UFO investigator Nick Pope.

“This may help us to finally solve Britain’s biggest UFO mystery,” Pope said.

“It blows the MoD’s line that these events had ‘no defence significance’ out of the water,” he added. (ANI)

The first (and really only) question we need to ask is this: WHAT WAS IT that drove Col. Halt to conclude that the craft he saw were extraterrestrial in origin? Was it scientific analysis of something the craft left behind, or perhaps a fragment of it? Was it some biological material analyzed by science? No. The answer is plainly stated by Col. Halt: ““The UFOs I saw were structured machines moving under intelligent control and operating beyond the realm of anything I have ever seen before or since.” In other words, since he had never before or since seen such craft, they MUST have been extraterrestrial.  Really?  There are no other possibilities? His “admission: is based on his own admitted absence of explanation, nothing more.  That isn’t science.

Anyone who has read Reich of the Black Sun by Joseph A. Farrell KNOWS there is at least one other possible interpretation of such craft. Farrell painstakingly details the very real post-German unification documentary evidence that shows (contrary to official history) the Nazis had a high level of competence in nuclear power and were already researching technologies associated with what would eventually become known as quantum physics.  Farrell skillfully explains how official history arose and how the new documents released after German unification show the official party line about Nazi nuclear capabilities to be a deliberate farce. This important book by Farrell was followed by two others (The SS Brotherhood of the Bell and Nazi International) that detail how the Nazi technology fell into the hands of other countries during the Cold War and, importantly, how it relates to the UFO issue.

Until someone can come along and refute Farrell’s expose of this new evidence, not found in any prior work on German wingless/saucer technology, reports such as the new Rendlesham revelation can be filed into your “more cultural acclimation for ET visitation” folder.  With Farrell’s work, the burden of proof is now squarely on those who insist on an ET hypothesis for UFOs (and even on those who see only a spiritual explanation).

Share on Facebook

Technorati Tags: Farrell, Man-Made UFOs, MJ12, Nazis, nuclear, UFO sightings, ufology, UFOs

“The” Christian View of Aliens, Part 4: Angels, Demons, Gods, and Aliens: An Interdimensional Common Ground?

In Part 3 of this discussion topic, I focused on the first of two descriptions of “alien” and talked about how that definition does not conform to the biblical characters we know as demons, angels, and gods. This first description of an “alien” went like this:

1. It isn’t human

2. It is from a different planet than earth within our universe / dimension.

3. It has a determinate life span (it can and will die in this universe / dimension)

4. It has to maintain its existence through some means of nourishment (i.e., it isn’t a machine) and through reproduction.

5. It is subject to the laws of physics by which our universe / dimension operates.

I noted that I didn’t believe any of these are in the Bible and discussed how biblical descriptions of angels and demons don’t really mesh with these descriptive criteria. Here was the gist of my position:

What this means is that, if there are real space aliens (beings that meet the above criteria), then they cannot be demons, since demons do not conform to these criteria in biblical theology. That said, such aliens could certainly be evil and demonic (using the adjective, not the noun) and unworthy of trust in any way. It would also mean that such beings cannot be angels for the same reason.  They would just be aliens, a separate category. But the point is of course moot without proof of actual aliens. If aliens are interdimensional, though, then things change.  The demon equation goes back on the table (I’ll explain in part 4).

This last comment-about the “interdimensional description-is my focus in this post. There is far more congruity between that description of an “alien” than the “physical, THIS dimension” description.

First Things First: What “elohim” Means At Its Most Basic Level

Readers are likely familiar with my discussion of “elohim” when it refers to the singular God of Israel (well over 2000 times in the Bible) that constitutes part of my rebuttal to the silliness of Zecharia Sitchin and his followers. That focus isn’t where I’m going here. Yes, elohim most often refers to the lone God of Israel (upwards to 98% of the time I’d guess).  But the curious thing is that elohim is used to describe several other entities besides the God of Israel. Elohim is used to describe the following in the Hebrew Bible:

1. The God of Israel

2. Demons

3. Angels / Sons of God

4. The spirits of human dead

I’ll spare you a lengthy discussion of what’s going on here (for Bible verses and brief comments, see this paper extract drawn from one of my published articles).

Anyone who’s read much of the Bible knows that neither the Bible nor its characters consider these four personages equal in attributes (power, character, etc.).  There is a huge difference between the attributes of God and the spirit of a dead human being. So why are they all called elohim? Because elohim is, at its most basic level, a “place of residence” term.  That is, if your “proper” realm is some place other than the reality plane embodied humans occupy, then you are, by definition, an elohim.  An elohim is a being that is a resident of another, different reality plane. Elohim can visit our reality plane and we can visit theirs, at least according to the Bible. There are many occasions where elohim (angels, demons) come to earth and interact with humans. There are also occasions where prophets get to see the other “dimension” or reality plane. The most common human path to that reality plane is, of course, death. The “other side” (other reality plane) has its own geography, too (heaven, hell/Hades/Sheol, that sort of thing).

In our scientific terminology, our concept of another dimension is basically the same as the ancient idea that there are other non-human reality planes where the gods (the elohim) live. It is an unseen realm, but considered just as real as the one we by nature inhabit.

Christians use terms like “spiritual world” or “supernatural realm” to describe this “elohim reality plane,” but those terms aren’t very accurate. Why not? Because, since ALL beings that exist are created by God, who is the lone uncreated being in biblical theology, then ALL other things must be made of something–they are material. We just mistakenly equate “unseen” with “non-material” but this is not allowed by biblical theology. Only God is not made of something. He is described as an uncreated spirit in the Bible.  He inhabits a reality plane that is occupied by the unseen entities he created (and of course may occupy ours). He is “realm independent,” but his “normal” place of residence (this is not a denial of omni-presence) is the unseen reality plane.

Applying this to the Alien Question

It’s pretty easy to see how these ideas dovetail with the discussion of “aliens.” If an alien is NOT a physical life form in the sense described in Part 3 and above, then perhaps “aliens” are members of another reality plane (dimension in our modern scientific parlance) that can interact with our reality plane / dimension.

What would the ramifications be? A number of questions and possibilities arise. If there is only one other dimension, this would suggest that angels and aliens and demons are all occupants of that reality plane — but there can still be differentiation. But there could also be overlap. Flying craft are still problematic IF one could ever prove that UFOs are BOTH alien in origin/manufacture AND physical (in terms of our reality plane). But we have all read instances where a UFO will break the sound barrier and NOT create a sonic boom, suggesting that whatever it was, it wasn’t physical (in our reality plane sense).

In some ways, this second description leaves us with the same questions and categories (angels, aliens, demons, gods can all exist and not be the same – they just share the same reality plane “normally”). The Bile does not put a number on the number of dimensions there are, primarily because such questions are not the focus of the Bible.  It wasn’t written to answer this question any more than it was written to tell us what’s really in fruit cake.  But the second description can also mean overlap and therefore lend credence to the demonic view — that what we think of as aliens (the Part 3 description) are actually best understood as beings from another reality plane that can enter our reality plane as they wish–possibly for the purposes of deception.

So what does this get us?  It shows that the demonic view shouldn’t be dismissed. But it also shows that, even if aliens are from a different reality plane, we cannot use that as a conclusive argument that they must be demons. The other-dimensional view is more useful for the demonic view, but isn’t a slam dunk. In short, even the other-dimensional view doesn’t compel a single Christian view.

Share on Facebook

Technorati Tags: aliens, ET Life, ExoTheology, extra-dimensional, extraterrestrials, interdimensional, theology