Don't MAKE me come DOWN there!

"Dr. Why", the current sockpuppet of the
fake alien, wrote:

"Greysky" wrote in message
. net...

"Dr. Why" wrote in message
...

snip
become fearless, to live their lives absolutely without fear, nearly
all
would decline to learn the method.
Why, in your opinion, would they turn down the opportunity to learn
how
to
live their lives fearlessly?

Yubiwan


Because, Dr. Y, then they would have to take full responsibility for
their
lives. It is much more fun to let responsibility slide onto the backs
of
others -- humans are experts at playing the blame game. Why do you
suppose
it is so hard for people to admit you may be advanced aliens? Sure,
part
of
it is ego - the 'we are the center of the universe' crap- but a large
part
of it is self blame. Would we be better off blaming 'Aliens' for the
current
miserable state of our lives? But they also know that you wont let them
get
away with it. So that forces them to look directly into the casm of
darkness
which to them is the fture knowing they are inadequate. Now, a truly
fearless response would be to acknowledge the current problems, roll up
their sleeves and begin to work industriously toward making the future
better. But there are currently very few fearl-less humans who are
willing
to look the tiger in the face and whip it into submission. I would say
you
are currently interacting with a goodly percentage of those humans both
here
on the 'net, and in your personal contacts. The vast majority would
prefer
to continue to play the blame-game, and keep the current status quo.
This
is
one of the reasons I applaud your fearlessness in accepting that it
would
be
good to make FOC even if the death rate exceeds 12% by a large margin.
It
puts you and a few others in the Sean Minority, but you stick to your
guns.

Greysky





Thank you, Greysky.
I shall definitely "stick to my guns".

But it's not fearlessness that makes me do so.
It's just common sense.
The galaxy Needs humanity, humans have a lot to offer as seen by your
indirect effects on the rest of the galaxy.
You cannot imagine how much better it can get if humans were able to
work
directly with other cultures.
On second thought, you are one of the few who may be able to imagine it.

Yep. Maximum benifit for all interested parties.


Make no mistake about me, though, Greysky.
I am as uncomfortable as Darla and the others about the 12%.
It would be a tragedy of unconcionable degree, especially since it would
probably be higher than 12%, perhaps much higher.
I would not want to even try to imagine the tremendous loss to the
galaxy
of
this many humans.

Perhaps it is just my naive enthusiasm showing, but I have found even
fearful people do not immediately become murderous. Just the opposite -
fear
can stop a killer cold. There will be a limited time window of opportunity
where violence can be defused and peace can be maximizd. But for this to
happen communication must be open, two-way, and continuous. A gap, even a
small one can allow fear to escalate to violent magnitudes. I predict, at
least for the technical societies, that most if not all people will pause
after the initial shock and wait to see what the 'next guy' is doing, or
how
our leaders are reacting. Done well, I dont think the death rate will be
even a few percentage points of the total population. Maybe even Nil.
However, it is how the typically closed nations will react that I can't
offer a prediction. Look at how the Islamic nations are reacting to even a
few cartoon depictions of their God...

You are correct about fearful people, Greysky.
Fear CAN stop a killer cold, however we are talking about an extreme with
which nobody on Earth has any experience.
You have probably come into at least an observational contact with the
context of "panic".
Multiply everything you know about this term by perhaps a thousand or more.

This is what we can expect --- Panic x 10^3 + !

The people who will be stopped cold, 88% or fewer, will still be panicked.
And for many years to come.

The limited time window of opportunity before the biocide ensues is
nonexistent, Greysky.
The murders and suicides will begin just minutes following FOC, and it will
all be over just minutes after that.
This is why there can be no containment, no stopping this carnage.

http://users.bigpond.net.au/wanglese/Alien_recipes.html

I don't see any porpoise steak recipies here, I wonder how well they
grill up?

I do have a few ideas on how to ameliorate even this situation, however.
Perhaps I and others can meet up pre-FOC to offer them?

There is only one thing to be done.
Humans must take steps to bolster their fearlessness.
We can help, but our powers are extremely limited.



The scales, in my opinion, show that the benefits of first contact
slightly
outweigh the tremendous tragedy that would ensue.
You can probably see how this is a weighty and controversial issue with
us.
And by "us", I don't just mean seans, I mean all the citizens of the
Milky
Way.

Benifits. Yes. That is the language to speak to head off the violence.


BTW, I'm betting that our recent, new extragalactic contact will push
the
decision toward FOC with humanity.

Most important decisions are not made in the luxury of peaceful abundance,
but under the fire of necessity. If other entities are pushing for FOC
with
the humans, rather than cogitate and debate for years when the right time
will be ripe, I am shure Sean Authorities will act quickly rather than
risk
getting the decision taken out of their control. Governments work at this
level just like individuals do. Maximum benifit.

We will need your direct input more than ever, now that we've become
members
of the clusteric community!

When the mass of humanity realizes that they aren't going to be eaten, and
that there is a valuable role for humanity to play in determining the
future
destiny of this galaxy - one even beings as old and as powerful as the
Seans
can't do without us, things will quickly stabilize.

This will take many years.
A long time will pass before even the younger generations begin to trust
other cultures.
People will no longer feel like they are at the top of the food chain.
Which, of course, they still will be.
Every missing person will be suspect.
Alien violence has become well-entrenched in the human psyche.
No amount of logic and reasoning will overcome this, only a standard
reduction of fear, and the reminder that humans are fundamentally,
genetically fearless beings.

Just more saucerhead gaga from the fake alien drama queen.

Yubiwan



--
Official Associate AFA-B Vote Rustler
Official Overseer of Kooks and Saucerheads in alt.astronomy
Official Agent of Deception
Co-Winner, alt.(f)lame Worst Flame War, December 2005

"Causation of gravity is missing frame field always attempting
renormalization back to base memory of equalized uniform momentum."
-- nightbat the saucerhead-in-chief

"Have patience. First I shall deal with the State of Oregon
and County of Josephine, Then the AFAB, government/media
disinformation Agents with whom you conspire to libel me and my
family. Your time will come."
-- Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, usenet "christ"

"Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, and rather ironic, coming from
someone who obviously has no understanding of what a signature is. Tell me,
Haslam, do you sign your checks as 'Can't you show a little restraint?'"
-- David Tholen, Clueless Newbie of the Month, February 2003

From 'Dr.Y':

Carl Sagan knew about space when we
first contacted him.
At that time he just didn't know quite how to present it to his peers,
let alone the
public.

After talking with us he decided this was
a good thing.
So he didn't.

Believe me, for now at least, humans are better off for it.

Hmm.. so Sagan actually knew the true nature of space, and suddenly went
mum about it? In that case, the same would have to be true of Einstein.
After wholeheartedly endorsing the Lorentz 'ether' for 35+ years
following the MM experiment, Einstein suddenly and inexplicably
flip-flopped to the 'no medium' doctrine in the mid-1920s. Was this
flip-flop an act of supreme stupidity, or an act of supreme wisdom and
self-sacrifice?
Einstein sure as hell wasn't stupid, so one is
compelled to assume the latter, and view the flip-flop in the best
possible light. Did he finally recognize the true nature of space as not
the stationary 'rigid lattice' ether but one that's dynamically FLUID,
compressible/expansible, and amenable to _density gradients_? Did he
recognize that the _energy density_ of this medium eclipses his
"E=mc²" so far as to make nuclear energy a pop-gun by comparison?
Recognizing mankind's imminent exploitation of "E=mc²", did he, like a
mother bird feigning a broken wing, lead the mainstream down the 'no
medium' primrose path?
To further solidify and entrench it, did he knowingly
sacrifice his last 30 years as a _feint_ of trying to unify gravity
under the 'no medium' clause? If such is the case, then the flip-flop
back in the mid-1920s was an act of a wise and benevolent steward, to
keep us corraled in our void-space 'playpen'.
oc

Bill Sheppard wrote:

Greysky asks "Dr.Y':

Why do you suppose it is so hard for
people to admit you may be advanced
aliens? Sure, part of it is ego - the 'we
are the center of the universe' crap-

I would ask this (and have asked it before of the 'Darla' contingent):

Why, if you are indeed extraterrestrial aliens, do you scrupulously
evade answering 'Test Questions' that could lend credibility to your
claim of alien-hood? Why do you say (paraphrasing), "we will not answer
test questions, so don't bother asking them"..?

Again, why not??

As stated before, certain knowledge would be basic, fundamental
'kindergarden' stuff to ANY spacefaring race.. namely, the true nature
of space, the cause of gravity, and the principle of hyperdrive (or
'warp' drive).

So far, y'all have not ceded one iota of information on these questions.
Until you do, you remain a sophomoric maven of East-coast pop psychology
with fantasies of alien-hood.

Extraordinary claims demand real answers.
oc


Do you really expect you'll get any answers to these questions from the
fake alien drama queen, BS?

--
Official Associate AFA-B Vote Rustler
Official Overseer of Kooks and Saucerheads in alt.astronomy
Official Agent of Deception
Co-Winner, alt.(f)lame Worst Flame War, December 2005

"Causation of gravity is missing frame field always attempting
renormalization back to base memory of equalized uniform momentum."
-- nightbat the saucerhead-in-chief

"Have patience. First I shall deal with the State of Oregon
and County of Josephine, Then the AFAB, government/media
disinformation Agents with whom you conspire to libel me and my
family. Your time will come."
-- Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, usenet "christ"

"Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, and rather ironic, coming from
someone who obviously has no understanding of what a signature is. Tell me,
Haslam, do you sign your checks as 'Can't you show a little restraint?'"
-- David Tholen, Clueless Newbie of the Month, February 2003

Bill Sheppard wrote:

From 'Dr.Y':

Carl Sagan knew about space when we
first contacted him.
At that time he just didn't know quite how to present it to his peers,
let alone the
public.

After talking with us he decided this was
a good thing.
So he didn't.

Believe me, for now at least, humans are better off for it.

Hmm.. so Sagan actually knew the true nature of space, and suddenly went
mum about it? In that case, the same would have to be true of Einstein.
After wholeheartedly endorsing the Lorentz 'ether' for 35+ years
following the MM experiment, Einstein suddenly and inexplicably
flip-flopped to the 'no medium' doctrine in the mid-1920s. Was this
flip-flop an act of supreme stupidity, or an act of supreme wisdom and
self-sacrifice?

Psssst, BS -- the drama queen is just name dropping a dead person who
cannot respond. This is called a logic error.

Einstein sure as hell wasn't stupid, so one is
compelled to assume the latter, and view the flip-flop in the best
possible light. Did he finally recognize the true nature of space as not
the stationary 'rigid lattice' ether but one that's dynamically FLUID,
compressible/expansible, and amenable to _density gradients_? Did he
recognize that the _energy density_ of this medium eclipses his
"E=mc²" so far as to make nuclear energy a pop-gun by comparison?
Recognizing mankind's imminent exploitation of "E=mc²", did he, like a
mother bird feigning a broken wing, lead the mainstream down the 'no
medium' primrose path?

Oooops! See above.

To further solidify and entrench it, did he knowingly
sacrifice his last 30 years as a _feint_ of trying to unify gravity
under the 'no medium' clause? If such is the case, then the flip-flop
back in the mid-1920s was an act of a wise and benevolent steward, to
keep us corraled in our void-space 'playpen'.
oc

Who is "us", filled-space kook?

--
Official Associate AFA-B Vote Rustler
Official Overseer of Kooks and Saucerheads in alt.astronomy
Official Agent of Deception
Co-Winner, alt.(f)lame Worst Flame War, December 2005

"Causation of gravity is missing frame field always attempting
renormalization back to base memory of equalized uniform momentum."
-- nightbat the saucerhead-in-chief

"Have patience. First I shall deal with the State of Oregon
and County of Josephine, Then the AFAB, government/media
disinformation Agents with whom you conspire to libel me and my
family. Your time will come."
-- Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, usenet "christ"

"Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, and rather ironic, coming from
someone who obviously has no understanding of what a signature is. Tell me,
Haslam, do you sign your checks as 'Can't you show a little restraint?'"
-- David Tholen, Clueless Newbie of the Month, February 2003

In article ScWJf.40405$id5.14355@bgtnsc04-
news.ops.worldnet.att.net, posted Sun, 19 Feb 2006 08:43:30
GMT, Dr. Why says...

"Kali" wrote in message
.. .
In article 5MEIf.400157$qk4.199838@bgtnsc05-
news.ops.worldnet.att.net, posted Wed, 15 Feb 2006 12:03:13
GMT, Dr. Why says...

[...]

As a student of neuroscience you must also be aware of how easily
sentient
beings can let external influences override genetic motivations.

On the contrary, I think DNA has one goal: survival.

My goodness! one goal?
DNA has millions of goals, Kali.
Survival is important, but it is certainly Not singular.

Survival is what all boils down to.

And if "survival" is "the ultimate human drive", how does this account
for
the fearlessness of, say, a typical fireman?

This may superficially seem paradoxical. However, the fireman
does not enter the fire with any intention of dying, but of
surviving, and saving others, as well. Even a suicidal person
does not desire death, but an end to suffering.

Of Course the fireman does not enter the fire with any intent to die.
He enters the fire with intent to save, to live, and with skills to make
this happen.
He also has good friends who are now quite dead.
So the fireman knows and fearlessly attempts to thwart death.

The point is that there is plenty of evidence that, while survival is an
important human drive, there is no ultimacy about it.
If there Is such a thing as ultimate human drive, there would be nothing
that could thwart it.

This is a faulty premise.

And survival drive is thwarted even by those who want an "end to suffering".

I argue that ironically to you perhaps, this is an attempt to
survive, and my argument would point out the belief by most
people that they have a soul that goes on after they die.

or even a stotting tommie for that matter?

Stotting tommie?

A little antelope creature in Africa.
If you place your fingers straight down on the desk, as if they were little
legs, and then move your hand up and down, this will give you an idea of
what "stotting" is.
When alarmed, the tommie will perform this stotting (usually at great risk
to itself) to let the rest of the tommies know that danger may be afoot.

Meerkats are like that, too. Amazing animals.

Well, perhaps the tommies are "one for your side" after all.
But I for one think that the ultimate human drive is exploration.
And that the reason for the present decay in human quality of life is
that
your kind is running out of places to explore.

My kind?

Humans, of course.

Your kind.

Oh sure, specific types such as yourself grind away at places like the
human
brain.
But this type of exploration is not popular among humans (or seans
either,
for that matter).
Most people would rather go "outside the box" instead of deeper inside
it,
don't you agree?
How many new neuroscientists do you expect to graduate this year?
(Just meant rhetorically)

I'm not sure what your point is; you seem to be going off track.
We were discussing your belief that your posts, in which you
claim to be several people - some of them aliens - are met with
derision because people are "afraid of aliens".

The relationship is a one-to-one correspondence, exploration and
fearlessness.

On Usenet.

(One problem may be that I do sometimes tend to go off on tangents.
Then I sometimes do not relate the tangent to the center for several
paragraphs.
It's a natural knack I have developed to test my patients in terms of their
awareness, their attention span, and their ability to follow an argument.
Please do forgive me.)

You say you manipulate anaphor in your posts intentionally and
that Usenet posters are not interlocutors, but instead your
patients. Your "patients"? You're more than a bit manipulative.

The point was that while there are still a few people like yourself who are
taking positive steps to find ways to satisfy the urge to explore, whether
such exploration is Antarctica or the human brain, the vast majority have
resigned themselves to a relatively mundane existence.

And this is not acceptable to you?

They are reduced to exploring life vicariously through people like yourself.
And this only carries them so far.
And has made them quite lazy.

You equate contentment with laziness?

From what you say, and from your attempts to make people believe
you are an alien, it seems that you *wish* you could make people
feel inferior and afraid, so that you have control over them and
maintain their attention and favor. If this is true, it's a cool
little game, but it will subject you to ridicule by reality
dwellers who know better.

How could they?
How can such "reality dwellers" "know better"?
What if these reality dwellers are really "imagination dwellers"?
How would they know what is real and what is imaginary?

Wise people proportion their beliefs to the evidence. While it
is true that absence of evidence != evidence of absence, it is
important to be able to distinguish between fantasy and reality.

Cool mental game possibilities, it's true.
Yet still a moot point.

No, this is the main point.

The discussion of fear is to enlighten, not to instill more fear.
Heaven knows humans have quite enough fear, and do not need any more from
us.

Your discussion on fear is about manipulating your presentation
so that a handful of Usenet posters, who desperately need to
believe that the aliens are going to swoop down and save them
from their mundane (as you put it) existence, will find your
story more credible.

You seem to be fairly intelligent and in possession of a sense
of humor. Darla, do *you* genuinely believe your story?

Not sure I understand your question here, Kali.
There is no "story" to "believe", here, by Darla or me.
To "believe" would indicate that you're asking if we accept our "story" on
faith.
One needs no faith (belief) when one "knows".

In other words, you do believe your own story.

Of course, we have access to positive evidence not available to you: Our
very lives.

And I have six arms. Do you fear my six arms?

There can be no containment, as it will all happen practically in the
blink
of an eye.

And, for the most part, the only ones who Won't commit murder/suicide
are
the ones who are too afraid to.

What's to be afraid of?

Here Lomie was alluding to the vast majority of remaining humans who,
while
fearing all the ramifications of "conquering aliens from outer space",
will
still be even more afraid of death and its unknown aspects.

It depends. Self-acceptance, including peace with one's past,
usually leads to an acceptance of the inevitability of death.
Look up Erikson's ego integrity vs. despair stage to learn more
about this. Also recent existentialist psychology, e.g. Yalom.

You're painting with a broad brush.

Acceptance of inevitability is soothing.
But it does Not do anything to quell the fear of the unknown.
Sartre's "will to death" is another exception, but even humans with a "death
wish" are still deathly afraid of the unknown.


Lomie
[...]

I'm a Jodie Foster fan, and loved the movie Contact, so I have
the DVD, and have viewed it at least 3 or maybe 4 times. I can't
think of what you're referring to wrt to biocides. Remind me?

So quick you missed it. G
There was brief mention about how the government was concerned that people
would start committing suicide because of the alien contact.

Are you suggesting that this supports your claim? Because if
part of a movie plot counts as evidentiary support in your
thinking, I can easily cite a few that refute your claim.

In stark contrast are the vast majority of films quite admirably
represented
by "Independence Day".
The aliens are anything but benevolent, and the humans once again beat
the
hell out of them against unconscionable odds.
Well, at least it shows humans are brave enough to think about it once in
a
while.

See, when you say things like that, it seems like the fear is
something you desire. It has a hostile scent to it.

All I meant was complimentary.
You draw erroneous conclusions because of your disbelief.
I'm not asking you to believe, never have, never will.
All I'm asking is that you be Aware that because of your disbelief, your
understanding of what I say will be tempered by your mindset.

It is called critical thinking.

We do not desire to propagate human fear.
Quite the contrary, we are avid about decreasing it!

I think that you, Darla, and your parade of sock puppets, will
use whatever angle it takes to make your far-out story credible.

The heroism Lomie mentioned in the female astronomer character in
"Contact"
is a direct result of the fearlessness of that character.
This is precisely what it will take, a marked increase in human
fearlessness, to make global contact possible.
Such a state is necessary, absolutely necessary, for exploration.
And most humans have lost this admirable trait, which BTW is also firmly
wired into the human genome.

Depends on what you mean by fearless. It was passion and
curiosity that carried the character in that film. Passion and
curiosity are person and situation specific states. She also
sought reunion with her dead father; this symbolism was rather
pervasive, I thought.

Technically, we are hard coded to experience fear. It serves a
very important purpose for survival. It is arguably the
strongest learning and memory tool we have.

Show me, Kali.
As a neuroscientist, can you point out the gene for fear?
It does not exist in the human genome.
Humans are by NO means "hard coded" to experience fear.
Hard coded fear is a misnomer marketed as the "fight or flee instinct".

How shocking that you, as a student of neuroscience, would not
be well versed in the literature on fear.

You LEARN to experience fear as a survival tool.

No.

Primarily, fear is merely the lazy way to survive.

No.

Look it up:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl...r+amygdala+LTP

Read anything recent by LeDoux for a summary:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=ledoux

Learn about the autonomic nervous system, the role of the
hypothalamus, adrenal glands, corticosteroids, norepinephrine,
and synaptic tagging in mammalian fear responses.

It takes much more effort to THINK your way out of a hazardous situation.
Which is exactly what the fearless do.

Don't look now, but you just contradicted yourself.

I do hope that I've not offended you nor anyone else with the "lazy"
comments.

But not having much to explore anymore has made humans as lazy as an animal
in a cage.

I refer you to the literature on classical conditioning and
learned helplessness. A caged animal isn't "lazy".

Human beings are genetically fearless.
Your minds do not always follow your hearts.

Yet I find it highly informative that the vast majority of you (and I am
certain of this) would attempt to save a child from a burning building
"without thinking" of the consequences to yourselves.

Information is only as useful as its interpretation allows it to
be. I find your interpretations somewhat limited. But then we're
not in reality here, we're in your make believe world; one in
which you seem compelled for some reason to pretend to be an
alien who would condescend to human beings. I think you're quite
human, Darla et al.

Yubiwan

So can you see this is a "catch-22"?
We want you to allay your fear, but in order to do this you must be given
hard evidence we are truly aliens.

Your assertion that I am fearful is an erroneous presupposition.
The arguments you build from this premise are therefore not
logical.

You argue:
"I am an alien. You are afraid of aliens, therefore you don't
believe.

No different than:
"I have six arms. You are afraid of a six armed person,
therefore you don't believe.

Silly, isn't it?

As a scientist, I hypothesize that you *are* an alien as
claimed, and I test the evidence presented. I find no support
for my hypothesis. I have, on the other hand, accumulated a
great deal of support for the alternative hypothesis.

If we give you hard evidence we are truly aliens before you allay your fear,
you will either commit some level of human biocide, or spend the rest of
your life feeling like cattle waiting to be led to slaughter.

Case in point: your argument is not rational.

We must find a way to allay human fear BEFORE we become "real" to you, Kali.

And again.

Even better, we would like to see if we can't remind humans how truly
fearless they are "wired" to be.

And again.
Yubiwan

Kali
--
A bore is simply a nonentity who resents his humble lot in life,
and seeks satisfaction for his wounded ego by forcing himself on
his betters. - H. L. Mencken

"Art Deco" wrote in message
...
"Dr. Why", the current sockpuppet of the
This is why there can be no containment, no stopping this carnage.

http://users.bigpond.net.au/wanglese/Alien_recipes.html

I don't see any porpoise steak recipies here, I wonder how well they
grill up?

Well, humans do eat dolphin (sweat-sweat) but that's a different kind of
dolphin, a fish.


This will take many years.
A long time will pass before even the younger generations begin to trust
other cultures.
People will no longer feel like they are at the top of the food chain.
Which, of course, they still will be.
Every missing person will be suspect.
Alien violence has become well-entrenched in the human psyche.
No amount of logic and reasoning will overcome this, only a standard
reduction of fear, and the reminder that humans are fundamentally,
genetically fearless beings.

Just more saucerhead gaga from the fake alien drama queen.

Usenet KNOWS drama! G

ching-ching

"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message
...
From 'Dr.Y':

I am as uncomfortable as... the others
about the 12%. It would be a tragedy of
unconcionable degree, especially since it would probably be higher
than 12%,
perhaps much higher.

Inducing a mass suicide of a large percentage of the human race? How
does this square with the Prime Directive of non-interferance?? :-)
oc


tinpd

y

"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message
...
Greysky asks "Dr.Y':

Why do you suppose it is so hard for
people to admit you may be advanced
aliens? Sure, part of it is ego - the 'we
are the center of the universe' crap-

I would ask this (and have asked it before of the 'Darla' contingent):

Why, if you are indeed extraterrestrial aliens, do you scrupulously
evade answering 'Test Questions' that could lend credibility to your
claim of alien-hood? Why do you say (paraphrasing), "we will not answer
test questions, so don't bother asking them"..?

We have nothing to prove, oc.

Again, why not??

Because we must presently remain "unreal" until humans are prepared (sorry
G, poor choice of word) for FOC.
Without proper planning, too many humans will commit murder and suicide.
They will consider what they do to be the lesser of two evils.
Because no matter what we do or say, once we become "real", we shall be
considered by most humans to be the greatest evil they could ever encounter.


As stated before, certain knowledge would be basic, fundamental
'kindergarden' stuff to ANY spacefaring race.. namely, the true nature
of space, the cause of gravity, and the principle of hyperdrive (or
'warp' drive).

So far, y'all have not ceded one iota of information on these questions.
Until you do, you remain a sophomoric maven of East-coast pop psychology
with fantasies of alien-hood.

And so must I remain.


Extraordinary claims demand real answers.
oc


I agree with that, oc.
However, there are dozens of people on Usenet and in other media who claim
to be or who portray aliens.
Why is our claiming to be aliens so extraordinary?

y

In article JrTJf.39992$id5.12743@bgtnsc04-
news.ops.worldnet.att.net, posted Sun, 19 Feb 2006 05:34:33
GMT, Dr. Why says...

"Kali" wrote in message
.. .
In article wsCIf.26702$id5.21579@bgtnsc04-
news.ops.worldnet.att.net, posted Wed, 15 Feb 2006 09:25:48
GMT, Dr. Why says...

"Kali" wrote in message
.. .
[...]

Unfortunately, this believability issue seems to be important to a lot of
people.
Don't take this wrong, dearest Kali, but doesn't this all stem from fear?

Skepticism is not about fear, imo. It is about reality
monitoring. It is a healthy way to approach claims that
contradict what we know about the world. I would argue instead
that fear ("of the unknown") is more likely to motivate people
to accept claims on faith.

Yes, for those of you who lead.
Followers, on the other hand?

Are more likely to accept claims on faith.

People appear to be as afraid to believe in advanced aliens as they are
afraid Not to believe in a deity.
Why do you suppose this is?

For the religious person, uncertainty and doubt - the opposite
of faith - can create a conflict. This would be true for someone
who accepts on faith that there are aliens living on earth, or
coming to visit. They would, like the religious person facing
uncertainty and doubt, be faced with an uncomfortable conflict
to resolve. To lose a dearly held belief, especially one that
provides hope and inspiration, is painful. This is why people
tend to find ways to strengthen their belief when they are in
doubt. Some may be afraid there will be nothing else to replace
it when they let it go.

Kali
--
"We found a great number of books...and since they contained
nothing but superstitions and falsehoods of the Devil we burned
them all." - Bishop Diego De Landa, who burned priceless books
of Mayan history and science

Agreed, however accepting that seans exist (as seans) has never been
something we have fostered directly.

That is why you, Darla, and your sock puppets, place yourself on
Usenet amidst a cadre of true believers and manipulate them into
positioning themselves to be special enough for contact with an
alien race? Special enough, of course, means "believing that you
are an alien", spun as "fearless explorer". Fish in a barrel,
all at the service of your very human ego. What extraordinary
talent you have.

We are here to learn about humans, and we simply do not care if they believe
we're aliens.
Frankly, we're looking for ways to reduce the damn^H^H^H^H (forgive me,
please) biocide rate so we can get on with contact.

We cannot keep the conflict you mention from existing.
No matter what we do, you and others will keep the issue of our reality at
the forefront.
But that's okay, for we can still continue our study under these conditions.
And you are welcome to continue Your study of us as well.

Yubiwan

Kali
--
A bore is simply a nonentity who resents his humble lot in life,
and seeks satisfaction for his wounded ego by forcing himself on
his betters. - H. L. Mencken

"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message
...
From 'Dr.Y':

Carl Sagan knew about space when we
first contacted him.
At that time he just didn't know quite how to present it to his peers,
let alone the
public.

After talking with us he decided this was
a good thing.
So he didn't.

Believe me, for now at least, humans are better off for it.

Hmm.. so Sagan actually knew the true nature of space, and suddenly went
mum about it? In that case, the same would have to be true of Einstein.
After wholeheartedly endorsing the Lorentz 'ether' for 35+ years
following the MM experiment, Einstein suddenly and inexplicably
flip-flopped to the 'no medium' doctrine in the mid-1920s. Was this
flip-flop an act of supreme stupidity, or an act of supreme wisdom and
self-sacrifice?
Einstein sure as hell wasn't stupid, so one is
compelled to assume the latter, and view the flip-flop in the best
possible light. Did he finally recognize the true nature of space as not
the stationary 'rigid lattice' ether but one that's dynamically FLUID,
compressible/expansible, and amenable to _density gradients_? Did he
recognize that the _energy density_ of this medium eclipses his
"E=mc²" so far as to make nuclear energy a pop-gun by comparison?
Recognizing mankind's imminent exploitation of "E=mc²", did he, like a
mother bird feigning a broken wing, lead the mainstream down the 'no
medium' primrose path?
To further solidify and entrench it, did he knowingly
sacrifice his last 30 years as a _feint_ of trying to unify gravity
under the 'no medium' clause? If such is the case, then the flip-flop
back in the mid-1920s was an act of a wise and benevolent steward, to
keep us corraled in our void-space 'playpen'.
oc

Sagan at that time was unable to figure out how to introduce this believably
to physics.
Remember that while he had a solid foundation in physics, Sagan was seen as
an astronomer.
His concern was that he didn't carry enough weight to introduce such a
radically different idea and at the same time maintain his hard-earned
credibility.
He was afraid physicists would murder him (professionally speaking, meaning
his reputation).

Einstein was guilty of withholding evidence.
He killed his discovery, once again, as a result of his comparison of evils.
Promoting the void was the lesser of two evils.
We coaxed and coaxed him until he finally decided.
Then in 1945, he realized it was the correct choice for him.
y