Sunday, May 21, 2017

Existing in Different Realities

Reality is an interesting concept.  Basically its the mental question that we ask on a second by second basis: "What is real?"

Reality is the state of things as they actually exist, not as it appears or as it is imagined.  Are UFOs a reality?  That depends on how you view reality which in turn goes to state of mind.  And most importantly, that reality may be intractably imbedded in relativism.  I'll touch on the concept of relativism in a later post, but it is the biggest obstacle we face when discussing the UFO subject both from a skeptical and believer point of view.

Can we exist in different competing realities?  The obvious answer is yes.  I use a personal example of living in two different versions of reality...and both were real, existing side by side, but one totally hidden from the other, yet meeting the textbook definition of reality.

Most know by now that back in the early 1980s I was a missile officer for the old Strategic Air Command...I was on a Minuteman II launch crew pulling nuclear alerts at Malmstrom AFB, MT.  Rather than live on base, my wife and I lived in the local community of Great Falls proper.

We initially lived in an apartment then saved up to buy a small home.  Along the way my daughter was born.  During this time I was subjected to the realities that come with living in a local economy.  I had rent/mortgage to pay along with the usual utility bills.  Gas was $1.15 per gallon and I bitched and moaned about that.  Social outlets were movies, occasional eating out at local restaurants, and road trips around that beautiful state called Montana.  This was the normal reality that most Americans were living in.

Contrast that to going out on nuclear alerts.  Getting up at 5 or 6 am depending if I had packed my crew bag the night before.  Pre-departure briefing at 7 am.  Because I was in the 490th SMS, I could anticipate a 2 to 3 hour drive to the site.  Once the alert commenced time changed as I was no longer clocking time in Pacific Standard local, but now under Zulu [GMT].  There was no visual references for day or night.  It was noisy as cold air was being blown into the equipment racks to keep them from overheating.

There would be a constant flow of message traffic [we were in a higher state of DEFCON] via the Primary Alerting System.  A warble tone...deedle, deedle, deedle ..."Sky Bird, Sky Bird, the is the SAC Airborne Command Post with a test of the primary alerting system...acknowledge."  This would go on with SAC HQ, 15th Air Force HQ and 8th Air Force HQ...all day and that does not include the myriad of Emergency Alert Messages that hit the command net.  I was surrounded by motor generator noise, radio traffic, communication racks discharging messages, buzzers and ringing bells.  Throw in the constant SAC exercises for good measure to complete the picture.

The above two mentioned realities co-existed side by side, yet one was totally hidden from the other.  So yes it is possible for two different realities to exist as both reflected things as they actually existed despite appearances and one's imagination.

Thursday, May 18, 2017

Are UFOs a Product of a Quantum Mental State?

That's the question posed by Rich Reynolds.  Can the UFO phenomena be understood from a quantum mechanics standpoint based on human observation?

"The quantum bromide that quantum particles in a superposition state, do or do not exist until they are measured (observed), allegorized in the Schrödinger “thought experiment” of the cat in a box, applies to UFOs.

"That is, UFOs do not exist until they are observed, but does that observation create the UFO sighting or does the UFO event exist before it is observed?"

"And how does consciousness enter into the equation? Is there a psychological component integral to UFOs, or even a neurological component?"

Rich presents some interesting thoughts, but in the above we are dealing with a micro sub particle concept and attempting to marry it to macro physiological system called the brain.

One question to ask is why do some segments of society see UFOs and the other doesn't?  In this post I refer to UFO as something airborne that cannot be identified as terrestrial by nature.

The structures of the brain can be reduced down to the billions of neurons and the numerous neurotransmitters all the way down to the sub particle realm where quantum mechanics would be in play.

But quantum physics provides no answer for defining the mind and thoughts.  We can identify and understand the various areas of cognition, but the concept of actual consciousness is still allusive.

Thus a humanistic neurological quantum state is not the answer to human observation of UFOs since this has no impact on consciousness.  But cognitive states may provide some clues.

Behaviorism provides some insight in the UFO phenomena.  Behaviorism revolves around cognitive functioning that develops through learned experience, memory, reasoning and a myriad of other areas of executive functioning. 

Behaviorism also includes the effects of conditioning. I proffer that conditioning is a prime factor that contributes towards the "observer's" perception. Conditioning occurs through various mechanisms, such as, being exposed from an early age to UFO books, TV programs, and movies.

It is through conditioning that provides a possible answers to the question regarding the observer's relationship to UFOs.  It is a cognitive perception exercise that has no metaphoric quantum observational meaning. 

Saturday, May 13, 2017

Skeptical Desconstructionism Regarding UFO Claims

My last post, I mentioned the term "deconstructionism" in the context of a skeptical approach to looking at the subjects of UFOs.  If this is to be the name of my approach, then I'm obligated to define the term, or if you will this personal "philosophy."

I must also freely admit that this term may have already been coined by someone else, as I've come to believe that original thinking is somewhat rare nowadays.  Or, I may be describing something that has been well established, but I'm providing a different label.  This is not unusual, the history of psychology is a good example of relabeling or repackaging a discipline to fit the current times.

Deconstruction does exist in the philosophical realm as it was proposed by the French philosopher Jacque Derrida.  Derrida developed the use of deconstruction as a critical outlook over the relationship between text and meaning.

Looking at Derrida's work, I'm not too far off the beaten path, but Derrida was not involved with the subject matter covered in this blog. 

Deconstructionism [my variation] is not limited to the subjects of UFOs, but can be adequately used as a process to look at any questionable claims...ghost hauntings, government conspiracy (pick your choice on this one) and the like.

Deconstructionism is the process(es) of initially viewing a claim as a completed jigsaw puzzle, yet somehow the puzzle appears disjointed or distorted usually minutely in its presentation.  The viewer sees the completed puzzle as a mental picture, but his/her mind consciously brushes over slight imperfections that go unnoticed.

The claim, the seemingly completed jigsaw puzzle, must be taken apart piece by piece.  Each piece must be individually assessed until the structure of the puzzle is no more.  Then the puzzle is pieced back together. 

Does the reconstructed puzzle still hold the original image?  If it is a different image, then the answer to the perplexing question of "Why?" lies in the independent analysis of the individual puzzle pieces themselves. 

Simple, right?  Not necessarily as the process of deconstruction requires time and effort that many are unwilling to invest.  Thus, the original claim is then held as acceptable and goes forth as the truth and the inherent flaws remain hidden from view.

If you take the time to peruse this blog and look at the UFO cases presented, you will see that each case took months, and in certain cases, well over a year to analyze.  Hence even for me briefly succumbing to the "burnout" factor.

Coming up next:  The use of objective and subjective criteria for UFO analysis.  Yes, I've harped on this before, but I will preach this gospel yet again!

To the family of Jacques Derrida, my apologies for linking, even subtly, deconstruction to UFO claims...I could call my approach Hebertism, but then I would be acting like an egocentric asshat and God knows that there are many of those who write on this subject.  

Wednesday, May 10, 2017

A New Approach...

I had put this blog in temporary storage with the thought of revamping it for future use.  That future is now...the present.  Rather than change the name, I believe its best to keep things as they, laughable but true.

The subject may change from time to time.  The skeptical view regarding UFOs will be the same...ironclad and resolute.  I've spent near a decade looking at cases and still conclude that there is nothing there.  That approach involved "deconstruction" and looking at individual pieces.

There...I coined my brand of UFO skeptical philosophy...deconstructionism.

Quick thoughts on previous cases discussed here:

Echo views have not changed and nothing new has been proffered to alter that view so it is a waste of valuable time to go in that direction. 

Oscar the above.

Minot interesting and complicated case, but the results lead to mis-identification and outright fabrication by outside sources.  The participants in the case appear truthful, but lacking of proof.  It's an example of a "good" investigation under circumstances, but a lackadaisical follow-up effort by Project Blue Book.  But in the end this case brings us no closer to resolving the questions of UFOs observing US ICBMs.  A waste of time, in my opinion.

This blog will look at the more complicated issues regarding the psychological aspects of UFOs in general.  I make my living using observation as a tool set.  That my profession deals with behavior issues and the effects of cognitive functions due to neural assaults, this gives me great latitude to look at the UFO subject from a different direction.  

I'm a pragmatist by nature, viewing the world as it is in the present state, but understanding that "truth" may very well be so imbedded in the concept of relativism that mere discussions concerning UFOs even from the skeptical point of view become totally useless.

I hope to have new blog postings soon. We shall see how this new approach works.  Comments will always be welcome, but I don't view comments as a benchmark for judging the success of a blog.